The URL can be used to link to this page

SP 2004-074 Air Quality & Impact Study (2004)tuu&t tI '4V �1k �;tW tl:K.�Yij �`tv�►� lra��a�i iu�ij Prepared By: Endo Engineering September 2004 Endo Engineering Traffic Engineering Air Quality Studies Noise Assessments September 22, 2004 Mr. Rod Grinberg Trans West Housing 9968 Hibert Street - Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92131 SUBJECT: Griffin Ranch Specific Plan and TTM 32879 Air Quality and Noise Impact Study Dear Mr. Grinberg; Endo Engineering is pleased to submit this evaluation of the air quality and noise impacts associated with the Griffin Ranch development in the City of La Quinta. The project site is located on 199± acres located east of Madison Street and south of Avenue 54. The proposed Griffin Ranch development includes the development of up to 305 single-family residential dwellings in a gated community with an equestrian center. The proposed project is expected to be completed by the year 2008. The methodology employed to assess the impacts is consistent with the requirements of the City of La Quinta and the South Coast Air Quality Management District. The report details in graphic and narrative form: (1) existing ambient air quality and noise conditions in the project vicinity; (2) future conditions with and without buildout of the proposed project in the year 2008; and (3) specific mitigation measures designed to substantially reduce any significant impacts identified. We trust that the information provided herein will be of value in your review the impacts and conditions of approval associated with the project. Should questions or comments arise regarding the findings and recommendations herein, please do not hesitate to contact our offices by telephone, facsimile or electronic mail at endoengr@cox.nzt. We look forward to discussing our findings with you. Sincerely, ENDO ENGINEERING Vicki Lee Endo, P.E. Registered Professional Traffic Engineer TR 1161 28811 Woodcock Drive, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677-1330 Phone: (949) 362-0020 FAX: (949) 362-0015 AIR QUALITY AND NOISE IMPACT STUDY GRIFFIN RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AND T.T.M. 32879 EAST OF MADISON STREET SOUTH OF AVENUE 54 CITY OF LA QUINTA September 22, 2004 Prepared For: Trans West Housing 9968 Hibert Street - Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92131 (858)653-3003 Prepared By: ENDO ENGINEERING 28811 Woodcock Drive Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Phone: (949) 362-0020 FAX: (949) 362-0015 E -Mail: endoengr@cox.net Section Table of Contents Title Page 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................. 1-1 - Air Quality - Noise 2.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ..................... 2-1 - Project Location - Project Description 3.0 AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS .......................................... 3-1 3.1 Existing Air Quality ................................................. 3-1 - Air Pollution Fundamentals - Regional Air Quality - Local Air Quality - Existing Sensitive Receptors - Local Sources of Air Contaminants - Regulatory Setting 3.2 Air Quality Impact Analysis ..................................... 3-21 - Impact Significance Threshold Criteria - Short -Term Construction -Related Impacts - Long -Term Operational Impacts - Relevant Planning Programs - Cumulative Impacts 3.3 Air Quality Mitigation Measures ............................... 3-31 4.0 NOISE ANALYSIS .................................................... 4-1 4.1 Existing Noise Environment ................................... 4-1 - Fundamentals of Noise - Harmful Effects of Noise - Community Responses To Sound - Land Use Compatibility With Noise - Current Noise Exposure - Noise Sensitive Receptors 4.2 Noise Impact Analysis ............................................ 4-12 - Significance Threshold Criteria - Short -Term Construction -Related Impacts - Long -Term Operational Impacts 4.3 Noise Mitigation Measures ...................................... 4-20 - General Methods to Reduce Noise Impacts - Specific Recommendations APPENDICES A. Air Quality Appendix B. Noise Appendix List of Figures Number Title Following Page 1 2-1 Regional Location........................................................ 2-1 2-2 Vicinity Map.............................................................. 2-1 2-3 Site Development Plan .......... ....................................... . . 2-1 3-1 Ambient Air Monitoring Stations Operating During 2000-2002 (Salton Sea Air Basin) ............................ 3-4 3-2 Annual Surface Wind Rose Summary (Thermal).................................................................. 3-10 3-3 Coachella Valley Ozone Data ............................................ 3-11 3-4 Coachella Valley PM10 Data .......... . . . ........ I .... I ................. 3-12 3-5 Coachella Valley Blowsand Region ................................... 3-14 4-1 Typical Noise Levels of Familiar Sources ............................ 4-3 4-2 Speech Communication As A Function of Background Noise Level ................................................ 4-4 4-3 Community Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix ............. 4-7 4-4 Construction Noise ...................................................... 4-12 ii List of Tables I Number Title Page I 3-1 Health Effects of Air Pollutants ........................................ 3-7 3-2 Emissions Significance Threshold Criteria ........................... 3-21 3-3 Peak Day Unmitigated Construction Emissions Estimates ..................................... 3-23 3-4 Unmitigated Quarterly Construction Emissions Estimates .................................... 3-24 3-5 Project Buildout Operational Air Pollutant Emissions ................................................. 3-25 3-6 Projected Future Carbon Monoxide Concentrations Near the Intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54 ............ 3-27 4-1 Human Response to Noise Level Changes ........................... 4-2 4-2 Harmful Effects of Noise ................................................ 4-5 4-3 Existing Exterior Noise Levels Adjacent to Nearby Roadways ......................................... 4-10 4-4 Year 2008+Project Exterior Noise Levels Adjacent to Area Roadways ............................................. 4-15 4-5 Project -Related Increase In Year 2008 Motor Vehicle Noise ..................................... 4-16 4-6 Design Noise Levels Adjacent to Master Planned Roadways Abutting the Site .......................... 4-19 m 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 AIR QUALITY 1.1.1 AIR QUALITY SETTING 1. The project site is located within the Salton Sea Air Basin, which has been recently designated (year 2003) by the California Air Resources Board as nonattainment for ozone and PM1o. The violations of the air quality standards for ozone are primarily due to pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin. 2. The Salton Sea Air Basin has been designated by the U.S. EPA as nonattainment for ozone (1 -hour standard) and as serious nonattainment for ozone (8 -hour standard) and for PMto. 3. Ozone levels exceeded the state one-hour standard (0.09 ppm) on 14 percent of the days monitored in Palm Springs and 6 percent of the days monitored in Indio. The maximum one-hour ozone concentration measured was 0.141 parts per million (ppm) in Palm Springs and 0.123 ppm in Indio. This exceeded the federal standard by 17 percent in Palm Springs, and exceeded the state standard by 57 percent. The federal one-hour ozone standard (>.12 ppm) was not exceeded in Indio. No ozone episodes were declared at either air monitoring station between 2001 and 2003. 4. PM10 concentrations exceeded the California 24-hour standard 4 percent of the time in Palm Springs and 45 percent of the time in Indio. The maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration monitored in Palm Springs was 108 micrograms per cubic meter (more than twice the state standard). In Indio, the maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration monitored was 309 micrograms per cubic meter (more than six times the state standard). Although the project site is located outside the Active Blowsand Zone established by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) in the "Blowsand Control and Protection Plan", the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan Environmental Hazards Element identifies the project site as an area that is subject to wind hazards. The northwest corner of the project site has been classified as being subject to very severe wind erosion hazards, based upon mapped soils highly erodable by wind or evidence of wind accumulation. The remainder of the project site has been identified as an area subject to severe wind erosion hazard, based on mapped soils that are moderately to highly erodable. 1.1.2 AIR QUALITY IMPACTS The City of La Quinta has recognized that there are certain substantial adverse impacts associated with implementation of the General Plan that cannot be avoided. Among these impacts are the exceedances of the SCAQMD significance threshold criteria for air pollutants. Attachment B of the "California Environmental Quality Act Statement of Overriding Considerations for the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan Update" concludes: "For the identified significant impacts which cannot be avoided or mitigated to a level of insignificance, the City of La Quinta finds that the feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR are appropriate and have been incorporated into the project. The City of La Quinta finds the project benefits outweigh the significant project impacts." 1-1 The proposed project includes conforming uses and all feasible mitigation measures identified in the "final EIR for the La Quinta General Plan Update" have been incorporated into the project as required. Since the exceedance of the SCAQMD threshold criteria was identified in the "Final EIR for the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan Update" as an unavoidable impact, the air quality impacts associated with the proposed project should be considered less than significant. 1. The proposed project appears to include conforming uses on the project site; therefore, it appears to be consistent with the population and employment growth projections that form the basis of the AQMP and the Regional Growth Management Plan. 2. Construction activities undertaken to implement the proposed project will cause temporary increases in localized emissions and concentrations of criteria pollutants in the project vicinity. Provided that no more than thirteen acres per day are disturbed on-site during grading activities, the proposed project is not projected to exceed the SCAQMD construction emissions thresholds of significance for PMio. Since PM10 concentrations are of concern in the Coachella Valley and residential development exists in the project vicinity that will be exposed to higher PMio concentrations during the construction activities on-site, all feasible mitigation measures should be incorporated to reduce construction -related PM io emissions to the maximum extent feasible. 4. The proposed project is expected to exceed the SCAQMD daily and quarterly construction emission thresholds of significance for ROG and NOx during construction activities on site, triggering the need for mitigation. The proposed project will implement all feasible mitigation measures to reduce ROG and NOx emissions. Since the exceedance of the SCAQMD threshold criteria was identified in the "Final EIR for the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan Update" as an unavoidable impact, with all feasible air quality mitigation measures implemented, the air quality impacts associated with the proposed project are reduced to a level of less than significant. 5. Project -related motor vehicle and area source emissions are not projected to exceed any of the SCAQMD long-term operational emission significance threshold criteria. 6. Based upon a carbon monoxide "hot spot" analysis, year 2008 carbon monoxide levels are not projected to exceed state or federal CO standards at the "worst case" intersection modeled with or without project -related traffic. Therefore, the proposed project will not interfere with the attainment of the state 1 -hour or 8 -hour carbon monoxide standards by either exceeding them or contributing to an existing or projected violation at sensitive receptor locations. The proposed project is consistent with the City's air quality goals and policies set forth in the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan. 1.1.3 AIR QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURES The City of La Quinta will use its discretionary permit authority to place conditions of approval on the proposed project that require compliance with all applicable policies, rules, regulations and ordinances. The inclusion of feasible mitigation measures in the project will minimize, to the greatest extent feasible, the potential air quality impacts attributable to 1-2 the proposed project. The following measures reflect policies, rules or regulations that apply to the proposed development in the City of La Quinta. The proposed project will comply with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code which establish minimum requirements for construction activities to reduce fugitive dust and PM10 emissions. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan describing fugitive dust sources at the site and the control measures to be implemented for each fugitive dust source during any dust -generating activity on-site from the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook (SCAQMD; May, 2003) shall be prepared and submitted to the City of La Quinta for approval prior to the issuance of any grading permits or building permits associated with the project and prior to the initiation of any earth -moving operations. 2. The project proponent shall comply with all applicable SCAQMD Rules and Regulations including but not limited to the following: • Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) specifies control measures for use in developing site specific fugitive dust control plans to minimize blowing dust from construction sites and insure the clean up of construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site including: watering measures, chemical stabilizers, wind fencing, covering haul vehicles, bed liners in haul vehicles, wheel washers, and high wind measures; • Rule 1108 and 1108.1 prohibits the use of rapid and medium cure cutback asphalts as well as organic compounds in emulsified asphalts used during the construction process; and Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) restricts the VOC content of any architectural coating materials used on-site to a maximum of 2.08 pounds of VOC per gallon. 3. Building construction on-site shall comply with the energy use guidelines in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. 4. As a condition of approval, the project proponent will comply with City requirements regarding the master planned Class II bikeways and Class II golf cart paths adjacent to the site along Avenue 54 and Madison Street. In addition to compliance with applicable rules, regulations and ordinances, the following measures are recommended for incorporation in the project to reduce the potential for adverse air quality impacts during construction. 5. If feasible, earth -moving activities should be limited to a maximum 13 acres disturbed per day to ensure that PM10 emissions during grading do not exceed the SCAQMD daily threshold criteria. 6. Earth -moving activities should be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 MPH, per the Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan and SCAQMD Rule 403.1. 7. Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to partially mitigate the impact of construction -generated dust particulates. Portions of the project site that are under- going earth moving operations shall be watered such that a crust will be formed on the ground surface and then watered again at the end of the day, as part of the construction specifications. 1-3 8. Any construction access roads should be watered, paved as soon as possible, and cleaned after each work day. The maximum vehicle speed limit on unpaved road surfaces shall be 15 mph. 9. As part of the construction specifications, any vegetative ground cover to be utilized on-site shall be planted as soon as possible to reduce the disturbed area subject to wind erosion. Irrigation systems needed to water these plants shall be installed as soon as possible to maintain the ground cover and minimize wind erosion of the soil. 10. Construction operations affecting off-site roadways shall be scheduled for off-peak traffic hours and shall minimize the obstruction of through -traffic lanes. 11. Architectural coatings should not be applied at the same time that other construction activities which generate high VOC emissions (e.g. asphalt paving) are under way on-site. 12, Consideration should be given to the implementation of other feasible mitigation strategies to minimize ROC emissions during architectural coating activities including: • the use of precoated building materials, • the use naturally colored building materials (brick, stone tile, etc.); • the use of water-based or low-VOC coatings; • using coating transfer or spray equipment with a high transfer efficiency • employing skilled operators who are well -versed in Rule 1113 requirements (improved transfer efficiency and fewer paint and solvent spills). 1.2 NOISE 1.2.1 NOISE SETTING 1 . The primary sources of noise in the study area are transportation facilities and ambient noise levels emanating from roadways in the project vicinity are relatively low. 2. Ambient noise levels emanating from area roadways currently range from a low of 46.3 CNEL (at 100 feet from the centerline of Avenue 54, west of Jefferson Street) to a high of 69.4 CNEL (at 100 feet from the centerline of State Highway 111, east of Jefferson Street). 3. The 70 CNEL, 65 CNEL, and 60 CNEL contours presently fall within the right-of- way along two of the twenty-one roadway segments modeled. 4. Current traffic volumes generate noise levels that fall between 60 CNEL and 65 CNEL at 100 feet from the centerline of eleven roadway segments in the study area. `. Current traffic volumes generate noise levels that fal'. between 65 CNEL and 70 CNEL at 100 feet from the centerline of four of the roadway segments modeled in the study area. 6. Ambient noise levels on the project site emanating from the adjacent roadways currently range from 58.9 CNEL. (at 100 feet from the centerline of Avenue 54) to 62.4 CNEL (at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of Madison Street). The 65 dBA CNEL contour is currently located 68 feet from the centerline of Madison Street and within the right-of-way of Avenue 54, adjacent to the project site. 1-4 t 1.2.2 NOISE IMPACTS The following impacts which will result from implementation of the proposed project were evaluated and determined to be less than significant, provided the proposed mitigation is implemented. 1. Construction activities on-site will cause temporary localized increases in noise levels at noise sensitive land uses in the project vicinity and could provoke community annoyance and complaints but not long-term or severe adverse effects. 2. On-site operations of the proposed project will generate intermittent noise increases during landscape maintenance, building maintenance, trash pick-up, ventilation and air conditioning unit operation, deliveries and other routine activities in residential neighborhoods (dogs barking, engine noise, car doors slamming etc.). 3. Long-term operation of the proposed project will contribute to future incremental increases in traffic noise adjacent to the roadways in the vicinity that provide access to the site. 4. Imperceptible noise increases of 1.1 dBA or less are projected to occur with the proposed project in the year 2008 along the roadway segments modeled in the project vicinity. 5. Without mitigation, the potential exists for exterior noise levels to exceed 65 CNEL (the exterior noise standard for residential uses in the La Quinta Comprehensive General Flan) at the residential lots proposed on-site abutting Madison Street and Avenue 54. 1.2.3 NOISE MITIGATION The following recommendations shall be incorporated in the construction contract specifications and apply to all project -related construction activities to minimize the potential for adverse levels of discernible noise on adjacent noise sensitive receptors. 1. Construction activities on-site shall take place only during the days and hours specified in the La Quinta California Municipal Code (Chapter 6.08.050) to reduce noise impacts during more sensitive time periods. 2. All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and the engines shall be equipped with shrouds. 3. All construction equipment shall be in proper working order and maintained in a proper state of tune to reduce backfires. 4. Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as far as practical from noise - sensitive receptors. 5. Parking, refueling and servicing operations for all heavy equipment and on-site construction vehicles shall be located as far as practical from existing homes. 6. Every effort shall be made during construction activities to create the greatest distance between noise sources and noise -sensitive receptors located in the vicinity of the project site. 1-5 7 . Stationary equipment should be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from noise -sensitive receptors. The following specific measures are recommended for incorporation in the project conditions of approval to mitigate potential on-site noise impacts and insure compliance with applicable City of La Quinta development standards related to noise. 8. Future on-site development shall comply with all relevant noise policies set forth in the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan and Municipal Code. 9. The proposed development shall incorporate a noise barrier (or berm and barrier combination) adjacent to Madison Street and Avenue 54 to assure that the living areas in abutting residential lots located within the unattenuated ultimate 65 CNEL contours comply with the City of La Quinta exterior noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL. Preliminary barrier attenuation modeling indicates that an acoustically opaque noise barrier or berm and barrier combination adjacent to Madison Street (at the residential property line) extending 7 feet above grade should be adequate and a noise barrier extending 6 feet above grade should be adequate adjacent to Avenue 54 to meet the City noise standard of 65 CNEL in outdoor living areas.l 10. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the final lot layout, pad elevations, building design, and acoustic berm or berm and barrier combinations shall be evaluated by a qualified acoustical consultant to verify that proper noise mitigation has been provided to ensure consistency with the La Quinta noise standards and policies. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that the project design will provide sufficient noise reduction to attain the City of La Quinta noise standard of 65 CNEL in outside living areas. 1. The barrier analysis was based upon preliminary plans (a progress print of the Tentative Tract Map dated August 13, 2004) for the project without final grade details and did not include verification of site specific characteristics with on-site noise measurements or vehicular classification counts. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the noise barrier may be impaired by the openings required for site access along Avenue 54 and Madison Street. 1-6 2.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION The project site is comprised of approximately 199 gross acres, generally located in the southeastern portion of the City of La Quinta. The land is currently vacant and used for agriculture. Figure 2-1 depicts the project site in its regional context. Figure 2-2, the Vicinity Map, depicts the study area and the intersections evaluated in the Griffin Ranch Specific Plan and T.T.M. 32879 Traffic Impact Study (Endo Engineering; September 7, 2004). As shown in Figure 2-2, the project site is more precisely located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Madison Street and 54th Avenue, opposite the PGA West golf resort and residential development. 2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Griffin Ranch project includes a Specific Plan to address the requested downgrading of Madison Street from a six -lane major roadway to a four -lane primary roadway and a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 32879) addressing a gated residential development with up to 305 private residential lots and equestrian facilities on 192.7 net acres. Figure 2-3 illustrates the Site Development Plan. The proposed project would include the development of single-family residential dwellings in a gated community. A 39.8 -acre parcel located in the middle of the project (adjacent to Avenue 54) is not part of the proposed project and would remain a horse ranch. The main site access will be gated and is proposed on Madison Street, opposite the existing PGA West gated access. The project also proposes two unsignalized access points on Avenue 54; one on either side of the 39.8 -acre parcel that is not part of the proposed project. Internal circulation on-site will accomplished via 6.3 acres of dedicated private streets. A roundabout is planned to facilitate access to the equestrian center by vehicles towing horse trailers. Similarly, a roundabout is planned where Street "A" intersects Street "C" (which will permit the most direct access to the equestrian center from Madison Street). Existing and Proposed General Plan and Zoning Designations The proposed Griffin Ranch project is consistent with the existing General Plan Land Use and zoning designations on-site. The project site is currently designated LDR (Low Density Residential) and VLDR (Very Low Density Residential) in the La Quinta General Plan, with a permitted residential density of up to 4 units per acre and up to 2 units per acre, respectively. Tht current zoning on-site is RL (Residential Low) and RVL (Residential Very Low) with an Equestrian Overlay. 2.3 PROJECT PHASING PLAN The project would be phased and built over a three-year period. For the purposes of the impact analysis, it was assumed that the project would begin construction in late spring of 2005 and be completed and occupied by the year 2008. 2-1 % Elsinore Temecula Figure 2-1 Regional Location / San Bernardino County ..�._,�..—._.�._..... Riverside County ,_.�...�., I Enda Engineering Scale: 1" = 13.3 Miles Indian Springs Figure 2-2 Home Depot Country Club Vicinity Map Commercial Highway 111 Gas (City of Indio) Station Mobile Homes Avenue 48 Power Vacant (City of Indio) Substation Legend y, Project Site • Key Intersection Site Access La Quinta Hotel Golf Resort Vacant Golf Course (Under Construction) VV111111c"Aal Avenue 50 Residential Vacant Avenue 52 Vacant Hideaway Golf Course (Under Construction) VVEndo Engineering Avenue 54 Airport Blvd. PGA Jack Nicklaus Resort Course a, Golf Course/ T Residential 07 C 0 'v (New Construction) Vacant Vacant Avenue 58 Scale: 1" _ PGA > PGA West 0 West cam° Development — Project { o 0 Site ; . CL---- —. Golf Course/ Residential VVEndo Engineering Avenue 54 Airport Blvd. PGA Jack Nicklaus Resort Course a, Golf Course/ T Residential 07 C 0 'v (New Construction) Vacant Vacant Avenue 58 Scale: 1" _ Figure 2-3 Site Development Plan .�..... ------------ All I �.. i amu. �� . � • �� 4 ZIP iF a&a j n —w • • — / ... _, —CM Source: MSA Inc. Scale: 1"= 500' There would be one grading phase lasting for a period of two months. The infrastructure would be constructed in three phases. There would be a total of eight building construction phases. The initial development phase would include 56 dwelling units. 2.4 CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT Cumulative development is currently occurring at a variety of locations throughout the City of La Quinta and the Coachella Valley at a rapid pace. From January 2002 to January 2003, the Cities of Coachella, La Quinta, and India were the fastest growing cities in the Coachella Valley. The City of Coachella grew by 10.1 percent, the population of La Quinta grew by 5.9 percent, and the population of Indio grew by 4.4 percent during that 12 -month interval. During the same period, Riverside County as a whole experienced a population growth of 3.7 percent. Cumulative development was addressed in the traffic study by reflecting the anticipated traffic growth on the circulation network in the study area, based on historical 24-hour traffic count data from two locations. Published 24-hour CVAG traffic count data for Madison Street, south of Avenue 54, indicates a 9 percent annual traffic growth rate from the year 1998 to the year 2003. This annual traffic growth rate was assumed for the key intersections on Monroe Street, Madison Street, and Avenue 54 at the site access points. Twenty-four hour traffic counts from 1998 to 2003 were also available for Jefferson Street, south of Highway 111. Based upon this traffic count data, the intersection of Jefferson Street and Highway 111 has experienced an annual traffic growth rate of 2.7 percent. Based upon coordination with the City of La Quinta, the the north/south through movements at the intersection of Jefferson Street and Avenue 54 were assumed to experience an annual traffic growth rate of 2.7 percent. All other turning movements at this intersection were assumed to be increasing at a rate of 9 percent per year. The 2.7 percent growth rate reflects the lower anticipated traffic growth from the nearly completed PGA West development. 000 3.0 AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS 3.1 EXISTING AIR QUALITY Various air quality fundamentals are discussed below including: criteria pollutants, ambient air quality standards, episode criteria, and demonstrated effects of air pollutants on sensi- tive receptors. This basic information is followed by a discussion of: (1) regional air qual- ity; (2) local ambient air quality; (3) existing sensitive receptor locations in the project vicinity; (4) local sources of air contaminants; and (5) the regulatory setting, Appendix A includes a glossary of technical terns used throughout the air quality analysis, 3.1.1 AIR POLLUTION FUNDAMENTALS Air pollution is comprised of many substances generated from a variety of sources, both man-made and natural. Since the rapid industrialization of the twentieth century, almost every human endeavor, especially those relying on the burning of fossil fuels, creates air pollution. Most contaminants are actually wasted energy in the form of unburned fuels or by-products of the combustion process. As more people worldwide enjoy modern energy intensive lifestyles, satellites are observing the continuous movement of polluted air masses in the form of dusty plumes that cross oceans above the marine layer and impact countries other than those that are the source of the polluted air mass. The transport of air pollutants from Asia (and China in particular) may cause or contribute to violations of health -based ambient air quality standards for particulate matter in California in the future. Recent studies indicate that the Asian plume (which is 50% carbonatious, 25% dust and 25% sulfate) is already a significant component of the background particulate matter over California.) Motor vehicles are by far the most significant source of air pollutants in urban areas, emit- ting photochemically reactive hydrocarbons (unburned fuel), carbon monoxide (CO), and oxides of nitrogen (NOx). These primary pollutants chemically react in the atmosphere with sunlight and the passage of time to form secondary pollutants such as ozone. Significant air quality improvements have been made in California over the past twenty years, as a result of a progression of standards that require increasingly cleaner air and improved technology and emission control programs. Despite continued growth in the economy, the population, and vehicle miles traveled, steady improvements in ambient air quality have occurred in the South Coast Air Basin since the late 1990s. However, Southern California still experiences severe air pollution problems and the air quality improvements may be coming to an end or even reversing over the next decade, as evidenced by the first Stage One ozone episode since 1998 occurring in Los Angeles in July of 2403.2 Oxidants and suspended particulate matter with a mean aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 micrometers (PM io) represent the major air quality problems in the desert regions of Southern California. 1. Presentation of January 22, 2004 by Dr. Vancuren before the California Air Resources Board and Journal of Geophysical Research, October, 2003. 2. Unusually hot weather for the last two years may have contributed to the recent increases in ozone levels. 3-1 r The air quality of the Coachella Valley is determined by the primary pollutant emissions ( added daily, and by the primary and secondary pollutants already present in the air mass. y Primary pollutants are those emitted directly from a source and include: carbon monoxide, nitric oxide (NO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (PM), and various hydrocarbons and other volatile organic compounds (VOC). Secondary pollutants are created with the passage of time in the air mass and include: photochemical oxidants (90% of which are ozone), photochemical aerosols, peroxyacetylnitrate (PAN), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Criteria Air Pollutants Criteria air pollutants are those air contaminants for which air quality standards currently exist. Currently, state and federal air quality standards exist for ozone, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, suspended particulate matter, and lead. California has also set standards for visibility and sulfates, hydrogen sulfide and vinyl chloride. Emissions of criteria air contaminants or their precursors typically also include reactive organic gases (ROG), oxides of nitrogen, sulfur oxides (SOx), and particulate matter. Carbon Monoxide Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless, toxic gas formed by incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. Carbon monoxide concentrations are generally higher in the winter, when meteorological conditions favor the build-up of directly emitted contaminants. Carbon monoxide health warnings and emergency episodes occur almost entirely during the winter. The most significant source of carbon monoxide is gasoline powered automobiles, as a result of inefficient fuel usage in internal combustion engines. Various industrial processes also emit carbon monoxide. Oxides of Nitrogen Oxides of nitrogen are the primary receptors of ultraviolet light initiating the photochemical reactions that produce smog. Nitric oxide combines with oxygen in the presence of reactive hydrocarbons and sunlight to form nitrogen dioxide and ozone. Oxides of nitrogen are contributors to other air pollution problems including: high levels of fine particulate matter, poor visibility and acid deposition. Seven oxides of nitrogen and two hydrated oxides can theoretically exist in the atmosphere, but only four are present in noticeable amounts. Two of these are classified as pollutants. These are nitric oxide, a colorless, odorless gas and nitrogen dioxide, a reddish -brown gas formed by the combination of nitric oxide with oxygen. Nitric oxide is far less toxic than nitrogen dioxide in humans. The primary sources of nitrogen oxides in the basin are incomplete combustion in motor vehicle engines, power plants, refineries and other industrial operations. Ships, railroads and aircraft are other significant emission sources. Sulfur Dioxide and Sulfate Sulfur dioxide results from the combustion of high sulfur content fuels. Fuel combustion is the major source of SO2, while chemical plants, sulfur recovery plants, and metal processing are minor contributors. Sulfates result from a reaction of sulfur dioxide and oxygen in the presence of sunlight. When sunlight is plentiful, sulfate is formed more readily. Therefore, sulfur dioxide levels are generally lower in the summer and higher in the winter. 3-2 Recent reductions in sulfur dioxide levels reflect the use of natural gas in power plants and boilers (since natural gas is very low in sulfur). Low sulfur fuel oil is also utilized within this air basin. Suspended Particulate Matter Suspended particulate matter is a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air. Particulate matter consists of particles in the atmosphere as a by-product of fuel combustion, through abrasion such as tire wear, and through soil erosion by the wind. Particulates can also be formed through photochemical reactions in the atmosphere. PMio refers to finely divided solids or liquids such as soot, dust, and aerosols which are 10 microns or less in diameter and can enter the lungs. About 90% of total particulates are less than 5 microns in diameter, while the aerosols formed in the atmosphere (primarily sulfate and nitrate) are usually smaller than 1 micron. Particulate concentrations are generally higher in the winter near major sources, when more fuel is burned and meteorological conditions favor the build-up of directly -emitted contami- nants. Lead is found in old paints and coatings, plumbing and a variety of other materials. Once in the blood stream, lead can cause damage iro the brain, nervous system, and other body systems. Children are highly susceptible to the effects of lead. Photochemical Oxidant Photochemical oxidant (03) can include several different pollutants, but consists primarily of ozone (90%) and a group of chemicals called organic peroxynitrates. Ozone is a pungent, colorless toxic gas which is produced by the photochemical process. Photo- chemical oxidant is created by complex atmospheric reactions involving oxides of nitrogen and volatile organic compounds, in the presence of ultraviolet energy from sunlight. Motor vehicles are the major source of ozone precursors (oxides of nitrogen and volatile organic compounds) in the air basin. Ozone is formed through chemical reactions of VOCs, oxides of nitrogen, and oxygen in the presence of sunlight. Peak ozone concentra- tions tend to occur in the South Coast Air Basin near the middle of the day in summer and early fall, when the solar radiation exposure of the air mass is the greatest, because the reactions that form ozone begin at sunrise and require sunlight to proceed. The prevailing marine air currents throughout the South Coast Air Basin typically carry polluted air inland as ozone -forming photochemical reactions proceed. That is why ljcak ozone concentrations in the SCAB are found in the inland valleys and adjacent mountains (between the San Fernando Valley and the Riverside -San Bernardino area), miles downwind of the largest concentrations of precursor emissions sources. Just as oxidant precursors from the coastal Los Angeles area aggravate oxidant problems inland in Riverside, precursor emissions from the central and eastern areas of the SCAB (including Anaheim) contribute to locally produced oxidant in the Coachella Valley.3 A 3. Drivas, P.J. and F.H. Shair; "A Tracer Study of Pollutant Transport in the Los Angeles Area"; Atmos. Environ. 8: 1155-1163; 1974 3-3 comprehensive study confirmed the transport pathways to the Coachella Valley in 1983.4 Although the extent to which the intrusion of ozone contributes to Coachella Valley ozone exceedances has not been quantified, "...it is ARB's judgment that oxidant problems in the Southeast Desert would be minimal if oxidants and oxidant precursors were effectively controlled in the South Coast Air Basin:15 In the Coachella Valley, air flow is from the northwest much of the time. Peak oxidant levels occur in the late afternoon and evening, as pollutants are blown through the San Gorgonio Pass. Oxidant concentrations in the Coachella Valley are highest closest to the South Coast Air Basin and decrease steadily as the air mass moves easterly. The role of local emissions in the formation of oxidants in the Coachella Valley is difficult to quantify. Locally produced oxidant undoubtedly accounts for some standard ex- ceedances. However, tracer studies and other recent studies of ozone levels by location, hour of day, day of week, etc, indicate that an oxidant cloud caused directly by transport from the SCAB causes exceedances in Palm Springs as late as 8 p.m., when local photo- chemical activity has slowed. In addition, transported NOx and VOC left over from the previous day have been identified as major contributors to ozone concentrations at down- wind desert locations.6 Volatile Organic Compounds Hydrocarbon and other volatile organic compounds are formed from the combustion of fuels and the evaporation of organic solvents. Many hydrocarbon compounds are major air pollutants, and those classified as aromatics are highly photochemically reactive with NOx, forming photochemical smog. Hydrocarbon concentrations are generally higher in winter, when sunlight is limited and photochemical reactions occur more slowly. During the winter, meteorological conditions are more favorable to the accumulation of VOCs in the atmosphere before photochemical oxidants are produced. Motor vehicles are the major source of organic gases in this basin. Ambient Air Quality Standards Ambient air quality is determined from data collected at air quality monitoring stations located throughout the Salton Sea Air Basin, as shown in Figure 3-1. The ambient air quality data is given in terms of state and federal standards. These standards represent air pollutant concentrations which are considered safe (with a reasonable margin of safety) to protect the public health and welfare. As such, they represent objectives for acceptable concentrations of specified pollutants in outdoor air. Ambient air quality standards are designed to protect public health and that segment of the population that is most sensitive and susceptible to respiratory distress or infection such as: asthmatics, the very young, the elderly, people weak with illness or disease, or persons engaged in heavy work or exercise (i.e. sensitive receptors). Healthy adults can tolerate periodic exposures to air pollutant levels well above these standards before adverse health effects are observed. Two types of national standards have been established by the U.S.EPA, as required by the Federal Clean Air Act. Primary standards were designed to safeguard the health of people 4. Smith, T.B. et al.; The Impact of Transport from the South Coast Air Basin on Ozone Levels in the Southeast Desert Air Basin; CARB Research Library Report No. ARB -R-83-183. 5. SCAQMD and SLAG; AQMP - Southeast Desert Air Basin, Riverside County; October 1979. 6. SCAQMD and SCAG; AQMP - Southeast Desert Air Basin, Riverside County; October 1979. 3-4 Figure 3-1 Ambient Air Monitoring Stations Operating During 2000-2002 Salton Sea Air Basin r ----------N Palm Springs �"•� Fire Station v �•� • Indio -Jackson Street Riverside County Salton co Sea a Niland-English Road o r' Q J � E) Westmorland -West 1st Street �--•� 1 B Imperial e Brawley-Main Street County i e EI Centro -9th Street L. -------------'-Calexico (3) Grant St./Ethel St./East MexiCO end • Gaseous monitoring and particulate sampling E) Particulate sampling only �Wndo Engineering Scale: 1" = 19.25 Miles F considered to be sensitive receptors while outdoors. Secondary standards were designed to safeguard public welfare by minimizing damage to plants and animals, buildings, the �Y oxidation of rubber and paint, and protecting against decreased visibility. The Federal Clean Air Act permits states to adopt more protective air quality standards if needed. California has set standards which are more protective of public health than the respective national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and set standards for some pollutants not addressed by the federal standards. The state and national ambient air quality standards are detailed in Appendix A. Unlike federal standards, there are no attainment + deadlines for state standards. State law requires that they be attained as expeditiously as possible. California has also adopted health advisory levels called episode criteria for ozone, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and ozone in combination with sulfates. Episode criteria repre- sent short-term exposures at concentrations which actually threaten public health (refer to Appendix A for additional details and specific episode criteria). Under the Federal Clean Air Act, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to set clean air standards and update them based upon scientific studies without consideration of the economic impact. In September of 1997, the EPA proposed tougher ozone and particulate standards intended to reduce the number of deaths, illnesses and lost work days linked to air pollution. The new national PM2.5 standards address particles roughly one twenty-eighth the diameter of a human hair that can become lodged far into the lungs. PM2.5 is a component or subset of PM a o. An annual arithmetic average of 15 micrograms per cubic meter of air (ug/m3) and a 24-hour average of 65 ug/m3 have been set as the new national primary standards for PM2.5. To allow for occasional atmospheric anomalies, communities would be allowed to exceed the 24-hour standard several times before being designated nonattainment. New and more strict state standards for particulate matter were proposed and adopted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) that include an annual average of 20 ug/m3 for PMio and a new annual average of 12 ug/m3 for PM2.5. The new PM2.5 standard was adopted in Jude of 2002 and became effective in July of 2003. The CARB is currently in the process of reviewing the state ozone and NO2 standards. The new national primary ozone standard is 0.08 ppm over an 8 -hour period. Communities would be allowed to disregard the three highest concentrations during each year in determining compliance. This would focus attention on long-term ozone exposures which pose a greater health risk than short-term abnormally high concentrations. Each of southern California's eight counties, where a total of 17 million people currently live, exceed the new ozone and/or the new particulate standards. The new standards force cities and states nationwide to mount aggressive and costly efforts to clean up the air over a 15 -year period or face harsh federal sanctions (such as a freeze on federal highway funds). Episode Criteria The South Coast Air Quality Management District monitors contaminant levels and meteo- rological factors on a daily basis in order to forecast high pollutant levels in stable atmo- spheric conditions. Such conditions are known as "episodes" and represent intermediate levels between the national ambient air quality standard and the level of significant harm for air pollutants at which some pollution abatement or health notification action must be taken. 3-5 r Applicable episode criteria by pollutant and averaging period have been established by the U.S.EPA and the California Air Pollution Emergency Plan Criteria (as shown in Appendix A). Episodes are divided into three stages, depending upon the concentration of the pollutant that is predicted or reached. SCAQMD Rule 701 identifies air pollution contingency actions required to be taken by the SCAQMD, including outdoor activity curtailment actions to be taken when the air quality exceeds the Health Advisory Episode level for ozone ( 0.15 ppm.) or the Stage 1 Episode level for other pollutants for which episode criteria are defined. Salton Sea Air Basin Attainment Status The California Clean Air Act requires the CARB to establish and periodically review designation criteria that provide the basis for designating areas each year with respect to the state ambient air quality standards and recent air quality data as: attainment, noriattainment, nonattainment-transitional or unclassified. The CARB recently established the 2003 area designations, based upon air quality data from 2000 through 2002. The Salton Sea Air Basin attainment status was designated as follows for the ten criteria pollutants: • Attainment - Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Dioxide, Sulfur Dioxide, Sulfates and Lead (particulate); • Nonattainment - Ozone and PMio; • Unclassified - PM2.5, Hydrogen Sulfide, and Visibility Reducing Particles. The U.S.EPA periodically reviews recent ambient air quality data that forms the basis for designating areas with respect to the national ambient air quality standards as: unclassified/ attainment or nonattainment. The most recent area designations by the U.S.EPA were based on national standards prior to promulgation of the new 8 -hour ozone standard and the new PM2.5 standards in July of 1997. The unclassified/attainment designation applies to areas found to be better than the national standards and areas that cannot be classified for some reason (such as the requisite data is not available). The nonattainment designation applies to areas that do not meet the primary standards. The Salton Sea Air Basin has been designated by the U.S.EPA for criteria pollutants as follows: • Unclassified/Attainment - PM2.5 (unclassified), Carbon Monuxide (attainment), Lead (attainment), Nitrogen Dioxide (attainment), and Sulfur Dioxide (attainment); • Nonattainment - Ozone (1 -hour standard), Ozone (8 -hour standard) serious nonattainment, and PMio serious nonattainment. Since the U.S.EPA designated 8 -hour ozone nonattainment areas in April of 2004, State Implementation Plans will be due in the year 2007. With more than 50 exceedances annually in the SCAB, more areas in the South Coast Air Basin will be nonattainment for the 8 -hour ozone standard than the 1 -hour ozone standard. The U.S.EPA expects to issue final designations for the national PM2.5 standards by December of 2004, based on air quality data from 2001 through 2003. This will require a State Implementation Plan to be submitted by 2007 with attainment deadlines ranging from 2009 through 2014, depending upon the severity of the problem. Based on air quality data from 2000 through 2002, there are expected to be four nonattainment areas in California, 3-6 including the South Coast Air Basin, where PM2.5 concentrations exceed the national annual and 24-hour standard by a substantial margin. Effects of Pollutants on Sensitive Receptors The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has identified the following groups of indi- viduals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65; children under 14; athletes; and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis. These sensitive groups represent over 50% of the total California population? Demonstrated effects of specific air contaminants on health and vegetation are discussed in Appendix A and summarized in Table 3-1. The elderly are most sensitive, since the loss of lung tissue is a natural process of aging. Inhalation of air pollution accelerates this loss by reducing lung volume, and functional lung tissue. Damaged and irritated lung tissue becomes susceptible to bacterial infection. This increases the likelihood of chronic respiratory disease by reducing the ability of the immune system to fight infection and resist disease. PM10 can accumulate in the respiratory system and enter the blood stream through the lungs, creating or aggravating cardiovascular and respiratory problems including asthma. EPA's scientific review concluded that fine particles (PM2.5), which penetrate deeply into the lungs, are more likely than PMio particles to contribute to adverse health effects. Elevated ozone concentrations result in reduced lung function, particularly during vigorous physical activity. Carbon monoxide can cause dizziness, fatigue, and impairments to central nervous system functions. Lead can cause damage to the brain, nervous system, and other body systems. 3.1.2 REGIONAL CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY The average wind speed in Los Angeles is the lowest of the nation's ten largest urban areas. The maximum mixing height during the summer months in Southern California averages the lowest in the nation, reducing the vertical dispersion of pollutants in the air mass. This region experiences more days of sunshine than any other major urban area in the nation except Phoenix. The abundant sunshine in Southern California drives photo- chemical reactions which form secondary pollutants including ozone. Although emissions in Southern California change somewhat by season, the observed variations in pollutant concentrations are largely the result of seasonal differences in weather conditions. Ozone concentrations peak during the summer months (May through September). CO and PM2.5 concentrations peak during the late fall and winter months. Peak PMIo concentrations in the South Coast Air Basin reflect no clear seasonal variation. Southern California, with the lowest summer time mean mixing height, the lowest average wind speed and emissions from the second largest urban area in the U.S., has one of the worst air pollution problems in the nation. Although past programs have been effective at improving the air quality of the SCAB, it still exceeds health -based standards frequently. 7. California Air Resources Board; Facts About How Air Pollution Damages Health; 1983 3-7 Table 3-1 Health Effects of Air PollutantSa Pollutant Most Relevant Effects Short -Term Exposures; Decline in pulmonary function in healthy individuals including breathing pattern changes, reduction of breathing capacity, increased susceptibility to infections, inflammation of the lung tissue and immunological changes. Increased frequency of asthma attacks, cough, chest discomfort and Ozone headache. Long -Term . Exposures; Risk to public health implied by altered connective tissue metabolism and host defense in animals. A correlation has been reporter] between elevated ambient ozone levels and increases in daily hospital admission rates and mortality. A consistent association between increased ambient CO levels and excess admissions for heart diseases (such as congestive heart failure) has been observed. Carbon Can cause decreased exercise capacity in patients with angina pectoris. Monoxide Adversely affects conditions with an increased demand for oxygen supply (fetal development, chronic hypoxemia, anemia, and diseases involving the heart and blood vessels). Can cause impairment of time interval estimation and visual function. Sensory responses may be elicited or altered. Nitrogen May cause some impairment of pulmonary function and increased incidence of acute Dioxide respiratory disease including infections and respiratory symptoms in children. Can cause difficulty in breathing in healthy as well as bronchitic groups. Increase in blood lead levels which may impair or decrease hemoglobin synthesis. Lead Adversely affects the development and function of the central neiAous system, leading to learning disorders, distractibility, lower I.Q. and increased blood pressure. lead poisoning can cause anemia, lethargy, seizures and death. May cause higher frequencies of acute respiratory symptoms (including airway Sulfur constriction in some asthmatics and reduction in breathing capacity leading to severe Dioxide difficulties) and diminished ventilatory function in children. Very high levels of exposure can cause lung edema (fluid accumulation), lung tissue damage, and sloughing off of cells lining the respiratory tract. May cause higher frequencies of acute respiratory symptoms and diminished ventilatory function in children. A consistent correlation between elevated ambient PM10 levels and an increase in Particulates mortality rates, respiratory infections, number and severity of asthma attacks and the number of hospital admissions has been observed. Some recent studies have reported an association between long-term exposure to air pollution dominated by fine particles and increased mortality, reduction in life -span, and the possibility of an increased incidence of cancer. a. SCAQMD, "Draft 1997 Air Quality Management Plan". 3-8 Ozone Trends in the SCAB Most of the urban areas in California exceed the state ozone standard and the SCAB is no exception. The number of days exceeding the state ozone standard and the peak ozone levels have declined in the SCAB. however, despite a 50 percent reduction in peak ozone levels since 1990, the SCAB is one of three remaining nonattainment areas in California with respect to the federal 1 -hour ozone standard of 0.12 ppm. The number of days per year that the federal ozone standard is exceeded has declined to fewer than 50 and the coastal areas are close to attainment. However, Santa Clara and the eastern portions in the SCAB still experience relatively high peak ozone levels. All of the emission control programs implemented for the 1 -hour ozone standard have contributed to progress on meeting the new 8 -hour standard, which is more stringent. The 8 -hour ozone standard is more health protective and will require more emission reductions and time to achieve than the 1 -hour standard. More areas in the SCAB are expected to be designated nonattainment for the new 8 -hour ozone standard than for the 1 -hour standard. An unusually strong high pressure system during the summer of 2003 created conditions that produced some of the worst air quality in terms of high ozone concentrations in the SCAB in many years. More days with the potential to create high ozone levels occurred in 2003 than in any of the previews 24 years. The result was more days above the federal 1 - hour ozone standard than in any of the previous five years and the first Stage One ozone episode on July 11, 2003 (i.e., 0.20 ppm or greater concentration) since 1998. In 1998, five more Stage One ozone episodes were called under milder weather conditions. By early August in 2003, air quality in the SCAB had exceeded federal health -based standards on 44 days, nearly twice the number in August of 2002. Thus, 1 -hour ozone standard exceedances are generated in the SCAB when adverse weather conditions occur, despite the progress made toward attainment. Suspended Particulate Matter Trends in the SCAB In the SCAB, PM10 is a complex problem because contributions come from a wide variety of emission sources. Virtually all areas in California exceed the state PM10 standards, Nevertheless, progress has been made toward attaining the federal PMio standard in several areas, especially those with fugitive dust problems. PMio concentrations in the SCAB are declining and the Basin is on track toward its federal PMio attainment deadline of 2006. There has been a 70 percent decrease in the number of days per year above the standard in the SCAB. The SCAB effectively attains the federal 24-hour PMio standard, with a few remaining exceedances in recent years due to natural windblown dust events. In 2003, the SCAB updated their State Implementation Plan (SIP) with additional control measures for PMio. Annual average PMio concentrations in the SCAB have shown a decrease of 25 percent since 1990. Weather patterns can influence the year-to-year variability in annual average PMio concentrations. Similarly, emission control programs have reduced directly emitted PM2.5 concentrations (and the combustion -related precursor emissions that form secondary particulates) by 20 to 30 percent since 1988. Other Regional Pollutant Trends The state carbon monoxide standard has been attained statewide, with two exceptions. One localized area within the SCAB is an exception and the other exception is Calexico. State 9M r standards for other criteria pollutants including NO2, SO2 and lead have been attained statewide. 3.1.3 LOCAL CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY Local Climate and Meteorology The study area is located in the Coachella Valley, an and desert region with a climate characterized by low annual rainfall, low humidity, hot days and very cool nights. The climatological stations at the Indio Fire Station and in Thermal are closest to the project site. The annual precipitation monitored during 2001 in Indio was 1.04 inches, which was 2.77 inches below the average annual rainfall total of 3.81 inches. Although the annual precipitation data for the year 2001 did not include data for the month of April, historically an average of 0.07 inches of precipitation occurs in Indio in April. In 2001, the average temperature was 72.2 degrees Fahrenheit in Thermal, 0.2 degrees below normal. Temperature extremes in Thermal ranged from 25 degrees Fahrenheit in December to 118 degrees Fahrenheit on the 2nd of July.8 Wind direction and speed (which in turn affect atmospheric stability) are the most important climatological elements affecting ambient air quality within the planning area. The prevailing wind direction in Thermal is predominantly from the northwest. The annual mean wind speed is 8.1 miles per hour. Calm conditions occur 2.0 percent of the time in Thermal, as shown in Figure 3-2. Desert regions are generally windy because minimal friction is generated between the moving air and the low, sparse vegetation. This allows the wind to maintain its speed crossing the desert plains. In addition, the rapid daytime heating of the air closest to the desert surface leads to convective activity and the exchange of surface air for upper air, which accelerates surface winds during the warm part of the day. Rapid cooling at night in the surface layers during the winter months results in a high frequency of calm winds.9 Since the dominant daytime onshore wind pattern follows the peak travel period (6:00 a.m. through 9:00 am.) in the Los Angeles/Orange County area, during periods of low inversions and low wind speeds, the photochemical smog formed in these areas is transported downwind into Riverside County, San Bernardino County and the Coachella Valley. Peak oxidant levels occur in the late afternoon and evening (between 4 p.m. and 8 p.m.), as pollutants are blown through the San Gorgonio Pass. Oxidant concentrations in the 50 - mile long and 20 -mile wide Coachella Valley are highest, closest to the South Coast Air Basin, and decrease steadily as the air mass moves east from Banning to Palm Springs and then Indio. Surface -based inversions in the Coachella Valley are prevalent at night throughout the year and usually persist into the day during the winter months. Inversion conditions are associ- ated with degraded air quality because the surface air is prevented from rising and dissipat- ing the air pollutants that accumulate throughout the day. 8. NOAA; Climatological Data Annual Summary, California, 2001. 9. California Air Resources Board; Climate of the Southeast Desert Air Basin, January, 1990. 3-10 2.7 1.7' Figure 3-2 Annual Surface Wind Rose Summary (Thermal) 11.2% 5.5% Note: Bar thickness represents percent of predominant wind direction. ITBar length indicates wind speed. Calm = 2.0% of time. Mean Speed = 8.1 mph. Endo Etrgineering %i r Radiation inversions are prevalent at night throughout the year. They fireit the mixing in the lower atmosphere to a height of 200 to 2,000 feet. They persist through much of the day in winter but are destroyed early in the day in summer. Local Ambient Air Quality The South Coast Air Quality Management District maintains ambient air quality monitoring stations at numerous locations. The project site is located within the Coachella Valley which is Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30. The SRA 30 monitoring stations are located in the City of Palm Springs and the City of Indio. The 2001 through 2003 ambient air quality data (which is included in Appendix A) indicates that only ozone and PMto have exceeded the relevant state and federal standards in the Riverside County portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin. Ozone Ozone air quality trends since 1976 for the Coachella -San Jacinto area indicate a downward trend in the number of days exceeding the federal 1 -hour ozone standard. This has occurred despite the fact that population growth in the Coachella Valley over this period has been dramatic. Figure 3-3 depicts the number of days from 2001 through 2003 exceeding the one-hour state ozone standard as well as the maximum hourly ozone concentrations at Coachella Valley ambient air monitoring stations in Indio and Palm Springs. Ozone levels exceeded the state one-hour standard (0.09 ppm) on 14 percent of the days monitored in Palm Springs and 6 percent of the days in Indio. The maximum one-hour ozone concentration measured was 0.141 parts per million (ppm) in Palm Springs and 0.123 ppm in Indio. This exceeded the federal standard by 17 percent in Palm Springs, and exceeded the state standard by 57 percent. Although the federal ane -hour ozone standard (>.12 ppm) was not exceeded in Indio, it was exceeded on 12 days in Palm Springs. No ozone episodes were declared at either air monitoring station during these three years. The 8 -hour average ozone concentrations monitored in Indio exceeded the federal standard (0.08 ppm) on 51 days (five percent of the days monitored) during the three-year interval from 2001 through 2003. The highest 8 -hour average CO level found in Indio exceeded the federal standard by 38 percent. By comparison, the 8 -hour average ozone concentrations monitored in Palm Springs exceeded the federal standard (0.08 ppm) on 128 days (12 percent of the days monitored). The highest 8 -hour average CO concentration monitored in Palm Springs exceeded the federal standard by 55 percent. Inhalable Particulate Matter (PM1o) PMto in the Coachella Valley comes mostly from locally generated fugitive dust produced by both human activities (on -road and off-road vehicles, construction activities and farming) and natural occurrences (sand and dust storms when winds exceed 25 mph). The highest PMto concentrations are typically found in the summer, when hot dry weather produces more dust. The SCAQMD identified the open sources of fugitive dust (PM to)emissions throughout Riverside County in 1987 and projected them for the year 2010. Although natural unspecified sources comprised over 65 percent of the open area source PM to emissions in 1987 (followed by paved roads at 14 percent, and construction at 10 percent), by the year 3-11 Figure 3-3 Coachella Valley Ozone Data Maximum Hourly Ozone Concentrations 0.20 E3 Palm Springs 0.18 ® Indio CL '90.16 c 0 0.14 c c0.12 - - Federal Standard o U 0.10 (.12 ppm) M State Standard E 0.08 (.0q Ppm) c� 0.06 20.06- 0 i 0.04- a) c 00.02- 0.02 0.00 0.00 2001 2002 2003 Year Days Exceeding State Ozone Standard 80 Palm Springs c 70 ' ® Indio o N 0 .060- 7 d O 2 � a) 50 O w c2n 40 co v v 30 Bs `4. 15 U) 20 7 Z 10 0 ' 2001 2002 2003 Year Endo Engineering Source. CARB Air Quality Data 2010, this situation was projected to change dramatically and the primary open area source category was projected to be construction (at more than 59 percent).10 The Coachella Valley is classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a "serious" nonattainment area for PMio, which means that the valley has violated federal health -based standards for particulate matter. The AQMD and CVAG adopted a comprehensive dust control plan (the Coachella Valley PMio SIP) in 1990 that has been updated several times since that time. Under that plan, local governments adopted dust control ordiminces and implemented extensive dust control programs. In 1996, the SCAQMD asked the EPA to re -designate the Coachella Valley as a PMIo attainment area, when the 3 -year average PMio concentration dropped below the annual average standard of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air. A PMio maintenance plan for the Coachella Valley was developed as a separate plan from the 1997 AQMP. The number of land development projects in the Coachella Valley has increased dramatically over the last few years, as the local economy has improved and population growth has accelerated. Not surprisingly, the number of public complaints regarding fugitive dust emissions at building and development sites and farms also increased. In response, the SCAQMD assigned a full-time air quality inspector to the Coachella Valley in 2001 to enforce fugitive dust regulations and educate businesses and local governments on SCAQMD requirements regarding PMio. PMio monitoring in the Coachella Valley indicated that Palm Springs had briefly attained the federal PMio standard. However, Indio typically had higher PMio concentrations because of its location downwind of many of the dust sources in the Coachella Valley. In addition, rapid development in Indio, including the disturbance and grading of vacant undeveloped land, has caused the localized dispersal of fugitive dust and sand particles into the atmosphere and increased the potential for wind erosion. Figure 3-4 depicts the percentage of PMio samples exceeding the state 24-hour standard from 2001 through 2003 as well as the maximum 24-hour PMio concentrations in the Coachella Valley. As shown therein, PMio concentrations exceeded the California 24-hour standard on 47 days (4 percent of the time) in Palm Springs and on 495 days (45 percent of the time) in Indio. The maximum 24-hour PMio concentration monitored in Palm Springs was 108 micrograms per cubic meter (more than twice the state standard of 50 micrograms per cubic meter). In Indio, the maximum 24-hour PM io concentration monitored was 309 micrograms per cubic meter (more than six times the state standard). The annual geometric mean PMio concentration did not exceed the state standard in Palm Springs. In Indio, the state standard of 30 micrograms per cubic meter was exceeded during all three years and by as much as 48 to 88 percent. The PMio annual geometric mean concentration ranged between 44.3 and 56.4 micrograms per cubic meter in Indio. The federal 24-hour PMiO standard of 150 ug/m3 was exceeded 18 times (on 6 percent of the days) between 2001 and 2003 in Indio. The PMio concentration increased each year in Indio (as construction activities increased) from 149 Ug/M3 in 2001 to 276 ug/m3 in 2002 and 309 ug/m3 in 2003. The annual arithmetic mean ranged between 50.2 and 56.7 micrograms per cubic meter and exceeded the federal standard of 50 ug/m3 in all three years. Given the most recent data, the SCAQMD will request an extension from the EPA 10. SCAQMD; AQMP Draft Technical Report III -F Inventory of Mo Emission, December 1990 3-12 Figure 3-4 Coachella Valley PM10 Data Maximum 24-Hour Concentrations 350 0 Palm Springs 300 ® Indio rn - 0 250 200 c 0 U 150 - Federal Standard (150 ug/m3) E 100 E_ 50 State Standard (50 ug/m3) 0. 2001 2002 2003 Year Percentage of PMio Samples Exceeding State Standard 100 _ [] Palm Springs 90 - ® Indio SO a0 70 7 m c� a� (n 60- co X W 0o3© cd 50- 0 3: 40- 30 07 a 20- 0 10 10 0 - 2001 2002 2003 Year Ertdo Engineering Source: CARB Air Monitoring Data to 2006 (or sooner if possible, based on the 2002 Coachella Valley PM10 SIP) for the Coachella Valley to demonstrate PMIo attainment. Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) The PM2.5 standards were not exceeded at the Indio or Palm Springs monitoring stations between 2001 and 2003. The highest concentration measured at either station was 44.7 ug/m3 in 2001 at the Palm Springs monitoring station. This daily concentration represents 69 percent of the federal standard. The highest annual arithmetic mean (12.2 ug/m3) occurred in Indio in 2001. It represented 81 percent of the federal standard. Nitrogen Dioxide The federal annual average nitrogen dioxide standard was not exceeded at the Palm Springs monitoring station between 2001 and 2003. Similarly, the state 1 -hour nitrogen dioxide standard was not exceeded. The maximum 1 -hour NO2 concentration monitored was 0.067 ppm, which represents 27 percent of the standard (0.25 ppm). Carbon Monoxide The state and federal carbon monoxide standards were not exceeded at the Palm Springs station between 2001 and 2003. The highest maximum CO concentration measured during the last three years was 2.0 ppm (1 -hour average) and 1.50 ppm (8 -hour average). Other Criteria Pollutants Sulfur dioxide and lead are not monitored in the Coachella Valley. Lead concentrations dropped dramatically following the phasing out of leaded gasoline. Federal sulfur dioxide standards were last exceeded in the 1960's and the state standards were last exceeded in 1990 in Los Angeles County. These pollutants are not of concern to the SCAQMD or the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in the Coachella Valley. 3.1.4 EXISTING SENSITIVE RECEPTORS Land uses considered by the SCAQMD to be sensitive receptors include the following: • residences, • long-term health care facilities, • schools, • rehabilitation centers, • playgrounds, • convalescent centers, • child care centers, • retirement homes, and • athletic facilities. Existing land uses, including sensitive residential land uses, exist in the project vicinity, as shown in Figure 2-2 (the Vicinity Map). Most of the single-family residential land uses are set back from the master planned streets. Single-family residential dwellings exist southwest of the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54, in the PGA West community. In addition, single-family residential dwellings are currently under construction in conjunction with the Hideaway Development, northwest of the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54. These sensitive receptors are closest to the project site and therefore likely to be affected most by project -related increases in traffic volumes. If sensitive receptors are located adjacent to a major intersection, carbon monoxide (CO) "hot spots" may occur during times of peak use. High levels of carbon monoxide are also associated with traffic congestion, and with idling or slow-moving vehicles, depending on 3-13 the background CO concentration. Therefore, projects that could negatively impact levels of service at major intersections with nearby sensitive receptors must quantify and, if necessary, mitigate potential impacts. Since ambient carbon monoxide concentrations in the Coachella Valley are quite low, it is unlikely that a CO "hot spot" exists locally. 3.1.5 LOCAL SOURCES OF AIR CONTAMINANTS The Coachella Valley is sparsely populated, with the largest urban area represented by Palm Springs. Industrial sources in the Coachella Valley are generally limited and localized. Blowsand is the most severe form of wind erosion, occurring when barren sand or sandy loam soils are exposed to high winds, in the absence of moisture. Blowsand can cause significant property damage and expensive clean-up procedures. It contributes to high suspended particulate levels and associated respiratory problems for sensitive receptors. Controlling the blowsand problem is intended: (1) to protect the health, safety and general welfare of any current or future residents of the blowsand hazard zone; (2) to provide for the protection of adjacent property owners who are subject to soil erosion and/or soil accumulation resulting from development activities within the blowsand hazard zone; and (3) to minimize the public cost of removing accumulated sand on public roads. As shown in Figure 3-5, the project site appears to be located outside the area designated by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) as a "Blowsand Hazard Zone".11 This zone is defined as ".. all land, by nature of its location or soil characteristics subject to real or potential sand accumulation and/or abrasion, or land which may cause sand damage to adjacent property." Within the blowsand hazard zone is an "Active Blowsand Zone". The project site is located outside of the "Active Blowsand Zone". Blowsand reduction measures are required for projects located within the "Active Blowsand Zone". Vegetative planting has been the most effective method of direct blowsand control and protection. Other possible methods include: walls, screens, fences, ground covers, soil stabilizers, and watering techniques. 3.1.6 REGULATORY SETTING Federal Clean Air Act Requirements Section 110 of the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that each State adopt a plan which provides for implementation, maintenance and enforcement of the primary and secondary national air quality standards in that state. That requirement is met by the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The federal CAA prohibits federal departments and agencies or other agencies from acting on behaf of the federal gavernment, and the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) from engaging in, supporting in any way, providing financial assistance for, licensing, permitting, or approving any activity that does not conform to the SIP. The Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) is the MPO for the Coachella Valley. Federal law requires that a proposed project conform with the SIP. The November 1990 amendments to the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) were intended to intensify air pollution control efforts across the nation. The CAA identified specific emission reduction goals, required both a demonstration of reasonable further progress (an 11. CVAG;Final S/P for PMIO in the Coachella Valley; November 1990. 3-14 Figure 3-5 Coachella Valley Blowsand Region -- Leqend —springs--� ------------ \ ; BlowsLHazardone Activene wey - \ \ �-� ;------, ------------- 10 Palm Springs ......... Cathedral \ --- : City Thousand \ \ Palms \ " Rancho , Palm . --- Mira Indio '-=.� a Desert ; r - .. Indian La Wells Quinta Coachella t ----, "- - Project Site rTN Enda Engineering Note: Derived from C.V.A.G. Blowsand Control and Protection Plan, June 1977 Scale: 1" =19,400' r incremental reduction in emissions of relevant air pollutants needed to ensure attainment of the national ambient air quality standards or NAAQS by the applicable date) and an attain- ment demonstration, and incorporates more stringent sanctions for failure to attain or to meet interim milestones. The California Clean Air Act The California Clean Air Act (CCAA), which is generally more stringent than the federal CAA, was signed into law in 1988 and amended in 1992. The CCAA divides nonattainment areas into categories with progressively more stringent requirements, based on pollutant levels monitored therein. The CCAA establishes a legal mandate to achieve health -based state air quality standards at the earliest practicable date that is generally more stringent than the federal CAA. Serious and above nonattainment areas are required to revise their AQMP to include specified emission reduction strategies and to meet milestones in implementing emission controls and achieving better air quality. The study area is located in the Coachella Valley, which is an extreme nonattainment area for ozone (based upon the state 1 -hour ozone standard). The ozone standard exceedance is attributed to pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). Since the SCAB is a nonattainment area for carbon monoxide, ozone, and PMio, the Coachella Valley may only be able to attain the ozone standard after the SCAB reduces emissions of ozone precursors (VOCs and NOx). Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) It is the responsibility of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to lead the regional effort to attain the state and national AAQS. The SCAQMD is charged with developing and implementing the Air Quality Management Plan and reducing emissions from industries, some mobile sources, and consumer products. The purpose of the AQMP is to set forth a comprehensive program to lead the basin into compliance with all national and state air quality standards. Since local government provides the primary focus of land use and growth management decisions, no air quality management plan can succeed without the active participation of local government. Most of the control measures relating to local government are in the areas of trip reduction, energy conservation, and dust control. Consistent with the need to reduce emissions from mobile sources, many control measures identified focus on alternatives to current transportation strategies. Ride sharing, carpooling, flexible work schedules, parking management and the acquisition of clean - fueled fleet vehicles are a few of the transportation control measures to be considered for adoption by the cities and counties in the Basin. Also included are measures which call upon local jurisdictions to develop more efficient management programs for solid waste including: (1) recycling programs; (2) energy conservation programs; and (3) programs to reduce fugitive dust emissions. Nearly all of the measures call for the adoption of ordinances to implement control programs. Control strategies from the AQMP that should be considered for adoption by local govern- ments include: (1) emission reductions from paved roads, unpaved roads, unpaved parking lots and staging areas (SCAQMD Rule 403); (2) promotion of lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planting programs; (3) advanced transportation technology 3-15 incentive programs such as telecommunications, advanced shuttle transit, zero -emission vehicles, alternative fuel vehicles and Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems. It should be noted that local governments (cities and counties) are also responsible for participating in voluntary supportive programs (e.g. implementing transportation improve- ments called for in the AQMP, coordinating with CVAG regarding regional transportation projects, programs and plans that conform to the State Implementation Program, develop- ing and adopting ordinances to comply with the CMP). Most AQMP Transportation Control Measures included in the RTIP are designed to relieve congestion, reduce emissions from idling vehicles, and help maintain the CMP level of service standards. Local governments and CVAG should coordinate on trip reduction strategies to meet CMP trip reduction requirements. Compliance with the provisions of the federal CAA and CCAA is the primary focus of the latest Air Quality Management Plan developed by SCAQMD and SCAG. The 1997 AQMP included short-term, intermediate, and long-term control measures, and market-based incentive strategies to meet targets for emission reduction. The short-term measures identified specific control measures that involve existing technology. The control measures consisted mainly of: (1) stationary source controls that will be the subject of the SCAQMD rule making, (2) CARB adopted motor vehicle emissions standards and fuel specifications, and (3) federally adopted programs to reduce emissions from sources under federal jurisdiction. Intermediate term measures were composed primarily of the extension or more stringent application of short-term control measures. Long-term measures depended on substantial technological advancements and breakthroughs that were expected to occur over the next 20 years. Control measures focused on adoption of new regulations or the enhancement of existing regulations for stationary sources, as well as implementation/facilitation of advanced transportation technologies (i.e., telecommunication, zero emission and alternative fuel vehicles and infrastructure and both capital and non -capital based transportation improvements). Capital -based improvements consisted of high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, transit improvements, traffic flow improvements, park and ride and inter -modal facilities, and urban freeway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Non -capital based improvements consisted of rideshare matching and CMP -based Transportation Demand Management activities. The AQMP control measures will reduce emissions by: • Maximizing reductions in the use of pollutant -emitting materials; • Maximizing the substitution of non-polluting or less -polluting materials; • Maximizing the use of the most efficient pollution control devices; • Maximizing the compliance and maintenance programs for fugitive dust emissions; • Maximizing the efficiency of the transportation infrastructure to provide less polluting forms of transportation; • Maximizing the effectiveness of existing measures through improved administrative practices; and • Maximizing strong public and private commitments for the required implementation actions. One type of transportation measure eliminated from the 1997 AQMP was indirect source controls, which would regulate local land use decisions, particularly medium to large-scale developments. These measures were found to be too expensive to implement without producing cost-effective emissions reductions. Rule 2202, the replacement for Regulation 3-16 D XV - Ride sharing, remains in effect to ensure that emissions reduction levels originally projected with implementation of Regulation XV and other indirect source control strategies are achieved. This removal reflects a growing understanding that command and control measures tied to local land use decisions do not effectively alter travel behavior. The 2003 AQMP The 2003 AQMP is the current SCAQMD plan to achieve clean air standards in Southern California by the end of the decade. It outlines the control measures needed to meet the federal health -based standard for ozone by 2010 and PMio by 2006. The 2003 AQMP demonstrates how the SCAB will continue to meet the federal CO standard that was met for the first time in 2002. It also addresses the measures that will be necessary to meet the new and more stringent health -based standards for ozone and PM2.5. Twenty-four air pollution control measures are identified for adoption by the SCAQMD, to reduce emissions from businesses, industry and paints. In addition, twenty-nine measures are specified in the 2003 AQMP for adoption by the CARB and the EPA to further reduce emissions from cars, trucks, construction equipment, aircraft, ships and consumer products. To achieve the federal standards, additional control measures that may require future development and commercialization of clean air technologies may be needed to reduce 226 tons per day of VOCs and 161 tons per day of NOx. VOCs (from paints, consumer products and vehicle fuel combustion) and NOx (primarily from vehicle fuel combustion) are the two major precursors of ozone and fine particulates. State Implementation Plan for PMio in the Coachella Valley The SCAQMD Final 2002 Coachella Valley PMio State Implementation Plan (CVSIP) addresses the EPA's serious PM10 nonattainment designation for the Coachella Valley and the control measures required to meet state and federal PMio standards. Large-scale blowsand events, which can produce high levels of PMio through natural processes, are not targeted for control. The EPA excludes these conditions if man-made dust sources are controlled and a system for notifying the public of high wind forecasts is in place. The Coachella Valley SIP focuses on man-made dust producing activities and the reduction of blowsand intrusion into populated areas. The implementation and monitoring program of the SIP is dependent on the SCAQMD, CVAG and local governments. Local governments were asked in the 1990 CVSIP to develop ordinances, monitor progress, and create a County Service Area (CSA) or similar funding mechanism to implement the SIP. These measures and the resulting dust control programs significantly reduced PMio levels in the early 1990s, and permitted the Coachella Valley to attain the 24-hour PMio standard since 1993. After years of demonstrating attainment, however, a building boom and other factors have led to PMio levels in 1999 through 2001 that do not demonstrate attainment of the national annual average PMio siandaxd. Under the federal Clean Air Act, an area can request an extension of up to five years to attain the PMio NAAQS, if certain requirements are met (including a SIP that demonstrates expeditious attainment of the standards). The 2002 CVSIP addresses the recent rise in PMio levels above the standard by establishing additional controls needed to demonstrate expeditious attainment of the standards such as: ■ additional stabilizing or paving of unpaved surfaces, including parking lots; • a prohibition on building new unpaved roads; 3-17 • requiring more detailed dust control plans from builders in the valley that specify the use of more aggressive and frequent watering, soil stabilization, wind screens, and phased development as opposed to mass grading to minimize dust; • designating a worker to monitor dust control at construction sites; and • testing requirements for soil and road surfaces. The attainment program builds upon a historically proactive and successful dust control program carried out by local jurisdictions in the Coachella Valley and the SCAQMD. Additional control measures have been included in the CVSIP. An update to the 1996 Natural Events Action Plan has been included in the CVSIP with a request for extension of the Mo attainment deadline. The Final 2002 Coachella Valley PM10 SIP will prevent the federal government from imposing its own plan on the Coachella Valley. SCAQMD Rules and Regulations The SCAQMD is responsible for controlling stationary air pollution sources. Therefore, its Rules and Regulations address a wide variety of industrial and commercial operations and require operational controls on many processes. The SCAQMD establishes Permit to Construct and Permit to Operate requirements, inspects emissions sources, and enforces rules and regulations through educational programs and fines. Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) specifies control measures for use in developing site specific fugitive dust control plans to minimize blowing dust from construction sites and insure the clean up of construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site including: watering measures, chemical stabilizers, wind fencing, covering haul vehicles, bed liners in haul vehicles, wheel washers, and high wind measures. Rule 403 also prohibits the release of fugitive dust emissions from any active operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area beyond the property line of the emission source and prohibits particulate matter deposits on public roadways. Rule 1108 specifies the content of cutback asphalt. Rule 1113 details permitted VOC emissions from architectural coatings. City of La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan The City of La Quinta General Plan Natural Resources Element identifies the City's goals, policies, and programs pertaining to the maintenance of acceptable air quality. It requires buffer zones to be located between sensitive receptors and highways. It also indicates that the City of La Quinta shall strive to maintain land use and development patterns which contribute to the improvement of air quality including a balance between the housing supply and employment opportunities to reduce the length of commuter trips. Growth is encouraged around activity centers and arterial streets to provide more efficient travel patterns and transit service. The La Quinta General Plan addresses coordinating local mass transit improvements with Sunline Transit Agency and CVAG. Sunline Transit Agency reviews site plans for new development to assure adequate and properly located bus turnouts, bus lanes and other transit facilities are incorporated where necessary. Alternative modes of transportation including walking and the use of golf carts and bicycles are encouraged through the development of community -wide trails and dedicated lanes. 3-18 Air quality policies in the General Plan specify that new development be designed and constructed in a manner which minimizes the emission of project -related air pollutants. To implement this policy, applicants are required to submit detailed air quality analyses for all proposed projects which meet or exceed any of the SCAQMD emission threshold criteria. Projects determined to have a potentially significant impact on ambient air quality are required to propose and implement mitigation measures which reduce impacts to insignificant levels in accordance with the Fugitive Dust Control Ordinance. Developers are encouraged to minimize the amount of mass clearing, excavation, and cut and fill operations required for development. The City promotes the development and use of alternative clean energy sources for transportation, heating, cooling and ventilation. New development is encouraged to incorporate energy efficient design measures to reduce the need for heating and cooling (trees for shade, windbreaks, careful orientation of buildings etc.). The City of La Quinta supports and participates in CVAG, SCAG and SCAQMD efforts to monitor and minimize air pollutant emissions, particularly pollutants of regional concern. The City of La Quinta also supports and implements the provisions of the SIP for PMio in the Coachella Valley. The Environmental Hazards Element of the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan includes a discussion and map of areas within the City of La Quinta that are subject to wind erosion hazards. As shown therein, City of La Quinta Municipal Code The City of La Quinta Fugitive Dust Control Ordinance (No. 391) establishes minimum requirements for construction and demolition activities to reduce man-made fugitive dust and PMio emissions. This ordinance identifies performance standards and available control measures for dust -generating activities, per the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook developed by the SCAQMD in May of 2003. It requires an approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan, prior to the initiation of earth -moving operations, that describes fugitive dust sources at the construction site and the corresponding control measures that will be employed to minimize emissions. Ordinance No. 391 limits vehicle speeds on unpaved roads, requires the installation of on-site wheel washers at construction sites and identifies wind fencing requirements. Ordinance 391 specifies that during non -work hours of the grading phase, at least one of the following short-term stabilization methods shall be implemented: • soils shall be maintained in a damp condition, as determined by sight or touch; • a stabilized surface shall be established through watering; or • a chemical dust suppressant shall be applied to maintain a stabilized surface. Visible fugitive dust emissions shall not be allowed that exceed 20 percent opacity or extend more than 100 feet horizontally or vertically from their origin, or cross any property line. Within 10 days of ceasing activity, at least one of the following long-term stabilization techniques shall be implemented for any disturbed surface where construction activities are not scheduled to occur for at least 30 days: • revegetation with 75 percent ground coverage with an active watering system in place at all times; • establish a stabilized surface through watering with physical access restriction surrounding the area; or 3-19 0 • establish a stabilized surface with chemical stabilizers with physical access restriction surrounding the area. All bulk material track -out from any site access point onto any paved road open to through traffic shall be removed at the conclusion of each workday and within one hour, if such material extends more than 25 feet from any site access point. At the intersection of each site entrance and any paved road open to through traffic, all vehicles exiting the site shall be routed over at least one of the following: • a pad of at least one -inch washed gravel maintained in a clean condition to a depth of at least six inches extending at least 30 feet wide and 50 feet long; or • a paved surface extending at least 20 feet wide and 100 feet long; or • a wheel washing system, or • a wheel shaker/wheel spreading device consisting of raised dividers (rails, pipe, or grates) at least three inches tall , six inches apart, and 20 feet long. During any work involving a disturbed surface area of 50 or more acres, an AQMD certified Environmental Observer shall be on the site or available on-site within 30 minutes of initial contact who has dust control as the sole or primary responsibility. This individual shall be identified in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan and have the authority to immediately employ sufficient dust suppression measures 24 hours per day and seven days per week to ensure compliance with Ordinance 391, the Fugitive Dust Control Plan, and AQMD regulations. UNCI 3.2 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS The South Coast Air Quality Management District is responsible for adopting, implement- ing and enforcing air quality regulations within the Salton Sea Air Basin. The SCAQMD reviews and comments on environmental documents for projects that may generate signifi- cant adverse air quality impacts. The SCAQMD advises the lead agency in addressing and mitigating the potential adverse air quality impacts caused by projects both during and after construction. The final decision on the significance of the air quality impacts lies with the judgment of the lead agency. The City of La Quinta is the lead agency with respect to land use decisions and discretionary permits. These decisions must be based upon several considerations including the following. 1) What is the intensity and type of project? 2) What is the location of the project (i.e. upwind of sensitive receptors or in areas with high pollutant concentrations)? 3) Will the project cause an exceedance of any air quality standard? 4) Will the project make a substantial contribution to an existing exceedance of an air quality standard? 5) Is the project inconsistent with the AQMP or State Implementation Plan? 6) Will the project emit toxic air contaminants (TACs)? 7) Will the mitigation measures that are attached to the project mitigate the air quality impacts to the maximum extent feasible? Local governments control the impact of air pollutants on sensitive receptors through land use decisions. Two types of air pollutant sources must be considered with respect to the proposed project: stationary sources and mobile sources. Stationary source considerations include emissions from construction activities and natural gas combustion, emissions at the power plant associated with the electrical requirements of the proposed development. Mobile source considerations include exhaust emissions resulting from short-term construction activities and long-term vehicular travel associated with the proposed project. 3.2.1 IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD CRITERIA The SCAQMD has established short-term construction -related and long-term operational thresholds which are recommended for use by lead agencies in considering both primary and secondary impacts on air quality, as shown in Table 3-2. Emissions thresholds are indicators of potential air quality impacts. If the lead agency finds that a project has the potential to exceed the thresholds, the project should be considered significant. However; the final determination of whether or not a project is significant is within the purview of the lead agency, pursuant to Section 15064 (b) of the CEQA Guidelines.) For construction -related emissions, the SCAQMD has established significance thresholds on both a daily and a quarterly basis, as shown in Table 3-2. Since a project's quarterly emissions are determined by averaging over a 3 -month period (including only actual 1 , SCAQMD, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993, page 6-2. 3-21 working days), it is possible to not exceed the quarterly thresholds while exceeding the daily thresholds shown in Table 3-2. Table 3-2 Emissions Significance Threshold Criteriaa (Pounds/Day) Pollutant CO ROC NOx Sox PM10 Operational Emissionsb -Pounds/Day 550 75 100 150 150 Construction Emissions - Pounds/Day 550 75 100 150 150 - Tons/Quarter 24.75 2.5 2.5 6.75 6.75 a. SCAQMD, CEQA Air Quality Handbook; November, 1993. b. Projects in the Coachella Valley with peak (highest daily) operation -related emissions that exceed any of these emissions thresholds should be considered significant. Air quality impacts resulting from the operation of the proposed project over the long term could be considered significant if the project's daily emissions exceed the operational threshold criteria shown in Table 3-2. If the project is inconsistent with the 2002 Coachella Valley PM to State Implementation Plan or the AQMP, its long-term operational impacts on air quality could be considered significant. Significant localized project impacts occur when carbon monoxide standard exceedances are projected at sensitive receptor locations adjacent to roadways serving project -related traffic, or, in cases where the background concentration already exceeds the state carbon monoxide standards, when there will be a measurable increase in carbon monoxide levels at the receptor site. A measurable increase is defined by the SCAQMD as 1.0 ppm for 1 -hour carbon monoxide levels and 0.45 ppm for 8 -hour carbon monoxide levels. A project has a significant adverse impact on air quality if it is inconsistent with the assumptions and objectives of regional air quality plans (AQMP and PMio SIP), because it could interfere with the region's ability to comply with federal and state ambient air quality standards. A project that requires a General Plan Amendment or revision which would provide directly or indirectly for increased population growth above that projected in the adopted AQMP will have a significant cumulative adverse air quality impact. Only new or amended General Plan Elements, Specific Plans, and significant projects need to undergo a consistency review. Projects that are consistent with local General Plans are considered consistent with the air quality related regional plans including: the current AQMP, the 2002 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan and other applicable regional plans.2 The City of La Quinta has recognized that there are certain substantial adverse impacts associated with implementation of the General Plan that cannot be avoided. Among these impacts are the exceedances of the SCAQMD significance thresholds for criteria air pollutant emissions. Attachment B of the "California Environmental Quality Act Statement 2. SCAQMD, CEQA Air Quality Handbook; November 1993; pg. 12-2. 3-22 of Overriding Considerations for the La Quinta General Plan Update" concludes: "For the identified significant impacts which cannot be avoided or mitigated to a level of insignificance, the City of La Quinta finds that the feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR are appropriate and have been incorporated into the project. The City of La Quinta finds the project benefits outweigh the significant project impacts." Since the proposed project includes conforming uses, and the exceedance of the SCAQMD threshold criteria was identified in the La Quinta General Plan Update as an unavoidable impact, the air quality impacts associated with the proposed project should be considered less than significant. 3.2.2 SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION -RELATED IMPACTS Short-term impacts on air quality will occur during the construction activities required to implement the proposed project. These adverse impacts will include: 1) diesel exhaust emissions from the construction equipment used as well as the vehicles used to transport the off-highway construction equipment required; 2) emissions from the commute vehicles of construction workers; 3) particulate emissions (fugitive dust) during excavation, grading and clearing activities; 4) exhaust emissions from the heavy vehicles used to transport building materials to the site; and 5) off-gasing emissions from architectural coatings used for buildings and paving materials used for roadway improvements. Construction Assumptions For a "worst case" short-term impact assessment, it was assumed that construction could begin in May of the year 2005 and extend over a period of three years. Construction equipment on-site will typically operate eight hours per day and six days per week, as specified by the La Quinta Municipal Code. On average, it is estimated that 60 construction workers will be required on-site to construct the proposed development. Buildout and full occupancy of the site is expected to occur in the year 2008. The entire 199 -acre project site was assumed to require grading over a period of two months. Cut and fill quantities are expected to be balanced on-site, without requiring the importation or exportation of material. During the grading activities, the maximum acreage disturbed per day is estimated to be 13 acres. Paving was assumed to occur on approximately 29 acres of the site in three infrastructure improvement phases, each requiring approximately 2 weeks to complete. The residential buildings will be constructed in eight phases with each incremental group of approximately 35 dwellings requiring approximately 6 months to construct. More than one development phase may be under construction on-site simultaneously, but at different stages of the building process. Architectural coatings will be applied over the course of 20 days for each development phase, with three days assumed per phase for drying of the interior and exterior coatings. 3-23 Computer Modeling URBEMIS2002 is a computer model developed as a tool to estimate emissions for land use development projects for many California air quality management and air pollution control districts and the California Air Resources Board.3 Short-term construction emissions can be estimated with the URBEMIS2002 computer model (Version 7.4) for three construction phases (demolition, site grading, and building construction) during summer days, winter days and on an annual basis. These emissions estimates include: fugitive dust (from demolition and site grading), on -road diesel exhaust (from demolition, site grading and asphalt paving), off-road diesel emissions (associated with demolition, site grading, building construction, and asphalt paving), worker commute trips (during each phase of construction), and off-gasing (during architectural coating and asphalt laying activities). Table 3-3 provides the project -related unmitigated construction emissions projections. Unmitigated emissions shown therein reflect the fact that the City of La Quinta will use its discretionary permit authority to place conditions of approval on the proposed project that require compliance with all applicable policies, rules, regulations and ordinances. The emissions projections included in Table 3-3 incorporate site specific construction details, where available, and assume default values for input parameters where site specific information is not currently known. The assumptions and URBEMIS2002 worksheets are provided in Appendix A. As shown in Table 3-3, construction activities undertaken to implement the proposed project will cause temporary increases in localized ROG, NOx, CO, and PM10 emissions and concentrations in the project vicinity. The primary sources of construction -related emissions on-site will be: (1) off-road diesel -powered heavy-duty mobile construction equipment exhaust NOx, (2) ROG off-gasing associated with the application of architectural coatings; and (3) PMio generated by grading operations involving disturbing sail and exposed earth surfaces. Exhaust emissions during the construction activities envisioned on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The resulting air pollutant concentration increases will depend on several factors including the soil composition and moisture content, the amount of grading required and underway at any one time, wind speeds, the number and type of machinery used at any given point in time, and the construction schedule (including the scheduling of concurrent construction processes and phases). On a peak day during the grading phase, the off-road diesel emissions generated at the project site are projected to include approximately: 20 pounds of ROG, 149 pounds of NOx, 151 pounds of CO and 7 pounds of PM10. In addition, the active soil disturbance associated with earthwork on 13 acres would generate an estimated 50 pounds of fugitive dust, assuming twice daily watering of exposed surfaces and any unpaved areas used as roads on-site, and maximum speeds of 15 mph on unpaved surfaces. Emissions at this rate would exceed the SCAQMD daily significance threshold for NOx by 49 percent. On a peak construction day after grading is completed, the maximum air pollutant emissions associated with building construction activities are projected to total approximately 164 pounds of ROG, 150 pounds of NOx, 161 pounds of CO, and 137 pounds of PM to. Emissions at this rate would exceed the SCAQMD significance threshold for ROG (by 118 percent) and the significance threshold for NOx (by 50 percent) to the extent that they could most likely not be mitigated to a level of insignificance. 3. Jones & Stokes Associates; URBEMIS2002 For Windows With Enhanced Construction Module; (Version 7.4.2) May, 2003 and EMFAC 2002 Version 2.2. 3-24 Table 3-3 Peak Day Unmitigated Construction Emissions Estimatesa (Pounds/Day) Emissions Source ROG NOx CO PM10 SITE GRADING PHASE - Fugitive Dust - - - 49.94 - Off -Road Diesel 19.93 149.16 150.79 6.80 - Worker Trips 0.20 0.24 5.06 0.02 Subtotal 20.13 149.40 155.85 56.76 BUILDING CONSTRUCTION Construction Process - Off -Road Diesel 14.04 111.82 100.41 5.09 - Worker Trips 1.45 0.74 17.99 0.24 Subtotal 15.49 112.56 118.40 5.33 Architectural Coatings - Off-Gasing 146.64 - - - - Worker Trips 1.45 0.74 16.21 0.24 Subtotal 148.09 0.74 16.21 0.24 Asphalt Paving - Off-Gasing 0.77 - - - Off -Road Diesel 5.04 33.76 41.09 1.46 - On -Road Diesel 0.18 3.52 0.68 0.08 - Worker Trips 0.03 0.02 0.01 Subtotal 6.02 37.30 _0.41 42.18 1.55 MAXIMUM ALL PHASESb 163.57 149.86 160.59 56.76 Daily Threshold 75 100 550 150 No Threshold Exceeded Yes Yes No a. Refer to Appendix A for the URBEMIS2002 printouts. The PM10 emissions include exhaust and fugitive dust emissions, assuming 13 acres per day are disturbed during grading. Twice daily watering of exposed surfaces was assumed as well as reduced speeds (<15 mph) on unpaved surfaces on-site. b. Building construction activities will occur in eight phases. The maximum emission projections for any phase are included here. Not all building activities will occur simultaneously on-site. Table 3-4 provides the unmitigated quarterly construction emissions estimates associated with the proposed project. The quarterly emissions were determined from the average annual emissions estimates and include only actual working days (22 days per month). It is possible to not exceed the quarterly thresholds while exceeding the daily thresholds. Without mitigation, the SCAQMD quarterly threshold for NOx is projected to be exceeded during site grading activities and during building construction activities. In addition, the SCAQMD quarterly ROG threshold is projected to be exceeded during architectural coating activities associated with the buildings to be constructed on-site. 3-25 Table 3-4 Unmitigated Quarterly Construction Emissions Estimatesa (Tons/Quarter) Emissions Source ROG NOx CO PM10 Maximum All Phases SCAQMD Threshold 3.52 3.59 2.50 Yes 4.30 1.99 6.75 No 2.50 24.75 Threshold Exceeded Yes No a. Refer to Appendix A for the URBEMIS2002 printouts. The quarterly emissions include only actual working days and were determined from the URBEMIS2002 annual construction emission estimates. Significance of Short -Term Impacts The proposed project is expected to exceed the SCAQMD daily and quarterly construction emission thresholds of significance for ROG and NOx during construction activities on site. The magnitude of the exceedances indicate that mitigation of both of these criteria pollutant emissions levels to a level of insignificance is not likely to be feasible. 3.2.3 LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL IMPACTS Criteria Air Pollutant Emission Projections During the life of the proposed development, a variety of emissions will be produced by its day-to-day operations. Emission projections were made for the project buildout year (2008) with the URBEMIS2002 model which utilizes EMFAC 2002 emission factors. The input assumptions utilized and model output sheets are provided in Appendix A. The results are summarized in Table 3-5 for a summer day and a winter day, because motor vehicle emissions of criteria pollutants (other than particulates) vary with the ambient temperature. Operational emissions associated with the proposed project will include motor vehicle emissions and area source emissions. The motor vehicle emissions projections include: running exhaust, tire wear particulates, brake wear particulates, variable starts, hot soaks, diurnal emissions, resting losses and evaporative running losses. They assume PM10 emissions associated with cars traveling over only paved streets. Only a small fraction of the project -related operational emissions would be area source emissions, which include fuel combustion for space and water heating, fuel combustion for landscape maintenance, and consumer product emissions from air fresheners, automotive products, household cleaners and personal care products. Upon full occupancy in the year 2008, the project is expected to generate up to 337 pounds of carbon monoxide, 44 pounds of reactive organic gases, 41 pounds of NOx, 29 pounds of PMIo and less than one pound of SOx, daily. Project -related motor vehicle and area source emissions are not projected to exceed any of the SCAQMD operational emission significance thresholds. 3-26 r Table 3-5 Project Buildout Operational Air Pollutant Emissionsa (Year 2008 Pounds/Day) Emissions Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 SUMMER DAY Motor Vehicles 28.49 26.77 332.19 0.21 29.45 Area Sources - Natural Gas 0.30 3.82 1.63 -- 0.005 - Landscaping 0.43 0.05 3.72 0.11 0.005 - Consumer Products 14.92 Subtotal 15.65 3.87 5.35 0.11 0.01 Total 44.14 30.64 337.54 0.32 29.46 WINTER DAY Motor Vehicles 23.13 36.75 263.59 0.16 29.45 Area Sources - Natural Gas 0.30 3.82 1.63 -- 0.01 - Landscaping - - - _ - Consumer Products 14.92 - - - - Subtotal 15.22 3.82 1.63 �-- 0.01 Total 38.35 75 40.57 100 265.22 0.16 29.46 Daily Threshold 550 150 150 No No No No No Threshold Exceeded a. See Appendix A for URBEMIS2002 (Version 7.4.2) output which utilizes EMFAC 2002 Version 2.2. Assumes 305 single-family dwellings generating 2,900 ADT. Carbon Monoxide "Hot Spot" Analysis Future carbon monoxide levels in the project vicinity during peak hour traffic were assessed with the CALINE4 computer model at the most heavily used intersection. The intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54 was modeled for year 2008 conditions with and without the proposed project, as shown in Table 3-6. Other intersections carrying project -related traffic will experience smaller increases in carbon monoxide levels than shown in Table 3-6. Peak hour traffic in the year 2008 (prior to the addition of project -related traffic) will contribute up to 0.1 ppm (over a 1 -hour period) and up to 0.1 ppm (over an 8 -hour period) to the carbon monoxide concentrations at the closest residential receptor locations near the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54. The highest carbon monoxide concentration expected at the nearest sensitive receptor sites at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54 under year 2008 ambient conditions is projected to be 3.0 ppm over a 1 -hour averaging period and 1.8 ppm over an 8 -hour averaging period. Project -related traffic volumes would increase carbon monoxide levels at receptors near this intersection to 3.1 ppm (over a 1 -hour period) and 1.9 ppm (aver an 8 -hour period). Changes in CO concentrations of this magnitude are not significant. 3-27 Table 3-6 Projected Future Carbon Monoxide Concentrations Near the Intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54 a. Receptors were located on the northwest, southwest and southeast corners of the intersection (at the intersection of the rights-of-way of Madison Street and Avenue 54 adjacent to the PGA West development and the Hideaway Resort, as well as at the closest residential lot on-site). b. Refer to Appendix A for the assumptions and CALINE 4 output sheets. c. A persistence factor of 0.6 was used to determine the 8 -hour CO concentrations from the 1 -hour values. d. The background CO concentrations were taken from the SCAQMD web site "CEQA Handbook" Update Revised August, 2003. The background concentration, when added to the CO concentration near each intersection, yields the total CO concentration projected to occur in the project vicinity. A project has a significant impact if it interferes with the attainment of the state 1 -hour or 8- hot11' carbon monoxide standards by either exceeding them or contributing to an existing or projected violation. Based upon the CO "hot spot" analysis, the proposed project will not interfere with the attainment of the state 1 -hour or 8 -hour carbon monoxide standards by either exceeding them or contributing to an existing or projected violation at sensitive receptor locations. Future carbon monoxide concentrations adjacent to the "worst case" intersection modeled will be sixteen percent of the 20 ppm state standard and nine percent of the 35 ppm federal standard (1 -hour average) with the proposed project. The 8 -hour carbon monoxide concentrations in the year 2008 with the proposed development will represent 21 percent of the state and federal 8 -hour carbon monoxide standard. Significance of Long -Term Impacts Since the proposed project includes conforming uses on the project site, it appears to be consistent with the population and employment growth projections that form the basis of the AQMP and the Regional Growth Management Plan. Project -related operational emissions projections are not expected to exceed the SCAQMD operational emissions significance thresholds. The proposed project will not interfere with the attainment of the 3-28 1 -Hour Averageb (ppm) 8 -Hour Averagec (ppm). Receptor Cornera (Feet) NW SW SE NW SW SE Year 2008 No -Project Year 2008 CO Backgroundd 2.3 2.3 2.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 Ambient Traffic Contribution 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 Year 2008 Background + Ambient 3.0 2.9 2.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 Year 2008 + Project Year 2008 CO Backgroundd 2.3 2.3 2.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 Project Buildout Traffic Contribution 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.4 Year 2008 Background + Buildout 3.1 3.0 3.0 1.9 1.8 1.8 State Standard 20.0 20.0 20.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Federal Standard 35.0 35.0 35.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 a. Receptors were located on the northwest, southwest and southeast corners of the intersection (at the intersection of the rights-of-way of Madison Street and Avenue 54 adjacent to the PGA West development and the Hideaway Resort, as well as at the closest residential lot on-site). b. Refer to Appendix A for the assumptions and CALINE 4 output sheets. c. A persistence factor of 0.6 was used to determine the 8 -hour CO concentrations from the 1 -hour values. d. The background CO concentrations were taken from the SCAQMD web site "CEQA Handbook" Update Revised August, 2003. The background concentration, when added to the CO concentration near each intersection, yields the total CO concentration projected to occur in the project vicinity. A project has a significant impact if it interferes with the attainment of the state 1 -hour or 8- hot11' carbon monoxide standards by either exceeding them or contributing to an existing or projected violation. Based upon the CO "hot spot" analysis, the proposed project will not interfere with the attainment of the state 1 -hour or 8 -hour carbon monoxide standards by either exceeding them or contributing to an existing or projected violation at sensitive receptor locations. Future carbon monoxide concentrations adjacent to the "worst case" intersection modeled will be sixteen percent of the 20 ppm state standard and nine percent of the 35 ppm federal standard (1 -hour average) with the proposed project. The 8 -hour carbon monoxide concentrations in the year 2008 with the proposed development will represent 21 percent of the state and federal 8 -hour carbon monoxide standard. Significance of Long -Term Impacts Since the proposed project includes conforming uses on the project site, it appears to be consistent with the population and employment growth projections that form the basis of the AQMP and the Regional Growth Management Plan. Project -related operational emissions projections are not expected to exceed the SCAQMD operational emissions significance thresholds. The proposed project will not interfere with the attainment of the 3-28 state 1 -hour or 8 -hour carbon monoxide standards by either exceeding them or contributing to an existing or projected violation at sensitive receptor locations. 3.2.4 RELEVANT PLANNING PROGRAMS Air Quality Management Plan The purpose of a consistency finding is to determine whether or not a project is consistent with the assumptions and objectives of regional air quality plans. Based on this determina- tion, conclusions can be drawn regarding whether or not a specific project will interfere with the region's ability to comply with federal and state air quality standards. The consistency determination fulfills the CEQA goal of fully informing local agency decision makers of the environmental costs of projects under consideration early enough to ensure that air quality concerns are fully addressed. This allows decision makers to contribute to the clean air goals in the AQMP and the PM10 SIP. When a project is inconsistent, local governments can consider project modifications or mitigation measures to eliminate the inconsistency. Since the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan is the basis for the AQMP emissions inventories, it appears that the proposed project, which is consistent with the General Plan land use designations on-site, is consistent with the key underlying assumptions associated with the AQMP. State Implementation Plan for PMlo in the Coachella Valley The proposed project will adhere to the provisions of the La Quinta Fugitive Dust Control Ordinance to minimize fugitive dust emissions during construction activities. This is a control measure outlined in the PM10 SIP. Through the construction specifications, the project proponent will implement feasible PM10 guidelines such as discontinuing grading when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. A PM10 fugitive dust mitigation plan will be developed by the project proponent and submitted to the City of La Quinta for approval, prior to the issuance of grading permits. It appears, therefore, that the proposed project is consistent with the PM10 SIP. SCAQMD Rules and Regulations The project proponent will comply with all applicable SCAQMD "Rules and Regulations". City of La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan The proposed project is consistent with the City's air quality goals, policies, and programs set forth in the Natural Resources Element of the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan. Buffer zones shall be located between the sensitive residential development proposed on- site and the abutting roadways (Madison Street and Avenue 54). The proposed project shall make provisions for alternative transportation modes including walking, golf carts and bicycles, as specified in the General Plan. A detailed air quality analysis has been prepared identifying mitigation measures which will reduce construction -related PM10 impacts to insignificant levels in accordance with City of La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan policies and Municipal Code requirements. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on-site to eliminate emissions associated with hauling material to or from the site. The land uses proposed on-site are consistent with the General Plan Land Use and zoning designations and therefore the underlying assumptions in the AQMP. The project -related long-term operational emissions of criteria air pollutants will not exceed any of the SCAQMD significance threshold criteria. 3-29 City of La Quinta Municipal Code The project proponent will comply with all provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code including the Fugitive Dust Control Ordinance (No. 391) which establishes mininnum requirements for construction activities to reduce fugitive dust and PMio emissions. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan describing fugitive dust sources at the site and the control measures to be implemented for each fugitive dust source during any dust -generating activity on-site from the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook (SCAQMD) shall be submitted to the City of La Quinta for approval in conjunction with the application for a grading permit or a building permit and prior to the initiation of any earth -moving operations. The most important control measures will be phased grading of the site (to minimize the number of acres disturbed each day), frequent watering of exposed surfaces, and the limitation of vehicle speeds to 15 mph on unpaved surfaces during construction activities. This will ensure that fugitive dust emissions are minimized during construction and no debris is washed, blown by wind, or otherwise deposited on abutting streets or adjacent property. 3.2.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS A project that requires a General Plan Amendment or revision which would provide directly or indirectly for increased population growth above that projected in the adopted AQMP will have a significant cumulative adverse air quality impact. The proposed project would not provide directly or indirectly for increased population growth above that projected in the adopted AQMP and, therefore, will not have a significant cumulative adverse air quality impact. Cumulative impacts on air quality were addressed in the carbon monoxide "hot spot" analysis. The ambient year 2008 traffic volumes modeled with the California Line Source Dispersion Model included the growth in background traffic volumes expected to occur in the project vicinity as a result of cumulative development in the area. As shown therein, the projected cumulative impact on air pollutant concentrations at the intersections carrying the most project -related traffic are not expected to be significant. Adherence to the SCAQMD "Rules and Regulations" and compliance with locally adopted AQMP and PMio SIP control measures will help reduce the pollutant burden of each cumulative development. Appropriate mitigation measures for cumulative impacts such as: fugitive dust control plans, grading permits, and TDM plans are required by the City of La Quinta and implemented through enforcement of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 3-30 3.3 AIR QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURES The inclusion of mitigation measures in the project is required to minimize to the greatest extent feasible the potential air quality impacts attributable to the proposed project. The City of La Quinta must take affirmative steps to determine that approved mitigation measures are implemented subsequent to project approval. A mitigation monitoring and reporting plan must be prepared, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081.6, for any mitigation measures incorporated in the project or imposed as a condition of approval. The City of La Quinta will use its discretionary permit authority to place conditions of approval on the proposed project that require compliance with all applicable policies, rules, regulations and ordinances. The following measures reflect policies, rules or regulations that apply to the proposed development. 1. The proposed project will comply with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code which establish minimum requirements for construction activities to reduce fugitive dust and PM10 emissions. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan describing fugitive dust sources at the site and the control measures to be implemented for each fugitive dust source during any dust -generating activity on-site from the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook (SCAQMD; May, 2003) shall be prepared and submitted to the City of La Quinta for approval prior to the issuance of any grading permits or building permits associated with the project and prior to the initiation of any earth -moving operations. 2. The project proponent shall comply with all applicable SCAQMD Rules and Regulations including but not limited to the following: • Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) specifies control measures for use in developing site specific fugitive dust control plans to minimize blowing dust from construction sites and insure the clean up of construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site including: watering measures, chemical stabilizers, wind fencing, covering haul vehicles, bed liners in haul vehicles, wheel washers, and high wind measures; • Rule 1108 and 1108.1 prohibits the use of rapid and medium cure cutback asphalts as well as organic compounds in emulsified asphalts used during the construction process; and • Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) restricts the VOC content of any architectural coating materials used on-site to a maximum of 2.08 pounds of VOC per gallon. 3. Building construction on-site shall comply with the energy use guidelines in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. 4. As a condition of approval, the project proponent will comply with City requirements regarding the master planned Class II bikeways and Class II golf cart paths adjacent to the site along Avenue 54 and Madison Street. In addition to compliance with applicable rules, regulations and ordinances, the following measures are recommended for incorporation in the project to reduce the potential for adverse air quality impacts during construction. 3-31 5 . If feasible, earth -moving activities should be limited to a maximum 13 acres disturbed per day to ensure that PM10 emissions during grading do not exceed the SCAQMD daily threshold criteria. 6. Earth -moving activities should be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 MPH, per the Coachella Valley PMio State Implementation Plan and SCAQMD Rule 403.1. 7. Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to partially mitigate the impact of construction -generated dust particulates. Portions of the project site that are under- going earth moving operations shall be watered such that a crust will be formed on the ground surface and then watered again at the end of the day, as part of the construction specifications. 8. Any construction access roads should be watered, paved as soon as possible, and cleaned after each work day. The maximum vehicle speed limit on unpaved road surfaces shall be 15 mph. 9. As part of the construction specifications, any vegetative ground cover to be utilized on-site shall be planted as soon as possible to reduce the disturbed area subject to wind erosion. Irrigation systems needed to water these plants shall be installed as soon as possible to maintain the ground cover and minimize wind erosion of the soil. 10. Construction operations affecting off-site roadways shall be scheduled for off-peak traffic hours and shall minimize the obstruction of through -traffic lanes. 11. Architectural coatings should not be applied at the same time that other construction activities which generate high VOC emissions (e.g. asphalt paving) are under way on-site. 12. Consideration should be given to the implementation of other feasible mitigation strategies to minimize ROC emissions during architectural coating activities including: • the use of precoated building materials, • the use naturally colored building materials (brick, stone tile, etc.); • the use of water-based or low-VOC coatings; • using coating transfer or spray equipment with a high transfer efficiency • employing skilled operators who are well -versed in Rule 1113 requirements (improved transfer efficiency and fewer paint and solvent spills). 3-32 4.0 NOISE ANALYSIS 4.1 EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT Noise fundamentals are introduced below such as: noise rating schemes, typical noise levels of familiar noise sources, sound propagation, and various factors which affect motor vehicle noise levels. This information is followed by a discussion of: (1) the harmful effects of noise, (2) community responses to sound, (3) guidelines for achieving land use compatibility with noise, and (4) the current noise environment in the project vicinity. A glossary of technical terms related to noise is provided in Appendix B. 4.1.1 FUNDAMENTALS OF NOISE Noise levels are measured on a logarithmic scale in decibels which are then weighted and added over a 24-hour period to reflect not only the magnitude of the sound, but also its duration, frequency, and time of occurrence. In this manner, various acoustical scales and units of measurement have been developed such as: equivalent sound levels (Leq), day - night average sound levels (Ldn) and community noise equivalent levels (CNELs). A -weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to a broad frequency noise source by discriminating against the very low and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. They are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies which are audible to the human ear. The decibel scale has a value of 1.0 dBA at the threshold of hearing and 140 dBA at the threshold of pain. Each interval of 10 decibels indicates a sound energy ten times greater than before, which is perceived by the human ear as being roughly twice as loud. Under controlled conditions in a laboratory, the trained healthy human ear is able to discern changes in sound levels of 1 dBA, when exposed to steady single frequency signals in the mid -frequency range. Outside of these controlled conditions, the trained ear can detect changes of 2 dBA in normal environmental noise. A 3.0 decibel increase in noise level reflects a doubling of the acoustic energy. It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear, however, can barely perceive noise level changes of 3 dBA.1 The human perception of loudness is nonlinear in terms of decibels and acoustical energy. For instance, if one source produces a noise level of 70 dBA, two of the same sources produce 73 dBA, three will produce about 75 dBA, and ten will produce 80 dBA. Human perception is complicated in that two identical noise sources do not sound twice as loud as one noise source. Acoustic experts have tested thousands of subjects to establish the relationship between changes in acoustical energy and the corresponding human reaction, Table 4-1 summarizes their findings. The average human perceives a 10 dBA decrease in noise levels as one-half of the original level, even though it exposes the average human to one-tenth of the acoustic energy associated with the reference sound. An increase of 3 dBA in noise level is perceived as a barely perceptible increase, but it actually exposes the listener to twice the acoustic energy of the noise level before the increase. 1. Mr. Rudy Hendriks, Caltrans Environmental Engineering - Noise, Air Quality and Hazardous Waste Management Office, Technical Noise Supplement, October 1998, pg. 41. 4-1 Table 4-1 Human Response to Noise Level Changes Noise Level Relative Energy Perceived Change Descriptive Change Change (dBA) Chane In Percents a In Human Perception +40 dBA 10,000 x Sixteen Times as Loud +30 dBA 1,000 x Eight Times as Loud +20 dBA 100 x +300% Four Times as Loud +15 dBA 31.6 x +183% +10 dBA lox +100% Twice as Loud +9 dBA 7.9 x +87% +8 dBA 6.3 x +74% +7 dBA 5.0 x +62% +6 dBA 4.0 x +52% +5 dBA 3.16 x +41% Readily Perceptible Increase +4 dBA 2.5 x +32% +3 dBA 2.0 x +23% Barely Perceptible Increase Reference (No Change) Barely Perceptible Reduction +0 dBA 1 0% -3 dBA 0.5 x -19% -4 dBA 0.4 x -24% -5 dBA 0.316 x -29% Readily Perceptible Reduction -6 dBA 0.25 x -34% -7 dBA 0.20 x -38% -8 dBA 0.16 x -43% -9 dBA 0.13 x -46% -10 dBA 0.10 x -50% One -Half as Loud -15 dBA 0.0316 x -65% -20 dBA 0.01 x -75% One -Quarter As Loud -30 dBA 0.001 x One -Eighth as Loud -40 dBA 0.0001 x One -Sixteenth as Loud a. Mr. Rudy Hendriks, Caltrans, Technical Noise Supplement, October, 1998. b. Change in relative energy with respect to a zero change in dBA (no change). c. Average human perceived change in noise level. A positive change represents an increase. A negative change represents a decrease. 4-2 Examples of the decibel level of various noise sources are shown in Figure 4-1. They include: the quiet rustle of leaves (10 dBA), a motion picture studio (20 dBA), a library (35 dBA), ambient noise outdoors (50 dBA), normal conversation at 5 feet (55 dBA), or a busy street at 50 feet (75 dBA). Noise Rating Schemes Equivalent sound levels are not measured directly but rather calculated from sound pressure levels typically measured in A -weighted decibels (dBA). The equivalent sound level (Leq) is the constant level that, over a given time period, transmits the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time -varying sound. Equivalent sound levels are the basis for both the Ldn and CNEL scales. Day -night average sound levels (Ldn) are a measure of the cumulative noise exposure of the community. The Ldn value results from a summation of hourly Leq's over a 24-hour time period with an increased weighting factor applied to the nighttime period between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. This noise rating scheme takes into account those subjectively more annoying noise events which occur during the normal sleeping hours. Community noise equivalent levels (CNEL) also carry a weighting penalty for noises that occur during the nighttime hours. In addition, CNEL levels include a penalty for noise events that occur during the evening hours between 7:00 PM and 10:00 PM. Because of the weighting factors applied, CNEL values at a given location will always be larger than Ldn values, which in turn will exceed Leq values. However, CNEL values are typically within one decibel of the Ldn value. As used in General Plan applications, the CNEL, metric means the annualized daily sound level (the sum of 365 days of individual CNEL values divided by 365). The annualized CNEL reflects the fundamental theory that real community impacts are related to long-term noise exposure levels. That is why airport, railroad, and highway noise impact criteria are all based on annualized CNEL values. Sound Propagation For a "line source" of noise such as a heavily traveled roadway, the noise level drops off by a nominal value of 3.0 decibels for each doubling of distance between the noise source and the noise receiver. Environmental factors such as wind conditions, temperature gradients, characteristics of the ground (hard or soft) and the air (relative humidity), and the presence of vegetation combine to increase the attenuation achieved outside laboratory conditions to 4.5 decibels per doubling of distance in many cases. The increase in noise attenuation in exterior environments is particularly true: (1) for freeways where an elevated or depressed profile, higher truck mix, or the presence of intervening buildings or topography come into play; (2) where the view of a roadway is interrupted by isolated buildings, clumps of bushes, scattered trees; (3) when the intervening ground is soft or covered with vegetation; or (4) where the source or receiver is located more than three meters above the ground. The nominal value of 3.0 dBA with doubling applies to sound propagation from a "line source": (1) over the top of a barrier greater than 3 meters in height; or (2) where there is a clear unobstructed view of the highway, the ground is hard, no intervening structures exist and the line -of -sight between the noise source and receiver averages more than 3 meters above the ground? 2. State of California, Department of Transportation, Noise Manual, 1980. 4-3 Figure 4-1 Typical Noise Levels of Familiar Sources Physically Painful Extremely Loud Discomforting Very Loud Very Quiet Barely Audible Threshold of Hearing Sonic Boom Jet Takeoff at 200' Oxygen Torch Discotheque Construction Noise at 10' Power Mower at 3' Newspaper Press, Subway Train Freight Train at 50' Food Blender Electric Mixer, Alarm Clock Heavy Truck at 50', Average Factory Busy Street Traffic at 50' Average Traffic at 100', Vacuum Cleaner at 10' Electric Typewriter at 10' Dishwasher at 10', Air Conditioning Unit at 15' Normal Conversation at 5' Typical Daytime Suburban Background, Quiet Office Refrigerator at 10' Bird Calls Library Soft Whisper at 16' Motion Picture Studio Leaves Rustling 71WI-11111 Engineering Source; 7i ier Paul A. "Ph sacs" New Yank: Worth Publishers f 976 In an area which is relatively flat and free of barriers, the sound level resulting from a single "point source" of noise drops by 6 decibels for each doubling of distance or 20 decibels for each factor of ten in distance. This applies to fixed noise sources and mobile noise sources which are temporarily stationary such as an idling truck or other heavy duty equipment operating within a confined area (such as industrial processes or construction). Factors Affecting Motor Vehicle Noise The noise levels adjacent to "line sources" such as roadways increase by 3.0 dBA with each doubling in the traffic volume (provided that the speed and truck mix do not change). From the mathematical expression relating increases in the number of noise sources (motor vehicles) to the increase in the adjacent sound level, it can be shown that a 26 percent increase in the traffic volume will cause a 1.0 dBA increase in adjacent noise levels. Doubling the number of vehicles on a given route increases the adjacent noise levels by 3.0 dBA, but changing the vehicle speed has an even more dramatic effect. Increasing the vehicle speed from 35 to 45 mph raises the adjacent noise levels by approximately 2.7 dBA. Raising the speed from 45 to 50 mph increases adjacent noise levels by 1.0 dBA. A speed increase from 50 to 55 mph increases adjacent noise levels by 0.9 dBA. Consequently, lower motor vehicle speeds can have a significant positive impact in terms of reducing adjacent noise levels.3 The truck mix on a given roadway also has a significant effect on adjacent noise levels. As the number of trucks increases and becomes a larger percentage of the vehicle volume, adjacent noise levels increase. This effect is more pronounced if the number of heavy duty (3+ axle) trucks is large when compared to the number of medium duty (2 -axle) trucks. 4.1.2 HARMFUL EFFECTS OF NOISE Noise can cause temporary physical and psychological responses in humans. Temporary physical reactions to passing noises range from a startle reflex to constriction in peripheral blood vessels, the secretion of saliva and gastric juices, and changes in heart rate, breathing patterns, the chemical composition of the blood and urine, dilation of pupils in the eye, visual acuity and equilibrium. The chronic recurrence of these physical reactions has been shown to cause fatigue, digestive disorders, heart disease, circulatory and equilibrium disorders. Moreover, noise is a causal factor in stress-related ailments such as ulcers, high blood pressure and anxiety. Three harmful effects of noise which are commonly of concern include speech interference, the prevention or interruption of sleep, and hearing loss. Figure 4-2 illustrates how excessive background noises can reduce the amount and quality of verbal exchange and thereby impact education, family life-styles, occupational efficiency, and the quality of recreation and leisure time. Speech interference begins to occur at about 40 to 45 decibels and becomes severe at about 60 decibels. Background noise levels affect performance and learning processes through distraction, reduced accuracy, increased fatigue, annoyance and irritability, and the inability to concentrate (particularly when complex tasks are involved or in schools where younger children exhibit short concentration spans). 3. Endo Engineering conclusions based upon computer runs of RD -77-108 with all variables held constant except vehicle speed. 4-4 M 120 2 110 100 Q m R 90 a� m J p 80 Z .D c 0 L 70 c� M 60 50 0 _j 40 Figure 4-2 Speech Communication as a Function of Background Noise Level A Ertcto Engineering Communication Possible Area of • . . . Expected I'' qql al Voice Level Nearly. Normal::.a Speech Commnication 25 Talker to Listener Distance in Feet Source: Miller, "Effects of Noise on People", Journal of Acoustical M of America, V.56, No. 3,9f74 Several factors determine whether or not a particular noise event will interfere with or prevent sleep. These factors include the noise level and characteristics, the stage of sleep, the individual's age and motivation to waken. III or elderly people are particularly susceptible to noise -induced sleep interference, which can occur when intruding noise levels exceed the typical 35-45 decibel background noise level in bedrooms. Sleep prevention can occur when intruding noise levels exceed 50 dBA. Hearing loss is one of the most harmful effects of noise on people. As shown in Table 4- 2, hearing loss may begin to occur at 75 dBA. Approximately 20 million people in the United States currently have some degree of hearing loss. In many of these cases, exposures to very loud, impulsive, or sustained noises caused damage to the inner ear which was substantial even before a hearing loss was actually noticed. To prevent the spread of hearing loss, a desirable goal would be to minimize the number of noise sources which expose people to sound levels above 70 decibels. Table 4-2 Harmful Effects Of Noisea Harmful Effect Noise Levels at Which Harmful Effects Occur Prevention or Interruption of Sleep 35 - 45 dB (A) Speech Interference 50 - 60 dB (A) Extra Auditory Physiological Effects 65 - 75 dB (A) Hearing Loss 75 - 85 dB (A) a. California Department of Public Health, Report to 1971 Legislature. 4.1.3 COMMUNITY RESPONSES TO SOUND People react to sound in different ways. A high level noise is more objectionable than a low level noise. Intermittent truck peak noise levels are more objectionable than continuous level fan noise. Humans are more sensitive to high frequency noise than low frequency noise. People tend to compare an intruding noise with the existing background noise and usually find it objectionable if the new noise is: (1) readily identifiable, or (2) considerably louder than the ambient noise. The nature of the work or activity that is underway when the noise exposure occurs affects the wav Iisteners react to the new noise. For example, workers in a factory or office may not be disturbed by highway traffic noise, but people sleeping at home or studying in a library and exposed to the same noise tend to be annoyed and find the noise objectionable. By the same token, an automobile horn at 2:00 a.m. is more disturbing than the same noise in traffic at 5:00 p.m. Approximately 10 percent of the population has a very low tolerance for noise and will object to any noise not of their own making. Consequently, even in the quietest environment, some complaints will occur. Another 25 percent of the population will not complain even in very severe noise environmentO A variety of reactions can be expected from people exposed to any given noise environment. Despite this variability in behavior on an individual level, the population as a whole can be expected to exhibit the following responses to changes in noise levels. An increase or decrease of 1.0 dBA cannot be perceived except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments. A 3.0 dBA increase is considered just noticeable outside of the laboratory. An increase of 5.0 dBA is often necessary before any noticeable change in community response (i.e. complaints) would be expected.5 Community responses to noise may range from registering a complaint by telephone or letter, to initiating court action, depending upon each individual's susceptibility to noise and personal attitudes about noise. Several factors are related to the level of community annoyance including: • fear associated with noise producing activities; • socio-economic status and educational level of the receptor; • noise receptor's perception that they are being unfairly treated; • attitudes regarding the usefulness of the noise producing activity; and • receptor's belief that the noise source can be controlled.6 Studies have shown that changes in long-term noise levels measured in units of Ldn or CNEL, are noticeable and are responded to by people. About 10 percent of the people exposed to traffic noise of 60 Ldn will report being highly annoyed with the noise, and each increase of one Ldn is associated with approximately 2 percent more people being highly annoyed. When, traffic noise exceeds 60 Ldn or aircraft noise exceeds 55 Ldn, people begin complaining? Group or legal actions to stop the noise should be expected to begin at traffic noise levels near 70 Ldn and aircraft noise levels near 65 Ldn. 4.1.4 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY WITH NOISE Some land uses are more tolerant of noise than others. For example, schools, hospitals, churches and residences are more sensitive to noise intrusion than commercial or industrial activities, As ambient noise levels affect the perceived amenity or livability of a development, so too can the mismanagement of noise impacts impair the economic health and growth potential of a community by reducing the area's desirability as a place to live, shop and work. For this reason, land use compatibility with the noise environment is an important consideration in the planning and design process. 4. Bolt Beranek & Newman, Literature Survey for the FHA Contract on Urban Noise, Report No. 1460, January 1967. 5. State of California, Department of Transportation, Noise Manual, 1980 and Highway Research Board, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 117, 1971. 6. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Public Health and Welfare Criteria For Noise, July 1973. 7. State of California, Department of Health Services, Dr. Jerome Lukas, Memo dated July 11, 1984. 4-6 La Quinta General Plan Standards and Policies The City of La Quinta has established goals and policies regarding land use compatibility with noise in the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan .Noise Element (March 20, 2002). The goal of the noise section in the Environmental Hazards Element is a healthy noise environment which complements the City's residential and resort character, and the mix of land uses provided in the City. The first policy in implementing this goal is to maintain the noise standards shown in Figure 4-3. For sensitive land uses, such as residences and schools, a maximum exterior noise level of 65 dBA CNEL is considered acceptable. Figure 4-3 is a land use compatibility matrix for community noise in the City of La Quinta. It was taken from the noise section of the Environmental Hazards Element. It allows noise concerns to be incorporated in land use planning to prevent future noise and land use incompatibilities. It identifies land use types as "normally acceptable", "conditionally acceptable" or "normally unacceptable" for development, by exterior noise exposure level. It also identifies noise exposure levels where new construction or development should not be undertaken. A "normally acceptable" designation indicates that conventional construction can occur with no special noise reduction requirements. A "conditionally acceptable" designation implies that new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements for each land use proposed is made and needed noise insulation features are incorporated in the design. Exterior noise level standards apply to outdoor noise exposure areas which have regular human use and in which a lowered noise level would be beneficial. They need not be applied to areas having limited human use or where lowered noise levels would produce little benefit. Outdoor environments are generally limited to the rear yard of single-family homes, multi -family patios and balconies (with a depth of 6 feet or more) and common recreational areas. The following City noise policies and programs that could be relevant to the proposed project are set forth in the noise section of the Environmental Hazards Element of the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan. City policy is to maintain noise standards in conformance with Figure 4-3, the Community Noise and Land Use Compatibility matrix. The Building Department maintains Uniform Building Code standards which ensure that interior noise levels meet or exceed City standards (which specify a maximum interior noise exposure of 45 dBA CNEL for residential structures). New or redevelopment projects proposing sensitive receptors located along arterial roadways whose CNEL levels are expected to exceed the City noise standards at buildout and who do not propose mitigation are required to prepare a noise impact analysis to mitigate noise levels to meet or exceed City standards. The City may require remedial noise control plans for areas experiencing noise in excess of adopted City standards. Municipal Code Requirements To control community noise impacts from non -transportation noise sources, the City of La Quinta has adopted maximum permissible sound levels by receiving land use including exterior sound levels for sensitive and non-residential land uses, which are found in the Noise Control Ordinance of the La Quinta Municipal Code (Chapter 9.100.210). Residential property, schools, hospitals, and churches are considered noise sensitive land uses. 4-7 Land Use Category Community Noise Exposure CNEL (dBA), 50 55 60 65 70 75 Residential Land Uses: Single and Multi -Family Dwellings, Group Quarters, Mobile Homes Transient Lodging - Motels, Hotels School Classrooms, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes and Convalescent Hospitals Recreation Land Uses: Golf Courses, Open Space (with walking, bicycling or horseback riding trails, etc.) Office Building, Personal Business, and Professional Services Commercial Land Uses: Retail Trade, Movie Theaters, Restaurants, Bars, Entertainment Actvities, Services Heavy Commercial/Industrial: Wholesale, Manufacturing, Utilities, Transportation, Communications Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphi-theaters, Music Shells (may be sensitive receptors or generators) Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports iWfEndo Engineering Figure 4-3 Community Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix Interpretation ® Normally Acceptable With no special noise reduction requirements assuming standard construction. Conditionally Acceptable New construction or development should be undertaken only after detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Generally Unacceptable New construction is discouraged. If new construction does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. 111W Land Use Discouraged New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. Source: "La Quinta General Plan" Adopted March The noise control standards for nonresidential land use districts set forth in the Noise Control Ordinance were established to prevent excessive sound levels which are detrimental to the public; health, welfare and safety or which are contrary to the public interest. The La Quinta Noise Ordinance sets exterior noise level limits based upon the receiving land use. The standard for noise sensitive land uses is 60 dBA (between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.) and 50 dBA (between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.).8 The standard for non-residential land uses is 75 dBA (between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.) and 65 dBA (between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.). Noise levels which exceed these limits are only allowed for limited time intervals. The noise limits shown above may not be exceeded for more than 30 cumulative minutes at the property line in one hour. Sound levels at the noise limits plus 5 dBA are allowed for up to 15 minutes per hour. Sound levels at the noise limits plus 10 dBA are allowed for up to 5 minutes per hour. Sound levels at the noise limits plus 15 dBA are allowed for up to i minute per hour. Sound levels that exceed the noise limits plus 20 dBA are not allowed. Section 6.08.050 of the La Quinta Municipal Code addresses disturbances caused by noise associated with construction activities. It specifies that construction activities are not allowed on Sundays or holidays. From October 1st through April 30th, construction equipment activities are limited to the period between 7:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on Monday through Friday, and the period between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. From May 1 st through September 30th, construction equipment activities are limited to the period between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, and the period between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. An exception can be made with a written early construction work permit issued by the city manager or his designee upon a showing of sufficient need due to hat or inclement weather, or the use of an unusually long process material, or other circumstances of unusual and compelling nature. (Ord. 393§1,2003: Ord. 18§1, 1982) To facilitate noise screening for residents and preserve visual openness, Section 9.50.020 of the La Quinta Municipal Code specifies that residential buildings within 150 feet of the right-of-way of agrarian image corridors be limited to one story in height (not to exceed 22 feet in height). It also specifies rear yard setbacks of a minimum of 25 feet for residential units abutting image corridors. 4.1.5 CURRENT NOISE EXPOSURE The CNEL noise metric allows the total noise exposure of an area resulting from many individual noise events over a long period of time to be summed and expressed as a single value that can be mapped as a series of contour lines around the noise source. CNEL values represent the accumulation of noise energy in a manner somewhat similar to the way a rain gauge accumulates precipitation from passing storm fronts. Whether the noise event is brief and intense or occurs over an extended period at lower levels, the total noise energy at a location is summed to determine the exposure over a specifieci period. The primary sources of noise in the study area are transportation facilities. Master planned roadways located near the project site accommodate passenger cars, trucks, buses and motorcycles that increase ambient noise levels throughout the study area. 8. The La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan indicates that the residential noise limits in the Noise Ordinance will be changed in the future to 65 dBA between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 55 dBA from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. In the case of highway noise, CNEL values typically reflect the noise exposure over an average 24-hour period. CNEL values can reflect the noise exposure over the peak activity period or over a year, as is often the case with airport contours. In either case, CNEL values reflect the weighted summation of all of the sound events at a designated location, whether the events are far away with minimal effect or nearby, creating the dominant noise exposure at that location. With the CNEL metric, sound events that occur during the evening hours are given a 5 dB penalty while those that occur at night are given a 10 dB penalty, to reflect the sensitivity of noise -sensitive receptors to sound events during these periods. This assumes that one evening noise event is equal in impact to three similar daytime events. It also assumes that one nighttime sound event is equal in impact to ten equivalent daytime sound events. Motor Vehicle Noise Noise from motor vehicles is generated by engine vibrations, the interaction between the tires and the road, and the exhaust system. Reducing the speed of motor vehicles reduces the noise exposure of listeners both inside the vehicle and adjacent to the roadway. The Federal Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (RD -77-108) developed by the Federal Highway Administration was used to evaluate existing roadway noise conditions near the project site. This model accepts various parameters including the traffic volume, vehicle mix and speed, and roadway geometry, in computing equivalent noise levels during typical daytime, evening and nighttime hours. The resultant noise levels are then weighted, summed over 24 hours, and output as the CNEL value. Various CNEL contours are subsequently located through a series of computerized iterations designed to isolate the 60, 65, and 70 CNEL contour locations. As noted previously, the CNEL values include adjustments during the evening and night to compensate for the heightened sensitivity of the average listener during these hours. Table 4-3 provides the current noise levels adjacent to roadways within the study area. The distance to various noise contours used for land use compatibility purposes has been determined by assuming a sound propagation with distance drop-off rate of 4.5 dBA with each doubling.9 This is a soft site assumption which accounts for the sound propagation loss over natural surfaces such as soil and ground vegetation. The traffic volume data assumed for the noise modeling was derived from. the Griffin Ranch Specific Flan and T.T.M. 32879 Trak Impact Study (Endo Engineering= September 7, 2004), The vehicle mix assumed for the noise modeling was taken from the truck mix and temporal distribution shown in Table 5 of the "City of La Quinta Noise Element Update Technical Report" prepared by RKJK (dated September 22, 2000). As shown therein, trucks were assumed to represent 2.28 percent of the total daily traffic volume for all roadways in the City of La Quinta. The hourly traffic flow distribution by vehicle type is included in Appendix B. As shown in Table 4-3, noise levels emanating from roadways in the project vicinity are relatively low. They currently range from a low of 46.3 CNEL (at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of Avenue 54, west of Jefferson Street) to a high of 69.4 CNEL (at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of State Highway 111, east of Jefferson Street). 9. This drop-off rate was assumed by RKJK & Associates Inc. to calculate all noise contours in "City of La Quinta Noise Element Update Technical Report," (September 22, 2000). A more conservative noise attenuation with distance drop-off rate of 3.0 dBA was assumed herein to evaluate on-site noise levels behind the noise barriers to assure that the City exterior noise standard of 65 CNEL will be met. 4-9 Table 4-3 Existing Exterior Noise Levels Adjacent to Nearby Roadways Roadway Segment A.D.T.a (VehJDay) CNELb @ 100 Feet Distance to Contours (Ft.)° 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA Jefferson Street - N/O Highway 111 13,540 63.4 R/W 82 159 - S/0 Highway 111 21,030 68.8 86 169 355 - N/O Avenue 54 13,960 67.0 71 131 270 - S/O Avenue 54 5,200 57.8 R/W R/W 77 Madison Street - S/0 Avenue 54 6,900 62.4 R/W 68 143 - N/O Site Access 6,350 62.0 R/W 65 135 - S/0 Site Access 6,260 62.1 R/W 67 136 - N/O Avenue 58 3,920 60.0 R/W R/W 100 - S/0 Avenue 58 2,550 58.2 R/W R/W 77 Monroe Street - N/O Avenue 54 6,300 63.0 R/W 74 158 - S/0 Avenue 54 4,520 61.5 R/W 59 126 Highway 111 - W/O Jefferson Street 29,990 69.3 92 181 382 - E/O Jefferson Street 29,400 69.4 93 179 374 Avenue 54 - W/O Jefferson Street 310 46.3 R/W R/W R/W - E/O Jefferson Street 10,060 64.1 R/W 88 184 - W/O Madison Street 9,410 63.8 R/W 84 176 - E/O Madison Street 3,170 58.9 R/W R/W 85 - W/O Monroe Street 3,350 60.2 R/W R/W 103 - E/O Monroe Street 4,890 61.9 R/W 62 134 Avenue 58 - W/O Madison Street 900 52.3 R/W R/W R/W - E/O Madison Street 1,660 56.1 R/W R/W 55 a. A.D.T. = average daily two-way traffic volume (current 2004 peak season). b. CNEL values are given at 100 feet from all roadway centerlines (see Appendix B for noise model input parameter assumptions). c. All distances are measured from the centerline. R/W means the contour falls within the right-of-way. The 70 CNEL, 65 CNEL, and 60 CNEL contours presently fall within the right-of-way along two of the roadway segments modeled. The 70 CNEL and 65 CNEL contours presently fall within the right-of-way along eight of the twenty-one roadway segments modeled. At a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of six roadway segments evaluated in the study area, current traffic volumes generate noise levels that are below 60 CNEL. At 100 feet from the centerline of elevens roadway segments in the study area that were; modeled, current traffic volumes generate noise levels that fall between 60 CNEL and 65 CNEL. Current traffic volumes generate noise levels that fall between 65 CNEL and 70 CNEL at 100 feet from the centerline of four of the roadway segments modeled in the study area. 4-10 Ambient noise levels on the project site emanating from the adjacent roadways are currently relatively low. They range from 62.4 CNEL (at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of Madison Street) to 55.9 CNEL (at 100 feet from the centerline of Avenue 54). Adjacent to the project site, the 65 dBA CNEL contour is currently located 65 feet from the centerline of Madison Street and within the right-of-way of Avenue 54. 4.1.6 NOISE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS A noise -sensitive area is an area of regular and intensive human usage where the usage is impaired or restricted when subjected to excessive levels of noise. Noise -sensitive land uses are those associated with indoor and/or outdoor human activities that may be subject to stress and/or significant interference from noise. The surrounding land uses in the project vicinity are illustrated in Figure 2-2. Noise - sensitive single-family residential land uses in the project vicinity are located directly south of the project site. Noise -sensitive residential land uses are also located west of the project site (across Madison Street) and northwest of the project site, across Avenue 54. The PGA West resort residential development is located south and west of the project site. Northwest of the project site is the Hideaway resort residential development. The proposed project is a residential development that is consistent with the surrounding community. The project site is currently designated LDR (Low Density Residential) and VLDR (Very Low Density Residential) in the La Quinta General Plan, with a permitted residential density of up to 4 units per acme and up to 2 units per acre, respectively. The proposed residential development is not expected to generate significant direct noise impacts on the adjacent community. However, unless appropriate noise attenuation features are incorporated in the project design, future residents of the proposed project could experience future noise exposures which exceed City standards as a result of future traffic volumes expected to use Madison Street and Avenue 54. 4-11 4.2 NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS 4.2.1 SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD CRITERIA Since noise increases or decreases of 1.0 dBA cannot be perceived (except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments) project -related noise impacts of this magnitude are not considered to be significant. If a project -related change in noise levels exceeds 3.0 dBA, it is considered to be audible and "potentially significant", provided noise -sensitive receptors are present. If a project -related noise increase exceeds 3.0 dBA and a receiving land use is expected to exceed the noise standards detailed in the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan as a result, the noise impact is considered "clearly significant" and warrants the development of appropriate mitigation strategies. 4.2.2 SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION -RELATED IMPACTS Short-term acoustic impacts are those associated with construction activities necessary to implement the proposed land uses on-site. These noise levels will be higher than the ambient noise levels in the project area today, but will subside once construction is completed. Noise impacts due to construction will be regulated through the City of La Quinta Municipal Code and Noise Control Ordinance as well as through environmental specifications in the construction contract and the Noise Control Act of 1972 (which sets noise emission standards for construction machinery). The transport of workers and equipment to the construction site will incrementally increase noise levels along the roadways leading to and from the site. The increase, although temporary in nature, could be audible to noise sensitive receptors abutting the roadways utilized for this purpose. Even though there could be a relatively high single event noise exposure potential with passing trucks causing annoyance, the effect on long-term ambient noise levels would be less than 3 dBA when truck noise (87 dBA at 50 feet) is added to existing noise levels and averaged over a 24-hour period. Therefore, short-term construction worker and equipment travel noise increases would represent less than significant impacts on noise sensitive receptors along the site access routes. The noise generated by the actual on-site construction activities is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to estimate at the noise sensitive residential receptor locations in the project vicinity due to variations in the location, number, and type of construction equipment used from day to day on the project site. However, based upon typical construction activities that occur during grading and building construction and their associated noise levels, construction noise level ranges can be estimated. Construction activities are carried out in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment, and its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases will change the character of the noise levels surrounding the construction site as work pzogresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow noise ranges to be categorized by work phase. Figure 4-4 shows typical construction equipment noise ranges at 50 feet. The earth -moving equipment category includes excavating machinery (back -hoes, bulldozers, shovels, trenchers, front loaders, etc.) and roadway building equipment (compactors, scrapers, graders, pavers, etc.). Typical operating cycles may involve one or two minutes of full power operation, followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. Noise levels at 50 feet from earth -moving equipment range from 73 to 96 dBA.. 4-12 Figure 4-4 Construction Noise Noise Level (dBA) at 50 feet 60 70 80 90 100 110 Front Loader Dozer rn c o Dragline Backfiller w Scraper/Grader Trucks t c Concrete Mixers v C c� 2 U) Concrete Pumps a� 2 Motor Crane } Pumps Im CZ o Generators CZ cn Compressors "Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, Source: EPA, 1971; and Home Appliances". NTID300.1 VW1,0o Engineering r The Environmental Protection Agency has found that the noisiest equipment types operating at construction sites typically range from 88 to 91 dBA at 50 feet. Although noise ranges were found to be similar for all construction phases, the erection phase (laying sub -base and paving) tended to be less noisy. Noise levels varied from 79 dBA to 89 dBA at 50 feet during the erection phase of construction. The foundation phase of construction tended to create the highest noise levels, ranging from 88 to 96 dBA at 50 feet. To reduce the potential for short-term noise impacts, construction activities shall be regulated and the construction equipment hours of operation on-site shall be limited (per La Quinta Municipal Code Section 6.08.050). Construction activities shall take place only during the days and hours specified therein and shall not be allowed on Sundays or holidays. From October 1 st through April 30th, construction equipment activities shall be limited to the period between 7:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on Monday through Friday, and the period between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. From May 1st through September 30th, construction equipment activities shall be limited to the period between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, and the period between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, when construction noise is deemed less disruptive in areas with noise sensitive land uses in the project vicinity. Effects on Sensitive Receptors Clearing, grading, trenching for utilities, roadway paving, concrete mixers and pumps used to pour foundations, framing and roofing of the buildings proposed on-site will create short-term noise increases that will be noticeable to residents located adjacent to the project site to the south and west. Adjacent residents may perceive short-term noise increases when: • vehicles enter and leave the site (with workers, building materials, or construction equipment); • activities occur in construction staging areas; • any temporary on-site generators are operated; • rough and finish grading activities are underway; and • building construction occurs. The intensity of the noise impact will depend upon the proximity of existing homes and other noise sensitive receptors to the area under construction, the number and type of construction equipment operating each day, and the length of time each piece of equipment is in use. Noise generated by a single point source of noise (like a stationary piece of construction equipment) attenuates at a rate of 6 dB with each doubling of distance between the noise source and receptor. Consequently, surrounding residential lots located 100 feet from the construction noise source would benefit from a 6 dBA noise attenuation with distance. Those residents living 200 feet away would benefit from a 12 dB reduction in exterior noise levels during construction activities. When the construction activities occur 400 feet away from residences, an 18 dB reduction in exterior noise levels would occur between the noise source and the noise receiver. To attenuate 91 dB by 26 decibels to 65 dB would require a distance of 1,000 feet between the construction noise source and the noise receptor with line -of -sight exposure to the noise source. 4-13 The level of construction noise expected at noise sensitive land uses in the project vicinity could cause significant annoyance but not long-term or severe effects. Hearing loss is not likely to occur, since construction operating cycles are limited to the less sensitive hours of the day and generate noise levels that are intermittent so the day -night noise level (Ldn) is not likely to exceed 75 dB. Temporary construction noise is an area of concern because construction noise frequently provokes community annoyance and complaints. Therefore, it will be important to incorporate sufficient noise reducing measures into the construction specifications to ensure that the potential for adverse impacts on the adjacent community is reduced to the maximum extent feasible. 4.2.3 LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL IMPACTS Long-term acoustic impacts could occur both off-site and on-site if the project is approved and implemented. Off-site noise impacts could result from project -related traffic increases on site access roads and from the intrusion of noise generated by future activities on-site into the neighboring noise -sensitive residential development. On-site acoustic impacts could result from motor vehicle noise generated by future traffic volumes on the master planned roadways adjacent to the site. The 60 dBA CNEL contour represents the zone in which any proposed noise -sensitive land use should be evaluated on a project specific basis to determine if it requires mitigation to meet City or State (Title 24) standards. The 65 CNEL contour represents the level at which any new noise -sensitive uses will require mitigation in order to comply with local noise standards. All of the residential lots proposed on-site are considered noise -sensitive. Off -Site Vehicular Noise Impacts The projected year 2008+project noise levels adjacent to roadways carrying appreciable volumes of project -related traffic are shown in Table 4-4. As shown therein, noise levels at 100 feet from the centerline of the various roadway segments evaluated will range from a low of 47.9 CNEL (along Avenue 54, west of Jefferson Street) to a high of 69.9 CNEL (along State Highway 111, east of Jefferson Street). The 70 CNEL and 65 CNEL contours will remain within the rights-of-way along four of the twenty-five roadway segments analyzed. Adjacent to the site, the noise levels generated by motor vehicles on Madison Street upon project completion in the year 2008 are projected to be 64.3 dBA at 100 feet from the centerline. The noise levels generated by motor vehicles on Avenue 54 adjacent to the site are projected to be 6I.6 dBA at 100 feet from the centerline upon project completion. Table 4-5 details the projected increase in motor vehicle noise associated with project - related traffic in year 2008 along each roadway segment in the study area. As shown therein, the proposed project will not generate a perceptible noise increase (greater than 3.0 dBA) along any of the roadways in the project vicinity. The largest project -related increase in noise levels projected along any of the roadway segments modeled (an increase of 1.1 dBA) is expected to occur along Avenue 54, east of Madison Street. Since noise increases of less than 3.0 dBA are imperceptible, the project - related incremental motor vehicle noise increases are considered adverse but not significant. 4-14 Table 4-4 Year 2008+Project Exterior Noise Levels Adjacent to Area Roadways Roadway Segment A.D.T.a (Veh/Day) CNEL @ 100 Feetb Distance to Contours (Ft.)c 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA Jefferson Street - N/O Highway 111 19,180 64.9 R/W 99 198 - S/O Highway 111 24,260 69.4 93 184 388 - N/O Avenue 54 21,600 68.9 87 171 360 - S/O Avenue 54 7,340 59.3 R/W R/W 92 Madison Street - S/O Avenue 54 10,470 64.3 R/W 90 189 - N/O Site Access 9,690 64.0 R/W 87 181 - S/O Site Access 9,130 63.7 R/W 83 173 - N/O Avenue 58 5,680 61.6 R/W 62 126 - S/O Avenue 58 3,750 59.8 R/W 50 97 Monroe Street - N/O Avenue 54 9,470 64.7 R/W 96 205 - SIO Avenue 54 6,380 63.0 R/W 74 158 Highway 111 - W/O Jefferson Street 33,740 69.8 97 195 413 - E/O Jefferson Street 32,770 69.9 99 192 404 Avenue 54 - W/O Jefferson Street 440 47.9 R/W R/W R/W - E/O Jefferson Street 16,090 66.2 59 119 253 - W/O Madison Street 15,170 65.9 57 114 241 - E/O Madison Street 5,840 61.6 R/W 60 127 - W/O West Site Access 6,100 61.8 R/W 62 131 - E/O West Site Access 5,810 61.6 R/W 60 127 - W/O East Site Access 5,810 61.6 R/W 60 127 - E/O East Site Access 5,450 61.3 R/W 58 122 - W/O Monroe Street 5,450 62.3 R/W 66 142 - E/O Monroe Street 7,040 63.5 R/W 80 171 Avenue 58 - W/O Madison Street 1,270 53.8 R/W R/W R/W - E/O Madison Street 2,340 57.6 R/W R/W 69 a. A.D.T. means average daily two-way traffic volume for 2008+project conditions. b. CNEL values are given at 100 feet from all roadway centerlines (see Appendix B for assumptions). c. All distances are measured from the centerline. R/W means the contour falls within the right-of-way. Off -Site Operational Noise Impacts The project includes residential land uses that will generate operational noise levels consistent with the neighboring residential community. No significant adverse operational noise impacts are expected to occur on adjacent noise sensitive land uses as a result of the residential land uses proposed on the project site. The equestrian center proposed on-site will not generate noise levels that exceed the noise standards set forth in the La Quinta Municipal Code Noise Control Ordinance. !BP Table 4-5 Project -Related Increase in Year 2008 Motor Vehicle Noise Roadway Link 2008 Ambienta CNEL at 100 Feet 2008+Project CNEL at 100 Feet Increase (dBA) Jefferson Street - N/0 Highway 111 64.8 64.9 0.1 - S/0 Highway 111 69.3 69.4 0.1 - N/O Avenue 54 68.5 68.9 0.4 - S/0 Avenue 54 59.3 59.3 0.0 Madison Street - SIO Avenue 54 64.0 64.3 0.3 - N/O Site Access 63.6 64.0 0.4 - S/0 Site Access 63.6 63.7 0.1 - N/0 Avenue 58 61.5 61.6 0.1 - SIO Avenue 58 59.7 59.8 0.1 Monroe Street - N/0 Avenue 54 64.5 64.7 0.2 - S/0 Avenue 54 63.0 63.0 0.0 Highway 111 - W/O Jefferson Street 69.7 69.8 0.1 - E/O Jefferson Street 69.9 69.9 0.0 Avenue 54 - W/O Jefferson Street 47.9 47.9 0.0 - E/O Jefferson Street 65.6 66.2 0.6 - W/O Madison Street 65.3 65.9 0.6 - E/O Madison Street 60.5 61.6 1.1 - W/O West Site Access 60.7 61.8 1.1 - E/O West Site Access 60.7 61.6 0.9 - W/O East Site Access 60.7 61.6 0.9 - E/O East Site Access 60.7 61.3 0.6 - W/O Monroe Street 61.7 62.3 0.6 - E/O Monroe Street 63.4 63.5 0.1 a. UINLL values are given at 1UU Leet trom all roadway centerlines (see Appendix B for assumptions). Year 2008 ambient roadway noise levels and traffic volumes are provided in Appendix B. On -Site Vehicular Noise Impacts Madison Street The current traffic volume on Madison Street adjacent to the project site (6,900 vehicles per day) generates a 65 CNEL contour that extends 68 feet from the roadway centerline. When the proposed project is completed, the I0,470 vehicles per day projected to be using Madison Street„ south of Avenue 54 are expected to generate a 65 CNEL contour 90 feet from the centerline of this roadway. 4-16 r Upon General Plan buildout, the traffic volume expected to be using Madison Street adjacent to the project site will be much larger than the year 2008 plus project traffic volume. Consequently, the 65 CNEL noise contour adjacent to Madison Street will also be substantially larger and extend onto the project site several hundred feet. The west side of Madison Street is fully improved as a primary arterial with a 34 -foot roadbed, adjacent to the PGA West development. Tentative Tract Map 32879 (dated August 13, 2004) shows Madison Street adjacent to the western site boundary as a four - lane divided primary arterial with an 18 -foot raised median and a 110 -foot right-of-way. This is not consistent with the recent re-classification of Madison Street (between Avenue 54 and Avenue 58) in the General Plan Circulation Element as a major arterial with a 120 - foot right-of-way. Tentative Tract Map 32879 includes a 24 -foot to 30 -foot setback between the proposed residential lots and the Madison Street right-of-way. The closest proposed residential lots have property lines located 79 feet from the Madison Street centerline. In order to limit the intrusion of highway noise into the proposed residential development to the level specified for new residential construction by the City of La Quinta (65 dBA CNEL) the ultimate or design year noise levels generated by vehicles on Madison Street are needed. dance the design year noise levels are determined, the minimum sound wall height and length required to attain the noise reduction needed to assure acceptable outdoor noise levels in the abutting outdoor living areas can be determined. Following City review and approval, the developer will construct solid acoustically opaque roadside noise barriers along Madison Street and Avenue 54 of sufficient height and length to shield the noise - sensitive residential development proposed. The City of La Quinta typically limits perimeter wall heights to six feet to create a more aesthetically appealing viewshed for motorists on City roadways. Consequently, an earthen mound topped by a sound wall to achieve the desired noise harrier height may be constructed on-site adjacent to Madison Street that is both functional and visually acceptable. Earth mounds are often used as noise barriers because they can be graded to achieve a natural form and landscaped to blend into the surrounding environment and soften the visual impact of the sound wall. All sound walls should be designed to achieve a minimum attenuation of 5 decibels. It is relatively simple to reduce the sound level behind a barrier by 5 dBA. In general, any barrier which breaks the line of sight between the noise source and the receiver will provide an attenuation of 5 dBA. To break Iine of sight exposure, noise barriers should have a minimum height of six feet (measured from the top of the barrier to the top of the foundation or the adjoining ground). Madison Street is designated as an agrarian image corridor adjacent to the project site. Agrarian image corridors restrict development within 150 feet of the right-of-way to one- story units a maximum of 22 feet in height. Although a noise barrier would not be effective in shielding the second stories or balconies, the 150 -foot setback with the intervening rooftops should be sufficient to minimize the potential for noise impacts on second story balconies. Avenue 54 The current traffic volume on Avenue 54 adjacent to the project site (east of Madison Street) is 3,170 vehicles per day, which generates a 65 CNEL contour that is within the roadway right-of-way. When the proposed project is completed, the 6,100 vehicles per 4-17 day projected to be using; Avenue 54, west of the West Site Access, are expected to generate a 65 CNEL contour 62 feet from the centerline of Avenue 54. Avenue 54 is currently classified as a secondary arterial in the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan with an 88 -foot right-of-way and a maximum daily capacity of 28,000 vehicles per day. The design capacity is 90 percent of the maximum capacity or 25,200 vehicles per day. It is unlikely that Avenue 54 will ever accommodate traffic demands approaching the capacity of a secondary roadway. Upon General Plan buildout, the traffic volume expected to be using Avenue 54 adjacent to the project site (east of Madison Street) will be greater than 6,100 vehicles per day. Consequently, the 65 CNEL noise contour adjacent to Avenue 54 may ultimately extend onto the residential lots proposed on the project site. Unfortunately, the General Plan buildout traffic projection for this roadway section is 3,100 vehicles per day, a volume much lower than expected upon project completion in the year 2008. Tentative Tract Map 32879 appears to show Avenue 54 adjacent to the site as a primary arterial with a raised 12 -foot median and a 100 -foot right-of-way. The Griffin Ranch Specific Plan includes a 24 -foot setback along Avenue 54, which results in a distance of 74 feet between the nearest residential lot lines and the Avenue 54 centerline. The project proposes a six-foot perimeter wall constructed on the residential lot lines abutting Avenue 54. This wall would reduce the year 2008+project noise exposures ten feet behind the noise barrier to 58.9 CNEL. With the traffic volumes expected on Avenue 54 adjacent to the site, the exterior noise levels at residential lots on-site may not exceed the City of La Quinta 65 CNEL exterior noise standard in the future even without a noise barrier. However, the ultimate future traffic volume on Avenue 54 is uncertain. Noise barriers should have a minimum height of six feet (measured from the top of the barrier to the top of the foundation). With a 6 -foot perimeter sound wall adjacent to Avenue 54, the highest projected noise level in the outdoor living areas at the nearest residential lot would be 58.9 CNEL. Consequently, the future traffic volumes on Avenue 54 could increase substantially without highway noise intruding on the site and exceeding the City noise standard for new residential construction. Even if the General Plan buildout traffic volumes increase up to 24,850 vehicles per day, the noise exposure of the residential lots adjacent to Avenue 54 would still meet the City of La Quinta exterior noise standard of 65 CNEL. Since the General Plan buildout traffic volumes on Avenue 54 are expected to be much lower than 24, 850 vehicles per day, the proposed six-foot perimeter wall will be sufficient to meet the City of La Quinta exterior noise standard of 65 CNEL Design Noise Levels The potential exists for residential development planned on-site with lots abutting Madison Street to have an exterior noise exposure in excess of 65 CNEL, The design noise levels adjacent to Madison Street were identified by assuming this roadway would ultimately be operating at the design capacity of a primary highway (90 percent of the maximum daily capacity of 38,000 vehicles per day) with a vehicle speed of 50 mph. A conservative (hard site) noise propagation factor was assumed to predict the ultimate or design noise levels, as shown in Table 4-6. 4-18 Table 4-6 identifies the location of the 65 CNEL contours on-site without noise barriers. This allows those residential lots on-site with the potential to exceed the City noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL (without a sound wall) to be identified. As shown, residential lots on- site located within 477 feet of the centerline of Madison Street will require a noise reduction of up to 7.4 dBA to meet the City exterior noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL. Therefore, a combination noise berm/barrier located at the lot line nearest Madison Street (located 79 feet from the Madison Street centerline) would need to be approximately 7 feet high to attenuate the highway noise from Madison Street sufficiently to attain the City of La Quinta General Plan 65 CNEL exterior noise standard. A 6 -foot sound wall atop a 1 -foot earthen berm would be effective, given the City policy limiting the noise barrier height to a maximum of six feet. Table 4-6 Design Noise Levels Adjacent To Master Planned Roadways Abutting the Site Roadway/Mitigation Designa CNEL @ Receiverb Distance To 65 CNEL Volume (dBA) Contour (Feet)e WITHOUT BARRIER Madison Street - SIO Avenue 54 34,200 VPD 72.4 CNEL 477 Feet Avenue 54 - E/O Madison Street 6,100 VPD 65.2 CNEL 87 Feet WITH 7 -FOOT BARRIER Madison Street - SIO Avenue 54 34,200 VPD 64.8 CNEL 79 Feet (at Barrier) WrrH 6 -FOOT BARRIER Avenue 54 - E/O Madison Street 6,100 VPD 58.9 CNEL 74 Feet (at Barrier) a. VPD=Vehicles Per Day. The value shown for Madison Street reflects the design capacity of a primary highway (90% of the maximum daily capacity of 38,000 VPD). The value assumed for Avenue 54 is the year 2008+project daily traffic volume projection. b. The Specific Plan includes a residential setback of 24 feet from the right-of-way, and the analysis assumes that the receptor is located 10 feet from the property line, for a total distance of 89 feet from the centerline to the receptor on Madison Street and 84 feet from the centerline to the receptor on Avenue 54. These calculations assume a hard site (3.0 dBA drop in noise with each doubling of distance between the noise source and the receiver) as appropriate for noise barrier evaluation. c. Distances are m€asured from the centerline of the roadway. Interior Noise Levels Residential buildings with exterior noise exposures up to 70 dBA can achieve 45 dBA interior noise levels with standard construction techniques. With exterior noise levels of 65 dBA or less behind the noise barriers constructed on-site, standard residential construction practices will be adequate to ensure that interior noise levels in the residential dwelling units built on-site shall not exceed 45 dBA. 4-19 4.3 NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES Noise standards are implemented at various points in the planning and design of a devel- opment. At the preliminary planning levels, the land use type and density near noisy transportation facilities can be controlled. Later, at more detailed planning levels, proper structure arrangement and orientation can be evaluated, with approval conditioned upon setbacks, landscaped buffers, etc., that can resolve noise difficulties. Detailed noise abatement requirements such as architectural design, acoustic construction techniques and the erection of noise barriers are established at the final stages of the planning process, when deemed necessary. Long-term acoustic impacts can be mitigated more effectively through proper site design than through the use of noise reducing construction techniques. Consequently, the mitiga- tion strategies identified in the pages which follow take the form of suggested design guidelines for use in future detailed planning efforts. 4.3.1 GENERAL METHODS TO REDUCE NOISE IMPACTS There are several basic techniques available to minimize the adverse effects of noise on sensitive noise receivers. Classical engineering principles suggest controlling the noise source when feasible and protecting the noise receptors when noise source control measures are inadequate. Many of the noise source control mechanisms are being applied by state and Federal governments. Acoustic site planning, architectural design, acoustic construction techniques and the erection of noise barriers are all effective methods for reducing noise impacts when source control mechanisms are insufficient to achieve desired results. Acoustic Site Planning Acoustic site planning involves the careful arrangement of land uses, lots and buildings to minimize intrusive noise levels. The placement of noise compatible land uses between the roadway and more sensitive uses is an effective planning technique. The use of buildings as noise barriers and their orientation away from the source of noise, can shield sensitive activities, entrances and common open space areas. Clustered and planned unit develop- ments can maximize the amount of open space available for landscaped buffers in place of continuous noise barriers next to heavily traveled roadways. Acoustic architectural design involves the incorporation of noise reducing strategies in the design and lay -out of individual structures. Building heights, room arrangements, window size and placement, balcony and courtyard design., and the provision of air conditioning all play an important role in shielding noise -sensitive activities from intrusive noise levels. Roof designs which reflect the noise back towards the roadway also reduce noise intrusion into adjacent tracts. Acoustic Construction Acoustic construction is the treatment of various parts of a building to reduce interior noise levels. Acoustic wall design, doors, ceilings and floors, as well as dense building materials, the use of acoustic windows (double glazed, double paned, thick, non-openable, or small with air -tight seals) and the inclusion of maximum air spaces in attics and wails are all available options. 4-20 Normal cmistruction techniques generally provide a 20 dBA reduction from outside to inside noise levels with windows closed. New energy insulation requirements for buildings can produce up to 25 dBA exterior to interior noise reductions with windows closed and 10 dBA reductions with open windows. Consequently, buildings with exterior noise exposures up to 70 dBA can achieve 45 dBA interior noise levels with standard construction techniques. Noise Barriers Any solid barrier that hides the passing vehicles from view on abutting properties will reduce traffic noise. To be an adequate noise shield, the mass and stiffness of the barrier must be sufficient to prevent bending or buckling and it must not vibrate easily or leak air. Up to 15 dBA reductions can be achieved using noise barriers such as berms and walls made of stucco, reinforced concrete, concrete blocks, or precast concrete panels. Various roadway designs are also effective in reducing traffic noise. Both depressed and elevated roadway designs can by themselves, or in combination with noise barriers, prevent adjacent areas from being exposed to excessive noise levels. Noise barriers can be quite effective in reducing noise for receptors within approximately 200 feet of a highway. It is relatively simple to reduce the sound level behind a barrier by 5 dBA. Any barrier which breaks the line of sight between the noise source and receiver will generally provide 5 dBA attenuation. This reduces the acoustic energy by 68 percent and would be subjectively assessed by noise receivers as a 30 percent reduction in loudness. However, small differences in attenuation do not evoke significantly different subjective reactions. A barrier attenuation of 10 dBA eliminates 90% of the acoustic energy and reduces the loudness by half. It is attainable using walls or berms of reasonable height and length. An attenuation of 15 dBA (97% reduction in acoustic energy and 65% reduction in loudness) is more difficult to attain and usually involves fairly high and long barriers with minimal leaks and openings and the use of materials with high transmission loss characteristics. A reduction in sound level of 20 dBA (99% reduction in acoustic energy and 75% reduction in loudness) is essentially impossible to attain with any noise barrier.l Where the terrain permits, the most desirable location for a noise barrier is at the roadway right-of-way or alternately, 30 feet or more from the traveled way. Throughout Riverside County, noise receptors are assumed to be located 5 feet above the ground and 10 feet behind the noise barrier of the living unit nearest the roadway (provided this is representative of potential outdoor activity areas). Noise barriers should have a minimum height of six feet (measured from the top of the barrier to the top of the foundation) and a maximum height of 14 to 16 feet. Noise barriers should not be designed to shield the second story of two-story residences. One noise barrier design consideration is access through the noise barrier for residents, maintenance crews, or firefighters. In some cases, access can be accomplished with overlapping barrier sections, provided the offset barriers concealing the opening are overlapped a minimum of 2.5 to 3 times the offset distance. Sight distance and continuity are also important considerations in sound wall design. Noise barrier performance can be jeopardized by gaps. To assure that the noise banter provides adequate attenuation for the end dwellings, careful consideration must be given to the length of the barrier in the area where it wraps around the end units and extends perpendicular to the roadway. Site access connections to Madison Street and Avenue 54 will also require careful consideration to 1. U.S. Federal Highway Administration, Noise Barrier Design Handbook, FHWA-RD-76-58, Feb. 1976. 4-21 r ensure that the barrier performance is not reduced. Sound walls more than 6 feet high should not be designed with abrupt beginnings or ends, but rather be tapered or stepped down. Interior Noise Impacts Residential buildings with exterior noise exposures up to 70 dBA can achieve 45 dBA interior noise levels with standard construction techniques. With exterior noise levels of 65 dBA or less behind the noise barriers constructed on-site, standard residential construction practices will be adequate to ensure that interior noise levels in the residential dwelling units built on-site shall not exceed 45 dBA. 4.3.2 SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS The following specific mitigation measures are recommended for incorporation in the project to minimize the potential for noise impacts and insure compliance with applicable noise standards. 1. Construction activities on-site shall take place only during the days and hours specified in the La Quinta California Municipal Code (Chapter 6.08.050) to reduce noise impacts during more sensitive time periods. 2. All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and the engines shall be equipped with shrouds. 3. All construction equipment shall be in proper working order and maintained in a proper state of tune to reduce backfires. 4. Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as far as practical from noise - sensitive receptors. l heavy ment 5 Parkin, refueling and servicing operations for on vehicles shall be located as far as practical from existingd o -site homes c 6. Every effort shall during construction oovicinitygreatest distance between n noisesources and receptors located icreaten of the project site. 7. Stationary equipment should be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from noise -sensitive receptors. 8. Future on-site development shall comply with all relevant noise policies set forth in the La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan and Municipal Code. 9. The proposed development shall incorporate a noise barrier (or berm and barrier combination) adjacent to Madison Street and Avenue 54 to assure that the living areas in abutting residential lots located within the unattenuated ultimate 65 CNEL contours comply with the City of La Quinta exterior noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL. Preliminary barrier attenuation modeling indicates that an acoustically opaque noise barrier or berm and barrier combination adjacent to Madison Street (at the residential property line) extending 7 feet above grade should be adequate and a noise barrier 4-22 r (- extending 6 feet above grade should be adequate adjacent to Avenue 54 to meet the City noise standard of 65 CNEL in outdoor living areas? 10. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the final lot layout, pad elevations, building design, and acoustic berm or germ and barrier combinations shall be evaluated by a qualified acoustical consultant to verify that proper noise mitigation has been provided to ensure consistency with the La Quinta noise standards and policies. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that the project design will provide sufficient noise reduction to attain the City of La Quinta noise standard of 65 CNEL in outside living areas. 2. The barrier analysis was based upon preliminary plans (a progress print of the Tentative Tract Map dated August 13, 2004) for the project without final grade details and did not include verification of site specific characteristics with on-site noise measurements or vehicular classification counts. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the noise barrier may be impaired by the openings required for site access along Avenge 54 and Madison Street. 4-23 Appendices A. Air Quality Appendix B. Noise Appendix Appendix A AIR QUALITY GLOSSARY AIR QUALITY STANDARDS EFFECTS OF AIR POLLUTANTS ON RECEPTORS AIR QUALITY DATA URBEMIS2002 WORKSHEETS CALINE4 ASSUMPTIONS AND OUTPUT Appendix A Air Quality Glossary Air Basin -- An area with common and distinctive geographical features. Air Monitoring -- Sampling and measuring pollutants present in the atmosphere. Ambient Air -- Outside air. AQMP -- The Air Quality Management Plan. ARB -- The California Air Resources Board. Attainment -- Legal recognition that an area meets standards for a particulate pollutant. AVR -- Average Vehicle Ridership AVR Requirement -- Achieving an average vehicle ridership during peak commute hours of 1.5 persons/vehicle by 1999. BACT -- Best Available Control Technology. CAA -- The Federal Clean Air Act. CARB -- The California Air Resources Board. CCAA -- The California Clean Air Act. CEQA -- The California Environmental Quality Act. CMP -- The Congestion Management Program. CO -- Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless, toxic gas formed by incomplete combus- tion of fossil fuels. Coachella Valley Blowsand Zone -- means the corridor of land extending two miles to either side of the centerline of the I-10 Freeway beginning at the SR -111/1-10 junction and continuing southeast to the I-10/Jefferson Street interchange in Indio. Construction/Demolition Activities -- are any on-site mechanical activities preparatory to or related to the building, alteration, rehabilitation, demolition or improvement of property, including, but not limited to the following activities; grading, excavation, loading, crushing, cutting, planing, shaping or ground breaking. Contingency Measures -- Actions which will be implemented in the event of a failure to attain or to meet interim milestones. Criteria Air Contaminants -- Criteria air contaminants are pollutants for which air quality standards currently exist (i.e. ozone, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), fine suspended particulates (PM io), lead and sulfate). CVAG -- The Coachella Valley Association of Governments. r Disturbed Surface Area -- means a portion of the earth's surface which has been physically moved, uncovered, destabilized, or otherwise modified from its undisturbed natural soil condition, thereby increasing the potential for emission of fugitive dust. This definition excludes those areas restored to a natural state, such that vegetative ground cover and soil characteristics are similar to adjacent or near -by natural conditions. Dust Suppressants -- are water, hygroscopic materials, or non-toxic chemical stabilizers used as a treatment material to reduce fugitive emissions. Non-toxic chemical stabilizers must not be used if prohibited by the Regional Water Quality Control Boards, the California Air Resources Board, the Environmental Protection Agency, or any other applicable law, rule or regulation; and should meet any specifications, criteria, or tests required by any federal, state, or local water agency. Earth -Moving Activities -- shall include, but not be limited to, such operations as grading, loading or unloading of dirt or bulk materials, adding to or removing from open storage piles of bulk materials, landfill operations, soil mulching, or agricultural tilling. EIR -- Environmental Impact Report. Emissions Inventory -- Listing by source of pollutants emitted into a community's atmosphere (typically given in amounts per day or per year). EPA -- The Environmental Protection Agency. Federal agency with responsibility for ambient air quality. Episode Criteria -- California has adopted health advisory levels called episode criteria for ozone, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and ozone in combination with sulfates. Episode criteria represent short-term exposures at concentrations which actually threaten public health. Facility -Y means any permit unit or grouping of permit units or other air contaminant - emitting activities which are located on one or more contiguous properties within the District, in actual physical contact or separated solely by a public roadway or other public right-of-way, and are owned or operated by the same person (or by persons under common control). FIP -- The Federal Implementation Plan. Fugitive Dust -- means any solid particulate matter that becomes airborne, other than that emitted from an exhaust stack, directly or indirectly as a result of the activities of man. GP -- General Plan. Health Advisory -- Issued when ozone levels are projected to reach 15 parts per hundred million to warn athletes to avoid strenuous outdoor activities. HOV -- High Occupancy Vehicle. Hydrocarbons -- Any compound containing carbon and hydrogen in various combinations found in solvents and fuels. Inversion -- A layer of warm air in the atmosphere that lies over a layer of cooler air, trapping pollutants in the mixing layer beneath it. Maximum Individual Cancer Risk (MICR) -- is the estimated probability of a potential maximally exposed individual contracting cancer as a result of exposure to toxic air contaminants over a period of 70 years for residential and 46 years for worker receptor locations. ug/m3 -- Microgram (1/1,000,000 of a gram) per cubic meter of air. NAAQS -- National Ambient Air Quality Standards. NO -- Nitric oxide is a colorless, odorless gas. NO2 -- Nitrogen dioxide is a reddish -brown gas formed by the combination of nitric oxide with oxygen. Nonattainment Area -- An area that does not meet state or national standards for a given pollutant. NOx -- Oxides of nitrogen. Gases formed primarily from atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen when combustion takes place (particularly under conditions of high temperature). Oxides of nitrogen are primary receptors of ultraviolet light initiating the photochemical reactions that produce smog. 03 -- Ozone is a pungent, colorless toxic gas which is produced by the photochemical process. Ozone is formed through chemical reactions of VOCs, oxides of nitrogen and oxygen in the presence of sunlight. Offset -- An emission reduction that compensates for an emission increase. Ozone Precursors -- Chemicals such as hydrocarbons VOCs and oxides of nitrogen, which contribute to the formation of ozone. Particulate Matter -- Particulate matter consists of particles in the atmosphere as a by- product of fuel combustion, through abrasion such as tire wear, and through soil erosion by the wind. Particulates can also be formed through photochemical reactions in the atmosphere. Permit Unit -- means any article, machine, equipment, or other contrivance, or combination thereof, which may cause or control the issuance of air contaminants, and which requires a written permit pursuant to Rules 201 and/or 203. Photochemical -- Requiring the presence of sunlight for a chemical reaction. Photochemical Oxidant - Photochemical oxidant (03) can include several different pollutants, but consists primarily of ozone (90%) and a group of chemicals called organic peroxynitrates. Photochemical oxidant is created by complex atmospheric reactions involving oxides of nitrogen and volatile organic compounds, in the presence of ultraviolet energy from sunlight. PM -- Total suspended particulate matter. PM2.5 -- Suspended particulate matter with a mean aerodynamic diameter of less than 2.5 micrometers. PM10 -- Suspended particulate matter with a mean aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 micrometers. PM10 SIP -- The PMio State Implementation Plan. PPM -- Parts per million parts of air. Primary Pollutants -- Primary pollutants are those emitted directly from a source and include: carbon monoxide (CO), nitric oxide (NO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulates, and various hydrocarbons and other volatile organic compounds (VOC). RACM -- Reasonably Available Control Measures. RACT -- Reasonably Available Control Technology. Rate -of -Progress -- Reducing pollutants contributing to nonattainment by five percent per year or all feasible control measures and an expeditious adoption schedule. Receptor Location -- means any location outside the boundaries of the facility at which a person could experience acute or chronic exposure. The SCAQMD shall consider the potential for exposure in determining whether the location will be considered a receptor location. Reasonable Further Progress -- An incremental reduction in emissions of relevant air pollutants that is needed to ensure attainment of the national ambient air quality standards or NAAQS by the applicable date. Risk Assessment -- Evaluation of expected health impacts on a specific population. ROC -- Reactive Organic Compounds. Compounds composed of hydrocarbons that contribute to the formation of photochemical oxidant. ROG -- Reactive Organic Gases. Gases composed of hydrocarbons that contribute to the formation of photochemical oxidant. SCAB -- The South Coast Air Basin. SCAG -- The Southern California Association of Governments. SCAQMD -- The South Coast Air Quality Management District. Secondary Pollutants -- Secondary pollutants are created with the passage of time in the air mass and include: photochemical oxidants (90% of which are ozone), photochemical aerosols, peroxyacetylnitrate (PAN), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Sensitive Land Use -- Sensitive land uses are land uses associated with indoor and/or outdoor human activities that may be subject to stress and/or significant impact as a result of air pollutant exposure. They include residential (single-family and multi -family dwellings, mobile home parks, dormitories and similar uses); transient lodging (including hotels, motels and similar uses); hospitals, nursing homes, convalescent hospitals and other facilities for long-term medical care; and public or private educational facilities. SIP -- State Implementation Plan. A document that shows the steps planned to meet federal air quality standards (outlined in the Clean Air Act). Each nonattainment area prepares an air quality improvement pian. These plans are combined to make the statewide SIP. SO2 -- Sulfur dioxide results from the combustion of high sulfur content fuels. SOV -- Single Occupant Vehicle. A vehicle with one occupant (the driver). SOx -- Sulfates result from a reaction of sulfur dioxide and oxygen in the presence of sunlight. SRA -- Source Receptor Area. The Coachella Valley is in Source Receptor Area 30. SSAB -- The Salton Sea Air Basin. Stage I Alert -- Called when ozone concentrations are projected to reach 20 parts per hundred million. A Stage I Alert indicates that the general public should avoid strenuous outdoor activities because of unhealthful air quality. Stage Ill Alert -- Called when ozone concentrations are projected to reach 35 parts per hundred million. A Stage H Alert indicates that everyone should remain indoors because of very unhealthful air quality. T-SACT -- Best Available Control Technology For Toxics means the most stringent emissions limitation or control technique which has been achieved in practice for such permit unit category or class of source or any other emissions limitation or control technique found by the SCAQMD to be technologically feasible for a specific source. TCM -- Transportation Control Measures. TDM -- Transportation Demand Management. Toxic Air Contaminant -- is an air pollutant which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. VMT -- Vehicle Miles Traveled (usually daily). VOC -- Hydrocarbon and ether Volatile Organic Compounds are formed from combustion of fuels and the evaporation of organic solvents. Many hydrocarbon compounds are major air pollutants, and those classified as aromatics are highly photochemically reactive with NOx, forming photochemical smog. VT -- Vehicle Trips. r Ambient Air Quality Standards (' STATE FEDERAL it Pollutant Averaging Time Concentration Primag Secondary Ozone (03) 1 Hour 0.09 ppm 0.12 ppm Same as (180 µgfm3) (235 pg.1d) Primary Std. r, 8 Hour 0.08 ppm Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Annual Average = 0.053 ppm Same as (100 pg/m3) Primary Std. 1 Hour 0.25 ppm - (470 gghn3) Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8 Hour 9 ppm 9 ppm - (10 mglm) (10 mg/ml) 1 Hour 20 ppm 35 ppm - (23 mg1m3) (40 mg/ml) Suspended Particulate Annual 30 pg/m3 - - Matter (PM,o) Geometric Mean 24 Hour 50 pg/m3 150 pg/m3 Same as Primary Std. Annual - 50 gg/m3 - Arithmetic Mean Suspended Particulate 24 Hour - 65 µg/m3 - Matter (PM2.5) Annual - 15 µg/nO Arithmetic Mean Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Annual Average - 80 pg/m3 - (0.03 ppm) 24 Hour 0.04 ppm 365 µg/m3 - (1054g/m') (0.14 ppm) 3 Hour - - 1,300 pg/m' (0.5 ppm) 1 Hour 0.25 ppm - - (655 leg/rn3) Lead 30 Day Average 1.5 pg/m3 - - Calendar Quarter - 1.5 gg/m3 Same as Primary Std. Sulfates 24 Hour 25 pg/m3 - - Hydrogen Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm - - (42 uglm3) _ Vinyl Chloride 24 Hour 0.010 ppm - - (chloroethene) (26 µgld) Visibility Reducing Particles 8 Hour 10 am -6 prn PST) Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2002. Notes: ppm = parts per million mg/ml = milligrams per cubic meter µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter *In sufficient amount to produce an extinction coefficient of 0.23 per kilometer due to particles when the relative humidity is less than 70 percent. Measurement in accordance with ARB Method V. Episode Criteria �Wndo Engineering Source: SCAQMD, 1983 SCAQMD and California Federal Air Pollutant Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Ozone 0.20 ppm. 1 -hr. avg. 0.35 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. 0.50 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. - 0.50 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. Carbon Monoxide 40 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. 75 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. 100 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. 15 ppm, 8 -hr. avg. 30 ppm, 8 -hr. avg. 40 ppm, 8 -hr. avg. 20 ppm, 12 -hr. avg. 35 ppm, 12 -hr. avg. 50 ppm, 12 -hr. avg. 0.60 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. 1.20 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. 1.60 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. Nitrogen Dioxide - 0.15 ppm, 24 -hr. avg. 0.30 ppm, 24 -hr. avg. 0.40 ppm, 24 -hr. avg. Sulfur Dioxide 0.50 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. 1.00 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. 2.00 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. _ 0.20 ppm, 24 -hr. avg. 0.70 ppm, 24 -hr. avg. 0.90 ppm, 24 -hr. avg. Sulfur Dioxide/ Particulate - - 65,000', 24 -hr. avg. 261,000`, 24 -hr. avg. 393,000', 24 -hr. avg. Matter Combined Particulate - 375 ug/m 3 24 -hr. avg. 625 ug/m 3 24 -hr. avg. 875 ug/m 3, 24 -hr. avg. Matter Sulfates" 25 ug/m 3, 24 -hr. avg. combined with ozone > 0.20 ppm, 1 -hr. avg. - Actions to be taken Health advisory to Intermediate Stage. Mandatory abatement Open burning pro- Incinerator use Vehicle use prohib- a) Persons with Abatement actions measures. Extensive hibited. Reduction prohibited. Reduction ited. Industry shut respiratory and taken to reduce actions taken to in vehicle operation in vehicle operation down or curtailment. coronary disease. concentration of prevent exposure at requested. Industrial required. Further Public activities b) School officials in pollutant at issue. indicated levels. curtailment. industrial curtailment. ceased. order to curtail State can take action students' participa- if local efforts tion in strenuous failed. activities. First steps in abatement plans. 3 ' Product of sulfur dioxide (ppm), particulate matter (ug/m ) and a factor (2620). " Episodes based upon these criteria are not classified according to stages. �Wndo Engineering Source: SCAQMD, 1983 r Appendix A Effects of Air Pollutants on Sensitive Receptors Oxidants (primarily ozone) at high enough concentrations can cause eye irritation; aggravate respiratory disease; suppress the body's capacity to fight infection; impair athletic performance and cause growth retardation in sensitive trees. Oxidants also cause cracking of untreated rubber. Short-term and long-term ozone exposures have been found to have adverse health effects on humans and animals. Ozone and fine particulates are responsible for a wide range of health effects including slowed lung growth in children, worsening of asthma symptoms, increased susceptibility to respiratory infections, increased hospital admissions, and increased death rates. Suspended particulates such as soot, dust, aerosols, fumes, and mists produce haze and reduce visibility. Health concerns focus on smaller particles that penetrate deeply into and then damage the human respiratory tract. Deaths from short-term exposures have been documented and symptoms are exacerbated in sensitive patients with respiratory disease. Excess seasonal declines in pulmonary function have been found (especially in children). Typically, industrial and agricultural operations, combustion, and photochemical reactions produce suspended particulates. Volatile organic compounds in the presence of other primary pollutants (particularly oxides of nitrogen) lead to the formation of oxidants. VOCs also damage plants by inhibiting growth and causing flowers and leaves to fall. Carbon monoxide is essentially colorless, odorless and toxic to humans. It enters the blood stream and interferes with the transfer of fresh oxygen, thereby depriving sensitive tissues in the heart and brain of oxygen. At high enough concentrations it can impair visual function, psychomotor performance and time discrimination. Carbon monoxide exposure aggravates angina pectoris and other aspects of coronary heart disease. It may also impose increase risks to fetuses. Nitrogen dioxide at high enough exposures can cause fibrotic lung changes, broncho- striction, and acute bronchitis among infants and school children. Over several months, it can cause collapsed lesions near the leaf margin and moderate injury in sensitive plants. Nitrogen dioxide aggravates chronic respiratory disease and respiratory symptoms in sensitive groups. Lead at high enough concentrations impairs hemoglobin synthesis and nerve conduction by increasing lead levels in the blood. Sulfur dioxide and suspended particulate exposures can each cause higher frequencies of acute respiratory symptoms and diminished ventilatory function in children. In addition, these two pollutants at lower concentrations can act in conjunction to cause greater harm by injuring lung tissue. Sulfur oxides, in combinations with moisture and oxygen, can yellow the leaves of plants, dissolve marble, and erode iron and steel. Sulfates decrease ventilatory function, aggravate asthmatic symptoms, aggravate cardio -pulmonary disease and cause damage to vegetation (while degrading visibility). CARB Air Q tia Iity Data for Indio Pollutant 2001 2002 2003 Max Value %Exceeded Carbon Monoxide NM NM NM NM - % >0.0534 ppm (Federal) Maximum 8 -Hour Cone. (ppm) NM NM NM NM - Days 8 -Hour Cone. x9.5 ppm (Federal) NM NM NM - NM Days 8 -Hour Cone. >9.0 ppm (State) NM NM NM - NM Maximum 1 -Hour Cone. (ppm) NM NM NM NM - Days 1 -Hour Cone. >20 ppm (State) NM NM NM - NM Percent of Year Monitored NM NM NM - - Ozone NM - NM Days 1 -Hour Cone. >0.25 ppm (State) NM NM Maximum 1 -Hour Cone. (ppm) 0.114 0.114 0.123 0.123 - Days 1 -Hour Cone. >0.12 ppm (Federal) 0 0 0 - 0 Days 1 -Hour Cone. >0.09 ppm (State) 21 24 24 - 6 Maximum 8 -Hour Cone. (ppm) 0.099 0.110 0.105 0.110 - Days 8 -Hour Cone. >0.08 ppm (Federal) 17 15 19 - 5 Percent of Year Monitored 100 100 100 - - Nitrogen Dioxide AAM Cone. (ppm) (Federal) NM NM NM NM - % >0.0534 ppm (Federal) NM NM NM NM Maximum 1 -Hour Cone. (ppm) NM NM NM NM - Days 1 -Hour Cone. >0.25 ppm (State) NM NM NM NM Maximum 24 -Hour Cone. (ppm) NM NM NM NM - Percent of Year Monitored NM NM NM - - Sulfur Dioxide Maximum 1 -Hour Cone. (ppm) NM NM NM NM - Days 1 -Hour Cone. >0.14 ppm (Federal) NM NM NM - NM Days 1 -Hour Cone. >0.25 ppm (State) NM NM NM - NM Maximum 24 -Hour Cone. (ppm) NM NM NM NM - Days 24 -Hour Cone. >0.05 ppm (State) NM NM NM - NM Percent of Year Monitored NM NM NM - Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10) Maximum 24 -Hour Cone. (ug/m3) 149 276 309 309 24 -Hour Samples >150 ug/m3 (Federal) 0 2 3 - - 24 -Hour Calc >150 ug/m3 (Federal) 0 9 9 - 6 24 -Hour Samples >50 ug/m3 (State) 50; 54 52 - - 24 -Hour Calc >50 ug/m3 (State) 150 184 161 - 45 AAM Cone. (ug/m3) (Federal) 50.2 55.0 56.7 56.7 - Conc. >50 ug/m3 (Federal) Yes, Yes Yes - AGM Cone. (ug/m3) (State) 44.3 48.0 56.4 56.4 Cone. >30 ug/m3 (State) Yes Yes Yes - Percent of Year Monitored 92 100 100 Suspended Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Maximum 24 -Hour Cone. (ug/m3) 33.5 26.8 26.8 33.5 - 24 -Hour Samples >65 ug/m3 (Federal) 0 0 0 - 0 % 24 -Hour Samples >65 ug/m3 (Federal) 0 0 0 - - AAM Cone, (ug/m3) 12.2 12.0 11.4 12.2 Cone,>15 ug/m3 (Federal) No No Noy - Percent of Year Monitored 93 100 NA - - Notes: NM=Not Monitored. Lead, Sulfate, TSP, CO, NO2, and SO2 not monitored. NA=Not Available. Shaded area represents less than 12 months of data. May not be representative. Data for the samples on high - wind days (190 ug/m3, 201 ug/m3, and 183 ug/m3) was excluded per EPA's Natural Events Policy. CARB Air Quality Data for Palm Springs Pollutant 2001 2002 2003 Max Value %Exceeded Carbon Monoxide Maximum 8 -Hour Conc. (ppm) 1.5 1.14 1.29 1.50 - Days 8 -Hour Conc. 0.5 ppm (Federal) 0 0 0 - 0 Days 8 -Hour Conc. >9.0 ppm (State) 0 0 0 - 0 Maximum 1 -Hour Conc. (ppm) 2 NM NM 2 - Days 1 -Hour Conc. >20 ppm (State) 0 NM NM - 0 Percent of Year Monitored 98 95 89 - - Ozone Maximum 1 -Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.137 0.136 0.141 0.141 - Days 1 -Hour Conc. >0.12 ppm (Federal) 6 2 4 - 1 Days 1 -Hour Conc. >0.09 ppm (State) 53 49 54 - 14 Maximum 8 -Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.113 0.124 0.110 0.124 - Days 8 -Hour Conc. >0.08 ppm (Federal) 39 46 43 - 12 Percent of Year Monitored 100 99 99 - - Nitrogen Dioxide AAM Conc. (ppm) (Federal) 0.0175 0.016 0.016 0.018 - % >0.0534 ppm (Federal) 0 0 0 - 0 Maximum 1 -Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.08 0.068 0.067 0.080 - Days 1 -Hour Conc. >0.25 ppm (State) 0 0 0 - 0 Maximum 24 -Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.043 NM NM 0.043 - Percent of Year Monitored 95 95 97 - - Sulfur Dioxide Maximum 1 -Hour Conc. (ppm) NM NM NM NM - Days 1 -Hour Conc. >0.14 ppm (Federal) NM NM NM - NM Days 1 -Hour Conc. >0.25 ppm (State) NM NM NM - NM Maximum 24 -Hour Conc. (ppm) NM NM NM NM - Days 24 -Hour Conc. >0.05 ppm (State) NM NM NM - NM Percent of Year Monitored NM NM NM - - Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10) Maximum 24 -Hour Conc. (ug/m3) 53 75 108 108 - 24 -Hour Samples >150 ug/m3 (Federal) 0 0 0 - - 24 -Hour Calc > 150 ug/m3 (Federal) 0 0: 0 0 24 -Hour Samples >50 ug/m3 (State) 1 3 4 - 24 -Hour Calc >50 ug/m3 (State) 6 18' 23 - 4 AAM Conc. (ug/m3) (Federal) 26.7 27.2' 27.1 27.2 - Conc. >50 ug/m3 (Federal) No No No - - AGM Conc. (ug/m3) (State) 23.9 24.0 27.1 27.1 - Conc. >30 ug/m3 (State) No No No - - Percent of Year Monitored 81 NA 100 - - Suspended Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Maximum 24 -Hour Conc. (ug/m3) 44.7 42.3 21.2 44.7 - 24 -Hour Samples >65 ug/m3 (Federal) 0 0 0 - 0 % 24 -Hour Samples >65 ug/m3 (Federal) 0 0 0 - - AAM Conc, (ug/m3) 10.8 10.0 9.0 10.8 - Conc. >15 ug/m3 (Federal) No No No - - Percent of Year Monitored 88 NA NA - Notes: NM=Not Monitored. SO2 not monitored. TSP not monitored. Sulfate not monitored. NA=Not Available. Shaded area represents less than 12 months of data. May not be representative. Data for the samples on high - wind days (432 ug/m3 on 7/3/01) was excluded per EPA's Natural Events Policy. Page: 1 URBEMIS 2002 For Windows 7.4.2 File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\Schnugga Cootie\Desktop\Work\Other Files\Griffin Ranch.urb Project Name: Griffin Ranch Project Location: South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) On -Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Based on EMFAC2002 version 2.2 SUMMARY REPORT (Pounds/Day - Summer) CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES PM10 PM10 PM10 *** 2005 *** ROG NOx CO S02 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 163.57 149.86 160.59 0.05 136.82 6.81 130.01 TOTALS (lbs/day, mitigated) 163.57 149.86 160.59 0.05 56.76 6.81 49.95 PM10 PM10 PM10 *** 2006 *** ROG NOx CO SO2 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 163.41 108.65 137.64 0.00 5.26 4.80 0.46 TOTALS (lbs/day, mitigated) 163.41 108.65 137.64 0.00 5.26 4.80 0.46 PM10 PM10 PM10 *** 2007 *** ROG NOx CO S02 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 TOTALS (lbs/day, mitigated) 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 PM10 PM10 PM10 *** 2008 *** ROG NOx CO S02 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 15.20 98.77 124.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 TOTALS (lbs/day, mitigated) 15.20 98.77 124.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO S02 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 15.65 3.87 5.35 0.11 0.01 OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO S02 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 28.49 26.77 332.19 0.21 29.45 SUM OF AREA AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 44.14 30.64 337.53 0.32 29.46 Page: 2 URBEMIS 2002 For Windows 7.4.2 File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\Schnugga Cootie\Desktop\Work\Other Files\Griffin Ranch.urb Project Name: Griffin Ranch Project Location: South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) On -Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Based on EMFAC2002 version 2.2 SUMMARY REPORT (Pounds/Day - Winter) CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES PM10 PM10 PM10 *** 2005 *** ROG NOx CO SO2 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 163.57 149.86 160.59 0.05 136.82 6.81 130.01 TOTALS (lbs/day, mitigated) 163.57 149.86 160.59 0.05 56.76 6.81 49.95 PM10 PM10 PM10 *** 2006 *** ROG NOx CO SO2 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 163.41 108.65 137.64 0.00 5.26 4.80 0.46 TOTALS (lbs/day, mitigated) 163.41 108.65 137.64 0100 5.26 4.80 0.46 PM10 PM10 PM10 *** 2007 *** ROG NOx CO SO2 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 TOTALS (lbs/day, mitigated) 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 PM10 PM10 PM10 *** 2008 *** ROG NOx CO SO2 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 15.20 98.77 124.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 TOTALS (lbs/day, mitigated) 15.20 98.77 124.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 15.22 3.82 1.63 0.00 0.01 OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO 802 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 23.13 36.75 263.59 0.16 29.45 SUM OF AREA AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 38.34 40.57 265.22 0.16 29.45 Page: 3 URBEMIS 2002 For Windows 7.4.2 File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\Schnugga Cootie\Desktop\Work\Other Files\Griffin Ranch.urb Project Name: Griffin Ranch Project Location: South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) On -Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Based on EMFAC2002 version 2.2 SUMMARY REPORT (Tons/Year) CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES *** 2005 *** ROG NOx CO S02 PM10 TOTAL PM10 EXHAUST PM10 DUST TOTALS (tpy, unmitigated) 3.37 12.55 13.42 0.00 15.01 0.59 2.86 TOTALS (tpy, mitigated) 3.37 12.55 13.42 0.00 7.97 0.59 1.10 *** 2006 *** ROG NOx CO S02 PM10 TOTAL PM10 EXHAUST PM10 DUST TOTALS (tpy, unmitigated) 14.08 14.35 17.20 0.00 4.80 0.60 0.00 TOTALS (tpy, mitigated) 14.08 14.35 17.20 0.00 4.80 0.60 0.00 PM10 PM10 PM10 *** 2007 *** ROG NOx CO S02 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST TOTALS (tpy, unmitigated) 1.92 13.68 15.96 0.00 4.80 0.60 0.00 TOTALS (tpy, mitigated) 1.92 13.68 15.96 0.00 4.80 0.60 0.00 PM10 PM10 PM10 *** 2008 *** ROG NOx CO S02 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST TOTALS (tpy, unmitigated) 0.64 4.36 5.45 0.00 1.28 0.16 0.00 TOTALS (tpy, mitigated) 0.64 4.36 5.45 0.00 1.28 0.16 0.00 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO S02 PM10 TOTALS (tpy, unmitigated) 2.82 0.70 0.63 0.01 0.00 OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO S02 PM10 TOTALS (tpy, unmitigated) 4.87 5.49 56.45 0.04 5.37 SUM OF AREA AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO S02 PM10 TOTALS (tpy, unmitigated) 7.69 6.19 57.08 0.05 5.38 FPage : 4 URBEMIS 2002 For Windows 7.4.2 File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\Schnugga Cootie\Desktop\Work\Other Files\Griffin Ranch.urb Project Name: Griffin Ranch ,Project Location: South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) On -Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Based on EMFAC2002 version 2.2 DETAIL REPORT (Pounds/Day - Winter) Construction Start Month and Year: May, 2005 Construction Duration: 36 Total Land Use Area to be Developed: 199 acres Maximum Acreage Disturbed Per Day: 13 acres ,Single Family Units: 305 Multi -Family Units: 0 Retail/Office/Institutional/Industrial Square Footage: 0 CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES UNMITIGATED (lbs/day) PM10 PM10 PM10 Source ROG NOx CO S02 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST *** 2005*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - 130.00 - 130.00 Off -Road Diesel 19.93 149.16 150.79 - 6.80 6.80 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.20 0.24 5.06 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 Maximum lbs/day 20.13 149.40 155.85 0.00 136.82 6.81 130.01 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 111.82 100.41 - 5.09 5.09 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.45 0.74 17.99 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 146.64 - - - - - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 1.45 0.74 16.21 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.77 - - - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 5.04 33.76 41.09 - 1.46 1.46 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.18 3.52 0.68 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.03 0.02 0.41 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 Maximum lbs/day 163.57 149.86 160.59 0.05 7.11 6.65 0.46 Max lbs/day all phases 163.57 149.86 160.59 0.05 136.82 6.81 130.01 *** 2006*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - O.CC - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 107.23 103.50 - 4.i8 4.78 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.36 0.71 17.07 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 146.64 - - - - - - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 1.36 0.71 17.07 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 163.41 108.65 137.64 0.00 5.26 4.80 0.46 Max lbs/day all phases 163.41 108.65 137.64 0.00 5.26 4.80 0.46 *** 2007*** Page: 5 Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 - Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 102.61 106.71 - 4.36 4.36 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.27 0.67 14.48 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 Max lbs/day all phases 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 *** 2008*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0100 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 98.15 109.80 - 3.96 3.96 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.16 0.62 14.94 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0,00 - - - - - - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 15.20 98.77 124.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 Max lbs/day all phases 15.20 98.77 124.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 Phase 1 - Demolition Assumptions: Phase Turned OFF Phase 2 - Site Grading Assumptions Start Month/Year for Phase 2: May '05 Phase 2 Duration: 2 months On -Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off -Road Equipment No. Type Horsepower Load Factor Hours/Day 1 Graders 174 0.575 8.0 1 Other Equipment 190 0.620 8.0 1 Rollers 114 0.430 6.0 1 Rubber Tired Dozers 352 0.590 8.0 3 Scrapers 313 0.660 8.0 1 Tractor/Loaders/Backhoes 79 0.465 8.0 Phase 3 - Building Construction Assumptions Start Month/Year for Phase 3: Jul '05 Phase 3 Duration: 34 months Start Month/Year for SubPhase Building: Jul 105 SubPhase Building Duration: 34 months Page: 6 Off -Road Equipment No. Type Horsepower Load Factor 1 Concrete/Industrial saws 84 0.730 5 Other Equipment 190 0.620 2 Rough Terrain Forklifts 94 0.475 1 Trenchers 82 0.695 Start Month/Year for SubPhase Architectural Coatings: Dec 105 SubPhase Architectural Coatings Duration: 8.5 months Phase 3 - Building Construction Start Month/Year for SubPhase Asphalt: Jul 105 Off -Road Diesel SubPhase Asphalt Duration: 4.5 months 149.16 On -Road Diesel Acres to be Paved: 29 Worker Trips 0.20 Off -Road Equipment Maximum lbs/day 20.13 No. Type Horsepower Load Factor 1 Graders 174 0.575 1 Pavers 132 0.590 1 Paving Equipment 111 0.530 1 Rollers 114 0.430 CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES MITIGATED (lbs/day) Source ROG NOx *** 2005*** Fugitive Dust - Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions 0.00 On -Road Diesel Fugitive Dust - - Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Fugitive Dust - - Off -Road Diesel 19.93 149.16 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.20 0.24 Maximum lbs/day 20.13 149.40 Phase 3 - Building Construction 0.00 Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 111.82 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.45 0.74 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 146.64 - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 1.45 0.74 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.77 - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 5.04 33.76 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.18 3.52 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.03 0.02 Maximum lbs/day 163.57 149.86 Max lbs/day all phases 163.57 149.86 *** 2006*** - Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions PM10 Fugitive Dust - Off -Road Diesel 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions 0.00 Fugitive Dust - Off -Road Diesel 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction 0.00 Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.36 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 146.64 Arch Coatings Worker Trips 1.36 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 163.41 Max lbs/day all phases 163.41 Hours/Day 8.0 8.0 8.0 0.0 Hours/Day 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 - - PM10 PM10 PM10 CO SO2 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST - - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - - 49.94 - 49.94 150.79 - 6.80 6.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.06 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 155.85 0.00 56.76 6.61 49.95 100.41 - 5.09 5.09 0.00 17.99 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 16.21 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 41.09 - 1.46 1.46 0.00 0.68 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 160.59 0.05 7.11 6.65 0.46 160.59 0.05 56.76 6.81 49.95 - - - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - - - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 107.23 103.50 - 4.78 4.78 0.00 0.71 17.07 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 0.71 17.07 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.65 137.64 0.00 5.26 4.80 0.46 108.65 137.64 0.00 5.26 4.80 0.46 FPage: 7 *** 2007*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0,00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 102.61 106.71 - 4.36 4.36 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.27 0.67 14.48 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 Max lbs/day all phases 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 *** 2008*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 98.15 109.80 - 3.96 3.96 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.16 0.62 14.94 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Off -Gas 0100 - - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 15.20 98.77 1.24.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 Max lbs/day all phases 15.20 98.77 124.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 Construction -Related Mitigation Measures Phase 2: Soil Disturbance: Water exposed surfaces - 2x daily Percent Reduction(ROG 0.0% NOx 0.08 CO 0.0% S02 0.0% PM10 34.08) Phase 2: Unpaved Reads: Water all haul roads 2x daily Percent Reduction(ROG 0.0% NOx 0.0% CO 0.08 S02 0.0% PM10 3.08) Phase 2: Unpaved Roads: Reduce speed on unpaved roads to < 15 mph Percent Reduction(ROG 0.0% NOx 0.0% CO 0.0% S02 0.08 PM10 40.08) Phase 1 - Demolition Assumptions: Phase Turned OFF Phase 2 - Site Grading Assumptions Start Month/Year for Phase 2: May 'OS Phase 2 Duration: 2 months On -Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off -Road Equipment No. Type Horsepower Load Factor Hours/Day 1 Graders 174 0.575 8.0 F I Page: 8 1 Other Equipment 190 0.620 8.0 1 Rollers 114 0.430 8.0 1 Rubber Tired Dozers 352 0.590 8.0 3 Scrapers 313 0.660 8.0 1 Tractor/Loaders/Backhoes 79 0.465 8.0 Phase 3 - Building Construction Assumptions Start Month/Year for Phase 3: Jul 105 Phase 3 Duration: 34 months Start Month/Year for SubPhase Building: Jul 105 SubPhase Building Duration: 34 months Off -Road Equipment No. Type Horsepower Load Factor Hours/Day 1 Concrete/Industrial saws B4 0.730 8.0 5 Other Equipment 190 0.620 8.0 2 Rough Terrain Forklifts 94 0.475 8.0 1 Trenchers 82 0.695 8.0 Start Month/Year for SubPhase Architectural Coatings: Dec 105 SubPhase Architectural Coatings Duration: 8.5 months Start Month/Year for SubPhase Asphalt: Jul 105 SubPhase Asphalt Duration: 4.5 months Acres to be Paved: 29 Off -Road Equipment No. Type Horsepower Load Factor Hours/Day 1 Graders 174 0.575 8.0 1 Pavers 132 0.590 8.0 1 Paving Equipment 111 0.530 8.0 1 Rollers 114 0.430 8.0 Page: 9 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES (Winter Pounds per Day, Unmitigated) Source ROG NOx CO S02 PM10 Natural Gas 0.30 3.82 1.63 _ 0.01 Wood Stoves 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fireplaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Landscaping - No winter emissions Consumer Prdcts 14.92 - - - - TOTALS(lbs/day,unmitigated) 15.22 3.82 1.63 0.00 0.01 Page: 10 UNMITIGATED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Single family housing 23.13 36.75 263.59 0.16 29.45 TOTAL EMISSIONS (lbs/day) 23.13 36.75 263.59 0.16 29.45 Does not include correction for passby trips. Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips. OPERATIONAL (Vehicle) EMISSION ESTIMATES Analysis Year: 2008 Temperature (F): 60 Season: Winter EMFAC Version: EMFAC2002 (9/2002) Summary of Land Uses: Unit Type Trip Rate Size Total Trips Single family housing 9.51 trips / dwelling units 305.00 2,899.94 Vehicle Assumptions: Fleet Mix: Vehicle Type Percent Type Non -Catalyst Catalyst Diesel Light Auto 55.00 1.60 98.00 0.40 Light Truck < 3,750 lbs 15.00 2.70 95.30 2.00 Light Truck 3,751- 5,750 16.20 1.20 97.50 1.30 Med Truck 5,751- 8,500 7.20 1.40 95.80 2.80 Lite -Heavy 8,501-10,000 1.10 0.00 81.80 18.20 Lite -Heavy 10,001-14,000 0.40 0.00 50.00 50.00 Med-Heavy 14,001-33,000 1.00 0.00 20.00 80.00 Heavy -Heavy 33,001-60,000 0.90 0.00 11.10 88.90 Line Haul > 60,000 lbs 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 Urban Bus 0.20 0.00 50.00 50.00 Motorcycle 1.70 76.50 23.50 0.00 School Bus 0.10 0.00 0.00 100.00 Motor Home 1.20 8.30 83.30 8.40 Travel Conditions Residential Commercial Home- Home- Home - Work Shop Other Commute Non -Work Customer Urban Trip Length (miles) 11.5 4.9 6.0 10.3 5.5 5.5 Rural Trip Length (miles) 11.5 4.9 6.0 10.3 5.5 5.5 Trip Speeds (mph) 35.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 8 of Trips - Residential 20.0 37.0 43.0 Page: 11 r Changes made to the default values for Land Use Trip Percentages Changes made to the default values for Construction The user has overridden the Default Phase Lengths Phase 2 mitigation measure Soil Disturbance: Water exposed surfaces - 2x daily has been changed from off to on. Phase 2 mitigation measure Unpaved Roads: Water all haul roads 2x daily has been changed from off to on. Phase 2 mitigation measure Unpaved Roads: Reduce speed on unpaved roads to < 15 mph has been changed from off to on. Changes made to the default values for Area The wood stove option switch changed from on to off. The fireplcase option switch changed from on to off. Changes made to the default values for Operations The operational emission year changed from 2004 to 2008. The operational winter temperature changed from 50 to 60. The operational summer temperature changed from 90 to 95. Page: 12 URBEMIS 2002 For Windows 7.4.2 File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\Schnugga Cootie\Desktop\Work\Other Files\Griffin Ranch.urb Project Name: Griffin Ranch Project Location: South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) On -Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Based on EMFAC2002 version 2.2 DETAIL REPORT (Pounds/Day - Summer) Construction Start Month and Year: May, 2005 Construction Duration: 36 Total Land Use Area to be Developed: 199 acres Maximum Acreage Disturbed Per Day: 13 acres Single Family Units: 305 Multi -Family Units: 0 Retail/Office/Institutional/Industrial Square Footage: 0 CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES UNMITIGATED (lbs/day) PM10 PM10 PM10 Source ROG NOx CO S02 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST *** 2005*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0,00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 130.00 - 130.00 Off -Road Diesel 19.93 149.16 150.79 - 6.80 6.80 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.20 0.24 5.06 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 Maximum lbs/day 20.13 149.40 155.85 0.00 136.82 6.81 130.01 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 111.82 100.41 - 5.09 5.09 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.45 0.74 17.99 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 146.64 - - - - - - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 1.45 0.74 16.21 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Asphalt Off -Gas 0,77 - - - - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 5.04 33.76 41.09 - 1.46 1.46 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.18 3.52 0.6B 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.03 0.02 0.41 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 Maximum lbs/day 163.57 149.86 160.59 0.05 7.11 6.65 0.46 Max lbs/day all phases 163.57 149.86 160.59 0.05 136.82 6.81 130.01 *** 2006*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 107.23 103.50 - 4.78 4.78 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.36 0.71 17.07 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 146.64 - - - - - - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 1.36 0.71 17.07 0.00 0.24 0.01 0,23 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker 'Drips 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 163.41 108.65 137.64 0.00 5.26 4.80 0.46 Max lbs/day all phases 163.41 108.65 137.64 0.00 5.26 4.80 0.46 *** 2007*** Page: 13 Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 102.61 106.71 - 4.36 4.36 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.27 0.67 14.48 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - _ Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 Max lba/day all phases 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 *** 2008*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0,00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Work -r Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 98.15 109.80 - 3.96 3.96 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.16 0.62 14.94 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 15.20 98.77 124.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 Max lbs/day all phases 15.20 98.77 124.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 Phase 1 - Demolition Assumptions: Phase Turned OFF Phase 2 - Site Grading Assumptions Start Month/Year for Phase 2: May 105 Phase 2 Duration: 2 months On -Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off -Road Equipment No. Type Horsepower Load Factor Hours/Day 1 Graders 174 0.575 8.0 1 Other Equipment 190 0.620 8.0 1 Rollers 114 0.430 8.0 1 Rubber Tired Dozers 352 0.590 8.0 3 Scrapers 313 0.660 8.0 1 Tractor/Loaders/Backhoes 79 0.455 8.0 Phase 3 - Building Construction Assumptions Start Month/Year for Phase 3: Jul 105 Phase 3 Duration: 34 months Start Month/Year for SubPhase Building: Jul 105 SubPhase Building Duration: 34 months Page: 14 CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES MITIGATED (lbs/day) Hours/Day 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Hours/Day 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Source *** 2005**+ Off -Road Equipment NOx CO S02 No. Type 1 Horsepower Load Factor Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Concrete/Industrial saws 84 0.730 5 Other Equipment 190 0.620 - 2 Rough Terrain Forklifts 94 0.475 1 Trenchers 82 0.695 0.00 Start Month/Year for SubPhase Architectural Coatings: Dec '05 0.00 0.00 SubPhase Architectural Coatings Duration: 8.5 months On -Road Diesel 0.00 Start Month/Year for SubPhase Asphalt; Jul 105 0.00 0.00 SubPhase Asphalt Duration: 4.5 months 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips Maximum lbs/day 0.00 Acres to be Paved: 29 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off -Road Equipment 0.00 0.00 No. Type 1 Horsepower Load Factor 0.00 Graders 174 0.575 1 Pavers 132 0.590 1 Paving Equipment 111 0.530 1 Rollers 114 0.430 CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES MITIGATED (lbs/day) Hours/Day 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Hours/Day 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Source *** 2005**+ ROG NOx CO S02 PM10 TOTAL PM10 EXHAUST PM10 DUST Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - Off -Road Diesel 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - Off -Road Diesel 19.93 _ 149.16 150.79 - - 49.94 6.80 6.80 49.94 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips Maximum lbs/day 0.20 0.24 5.06 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 20.13 149.40 155.85 0.00 56.76 6.81 49.95 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 111.82 100.41 - 5.09 5.09 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.45 0 74 17.99 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 146.64 - - _ Arch Coatings Worker Trips 1.45 0.74 16.21 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.77 _ - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 5.04 33.76 41.09 - 1.46 1.46 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.18 3.52 0.68 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips Maximum lbs/day 0.03 163.57 0.02 0.41 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 149.86 160.59 0.05 7.11 6.65 0.46 Max lbs/day all phases 163.57 149.86 160.59 0.05 56.76 6.81 49.95 *** 2006*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - Off -Road Diesel 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - Off -Road Diesel 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel Bldg Const Worker 14.04 107.23 103.50 - 4.78 4.78 0.00 Trips Arch Coatings Off -Gas 1.36 146.64 0.71 - 17.07 - 0.00 _ 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Worker Trips Asphalt 1.36 0.71 17.07 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Off -Gas 0.00 - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 163.41 108.65 137.64 0.00 5.26 4.80 0.46 Max lbs/day all phases 163.41 108.65 137.64 0.00 5.26 4.80 0.46 Page: 15 *** 2007*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 102.61 106.71 - 4.36 4.36 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.27 0.67 14.48 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 Max lbs/day all phases 15.30 103.27 121.19 0.00 4.60 4.37 0.23 *** 2008*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.00 - 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 14.04 98.15 109.80 - 3.96 3.96 0.00 Bldg Const Worker Trips 1.16 0.62 14.94 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.23 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - - Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 - - - - - - Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum lbs/day 15.20 98.77 124.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 Max lbs/day all phases 15.20 98.77 124.75 0.00 4.21 3.98 0.23 Construction -Related Mitigation Measures Phase 2: Soil Disturbance: Water exposed surfaces - 2x daily Percent Reduction(ROG 0.0€ NOx 0.0% CO 0.08 S02 0.08 PM10 34.0%) Phase 2: Unpaved. Roads: Water all haul roads 2x daily Percent Reduction(ROG 0.08 NOx 0.08 CO 0.08 S02 0.08 PM10 3.0%) Phase 2: Unpaved Roads: Reduce speed on unpaved roads to < 15 mph Percent Reduction(ROG 0.08 NOx 0.08 CO 0.08 S02 0.0% PM10 40.08) Phase 1 - Demolition Assumptions: Phase Turned OFF Phase 2 - Site Grading Assumptions Start Month/Year for Phase 2: May 105 Phase 2 Duration: 2 months On -Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off -Road Equipment No. Type Horsepower Load Factor Hours/Day 1 Graders 174 0.575 8.0 Page: 16 1 Other Equipment 190 0.620 8.0 1 Rollers 114 0.430 8.0 1 Rubber Tired Dozers 352 0.590 8.0 3 Scrapers 313 0.660 8.0 1 Tractor/Loaders/Backhoes 79 0.465 8.0 Phase 3 - Building Construction Assumptions Start Month/Year for Phase 3: Jul 105 Phase 3 Duration: 34 months Start Month/Year for SubPhase Building: Jul 105 SubPhase Building Duration: 34 months Off -Road Equipment No. Type Horsepower Load Factor Hours/Day 1 Concrete/Industrial saws 84 0.730 8.0 5 Other Equipment 190 0.620 8.0 2 Rough Terrain Forklifts 94 0.475 8.0 1 Trenchers 82 0.695 8.0 Start Month/Year for SubPhase Architectural Coatings: Dec 105 SubPhase Architectural Coatings Duration: 8.5 months Start Month/Year for SubPhase Asphalt: Jul 105 SubPhase Asphalt Duration: 4.5 months Acres to be Paved: 29 Off -Road Equipment No, Type Horsepower Load Factor Hours/Day 1 Graders 174 0.575 8.0 1 Pavers 132 0.590 8.0 1 Paving Equipment 111 0.530 8.0 1 Rollers 114 0.430 8.0 FPage: 17 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES (Summer Pounds per Day, Unmitigated) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Natural Gas 0.30 3.62 1.63 - 0.01 Wood Stoves - No summer emissions Fireplaces - No summer emissions Landscaping 0.43 0.05 3.72 0.11 0.01 Consumer Prdcts 14.92 TOTALS(lbs/day,unmitigated) 15.65 3.87 5.35 0.11 0.01 Page: 18 UNMITIGATED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Single family housing 28.49 26.77 332.19 0.21 29.45 TOTAL EMISSIONS (lbs/day) 28.49 26.77 332.19 0.21 29.45 Does not include correction for passby trips. Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips. OPERATIONAL (Vehicle) EMISSION ESTIMATES Analysis Year: 2008 Temperature (F): 95 Season: Summer EMFAC Version: EMFAC2002 (9/2002) Summary of Land Uses: Unit Type Trip Rate Size Total Trips Single family housing 9.51 trips / dwelling units 305.00 2,899.94 Vehicle Assumptions: Fleet Mix: Vehicle Type Percent Type Non -Catalyst Catalyst Diesel Light Auto 55.00 1.60 98.00 0.40 Light Truck < 3,750 lbs 15.00 2.70 95.30 2.00 Light Truck 3,751- 5,750 16.20 1.20 97.50 1.30 Med Truck 5,751- 8,500 7.20 1.40 95.80 2.80 Lite -Heavy 8,501-10,000 1.10 0.00 81.80 18.20 Lite -Heavy 10,001-14,000 0.40 0.00 50.00 50.00 Med-Heavy 14,001-33,000 1.00 0.00 20.00 80.00 Heavy -Heavy 33,001-60,000 0.90 0.00 11.10 88.90 Line Haul > 60,000 lbs 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 Urban Bus 0.20 0.00 50.00 50.00 Motorcycle 1.70 76.50 23.50 0.00 School Bus 0.10 0.00 0.00 100.00 Motor Home 1.20 8.30 83.30 8.40 Travel Conditions Residential Commercial Home- Home- Home - Work Shop Other Commute Non -Work Customer Urban Trip Length (miles) 11.5 4.9 6.0 10.3 5.5 5.5 Rural Trip Length (miles) 11.5 4.9 6.0 10.3 5.5 5.5 Trip Speeds (mph) 35.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 % of Trips - Residential 20.0 37.0 43.0 Page: 19 Changes made to the default values for Land Use Trip Percentages Changes made to the default values for Construction The user has overridden the Default Phase Lengths Phase 2 mitigation measure Soil Disturbance: Water exposed surfaces - 2x daily has been changed from off to on. Phase 2 mitigation measure Unpaved Roads: Water all haul roads 2x daily has been changed from off to on. Phase 2 mitigation measure Unpaved Roads: Reduce speed on unpaved roads to < 15 mph has been changed from off to on. Changes made to the default values for Area The wood stove option switch changed from on to off. The fireplcase option switch changed from on to off. Changes made to the default values for Operations r The operational emission year changed from 2009 to 2008. IThe operational winter temperature changed from 50 to 60. The operational summer temperature changed from 90 to 95. Page: 20 d URBEMIS 2002 For Windows 7.4.2 t File Name: C:\Documents and Settings s\Schnu Project Name: Griffin Ranch g gga Cootie\Desktop\Work\Other Files\Griffin Ranch.urb Project Location: South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) 1 On -Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Based on EMFAC2002 version 2.2 DETAIL REPORT (Tons/Year) Construction Start Month and Year: May, 2005 Construction Duration: 36 Total Land Use Area to be Developed: 199 acres Maximum Acreage Disturbed Per Day: 13 acres Single Family Units: 305 Multi -Family Units; 0 Retail/Office/Institutional/Industrial Square Footage: 0 CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES UNMITIGATED (tons/year) ***Source ROG NOxPM10 PM10 PM10 2005*** CO SO2 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust Off -Road Diesel0.00 - - 0.00 - 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0100 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tons/year 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust Off -Road Diesel- 3 28 - - 2.86 - 2.86 On Diesel 3.32 - 0.14 0.14 0.00 Worker Trips 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.00 44 3 28 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tons/year 0 3.93 0.00 11.86 0,19 2.86 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 0.90 7.38 6.60 Bldg Const Worker Trips p,Og - 0.36 0.36 0.00 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.06 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.02- - - Asphalt Off -Gas 0.01 - 004 - 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 Asphalt Off -Road Diesel _ - 0.- Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0. 1.67 2.03 0.09 0.09 0 - 0.00 00 0.15 0,09 0.000 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tons/year 2.93 9 27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.99 0.00 3.15 0.95 0.00 Total all phases tons/yr 3.37 12.55 13.42 0.00 15.01 0.59 2.86 *** 2006*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tons/year 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0,00 - 0.00 - 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0,00 Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tons/year 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Lldg Const Off -Road Diesel 1.80 14.16 13.68 Bldg Const Worker Trips 0,12 0.12 2.16 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 12.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 0.07 1.36 0.00 Asphalt Off' -Gas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0,00 0.00 0.00 - - - Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0,00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tons/year 14.08 14.35 17.20 0.00 4.80 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total all phases tons/yr 14.08 14.35 17.20 0.00 9,60 0.60 0.00 *** 2007*** Page: 21 Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust _ Off -Road Diesel 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 Total tons/year 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 Worker Trips Total tons/year 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 1.80 Bldg Const Worker Trips 0.12 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.00 Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 Total tons/ ear Y 1.92 Total all phases tons/yr 1.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.56 0 12 0.00 • 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.68 13.68 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.09 1 92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.96 15.96 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ 0.00 _ - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 _ 0.00 _ 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.80 4.80 - 0.00 0,00 0.00 0..00 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.660 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 *** 2008*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust _ Off -Road Diesel 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 Worker Trips 0 .00 Total tons/year 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust _ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off -Road Diesel 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 Worker Trips .00 Total tons/year 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 0.60 Bldg Const Worker Trips 0.04 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.00 Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 Total tons/year 0.64 Total all phases tons/yr 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.32 p,09 - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 4,36 4.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.84 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.95 5.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 _ 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 1.28 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0..00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 1 - Demolition Assumptions: Phase Turned OFF Phase 2 - Site Grading Assumptions Start Month/Yeas for Phase 2: May 105 Phase 2 Duration: 2 months On -Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off -Road Equipment No. Type 1 Graders 1 Other Equipment 1 Rollers 1 Rubber Tired Dozers 3 Scrapers 1Tractor/Loaders/Backhoes Horsepower 179 190 114 352 313 79 Load Factor 0.575 0.620 0.430 0.590 0.660 0.965 Hours/Day 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Phase 3 - Building Construction Assumptions Start Month/Year for Phase 3: Jul '05 Phase 3 Duration: 34 months Start Month/Year for SubPhase Building: Jul 105 SubPhase Building Duration: 34 months Page: 22 Off -Road Equipment No. Type 1 Concrete/Industrial saws Horsepower 84 Load Factor Hours/Day 5 Other Equipment 190 0.730 8.0 2 Rough Terrain Forklifts 94 0.620 8.0 1 Trenchers 0.475 8.0 Start Month/Year for SubPhase SubPhase Architectural Coatings: Dec '05695 8.0 Architectural Coatings Start Month/Year for Duration: 8.5 months SubPhase SubPhase Asphalt Duration: Asphalt: 4.5 months Jul '05 Acres to be Paved: 29 Off -Road Equipment No. Type 1 Graders Horsepower Load Factor Hours/Day 1 Pavers 174 0.575 8.0 1 Paving Equipment 132 111 0.590 8.0 1 Rollers 0.530 8.0 114 0.430 8.0 CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES MITIGATED (tons/year) ***Source 2005*** ROG NOxPM10 CO SO2 TOTAL PM10 EXHAUST PM10 Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions DUST Fugitive Dust Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 On -Road Diesel Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tans/year 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust Off -Road Diesel 0.44 3,28 3.32 - 1.10 - 1.10 On -Road Diesel Worker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 Total tons/year 0.00 0.44 0 .00 3.28 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.43 0.00 9.82 0.14 1.10 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel Bldg Const 0.90 7.38 6.60 0.36 Worker Trips Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.09 0.06 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.00 Arch Coatings Worker Trips 1 .61 0.02 0.01 0.18 _ _ 0.00 - Asphalt Off -Gas 0 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.27 1.67 2,09 _ _ Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.15 0.04 _ 0.09 0.09 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0.00 0,00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0,00 Total tons/year 2.93 9.27 9.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.15 0.45 0.00 Total all phases tons/yr 3.37 12.55 13.42 0.00 7.97 0.59 1.10 *** 2006*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust Off -Road Diesel On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 - - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 Worker Trips 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0100 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tons/year 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 On -Road Diesel Worker Trip9 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tons/year0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel Bldg Const 1.80 14.16 13.68 Worker Trips Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.12 0.12 2.16 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 Arch Coatings Worker Trips 12.08 0.08 0.07 0.00 - Asphalt Off -Gas 0 00 1.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 - Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Worker Trips 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tons/year 14.08 14.35 17.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 4.80 0.660 0.00 Total all phases tons/yr 14.08 14.35 17.20 0.00 9.80 0.60 0.00 Page: 23 *** 2007*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust _ Off -Road Diesel- On -Road Diesel Worker Trips Total tons/year 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust Off -Road Diesel 0.00 On -Road Diesel 0.00 Worker Trips 0.00 Total tons/ ear Y 0.00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel 1.80 Bldg Const Worker Tri s P 0.12 Arch Coatings Off -Gas 0.00 Arch Coatings Worker Trips 0.00 Asphalt Off -Gas 0.00 Asphalt Off -Road Diesel 0.00 Asphalt On -Road Diesel 0.00 Asphalt Worker Tri s P 0.00 Total tons/year 1.92 _ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0100 13.56 0.12 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.04 1.92 0.00 _ 0.00- 0.00 0.00 15.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.80 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00_ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total all phases tons/yr 1.92 13.68 15.96 0.00 4.80 0.60 0.00 *** 2008*** Phase 1 - Demolition Emissions Fugitive Dust _ Off -Road Diesel- On -Road Diesel Worker Trips Total tons/ ear Y 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 Phase 2 - Site Grading Emissions Fugitive Dust Off -Road Diesel On -Road Diesel Worker Trips Total tons/year 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 0..00 Phase 3 - Building Construction Bldg Const Off -Road Diesel Bldg Const Worker Tri s P Arch Coatings Off -Gas Arch Coatings Worker Trips Asphalt Off -Gas Asphalt Off -Road Diesel Asphalt On -Road Diesel Asphalt Worker Trips P Total tons/year 0.60 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 4.32 0.04 - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0,00 4.36 4.89 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.45 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total all phases tons/yr 0.64 4.36 5.45 0.00 1.28 0.16 0.00 Construction -Related Mitigation Measures Phase 2: SOU Disturbance: Water exposed surfaces - 2x daily Percent ReductionR3:7G 0.08 NOx 0.08 CO 0.08 S02 0,0% PM10 34.0%) Phase 2: Unpaved Roads: Water all haul roads 2x daily Percent Reduction(ROG 0.08 Nox 0.08 CO 0.08 SO2 0.08 PM10 3.0%) Phase 2; Unpaved Roads; Reduce speed on unpaved roads to < 15 mph Percent Reduction(ROG 0.0% NOx 0.0% CO 0,08 802 0.08 PM10 40.08) Phase 1 - Demolition Assumptions: Phase Turned OFF Phase 2 - Site Grading Assumptions Start Month/Year for Phase 2: May 105 Phase 2 Duration: 2 months On -Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off -Road Equipment No. Type Horsepower Load Factor Hours/Day 1 Graders 174 0.575 8.0 j y Page: 24 Other Equipment 190 0.620 0.620 Rollers 114 0.430 8.0 Rubber Tired Dozers 352 0.590 8.0 Scrapers 313 0.660 8.0 Tractor/Loaders/Backhoes 79 8.0 0.465 8.0 Phase 3 - Building Construction Assumptions Start Month/Year for Phase 3: Jul 105 Phase 3 Duration: 34 months Start Month/Year for SubPhase Building: Ju: SubPhase Building Diaration: 34 months Off -Road Equipment No. Type 1 Concrete/Industrial saws 5 Other Equipment 2 Rough Terrain Forklifts 1 Trenchers Start Month/Year for SubPhase Architectura] SubPhase Architectural Coatings Duration: Start Month/Year for SubPhase Asphalt: Jul SubPhase Asphalt Duration: 4.5 months Acres to be Paved: 29 Off -Road Equipment No. Type i Graders 1 Pavers 1 Paving Equipment 1 Rollers '05 Horsepower Load Factor 84 0.730 190 0.620 94 0.475 82 0.695 Coatings: Dec 105 .5 months '05 Horsepower 174 132 lli 114 Load Factor 0.575 0.590 0.530 0.430 Hours/Day 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Hours/Day 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Page: 25 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES CO Source ROG Natural Gas 0.05 Wood Stoves 0.00 Fireplaces 0.00 Landscaping 0.04 Consumer Prdcts 2.72 TOTALS (tpy, unmitigated) 2.82 NOx CO S02 PM10 0,70 0.30 - 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.01 0.00 0.70 0.63 0.01 0.00 Page: 26 UNMITIGATED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS Single family housin ROG NOx CO S02 g 4.87 5.49 56.45 0.04 TOTAL EMISSIONS (tons/yr) 4.87 5.49 56.45 0.04 Does not include correction for passby trips. Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips. OPERATIONAL (Vehicle) EMISSION ESTIMATES Analysis Year: 2008 Temperature (F): 95 Season: Annual EMFAC Version: EMFAC2002 (9/2002) Summary of Land Uses: Unit Type T , PM10 5.37 5.37 rip Rate Size Total Trips Single family housing 9.51 trips / dwelling units 305.00 2,899.94 Vehicle Assumptions: Fleet Mix: Vehicle Type Light Auto Light Truck [ 3,750 lbs Light Truck 3,751- 5,750 Med Truck 5,751- 8,500 Lite -Heavy 8,501-10,000 Lite -Heavy 10,001-14,000 Med-Heavy 14,001--33,000 Heavy -Heavy 33,001-60,000 Line Haul a 60,000 lbs Urban Sus Motorcycle School Bus Motor Home Travel Conditions Percent Type Non -Catalyst Catalyst Diesel 55.00 15.00 1.60 98.00 0.40 16.20 2.70 1.20 95.30 2.00 7.20 1.40 97.50 95.80 1.30 1.10 0.00 81.80 2.80 18.20 0.40 1.00 0.00 50.00 50.00 0.90 0.00 0.00 20.00 80.00 0.00 0.00 11.10 0.00 88.90 0.20 0.00 50.00 100.00 50.00 1.70 76.50 23.50 0.00 0.10 1.20 0.00 0.00 100.00 8.30 83.30 8.40 Home - Work Urban Trip Length (miles) 11.5 Rural Trip Length (miles) 11.5 Trip Speeds (mph) 35.0 8 of Trips - Residential 20.0 Residential Commercial Home- Home - Shop Other Commute Non -Work Customer 4.9 6.0 10.3 5.5 5.5 4.9 6.0 10.3 5.5 5.5 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 37.0 43.0 Page: 27 f Changes made to the default values for Land Use Trip Percentages Changes made to the default values for Construction The user has overridden the Default Phase Lengths Phase 2 mitigation measure Soil Disturbance: Water exposed surfaces - 2x daily has been changed from off to on. Phase 2 mitigation measure Unpaved Roads: Water all haul roads 2x daily has been changed from off to on. Phase 2 mitigation measure Unpaved Roads: Reduce speed on unpaved roads to < 15 mph has been changed from off to on. Changes made to the default values for Area The wood stove option switch changed from on to off. The fireplcase option switch changed from on to off. Changes made to the default values for Operations The operational emission year changed from 2004 to 2008. The operational winter temperature changed from 50 to 60. The operational summer temperature changed from 90 to 95. Appendix A CALINE 4 Assumptions Traffic Data -- was taken from the "Griffin Ranch Specific Plan and TTM 32879 Traffic Impact Study„ ,prepared by Endo Engineering (dated September 7, 2004). Traffic volumes were provided which represented year 2008 conditions with and without the proposed project. Roadway Speeds -- Average speeds for the approach and departure segments were developed from Table B.13 and Table B.14 from the "Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol', revised December, 1997. A cruise speed of 40 mph was assumes! for Madison Street and Avenue 54. The percent red time and traffic volume were taken from the traffic study. Meteorological Conditions -- included 0.5 mph winds, stability class G for one-hour values, a persistence factor of 0.60 for eight-hour values and wind directions determined by iterative runs of the computer model to insure that carbon monoxide concentrations are maximized (greatest concentration for the nearest receptor). Highway Widths -- were derived for existing roadway cross-sections. FL1tUre cross- sections were based upon the master planned classifications. The widths included 3 meters per side as specified for the CALINE 4 model input. Receptor Placement and Heights -- were located at the intersection of the rights-of- way of Madison Street and Avenue 54 adjacent to the PGA West development and the Hideaway Resort, as well as at the closest residential lot on-site. The heights were 1.8 meters as specified by the EPA and Caltrans receptor height guidance presented in the "Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol", revised December, 1997 and User's Guide. .Emission Tactors -- were developed from EMFAC 2002 version 2.2 and using the procedures detailed in the "Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol", revised December, 1997. Background Concentrations -- for the future year 2008 were determined from the SCAQMD web site update of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. CALINE4: CALIFORNIA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL JUNE 1989 VERSION JOB: Griffin Ranch Year 2008 No Project RUN: Hoar 1(WORST CASE ANGLE) POLLUTANT: Carbon Monoxide I. SITE VARIABLES U= .5 M/S BRG= WORST CASE CLAS= 7 (G) MIXH=1000. M SIGTH= 20. DEGREES Z0=100. CM ALT= 0. (M) VD= .0 CM/S VS= .0 CM/S AMB= .0 PPM TEMP= 7.0 DEGREE (C) II. LINK VARIABLES LINK * LINK COORDINATES (M) DESCRIPTION * X1 Y1 X2 A. NTA * --------- 306 --------------- 300 306 B. NLA * 300 300 300 C. SD * 293 300 293 D. ETA 150 293 300 E. WD 300 307 150 F. WTA ' 300 304 450 G. ED * 300 295 450 H. NAE ' 306 150 306 I. SDE ' 293 150 293 J. EAE 0 293 150 K. WAE * 450 304 600 L. WDE 0 307 150 M. EDE * 450 293 600 III. RECEPTOR LOCATIONS * COORDINATES (M) RECEPTOR * X Y Z 1. Recpt 1 * 283 317 1.8 2. Recpt 2 * 283 283 1.8 3. Recpt 3 * 324 279 1.8 IV. MODEL RESULTS (WORST CASE WIND ANGLE) * * PRED * CONC/LINK * BRG * CONC * (PPM) RECEPTOR *(DEG) * (PPM) * A -B C�D E F G H I. Recpt 1 * 168, * .7 * .0 ,1 A ,2 .2 .0 ,0 .0 2. Recpt 2 * 288, * .6 * .0 .0 ,0 .4 .2 .0 .0 .0 3. Recpt 3 * 284,' .6 * .0 ,0 .0 .3 .1 .0 .0 .0 * CONC/LINK * (PPM) RECEPTOR * I J K L M 1. Recpt 1 * .0 .0 ,0 .0 ,0 2. Recpt 2 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3. Recpt 3 * .0 .0 .0 .0 ,0 EF H W Y2 ' TYPE VPH (G/MI) (M) (M) 150 * AG 29 7.4 .0 13.0 150 * AG 249 7.4 .0 10.0 150 * AG 434 4.8 .0 13.0 293 * AG 539 9.2 .0 13.0 307 * AG 404 9.2 .0 13.0 304 * AG 155 5.3 .0 10,0 295 * AG 134 5.3 .0 13.0 0 ` AG 278 4.1 .0 13.0 0 * AG 434 4.1 .0 13.0 293 * AG 539 4.1 .0 13,0 304 * AG 155 4.1 .0 10.0 307 * AG 404 4.1 .0 13.0 293 * AG 134 4.1 .0 13.0 IV. MODEL RESULTS (WORST CASE WIND ANGLE) * * PRED * CONC/LINK * BRG * CONC * (PPM) RECEPTOR *(DEG) * (PPM) * A -B C�D E F G H I. Recpt 1 * 168, * .7 * .0 ,1 A ,2 .2 .0 ,0 .0 2. Recpt 2 * 288, * .6 * .0 .0 ,0 .4 .2 .0 .0 .0 3. Recpt 3 * 284,' .6 * .0 ,0 .0 .3 .1 .0 .0 .0 * CONC/LINK * (PPM) RECEPTOR * I J K L M 1. Recpt 1 * .0 .0 ,0 .0 ,0 2. Recpt 2 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3. Recpt 3 * .0 .0 .0 .0 ,0 CALINE4: CALIFORNIA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL JUNE 1989 VERSION JOB: Griffin Ranch Year 2008 With Project RUN: Hour (WORST CASE ANGLE) POLLUTANT: Carbon Monoxide I. SITE VARIABLES U= .5 M/S BRG= WORST CASE CLAS= 7 (G) MIXH= 1000, M SIGTH= 20. DEGREES Z0=100. CM ALT= 0. (M) VD= .0 CM/S VS= .0 CM/S AMB= .0 PPM TEMP= 7.0 DEGREE (C) II. LINK VARIABLES LINK * LINK COORDINATES (M) ' DESCRIPTION * X1 Y1 X2 A. NTA 306 300 306 B. NLA 300 300 300 C. SD 293 300 293 D. ETA 150 293 300 E. WD 300 307 150 F. WTA 300 304 450 G. ED 300 295 450 H. NAE 306 150 306 I. SDE 293 150 293 J. EAE 293 150 293 K. WAE ' 450 304 600 L. WDE ' 307 150 307 M. EDE * 450 293 600 III. RECEPTOR LOCATIONS * COORDINATES (M) RECEPTOR * X Y Z 1. Recpt 1 * 283 317 1.8 2. Recpt 2 * 283 283 1.8 3. Recpt 3 * 324 279 1.8 IV. MODEL RESULTS (WORST CASE WIND ANGLE) * PRED * CONC/LINK BRG * CONC * (PPM) RECEPTOR * (DEG) * (PPM)' A B C D E F G H ---------- -*----- * _' 1. Recpt 1 * 168. * .8 * .0 1 .1 .2 .3 .0� .0 .0 2. Recpt 2 * 288. * .7' .0 .0 .0 .5 .2 .0 .0 .0 3. Recpt 3 * 285. * .7 * .0 .0 .0 .3 .2 .0 .0 .0 CONC/LINK ' (PPM) RECEPTOR * I J K L M 1. Recpt 1 ' .0 .0 .0 V.0 .0 2. Recpt 2 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3. Recpt 3 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 Y2 * TYPE VPH (G/MI) (M) (M) 150 " AG 32 7.4 .0 13.0 150 * AG 285 7.4 .0 10.0 150 * AG 446 4.8 .0 13.0 293 * AG 575 9.2 .0 13.0 307 * AG 518 9.2 .0 13.0 304 * AG 233 5.3 .0 10.0 295 * AG 162 5.3 .0 13.0 0 ` AG 317 4.1 .0 13.0 0 * AG 446 4.1 .0 13.0 0 * AG 575 4.1 .0 13.0 304 * AG 233 4.1 .0 10.0 0 * AG 518 4.1 .0 13.0 293 * AG 162 4.1 .0 13.0 IV. MODEL RESULTS (WORST CASE WIND ANGLE) * PRED * CONC/LINK BRG * CONC * (PPM) RECEPTOR * (DEG) * (PPM)' A B C D E F G H ---------- -*----- * _' 1. Recpt 1 * 168. * .8 * .0 1 .1 .2 .3 .0� .0 .0 2. Recpt 2 * 288. * .7' .0 .0 .0 .5 .2 .0 .0 .0 3. Recpt 3 * 285. * .7 * .0 .0 .0 .3 .2 .0 .0 .0 CONC/LINK ' (PPM) RECEPTOR * I J K L M 1. Recpt 1 ' .0 .0 .0 V.0 .0 2. Recpt 2 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3. Recpt 3 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 Appendix B NOISE GLOSSARY RD -77-108 NOISE ASSUMPTIONS YEAR 2008 AMBIENT EXTERIOR NOISE EXPOSURE PRELIMINARY BARRIER MODELING Appendix B Noise Glossary A -Weighted Sound Level (dBA) .- An A -weighted sound level is the sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A -weighting filter network. The A -weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of the human ear and provides good correlation with subjective reactions to noise. Ambient Noise Level -- The composite noise from all sources near and far is the ambient noise level. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location. Barrier -- A natural or man-made object that interrupts the path of sound from the sound from the sound source to the sound receiver. Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) -- CNEL is the average equivalent A - weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of five decibels to sound levels occurring during the evening from 7 p.m. to 10 P.M. and addition of ten decibels to sound levels occurring during the night from, 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. The S and 10 decibel penalties are applied to account for increased noise sensitivity during the evening and nighttime hours. The CNEL represents the daily energy noise exposure averaged on an annual basis. The State of California uses the dBA CNEL noise index to relate community noise exposure to compatibility criteria. CNEL -- See Community Noise Equivalent Level. Day -Night Average Noise Level (Ldn) -- The average equivalent A -weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 10 decibels to sound levels occurring during the nighttime from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. The 10 -decibel penalty is applied to account for increased noise sensitivity during the nighttime hours. The Ldn represents the daily energy noise exposure averaged on an annual basis and is typically within I dBA of the CNEL value. dB -- See Decibel. dBA -- See A -Weighted Sound Level. Decibel (dB) -- A decibel is a unit of measurement on a logarithmic scale which describes the magnitude of a particular quantity of sound pressure or power with respect to a standard reference value. A decibel is equal to 10 times the logarithm (to the base 10) of the ratio of the measured sound pressure squared to a reference pressure (i.e., 20 micro - pascals) squared. Design Noise Level -- The noise level selected by the designer after consideration of applicable standards for various land use or activity categories to be used for determining traffic noise impacts and the assessment of the noise abatement treatment for a particular highway section. EPA -- Environmental Protection Agency. r Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) _.. An Leq is the sound level corresponding to a steady state sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying sound level over a given sample period. FHWA -- Federal Highway Administration. Frequency (Hz) -- The frequency is the number of times per second that a sound Pressure signal oscillates about the prevailing atmosphere. The unit of frequency is the hertz. Habitable Room -- A habitable room is defined as any room meeting the requirements of the Uniform Building Code or other applicable regulations that is intended to be ud for sleeping, living, cooking or dining purposes, excluding such enclosed spaces as cse losets, pantries, bath or toilet rooms, service rooms, connecting corridors, laundries, unfi attics, foyers, storage spaces, cellars, utility rooms and similar spaces. nished Hz -- A unit of measurement of frequency, numerically equal to cycles per second (See Frequency). Intrusive Noise That noise exceeding the existing ambient noise at a given location is termed an intrusive noise. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency, time of occurrence and tonal or informational content, as well as prevailing ambient noise level. Leq -- See Equivalent Sound Level. Ldn -- See Day -Night Average Noise Level. Line Source -- A noise source which generates sound along a line rather than at a single fixed point. L Percentile -- L percentiles represent the A -weighted sound level exceeded for the identified percent of the sample time. For example, a value of 55 dBA Lto would mean that 55 dBA was exceeded 10 percent of the time. Cather L percentiles commonly used include L5o, Lgo, L94, etc. The L5o corresponds to the average level of noise. The Lao corresponds to peaks of noise in the time history of environmental noise. Noise -- Noise is any unwanted sound, or sound that is undesirable because it interferes with speech and hearing, or is intense enough to damage hearing, or is otherwise annoying. The State Noise Control Act defines noise as "excessive undesirable sound". Noise Attenuation -- Noise attenuation is the ability of a material substance, or medium to reduce the noise level from one place to another or between one room and another. Noise attenuation is specified in decibels. Noise Contours -- The lines drawn around a noise source indicating constant or equal level of noise exposure from that source are termed noise contours. CNEL and Ldn are typical standards used for comparison. Noise Sensitive Area -- An area of regular and intensive human usage where the usage is impaired or restricted when subjected to excessive levels of noise. Noise Sensitive Land Use -- Noise -sensitive land uses are land uses associated with indoor and/or outdoor human activities that may be subject to stress andJor significant interference from noise. They include residential (single-family and multi -family dwellings, mobile home parks, dormitories and similar uses), transient lodging (including hotels, motels and similar uses); hospitals, nursing homes, convalescent hospitals and other facilities for long-term medical care, and public or private educational facilities, libraries, churches and places of public assembly. Outdoor Living Area -- Outdoor Iiving area is a term used to define spaces that are associated with residential land uses and are typically used for passive recreational activities. Such spaces include patio areas, barbecue areas, Jacuzzi areas, etc. Outdoor areas usually not included in this definition are front yard areas, driveways, greenbelts, maintenance areas and storage areas associated with residential land uses. Point Source -- A stationary device which creates sounds while fixed or motionless. Shadow Zone -- Area of reduced sound levels adjacent to a natural or man-made barrier Appendix B Noise Model Assumptions I • Temporal Traffic Distribution Assumed (Percent) All Highways Type of Vehicle Overall Day Evening Ni ht g Automobile 97.72 70.85 17.59 Medium Truck 1.72 11.56 62.10 19.27 18.63 Heavy Truck 0.56 66.89 15.89 17.22 La Quinta vehicle distribution per General Plan technical report. II. Road Grade Assumptions -- level terrain and roadway. III• Roadway Widths Assumed -- were based upon the traffic study and Endo Engineering field observations. I V . Speeds Assumed -- were based upon field observations as shown on the following table. V . RD -77-108 Input Parameters -- the Calveno noise emission levels were used for the noise modeling. See the tables on the following pages for the existing condition input parameters assumed. VI. Alpha-- was assumed to be 0.5 (4.5 decibels per doubling of distance). Appendix B Noise Model Assumptions Roadway Segment S eeda Half-Widthb Percent Trucks(mph) (feet) (% - Medium) Jefferson Street - N/o Highway 111 40 - SIO Highway 111 55 41 2.28 75.44 -1V/O Avenue 54 55 41 2.28 75.44 - SIO Avenue 54 35 41 2.28 75.44 Madison Street 41 2.28 75.44 - SIO Avenue 54 50 - N/O Site Access 50 18 2.28 75.44 - SIO Site Access 50 18 2.28 75.44 - N/O Avenue 58 50 24 2.28 75.44 - SIO Avenue 58 50 24 2.28 75.44 Monroe Street 24 2.28 75.44 - N/O Avenue 54 55 - S/O Avenue 54 55 6 2.28 75.44 Highway 111 6 2.28 75.44 - W/O Jefferson Street 50 - E/O Jefferson Street 50 41 2.28 75.44 Avenue 54 48 2.28 75.44 - W/O Jefferson Street 40 - E/O Jefferson Street 50 6 2.28 75.44 - W/O Madison Street 50 24 2.28 75.44 - E/O Madison Street 50 24 2.28 75.44 - W/O West Site Access 50 6 2.28 75.44 - E/O West Site Access 50 6 2.28 75.44 - W/O East Site Access 50 6 2.28 75.44 - E/O Fast Site Access 50 6 2.28 75.44 - W/O Monroe Street 55 6 2.28 75.44 - E/O Monroe Street 55 6 2.28 75.44 6 2.28 75.44 a. Speed is based upon posted speed limits or conditions observed during field reconnaissance. b. The half -width is the distance from the roadway centerline to the center, of the outermost travel lane c. La Quinta vehicle distribution per City of La Quinta Noise Element Update technical report. Appendix B Year 2008 Ambient Exterior Noise Exposure dway Segment A.D.T.a CNEL @ Distance to Contours (Ft.)c (Veh/Day) 50 Feetb 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA Street rern ghway 11118,740 64.8hway 111 23390 69.392 R/VV 97 195 enue 54 19,710 68.583 181 382 enue 54 7,340 59.3 161 339 treet R/W R/W 92 nue 54 - N/O Site Access 9,740 64.0 R/W 87 181 - SIO Site Access 8,960 8,840 63.6 R/W 82 170 - N/O Avenue 58 5,530 63.6 61.5 RNV 82 170 - SIO Avenue 58 3,600 59.7 R/W 62 125 Monroe Street R/W 49 96 - N/O Avenue 54 - SIO Avenue 54 8,890 64.5 R/W 93 199 Highway 111 6,380 63.0 R/W 74 158 - W/O Jefferson Street 33,360 69.7 - E/O Jefferson Street 32710 , 69.9 96 192 406 Avenue 54 99 192 404 - W/O Jefferson Street 440 47.9 - E/O Jefferson Street 14,200 65.6 R/W R[W R/W - W/O Madison Street 13,280 65.3 55 109 231 - E/O Madison Street 4,470 60.5 R /W 104 220 - W/O West Site Access 4,730 60.7 RAV R/W - E/O West Site Access 4,730 60.7 R/W R/W 111 - W/O East Site Access 4,730 60.7 R/W R/W 111 - E/O East Site Access 4,730 60.7 R R/W 111 - W/O Monroe Street 4,730 61 RIW R/W 111 - E/O Monroe Street 6,900 '7 63.4 R/W W 60 130 Avenue 58 R/W 78 168 - W/O Madison Street 1,270 53.8 - E/O Madison Street 2,340 57.6 R/W RNV R/W R/W R/W 69 a. A.D.T. = average daily two-way traffic volume. b. CNEL is provided at 100 feet from all roadway centerlines c. All distances are measured from the . centerline. R/W means the contour falls within the right-of-way.