HomeMy WebLinkAboutMonterey Crossing - CEQA Chcklst - AssessmntCITY OF PALM DESERT
CEQA Environmental Checklist & Environmental Assessment
Project Title:
Lead agency name and address:
Monterey Crossing,
Specific Plan 16-166
Conditional Use Permit 16-166
Tentative Vesting Parcel Map 37157
Waiver of Parcel Map 16-166
City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Contact persons and phone number: Eric Ceja, Principal Planner
760-346-0611
Project location: The northeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Dinah Shore Drive.
Project sponsor's name and address:
General Plan Designation:
Regional Commercial (C-R)
Fountainhead Shrugged, LLC
Vasanthi Okuma
1401 Quail Street Suite 100
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Zoning:
Planned Regional Commercial (PC3)
Freeway Commercial Overlay (FCOZ)
Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project,
and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
The proposed project is a commercial development comprised of a four story hotel building with 130 hotel
rooms; and 73,200 square feet of single story commercial development comprised of a 6,815-square-foot
automobile sales building, car wash and sales lot, an 12,185 square -foot tire store, two multi -tenant
retail/restaurant buildings totaling 14,400 square feet, three fast-food restaurants with drive -through service
totaling 11,200-square feet, and three contiguous buildings for retail uses totaling 28,600 square feet (See
Exhibit 4; Table 1). The project is located on 17.79 acres of undeveloped land bounded by Dinah Shore Drive
on the south, undeveloped desert land on the east, Monterey Avenue on the west, and the Interstate-10/Union
Pacific Railroad to the north, in the City of Palm Desert, California.
Access to the project site will he provided via one primary full -access driveway at Toni Drive and Dinah Shore
Drive, one right-in/right-out only driveway on Dinah Shore Drive to the east of the primary entry, and one
right-in/right-out/left-in only (left -turn egress is restricted) driveway at the east end of the property onto Dinah
Shore Drive. Interior driveways will connect all buildings within the project site. Parking areas (651 spaces)
will be provided for each building throughout the project site.
An infiltration basin has been designed for the project site, located on the northern portion of the site
paralleling the existing railroad tracks. The infiltration basin is a flat earthen basin and will capture the design
capture volume from the site. The total capacity of the infiltration basin is approximately 14,223 cubic feet.
Dry wells would be implemented throughout the project site at key locations.
The project site consists of two parcels: 685-020-020 and 694-060-010. The County of Riverside owns parcel
685-020-020, and Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) owns parcel 694-060-010. Both of these parcels
together create a triangle -shaped parcel.
-1-
The project site is being subdivided into 11 parcels (Tentative Parcel Map 37157) to allow mixed commercial
development (hotel, restaurants, retail, and auto sales). Both a tentative and final map are required by the State
Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410 et seq). The applicant has submitted "Parcel Map
Waiver 16-166" along with the application package to allow the auto sales parcel to be created and to be
purchased simultaneously with the closing of the property and ahead of the recordation of the parcel map.
Existing Project -Site Conditions:
The project site is currently undeveloped and vacant, with the exception of a walled well site at its southeastern
corner. A perimeter wall was built around parcel number 694-060-010 between 2004 and 2005 which is still
present. Monterey Avenue rises significantly along the property boundary, to cross over the I-10 and railroad
rights -of -way. As a result, the project site occurs at a lower elevation than most of Monterey Avenue. Dinah
Shore Drive is fully developed to the south of the site, including a free right turn "pork chop" at its intersection
with Monterey Avenue.
A CVWD sewer trunk line is located along the northern edge of the project site. A second sewer line, which
enters the site at the coiner of Monterey Avenue and Dinah Shore Drive and extends northeasterly to connect to
the trunk line, will be relocated to Dinah Shore Drive, and will turn north into the site under the main access
driveway.
The site topography gently slopes at 1 % towards the easterly end of the site towards an existing drainage
channel which parallels the Union Pacific Railroad.
A summary of the proposed building square footages and project components follows:
Parcel
No.
Land Use
Table 1
Monterey Crossing
Proposed Building Square Footage
Acres
Stalls Stalls
Required Provided
1 Hotel 2.65 130 130
2 Retail 1.11 30 50
3 Fast Food Restaurant 0.73 24 29
4 Fast Food Restaurant 0.90 39 50
5 Retail/Restaurant 1.07 66 66
6 Retail/Restaurant 0.93 48 56
7 Fast Food Restaurant 0.85 27 32
8 Retail/tire store 1.59 12 33
9 Auto Sales 5.34 14 77
10 Retail 1.27 30 1 64
11 Retail 1.35 30 64
Total 17.79 450 651
* Source: Monterey Crossing Site Plan by Bickel Group Architecture
Projected
Building
Square
Footage/Hotel
Rooms
130
10,000
3,000
4,800
8,400
6,000
3,400
12,185
6,815
10,000
8,600
73,200 s.f./
130 rooms
Zoning Standards
The proposed site is currently zoned for Planned Regional Commercial (PC-3) which allows commercial
-2-
development. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required to allow the following uses: hotels (full service,
limited service and extended stay), automotive sales (including car wash for sales lot and repair facilities),
automotive repairs, automotive parts and service including tire store, medical office and laboratories, fast food
restaurants with drive -through, and alcohol sales for restaurants (full service, fast casual and fast food). An
additional CUP will be required to allow alcohol sales not a part of restaurant should a retail location propose
alcohol sales.
The City applies a Freeway Commercial Overlay Zone (FCOZ) district regulation to development close to
freeways. The main purpose of FCOZ is to provide optional standards and incentives for the development of
specific types of commercial uses on commercially zoned properties with freeway frontage. The site is located
within the FCOZ.
Protect Applications
The applicant has filed a Specific Plan application, to allow for variation from City zoning standards. A
Conditional Use Pennit has been filed to address the conditionally permitted uses in the zone. And a parcel
map is proposed to subdivide the property for each land use/building proposed.
Utilities and Service Providers
The following utilities will provide service to the project:
1. Sewer: Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
2. Water: Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
3. Electricity: Southern California Edison (SCE)
4. Gas: Southern California Gas Company
5. Telephone: Frontier (Formally Verizon)
6. Storm Drain: City of Palm Desert
Environmental Setting and Surrounding Land Uses
The subject property is located in the northwesterly portion of the City. The site is undeveloped, vacant,
relatively flat, and contains sparse native vegetation. Land uses nearby and adjacent to the site are mainly
commercial and office uses. The nearest residential development is located approximately 0.159 miles (256
meters) northeast of the project site, on the north side of I-10.
North: Union Pacific Railroad, Interstate-10 (1-10)
South: Dinah Shore Drive, Commercial development
East: Undeveloped desert land, SCE electrical poles, CVWD drainage and levee
West: Monterey Avenue, Costco Wholesale
Other public agencies whose approval is or may be required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation
agreement.)
None.
-3-
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project. involving at least one impact that is a
"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics
Biological Resources
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Land Use Planning'
Population Housing
TransportationiTraffic
A,ncutture and
Forestry Resources
Cultural Resources
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Mineral Resources
Public Services
Utilities Service
Systems
Air Quality
❑ Geology Soils
❑ II) drology Water Quality
❑ Noise
❑ Recreation
❑ Mandatory Findings of
Siuniticance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will he prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment. and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
1 find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment.
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including
revisions or mitigation measures that arc imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further
is required.
Eric Ceja. Princip• f Tanner Date
City of Palm Destt
4.
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project
falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based
on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site,
cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant
with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is
substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially
Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact"
to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures,
and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation
measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific
conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources
for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared
or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where
the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead
agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's
environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
-5-
PACIFIC
OCEAN
Riverside.
v
Temecula
CALIFORNIA
lk_711111itAlp
„low
MEXICO
.=Oesert Hat Springs
Palm Springs,
Cathedral City.
Rancho Mirage c
Palm Desert
Indian Wells
La Ouinta'
Indio
Coachella
as W] 11<
renal Park
es
ts. R :r
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
L A TERRA NOVA
PLAIINM & FIC:SCA C t. INC.
Monterey Crossing
Regional Location Map
Palm Desert, California
Exhibit
1
N
t sa--w-
�liL.��killa
C
APPROXIMA
LOCATION"-
Dinah Shore Drive
.»w.p.ns :•---
•
!Source: Earth Systems Southwest, Water Quality Management Plan, 2016
r�
6 A IVRA NOVA`)
Monterey Crossing
Project Location Map
Palm Desert, California
3
9-SO.
x
w
N
U
13 g
glt 2 f 19 gll
1 \ . 4 ., af.:5
fi
{ _al_.. 1 6
_...� •I 1€ �1.~ 1' jj]r,_ }� I a��i m
-
cc
mi
iii
ct
L
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
N
cep
6
11
,i)
1,/'
,..
' I
1 --Wirral,'
4fi:446:" Ly.gel
1,
1 '
'-:•----- I [
•-•-•..-r
f---.
1 9 lic
•
•-•••,-,0
If
.„ _.
4 1
4, i
i
,s ....,
,-,
,i,
1 _
' - f f __,„..„-:
arwelorlasaliom
geler
-WO Of.psti
k
91:Z0.60
1.11
Z " X
LLI
CL
CS) E
_
a) 73
2 0
0 —
0
CL
cu
>
nci)
—
c E
2 42
CL
as
c
[7).
>
c 0 6
ffr: Z
CC 7,4
CC
2
'1
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its X
surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or X
nighttime views in the area?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; Palm Desert General Plan 2016; Zoning Ordinance; Municipal Code;
Project's site plan and architectural design plans.
No
Impact
Setting
The City of Palm Desert, including the project site, is located in the Coachella Valley, surrounded by the
San Bernardino, San Jacinto, and Santa Rosa Mountain Ranges in all directions. The San Bernardino,
Santa Rosa, and San Jacinto Mountain Ranges have a significant rise over the valley floor and are
visible from most locations in the City. The foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains extend along the
northerly and easterly portion of the City, beginning approximately 2.85 miles northeast of the subject
property. The foothills of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains extend along the westerly and
southerly portions of the City, beginning approximately 4.27 miles southwest of the subject property.
Ultimate development of the site will result in the construction of mixed -use single story commercial
buildings and a hotel of up to four stories in height.
Discussion of Impacts
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The subject property is located approximately 2.85 miles
southwest of the San Bernardino Mountain foothills and approximately 4.27 miles east of the
Santa Rosa and San Jacinto and Mountain foothills, which are considered a scenic vista for much
of the Coachella Valley (See Exhibit 1 and 2). From the subject property, scenic views of the San
Bernardino Mountains are to the north, northeast, and east. Views of the San Jacinto and Santa
Rosa Mountains are to the south and west. Views of the lower elevations of the mountains arc
blocked by intervening development in all directions. However, middle and upper elevations of
the mountains are visible above. Lands immediately to the east are currently undeveloped natural
space (See Exhibit 2). The mountains are visible to the east and southeast, but are more distant,
so their immediate scenic value is diminished. Surrounding views have been impacted to some
extent by surrounding commercial development to the south and west and by the Union Pacific
Railroad/Interstate-10 to the north.
Currently, the subject property is vacant and undeveloped, and is surrounded by commercial
buildings to the south and west, consistent with other urban development in the area in scale and
-11-
height. The development of the proposed project will primarily affect scenic mountain views as
seen from properties west and south of the subject site. Building height on the subject site can
extend to 50 feet. The ultimate construction of mixed -use commercial buildings on the site
would result in limited obstruction of views for viewers looking to the east and north from Dinah
Shore Drive, insofar as four stories would result in short-range view blockage. However, views
to the northwest would remain.
Subdivision of assessor's parcel numbers 685-020-020 and 694-060-010 into eleven parcels and
project implementation will impact views from other properties in the project vicinity to a lesser
degree. From the south and west, street level views of the Costco Wholesale and Sam's Club will
remain largely unchanged from current conditions. Building appearances and materials can be
expected to be similar to existing structures in the area (See Exhibit 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10).
The architectural design plan proposes hotel building heights of up to 50 feet (four stories) in
Parcel 1, and up to 40 feet for the other mixed commercial planning areas (See Exhibit 6, 7, 8, 9,
and 10). The proposed project will include full site improvements, including landscaping and
architecturally treated buildings to enhance the site's appearance (See Exhibit 11). Build -out of
the proposed project would result in limited new obstruction to surrounding views. Proposed
building appearance and materials will be consistent with surrounding development.
Overall, although there will be some impact from the proposed project on short-range views to
the west and south, impacts to views of scenic vistas from surrounding properties will be less
than significant.
b) No Impact. The project site is located south of Union Pacific Railroad/Interstate-10. It is not
located within a state scenic highway or locally designated scenic corridor. It does not contain
scenic resources such as rock outcroppings or trees. No impact is expected.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is currently vacant and undeveloped. The
ultimate commercial development of the site will result in the construction of a four-story hotel
building and 30 to 40 foot high commercial buildings in a style that is expected to be consistent
with the style of development in the arca (See Exhibit 6, 7, 8, 9, 10). Commercial buildings to
the west and south of the subject property have maximum heights of about 30 feet. For the
proposed mixed -use commercial development, structure heights of up to 50 feet would be
somewhat greater (up to 20 feet) than the building heights currently occurring in the immediate
vicinity. Buildings to the south are located at a higher elevation than the proposed project site,
and will appear consistent. Buildings to the west are located at an elevation equal to or less than
the project site, but are separated by the Monterey Avenue right of way, and are of similar
character. The Specific Plan zoning and design standards will be incorporated into the project to
assure that project's structure heights and associated visual impact will be less than significant.
The visual character of Monterey Avenue and Dinah Shore Drive is similar to that proposed for
the project, being dominated by commercial development immediately west and south of the site.
The existing buildings are up to 30 feet in height (i.e. Costco Wholesale, Sam's Club, and a gas
station). The proposed project will increase the mass of the structures on Monterey Avenue and
Dinah Shore Drive, but design review and the inclusion of view corridors, variations in building
massing and high quality architectural treatment to the structures will improve the visual
character. The impacts associated with visual character are expected to be less than significant.
-12-
d) Less Than Significant Impact. The site is currently vacant and undeveloped and there is no
Lighting onsite. Implementation of the Specific Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Tentative
Vesting Parcel Map can be expected to generate increased levels of light and glare from interior
and exterior building lighting, safety and security lighting, landscape lighting, and vehicles
accessing the site. However, lighting and glare levels are not expected to exceed typical levels
within the surrounding urban environment, and will be regulated by the city's lighting standards.
The project will be designed according to the city's zoning ordinance and will properly shield
light fixtures to minimize spillage onto adjacent properties. The zoning ordinance and design
standards will be incorporated to assure that project light and glare impacts will be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
None.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
None.
-13-
Source: Bickel Group Architecture,
r�
. A TERRA NOVA®
PLANNING S RESEARL'11, INC.
NORTH ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
Inc., 2016
Monterey Crossing
Building Elevations - North and South
Palm Desert, California
6
9L ZO • 60
Source: Bickel Group Architecture, Inc., 2016
4-1
N
• r
C
03
CO W
❑ '
c
a0
i �
G7 >
G 0
❑ WE
.a 0.
CC
w
r�
0
L
0
0
m
N
0
9l'ZD'6D .
✓ ▪ CO
Bickel Group Architecture, Inc., 2016
0
Q)
uJ
N
C1 0 _
L
0
co co -
° 0v
U }'
as y
O W Q
c a)
O =E
2 'a rti
•5
CO
06
}QZ
F—
r
1 L ti 1
1
Z
F.
"r 4 h. i S 4
9 L'ZO'6O
:cs
2 CD
A
r
W
Source: Bickel Group Architecture, Inc., 2016
W
A. A. A.
iii i
),..44
k. .
4 4 4.
A. A.
444 A. 4 4
4
9 L-Z0-61:1
Source: Bickel Group Architecture, Inc., 2016
LLJ
1.1D
75
CD a.
(7)
2 o
>, >
cu
a) L.Ti
c
o c
2 5
0
E
8
0)
T-7
a_
4 .4
I}j1
k k k k' f1 i!
k 1 k
1
3
e n . 4;37___„
. , 1
� G3
/
• o `'" ; Q as
nQ C30 0 0 '' �
1
i
Q n
V {Q
00 0 Q f3 Tx� �`
a Ut
13
k
ra
SYii+7 d7:C:1' Y.3ti
9 V O'64 +,
..Q
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES:
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
h) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland
(as defined by Public Resources Code section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government code
section 5110-1(g))?
d) Result in the Toss of forest land or conversion
of forest land to non -forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to
non-agricultural use?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; Paltn Desert General Plan 2016; Riverside County Important Fannland
Map, 2010.
No
Impact
Setting
The project site is located in an area of the City designated for commercial land use. There are no active
agricultural lands within the vicinity of the project.
Discussion of Impacts
a-c)
No Impact. Currently, the project site is designated as regional commercial (C-R) on City land
use maps. According to the Riverside County Important Farmland, 2010 map, the area is
considered Other Land and is not suitable for livestock grazing, confined livestock, or poultry.
The site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide or
Local Importance by the California Department of Conservation. In addition, the site is
surrounded by lands which are not in agricultural uses. The proposed development will not
conflict with zoning for agricultural uses or a Williamson Act contract. It will not result in other
changes that could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. There will be no
impact to agricultural resources as a result of the proposed project.
Mitigation Measures
None.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
None.
-20-
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or X
projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non -attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality X
standard (including releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; "Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Technical Report for the NEC Dinah
Shore and Monterey Avenue Development Project," prepared by Dudek in August 2016; "Health Risk
Assessment Impact Analysis" prepared by Kunzman Associates, Inc. in August 2016
No
Impact
Setting
The project site is located in the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). All development within the SSAB is subject
to SCAQMD's 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (2012 AQMP) and the 2003 Coachella Valley PMi0
State Implementation Plan (2003 CV PMi() SIP). The SCAQMD operates and maintains regional air
quality monitoring stations at numerous locations throughout its jurisdiction. The proposed site is
located within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes monitoring stations in Palm Springs and
Indio. The Indio station has been operational since 1985 and the Palm Springs station since 1987. A new
station in Thermal was recently established, but has limited data collected at this time.
The California Emissions Estimator Model (Ca1EEMod) Version 2013.2.2 was used to project air
quality emissions that will be generated by the proposed project's construction and calculate the
maximum number of acres disturbed during peak hours per day using crawler tractors, graders, rubber
tired dozers, and scrapers.
Criteria air pollutants are contaminants for which state and federal air quality standards have been
established. The Salton Sea Air Basin exceeds state and federal standards for fugitive dust (PM10) and
ozone (O3), and is in attainment/unclassified for PM, 5. Ambient air quality in the SSAB, including the
project site, does not exceed state and federal standards for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxides, sulfur
dioxide, lead, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, or Vinyl Chloride.
-21-
Table 2
Ambient Air Quality Standards
California Standards'
Pollutant Average Time
Concentration
03 1 hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m')
8 hours 0.070 ppm (137 µg"m')
NO25 1 hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m')
CO
so,'
Annual Arithmetic
Mean
1 hour
8 hours
I hour
3 hours
24 hours
Annual
0.030 ppm (57 µg/m')
20 ppm (23 mg/m')
9.0 ppm (10 mg'm')
0.25 ppm (655 µg/m')
0.04 ppm (105 µg/m)
PMi0' 24 hours 50 µg/m3
Annual Arithmetic 20 mg/in'
Mean
PM25' 24 hours 35 1.1g/m3
National
Primary"
0.070 ppm (137
µg/m') t
0.100 ppm (188
µg/m)
0.053 ppm (100
35 ppm (40 mg/m')
9 ppm (10 mg/m')
0.075 ppm (196
µg/m3)
0.14 ppm (for certain
areas)
0.030 ppm (for certain
areas)s
Lead
Hydrogen
sulfide
Vinyl
chloride'
Sulfates
Visibility
reducing
particles
Annual Arithmetic
Mean
30-day Average
Calendar Quarter
Rolling 3-Month
Average
1-hour
150 µg/m'
12 µg/m3 12.0 µg/m3
1.5 µg/m3
0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3)
24-hour 0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3)
24-hour
8-hour (10:00 a.m. to
6:00 p.m. PST)
25 µg/m3
Insufficient amount to
produce an extinction
coefficient of 0.23 per
kilometer due to particles
when the relative humidity is
less than 70%
1.5 µg/m3 (for certain
areas)i'
0.15 µg/m'
Standards"
Secondary``
Same as Primary
Standard
Same as Primary
Standard
None
0.5 ppm (1,300 µg/m')
Same as Primary
Standard
Same as Primary
Standard
15.0 µg/m3
Same as Primary
Standard
Source: CARB 2016b.
Notes: ppm = parts per million by volume; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; mg/m3= milligrams per cubic meter.
Cali fomia standards for 03, CO, S02 (I -hour and 24-hour), NO2, suspended particulate matter—PM10, PM2 5, and visibility -reducing
particles, are values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. CAAQS are listed in the Table of
Standards in Section 70200 of Title 17 of the Califomia Code of Regulations.
National standards (other than 0i, NO2, SO2, particulate matter, and those based on annual averages or annual arithmetic mean) are
not to be exceeded more than once a year. The 03 standard is attained when the fourth highest 8-hour concentration measured at each
site in a year, averaged over 3 years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM10, the 24-hour standard is attained when the expected
number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 micrograms per cubic meter (tig/m3) is equal to or
-22-
It
less than one. For PM, t, the 24-hour standard is attained when 98% of the daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years, are equal to or
less than the standard.
Concentration expressed first in units in which it was promulgated. Equivalent units given in parentheses are based upon a reference
temperature of 25° Celsius (°C) and a reference pressure of 760 torr. Most measurements of air quality are to be corrected to a reference
temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torn; ppm in this table refers to ppm by volume, or micromoles of pollutant per mole of
gas.
National Primary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety to protect the public health.
National Secondary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adh erse
effects of a pollutant.
On October 1, 2015, the pnmary and secondary NAAQS for 03 were lowered from 0.075 ppm to 0.070 ppm.
To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 98th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at
each site must not exceed 100 parts per billion (ppb). Note that the national 1-hour standard is in units of ppb. California standards are in
units of parts per million (ppm). To directly compare the national 1-hour standard to the California standards the units can be converted
from ppb to ppm. In this case, the national standard of 100 ppb is identical to 0.100 ppm.
On June 2, 2010, a new I -hour SO2 standard was established and the existing 24-hour and annual primary standards were revoked. To
attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each
site must not exceed 75 ppb. The 1971 SO, national standards (24-hour and annual) remain in effect until I year after an area is designated
for the 2010 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment of the 1971 standards, the 1971 standards remain in effect until
implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2010 standards are approved.
On December 14, 2012, the national annual PM, s primary standard was lowered from 15 µg/m' to 12.0 µg/m'. The existing national 24-
hour PM, 5 standards (primary and secondary) were retained at 35 µg/m3, as was the annual secondary standard of 15 µg/m`. The existing
24-hour PM10 standards (primary and secondary) of 150 µg/m` also were retained. The form of the annual primary and secondary
standards is the annual mean, averaged over 3 years.
CARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as TACs with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined. These
actions allow for the implementation of control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants.
The national standard for lead was revised on October I5, 2008, to a rolling 3-month average. The 1978 lead standard (1.5 µg/In3 as a
quarterly average) remains in effect until one year after an area is designated for the 2008 standard, except that in areas designated
nonattainment for the 1978 standard, the 1978 standard remains in effect until implementation plansto attain or maintain the 2008
standard are approved.
The proposed project impacts may include emissions of pollutants identified as Toxic Air Contaminant
(TAC). The greatest potential for TAC emissions during construction would be diesel particulate
emissions from heavy equipment operations and heavy-duty trucks and the associated health impacts to
sensitive receptors. The project's proximity to the railroad and high -volume of traffic on 1-10 increase
the TAC hazard for sensitive receptors, including hotel guests. These air pollutants are highly toxic and
may pose health risks in human beings. The major concern is that TACs may cause cancer. For this
reason, a "Health Risk Assessment Impact Analysis" was prepared by Kunzman Associates, Inc. in
August 2016 for the proposed project to assess the possibilities of cancer risks from diesel particulate
mater (DPM) emissions associated with the Interstate-10/Union Pacific Railroad, located north of the
project site.
Ultimate development of the site will result in short-term impacts associated with site disturbance and
construction, and long-term impacts associated with mobile emissions and facility operation.
Discussion of Impacts
a) No Impact. The project site is located in the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) and will be subject to
SCAQMD's 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (2012 AQMP) and the 2003 Coachella Valley
PM,0 State Implementation Plan (2003 CV PMI() SIP). The AQMP is based, in part, on the land
use plans of the jurisdictions in the region. The AQMP is a comprehensive plan that establishes
control strategies and guidance on regional emission reductions for air pollutants. The proposed
project is consistent with the City of Palm Desert land use designations assigned to the subject
property. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the intent of the AQMP and will not
conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. No impact associated
with compliance with applicable management plans is expected.
-23-
b) Less Than Significant Impact. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod)
Version 2013.2.2 was used by Dudek to project air quality emissions that will be generated by
the proposed project. Criteria air pollutants will be released during both the construction and
operation of the proposed project, as summarized in Tables 4 and 5. Table 4 summarizes short-
term construction -related emissions, and Table 5 summarizes ongoing emissions generated
during operation.
Construction Emissions
The construction period includes all aspects of project development, including site preparation,
grading, hauling, paving, building construction, and application of architectural coatings. For
analysis purposes, and to provide a conservative analysis, it is assumed that construction will
occur over 18 months' period from early 2017 to mid 2018. The assumptions used for the
construction period are shown in Table 3.
Construction
Phase
Site Preparation
Table 3
Construction Scenario Assumptions
One-way Vehicle Trips Equipment
Average
Daily Worker Average Daily Total Haul
Trips Vendor Truck Trips Truck Trips
18 0 0
Grading 20 0 0
Building
Construction
340 136 0
Paving 16 0 0
Architectural
Coating
68 0 0
Usage
Equipment Type Quantity Hours
Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8
Tractors.%Loaders/Backhoe 4 8
s
Excavator 1 6
Grader 1 6
Rubber fired Dozers 1 6
Scrapers 1 6
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoe 1 6
s
Cranes 1 7
Forklifts 3 8
Generator Sets 1 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoe 3 7
s
Welders 1 8
Pavers 2 8
Paving Equipment 2 8
Rollers 2 8
Air Compressors 1 6
As shown in Table 4, emissions generated by construction activities will not exceed SCAQMD
thresholds for any criteria pollutant. The model was run with two assumptions: that a fugitive
dust control program, as required by SCAQMD Rule 403 and the Coachella Valley SIP would be
implemented, and that low VOC architectural coatings would be employed.
-24-
Year
2017
2018
2017
2018
Maximum Daily
Pollutant Threshold
Threshold Exceeded?
Table 4
Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions
VOC
(pounds/day)
6.17
38.23
6.16
38.22
38.23
75
No
NO, CO
(pounds/day) (pounds/day)
Sumnter
69.67 47.82
33.98 43.81
Winter
69.68 47.82
34.28 43.27
69.68 I 47.82
/00 550
No I No
SO, PMio PM2.5
(pounds/day) (pounds/day) (pounds/day)
0.10 10.00 6.46
0.10 6.36 2.85
0.10 10.00 6.46
0.10 6.36 2.85
0.10 I 10.00 6.46
150 I 150 I 55
No I No I No
Notes: These estimates reflect control of fugitive dust required by Rule 403 requiring that active sites are watered three times daily which
would result in a 61 % reduction of fugitive dust emissions and Rule 1 113 requiring architectural coatings to have low VOC content.
Operational Emissions
Operational emissions are ongoing emissions that will occur over the life of the project. They
include area source emissions, emissions from energy demand (electricity), and mobile source
(vehicle) emissions. Traffic generation trip rates were calculated by Linscott, Law & Greenspan,
Engineers (LLC). It was assumed that the project would generate approximately 7,803 daily
vehicle trips. Table 5 provides a summary of projected emissions at operation of the proposed
project.
-25-
Emission Source
Table 5
Estimated Daily Maximum Operational Emissions
VOC
(pounds/day)
NO,
(pounds/day)
CO
(pounds/day)
SO,
(pounds/day)
PMto
(pounds/day)
PM2.5
(pounds/day)
Summer
Area 16.50 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.24 2.20 1.85 0.01 0.17 0.17
Mobile 20.21 39.12 153.43 0.38 25.26 7.12
Total Summer 36.95 41.32 155.39 0.55 25.43 7.29
Winter
Area 16.50 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.24 2.20 1.85 0.01 0.17 0.17
Mobile 19.77 40.46 154.29 0.35 25.26 7.13
Total Winter 36.51 42.66 156.25 0.36 25.43 7.30
Maximum Daily 36.95 42.66 156.25 0.55 25.43 7.30
SCAQMD pollutant 75 /00 550 150 150 55
threshold
Threshold exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes: These estimates reflect states goal of 20% reduction in indoor water use and 25% reduction in outdoor water use, compliance with
2013 Title 24 standards, City's goal of exceeding Title 24 by 10%, and the City's waste diversion goal of 74%.
VOC = volatile organic compound; NO, = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SO, = sulfur oxides; PMio = coarse particulate
matter; PM, 5 = fine particulate matter.
As shown in Table 5, operational emissions will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance
for any criteria pollutants. Impacts related to operation will be less than significant.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in the Coachella Valley portion of the
Salton Sea Air Basin, which is classified as a "non -attainment" area for PMio and ozone. In order
to achieve attainment in the region, the 2003 Coachella Valley PMi() Management Plan was
adopted, which established strict standards for dust management for development proposals. The
proposed project will contribute to an incremental increase in regional PMio and ozone
emissions. However, given its limited size and scope, cumulative impacts are not expected to be
considerable. Project construction and operation emissions will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds
for PMto or ozone precursors (NOx and CO). The project will not conflict with any attainment
plans and will result in less than significant impacts.
d) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The nearest sensitive receptors
are single-family residences located approximately 0.159 miles (256 meters) northeast of the
project site. To determine if the proposed project has the potential to generate significant adverse
localized air quality impacts, the mass rate Localized Significance Threshold (LST) Look -Up
Table was used. The City of Palm Desert and the project property are located within Source
Receptor Area 30 (Coachella Valley).
Maximum acres on the project site that would be disturbed by off -road equipment would be 4.0
acres per day. As SCAQMD does not provide allowable emission (lb/day) values for 4 acres of
land, the LST values for 2 and 5 acres within SRA 30 were interpolated to generate LSTs for a
disturbed acreage of 4 acres for the proposed project. Table 6 shows on -site emission
concentrations for project construction and the associated LST.
-26-
As shown in the Table 6, LSTs will not be exceeded under unmitigated conditions for all criteria
pollutants. Therefore, air quality impacts to nearby sensitive receptors during construction will
be less than significant.
Table 6
Monterey Crossing
Localized Significance Thresholds
(pounds per day)
CO NOx PMto PM2.5
Project Emissions 47 70 7 4
LST Threshold 12,967 569 130 51
Exceeds? No No No No
Source: SCAQMD 2009.
Note: Localized significance thresholds are shown for a 4-acre project site
corresponding to a distance to a sensitive receptor of 256 meters.
These estimates reflect control of fugitive dust required by Rule 403.
LST = localized significance threshold; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; CO = carbon
monoxide; PM10 = particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter
Health Risk Assessment
A Health Risk Assessment Impact Analysis for the project was prepared by Kunzman
Associates, Inc. in August 2016 to assess the possibilities of cancer risks from diesel particulate
mater (DPM) emissions associated with the Interstate-10/Union Pacific Railroad, located north
of the project site.
DPM is considered a toxic air contaminant (TAC) which is defined as an air pollutant which may
cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or may pose a hazard to human
health. TACs are usually present in small quantities in the ambient air. However, these air
pollutants are highly toxic and may pose health risks in human beings. The major concern is,
TACs may cause cancer.
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and Air Resources Board (ARB)
operate monitoring stations in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) to measure ambient
concentrations of certain TACs, associated with important health -related effects. SCAQMD has
established thresholds for cancer risk that apply to new development projects within SCAQMD
jurisdictions. Generally, the threshold for cancer risk is 10 cancer cases per million of
population. No such threshold has been developed for projects which do not generate TACs, but
occur near TAC generating facilities. SCAQMD has conducted a survey of estimated risk
throughout its basins. The SCAQMD MATES -IV Study determined that the average cancer risk
in the South Coast Air Basin portion of Riverside County is 223 in one million of population.
The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are the Palm Estate and Country Club mobile
home work park located approximately 860.12 feet northeast. The nearest sensitive receptor
being developed within the project site is the hotel, close to northern boundary (See Exhibit 12).
The proposed project site would be exposed to TAC emissions from diesel truck emissions
generated by the Interstate-10/Union Pacific Railroad uses. The Health Risk Assessment analysis
_27_
shows that the highest cancer risks (12.45 cancer cases per million of population) would occur
along the northern portion of the project site which includes Pads 2A-2C. Hotel workers within
500 feet of the I-10/Union Pacific Railroad would experience a cancer risk of 11.44 cancer cases
per million of population (Table 7).
A cancer risk represents the probability (in terms of risk per million individuals) that an
individual would contract cancer resulting from exposure to TACs continuously over a lifetime
exposure period of 70 years for sensitive receptors. Risk characterization for non -cancer health
hazards from TACs is expressed as a hazard index (HI). The HI is a ratio of the predicted
concentration of the project's emissions to a concentration considered acceptable to public health
professionals, termed the Reference Exposure Level (REL).
Receptor
Table 7
Monterey Crossing
MEIR — Adult Worker Exposure Scenario (25 years)
Carcinogenic Hazards Non carcinogenic Hazards
Contaminant CPF Risk REL RfD Index
(e) (mg/kg/day) (per million) (ug/m3) (mg/kg/day) 6)
(0 (g) (h) (i)
Hotel area DPM 1.1E+00 11.44 5.0E+00
Hot Pool DPM 1.1E+00 7.45 5.0E+00
Commercial DPM 1.1E+00 12.45 5.0E+00
1.4E-03
1.4E-03
1.4E-03
Source: "Health Risk Assessment Impact Analysis," prepared by Kunanan Associates, Inc. in August 2016
0.035
0.023
0.038
The cancer risk at the project site will be higher than other areas of Riverside/San Bernardino
County, but much less than the average in the South Coast Air Basin, which is 260 in one
million. However, to minimize the cancer risk at the project site, a mitigation measure is
provided at the end of this section. Installation of high efficiency Minimum Efficiency Reporting
Value (MERV) filters of MERV 16 will reduce 90% of particulates, including DPM, resulting in
a cancer risk of 1.2 in one million, and the project -related impacts will be less than significance
with mitigation.
e) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be developed with commercial uses
and is not expected to generate objectionable odors during any phase of construction or at project
buildout. Short term odors associated with paving and construction activities could be generated;
however, any such odors would be quickly dispersed below detectable levels as distance from
the construction site increases. Therefore, impacts from objectionable odors are expected to be
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
As described above, the proposed project impacts may include emissions of pollutants identified as
Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC). The following measure is required to reduce diesel particulate emissions:
1. Commercial uses within 500 feet of the mainline of the I-10 Freeway shall be required to install high
efficiency Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) filters of MERV 16 or better as indicated
by the American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers ASHRAE)
-28-
Standard 52.2, in the intake of ventilation systems. Heating, air conditioning and ventilation
(HVAC) systems shall be installed with a fan unit power designed to force air through the MERV 16
filter. To ensure long-term maintenance and replacement of the MERV 16 filters, the following shall
occur:
i) The developer, sales, and/or rental representative shall provide notification to all affected
commercial tenants of the potential health risk from I-10 Freeway for all affected commercial
units.
ii) For commercial rental space within 500 feet of the I-10 Freeway, the owner/property
manager shall maintain and replace MERV 16 filters in accordance with the manufacture's
recommendations. The property owner shall inform prospective tenants of increased risk of
exposure to diesel particulates from I-10 Freeway while workers are outside, or if doors are
open.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
A. MERV 16 filters will be incorporated into building plans for all commercial buildings within
500 feet of the mainline of the I-10 freeway.
Responsible Parties: Building Department Plan Check staff
_19_
556700 556800 556900 557000 557100
UTM East [m]
Cancer Risk for Commercial Uses
Source: Kunzman Associates, 2016
r
L A TERRA NOVA
PLANNING & AESEAP C?1,
= 20 in One Million
10 in One Million
5 in One Million
= 1 in One Million
Monterey Crossing
Cancer Risk Map
Palm Desert, California
12
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES --
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
cotntnunity identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
c) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
No
Impact
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other X
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan'?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; Palm Desert General Plan 2016; "Biological Site Assessment," prepared
by Dudek March 2016; Final Recirculated Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and
Natural Community Conservation Plan prepared by CVAG in 2007.
Setting
The subject site is primarily characterized as stabilized shielded desert. The site is surrounded on all
sides by development, including Interstate-10/Union Pacific Railroad, paved roads, parking lots, and
commercial uses. Dudek prepared a biological resource assessment for the proposed project in March,
-31-
2016. There are no sensitive habitats present or potentially occurring within the project site. No
avoidance or mitigation measures are required. During the biological assessment, a buffer zone of 500
feet was studied around the project site to assure consideration of biological resource movement.
Based on the literature review and field assessment of the site, the subject property is located within the
boundaries of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The site is
neither located within nor adjacent to any designated conservation areas. The nearest conservation area
is Thousand Palms Conservation Area, located approximately 1.25 miles northeast of the project site. In
the CVMSHCP, the project site is mapped as stabilized shielded sand fields.
Discussion of Impacts
a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is
predominantly comprised of stabilized shielded desert sand fields. This plant community is
typically comprised of perennial species including Creosote Bush (Larrea tridentate), four -wing
Saltbrush (Atriplex canescens), California croton (Croton californicus), and indigo bush
(Psorothamnus arborescens). Other plant communities include Arrow Weed Scrub, Desert
Saltbrush Scrub, disturbed Desert Saltbush Scrub, and disturbed habitat.
Special -Status Plant/Wildlife Species on Project Site
During site visit, no special -status plant species including USFWS-designated critical habitat
were identified within the subject site.
No special -status wildlife including USFWS-designated critical habitat was observed within the
project area during the reconnaissance survey. Common wildlife species including American
kestrel (Falco sparverius), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), California harvester ant
(Pogonomyrmex californicus), monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus), house finch (Haemorhous
tnexicanus) Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), common raven (Corvus corax), Say's phoebe
(Sayornis saya), and desert iguana (Dipsosaurus dorsalis) were observed on site.
There is a low potential for the following special -status wildlife species to occur onsite:
Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), Pallid San Diego
Pocket Mouse (Chaetodipus fallax pallidus), and Pocketed Free -tailed Bat (Nyctinomops
femorosaccus). These are not covered under the CVMSHCP.
Nesting Birds
There is a low potential for the project site to support nesting birds. Although potential nesting
habitat is limited within the site due to sparse vegetation cover and the disturbed nature of the
site, the potential for birds to nest on site still remains, and direct impacts to migratory nesting
birds must be avoided for compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Fish and Game
Code 3516.
There are ornamental trees and shrubs outside the project site but close to site boundaries that
could provide potential nesting and foraging habitat for a variety of songbirds and raptors in the
area. Nesting birds can be significantly affected by indirect impacts from short-term
construction -related noise especially during the breeding season (January 15—July 31). This may
result in decreased reproductive success or abandonment of an area as a nesting habitat.
-32-
In conclusion, the proposed project will not have substantial adverse effect on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. In order to protect nesting birds, mitigation measures are provided at the end of this
section. With implementation of the mitigation measures, impacts associated with sensitive
species will be less than significant.
b, c) Less Than Significant Impact. The project site does not contain any streams, riparian habitat,
marshes, protected wetlands, vernal pools or sensitive natural communities protected by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The man-made Mid -Valley Stormwater Channel runs beneath the project site and emerges at the
northeastern corner of the site. A small patch of arrow weed scrub found at the northeastern
corner of the site could be indicative of a potential jurisdictional feature because of its
Facultative Wetland (FACW) indicator status. However, this small patch of arrow weed scrub
does not appear in historic aerial views of the site. For this reason, it is a man-made feature in
association with the construction of the channel not a Jurisdictional Water resource.
d) No Impact. The subject property is located in an urban area and surrounded by roadways, the
Interstate-10/Union Pacific Railroad, Monterey Avenue, Dinah Shore Drive, and commercial
development. Habitat and other features onsite are not suitable for a migratory wildlife corridor.
No project -related impacts will occur.
e, f)
No Impact. The subject property is located within the boundaries of the CVMSHCP, therefore,
is subject to payment of the Development Mitigation Fee, which will mitigate potential impacts
to covered species.
The site is not within or adjacent to a CVMSHCP-designated Conservation Area, so no
additional mitigation measures or provisions are required. The project will not conflict with any
policies or ordinances that protect biological species, or any habitat conservation plans or natural
community conservation plans. No project -related impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures
1. If ground disturbance, tree or plant removal is proposed between January 15th and July 31`h, a
qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting -bird survey within 72 hours of initiation of grading
onsite focusing on MBTA covered species. The survey shall consist of full coverage of the
project site footprint and up to a 300-foot buffer. The specific survey buffer will be determined
in the field by the project biologist and will take into account the species nesting in the area, the
habitat present, and where access is permitted. If no active nests arc found, no additional
measures are required.
If active nests are reported, then the qualified biologist with GPS equipment shall map nest
locations, where feasible. The nesting bird species will he documented and, to the degree
feasible, the nesting stage (e.g., incubation of eggs, feeding of young, near fledging). The
biologist shall establish a no -disturbance buffer of 300 feet around each active nest. The
qualified biologist based on the biology of the species present and surrounding will determine the
buffer habitat. No construction or ground disturbance activities shall be conducted within the
-33-
buffer until the biologist has determined the nest is no longer active and has informed the
construction supervisor that activities may resume.
2. The limits of the Mid -Valley Stormwater Channel shall be flagged with silt fencing prior to the
beginning of construction activities to avoid potential impacts to it.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
A. The City Engineer shall assure that necessary nesting bird surveys are completed in compliance
with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Responsible Parties: City Engineer
Schedule: Between January 15t and August 31s` and no more than 72 prior to site disturbance.
-34-
Potentially
Significant
Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would
the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
'15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to '15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less Than Less Than
Significant w/ Significant
Mitigation Impact
No
Impact
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; Palm Desert General Plan 2016; "Cultural Resource Technical Report,"
prepared by Dudek, June, 2016.
Setting
At the beginning of the historic period, the City of Palm Desert fell within the vast lands of the Cahuilla
Indian tribe where the Cahuilla Tribe typically lived in camps of between 75 and 100 individuals,
preferentially located along the lower edges of alluvial fans near permanent sources of water. One such
camp was the Palm Oasis at modern day Thousand Palms, north of and adjacent to the City's
boundaries. The camps characteristically contained community houses and sweat lodges, with houses
being semi -excavated and having heavy and flat roofs supported by large cottonwood poles.
In the 1930s, the City of Palm Desert was a cluster of a few homes located on the north side of Highway
111. After World War II, a group of businessmen (four brothers — Clifford, Randall, Phil, and Carl
Henderson) came to the region between Indian Wells and Rancho Mirage. Instead of desert and
scrubland, they visualized "fine homes and swimming pools, schools, churches, and culture that would
draw visitors and families from far and wide," and in 1945 they formed the Palm Desert Corporation. In
1946, they started constructing streets and commercial buildings which later became known as Palm
Desert.
The project site is located in an area designated as "relatively high sensitivity for historical structures or
archaeological resources from pre-1940-era (General Plan; Exhibit IV-1)." Based on Eastern
Information Center records, there are three previously recorded cultural resources within one-half mile
of the project site, all of which consist of historic -age resources. One of these resources, the UPRR (CA-
RIV-6381 H) is outside but adjacent to the project site paralleling the northern perimeter of the proposed
site. The remaining sites (CA-RIV-3440H and P-33-005625) are clustered around the UPRR nearly a
quarter -mile northwest of the project site.
Discussion of Impacts
a-b) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Dudek prepared a cultural resource
technical report for the proposed project site in June 2016. The survey included a comprehensive
records search, historical research, consultation with Native American representatives, an on -site
-35-
field survey. Two newly identified historic -age cultural resources were recorded by Dudek
within the project site: NEC-AD-01 and NEC-ISO-01. These resources were further analyzed in
a Phase II investigation.
NEC-AD-01 consists of a widely dispersed and diverse assemblage of historic -age debris,
splintered lumber and slag, fragments of glass insulators, sanitary cans, soft -top aluminum beer
cans, a sun colored amethyst glass fragment, various glass bottles, and modern materials (such as
plastic from buckets, caution tape, surveyor flags, paper and plastic food containers, and
discarded clothing). NEC- AD-01 parallels the UPRR/SPRR but is separated from the railroad by
approximately 80 feet. Results of Shovel Test Pit Excavations at NEC-AD-01 show that NEC-
AD-01 has no apparent potential to yield important archaeological information due to its lack of
a sub -surface component. The site appears to be of little scientific or cultural value. Most
probably, it is associated with the maintenance and/or dismantling of the telegraph line that
previously ran parallel to the UPRR/SPRR not with any significant events locally, regionally, or
nationally, therefore, it is not eligible for listing on the CRHR or the local register. NEC-AD-01
is not a "unique" archaeological resource under CEQA, and is not significant under CEQA. No
further cultural resource considerations are recommended.
NEC-ISO-01 consists of three historic -age cans which are concentrated near the center of the
project site. Two of the cans are the sanitary type and one can is a one -gallon paint type. These
cans are crushed and are not suitable for measuring and chronological dating based on size and
dimensions. Further analysis shows that NEC-ISO-01 has no potential to be an eligible resource,
therefore, no additional cultural resources considerations are necessary.
Nevertheless, resources could be uncovered during project construction, and Dudek
recommended implementation of mitigation measures to conform to Section 15064.5 regulations.
Mitigation measures are provided at the end of this section.
c) No Impact. The subject site is not known to contain unique paleontological features. Also, there
are no unique geological features (river, lake, hills, faults, and folds etc.) located on -site that can
directly or indirectly be destroyed. The surface soils consist of light brown, fine -to -coarse
alluvial sands mixed with small rocks. Recent deposits are not conducive to the location of
paleontological resources. The proposed project will result in the development of four-story hotel
building and other mixed -use commercial buildings which will not require deep excavation. The
proposed project will not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site
or unique geologic feature. Therefore, no project -related impacts are anticipated.
d) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. No cemeteries or human remains are
known to occur on -site, and it is unlikely that human remains will be uncovered during project
development. However, if resources to be uncovered during ground disturbance activities then
with the implementation of mitigation measures to conform to Section 7050.5 of the California
Health and Safety Code, impacts to the resources will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
1. In the event that archaeological resources (sites, features, or artifacts) are exposed during
construction activities for the proposed project, all construction work occurring within 100 feet
of the find shall immediately stop until a qualified archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the
Interior's Professional Qualification Standards, can evaluate the significance of the find and
-36-
determine whether or not additional study is warranted. Depending upon the significance of the
find, the archaeologist may simply record the find and allow work to continue. If the discovery
proves significant under CEQA, additional work such as preparation of an archaeological
treatment plan, testing, or data recovery may be warranted.
2. In accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, if human remains
are found, the County Coroner shall be notified within 24 hours of the discovery. No further
excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent
remains shall occur until the County Coroner has determined, within two working days of
notification of the discovery, the appropriate treatment and disposition of the human remains. If
the remains are deternined to be Native American, the Coroner shall notify the NAHC in
Sacramento within 24 hours. In accordance with California Public Resources Code, Section
5097.98, the NAHC must immediately notify those persons it believes to be the MLD from the
deceased Native American. The MLD shall complete their inspection within 48 hours of being
granted access to the site. The designated Native American representative would then determine,
in consultation with the property owner, the disposition of the human remains.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
A. The applicant shall immediately notify the City if resources are identified.
Responsible parties: Planning Department, City Engineer, Building Department.
-37-
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would
the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault'?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in X
on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems X
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; Palm Desert General Plan 2016; "Geotechnical Engineering and
Infiltration Testing Report," prepared by Earth Systems Southwest in March 2016. "Soil Survey of Riverside
County, California, Coachella Valley Area," U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, 1980.
No
Impact
Setting
The Coachella Valley is located in the northwestern portion of the Salton Trough, a tectonic depression
roughly 130 miles long and 70 miles wide that extends from the San Gorgonio Pass to the Gulf of
Mexico. The valley is bounded by the San Bernardino Mountains on the northwest, San Jacinto
Mountains on the west, Santa Rosa Mountains on the south, and Little San Bernardino Mountains and
Indio Hills on the north. The Salton Sea is located to the southeast.
The valley's geologic composition is directly related to its proximity to the San Andreas Fault, which
passes through the northeasterly portion of the valley, and other active faults. The region is susceptible
to a range of geologic hazards, including ground rupture, major ground shaking, slope instability, and
collapsible and expansive soils.
-38-
Episodic flooding of major regional drainages, including the Whitewater River, results in the deposition
of sand and gravel on the valley floor. Strong sustained winds emanating from the San Gorgonio Pass
cause wind erosion and transport and deposit dry, finely granulated, sandy soils on the central valley
floor.
Regional soils range from rocky outcrops within the mountains bordering the valley to coarse gravels of
mountain canyons and recently laid fine- and medium -grained alluvial (stream deposited) and aeolian
(wind deposited) sediments on the central valley floor.
Earth Systems Southwest prepared a, "Geotechnical Engineering and Infiltration Testing Report" for the
project site on March 14, 2016. The exploration and testing methods included literature review, field
exploration, and laboratory testing of the site. Results of the project site's assessment are as follows:
Soil Conditions
The site predominantly consists of poorly graded sand, poorly graded sand with silt, and silty sand to the
maximum depth of 51 '/z feet below the ground surface.
Seven borings were extracted from the project site to investigate the subsurface soil conditions. In
borings logs, loose to medium dense sandy soils were observed from the ground surface to a depth of
approximately 12 feet. Below 12 feet (up to 23 feet), medium dense sandy soils were encountered.
Below 23 feet (up to 33 feet), medium dense to very dense sandy soils were observed. Below 33 feet (up
to 50 feet), the sands were very dense. The soils were dry to damp with moisture levels generally less
than 2 percent. Overall, the site soils are classified as Type C in accordance with Cal OSHA.
The project site lies within a recognized blow sand hazard area and fine particulate matter (PM10) which
can create an air quality hazard if dust is blowing. Watering the surface, planting grass or landscaping,
or placing hardscape normally mitigates this hazard.
Groundwater
Depth to the groundwater is greater than 100 feet in the project area. However, groundwater levels may
fluctuate with precipitation, irrigation, drainage, regional pumping from wells, and site grading.
Moisture content of soil ranges between dry and damp.
Collapse Potential/Consolidation Potential
The site is located in a geological environment where the potential for collapsible soil exists. Collapse
potential tests were performed on few samples from the site which show low collapse potential (0.2 to
1.3%). Within the project site, the consolidation potential of the soil under the anticipated overburden
and foundation loads is low.
Expansive Soils
The soil with the project site is granular with a "very low" Expansion Index.
Corrosion Potential
Two soil samples from the project site were tested for potential of corrosion of concrete and ferrous
metals. Results revealed pH values between 8.5 and 9.3, chloride contents between 4 and 7 ppm, sulfate
contents between 14 to 25 ppm, and minimum resistivities between 5,464 and 6,369 ohm -cm.
-39-
Geologic Hazards
The project site is not located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. No active faults are
mapped in the immediate vicinity of the project site. However, segments of the San Andreas fault are
located approximately 2.8 miles northeast of the project site.
The project site is located within an active seismic area in Southern California where large numbers of
earthquakes occur each year. Therefore, strong ground shaking can be expected onsite during
earthquakes on surrounding faults.
Infiltration and Percolation Testing
Earth Systems Southwest further excavated three borings from the project site to perform infiltration and
percolation testing to determine the absorption rate of site soil for a storm water runoff drain. The results
show that the onsite soil is mainly loose fill up to 3 feet. Below that, the soil mainly consists of alluvial
sediment to a depth of up to 30 feet.
Conclusion
The geotechnical analysis also included a number of recommendations for site and building
construction, to assure that soils are properly sited and compacted, and that structures withstand
groundshaking. These recommendations will be incorporated into the site -specific geotechnical analysis
required for submittal of grading plans, and will be reflected in the City's review of grading and building
plans. These standard requirements will be imposed as conditions of approval by the City.
Discussion of Impacts
a.i)
No Impact. The subject property is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The
nearest earthquake fault is the San Andreas Fault (southern segment), which are capable of
generating earthquakes of magnitude 5.5. Fault rupture is not expected on the project site.
a.ii) Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in a seismically active region where
earthquakes originating on local and regional seismic faults can produce severe ground shaking.
Buildings proposed for the site will be required to be constructed in accordance with the most
recent edition of the California Building Code (CBC) and Palm Desert Municipal Code to
provide collapse -resistant design.
The City has adopted several modifications to the CBC in accordance to local geology. The Palm
Desert Municipal Code provides regulations for collapse -resistant design. Project -related impacts
associated with seismic ground shaking are less than significance.
a.iii) Less Than Significant Impact. The California Geological Survey does not identify liquefaction
susceptible areas for the City of Palm Desert. The project site is located in an area that has a low
susceptibility to liquefaction (General Plan, Exhibit V-5). Onsitc underlying soils consist of
poorly graded sand, poorly graded sand with silt, and silty sand, which are soft, expansive, and
could be susceptible to liquefaction. The depth of the groundwater in the area is greater than 100
feet below the ground surface. For liquefaction to occur, groundwater levels must be within 50
feet of the ground surface.
The City will require, with the submittal of grading and building plans, the preparation of site -
specific soil analysis to address design loads specifically related to the site. These City
-40-
requirements assure that project -related impacts associated with seismic related ground failure
including liquefaction are less than significance.
a.iv) No Impact. The project site lies on the Coachella Valley floor, and is just outside the landslide
and rockfall hazard area (General Plan; Exhibit V-1). The site consists of, and is surrounded by,
relatively flat terrain; therefore, no impacts associated with landslides are anticipated.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in an area designated as an area "high
wind erodibility" (General Plan; Exhibit V-3). The City will require the preparation and
implementation of a dust management plan as part of the grading permit process for the project
site. This plan will include wind erosion best management practices, as prescribed by the
SCAQMD. Project related impacts associated with wind erosion will be less than significant.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. Surface soils of the project site consist of poorly graded sand,
poorly graded sand with silt, and silty sand. As described in Section VI a) iv., above, the site has
low susceptibility to liquefaction due to groundwater levels greater than 100 feet below the
ground surface. The site is not susceptible to lateral spreading, which requires a shallow water
table or proximity to a water source that could cause inundation of onsite soils. The site is not
susceptible to landslides due to its relatively flat terrain and distance from mountainous slopes.
Land subsidence has been documented in the Coachella Valley due to extensive groundwater
pumping. The project site is located north of a "USGS subsidence zone study area" which is
monitored to record subsidence in the City of Palm Desert. The Coachella Valley Water District
(CVWD) has indicated a commitment to groundwater replenishment programs intended to limit
future subsidence within the Coachella Valley. However, subsidence is considered a regional
problem requiring regional mitigation and not site -specific mitigation.
Although there has been recent documentation of subsidence occurring in the Coachella Valley,
Earth Systems Southwest found no fissures or other superficial evidence of subsidence on or near
the project site. Therefore, current and near future impacts due to subsidence are expected to be
less than significant.
d) Less Than Significant Impact. Expansive soils typically contain large amounts of clay that
expand when water is absorbed and shrink when they dry. As described in VI a) iv., above, the
site's underlying soils consist of poorly graded sand, poorly graded sand with silt, and silty sand,
which have a low -moderate shrink -swell potential and "very low" Expansion Index. These
values can potentially change based on several factors, such as importing soil from other site and
the quality of water used during construction and subsequent landscape irrigation.
Therefore, it is recommended that the samples of building pad soils should further be analyzed
during site grading to test the volume change capacity under various moisture content.
Implementation of City's policies and programs will decrease the project -related impact.
Furthermore, Earth Systems Southwest has provided several recommendations to improve the
building foundation prior project's construction which are provided at the end of this section.
Therefore, less than significant impacts associated with expansive soils will occur.
e) No Impact. The proposed project will connect to the CVWD existing sewer system. No septic
tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are proposed. No adverse impacts associated
with wastewater disposal systems will occur.
-41-
Mitigation Measures:
None.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
None.
-42-
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS --
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas etissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment? (CaIEEMod)
h) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the X
emissions of greenhouse gases? (Development
Code: General Plan)
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; Palm Desert General Plan 2016; "Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas
Technical Report for the NEC Dinah Shore and Monterey Avenue Development Project," prepared by Dudek in
August 2016.
Setting
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Principal GHGs include carbon dioxide (CO,), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N,O), 03, and water vapor
(H2O). Some GHGs, such as CO,, CH4, and N,O, occur naturally and are emitted to the atmosphere
through natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO, and CH4 are emitted in the greatest
quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO, are largely byproducts of fossil fuel combustion,
whereas CH4 results mostly from off -gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills.
Man-made GHGs, which have a much greater heat -absorption potential than CO,, include fluorinated
gases, such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and
nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), which are associated with certain industrial products and processes.
Greenhouse gas emissions are generated by both moving and stationary sources, including vehicles, the
production of electricity and natural gas, water pumping and fertilizers.
State law mandates that all cities decrease their greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year
2020. In June 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger established California's GHG emissions reduction
targets in Executive Order S-3-05. The Executive Order established the following goals: GHG emissions
should be reduced to 2000 levels by 2010; GHG emissions should be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020;
and GHG emissions should be reduced to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. In furtherance of the goals
established in Executive Order S-3-05, the legislature enacted AB 32 (Nunez and Pavley), the California
Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which Governor Schwarzenegger signed on September 27,
2006. On April 29, 2015, Governor Jerry Brown issued an executive order which identified an interim
GHG reduction target in support of targets previously identified under S-3-05 and AB 32. Executive
Order B-30-15 set an interim target goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030
to keep California on its trajectory toward meeting or exceeding the long-term goal of reducing GHG
emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050 as set forth in S-3-05.
The SCAQMD has not adopted recommended numeric CEQA significance thresholds for GHG
emissions for lead agencies to use in assessing GHG impacts of residential and commercial development
projects. The SCAQMD formed a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group to work with
SCAQMD staff on developing GHG CEQA significance thresholds until statewide significance
thresholds or guidelines are established. The SCAQMD proposed three tiers of compliance that may
lead to a determination that impacts are less than significant, including the following:
-43-
1. Projects with GHGs within budgets set out in approved regional plans to be developed under the
SB 375 process.
2. Projects with GHG emissions that are below designated quantitative thresholds:
a. Industrial projects with an incremental GHG emissions increase that falls below (or is
mitigated to be less than) 10,000 MT CO,E per year.
b. Commercial and residential projects with an incremental GHG emissions increase that falls
below (or is mitigated to be less than) 3,000 MT CO,E per year, provided that such projects
also meet energy efficiency and water conservation performance targets that have yet to be
developed.
3. Projects that purchase GHG offsets that, either alone or in combination with one of the three tiers
mentioned above, achieve the target significance screening level.
Because the proposed project consists of mixed -use development, the recommended SCAQMD
threshold to apply to the project is the Option 1, 3,000 MT CO,E per year. This analysis added
amortized construction emissions to the estimated annual operational emissions before comparing
operational emissions to the proposed SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MT CO,E per year.
In 2010, the City adopted the Environmental Sustainability Plan (ESP), which demonstrates how the
City has been involved on issues relating to environmental sustainability including, energy, waste
management, storm water, water reclamation, transportation, and landscaping. The Plan sets out a series
of goals for the City that are grounded in the principles of environmental soundness and sustainable
development and addresses six resource areas, including the built environment.
Discussion of Impacts
a-b)
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project will
generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during both construction and operation. As
described in Section III, the Ca1EEMod model was used to quantify air quality emission
projections, including greenhouse gas emissions.
Construction Emissions
The estimated total GHG emissions during construction would be approximately 989 MT
CO2E in 2017 and 343 MT CO2E in 2018, fora total of 1,332 MT CO2E over the construction
period. Estimated project -generated construction emissions amortized over 30 years would be
approximately 44 MT CO2E per year. However, construction related greenhouse gas emissions
will be temporary and will end once the project is completed.
Operational Emissions
Operation of the proposed project will create on -going greenhouse gases through area source
emissions, such as vehicle trips, landscaping and off -gassing from the pavement. The estimated
annual project -generated GHG emissions would be approximately 6,042 MT CO2E per year as
a result of project operation. Estimated annual project -generated operational emissions in 2019
and amortized project construction emissions would be approximately 6,086 MT CO2E per
year.
Table 8 provides a summary of the proposed projected short-term and annual GHG generation
associated with the potential operational buildings and amortized construction phase on the
site.
-44-
Table 8
Monterey Crossing
Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions
(Metric Tons per year)
Phase CO2e
Construction - 2017 989.13
2018 343.12
Total Construction 1,332.25
Operational - 2019 6,041.91
Amortized Construction Emissions - 2019 44.41
Total Operational 6,086.32
Source: CaIEEMod Version 2013.2.2.
GHG Thresholds
In November 2009, during SCAQMD GHG working group meetings, SCAQMD staff had
proposed a variety of thresholds for GHG emissions, including a "land use" threshold that
would be 3,500 MTCO2e/yr for residential projects, 1,400 MTCO2e/yr for commercial
projects, and 3,000 MTCO2e/yr for mixed -use projects. Based on this proposal, the annual
operational GHG emissions with amortized construction emissions would exceed the
SCAQMD screening threshold of 3,000 MT CO2E per year for the proposed project. However,
as of August 2016, the SCAQMD Governing Board has not formally adopted the proposed
interim tiered approach for evaluating GHG impacts, including the 3,000 MTCO2e/yr
threshold for mixed -use projects.
The SCAQMD draft threshold tiered approach states that a project would not have significant
GHG emissions if it were consistent with a qualifying local GHG reduction plan. In August
2015, the City of Palm Desert updated its adopted Environmental Sustainability Plan (ESP)
with approaches to reducing GHG emissions by a total of 35,829 MT CO2E, a reduction target
of approximately 5.8% below the 2008 baseline. To reduce the generation of the GHG during
project's construction and operational phases, the updated ESP goals and policies (such as
requiring that new development must exceed Title 24 standards by at least 5 to 15% and
complying with the City's current diversion rate of 74%) were incorporated into the
Ca1EEMod modeling. The implementation of the mitigation measure provided below will
assure that GHG emissions from the proposed project will meet the proposed thresholds of the
SCAQMD, through compliance with the City's ESP. As a result, impacts associated with GHG
emissions will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
1. The following GHG emissions reduction measures shall be implemented:
• Use light-colored surfaces and shading mechanisms in parking areas.
• Provide preferential parking for carpool, shared, electric, and hydrogen vehicles.
• Exceed 2016 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards by 10%.
-45-
• Implement energy -efficient design practices such as high-performance glazing, Energy
Star compliant systems and appliances, radiant heat roof barriers, insulation on all pipes,
programmable thermostats, solar access, and sealed ducts.
• Equip the pool(s) and spa(s) with active solar water heating systems.
• Use native species and drought tolerant species for a minimum of 50% of the ornamental
plant palette in non -turf areas for to minimize water demand.
• Ensure recycling of construction debris and waste through administration by an on -site
recycling coordinator and presence of recycling/separation areas.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
A. Building plans shall incorporate the measures listed in mitigation measure 1.
Responsible parties: Planning Department, City Engineer, Building Department.
-46-
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS --Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the puhlic or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or X
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment'?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a X
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a puhlic airport or public use X
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard X
for people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency response X
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to X
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; Palm Desert General Plan 2016; California Department of Toxic
Substances Control Iazardous Waste, https://www.dtsc.ca.gov/HazardousWaste//; Accessed on 08.04.2016;
State Water Resources Control Board,
http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/snap/'?CMD=runreport&tnyaddress=palm+desert ; Accessed on 08.23.2016.
Setting
The project site is flat, vacant, and undeveloped. In the City of Palm Desert, hazardous materials
transport, storage, and use is strictly regulated for large quantity users, such as industrial processing
plants and commercial dry cleaners. The City implements the General Plan's Hazardous and Toxic
Materials element through regular consultation with the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) and Department of Environmental Health. The City also monitors and regulates industrial
plants and commercial areas through the element's goals, policies, and programs.
The State Water Resources Control Board's online database (Geo Tracker) indicates that the City of
Palm Desert contains 53 sites that are either listed or permitted as hazardous material sites under the
-47-
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The majority of these sites are located
along Country Club Drive, Hovley Lane East, Cook Street, Hwy 111, Monterey Avenue, Cook Street,
and Washington Street. According to GeoTracker, one permitted underground storage tank (UST) is
located on the western side of the Monterey Avenue, located at 72800 Dinah Shore Drive, and named as
Costco Wholesale# 441. Costco Wholesale# 441 (Facility ID No. 250) is permitted by Riverside County
and is located in proximately to the project site. No further information was provided by the GeoTracker
Database. Potential impacts to the project site are very limited due to distance (approximately 0.09 miles
west) from the project area.
Discussion of Impacts
a, b)
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will result in the development of mixed -
use commercial buildings. Cleaners, solvents, fertilizers and pesticides may be used on -site for
routine cleaning and landscaping. The proposed project also includes automotive uses which
may generate several different types of hazardous waste (e.g. engine oil, transmission oil, and
lubricants/grease), however, they will be in small amounts, regulated by the Department of
Environmental Health and the Fire Department. These materials, if used, shall be properly
stored, handled and treated according to the regulations issued by the State of California (See
Chapter 30, Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. None of those cleaners, solvents,
fertilizers and pesticides will be used in sufficient quantities to pose a threat to humans or cause a
foreseeable chemical release into the environment.
The construction phase would involve the use of heavy equipment, which uses small amounts of
oil and fuels and other potential flammable substances. During construction, equipment would
require refueling and minor maintenance on location that could lead to fuel and oil spills. The
contractor will be required to identify a staging area for storing materials. The use and handling
of hazardous materials during construction activities would occur in accordance with applicable
Federal, State, and local laws including California Occupational Health and Safety
Administration (CalOSHA) requirements. The proposed project would not result in a significant
risk of explosion or accidental release of hazardous substances.
The project site is immediately south of Pacific Railroad lines and the I-10. Hazardous materials
are transported through the freeway and railroad which are the preferred transport route. Arterial
streets are the preferred local truck routes. Designated truck routes in the City of Palm Desert
include Dinah Shore Drive, Gerald Ford Drive, Monterey Avenue, and Highway 111 as well as
portions of Bob Hope Drive, Frank Sinatra Drive, and Country Club Drive. The City, County
and Highway Patrol have established and adopted emergency response plans for potential
accidents on the freeway and on the railroad. These plans include the County's Hazardous
Materials Team, which is well trained in the proper handling of spills and similar hazards.
Further, the railroad is separated from development areas on the project site by a drainage
channel, and the property occurs at a higher elevation than the railroad track. The channel will
therefore act as a physical barrier in the event of a railroad accident.
Overall, the regulations, emergency response plans and physical features of the site will assure
that impacts associated with the transport, storage or use of hazardous materials will be less than
significant.
-48-
c) No Impact: No schools are located within one -quarter mile of the project site. The nearest
school is Xavier College Preparatory High School located approximately 2.03 miles northeast
from the proposed site. There will be no hazardous materials -related impacts to schools.
d) No Impact: The subject property is not included on a list compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.3. The proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or
environment.
e-f) No Impact: The Palm Springs International Airport is located approximately 8.4 miles
northwest of the subject property. The Bermuda Dunes Airport is located approximately 7.2
miles southeast of the project site. The subject site is not located within the boundaries of either
of the airports' land use compatibility plan. The site is not located in the vicinity of a private
airstrip. The project will not result in safety hazards for people living or working in the area.
g)
No Impact: The proposed project will not significantly alter the existing circulation pattern in
the project area or adversely impact evacuation plans. The primary project access point is on
Dinah Shore Drive, which is currently fully developed. Proposed parking and circulation plans
will be reviewed by the Fire and Police Departments to assure that driveways and roads are
adequate for emergency vehicles. A construction plan will be required by the City to assure that
the project does not interfere with emergency access during development. These standard
requirements will assure that impacts associated with emergency response remain less than
significant.
h) No Impact: The project site is not located in a wildland fire hazard zone and is not susceptible to
wildfires. Therefore, the proposed project will not expose people or structures to significant risks
associated with wildfires. No related impact is expected.
Mitigation Measures
None.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
None.
-49-
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER
QUALITY -- Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off -site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on- or off -
site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
• f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect flood
flows?
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
X
X
No
Impact
X
X
X
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
Toss, injury or death involving flooding, including X
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; https://rainfall.weatherdb.com/I/19812/Palm-Desert-California,
Accessed on 08.03.2016; "Preliminary Hydrology Study for Monterey Crossing, Tentative Parcel Map 37157"
prepared by Proactive Engineering Consultations West, Inc. July 2016; "Water Quality Managerent Plan for
Monterey Crossing" prepared by Proactive Engineering Consultants West, Inc. June 2016; Coachella Valley
Water Management Plan Update (Final Report), January 2012.
-50-
Setting
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides domestic water to the City of Palm Desert,
including the project site. Its primary source of fresh water is groundwater extracted by deep wells from
the Whitewater River sub -basin. The Whitewater River Subbasin water resource consists of a
combination of natural runoff, recycled water, imported water, inflows from adjacent basins, and ground
water system. This subbasin is also artificially recharged through imported State Water Project
Exchange and Colorado River water. The total storage capacity of the Whitewater River Subbasin is
approximately 28.8 million acre feet and it currently contains approximately 25 million acre feet. It is
capable of meeting the water demands of the Coachella Valley, including the City of Palm Desert, for
extended normal and drought periods.
CVWD's domestic water system includes 50 wells with an average depth of 900 feet to serve the City of
Palm Desert and its wider customer base. CVWD has a total of 27 reservoirs, with an average capacity
of 1.8 million gallons.
CVWD also provides wastewater collection and treatment services to the City of Palm Desert. CVWD
treats and recycles Palm Desert wastewater at the Cook Street Wastewater Reclamation Plant, with a
capacity of 20 million gal/day (mgd). CVWD continually increases the capacity of its wastewater
reclamation facilities by constructing new treatment ponds, aeration, and other structures. CVWD
implements all requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board pertaining to water quality
and wastewater discharge.
The project site is located in the northern portion of the Coachella Valley. It has an average rainfall of
3.76 inches per year. Several watersheds drain the adjoining elevated terrain of the San Jacinto and
Santa Rosa Mountains towards the valley floor. The Whitewater River is the primary drainage course for
the City of Palm Desert, which runs approximately 4 miles south of the project site. The Mid -Valley
Stormwater Channel runs just south of the railroad tracks that make the northern boundary of the project
site. At the subject site, the Mid -Valley Stormwater Channel runs beneath the ground and emerges at the
northeastern portion of the project site. The Mid -Valley Stormwater Channel mainly collects runoff
from the southern portion of the Southern Pacific Railroad.
The project site and areas surrounding it are subject to City requirements relating to flood control. The
City implements standard requirements for the retention of storm flows, and participates in the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to protect surface waters from pollution.
Development projects must retain the 100 year storm flow on site.
Discussion of Impacts:
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in the Whitewater River watershed.
All water providers in the watershed are required to comply with Regional Water Quality
Control Board standards for the protection of water quality, including the preparation of site -
specific Water Quality Management Plans (WQMP) for surface waters.
The proposed project will connect to an existing 8 inch water line located in Dinah Shore Drive.
The CVWD is required to meet water quality requirements in its production and delivery of
domestic water. The CVWD is regulated by the State Water Resources Control Board Division
of Drinking Water (DDW) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and must
maintain strict water quality standards in the treatment of effluent.
-51-
Wastewater will be transported to and processed at the Cook Street Wastewater Treatment Plant
(Water Reclamation Plant No. 10) located in the central portion of the City on Cook Street. The
proposed project will extend an 8-inch sanitary sewer line from the project site to connect to an
existing 8-inch line. The proposed project will not violate water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements. The project will connect to existing sewer lines located in the immediate
project vicinity.
The project will also be required to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) regulations, which minimize the pollutant load associated with urban runoff.
The imposition of conditions of approval, local, state and federal standard requirements and the
requirements of law will assure that the project will not violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements. No impact is associated.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will require water for commercial use and
landscape irrigation. The Coachella Valley Water District has developed demand factors by land
use that the City has deemed appropriate for this analysis. The commercial demand factor was
provided by CVWD staff from the CVWD draft Supplemental Water Supply Program and Fee
Study. Annual demand (consumption) factors were developed based on collected data specific to
the Coachella Valley and local water purveyors. Commercial land uses are expected to generate
a demand of 1.92 acre-feet per acre per year, which means the site has the potential to generate a
demand of 34.15 acre-feet per year. The site's proposed development is consistent with the land
use designation for the property, on which CVWD's water demand and supply analysis is based.
Based on the District's Urban Water Management Plan (2015-2016), CVWD will be able to
fulfill the project's water demand. Project impacts associated with domestic water demand are
expected to be less than significant.
The project will connect to existing water lines beneath Dinah Shore Drive and Monterey
Avenue. No new wells or additional water infrastructure are proposed for the project water
requirement.
The project will be required to comply with the City's water -efficiency requirements, including
the use of drought -tolerant planting materials and limited landscaping irrigation. Implementation
of these and other applicable requirements will assure that water -related impacts are reduced to
less than significant levels.
c-c) Less Than Significant Impact. The subject site is generally flat and contains no rivers or
streams. Development of the proposed project will increase impermeable surfaces on site, and
therefore increase on -site storm flows. Infiltration basins are proposed throughout the project site
to capture the on -site runoff.
Drainage System for the Project Site:
Proactive Engineering Consultants West, Inc. has prepared the "Preliminary Hydrology Study"
for the project site in July 2016. The study area is divided into six sub -areas (Areas "1", "2", "3",
"4", "5", "6") (Exhibit 13). Onsite runoff from "Area 1" will be conveyed in the parking
aisleways. From there, it will be collected at gutters to further convey the flow towards the north
end of the project site. The strategic dry wells will be used to avoid gutter flow depths exceeding
top of curb for 10-year flows or building pads for 100-year flows. These flows will be collected
-52-
in infiltration basin "A". The infiltration basin "A" will mitigate for water quality and retain the
100-year, 24-hour storm event.
Onsite runoff from Areas "2" through "6" will be conveyed in the parking aisleways to an
infiltration basin located within each area where the water quality will be mitigated, and the 100-
year, 24-hour storm event retained. The proposed infiltration basins will mitigate for water
quality, 100% retention of the 100-year, 24-hour storm event as well as the offsite flow from the
adjacent slope on the west end of the project site.
Infiltration Basin for the Project Site:
The majority of the project site will be paved for parking lots and driveway access which can
increase the runoff volumes and velocities to the existing downstream drainage channel. Also,
stormwater runoff from the project site may contain numerous pollutants. The site topography
gently slopes at 1 % to the easterly end of the site towards an existing drainage channel which
parallels the Union Pacific Railroad.
To reduce discharge of pollutants into urban runoff from the proposed development, Proactive
Engineering Consultants West, Inc. prepared the "Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)" in
June 2016. An infiltration basin "A" is designed for the site, located on the eastern portion of the
site and parallels the existing railroad tracks (See Exhibit 13 and 14). An infiltration basin is a
flat earthen basin designed to capture the design capture volume (Vbmp) from the site. The total
capacity of infiltration basin "A" is designed to capture approximately 14,223 cubic feet of
project runoff. The stormwater will infiltrate through the bottom of the basin into the underlying
soil over a 72 hour drawdown period. Flows exceeding Vbmp will be discharged to a
downstream conveyance system. Infiltration basins are highly effective in removing all targeted
pollutants from stormwater runoff.
The infiltration basin "A" will also capture the 100-year, 24-hour storm event as required by the
City. In future as development occurs, dry wells would be implemented throughout the project
site at key locations to mitigate the 100-year 24-hour storm event and the water quality volume.
The proposed development project will be required to comply with the City's requirements as
they relate to storm water retention, including the approval of a project -specific hydrology study
and water quality management plan. Implementation of these and other applicable requirements
will assure that drainage and stormwater will not create or contribute water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff
f) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be required to comply with all
applicable water quality standards, and will implement a Water Quality Management Plan
approved by the City and the Regional Water Quality Control Board for both construction
activities and long term operation of the site. Adherence to the City's standard requirements
related to water quality will ensure impacts will be less than significant.
g, h, i) No Impact. The project site is not located in the 100-year floodplain and will not place housing
or other structures in an area that would impede or redirect flows (General Plan; Exhibit V-6).
According to Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) prepared by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), the site is located in Zone X, which represents "areas outside of
0.2% annual chance flood." (FIRM Map No. 06065C1595G, August 24, 2016)
-53-
i, j)
Less Than Significant Impact. As noted above, the proposed project is located outside a
FEMA or regionally designated floodplain. However, the Mid -Valley Stormwater Channel runs
beneath the project site and emerges at the northeastern corner of the site. This project site is also
in a seismic active region. As a result, seismic waves can cause oscillations in the enclosed water
channel, beneath the site, called seiche. However, the onsite infiltration basin will be capable of
accommodating the generated flow. Less than significant impact is expected.
Mitigation Measures
None.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
None.
-54-
1(7
M
T
.03
G7 i
03
.N g ,v
473
a, a)
U U
cm 0
o 0
a.
A
4r
a ry
VI �4 773 CI
z
❑
•
6
91:Z0'60 ..
x
uJ
cu
(n
cn
ca
N =
❑ 0}
U
0) 2
c
0
Ta
3
Q
0]
c4
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING -
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established
community'?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use
plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but
not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004.
Setting
No
Impact
The project site is governed by the policies and land use designations of the City of Palm Desert General
Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The site is designated as a Regional Commercial (C-R) in the General Plan
Land Use Map. The site is zoned as Planned Commercial.
Discussion of Impacts
a) No Impact. The subject property is currently vacant and located in an area that is developed for
similar commercial land uses. The proposed development will not physically divide an
established community. No impact is expected.
b) No Impact. The subject property occurs in an area designated for Regional Commercial (C-R)
development in the General Plan. The project proposes a Specific Plan to address site specific
regulations and standards for the site.
The project includes a four story hotel building, automobile sales, tire store, restaurants, and
retail buildings. The mix of land uses will not be substantially different from that planned in the
General Plan. The proposed land uses are consistent with commercial land uses immediately
surrounding the site. The proposed hotel building will extend up to 50 feet. Minor variations
from the Ordinance include increased variations to setback requirements to improve sight
distance within driveways. These variations, if approved, are not significant changes to the City's
standards, and are allowed with approval of a Specific Plan.
All activities will be conducted pursuant to the City's Municipal Code requirements and
standards to avoid any conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction. No impact is expected.
-57-
Overall, the provisions of the Specific Plan and the development of the project are not expected
to conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project. No impact is expected.
c) No Impact. As described in Section IV, Biological Resources, the project site is located in the
Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) boundaries. The
proposed project is required to comply with its requirements, including payment of the MSHCP
Local Development Mitigation Fee. No conservation plan -related conflict is expected.
Mitigation Measures
None.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
None.
-58-
Potentially
Significant
Impact
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would
the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of the
state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally -important mineral resource recovery
site delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan'?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004.
Setting
Less Than Less Than
Significant w/ Significant
Mitigation Impact
No
Impact
The majority of the City of Palm Desert is made up of alluvial fans, which are mainly sand and gravel.
Sand and gravels are considered an economic resource and commonly used for road base and other
building materials. Small amounts of limestone, copper and gold have been explored from some parts of
the city in past. No existing sand or gravel operations occur in the vicinity of the project site.
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in Mineral Zone MRZ-3, which
indicates an area containing mineral deposits, however the significance of these deposits cannot
be evaluated from available data (Palm Desert General Plan; Exhibit IV-7). The site is
designated for regional commercial development, and is not in an area designated for mining
activities. Although development of the site has the potential to reduce the area available for sand
and gravel mining, the reduction will be minimal, and impacts to mineral resources will be less
than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
None.
-59-
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
XII. NOISE - Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of
noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise X
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundbome vibration or X
groundbome noise levels?
c) A substantial pennanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity X
above levels existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without
the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two iniles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; Palm Desert General Plan 2016.
Setting
No
Impact
The project site is located on Monterey Avenue and Dinah Shore Drive. Both streets are designated an
"Arterial" roadway as defined by the City's General Plan Circulation Element. Noise levels on these
roadways can be expected to be greater than would be typical of local streets. Primary sources of noise
in the City of Palm Desert include traffic. As part of the development of the Noise Element of the
General Plan, noise level measurements were collected at various locations throughout the City. The
noise levels on Monterey Avenue from Varner Road to the I-10 Freeway were estimated to be 74.7 dBA
CNEL at 100 feet from the centerline, and 74.2 dBA CNEL 100 feet from centerline north of Gerald
Ford at General Plan buildout.
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) Less Than Significant Impact. The subject property is currently vacant and undeveloped. The
main noise source in the area is vehicular traffic on adjacent and nearby roadways (Union Pacific
Railroad, Interstate-10, Monterey Avenue, and Dinah Shore Drive). The nearest sensitive
-60-
receptors are single-family residences located approximately 0.159 miles (256 meters) northeast
of the project site.
Impacts of Off -Site Noise Sources on the Proposed Proiect
The proposed project will experience noise levels of 74.7 at buildout of the General Plan, which
is below the City's standard for commercial development. According to the Palm Desert General
Plan, the noise levels on Monterey Avenue would be under 75 dBA, the established standard for
commercial development Structures will be required to meet the most recent version of the
California Building Code noise insulation standards, which will assure that off -site noise impacts
to the project are minimized to less than significant levels. Adherence to standards will ensure
operations related noise would remain less than significant.
The proposed hotel will occur adjacent to Monterey Avenue, near the I-10 freeway. Noise levels
have the potential to be elevated for guests of the hotel. However, the City will require that
project specific noise analysis be submitted with building plans that demonstrate that interior
noise levels will be 45 dBA or less. The implementation of building standards, such as dual
glazing, additional insulation and building orientation will be assessed as part of this analysis,
thereby ensuring that noise impacts to the hotel's residents will be less than significant.
Impacts of the Proposed Project on Surrounding Development
Primary project -related noise sources will include vehicular traffic accessing the site, grounds
maintenance equipment, and heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) units. The vehicle
mix will be comparable with existing vehicles on surrounding roads. Noise generated by the
visitors and employees is expected to be consistent with noise levels at any commercial
development, and will not exceed City standards. The proposed project is compatible with
surrounding land uses, and operational noise impacts are not expected to exceed acceptable
commercial noise standards.
Groundborne Vibration
Ground -borne vibration and/or ground -borne noise would be generated during construction of
the proposed project, which could be felt by adjacent land uses. The primary source of ground -
borne vibration will be operation of heavy equipment, such as bulldozers; however, the impacts
will be temporary and will end once construction is complete. Furthermore, the site is isolated by
roadways and railroad right of way, and groundborne vibration will dissipate prior to reaching
existing development to the cast.
Long-term operation of the project is not expected to generate ground -borne vibrations or noise.
Impacts will be less than significant.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. As described above, the primary permanent noise sources will
be vehicles traveling to and from the site, HVAC units, and grounds maintenance equipment.
The proposed project is not expected to results a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Project -related vehicles
will be consistent with vehicles already using area roadways. Less than significant impacts are
expected.
d) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation. Temporary noise generated during the
construction phase of the proposed project could exceed acceptable noise levels. Primary noise
sources will be heavy equipment, some of which will operate in close proximity to sensitive
-61-
receptors, including hotel guests if the hotel is built before the balance of the site. However,
these impacts will be short-lived and temporary.
The City will require that construction activity comply with Section 9.24.070 of the Municipal
Code, which limits construction activity to between 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays and 8 a.m. to 5
p.m. on Saturdays. No activity is permitted on Sundays and holidays. Construction of the project
will therefore not occur during the sensitive evening hours, when hotel guests would be
impacted. This standard requirement will assure that construction impacts on the proposed hotel
will be less than significant.
e-f) No Impact. The Palm Springs International Airport is located approximately 8.4 miles northwest
of the subject property and its noise contours are localized, and not located in the vicinity of the
proposed project site. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures
1. Project construction activities shall only occur between the permitted hours of the city's Municipal
Code.
2. During all project site construction, all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped
with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards. The
construction supervisor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is
directed away from the noise -sensitive receivers nearest the Project site.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
A. Project construction shall be monitored to assure compliance with City construction hours.
Responsible Party: Building Department
-62-
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
No
Impact
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING —
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an
area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or X
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of X
replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement X
housing elsewhere?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; California Department of Finance, Report E-5 accessed July 2016.
Setting
The current population of the City of Palm Desert is 49,335 (2016), and the average household size is
2.14 persons. The City is composed of a mix of single family and multi -family development, but the
majority (55%) of housing units are single-family homes. The proposed development will be a mixed -
use commercial development which will result in a need for employees for hotel, retail stores,
restaurants, and similar businesses.
Discussion of Impacts
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will not directly generate population
growth in the area. The proposed mixed -use commercial development will result in a number of
hotel guests and/or visitors and need for employees for each commercial building development.
The facility will generate a need for approximately 150 employees. New jobs are likely to he
tilled by existing residents, or new residents to the area who will move based on employment
and housing opportunities.
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) estimates that the City will have a
total population of 52,100 in 2020 and 56,00 in 2035. In addition, SCAG estimates that the City
will have a need for 6,800 new jobs between 2008 and 2035. The project will provide for some
of these jobs, and will expand employment opportunities in the City.
Development of the project will not result in any major extensions of roads and other
infrastructure that would directly or indirectly attract additional population to the area. Impacts to
population growth are expected to be less than significant and will be absorbed by the natural
growth of the City over time.
The anticipated population growth will be considerably greater than that needed to supply
employees to the proposed development. The project will benefit from anticipated population
growth, and is not expected to induce it.
-63-
b-c) No Impact. Currently, the project site is vacant and undeveloped and no residents will be
displaced, and no replacement housing will be required elsewhere. No project -related impact is
expected.
Mitigation Measures
None.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
None.
-64-
Potentially
Significant
Impact
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response tines or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection'?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004.
Setting
Less Than Less Than
Significant w/ Significant
Mitigation Impact
No
Impact
Fire Protection: The City contracts with Riverside County Fire Department for its local service. The
nearest fire station is Riverside County Fire Palm Desert Station 71 at 73995 Country Club Drive,
approximately 4.2 mile southeast of the project site. The City of Palm Desert also receives additional
fire support from station No. 55 in Indian Wells and Stations No. 50 and No. 69 in Rancho Mirage, in
addition to the services provided by its own stations. The Cove Communities Fire Department has 84
personnel in total, distributed among the three cities, all of which operate under a Regional Fire
Protection Program. The station physically closest to the emergency will respond even if it is outside the
station's official jurisdiction.
Police Protection: The City of Palm Desert contracts with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department for
police protection services. The nearest police station is Palm Desert Police Department at 73705 Gerald
Ford Drive, approximately 1.6 mile southeast of the project site. The police department consists of 70
sworn officers that include 45 deputies, 10 of which are dedicated to traffic enforcement. The City of
Palm Desert currently provides about 1.75 sworn officers for every 1,000 residents. The average
response time for the highest priority emergency calls was 4.6 minutes.
Schools: The City of Palm Desert is located within the boundaries of the two school districts: Desert
Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) and Palm Springs Unified School District (PSUSD). Most of
the city is served by DSUSD. PSUSD includes the northwestern portion of the city. Both the school
districts currently operate four elementary schools, one middle school, one continuation high school, and
one high school within the City. The nearest school is Xavier College Preparatory High School, a private
school located approximately 2.03 miles northeast from the proposed site.
-65-
Parks: In the City of Palm Desert, a total of 911 acres are dedicated for parks (General Plan Table III-2).
The three types of parks serving the Palm Desert area are community, neighborhood, and mini/pocket
parks. The nearest park to the project site is Palm Desert Civic Center Park, approximately 5.5 miles
south.
Discussion of Impacts
XIV. a)
Fire Protection
Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the project will marginally increase the
demand on fire service in the City. The project will not induce population growth requiring
additional fire protection services. The project will require fire protection services comparable to
surrounding commercial land uses. The development within the project, however, will contribute
to the maintenance of fire services through the City's structural fire tax, which is assessed on
property tax bills, and assures that the City can continue to provide fire services as development
occurs. Given the site's proximity to a local fire station, fire personnel will be able to reach the
site within the target five-minute response time. Emergency access will be provided to the
property via the existing public roadway network.
The Fire Department will review the project site plan to ensure it meets applicable fire standards
and regulations. No construction of new or expanded fire services or facilities are required for
the proposed project. Project -related fire protection impacts will be less than significant.
Police Protection
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will result in a marginal increase in
demand for police services. Project operations will require police services comparable to
surrounding commercial land uses. Police personnel will be able to access the site using
Monterey Avenue and Dinah Shore Drive. The project will be required to comply with all Police
Department regulations and procedures. Project related impacts are expected to be less than
significant.
Schools
No Impact. The proposed project will not require the construction of a new school facility. The
project is a mixed -use commercial development that will not increase the City's student
population. The proposed project will be required to pay the mandated school development
impact fees to offset increases in student population associated with the employees at the facility.
Based on current PSUSD developer impact fees of $0.56 per square foot, Table 9 provides an
estimate of developer impact fees that development within the proposed project could generate at
build -out. These fees are designed to mitigate impacts to schools. No impact is anticipated.
-66-
Table 9
Estimated School Mitigation Fees at Buildout
Square Estimated
Parcel Land Use Footage School
No. Acres (SF) Mitigation Fees
1 Hotel 2.65 63,500 S35,560.00
2 Retail 1.11 10,000 $ 5,600.00
3 Fast Food Restaurant 0.73 3,000 $1,680.00
4 Fast Food Restaurant 0.90 4,800 $2,688.00
5 Retail/Restaurant 1.07 8,400 $4,704.00
6 RetailiRestaurant 0.93 6,000 $3,360.00
7 Fast Food Restaurant 0.85 3,400 $1,904.00
8 Retail/Tire Store 1.59 12,185 S6,823.60
9 Auto Sales 5.34 6,815 S3,816.40
10 Retail 1.27 10,000 $5,600.00
11 Retail 1.35 8,600 S4,816.00
TOTAL $76,552.00
Source: Project's site plan; Palm Springs Unified School District updated fee program (2016)
Parks/ Other public facilities
Less Than Significant Impact. Project buildout is not expected to impact local and/or regional
parks significantly. The project proposes a mixed -use development that will not induce
population growth in the area and therefore, would not result in the need for new parks and
recreation facilities. No additional public facilities are required for the proposed project to
accommodate the employees. Increase in demand for the city's existing facilities will be less
than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
None.
-67-
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
XV. RECREATION --
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
No
Impact
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; Palm Desert General Plan 2016.
Setting
Within the City of Palm Desert, there are several mini, neighborhood, community, and school parks, one
community center, a Community Health and Wellness Centers, a senior center, and a museum.
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will include onsite recreational
amenities at the hotel, as required in the Zoning Ordinance for that use. Hotel guests can be
expected to utilize onsite recreational amenities as well as local and regional recreational
facilities. The proposed development will not induce substantial population growth that would
result in significant impacts to existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities. Project -related impacts are expected to be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
None.
-68-
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC --
Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan,
ordinance or policy establishing measures of
effectiveness for the performance of the
circulation system, taking into account all
modes of transportation including mass
transit and non -motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system,
including but not limited to intersections,
streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian
and bicycle paths, and mass transit'?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and
travel demand measures, or other standards X
established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., fann equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access'? X
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease
the performance or safety of such facilities?
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; Palm Desert General Plan 2016; "Focused Traffic Impact Analysis for
the 1-10 & Monterey Mixed -Use Project", prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLC) in June 21,
2016.
No
Impact
Setting
The project site is located on the northeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Dinah Shore Drive. Access
to the project site will be provided via one full -access driveway at Toni Drive and Dinah Shore Drive,
one right-in/right-out only driveway along Dinah Shore Drive, and one right-in/right-out/left-in (with
restricted left turn) only driveway at the project's southeastern corner on Dinah Shore Drive.
The applied measures of effectiveness for the performance ot'the circulation system were derived from
applicable City standards. The City of Palm Desert has established a goal for Monterey Avenue and
-69-
Dinah Shore Drive intersection operations and roadway link segment operations of Level of Service
(LOS) D or better.
The Trip Generation Handbook, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was used
to calculate trip generation for the project. The categories used for the existing site condition analysis are
No. 310 (hotel), No. 820 (shopping center), No. 841 (automobile sales), No. 848 (tire store), No. 932
(high -turnover (site -down) restaurant) and No. 934 (fast-food restaurant with drive -through window
rates), which correctly describes the proposed development.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLC) prepared a "Focused Traffic Impact Analysis Report" for
the proposed project in October 2016. The traffic analysis was based upon a variety of sources,
including the General Plan Circulation Element and the Institute of Transportation Engineers' 9th
Edition Trip Generation Manual (2012).
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The following traffic analysis
was based upon a variety of sources, including the General Plan Circulation Element and the
project specific Traffic Impact Analysis Report prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan,
Engineers (LLC).
Existing Traffic Conditions
The site is currently undeveloped. Existing roadways in the vicinity of the project site include
Monterey Avenue and Dinah Shore Drive. Both are designated as an "Arterial" in the General
Plan. These roadways carried approximately 32,700 (avg.) and 20,500 (avg.) vehicles per day,
respectively, based on year 2000 General Plan analysis. General Plan conditions and traffic
analysis indicated that Monterey Avenue at Dinah Shore Drive was operating at LOS B (Palm
Desert General Plan; Table III-3).
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLC) calculated existing traffic conditions (2016) along
Monterey Avenue/Dinah Shore Drive based on existing traffic volumes and current street
geometry. Monterey Avenue/Dinah Shore Drive currently operates at an unacceptable LOS F in
the PM peak hour.
Traffic Conditions at Project Build -out
Four key intersections, in the project vicinity, have been selected to evaluate the potential trip
generation as a result of proposed project: Monterey Avenue at Dinah Shore Drive, Toni
Drive/Driveway A at Dinah Shore Drive, Driveway B at Dinah Shore Drive (Right-in/right-out
only), and Driveway C at Dinah Shore Drive (Right-in/right-out/left-in only — left -turn egress is
restricted).
The proposed project will generate 7,803 daily trips, with 492 trips (275 inbound, 217 outbound)
during AM peak hour and 439 trips (218 inbound, 221 outbound) during PM peak hour on a
"typical" weekday (Table 10 & 11). The analysis includes adjustments for internal capture and
pass -by. The pass -by reduction factors used in this report are based on information published in
the Trip Generation Handbook, published by ITE (2014) and have been reduced by 50% based
on engineering judgment.
-70-
Table 10
Monterey Crossing
Project Traffic Generation Rates
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
ITE Land Use Code 2-Way Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total
Generation Rates:
310: Hotel, TE/RM 8.17 0.31 0.22 0.53 0.31 0.29 0.60
820: Shopping Center
(TE/1000SF)4 95.18 1.42 0.88 2.30 3.99 4.33 8.23
841: Auto. Sales
(TE/1000SF) 32.30 1.44 0.48 1.92 1.05 1.57 2.62
848: Tire Store
(TE/I000SF) 24.87 1.82 1.07 2.89 1.78 2.37 4.15
932: High-TRI
(TE/1000SF) 127.15 5.95 4.86 10.81 5.91 3.94 9.85
934: Fast-FR2
(TE/1000SF) 496.12 23.16 22.26 45.42 16.98 15.67 32.65
' High -Turnover (Sit-down) Restaurant
- Fast -Food Restaurant with Drive -Through Window
Notes: TE/ 1000 SF= Trip end per 1,000 SF of development and TE/RM= Trip end per room
Table 11
Monterey Crossing
Project Traffic Generation Forecast
Daily AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Project Description 2-Way Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total
Generation Rates:
Hotel (130 Rooms) 806 40 25 65 29 30 59
Shopping Center
(38,200 SF) 2,520 45 27 72 75 87 162
Automobile Sales
(6,815 SF) 176 9 3 12 5 9 14
Tire Store (10.140 SF) 211 19 11 30 12 18 30
High-TR' (6,000 SF) 579 31 26 57 17 10 27
Fast-FR' (11,200 SF) 3,511 131 125 256 80 67 147
Project Trip Generation
(Sub -Total) 9,340 411 343 754 353 349 702
Total Project Net Trip
Generation 7,803 275 217 492 218 221 439
' High -Turnover (Sit-down) Restaurant
2 Fast -Food Restaurant with Drive -Through Window
Notes: TE/1000 SF= trip end per 1,000 SF of development and TE/RM= Trip end per room
The analysis included two improvements planned as part of the proposed project. These
improvements are:
• Monterey Avenue at Dinah Shore Drive: Eliminate the median and restripe the east leg of the
intersection to construct westbound dual left -turn pockets of 160-feet with a 120-foot
transition.
-71-
• Toni Drive/Driveway A at Dinah Shore Drive: North leg (Project Driveway A) of the
intersection shall be modified to include two inbound lanes, a southbound left -turn lane, and
a shared through/right-turn lane. Eliminate the median and restripe the west leg of the
intersection to construct eastbound dual left -turn pockets of 145-feet with a 120-foot
transition. The existing traffic signal shall be modified as necessary.
Multiple intersections, five intersections along Dinah Shore Drive and one intersection along
Monterey Avenue, will be synchronized through signal coordination mechanism' to further
improve the overall flow of traffic in the project vicinity. The intersections that will be
synchronized include:
• Miriam Way at Dinah Shore Drive
• Shoppers lane at Dina Shore Drive
• Monterey Avenue at Dinah Shore Drive
• Toni Drive at Dinah Shore Drive
• Monterey Avenue at Market Place Way
The traffic report analyzed opening year (2018) plus ambient growth plus cumulative projects.
The analysis assumes that all components of the project will be operational in 2018. This
represents a conservative analysis, because project development is expected to occur over a
longer time period, as tenants are secured.
The analysis shows that with project -related improvements, all of the key intersections are
forecast to operate at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours, with the
exception of the intersection of Monetary Avenue/Dinah Shore Drive which is forecast to
operate at unacceptable LOS F in the PM peak hour. Although the intersection of Monterey
Avenue/Dinah Shore Drive is forecast to operate at adverse LOS F, the proposed project will not
significantly impact that condition, which currently exists. The planned improvements by the
project to the intersection, described above, offset the impact directly associated with the project.
Queuing Analysis
A queuing assessment was also conducted for the proposed project to assess the potential
impacts along Dinah Shore Drive associated with the proposed development and the construction
of the east -bound left -turn pockets at Driveway A and Driveway C as well as the west -bound
left -turn pockets at Monterey Avenue/Dinah Shore Drive.
Queuing analysis shows that the proposed turn -pockets along Dinah Shore Drive will provide
adequate storage to minimize impacts to through traffic along Dinah Shore Drive. Also,
motorists entering and exiting the project site will be able to do so comfortably, safely, and
without undue congestion.
Site Access and Internal Circulation Evaluation
Level of Service Analysis for Project Access Locations
Access to the subject site will be provided via one full -access driveway at Toni Drive and Dinah
Shore Drive, a right-in/right-out only driveway along Dinah Shore Drive, and a right-in/right-
Signal Coordination: The ability to synchronize multiple intersections to enhance the operation of one or more
directional movements in a traffic system.
-72-
out/left-in only (left -turn egress is restricted) driveway at the eastern end of the project on Dinah
Shore Drive. Analysis included assumptions allowing for the development of extensive other
cumulative projects in the surrounding area, and for ambient growth. On the basis of these
assumptions, the traffic study found that all three -project driveways are forecast to operate at an
acceptable LOS B or better during the AM and PM peak hours.
Overall, impacts associated with the ultimate development of the site will be less than significant
with mitigation with onsite and offsite improvements and signal coordination.
c) No Impact. The Palm Springs International Airport is located approximately 8.4 miles northwest
of the subject property. The development of the proposed project will have no impact on the
facilities or operations of regional airports, and will not result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including an increase in traffic levels. It will also not create substantial safety risks. No project
related impact is anticipated.
d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will be developed in accordance with City design
guidelines and will not create a substantial increase in hazards due to a design feature. The
project's access point will be located with adequate sight distances, and project -generated traffic
will be consistent with existing traffic in the area. Improvements along Dinah Shore Drive at
Monterey Avenue and Toni Drive/Driveway A will be provided to offset the project related
impact from the regular traffic. Therefore, project related impact would be less than significant.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. Access to the project site will be provided via one full -access
driveway at Toni Drive and Dinah Shore Drive and one right-in/right-out only driveway and one
right-in/right-out/left-in (with restricted left turn) only driveway at the eastern end of the project
on Dinah Shore Drive.
A sight distance evaluation was also performed for all three project driveways as well as the
proposed left -turn in median break at the easterly project driveway based on criteria and
procedures set forth by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the State's
Highway Design Manual (HDM).
Based on the evaluation, a posted speed limit of 45 mph along Dinah Shore Drive, a corner sight
distance (7 1/2 second criteria) of the Caltrans HDM, and a corner sight distance of 495 feet is
required for the proposed project driveways. This will minimize the obstructions within the sight
triangle provided by sight lines at the project driveways. Further analysis of existing conditions
on Dinah Shore Drive along the project frontage indicates that obstructions, with the exception
of landscaping/street trees, along the sidewalks are minimal. Any additional landscaping and/or
hardscapes (i.e. monument signs) shall be designed such that a driver's clear line of sight is not
obstructed.
All three driveways will also be available for emergency purposes, therefore, emergency access
should not impact traffic flow along Dinah Shore Drive significantly. However, prior to
constriction, both the Fire Department and Police Department will review the project site plan to
ensure safety measures are addressed, including emergency access. The proposed project will not
result in inadequate emergency access. Less than significant impact is anticipated.
Less Than Significant Impact. SunLine Transit operates bus routes along Monterey Avenue
and Dinah Shore Drive and will provide public transit access to the proposed project. SunLine
-73-
has adequate capacity in its system to accommodate the proposed project. The project design will
not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. Less than
significant impact is anticipated.
Mitigation Measures
1. The proposed project shall construct off -site intersection improvements described above,
consistent with the requirements of the City.
2. Signal coordination shall be incorporated mitigate the overall flow of traffic in the project
vicinity.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
A. The project proponent shall submit improvement plans to the Public Works Department reflecting
added turn lanes and signal coordination, for approval by the City Engineer.
Responsible Party: Engineer of record, City Engineer.
-74-
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE
SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of
new water or wastewater treatment facilities
or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project from existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider that serves or
may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
No
Impact
Source: Palm Desert General Plan 2004; Palm Desert General Plan 2016; Ordinance No. 1422.3 titled
"Ordinance of the Coachella Valley Water District Imposing Revised and Additional Restrictions on Water Use to
Comply with Statewide Drought Regulations.", http://www.cvwd.org_/ArchiveCenter/ViewFi1c/Item/511,
Accessed on 08.23.2016.
Setting
Wastewater Treatment
The City works with Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) to treat and recycle wastewater at the
Cook Street Wastewater Treatment Plant. This wastewater treatment plant also serves other
communities and has a tertiary water capacity of 20 million gallons per day (mgd). CVWD continually
-75-
increases the capacity of its wastewater reclamation facilities by constructing new treatment ponds,
aeration, and other structures throughout the Coachella Valley. CVWD implements all requirements of
the Regional Water Quality Control Board pertaining to water quality and wastewater discharge.
Domestic Water
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides domestic water to the project area. Its primary
source of fresh water is groundwater extracted by deep wells from the Whitewater River sub -basin.
CVWD's service area lies in the Whitewater River Watershed, and adopted Ordinance No. 1422.3 titled
"Ordinance of the Coachella Valley Water District Imposing Revised and Additional Restrictions on
Water Use to Comply with Statewide Drought Regulations" to implement regional management of
water supplies. CVWD, as an urban water supplier, is required to prepare an "Urban Water Management
Plan (UWMP)" every five years in response to the requirements of the Urban Water Management
Planning Act (UWMP Act), California Water Code Sections 10610 through 10656. CVWD's UWMP is
a planning tool that documents actions in support of long-term water resources planning and ensures
adequate water supplies are available to meet existing and future urban water demands.
In addition to its UWMP, CVWD prepares an annual report each year to document and analyze the
region's water needs and long-term demand for domestic water. This analysis includes conservation
measures and replenishment programs to make it possible for CVWD to meet increasing demand of the
services area.
The proposed project will be required to implement all water conservation measures imposed by CVWD
under both normal and drought conditions over the life of the project. In addition, the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has issued Emergency Order 2014-0718-01E, which mandates
water suppliers enact certain water restrictions. On May 9, 2016, the Governor issued an Executive
Order to direct the State Water Resources Control Board to adjust and extend its emergency water
conservation regulations through the end of January 2017 in recognition of the differing water supply
conditions for many communities. The project will also be required to implement the updated 2016
emergency measures, if in effect at the time construction occurs.
The proposed project will tie into existing domestic water lines in Dinah Shore Drive. No new wells or
additional water infrastructure or entitlements will be required.
Storm Water Management
Storm water drainage infrastructure within the City of Palm Desert consists of a network of regional and
local drainage systems which are ultimately interrelated. The regional and local drainage system
includes natural and improved streams, storm drains, storm channels, and catch basins intended to
manage stormwater that flows into the Whitewater Storm Water Channel, Deep Canyon Stormwater
Channel, Palm Valley Stormwater Channel, Mid -Valley Stormwater Channel, Dead Indian Channel,
Ironwood Channel, and Portola and Haystack Channels. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD),
the Riverside County Flood Control District, and the City of Palm Desert control this drainage system.
In 1993, the "Palm Desert Comprehensive Storm Drain Master Plan" was prepared to better manage the
storm water runoff in the City. In that Master Plan, the City is divided into four drainage areas (Zone 1,
Zone 2, Zone 3, and Zone 4) to manage and divert the runoff into the regional and local drainage
systems. The project site is located in the Zone 1 which mainly drains into the Whitewater Channel,
Palm Valley Channel, Haystack, and San Pascual Channels.
-76-
The "Preliminary Hydrology Study" prepared for the project site in 2016 to fulfill the City's drainage
requirements for the entitlement of the proposed project evaluated the 10 and 100 year 1-hour storm
runoff conditions. The project site is divided into six areas to divert the onsite runoff into infiltration
basins for each area drainage area.
Solid Waste
Waste Management of the Desert provides solid waste disposal, through a franchise agreement with the
City, and will be responsible for collection and disposal of solid waste from the project site. Trash and
recycled materials are collected from customers in the City and transported to the Badlands Landfill,
located at 31125 Ironwood Avenue, Moreno Valley. Other possible alternatives include the Lamb
Canyon Landfill and El Sobrante Landfill. The County of Riverside operates all these landfills.
Discussion of Impacts
a) Less Than Significant Impact. Buildout of the planning area will include a four story hotel
building with 130 hotel rooms, automobile sales building and sales lot, tire store, high turnover
(site down) restaurant, three fast-food restaurants with drive -through service, and two additional
buildings for retail uses. Development facilitated by the proposed project will result in increased
wastewater flows. All development will be required to connect to the existing sanitary sewer
system. The CVWD, which operates wastewater treatment facilities in the City of Palm Desert
will serve the proposed project and is subject to wastewater treatment standards established by
the Regional Water Quality Control Board. All components of the proposed project will be
required to design facilities consistent with CVWD and Regional Board standards. These
standards and requirements will assure that impacts associated with wastewater standards will be
less than significant.
b, d) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be required to connect to existing
water lines in adjacent roadways. As previously identified, sanitary sewer service is available in
the area of the proposed project along Dinah Shore Drive. The project site will be served by the
Cook Street Wastewater Treatment Plant.
The proposed project will be responsible for the connections necessary to tie into existing water
lines to the standards set by the City and CVWD. The site is being developed with land uses
consistent with the parcel's land use designation for regional commercial uses, which is
consistent with the assumptions made by CVWD in their UWMP. Build out of the project will
result in an increase of less than 1% in demand over current conditions. This is within the
CVWD's capacity, and impacts associated with water supplies will be less than significant. The
City's and CVWD's standards and requirements will assure that impacts associated with water
conveyance and water supply will be less than significant.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be required to contain the 100-year
storm on -site, as required by City standards. The site will be graded to drain to several
infiltration basins. From there, concrete ribbon gutters will convey stormwater to the common
retention basin in the eastern portion of the property. This system will be reviewed and approved
by the City Engineer to assure that it meets City standards. These standards and requirements
will assure that impacts associated with storm water management will be less than significant.
e) Less Than Significant Impact. The City works with Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
to treat and recycle wastewater at the Cook Street Wastewater Treatment Plant. This wastewater
-77-
f, g)
treatment plant also serves other communities and has a tertiary water capacity of 20 million
gallons per day (mgd). CVWD continually increases the capacity of its wastewater reclamation
facilities by constructing new treatment ponds, aeration, and other structures. CVWD
implements all requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board pertaining to water
quality and wastewater discharge. There will be less than significant impact to wastewater
treatment capacities associated with the proposed project.
Less Than Significant Impact. The City has an exclusive franchise agreement with Waste
Management of the Desert for its collection and disposal of solid waste from the project site. All
waste generated on the project site will be collected and transported to the Badlands Landfill.
This landfills is owned and operated by Riverside County. They have the capacity to
accommodate waste generated by future development on the project site. Burrtec is also required
to comply with local, regional and state requirements associated with solid waste disposal.
Impacts will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
None.
_78_
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant w/ Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE --
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory'?
b) Does the project have the potential to
achieve short -teen, to the disadvantage of
long-term environmental goals'?
c) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future projects)?
d) Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated:
No
Impact
Biological Resources
The project site is not located within the boundaries of a CVMSHCP-designated conservation
area, and does not contain any wildlife corridor or biological linkage area. However, mitigation
measures have been included in this Initial Study to reduce potential impacts to migratory birds
to less than significant levels. The proposed project will not significantly reduce fish or wildlife
habitat or otherwise adversely impact a fish or wildlife species.
Cultural Resources
The site has a low probability of containing archaeological resources, and there are no historic
structures on site. However, mitigation measures have been included in this Initial Study to
assure that impacts associated with cultural resources remain less than significant.
With implementation of the mitigation measures provided in this report, impacts will be less than
significant.
-79-
b) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: The proposed project proposes a
Specific Plan and Conditional Use Permit to support the planned land uses. The project also
proposes Tentative Vesting Parcel Map to subdivide the subject site's two parcel into 11 parcels
to further support the mixed -use commercial development. The proposed project will be
consistent with the land use designations for the site. The project is also consistent with the
commercial development trends in the immediate vicinity. Public utility providers have indicated
they will be capable of serving the project with existing and/or planned facilities. Potential
environmental impacts are expected to remain at, or be mitigated to, levels below significance,
and long-term environmental goals are not expected to be adversely impacted by the project.
c) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: The project will contribute to
the cumulative impacts of development in the City of Palm Desert and broader Coachella Valley.
Project construction will contribute to the region's current exceedances of PM1o; however, these
impacts will be mitigated to less than significant levels through implementation of City
requirements, consistent with the region's fugitive dust reduction measures. These impacts will
be further mitigated to less than significant levels through implementation of air quality
mitigation measures.
d) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: This Initial Study document
identifies potential impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions and TACs, as well as noise
impacts as a result of build out of the proposed project.
Air Quality
The proposed project site would be exposed to Toxic Air Contaminations (TAC) which increase
cancer risk. The main source of generated TAC emissions would be diesel truck and railroad
emissions generated by the Interstate-10/Union Pacific Railroad uses. Mitigation measures have
been included in this Initial Study to assure that impacts associated with TACs remain less than
significant.
Greenhouse Gas
The proposed project will generate greenhouse gas emissions during construction and operation.
A set of mitigation measures is included in this Initial Study to minimize the greenhouse
emissions and assure that GHG emissions from the proposed project will meet the proposed
thresholds of the SCAQMD, through compliance with the City's ESP. As a result, impacts
associated with GHG emissions will be less than significant.
Noise
The proposed project has the potential to generate high levels of noise during construction;
however, mitigation measures will be implemented to minimize the environmental effects and
reduce substantial adverse effects on human beings.
Suitable mitigation measures have been provided to mitigate the potential impacts to less than
significant levels. Therefore, impacts to human beings are expected to be less than significant.
-80-