Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-08-16 PC Regular Meeting Agenda Packet CITY OF PALM DESERT REGULAR PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TUESDAY, AUGUST 16, 2022 – 6:00 P.M. ZOOM VIRTUAL MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Any person wishing to discuss any item not appearing on the agenda may address the Planning Commission via the Zoom session at this point by giving his/her name and address for the record. Remarks shall be limited to a maximum of three (3) minutes unless the Planning Commission authorizes additional time. Because the Brown Act does not allow the Planning Commission to take action on items not on the agenda, members will not enter into discussion with speakers but may briefly respond or instead refer the matter to staff for a report and recommendation at a future Planning Commission meeting. THREE OPTIONS FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE MEETING Option 1 – To Participate by email: 1. Send your comments by email to: planning@cityofpalmdesert.org. Emails received by 3:00 p.m. prior to the meeting will be made part of the record and distributed to the Planning Commission. This method is encouraged because it will give the Commissioners the opportunity to reflect upon your input. Emails will not be read aloud. Option 2 – To Participate and Provide Verbal Comments by Using Your Internet, then click on “Launch Meeting.” 1. Click the link: https://palmdesert.zoom.us/j/84739707419 Pursuant to Assembly Bill No. 361, the Planning Commission may be conducted via teleconference/virtual meeting and there will be no in-person public access to the meeting location. AGENDA REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 16, 2022 2 Option 3 – To Listen and Provide Verbal Comments Using Your Telephone 1. Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): Telephone US: +1 669 219 2599 or +1 669 900 9128 or +1 213 338 8477 or +1 602 753 0140 or +1 971 247 1195 or +1 253 215 8782 2. Enter the Webinar ID: 847 3970 7419 followed by #. 3. Indicate that you are a participant by pressing # to continue. 4. You will hear audio of the meeting in progress. Remain on the line if the meeting has not yet started. 5. During the meeting, press *9 to raise your hand to be added to the queue to provide public comment. When it is your turn, City staff will announce your name or phone number. To mute or unmute your phone during the meeting, press *6. LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE (3) MINUTES Staff reports and documents for agenda items are available for public inspection at the Planning/Land Development Division and on the City’s website: www.cityofpalmdesert.org. V. CONSENT CALENDAR ALL MATTERS LISTED ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE ROLL CALL VOTE. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION AND ACTION UNDER SECTION VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER, OF THE AGENDA. A. MINUTES of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of July 5, 2022. Rec: Approve as presented. VI. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER VII. NEW BUSINESS None VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he or she raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. Remarks shall be limited to a maximum of three minutes unless the Planning Commission authorizes additional time. AGENDA REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 16, 2022 3 A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION to adopt a Notice of Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to establish a professional real estate office use within an existing ground floor commercial building space located at 73111 El Paseo, Suite 101. Case No. CUP22-0004 (EQTY Real Estate, Newport Beach, California, Applicant). Rec: Waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2816, adopting a Notice of Exemption, and approve Case No. CUP22- 0004. B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION of a recommendation to the City Council to adopt a resolution under CEQA and approve a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) and a Precise Plan (PP) for the development of a 241-unit multi-family (affordable housing) development, a housing density bonus, and related improvements on a 10.49-acre parcel located at the northwest corner of Gerald Ford Drive and the extension of Technology Drive. Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 (Palm Communities, Irvine, California, Applicant). Rec: Waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2817, approving Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366. IX. MISCELLANEOUS None X. SUMMARY OF CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS XI. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. Cultural Arts Committee B. Parks & Recreation Commission XII. REPORTS AND REMARKS XIII. INFORMATION ITEMS A. Attendance Record XIV. ADJOURNMENT I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda for the Planning Commission was posted on the City Hall bulletin board not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting. Dated this 12th day of August 2022. Monica O’Reilly Monica O’Reilly, Management Specialist II CITY OF PALM DESERT REGULAR PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PRELIMINARY MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 5, 2022 – 6:00 P.M. ZOOM VIRTUAL MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER Chair John Greenwood called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Chair John Greenwood Vice-Chair Nancy DeLuna Commissioner Ron Gregory Commissioner Lindsay Holt Commissioner Joseph Pradetto Also Present: Craig Hayes, Assistant City Attorney Richard Cannone, Deputy Director of Development Services Rosie Lua, Planning Manager Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner Nick Melloni, Associate Planner Melinda Gonzalez, Management Specialist II III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Joseph Pradetto led the Pledge of Allegiance. IV. SUMMARY OF CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS Deputy Director of Development Services Richard Cannone summarized pertinent City Council actions from the meetings of June 9 and June 23, 2022. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JULY 5, 2022 2 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of June 7, 2022. Rec: Approve as presented. Upon a motion by Commissioner Gregory, seconded by Vice-Chair DeLuna and a 5-0 vote of the Planning Commission, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None). VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None VIII. NEW BUSINESS With Planning Commission concurrence, Chair Greenwood moved the New Business agenda items to after Public Hearings. A. SELECTION of a Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson. Rec: By Minute Motion, nominate and appoint positions. Commissioner Pradetto moved to nominate Vice-Chair DeLuna to Chairperson. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Greenwood and was carried by a 5-0 vote (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None). Commissioner Greenwood moved to nominate Commissioner Pradetto to Vice- Chairperson. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gregory and was carried by a 5-0 vote (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None). The Commission thanked Commissioner Greenwood for his excellent service as Chairperson. B. SELECTION of Commission liaisons for the Cultural Arts Committee and Parks and Recreation Commission. Rec: By Minute Motion, nominate and appoint positions. Vice-Chair Pradetto moved to reappoint Commissioner Holt to the Cultural Arts Committee, and Commissioner Greenwood to the Parks and Recreation Commission. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gregory and was carried by a 5-0 vote (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None). PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JULY 5, 2022 3 IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION to adopt a resolution under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and approval of a Precise Plan (PP) for a 150- unit multi-family (affordable housing) project adjacent to the Spanish Walk community along the east side of Gerald Ford Drive, north of Frank Sinatra Drive, and south of the I-10/Railroad. Case No. PP22-0004 (Western National Group, Irvine, California, Applicant). Rec: Waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2814, adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving Case No. PP22-0002. The staff report(s) and Zoom video of the meeting are available on the City’s website. Click on the following link to access: www.planning-commission- information-center. Vice-Chair Nancy DeLuna noted that her employer is involved in a business relationship with the City on property nearby and recused herself from this item due to a conflict of interest. She left the meeting at this point. Associate Planner Kevin Swartz provided a presentation on the item. Chair Greenwood declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. Mr. Mark Bigley, the Applicant, Santa Ana, California, introduced his team and provided a presentation giving a brief overview of the project. The team responded to questions from the Planning Commission. With no further testimony offered, Chair Greenwood declared the public hearing closed. The Planning Commission provided comments in support of the proposed project. Commissioner Pradetto moved to waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2814, adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving Case No. PP22-0002. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gregory and was carried by a 4-0 vote (AYES: Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: DeLuna). Commissioner DeLuna rejoined the meeting. PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JULY 5, 2022 4 B. REQUEST FOR COSIDERATION to adopt a Notice of Exemption under CEQA and approval of a Precise Plan for modifications to The Living Desert Zoo and Gardens, including expanding the existing on-site parking, construction of a single- story facilities building, two (2) single-story storage buildings, a private drive aisle for staff, and modifications of the existing median on Portola Avenue for a new driveway entry at 47900 Portola Avenue. Case No. PP22-0001 (PVG Architects, Palm Desert, California, Applicant). Rec: Waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2815, adopting a Notice of Exemption and approving Case No. PP22-0001. Chair Greenwood stated he is a principal with PVG Architects and recused himself. Commissioner Lindsay Holt disclosed that she lives within 500 to 1,000 feet of the project and recused herself. Commissioner Ron Gregory also disclosed that he works for MSA Engineering, which provided engineering and landscape architectural services for the project and recused himself. Vice-Chair DeLuna stated that PVG Architects recently hired a family member and recused herself from this item out of an abundance of caution. With four Commissioners recusing themselves from this item, Assistant City Attorney Craig Hayes explained the Rule of Necessity and the Random Means of Selection. To randomly select two Commissioners, City staff used a Wheel of Names and randomly selected Commissioners Greenwood and Holt for a quorum. Associate Planner Nick Melloni provided a PowerPoint presentation overviewing the proposed project. Chair Greenwood declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. Mr. Chris Mills, the Applicant, Palm Desert, California, spoke on parking and offered to answer any questions. Mr. Alex DeLaCruz, Cathedral City, California, voiced his concern with the parking lot expansion, which would add to the heat island effect. Mr. Allen Monroe, The Living Desert President/CEO, briefly spoke about the project and addressed the parking concern. The Applicant answered questions by the Planning Commission. With no further testimony offered, Chair Greenwood declared the public hearing closed. PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JULY 5, 2022 5 The Planning Commission noted that they heard Mr. DeLaCruz’s concern and provided comments supporting the proposed project. Commissioner Pradetto moved to waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2815, adopting a Notice of Exemption and approving Case No. PP22-0001. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Holt and was carried by a 3-0 vote (AYES: Greenwood, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: DeLuna and Gregory). X. MISCELLANEOUS None XI. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. Cultural Arts Committee Commissioner Holt reported that there was a request to City Council to approve additional funds for the San Pablo Phase I roundabout sculpture. B. Parks and Recreation Commission None XII. REPORTS AND REMARKS Chair Greenwood moved back to New Business on the agenda. Commissioner Gregory asked if there are plans for the Planning Commission to return to in-person meetings. Staff responded that after the completion of the Council Chamber remodel, the City Council and Planning Commission should return to in-person meetings in September or October. XIII. INFORMATION ITEMS A. Attendance Record PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JULY 5, 2022 6 XIV. ADJOURNMENT With the Planning Commission concurrence, Chair DeLuna adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m. NANCY DE LUNA, CHAIR ATTEST: MARTĺN ALVAREZ, SECRETARY MONICA O’REILLY, RECORDING SECRETARY Page 1 of 5 CITY OF PALM DESERT STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: August 16, 2022 PREPARED BY: Nick Melloni, Senior Planner REQUEST: CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), AND APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) TO ESTABLISH A PROFESSIONAL REAL ESTATE OFFICE USE WITHIN AN EXISTING GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL BUILDING SPACE LOCATED AT 73111 EL PASEO, SUITE 101. RECOMMENDATION: Waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2816: 1. Adopting a Notice of Exemption in accordance with CEQA. 2. Approving the CUP request to establish a new professional real estate office within an existing ground-floor commercial building space located at 73111 El Paseo. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Approval of staff’s recommendation will adopt a resolution approving a CUP to open a 3,248-square- foot luxury real estate office at 73111 El Paseo Drive, Suite 101. The suite is a ground-floor commercial building fronting El Paseo located within the El Paseo Overlay District (EPOD). The EPOD requires professional offices on the ground floor street frontages to obtain a CUP to preserve the high-end luxury and pedestrian-oriented character of El Paseo and limit the density of office uses on the street frontage. EQTY/Forbes Global Properties will operate the proposed real estate office. The applicant will incorporate high-quality interior tenant improvement finishes and art pieces in storefront displays to maintain a high-end character and contribute to the El Paseo street scene. Staff finds the proposed office is compatible with the existing adjacent land uses and satisfies the goals of the EPOD. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: A. Property Description: The project site is an existing commercial building complex located at the southeast corner of El Paseo and Ocotillo Drive, generally known as Galleria. The site is comprised of two parcels totaling 1.67 acres, containing two (2) two-story commercial buildings with a combined floor area of approximately 29,500 square feet and 113 parking spaces. The building was approved in 1977 per Case No. 62C under Planning Commission Resolution No. 301, and construction was completed in 1980. The adjacent parking lot was approved in 1977 per Case No. CUP 11-77 per Planning Commission Resolution No. 270. City of Palm Desert Case No. CUP22-0004 – EQTY/Forbes Global Partners Real Estate Office Page 2 of 5 Existing tenants within the complex include art galleries, a sushi restaurant, retail stores, salons, and existing professional office spaces on the second story. The project will be located within Suite 101, located at the eastern edge of the site. This suite is approximately 3,248 square feet and was previously occupied by an art gallery. B. Current Zoning & General Plan Land Use Designation: Zone: Downtown (D) General Plan: Downtown C. Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North: Downtown/The Shops on El Paseo commercial building South: Downtown Edge (DE)/Parking area and multi-family apartments East: Downtown/El Paseo Eleganté commercial building West: Downtown/The Shops on El Paseo commercial building Project Description: The project is a CUP request by EQTY Real Estate, Inc. to open a luxury real estate office in a ground-floor, street-fronting space located at 73111 El Paseo, Suite 101. The floor plan of the proposed office places work areas away from the existing storefront windows. Art pieces and sculptures are proposed within the storefront window area to add visual interest for the exterior sidewalk. The interior design of the space will utilize a contemporary design with updated high-end tenant improvement finishes and lighting fixtures. The exterior façade will include a new black canvas awning located on the eave of the building, subject to review by the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). The existing awning overhanging located facing the public sidewalk will be removed. The business will operate from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily. No modifications are proposed to the existing building site. Analysis: The project site has a zoning designation of Downtown (D) and falls within the EPOD, established under Palm Desert Municipal Code (PDMC) Section 25.28.040. The EPOD is intended to allow professional office uses on the ground floor fronting El Paseo, subject to a CUP and subject to findings and requirements listed under PDMC 25.72.050. The EOPD’s overall goal is for El Paseo to remain a high-end luxury retail use with pedestrian-friendly streets while allowing a limited amount of storefront office uses. As part of the CUP review process the Planning Commission must make specific findings for offices in the EPOD 1. Type of office uses. The Planning Commission will be reviewing the type of office uses on how they energize/engage interest along the street and enhance its primary use as a retail/entertainment center. The proposed use is a luxury professional real estate office, which is anticipated to have some customers visiting the site to access services. The business will provide visual interest by preserving the existing large storefront windows and adding art pieces and sculptures, which will have a character similar to existing art galleries on El Paseo. Additionally, this office will focus on City of Palm Desert Case No. CUP22-0004 – EQTY/Forbes Global Partners Real Estate Office Page 3 of 5 luxury property listings and incorporate high-quality design finishes on the interior of the space, making it compatible with the high-end character of El Paseo. 2. Locations. The Planning Commission will review and analyze the locations based on the following. A. Corner properties: The overall goal for corner properties is to preserve them for restaurants with patio spaces and retail uses with large storefronts. B. Density: The Planning Commission shall review each application to preserve El Paseo as a retail district. C. Abut/neighbor one another: The overall goal is not to have large consecutive building storefronts of office spaces. The location of the office is on the end cap of an existing building. The property is not located on a corner of a street intersection and is, therefore, not considered a corner property. It is located midblock, approximately 318’-0” west of the intersection of El Paseo and Ocotillo Drive. The block on which the use is located is occupied by retail stores (jewelry, home furnishings, clothing), restaurants, and art galleries. There are no other professional office uses located on ground-floor frontages on the southern block of El Paseo between Ocotillo Drive and Sage Lane. The nearest existing ground-floor office is a medical office located at 73180 El Paseo on the north side of the street, located approximately 275’-0” northeast of the site. Since the EPOD was amended to allow offices by a CUP in October 2019, the Planning Commission has approved two (2) other professional offices, as shown below. Based on the distance from these existing offices, the proposed real estate office will not create a substantial saturation of offices in the immediate vicinity. Figure 1 – Existing CUP Approvals for Offices on El Paseo Case No. Address Business Name Distance from Project Site CUP 20-0006 73280 El Paseo iHart Real Estate 700’-0”+ CUP 20-0008 73260 El Paseo Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate 770’-0”+ Public Input: Public noticing was conducted for the August 16, 2022, Planning Commission meeting under PDMC Section 25.60.060 and Government Code Sections 65090 to 65094. A public hearing notice was published a minimum of 10 days prior to the hearing date on Friday, August 5, 2022, in The Desert Sun newspaper. Notices were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site for a total of nine (9) public hearing notices mailed. Environment Review: Staff has reviewed the project under the CEQA and determined that the project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15301 - Existing Facilities (Class 1) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Class 1 applies to projects involving the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. City of Palm Desert Case No. CUP22-0004 – EQTY/Forbes Global Partners Real Estate Office Page 4 of 5 The project consists of a new real estate office utilizing an existing space previously occupied by an art gallery. The proposed real estate would operate within an existing commercial building, involving minor tenant improvements accommodating for the proposed use. The project will not involve the expansion of the existing building. The project is consistent with the City Center/Downtown land use designation for the site, as well as the Downtown zoning designation. Findings of Approval: Under PDMC 25.72.050 (F), the following findings are required before granting a CUP: 1. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of this title and the purpose of the district in which the site is located. The proposed location is zoned D within the EPOD and allows office uses with the approval of a CUP. The D zone is intended to provide urban, multi-story buildings up to three (3) stories tall and located at or near the sidewalk. Primary building access is from the sidewalk, and parking is behind buildings or subterranean. Ground floors accommodate retail, restaurant, service, and office uses, while upper floors accommodate residential and office uses. The EPOD intended to create and maintain a continuous succession of diverse but compatible businesses which attract and sustain pedestrian interest, including art galleries, shops, and restaurants. The proposed use is allowed in the D zone by CUP. The nature of the use is in accord with the objectives of the EPOD as it adds visual interest to the existing store frontage by utilizing art sculptures placed in pedestrian-oriented storefront window displays and is a service-oriented real estate office. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed real estate office will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, be materially injurious to properties, or improvements in the vicinity. Similar real estate offices have been previously established within the vicinity of the site. This type of use is not generally anticipated to create adverse impacts on health, safety, or welfare. The use will operate within an existing space within an existing approved commercial building. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this title, except for approved variances or adjustments. The proposed use will comply with the objective requirements of the zoning ordinance. The site generally complies with the intent and purpose of the D zoning district, and no modifications are proposed to the site. The site is served by adequate parking in the form of a surface lot located at the rear of the site. Parking is generally provided at a ratio of one (1) space per 250 square feet of building area, which is greater than the required three (3) spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area required in the Downtown Zone for Commercial Uses per PDMC 25.18.050. 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the City’s General Plan. City of Palm Desert Case No. CUP22-0004 – EQTY/Forbes Global Partners Real Estate Office Page 5 of 5 The project site has a General Plan land use designation of City Center/Downtown. This land use designation is intended to provide for high-intensity mixed-use development and uses, which include a variety of civic, cultural, entertainment, retail, restaurant, and commercial services activity along with multi-family dwellings organized along walkable streetscapes. Ground floor uses include retail, restaurant, service, and office uses, while upper floors accommodate residential and office uses. The proposed use is a ground-floor office that is in a pedestrian-oriented, highly walkable area and complies with the intent of the land use designation. REVIEWED BY: Department Director: Martin Alvarez Deputy Director: Richard Cannone, AICP City Attorney: N/A Finance Director: N/A Assistant City Manager: N/A City Manager: N/A ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Planning Commission Resolution No. 2816 2. Public Hearing Notice 3. CEQA Notice of Exemption 4. Project Plans PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2816 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) TO ESTABLISH A 3,248-SQUARE-FOOT PROFESSIONAL REAL ESTATE OFFICE WITHIN AN EXISTING GROUND-FLOOR COMMERCIAL BUILDING SPACE LOCATED AT 73111 EL PASEO, SUITE 101 CASE NO. CUP22-0004 WHEREAS, EQTY Real Estate, Inc., (“Applicant”), submitted a CUP application to establish a real estate office within an existing ground-floor commercial building space located at 73111 El Paseo, Suite 101 (“Project”); and WHEREAS, the proposed Project is consistent with the development density and use characteristics considered by the Palm Desert General Plan in the City Center/Downtown; and WHEREAS, the proposed Project conforms to the General Plan land use designation of City Center/Downtown and development standards listed in the City’s Zoning Ordinance for the Downtown (D) zoning district and El Paseo Overlay District; and WHEREAS, the proposed project is compatible with the uses along El Paseo and conforms to the zoning designation and overlay district; and WHEREAS, under Section 21067 of the Public Resources Code, Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), and the City of Palm Desert’s (“City’s”) Local CEQA Guidelines, the City is the lead agency for the proposed Project; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of CEQA” Resolution No. 2019-41, in that the Director of Development Services has determined that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment and that the project is categorically exempt under Article 19, Section 15301 Existing Facilities (Class 1) of the CEQA Guidelines, as outlined in the staff report and the project is not subject to any of the exceptions for categorical exemptions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2; therefore, no further environmental review is necessary; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on, the 16th day of August 2022, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by EQTY Real Estate, Inc., the Applicant, for approval of the above-noted Project request; and WHEREAS, at the said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons, which are outlined in the staff report, exist to justify approval of said request: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2816 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Recitals. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as substantive findings of this Resolution. Findings of Approval: Under Palm Desert Municipal Code (PDMC) 25.72.050 (F), the following findings are required before granting a conditional use permit: 1. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of this title and the purpose of the district in which the site is located. The proposed location is zoned Downtown (D) within the El Paseo Overlay District (EPOD) and allows office uses with the approval of a CUP. The D zone is intended to provide urban, multi-story buildings up to three (3) stories tall and located at or near the sidewalk. Primary building access is from the sidewalk, and parking is behind buildings or subterranean. Ground floors accommodate retail, restaurant, service, and office uses, while upper floors accommodate residential and office uses. The EPOD is intended to create and maintain a continuous succession of diverse but compatible businesses which attract and sustain pedestrian interest, including art galleries, shops, and restaurants. The proposed use is allowed in the D zone by a CUP. The nature of the use is in accord with the objectives of the EPOD as it adds visual interest to the existing store frontage by utilizing art sculptures placed in pedestrian-oriented storefront window displays and is a service-oriented real estate office. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed real estate office will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Similar real estate offices have been previously established within the vicinity of the site. This type of use is not generally anticipated to create adverse impacts on health, safety, or welfare. The use will operate within an existing space within an existing approved commercial building. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this title, except for approved variances or adjustments. The proposed use will comply with the objective requirements of the zoning ordinance. The site generally complies with the intent and purpose of the D zoning district and no modifications are proposed to the site. The site is served by adequate parking in the form of a surface lot located at the rear of the site. Parking is generally provided at a ratio of one (1) space per 250 square feet of building area, which is greater than the required three (3) spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area required in the Downtown Zone for Commercial Uses per PDMC 25.18.050. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2816 3 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the City’s General Plan. The project site has a General Plan land use designation of City Center/Downtown. This land use designation is intended to provide for high-intensity mixed-use development and uses, which include a variety of civic, cultural, entertainment, retail, restaurant, and commercial services activity along with multi-family dwellings organized along walkable streetscapes. Ground floor uses include retail, restaurant, service, and office uses, while upper floors accommodate residential and office uses. The proposed use is a ground-floor office that is in a pedestrian-oriented, highly walkable area. And complies with the intent of the land use designation. 5. The Planning Commission finds that the project is exempt from CEQA per Section 15301 of the CEQA guidelines as the project is a Class 1 Exemption for “Existing Facilities” development. Class 1 applies to projects involving the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. The project consists of a new real estate office utilizing an existing space previously occupied by an art gallery. The proposed real estate would operate within an existing commercial building, involving minor tenant improvements accommodating for the proposed use. The project will not involve the expansion of the existing building. The project is consistent with the City Center/Downtown land use designation for the site, as well as the Downtown zoning designation. SECTION 2. Project Approvals. The Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of CUP22-0004, subject to Conditions of Approval attached as “Exhibit A.” SECTION 3. Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at the City’s office at 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260. Martin Alvarez, the Secretary to the Palm Desert Planning Commission, is the custodian of the record of proceedings. SECTION 4. Execution of Resolution. The Chairperson of the Planning Commission signs this Resolution and the Secretary to the Commission shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings for approval of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby approve Case No. CUP22-0004. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2816 4 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, at its regular meeting held on the 16th day of August 2022, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: NANCY DE LUNA, CHAIR ATTEST: MARTIN ALVARES, SECRETARY PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2816 5 EXHIBIT “A” CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. CUP 22-0004 PLANNING DIVISION: 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with the approved exhibits contained in CUP22-0004 on file in Development Services Department, as modified by the following conditions. 2. The applicant agrees that in the event of any administrative, legal, or equitable action instituted by a third party challenging the validity of any of the procedures leading to the adoption of these Project Approvals for the Project, or the Project Approvals themselves, the developer and City each shall have the right, in their sole discretion, to elect whether or not to defend such action. developer, at its sole expense, shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City (including its agents, officers, and employees) from any such action, claim, or proceeding with counsel chosen by the City, subject to the developer’s approval of counsel, which shall not be unreasonably denied, and at the developer’s sole expense. If the City is aware of such an action or proceeding, it shall promptly notify the developer and cooperate in the defense. The developer upon such notification shall deposit with the City sufficient funds in the judgment of the City Finance Director to cover the expense of defending such action without any offset or claim against said deposit to assure that the City expends no City funds. If both Parties elect to defend, the Parties hereby agree to affirmatively cooperate in defending said action and to execute a joint defense and confidentiality agreement in order to share and protect the information under the joint defense privilege recognized under applicable law. As part of the cooperation in defending an action, City and developer shall coordinate their defense in order to make the most efficient use of legal counsel and to share and protect information. Developer and City shall each have sole discretion to terminate its defense at any time. The City shall not settle any third-party litigation of Project approvals without the developer’s consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed unless the developer materially breaches this indemnification requirement. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein, which are in addition to the approved development standards listed in the PDMC, and state and federal statutes now in force or which hereafter may be in force. 4. The CUP shall expire if construction of the said project shall not commence within two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted by the Palm Desert Planning Commission; otherwise, said approval shall become null, void, and of no effect whatsoever. 5. The approved CUP may only be modified with City approval under Palm Desert Municipal Code (PDMC) Chapter 25.72.050. 6. The Applicant shall execute a written acknowledgment to the Planning Division stating acceptance of and compliance with all the Conditions of Approval of Resolution No. 2816 for CUP22-0004 and that the plans submitted comply with the Conditions of Approval. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2816 6 No modifications shall be made to said plans without written approval from the appropriate decision-making body. 7. Use shall commence within two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise, said approval shall become null, void, and of no effect whatsoever. 8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of any use or structure contemplated by this approval, the Applicant shall first obtain permits and or clearance from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the Building & Safety Division at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 9. The professional real estate office shall operate in a 3,248-square-foot suite. 10. The Applicant shall preserve existing storefront glass and provide displays as described in the approved operations statement dated July 27, 2022. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION: 11. This project shall comply with the latest adopted edition of the following codes: A. California Building Code and its appendices and standards. B. California Plumbing Code and its appendices and standards. C. California Mechanical Code and its appendices and standards. D. California Electrical Code. E. California Energy Code. F. California Green Building Standards Code G. Title 24, California Code of Regulations. H. California Fire Code and its appendices and standards. 12. This project will fall under the review and compliance of Chapters 11-A and Chapter 11- B of the latest adopted edition of the California Building Code. 13. The Applicant shall coordinate directly with: Riverside County Fire Marshal’s Office CAL FIRE/Riverside County Fire Department Main: 760-863-8886 77933 Las Montañas Road, Suite 201, Palm Desert, CA 92211 14. All trash enclosures are required to be accessible. Provide an accessible path of travel to the trash enclosure. Trash enclosures shall comply with the minimum requirements established by Chapter 8.12 of the PDMC. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2816 7 15. All contractors and subcontractors shall have a current City of Palm Desert Business License prior to permit issuance per PDMC, Title 5. 16. All contractors and/or owner-builders must submit a valid Certificate of Workers’ Compensation Insurance coverage prior to the issuance of a building permit per California Labor Code, Section 3700. 17. Address numerals shall comply with Palm Desert Ordinance No. 1351 (PDMC 15.28. Compliance with Ordinance 1351 regarding street address location, dimension, a stroke of line, distance from the street, height from grade, height from the street, etc., shall be shown on all architectural building elevations in detail. Any possible obstructions, shadows, lighting, landscaping, backgrounds, or other reasons that may render the building address unreadable shall be addressed during the plan review process. The applicant may request a copy of Ordinance 1351 or Municipal Code Section 15.28 from the Building and Safety Division counter staff. END OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL G:\Planning\Case Files\CUP\CUP 22-0004 - Forbes Real Estate Office on El Paseo\PC\1. CUP 22-0004 - Public Hearing Notice (7.5.22).docx CITY OF PALM DESERT PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CASE NO. CUP22-0004 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION AND A REQUEST BY EQTY REAL ESTATE FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A NEW REAL ESTATE OFFICE AT 73111 EL PASEO, SUITE 101 The City of Palm Desert (City), in its capacity as the Lead Agency for this project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), finds that the proposed project is categorically exempt under Article 19 Section 15301 Existing Facilities (Class 1) of the CEQA; therefore, no further environmental review is necessary, and that a Notice of Exemption can be adopted as part of this project. Project Location/Description: Project Location: 73111 El Paseo, Suite 101 (APN 627-232-009) Project Description: The proposal is a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to convert an existing 3,248-square-foot art gallery at 73111 El Paseo, Suite 101, into a real estate office that will be operated by Forbes Global Partners. Recommendation: Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution approving the project request, subject to the conditions of approval. Public Hearing: The public hearing will be held before the Planning Commission on Tuesday, August 16, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. via Zoom. The hearing will be conducted in accordance with the City’s emergency protocols for social distancing. Options for remote participation will be listed on the Posted Agenda for the meeting at: https://www.cityofpalmdesert.org/our-city/committees- and-commissions/planning-commission-information-center. Comment Period: The public comment period for this project is from August 5, 2022, to August 16, 2022. Public Review: The plans and related documents are available for public review Monday through Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. by contacting the project planner, Nick Melloni. Please submit written comments to the Planning Division. If any group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence at or prior to the Planning Commission hearing. All comments and any questions should be directed to: Nick Melloni, Senior Planner City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 (760) 346-0611, Extension 479 nmelloni@cityofpalmdesert.org PUBLISH: DESERT SUN MARTIN ALVAREZ, SECRETARY AUGUST 5, 2022 PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION Notice of Exemption FORM “B” NOTICE OF EXEMPTION TO: Office of Planning and Research P. O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 FROM: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Clerk of the Board of Supervisors or County Clerk County of: Riverside 2724 Gateway Dr, Riverside, CA 92507 1. Project Title: CUP22-0004 2. Project Applicant: EQTY Real Estate, LLC 3. Project Location – Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15’ or 7 1/2’ topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 73111 El Paseo, Southeast corner of El Paseo and Ocotillo Drive 4. (a) Project Location – City: Palm Desert (b) Project Location – County: Riverside 5. Description of nature, purpose, and beneficiaries of Project: Request to establish a 3,248-square-foot real estate office 6. Name of Public Agency approving project: City of Palm Desert 7. Name of Person or Agency undertaking the project, including any person undertaking an activity that receives financial assistance from the Public Agency as part of the activity or the person receiving a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement of use from the Public Agency as part of the activity: EQTY Real Estate, LLC 8. Exempt status: (check one) (a) Ministerial project. (b) Not a project. (c) Emergency Project. (d) Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: (Pub. Res. Code § 21080(b)(1); State CEQA Guidelines § 15301) (e) Declared Emergency. (f) Statutory Exemption. State Code section number: (g) Other. Explanation: 9. Reason why project was exempt: Staff has reviewed the project in accordance with CEQA and determined that the project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15301 - Existing Facilities (Class 1) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Class 1 applies to projects involving the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or Notice of Exemption FORM “B” private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. The project consists of a new real estate office utilizing an existing space previously occupied by an art gallery. The proposed real estate would operate within an existing commercial building, involving minor tenant improvements accommodating for the proposed use. The project will not involve expansion of the existing building. The project is consistent with the City Center / Downtown land use designation for the site, as well as the Downtown zoning designation. 10. Lead Agency Contact Person: Nick Melloni, Senior Planner Telephone: (760) 346-0611 11. If filed by applicant: Attach Preliminary Exemption Assessment (Form “A”) before filing. 12. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project?  Yes  No 13. Was a public hearing held by the lead agency to consider the exemption?  Yes  No If yes, the date of the public hearing was: 8/16 2022 Signature: Date: 8/16/2022 Title: Senior Planner ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________  Signed by Lead Agency  Signed by Applicant Date Received for Filing: (Clerk Stamp Here) Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21100, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21108, 21152, and 21152.1, Public Resources Code. Page 1 of 16 CITY OF PALM DESERT STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: August 16, 2022 PREPARED BY: Nick Melloni, Senior Planner REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), AND APPROVE A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AND PRECISE PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 241-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY (AFFORDABLE HOUSING) DEVELOPMENT, A HOUSING DENSITY BONUS, AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS ON A 10.49-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GERALD FORD DRIVE AND THE EXTENSION OF TECHNOLOGY DRIVE. RECOMMENDATION: Waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2817: 1.Finding no further environmental review is required for the project under CEQA per Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (State CEQA Guidelines). 2.Recommending approval of Precise Plan (PP) 22-0003, Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 38366, and Environmental Assessment to the Palm Desert City Council for the development of a 241- unit multi-family (affordable housing) development, a housing density bonus, and related improvements on a 10.49-acre site located at the northwest corner of Gerald Ford Drive and the extension of Technology Drive. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed the proposed project, including architecture and landscaping, at their regular meeting on April 12, 2022. The ARC was accepting of the proposed architecture and landscaping design provided that the Applicant incorporate design modifications before the project proceeds to Planning Commission. The ARC recommended approval of the project architecture subject to the conditions in a 4-0 vote, with Chair Van Vliet and Commissioner McIntosh absent. The conditions of approval are listed in the Notice of Action dated April 22, 2022 (Attachment No. 4): 1)Carry tan color transitions on third-story balcony columns into interior column areas. 2)Extend tan color at building entries further back from the front elevation. 3)Ensure extensions on window trims remain and are not squared off. 4)Add trim around windows through the use of 2X4 nailers to increase window recessing where no recess is proposed. City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 2 of 16 5) Add a color change between the first floor and upper floors where the building is one solid color. 6) Incorporate flat arch balcony design in addition to the corbeled rectangle arch on residential buildings. 7) Thicken the column on the second-level balcony area located on the community building (Right Side Elevation). 8) Revise the exposed wood truss eave tails and explore other options for design, which includes the use of non-warping material. 9) Remove Washingtonia Robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) from the proposed landscape palette and use Washingtonia Filifera (California Fan Palm) or another similar palm. 10) The Applicant shall utilize single-trunk shade tree specimens which are resistant to high winds common in the area. The Applicant shall add a note of this condition on the landscape plans. 11) Provide an updated landscape palette, which identifies quantities for proposed shrubs, groundcovers, and accents. 12) Provide enhanced pedestrian entry gates for a pedestrian connection directly to the sidewalk along Gerald Ford Drive and to the future park site. 13) Project revisions will be reviewed by staff and returned to the ARC should there be any items that cannot be resolved with Applicant. The conditions of approval have been incorporated into the design of the project and are presented as revisions to the plan set attached to this staff report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Applicant, Palm Communities, is proposing a PP, TPM, and Environmental Assessment to develop two (2) phased affordable apartment community, referred to as Palm Villas at Millennium, on a 10.49-acre site located at the northwest corner of Gerald Ford Drive and the planned extension of Technology Drive. The proposed project approvals include the entire site; however, the Applicant has requested to construct the project in two (2) phases. The project summary includes: • 241 units comprised of ten (10) three-story buildings, one (1) two-story community building, two (2) on-site manager units, and on-site amenities. • Affordability restrictions for households with incomes between 30% and 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI) or as otherwise agreed to in the Housing Agreement (HA). The project will include two (2) on-site manager units that will not be income restricted. • The 10.49-acre site will be subdivided into two (2) parcels. • A phasing plan to develop the project in two phases. City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 3 of 16 o Phase 1: Located on Parcel 1 (6.023-acres) at the eastern edge of the site, including 121 units, 177 parking spaces, central amenities and community building, and temporary access. o Phase 2: Located on Parcel 2 (4.465-acres) will include 120 units, and 173 parking spaces and will complete the project. • A Density Bonus request to increase the density of the project by five percent (5%) from 22 dwelling units per acre to 23.5 dwelling units per acre per Government Code Section 65915. • A request for a reduction of the City’s parking requirement to provide 350 on-site parking spaces under the Density Bonus law pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(p)(1). The project has been reviewed by staff for consistency with the General Plan land use designation and conformance with the requirements for the Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan (MSP) and is consistent with zoning requirements. For the purposes of CEQA, the project has been deemed to be consistent with the General Plan and Zoning; therefore, no further environmental review is required pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. Adoption of the resolution will recommend approval of the project to the City Council, resulting in a subsequent public hearing before the Palm Desert City Council for final approval. The project site City-owned and is subject to an Exclusive Negotiations Agreement (ENA) contract No. C41030C between the City and the Applicant. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: A. Property Description: The project site is a vacant 10.49-acre property located at the northwest corner of Gerald Ford Drive and an extension of Technology Drive (Parcel 8 and a portion of Parcel 9 of Parcel Map 36792). The site is generally flat, with a high point of 177’ above mean sea level (MSL) at the southwestern corner of the site sloping down in an easterly direction to 173’ MSL at the corner of Gerald Ford Drive and Technology at the east end. Gerald Ford Drive is located at the southern edge of the property and is developed with full road width, curb, and gutter, with no sidewalk. The planned extension of Technology Drive is located along the eastern edge of the parcel and is currently undeveloped. On March 26, 2015, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1281, approving the MSP. The MSP established zoning designations, development standards, design standards, procedures, and roadway configurations for a 152 ±acre area generally located on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive, east of Technology Drive, west of Portola Avenue, and south of the Union Pacific Railroad. The MSP established nine (9) mixed-use planning areas/parcels, as shown in the exhibit below. City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 4 of 16 Figure 1 – Millennium Specific Plan – Planning Area and Land Use Map – MSP Pg. 18 The proposal is located on Parcel 8, also known as Planning Area 8, of the MSP, which is a 10-acre site envisioned for up to 220 units of multi-family housing at a maximum density of 22 dwelling units per acre. The 0.49-acre area is a portion of Planning Area 9 of the MSP, which is envisioned as a City park. Additionally, the site is owned by the City of Palm Desert, and per the original intent of the MSP, and the current adopted General Plan Housing Element, this site is required to provide 239 units of affordable housing. B. Current Zoning & General Plan Land Use Designation: Zone: Millennium Specific Plan PA 8 - Planned Residential – 22 dwelling units per acre (PR-22)/Housing Overlay District and MSP PA 9 – Open Space General Plan: Town Center Neighborhood (TCN) – 7 to 40 dwelling units per acre (du/acre) C. Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North: MSP – PA 9 – Open Space (OS) – Vacant South: University Neighborhood Specific Plan (UNSP) – PR-5 – Approved for single- family residential tract (University Park - VTTM 37506) East: MSP – PA 7 – Planned Residential – Approved 330-unit apartment community West: MSP – PA 1 – Planned Residential – Existing single family residential tract containing 166 single-family dwellings (Genesis – TR 36793) Project Description: The Palm Villas at Millennium development is a 241-unit multi-family apartment community on a vacant 10.49-acre site. At least 239 of the units will be made affordable for households between 30% and 60% of the area median income (AMI) or as finalized by the HA. The remaining two (2) City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 5 of 16 units will be non-income restricted for on-site managers. The project is requesting a density bonus in accordance with State law to reduce City Parking Requirements and exceed the maximum allowable residential density. Additionally, the project includes Tentative Parcel Map 38366 to: • Increase the area of the existing 10-acre parcel by 0.49-acres to a total of 10.49-acres by acquiring land area from Planning Area 9. • Subdivide the 10.49-acre parcel into two lots for phasing: o Lot 1 – 6.023 acres – Phase 1 – 121 units (Eastern Lot) o Lot 2 – 4.465-acres – Phase 2 - 120 units (Western Lot) • Dedicate right-of-way areas for the vehicular access points on Technology Drive and Dinah Shore Drive. The project will be developed in two (2) phases per the proposed phasing plan. The project includes: Phase 1: Approximately 6.023 acres (Eastern Lot): • 121 units, five (5) three-story apartment buildings • One (1) two-story 3,139 ± square foot community building containing a leasing area, office, mailroom, community room, and. laundry facility, and manager’s unit on the second story. • Outdoor common open space amenity area featuring a sports court, playground, and barbeque areas with shading and picnic benches. • One detached single-story accessory structure for a maintenance building and laundry room. • Off-site improvements consist of the following: o Street frontage improvements along the Technology Drive street frontage. o Public sidewalks and utility corridors along the project frontage on Gerald Ford Drive. o Public sidewalks and utility corridors along Gerald Ford Drive, extending to Dinah Shore Drive to provide a continuous sidewalk connection to the traffic signal. o Vehicular (2) vehicular access driveways.  Primary on the eastern edge of the site  Temporary access on the western edge of the site connecting to Dinah Shore Drive. Phase 2: • Approximately 4.465 acres (Western Lot) • 120 units, five (5) three-story residential apartment buildings • One (1) detached single-story accessory structure for a maintenance building and laundry room A. Site Plan: The site plan is shown on page A-0 of the architectural plan set, and a full-color copy is shown on Sheet L-1 of the landscape plan set. The Gerald Ford Drive frontage is lined with apartment buildings with varying setbacks. Buildings are generally oriented to provide access to the units directly from the parking areas in compliance with the design City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 6 of 16 requirements of the MSP. Parking areas are generally screened from public view by the apartment buildings. Parking is provided in the form of detached carports or surface parking areas. Trash enclosures are also located throughout the site plan in areas located behind the building to minimize visibility from public frontages and traffic conflicts. Figure 2 – Project Overall Site Plan – Project Plan Set - Sheet A-0 B. Access and Circulation: The community is designed with three (3) vehicular access driveways. The primary vehicular entrance to the community is located along Technology Drive at the east portion of the site. Secondary access/entry points are located at the western portion of the site along with the northern boundary, Dinah Shore Drive. An interim access design is proposed for resident and emergency vehicle access during phase one of project construction. At project buildout, the one access point to Dinah Shore Drive will be restricted to emergency vehicles only. All proposed access points will be gated and accessible to apartment residents by a transponder. The proposed access locations are consistent with the required project entry points established for the MSP (see Exhibit 10 on MSP page 27). A minimum 24’-0” wide drive aisle is provided for internal site circulation and emergency vehicle access. To address fire department requirements for secondary access, the Applicant will construct a turn-around and a secondary emergency fire apparatus access road near Dinah Shore Drive as a part of Phase 1, as an interim condition until Phase 2 is completed. The site plan provides for internal pedestrian connections throughout the site with continuous paved pathways between apartment buildings and the on-site amenities. Pedestrian access points to the public sidewalk occur near the main vehicle points of the site via sidewalk connections. These access points are located near Technology City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 7 of 16 Drive, Gerald Ford Drive, Dinah Shore Drive, and on the north side of the project. Pedestrian access gates will feature lighting, decorative pilasters, and arbor trellises. C. Architecture: The proposed architecture style is a Spanish Revival theme. The architecture of the structures is characterized by low-pitched roofs, with short overhangs, red tile roof covering, gabled roof ends stucco exterior walls, and prominent balconies. Architectural details of the residential buildings are also applied to the clubhouse, trash enclosures, laundry buildings, and maintenance buildings. Architectural details and articulation for the structure include tile faux vents located at each of the gable ends, foam trim sills, and headers around each of the windows and faux shutters. Windows on the residential structure are generally recessed three (3) inches, including the foam trim elements. Spot details and cross-sections for architectural details are shown on Sheet AD-1. Figure 3 – Project Elevations – Project Plan Set - Sheet A-2.3 The plan includes solar carports with simple steel posts and beams, which will be painted to match the architecture of the buildings. The underside of the carports will be painted white and feature down lighting. The ten (10) three-story residential apartment buildings are comprised of one plan type summarized below in Exhibit 2. The apartment unit plan types (number of bedrooms) and floor area are provided on Sheet A.0 of the architecture plan set. City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 8 of 16 Figure 4 – Residential building characteristics Number of Units Number of Stories Gross Floor Area Net Floor Area Roof Line Height 24 units 3 stories 24,302 sq. ft. 19,846 ft. 31'-9" The three-story buildings include eight (8) units on each floor for a total of 24 units per building. Access to the upper levels of each unit is provided by one of two exterior stairwells providing access to clusters of four units on each level. The Applicant is proposing ground-mounted HVAC units, which will be clustered together in landscape areas around the buildings and screened by a 42” block wall. Certain units, such as those located along Gerald Ford Drive will not be located behind a low wall as they will be screened by the perimeter block wall. Utility rooms for additional screening are provided at the ends of the ground floor of each building residential building. D. Landscaping: The proposed landscape is located on perimeter roadway frontages, retention areas, and common areas. Shade trees will be provided throughout the perimeters and internal drive aisles of the site. The planting materials are low and moderate water usage consisting of desert native species for trees and shrubs. Gerald Ford Drive and Technology Drive are the public roadways along the perimeter of the project will be walled to provide noise attenuation. The corner of Gerald Ford Drive and Technology Drive will feature a corner monument sign. The landscape palette consists of drought-tolerant 36-inch box multi-trunk Palo Verde, 24-inch box Shoestring Acacia, Desert Willow, Texas Ebony, and Honey Mesquite. The plan will feature 15’ brown-trunk height (BTH) Date Palms and California Fan Palms. The planting schedule for shrubs and ground cover is shown on the plan. All shrubs are proposed with a minimum five-gallon size. Landscape details are shown on Sheet L-1 of the landscape plan. The Central portion of the project site features a community amenity area, including a sport court, two shaded grill areas, tot lot play structure, and a turf area. The perimeter walls for the site are shown on sheet L-1 of the landscape concept plan. Exterior perimeter walls along the street frontages and northern frontage will be block walls, featuring decorative pilasters finished with a 16-20 plaster finish to match the buildings and feature a stone cap. The walls along the southern and northern project boundaries will serve as sound attenuation walls per the recommendations of the noise study prepared by the Applicant. In Phase 1, the Applicant has proposed to only construct the walls located along the north, east, and southern property boundaries. The remaining perimeter wall of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 will not be constructed until Phase 2 commences. As an interim condition, the Applicant will construct a windscreen fence along the parcel boundary of Phase 1, and the northern property line of Phase 2. The Applicant has not provided a timeline for construction commencement on Phase 2. City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 9 of 16 E. Phasing Plan: The project is proposed as a two (2) phased project. Phase 1 includes Parcel 1 of the TPM constructing121 units, the central amenity area, and community building. The Applicant will construct a primary access point on Technology Drive and an interim access for residents on Dinah Shore Drive, as shown in Figure 5 below. Perimeter sidewalk improvements will be constructed under Phase 1. Each phase will comply with minimum development and parking requirements. Easements will be provided for access between both parcels to ensure accessibility and maintenance. Figure 5 – Phase 1 Exhibit Analysis: The project site is designated Town Center Neighborhood (TCN) by the Palm Desert General Plan Land Use Element (see page 30 of the General Plan). The TCN designation is intended to provide moderate to higher intensity neighborhood development that features a variety of housing choices, walkable streets, and mixed uses with an allowable density range of seven (7) to 40 dwelling units per acre. The project site is zoned Planned Residential-22 dwelling units per acre (PR-22) and subject to the development standards established by the Millennium Specific Plan (MSP) for Planning Area 8. As a part of the project approval, a 0.49-acre portion of PA 9, the City Park, will be added to PA 8. The MSP allows for the Director to administrative approve minor modifications which enlarge or decrease the area of any planning area by 15% or less. The MSP allows the development of a 220-unit apartment development, subject to the approval of a PP by the Planning Commission under Chapter 25.72 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code (PDMC). City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 10 of 16 Land Use Compatibility The project is consistent with the Palm Desert General Plan goals and policies of the Land Use Element. The project has a density of 23.5 Dwelling Units Per Acre, therefore, falls within the allowable density range established for the TCN land use designation. Additionally, the project conforms with the intended built form and character established for the TCN designation as the proposed development of the site is a three-story moderate density multi-family apartment development. The proposed project is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the General Plan, as demonstrated below: Land Use Element: Policy No. 3.3 Variety of types of neighborhoods. Promote a variety of neighborhoods within the City and ensure that neighborhood types are dispersed throughout the City. The proposed development introduces additional high-density, multi-story, multi-family housing within proximity to existing and planned retail and service uses. The project promotes multi-family residential that is in keeping with the mix of higher and lower densities in the area, including single-story residential developments, which meets the intent of this policy. Policy No. 3.21 Infill neighborhoods. In existing developed areas of the City, encourage development that repairs connectivity, adds destinations, and encourages complete neighborhoods. This can be achieved by increasing intersection density, reducing block size, and providing new community amenities and destinations. The proposed project is compatible with the development pattern within the surrounding area by proposing 241 multi-family dwellings contained within three-story buildings. In existing developed areas, the City encourages development that repairs connectivity, adds destinations, and encourages complete neighborhoods. The proposed project supports the expansion of housing by providing high-quality residential development that is within a vacant property fronting Gerald Ford Drive. The project is designed with internal pedestrian access and provides common area recreational amenities available to all residents. The proposed project includes local streets, pathways, and open spaces intended to allow residents to enjoy not only the project’s amenities but to connect pedestrians to the existing neighborhoods to the west, east, and south, thereby creating a pedestrian, family-oriented atmosphere. Zoning/Specific Plan The project will include a modification of the acreage of Planning Areas 8 and 9. A 0.49-acre portion of Planning Area 9 to be added to Planning Area 8 is administratively permissible per Section VI of the Millennium Specific Plan, which allows minor changes in Planning Area Boundaries that increase or decrease any Planning Area acreage by 15%. The 0.49-acre modification is less than 15% and can be approved. The General Plan land use designation of the 0.49-acre area is Town Center Neighborhood; therefore, the change to Planning Area 8 to allow planned residential is consistent with the General Plan. City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 11 of 16 Development Standards The project is subject to the development standards set forth by the MSP for Planning Area 8 established on Table 5 found in Page 25 of the MSP. The table on page 6 summarizes the project’s conformance with development standards for the MSP. Figure 6 – Project Conformance Determination STANDARD PLANNING AREA 8 PROJECT CONFORMS Maximum Density 22 units/acre 23.5 units/acre Yes* Minimum Density 18 units/acre 23.5 units/acre Yes* Front Yard Setback 10’-0” 21’-4” min. (Bldg. I) Yes Side Yard Setback 8’-0” 8’-9” (Carports west) N/A Combined side 16’-0” - N/A Street Side Yard Setback 10’-0” 29’-10” min. (Bldg. A) Yes Rear Yard Setback 10’-0” 13’-1” min. (Bldg. C) Yes Maximum Lot Coverage 50% 20% Yes Maximum Height 40’-0” 33’-1/8” Yes Maximum No. of Stories 3 Stories 3 Yes Common Area Open Space per unit 60,250 SF (250 SF/Unit) 223,846 SF (928 SF/Unit) Yes *Density increase permitted per Density Bonus Law GC 69515 Density The proposal is requesting a density bonus under state law (GC Section 65915 – 65918) to exceed the limit on the maximum number of dwellings permitted on the property pursuant to the MSP. Palm Desert Municipal Code (PDMC) Section 25.34.040 Affordable Housing and Density Bonus Provisions provides for the application of density bonuses and eligible incentives/concessions. The Applicant is proposing 241 units, which equates to 23.5 dwelling units per acre, five percent (5%) above the base zone allowance of 22 units per acre. The proposed density bonus is within the allowances of State Law and the PDMC. Additionally, the density is under the maximum of 40 dwelling units per acre considered for the TCN General Plan Land Use Designation. Parking Section 25.46.040 Parking Requirements of the PDMC establishes that multi-family dwellings require a minimum of two (2) parking spaces per unit. The 241-unit project would require a minimum of 482 on-site parking spaces per this standard. The property is requesting a density bonus for providing 239 affordable units and is subject to the parking requirements of the state density bonus law for the affordable units. State Density Bonus laws allow affordable community developments to reduce the total number of parking units required as an incentive for the development. This law is summarized under City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 12 of 16 California Government Code Sections 65915(p)(1). This section indicates that local jurisdiction cannot require a parking ratio for affordable developments that exceed the following: • Studio and one bedroom: one (1) on-site parking space. • Two to three bedrooms: one and one-half (1.5) on-site parking spaces. Figure 7 – Project Parking Summary According to the state density bonus law, based on the mix of unit types, the project is required to provide a minimum of 350 units on site. The project provides a minimum of 350 on-site parking spaces; therefore, complies with density bonus requirements. The project will provide 241 covered parking spaces for a minimum of one covered parking space per unit. Housing Element The Housing Element (HE), a component of the General Plan identifies the City’s housing conditions and needs and establishes goals, objectives, and policies that are the foundation of the City’s housing and growth strategy. The City of Palm Desert recently adopted an update to the Housing Element of the General Plan, as required by State law. The 2021-2029 Housing Element is the sixth update and is also referred to as the 6th Cycle Housing Element. On March 10, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022-20, adopting the 6th Cycle Housing Element, which is currently under review by the State Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) for certification. The current Housing Element identifies this site as Letter “C” on Page III-96, and Table III-47 allocating a total of 240 affordable units to the site. This project is providing 239 affordable units, which is one unit below the minimum number of affordable units required. A condition of approval of this project will require approval of a HA by the City Council. City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 13 of 16 Public Input: Public Notification Public noticing was conducted for the August 16, 2022, Planning Commission meeting per the requirements of PDMC Section 25.60.060 and Government Code Sections 65090 to 65094. A public hearing notice was published a minimum of 10 days before the hearing date on Friday, August 5, 2022, in The Desert Sun newspaper. Notices were mailed to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the project site for a total of 93 public hearing notices mailed. PDMC Section 25.60.160 requires all development projects on sites greater than five (5) acres to prepare Community Engagement Plans to present and engage in a public outreach meeting early in the entitlement process of new projects and address concerns of the public prior to an action of the approving body. The proposal is located on a site that is 10.49-acres; therefore, prepared a community engagement plan per PDMC. Community Engagement Plan The Applicant held two (2) meetings with neighboring residents. Mailed notices were sent to residents within 1,000 feet of the project site and all residents of the Genesis community, located west of the project site, per the Applicant’s statement. The first meeting was held on March 31, 2022, using video teleconferencing technology. The Applicant presented the project proposal to residents in attendance and fielded questions and concerns, including concerns over environmental impacts on traffic, population, and questions on the architectural characteristics of the project. Per the requirements of the PDMC 25.60.160 (Community Engagement Ordinance), the Applicant provided written responses addressing concerns expressed by participants, refer to Attachment No. 3. The second meeting was held on July 27, 2022, at the Palm Desert iHub located at 37023 Cook Street, Suite 102. This meeting was attended by 13 residents, most of the Genesis Community. Residents voiced concerns over the lack of a communal pool for future apartment residents, the distance of the project site from amenities, including stores, services, schools, transit, and the project architecture quality. The project Applicant has not provided a written response to these concerns. The information below has been prepared by staff to help address the resident’s concerns. Schools During the public meeting, residents of surrounding communities voiced concerns that the proposed apartment community is not within walking distance of existing schools and will create a burden for families that may inhabit the community. The area is serviced by the Palm Springs Unified School District (PSUSD). The nearest existing school facilities and their proximity to the proposed apartment site are summarized below: City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 14 of 16 PSUSD School Name Approximate Distance (Miles) Within School Transportation Area? (Student Bus Available) Rancho Mirage Elementary School 4.63 Yes Nellie Coffman Middle School 5.10 Yes Rancho Mirage High School 4.87 No PSUSD owns a 25-acre parcel bordered by Gateway Drive, Dolce Avenue, and Cortesia Way, which is planned for a potential K-8 school. This future school is approximately 1.1 miles from the proposed apartment site. PSUSD has indicated that current enrollment and projected needs in the surrounding area have not warranted the construction of this school site in the immediate future. If future development and enrollment in the area increases the need for the school, construction for the new school would take approximately five (5) years. Transit Access Residents of the surrounding area have expressed concern that the proposed apartment site is located in an area that is too far from existing public bus stops. Sunline Transit Agency (STA) provides public bus service throughout the Coachella Valley. The nearest existing STA route is Route 5, approximately 4,000 feet to the east from the site on Cook Street near the Cal State University San Bernardino satellite campus. The project site is within the Palm Desert service area of the SunRide, an on-demand micro-transit service that connects riders to the fixed routes of the STA network. STA evaluates ridership demand and needs every three (3) years, with the next re-evaluation to occur in 2022. STA is aware of the proposed development in the vicinity of the proposed site and will evaluate if there is a need for new routes or altered bus service during their next evaluation. Proximity to Services Residents voiced concerns that the location of the apartments is not within walking distance from existing services, including grocery stores. The nearest grocery store is approximately 1.5 miles away from the project site on Monterey Avenue. The project site is within a one-mile radius of healthcare offices, the CSU San Bernardino Palm Desert Campus, a Department of Motor Vehicles Office, and restaurants located near the intersection of Gerald Ford Drive and Cook Street. The project site has been zoned to allow affordable, multi-family residential uses since 2015, with the adoption of the MSP. Vacant parcels within a one-half mile walking distance of the site are zoned commercial per the MSP to permit the potential construction of additional service uses such as retail uses, grocery stores, and offices. Lack of Pool Amenities The proposed project does not include a swimming pool with community amenities. Attendees voiced concerns over the lack of a pool within the apartment community. The Applicant has stated they are unable to provide a pool due to financing purposes. Planning staff has recommended to the Applicant to provide a swimming pool for residents of the apartment community. The City does not have a requirement that developments provide a swimming pool. City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 15 of 16 Project Architecture Residents in attendance of the community meetings provided comments that the architecture of the community appeared out of character with surrounding development as it uses Spanish style architecture. The architecture was approved by the ARC on April 12, 2022. Environment Review: This document analyzes the proposed project with respect to its compliance with the CEQA, particularly CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, and in the context of consistency with the City of Palm Desert General Plan and its certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR). CEQA Requirements (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines require that state and local government agencies evaluate and consider the potential environmental effects of projects over which they have discretionary authority. CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 allows for a streamlined environmental review process for projects, which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects, which are peculiar to the project or its sites. If the above qualifications are met, as stated in Section 15183(b), “a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis: (1) are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located, (2) were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent, (3) are potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action, or the Project’s CEQA Section 15183 Analysis (4) are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR.” This document has been prepared to satisfy the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. It analyzes the potential environmental effects of the proposed project and evaluates whether they were adequately analyzed in a prior EIR such that the above-identified streamlining criteria apply. The project is consistent with the Palm Desert General Plan Update (General Plan Update), for which an EIR (SCH # 2015081020) was certified. The General Plan Update provides a framework for future growth of the City and projects the development reasonably expected to occur during the buildout period. The Genal Plan Update EIR analyzed the environmental impacts associated with the adoption and implementation of the General Plan Update. The proposed project is permitted in the zoning district where the project site is located and consistent with the land uses, density, and vision of the General Plan Update. The proposed apartment development is permitted within the MSP Planning Area 8 (MSP – PA 8) zoning designation and will therefore be consistent with the land use envisioned for the site. A 0.49-acre portion of PA 9 will be added to PA 8 per the MSP. The proposal is consistent with development standards for height, building coverage, open space, setbacks, and construction measures for site disturbance. The project would be developed at a lower density than the residential uses anticipated in the General Plan Town Center Neighborhood (TCN) land use designation identified in the General Plan EIR. The MSP was previously analyzed by an Initial Study, and the project has implemented all mitigation measures from the Initial Study for air quality, biological resources, and noise. The construction of the project will comply with PDMC construction standards for grading and erosion control (Chapter 27.12.065). The project will implement policies from the General Plan EIR requiring Burrowing Owl Surveys to be conducted before to any ground- City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 16 of 16 disturbing activities between January 1 and August 31. The project’s trip generation does not exceed the limit anticipated by the General Plan EIR, no further analysis and/or mitigation is required. The Applicant prepared a noise study and has incorporated design recommendations for noise attenuation and no further impacts are anticipated. The proposed apartment project is being undertaken in conformity with the approved 2016 General Plan Town Center Neighborhood land use designation. The proposed project will be consistent with MSP development standards and the General Plan. There are no substantial changes in the project from those analyzed in the 2016 General Plan EIR. Findings of Approval: Findings can be made in support of the project under the PDMC. Findings in support of this project are contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2817, attached to this staff report. REVIEWED BY: Department Director: Martin Alvarez Deputy Director: Richard Cannone, AICP City Attorney: N/A Finance Director: N/A Assistant City Manager: N/A City Manager: N/A ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Planning Commission Resolution No. 2817 2. Public Hearing Notice 3. Community Engagement Plan 4. ARC Notice of Action and Minutes of April 12, 2022 5. CEQA Notice of Exemption 6. Project Initial Study/15183 Analysis 7. Project Plans PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, FINDING NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS NECESSARY UNDER THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) GUIDELINES SECTION 15183, AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (TPM) AND A PRECISE PLAN (PP) FOR A 241- UNIT MULTI-FAMILY (AFFORDABLE HOUSING) PROJECT ON A 10.49- ACRE SITE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GERALD FORD DRIVE AND TECHNOLOGY DRIVE CASE NOS. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 WHEREAS, Palm Communities, a California Corporation (“Applicant”), submitted a TPM establishing two (2) parcels, a PP application for a 241-unit multi-family (affordable housing) development community consisting of 10 three-story apartment buildings, one (1) two-story community building with an on-site manager’s unit, outdoor recreation areas, and associated parking areas on a 10.49-acre site, including related off-site improvements (“Project”); and WHEREAS, the Project site has a land use designation of Town Center Neighborhood (TCN) in the General Plan adopted November 10, 2016, and a zoning designation of Planning Residential (PR-22) in Planning Area 8 High Density (10 acres), and Open Space in Planning Area 9 (0.49 acres) within the Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan. The Director of Development Services has administrative authority to approve Minor changes in Planning Areas boundaries that increase or decrease any Planning Area acreage by 15% or less. WHEREAS, under Section 21067 of the Public Resources Code, Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), and the City of Palm Desert’s (“City’s”) Local CEQA Guidelines, the City is the lead agency for the Project; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified by the City Council as part of the Palm Desert General Plan (SCH# 2015081020); and WHEREAS, the proposed Project is consistent with the development density and use characteristics considered by the General Plan EIR in the TCN land use designation; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2022, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert adopted the 2021-2029 Housing Element for the 6th Cycle, which allocates that the Project site provides a minimum of 240 units for affordable housing. WHEREAS, the Applicant has agreed to provide 239 units within the development at affordable levels for income-qualified persons and two (2) manager units as determined by a housing agreement and, as such, is eligible for a density bonus provided by AB 2222 (Government Code section 65915 et seq.) and Palm Desert Municipal Code Section (PDMC) 25.34.040; and WHEREAS, the Applicant did, on July 15, 2022, enter into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) with the City of Palm Desert per Contract No. C41030C; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 2 WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 12th day of April 2022, consider the request by the Applicant at its meeting and recommended approval with conditions to the Planning Commission of the above-noted Project request; and WHEREAS, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 (Public Resources Code §21083.3) provides that projects which are consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning for which an EIR has been certified “shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the Project or its site;” and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 16th day of August 2022, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the Applicant for approval of the above-noted Project request; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred; and WHEREAS, at the said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons, which are outlined in the staff report, exist to justify approval of said request: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Recitals. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as substantive findings of this Resolution. SECTION 2. Findings on Tentative Parcel Map. In recommending approval of this Project, the Planning Commission, and under PDMC Section 26.20.100(C) shall deny approval of a tentative map if any of the following findings are made: 1. That the density of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. The proposed map has been reviewed and found to be consistent with the density standards of the TCN designation and the Millennium Specific Plan (MSP). The TCN zone allows densities between seven (7) and 40 units per acre. The MSP allows up to 22 dwelling units per acre in Planning Area 8. The project proposes 23.5 dwelling units per acre. This density is consistent with the TCN designation and exceeds the MSP; however, is allowable as the Project is requesting a density bonus pursuant to Government Code 65915-65918 for providing affordable housing and is permitted to exceed the allowable zoning density. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 3 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the applicable TCN requirements, circulation element requirements, and requirements of the MSP. The dedications for public right-of-way are consistent with the applicable circulation elements of the General Plan and Specific Plan. The proposed vehicle access points are consistent with the MSP. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. The site is physically suitable for the proposed multi-family housing development. The site has suitable access, grading, drainage, and zoning to allow the proposed development. 4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. The allowable density for the site has been evaluated by the General Plan. The Applicant has prepared the appropriate technical studies to assess that the site is physically suitable to develop. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The design of the subdivision and proposed improvements will not cause damage or substantially injure wildlife habitat. The subject property is in an urbanized area of Palm Desert and is adjacent to major roadways, including Gerald Ford Drive. The site is vacant and surrounded by residential development to the west and commercial development to the east. A biological assessment of the site was prepared for the MSP and did not identify suitable habitats for wildlife that could be damaged or affected as a result of the development of the Project. Ground disturbing activities for the development of the project shall comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as well as preparation of a burrowing owl survey prior to ground-disturbing activities, and prior to the removal of vegetation or tree removal shall ensure no habitat is damaged. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious health problems. The Project is not located within a hazardous area that would be subject to flooding, liquefaction, landslide, fault zones, or other natural hazards. The project does not generate adverse effects that would cause public health problems. Ground disturbing PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 4 activities are conditioned to prepare plans to control fugitive dust. The access locations to the subdivision have been evaluated in accordance with the Millennium Specific Plan and will not adversely affect public health. SECTION 3. Finding. The application has complied with the requirements of the “City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of CEQA” Resolution No. 2019- 41, in that the Director of Development Services has determined that the Project is consistent with the approved General Plan and MSP and that other project-specific impacts were evaluated in the approval of the MSP and that no further environmental review is required under State CEQA Guidelines 15183. CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 allows for a streamlined environmental review process for projects, which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or General Plan policies for which an EIR was certified, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the Project or its sites. If the above qualifications are met, as stated in Section 15183(b), “a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis: (1) are peculiar to the Project or the parcel on which the Project would be located, (2) were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, General Plan, or community plan, with which the Project is consistent, (3) are potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the General Plan, community plan or zoning action, or the Project’s CEQA Section 15183 Analysis (4) are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information, which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR.” This document has been prepared to satisfy the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. It analyzes the potential environmental effects of the proposed Project and evaluates whether they were adequately analyzed in a prior EIR such that the above-identified streamlining criteria apply. The Project is consistent with the Palm Desert General Plan Update (General Plan Update), for which an EIR (SCH No. 2015081020) was certified. The General Plan Update provides a framework for future growth of the City and projects the development reasonably expected to occur during the buildout period. The Genal Plan Update EIR analyzed the environmental impacts associated with the adoption and implementation of the General Plan Update. The proposed Project is permitted in the zoning district where the Project site is located and consistent with the land uses, density, and vision of the General Plan Update; and SECTION 4. Project Recommendations. The Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of PP22-0003 and TPM 38366 to the City Council, subject to the findings and conditions of approval. SECTION 5. Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at the City’s office at 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260. Martin Alvarez, the Secretary to the Palm Desert Planning Commission, is the custodian of the record of proceedings. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 5 SECTION 6. Execution of Resolution. The Chairperson of the Planning Commission signs this Resolution and the Secretary to the Commission shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption thereof. SECTION 7. Recitals. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as substantive findings of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, at its regular meeting held on the 16th day of August 2022, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: NANCY DE LUNA, CHAIR ATTEST: MARTIN ALVAREZ, SECRETARY PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 6 EXHIBIT “A’ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NOS. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 PLANNING DIVISION: 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Development Services Department, as modified by the following conditions. 2. The Applicant agrees that in the event of any administrative, legal, or equitable action instituted by a third party challenging the validity of any of the procedures leading to the adoption of these Project Approvals for the Project, or the Project Approvals themselves, the Developer and City each shall have the right, in their sole discretion, to elect whether or not to defend such action. Developer, at its sole expense, shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City (including its agents, officers, and employees) from any such action, claim, or proceeding with counsel chosen by the City, subject to the Developer’s approval of counsel, which shall not be unreasonably denied, and at the Developer’s sole expense. If the City is aware of such an action or proceeding, it shall promptly notify the Developer and cooperate in the defense. The Developer, upon such notification, shall deposit with City sufficient funds in the judgment of the City Finance Director to cover the expense of defending such action without any offset or claim against said deposit to assure that the City expends no City funds. If both Parties elect to defend, the Parties hereby agree to affirmatively cooperate in defending said action and to execute a joint defense and confidentiality agreement in order to share and protect the information under the joint defense privilege recognized under applicable law. As part of the cooperation in defending an action, City and Developer shall coordinate their defense in order to make the most efficient use of legal counsel and to share and protect information. Developer and City shall each have sole discretion to terminate its defense at any time. The City shall not settle any third-party litigation of Project Approvals without the Developer’s consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed unless the Developer materially breaches this indemnification requirement. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein, which are in addition to the approved development standards listed in the PDMC, and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. The PP shall expire if construction of the said Project shall not commence within two (2) years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted by the Palm Desert Planning Commission; otherwise, said approval shall become null, void, and of no effect whatsoever. 5. The PP approval is for a two-phase, 241-unit apartment development, however, may be constructed as a single phase in the future: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 7 A. Phase 1 consists of 121 apartment units, a community building, facilities, a common area, and related on-site and off-site improvements (including the temporary access to Dinah Shore Drive) B. Phase 2 consists of 120 apartment units, facilities, the remaining common area, and related on-site and off-site improvements. 6. The approved PP shall only be modified with written City approval per PDMC Chapter 25.72.030. Any proposed changes to this PP will require an amendment to the application, which may result in a new public hearing. 7. All construction documentation shall be coordinated for consistency, including, but not limited to, architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, landscape and irrigation, grading, and street improvement plans. All such plans shall be consistent with the approved entitlement plans on file with the Development Services Department. 8. The Applicant shall execute a written acknowledgment to the Planning Division stating acceptance of and compliance with all the Conditions of Approval of Resolution No. 2817 for PP22-0003 and TPM 38366 and that the plans submitted are in compliance with the Conditions of Approval. No modifications shall be made to said plans without written approval from the appropriate decision-making body. 9. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use or structure contemplated by this approval, the Applicant shall first obtain permits and or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) Public Works Department Fire Department Building and Safety Division Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the Building & Safety Division at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 10. This Project is subject to payment of the City’s Public Art fee. The fee will be applied at the time of a building permit issuance and shall remain in the City’s public art fund. 11. Final lighting plans shall be submitted per PDMC Section 24.16 for any landscape, architectural, street, or other lighting types within the Project area. 12. All exterior lighting sources shall be fully shielded and directed downwards and is subject to approval by the Development Services Department. Luminaries with total lamp lumens above 16,000 lumens shall not be used. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 8 13. Access to trash and service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas. Said placement shall be approved by the applicable waste company and the Development Services Department and shall include a recycling program and organic waste programs as required by law. 14. Final landscape and irrigation documents shall be prepared by a landscape architect registered with the State of California and shall be submitted to the Development Services Department and the CVWD for review and approval. All sheets shall be signed by the landscape architect and shall include the license number and the expiration date. The landscape plan shall conform to the preliminary landscape plans prepared as part of this application and shall include dense plantings of landscape material. All plants shall be a minimum of five (5) gallons in size, and all trees shall be a minimum 24-inch box in size. A. The Applicant shall submit final landscape construction plans to the Palm Desert Development Services Department for review and acceptance prior to submittal to CVWD. 15. All Project irrigation systems shall function properly, and landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition. The maintenance of landscaping and the irrigation system shall be permanently provided for all areas of the Project site, as well as walkways and the portion of public right-of-way abutting the Project site (parkways). Furthermore, the plans shall identify responsibility for the continued maintenance. 16. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, the Project landscape architect shall submit written verification to the Planning Division that the landscaping and irrigation have been installed per the approved landscape plan. 17. All exterior equipment and all appurtenances thereto shall be completely screened from public view by walls or roof screens that are architecturally treated to be consistent with the building. The final construction plans shall include appropriate drawings demonstrating how such equipment is to be screened from view. No rooftop equipment shall be permitted. 18. All roof drainage systems and devices shall be designed such that they are fully screened from view from all public streets. Drainage devices, including but not limited to down-spouts, shall not be located on any street-facing building elevation or area that is clearly visible from the public right-of-way. Drainage devices shall be fully integrated into the building structure. 19. All ground-mounted utility structures including, but not limited to, transformers, HVAC equipment, and backflow prevention valves shall be located out of view from any public street or adequately screened using landscaping and/or masonry walls. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 9 20. Exterior building elevations showing building wall materials, roof types, exterior colors, and appropriate vertical dimensions, shall be included in the development construction drawings. 21. The Applicant shall construct the pedestrian circulation network as shown on the approved preliminary site plan. 22. All roof access ladders shall be located on the inside of the building. 23. All parking spaces shall be clearly marked with white or yellow paint or other easily distinguished material. Except as required by State and ADA requirements, all markings shall be a minimum four-inch (4”) wide double (“hairpin” style) stripe designed to provide 18 inches measured outside to outside under City Council Resolution No. 01-5. 24. The Applicant shall provide a minimum of on-site parking spaces per Government Code Section 65915(p)(1), per the State Density Bonus Law. The Applicant shall provide covered parking to ensure each Phase of development provides each unit with a minimum of one (1) covered parking stall. 25. The Applicant shall comply with the recommendations made by the City’s ARC, as referenced on the April 22, 2022, Notice of Action for the April 12, 2022, meeting. 26. The Applicant or any successor in interest shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, and regulations. 27. A copy of the herein-listed Conditions of Approval shall be included in the construction documentation package for the Project, which shall be continuously maintained on- site during Project construction. 28. Prior to permit issuance, the Applicant shall submit plans for the final design of all site walls subject to review and approval by the Palm Desert Development Services Department. The design of the walls shall be consistent with the height, material, and design (smooth plaster finish, pilaster, and cap) on the approved conceptual landscape plan. A. The Applicant shall incorporate noise abatement measures into the Project, including the construction of an eight-foot-tall (8’) and six-foot (6’) sound walls, as identified by the REC-1 of Project Acoustical Assessment dated December 2021. B. The Applicant shall provide pedestrian access points to Gerald Ford Drive and along the northern property boundary. The design of these access points shall include a decorative gate, pilasters, decorative cap, and arbors. C. The interim fencing between Phase 1 and Phase 2 shall consist of windscreen fencing. The fencing shall be removed upon commencement of PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 10 Phase 2. The windscreen fencing shall be placed along the western boundary of Phase 1 and the northern boundary of Phase 2 and shall remain in place and maintained until the commencement of Phase 2. The temporary windscreen fencing shall be constructed per Section 304-3 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. The fence shall have an overall height of six (6) feet measured from the top of the grade. The chain link fabric shall be nine (9) gauge, two inches (2”) galvanized material. The fence shall include a top rail and an 88% opacity, tan, knitted, High-Density Polyethylene windscreen. Fence post footings shall by 12” diameter and 36” depth for end posts, eight inches (8”) diameter and 36” depth for line posts. D. The Applicant shall provide a detailed construction plan for all access gates to staff prior to permit issuance. E. All ground-mounted HVAC shall be screened by a minimum 42” low wall or greater to screen the equipment. The design of the wall shall be consistent with site walls and as shown on the approved preliminary landscape plans. 29. The Applicant shall construct the pedestrian circulation network as shown on the approved preliminary site plan. 30. All mitigation measures identified in the CEQA Environmental Assessment and Initial Study shall be incorporated into the planning, design, development, and operation of the Project. 31. The Applicant shall incorporate all noise abatement measures as recommended by the Project Acoustical Assessment dated December 2021. 32. All monument signage shall be subject to review and approval by the Development Services Department and shall substantially conform with the exhibits approved by the ARC. 33. The Applicant shall remove temporary facilities, including temporary access, signage, and fencing prior to commencement of Phase 2. 34. The Applicant shall comply with all Conditions of Approval of City Council Resolution 2015-15 except as modified herein. 35. The Applicant shall incorporate all mitigation measures identified by the Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan Mitigated Negative Declaration. 36. The Applicant shall enter into a Housing Agreement (HA) with the City agreeing to make 100% of the Project affordable providing all units to extremely low, very low, and low-income households. The HA will create such conditions, covenants, restrictions, liens, and charges in favor of the City upon and subject to which the Project shall be occupied, leased, and rented. The provisions of the HA shall run with PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 11 title to each and every portion of the Apartment Site and the Project and shall inure to and pass with each and every portion thereof and shall apply to and bind any successors-in-interest of Owner for a minimum period of 55 years from the date on which the City issues the Certificate of Occupancy for the Project. The HA shall be signed and completed by both the City and the Applicant prior to issuance of a Building Permit. LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: 37. The following plans, studies, and exhibits are hereby referenced: TPM 38366, prepared by Kimley Horn and dated January 2022; Preliminary Grading and Utility Plan Phase 1, prepared by Kimley Horn and dated March 2022; Preliminary Grading & Utility Plan Phase 2, prepared by Kimley Horn and dated March 2022. 38. It is assumed that easements shown on the preliminary grading exhibit are shown correctly and include all the easements that encumber the subject property. A current preliminary title report for the site will be required to be submitted at technical plan. The Applicant shall secure approval from all, if any, easement holders for all grading and improvements, which are proposed over the respective easement or provide evidence that the easement has been relocated, quitclaimed, vacated, abandoned, easement holder cannot be found, or is otherwise of no effect. Should such approvals or alternate actions regarding the easements not be provided and approved by the City, the Applicant may be required to amend or revise the proposed site configuration as may be necessary. 39. It is understood that the conceptual exhibits correctly show acceptable centerline elevations, all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses with appropriate Qs and that an omission or unacceptability may require the Applicant to amend or revise the site plan as may be. 40. All private streets and common areas will be permitted as shown on the conceptual exhibit subject to these Conditions of Approval and the Applicant providing adequate provisions, by means of a homeowners’ association (HOA) or another equivalent responsible mechanism as approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney, for the continued and perpetual maintenance of these streets, common areas, and on-site post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney. 41. The Applicant shall pay all signalization fees per the City’s Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55. 42. Prior to map approval, the Applicant shall pay all, appropriate drainage fees in perPDMC Section 26.49.050 and Palm Desert Ordinance No. 653. 43. The Applicant shall pay all appropriate park fees per PDMC Section 26.48.060. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 12 44. The Applicant shall comply with Pam Desert Ordinance No. 843, Section 24.20 Stormwater Management and Discharge. 45. All utility extensions within the site shall be placed underground unless otherwise specified or allowed by the respective utility purveyor. 46. Prior to a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare a final grading plan for the site. No grading or other improvements shall be permitted until a final grading plan has been approved by the City Engineer. Grading plans and all grading shall conform to the approved Conceptual Grading Plan, the California Building Code, PDMC Title 27 Grading, and all other relevant laws, rules, and regulations governing grading in the City of Palm Desert. 47. The grading plan shall provide for acceptance and proper disposal of all off-site drainage flowing onto or through the site. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, the Applicant shall provide adequate drainage facilities and/or appropriate easements as approved by the City Engineer. 48. The grading plan shall provide for the protection of downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns, i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. 49. Pad elevations, as shown on the conceptual exhibit, are subject to review and modification per Chapter 27 of the PDMC. 50. Prior to approval of the grading plan, the Applicant shall prepare a detailed final flood hazard/hydrology and hydraulics report for approval of the City Engineer. 51. Prior to approval of the grading plans, the Applicant shall provide the City Engineer with evidence that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with the State Water Resources Control Board. Such evidence shall consist of a copy of the NOI stamped by the State Water Resources Control Board or the Regional Water Quality Control Board or a letter from either agency stating that the NOI has been filed. 52. The Applicant shall submit a final Hydrology and Hydraulics Report for the entire site. The report shall comply with all relevant laws, rules, and regulations governing the City of Palm Desert. 53. All drainage and storm drain improvements shall be designed per PDMC Title 24, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District’s standards for the Drainage Element of the Palm Desert General Plan, and all other relevant laws, rules, and regulations governing grading in the City of Palm Desert. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 13 54. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a PM10 application for review and approval. The Applicant shall comply with all provisions of PDMC Section 24.12 regarding Fugitive Dust Control. 55. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for review and approval from the Land Development Division. 56. Where grading involves import or export, the Applicant shall obtain permits from the Public Works Department, including import/export quantities and hauling route. 57. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Applicant to obtain any and all proposed or required easements and/or permissions necessary to perform the grading shown on the tentative grading plan exhibit. Proof shall be provided to the Land Development Division prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 58. Prior to a grading permit and if grading is required off-site, the Applicant shall obtain written permission from the property owner(s) to grade as necessary and provide a copy to the Engineering Department. 59. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a signed and notarized WQMP Operations and Maintenance Agreement to the City. The agreement shall provide for the maintenance and operation of open space areas, common spaces such as parking lot and recreational facilities, trash disposal for common areas, and water quality BMP facilities, by either the property owner’s association or the owners of each individual lot or unit as tenants in common. 60. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit and in compliance with the PDMC Section 27.24, the Applicant shall enter into an agreement and post financial security guarantee for all grading work related to this Project. 61. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit for review and approval of the City Engineer a final Geotechnical Report that includes project- specific recommendations. 62. Upon completion of grading, the Project' Geotechnical Engineer shall certify the completion of rough grading in conformance with the approved grading plans and the recommendations of the geotechnical report approved for this project. A licensed land surveyor shall certify the completion of grading in conformance with the lines and grades shown on the approved grading plans. 63. It is assumed that the grading and the provisions for water quality management shown on the conceptual grading exhibit can comply with all requirements for a Final Water Quality Management Plan (F-WQMP), without substantial change from that shown. Prior to the approval of the grading plan, the landowner shall prepare, or PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 14 cause to be prepared, a Final WQMP in conformance with the requirements of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) Whitewater River Watershed area for approval of the City Engineer. 64. The Applicant shall submit a final Water Quality Management Plan. The report shall comply with all relevant laws, rules, and regulations governing in the City of Palm Desert. 65. All post-construction BMPs shall be designed based on the City of Palm Desert’s maximum infiltration criteria of one (1) inch/hour unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer for which an alternate of 2 inches/hour has been specifically approved for this Project. 66. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit plans for review and approval to the City Engineer for all public improvements, including but not limited to street and roadway improvements and landscape and irrigation improvements. 67. Prior to the issuance of an encroachment permit, for public improvements and/or map recordation, whichever comes first, the Applicant shall enter into an agreement and post financial security guarantee for the construction of all off-site/public improvements per Section 27.24 of the PDMC. The form and amount of the financial security shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. The Applicant shall guarantee all improvements for a period of one (1) year from the date of final acceptance, and the improvement guarantee shall be backed by a bond or cash deposit in the amount of 10% of the surety posted for the improvements. 68. Prior to the map recordation, the Applicant shall submit improvement plans for Dinah Shore Drive and the proposed access road to the site. The Applicant is responsible for the construction and installation of improvements for Dinah Shore Drive per the following: A. Prior to the issuance of a building Certificate of Occupancy for the first building of Phase 1 of the development, the Applicant shall construct parkway improvements along site frontage and along the proposed access road (“Proposed Public Street” on TPM exhibit) to Dinah Shore Drive; including sidewalk, curb and gutter, and landscape and irrigation improvements, as approved by the City Engineer. B. Prior to the issuance of a building Certificate of Occupancy for the last building of Phase 1 of the development, the Applicant shall complete improvements for the proposed access road and intersection improvements for Dinah Shore Drive and the proposed access road to the site intersection; including Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant curb ramps, signing and striping, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities. C. The Applicant shall provide one (1) driveway to provide access for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the development to the proposed access road to Dinah Shore Drive. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 15 The location and design shall be per the approved conceptual exhibits and the Palm Desert Standard Drawings and Specifications. D. The Applicant shall provide a second emergency vehicle-only access for Phase 2 to the proposed access road to Dinah Shore Drive. E. The Applicant shall show, as reference only, all existing and proposed utility connections. Utility plans shall be processed and approved by CVWD. 69. Technology Drive is identified in the Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan as a Collector Street with a 72-foot ultimate right-of-way, looping from the existing intersection with Gerald Ford Drive to a northwesterly intersection with Gerald Ford Drive adjacent to the project site. If ultimate improvements for Technology Drive are not present at the time of project construction, the Applicant shall provide interim intersection improvements, as described on these Conditions of Approval and approved by the City Engineer, to provide access from the site to Gerald Ford Drive. 70. If interim intersection improvements are applicable per Condition of Approval No. 69, prior to the issuance of an encroachment permit for public improvements and/or map recordation, whichever comes first, the Applicant shall submit improvement plans for Technology Drive/Site Access - Gerald Ford Drive interim improvements, which include: A. Curb adjacent landscape and irrigation improvements along the site frontage. B. Sidewalk along the site frontage and around the westerly side of the Technology Drive roundabout. C. Roadway improvements for half-width of the street plus 12 feet. D. Fire Department and City approved turnaround for vehicles at Technology Drive and project access drive intersection. E. Separate signing and striping plans. F. All plans shall show, as reference only, all existing and proposed utility connections. Utility plans shall be processed and approved by CVWD. 71. Prior to the map recordation, the Applicant shall submit improvement plans for Gerald Ford Drive. The Applicant is responsible for the construction and installation of improvements for Gerald Ford Drive, including, but not limited to: A. The Applicant shall construct parkway improvements along site frontage, including landscape and irrigation improvements along Phase 1 and meandering sidewalk from the northerly intersection with Technology Drive to the intersection with Dinah Shore Drive. B. Prior to the issuance of the building Certificate of Occupancy for the first building of the development, the Applicant shall construct parkway improvements along site frontage, including sidewalk, and landscape and irrigation improvements, as approved by the City of Palm Desert Planning Division. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 16 C. The Applicant shall be responsible for repairs to the existing curb and gutter along the project frontage, as needed and required by the City Engineer. D. If not in place at the time of project construction, the Applicant shall provide for the installation of a streetlight at the northerly intersection of Gerald Ford Drive and Technology Drive. 72. Prior to the map recordation, the Applicant shall provide a full-scale signing and striping improvement plan for Dinah Shore Drive as a separate set of plans from street improvement plans for review and approval of the City Engineer. Signing and striping plans shall show existing improvements and modifications including, but not limited to, bike lanes, roundabout(s), travel lanes, pavement markings, turning arrows, etc. 73. Prior to the map recordation, the Applicant shall provide a full-scale signing and striping improvement plan for Gerald Ford Drive as a separate set of plans from street improvement plans for review and approval of the City Engineer. Signing and striping plans shall show existing improvements and modifications including, but not limited to, bike lanes, roundabout(s), travel lanes, pavement markings, turning arrows, etc. 74. The Applicant shall provide a private easement for reciprocal access between proposed Lot 1 and Lot 2 of the subdivision. If rights are reserved outside the final parcel map, proof of recorded document shall be provided to the City Engineer prior to Final Parcel Map recordation. 75. The Applicant shall provide drainage easement for proposed Lot 2 over proposed Lot 1 of the subdivision. If rights are reserved outside the Final Parcel Map, proof of recorded document shall be provided to the City Engineer prior to Final Parcel Map recordation. 76. Prior to map approval, covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) related to this development shall be submitted to the City for review and approval of the City Engineer. 77. Abutter’s rights along Parcel 8 of Parcel Map No. 36792 shall be perpetuated on the final map. 78. Prior to the map recordation, the Applicant shall enter into a subdivision improvement agreement and post financial securities with the City for the required public improvements. The form and amount of the financial security shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and comply with PDMC Section 26.28.030 and Section 26.28.040. 79. Prior to the map recordation, the Applicant shall submit grading and improvement plans for all private (on-site), improvements for review and approval of the City PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 17 Engineer. Signing and striping shall be part of the plans and shall include stop signs and stop bars for vehicles exiting the development via the approved driveways. 80. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall provide the City Land Development Division with a copy of the Fire Department clearance for the secondary access road. Access road shall be designed and constructed per the Fire Department standards and shall be clearly shown and identified on the project grading plans. 81. Prior to a building final inspection, the Applicant is responsible for the completion of construction of all grading and improvements for which plans are required and shall comply with all requirements within the public and private road right-of-ways. 82. Modifications, if any, to approved plans shall be submitted to the City for review as delta revisions and will require approval of the City Engineer. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION: 83. This project shall comply with the latest adopted edition of the following codes: A. California Building Code and its appendices and standards. B. California Residential Code and its appendices and standards. C. California Plumbing Code and its appendices and standards. D. California Mechanical Code and its appendices and standards. E. California Electrical Code. F. California Energy Code. G. California Green Building Standards Code. H. Title 24, California Code of Regulations. I. California Fire Code and its appendices and standards. 84. This project will fall under the review and compliance of Chapters 11-A and Chapter 11-B of the 2019 California Building Code. 85. The Applicant shall coordinate directly with: Riverside County Fire Marshal’s Office CAL FIRE/Riverside County Fire Department Main: (760) 863-8886 77933 Las Montañas Road, Suite 201 Palm Desert, CA 92211 86. Plan approval must be obtained from the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health (Health Department) before constructing or altering structure or equipment (such as fencing and decking). The Applicant shall coordinate directly with the Health Department for the application, plans, and specifications. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 18 87. All trash enclosures are required to be accessible. Provide an accessible path of travel to the trash enclosure. Trash enclosures shall comply with the minimum requirements established by Section 8.12 of the PDMC. 88. All contractors and subcontractors shall have a current City of Palm Desert Business License before permit issuance per PDMC, Title 5. 89. All contractors and/or owner-builders must submit a valid Certificate of Workers’ Compensation Insurance coverage before the issuance of a building permit per California Labor Code, Section 3700. 90. Address numerals shall comply with Palm Desert Ordinance No. 1351 (PDMC Section 15.28). Compliance with Ordinance 1351 regarding street address location, dimension, a stroke of line, distance from the street, height from grade, height from the street, etc., shall be shown on all architectural building elevations in detail. Any possible obstructions, shadows, lighting, landscaping, backgrounds, or other reasons that may render the building address unreadable shall be addressed during the plan review process. The Applicant may request a copy of Ordinance 1351 or PDMC Section 15.28 from the Building and Safety Division counter staff. FIRE DEPARTMENT: 91. Fire Hydrants and Fire Flow: Prior to the issuance of building permits, plans for the water system shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval. The water system shall be capable of delivering 1,500 GPM at 20 psi for a two-hour duration. Fire hydrant location and spacing shall comply with the fire code. Off-site (public) hydrants are required to be located next to the access walkways providing access to the property from Gerald Ford Drive and Technology Drive. (Reference the preliminary fire access site plan and the preliminary fire service water plan.) An approved water supply for fire protection during construction shall be made available before the arrival of combustible materials on-site. Reference 2019 California Fire Code (CFC) 507.5.1, 507.5.1, 3312, Appendices B and C. 92. Fire Department Access: Prior to building permit issuance, a fire access site plan shall be approved. The access roads shall be capable of sustaining 60,000 lbs. over two axels in all weather conditions. An approved access walkway shall be provided around the buildings. For ground ladder placement, the level grade shall be provided around the buildings for a minimum of eight (8) feet measured perpendicular from the exterior building walls. Approved vehicle access, either permanent or temporary, shall be provided during construction. CFC 503.1.1, 3310.1 and 503.2.1. 93. Requests for installation of traffic calming designs and devices on fire apparatus roads shall be submitted and approved by the Office of the Fire Marshal. Ref. CFC 503.4.1. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 19 94. Phased Construction Access: If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access for fire protection prior to any construction. An additional fire apparatus access road shall be provided to the site for Phase 1. The additional access point may be restricted to fire apparatus access only with approved Knox equipment installed for the gates. (Ref. CFC 503.1) 95. Construction Permits: Prior to the building permit issuance, building construction plans shall be submitted to the Office of the Fire Marshal for review and approval. Construction plans for solar photovoltaic power systems and electrical energy storage systems (ESS) shall be provided to the Office of the Fire Marshal for review and approval. (CFC 1206) 96. Fire Sprinkler System: All new commercial structures 3,000 square feet or larger shall be protected with a fire sprinkler system. All new apartment buildings shall be protected with fire sprinklers regardless of building size. Ref CFC 903.2.8 and CFC 903.2 as amended by the City of Palm Desert. 97. Fire sprinkler system risers shall not be obstructed in any manner. If a system riser is to be concealed by means of a wall, soffit, column, or other building construction, it shall be provided with 18-inch clearance to each side and to the front of the system riser. Access shall be provided by means of a door with the minimum dimensions of two (2) feet, six (6) inches in width by six (6) feet, and eight (8) inches in height from the exterior of the building directly to the riser as approved by the fire code official. (Ref. RVC Fire IB 06-07) 98. Fire Alarm and Detection System: A water flow monitoring system and/or the fire alarm system may be required and determined at the time of building plan review. (Ref. CFC 903.4, CFC 907.2 and NFPA 72) 99. Knox Box and Gate Access: Buildings shall be provided with a Knox Box. The Knox Box shall be installed in an accessible location approved by the Office of the Fire Marshal. Electric gate operators shall be provided with Knox key switches. Electric gate operators shall also be connected to a remote signal receiver compatible for use with the preemption devices on the Riverside County fire apparatus. The gate shall automatically open upon receiving a remote signal from the fire apparatus and remain in the fully open position for a minimum of 30 seconds. (Ref. CFC 506.1) 100. Addressing: All residential dwellings and commercial buildings shall display street numbers, building number/letter designators, and unit designators in a prominent location on the street side of the premises and additional locations as required. The premises shall have an illuminated diagrammatic representation of the actual site layout which shows the name of the complex, all streets, building designators, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. These directories shall be a minimum of four feet by four feet (4’x4’) in dimension and located next to roadway PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2817 20 access. Ref. CFC 505.1 and County of Riverside Office of the Fire Marshal Standard No. 07-01. 101. Energy Systems: Construction plans for solar photovoltaic power systems and electrical energy storage systems (ESS) shall be provided to the Office of the Fire Marshal for review and approval. (CFC 1206) END OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL G:\Planning\Case Files\PP\PP 22-0003 - Palm Villas at Millennnium\PC\1. PP 22-0003 - Public Hearing Notice (8.16.22).docx CITY OF PALM DESERT PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CASE NO. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER A REQUEST BY PALM COMMUNITIES, LLC, FOR A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A PRECISE PLAN, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO DEVELOP A 241- UNIT AFFORDABLE APARTMENT COMMUNITY, HOUSING DENSITY BONUS, AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS ON A 10.49-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GERALD FORD DRIVE AND TECHNOLOGY DRIVE. The City of Palm Desert (City), in its capacity as the Lead Agency for this project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), has determined that this project is consistent with the City of Palm Desert General Plan, and no further environmental review is required under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. Project Location/Description: Project Location: The northwest corner of Gerald Ford Drive and Technology Drive - APN 694- 120-028 and a portion of 694-120-029. Project Description: The proposal is a Precise Plan, Environmental Assessment, and Tentative Parcel Map to construct a 241-unit affordable apartment comprised of 10 three-story apartment buildings, one two-story community building containing an on-site manager’s unit, on-site landscaping, 350 parking spaces, private open space on a 10.49-acre parcel, and related off- site improvements. The project includes a Density Bonus Request under Government Code Section 65915 to increase the site density by approximately five percent (5%) and a parking reduction. The Tentative Parcel Map will subdivide the site into two parcels to establish two phases for the project. Recommendation: Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending approval of the project to the City Council. Public Hearing: The public hearing will be held before the Planning Commission on August 16, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. via Zoom. The hearing will be conducted in accordance with the City’s emergency protocols for social distancing. Options for remote participation will be listed on the Posted Agenda for the meeting at: https://www.cityofpalmdesert.org/our-city/committees-and- commissions/planning-commission-information-center. Comment Period: The public comment period for this project is from August 5, 2022, to August 16, 2022. Public Review: The plans and related documents are available for public review Monday through Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. by contacting the project planner, Nick Melloni. Please submit written comments to the Planning Division. If any group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence at or prior to the Planning Commission hearing. All comments and any questions should be directed to: Nick Melloni, Senior Planner City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 (760) 346-0611, Extension 479 nmelloni@cityofpalmdesert.org PUBLISH: DESERT SUN MARTIN ALVAREZ, SECRETARY AUGUST 5, 2022 PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TO: FROM: Palm Communities DATE: RE: Community Engagement Plan for Palm Villas at Millennium C. The Community Engagement Plan must contain the following: 1. Developer’s method(s) of communication with the public. Proposed location(s) of public outreach shall be provided; a. Informational Flyer Invitation (To all property owners within 1,000 feet of the project site) b. Social Media c. Palm’s Website d. Public Meeting (Virtual Open House) 2. Submit written publications distributed to the public that includes any informational items of the project; a. Informational Flyer Invitation for Virtual Open House: i. Palm will draft and distribute by mail an informational flyer to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the project site. The flyer will outline details of the proposed Palm Villas apartments. (Flyer draft included) ii. The flyer will include basic details of the apartment project including size, location, and images. iii. The flyer will highlight details of the required public meeting (Virtual Open House) and contact information for Palm staff. b. Social Media i. Palm will post details from the Informational Flyer Invitation on Palm’s Facebook page. c. Palm’s Website i. Palm will create a landing page on our website with details of Palm Villas and the required public meeting (Virtual Open House). 3. A minimum of one (1) meeting with the public is required, follow up meetings may be required as requested by the Director of Development Services; d. Public Meeting (Virtual Open House) a. Palm will host one (1) Virtual Open House through the video conferencing application, Zoom. b. This Virtual Open House meeting is open to anyone in the community. c. Information about Palm Villas and the Virtual Open House will be posted publicly on the Informational Flyer Invitation, Palm’s Facebook page, and Palm’s website. e. Developer shall provide written responses to City staff on how each public concern will be addressed; a. Palm will provide information about the property during the Virtual Open House through a slide show presentation with details about the property, images, and insights from expert speakers. b. The presentation will be about 30 minutes followed by a Q&A. c. Virtual Open House attendees will have an opportunity to submit questions through the Zoom app to Palm. d. Palm will allocate at least an hour to questions. e. After the meeting, Palm will create a detailed Frequently Asked Questions document based on the questions during the Virtual Open House and will post it on Palm’s website. f. Palm has a dedicated email address for the local community to reach out for further information. (Email address will be posted in the flyer, Palm’s website, and during the Virtual Open House) Hello Neighbor! Palm Communities would like to invite you to a Virtual Open House to announce details of a planned apartment community in the City of Palm Desert. Palm Villas at Millennium Apartments is a planned 241-unit affordable multifamily housing community located on 10-acres at the north side of Gerald Ford Drive, between Portola Road and Cook Street in Palm Desert (see reverse for images). Please join us virtually for this informational meeting followed by a Q&A section. Who: Palm Communities What: A Virtual Open House for the Palm Villas Apartments (30-minute presentation followed by a Q&A) When: TBD Where: Zoom (Details forthcoming) Registered participants will be able to submit written questions through Zoom during the Q&A. Why: To find out details about the Palm Villas at Millennium Apartments and connect with the community. Please use the Zoom link provided to join the Virtual Open House. You do not need to RSVP to attend. A Frequently Asked Questions page will be accessible online after TBD date on Palm’s website. Please email us at palmvillas@palmcommunities.com if you have any questions. Connect with us on Facebook or LinkedIn at Palm Communities, Inc. for more details about this meeting and Palm. Thank you, and we look forward to seeing you at the Virtual Open House! The Palm Team palmvillas@palmcommunities.com www.palmcommunities.com https://www.facebook.com/Palm-Communities https://www.linkedin.com/company/palm-communities-inc Palm Villas at Millennium Palm Villas at Millennium Virtual Open House Frequently Asked Questions March 31, 2022 1. Q: How is the land immediately east of the GHA’s Genesis development zoned (where Palm’s affordable housing, Palm Villas, is proposed)? Is it supposed to be zoned as single-family attached projects such as condos? A: The property for the planned Palm Villas at Millennium, Planning Area 8, directly to the east of the existing Genesis development, was zoned PR 22 (Planned Residential with a maximum density of 22 units per acre). That zoning has been in place since 2015 when the Millennium Specific Plan was adopted by the City Council. The Specific Plan did not anticipate attached condominiums or single-family residential to be developed on this site. (Answer provided by the City of Palm Desert) 2. Q: Is there an additional proposed apartment community scheduled to be built farther east along Gerald Ford closer to Technology Drive? A: There is another proposal for apartment developments further to the east along Gerald Ford. That is located on Planning Area 7 which is a 15-acre site that was envisioned for up to 330 multi-family dwellings that were approved by the Planning Commission on March 15, 2022. (Answer provided by the City of Palm Desert) 3. Q: Has the zoning/location for these two above-mentioned projects "flipped"? A: No. The zoning for these sites has not changed since the Specific Plan was adopted in 2015. (Answer provided by the City of Palm Desert) 4. Q: When did Palm Communities begin processing specific plans and permits for Palm Villas? A: Palm Communities began discussions with the city of Palm Desert about this site in late 2020. Palm Communities received site control in early 2021. Palm began due diligence in June/July 2021 and submitted plans to the City in January of 2022. 5. Q: Palm Villas is not the same as typical market-rate apartments. What makes it different? A: The Palm Villas at Millennium are considered affordable housing apartments. This means that households in Palm Desert with incomes at or below $63,200 (for a family of four) will be eligible to live at the project and benefit from below-market rents. 6. Q: What percentage/number of the 241units at Palm Villas are estimated to be inhabited by those that qualify for Section 8 housing? A: Palm Villas is not Section 8 housing; however, it will accept residents that have Housing Choice Vouchers Approximately half or about 100 units are eligible for Section 8 housing. To be eligible, an individual or family has to be at 50% of the area median income or below. Section 8 housing refers to housing where the resident has received a Housing Choice Voucher from the local housing authority. With the voucher, the resident typically pays 30% of her income towards the rent amount, and the housing authority pays the other 70%. 7. Q: Was Palm Villas subject to a CEQA review (Environmental Impact Report- EIR/Mitigated Negative Declaration-MND)? A: The proposal is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposal is consistent with the Millennium Specific Plan. The environmental review will examine the Palm Villas plan, and it is still in progress at this time. Full details will be provided in the future. (Answer provided by the City of Palm Desert) 8. Q: What area is designated for development? A: (See proposed site map below. Site is outlined in yellow) 9. Q: How were the cumulative effects of the project evaluated considering the Palm Desert recently approved an affordable income project close to the existing Police/Sheriff station on Gerald Ford? It seems the north side of Palm Desert will contain the majority of "new" affordable income projects. A: In the city’s General Plan Housing Element, the City of Palm Desert identifies various properties that are intended for future development of affordable housing and works to facilitate development on those sites either by zoning or facilitating the development. Each of the properties are reviewed to see any impacts. (Answer provided by the City of Palm Desert) 10. Q: What are the impacts on current property values and all other new home developments that are in close proximity to the proposed development? A: Based on historical and statistical data, there is no expected loss in property values, long or short term, because of affordable housing communities for nearby residents. 11. Q: Is a park still planned to be developed in the vacant lot between the proposed community and the existing GHA Genesis development? A: Yes, this is still envisioned as a regional park site. The city is in the beginning stages of planning for the park. (Answer provided by the City of Palm Desert) 12. Q: The elevations look rather simple and plain. Can Palm Communities assure the neighborhood that the buildings will not give a low-income value look? A: The design style for Palm Villas is called Spanish Colonial, which is a common style in Southern California. However, all developments must go before the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). This project went before the ARC on April 12 and was approved. Prior to submitting an official application, Palm Villas received a preliminary review by the ARC, and Palm Communities incorporated that feedback, which was noted by the ARC. The aesthetic of Palm Villas is in alignment with the surrounding community architecture and the overarching desert architecture at large. Accuracy of Information. Although every effort has been made to provide complete and accurate information, Palm Communities makes no warranties, express or implied, or representations as to the accuracy of the content on this website. The information provided is current as of May 5, 2022. Project information and plans are subject to change from time to time and without notice. Any design plans, photographs, renderings, and other depictions of the residences, community, and other features are for illustrative and conceptual purposes only and subject to change. Palm Communities assumes no liability or responsibility for any error or omissions in the information contained in the website or the operation of the website. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NOTICE OF ACTION April 22, 2022 Palm Communities 100 Pacifica Suite #203 Irvine, CA 92618 Subject: Consideration of a recommendation to the Planning Commission for approval of a Precise Plan, Tentative Parcel Map, and Environmental Assessment to develop a 241-unit multi-family residential apartment community including 10 three-story apartment buildings, a two-story clubhouse, private outdoor recreation areas, and related off-site improvements on a 10.49-acre parcel located at the northwest corner of Gerald Ford Drive and Technology Drive. The Architectural Review Commission of the City of Palm Desert considered your request at its meeting of April 12, 2022: By Minute Motion, the Architectural Review Commission approved Case No. PP22- 0003 subject to the following: 1) Carry tan color transitions on third-story balcony columns into interior column areas; 2) Extend tan color at building entries further back from the front elevation; 3) Ensure extensions on window trims remain and are not squared off; 4) Add trim around windows through the use of 2X4 nailers to increase window recessing where no recess is proposed; 5) Add a color change between the first floor and upper-floors where building is one solid color; 6) Incorporate flat arch balcony design in addition to the corbeled rectangle arch on residential buildings; 7) Thicken the column on the second level balcony area located on the community building, (Right Side Elevation); 8) Revise the exposed wood truss eave tails and explore other options for design which includes the use of non-warping material; 9) Remove Washingtonia Robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) from the proposed landscape palette and use Washingtonia Filifera (California Fan Palm) or another similar palm; 10) Applicant shall utilize single-trunk shade tree specimens which are resistant to high winds common in the area. The applicant shall add a note of this condition on the landscape plans; 11) Provide an updated landscape palette which identifies quantities for proposed shrubs, groundcovers, and accents; 12) Provide enhanced pedestrian entry gates for a pedestrian connection directly to the sidewalk along Gerald Ford Drive and to the future park site; and 13) Project revisions will be reviewed by staff and return to the ARC should there be any items that cannot be resolved with Applicant. The motion carried by a 4-0 vote. (AYES: Lambell, Latkovic, McAuliffe, and Vuksic; NOES: None; ABSENT: McIntosh, Van Vliet). Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within 15 days of the date of the decision. If you have any questions, please contact Associate Planner, Nick Melloni, at (760) 346-0611, Extension 479 or nmelloni@cityofpalmdesert.org. Sincerely, ROSIE LUA, SECRETARY ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION cc: File MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 12, 2022 5 Commissioner McAuliffe rejoined the meeting. Associate Planner, Kevin Swartz, presented the item including highlights of revisions made to the project in response to commissioner’s comments given during a preliminary discussion on this item at the ARC meeting held March 22, 2022. The request is a proposed 150-unit affordable apartment community. Mr. Swartz turned the presentation over to the applicant, and their architect team, TCA Architects, who provided a more detailed presentation on the revisions made to the proposed project and answered questions from the Commission. Discussion on the item ensued with Commissioners providing comments and concerns for the project. Planning Manager, Rosie Lua, invited comments from the public, to which there were none. Upon a motion by Commissioner McAuliffe, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic, and a 5-0 vote of the Architectural Review Commission, Case No. PP/CUP22-0004 was approved subject to the following: 1) Revisit parapets to ensure all ends are concealed and/or returned inward enough to provide the appearance of a three-dimensional mass; 2) Revisit typical parapet detail and refine the design to demonstrate concealed detail edges; 3) Staff will confirm flashing details are concealed against clean edges and is included in construction documents; 4) Landscaping should have provisions in place which ensure it is well maintained and watered properly; 5) Applicant will be mindful of the need for noise mitigation measures; 6) Applicant shall call for a planning inspection during framing to ensure parapets are built and concealed as approved and utility equipment is screened appropriately; and 7) Project revisions will be reviewed by staff and return to the ARC should there be any items that cannot be resolved with Applicant. (AYES: Lambell, Latkovic, McAuliffe, McIntosh, and Vuksic; NOES: None; ABSENT: Van Vliet). 5. CASE NO: PP 22-0003 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration of a recommendation to the Planning Commission for approval of a Precise Plan, Tentative Parcel Map, and Environmental Assessment to develop a 241-unit multi-family residential apartment community including 10 three-story apartment buildings, a two-story clubhouse, private outdoor recreation areas, and related off-site improvements on a 10.49-acre parcel located at the northwest corner of Gerald Ford Drive and Technology Drive. APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: Palm Communities, Irvine, CA, 92618 LOCATION: NW Corner of Gerald Ford Drive and Technology Drive ZONE: Millennium Specific Plan Area 8, PR-22 Associate Planner, Nick Melloni, presented the item including highlights of revisions made to the project in response to commissioner’s comments given during a preliminary discussion on this item at an ARC meeting held in November 2021. The applicant is proposing an affordable housing MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 12, 2022 6 development including 241-units as a two phased project. Mr. Melloni turned the presentation over to the applicant and their architect, Bill Atkins, who provided a more detailed presentation on revisions to the proposed project. Discussion on the item ensued with Commissioners providing comments and concerns for the project. Planning Manager, Rosie Lua, invited comments from the public, to which there were none. Due to a conflicting obligation Commissioner McIntosh left the meeting at 3:55 p.m. Upon a motion by Vice Chair Lambell, seconded by Commissioner McAuliffe, and a 4-0 vote of the Architectural Review Commission, Case No. PP22-0003 was approved subject to the following: 1) Carry tan color transitions on third-story balcony columns into interior column areas; 2) Extend tan color at building entries further back from the front elevation; 3) Ensure extensions on window trims remain and are not squared off; 4) Add trim around windows through the use of 2X4 nailers to increase window recessing where no recess is proposed; 5) Add a color change between the first floor and upper-floors where building is one solid color; 6) Incorporate flat arch balcony design in addition to the corbeled rectangle arch on residential buildings; 7) Thicken the column on the second level balcony area located on the community building, (Right Side Elevation); 8) Revise the exposed wood truss eave tails and explore other options for design which includes the use of non-warping material; 9) Remove Washingtonia Robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) from the proposed landscape palette and use Washingtonia Filifera (California Fan Palm) or another similar palm; 10) Applicant shall utilize single-trunk shade tree specimens which are resistant to high winds common in the area. The applicant shall add a note of this condition on the landscape plans; 11) Provide an updated landscape palette which identifies quantities for proposed shrubs, groundcovers, and accents; 12) Provide enhanced pedestrian entry gates for a pedestrian connection directly to the sidewalk along Gerald Ford Drive and to the future park site; and 13) Project revisions will be reviewed by staff and return to the ARC should there be any items that cannot be resolved with Applicant. (AYES: Lambell, Latkovic, McAuliffe, and Vuksic; NOES: None; ABSENT: McIntosh, Van Vliet). B. PRELIMINARY PLANS None C. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS None VI. COMMENTS Planning Manager, Rosie Lua, informed the Commission staff had no comments to provide and invited comments from commissioners, to which there were none. Notice of Exemption FORM “B” NOTICE OF EXEMPTION TO: Office of Planning and Research P. O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 FROM: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Clerk of the Board of Supervisors or County Clerk County of: Riverside 2724 Gateway Dr, Riverside, CA 92507 1. Project Title: PP22-0003 / TPM 38366 2. Project Applicant: Palm Communities, LLC 3. Project Location – Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15’ or 7 1/2’ topographical map identified by quadrangle name): Northwest corner of Gerald Ford Drive and Technology Drive - APN: 694120028 and 0.49 acre portion of 694120029 4. (a) Project Location – City: Palm Desert (b) Project Location – County: Riverside 5. Description of nature, purpose, and beneficiaries of Project: Tentative Parcel Map establishing two (2) parcels, a Precise Plan application for a 241-unit multi-family (affordable housing) development community consisting of 10 three-story apartment buildings, one (1) two-story community building with an onsite manager’s unit, outdoor recreation areas, and associated parking areas on a 10.49-acre site, including related off-site improvements 6. Name of Public Agency approving project: City of Palm Desert 7. Name of Person or Agency undertaking the project, including any person undertaking an activity that receives financial assistance from the Public Agency as part of the activity or the person receiving a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement of use from the Public Agency as part of the activity: Palm Communities, LLC 8. Exempt status: (check one) (a) Ministerial project. (Pub. Res. Code § 21080(b)(1); State CEQA Guidelines § 15268) (b) Not a project. (c) Emergency Project. (Pub. Res. Code § 21080(b)(4); State CEQA Guidelines § 15269(b),(c)) (d) Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: (e) Declared Emergency. (Pub. Res. Code § 21080(b)(3); State CEQA Guidelines § 15269(a)) (f) Statutory Exemption. State Code section number: Notice of Exemption FORM “B” (g) Other. Explanation: Projects Consistent with the General Plan or Zoning – State CEQA Guidelines § 15183 9. Reason why project was exempt: The project is consistent with the Palm Desert General Plan Update (General Plan Update), for which an EIR (SCH # 2015081020) was certified. The General Plan Update provides a framework for future growth of the City and projects the development reasonably expected to occur during the buildout period. The Genal Plan Update EIR analyzed the environmental impacts associated with the adoption and implementation of the General Plan Update. The proposed project is permitted in the zoning district where the project site is located and consistent with the land uses, density, and vision of the General Plan Update. 10. Lead Agency Contact Person: Nick Melloni, Senior Planner Telephone: (760) 346-0611 11. If filed by applicant: Attach Preliminary Exemption Assessment (Form “A”) before filing. 12. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project?  Yes  No 13. Was a public hearing held by the lead agency to consider the exemption?  Yes  No If yes, the date of the public hearing was: 8/16 2022 Signature: Date: 8/16/2022 Title: Senior Planner ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________  Signed by Lead Agency  Signed by Applicant Date Received for Filing: (Clerk Stamp Here) Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21100, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21108, 21152, and 21152.1, Public Resources Code. PALM COMMUNITIES PALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUM NOTICE OF EXEMPTION McKENNA LANIER GROUP, INC. DBE, WBE, SB Micro Planning | Environmental | Entitlement Services 30550 Rancho California Road, Suite D406-166 Temecula, CA 92591 949.701.1606 City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Page iii of 106 City of Palm Desert I. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. TABLE OF CONTENTS.......................................................................................... III II. LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................. IV III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ....................... 1 A. PROJECT CASE NUMBER(S): ......................................................................... 1 B. PROJECT TITLE: ........................................................................................... 1 C. LEAD AGENCY: ............................................................................................. 1 D. PREPARED BY: ............................................................................................. 1 E. PROJECT SPONSOR: ..................................................................................... 1 F. PROJECT LOCATION: .................................................................................... 1 G. GENERAL PLAN: ........................................................................................... 2 H. ZONING: ...................................................................................................... 2 I. MILLENNIUM PALM DESERT SPECIFIC PLAN: ................................................... 3 J. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING: ...................................................... 4 K. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND PROJECT ....................................................... 4 Environmental Setting ................................................................................ 4 Project Description ..................................................................................... 4 IV. EXEMPTION AND STREAMLINING ANALYSIS: ................................................... 6 State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183...................................................... 6 Palm Desert General Plan (PDGP) and Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) ................................................................................... 7 Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan ....................................................... 7 Initial Study and Notice of Exemption ........................................................ 8 V. APPENDICES (FOUND AS SEPARATE DOCUMENTS AND INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO THIS NOE PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15150): .................................................................................................... 8 VI. REASONS WHY THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT: ..................................................... 17 I. AESTHETICS – ....................................................................................... 17 II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES – .......................... 20 III. AIR QUALITY – ............................................................................. 23 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – ...................................................... 28 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES – ........................................................ 32 VI. ENERGY – .................................................................................... 35 VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – ............................................................. 39 VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – ............................................ 46 IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – ............................. 49 X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – ..................................... 52 XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING – ..................................................... 60 XII. MINERAL RESOURCES – ........................................................... 63 XIII. NOISE – ........................................................................................ 65 XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING – .................................................. 80 XV. PUBLIC SERVICES – ................................................................... 82 XVI. RECREATION – ............................................................................ 85 XVII. TRANSPORTATION – .................................................................. 87 XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES – ........................................... 90 Palm Villas at Millennium Page iv of 106 City of Palm Desert XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – ....................................... 94 XX. WILDFIRE – .................................................................................. 99 VII. LEAD AGENCY CONTACT: ............................................................................... 102 II. LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - Location Map .................................................................................................. 9 Figure 2 - Aerial Map ..................................................................................................... 10 Figure 3 - Site Plan........................................................................................................ 11 Figure 4 - Grading Plan ................................................................................................. 12 Figure 5 – Temporary Access Plan ............................................................................... 13 Figure 6 - Renderings .................................................................................................... 14 Figure 7 - Preliminary Landscape Plan ......................................................................... 15 Figure 8 - Photos ........................................................................................................... 16 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 1 of 106 City of Palm Desert III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. Project Case Number(s): PP/TPM/EA 22.003 / TPM 38366 Density Bonus Request B. Project Title: Palm Villas at Millennium C. Lead Agency: Nick Melloni, Associate Planner City of Palm Desert Planning Division 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578 760.346.0611 nmelloni@cityofpalmdesert.org D. Prepared By: McKenna Lanier Group, Inc. DBE, WBE, SBE 30650 Rancho California Road, Suite D406-166 Temecula, CA 92591 949.701.1606 Contact: Mary E. Lanier, President mary@mckennalanier.com E. Project Sponsor: Applicant/Developer Property Owner Danavon Horn Martin Alvarez, Owner Representative Palm Communities City of Palm Desert 100 Pacifica, Suite 203 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Irvine, CA 92618 Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578 760.413.5804 760.346.0611 dhorn@palmcommunities.com malvarez@cityofpalmdesert.org F. Project Location: The property is the vacant 10.49-acre site located on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive between Dinah Shore Drive and Technology Drive in the City of Palm Desert. The project site is identified on the U.S. Geological Service (USGS) 7.5-minute Myoma quadrangle map Section 28 and 33 Township 4 South, Range 6 East San Bernardino Principal Me- ridian and is comprised of Tax Assessor parcel numbers 694-120-028 and a 0.49-acre portion of 694-120-029. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 2 of 106 City of Palm Desert G. General Plan: The project site is Town Center Neighborhood, allowing residential densities from 7.0 to 40.0 dwelling units per acre, per the Palm Desert General Plan (PDGP). PDGP Chapter 3, page 30, uses include “a range of single-family and multi-family residential uses includ- ing duplex, triplex, quadruplex, rowhouses, townhouses, courtyard multi-family buildings and small-scale multi-family buildings organized along walkable streetscapes with fo- cused commercial/retail activity within walking distance.” H. Zoning: The Zoning designation of “Planned Residential - 22” allows a residential density of 22 units per acre. The maximum height is 40 feet or 3 stories. The purpose of this district is to provide for flexibility in residential development, by encouraging creative and imagina- tive design, and the development of parcels of land as coordinated projects involving a mixture of residential densities (4.0—40.0 du/ac), mixed housing types, and community facilities. The district is characterized as providing for the optimum integration of urban and natural amenities within developments and is organized around formal, walkable, and highly connected streetscapes. Per Article 25.10.050 B – Planned Residential District Standards 25.10.050B. Planned Residential Standards, the: B. Planned Residential District Standards. 1. Purpose. It is the purpose of the PR district to provide for flexibility in devel- opment, creative and imaginative design, and the development of parcels of land as coordinated projects involving a mixture of residential densities and housing types, and community facilities. The PR district is further in- tended to provide for the optimum integration of urban and natural amenities within developments. The PR district is also established to give a land de- veloper assurance that innovative and unique land development techniques will be given reasonable consideration for approval and to provide the city with assurances that the completed project will contain the character envi- sioned at the time of approval. 3. Maximum Project Densities. The maximum project density shall be as ex- pressed in dwelling units per gross acre of not more than the number fol- lowing the zoning symbol PR. The council shall determine the densities to be allowed within each PR district at the time the involved properties are rezoned and as designated on the zoning map within the following range: one to 40 dwelling units maximum per average gross acre. The density des- ignation shall mean dwelling units per average gross acre. For example, PR-7 means a planned residential development with 7 units per gross acre. 4. Maximum Density for “Affordable Projects.” For projects containing at least 20 percent units affordable to low-income households as defined by the Riverside County Housing Authority, a maximum density of 55 dwelling units per acre may be allowed by precise plan. To be eligible for this pro- gram, the developer must enter into a development agreement which will Palm Villas at Millennium Page 3 of 106 City of Palm Desert tie the zoning designation and the precise plan approval to affordable hous- ing performance standards. Zoning for the 0.49-acre portion is Open Space as outline in the Palm Desert Municipal Code Zoning. Per Article 25.22 – Special Districts Open Space (OS Open Space (OS). The open space district is intended to provide for areas reserved for parks, public or pri- vate recreation, protection of natural and developed open spaces, governmental public uses, or areas where a hazard to the public may exist. I. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan: The 10.49-acre project site is within the Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan (MPDSP) boundaries and is part of the master development, with the Specific Plan being the guid- ing land-use document. The project site is identified as Planning Area 8, designated for high-density residential development. As noted on page 25 of MPDSP, “the Apartment development is expected on both Planning Areas 7 and 8. In the case of Planning Area 8, it is expected that the City will develop, or cause to be developed, an affordable housing project. Development within these Planning Areas will be subject to the requirements of the Planned Residential zoning district, except as modified in Table 5, and under Section D. General Development Standards., page 25” The project site is within Planning Area 8 of the MPDSP. It is subject to the requirements of the “Multi-family residential” zoning district, except as modified in Table 5 of the MPDSP. Within Planning Area 8, the MPDSP allows a residential density of up to 22 units per acre. A 0.49-acre portion of Planning Area 9 is proposed to be added to Planning Area 8 through a Substantial Conformance. The MPDSP allows for administrative approval of modifications such as minor changes in Planning Area boundaries that increases or de- creases any Planning Area acreage by 15% or less (Pg. 34 of the MPDSP.) Through the substantial conformance, the 0.49 acres would become part of Planning Area 8, which allows for residential uses. The Substantial Conformance is an administrative approval by the Community Development Director. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 4 of 106 City of Palm Desert J. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Land Use General Plan Zoning MPD Specific Plan Land Use Designation/ Planning Area Project Site Vacant Town Center Neighbor- hood Planned Residential – 22 Millennium Specific Plan – High-Density Residen- tial Development PA High Density Residential Planning Area 8 North Vacant Land and the I-10 corridor Open Space Open Space PA (City Park) Planning Area 9 South Gerald Ford Drive and Vacant Land Town Center Neighborhood Planned Residential - 18 University Specific Plan East Vacant Land pro- posed for the Millen- nium Apartments Town Center Neighborhood Planned Residential - 22 PA High Density Residential Planning Area 7 West Single-family homes Town Center Neighborhood Planned Residential - 5 PA Residential Planning Area 1 K. Description of the Site and Project: Environmental Setting The 10.49-acre project site is vacant that has been mass graded as part of the MPDSP mass grading program. The property is located in an area for residential development. As described in J above, the properties to the north and east are vacant. To the west is single-family residential. Gerald Ford Drive bounds the subject property to the south, with vacant property beyond. Per the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Appendix 4), the site and adjacent prop- erties have been historically vacant from 1944 to 2021 and remains vacant. The property is generally flat and approximately 165 feet above average mean sea level. “Quaternary Deposits, Marine and Non-marine (Continental) Sedimentary Rocks (Qs) Pleistocene-Holocene-aged. Extensive marine and non-marine sand deposits, generally near the coast or desert playas are found at the site.” page 10, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Appendix 4). A multi-family residential project, the Millennium Apartments is proposed on the adjacent property to the east. Project Description The Palm Villas at Millennium project is a 241-unit affordable housing project on a 10.49- acres and will include a two lot Tentative Parcel Map subdivision. The City will process a Lot Line adjustment for a 0.49-acre portion of Planning Area 9 to be added to Planning Area 8 through a Substantial Conformance to create the 10.49-acre property. The MPDSP allows for administrative approval of modifications such as minor changes in Planning Area boundaries that increases or decreases any Planning Area acreage by 15% or less (Pg. 34 of the MPDSP.) Through the substantial conformance, the 0.49 acres would become part of Planning Area 8, which allows for residential uses. The Substantial Conformance is an administrative approval by the Community Development Director. The property is currently vacant and is surplus land owned by the City of Palm Desert. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 5 of 106 City of Palm Desert The project will be built in two phases. Phase I consists of 6.02 gross acres and includes five 3-story low rise twenty-four-unit apartment buildings with 120 total units, a Community Building, one manager’s unit, and Community Mail and Laundry Room. Amenities include a Community BBQ Area, Shaded Picnic Area, Tot Lot, Multi-sport Ball Court, and Mainte- nance Building. Phase II consists of 4.472 gross acres and includes five 3-story low rise twenty-four-unit apartment buildings with 120 total units, one manager’s unit, and a Laun- dry Room. Amenities include two BBQ Areas and a Shaded Picnic Area. Density Bonus Law The applicant requests a density increase of approximately 5% under Density Bonus Law (Government Code 65915), The Density Bonus request is to increase the density by ap- proximately 5%, from 22 dwelling units per acre to 23.5 dwelling units per acre. The site is a total of 10.49 acres and would be permitted a maximum of 230 units where the project proposes 241 units or an additional 11 units. Of the 241 units, 2 units will be manager’s units, with 239 that are 100% affordable. All units will be available to households whose incomes are between 30% and 60% of the Area Median Income. In addition, the applicant is requesting to utilize the parking ratios provision of the Density Bonus Law pursuant to Government Code Section 65915 (p) (5). The parking ratio provi- sion is as follows: (A) Zero to one-bedroom: one on-site parking space. (B) Two- to three-bedrooms: one and one-half on-site parking spaces. (C) Four- and more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces. Parking Requirements City Requirements Type Space Required Number of Units Total Required 3 Bedroom Units 2 61 122 2 Bedroom Units 2 150 300 1 Bedroom Unis 2 30 60 Total City Required Parking 482 Density Bonus Law Requirements Type Space Required Number of Units Total Required 3 Bedroom Units 1.5 61 92 2 Bedroom Units 1.5 150 225 1 Bedroom Unis 1 30 30 Total Density Bonus Law Required Parking 347 Parking Provided 350 Surplus Parking Over Required Density Bonus Law Requirements 3.0 The parking ratio provision of the Density Bonus Law reduces the parking requirements for housing projects. Per the City’s Zoning Code, the required on-site parking for the pro- ject is 482, with 350 parking spaces proposed, of which 36 are Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (EVCS). Palm Communities owns and manages affordable apartment commu- nities throughout California and has identified the number of parking spaces needed to support its tenants. No off-site parking is required for the proposed Palm Villas at Millen- nium. The project will take access from Dinah Shore Drive and Technology Drive, with Phase I taking primary access from Dinah Shore Drive. The access from Dinah Shore Drive is Palm Villas at Millennium Page 6 of 106 City of Palm Desert through an extension of Genesis Pointe across APN 694-120-029. Two easements will be required for Technology Drive, a 10-foot easement across APN 694-120-030 for shared access to APN 694-120-029 and a triangular easement on 694-120-029 to provide for shared the access (see grading plan for detail). Overall, the project is consistent with the General Plan. Even with the Density Bonus request under the MPDSP, an additional 7% or 23.5 dwelling units per acre will still be less than the maximum dwelling units permitted under the General Plan of 40 dwelling units per acre. At 40 dwelling units per acre, this project could have 419 units where only 241 units are proposed. Therefore, the project proposes 178 fewer units than that planned for and analyzed under the General Plan FEIR. IV. EXEMPTION AND STREAMLINING ANALYSIS: The proposed project is eligible for an Exemption under CEQA Guideline Section 15183. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 CEQA Guidelines §15183 allows for a streamlined environmental review process for pro- jects that are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an FEIR was certified, except as it might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. (a) CEQA mandates that projects which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an FEIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant ef- fects which are peculiar to the project or its site. This streamlines the review of such projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies. (b) In approving a project meeting the requirements of this section, a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency de- termines, in an initial study or other analysis: (1) Are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be lo- cated, (2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior FEIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent, (3) Are potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior FEIR prepared for the general plan, commu- nity plan or zoning action, or (4) Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the FEIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior FEIR. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 7 of 106 City of Palm Desert This analysis has been prepared to satisfy the requirements of CEQA Guidelines §15183. It analyzes the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. It evaluates whether they were adequately analyzed in the prior Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), such that the above-identified streamlining criteria apply. Palm Desert General Plan (PDGP) and Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) The proposed project is consistent with the City of Palm Desert General Plan (PDGP), Environmental Impact Report, and Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2015081020) and Technical Appendices (entire report referred to as FEIR), certified in 2016 by Resolution No. 2016-86, November 10, 2016. The PDGP provides a framework for future growth of the City and projects the development reasonably expected to occur during the 20-year build-out period. It includes a land-use map for future development and General Plan Elements that establish goals, policies, and programs that address the community's needs, environmental protection, and urban growth. The FEIR analyzed the potential environmental impacts associated with the adoption and implementation of the General Plan. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan “Town Center Neighborhood” land use designation assigned to it, allowing moderate to higher intensity neighborhood development with densities of up to 40 units per acre and a maximum building height of 3 stories. Given the project’s consistency with the PDGP, the City is not required to ex- amine environmental impacts already evaluated in the previously certified General Plan FEIR. The proposed project is evaluated for consistency with the intent of PDGP policies and conformance with development regulations. The FEIR serves as the basis of this Initial Study and analysis, and information contained in the FEIR is incorporated by reference, and mitigation measures that would apply to the proposed project are identified and are identified to be applied as conditions of approval. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan The project site is within the Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan (MPDSP) (adopted in 2015). The SP is divided into nine (9) Planning Areas, each designated for specific land use. The project site is within Planning Area 8, which designates the subject property for “High-Density Residential” (General Plan) land uses and is subject to the requirements of the “Multi-family Residential” zoning district. Planning Area 8 permits a residential density of up to 22 units per acre and a maximum height of up to 3 stories. The MPDSP estab- lishes development standards for building setbacks, building heights, and wall/hedge/fence heights. When the MPDSP Plan was prepared, the City approved an Initial Study, leading to a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The proposed project is subject to the Initial Study's anal- ysis and mitigation measures. Where they apply, they have been incorporated below. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 8 of 106 City of Palm Desert Initial Study and Notice of Exemption This Initial Study (IS) and Notice of Exemption (NOE) analyzes the proposed Palm Villas at Millennium in relation to its compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code [PRC] §§ 21000 et seq.); the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations [CCR] §§ 15000 et seq.); Further, the IS/NOE was prepared in the context of consistency with the City of Palm Desert General Plan (PDGP), its certified Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) (SCH #2015081020), and the Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan Mitigated Negative Declaration (MPDSP-MND). V. APPENDICES (Found as Separate Documents and Incorporated by Reference Into This NOE Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150): 1. Architectural Drawings 2. Civil Drawings 3. Acoustical Assessment Palm Villas at Millennium Project City of Palm Desert, California, prepared by Kimley Horn, December 2021 4. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by SCS Engineers, September 20, 2021 5. Revised Design Phase Geotechnical Investigation Report Proposed Palm Villas At Mil- lennium Apartment Complex 10-Acres Site, prepared by Petra GeoSciences Inc., Novem- ber 16, 2021 6. Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report Prepared by Kimley Horn and Associates dated March 2022 7. Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan, Prepared by Kimley Horn and Associ- ates dated March 2022 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 9 of 106 City of Palm Desert Figure 1 - Location Map Palm Villas at Millennium Page 10 of 106 City of Palm Desert Figure 2 - Aerial Map Palm Villas at Millennium Page 11 of 106 City of Palm Desert Figure 3 - Site Plan Palm Villas at Millennium Page 12 of 106 City of Palm Desert Figure 4 - Grading Plan Palm Villas at Millennium Page 13 of 106 City of Palm Desert Figure 5 – Temporary Access Plan Palm Villas at Millennium Page 14 of 106 City of Palm Desert Figure 6 - Renderings Palm Villas at Millennium Page 15 of 106 City of Palm Desert Figure 7 - Preliminary Landscape Plan Palm Villas at Millennium Page 16 of 106 City of Palm Desert Figure 8 - Photos Palm Villas at Millennium Page 17 of 106 City of Palm Desert VI. REASONS WHY THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT: ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact I. AESTHETICS – Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099 – Modernization of Transportation Analysis for Transit-Oriented Infill Projects – Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly ac- cessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Aesthetics 4.1  FEIR Technical Background Report 2. Aesthetics 3. Municipal Code Title 24 Environmental Conservation Article 24 – Outdoor Lighting Requirements 4. CalTrans Scenic Highways – Accessed June 7, 2022 a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? As noted in the MSP MND, “The primary scenic viewsheds in the project area in- clude the San Jacinto, Santa Rosa, and San Bernardino Mountain ranges that en- circle the desert floor. Scenic resources are visible along essentially all major road- ways in the City and project area. Surrounding views have been impacted to some extent by surrounding commercial and residential development to the south, com- mercial development to the east, residential development to the west, and the I-10 freeway and railroad corridor to the north. The proposed project is not expected to result in development that will significantly impact a scenic vista. Scenic vistas have the potential to be impacted for lands to the south of the proposed project. Lands to the west and southwest occur at a higher elevation than the proposed project, across Portola Avenue. As a result, view corridors for scenic vistas will not be impacted for the residential units west and southwest of the proposed project. The project would not have any significant impact on scenic resources as none occur onsite or in the immediate vicinity. The primary scenic viewsheds in the pro- ject area include the San Jacinto, Santa Rosa, and San Bernardino Mountain ranges that surround the desert floor.” Palm Villas at Millennium Page 18 of 106 City of Palm Desert The 34.52 foot/3 story height proposed for the project could partially limit views of the San Bernardino Mountains to the north. The property to the north is designated for a park and future development to the south of the project area would not impact views of the San Jacinto Mountains to the west and southwest. However, devel- opment to the south will occur at a higher base elevation, which will somewhat lessen the potential for impact, insofar as the finished floor on the project site will be 6 to 10 feet below the finished floor elevation of projects to the south. The pro- ject also proposes multiple buildings, rather than one large structure, which pro- vides variation and articulation along Gerald Ford Drive, allowing view corridors through to the north and south and reducing overall impacts on viewsheds. The project will have a less than significant impact on scenic vistas directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. It would not result in a substantial change in the scenic views available in the surrounding area. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? The site is currently vacant with sparse vegetation regrowth and signs of site dis- turbance. The site does not contain on-site scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings, or historical buildings. A CalTrans Scenic Highways Program review found that Interstate 10 in Palm Desert is not a designated state scenic highway. Gerald Ford Drive is identified as a local scenic roadway. The closest designated scenic highway is State Route 74, located in Palm Desert south of Highway 111 approximately 5 miles southwest of the project site. As noted in the FEIR, “The intent of the scenic roadway designation is to require special setbacks and land- scaping where applicable.” With the addition of the setback and landscaping, the project will have no impact directly, indirectly, or cumulatively on scenic resources within a state or City designated scenic highway/corridor. c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? The project site is located in an area with other undeveloped parcels within an urbanized area, and it does not conflict with the zoning or other regulations gov- erning scenic quality. The project proposed is being developed within the architec- tural and landscape requirements. The project design was reviewed through the Architectural and Precise Planning process. It will utilize desert colors in architec- ture, site features, and an approved plant palette in keeping with the surrounding desert environment. In summary, the project will comply with the applicable zoning and other regula- tions governing scenic quality. In addition, both indirectly and cumulatively, the project would not conflict with appropriate zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. As designed and conditioned, the project will have a less than sig- nificant impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively, on the existing visual charac- ter. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 19 of 106 City of Palm Desert d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely af- fect day or nighttime views in the area? Lighting and glare would increase compared to the currently vacant lot but still would be compatible with surrounding residential uses. The project will be required to comply with the City’s lighting requirements in Chapter 24.16 Outdoor Lighting Requirements. The impacts would be reduced through proper shielding of light sources and light spillage on adjacent properties. Adherence to the City’s provi- sions, existing regulations, and implementation of the policies of the PDGP will ensure that nighttime light and daytime glare from the project will be minimized and no significant impacts will occur. A photometric plan will be submitted and approved prior to the approval of the project, and all required conditions of approval will be applied. Adherence to the City’s provisions and other existing regulations and implementa- tion of the policies of the General Plan will ensure that nighttime light and daytime glare from the project will be minimized and no significant impacts will occur. As designed and conditioned, the impacts of lighting and glare will be less than sig- nificant, directly, indirectly, and cumulatively. AESTHETICS CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, implementing the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on aesthetics. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with aesthetics, as they would for other projects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately ad- dressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Land Use and Community Character Element Policy 1.1 Scale of development. Require new development along the city’s corridors to use design techniques to moderate height and use and ensure compatible fit with sur- rounding development. Policy 2.3 Landscaping. Require development projects to incorporate high quality land- scaping in order to extend and enhance the green space network of the city. Policy 2.5 Streetscape. Enhance pedestrian experience through streetscape improve- ments that could include new street lighting, tree planting, and easement dedications to increase the size of sidewalks and pedestrian amenities. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 20 of 106 City of Palm Desert Environmental Resources Element Policy 2.1 View corridor preservation. Protect and preserve existing, signature views of the hills and mountains from the city. AESTHETICS DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. Nothing unusual or peculiar about the proposed project or subject parcels would change or affect the aesthetic impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject parcel is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts to aesthetics related to the proposed project or subject parcels were ana- lyzed in the FEIR and found consistent. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative aesthetic impacts are associated with the pro- posed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known when the FEIR was certified, indicating that the project's aesthetic impact would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to the parcels or in the project area that would require further environ- mental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES – In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agen- cies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement meth- odology provided in Forest protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. – Would the pro- ject: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farm- land, or Farmland of Statewide Im- portance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farm- land Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricul- tural use or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as de- fined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Palm Villas at Millennium Page 21 of 106 City of Palm Desert ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES – In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agen- cies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement meth- odology provided in Forest protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. – Would the pro- ject: Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or con- version of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing en- vironment which, due to their location or nature, could result in the conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or con- version of forest land to non-forest use? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Agricultural and Forest Resources 4.2  FEIR Technical Background Report 3. Agricultural Resources  FEIR Technical Background Report Figure 3-1 Farmland in Palm Desert and Sphere of Influence 3. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program – Accessed June 15, 2022 4. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Timberland Conservation Program 5. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Prepared by SCS Engineers dated September 20, 2021 a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Im- portance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farm- land Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Per the FEIR, “As identified by the California Department of Conservation (2014) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), there is no Prime Farmland of Statewide Importance in the project site.” A review of the FMMP found the project to be designated “Other Land.” The FMMP definition of “Other Land” is below, and it is not farmland. Other Land (X): Land which does not meet the criteria of any other category. Typ- ical uses include low density rural development, heavily forested land, mined land, or government land with restrictions on use. The property is vacant and surrounded by vacant land and single-family residential and, as noted above, is not designated for farmland. Therefore, the project would not affect any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Palm Villas at Millennium Page 22 of 106 City of Palm Desert Importance, and no impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively, would occur to farmland. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act con- tract? The property has a Zoning designation of “Planned Residential - 22,” which allows a residential density of 22 units per acre and is not intended for agricultural uses. Per the FEIR, “There are no Williamson Act contracted lands in the Planning Area.” The project will have no impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively, on zoning for agricultural use or on 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 Pub- lic Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Produc- tion (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? The project site is not located in a forest, and no timberland exists on the site. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the existing zoning for or cause re- zoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. The project will have no impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? There is no commercial forestry or timber production industry on the project site. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to a non-forest use. The project will have no impact, directly, indi- rectly, or cumulatively. e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their loca- tion or nature, could result in the conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? The project site has been vacant from 1944 to the present. Therefore, the project would not result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use, and it will have no impact directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project would not result in the loss or conversion of agricultural or forest land. No impact would occur. The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use designation assigned by the PDGP and analyzed and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory require- ments, and PDGP policies and programs implementing the PDGP would have no impact on agricultural and forestry resources. No agricultural or forestry uses are proposed on the proposed project site. The project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was Palm Villas at Millennium Page 23 of 106 City of Palm Desert adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. Nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels would change or affect the agriculture and forestry resources impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject parcel is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designa- tion. 2. Impacts on agriculture and forestry resources related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR and found consistent. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative agriculture and forestry resources impacts are associated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the project's agriculture and forestry resources impact would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact III. AIR QUALITY – Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attain- ment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely af- fecting a substantial number of people? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Air Quality 4.3 3. PD Municipal Code Title 15 Buildings and Construction 4. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND Palm Villas at Millennium Page 24 of 106 City of Palm Desert a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? As noted in the General Plan Update University Neighborhood Specific Plan Envi- ronmental Impact Report, page 4.3-1, “Palm Desert is located in the Salton Sea Air Basin (Basin) and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the air pollution control district principally responsible for comprehensive air pol- lution control in the Basin.” Vehicle use, energy consumption, and associated air pollutant emissions are directly related to population growth. A project may be in- consistent with the 2016 SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) if it would generate population, housing, or employment growth exceeding the fore- casts for developing the AQMP. SCAQMD 2016 AQMP is based upon Southern California Association of Govern- ments (SCAG) growth forecasts in their Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), which in turn is based upon the City’s General Plan. Since the Millennium Specific Plan is an implementation toll of the City’s General Plan and the proposed project is consistent with the Specific Plan, the project will not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP. Therefore, it will have a less than significant impact. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Responses b) and c): The project is an affordable multi-family residential development that will conform to the City’s General Plan, Specific Plan, and Zoning standards. The project will result in 178 fewer dwelling units than initially planned under the General Plan, which permits 40 dwelling units to the acre, and the project is building 23.5 units per acre. As such, the temporary construction impacts and final operational im- pacts compared to the maximum buildout of the site under the General Plan des- ignation will be less. The project would be expected to have lower air emissions than those analyzed in the FEIR due primarily to the significant reduction in vehi- cles accessing the site. The FEIR determined that implementing the General Plan would result in less than significant air quality impacts because the General Plan would enforce SCAQMD Rules and Regulations that would help reduce short-term emissions and provide mitigation measures as necessary on a case-by-case basis. In this case, the anal- ysis contained in the Specific Plan Initial Study found that implementing fugitive dust control plans consistent with SCAQMD Rules 403 and 403.1 would ade- quately mitigate construction impacts. The project will be required to comply with this requirement as a standard condition of approval. The project will also be re- quired to implement the following mitigation measures from the Millennium Specific Plan Mitigated Negative Declaration (pages 23 to 25) as conditions of approval. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 25 of 106 City of Palm Desert COA AIR-1: All construction equipment shall be equipped with Tier 4 Interim en- gines when possible. COA AIR-2: Construction equipment, delivery trucks, worker vehicles, and haul trucks will limit idling time to no more than 5 minutes. COA AIR-3: The grading contractor shall certify in writing that all construction equipment is properly serviced and maintained in good operating conditions. Certification shall be provided to City Engineer for review and approval. COA AIR-4: Diesel-powered construction equipment shall utilize aqueous diesel fuels and be equipped with diesel oxidation catalysts. COA AIR-5: A fugitive dust plan shall be prepared for the proposed project and shall be approved by the City Engineer. Said plan shall include but not be limited to the following best management practices:  Chemically treat soil where activity will cease for at least four consecutive days;  All construction grading operations and earth moving opera- tions shall cease when winds exceed 25 miles per hour;  Water site and equipment at least 3 times per day;  Operate street-sweepers on paved roads adjacent to the site;  Establish and strictly enforce limits of grading for each phase of development; and/or  Stabilize and re-vegetate areas of temporary disturbance needed to accomplish each phase of development. The proposed project would generate temporary air pollutant emissions during construction and long-term operational emissions from stationary sources (elec- tricity and natural gas) and vehicle trips. Pollutant emissions could adversely im- pact sensitive receptors in the project vicinity. The project’s residents will be sen- sitive receptors, and the nearest sensitive land uses to the project site are single- family residences located northwest of the subject property. The primary source of air emissions for the proposed project will be vehicle emissions from local road- ways and the I-10 freeway, which is approximately 585 feet northeast of the project site. With the implementation of the above-noted conditions of approval for construction impacts, the project will have a less than significant impact on a net increase of a criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment or on exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affect- ing a substantial number of people? SCAQMD Rule 402, commonly referred to as the public nuisance rule, prohibits emissions from any source in such quantities of air contaminants or other material Palm Villas at Millennium Page 26 of 106 City of Palm Desert that cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to the public health or dam- age to property. The potential for an operation to result in odor complaints from a “considerable” number of persons in the area would be considered to be a signifi- cant, adverse odor impact. The project could generate odors during construction (i.e., from diesel exhaust and the application of architectural coatings); however, these would be temporary and intermittent, and, given that the project is not industrial or similar, no substantial long-term odor impacts would occur. During long-term operation, residential units will generate odors from cooking and other typical household activities but will not generate objectionable odors. There- fore, impacts from objectionable odors will be less than significant. Therefore, compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 will ensure that a less than sig- nificant impact from odors will occur during the temporary construction and oper- ational stages. AIR QUALITY CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, implementing the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on air quality. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with air quality, as they would for other projects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately ad- dressed in the FEIR and would not change. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Mobility Element Policy 3.1 Pedestrian Network. Provide a safe and convenient circulation system for pedestrians that include sidewalks, crosswalks, places to sit and gather, appropriate street lighting, buffers from moving vehicles, shading, and amenities for people of all ages. 4.3 Bicycle Parking. Require public and private development to provide sufficient bicycle parking. Land Use and Community Character Element Policy 3.1 Complete neighborhoods. Complete neighborhoods. Through the develop- ment entitlement process, ensure that all new Neighborhoods (areas with a “Neighbor- hood” General Plan Designation) are complete and well-structured such that the physical layout and land use mix promote walking to services, biking, and transit use, are family friendly and address the needs of multiple ages and physical abilities. New neighbor- hoods should have the following characteristics: Palm Villas at Millennium Page 27 of 106 City of Palm Desert • Contain short, walkable block lengths. • Contain a high level of connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles where practicable. • Are organized around a central focal point such as a park, school, civic building, or neighborhood retail such that most homes are no more than one-quarter mile from this focal point. • Have goods and services within a short walking distance. • Contain a diversity of housing types, where possible. • Have homes with entries and windows facing the street. • Have a grid or modified grid street network (except where topography necessitates another street network layout). • Provide a diversity of architectural styles. Policy 3.14: Access to daily activities. Require development patterns such that the majority of residents are within one-half mile walking distance to a variety of neighborhood goods and services, such as supermarkets, restaurants, churches, cafes, dry cleaners, laundromats, farmers markets, banks, hair care, pharmacies, and similar uses. Policy 6.1: Near-source air quality impacts. Avoid locating new air quality-sensitive uses (schools, childcare centers, senior centers, medical facilities, and residences) in proximity to sources of localized air pollution (e.g., Interstate 10, high traffic roads, certain industrial facilities), and vice versa. Where such uses are located within 500 feet of each other, require preparation of a health impact assessment (HIA) or similarly effective health analysis as part of the CEQA environmental review process, to analyze the significance of the health impact on sensitive land uses and incorporate project-specific mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts. For sensitive land uses that cannot be avoided within 500 feet of sources of localized air pollution, potential design mitigation options include: • Providing residential units with individual HVAC systems in order to allow adequate ventilation with windows closed. • Locating air intake systems for heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) sys- tems as far away from existing air pollution sources as possible. • Using HEPA air filters in the HVAC system and developing a maintenance plan to ensure the filtering system is properly maintained. • Utilizing only fixed windows next to any existing sources of pollution. • Using sound walls, berms, and vegetation as physical barriers. • Notifying new potential home buyers of risks from air pollution. Policy 6.2: Healthy buildings. Require new development to meet the State’s Green Build- ing Code standards for indoor air quality performance, and promote green building prac- tices that support “healthy buildings,” such as low VOC materials, environmental tobacco smoke control, and indoor air quality construction pollution prevention techniques. Policy 6.3: Sensitive receptors. Avoid the siting of new projects and land uses that would produce localized air pollution in a way that would adversely impact existing air quality-sensitive receptors including schools, childcare centers, senior housing, and sub- sidized affordable housing. The recommended minimum distance separating these uses Palm Villas at Millennium Page 28 of 106 City of Palm Desert should be 500 feet. When a minimum distance of 500 feet cannot be avoided, a health impact assessment (HIA) shall be completed in compliance with Policy 6.1. Environmental Resource Element Policy 3.1 Electric vehicles. Encourage the use of electric vehicles (EV), including golf carts and Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEV), by encouraging developments to pro- vide EV and NEV charging stations, street systems, and other infrastructure that support the use of EVs. Similarly, encourage the use of renewable energy sources to power EV plug-in stations. Policy 3.1 Construction-related emissions. Require construction activities, including on-site building and the transport of materials, to limit emissions and dust. AIR QUALITY DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. Nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels would change or affect the air quality impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject parcel is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts on air quality related to the proposed project or subject parcels were ana- lyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative air quality impacts are associated with the pro- posed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the air quality materials impact of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No 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 lo- cal or regional plans, policies, or regula- tions or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the Palm Villas at Millennium Page 29 of 106 City of Palm Desert ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project: California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (in- cluding, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct re- moval, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the move- ment of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with an established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordi- nances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or or- dinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or another approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Biological Resources 4.5  FEIR Technical Background Report 5. Biological Resources  FEIR Technical Background Report Figure 5.1 Vegetation (CVMSHCP) and 5.4 Federal and State Existing Conservation Lands 3. Municipal Code Title 24 Environmental Conservation Article 24 Chapter 24.20 Stormwater Man- agement and Discharge Control 4. Coachella Valley Multiple Species Conservation Program (CVHMSCP) 5. US Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Mapper, accessed June 10, 2022, 2022 6. PD 80, LLC Master Plan and Development Project Biological Resources Assessment” prepared by AMEC July 2014 7. Phase I ESA prepared by SCS Engineers, dated September 20, 2021 a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifi- cations, 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? The subject property is located in an urbanized area of the City and is adjacent to Gerald Ford Drive, vacant lands, and previously disturbed. The site is currently vacant and has been vacant since 1944. The site does not contain designated critical habitat for threatened or endangered or local or regional plans, including the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Conservation Program (CVHMSCP). As part of the MPDSP, a project-specific biological resources evaluation was com- pleted. It is therefore a less than significant impact. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 30 of 106 City of Palm Desert b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? There are no riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities on-site; there- fore, there are no impacts on these features. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? There are no jurisdictional waters or wetlands on-site; therefore, there are no im- pacts on these features. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with an established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? There are no wildlife corridors or habitat linkages on-site; therefore, there are no impacts on these resources. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological re- sources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? There are no trees on the property to preserve. The City implements the CVMSHCP. The proposed project will be required to pay the mitigation fee when development occurs. This fee is designed to offset potential impacts and assure that impacts to sensitive species are less than significant. The project will not im- pact local policies or conservation plans. As noted in this section, there are no trees or sensitive biological species to protect on the property so the project will have no impact. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or another approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The project will have no impact on the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs that implementing the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on biological resources. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs for biological resources. No significant off-site or Palm Villas at Millennium Page 31 of 106 City of Palm Desert cumulative biological resources impacts were associated with the proposed project that were not addressed in the FEIR. The project involves the development of a vacant parcel with land use that, subject to the approval of a Precise Plan, is consistent with the land use analyzed in the FEIR. Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 (FEIR p. 4.5-24 to 4.5-25) was in- cluded in the FEIR to reduce potential impacts on sensitive species and habitats by re- quiring applicants of future development projects that disturb undeveloped land to prepare and submit biological resources surveys and, as applicable, obtain permits and authori- zations from relevant federal and state agencies to address and minimize potential pro- ject-related impacts on sensitive species and habitats, nesting birds (burrowing owl). Further, the MPDSP IS, and the site-specific survey found no sensitive habitat. The pro- posed project would comply with required mitigation through conditions of approval and result in a less than significant impact on biological resources. To ensure compliance with the FEIR, MPDSP IS conditions of approval are to be implemented to prepare pre-con- struction surveys for burrowing owls and migratory birds, consistent with state and federal requirements. COA BIO-1: To comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), any vegetation or tree removal, or other ground disturbing activities occurring on any planning area between January 1 and August 31 with the potential to impact nesting birds shall be preceded by a nesting bird survey to determine if there is a potential impact to such species. All vegetation and suitable nesting habitat (includ- ing open ground) on the project site, whether or not it will be removed or disturbed, shall be surveyed for nesting birds. If no nests are present, this mitigation measure will be concluded. If active nests of any native bird are found on site they will be avoided until after the young have fledged. COA BIO-2: A protocol compliant burrowing owl survey will be conducted prior to the initiation of ground disturbing activities on any part of the project site. Land Use and Community Character Element Policy 1.2 Open space preservation. Balance the development of the city with the pro- vision of open space, and especially the hillsides surrounding the City, as to create both high quality urban areas and high quality open space. Environmental Resources Element Policy 4.3 Landscape design. Continue to encourage new developments to incorporate native vegetation materials into landscape plans and prohibit the use of species known to be invasive according to the California Invasive Plant Inventory. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. Nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels would change or affect the biological resources analyzed in the FEIR. The subject parcels have been vacant from 1944 to the present. The subject parcels are designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is consistent with multi- family residential uses listed under the designation. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 32 of 106 City of Palm Desert 2. Impacts on biological resources related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative biological resource impacts are associated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use as- signed to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. The site remains vacant, and no changes have occurred on or in the project area that would require further en- vironmental analysis. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the biological resource impacts of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological re- source pursuant to §15064.5? c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formally dedi- cated cemeteries? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR) 3.  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Cultural Resource 4.6.  FEIR Technical Background Report 6.0 Cultural Resources  FEIR Technical Background Report 6.0 Figure 6-1: Areas Surveyed for Cultural Re- sources  FEIR Technical Background Report 6.0 Figure 6-2: Palm Desert Landmarks  FEIR Technical Background Report 6.0 Appendix 4.0 Prehistoric and Historic Overview 4. Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report, prepared by CRM TECH, July 24, 2014 a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical re- source pursuant to §15064.5? The project site has been vacant since 1944. The FEIR evaluated the potential effects related to cultural resources. Figure 6.0: Palm Desert Register Landmarks depicts the location of historic landmarks in the City. The project site is not identi- fied on the list. Further, as required by the FEIR, as part of the MPDSP MND, a Historical and Archaeological Resources Survey was conducted for the 152-acre proposed site and planning area. As indicated in the Resources Survey, findings were established through a search of historical/archaeological resources records, Palm Villas at Millennium Page 33 of 106 City of Palm Desert historical background research, contact with Native American representatives, and an intensive-level field survey. According to the survey, there is no further evidence of historical or archaeological resources within the survey area. The FEIR determined that implementing the General Plan would significantly im- pact historical, tribal, and archaeological resources. Mitigation Measures 4.6-2a through 4.6-2d (FEIR p. 4.6-18) were established for projects involving ground dis- turbance, such as grading and excavation. Special studies are required for project sites to identify on-site archaeological resources and provide detailed mitigation plans if the site is determined to be moderately to highly sensitive for a resource. The MPDSP IS/MND included an archaeological resource study, which found no cultural resources and identified no impact on archaeological or cultural resources. The FEIR determined that, with mitigation, potentially significant impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. Further, the MSP IS/MND found no re- sources through a site-specific archaeological study. There is no substantial new information indicating that the cultural resource im- pacts of the project would be more severe than those described in the FEIR. No changes have occurred on the subject parcel or the project area that would require further environmental analysis. Therefore, the project will have less than significant impact on a historic or ar- chaeological resource. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? See response a) above. c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formally dedicated cemeteries? No cemeteries or human remains are known to occur on-site, and it is unlikely that human remains will be uncovered during project development. Pursuant to Public Resources Code §5097.98 and Health and Safety Code §7050.5, in the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, the steps laid out in Public Resources Code §5097.98 and Health and Safety Code §7050.5 shall be followed. Following the requirements of Public Resources Code §5097.98 and Health and Safety Code §7050.5 will en- sure that if human remains are discovered, they will be handled appropriately. It is not anticipated that any human remains will be encountered during the develop- ment of the project site. Therefore, the project will have less than significant im- pact on human remains. CULTURAL RESOURCES CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, Palm Villas at Millennium Page 34 of 106 City of Palm Desert the implementation of the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on cultural resources, as the properties are vacant and do not contain historical resources, land- marks, or points of interest. A 2014 Historical Resources and Archaeological Resources Survey was conducted for the MPDSP IS. Historical/archaeological resources records and contact with Native American representatives were completed. An intensive field sur- vey was conducted. The Survey found no evidence of historical or archaeological re- sources in the project area. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, General Plan policies, and programs associated with cultural resources, as would other projects in the City. Completion of the Survey completed for the MPDSP IS/MND implemented mitigation 4.6-2a through 4.6-2d (FEIR p. 4.6-18 and 5.6-19) for the project and addressed ground disturbance, such as grading and excavation. The pro- posed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Environmental Resources Element Policy 9.1 Disturbance of human remains. In areas where there is a high chance that human remains may be present, the City will require proposed projects to conduct a sur- vey to establish occurrence of human remains, if any. If human remains are discovered on proposed project sites, the project must implement mitigation measures to prevent impacts to human remains in order to receive permit approval. Policy 9.2 Discovery of human remains. Require that any human remains discovered during implementation of public and private projects within the City be treated with respect and dignity and fully comply with the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and other appropriate laws Policy 9.4 Protected sites. Require sites with significant cultural resources to be pro- tected. 9.5 Preservation of historic resources. Encourage the preservation of historic re- sources, when practical. When it is not practical to preserve a historic resource in its entirety, the City will require the architectural details and design elements of historic struc- tures to be preserved during renovations and remodels as much as feasible. Policy 9.3 Tribal coordination. Require notification of California Native American tribes and organizations of proposed projects that have the potential to adversely impact cultural resources. Policy 10 Mitigation and preservation of cultural resources. Require development to avoid archaeological and paleontological resources, whenever possible. If complete avoidance is not possible, require development to minimize and fully mitigate the impacts to the resource. CULTURAL RESOURCE DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. Nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels would change or affect the cultural resource impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The MPDSP IS/MND included an archaeological resource study, found no cultural resources, Palm Villas at Millennium Page 35 of 106 City of Palm Desert and identified no impact on cultural resources. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is consistent with multi- family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts on cultural resources related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative cultural resource impacts are associated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use as- signed to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the cultural resources impact of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. Further, the MPDSP IS/MND included an archaeological resource study, which found no cultural re- sources and identified no impact on cultural resources. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VI. ENERGY – Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environ- mental impact due to wasteful, ineffi- cient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project con- struction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy effi- ciency? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Public Services and Utilities 4.14-1  FEIR Technical Background Report 15.0 Public Services Utilities, and Recreation p. 15- 10, 11  FEIR Technical Background Report 16. Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change p. 16- 9 through 16-13 3. PD Municipal Code Title 15 Buildings and Construction Chapter 15.14 Energy Code a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inef- ficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation? Construction Energy Demand Construction of the project would consume energy primarily from fuel consumed by construction vehicles and equipment. Fossil fuels used for construction vehicles and other equipment would be used during site clearing, grading, paving, and Palm Villas at Millennium Page 36 of 106 City of Palm Desert building construction. Fuel consumed during construction would be temporary and would not represent a significant demand on available fuel. Project-related design features and conditions would also reduce fuel and energy during construction. Overall, fuel and energy reductions are difficult to quantify; however, certain air quality emission reduction measures would also reduce fuel and electricity use during the project's construction and reduce energy consump- tion by requiring the contractor to minimize equipment idling time. Additionally, all diesel-fueled construction vehicles would be required to meet the latest emissions standards. These measures would further reduce fuel and energy use during all stages of construction and avoid wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary fuel energy consumption. The project implementation would not induce substantial growth and would not result in a significant generation of construction or operational energy usage. Dur- ing operation, energy consumption would involve the same usage and activities as other multi-family residential development projects. The equipment used to implement the infrastructure improvements would directly consume a minimal amount of energy and comply with the state’s current energy efficiency standards. Therefore, the project would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary fuel energy consumption. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard. Cumulative Impacts As discussed above, the proposed project would not cause a new energy impact to occur, nor an increase in the severity of an energy impact previously identified in the General Plan FEIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause a new cumulative impact or a substantial increase in the severity of a cumulative impact previously disclosed. Construction Energy Efficiency/Conservation Measures Construction equipment used over the construction phase would conform to CARB regulations and California emissions standards and is evidence of related fuel ef- ficiencies. In addition, the CARB Airborne Toxic Control Measure limits the idling times of construction vehicles to no more than five minutes, thereby minimizing unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of con- struction equipment. Furthermore, the project has been designed to comply with California’s Energy Efficiency and 2019 CALGreen Standards. Construction of the proposed residential (multi-family) development would require the typical use of energy resources. No unusual project characteristics or construc- tion processes would require the use of equipment that would be more energy- intensive than is used for comparable activities; or equipment that would not con- form to current emissions standards (and related fuel efficiencies). Equipment em- ployed in the project's construction would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or un- necessary fuel consumption and would be less than significant. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 37 of 106 City of Palm Desert Operational Energy Demand Energy consumption in support of or related to project operations would include tenant transportation energy demands and apartment energy demands. Transportation Fuel Consumption Access to/from the project site is primarily from existing roads. Technology Drive will receive frontage improvements as secondary access to Phase I. The largest source of operational energy use would be the vehicle operation of tenants. The site is in an urbanized area within the City of Palm Desert. Therefore, the proposed project's electricity and natural gas demand was analyzed in the FEIR and are less than significant. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Regarding the State’s Energy Plan and compliance with Title 24 CCR energy effi- ciency standards, the applicant must comply with the California Green Building Standard Code requirements for energy-efficient buildings and appliances and util- ity energy efficiency programs implemented by Southern California Edison and Southern California Gas. Regarding the State’s Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards, the project would be required to meet or exceed the energy standards established in the California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11 (CALGreen). CalGreen Stand- ards require that new buildings reduce water consumption, employ building com- missioning to increase building system efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills, use LED lighting, and install low pollutant-emitting finish materials. The project will implement Title 15.14 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Therefore, the project will not conflict with or obstruct a state or local renewable energy or energy efficiency plan. As discussed above, the project would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnec- essary energy consumption. Therefore, the project would not conflict with or ob- struct any state or local renewable or energy efficiency plans. No impact would occur. ENERGY CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, the implementation of the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on energy. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with energy applicable to residential development. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 38 of 106 City of Palm Desert The proposed project will be required to implement the same standard requirements, and conformance with the City’s Building Code, as other development projects in the City. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change from that identified as a result of the pro- posed project. The proposed project would not cause a new cumulative impact or a substantial increase in the severity of a cumulative impact previously disclosed. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Environmental Resources Element Policy 5.1 Designing for warming temperatures. When reviewing development pro- posals, encourage applicants and designers to consider warming temperatures in the de- sign of cooling systems. Policy 6.1 Passive solar design. Require new buildings to incorporate energy efficient building and site design strategies for the desert environment that include appropriate solar orientation, thermal mass, use of natural daylight and ventilation, and shading. Policy 6.2 Alternative energy. Continue to promote the incorporation of alternative en- ergy generation (e.g., solar, wind, biomass) in public and private development. Policy 6.3 Energy Efficient Buildings. Encourage new buildings and buildings under- going major retrofits to exceed Title 24 energy efficiency standards. Policy 7.1 Affordable housing – green design. Require affordable housing develop- ments to prioritize green building design features that reduce monthly utility costs, en- hance occupant health, and lower the overall cost of housing. ENERGY DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. There is nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels that would change or affect the energy impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject prop- erty is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is con- sistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts on energy related to the proposed project or subject parcels were ana- lyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative energy impacts are associated with the pro- posed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the energy impact of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 39 of 106 City of Palm Desert ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project: a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map is- sued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unsta- ble as a result of the project, and poten- tially result in on- or off-site landslide, lat- eral 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 direct or indirect risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately sup- porting the use of septic tanks or alterna- tive wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Geology and Soils 4.7.  FEIR Technical Background Report 7.0 Geology and Soils  FEIR Technical Background Report 7.0 Figure 7.2: Wind Erosion Hazard Zones (High)  FEIR Technical Background Report 7.0 Figure 7.3: NRCS Soils  FEIR Technical Background Report 7.0 Figure 7.4: Faults and Fault Zones  FEIR Technical Background Report 7.0 Figure 7.5: Landslide Susceptibility  FEIR Technical Background Report 7.0 Figure 7.6: Liquefaction Susceptibility 3. PD Municipal Code Title 15 Buildings and Construction 4. Palm Desert General Plan; Geotechnical Investigation Proposed PD 80 Centre at University Park,” prepared by Sladden Engineering July 21, 2014 5. Revised Design-Phase Geotechnical Investigation Report Proposed Palm Villas at Millennium Apartment Complex. APN 694-120-028 by PETRA GOSCIENCES, Inc. dated November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 40 of 106 City of Palm Desert ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project: 6. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Prepared by SCS Engineers dated September 20, 2021 7. California Department of Conservation EQ Zapp – California Earthquake Hazards Zone Applica- tion, accessed May 3, 2022 8. USGS Interactive Fault Map application, accessed May 3, 2022 This section utilizes the FEIR and references a Geotechnical Investigation prepared for the subject property by Sladden Engineering on July 21, 2014, as part of the MPDSP. Results of the report, including recommended mitigation measures, are summarized be- low. Further, as part of the project, a site-specific Revised Design-Phase Geotechnical Investigation Report by Petra GeoSciences, Inc., dated November 16, 2021, was pre- pared for the project and is cited in this section. a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geol- ogist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. The FEIR Technical Background Report states that “The city and SOI are not located within a fault zone, as defined by the Alquist-Priolo Act (CGS 2014). Based on information from the CGS, no known major active faults are located within the city and SOI. According to the Southern California Earthquake Data Center (SCEC), the closest active faults to the city of Palm Desert are the San Andreas Fault, located approximately 4 miles to the north; the San Jacinto fault located 10 miles to the southwest; and the Elsi- nore Fault, located 30 miles to the southwest (SCEC 2014). (Figure 7-4).” The Petra Revised Geotechnical Investigation substantiates this: "The Coachella Valley is a seismically active area and numerous northwest- trending active faults have been documented within the area. The San An- dreas fault zone is the most prominent fault within the Coachella Valley, and is considered to be “active”. An “active” fault is defined as a fault that has had displacement within the Holocene epoch, or last 11,000± years. Based on our review of the referenced geologic maps and literature, no active faults are known to project through the property. Furthermore, the site does not lie within the boundaries of an “Earthquake Fault Zone” as defined by the State of California in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (CGS, 2018) and the County of Riverside Map My County System. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (AP Act) defines an active fault as one that “has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years).” The main objective of the AP Act is to prevent the con- struction of dwellings on top of active faults that could displace the ground surface resulting in loss of life and property. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 41 of 106 City of Palm Desert Therefore, the project will have less than significant impact on potential hazards associated with fault rupture directly, indirectly, and cumulatively. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Ground shaking hazards caused by earthquakes along active regional faults exists. The California Building Code requires use-modified spectral accelerations and velocities for most structural designs. Based on this anal- ysis, compliance with an approved geotechnical report, the California Build- ing Code, and the City of Palm Desert Municipal Code will ensure that risks associated with ground shaking are considered less than significant, di- rectly, indirectly, and cumulatively. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? As noted in the FEIR and MPDSP IS/MND, “According to the County of Riverside, the subject site is located in an area of moderate liquefaction potential. However, findings from the field study conducted by Sladden En- gineering suggest that the risk associated with liquefaction is considered negligible due to groundwater depths being greater than 50 feet. Impacts associated with liquefaction are anticipated to be less than significant. Other forms of seismic related ground failure will be addressed through the devel- opment recommendations set forth in the geotechnical report and adher- ence to standards of the Uniform Building Code for Seismic Zone 4.” Further review of documents by Petra Geotechnical Investigation found in “Review of the County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521 (public review draft) indicates that the property is located within an area that has been designated as having a Moderate potential for earthquake-in- duced liquefaction (Riverside County, 2014). However, based upon a rela- tively deep historic high groundwater level (180+ feet), the liquefaction po- tential at the site is considered negligible. As such, surface manifestation of liquefaction such as ground fissures, sand boils, loss of bearing, liquefac- tion-induced settlement, etc. is considered negligible. Due to the absence of water and based on our site exploration, the most likely scenario for dynamic settlements is the dry sand settlement. This is due primarily to the presence of partially consolidated granular sandy soils and to the proximity of seismic sources. For this reason, a site-specific dry sand settlement analysis was performed as part of this study.” Implementation of existing state and local laws and regulations concerning soil liquefaction and ground failure is required for all projects in the City. Therefore, there will be less than significant impacts related to liquefac- tion, and ground failure will occur directly, indirectly, and cumulatively. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 42 of 106 City of Palm Desert iv) Landslides? The proposed project site occurs on the Valley floor, far removed from hillsides. According to the FEIR Technical Background Report 7.0 Figure 7.5, the project site is located in an area with low to no susceptibility to rock falls or landslides. There will be no impact associated with landslides. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? As referenced in FEIR Technical Background Report, “The sand dunes along I-10 and the Whitewater River are the two most significant sources of windblown sand in the study area.” Figure 7.2 shows Wind Erosion Hazard Zones for the city. According to the Sladden Geotechnical Investigation, “The project site is located in an area susceptible to severe wind erosion. The project will be required to im- plement a dust control and management plan as part of the grading permit pro- cess, which will mitigate impacts associated with blowing dust and sand. Once completed, the project will include impervious surfaces and landscaped areas, which will stabilize soils. The impacts associated with soil erosion and loss of top- soil will be less than significant.” Project construction would be subject to local and state codes, erosion control, and grading requirements. Because construction activities would disturb one or more acres, the project must adhere to the NPDES Construction General Permit provi- sions. Construction activities subject to this permit include clearing, grading, and other soil disturbances, such as stockpiling and excavating. The NPDES Construc- tion General Permit requires implementing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), including temporary project construction features (i.e., BMPs) de- signed to prevent erosion and protect the quality of stormwater runoff. Sediment- control BMPs may include stabilized construction entrances, straw wattles on earthen embankments, sediment filters on existing inlets, or the equivalent. In addition, grading activities would be required to conform to the most current version of the California Building Code, the City Code, the approved grading plans, and BMP’s engineering practices. Compliance with federal, regional, and local re- quirements would reduce the potential for on-site and off-site erosion effects to accepted levels during project construction. Upon completion of construction activities, ground surfaces would be stabilized by project structures, paving, and landscaping. Therefore, impacts associated with soil erosion and the loss of topsoil would be less than significant, directly, indi- rectly, or cumulatively. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? The NRCS soils data referenced in the FEIR Technical Report (Figure 7.3 and Table 7.1) does not appear that expansive clays or soils exhibiting shrink-swell characteristics underlie the City and Sphere of Influence (SOI). However, since no Palm Villas at Millennium Page 43 of 106 City of Palm Desert citywide soil report exists, expansive and collapsible soils may need to be analyzed on a project-by-project basis. The Petra Geotechnical Investigation provided that project-specific report and found that “The site does lie within the active subsidence areas and site soil has been identified as unconsolidated deposits as documented by Sneed (2001, 2007, 2014). Measured subsidence in the site area from subsidence related to ground- water withdrawal has reached approximately a few 10’s of mm (less than 30 mm) according to data presented in the latest USGS report on this local topic (Figure 8 - Sneed, 2014). Provided that our recommendation presented in this report are implemented properly during site development, the potential for ground subsid- ence to affect development of the site is expected to be low.” However, building, and seismic code requirements, in addition to recommenda- tions outlined in the Geotechnical Report, assure that the potential impact associ- ated with ground subsidence is reduced to less than significant levels through site preparation techniques such as ground compaction. Therefore, current and near-future impacts due to subsidence are expected to be less than significant. Landslides A landslide is a movement of surface material down a slope. As noted in Section VII a) iv) above, the proposed project site occurs on the Valley floor, far removed from hillsides. There will be no impact associated with landslides. Lateral Spreading Lateral spread refers to landslides that commonly form on gentle slopes with rapid fluid-like flow movement, like water. As noted in Section VII a) iv) above, the pro- posed project site occurs on the Valley floor, far removed from hillsides. According to FEIR Technical Background Report 7.0 Figure 7.5, the project site is not in an area impacted by rock falls or landslides. There will be no impact associated with lateral spreading. Subsidence Subsidence is the sinking of the land surface. Evidence of subsidence includes ground cracking and damage to roadways, aqueducts, and structures. Subsidence caused by excessive groundwater pumping is a common occurrence in areas of California where groundwater is pumped for agricultural and municipal wells. Some shrinkage and subsidence are expected during the project grading activities as the pad is prepared for the project. Adherence to the recommendations of the Ge- otechnical Evaluation will ensure that the project site meets all City Code require- ments, and the effect of subsidence will be less than significant, directly, indi- rectly, and cumulatively. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 44 of 106 City of Palm Desert Liquefaction Liquefaction is when strong earthquake shaking causes sediment layers saturated with groundwater to lose strength and behave as a fluid. This sub-surface process can lead to near-surface or surface ground failure resulting in property damage and structural failure. If surface ground failure does occur, it is usually expressed as lateral spreading, flow failures, ground oscillation, and/or general loss of bearing strength. Sand boils (injections of fluidized sediment) can commonly accompany these different types of failure. As noted in Response VII a) iii) above, Implementation of existing state and local laws and regulations concerning soil liquefaction and ground failure is required for all projects in the City. Therefore, there will be less than significant impacts re- lated to liquefaction, and ground failure will occur directly, indirectly, and cumula- tively. Collapsible Soils Collapsible Soils are low-density, silty to very fine-grained, predominantly granular soils containing minute pores and voids. When saturated, these soils undergo a rearrangement of the grains and a loss of cementation, causing substantial, rapid settlement under even relatively light loads. A rise in the groundwater table or an increase in surface water infiltration, combined with the weight of a building or structure, can cause rapid settlement and consequent cracking of foundations and walls. Collapsible soils generally result from rapid deposition close to the source of the sediment where the materials have not been sufficiently moistened to form a compact soil. Adherence to the recommendations of the Geotechnical Evaluation will ensure that the project site meets all City Code requirements, and the effect of project grading will be less than significant, directly, indirectly, and cumulatively. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Build- ing Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or prop- erty? Expansive soils contain certain clay minerals that shrink or swell as the moisture content changes; the shrinking or swelling can shift, crack, or break structures built on such soils. Arid or semi-arid areas with seasonal soil moisture changes experi- ence a much higher frequency of problems from expansive soils than areas with higher rainfall and more constant soil moisture. The Petra Geotechnical Investigation notes that the “visual classification and la- boratory testing of onsite soil materials indicates that expansive soils are not pre- sent at the site near the surface. If importing soil material will be required to con- struct the proposed pads, it is possible that expansive soils could become incor- porated into onsite fills.” By adhering to state and local seismic and structural regulations (i.e., California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, California Building Code, and City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Page 45 of 106 City of Palm Desert Municipal Code), the impacts of expansive soils will be less than significant di- rectly, indirectly, or cumulatively. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or al- ternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Not applicable as the Coachella Valley Water District provides sewer to the project area, and the project must connect to the sewer. The project is served by existing infrastructure, as planned for by the MSPDSP and suitable for the proposed pro- ject. No impact. f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Ground-disturbing activities have the potential to unearth previously unidentified paleontological resources. However, the project site is underlain by igneous bed- rock, which has no potential to yield paleontological resources. The project is not expected to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource. The City and the project area are well outside the boundary of ancient Lake Ca- huilla, an area where paleontological resources have occurred. Soils in the City are generally post-Pleistocene age alluvium from the surrounding mountains, mak- ing them too young in the context of paleontology to yield fossilized remains. Ac- cording to the Survey, no further evidence indicates the existence of historical, archaeological, or paleontological resources within the project area. The proposed project is not expected to impact such resources. The Sladden Geotechnical Evaluation prepared for the FEIR did not identify any unique geologic features on the project site. The project would have a less than significant impact on unique paleontological resources. GEOLOGY AND SOILS CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs that implementing the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on geology and soils. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with geology and soils as they would for other projects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. The proposed project will be required to implement the same standard requirements, and conformance with the City’s Building Code, as other development projects in the City. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately Palm Villas at Millennium Page 46 of 106 City of Palm Desert addressed in the FEIR and would not change from that identified in the FEIR as a result of the proposed project. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Safety Element Policy 2.1 Seismic Standards. Consider exceeding minimum seismic safety standards for critical facilities that ensure building function and support continuity of critical services and emergency response after a seismic event. Policy 2.2: Structural Stability. Maintain development code standards to prohibit siting of new septic tanks, seepage pits, drainage facilities, and heavily irrigated areas away from structure foundations to reduce potential soil collapse. Policy 9.6: Paleontological resources. Require any paleontological artifacts found within the City or its Sphere of Influence to be reported to the City and temporarily loaned to local museums like the Western Science Center for Archaeology and Paleontology, in Hemet, CA. GEOLOGY AND SOILS DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. Nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels would change or affect the geology and soil impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts on geology and soils related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative geology and soil impacts are associated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use as- signed to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the geology and soils of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, ei- ther directly or indirectly that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emission of greenhouse gases? Palm Villas at Millennium Page 47 of 106 City of Palm Desert ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project: Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4.4  Palm Desert Sustainability Plan 3. PD Municipal Code Title 15 Buildings and Construction 4. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly that may have a significant impact on the environment? The project would generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during construction and operations. Temporary impacts would include the temporary operation of con- struction vehicles and equipment. Temporary impacts will end when the project is completed. Project operations would include long-term power and heat generation, energy use associated with waste disposal, water and wastewater treatment, and long-term operation of vehicles by residents, visitors, employees, and others ac- cessing the site. It would also contribute to cumulative regional increases in green- house emissions. However, the project is part of a more extensive mixed-use de- velopment (MPDSP), including residential, commercial, and park use. It will likely contribute to fewer vehicle trips and increase non-motorized transportation. It would be required to comply with energy efficiency site planning, building design measures, and applicable waste diversion measures. Adherence to General Plan policies and programs, Palm Desert Environmental Sustainability Plan policies, energy efficiency standards, and building code requirements would contribute to additional greenhouse reductions. Statewide programs and standards will further reduce greenhouse emissions generated by the project, including new fuel-effi- cient car standards and newly adopted Building Code Title 24 standards. As noted in the General Plan Update University Neighborhood Specific Plan Envi- ronmental Impact Report, pages 4.4-14 – 4.4-15, “Addressing GHG generation impacts requires an agency to make a determination as to what constitutes a sig- nificant impact. The amendments to the CEQA Guidelines specifically allow lead agencies to determine thresholds of significance that illustrate the extent of an im- pact and are a basis from which to apply mitigation measures. This means that each agency is left to determine whether a project's GHG emissions will have a "significant" impact on the environment. The guidelines direct that agencies are to use "careful judgment'' and "make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate" the project's GHG emissions (14 California Code of Regulations Section 15064.4(a)).” The project is an affordable multi-family residential development that will conform to the City’s General Plan, Specific Plan, and Zoning standards. The project will result in 178 fewer dwelling units than initially planned under the General Plan, which permits 40 dwelling units to the acre, and the project is building 23.5 units Palm Villas at Millennium Page 48 of 106 City of Palm Desert per acre. Further, the overall residential units for the MPDSP are below the 778 analyzed initially. The project complies with all applicable laws, regulations, design standards, and plans relating to greenhouse gas emission reductions. Statewide programs and standards will further reduce GHG emissions generated by the pro- ject, including new fuel-efficient standards for cars and Building Code Title 24 standards. Finally, the project's mix of residential, commercial, and park uses will likely contribute to fewer vehicle trips and an increase in non-motorized transpor- tation. As such, the temporary construction and final operational impacts will be less than the maximum buildout of the site under the General Plan designation. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The proposed project would result in somewhat reduced GHG emissions than those assumed for the site. The project will generate substantially fewer trips and associated greenhouse gas emissions than the 40 dwelling units per acre permitted under the PDGP for the site. However, this reduction, when taken in the context of PDGP build-out, would not be sufficient to reduce overall PDGP build-out emissions throughout the City significantly. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change from that identified in the FEIR. The impact of the project overall is less than significant. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emission of greenhouse gases? The project will not conflict with PDGP policies and programs, Palm Desert Envi- ronmental Sustainability Plan policies, energy efficiency standards, and building code requirements. Therefore, the project will have no impact. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, the implementation of the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts for green- house gas. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with greenhouse gas, as applicable to residential development and they would for other projects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. Nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels would change or affect the greenhouse gas emission impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses. The project is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation and proposed less than the density allowed. Reducing vehicle trips associated with the project will slightly reduce the overall impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions at PDGP buildout. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 49 of 106 City of Palm Desert 2. Impacts on greenhouse gas emissions related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative greenhouse gas emission impacts are associ- ated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the greenhouse gas emissions impact of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident condi- tions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materi- als, 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 com- piled pursuant to Government Code sec- tion 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or ex- cessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically in- terfere with an adopted emergency re- sponse plan or emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures, either di- rectly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 50 of 106 City of Palm Desert ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – Would the project: 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4.8  FEIR Technical Background Report 8.0 Hazards and Hazardous Materials  FEIR Technical Background Report 8.0 Figure 8.1: Airport Land Use Plan  FEIR Technical Background Report 8.0 Figure 8.2: Fire Hazard Severity Zone 3. PD Municipal Code Title 15 Buildings and Construction 4. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND 5. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Prepared by SCS Engineers dated September 20, 2021 a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the rou- tine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The proposed project is multi-family residential and would result in the transport, use, storage, and disposal of limited quantities and types of hazardous materials, such as chemicals for household cleaning, pool upkeep, and landscaping. As noted in the Phase I Environmental Assessment, the project site is not identified as a hazardous materials site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, nor would the proposed land use generate a significant public hazard involving the release of hazardous materials. Therefore, there will be a less than significant impact. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reason- ably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of haz- ardous materials into the environment? See a). c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous mate- rials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or pro- posed school? No schools are located or planned within one-quarter mile of the project site. Therefore, there will be no impact. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? According to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control Hazardous Waste and Substance Site List, pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, the project site is not located on or near a hazardous site. Therefore, there will be no impact. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 51 of 106 City of Palm Desert e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use air- port, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? The proposed project is not located near an airport, airstrip, or within an airport land use compatibility plan. The project would not create an associated safety haz- ard to people living or working in the project area. Therefore, there will be no im- pact. f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Temporary construction traffic plans would be approved by and coordinated with the City, Police, and Fire Departments so the project would not interfere with emer- gency response plans. The project will have access off Dinah Shore Drive and Technology Drive, provid- ing adequate access for emergency vehicles, including adequate street widths and vertical clearance on new streets. Implementing federal, state, and local laws and regulations in the project's construction will ensure a less than significant impact. g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires? See the responses under Section XX below for further information on wildfire im- pacts. The project site is located in an urbanized area of the City. The site is not located in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone, as noted on the CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. The project will include new residential buildings to be built to the latest Building and Fire Codes. The project will have no impact on exposing people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, the implementation of the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts for hazards and hazardous materials. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with hazards and haz- ardous materials, as applicable to residential development and they would for other pro- jects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was ade- quately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were re- quired or provided in the FEIR. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 52 of 106 City of Palm Desert There are no General Plan policies applicable to the proposed project. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. There is nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels that would change or affect the hazardous material impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the pro- ject is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts on hazards and hazardous materials related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative hazardous materials impacts are associated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the hazardous materials impact of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or other- wise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? b) Substantially decrease groundwater sup- plies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the pro- ject may impede sustainable groundwa- ter management of the basin? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site? iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? Palm Villas at Millennium Page 53 of 106 City of Palm Desert ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project: e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustain- able groundwater management plan? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR) 3. General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016 4. Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update 5. Draft FEIR Hydrology and Water 4.9 6. FEIR Technical Background Report 9.0 Hydrology and Water Resources 7. Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report Prepared by Kimley Horn and Associates dated March 2022 8. Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan, Prepared by Kimley Horn and Associates dated March 2022 9. PD Municipal Code Title 27 Chapter 27.12 Requirements and Standards of Land Alteration 10. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND 11. “Preliminary Hydrology Study for Millennium Village, TPM 36792” prepared by MDS Consulting, October 2014; 12. “Preliminary Hydrology Study for Millennium Village, TTM 36793” prepared by MDS Consulting, October 2014; “Project- 13. Specific Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Millennium Village, TPM 36792”, pre- pared by MDS Consulting, 14. October; “Project-Specific Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Millennium Village, TTM 36793 “Infiltration 15. Testing for On-Site Storm Water Retention” for TTM 36792, prepared by Sladden Engineering, 7.14.14; “Geotechnical 16. Investigation (for) Proposed PD 80 Centre @ University Park”, prepared by Sladden Engineer- ing, 7.21.14; “Water Supply 17. Assessment/Verification for the Millennium Village Project,” prepared by Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc., October 2014 a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or oth- erwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? See responses in Section XVX below for further information on water and wastewater. The Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for this project site has a variety of nonstructural and structural control best management practices (BMPs) that will be implemented. These include the education of property owners, busi- ness owners, and residents, activity restrictions, irrigation and landscape manage- ment, and street sweeping. Also included are on-site signage and channel and slope protection. Based on the water quality management plan prepared for this project, the proposed management scheme will not impair any receiving waters. The project will not violate applicable water quality standards, will not discharge waste into the project drainage system, nor exceed any waste discharge require- ments. The project will not substantially degrade water quality, create, or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of any existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 54 of 106 City of Palm Desert National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) The project site is located in the Whitewater Watershed. The City is a co-permittee with the County of Riverside and other municipalities for NPDES management. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program is admin- istered by the Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), which provides over- sight in California to the Regional Water Quality Control Boards. The CWA estab- lished the NPDES permit system to regulate discharges to surface waters of the U.S. from municipal and industrial sources. The NPDES permit is required to iden- tify limits on allowable concentrations and mass emissions of pollutants contained in discharges. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) The Project Specific WQMP prepared by Kimley Horn and Associates has been used to prepare and is quoted throughout this Section. The proposed project will not violate the water quality standards or waste dis- charge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality. The project will be built in two phases. Two retention basins are proposed. In phase 1, the buildings will have a roof drain system that discharges to the sur- face or a yard drain system that eventually discharges into the retention basin #1. Phase 2 run-off will discharge to retention basin #2. In a large storm event (with rainfall depth greater than the design 85th percentile storm), storm water is also collected in the retention basins as the basins have been designed to retain up to the 100-year, 24-hour storm event. Emergency overflow beyond the basin capacity will overflow northeasterly to Technology Drive. Drainage improvements will include curb inlets, catch basins, ribbon gutters, brow ditches, and storm drain pipes. An underground detention vault is proposed near the northeast corner to handle hydromodification requirements. Two (2) Modular Wetland Systems (MWS) are proposed upstream of the underground detention vault to provide stormwater treatment. Hydrology The Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Study prepared by Kimley Horn and As- sociates has been used to prepare and quoted throughout this Section. The preliminary hydrology and hydraulic analyses were completed in accordance with the Riverside County Hydrology Manual. A rational method analysis in accord- ance with the Manual was completed to calculate the peak discharges for pro- posed project conditions. Per City standards, proposed developments are required to retain each storm event up to the 100-year, 24-hour therefore, an existing con- ditions analysis was not completed for this preliminary analysis. A review of the Design-Phase Geotechnical Investigation Reports dated Novem- ber 16, 2021, prepared by Petra Geosciences Inc., found that subsurface soils at the site consisted of hydrologic soil group A which has high infiltration capacities. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 55 of 106 City of Palm Desert Infiltration rates for the site of 9.18 in/hr were calculated using a factor of safety of 3. Per the Riverside County Hydrology Manual, an antecedent moisture condition (AMC) of 2 was used for the 100-year storm event. Land use for proposed drainage areas was selected based on actual imperviousness for each drainage area. Storm depths from NOAA 14 were used for the analyses. The Advance Engineering Soft- ware (AES) Hydrosoft package was used to complete the rational method analysis. Conclusion The project must comply with City ordinances and the MS4 permit. Therefore, the project will be designed to comply with existing federal, state, and local water qual- ity laws and regulations pertaining to water quality standards, ensuring a less than significant impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively, on water quality and dis- charge. b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable ground- water management of the basin? See responses in Section XVX below for further information on water. Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) has many programs to maximize the wa- ter resources available to it, including recharge of the basin using its Colorado River and State Water Project (SWP) supplies, recycled wastewater, desalinated agricultural drain water, conversion of groundwater-dependent uses to canal wa- ter, and water conservation including tiered water rates, landscaping ordinance, outreach, and education. The CVWD groundwater replenishment programs estab- lish a comprehensive and managed effort to eliminate overdraft. These programs allow CVWD to maintain the groundwater basin as its primary water supply and recharge it as its other supplies are available. Since 2002, CVWD has purchased 115,250 acre-feet of additional SWP Table A water per year. The project would not construct wells or propose other means of extracting ground- water. Therefore, the project would not deplete groundwater supplies. The project will install water quality bio-filtration to expand and improve groundwa- ter quality. Consequently, the project's development would not result in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the groundwater table. The project will be designed to comply with existing federal, state, and local water quality laws and regulations related to groundwater. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact on groundwater supplies, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addi- tion of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: Palm Villas at Millennium Page 56 of 106 City of Palm Desert i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Project construction would be subject to local and state codes, erosion con- trol, and grading requirements. Because construction activities would dis- turb one or more acres, the project must adhere to the NPDES Construction General Permit provisions to prevent sediment from leaving the project site. Construction activities subject to this permit include clearing, grading, and other soil disturbances, such as stockpiling and excavating. The NPDES Construction General Permit requires implementing a Storm Water Pollu- tion Prevent Plan (SWPPP), including temporary project construction fea- tures (i.e., BMPs) designed to prevent erosion and sediment, leaving the project site protecting the quality of stormwater runoff. Sediment-control BMPs may include stabilized construction entrances, straw wattles on earthen embankments, sediment filters on existing inlets, or the equivalent. Pursuant to NPDES regulations, the City will require that the project complies with existing RWQCB and City stormwater controls, including compliance with NPDES construction and operation measures to prevent erosion siltation and transport of urban pollutants. In addition, the City is a Co-Permittee and is required to comply with the MS4 Permit. In conform- ance with the MS4 permit and the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the project is required to implement structural and non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to retain and treat pollutants of con- cern (in dry-weather runoff and first-flush stormwater runoff) and minimize hydrologic conditions of concern (HCOCs), both during and post-construc- tion. In addition, grading activities would be required to conform to the most cur- rent version of the California Building Code, the City Code, the approved grading plans, and good engineering practices. The project must also com- ply with SDAPCD Rule 51 (Nuisance) and Rule 55 (Fugitive Dust), as noted under the Air Quality Section 2.1.2 of the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas/En- ergy Impact Study (Appendix 3), which would reduce construction erosion impacts. Compliance with these federal, regional, and local requirements would reduce the potential for on-site and off-site erosion effects to ac- cepted levels during project construction. Ground surfaces would be stabilized by project structures, paving, and land- scaping for project operation upon completion of construction activities. Therefore, impacts associated with soil erosion and the loss of topsoil would be less than significant. ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site? In addition to response Section X c) i) above, the City Engineer will review and approve the design and implementation of these facilities to assure compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal standards. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 57 of 106 City of Palm Desert Implementation of the required NPDES and WQMP requirements dis- cussed above and other applicable requirements will ensure that drainage and stormwater will not create or contribute water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively, on the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site. iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substan- tial additional sources of polluted runoff? See Response Section X c) i) & ii above. Implementation of the required NPDES and WQMP requirements discussed above and other applicable requirements will ensure that runoff water will not exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. These regulations will also ensure the project will not provide additional sources of polluted runoff. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact directly, in- directly, and cumulatively. iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? The Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Study (Appendix 6), prepared by Kimley Horn and Associates, has been used to prepare and is quoted throughout this Section. Based on the Design-Phase Geotechnical Investigation Report prepared by Petra Geosciences, Inc on November 16, 2021, it is found that the soils at the site will exhibit high percolation rates due to the sandy soil type, and the groundwater level is approximately 180 feet below existing ground surface. Based on this information, a BMP relying solely on infiltration for treatment is feasible and recommended. Therefore, infiltration basins are the pro- posed LID BMP for this project. For the design of the infiltration basin, an infiltration rate of 9.18 in/hr with a factor of safety of 3 was used per table 1, appendix B: “Infiltration Testing” from the BMP Handbook. The design rate provides the required drawdown rate for the DVC within 48 hours. The max- imum allowable effective depth of the basin is 5 feet. Additional testing will be performed once the basin locations have been determined to finalize the design infiltration rate during the construction document review phase of the projects. To meet the county of Riverside County Watershed Protection Program – Whitewater Watershed requirements, during the low flow design storm event (85th percentile), the site will be broken into two (2) drainage man- agement areas (DMAs) as follows: DMA 1 consists of direct surface runoff from the southerly driveway and uncovered parking, roof drainage, land- scaped common area and the proposed building. The area will surface flow towards the proposed on-site catch basin with an insert filter located at the Palm Villas at Millennium Page 58 of 106 City of Palm Desert project's northeast corner, west of Building C. The catch basin will capture and divert flow easterly via a PVC stormwater pipe toward the proposed infiltration basin #1 in DMA 1 for further treatment and percolation. The area South of DMA 1 is a landscaped lot. It will be treated as a self-treated area along the Gerald Ford Drive. DMA 2 consists of direct surface runoff from the northeast driveway, uncov- ered parking, roof drainage, common landscape area, and the proposed building. The area will surface flow towards the proposed on-site catch ba- sin with an insert filter west of Building L. The catch basin will capture and divert flow easterly via a PVC stormwater pipe toward the proposed infiltra- tion basin #2 in DMA 2 for further treatment and percolation. In a large storm event (with rainfall depth greater than the design 85th per- centile storm), storm water is also collected in the retention basins as the basins have been designed to retain up to the 100-year, 24-hour storm event. Emergency overflow beyond the basin capacity will overflow north- easterly to Technology Drive. As described throughout this response, the project will be required to com- ply with all applicable water quality standards. The project re-direction of on-site stormwater will be less than significant, directly, indirectly cumulatively. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? The subject property is not located in a floodplain designated by the Federal Emer- gency Management Agency (FEMA) or the regional flood control agency (CVWD). The project's development will not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area. Neither will the project place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area, structures that would impede or redirect flood flows. Seiche is a temporary disturbance or oscillation in the water level of a lake or par- tially enclosed body of water, especially one caused by changes in atmospheric pressure. A tsunami is a long high sea wave caused by an earthquake, submarine landslide, or other disturbance. As noted in the Geotechnical evaluation, the subject property is not located imme- diately adjacent to any lakes or confined bodies of water; therefore, the potential for a seiche to affect the site is considered low. The subject property is not located within a Tsunami Evacuation Area. Therefore, damage due to tsunamis is consid- ered low. The project location as well as compliance with existing federal, state, and local flood hazard laws and regulations pertaining to the project’s design will ensure no impact on flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 59 of 106 City of Palm Desert e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? As described throughout this Section and Section X of this review, the project is required to comply with Title 27 – Grading, Chapter 27.12 Requirements and Standards of Land Alteration – of the City’s Municipal Code, the Riverside County Hydrology Manual, and MS4 permit. Therefore, the project will be designed to com- ply with existing federal, state, and local water quality laws and regulations per- taining to water quality standards, ensuring a less than significant impact, di- rectly, indirectly, or cumulatively, on the water quality control and groundwater management plan. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. Future water demands and impacts on groundwater recharge and water quality were evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and standard con- ditions of approval, development resulting from implementing the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on hydrology and water quality. No mitigation measures were required or provided. The proposed project will result in a multi-family residential devel- opment consistent with the land use designation assigned to the property. Water demand will be consistent with multi-family residential developments. The project will integrate into the existing storm drainage system adjacent to the site and will conform with City stand- ards associated with stormwater pollution prevention. The FEIR determined upon imple- mentation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs that implementing the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on hydrology and water quality. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with hydrology and water quality, as applicable to residential development and they would for other projects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. There is nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels that would change or affect the hydrology and water quality impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the des- ignation. 2. Impacts on hydrology and water quality related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are asso- ciated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 60 of 106 City of Palm Desert 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known when the FEIR was certified, indicating that the project's hydrology and water quality impact would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the project: a) Physically divide an established commu- nity? b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the pur- pose of avoiding or mitigating an environ- mental effect? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Land Use and Planning 4.10  FEIR Technical Background Report 10.0 Land Use and Planning 3. PD Municipal Code Title 25 Zoning 4. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND a) Physically divide an established community? The proposed project site is currently vacant and part of the MPDSP. The pro- posed project is a 241 multi-family affordable residential development consisting of ten (10) apartment buildings and one (1) community building. The subject prop- erty is 10.49 acres of vacant land located on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive, between Dinah Shore Drive and Technology Drive. The project site is surrounded by vacant lands and a mix of commercial and residential development. The project will not divide an existing community but will create and expand an existing community as planned by the PDGP. Therefore, no impact either directly, indirectly, or cumulatively will occur on an established community. b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The project is consistent with the applicable PDGP designation of “Town Center Neighborhood,” which is intended for moderate to higher intensity neighborhood development with densities of up to 40 units per acre and a maximum building height of 3 stories policies, zoning designation, and regulations. The project site lies within the MPDSP, which designates the project site as “High-Density Resi- dential,” with a maximum density of 22 units per acre. The MPDSP establishes standards for building setbacks, building heights, and wall/hedge/fence heights Palm Villas at Millennium Page 61 of 106 City of Palm Desert (front yard 10 feet, side yard 8 feet, rear yard 10 feet). The proposed project is consistent with the MPDSP, and no amendments are required. The 0.49-acre portion will be used as an access easement from Dinah Shore Drive to the project site and some project parking. The subject property is 10.49 acres of vacant land located on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive, between Dinah Shore Drive and Technology Drive. The project site is surrounded by vacant lands and a mix of commercial and residential devel- opment. The project is compatible with these land uses as it is residential and will not be a significant generator of noise, air pollutants, or traffic volumes that would conflict with existing development. The project site is currently vacant. It will not divide an established community. The project site is within the boundaries of the CVMSHCP and is not within or adjacent to an established conservation area. The project is consistent with the CVMSHCP and will have no impact. LAND USE AND PLANNING CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed multi-family project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use designation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and pro- grams, the implementation of the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on land use. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with land use, as applicable to multi-fam- ily residential development and they would for other projects in the City. The project is also consistent with the MPDSP, and no amendments are required. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The project and site are not within or adjacent to an estab- lished conservation area and would not conflict with a conservation plan. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Land Use and Community Character Element Policy 3.1 Complete neighborhoods. Through the development entitlement process, ensure that all new Neighborhoods (areas with a “Neighborhood” General Plan Designa- tion) are complete and well-structured such that the physical layout and land use mix promote walking to services, biking, and transit use, are family friendly and address the needs of multiple ages and physical abilities. New neighborhoods should have the follow- ing characteristics: • Contain short, walkable block lengths. • Contain a high level of connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles where practicable. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 62 of 106 City of Palm Desert • Are organized around a central focal point such as a park, school, civic building or neighborhood retail such that most homes are no more than one quarter-mile from this focal point. • Have goods and services within a short walking distance. • Contain a diversity of housing types, where possible. • Have homes with entries and windows facing the street. • Have a grid or modified grid street network (except where topography necessitates another street network layout). • Provide a diversity of architectural styles. 3.2 Conventional neighborhood design. Discourage the construction of new residential neighborhoods that are characterized by cul-de-sacs, soundwalls, long block lengths, sin- gle building and housing types and lack of access to goods and services. 3.3 Variety of types of neighborhoods. Promote a variety of neighborhoods within the City and ensure that neighborhood types are dispersed throughout the City. 3.4 Balanced neighborhoods. Within the allowed densities and housing types, promote a range of housing and price levels within each neighborhood in order to accommodate diverse ages and incomes. For development projects larger than five acres, require that a diversity of housing types be provided and that these housing types be mixed rather than segregated by unit type. 3.5 Housing affordability. Ensure affordable housing is distributed throughout the City to avoid concentrations of poverty and to be accessible to jobs. 3.7 Walkable neighborhoods. Require that all new neighborhoods be designed and constructed to be pedestrian friendly and include features such as short blocks, wide sidewalks, tree-shaded streets, buildings that define and are oriented to streets or public spaces, traffic-calming features, convenient pedestrian street crossings, and safe streets that are designed for pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles. • Provision of sidewalks. Except within designated rural areas, require sidewalks of at least six feet in width on both sides of streets in neighborhoods and prohibit obstructions that would impede use of the sidewalk. • Block size. Require new neighborhoods to be designed with blocks no longer than 600 to 800 feet. Exceptions can be made if mid-block pedestrian and bicycle con- nections are provided. 3.8 Neighborhood intersection density. Require new neighborhoods to provide high levels of intersection density. Town Center and Small Town Neighborhoods should strive for 400 intersections per square mile. Conventional Suburban Neighborhoods should strive for at least 200 intersections per square mile. 3.14 Access to daily activities. Require development patterns such that the majority of residents are within one-half mile walking distance to a variety of neighborhood goods and services, such as supermarkets, restaurants, churches, cafes, dry cleaners, laundro- mats, farmers markets, banks, hair care, pharmacies, and similar uses. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 63 of 106 City of Palm Desert 3.18 Soundwalls. Allow the use of soundwalls to buffer new Neighborhoods from existing sources of noise pollution such as railroads and limited access roadways. Prohibit the use of soundwalls to buffer residential areas from arterial or collector streets. Instead design approaches such as building setbacks, landscaping and other techniques shall be used. In the case where soundwalls might be acceptable, require pedestrian access points to improve access from the Neighborhoods. LAND USE AND PLANNING DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. There is nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels that would change or affect the land use analyzed in the FEIR. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts to land use related to the proposed project or subject parcels were ana- lyzed in the FEIR. 3. There are no significant off-site or cumulative land use associated with the pro- posed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the land-use impact of the project would be more se- vere than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XII. 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 recov- ery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land-use plan? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Mineral Resources 4.11  FEIR Technical Background Report 11.0 Mineral Resources  FEIR Technical Background Report Figure 11.1 Mineral Resource Zone 3. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND 4. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Prepared by SCS Engineers dated September 20, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 64 of 106 City of Palm Desert 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? As noted in the MPDSP, “the project site is located in Mineral Resource Zone 3, an area containing mineral deposits. However, the significance of these deposits cannot be evaluated from available data. The project site occurs in an urban setting and is not designated for mineral resources. The project site is designated “Town Center Neighborhood,” which includes multi-family residential development.” The project will have no impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively on mineral re- sources. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource re- covery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land- use plan? Response XII) a) above noted that the project site is not delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land-use plans for mineral resources. There- fore, the project will have no impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively on the availability of important mineral resources. MINERAL RESOURCES CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs that implementing the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on mineral re- sources. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with mineral resources as they would for other projects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. The proposed project does not impact any mining operations or impact any Williamson Act contracts MINERAL RESOURCES DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. There is nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels that would change or affect the mineral resource impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the pro- ject is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts on mineral resources related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative mineral resource impacts are associated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use as- signed to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 65 of 106 City of Palm Desert 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the mineral resources impact of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XIII. NOISE – Would the project: a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in ex- cess of standards established in the lo- cal general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Generation of excessive groundborne vi- bration or groundborne noise levels? c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public air- port or public use airport, would the pro- ject expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise lev- els? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016 Section 7. Noise Figure 7.1 Noise Compatibility Matrix  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Noise 4.12  FEIR Technical Background Report 12.0 Noise 3. PD Municipal Code Title 15 Buildings and Construction 4. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND 5. Acoustical Assessment Palm Villas at Millennium Project prepared by Kimley Horn and Associ- ates, Inc. December 2021 The Acoustical Assessment Palm Villas At Millennium Project City of Palm Desert, Cali- fornia, prepared by Kimley Horn, December 2021, (Appendix 3), has been used to pre- pare and is quoted throughout this Section. a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? The project is an affordable multi-family residential development that will conform to the City’s General Plan, Specific Plan, and Zoning standards. The project will result in 178 fewer dwelling units than originally planned under the General Plan, which permits 40 dwelling units to the acre, and the project is building 23.5 units Palm Villas at Millennium Page 66 of 106 City of Palm Desert per acre. As such, the temporary construction impacts and final operational im- pacts compared to the maximum buildout of the site under the General Plan des- ignation will be less. As noted in the General Plan Update University Neighborhood Specific Plan Envi- ronmental Impact Report, page 4.12-11, “Application of the noise standards will vary on a case-by-case basis according to location, development type, and asso- ciated noise sources.” The General Plan Update FEIR proposed mitigation meas- ure NOI-1 for construction noise impacts. For operational impacts, it is recom- mended future projects prepare project-level noise analyses. Lastly, long-term noise impacts from roadways were found to be less than significant for the General Plan Update. The Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan (MPDSP) did further noise analysis on the project area. Construction Noise As stated in the MPDSP Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), page 44, “Con- struction noise will occur throughout the build-out of the project, as each planning area is developed. Construction noise, however, is temporary and periodic. The loudest construction noise is generally the grading phase, when more heavy equip- ment is used more consistently on a site. Bulldozers can generate noise levels of up to 90 dB at 50 feet of distance, while heavy trucks can generate up to 94 dB at the same distance. The noise study considered a worst case scenario of six pieces of equipment operating simultaneously adjacent to planning area 1, with single family homes constructed. The unmitigated noise levels could reach 77.4 dB at the property line of the nearest homes. This represents an unacceptable noise level that would require mitigation.” The nearest existing sensitive receptors to the proposed project site are approxi- mately 100-feet to the west across Dinah Shore Drive. The recommended con- struction noise mitigation measures will be applied to this project as conditions of approval. COA NOI-1: During all project site excavation and grading on-site, construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturer standards. COA NOI-2: The contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from nearby single-family de- tached residential dwelling units. COA NOI-3: The contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will cre- ate the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 67 of 106 City of Palm Desert COA NOI-4: The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment. COA NOI-5: For the duration of construction activities, the construction manager shall serve as the contact person should noise levels become dis- ruptive to local residents. A sign should be posted at the project site with the contact phone number. Operational Noise The following information is taken from the Acoustical Assessment (Appendix 3) prepared by Kimley Horn. Existing Conditions Noise Measurements To determine ambient noise levels in the project area, Kimley-Horn conducted four short-term (10-minute) measurements on November 10, 2021, and one long-term noise measurement (24 hours in duration) starting on November 10, 2021, and ending on November 11, 2021, August 2, 2021; see Appendix A: Existing Ambient Noise Measurements of the Acoustical Assessment (Appendix 3). The noise measurement sites were representative of typical existing noise exposure within and immediately adjacent to the project site. The 10-minute daytime measure- ments were taken between 10:37 a.m., and 12:03 p.m. Measurements of Leq are considered representative of the noise levels throughout the day. The average noise levels and sources of noise measured at each location are listed in Table 4: Noise Measurements and shown in Exhibit 5: Noise Measurement Locations. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 68 of 106 City of Palm Desert Acoustical Impacts A noise impact analysis has been completed to determine the noise exposure lev- els that would result from off-site transportation noise sources and identify potential noise reduction measures that would achieve acceptable project exterior and inte- rior noise levels. The primary source of traffic noise affecting the project site is from I-10. However, the project would also be exposed to traffic noise from Gerald Ford Drive and Dinah Shore Drive and train noise from freight and Amtrak pass-bys on the UPRR rail line to the north. This analysis addresses on-site exterior and interior noise levels at proposed residential receptors/receivers. Predicted On-Site Mobile Source Noise Levels On-Site Traffic Noise Traffic volumes along I-10 were obtained from the Caltrans Traffic Census Pro- gram.1 Truck ADT and fleet mix data were also obtained from Caltrans Traffic Cen- sus. Manual traffic counts were taken for Dinah Shore Drive during site reconnais- sance on November 10, 2021, and traffic volumes along Gerald Ford Drive were obtained from the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) Coachella Valley Traffic Counts database.2 Roadways and receivers were 1 California Department of Transportation, Traffic Census Program, http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/, accessed November 29, 2021. 2 Coachella Valley Association of Governments, Coachella Valley Traffic Counts https://www.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?ap- pid=fb9489b188e74be3b599afb52741849d, accessed November 29, 2021. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 69 of 106 City of Palm Desert digitized in TNM 2.5 based on the Project site plan layout. The model also ac- counted for the differences in elevation between the roadway and each receptor. Table B-1 (Modeled Traffic Noise Levels) in Appendix B: Traffic Noise Modeling Data of the Acoustical Assessment (Appendix 3) provides the results of the mod- eling, and Exhibit 6: Traffic Noise Receiver Locations (All Floors) depicts the loca- tion of the modeled noise receivers at the project site. As indicated in Table B-1, exterior noise levels on-site would range from 46 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 71 dBA CNEL at first-floor receptors, from 48 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 70 dBA CNEL at second-floor receptors, and from 51 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 71 dBA CNEL at third-floor receptors. Interior noise levels on-site would range from 21 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 46 dBA CNEL at first-floor receptors, from 23 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 45 dBA CNEL at second-floor receptors, and from 26 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 46 dBA CNEL at third-floor receptors; see Table B-1. On-Site Train Noise Noise modeling in compliance with the FTA Noise and Vibration Manual tools and methods was conducted for the receivers proposed nearest the UPRR corridor. A total of 61 receiver locations were modeled and are shown in Exhibit 7: Train Noise Receiver Locations. The modeling results are provided in Table C-1 (Modeled Train Noise Levels) in Appendix C: Train Noise Modeling Data of the Acoustical Assessment (Appendix 3). The issue with train traffic noise is the maximum instan- taneous noise from each individual train pass-by and their contribution to the 24- hour Ldn level. The modeling results provided in Table C-1 indicate that train traffic along the UPRR rail line would result in exterior noise levels between 49 dBA Ldn Palm Villas at Millennium Page 70 of 106 City of Palm Desert and 62 dBA Ldn, and interior noise levels would range between 24 dBA Ldn and 37 dBA Ldn at the on-site modeled receiver locations. Combined Traffic and Train Noise Levels Based on the modeling results described above, on-site traffic and train noise lev- els were logarithmically added to determine the combined noise levels at the pro- ject site. Table D-1 (Composite Traffic + Train Noise Levels) in Appendix D: Com- posite Noise Modeling Data of the Acoustical Assessment (Appendix 3) provides the composite on-site noise levels from mobile traffic and train noise sources. As shown in Table D-1, exterior traffic and train noise levels would range from 54 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 72 dBA CNEL at first-floor receptors, from 54 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 71 dBA CNEL at second-floor receptors, and from 55 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 72 dBA CNEL at third-floor receptors. Combined interior noise levels would range from 29 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 47 dBA CNEL at first-floor receptors, from 29 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 46 dBA CNEL at second-floor receptors, and from 29 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 47 dBA CNEL at third-floor receptors; see Table D-1. As indicated in Table D-1, on-site noise levels from traffic and train noise sources would exceed the City’s 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard at 68 residential receivers on the first floor, 74 residential receivers on the second floor, and 86 residential receivers on the third floor. Noise levels at the park/recreation area in the northern portion of the Project site would also exceed the City’s normally ac- ceptable noise standard of 70 dBA CNEL for playgrounds/neighborhood parks; see Table D-1. Further, the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard would be Palm Villas at Millennium Page 71 of 106 City of Palm Desert exceeded at 6 residential receivers on the first floor, 4 residential receivers on the second floor, and 5 residential receivers on the third floor.3 Therefore, noise re- duction measures are recommended to reduce on-site traffic and train noise levels to comply with the City’s exterior and interior noise standards. All other modeled receivers would be exposed to noise levels within the City’s ex- terior and interior noise standards. Based on standard construction practices and the project’s heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system, interior noise levels at these receivers would be 45 dBA CNEL or lower in compliance with the State Building Code and would not require additional noise insulation features. Noise Reduction Techniques As discussed above, noise abatement is required to reduce exterior and interior noise levels at numerous residential receivers/dwelling units and at the park/rec- reation area in the portion of the project site. Recommendations would include the use of perimeter sound walls/barriers, upgraded windows and entry doors, and balcony treatments to reduce noise levels at the impacted receivers/dwelling units. Perimeter Sound Walls To reduce traffic noise levels from I-10 and train noise from the UPRR rail line, and traffic noise from Gerald Ford Drive at the outdoor patio areas of on-site residential units and the park/recreation area in the northern portion of the site, perimeter sound walls are recommended for the project as part of Recommendation 1 (REC- 1), and their approximate locations are shown on Exhibit 8: Recommended Noise Barrier Locations. As indicated in Table D-1, noise levels at first-floor residential receivers would not exceed the City’s exterior and/or interior standards of 65 dBA CNEL and 45 dBA CNEL, respectively, with the implementation of the sound walls per REC-1. In addition, noise levels at the park/recreation area in the northern portion of the site would not exceed the City’s normally acceptable 70 dBA CNEL noise standard for playgrounds/neighborhood parks with the implementation of REC-1. However, due to the elevation difference between the residential dwellings on the second and third floors and I-10, the UPRR rail line, and Gerald Ford Drive, the recommended sound walls would not be effective for upper-story receivers. Thus, additional noise abatement and attenuation features are needed for upper floor receivers. 3 Assuming an exterior-interior sound reduction of 25 dBA from standard construction practices, per the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Noise Guidebook, available at: https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/313/hud-noise-guidebook/, 2009. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 72 of 106 City of Palm Desert Balcony Treatments In general, second and third-floor receivers on the northern, eastern, and western facades of the residential buildings closest to the I-10 freeway and UPRR rail line (Buildings 1 through 4), and second and third-floor receivers located on the south- ern façade of buildings nearest to Gerald Ford Drive (Buildings 5 through 9) would be exposed to exterior noise levels exceeding the City’s 65 dBA CNEL noise stand- ard; see Table D-1 for noise modeling results and Exhibit 6 for receiver locations. Therefore, it is recommended that outdoor balconies in the areas identified in Ex- hibit 9: Recommended Balcony Treatments incorporate noise attenuating balcony or patio treatments to reduce exterior noise levels below the City’s 65 dBA CNEL standard recommended in REC-2. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 73 of 106 City of Palm Desert Window and Door Treatments Although sound insulation varies with frequency and is very different for various types of partitions, it is convenient to compare the effectiveness of two partitions using a method of rating insulation that can be represented by a single number. In North America, the most commonly used single number rating is the Sound Trans- mission Class (STC). An STC rating of 0 indicates that a partition provides no air- borne sound insulation. Typical values of sound insulation ratings provided by var- ious types of window constructions are presented in Table 5: Sound Transmission Class for Windows. For high sound insulation, the purchase of commercially avail- able windows that have been rated by a recognized testing laboratory provides better performance for a given cost than individually designed units. To obtain a sound transmission class rating above 45, it is necessary to select acoustical win- dows with specially designed frames, and glass mounting is recommended. Transmission of sound through a hollow window-frame can significantly reduce the sound insulation, especially for windows with very high STC. This reduction can be minimized by drilling one or more holes in the hollow frame and pumping a mastic material to fill the hollow frame. The following is a listing of various window types that are utilized on typical residential structures: • Single Glazing (Unlaminated). The sound insulation provided by single glaz- ing improves with increasing glass thickness. However, the increase is lim- ited in the mid-frequency range by the stiffness of the glass. As indicated in Table 5, a single, unlaminated layer of solid glass usually does not provide an STC rating above 32 for a sealed window and 29 for an operable window. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 74 of 106 City of Palm Desert • Laminated Glass. aminated glass is two or more layers of glass bonded together by think plastic interlayers. It can provide higher values of sound transmission class than solid glass of equal thickness. This is because the sound insulation versus thickness of single sheets of glass exhibits a dip at a frequency determined by the stiffness of the glass. The improvement in sound insulation is primarily due to damping by the plastic interlayers that reduce the magnitude of the dip. • Dual Glazing. Dual glazing is two panes of glass with an airspace between them. Dual glazing provides greater sound insulation at high frequencies than single-glazed laminated glass. Table 5 compares typical vales of STC for sealed windows with corresponding values for operable windows and for single-glazed windows of various thicknesses. These STC values increase with the increasing thickness of glass. For glass of a given thickness, sealed windows provide greater sound insulation than operable windows. The overall improvement provided by dual glazing depends on the sep- aration of the layers and glass thickness. For each doubling of the airspace, there is an increase in STC rating of about 3. There is some advantage in using two panes of laminated glass, especially for glass thicker than ¼ inch (6 mm). Based on the traffic and train noise modeling for future receptors at the project site, generally, the interior noise levels experienced at second and third-floor receivers on the northern facades of Buildings 3 and 4 (the residential buildings closest to the I-10 freeway and UPRR rail line) would exceed the City’s 45 dBA CNEL noise standard; see Table D-1 for noise modeling results and Exhibit 6 for receiver loca- tions. Therefore, it is recommended the impacted receiver locations identified in Exhibit 10: Recommended Window and Entry Door Treatments include windows and entry doors with a minimum STC rating of 29 to reduce interior noise levels below 45 dBA CNEL, as recommended in REC-3. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 75 of 106 City of Palm Desert Conclusion Based on the traffic and train noise modeling for future receivers at the project site, the project should include perimeter sound walls and balcony and window treat- ments at the impacted receivers identified above to ensure exterior and interior noise levels are below the City’s 65 dBA CNEL and 45 dBA CNEL interior stand- ards (see Mitigation Measure 6 for the Millennium Palm Desert Project IS/MND). With the implementation of REC-1 through REC-3, exterior and interior noise levels experienced at the project site would not exceed the City’s exterior or interior noise standards. Upon final site design and development of architectural schematic and building plans, the project engineer shall ensure that the building construction specifica- tions include the recommended balcony treatments, windows, and entry doors with a minimum STC rating of 29 and perimeter sound walls as identified above. These design features shall be specified upon final site design and shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Palm Desert prior to the issuance of building permits for the project. With the implementation of conditions NOI-1 through NOI-8 for construction and operational noise, the project will have a less than significant impact. COA NOI-6: Construction of an approximately 1,215-foot long, 8-foot-high sound wall along the northern property, and the construction of an approxi- mately 1,200-foot long, 6-foot-high sound wall along the southern property boundary (consistent with Mitigation Measure 6 for the Palm Villas at Millennium Page 76 of 106 City of Palm Desert Millennium Palm Desert Project IS/MND) would sufficiently attenuate exterior noise levels at all first-floor receivers/dwelling units to 65 dBA CNEL or lower; see Exhibit 8 of the Acoustical Assessment prepared by Kimley Horn for approximate barrier locations. Acceptable mate- rials for the construction of the barrier shall have a minimum density of 3.5 pounds per square foot of surface area and may be composed of the following: masonry block, stucco veneer over wood framing (or foam core), glass, Plexiglass, Lexan 9 ¼ inch thick), or metal. The barrier may also be constructed out of a combination of the above listed materials. The barrier must be solid and any gaps shall have overlapping edges. The final recommendations for design shall be submitted and approved by the City of Palm Desert Planning Direc- tor. COA NOI-7: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City of Palm Desert Building Official, that the outside-facing residential units identified in Exhibit 9 of the Acoustical Assessment prepared by Kimley Horn shall incor- porate noise attenuating balcony and/or patio treatments. Balconies more than 6 feet deep and patios shall include a barrier that is at least 42 inches high as measured from the floor. Acceptable materi- als for the construction of the barrier shall have a weight of 2.5 pounds per square foot of surface area. The barrier may be com- posed of the following: masonry block, stucco veneer over wood framing (or foam core), glass, Plexiglass, or Lexan (1/4-inch thin) and may be constructed out of a combination of the above listed materials COA NOI-8: After the final architectural drawings have been developed and prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City of Palm Desert Building Official, that the applicable Project plans and specifications include sound-rated windows and entry doors on the residential facades identified in Exhibit 10 of the Acoustical Assessment prepared by Kimley Horn. These receptor locations require a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 29. dBA = A-weighted sound level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighted filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high-frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the human ear's response. A numerical method of human rating judgment of loudness. Leq = Equivalent Sound Level – the sound level corresponding to a steady noise level over a given sample period with the same acoustic energy as the actual time- varying noise level. The energy average noise level during the sample period. CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level – the average equivalent A-weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after the addition of five (5) decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 to 10:00 p.m. and after the addition of ten (10) decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 77 of 106 City of Palm Desert b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise lev- els? Construction activities can produce a vibration that may be felt by adjacent land uses. The proposed project's construction would not require equipment such as pile drivers, which are known to generate substantial construction vibration levels. The primary vibration source during construction may be from a bulldozer. A large bulldozer has a vibration impact of 0.089 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV) at 25 feet which is perceptible but below any risk of architectural damage. The fundamental equation used to calculate vibration propagation through average soil conditions and distance is as follows: PPVequipment = PPVref (100/Drec)n Where: PPVref = reference PPV at 100ft. Drec = distance from equipment to receiver in ft. n = 1.1 (the value related to the attenuation rate through ground) The thresholds from the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Induced Vibra- tion Guidance Manual in the table below provide general thresholds and guidelines for the vibration damage potential from vibratory impacts. Guideline Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria Structure and Condition Maximum PPV (in/sec) Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments 0.12 0.08 Fragile buildings 0.2 0.1 Historic and some old buildings 0.5 0.25 Older residential structures 0.5 0.3 New residential structures 1.0 0.5 Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.0 0.5 Source: Table 19, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, Caltrans, Sept. 2013. Note: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory com- paction equipment. The following table gives approximate vibration levels for particular construction activities. This data provides a reasonable estimate for a wide range of soil condi- tions. Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment1 Equipment Peak Particle Velocity Approximate Vibration Level (inches/second) at 25 feet LV (dVB) at 25 feet Pile driver (impact) 1.518 (upper range) 112 0.644 (typical) 104 Pile driver (sonic) 0.734 upper range 105 0.170 typical 93 Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94 Hydromill 0.008 in soil 66 (slurry wall) 0.017 in rock 75 Vibratory Roller 0.21 94 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 78 of 106 City of Palm Desert Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment1 Equipment Peak Particle Velocity Approximate Vibration Level (inches/second) at 25 feet LV (dVB) at 25 feet Hoe Ram 0.089 87 Large bulldozer 0.089 87 Caisson drill 0.089 87 Loaded trucks 0.076 86 Jackhammer 0.035 79 Small bulldozer 0.003 58 1 Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, Federal Transit Administration, May 2006. At a distance of 30 feet, a large bulldozer would yield a worst-case 0.073 PPV (in/sec) which may be perceptible for short periods of time during grading. How- ever, the closest sensitive receptors are over 100-feet away across Dinah Shore Drive. The project will have no impact, and no mitigation is required. PPV – Known as the peak particle velocity (PPV), the maximum instantaneous peak in vibration velocity is typically given in inches per second. RMS – Known as the root mean squared (RMS), can be used to denote vibration amplitude. VdB – A commonly used abbreviation to describe the vibration level (VdB) for a vibration source. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The MPDSP Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), page 45, “The project is lo- cated approximately 5 miles west of the Bermuda Dunes Airport. Although an oc- casional overflight is likely, the approach patterns do not occur in the vicinity of the proposed project. There are no private airstrips in the area. Therefore, there will be no impact associated with airport noise. NOISE CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, the implementation of the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts for noise materials. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with noise, as applicable to residential development and other projects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Palm Villas at Millennium Page 79 of 106 City of Palm Desert Land Use and Community Character Element Policy 3.18 Soundwalls. Allow the use of soundwalls to buffer new Neighborhoods from existing sources of noise pollution such as railroads and limited access roadways. Prohibit the use of soundwalls to buffer residential areas from arterial or collector streets. Instead design approaches such as building setbacks, landscaping and other techniques shall be used. In the case where soundwalls might be acceptable, require pedestrian access points to improve access from the Neighborhoods. Noise Element 1.1 Noise Compatibility. Apply the Noise Compatibility Matrix, shown in Figure 7.1, as a guide for planning and development decisions. The City will require projects involving new development or modifications to existing development to implement mitigation measures, where necessary, to reduce noise levels to at least the normally compatible range shown in the City’s Noise Compatibility Matrix shown in Figure 7.1. Mitigation measures should focus on architectural features and building design and construction, rather than site de- sign features such as excessive setbacks, berms, and sound walls, to maintain compati- bility with adjacent and surrounding uses. Policy 1.2 Noise Buffers. Require an open space or other noise buffer between new projects that are a source of excessive noise and nearby noise-sensitive receptors. Policy 1.6 Land Use and Community Design. Prioritize the building design and char- acter policies in the Land Use and Community Character Element over those in the Noise Element to ensure that new development meets the design vision of the city. This policy will not apply when noise levels are clearly in the incompatible range as shown in the City’s Noise Compatibility Matrix shown in Figure 7.1. Policy 2.1 Noise Ordinance. Minimize noise conflicts between neighboring properties through enforcement of applicable regulations such as the City’s Noise Control Ordi- nance. 2.2 Noise Control. Ensure that noise impacts from stationary sources on noise- sensitive receptors and noise emanating from construction activities, private develop- ments/residences, landscaping activities, night clubs and bars, and special events are minimized. NOISE DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. There is nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels that would change or affect the noise impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject prop- erty is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is con- sistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts from and on noise related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative noise impacts are associated with the pro- posed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 80 of 106 City of Palm Desert 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the noise impact of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmen- tal analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project: a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for ex- ample, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of road or other infra- structure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the con- struction of replacement housing else- where? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Population, Employment, and Housing 4.13  FEIR Technical Background Report 13.0 Population and Housing 3. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for ex- ample, through extension of road or other infrastructure)? The project does not propose new homes or infrastructure extensions not previ- ously planned in the PDGP or FEIR. The project proposes 241-multi-family afford- able residential apartments. The maximum number of units for Planning Area 8 is 220 units. The additional 0.49 acres would add 10.78 units to the project. Overall, the project will result in 178 fewer dwelling units than initially planned under the PDGP, which permits 40 dwelling units to the acre, and the project is building 23.5 units per acre. The PDGP projected a total of 778 single-family and multi-family units. The total units with the proposed project are 716. The Density Bonus Re- quest of an additional 21 units will still be below the number initially planned under the PDGP. According to the California Department of Finance, in 2022, the average household size in Palm Desert is 2.05, down from 2021. The proposed units will add approx- imately 720 additional residents to the City’s population. The site's development will result in a new multi-family affordable housing apart- ment community. The project site is on an existing street, and utilities and public facilities are available in the immediate area. No new road or utility infrastructure is required. However, street frontage improvements are required for Technology Palm Villas at Millennium Page 81 of 106 City of Palm Desert Drive. Therefore, project-related impacts are expected to be less than significant, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The project site is vacant, and the site's development will not displace any persons or require the construction of replacement housing. Therefore, no impact on hous- ing will occur directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. POPULATION AND HOUSING CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs that implementing the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on population and housing. The population generated by the project is less than analyzed under the PDGP. Further, a 100% affordable project will increase the City’s housing affordable housing options. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory require- ments, and General Plan policies and programs associated with population and housing, as applicable to multi-family residential development as they would for other projects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Land Use and Community Character Element Policy 3.3 Variety of types of neighborhoods. Promote a variety of neighborhoods within the City and ensure that neighborhood types are dispersed throughout the City. Policy 3.4 Balanced neighborhoods. Within the allowed densities and housing types, promote a range of housing and price levels within each neighborhood in order to accom- modate diverse ages and incomes. For development projects larger than five acres, re- quire that a diversity of housing types be provided and that these housing types be mixed rather than segregated by unit type. Policy 3.5 Housing affordability. Ensure affordable housing is distributed throughout the City to avoid concentrations of poverty and to be accessible to jobs. Housing Element Policy 1 New affordable housing projects shall be encouraged in all areas of the City. Special attention will be made to distributing the units so that large concentrations of af- fordable housing in any one area are avoided. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 82 of 106 City of Palm Desert POPULATION DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. There is nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels that would change or affect the population and housing impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts on population and housing-related to the proposed project or subject par- cels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. There are no significant off-site or cumulative population and housing impacts as- sociated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the population and housing impacts of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XV. PUBLIC SERVICES – Would the project: a) 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 con- struction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire protection? ii) Police protection? iii) Schools? iv) Parks? v) Other public facilities? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Public Services and Utilities 4.14  FEIR Technical Background Report 15.0 Public Services, Utilities, and Recreation 3. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physi- cally altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Palm Villas at Millennium Page 83 of 106 City of Palm Desert i) Fire protection? The Riverside County Fire Department provides fire services for the City of Palm Desert. The service contract for fire protection is entered into jointly by the Cove Communities Service Commission member jurisdictions. Due to this contract, the City of Palm Desert 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 stations. This means the station physically closest to the emergency will respond even if it is outside the station’s official jurisdiction. There are three fire stations located within the boundaries of Palm Desert. Station No. 33, south of Fred Warning Drive, serves as the division headquarters. Like any development project, the project may increase the demand for fire service; however, the project would not increase the population beyond what was anticipated in the General Plan. Further, the project would be designed and constructed consistent with applicable codes and standards for access and fire suppression infrastructure. It should be noted that future development is expected to be phased, allowing the Fire Department time to gradually increase necessary resources. However, the development within the project will contribute to the maintenance of fire services through the City’s structural fire tax, which is assessed on property tax bills and as- sures that the City can continue to provide fire services as development occurs. The project will have a less than significant impact on fire ser- vices, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. ii) Police protection? The Palm Desert Police Department will serve the project and is located one-half mile west of the project site on Gerald Ford Drive. Like any devel- opment project, the project may increase the demand for police service; however, the project would not increase the population beyond what was anticipated in the General Plan. The proposed project will generate property tax and, in this manner, con- tribute to the offset of its increased demand. All development associated with the proposed project will be subject to review by the City Police Depart- ment and will include a review for defensible space and adequate levels of security lighting around buildings, parking lots, and other areas. The proposed project is planned for under the General Plan and would have a less than significant impact on police protection. iii) Schools? The proposed project is located within the Palm Springs Unified School Dis- trict (PSUSD). PSUSD continues to plan for expanded facilities to serve the growing population within the district boundaries. The project is required to pay the state-mandated school fees in place when development occurs. These fees are designed to mitigate impacts on schools by providing funds Palm Villas at Millennium Page 84 of 106 City of Palm Desert to construct new facilities. By implementing all regulations and City and School District policies for development projects, the project will have a less than significant impact on schools, directly, indirectly, and cumulatively. iv) Parks? The project will increase the demand for public parks, but the project will not increase the demand beyond what was anticipated in the General Plan. The City imposes a fee for residential projects. This fee is designed to reduce the impacts of new development on City park facilities. By implementing all regulations and City policies for development projects, the project will have a less than significant impact on parks, directly, indirectly, and cumula- tively. v) Other public facilities? The proposed project is planned for under the General Plan and would have a less than significant impact on other public facilities. PUBLIC SERVICES CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, the implementation of the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on public services, including fire protection, law enforcement, school, and library facilities. The pro- posed project is consistent with the land use designation assigned to the site, is under the analyzed 40 units per acre, and will result in less intense demand for services than was considered in the FEIR. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with public services, as applicable to residential development and other projects in the City. The proposed project will be required to implement the same standard requirements, conformance with the City’s Building Code, and pay fees as other development projects in the City. There- fore, the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impacts were adequately ad- dressed in the FEIR and would not change from that identified as a result of the proposed project. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impacts were adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Public Utilities and Services Element Policy 7.8 Fire and emergency services. Continue to coordinate with Riverside County Fire Department to ensure continued excellent fire and emergency services. Policy 7.9 Police services. Work with all available resources to ensure continued excel- lent and cost-effective police services in Palm Desert. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 85 of 106 City of Palm Desert PUBLIC SERVICES DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. Nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels would change or affect the public services element impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the pro- ject is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts on public services related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative public services impacts are associated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the pro- ject is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the public services impact of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVI. RECREATION – Would the project: a) Would the project increase the use of ex- isting 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 fa- cilities or require the construction or ex- pansion of recreational facilities that have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Public Services and Utilities Element 4.14  FEIR Technical Background Report 15.0 Public Services, Utilities, and Recreation 3. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterio- ration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? The proposed project with 221 units will increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks. It will add an estimated 720 persons to the City of Palm Desert population. The project features a recreation building, tot lot, multi-sport ball court, two (2) shaded picnic areas, and two (2) BBQ areas. As part of the MPDSP, a 27- Palm Villas at Millennium Page 86 of 106 City of Palm Desert acre park is proposed adjacent to the proposed project. With the development of the proposed park within the project, the City will expand its recreational opportu- nities for residents in this part of the City beyond the proposed project. By implementing all regulations and City policies for development projects, the project will have a less than significant impact on parks, directly, indirectly, and cumulatively. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The project does provide a recreation building, tot lot, multi-sport ball court, shaded picnic area, and BBQ area. It will not require the construction or expansion of rec- reational facilities beyond what was analyzed in the PDGP and FEIR. Therefore, the project will have less than significant on recreational facilities, causing an adverse effect on the environment. RECREATION CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, the implementation of the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts for recrea- tion, as the project site includes a recreation building, tot lot, multi-sport ball court, two (2) shaded picnic areas, and two (2) BBQ areas. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with recreation applicable to multi-family residential development as they would for other projects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or signifi- cant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Land Use and Community Character Element Policy 3.15 Access to parks and open spaces. Require the design of new neighbor- hoods and, where feasible, retrofit existing neighborhoods, so that 60 percent of dwelling units are within a ¼ mile walking distance of a usable open space such as a tot-lot, neigh- borhood park, community park, or plaza/green. RECREATION DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. There is nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels that would change or affect the recreation impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 87 of 106 City of Palm Desert 2. Impacts on recreation related to the proposed project or subject parcels were an- alyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative recreational impacts are associated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the pro- ject is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the recreational impact of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVII. TRANSPORTATION – Would the project: a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation sys- tem, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or in- compatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency ac- cess? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Transportations 4.15  FEIR Technical Background Report 14. Transportation 3. PD Municipal Code Title 15 Buildings and Construction 4. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND 5. Gateway Village Project Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Kunzman Associates, November 24, 2014; a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? As noted in the General Plan Update University Neighborhood Specific Plan Envi- ronmental Impact Report, page 4.15-57, “The General Plan Mobility Element pro- poses a comprehensive system of bicycle lanes and golf cart facilities. Additionally, the Mobility Element identifies a series of Goals and Policies to ensure the integrity and service levels for bikes, pedestrians, golf carts, and transit facilities are main- tained. Figure 4.2 in the Mobility Element (Proposed Bicycle and Golf Cart Palm Villas at Millennium Page 88 of 106 City of Palm Desert Network) was developed to be consistent with regional and local plans. The pro- posed roadway cross sections provide pedestrian facilities.” The proposed project is located in the MPDSP and will be designed to meet all of the required MPDSP, Zoning, and General Plan design requirements for mobility facilities. Therefore, the project will have no impact or conflict with adopted pro- grams for circulation systems. b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivi- sion (b)? Senate Bill (SB) 743 was adopted in 2013, requiring the Governor’s Office of Plan- ning and Research (OPR) to identify new metrics for identifying and mitigating transportation impacts within the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). OPR has identified Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) for land-use projects as the new metric for transportation analysis under CEQA. The regulatory changes to the CEQA guidelines that implement SB 743 were approved on December 28th, 2018, with July 1st, 2020, as the new metric. Since the City does not have established guidelines, the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, December 2018, will be used. “Adding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves jobs-housing match, in turn shortening commutes and reducing VMT. Further, “… low-wage workers in particular would be more likely to choose a residential location close to their workplace, if one is available.” In areas where existing jobs-housing match is closer to optimal, low income housing nevertheless generates less VMT than market-rate housing. Therefore, a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis for the lead agency to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Evidence supports a presumption of less than significant impact for a 100 percent affordable residential development (or the residential component of a mixed-use development) in infill locations. Lead agen- cies may develop their own presumption of less than significant impact for residen- tial projects (or residential portions of mixed use projects) containing a particular amount of affordable housing, based on local circumstances and evidence. Fur- thermore, a project which includes any affordable residential units may factor the effect of the affordability on VMT into the assessment of VMT generated by those units (pages 14 -15).” Since the project is 100 percent affordable and located at an infill location, the project is assumed to have a less than significant impact on vehicle miles trav- eled. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equip- ment)? Driveways on Dinah Shore Drive and Technology Drive will provide access to the project site, with the Dinah Shore Driveway serving as the primary entrance for Phase I. The driveway will be improved in compliance with recommended roadway classifications and respective cross-sections in the PDGP. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 89 of 106 City of Palm Desert In addition, further review will take place at the time of final grading, landscaping, and street improvement plans. Signing/striping will be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project site. The project will have a less than significant impact, directly, indirectly, or cumu- latively, on creating or increasing hazards or incompatible uses with the above provisions. d) Result in inadequate emergency access? Emergency access to the site will be provided during the development's construc- tion and operational phases. As designed, Engineering and Fire reviewed the pro- ject for on-site and off-site safety hazards to ensure adequate emergency access. The project will have less than significant impact on emergency access, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. The project will have a less than significant impact, directly, indirectly, or cumu- latively, on creating or increasing hazards or incompatible uses with the above provisions. TRANSPORTATION CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs that implementing the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on traffic mate- rials. Further, the total number of residential units built within the MPDSP is less than the projected units and less than that analyzed in the FEIR. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with traffic materials, as applicable to residential development and they would for other projects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Mobility Element Policy 1.1 Complete Streets. Consider all modes of travel in planning, design, and con- struction of all transportation projects to create safe, livable, and inviting environments for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and public transit users of all ages and capabilities. Policy 1.2 Transportation System Impacts. Evaluate transportation and development projects in a manner that addresses the impacts of all travel modes on all other travel modes through the best available practices. Policy 1.3 Facility Service Levels. Determine appropriate service levels for all modes of transportation and develop guidelines to evaluate impacts to these modes for all related public and private projects Palm Villas at Millennium Page 90 of 106 City of Palm Desert Policy 3.4 Access to Development. Require that all new development projects or rede- velopment projects provide connections from the site to the external pedestrian network. Policy 8.6 Electric Vehicles. Encourage the use of electric vehicles (EV), including golf carts and Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEV) by supporting the use of EVs and en- couraging NEV charging stations to be powered with renewable resources. TRANSPORTATION DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. There is nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels that would change or affect the traffic impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject prop- erty is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is con- sistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts to were on materials related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. There are no significant off-site or cumulative traffic impacts associated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the pro- ject is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the project's traffic impact would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geograph- ically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i) Listed or eligible for listing in the Califor- nia Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivi- sion (c) of Public Resources Code Sec- tion 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Re- sources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native Amer- ican tribe. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 91 of 106 City of Palm Desert ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Cultural Resources 4.6  FEIR Technical Background Report 4.0 Cultural Resources 3. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Re- sources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Pub- lic Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or As noted in the General Plan Update University Neighborhood Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report, page 4.6-11, “In compliance with AB 52, the City has provided formal notification to the three tribes that have previously requested notice of proposed projects under AB 52. In addition, the City sent approximately 30 tribes formal invitations to consult pursuant to SB 18. As of the release of the Draft EIR, no tribe has formally requested consul- tation under either statute; however, the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians has indicated, in its response to both the SB 18 and AB 52 invita- tions, that it will review the Draft EIR during the public review period and provide its comments at that time.” The FEIR evaluated the potential effects related to tribal cultural resources. As required by the FEIR and as part of the MPDSP MND, a Historical and Archaeological Resources Survey was conducted for the 152-acre pro- posed site and planning area. As indicated in the Resources Survey, find- ings were established through a search of historical/archaeological re- sources records, historical background research, contact with Native Amer- ican representatives, and an intensive-level field survey. According to the survey, there is no further evidence of historical or archaeological resources within the survey area. The FEIR determined that implementing the General Plan would signifi- cantly impact historical, tribal, and archaeological resources. Mitigation Measures 4.6-2a through 4.6-2d (FEIR p. 4.6-18) were established for pro- jects involving ground disturbance, such as grading and excavation. Special studies are required for project sites to identify on-site archaeological re- sources and provide detailed mitigation plans if the site is determined to be Palm Villas at Millennium Page 92 of 106 City of Palm Desert moderately to highly sensitive for a resource. The MPDSP IS/MND included an archaeological resource study, which found no cultural resources and identified no impact on archaeological or cultural resources. The FEIR determined that, with mitigation, potentially significant impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. Further, the MSP IS/MND found no resources through a site-specific archaeological study. There is no substantial new information indicating that the cultural resource impacts of the project would be more severe than those described in the FEIR. No changes have occurred on the subject parcel or the project area that would require further environmental analysis. As part of the General Plan FEIR, coordination with the Native American tribes was completed through SB 18 and AB 52 and is assured through compliance with AB 52 and SB 18 and implementation of Title 29 of the City of Palm Desert Municipal Code. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively, on any cultural resource defined by Public Re- sources Code Section 5020.1(k). ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and sup- ported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. See response Section XVIII a) above. The project will have less than sig- nificant impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively, on Tribal Historical Re- sources. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, the implementation of the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts on Tribal Cultural Resources. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory require- ments, and General Plan policies and programs associated with Tribal Cultural Re- sources, as applicable to residential development and they would for other projects in the City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately ad- dressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Palm Villas at Millennium Page 93 of 106 City of Palm Desert Environmental Resources Element Policy 9.1 Disturbance of human remains. In areas where there is a high chance that human remains may be present, the City will require proposed projects to conduct a sur- vey to establish occurrence of human remains, if any. If human remains are discovered on proposed project sites, the project must implement mitigation measures to prevent impacts to human remains in order to receive permit approval. Policy 9.2 Discovery of human remains. Require that any human remains discovered during implementation of public and private projects within the City be treated with respect and dignity and fully comply with the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and other appropriate laws Policy 9.4 Protected sites. Require sites with significant cultural resources to be pro- tected. 9.5 Preservation of historic resources. Encourage the preservation of historic re- sources, when practical. When it is not practical to preserve a historic resource in its entirety, the City will require the architectural details and design elements of historic struc- tures to be preserved during renovations and remodels as much as feasible. Policy 9.3 Tribal coordination. Require notification of California Native American tribes and organizations of proposed projects that have the potential to adversely impact cultural resources. Policy 10 Mitigation and preservation of cultural resources. Require development to avoid archaeological and paleontological resources, whenever possible. If complete avoidance is not possible, require development to minimize and fully mitigate the impacts to the resource. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. Nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels would change or affect the Tribal Cultural Resources impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the pro- ject is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. 2. Impacts on Tribal Cultural Resources related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative Tribal Cultural Resources impacts are associ- ated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the Tribal Cultural Resources impact of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 94 of 106 City of Palm Desert ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or con- struction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the con- struction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably fore- seeable future development during nor- mal, dry, and multiple dry years? c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the pro- ject’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the ca- pacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste re- duction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Public Services and Utilities Element 4.14  FEIR Technical Background Report 15.0 Public Services, Utilities, and Recreation 3. PD Municipal Code Title 27 Chapter 27.12 Requirements and Standards of Land Alteration 4. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND 5. Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan, Prepared by Kimley Horn and Associates dated March 2022 Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report Prepared by Kimley Horn and Associates dated March 2022 6. Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan, Prepared by Kimley Horn and Associates dated March 2022 a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Water See also responses Section X above and XIX b) below for additional information. Domestic water is supplied to the project area by the Coachella Valley Water Dis- trict (CVWD), which serves much of the Coachella Valley. CVWD’s primary source Palm Villas at Millennium Page 95 of 106 City of Palm Desert of domestic water is groundwater extracted from the Whitewater River Subbasin. Efforts to conserve and supplement finite groundwater supplies include a groundwater recharge program using im- ported Colorado River water, tertiary (three-stage) treated wastewater for golf course and greenway irrigation, and recycled water for agricultural and other pur- poses in the lower valley. Domestic water lines are in place beneath roads in the immediate project vicinity. Existing water lines are located in Gerald Ford Drive - 18-inch water line between Portola Avenue and Technology Drive, and in Tech- nology Drive - 18-inch water line between Gerald Ford Drive and the northerly terminus of Technology Drive. A Water Supply Assessment was prepared and approved for the MPDSP and the project scope is within what was analyzed. The project will not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water lines or facilities that could cause significant environmental effects. There- fore, the project will have a less than significant effect on water facility expansion, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. Wastewater Treatment See also response Section X above and XIX c) below for additional information. CVWD provides wastewater collection and treatment services to the project area. Existing sewer lines are located in both Gerald Ford Drive and Technology drive and can services the proposed project. Effluent from the project area is conveyed to CVWD’s Wastewater Reclamation Plant No.10 (WRP-10) on Cook Street in Palm Desert. All components of the proposed project will be required to design facilities consistent with CVWD and Regional Board standards. The project will implement the General Plan and will have a less than significant effect on directly, indirectly, or cumulatively expanding wastewater facilities. Storm Water Drainage Per Response X) a). The project must comply with Title 27 – Grading, Chapter 22, and the MS4 permit. The City of Palm Desert is responsible for local stormwater management in the project area. No local drainage facilities are located on the project site. The City will require the project to retain 100 percent of the 100-year flood onsite. Therefore, the project will be designed to comply with existing federal, state, and local water quality laws and regulations pertaining to water quality stand- ards, ensuring a less than significant impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively, on water quality and discharge Electric Power & Natural Gas Southern California Edison (SCE) will provide electricity to the project. Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) will provide gas to the project. The project is consistent with the PDGP, and services are provided in accordance with the General Plan buildout. The project will not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded electric or gas power facilities, which could Palm Villas at Millennium Page 96 of 106 City of Palm Desert cause significant environmental effects. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant effect on electric or gas power expansion. Telecommunications Facilities Verizon provides telephone and data services including internet tor the proposed project site. Spectrum Charter Communications provides cable television services to Palm Desert, and connections to their facilities will be made using existing facil- ities. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant effect on telecommu- nication facility expansion. b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? See also response Section X above for additional information. Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides potable and non-potable water to the City of Palm Desert, supplied by several sources: groundwater, surface wa- ter from local streams, and imported water from either the State Water Project (SWP) or the Colorado River via the Coachella Canal and recycled water. The Whitewater River subbasin, which encompasses 400 square miles and under- lies much of the Coachella Valley, serves as the groundwater repository for the Palm Desert area. The City is located within the boundaries of the upper Thermal subarea. The entire Thermal subarea (including the upper and lower Thermal sub- areas) contains an estimated 19.4 million acre-feet of groundwater storage in the first 1,000 feet below the surface. Therefore, the project will have less than significant impact on groundwater sup- plies. c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which 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? See also response Section X and XIX a) above for additional information. CVWD also provides wastewater and sewage and treatment services in the City. The only outlets for groundwater in the Coachella Valley are through subsurface outflow under the Salton Sea or through collection drains and transport to the Sal- ton Sea via the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel. The project will implement the General Plan and will have a less than significant effect on directly, indirectly, or cumulatively expanding wastewater facilities. d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Palm Villas at Millennium Page 97 of 106 City of Palm Desert The City has an exclusive franchise agreement with Waste Management of the Desert. It will utilize Burrtec Waste and Recycling Services to collect and dispose of solid waste from the project site. All waste generated on the project site will be collected and transported to the Edom Hill transfer station and once sorted to one of two regional landfills; Lambs Canyon or Badlands. Both landfills are 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. The project will be required to reduce landfill waste by diverting a minimum of 50 percent of the construction and demolition debris resulting from that project from the landfill in compliance with state and local statutory goals and policies. The project is consistent with the PDGP. Future project tenants would be required to pay solid waste collection fees to offset the project’s incremental demand for solid waste services and facilities. Between the mandates for reductions in what is sent to the landfill and the fees to offset the demand on the landfill, landfill capacity is available now to accommodate this project and will be available in the future. The project will have a less than significant impact on landfills directly, indirectly, and cumulatively. e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Federal, state, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste generation, transport, and disposal are intended to assure adequate landfill capacity through mandatory reductions in solid waste quantities (for example, through recycling and composting of green waste) and the safe and efficient transportation of solid waste. The project will comply with all regulatory requirements regarding solid waste, in- cluding AB 939 and AB 341. AB 939, administered by the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, required local governments to achieve a landfill diversion rate of at least 50 percent by January 1, 2000, through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities. Moreover, AB 341 increased the minimum solid waste diversion rate to 75 percent in 2020. Such regulations will apply to this project, and compliance is mandatory. Further, mandates set forth by the CALGreen Code aim to reduce solid waste generation and promote recycling and diversion design and activities, to which this project is required to comply. There will be no impacts, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively, regarding compli- ance with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, the implementation of the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts for utilities and service systems. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory re- quirements, and General Plan policies and programs associated with utilities and service systems, as applicable to residential development and they would for other projects in the Palm Villas at Millennium Page 98 of 106 City of Palm Desert City. The proposed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately ad- dressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. The proposed project is consistent with the following PDGP policies: Public Utilities & Services Policy 1.1 Stormwater infrastructure for new development. Require development pro- jects pay for their share of new stormwater infrastructure or improvements necessitated by that development (regional shallow groundwater). Policy 1.2 On-site stormwater retention and infiltration. Whenever possible, storm- water shall be infiltrated, evapotranspirated, reused or treated onsite in other ways that improve stormwater quality and reduce flows into the storm drain system. Policy 1.3 Groundwater infiltration. Encourage the use of above-ground and natural stormwater facilities in new development and redevelopment, such as vegetated swales and permeable paving. Policy 1.10 Stormwater in urban context. Development projects shall incorporate stormwater management into landscaping, except in downtown designations where catch basins shall be prohibited. Policy 1.11 Water quality detention basins. Require water detention basins to be aes- thetically pleasing and to serve recreational purposes, such as in the form of a mini park. Detention basins designed for active uses are intended to supplement park and open space and should not be counted towards a developer’s minimum park requirements, unless otherwise determined by the Planning Commission or City Council. Policy 1.12 Retention Basins. Encourage storm water retention basins, especially in the City Center Area, to be underground in future development so as to achieve the most efficient use of land and compact development and promote the urban character goals of the General Plan. Policy 1.13 Soil erosion. Require the prevention of water-born soil erosion from sites, especially those undergoing grading and mining activities. Policy 2.2 Sewer infrastructure for new development. Require development projects to pay for their fare share of new sewer infrastructure or improvements necessitated by that development. Policy 2.3 Sewer connections. In the event that a sewer line exists in the right-of-way where a lateral line connection is required to serve a lot, require a sewer connection at the time the lot is developed. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 99 of 106 City of Palm Desert Environmental Resources Element Policy 1.1 Water conservation technologies. Promote indoor and outdoor water con- servation and reuse practices including water recycling, grey water reuse and rainwater harvesting. Policy 1.2 Landscape design. Encourage the reduction of landscaping water consump- tion through plant selection and irrigation technology. Policy 1.3 Conservation performance targeted to new construction. Incentivize new construction to exceed the state’s Green Building Code for water conservation by an ad- ditional 10 percent. Policy 1.4 Greywater. Allow the use of greywater and establish criteria and standards to permit its safe and effective use (also known as on-site water recycling). UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. There is nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels that would change or affect the utilities and service systems impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject property is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is consistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the des- ignation. 2. Impacts on utilities and service systems related to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. 3. No significant off-site or cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are asso- ciated with the proposed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the project's utilities and service systems impact would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmental analysis. ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XX. WILDFIRE – If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, Would the project: a) Substantially impair an adopted emer- gency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pol- lutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? Palm Villas at Millennium Page 100 of 106 City of Palm Desert ISSUES & SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Sig- nificant with Mitigation In- corporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XX. WILDFIRE – If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, Would the project: c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk, or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts on the environment? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or down- stream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Sources: 1. City of Palm Desert General Plan dated November 10, 2016 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan Environmental Documents (FEIR)  General Plan Update & University Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft FEIR August 2016  Final Environmental Impact Report General Plan Update  Draft FEIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4.8  FEIR Technical Background Report 8.0 Hazards and Hazardous Materials  FEIR Technical Background Report 8.0 Figure 8.2: Fire Hazard Severity Zone 3. PD Municipal Code Title 15 Buildings and Construction 4. Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan IS/MND 5. CalFire FHSZ Viewer a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? As stated in response to Section IX f) above, the project will have access to Dinah Shore Drive and Technology Drive. The project provides adequate emergency ve- hicle access, including street widths and vertical clearance on new streets. Imple- menting federal, state, and local laws and regulations in the project's construction will ensure a less than significant impact. Temporary construction traffic plans would be approved and coordinated with the City, Police, and Fire Departments so the project would not interfere with emer- gency response plans. The project provides adequate emergency vehicle access, including street widths and vertical clearance on new streets. Implementing federal, state, and local laws and regulations in the project's construction will ensure a less than significant impact on adopted emergency response or evacuation plans. b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? In addition to response Section IX g) above, the project site is located in an urban- ized area of the City. The site is not located in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone, as noted on the CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. The project will include Palm Villas at Millennium Page 101 of 106 City of Palm Desert new residential buildings to be built to the latest Building and Fire Codes. The pro- ject will have no impact on exposing project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utili- ties) that may exacerbate fire risk, or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts on the environment? The vacant project site is within an urbanized area of the City. It will not require installing or maintaining associated infrastructure that would exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts on the environment. As such, the project will have no impact, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope in- stability, or drainage changes? In addition to response IX g) above, it is noted that while the project site is vacant, it is in an urbanized area of the City along Gerald Ford Drive. Therefore, the project will have no impact directly, indirectly, or cumulatively, as it is not expected to have a wildland fire on-site and will not expose people or structures to significant risk from flooding or landslides as a result of a post-wildfire. WILDFIRE CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN: The proposed project is consistent with the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use desig- nation assigned by the PDGP and evaluated in the FEIR. The FEIR determined upon implementation of standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs, the implementation of the PDGP would result in less than significant impacts for wildfires. The project site is not located in a high-fire zone. The proposed project will be subject to standards, regulatory requirements, and PDGP policies and programs associated with wildfires, as applicable to residential development and other projects in the City. The pro- posed project would not result in any new impacts or significant findings or increase the severity of impacts identified in the FEIR. The impact was adequately addressed in the FEIR and would not change. No mitigation measures were required or provided in the FEIR. WILDFIRE DETERMINATION FINDINGS: 1. There is nothing unusual or peculiar to the proposed project or subject parcels that would change or affect the wildfire impacts analyzed in the FEIR. The subject prop- erty is designated for “Town Center Neighborhood” uses, and the project is con- sistent with multi-family residential uses listed under the designation. The project is not in a high fire zone susceptible to wildfire impacts. 2. Impacts on wildfire-related hazards to the proposed project or subject parcels were analyzed in the FEIR. Palm Villas at Millennium Page 102 of 106 City of Palm Desert 3. No significant off-site or cumulative wildfire impacts are associated with the pro- posed project or subject parcels that were not addressed in the FEIR; the project is not more intensive than the “Town Center Neighborhood” land use assigned to it in the PDGP and analyzed in the FEIR. 4. There is no substantial new information from what was known at the time the FEIR was certified, indicating that the wildfire impact of the project would be more severe than those initially described in the FEIR. The parcels are vacant, and no changes have occurred to them or in the project area that would require further environmen- tal analysis. VII. LEAD AGENCY CONTACT: Contact Person: Phone: Signature: Date: Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant Date received for filing at OPR: Acoustical Assessment Palm Villas at Millennium Project City of Palm Desert, California Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 1100 W. Town and Country Road, Suite 700 Orange, California 92868 Contact: Mr. Ryan Chiene 714.705-1343 December 2021 City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Location ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Description .................................................................................................................... 1 2 FUNDAMENTALS OF SOUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE Fundamentals of Sound and Environmental Noise ................................................................... 5 3 REGULATORY SETTING 3.1 State of California .................................................................................................................... 10 3.2 City of Palm Desert .................................................................................................................. 10 4 METHODOLOGY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS 4.1 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 14 4.2 Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................. 15 5 ACOUSTICAL IMPACTS 5.1 Predicted On-Site Mobile Source Noise Levels ....................................................................... 18 5.2 Mitigation Techniques ............................................................................................................. 21 6 RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 27 7 REFERENCES References ............................................................................................................................... 28 TABLES Table 1 Typical Noise Levels ................................................................................................................... 5 Table 2 Definitions of Acoustical Terms ................................................................................................. 6 Table 3 Palm Desert Noise Limits for Stationary Sources .................................................................... 13 Table 4 Noise Measurements .............................................................................................................. 16 Table 5 Sound Transmission Class for Windows .................................................................................. 25 EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 Regional Vicinity ........................................................................................................................ 2 Exhibit 2 Site Vicinity ................................................................................................................................ 3 Exhibit 3 Conceptual Site Plan .................................................................................................................. 4 Exhibit 4 City of Palm Desert Noise Compatibility Matrix ...................................................................... 11 Exhibit 5 Noise Measurement Locations ................................................................................................ 17 Exhibit 6 Traffic Noise Receiver Locations ............................................................................................. 19 Exhibit 7 Train Noise Receiver Locations................................................................................................ 20 Exhibit 8 Recommended Noise Barrier Locations .................................................................................. 23 Exhibit 9 Recommended Balcony Treatments ....................................................................................... 24 Exhibit 10 Recommended Window and Entry Door Treatments ............................................................. 26 City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | iii APPENDICES Appendix A: Existing Ambient Noise Measurements Appendix B: Traffic Noise Modeling Data Appendix C: Train Noise Modeling Data Appendix D: Composite Noise Modeling Data City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | iv LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS ADT Average Daily Traffic ANSI American National Standards Institute CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level dB decibel dBA A-weighted decibel DNL day-night average EPA Environmental Protection Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning Hz hertz Ldn day-night average sound level Leq Equivalent Sound Level Lmax maximum A-weighted sound level Lmin minimum A-weighted sound level Ldn day-night average sound level Leq Equivalent Sound Level mm millimeter mph miles per hour STC sound transmission class TNM 2.5 Traffic Noise Model, Version 2.5 City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 1 1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Acoustical Assessment is to evaluate potential impacts for noise-sensitive areas that would be affected by the proposed Palm Villas at Millennium Project (Project), located in the City of Palm Desert, California. 1.1 Project Location The Project site is located north of Gerald Ford Drive between Dinah Shore Drive and Cook Street in the City of Palm Desert (City), County of Riverside, California; refer to Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity. Specifically, the Project is located at Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 694-120-028, approximately 620 feet south of Interstate 10 (I-10) and 490 feet south of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) corridor; see Exhibit 2: Site Vicinity. 1.2 Project Description The proposed Project includes the construction of a new 241-unit affordable housing community on the 10.49 gross acre site. The Project site would also include a community building, barbecue area, shaded picnic area, tot lot, multi-sport ball court, and maintenance building; refer to Exhibit 3: Conceptual Site Plan. Site access would be provided via two new entrances Dinah Shore Drive and Technology Drive. Palm Desert AÙH AÙH AÙH !"`$ !"`$ !"`$ Project Site EXHIBIT 1: Regional VicinityPalm Villas at Millennium Project - Acoustical Assessment Source: ESRI World Street Map K:\RIV_GIS\195246003 - Palm Villas at Millennium GIS\01 Regional Vicinity.mxd 0 21 Miles ^_ ?±E !"`$ UNION PACIFIC RR G eral d F or dDri veCollege DrivePacific AvenueDinah Shore Drive Portola AvenueTec h n ol ogyDriveEXHIBIT 2: Site VicinityPalm Villas at Millennium Project - Acoustical Assessment Source: ESRI World Imagery K:\RIV_GIS\195246003 - Palm Villas at Millennium GIS\02 Site Vicinity.mxd 0 600300 Feet PROJECT SITE EXHIBIT 3: Conceptual Site PlanPalm Villas at Millennium Project - Acoustical Assessment Source: Derra Design, Site Development Plan K:\RIV_GIS\195246003 - Palm Villas at Millennium GIS\03 Conceptual Site Plan.mxd 0 200100 Feet City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 5 2 FUNDAMENTALS OF SOUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE Acoustics is the science of sound. Sound can be described as the mechanical energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium (e.g., air) to human (or animal) ear. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), they can be heard and are called sound. The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound and is expressed as cycles per second, or hertz (Hz). Noise is defined as loud, unexpected, or annoying sound. In acoustics, the fundamental model consists of a sound (or noise) source, a receptor, and the propagation path between the two. The loudness of the noise source and obstructions or atmospheric factors affecting the propagation path to the receptor determine the sound level and characteristics of the noise perceived by the receptor. Acoustics deal primarily with the propagation and control of sound. A typical noise environment consists of ambient noise that is the sum of many distant and indistinguishable noise sources. Superimposed on this ambient noise is the sound from individual local sources. These sources can vary from an occasional aircraft or train passing by to virtually continuous noise from, for example, traffic on a major highway. Perceptions of sound and noise are highly subjective from person to person. Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a large and awkward range of numbers. To avoid this, the decibel (dB) scale was devised. The dB scale uses the hearing threshold (20 micropascals) as a point of reference, defined as 0 dB. Other sound pressures are then compared to this reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The dB scale allows a million-fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB, and changes in levels (dB) correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness. Table 1: Typical Noise Levels provides typical noise levels associated with common activities. Table 1: Typical Noise Levels Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dBA) Common Indoor Activities – 110 – Rock Band Jet fly-over at 1,000 feet – 100 – Gas lawnmower at 3 feet – 90 – Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 miles per hour Food blender at 3 feet – 80 – Garbage disposal at 3 feet Noisy urban area, daytime Gas lawnmower, 100 feet – 70 – Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet Commercial area Normal Speech at 3 feet Heavy traffic at 300 feet – 60 – Large business office Quiet urban daytime – 50 – Dishwasher in next room Quiet urban nighttime – 40 – Theater, large conference room (background) Quiet suburban nighttime – 30 – Library Quiet rural nighttime Bedroom at night, concert hall (background) – 20 – Broadcast/recording studio – 10 – Lowest threshold of human hearing – 0 – Lowest threshold of human hearing dBA = A-weighted decibels; mph = miles per hour Source: California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 6 Noise Descriptors The dB scale alone does not adequately characterize how humans perceive noise. The dominant frequencies of a sound have a substantial effect on the human response to that sound. Several rating scales have been developed to analyze the adverse effect of community noise on people. Because environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that the effect of noise on people is largely dependent on the total acoustical energy content of the noise, as well as the time of day when the noise occurs. The equivalent noise level (Leq) is a measure of ambient noise, while the day-night noise level (Ldn) and Community Equivalent Noise Level (CNEL) are measures of community noise. Each is applicable to this analysis and defined in Table 2: Definitions of Acoustical Terms. Table 2: Definitions of Acoustical Terms Term Definitions Decibel, dB A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The reference pressure for air is 20. Sound Pressure Level Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, usually expressed in micropascals (or 20 micronewtons per square meter), where 1 pascal is the pressure resulting from a force of 1 newton exerted over an area of 1 square meter. The sound pressure level is expressed in decibels as 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio between the pressures exerted by the sound to a reference sound pressure (e.g., 20 micropascals). Sound pressure level is the quantity that is directly measured by a sound level meter. Frequency, Hz The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric pressure. Normal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. Infrasonic sound are below 20 Hz and ultrasonic sounds are above 20,000 Hz. A-Weighted Sound Level, dBA The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. Equivalent Noise Level, Leq The average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night. Lmax, Lmin The maximum and minimum A-weighted noise level during the measurement period. L01, L10, L50, L90 The A-weighted noise levels that are exceeded 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of the time during the measurement period. Day/Night Noise Level, Ldn or DNL A 24-hour average Leq with a 10 dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the nighttime. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.4 dBA Ldn. Community Noise Equivalent Level, CNEL A 24-hour average Leq with a 5 dBA “weighting” during the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and a 10 dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.7 dBA CNEL. Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location. Intrusive That noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends on its amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content as well as the prevailing ambient noise level. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 7 The A-weighted decibel (dBA) sound level scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, a method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying events. The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about plus or minus 1 dBA. Various computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends on the distance between the receptor and the noise source. Close to the noise source, the models are accurate to within about plus or minus 1 to 2 dBA. A-Weighted Decibels The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent on many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable and can be approximated by dBA values. There is a strong correlation between dBA sound levels and the way the human ear perceives sound. For this reason, the dBA sound level has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment. All noise levels reported in this document are in terms of dBA, but are expressed as dB, unless otherwise noted. Addition of Decibels The dB scale is logarithmic, not linear, and therefore sound levels cannot be added or subtracted through ordinary arithmetic. Two sound levels 10 dB apart differ in acoustic energy by a factor of 10. When the standard logarithmic decibel is A-weighted, an increase of 10 dBA is generally perceived as a doubling in loudness. For example, a 70 dBA sound is half as loud as an 80 dBA sound and twice as loud as a 60 dBA sound. When two identical sources are each producing sound of the same loudness, the resulting sound level at a given distance would be 3 dB higher than one source under the same conditions. Under the decibel scale, three sources of equal loudness together would produce an increase of 5 dBA. Sound Propagation and Attenuation Sound spreads (propagates) uniformly outward in a spherical pattern, and the sound level decreases (attenuates) at a rate of approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a stationary or point source. Sound from a line source, such as a highway, propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of approximately 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source, such as a roadway, depending on ground surface characteristics. No excess attenuation is assumed for hard surfaces like a parking lot or a body of water. Soft surfaces, such as soft dirt or grass, can absorb sound, so an excess ground-attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally assumed. For line sources, an overall attenuation rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance is assumed. Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures; generally, a single row of buildings between the receptor and the noise source reduces the noise level by about 5 dBA, while a solid wall or berm reduces noise levels by 5 to 10 dBA. The manner in which older homes in California were constructed generally provides a reduction of exterior-to-interior noise levels of about 20 to 25 dBA with closed windows. The exterior-to-interior reduction of newer residential units is generally 30 dBA or more. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 8 Human Response to Noise The human response to environmental noise is subjective and varies considerably from individual to individual. Noise in the community has often been cited as a health problem, not in terms of actual physiological damage, such as hearing impairment, but in terms of inhibiting general well-being and contributing to undue stress and annoyance. The health effects of noise in the community arise from interference with human activities, including sleep, speech, recreation, and tasks that demand concentration or coordination. Hearing loss can occur at the highest noise intensity levels. Noise environments and consequences of human activities are usually well represented by median noise levels during the day or night or over a 24-hour period. Environmental noise levels are generally considered low when the CNEL is below 60 dBA, moderate in the 60 to 70 dBA range, and high above 70 dBA. Examples of low daytime levels are isolated, natural settings with noise levels as low as 20 dBA and quiet, suburban, residential streets with noise levels around 40 dBA. Noise levels above 45 dBA at night can disrupt sleep. Examples of moderate-level noise environments are urban residential or semi- commercial areas (typically 55 to 60 dBA) and commercial locations (typically 60 dBA). People may consider louder environments adverse, but most will accept the higher levels associated with noisier urban residential or residential-commercial areas (60 to 75 dBA) or dense urban or industrial areas (65 to 80 dBA). Regarding increases in A-weighted noise levels (dBA), the following relationships should be noted:  Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 1 dBA cannot be perceived by humans.  Outside of the laboratory, a 3 dBA change is considered a just-perceivable difference.  A change in level of at least 5 dBA is required before any noticeable change in community response would be expected. An increase of 5 dBA is typically considered substantial.  A 10 dBA change is subjectively heard as an approximate doubling in loudness and would almost certainly cause an adverse change in community response. Effects of Noise on People Hearing Loss While physical damage to the ear from an intense noise impulse is rare, a degradation of auditory acuity can occur even within a community noise environment. Hearing loss occurs mainly due to chronic exposure to excessive noise, but may be due to a single event such as an explosion. Natural hearing loss associated with aging may also be accelerated from chronic exposure to loud noise. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has a noise exposure standard that is set at the noise threshold where hearing loss may occur from long-term exposures. The maximum allowable level is 90 dBA averaged over 8 hours. If the noise is above 90 dBA, the allowable exposure time is correspondingly shorter. Annoyance Attitude surveys are used for measuring the annoyance felt in a community for noises intruding into homes or affecting outdoor activity areas. In these surveys, it was determined that causes for annoyance include interference with speech, radio and television, house vibrations, and interference with sleep and rest. The Ldn as a measure of noise has been found to provide a valid correlation of noise level and the City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 9 percentage of people annoyed. People have been asked to judge the annoyance caused by aircraft noise and ground transportation noise. There continues to be disagreement about the relative annoyance of these different sources. A noise level of about 55 dBA Ldn is the threshold at which a substantial percentage of people begin to report annoyance.1 1 Federal Interagency Committee on Noise, Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues, August 1992. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 10 3 REGULATORY SETTING To limit population exposure to physically and/or psychologically damaging as well as intrusive noise levels, the federal government, the state of California, various county governments, and most municipalities in the state have established standards and ordinances to control noise. 3.1 State of California California Government Code California Government Code Section 65302 (f) mandates that the legislative body of each county and city adopt a noise element as part of its comprehensive general plan. The local noise element must recognize the land use compatibility guidelines established by the State Department of Health Services. The guidelines rank noise land use compatibility in terms of “normally acceptable”, “conditionally acceptable”, “normally unacceptable”, and “clearly unacceptable” noise levels for various land use types. Single-family homes are “normally acceptable” in exterior noise environments up to 60 CNEL and “conditionally acceptable” up to 70 CNEL. Multiple-family residential uses are “normally acceptable” up to 65 CNEL and “conditionally acceptable” up to 70 CNEL. Schools, libraries, and churches are “normally acceptable” up to 70 CNEL, as are office buildings and business, commercial, and professional uses. Title 24 – Building Code The state’s noise insulation standards are codified in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24: Part 1, Building Standards Administrative Code, and Part 2, California Building Code. These noise standards are applied to new construction in California for the purpose of interior noise compatibility from exterior noise sources. The regulations specify that acoustical studies must be prepared when noise-sensitive structures, such as residential buildings, schools, or hospitals, are located near major transportation noise sources, and where such noise sources create an exterior noise level of 65 dBA CNEL or higher. Acoustical studies that accompany building plans must demonstrate that the structure has been designed to limit interior noise in habitable rooms to acceptable noise levels. For new residential buildings, schools, and hospitals, the acceptable interior noise limit for new construction is 45 dBA CNEL. 3.2 City of Palm Desert City of Palm Desert General Plan The Noise Element of the City of Palm Desert General Plan (Palm Desert General Plan) provides a comprehensive program for including noise control in the planning process. The Noise Element is used to ensure land uses are compatible with environmental noise levels and Palm Desert residents are protected from excessive noise intrusion. Land use compatibility noise criteria are provided to make decisions on the location of land uses in relation to noise sources and for determining noise mitigation requirements. Exhibit 4: City of Palm Desert Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments shows the land use compatibility noise standards for the City. As indicated, the normally acceptable exterior noise level for multi-family residential uses in the City is 65 dBA CNEL. Noise levels up to 70 dBA CNEL are considered conditionally acceptable for multi-family residential uses. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 11 Exhibit 4: City of Palm Desert Noise Compatibility Matrix Source: City of Palm Desert, City of Palm Desert General Plan, adopted November 10, 2016. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 12 The following goals and policies from the Noise Element of the Palm Desert General Plan are applicable to the proposed Project: Goal 1. Land Use Planning and Design. A city where noise compatibility between differing types of land uses is ensured through the land use planning process and design strategies. Policy 1.1 Noise Compatibility. Apply the Noise Compatibility Matrix, shown in Figure 7.1 (Exhibit 4), as a guide for planning and development decisions. The City will require projects involving new development or modifications to existing development to implement mitigation measures, where necessary, to reduce noise levels to at least the normally compatible range shown in the City’s Noise Compatibility Matrix shown in Figure 7.1 (Exhibit 4). Mitigation measures should focus on architectural features and building design and construction, rather than site design features such as excessive setbacks, berms and sound walls, to maintain compatibility with adjacent and surrounding uses. Goal 3. Mobile Sources of Noise. A city with minimal noise from mobile sources. Policy 3.1 Roadway Noise. Implement the policies listed under Goal 1 to reduce the impacts of roadway noise on noise-sensitive receptors where roadway noise exceeds the normally compatible range shown in the City’s Noise Compatibility Matrix shown in Figure 7.1 (Exhibit 4). Policy 3.4 Railway Noise. Ensure that noise from rail lines is taken into account during the land use planning and site development processes. Goal 3. Neighborhoods. Neighborhoods that provide a variety of housing types, densities, designs and mix of uses and services that support healthy and active lifestyles. Policy 3.18 Soundwalls. Allow the use of soundwalls to buffer new Neighborhoods from existing sources of noise pollution such as railroads and limited access roadways. Prohibit the use of soundwalls to buffer residential areas from arterial or collector streets. Instead design approaches such as building setbacks, landscaping and other techniques shall be used. In the case where soundwalls might be acceptable, require pedestrian access points to improve access from the Neighborhoods. City of Palm Desert Municipal Code The Palm Desert Municipal Code (“Municipal Code” or “PDMC”) includes standards pertaining to noise control within the City. PDMC Section 9.24.030 establishes sound level limits for residential, public institutional, commercial, manufacturing industrial, and agricultural uses in the City from fixed noise sources; see Table 3: Palm Desert Noise Limits for Stationary Sources. PDMC Section 9.24.040 prohibits any person within the City to make any loud, or disturbing, or unnecessary, or unusual or habitual noise or any noise which annoys or disturbs or injures or endangers the health, repose, peace or safety of any reasonable person of normal sensitivity present in the area. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 13 Table 3: Palm Desert Noise Limits for Stationary Sources Zone Time Applicable Ten-Minute Average Decibel Limit (A-Weighted) Residential – All Zones 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 55 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 45 Public Institutional 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 65 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 55 Commercial 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 65 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 55 Manufacturing Industrial 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 70 Agricultural 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 55 Source: City of Palm Desert, Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 9.24.030, 2021. The Millennium Palm Desert Initial Study The Project site is located within Parcel 8 of Tentative Parcel Map No. 36792 for the Millennium Palm Desert Project. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Millennium Palm Desert Project established the following noise mitigation measures that would apply to the proposed Project: 6. Site specific noise analysis shall be prepared for planning areas 7 and 8 when site plans are finalized. The noise analysis will include any necessary mitigation measures to assure exterior noise levels of 65 dBA CNEL for recreation areas, and 45 dBA CNEL for interior spaces. 7. Assuming residential units will be developed near the property lines, approximately 39.0 dB of exterior to interior noise attenuation shall be provided for units situated along the north/northeastern property lines of Planning Areas 7 and 8; and 27.4 dB of exterior to interior noise attenuation will be necessary for units along the western and southwestern property lines. 9. In order to be consistent with this the City’s land use compatibility standards, parks in the project area should be shielded from noise associated with the I-10 Freeway, the Union Pacific Rail Line and Portola Avenue Gerald Ford Drive using noise buildings or noise barriers. The barriers should be high enough to block the line of sight between the roadway(s) and rail and the receiver. 10. In order to reduce backyard noise levels to below 65 dBA CNEL, a six foot barrier shall be constructed between proposed single-family detached residential lots abutting Gerald Ford Drive and Portola Avenue. This barrier should be continuous with no holes or cracks. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 14 4 METHODOLOGY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS 4.1 Methodology Traffic Noise Model In March 1998, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) released the Traffic Noise Model, Version 1.0 (FHWA TNM). It was developed as a means for aiding compliance with policies and procedures under FHWA regulations. Since its release in March 1998, Version 1.0a was released in March 1999, Version 1.0b in August 1999, Version 1.1 in September 2000, Version 2.0 in June 2002, Version 2.1 in March 2003 and the current version, Version 2.5 in April 2004. TNM 2.5 was utilized to determine the noise resulting from vehicular activity along the surrounding roadways. TNM is a state-of-the-art computer program used for predicting noise impacts in the vicinity of highways. It uses advances in personal computer hardware and software to improve upon the accuracy and ease of modeling highway noise, including the design of effective, cost-efficient noise barriers. TNM contains the following components:  Modeling of five standard vehicle types, including automobiles, medium trucks, heavy trucks, buses, and motorcycles, as well as user-defined vehicles;  Modeling of both constant-flow and interrupted-flow traffic using a 1994/1995 field-measured data base;  Modeling of the effects of different pavement types, as well as the effects of graded roadways;  Sound level computations based on a one-third octave-band data base and algorithms;  Graphically-interactive noise barrier design and optimization;  Attenuation over/through rows of buildings and dense vegetation;  Multiple diffraction analysis;  Parallel barrier analysis; and  Contour analysis, including sound level contours, barrier insertion loss contours, and sound-level difference contours. The TNM 2.5 database is made up of over 6,000 individual pass-by events measured at forty sites across the country. It is the primary building block around which the acoustic algorithms are structured. The model has been tested for accuracy with modeled and actual measured noise. In cooperation with the FHWA, the Volpe Center Acoustics Facility (Volpe) has conducted multiple-phase studies to assess the accuracy and make recommendations of the use of the TNM 2.5 model. The study, TNM version 2.5 Addendum to Validation of FHWA’s Traffic Noise Model: Phase I (dated July 2004), included 100 hours of traffic noise data were collected at seventeen highway sites around the country. The sites had characteristics of those most commonly modeled by TNM users. TNM 2.5 was used to model and compare the predicted noise over the measured noise. The study determined that the model includes a 0.5 standard deviation of measured noise to modeled noise. TNM 2.5 is also much more user friendly compared to its predecessor Sound 2000. TNM 2.5 allows the user to import CADD files to determine more precise locations of the noise at surrounding sensitive receptors. This acoustical analysis was able to utilize TNM 2.5 to determine the noise levels at proposed residential units throughout the Project site. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 15 Train Noise Calculations The methodology used in assessing railroad noise at the Project site is based on the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA Noise and Vibration Manual) (2018). Locomotive and rail car noise was modeled using the FTA Noise Impact Assessment Spreadsheet (October 1, 2018). Modeling was conducted for freight and Amtrak trains to determine the noise levels currently generated along the UPRR corridor. The following assumptions were utilized in the analysis of railroad operations:  Model results are calculated for the noise-sensitive receivers proposed nearest the UPRR corridor (i.e., 60 modeled residential receiver locations and 1 park/recreational receiver).  Fixed guideway source type.  42 freight trains and one Amtrak train per day (43 total train pass-bys).  Each freight train would have three locomotives with up to 75 rail cars traveling at up to 79 miles per hour (mph).  Each Amtrak train would have one locomotive with up to six rail cars traveling at up to 79 mph.  Warning horns would not be used as there are no at-grade crossings near the Project site (all crossings are grade separated). The modeled assumptions for train pass-bys (i.e., number of daily Amtrak and freight trains, rail cars, speed, etc.) were obtained from the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program Noise and Vibration Technical Memorandum (Caltrans, Federal Railroad Administration, and Riverside County Transportation Authority, May 2021). 4.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS Noise Measurements To determine ambient noise levels in the Project area, Kimley-Horn conducted four short-term (10- minute) measurements on November 10, 2021, and one long-term noise measurement (24 hours in duration) starting on November 10, 2021 and ending November 11, 2021 August 2, 2021; see Appendix A: Existing Ambient Noise Measurements. The noise measurement sites were representative of typical existing noise exposure within and immediately adjacent to the Project site. The 10-minute daytime measurements were taken between 10:37 a.m. and 12:03 p.m. Measurements of L eq are considered representative of the noise levels throughout the day. The average noise levels and sources of noise measured at each location are listed in Table 4: Noise Measurements and shown on Exhibit 5: Noise Measurement Locations. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 16 Table 4: Noise Measurements Site No. Location Leq (dBA) Lmin (dBA) Lmax (dBA) CNEL/Ldn Time Short-Term Noise Measurements (10-minute measurements) ST-1 Adjacent to residential neighborhood along Portola Road to the west of the Project site, at the corner of Athena Point and Millenia Way. 54.6 45.7 68.0 - 10:37 a.m. ST-2 Western portion of Project site, adjacent to the Gerald Ford Drive and Dinah Shore Drive. 57.1 46.7 65.9 - 11:01 a.m. ST-3 Northern portion of Project site, adjacent to the Gerald Ford Drive. 54.6 51.7 68.4 - 11:23 a.m. ST-4 Vacant land near northern terminus of Technology Drive. 53.7 49.0 60.0 - 11:53 a.m. Long-Term Noise Measurements (continuous 24-hour measurement) LT-1 Vacant land near northern terminus of Technology Drive. 61.7 46.4 81.6 69.3 12:35 p.m. Source: Noise measurements taken by Kimley-Horn and Associates, November 10-11, 2021. See Appendix A for noise measurement results. !"`$ UNION PACIFIC RR G eral d F or dDri veCollege DrivePacific AvenueDinah Shore Drive Portola AvenueTec h n ol ogyDriveST-3 ST-2 ST-1 ST-4/LT-1 EXHIBIT 5: Noise Measurement LocationsPalm Villas at Millennium Project - Acoustical Assessment Source: ESRI World Imagery K:\RIV_GIS\195246003 - Palm Villas at Millennium GIS\05 Noise measurement Locations.mxd 0 600300 Feet Noise Measurement Locations PROJECT SITE City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 18 5 ACOUSTICAL IMPACTS A noise impact analysis has been completed to determine the noise exposure levels that would result from off-site transportation noise sources, and to identify potential noise reduction measures that would achieve acceptable Project exterior and interior noise levels. The primary source of traffic noise affecting the Project site is from I-10. However, the Project would also be exposed to traffic noise from Gerald Ford Drive and Dinah Shore Drive, as well as train noise from freight and Amtrak pass-bys on the UPRR rail line to the north. This analysis addresses on-site exterior and interior noise levels at proposed residential receptors/receivers. 5.1 Predicted On-Site Mobile Source Noise Levels On-Site Traffic Noise Traffic volumes along I-10 were obtained from the Caltrans Traffic Census Program.2 Truck ADT and fleet mix data was also obtained from Caltrans Traffic Census. Manual traffic counts were taken for Dinah Shore Drive during site reconnaissance on November 10, 2021, and traffic volumes along Gerald Ford Drive were obtained from the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) Coachella Valley Traffic Counts database.3 Roadways and receivers were digitized in TNM 2.5 based on the Project site plan layout. The model also accounted for the differences in elevation between the roadway and each receptor. Table B- 1 (Modeled Traffic Noise Levels) in Appendix B: Traffic Noise Modeling Data provides the results of the modeling and Exhibit 6: Traffic Noise Receiver Locations (All Floors) depicts the location of the modeled noise receivers at the Project site. As indicated in Table B-1, exterior noise levels on-site would range from 46 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 71 dBA CNEL at first floor receptors, from 48 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 70 dBA CNEL at second floor receptors, and from 51 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 71 dBA CNEL at third floor receptors. Interior noise levels on-site would range from 21 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 46 dBA CNEL at first floor receptors, from 23 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 45 dBA CNEL at second floor receptors, and from 26 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 46 dBA CNEL at third floor receptors; see Table B-1. On-Site Train Noise Noise modeling in compliance with the FTA Noise and Vibration Manual tools and methods was conducted for the receivers proposed nearest the UPRR corridor. A total of 61 receiver locations were modeled and are shown in Exhibit 7: Train Noise Receiver Locations. The modeling results are provided in Table C-1 (Modeled Train Noise Levels) in Appendix C: Train Noise Modeling Data. The issue with train traffic noise is the maximum instantaneous noise from each individual train pass-by and their contribution to the 24- hour Ldn level. The modeling results provided in Table C-1 indicate that train traffic along the UPRR rail line would result in exterior noise levels between 49 dBA Ldn and 62 dBA Ldn, and interior noise levels would range between 24 dBA Ldn and 37 dBA Ldn at the on-site modeled receiver locations. 2 California Department of Transportation, Traffic Census Program, http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/, accessed November 29, 2021. 3 Coachella Valley Association of Governments, Coachella Valley Traffic Counts, https://www.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=fb9489b188e74be3b599afb52741849d, accessed November 29, 2021. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 891110121314 15 16 165 166 167 168 169 170171 172173174175176177 178 179 150 151 152 153 154 155156 157 158159160161162 163 164 148 147 146 145 144 143 142 149 134 135 136137 138 139 140 141132 131 130 129 128 127 133 119 121 120 122 123124 126 125 117 118 116 115 114 113 112 111 110 109 108107106105 104103 102 81 82 8384 86 87 88 89 90 91929394959697 9899100101 85 1736 35 343332 31 30 29 28 27 26 252423 21 22 20 19 18 180 37 38 39 40 41424344 46 45 474849 50 51 5857 5655545352 80 59 60 61 62 6364 6766 65 68697071 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 BUILDING 1 BUILDING 10 BUILDING 9 BUILDING 8 BUILDING 7 BUILDING 6 BUILDING 5BUILDING 3BUILDING 4BUILDING 2EXHIBIT 6: Traffic Noise Receiver Locations (All Floors)Palm Villas at Millennium Project - Acoustical Assessment Source: Derra Design, Site Development Plan K:\RIV_GIS\195246003 - Palm Villas at Millennium GIS\06 Traffic Noise Receiver Locations (All Floors).mxd 0 200100 Feet Traffic Noise Receiver Locations !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( BUILDING 1 BUILDING 10 BUILDING 9 BUILDING 8 BUILDING 7 BUILDING 6 BUILDING 5BUILDING 3BUILDING 4BUILDING 21 2 3 45 6 55 60 59 58 57 56 12 7 8 9 10 11 49 50 51 48 5253 54 43 47 46 44 45 42 37 40 41 38 39 36 31 32 33 34 35 30 25 29 28 27 26 22 21 23 24 20 1917 16 15 14 1318 61 EXHIBIT 7: Train Noise Receiver Locations (All Floors)Palm Villas at Millennium Project - Acoustical Assessment Source: Derra Design, Site Development Plan K:\RIV_GIS\195246003 - Palm Villas at Millennium GIS\07 Train Noise Receiver Locations (All Floors).mxd 0 200100 Feet !(Train Noise Receiver Locations City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 21 Combined Traffic and Train Noise Levels Based on the modeling results described above, on-site traffic and train noise levels were logarithmically added to determine the combined noise levels at the Project site. Table D-1 (Composite Traffic + Train Noise Levels) in Appendix D: Composite Noise Modeling Data provides the composite on-site noise levels from mobile traffic and train noise sources. As shown in Table D-1, exterior traffic and train noise levels would range from 54 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 72 dBA CNEL at first floor receptors, from 54 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 71 dBA CNEL at second floor receptors, and from 55 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 72 dBA CNEL at third floor receptors. Combined interior noise levels would range from 29 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 47 dBA CNEL at first floor receptors, from 29 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 46 dBA CNEL at second floor receptors, and from 29 dBA CNEL to a maximum of 47 dBA CNEL at third floor receptors; see Table D-1. As indicated in Table D-1, on-site noise levels from traffic and train noise sources would exceed the City’s 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard at 68 residential receivers on the first floor, 74 residential receivers on the second floor, and 86 residential receivers on the third floor. Noise levels at the park/recreation area in the northern portion of the Project site would also exceed the City’s normally acceptable noise standard of 70 dBA CNEL for playgrounds/neighborhood parks; see Table D-1. Further, the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard would be exceeded at 6 residential receivers on the first floor, 4 residential receivers on the second floor, and 5 residential receivers on the third floor.4 Therefore, noise reduction measures are recommended to reduce on-site traffic and train noise levels to comply with the City’s exterior and interior noise standards. All other modeled receivers would be exposed to noise levels within the City’s exterior and interior noise standards. Based on standard construction practices and the Project’s heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system, interior noise levels at these receivers would be 45 dBA CNEL or lower in compliance with the State Building Code and would not require additional noise insulation features. 5.2 Mitigation Techniques As discussed above, noise abatement is required to reduce exterior and interior noise levels at numerous residential receivers/dwelling units and at the park/recreation area in the portion of the Project site. Recommendations would include the use of perimeter sound walls/barriers, upgraded windows and entry doors, and balcony treatments to reduce noise levels at the impacted receivers/dwelling units. Perimeter Sound Walls In order to reduce traffic noise levels from I-10 and train noise from the UPRR rail line, and traffic noise from Gerald Ford Drive at the outdoor patio areas of on-site residential units and the park/recreation area in the northern portion of the site, perimeter sound walls are recommended for the Project as part of Recommendation 1 (REC-1) and their approximately locations are shown on Exhibit 8: Recommended Noise Barrier Locations. As indicated in Table D-1, noise levels at first floor residential receivers would not exceed the City’s exterior and/or interior standards of 65 dBA CNEL and 45 dBA CNEL, respectively, with implementation of the sound walls per REC-1. In addition, noise levels at the park/recreation area in the northern portion of the site would not exceed the City’s normally acceptable 70 dBA CNEL noise standard 4 Assuming an exterior-interior sound reduction of 25 dBA from standard construction practices, per the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Noise Guidebook, available at: https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/313/hud-noise-guidebook/, 2009. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 22 for playgrounds/neighborhood parks with implementation of REC-1. However, due to the elevation difference between the residential dwellings on the second and third floors and I-10, the UPRR rail line, and Gerald Ford Drive, the recommended sound walls would not be effective for upper story receivers. Thus, additional noise abatement and attenuation features are needed for upper floor receivers. Balcony Treatments In general, second and third floor receivers on the northern, eastern, and western facades of the residential buildings closest to the I-10 freeway and UPRR rail line (Buildings 1 through 4), and second and third floor receivers located on the southern façade of buildings nearest to Gerald Ford Drive (Buildings 5 through 9) would be exposed to exterior noise levels exceeding the City’s 65 dBA CNEL noise standard; see Table D-1 for noise modeling results and Exhibit 6 for receiver locations. Therefore, it is recommended that outdoor balconies in the areas identified in Exhibit 9: Recommended Balcony Treatments incorporate noise attenuating balcony or patio treatments to reduce exterior noise levels below the City’s 65 dBA CNEL standard, as recommended in REC-2. Window and Door Treatments Although sound insulation varies with frequency and is very different for various types of partitions, it is convenient to compare the effectiveness of two partitions using a method of rating insulation that can be represented by a single number. In North America, the most commonly used single number rating is the Sound Transmission Class (STC). An STC rating of 0 indicates that a partition provides no airborne sound insulation. Typical values of sound insulation ratings provided by various types of window constructions are presented in Table 5: Sound Transmission Class for Windows. For high sound insulation, the purchase of commercially available windows that have been rated by a recognized testing laboratory provides better performance for a given cost than individually designed units. To obtain a sound transmission class rating above 45, it is necessary to select acoustical windows with specially designed frames, and glass mounting is recommended. Transmission of sound through a hollow window-frame can significantly reduce the sound insulation, especially for windows with very high STC. This reduction can be minimized by drilling one or more holes in the hollow frame and pumping a mastic material to fill the hollow frame. The following is a listing of various window types that are utilized on typical residential structures:  Single Glazing (Unlaminated). The sound insulation provided by single glazing improves with increasing glass thickness. However, the increase is limited in the mid-frequency range by the stiffness of the glass. As indicated in Table 5, a single, unlaminated layer of solid glass usually does not provide an STC rating above 32 for a sealed window and 29 for an operable window.  Laminated Glass. aminated glass is two or more layers of glass bonded together by think plastic interlayers. It can provide higher values of sound transmission class than solid glass of equal thickness. This is because the sound insulation versus thickness of single sheets of glass exhibits a dip at a frequency determined by the stiffness of the glass. The improvement in sound insulation is primarily due to damping by the plastic interlayers that reduce the magnitude of the dip.  Dual Glazing. Dual glazing is two panes of glass with airspace between them. Dual glazing provides greater sound insulation at high frequencies than single glazed laminated glass. BUILDING 1 BUILDING 10 BUILDING 9 BUILDING 8 BUILDING 7 BUILDING 6 BUILDING 5BUILDING 3BUILDING 4BUILDING 2EXHIBIT 8: Recommended Noise Barrier LocationsPalm Villas at Millennium Project - Acoustical Assessment Source: Derra Design, Site Development Plan K:\RIV_GIS\195246003 - Palm Villas at Millennium GIS\08 Recommended Noise Barrier Locations.mxd 0 200100 Feet 8-foot-high Wall 6-foot-high Wall 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 891110121314 15 16 165 166 167 168 169 170171 172173174175176177 178 179 150 151 152 153 154 155156 157 158159160161162 163 164 148 147 146 145 144 143 142 149 134 135 136137 138 139 140 141132 131 130 129 128 127 133 119 121 120 122 123124 126 125 117 118 116 115 114 113 112 111 110 109 108107106105 104103 102 81 82 8384 86 87 88 89 90 91929394959697 9899100101 85 1736 35 343332 31 30 29 28 27 26 252423 21 22 20 19 18 180 37 38 39 40 41424344 46 45 474849 50 51 5857 5655545352 80 59 60 61 62 6364 6766 65 68697071 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 BUILDING 1 BUILDING 10 BUILDING 9 BUILDING 8 BUILDING 7 BUILDING 6 BUILDING 5BUILDING 3BUILDING 4BUILDING 2EXHIBIT 9: Recommended Balcony TreatmentsPalm Villas at Millennium Project - Acoustical Assessment Source: Derra Design, Site Development Plan K:\RIV_GIS\195246003 - Palm Villas at Millennium GIS\09 Recommended Balcony Treatments.mxd 0 200100 Feet Noise Receiver Locations Second and Third Floor Balcony Treatments Third Floor Only Balcony Treatments City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 25 Table 5: Sound Transmission Class for Windows STC1 Single Glazed Glass Thickness Dual Glazed Glass (Airspace Between Glass) Inches (mm) Sealed Window Operable Window Inches (mm) Both 1/8-inch (3-mm) Glass Both ¼-inch (6-mm) Glass ¼-inch (6-mm) and laminated 9/32-inch (7-mm) Glass 30 27 1/8 (3), 5/32 (4) ¼ (6) NA NA 32 29 ¼ (6) 3/8 (10) NA NA 34 31 ¼ (6) L2 ¾ (20) 5/16 (8) NA 36 32 ½ (12) 1 ¼ (30) ½ (13) NA 38 34 ½ (12) L2 2 (50) ¾ (20) 3/8 (10) 40 36 NA 2 ¾ (70) 1 ¼ (30) 5/8 (16) 42 37 NA 4 (100) 2 (50) 1 (25) 44 39 NA 6 (150) 3 ¼ (80) 1 ½ (40) 46 41 NA NA 4 ¾ (120) 2 7/8 (60) 48 43 NA NA NA 4 (100) mm = millimeter; NA = Not Applicable Notes: 1. STC ratings assume that windows have effective weather stripping. 2. L denotes laminated glass. For example ¼ (6) L is 1-4-inch (6 mm) thick laminated glass. Source: Cyril M. Harris, Noise Control in Buildings – A Practical Guide for Architects and Engineers, 1994. Table 5 compares typical vales of STC for sealed windows, with corresponding values for operable windows, and for single-glazed windows of various thicknesses. These STC values increase with the increasing thickness of glass. For glass of a given thickness, sealed windows provide greater sound insulation than operable windows. The overall improvement provided by dual glazing depends on the separation of the layers and glass thickness. For each doubling of the airspace, there is an increase in STC rating of about 3. There is some advantage in using two panes of laminated glass, especially for glass thicker than ¼ inch (6 mm). Based on the traffic and train noise modeling for future receptors at the Project site, generally the interior noise levels experienced at second and third floor receivers on the northern facades of Buildings 3 and 4 (the residential buildings closest to the I-10 freeway and UPRR rail line) would exceed the City’s 45 dBA CNEL noise standard; see Table D-1 for noise modeling results and Exhibit 6 for receiver locations. Therefore, it is recommended the impacted receiver locations identified in Exhibit 10: Recommended Window and Entry Door Treatments include windows and entry doors with a minimum STC rating of 29 to reduce interior noise levels below 45 dBA CNEL, as recommended in REC-3. Conclusion Based on the traffic and train noise modeling for future receivers at the Project site, the Project should include perimeter sound walls, and balcony and window treatments at the impacted receivers identified above to ensure exterior and interior noise levels are below the City’s 65 dBA CNEL and 45 dBA CNEL interior standards (see Mitigation Measure 6 for the Millennium Palm Desert Project IS/MND in Section 3.2 above). With implementation REC-1 through REC-3, exterior and interior noise levels experienced at the Project site would not exceed the City’s exterior or interior noise standards. Upon final site design and development of architectural schematic and building plans, the Project engineer shall ensure that the building construction specifications include the recommended balcony treatments, windows and entry doors with a minimum STC rating of 29, and perimeter sound walls as identified above. These design features shall be specified upon final site design and shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Palm Desert prior to issuance of building permits for the Project. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 891110121314 15 16 165 166 167 168 169 170171 172173174175176177 178 179 150 151 152 153 154 155156 157 158159160161162 163 164 148 147 146 145 144 143 142 149 134 135 136137 138 139 140 141132 131 130 129 128 127 133 119 121 120 122 123124 126 125 117 118 116 115 114 113 112 111 110 109 108107106105 104103 102 81 82 8384 86 87 88 89 90 91929394959697 9899100101 85 1736 35 343332 31 30 29 28 27 26 252423 21 22 20 19 18 180 37 38 39 40 41424344 46 45 474849 50 51 5857 5655545352 80 59 60 61 62 6364 6766 65 68697071 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 BUILDING 1 BUILDING 10 BUILDING 9 BUILDING 8 BUILDING 7 BUILDING 6 BUILDING 5BUILDING 3BUILDING 4BUILDING 2EXHIBIT 10: Recommended Window and Entry Door TreatmentsPalm Villas at Millennium Project - Acoustical Assessment Source: Derra Design, Site Development Plan K:\RIV_GIS\195246003 - Palm Villas at Millennium GIS\10 Recommended Window and Entry Door Treatments.mxd 0 200100 Feet Noise Receiver Locations Second and Third Floor Window and Entry Door Treatments Third Floor Only Window and Entry Door Treatments City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 27 6 RECOMMENDATIONS REC-1 Construction of an approximately 1,215-foot long, 8-foot-high sound wall along the northern property, and the construction of an approximately 1,200-foot long, 6-foot-high sound wall along the southern property boundary (consistent with Mitigation Measure 6 for the Millennium Palm Desert Project IS/MND) would sufficiently attenuate exterior noise levels at all first-floor receivers/dwelling units to 65 dBA CNEL or lower; see Exhibit 8 for approximate barrier locations. Acceptable materials for the construction of the barrier shall have a minimum density of 3.5 pounds per square foot of surface area and may be composed of the following: masonry block, stucco veneer over wood framing (or foam core), glass, Plexiglass, Lexan 9 ¼ inch thick), or metal. The barrier may also be constructed out of a combination of the above listed materials. The barrier must be solid and any gaps shall have overlapping edges. The final recommendations for design shall be submitted and approved by the City of Palm Desert Planning Director. REC-2 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City of Palm Desert Building Official that the outside-facing residential units identified in Exhibit 9 shall incorporate noise attenuating balcony and/or patio treatments. Balconies more than 6 feet deep and patios shall include a barrier that is at least 42 inches high as measured from the floor. Acceptable materials for the construction of the barrier shall have a weight of 2.5 pounds per square foot of surface area. The barrier may be composed of the following: masonry block, stucco veneer over wood framing (or foam core), glass, Plexiglass or Lexan (1/4-inch thin) and may be constructed out of a combination of the above listed materials. REC-3 After the final architectural drawings have been developed, and prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City of Palm Desert Building Official that the applicable Project plans and specifications include sound-rated windows and entry doors on the residential facades identified in Exhibit 10. These receptor locations require a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 29. City of Palm Desert Palm Villas at Millennium Project Acoustical Assessment December 2021 Page | 28 7 REFERENCES 1. California Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, and Riverside County Transportation Authority, Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program Noise and Vibration Technical Memorandum, May 2021. 2. California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013. 3. California Department of Transportation, Traffic Census Program, http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/, accessed November 29, 2021. 4. City of Palm Desert, City of Palm Desert General Plan, adopted November 10, 2016. 5. City of Palm Desert, Palm Desert Municipal Code, current through Ordinance 1368 and the August 2021 code supplement Section 9.24.030. 6. City of Palm Desert, The Millennium Palm Desert, General Plan Amendment 14-332, Change of Zone 14-332, Development Agreement 14-332, Tentative Parcel Map 36792, Tentative Tract Map 36793 CEQA Environmental Checklist & Environmental Assessment , 2015. 7. Coachella Valley Association of Governments, Coachella Valley Traffic Counts, https://www.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=fb9489b188e74be3b599afb52741849d, accessed November 29, 2021. 8. Cyril M. Harris, Handbook of Noise Control, Second Edition, 1979. 9. Cyril M. Harris, Noise Control in Buildings – A Practical Guide for Architects and Engineers, 1994. 10. Federal Highway Administration, TNM version 2.5 Addendum to Validation of FHWA’s Traffic Noise Model: Phase I, July 2004. 11. Federal Interagency Committee on Noise, Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues, August 1992. 12. Federal Transit Administration, Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018. 13. Federal Transit Administration, Noise Impact Assessment Spreadsheet, October 1, 2018. 14. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, TNM Version 2.5 Addendum to Validation of FHWA’s Traffic Noise Model TNM: Phase I, July 2004. 15. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Noise Guidebook, March 2009. 16. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Protective Noise Levels (EPA 550/9-79-100), November 1979. Appendix A Existing Ambient Noise Measurements Noise Measurement Field Data Project: Job Number:195246003 Site No.: Date:11/10/2021 Analyst: Time:10:37 - 10:47 AM Location: Noise Sources: Results (dBA): Leq:Lmin:Lmax:Peak: 54.6 45.7 68.0 88.5 Sound Level Meter:LD SoundExpert LxT Temp. (degrees F):83° Calibrator:CAL200 Wind (mph):< 5 Response Time:Slow Sky:Clear Weighting:A Bar. Pressure:30.07" Microphone Height:5 feet Humidity:24% Photo: Equipment Weather Palm Villas at Millennium ST-1 Serena Lin, Jackie Tran Corner of Athena Point and Millenia Way Cars, large construction trucks, gate Measurement Report Report Summary Meter's File Name PD.001.s Computer's File Name LxTse_0005586-20211110 103754-PD.001.ldbin Meter LxT SE 0005586 Firmware 2.404 User Location Job Description Note Start Time 2021-11-10 10:37:54 Duration 0:10:00.0 End Time 2021-11-10 10:47:54 Run Time 0:10:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Results Overall Metrics LAeq 54.6 dB LAE 82.4 dB SEA --- dB EA 19.4 µPa²h LApeak 88.5 dB 2021-11-10 10:46:12 LASmax 68.0 dB 2021-11-10 10:43:59 LASmin 45.7 dB 2021-11-10 10:41:16 LAeq 54.6 dB LCeq 68.0 dB LCeq - LA eq 13.3 dB LAIeq 56.1 dB LAIeq - LA eq 1.5 dB Exceedances Count Duration LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 Community Noise LDN LDay LNight 54.6 dB 54.6 dB 0.0 dB LDEN LDay LEve LNight 54.6 dB 54.6 dB --- dB --- dB Any Data A C Z Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Leq 54.6 dB 68.0 dB --- dB Ls(max)68.0 dB 2021-11-10 10:43:59 --- dB --- dB LS(min)45.7 dB 2021-11-10 10:41:16 --- dB --- dB LPeak(max)88.5 dB 2021-11-10 10:46:12 --- dB --- dB Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration 0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0 Statistics LAS 5.0 61.6 dB LAS 10.0 59.1 dB LAS 33.3 50.3 dB LAS 50.0 49.1 dB LAS 66.6 48.4 dB LAS 90.0 46.9 dB Noise Measurement Field Data Project: Job Number:195246003 Site No.: Date:11/10/2021 Analyst: Time:11:01 - 11:11 AM Location: Noise Sources: Results (dBA): Leq:Lmin:Lmax:Peak: 57.1 46.7 65.9 81.4 Sound Level Meter:LD SoundExpert LxT Temp. (degrees F):83° Calibrator:CAL200 Wind (mph):< 5 Response Time:Slow Sky:Clear Weighting:A Bar. Pressure:30.07" Microphone Height:5 feet Humidity:24% Photo: Equipment Weather Palm Villas at Millennium ST-2 Serena Lin, Jackie Tran Gerald Ford and Dinah Cars, trucks, train, construction, birds, trucks, construction Measurement Report Report Summary Meter's File Name PD.002.s Computer's File Name LxTse_0005586-20211110 110150-PD.002.ldbin Meter LxT SE 0005586 Firmware 2.404 User Location Job Description Note Start Time 2021-11-10 11:01:50 Duration 0:10:00.0 End Time 2021-11-10 11:11:50 Run Time 0:10:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Results Overall Metrics LAeq 57.1 dB LAE 84.9 dB SEA --- dB EA 34.2 µPa²h LApeak 81.4 dB 2021-11-10 11:04:25 LASmax 65.9 dB 2021-11-10 11:04:26 LASmin 46.7 dB 2021-11-10 11:01:56 LAeq 57.1 dB LCeq 69.3 dB LCeq - LA eq 12.2 dB LAIeq 58.2 dB LAIeq - LA eq 1.1 dB Exceedances Count Duration LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 Community Noise LDN LDay LNight 57.1 dB 57.1 dB 0.0 dB LDEN LDay LEve LNight 57.1 dB 57.1 dB --- dB --- dB Any Data A C Z Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Leq 57.1 dB 69.3 dB --- dB Ls(max)65.9 dB 2021-11-10 11:04:26 --- dB --- dB LS(min)46.7 dB 2021-11-10 11:01:56 --- dB --- dB LPeak(max)81.4 dB 2021-11-10 11:04:25 --- dB --- dB Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration 0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0 Statistics LAS 5.0 61.0 dB LAS 10.0 60.0 dB LAS 33.3 57.3 dB LAS 50.0 55.9 dB LAS 66.6 54.2 dB LAS 90.0 51.2 dB Noise Measurement Field Data Project: Job Number:195246003 Site No.: Date:11/10/2021 Analyst: Time:11:23 - 11:33 AM Location: Noise Sources: Results (dBA): Leq:Lmin:Lmax:Peak: 54.6 51.7 58.4 74.0 Sound Level Meter:LD SoundExpert LxT Temp. (degrees F):84° Calibrator:CAL200 Wind (mph):< 5 Response Time:Slow Sky:Clear Weighting:A Bar. Pressure:30.06" Microphone Height:5 feet Humidity:23% Photo: Equipment Weather Palm Villas at Millennium ST-3 Serena Lin, Jackie Tran Gerald Ford Drive/Varner Avenue Cars, trucks, near freeway, birds Measurement Report Report Summary Meter's File Name PD.003.s Computer's File Name LxTse_0005586-20211110 112349-PD.003.ldbin Meter LxT SE 0005586 Firmware 2.404 User Location Job Description Note Start Time 2021-11-10 11:23:49 Duration 0:10:00.0 End Time 2021-11-10 11:33:49 Run Time 0:10:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Results Overall Metrics LAeq 54.6 dB LAE 82.4 dB SEA --- dB EA 19.4 µPa²h LApeak 74.0 dB 2021-11-10 11:31:39 LASmax 58.4 dB 2021-11-10 11:28:49 LASmin 51.7 dB 2021-11-10 11:33:37 LAeq 54.6 dB LCeq 70.0 dB LCeq - LA eq 15.3 dB LAIeq 55.5 dB LAIeq - LA eq 0.8 dB Exceedances Count Duration LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 Community Noise LDN LDay LNight 54.6 dB 54.6 dB 0.0 dB LDEN LDay LEve LNight 54.6 dB 54.6 dB --- dB --- dB Any Data A C Z Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Leq 54.6 dB 70.0 dB --- dB Ls(max)58.4 dB 2021-11-10 11:28:49 --- dB --- dB LS(min)51.7 dB 2021-11-10 11:33:37 --- dB --- dB LPeak(max)74.0 dB 2021-11-10 11:31:39 --- dB --- dB Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration 0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0 Statistics LAS 5.0 56.5 dB LAS 10.0 56.0 dB LAS 33.3 55.0 dB LAS 50.0 54.5 dB LAS 66.6 53.8 dB LAS 90.0 52.7 dB Noise Measurement Field Data Project: Job Number:195246003 Site No.: Date:11/10/2021 Analyst: Time:11:53 - 12:03 AM Location: Noise Sources: Results (dBA): Leq:Lmin:Lmax:Peak: 53.7 49.0 60.0 74.4 Sound Level Meter:LD SoundExpert LxT Temp. (degrees F):83° Calibrator:CAL200 Wind (mph):< 5 Response Time:Slow Sky:Clear Weighting:A Bar. Pressure:30.04" Microphone Height:5 feet Humidity:22% Photo: Equipment Weather Palm Villas at Millennium ST-4 Serena Lin, Jackie Tran Near the northern terminus of Technology Drive Cars, freeway Measurement Report Report Summary Meter's File Name PD.004.s Computer's File Name LxTse_0005586-20211110 115314-PD.004.ldbin Meter LxT SE 0005586 Firmware 2.404 User Location Job Description Note Start Time 2021-11-10 11:53:14 Duration 0:10:00.0 End Time 2021-11-10 12:03:14 Run Time 0:10:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Results Overall Metrics LAeq 53.7 dB LAE 81.5 dB SEA --- dB EA 15.5 µPa²h LApeak 74.4 dB 2021-11-10 11:53:20 LASmax 60.0 dB 2021-11-10 12:00:15 LASmin 49.0 dB 2021-11-10 11:59:39 LAeq 53.7 dB LCeq 68.9 dB LCeq - LA eq 15.2 dB LAIeq 54.5 dB LAIeq - LA eq 0.8 dB Exceedances Count Duration LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 Community Noise LDN LDay LNight 53.7 dB 53.7 dB 0.0 dB LDEN LDay LEve LNight 53.7 dB 53.7 dB --- dB --- dB Any Data A C Z Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Leq 53.7 dB 68.9 dB --- dB Ls(max)60.0 dB 2021-11-10 12:00:15 --- dB --- dB LS(min)49.0 dB 2021-11-10 11:59:39 --- dB --- dB LPeak(max)74.4 dB 2021-11-10 11:53:20 --- dB --- dB Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration 0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0 Statistics LAS 5.0 56.4 dB LAS 10.0 55.5 dB LAS 33.3 53.9 dB LAS 50.0 53.1 dB LAS 66.6 52.4 dB LAS 90.0 51.1 dB Noise Measurement Field Data Project: Job Number:195246003 Site No.: Date:11/10/2021 - 11/11/2021 Analyst: Time: 11/10/2021, 12:35 PM - 11/11/2021, 1:32 PM Location: Noise Sources: Results (dBA): Lmin:Lmax:Peak:CNEL/Ldn: 46.4 81.6 106.8 69.3 Sound Level Meter:LD SoundExpert LxT Temp. (degrees F):83° Calibrator:CAL200 Wind (mph):< 5 Response Time:Slow Sky:Clear Weighting:A Bar. Pressure:30.04" Microphone Height:5 feet Humidity:22% Photo: Equipment Weather Palm Villas at Millennium LT-1 Serena Lin, Jackie Tran Far corner of fence, near the northern end of Technology Drive Cars, freeway Leq: 61.7 Measurement Report Report Summary Meter's File Name LB.005.s Computer's File Name LT-1 Data.ldbin Meter LxT SE 0005586 Firmware 2.404 User Location Job Description Note Start Time 2021-11-10 12:35:14 Duration 24:56:54.9 End Time 2021-11-11 13:32:09 Run Time 24:56:54.9 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Results Overall Metrics LAeq 61.7 dB LAE 111.2 dB SEA --- dB EA 14.8 mPa²h LApeak 106.8 dB 2021-11-11 13:29:30 LASmax 81.6 dB 2021-11-11 05:30:16 LASmin 46.4 dB 2021-11-11 02:33:28 LAeq 61.7 dB LCeq 73.2 dB LCeq - LA eq 11.5 dB LAIeq 62.7 dB LAIeq - LA eq 1.0 dB Exceedances Count Duration LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0 Community Noise LDN LDay LNight 69.3 dB 60.6 dB 0.0 dB LDEN LDay LEve LNight 69.6 dB 59.9 dB 62.6 dB 63.2 dB Any Data A C Z Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Leq 61.7 dB 73.2 dB --- dB Ls(max)81.6 dB 2021-11-11 05:30:16 --- dB --- dB LS(min)46.4 dB 2021-11-11 02:33:28 --- dB --- dB LPeak(max)106.8 dB 2021-11-11 13:29:30 --- dB --- dB Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration 0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0 Statistics LAS 5.0 65.5 dB LAS 10.0 63.9 dB LAS 33.3 60.5 dB LAS 50.0 58.3 dB LAS 66.6 56.1 dB LAS 90.0 53.1 dB Short-Term Noise Measurement Traffic Data Sheet Project: Site No.: Job No.: Date: Analyst: Time: Street Name: 30-40 ~10 feet Notes: 10 Auto Medium Truck Heavy Truck Bus Motorcycle SE NW Auto Medium Truck Heavy Truck Bus Motorcycle 12 ST-1 11/10/2021 10:37 - 10:47 AM Corner of Athena Point and Millenia Way Roundabout traffic circle (20 mph speed limit for the circle); traffic counts done near the residential neighorhood gate 45 1 lane SE, 2 lanes NWNumber of Lanes: Pavement/ROW Width: Posted Speed Limit (mph): Average Speed (mph): Serena Lin, Jackie Tran 195246003 Palm Villas at Millennium Short-Term Noise Measurement Traffic Data Sheet Project: Site No.: Job No.: Date: Analyst: Time: Street Name: 30-40 ~10 feet Notes: 9 7 Palm Villas at Millennium ST-2 195246003 11/10/2021 Serena Lin, Jackie Tran 11:01 - 11:11 AM Along Dinah Shore and Genesis Posted Speed Limit (mph): 45 Average Speed (mph): Number of Lanes:2/1 lane N, 2/1 lanes S Pavement/ROW Width: Traffic counts for roads west of the site NB Auto Medium Truck Heavy Truck Bus Motorcycle SB Auto Medium Truck Heavy Truck Bus Motorcycle Short-Term Noise Measurement Traffic Data Sheet Project: Site No.: Job No.: Date: Analyst: Time: Street Name: 40-50 ~10 feet Notes: 92 61 771 EB Auto Medium Truck Heavy Truck Bus Motorcycle Palm Villas at Millennium ST-2 195246003 11/10/2021 Serena Lin, Jackie Tran 11:01 - 11:11 AM Along Gerald Ford Drive Posted Speed Limit (mph): 50 Average Speed (mph): Number of Lanes:3 lane W, 3 lanes E Pavement/ROW Width: Traffic counts for roads south of the site WB Auto Medium Truck Heavy Truck Bus Motorcycle Short-Term Noise Measurement Traffic Data Sheet Project: Site No.: Job No.: Date: Analyst: Time: Street Name: 40-50 ~10 feet Notes: 3277 6559 Palm Villas at Millennium ST-3 195246003 11/10/2021 Serena Lin, Jackie Tran 11:23 - 11:33 AM Along Gerald Ford Drive Posted Speed Limit (mph): 50 Average Speed (mph): Number of Lanes:3 lane W, 3 lanes E Pavement/ROW Width: Traffic counts for roads southwest of the site NW Auto Medium Truck Heavy Truck Bus Motorcycle SE Auto Medium Truck Heavy Truck Bus Motorcycle Appendix B Traffic Noise Modeling Data Table B-1: Modeled Traffic Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 1 Residential 67 68 68 42 43 43 63 68 68 38 43 43 2 Residential 68 68 68 43 43 43 63 68 68 38 43 43 3 Residential 67 67 67 42 42 42 62 67 67 37 42 42 4 Residential 66 67 66 41 42 41 61 67 66 36 42 41 5 Residential 68 68 68 43 43 43 63 68 68 38 43 43 6 Residential 68 68 68 43 43 43 63 68 68 38 43 43 7 Residential 66 67 67 41 42 42 61 67 67 36 42 42 8 Residential 49 52 55 24 27 30 49 52 55 24 27 30 9 Residential 50 53 57 25 28 32 51 53 57 26 28 32 10 Residential 48 50 53 23 25 28 48 50 53 23 25 28 11 Residential 46 50 55 21 25 30 46 50 55 21 25 30 12 Residential 49 50 53 24 25 28 49 50 53 24 25 28 13 Residential 50 53 56 25 28 31 50 53 56 25 28 31 14 Residential 54 56 59 29 31 34 53 56 59 28 31 34 15 Residential 63 64 64 38 39 39 60 64 64 35 39 39 16 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 61 66 66 36 41 41 17 Residential 70 69 70 45 44 45 63 69 70 38 44 45 18 Residential 70 69 70 45 44 45 63 69 70 38 44 45 19 Residential 69 68 69 44 43 44 62 68 69 37 43 44 20 Residential 68 68 68 43 43 43 62 68 68 37 43 43 21 Residential 67 67 68 42 42 43 62 67 68 37 42 43 22 Residential 57 58 59 32 33 34 54 58 59 29 33 34 23 Residential 62 63 63 37 38 38 58 63 63 33 38 38 24 Residential 65 66 66 40 41 41 60 66 66 35 41 41 25 Residential 66 67 67 41 42 42 61 67 67 36 42 42 26 Residential 66 66 67 41 41 42 61 66 67 36 41 42 27 Residential 61 62 63 36 37 38 57 62 63 32 37 38 28 Residential 53 55 56 28 30 31 52 54 56 27 29 31 29 Residential 55 56 57 30 31 32 54 56 57 29 31 32 30 Residential 63 64 64 38 39 39 60 64 64 35 39 39 31 Residential 64 64 64 39 39 39 60 64 64 35 39 39 32 Residential 59 59 60 34 34 35 56 59 60 31 34 35 33 Residential 50 51 55 25 26 30 49 51 55 24 26 30 34 Residential 65 65 65 40 40 40 60 65 65 35 40 40 Table B-1: Modeled Traffic Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 35 Residential 62 63 64 37 38 39 62 63 64 37 38 39 36 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 60 66 66 35 41 41 37 Residential 71 70 71 46 45 46 64 70 71 39 45 46 38 Residential 71 70 71 46 45 46 64 70 71 39 45 46 39 Residential 69 68 69 44 43 44 62 68 69 37 43 44 40 Residential 67 67 68 42 42 43 61 67 68 36 42 43 41 Residential 67 67 68 42 42 43 61 67 68 36 42 43 42 Residential 55 55 57 30 30 32 52 55 57 27 30 32 43 Residential 63 63 64 38 38 39 58 63 64 33 38 39 44 Residential 64 64 65 39 39 40 59 64 65 34 39 40 45 Residential 65 65 66 40 40 41 60 65 66 35 40 41 46 Residential 64 65 65 39 40 40 60 65 65 35 40 40 47 Residential 54 55 57 29 30 32 52 55 57 27 30 32 48 Residential 49 49 52 24 24 27 49 49 52 24 24 27 49 Residential 50 51 53 25 26 28 50 51 53 25 26 28 50 Residential 51 51 54 26 26 29 51 51 54 26 26 29 51 Residential 65 66 66 40 41 41 60 66 66 35 41 41 52 Residential 66 66 67 41 41 42 61 66 67 36 41 42 53 Residential 65 65 65 40 40 40 60 65 65 35 40 40 54 Residential 61 60 61 36 35 36 56 60 61 31 35 36 55 Residential 50 51 53 25 26 28 50 51 53 25 26 28 56 Residential 67 66 67 42 41 42 61 66 67 36 41 42 57 Residential 68 67 68 43 42 43 61 67 68 36 42 43 58 Residential 69 68 69 44 43 44 62 68 69 37 43 44 59 Residential 71 70 71 46 45 46 64 70 71 39 45 46 60 Residential 71 70 71 46 45 46 64 70 71 39 45 46 61 Residential 70 70 70 45 45 45 63 70 70 38 45 45 62 Residential 68 68 69 43 43 44 62 68 69 37 43 44 63 Residential 68 68 68 43 43 43 62 68 68 37 43 43 64 Residential 56 57 58 31 32 33 54 57 58 29 32 33 65 Residential 62 62 62 37 37 37 58 62 62 33 37 37 66 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 61 66 66 36 41 41 67 Residential 67 67 68 42 42 43 63 67 68 38 42 43 68 Residential 67 67 67 42 42 42 63 67 67 38 42 42 Table B-1: Modeled Traffic Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 69 Residential 58 59 60 33 34 35 56 59 59 31 34 34 70 Residential 57 58 59 32 33 34 55 58 59 30 33 34 71 Residential 56 57 58 31 32 33 53 57 58 28 32 33 72 Residential 49 50 53 24 25 28 48 50 52 23 25 27 73 Residential 64 65 65 39 40 40 60 65 65 35 40 40 74 Residential 65 65 66 40 40 41 60 65 66 35 40 41 75 Residential 64 64 65 39 39 40 59 64 65 34 39 40 76 Residential 63 63 64 38 38 39 58 63 64 33 38 39 77 Residential 53 53 55 28 28 30 51 53 55 26 28 30 78 Residential 67 67 68 42 42 43 61 67 68 36 42 43 79 Residential 67 66 67 42 41 42 61 66 67 36 41 42 80 Residential 70 69 70 45 44 45 63 69 70 38 44 45 81 Residential 64 65 66 39 40 41 62 65 66 37 40 41 82 Residential 64 65 66 39 40 41 62 65 66 37 40 41 83 Residential 64 66 66 39 41 41 63 66 66 38 41 41 84 Residential 62 63 64 37 38 39 61 63 64 36 38 39 85 Residential 64 65 65 39 40 40 62 65 65 37 40 40 86 Residential 60 62 62 35 37 37 57 62 62 32 37 37 87 Residential 64 65 66 39 40 41 62 65 66 37 40 41 88 Residential 63 64 67 38 39 42 60 64 67 35 39 42 89 Residential 61 63 66 36 38 41 58 63 66 33 38 41 90 Residential 64 65 68 39 40 43 59 64 68 34 39 43 91 Residential 65 65 68 40 40 43 59 64 68 34 39 43 92 Residential 67 67 68 42 42 43 61 67 68 36 42 43 93 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 94 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 95 Residential 66 66 67 41 41 42 59 66 67 34 41 42 96 Residential 65 65 65 40 40 40 58 64 65 33 39 40 97 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 59 66 66 34 41 41 98 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 99 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 100 Residential 67 67 67 42 42 42 60 66 67 35 41 42 101 Residential 66 66 67 41 41 42 60 65 67 35 40 42 102 Residential 65 65 66 40 40 41 59 64 66 34 39 41 Table B-1: Modeled Traffic Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 103 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 104 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 105 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 106 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 107 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 108 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 109 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 110 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 111 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 112 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 113 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 114 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 115 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 116 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 117 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 118 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 119 Residential 63 65 65 38 40 40 61 65 65 36 40 40 120 Residential 63 65 65 38 40 40 61 65 65 36 40 40 121 Residential 62 64 64 37 39 39 60 64 64 35 39 39 122 Residential 63 64 65 38 39 40 60 64 65 35 39 40 123 Residential 63 64 65 38 39 40 60 64 65 35 39 40 124 Residential 62 64 64 37 39 39 59 64 64 34 39 39 125 Residential 64 65 65 39 40 40 60 64 65 35 39 40 126 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 60 65 66 35 40 41 127 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 128 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 129 Residential 65 65 65 40 40 40 58 65 65 33 40 40 130 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 131 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 132 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 59 65 66 34 40 41 133 Residential 64 65 65 39 40 40 60 64 65 35 39 40 134 Residential 60 62 62 35 37 37 58 62 62 33 37 37 135 Residential 61 63 63 36 38 38 59 63 63 34 38 38 136 Residential 62 64 64 37 39 39 60 64 64 35 39 39 Table B-1: Modeled Traffic Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 137 Residential 61 64 64 36 39 39 60 64 64 35 39 39 138 Residential 62 64 64 37 39 39 60 64 65 35 39 40 139 Residential 63 65 65 38 40 40 61 65 65 36 40 40 140 Residential 63 64 64 38 39 39 58 63 64 33 38 39 141 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 142 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 143 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 144 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 145 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 146 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 147 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 148 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 149 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 150 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 151 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 152 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 153 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 154 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 155 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 156 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 157 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 158 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 159 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 160 Residential 65 65 65 40 40 40 58 65 65 33 40 40 161 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 162 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 163 Residential 66 66 67 41 41 42 61 66 67 36 41 42 164 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 165 Residential 60 61 61 35 36 36 58 61 61 33 36 36 166 Residential 50 51 54 25 26 29 50 51 54 25 26 29 167 Residential 47 48 51 22 23 26 47 48 51 22 23 26 168 Residential 51 52 54 26 27 29 49 52 54 24 27 29 169 Residential 57 58 59 32 33 34 54 58 59 29 33 34 170 Residential 61 62 62 36 37 37 58 62 63 33 37 38 Table B-1: Modeled Traffic Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 171 Residential 62 64 64 37 39 39 59 64 64 34 39 39 172 Residential 62 64 64 37 39 39 59 64 64 34 39 39 173 Residential 56 57 59 31 32 34 54 57 59 29 32 34 174 Residential 56 58 59 31 33 34 54 57 59 29 32 34 175 Residential 53 55 57 28 30 32 52 54 57 27 29 32 176 Residential 57 59 61 32 34 36 55 59 61 30 34 36 177 Residential 58 60 61 33 35 36 55 59 60 30 34 35 178 Residential 63 64 64 38 39 39 60 64 64 35 39 39 179 Residential 63 64 64 38 39 39 60 64 64 35 39 39 180 Park/ Recreational 70 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 64 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Notes: 1. Refer to Exhibit 6 for modeled receiver locations. 2. Due to TNM 2.5 modeling complications, some receivers in this table do not have modeled noise level results. TNM 2.5 modeling outputs are provided below. 3. Interior noise levels were calculated assuming an exterior-interior sound reduction of 25 dBA from standard construction practices, per the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Noise Guidebook, available at: https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/313/hud-noise-guidebook/ (2009). 4. Mitigated noise levels include implementation of the perimeter sound walls as recommended in REC-1 and shown in Exhibit 8. 3-Dec-21 Ryan Chiene TNM 2.5 Calculated with TNM 2.5 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS PROJECT/CONTRACT: Palm Villas at Millennium RUN: Future_First Floor_A BARRIER DESIGN: BAR 1 Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA. Receiver Name No. #DUs Existing No Barrier With Barrier Ldn Ldn Increase over existing Type CalculatedNoise Reduction Calculated Crit'n Calculated Crit'n Impact Ldn Calculated Goal Calculated Sub'l Inc minus Goal dBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB 1 2 1 0 67.4 66 67.4 10 Snd Lvl 62.9 4.5 8 -3.5 2 3 1 0 67.5 66 67.5 10 Snd Lvl 62.9 4.6 8 -3.4 3 4 1 0 66.6 66 66.6 10 Snd Lvl 62.2 4.4 8 -3.6 4 5 1 0 66 66 66 10 Snd Lvl 61.4 4.6 8 -3.4 5 6 1 0 67.7 66 67.7 10 Snd Lvl 62.9 4.8 8 -3.2 6 7 1 0 67.7 66 67.7 10 Snd Lvl 62.9 4.8 8 -3.2 7 10 1 0 66 66 66 10 Snd Lvl 61.4 4.6 8 -3.4 8 11 1 0 49.2 66 49.2 10 ---- 48.7 0.5 8 -7.5 9 12 1 0 50 66 50 10 ---- 50.5 -0.5 8 -8.5 10 13 1 0 47.8 66 47.8 10 ---- 47.9 -0.1 8 -8.1 11 14 1 0 45.5 66 45.5 10 ---- 45.5 0 8 -8 12 15 1 0 48.5 66 48.5 10 ---- 49.2 -0.7 8 -8.7 13 16 1 0 49.6 66 49.6 10 ---- 49.6 0 8 -8 14 17 1 0 54.1 66 54.1 10 ---- 53.2 0.9 8 -7.1 15 18 1 0 63 66 63 10 ---- 59.5 3.5 8 -4.5 16 19 1 0 65.6 66 65.6 10 ---- 61.1 4.5 8 -3.5 17 21 1 0 69.9 66 69.9 10 Snd Lvl 63.2 6.7 8 -1.3 18 22 1 0 70 66 70 10 Snd Lvl 63.2 6.8 8 -1.2 19 23 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 62.2 6.7 8 -1.3 20 24 1 0 68.1 66 68.1 10 Snd Lvl 61.9 6.2 8 -1.8 21 25 1 0 67.2 66 67.2 10 Snd Lvl 61.6 5.6 8 -2.4 22 26 1 0 57.3 66 57.3 10 ---- 53.8 3.5 8 -4.5 23 27 1 0 61.9 66 61.9 10 ---- 57.6 4.3 8 -3.7 24 28 1 0 65.2 66 65.2 10 ---- 60.2 5 8 -3 25 29 1 0 66.2 66 66.2 10 Snd Lvl 61.2 5 8 -3 26 30 1 0 65.5 66 65.5 10 ---- 60.9 4.6 8 -3.4 27 31 1 0 61 66 61 10 ---- 57.4 3.6 8 -4.4 28 32 1 0 52.5 66 52.5 10 ---- 51.9 0.6 8 -7.4 29 33 1 0 55.1 66 55.1 10 ---- 53.7 1.4 8 -6.6 30 34 1 0 63.2 66 63.2 10 ---- 60 3.2 8 -4.8 31 35 1 0 63.6 66 63.6 10 ---- 59.9 3.7 8 -4.3 32 36 1 0 59 66 59 10 ---- 56.3 2.7 8 -5.3 33 37 1 0 49.5 66 49.5 10 ---- 49.2 0.3 8 -7.7 34 38 1 0 64.8 66 64.8 10 ---- 59.8 5 8 -3 35 39 1 0 61.5 66 61.5 10 ---- 61.6 -0.1 8 -8.1 36 40 1 0 66 66 66 10 Snd Lvl 59.8 6.2 8 -1.8 37 42 1 0 70.8 66 70.8 10 Snd Lvl 63.8 7 8 -1 38 43 1 0 70.7 66 70.7 10 Snd Lvl 63.9 6.8 8 -1.2 39 44 1 0 68.5 66 68.5 10 Snd Lvl 62 6.5 8 -1.5 40 45 1 0 66.9 66 66.9 10 Snd Lvl 60.8 6.1 8 -1.9 41 46 1 0 66.8 66 66.8 10 Snd Lvl 61.1 5.7 8 -2.3 42 47 1 0 54.7 66 54.7 10 ---- 51.5 3.2 8 -4.8 43 48 1 0 62.5 66 62.5 10 ---- 57.8 4.7 8 -3.3 44 49 1 0 63.8 66 63.8 10 ---- 58.9 4.9 8 -3.1 45 52 1 0 65 66 65 10 ---- 60.1 4.9 8 -3.1 46 54 1 0 64.1 66 64.1 10 ---- 59.6 4.5 8 -3.5 47 57 1 0 53.9 66 53.9 10 ---- 51.7 2.2 8 -5.8 48 58 1 0 48.6 66 48.6 10 ---- 48.6 0 8 -8 49 59 1 0 50.4 66 50.4 10 ---- 49.8 0.6 8 -7.4 50 61 1 0 51.2 66 51.2 10 ---- 50.6 0.6 8 -7.4 51 62 1 0 65.2 66 65.2 10 ---- 60.4 4.8 8 -3.2 52 63 1 0 65.8 66 65.8 10 ---- 60.7 5.1 8 -2.9 53 65 1 0 64.7 66 64.7 10 ---- 59.6 5.1 8 -2.9 54 66 1 0 60.6 66 60.6 10 ---- 56.1 4.5 8 -3.5 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 55 67 1 0 50.4 66 50.4 10 ---- 49.5 0.9 8 -7.1 56 69 1 0 66.7 66 66.7 10 Snd Lvl 61 5.7 8 -2.3 57 70 1 0 67.7 66 67.7 10 Snd Lvl 61.3 6.4 8 -1.6 58 71 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 62 6.9 8 -1.1 59 73 1 0 71 66 71 10 Snd Lvl 63.9 7.1 8 -0.9 60 74 1 0 71 66 71 10 Snd Lvl 63.9 7.1 8 -0.9 61 75 1 0 70.1 66 70.1 10 Snd Lvl 63.1 7 8 -1 62 76 1 0 68.2 66 68.2 10 Snd Lvl 62.1 6.1 8 -1.9 63 77 1 0 67.8 66 67.8 10 Snd Lvl 62.3 5.5 8 -2.5 64 78 1 0 56 66 56 10 ---- 54.4 1.6 8 -6.4 65 79 1 0 62.2 66 62.2 10 ---- 58.3 3.9 8 -4.1 66 80 1 0 65.7 66 65.7 10 ---- 60.9 4.8 8 -3.2 67 81 1 0 67.3 66 67.3 10 Snd Lvl 62.5 4.8 8 -3.2 68 82 1 0 67 66 67 10 Snd Lvl 62.7 4.3 8 -3.7 69 83 1 0 58 66 58 10 ---- 56.4 1.6 8 -6.4 70 84 1 0 57.1 66 57.1 10 ---- 55.1 2 8 -6 71 85 1 0 55.9 66 55.9 10 ---- 53.4 2.5 8 -5.5 72 88 1 0 49.2 66 49.2 10 ---- 48.2 1 8 -7 73 89 1 0 64.2 66 64.2 10 ---- 59.6 4.6 8 -3.4 74 90 1 0 65.1 66 65.1 10 ---- 60.1 5 8 -3 75 91 1 0 63.8 66 63.8 10 ---- 58.8 5 8 -3 76 92 1 0 62.6 66 62.6 10 ---- 57.7 4.9 8 -3.1 77 93 1 0 53.4 66 53.4 10 ---- 51.3 2.1 8 -5.9 78 95 1 0 67.1 66 67.1 10 Snd Lvl 61.2 5.9 8 -2.1 79 96 1 0 66.8 66 66.8 10 Snd Lvl 60.7 6.1 8 -1.9 80 97 1 0 69.5 66 69.5 10 Snd Lvl 62.6 6.9 8 -1.1 81 99 1 0 63.9 66 63.9 10 ---- 62.2 1.7 8 -6.3 82 100 1 0 63.8 66 63.8 10 ---- 62.1 1.7 8 -6.3 83 101 1 0 64.1 66 64.1 10 ---- 62.5 1.6 8 -6.4 84 103 1 0 61.9 66 61.9 10 ---- 61.2 0.7 8 -7.3 85 104 1 0 63.5 66 63.5 10 ---- 62 1.5 8 -6.5 86 105 1 0 59.8 66 59.8 10 ---- 57.1 2.7 8 -5.3 87 107 1 0 63.9 66 63.9 10 ---- 62.3 1.6 8 -6.4 88 109 1 0 62.7 66 62.7 10 ---- 60.4 2.3 8 -5.7 89 110 1 0 61 66 61 10 ---- 58.3 2.7 8 -5.3 90 112 1 0 64.1 66 64.1 10 ---- 58.7 5.4 8 -2.6 91 113 1 0 65 66 65 10 ---- 59.4 5.6 8 -2.4 92 115 1 0 67.2 66 67.2 10 Snd Lvl 60.6 6.6 8 -1.4 93 116 1 0 68.7 66 68.7 10 Snd Lvl 62 6.7 8 -1.3 94 117 1 0 68.7 66 68.7 10 Snd Lvl 62.3 6.4 8 -1.6 95 118 1 0 66.2 66 66.2 10 Snd Lvl 59.3 6.9 8 -1.1 96 119 1 0 65.1 66 65.1 10 ---- 58 7.1 8 -0.9 97 120 1 0 65.8 66 65.8 10 ---- 59.1 6.7 8 -1.3 98 121 1 0 68.8 66 68.8 10 Snd Lvl 62 6.8 8 -1.2 99 122 1 0 68.7 66 68.7 10 Snd Lvl 62 6.7 8 -1.3 100 124 1 0 67.1 66 67.1 10 Snd Lvl 60 7.1 8 -0.9 101 126 1 0 65.7 66 65.7 10 ---- 59.9 5.8 8 -2.2 102 127 1 0 64.5 66 64.5 10 ---- 59.2 5.3 8 -2.7 3-Dec-21 Ryan Chiene TNM 2.5 Calculated with TNM 2.5 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS PROJECT/CONTRACT: Palm Villas at Millennium RUN: Future_Second Floor_A BARRIER DESIGN: BAR 1 Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA. Receiver Name No.#DUs Existing No Barrier With Barrier Ldn Ldn Increase over existing Type Calculated Noise Reduction Calculated Crit'n Calculated Crit'n Impact Ldn Calculated Goal Calculated Sub'l Inc minus Goal dBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB 1 2 1 0 68 66 68 10 Snd Lvl 68 0 8 -8 2 3 1 0 68.1 66 68.1 10 Snd Lvl 68.1 0 8 -8 3 4 1 0 67.3 66 67.3 10 Snd Lvl 67.2 0.1 8 -7.9 4 5 1 0 66.5 66 66.5 10 Snd Lvl 66.5 0 8 -8 5 6 1 0 68.3 66 68.3 10 Snd Lvl 68.2 0.1 8 -7.9 6 7 1 0 68.2 66 68.2 10 Snd Lvl 68.2 0 8 -8 7 10 1 0 66.8 66 66.8 10 Snd Lvl 66.7 0.1 8 -7.9 8 11 1 0 51.9 66 51.9 10 ----51.7 0.2 8 -7.8 9 12 1 0 52.9 66 52.9 10 ----52.9 0 8 -8 10 13 1 0 50.4 66 50.4 10 ----50.4 0 8 -8 11 14 1 0 50.2 66 50.2 10 ----50.2 0 8 -8 12 15 1 0 50.3 66 50.3 10 ----50.3 0 8 -8 13 16 1 0 52.6 66 52.6 10 ----52.6 0 8 -8 14 17 1 0 56.3 66 56.3 10 ----56.3 0 8 -8 15 18 1 0 63.5 66 63.5 10 ----63.5 0 8 -8 16 19 1 0 66.1 66 66.1 10 Snd Lvl 66.1 0 8 -8 17 21 1 0 69.3 66 69.3 10 Snd Lvl 69.3 0 8 -8 18 22 1 0 69.4 66 69.4 10 Snd Lvl 69.4 0 8 -8 19 23 1 0 68.4 66 68.4 10 Snd Lvl 68.4 0 8 -8 20 24 1 0 67.8 66 67.8 10 Snd Lvl 67.8 0 8 -8 21 25 1 0 67.2 66 67.2 10 Snd Lvl 67.2 0 8 -8 22 26 1 0 58 66 58 10 ----58 0 8 -8 23 27 1 0 62.6 66 62.6 10 ----62.6 0 8 -8 24 28 1 0 65.6 66 65.6 10 ----65.6 0 8 -8 25 29 1 0 66.6 66 66.6 10 Snd Lvl 66.6 0 8 -8 26 30 1 0 66.1 66 66.1 10 Snd Lvl 66.1 0 8 -8 27 31 1 0 62.2 66 62.2 10 ----62.1 0.1 8 -7.9 28 32 1 0 54.5 66 54.5 10 ----54.1 0.4 8 -7.6 29 33 1 0 56.1 66 56.1 10 ----56 0.1 8 -7.9 30 34 1 0 63.9 66 63.9 10 ----63.8 0.1 8 -7.9 31 35 1 0 64 66 64 10 ----63.9 0.1 8 -7.9 32 36 1 0 59.3 66 59.3 10 ----59.2 0.1 8 -7.9 33 37 1 0 51.2 66 51.2 10 ----51.1 0.1 8 -7.9 34 38 1 0 64.7 66 64.7 10 ----64.6 0.1 8 -7.9 35 39 1 0 62.6 66 62.6 10 ----62.6 0 8 -8 36 40 1 0 65.5 66 65.5 10 ----65.5 0 8 -8 37 42 1 0 70.2 66 70.2 10 Snd Lvl 70.2 0 8 -8 38 43 1 0 70.1 66 70.1 10 Snd Lvl 70.1 0 8 -8 39 44 1 0 68.1 66 68.1 10 Snd Lvl 68.1 0 8 -8 40 45 1 0 66.6 66 66.6 10 Snd Lvl 66.6 0 8 -8 41 46 1 0 66.8 66 66.8 10 Snd Lvl 66.8 0 8 -8 42 47 1 0 55.2 66 55.2 10 ----55.2 0 8 -8 43 48 1 0 62.9 66 62.9 10 ----62.9 0 8 -8 44 49 1 0 64.2 66 64.2 10 ----64.2 0 8 -8 45 52 1 0 65.4 66 65.4 10 ----65.4 0 8 -8 46 54 1 0 64.8 66 64.8 10 ----64.8 0 8 -8 47 57 1 0 55.3 66 55.3 10 ----55.3 0 8 -8 48 58 1 0 49.2 66 49.2 10 ----49.2 0 8 -8 49 59 1 0 51 66 51 10 ----50.6 0.4 8 -7.6 50 61 1 0 51.2 66 51.2 10 ----50.7 0.5 8 -7.5 51 62 1 0 65.5 66 65.5 10 ----65.5 0 8 -8 52 63 1 0 65.9 66 65.9 10 ----65.9 0 8 -8 53 65 1 0 64.5 66 64.5 10 ----64.5 0 8 -8 54 66 1 0 60.4 66 60.4 10 ----60.4 0 8 -8 55 67 1 0 50.9 66 50.9 10 ----50.9 0 8 -8 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 56 69 1 0 66.4 66 66.4 10 Snd Lvl 66.4 0 8 -8 57 70 1 0 67.2 66 67.2 10 Snd Lvl 67.2 0 8 -8 58 71 1 0 68.3 66 68.3 10 Snd Lvl 68.3 0 8 -8 59 73 1 0 70.3 66 70.3 10 Snd Lvl 70.3 0 8 -8 60 74 1 0 70.3 66 70.3 10 Snd Lvl 70.3 0 8 -8 61 75 1 0 69.5 66 69.5 10 Snd Lvl 69.5 0 8 -8 62 76 1 0 67.8 66 67.8 10 Snd Lvl 67.8 0 8 -8 63 77 1 0 67.6 66 67.6 10 Snd Lvl 67.6 0 8 -8 64 78 1 0 57 66 57 10 ----56.9 0.1 8 -7.9 65 79 1 0 61.9 66 61.9 10 ----61.9 0 8 -8 66 80 1 0 65.6 66 65.6 10 ----65.6 0 8 -8 67 81 1 0 67.4 66 67.4 10 Snd Lvl 67.3 0.1 8 -7.9 68 82 1 0 67.3 66 67.3 10 Snd Lvl 67.3 0 8 -8 69 83 1 0 58.8 66 58.8 10 ----58.6 0.2 8 -7.8 70 84 1 0 58.1 66 58.1 10 ----57.7 0.4 8 -7.6 71 85 1 0 57.1 66 57.1 10 ----56.7 0.4 8 -7.6 72 88 1 0 50.3 66 50.3 10 ----49.7 0.6 8 -7.4 73 89 1 0 64.8 66 64.8 10 ----64.8 0 8 -8 74 90 1 0 65.4 66 65.4 10 ----65.4 0 8 -8 75 91 1 0 63.8 66 63.8 10 ----63.8 0 8 -8 76 92 1 0 62.7 66 62.7 10 ----62.7 0 8 -8 77 93 1 0 53.4 66 53.4 10 ----53.3 0.1 8 -7.9 78 95 1 0 66.8 66 66.8 10 Snd Lvl 66.8 0 8 -8 79 96 1 0 66.4 66 66.4 10 Snd Lvl 66.4 0 8 -8 80 97 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 68.9 0 8 -8 81 99 1 0 65.2 66 65.2 10 ----65.2 0 8 -8 82 100 1 0 65.1 66 65.1 10 ----65.2 -0.1 8 -8.1 83 101 1 0 65.5 66 65.5 10 ----65.5 0 8 -8 84 103 1 0 63.4 66 63.4 10 ----63.4 0 8 -8 85 104 1 0 64.9 66 64.9 10 ----64.9 0 8 -8 86 105 1 0 61.5 66 61.5 10 ----61.6 -0.1 8 -8.1 87 107 1 0 65.3 66 65.3 10 ----65.3 0 8 -8 88 109 1 0 64.3 66 64.3 10 ----64.3 0 8 -8 89 110 1 0 62.8 66 62.8 10 ----62.8 0 8 -8 90 112 1 0 64.8 66 64.8 10 ----63.9 0.9 8 -7.1 91 113 1 0 65.3 66 65.3 10 ----64.4 0.9 8 -7.1 92 115 1 0 67.3 66 67.3 10 Snd Lvl 67 0.3 8 -7.7 93 116 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 68.9 0 8 -8 94 117 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 68.9 0 8 -8 95 118 1 0 66.4 66 66.4 10 Snd Lvl 66.4 0 8 -8 96 119 1 0 65.2 66 65.2 10 ----63.7 1.5 8 -6.5 97 120 1 0 66 66 66 10 Snd Lvl 65.8 0.2 8 -7.8 98 121 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 68.9 0 8 -8 99 122 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 68.9 0 8 -8 100 124 1 0 67.2 66 67.2 10 Snd Lvl 66.2 1 8 -7 101 126 1 0 66.2 66 66.2 10 Snd Lvl 65.3 0.9 8 -7.1 102 127 1 0 65.2 66 65.2 10 ----64.3 0.9 8 -7.1 103 129 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 104 131 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 105 133 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 106 134 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 107 135 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 108 137 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 109 139 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 110 140 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 111 141 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 112 142 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 113 144 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 114 145 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 115 146 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 116 147 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 117 148 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 118 149 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 119 150 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 120 151 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 121 154 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 122 155 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 123 156 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 124 159 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 125 161 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 126 163 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 127 164 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 128 165 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 129 167 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 130 168 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 131 170 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 132 171 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 133 172 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 134 174 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 135 175 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 136 176 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 137 177 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 138 178 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 139 179 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 140 180 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 141 181 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 142 184 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 143 185 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 144 186 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 145 188 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 146 190 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 147 192 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 148 194 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 149 195 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 150 196 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 151 198 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 152 201 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 153 202 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 154 203 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 155 205 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 156 206 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 157 207 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 158 208 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 159 209 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 160 210 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 161 211 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 162 212 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 163 214 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 164 215 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 165 216 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 166 217 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 167 220 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 168 223 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 169 226 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 170 227 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 171 228 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 172 230 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 173 232 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 174 236 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 175 237 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 176 238 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 177 239 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 178 243 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 179 244 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 180 245 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 181 246 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 182 247 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 183 248 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 184 249 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 185 253 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 186 254 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 187 255 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 188 257 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 189 258 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 190 259 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 191 260 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 192 261 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 193 262 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 194 263 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 195 265 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 196 266 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 197 267 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 198 269 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 199 270 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 200 271 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 201 273 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 202 274 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 203 275 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 204 277 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 205 278 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 206 281 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 207 282 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 208 283 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 209 285 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 3-Dec-21 Ryan Chiene TNM 2.5 Calculated with TNM 2.5 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS PROJECT/CONTRACT: Palm Villas at Millennium RUN: Future_Third Floor_A BARRIER DESIGN: BAR 1 Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA. Receiver Name No. #DUs Existing No Barrier With Barrier Ldn Ldn Increase over existing Type CalculatedNoise Reduction Calculated Crit'n Calculated Crit'n Impact Ldn Calculated Goal Calculated Sub'l Inc minus Goal dBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB 1 2 1 0 67.6 66 67.6 10 Snd Lvl 67.6 0 8 -8 2 3 1 0 67.7 66 67.7 10 Snd Lvl 67.7 0 8 -8 3 4 1 0 66.8 66 66.8 10 Snd Lvl 66.8 0 8 -8 4 5 1 0 66.1 66 66.1 10 Snd Lvl 66.1 0 8 -8 5 6 1 0 67.9 66 67.9 10 Snd Lvl 67.9 0 8 -8 6 7 1 0 67.9 66 67.9 10 Snd Lvl 67.9 0 8 -8 7 10 1 0 66.5 66 66.5 10 Snd Lvl 66.5 0 8 -8 8 11 1 0 55.1 66 55.1 10 ---- 55 0.1 8 -7.9 9 12 1 0 56.9 66 56.9 10 ---- 56.9 0 8 -8 10 13 1 0 53.2 66 53.2 10 ---- 53.2 0 8 -8 11 14 1 0 54.8 66 54.8 10 ---- 54.8 0 8 -8 12 15 1 0 53.1 66 53.1 10 ---- 53.1 0 8 -8 13 16 1 0 55.7 66 55.7 10 ---- 55.7 0 8 -8 14 17 1 0 58.6 66 58.6 10 ---- 58.6 0 8 -8 15 18 1 0 63.6 66 63.6 10 ---- 63.6 0 8 -8 16 19 1 0 65.7 66 65.7 10 ---- 65.7 0 8 -8 17 21 1 0 69.8 66 69.8 10 Snd Lvl 69.8 0 8 -8 18 22 1 0 69.8 66 69.8 10 Snd Lvl 69.8 0 8 -8 19 23 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 68.9 0 8 -8 20 24 1 0 68.4 66 68.4 10 Snd Lvl 68.4 0 8 -8 21 25 1 0 67.8 66 67.8 10 Snd Lvl 67.8 0 8 -8 22 26 1 0 59.2 66 59.2 10 ---- 59.2 0 8 -8 23 27 1 0 63.3 66 63.3 10 ---- 63.3 0 8 -8 24 28 1 0 66.1 66 66.1 10 Snd Lvl 66.1 0 8 -8 25 29 1 0 67.1 66 67.1 10 Snd Lvl 67.1 0 8 -8 26 30 1 0 66.6 66 66.6 10 Snd Lvl 66.6 0 8 -8 27 31 1 0 62.8 66 62.8 10 ---- 62.7 0.1 8 -7.9 28 32 1 0 55.8 66 55.8 10 ---- 55.6 0.2 8 -7.8 29 33 1 0 57.2 66 57.2 10 ---- 57.1 0.1 8 -7.9 30 34 1 0 63.9 66 63.9 10 ---- 64 -0.1 8 -8.1 31 35 1 0 64.1 66 64.1 10 ---- 64.2 -0.1 8 -8.1 32 36 1 0 59.5 66 59.5 10 ---- 59.5 0 8 -8 33 37 1 0 54.8 66 54.8 10 ---- 54.8 0 8 -8 34 38 1 0 64.9 66 64.9 10 ---- 65 -0.1 8 -8.1 35 39 1 0 64.4 66 64.4 10 ---- 64.4 0 8 -8 36 40 1 0 65.8 66 65.8 10 ---- 65.8 0 8 -8 37 42 1 0 70.8 66 70.8 10 Snd Lvl 70.8 0 8 -8 38 43 1 0 70.9 66 70.9 10 Snd Lvl 70.9 0 8 -8 39 44 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 68.9 0 8 -8 40 45 1 0 67.5 66 67.5 10 Snd Lvl 67.5 0 8 -8 41 46 1 0 67.7 66 67.7 10 Snd Lvl 67.7 0 8 -8 42 47 1 0 56.7 66 56.7 10 ---- 56.7 0 8 -8 43 48 1 0 63.7 66 63.7 10 ---- 63.7 0 8 -8 44 49 1 0 64.8 66 64.8 10 ---- 64.8 0 8 -8 45 52 1 0 66.1 66 66.1 10 Snd Lvl 66.1 0 8 -8 46 54 1 0 65.4 66 65.4 10 ---- 65.4 0 8 -8 47 57 1 0 56.7 66 56.7 10 ---- 56.7 0 8 -8 48 58 1 0 51.5 66 51.5 10 ---- 51.5 0 8 -8 49 59 1 0 52.9 66 52.9 10 ---- 52.8 0.1 8 -7.9 50 61 1 0 54.2 66 54.2 10 ---- 54.1 0.1 8 -7.9 51 62 1 0 66.1 66 66.1 10 Snd Lvl 66.1 0 8 -8 52 63 1 0 66.5 66 66.5 10 Snd Lvl 66.5 0 8 -8 53 65 1 0 65.2 66 65.2 10 ---- 65.2 0 8 -8 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 54 66 1 0 61.2 66 61.2 10 ---- 61.2 0 8 -8 55 67 1 0 52.5 66 52.5 10 ---- 52.5 0 8 -8 56 69 1 0 67.1 66 67.1 10 Snd Lvl 67.1 0 8 -8 57 70 1 0 67.9 66 67.9 10 Snd Lvl 67.9 0 8 -8 58 71 1 0 69 66 69 10 Snd Lvl 69 0 8 -8 59 73 1 0 71.2 66 71.2 10 Snd Lvl 71.2 0 8 -8 60 74 1 0 71.2 66 71.2 10 Snd Lvl 71.2 0 8 -8 61 75 1 0 70.3 66 70.3 10 Snd Lvl 70.3 0 8 -8 62 76 1 0 68.5 66 68.5 10 Snd Lvl 68.6 -0.1 8 -8.1 63 77 1 0 68 66 68 10 Snd Lvl 68 0 8 -8 64 78 1 0 57.8 66 57.8 10 ---- 57.8 0 8 -8 65 79 1 0 62.4 66 62.4 10 ---- 62.4 0 8 -8 66 80 1 0 65.8 66 65.8 10 ---- 65.8 0 8 -8 67 81 1 0 67.6 66 67.6 10 Snd Lvl 67.6 0 8 -8 68 82 1 0 67.4 66 67.4 10 Snd Lvl 67.4 0 8 -8 69 83 1 0 59.5 66 59.5 10 ---- 59.4 0.1 8 -7.9 70 84 1 0 58.8 66 58.8 10 ---- 58.7 0.1 8 -7.9 71 85 1 0 57.7 66 57.7 10 ---- 57.6 0.1 8 -7.9 72 88 1 0 52.7 66 52.7 10 ---- 52.4 0.3 8 -7.7 73 89 1 0 65.3 66 65.3 10 ---- 65.3 0 8 -8 74 90 1 0 66.1 66 66.1 10 Snd Lvl 66.1 0 8 -8 75 91 1 0 64.6 66 64.6 10 ---- 64.6 0 8 -8 76 92 1 0 63.5 66 63.5 10 ---- 63.5 0 8 -8 77 93 1 0 54.5 66 54.5 10 ---- 54.5 0 8 -8 78 95 1 0 67.7 66 67.7 10 Snd Lvl 67.7 0 8 -8 79 96 1 0 67.3 66 67.3 10 Snd Lvl 67.3 0 8 -8 80 97 1 0 69.7 66 69.7 10 Snd Lvl 69.7 0 8 -8 81 99 1 0 65.6 66 65.6 10 ---- 65.6 0 8 -8 82 100 1 0 65.6 66 65.6 10 ---- 65.6 0 8 -8 83 101 1 0 66 66 66 10 Snd Lvl 66 0 8 -8 84 103 1 0 64.3 66 64.3 10 ---- 64.3 0 8 -8 85 104 1 0 65.4 66 65.4 10 ---- 65.4 0 8 -8 86 105 1 0 62.1 66 62.1 10 ---- 62.1 0 8 -8 87 107 1 0 66.4 66 66.4 10 Snd Lvl 66.4 0 8 -8 88 109 1 0 66.5 66 66.5 10 Snd Lvl 66.5 0 8 -8 89 110 1 0 66.3 66 66.3 10 Snd Lvl 66.3 0 8 -8 90 112 1 0 67.6 66 67.6 10 Snd Lvl 67.6 0 8 -8 91 113 1 0 67.7 66 67.7 10 Snd Lvl 67.7 0 8 -8 92 115 1 0 67.5 66 67.5 10 Snd Lvl 67.5 0 8 -8 93 116 1 0 69 66 69 10 Snd Lvl 69 0 8 -8 94 117 1 0 69 66 69 10 Snd Lvl 69 0 8 -8 95 118 1 0 66.6 66 66.6 10 Snd Lvl 66.6 0 8 -8 96 119 1 0 65.3 66 65.3 10 ---- 65.3 0 8 -8 97 120 1 0 66.2 66 66.2 10 Snd Lvl 66.2 0 8 -8 98 121 1 0 69.1 66 69.1 10 Snd Lvl 69.1 0 8 -8 99 122 1 0 69 66 69 10 Snd Lvl 69 0 8 -8 100 124 1 0 67.4 66 67.4 10 Snd Lvl 67.4 0 8 -8 101 126 1 0 66.5 66 66.5 10 Snd Lvl 66.5 0 8 -8 102 127 1 0 65.5 66 65.5 10 ---- 65.5 0 8 -8 103 129 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 104 131 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 105 133 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 106 134 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 107 135 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 108 137 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 109 139 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 110 140 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 111 141 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 112 142 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 113 144 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 114 145 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 115 146 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 116 147 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 117 148 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 118 149 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 119 150 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 120 151 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 121 154 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 122 155 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 123 156 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 124 159 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 125 161 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 126 163 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 127 164 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 128 165 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 129 167 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 130 168 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 131 170 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 132 171 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 133 172 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 134 174 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 135 175 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 136 176 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 137 177 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 138 178 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 139 179 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 140 180 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 141 181 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 142 184 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 143 185 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 144 186 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 145 188 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 146 190 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 147 192 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 148 194 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 149 195 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 150 196 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 151 198 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 152 201 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 153 202 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 154 203 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 155 205 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 156 206 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 157 207 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 158 208 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 159 209 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 160 210 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 161 211 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 162 212 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 163 214 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 164 215 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 165 216 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 166 217 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 167 220 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 168 223 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 169 226 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 170 227 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 171 228 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 172 230 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 173 232 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 174 236 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 175 237 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 176 238 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 177 239 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 178 243 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 179 244 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 180 245 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 181 246 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 182 247 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 183 248 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 184 249 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 185 253 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 186 254 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 187 255 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 188 257 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 189 258 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 190 259 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 191 260 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 192 261 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 193 262 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 194 263 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 195 265 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 196 266 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 197 267 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 198 269 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 199 270 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 200 271 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 201 273 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 202 274 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 203 275 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 204 277 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 205 278 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 206 281 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 207 282 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 208 283 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 209 285 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 6-Dec-21 Ryan Chiene TNM 2.5 Calculated with TNM 2.5 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS PROJECT/CONTRACT: Palm Villas at Millennium RUN: Future_First Floor_B BARRIER DESIGN: BAR 1 Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA. Receiver Name #DUs Existing No Barrier With Barrier LdnLdn Increase over existing Type CalculatedNoise Reduction Calculated Crit'n Calculated Crit'n Impact Ldn Calculated Goal Calculated Sub'l Inc minus Goal dBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB 103 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 104 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 105 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 106 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 107 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 108 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 109 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 110 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 111 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 112 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 113 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 114 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 115 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 116 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 117 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 118 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 119 1 0 62.9 66 62.9 10 ---- 60.5 2.4 8 -5.6 120 1 0 63 66 63 10 ---- 60.6 2.4 8 -5.6 121 1 0 62.4 66 62.4 10 ---- 59.6 2.8 8 -5.2 122 1 0 62.9 66 62.9 10 ---- 60 2.9 8 -5.1 123 1 0 62.9 66 62.9 10 ---- 59.8 3.1 8 -4.9 124 1 0 62.4 66 62.4 10 ---- 59.1 3.3 8 -4.7 125 1 0 64.2 66 64.2 10 ---- 59.7 4.5 8 -3.5 126 1 0 65.7 66 65.7 10 ---- 59.6 6.1 8 -1.9 127 1 0 68.6 66 68.6 10 Snd Lvl 61.9 6.7 8 -1.3 128 1 0 68.7 66 68.7 10 Snd Lvl 61.9 6.8 8 -1.2 129 1 0 65 66 65 10 ---- 57.9 7.1 8 -0.9 130 1 0 68.6 66 68.6 10 Snd Lvl 61.9 6.7 8 -1.3 131 1 0 68.5 66 68.5 10 Snd Lvl 61.8 6.7 8 -1.3 132 1 0 65.5 66 65.5 10 ---- 59.3 6.2 8 -1.8 133 1 0 63.7 66 63.7 10 ---- 60.1 3.6 8 -4.4 134 1 0 59.8 66 59.8 10 ---- 58.2 1.6 8 -6.4 135 1 0 61.1 66 61.1 10 ---- 59.4 1.7 8 -6.3 136 1 0 61.5 66 61.5 10 ---- 59.8 1.7 8 -6.3 137 1 0 61.3 66 61.3 10 ---- 59.5 1.8 8 -6.2 138 1 0 62.4 66 62.4 10 ---- 60.3 2.1 8 -5.9 139 1 0 62.9 66 62.9 10 ---- 60.9 2 8 -6 140 1 0 62.6 66 62.6 10 ---- 58.4 4.2 8 -3.8 141 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 142 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 143 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 144 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 145 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 146 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 147 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 148 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 149 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 150 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 151 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 152 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 153 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 154 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 155 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 156 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 157 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 158 1 0 68.7 66 68.7 10 Snd Lvl 62 6.7 8 -1.3 159 1 0 68.7 66 68.7 10 Snd Lvl 62.1 6.6 8 -1.4 160 1 0 64.9 66 64.9 10 ---- 57.7 7.2 8 -0.8 161 1 0 68.7 66 68.7 10 Snd Lvl 62.1 6.6 8 -1.4 162 1 0 68.7 66 68.7 10 Snd Lvl 62.1 6.6 8 -1.4 163 1 0 66.2 66 66.2 10 Snd Lvl 61.1 5.1 8 -2.9 164 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 165 1 0 60.4 66 60.4 10 ---- 57.8 2.6 8 -5.4 166 1 0 49.9 66 49.9 10 ---- 49.8 0.1 8 -7.9 167 1 0 46.5 66 46.5 10 ---- 46.5 0 8 -8 168 1 0 50.5 66 50.5 10 ---- 49.2 1.3 8 -6.7 169 1 0 56.9 66 56.9 10 ---- 53.8 3.1 8 -4.9 170 1 0 60.8 66 60.8 10 ---- 57.7 3.1 8 -4.9 171 1 0 62 66 62 10 ---- 59.2 2.8 8 -5.2 172 1 0 61.8 66 61.8 10 ---- 59.2 2.6 8 -5.4 173 1 0 55.6 66 55.6 10 ---- 54.1 1.5 8 -6.5 174 1 0 55.9 66 55.9 10 ---- 54.4 1.5 8 -6.5 175 1 0 53.4 66 53.4 10 ---- 51.6 1.8 8 -6.2 176 1 0 57.3 66 57.3 10 ---- 55.2 2.1 8 -5.9 177 1 0 57.9 66 57.9 10 ---- 55.2 2.7 8 -5.3 178 1 0 62.9 66 62.9 10 ---- 60.1 2.8 8 -5.2 179 1 0 63 66 63 10 ---- 60.3 2.7 8 -5.3 180 1 0 70.3 66 70.3 10 Snd Lvl 63.5 6.8 8 -1.2 6-Dec-21 Ryan Chiene TNM 2.5 Calculated with TNM 2.5 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS PROJECT/CONTRACT:Palm Villas at Millennium RUN:Future_Second Floor_B_119-127 BARRIER DESIGN:BAR 1 Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA. Receiver Name #DUs Existing No Barrier With Barrier Ldn Ldn Increase over existing Type CalculatedNoise Reduction Calculated Crit'n Calculated Crit'n Impact Ldn Calculated Goal Calculated Sub'l Inc minus Goal dBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB 1 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 2 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 3 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 4 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 5 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 6 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 7 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 8 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 9 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 10 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 11 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 12 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 13 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 14 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 15 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 16 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 17 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 18 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 19 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 20 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 21 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 22 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 23 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 24 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 25 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 26 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 27 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 28 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 29 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 30 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 31 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 32 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 33 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 34 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 35 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 36 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 37 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 38 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 39 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 40 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 41 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 42 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 43 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 44 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 45 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 46 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 47 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 48 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 49 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 50 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 51 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 52 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 53 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 54 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 55 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 56 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 57 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 58 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 59 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 60 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 61 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 62 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 63 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 64 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 65 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 66 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 67 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 68 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 69 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 70 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 71 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 72 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 73 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 74 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 75 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 76 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 77 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 78 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 79 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 80 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 81 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 82 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 83 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 85 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 87 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 88 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 89 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 90 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 91 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 92 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 93 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 94 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 96 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 98 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 99 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 100 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 101 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 102 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 103 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 104 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 105 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 106 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 107 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 108 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 109 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 110 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 111 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 112 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 113 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 114 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 115 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 116 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 117 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 118 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 119 1 0 64.6 66 64.6 10 ----64.6 0 8 -8 120 1 0 64.6 66 64.6 10 ----64.6 0 8 -8 121 1 0 63.9 66 63.9 10 ----64 -0.1 8 -8.1 122 1 0 64.3 66 64.3 10 ----64.3 0 8 -8 123 1 0 64.3 66 64.3 10 ----64.3 0 8 -8 124 1 0 64 66 64 10 ----64 0 8 -8 125 1 0 65.1 66 65.1 10 ----64.3 0.8 8 -7.2 126 1 0 66.1 66 66.1 10 Snd Lvl 65 1.1 8 -6.9 127 1 0 68.8 66 68.8 10 Snd Lvl 68.8 0 8 -8 128 1 0 68.8 66 68.8 10 Snd Lvl 68.8 0 8 -8 129 1 0 65.1 66 65.1 10 ----64.9 0.2 8 -7.8 130 1 0 68.7 66 68.7 10 Snd Lvl 68.7 0 8 -8 131 1 0 68.7 66 68.7 10 Snd Lvl 68.7 0 8 -8 132 1 0 65.8 66 65.8 10 ----64.7 1.1 8 -6.9 133 1 0 65 66 65 10 ----64.4 0.6 8 -7.4 134 1 0 62.1 66 62.1 10 ----62.2 -0.1 8 -8.1 135 1 0 63.3 66 63.3 10 ----63.4 -0.1 8 -8.1 136 1 0 63.7 66 63.7 10 ----63.8 -0.1 8 -8.1 137 1 0 63.5 66 63.5 10 ----63.5 0 8 -8 138 1 0 64.3 66 64.3 10 ----64.4 -0.1 8 -8.1 139 1 0 64.7 66 64.7 10 ----64.7 0 8 -8 140 1 0 63.8 66 63.8 10 ----63.3 0.5 8 -7.5 141 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 142 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 143 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 144 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 145 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 146 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 147 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 148 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 149 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 150 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 151 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 152 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 153 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 154 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 155 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 156 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 157 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 158 1 0 68.8 66 68.8 10 Snd Lvl 68.8 0 8 -8 159 1 0 68.8 66 68.8 10 Snd Lvl 68.8 0 8 -8 160 1 0 65 66 65 10 ----65 0 8 -8 161 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 68.9 0 8 -8 162 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 68.9 0 8 -8 163 1 0 66.4 66 66.4 10 Snd Lvl 65.9 0.5 8 -7.5 164 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 165 1 0 60.9 66 60.9 10 ----60.9 0 8 -8 166 1 0 50.8 66 50.8 10 ----50.8 0 8 -8 167 1 0 47.8 66 47.8 10 ----47.8 0 8 -8 168 1 0 51.9 66 51.9 10 ----52 -0.1 8 -8.1 169 1 0 58.2 66 58.2 10 ----58.3 -0.1 8 -8.1 170 1 0 62.4 66 62.4 10 ----62.4 0 8 -8 171 1 0 63.6 66 63.6 10 ----63.5 0.1 8 -7.9 172 1 0 63.6 66 63.6 10 ----63.5 0.1 8 -7.9 173 1 0 57.4 66 57.4 10 ----57 0.4 8 -7.6 174 1 0 57.7 66 57.7 10 ----57.3 0.4 8 -7.6 175 1 0 54.9 66 54.9 10 ----54.1 0.8 8 -7.2 176 1 0 59.4 66 59.4 10 ----58.9 0.5 8 -7.5 177 1 0 59.7 66 59.7 10 ----59.1 0.6 8 -7.4 178 1 0 63.8 66 63.8 10 ----63.6 0.2 8 -7.8 179 1 0 64 66 64 10 ----63.9 0.1 8 -7.9 180 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 6-Dec-21 Ryan Chiene TNM 2.5 Calculated with TNM 2.5 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS PROJECT/CONTRACT: Palm Villas at Millennium RUN: Future_Third Floor_B_119-127 BARRIER DESIGN: BAR 1 Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA. Receiver Name #DUs Existing No Barrier With Barrier Ldn Ldn Increase over existing Type CalculatedNoise Reduction Calculated Crit'n Calculated Crit'n Impact Ldn Calculated Goal Calculated Sub'l Inc minus Goal dBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB 1 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 2 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 3 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 4 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 5 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 6 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 7 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 8 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 9 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 10 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 11 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 12 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 13 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 14 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 15 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 16 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 17 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 18 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 19 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 20 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 21 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 22 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 23 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 24 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 25 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 26 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 27 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 28 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 29 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 30 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 31 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 32 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 33 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 34 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 35 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 36 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 37 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 38 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 39 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 40 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 41 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 42 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 43 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 44 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 45 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 46 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 47 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 48 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 49 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 50 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 51 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 52 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 53 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 54 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 55 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 56 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 57 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 58 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 59 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 60 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 61 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 62 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 63 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 64 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 65 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 66 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 67 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 68 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 69 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 70 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 71 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 72 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 73 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 74 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 75 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 76 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 77 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 78 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 79 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 80 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 81 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 82 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 83 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 85 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 87 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 88 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 89 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 90 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 91 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 92 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 93 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 94 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 96 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 98 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 99 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 100 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 101 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 102 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 103 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 104 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 105 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 106 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 107 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 108 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 109 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 110 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 111 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 112 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 113 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 114 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 115 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 116 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 117 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 118 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 119 1 0 64.7 66 64.7 10 ---- 64.7 0 8 -8 120 1 0 64.8 66 64.8 10 ---- 64.8 0 8 -8 121 1 0 64.2 66 64.2 10 ---- 64.2 0 8 -8 122 1 0 64.6 66 64.6 10 ---- 64.6 0 8 -8 123 1 0 64.7 66 64.7 10 ---- 64.7 0 8 -8 124 1 0 64.4 66 64.4 10 ---- 64.4 0 8 -8 125 1 0 65.4 66 65.4 10 ---- 65.4 0 8 -8 126 1 0 66.3 66 66.3 10 Snd Lvl 66.3 0 8 -8 127 1 0 69 66 69 10 Snd Lvl 69 0 8 -8 128 1 0 69 66 69 10 Snd Lvl 69 0 8 -8 129 1 0 65.4 66 65.4 10 ---- 65.4 0 8 -8 130 1 0 68.9 66 68.9 10 Snd Lvl 68.9 0 8 -8 131 1 0 68.8 66 68.8 10 Snd Lvl 68.8 0 8 -8 132 1 0 66 66 66 10 Snd Lvl 66 0 8 -8 133 1 0 65 66 65 10 ---- 65 0 8 -8 134 1 0 62.1 66 62.1 10 ---- 62.2 -0.1 8 -8.1 135 1 0 63.4 66 63.4 10 ---- 63.4 0 8 -8 136 1 0 63.7 66 63.7 10 ---- 63.8 -0.1 8 -8.1 137 1 0 63.5 66 63.5 10 ---- 63.5 0 8 -8 138 1 0 64.4 66 64.4 10 ---- 64.5 -0.1 8 -8.1 139 1 0 64.8 66 64.8 10 ---- 64.8 0 8 -8 140 1 0 64.3 66 64.3 10 ---- 64.3 0 8 -8 141 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 142 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 143 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 144 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 145 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 146 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 147 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 148 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 149 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 150 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 151 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 152 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 153 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 154 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 155 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 156 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 157 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 158 1 0 69.1 66 69.1 10 Snd Lvl 69.1 0 8 -8 159 1 0 69.1 66 69.1 10 Snd Lvl 69.1 0 8 -8 160 1 0 65.3 66 65.3 10 ---- 65.3 0 8 -8 161 1 0 69.1 66 69.1 10 Snd Lvl 69.1 0 8 -8 162 1 0 69.1 66 69.1 10 Snd Lvl 69.1 0 8 -8 163 1 0 66.6 66 66.6 10 Snd Lvl 66.6 0 8 -8 164 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 165 1 0 61 66 61 10 ---- 61 0 8 -8 166 1 0 53.6 66 53.6 10 ---- 53.6 0 8 -8 167 1 0 51.4 66 51.4 10 ---- 51.4 0 8 -8 168 1 0 54.1 66 54.1 10 ---- 54.1 0 8 -8 169 1 0 58.9 66 58.9 10 ---- 59 -0.1 8 -8.1 170 1 0 62.4 66 62.4 10 ---- 62.5 -0.1 8 -8.1 171 1 0 63.5 66 63.5 10 ---- 63.6 -0.1 8 -8.1 172 1 0 63.5 66 63.5 10 ---- 63.5 0 8 -8 173 1 0 58.6 66 58.6 10 ---- 58.5 0.1 8 -7.9 174 1 0 58.6 66 58.6 10 ---- 58.5 0.1 8 -7.9 175 1 0 57.2 66 57.2 10 ---- 57.1 0.1 8 -7.9 176 1 0 60.8 66 60.8 10 ---- 60.7 0.1 8 -7.9 177 1 0 60.5 66 60.5 10 ---- 60.3 0.2 8 -7.8 178 1 0 63.9 66 63.9 10 ---- 63.8 0.1 8 -7.9 179 1 0 64.1 66 64.1 10 ---- 64.1 0 8 -8 180 1 0 0 66 0 10 inactive 0 0 8 0 Appendix C Train Noise Modeling Data Table C--1: Modeled Train Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 1 Residential 58 58 58 33 33 33 54 54 54 29 29 29 2 Residential 59 59 59 34 34 34 55 55 55 30 30 30 3 Residential 59 59 59 34 34 34 55 55 55 30 30 30 4 Residential 54 54 54 29 29 29 50 50 50 25 25 25 5 Residential 54 54 54 29 29 29 49 49 49 24 24 24 6 Residential 54 54 54 29 29 29 49 49 49 24 24 24 7 Residential 61 61 61 36 36 36 56 56 56 31 31 31 8 Residential 60 60 60 35 35 35 56 56 56 31 31 31 9 Residential 60 60 60 35 35 35 55 55 55 30 30 30 10 Residential 55 55 55 30 30 30 50 50 50 25 25 25 11 Residential 55 55 55 30 30 30 51 51 51 26 26 26 12 Residential 60 60 60 35 35 35 56 56 56 31 31 31 13 Residential 62 62 62 37 37 37 57 57 57 32 32 32 14 Residential 61 61 61 36 36 36 57 57 57 32 32 32 15 Residential 56 56 56 31 31 31 51 51 51 26 26 26 16 Residential 55 55 55 30 30 30 51 51 51 26 26 26 17 Residential 60 60 60 35 35 35 56 56 56 31 31 31 18 Residential 61 61 61 36 36 36 57 57 57 32 32 32 19 Residential 62 62 62 37 37 37 58 58 58 33 33 33 20 Residential 61 61 61 36 36 36 57 57 57 32 32 32 21 Residential 56 56 56 31 31 31 52 52 52 27 27 27 22 Residential 55 55 55 30 30 30 51 51 51 26 26 26 23 Residential 60 60 60 35 35 35 56 56 56 31 31 31 24 Residential 57 57 57 32 32 32 53 53 53 28 28 28 25 Residential 59 59 59 34 34 34 55 55 55 30 30 30 26 Residential 59 59 59 34 34 34 55 55 55 30 30 30 27 Residential 59 59 59 34 34 34 54 54 54 29 29 29 28 Residential 54 54 54 29 29 29 50 50 50 25 25 25 29 Residential 54 54 54 29 29 29 50 50 50 25 25 25 30 Residential 59 59 59 34 34 34 55 55 55 30 30 30 31 Residential 54 54 54 29 29 29 50 50 50 25 25 25 32 Residential 59 59 59 34 34 34 55 55 55 30 30 30 33 Residential 54 54 54 29 29 29 50 50 50 25 25 25 34 Residential 54 54 54 29 29 29 50 50 50 25 25 25 Table C--1: Modeled Train Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 35 Residential 52 52 52 27 27 27 48 48 48 23 23 23 36 Residential 58 58 58 33 33 33 54 54 54 29 29 29 37 Residential 58 58 58 33 33 33 54 54 54 29 29 29 38 Residential 59 59 59 34 34 34 54 54 54 29 29 29 39 Residential 58 58 58 33 33 33 54 54 54 29 29 29 40 Residential 53 53 53 28 28 28 49 49 49 24 24 24 41 Residential 53 53 53 28 28 28 49 49 49 24 24 24 42 Residential 53 53 53 28 28 28 49 49 49 24 24 24 43 Residential 58 58 58 33 33 33 53 53 53 28 28 28 44 Residential 53 53 53 28 28 28 49 49 49 24 24 24 45 Residential 53 53 53 28 28 28 49 49 49 24 24 24 46 Residential 53 53 53 28 28 28 49 49 49 24 24 24 47 Residential 53 53 53 28 28 28 49 49 49 24 24 24 48 Residential 57 57 57 32 32 32 53 53 53 28 28 28 49 Residential 51 51 51 26 26 26 47 47 47 22 22 22 50 Residential 57 57 57 32 32 32 53 53 53 28 28 28 51 Residential 57 57 57 32 32 32 51 51 51 26 26 26 52 Residential 52 52 52 27 27 27 48 48 48 23 23 23 53 Residential 49 49 49 24 24 24 45 45 45 20 20 20 54 Residential 49 49 49 24 24 24 45 45 45 20 20 20 55 Residential 53 53 53 28 28 28 49 49 49 24 24 24 56 Residential 54 54 54 29 29 29 50 50 50 25 25 25 57 Residential 58 58 58 33 33 33 54 54 54 29 29 29 58 Residential 52 52 52 27 27 27 48 48 48 23 23 23 59 Residential 51 51 51 26 26 26 47 47 47 22 22 22 60 Residential 52 52 52 27 27 27 47 47 47 22 22 22 61 Park/ Recreational 61 - - - - - 57 - - - - - Notes: 1. Refer to Exhibit 7 for modeled receiver locations. 2. Noise levels calculated using the FTA Noise Impact Assessment Spreadsheet (October 1, 2018). 3. Interior noise levels were calculated assuming an exterior-interior sound reduction of 25 dBA from standard construction practices, per the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Noise Guidebook, available at: https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/313/hud-noise-guidebook/ (2009). 4. Mitigated noise levels include implementation of the perimeter sound walls as recommended in REC-1 and shown in Exhibit 8. Appendix D Composite Noise Modeling Results Table D-1: Composite Traffic + Train Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated5 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 1 Residential 68 68 68 43 43 43 63 68 68 38 43 43 2 Residential 68 69 68 43 44 43 63 68 68 38 43 43 3 Residential 67 68 67 42 43 42 63 67 67 38 42 42 4 Residential 67 67 67 42 42 42 62 67 66 37 42 41 5 Residential 68 69 68 43 44 43 64 68 68 39 43 43 6 Residential 68 69 68 43 44 43 64 68 68 39 43 43 7 Residential 67 67 67 42 42 42 62 67 67 37 42 42 8 Residential 59 60 60 34 35 35 56 57 58 31 32 33 9 Residential 55 56 59 30 31 34 53 55 58 28 30 33 10 Residential 55 56 57 30 31 32 52 53 55 27 28 30 11 Residential 55 56 57 30 31 32 51 53 56 26 28 31 12 Residential 55 56 57 30 31 32 52 53 55 27 28 30 13 Residential 55 56 58 30 31 33 52 54 57 27 29 32 14 Residential 57 58 60 32 33 35 55 57 59 30 32 34 15 Residential 64 64 64 39 39 39 60 64 64 35 39 39 16 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 61 66 66 36 41 41 17 Residential 70 70 70 45 45 45 64 69 70 39 44 45 18 Residential 71 70 70 46 45 45 64 70 70 39 45 45 19 Residential 70 69 70 45 44 45 63 69 69 38 44 44 20 Residential 69 68 69 44 43 44 63 68 69 38 43 44 21 Residential 68 68 68 43 43 43 63 68 68 38 43 43 22 Residential 62 62 63 37 37 38 58 60 61 33 35 36 23 Residential 64 65 65 39 40 40 60 63 64 35 38 39 24 Residential 66 67 67 41 42 42 61 66 66 36 41 41 25 Residential 67 67 68 42 42 43 62 67 67 37 42 42 26 Residential 67 67 67 42 42 42 62 66 67 37 41 42 27 Residential 62 63 63 37 38 38 58 62 63 33 37 38 28 Residential 57 58 58 32 33 33 54 56 57 29 31 32 29 Residential 58 59 59 33 34 34 55 57 58 30 32 33 30 Residential 64 64 64 39 39 39 61 64 64 36 39 39 31 Residential 64 65 65 39 40 40 60 64 64 35 39 39 32 Residential 60 61 61 35 36 36 57 60 60 32 35 35 33 Residential 56 57 58 31 32 33 53 54 56 28 29 31 34 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 61 65 66 36 40 41 Table D-1: Composite Traffic + Train Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated5 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 35 Residential 64 65 66 39 40 41 63 63 65 38 38 40 36 Residential 67 67 67 42 42 42 61 66 66 36 41 41 37 Residential 71 71 71 46 46 46 65 70 71 40 45 46 38 Residential 71 71 71 46 46 46 65 70 71 40 45 46 39 Residential 69 69 70 44 44 45 63 68 69 38 43 44 40 Residential 68 68 68 43 43 43 62 67 68 37 42 43 41 Residential 68 68 69 43 43 44 63 67 68 38 42 43 42 Residential 62 62 62 37 37 37 58 59 60 33 34 35 43 Residential 65 65 66 40 40 41 60 64 65 35 39 40 44 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 61 65 65 36 40 40 45 Residential 66 66 67 41 41 42 61 66 66 36 41 41 46 Residential 65 65 66 40 40 41 60 65 66 35 40 41 47 Residential 58 59 59 33 34 34 54 57 58 29 32 33 48 Residential 56 56 57 31 31 32 53 53 54 28 28 29 49 Residential 56 56 57 31 31 32 53 54 55 28 29 30 50 Residential 57 57 58 32 32 33 54 54 56 29 29 31 51 Residential 66 67 67 41 42 42 62 66 67 37 41 42 52 Residential 67 67 67 42 42 42 62 66 67 37 41 42 53 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 61 65 66 36 40 41 54 Residential 63 63 64 38 38 39 59 62 62 34 37 37 55 Residential 60 61 61 35 36 36 57 57 58 32 32 33 56 Residential 68 68 68 43 43 43 62 67 68 37 42 43 57 Residential 69 68 69 44 43 44 63 68 68 38 43 43 58 Residential 70 69 70 45 44 45 63 69 69 38 44 44 59 Residential 72 71 72 47 46 47 65 71 71 40 46 46 60 Residential 72 71 72 47 46 47 65 71 71 40 46 46 61 Residential 71 70 71 46 45 46 64 70 71 39 45 46 62 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 63 68 69 38 43 44 63 Residential 69 68 69 44 43 44 63 68 68 38 43 43 64 Residential 59 60 60 34 35 35 56 58 59 31 33 34 65 Residential 63 63 63 38 38 38 59 62 63 34 37 38 66 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 61 66 66 36 41 41 67 Residential 68 68 68 43 43 43 63 67 68 38 42 43 68 Residential 67 68 68 42 43 43 63 67 68 38 42 43 Table D-1: Composite Traffic + Train Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated5 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 69 Residential 60 60 61 35 35 36 58 59 60 33 34 35 70 Residential 59 60 60 34 35 35 57 59 59 32 34 34 71 Residential 58 59 60 33 34 35 55 58 58 30 33 33 72 Residential 56 56 57 31 31 32 53 53 55 28 28 30 73 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 61 65 66 36 40 41 74 Residential 66 67 67 41 42 42 62 66 67 37 41 42 75 Residential 65 65 66 40 40 41 61 64 65 36 39 40 76 Residential 65 65 65 40 40 40 60 64 64 35 39 39 77 Residential 61 61 61 36 36 36 57 58 58 32 33 33 78 Residential 68 67 68 43 42 43 62 67 68 37 42 43 79 Residential 67 67 68 42 42 43 61 67 67 36 42 42 80 Residential 70 70 70 45 45 45 64 69 70 39 44 45 81 Residential 65 66 66 40 41 41 63 66 66 38 41 41 82 Residential 65 66 66 40 41 41 63 66 66 38 41 41 83 Residential 65 66 67 40 41 42 63 66 66 38 41 41 84 Residential 64 65 65 39 40 40 62 64 65 37 39 40 85 Residential 65 66 66 40 41 41 63 65 66 38 40 41 86 Residential 62 63 64 37 38 39 59 62 63 34 37 38 87 Residential 65 66 67 40 41 42 63 66 67 38 41 42 88 Residential 64 65 67 39 40 42 62 65 67 37 40 42 89 Residential 63 64 67 38 39 42 60 63 67 35 38 42 90 Residential 65 66 68 40 41 43 60 64 68 35 39 43 91 Residential 66 66 68 41 41 43 61 65 68 36 40 43 92 Residential 67 67 68 42 42 43 61 67 68 36 42 43 93 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 94 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 63 69 69 38 44 44 95 Residential 66 67 67 41 42 42 60 66 67 35 41 42 96 Residential 65 66 66 40 41 41 59 64 65 34 39 40 97 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 60 66 66 35 41 41 98 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 99 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 100 Residential 67 67 68 42 42 43 60 66 67 35 41 42 101 Residential 67 67 67 42 42 42 61 66 67 36 41 42 102 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 61 65 66 36 40 41 Table D-1: Composite Traffic + Train Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated5 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 103 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 104 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 105 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 106 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 107 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 108 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 109 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 110 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 111 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 112 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 113 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 114 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 115 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 116 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 117 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 118 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 119 Residential 64 65 66 39 40 41 61 65 65 36 40 40 120 Residential 64 65 66 39 40 41 61 65 65 36 40 40 121 Residential 64 65 65 39 40 40 61 64 65 36 39 40 122 Residential 64 65 66 39 40 41 61 65 65 36 40 40 123 Residential 64 65 66 39 40 41 61 65 65 36 40 40 124 Residential 64 65 66 39 40 41 60 64 65 35 39 40 125 Residential 65 66 66 40 41 41 61 65 66 36 40 41 126 Residential 66 67 67 41 42 42 61 65 67 36 40 42 127 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 128 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 129 Residential 65 65 66 40 40 41 58 65 65 33 40 40 130 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 131 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 132 Residential 66 66 66 41 41 41 60 65 66 35 40 41 133 Residential 64 65 65 39 40 40 60 65 65 35 40 40 134 Residential 62 63 63 37 38 38 59 63 63 34 38 38 135 Residential 63 64 65 38 39 40 60 64 64 35 39 39 136 Residential 63 65 65 38 40 40 61 64 64 36 39 39 Table D-1: Composite Traffic + Train Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated5 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 137 Residential 63 65 65 38 40 40 60 64 64 35 39 39 138 Residential 63 65 65 38 40 40 61 65 65 36 40 40 139 Residential 63 65 65 38 40 40 61 65 65 36 40 40 140 Residential 63 64 65 38 39 40 59 63 64 34 38 39 141 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 142 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 143 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 144 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 145 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 146 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 147 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 148 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 149 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 150 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 151 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 152 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 153 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 154 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 155 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 156 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 157 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 158 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 159 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 160 Residential 65 65 65 40 40 40 58 65 65 33 40 40 161 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 162 Residential 69 69 69 44 44 44 62 69 69 37 44 44 163 Residential 66 66 67 41 41 42 61 66 67 36 41 42 164 Residential - - - - - - - - - - - - 165 Residential 61 62 62 36 37 37 58 61 61 33 36 36 166 Residential 55 55 56 30 30 31 52 53 55 27 28 30 167 Residential 54 54 55 29 29 30 51 51 53 26 26 28 168 Residential 56 56 57 31 31 32 53 54 56 28 29 31 169 Residential 59 60 60 34 35 35 55 59 60 30 34 35 170 Residential 62 63 63 37 38 38 58 63 63 33 38 38 Table D-1: Composite Traffic + Train Noise Levels Receiver No.1 Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated5 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)2,3 Interior Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)2,3,4 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 171 Residential 63 65 65 38 40 40 60 64 64 35 39 39 172 Residential 63 65 65 38 40 40 60 64 64 35 39 39 173 Residential 57 59 59 32 34 34 55 58 59 30 33 34 174 Residential 57 59 59 32 34 34 55 58 59 30 33 34 175 Residential 56 57 58 31 32 33 53 55 58 28 30 33 176 Residential 58 60 61 33 35 36 56 59 61 31 34 36 177 Residential 59 60 61 34 35 36 56 59 60 31 34 35 178 Residential 63 64 64 38 39 39 60 64 64 35 39 39 179 Residential 63 64 64 38 39 39 60 64 64 35 39 39 180 Park/ Recreational 71 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 64 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Notes: 1. Refer to Exhibit 6 for modeled receiver locations. 2. Based on the results shown in Table B-1 and Table C-1 above, the modeled traffic and train noise levels were logarithmically added together to determine the combined noise levels at each receiver at the Project site. Receivers in Bold text exceed applicable noise standards. 3. Due to TNM 2.5 modeling complications, some receivers in this table do not have modeled noise level results. TNM 2.5 modeling outputs are provided in Appendix B. 4. Interior noise levels were calculated assuming an exterior-interior sound reduction of 25 dBA from standard construction practices, per the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Noise Guidebook, available at: https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/313/hud-noise-guidebook/ (2009). 5. Mitigated noise levels include implementation of the perimeter sound walls as recommended in REC-1 and shown in Exhibit 8. DENSITY BONUS REQUEST PALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUM DENSITY BONUS GOVERNMENT CODE 65915 The Density Bonus request is to increase the density by approximately 5%, from 22 dwelling units per acre to 23.5 dwelling units per acre. The site is a total of 10.49 acres and would be permitted a maximum of 230 units where the project proposes 241 units or an additional 11 units. The project is 100% affordable. All units will be available to households whose incomes are between 30% and 60% of the Area Median Income. The Palm Villas at Millennium is a phased 241 unit gated affordable housing community on a 10.49-acre (gross) site. Two phases are proposed, with Phase I including 121 units and Phase II 120 units. MAXIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS Palm Communities is requesting to utilize the parking ratios provision of the Density Bonus Law pursuant to Government Code Section 65915 (p) (5). The parking ratio provision is as follows: (A) Zero to one-bedroom: one on-site parking space. (B) Two- to three-bedrooms: one and one-half on-site parking spaces. (C) Four- and more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces. Parking Requirements City Requirements Type Space Required Number of Units Total Required 3 Bedroom Units 2 61 122 2 Bedroom Units 2 150 300 1 Bedroom Unis 2 30 60 Total City Required Parking 482 Density Bonus Law Requirements Type Space Required Number of Units Total Required 3 Bedroom Units 1.5 61 91.5 2 Bedroom Units 1.5 150 225 1 Bedroom Unis 1 30 30 Total Density Bonus Law Required Parking 346.5 Parking Provided 350 Surplus Parking Over Required Density Bonus Law Requirements 3.5 The parking ratio provision of the Density Bonus Law reduces the parking requirements for housing projects. Per the City’s Zoning Code, the required on-site parking for the project is 482, with 350 parking spaces proposed, of which 36 are Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (EVCS). Palm Communities owns and manages affordable apartment communities throughout California and has identified the number of parking spaces needed to support its tenants. No off-site parking is required for the proposed Palm Villas at Millennium. B ld g A C o m m u n it y B l d g 2 -s t o r ylaundry m a il Bldg GMaint Bldg B Residential Bldg Type R-1 (reverse) 3-story - 24 Units Bldg E Residential Bldg Type R-1 3-story - 24 Units Bldg DResidential BldgType R-1 (reverse)3-story - 24 UnitsBldg CResidential BldgType R-13-story - 24 UnitsBldg FResidential Bldg Type R-1 (reverse) 3-story - 24 Units bbqarea VANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANEVCSEVCSUSPSEVCSEVCSVANVANEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSVANVANVANVANEVCS EVCS EVCSEVCSEVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCSVANVAN EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCS PARCEL 8 PAR CEL 10Bldg MlaundryBldg HResidential BldgType R-13-story - 24 Units Bldg LResidential BldgType R-13-story - 24 UnitsBldg I Residential Bldg Type R-1 (reverse) 3-story - 24 Units Bldg J Residential Bldg Type R-1 3-story - 24 Units Bldg K Residential Bldg Type R-1 3-story - 24 Units PARCEL 9 PARC EL 9 bbqareaSCESCESCE SCEG Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 SHEET A-0.1 FOR INFORMATION SEE SITE PLAN DETAIL PHASE I SHEET A-0.2 FOR INFORMATION SEE SITE PLAN DETAIL PHASE II PHASE IIPHASE IIPHASE IPHASE I PARCEL 8 PARCEL 10 PARCEL 9 G G.1 G.2 SHEET A-0.3 FOR INFORMATION SEE ENLARGED CORNER DETAIL VANVANEVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCSEVCSEVCS EVCS VANVANVANVANEVCSEVCS EVCSEVCSEVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCSVANVAN EVCS EVCS EVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCS PARCEL 10Bldg MlaundryBldg HResidential BldgType R-13-story - 24 Units Bldg LResidential BldgType R-13-story - 24 UnitsBldg I Residential Bldg Type R-1 (reverse) 3-story - 24 Units Bldg J Residential Bldg Type R-1 3-story - 24 Units Bldg K Residential Bldg Type R-1 3-story - 24 Units PARCEL 9 bbqarea500kVA SCE SCE150kVAEVCS EVCS PARCEL 9 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2PHASE IIPHASE IIPHASE IPHASE I Bldg 2-story G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 SHEET A-0.1 FOR MORE INFORMATION SEE SITE PLAN DETAIL PHASE I Bldg A Community Bldg 2-story laundry mail Bldg G Maint Bl d g B Re s i d e n t i a l B l d g Ty p e R - 1 ( r e v e r s e ) 3- s t o r y - 2 4 U n i t s Bld g E Res i d e n t i a l B l d g Typ e R - 1 3-st o r y - 2 4 U n i t s Bldg DResidential BldgType R-1 (reverse)3-story - 24 UnitsBldg CResidential BldgType R-13-story - 24 UnitsBldg FResid e n t i a l B l d g Type R - 1 ( r e v e r s e ) 3-stor y - 2 4 U n i t s bbq area VANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANEVCSEVCSU SPSEVCSEV C SVANVANEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSVANVANVANVANEVCS EVCS EVCSEVCSEVC S EVC S EVC S EVC S EV C S EV C S EV C S EVC S EVC S EVC S EVCSVANVAN EVCS EVCS EVC S EVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCS PARCEL 8 PARCEL 10Bldg MlaundryBldg H Residential Bld g Type R-1 3-story - 24 Un i t s Bldg LResidential BldgType R-13-story - 24 UnitsBldg I Residential Bldg Type R-1 (reverse) 3-story - 24 Units Bldg J Residential Bldg Type R-1 3-story - 24 Units Bldg K Residential Bldg Type R-1 3-story - 24 Units PARCEL 9 PARCEL 9 bbqareaSCE300kVASCE5 00kVA 500kVA SCE SCE150kVAVAN VAN VAN G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 SHEET A-0.1 FOR INFORMATION SEE SITE PLAN DETAIL PHASE I SHEET A-0.2 FOR INFORMATION SEE SITE PLAN DETAIL PHASE II PHASE IIPHASE IIPHASE IPHASE I Bldg A Community Bldg 2-story laundry mail Bldg G Maint Bl d g B Re s i d e n t i a l B l d g Ty p e R - 1 ( r e v e r s e ) 3- s t o r y - 2 4 U n i t s Bld g E Res i d e n t i a l B l d g Typ e R - 1 3-st o r y - 2 4 U n i t s Bldg DResidential BldgType R-1 (reverse)3-story - 24 UnitsBldg CResidential BldgType R-13-story - 24 UnitsBldg FResid e n t i a l B l d g Type R - 1 ( r e v e r s e ) 3-stor y - 2 4 U n i t s bbq area VANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANEVCSEVCSUSPSEVCSEVC SVANVANEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCSVANVANVANVANEVCS EVCS EVCSEVCSEVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVC S EVC S EVC S EVCS EVCS EVCS E V C SVANVAN EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCSE V C SEVCSEVCSEVCSEVCS PARCEL 8 PARCEL 10Bldg MlaundryBldg H Residential Bld g Type R-1 3-story - 24 Uni t s Bldg LResidential BldgType R-13-story - 24 UnitsBldg I Residential Bldg Type R-1 (reverse) 3-story - 24 Units Bldg J Residential Bldg Type R-1 3-story - 24 Units Bldg K Residential Bldg Type R-1 3-story - 24 Units PARCEL 9 PARCEL 9 bbqareaSCESCESCE SCEG Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 Bldg A Community Bldg 2-story laundry mail Bldg G Maint Bl d g B Re s i d e n t i a l B l d g Ty p e R - 1 ( r e v e r s e ) 3- s t o r y - 2 4 U n i t s Bld g E Res i d e n t i a l B l d g Typ e R - 1 3-st o r y - 2 4 U n i t s Bldg DResidential BldgType R-1 (reverse)3-story - 24 UnitsBldg CResidential BldgType R-13-story - 24 UnitsBldg FResid e n t i a l B l d g Type R - 1 ( r e v e r s e ) 3-stor y - 2 4 U n i t s bbq area VANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANVANEVCSEVCSUSPSEVCSEV C S EVCS EVCS EV C S EV C S EV C S EVC S EVC S EVC S E V C S EVCS EVCS EVC S EVCSE V C S PARCEL 8 PARCEL 10 PARCEL 9 PARCEL 9 SCE300kVASCE500kVAG Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 PRIVATE PATIO "SOUND RECEIVER" EXTERIOR "SOUND SOURCE" G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 G G.1 NOTE: VENTS THROUGH ROOF SHALL BE PAINTED TO MATCH TILE 1 AD-1 2 AD-1 G G.1 NOTE: VENTS THROUGH ROOF SHALL BE PAINTED TO MATCH TILE 1 AD-1 2 AD-1 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 NOTE: SEE DETAIL _/__ FOR FLASHING INSTALLATION G Palm VillasatMillenniumNorth Gerald Ford Dr.Palm Desert, CA.APN: 694-120-028A Palm Communities AffordableHousing DevelopmentG.1 G.2 PRELIMINARY GRADING & UTILITY PLANPALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUMPARCEL 8 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 36792 IN THECITY OF PALM DESERTPROJECTLOCATIONNORTH113LEGAL DESCRIPTIONESTIMATED CUT/FILLAPNsBENCHMARKTOPOGRAPHY SOURCEOWNERDEVELOPERCIVIL ENGINEERPROEJCT AREALEGENDSDSDSSWW WPHASE IPARCEL 9APN 694-120-029PARCEL 9APN 694-120-029PARCEL 9APN 694-120-029PARCEL 4APN 694-120-030BASIN #2PHASE II(SEE SHEET 2)PACIFICAVE.GERALD FORD DRIVETECHNO LOGYDR.AAC C B B BASIN #1DDPHASE IIDINAH SHORE DR. BL D G DBLDG FBLDG EBLDG BBLDG ABL D G CGERALD FORD DRIVEDINAH SHORE DRIVETECHNOLOGY DRIVEPHASE I PROJECT ENTRY AT TECHNOLOGY DRIVEPHASE II PROJECT ENTRANCE AT DINAH SHORE DRIVE PRELIMINARY GRADING & UTILITY PLANPALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUMPARCEL 8 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 36792 IN THECITY OF PALM DESERTPROJECTLOCATIONNORTH223LEGAL DESCRIPTIONAPNsBENCHMARKOWNERDEVELOPERCIVIL ENGINEERLEGENDESTIMATED CUT/FILLTOPOGRAPHY SOURCEPROEJCT AREASDSDSSWW WPHASE IPARCEL 9APN 694-120-029PARCEL 9APN 694-120-029PARCEL 9APN 694-120-029PARCEL 4APN 694-120-030BASIN #2PACIFICAVE.GERALD FORD DRIVETECHNO LOGYDR.EAAC C B BF FBASIN #1DDPHASE IIEBLDG IDINAH SHORE DR.BLDG HBLDG JBLDG KBLDG LBL D G DBLDG FBLDG EBLDG BBLDG ABL D G CGERALD FORD DRIVEDINAH SHORE DRIVETECHNOLOGY DRIVEPHASE I PROJECT ENTRY AT TECHNOLOGY DRIVEPHASE II PROJECT ENTRANCE AT DINAH SHORE DRIVE PRELIMINARY GRADING & UTILITY PLANPALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUMPARCEL 8 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 36792 IN THECITY OF PALM DESERT333SECTION A-AN.T.SSECTION E-EN.T.SSECTION B-BN.T.SSECTION C-CN.T.SSECTION D-DN.T.SSECTION F-FN.T.SPROP. BUILDING DFF = 174.47PE = 173.80PROP. BUILDING CFF = 173.97PE = 173.30PHASE LINEPHASE IIPHASE IPARCEL 9(NOT A PART)DINAH SHORE DRIVEPROP. BUILDING KFF = 177.67PE = 177.00PROP. BUILDING KFF = 176.67PE = 176.00BUILDING MLAUNDRYPROP. BUILDING LFF = 176.17PE = 175.50RECREATIONPARKPHASE LINEPHASE IIPHASE IPROP. BUILDING BFF = 175.77PE = 175.10PROP. BUILDING CFF = 174.97PE = 174.30PROP. BUILDING CFF = 173.97PE = 173.30PARCEL 9(NOT A PART)GERALD FORD DRIVEPLPARCEL 9(NOT A PART)PROP. BUILDING KFF = 177.67PE = 177.00PROP. BUILDING IFF = 180.67PE = 180.00PROP. BUILDING JFF = 180.17PE = 179.50GERALD FORD DRIVEPARCEL 9(NOT A PART)TECHNOLOGY DRIVE INTERSTATE 10UNION PACIFIC RAILROADDINAH SHORE DRIVEDINAH SHORE DRIVEGERALD FORD DRIVET E CH NO LOG Y DRIVE PROPOSED LOT 1AREA=262,362.40 SFAREA= 6.023 ACPROPOSED LOT 2AREA=194,494.88 SFAREA= 4.465 ACLINE AND CURVE TABLEGERALD FORD DRIVEDINAH SHORE DRIVETECHNOLOGY DRIVEPHASE I PROJECT ENTRY AT TECHNOLOGY DRIVEPHASE II PROJECT ENTRANCE AT DINAH SHORE DRIVETENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 38366PALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUMAFFECTING PARCEL 8 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 36792CITY OF PALM DESERTPROJECTLOCATIONNORTH11LEGAL DESCRIPTIONAPNOWNERDEVELOPERLEGENDTOPOGRAPHY SOURCETENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 38366DATE OF SURVEYADDRESSBASIS OF BEARINGPARCEL 8 AREAFLOOD ZONE NOTEZONING NOTEBENCHMARK NOTEMONUMENT NOTE SURVEYOR'S NOTESRECORD DATA LEGENDSURVEY PERFORMED BY:—GENERAL NOTESPARCEL 8 TITLE INFORMATIONPARCEL 9 EASEMENT NOTESCIVIL ENGINEER RESPONSIBLE INCHARGE OF THIS TPMUTILITY PROVIDERS Pal m Villas at Millennium A Palm Communities Affordable Housing Development North Gerald Ford Dr. Palm Desert, CA. APN: 694-120-028    Exterior Cement Plaster: 16-20 smooth sand nish DE6170 Rice Bowl P2: DEC756 Weathered Brown P1: DEA187 Black Moisture proof decking systems: DE6144 Graham Cracker   P3: Accent Paint Color DE6144 Graham Cracker PARCEL8 PARCEL10 PARCEL9 G G.1 G.2 EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCSEVCS EVCS PARCEL10 BldgI ResidentialBldg TypeR-1(reverse) 3-story24Units BldgJ ResidentialBldg TypeR-1 3-story24Units BldgK ResidentialBldg TypeR-1 3-story24Units PARCEL9 500kVA SCE PARCEL9 G G.1 G.2 G G.1 G.2 G G.1 G.2 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan For: Palm Villas at Millenium Northeast corner of Gerald Ford Dr, and Dinah Shore Dr, Palm Desert, CA 92211 DEVELOPMENT NO. PARCEL 8 - PARCEL MAP NO. 36792 PMB 239 /9-15 DESIGN REVIEW NO. PP 22-0003 / TPM 38366 Prepared for: Palm Communities 100 Pacifica, Suite 203 Irvine, CA 92618 Telephone: (949) 878-9399 Prepared by: Mike Sutton, P.E. Kimley-Horn and Associates 45-025 Manitou Drive, Suite 11 Indian Wells, CA 92210 Telephone: (760) 565-5103 Original Date Prepared: 12/17/2021 Revision Date(s): 03/23/2022, 06/15/2022 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA OWNER'S CERTIFICATION This project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for: City of Palm Desert by Kimley Horn & Associates, Inc. for the project known as Palm Villas at Millenium at Northeast corner of Gerald Ford Drive and Dinah Shore Drive, APN: 694120028 This WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of City of Palm Desert for Parcel 8 - Parcel Map No. 36792 PMB 239 /9-15 which includes the requirement for the preparation and implementation of a project-specific WQMP. The undersigned, while owning the property/project described in the preceding paragraph, shall be responsible for the implementation of this WQMP and will ensure that this WQMP is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site. This WQMP will be reviewed with the facility operator, facility supervisors, employees, tenants, maintenance and service contractors, or any other party (or parties) having responsibility for implementing portions of this WQMP. At least one copy of this WQMP will be maintained at the project site or project office in perpetuity. The undersigned is authorized to certify and to approve implementation of this WQMP. The undersigned is aware that implementation of this WQMP is enforceable under City of Palm Desert Water Quality Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 24.20). If the undersigned transfers its interest in the subject property/project, the undersigned shall notify the successor in interest of its responsibility to implement this WQMP. "I, the undersigned, certify under penalty of law that I am the owner of the property that is the subject of this WQMP, and that the provisions of this WQMP have been reviewed and accepted and that the WQMP will be transferred to future successors in interest." ATTEST Owner's Signature City of Palm Desert Owner's Printed Name City Clerk Owner's Title/Position Date 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 (949) 878-9399 THIS FORM SHALL BE NOTARIZED BEFORE ACCEPTANCE OF THE FINAL PROJECT SPECIFIC WQMP Notary Signature Printed Name Title/Position Date 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-i Contents SECTION PAGE I. Project Description .................................................................................................................... 1 II. Site Characterization................................................................................................................. 5 III. Pollutants of Concern ................................................................................................................ 7 IV. Hydrologic Conditions of Concern .......................................................................................... 8 V. Best Management Practices...................................................................................................... 9 V.1 SITE DESIGN BMP CONCEPTS, LID/SITE DESIGN AND TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS ...... 9 V.1.A SITE DESIGN BMP CONCEPTS AND LID/SITE DESIGN BMPS ................................. 11 V.1.B TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS ................................................................................ 17 V.1.C MEASURABLE GOAL SUMMARY ............................................................................. 19 V.2 SOURCE CONTROL BMPS ............................................................................................. 20 V.3 EQUIVALENT TREATMENT CONTROL BMP ALTERNATIVES .......................................... 22 V.4 REGIONALLY-BASED BMPS ......................................................................................... 22 VI. Operation and Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs ........................................................ 23 VII. Funding..................................................................................................................................... 24 TABLES TABLE 1. POLLUTANT OF CONCERN SUMMARY 7 TABLE 2. BMP SELECTION MATRIX BASED UPON POLLUTANT OF CONCERN REMOVAL EFFICIENCY 10 TABLE 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF SITE DESIGN BMP CONCEPTS 12 TABLE 4. LID/SITE DESIGN BMPS MEETING THE LID/SITE DESIGN MEASURABLE GOAL 16 TABLE 5: TREATMENT CONTROL BMP SUMMARY 18 TABLE 6: MEASURABLE GOAL SUMMARY 19 TABLE 7. SOURCE CONTROL BMPS 20 APPENDICES A. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL B. VICINITY MAP, WQMP SITE PLAN, AND RECEIVING WATERS MAP C. SUPPORTING DETAIL RELATED TO HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS OF CONCERN (IF APPLICABLE) D. EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS E. SOILS REPORT (IF APPLICABLE) F. STRUCTURAL BMP AND/OR RETENTION FACILITY SIZING CALCULATIONS AND DESIGN DETAILS G. AGREEMENTS – CC&RS, COVENANT AND AGREEMENTS, BMP MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS AND/OR OTHER MECHANISMS FOR ENSURING ONGOING OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, FUNDING AND TRANSFER OF REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT-SPECIFIC WQMP H. PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT – SUMMARY OF SITE REMEDIATION CONDUCTED AND USE RESTRICTIONS I. PROJECT-SPECIFIC WQMP SUMMARY DATA FORM 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-1 I. Project Description Project Owner: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 (760) 346-0611 Project Developer: Palm Communities 100 Pacifica, Suite 203 Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 878-9399 WQMP Preparer: Mike Sutton, P.E. Kimley-Horn and Associates 45-025 Manitou Drive, Suite 11 Indian Wells, CA 92210 (760) 565-5103 Project Site Address: Northeast corner of Gerald Ford Dr, and Dinah Shore Dr Palm Desert, CA 92211 Planning Area/ Community Name/ Development Name: Palm Villas at Millenium APN Number(s): Parcel 8 - Parcel Map No. 36792 PMB 239 /9-15 Latitude & Longitude: Lat: 33.787484 Long: -116.362150 Receiving Water: Whitewater River Project Site Size: 10.4 acres Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code: N/A Formation of Home Owners' Association (HOA) or Property Owners Association (POA): Y N 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-2 Additional Permits/Approvals required for the Project: AGENCY Permit required State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish and Game Code §1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement Y N State Water Resources Control Board, Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401 Water Quality Certification Y N US Army Corps of Engineers, CWA Section 404 permit Y N US Fish and Wildlife, Endangered Species Act Section 7 biological opinion Y N Statewide Construction General Permit Coverage Y N Statewide Industrial General Permit Coverage Y N Other (please list in the space below as required) 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-3 The project is a proposed multi-family planned residential development located on the northeast corner of Gerald Ford Drive and Dinah Shore Drive. The project site is currently a vacant land. The site will propose 10 multi-family buildings, uncovered parking spaces, recreational park, trash enclosure, and retention basin. Landscape will be a variety of trees, shrubs, and ground covered drought tolerant native species. The property will be phased into two (2) phases, each phase is described as follows: In phase 1, southerly along the property line, and a portion of northeast corner of the property will be constructed. The construction includes 6 multi-family buildings, uncovered parking spaces, recreational park, and 1 retention basin. The entrance will be to the northeast corner of the site, access to Technology Drive. The existing condition of the site drains from the southwest corner to the northeast corner. The building will have a roof drain system that discharges to the surface or yard drain system which eventually discharge into the retention basin #1. In phase 2, the remaining of the northwest portion of the property will be constructed. The construction includes 3 multi-family buildings, uncovered parking spaces, and 1 retention basin. The entrance will be to the northwest corner of the site, access to Dinah Shore Drive. The run off in this area will eventually discharge into the retention basin #2. Based on the Design-Phase Geotechnical Investigation Report prepared by Petra Geosciences, Inc on November 16, 2021, it is found that the soils at the site will exhibit high percolation rates at due to the sandy soil type, and the groundwater level is approximately 180 feet below existing ground surface. Based on this information a BMP relying solely on infiltration for treatment is feasible and recommended. Therefore, infiltration basins are the proposed LID BMP for this project. For the design of the infiltration basin, an infiltration rate of 9.18 in/hr with a factor of safety of 3 was used per table 1, appendix B: “Infiltration Testing” from the BMP Handbook. This infiltration rate was found based on the Design- Phase Geotechnical Investigation Report prepared by Petra Geosciences, Inc, however based on historical data the project will be using a 2 in/hr infiltration rate. The design rate used provides the required drawdown rate for the DVC within the allotted 48 hours. The maximum allowable effective depth of the basin is 5 feet. Additional testing will be performed once the basin locations have been determined to finalize the design infiltration rate during the construction document review phase of the projects. To meet the county of Riverside County Watershed Protection Program – Whitewater Watershed requirements, during the low flow design storm event (85th percentile), the site will be broken into two (2) drainage management areas (DMAs) as follows: DMA 1 consists of direct surface runoff from the southerly driveway and uncovered parking, roof drainage, landscape common area and the proposed building. The area will surface flow towards the proposed on-site grate inlet located on the northern portion of the site and also flows to a catch basin with insert filter located at the northeast corner of the project, east of Building C. The grate inlet and catch basin will capture and divert flow via a PVC storm water pipe toward the proposed infiltration basin #1 in DMA 1 for further treatment and percolation. The area South of DMA 1 is a landscape lot, it will be treated as self-treated area along the Gerald Ford Drive. DMA 2 consists of direct surface runoff from the northwest driveway and uncovered parking, roof drainage, landscape common area and the proposed building. The area will surface flow towards the proposed on-site catch basin with insert filter located west of Building L. The catch basin will capture and divert flow easterly via a PVC storm water pipe toward the proposed infiltration basin #2 in DMA 2 for further treatment and percolation. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-4 In the event of a large storm event (with rainfall depth greater than the design 85th percentile storm), storm water also be collected in the retention basins as the basins have been designed to retain up to the 100-year, 24-hour storm event. Emergency overflow beyond the basin capacity will overflow northeasterly to Technology Drive. Appendix A of this project-specific WQMP includes a complete copy of the final Conditions of Approval. Appendix B of this project-specific WQMP includes: a. A Vicinity Map identifying the project site and surrounding planning areas in sufficient detail; and b. A Site Plan for the project. The Site Plan included as part of Appendix B depicts the following project features: ◼ Location and identification of all structural BMPs, including Source Control, LID/Site Design and Treatment Control BMPs. ◼ Landscaped areas. ◼ Paved areas and intended uses (i.e., parking, outdoor work area, outdoor material storage area, sidewalks, patios, tennis courts, etc.). ◼ Number and type of structures and intended uses (i.e., buildings, tenant spaces, dwelling units, community facilities such as pools, recreation facil ities, tot lots, etc.). ◼ Infrastructure (i.e., streets, storm drains, etc.) that will revert to public agency ownership and operation. ◼ Location of existing and proposed public and private storm drainage facilities (i.e., storm drains, channels, basins, etc.), including catch basins and other inlets/outlet structures. Existing and proposed drainage facilities should be clearly differentiated. ◼ Location(s) of Receiving Waters to which the project directly or indirectly discharges. ◼ Location of points where onsite (or tributary offsite) flows exit the property/project site. ◼ Delineation of proposed drainage area boundaries, including tributary offsite areas, for each location where flows exit the project site and existing site (where existing site flows are required to be addressed). Each tributary area should be clearly denoted. ◼ Pre- and post-project topography. Appendix I is a one page form that summarizes pertinent information relative to this project - specific WQMP. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-5 II. Site Characterization Land Use Designation or Zoning: P.R.-22, Planned Residential Current Property Use: Vacant Land Proposed Property Use: Multi-family Residential Development Availability of Soils Report: Y N Note: A soils report is required if infiltration BMPs are utilized. Attach report in Appendix E. Phase 1 Site Assessment: Y N Note: If prepared, attached remediation summary and use restrictions in Appendix H. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-6 Receiving Waters for Urban Runoff from Site Receiving Waters EPA Approved 303(d) List Impairments Designated Beneficial Uses Proximity to RARE Beneficial Use Designated Receiving Waters Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel N/A FRSH, RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD ~ 14 mi Salton Sea N/A AQUA, IND, RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD ~ 34 mi 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-7 III. Pollutants of Concern Table 1. Pollutant of Concern Summary Pollutant Category Potential for Project and/or Existing Site Causing Receiving Water Impairment Bacteria/Virus Yes Animal or human fecal wastes Heavy Metals No N/A Nutrients Yes Fertilizers and eroded soil Toxic Organic Compounds No N/A Sediment/Turbidity Yes Landscape area Trash & Debris Yes Household waste Oil & Grease Yes Uncovered parking areas Other (specify pollutant): Other (specify pollutant): 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-8 Note: The proposed basins will retain up to the 100-year, 24-hour therefore there is no discharge expected from the project in the proposed conditions during the 2- and 10-year storm events. IV. Hydrologic Conditions of Concern Local Jurisdiction Requires On-Site Retention of Urban Runoff: Yes The project will be required to retain urban runoff onsite in conformance with local ordinance (See Table 6 of the WQMP Guidance document, "Local Land use Authorities Requiring Onsite Retention of Stormwater"). This section does not need to be completed; however, retention facility design details and sizing calculations must be included in Appendix F. No This section must be completed. This Project meets the following condition: Condition A: 1) Runoff from the Project is discharged directly to a publicly-owned, operated and maintained MS4 or engineered and maintained channel, 2) the discharge is in full compliance with local land use authority requirements for connections and discharges to the MS4 (including both quality and quantity requirements), 3) the discharge would not significantly impact stream habitat in proximate Receiving Waters, and 4) the discharge is authorized by the local land use authority. Condition B: The project disturbs less than 1 acre and is not part of a larger common plan of development that exceeds 1 acre of disturbance. The disturbed area calculation must include all disturbances associated with larger plans of development. Condition C: The project's runoff flow rate, volume, velocity and duration for the post-development condition do not exceed the pre-development condition for the 2- year, 24-hour and 10-year 24-hour rainfall events. This condition can be achieved by, where applicable, complying with the local land use authority's on-site retention ordinance, or minimizing impervious area on a site and incorporating other Site- Design BMP concepts and LID/Site Design BMPs that assure non-exceedance of pre-development conditions. This condition must be substantiated by hydrologic modeling methods acceptable to the local land use authority. None: Refer to Section 3.4 of the Whitewater River Region WQMP Guidance document for additional requirements. Supporting engineering studies, calculations, and reports are included in Appendix C. 2 year – 24 hour 10 year – 24 hour Precondition Post-condition Precondition Post-condition Discharge (cfs) 0.164 0 0.365 0 Velocity (fps) 0.42 0 0.52 0 Volume (cubic feet) 4,451 0 9,927 0 Duration (minutes) - - - - 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-9 V. Best Management Practices This project implements Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address the Pollutants of Concern that may potentially be generated from the use of the Project site. These BMPs have been selected and implemented to comply with Section 3.5 of the WQMP Guidance document, and consist of Site Design BMP concepts, Source Control, LID/Site Design and, if/where necessary, Treatment Control BMPs as described herein. V.1 SITE DESIGN BMP CONCEPTS, LID/SITE DESIGN AND TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS Local Jurisdiction Requires On-Site Retention of Urban Runoff: Yes The project will be required to retain Urban Runoff onsite in conformance with local ordinance (See Table 6 of the WQMP Guidance document, "Local Land use Authorities Requiring Onsite Retention of Stormwater). The LID/Site Design measurable goal has thus been met (100%), and Sections V.1.A and V.1.B do not need to be completed; however, retention facility design details and sizing calculations must be included in Appendix F, and '100%' should be entered into Column 3 of Table 6 below. No Section V.1 must be completed. This section of the Project-Specific WQMP documents the LID/Site Design BMPs and, if/where necessary, the Treatment Control BMPs that will be implemented on the project to meet the requirements detailed within Section 3.5.1 of the WQMP Guidance document. Section 3.5.1 includes requirements to implement Site Design Concepts and BMPs, and includes requirements to address Pollutants of Concern with BMPs. Further, sub-section 3.5.1.1 specifically requires that Pollutants of Concern be addressed with LID/Site Design BMPs to the extent feasible. LID/Site Design BMPs are those BMPs listed within Table 2 below which promote retention and/or feature a natural treatment mechanism; off-site and regionally-based BMPs are also LID/Site Design BMPs, and therefore count towards the measurable goal, if they fit these criteria. This project incorporates LID/Site Design BMPs to fully address the Treatment Control BMP requirement where and to the extent feasible. If and where it has been acceptably demonstrated to the local land use authority that it is infeasible to fully meet this requirement with LID/Site Design BMPs, Section V.1.B (below) includes a description of the conventional Treatment Control BMPs that will be substituted to meet the same requirements. In addressing Pollutants of Concern, BMPs are selected using Table 2 below. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-10 Table 2. BMP Selection Matrix Based Upon Pollutant of Concern Removal Efficiency (1) (Sources: Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District Design Handbook for Low Impact Development Best Management Pract ices, dated September 2011, the Orange County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans, dated May 19, 2011, and the Caltrans Treatment BMP Technology Report, dated April 2010 and April 2008) Pollutant of Concern Landscape Swale2, 3 Landscape Strip2, 3 Biofiltration (with underdrain)2, 3 Extended Detention Basin2 Sand Filter Basin2 Infiltration Basin2 Infiltration Trench2 Permeable Pavement2 Bioretention (w/o underdrain)2, 3 Other BMPs Including Proprietary BMPs4, 6 Sediment & Turbidity M M H M H H H H H Varies by Product5 Nutrients L/M L/M M L/M L/M H H H H Toxic Organic Compounds M/H M/H M/H L L/M H H H H Trash & Debris L L H H H H H L H Bacteria & Viruses (also: Pathogens) L M H L M H H H H Oil & Grease M M H M H H H H H Heavy Metals M M/H M/H L/M M H H H H Abbreviations: L: Low removal efficiency M: Medium removal efficiency H: High removal efficiency Notes: (1) Periodic performance assessment and updating of the guidance provided by this table may be necessary. (2) Expected performance when designed in accordance with the most current edition of the document, "Riverside County, Whitewater River Region Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice Design Handbook". (3) Performance dependent upon design which includes implementation of thick vegetative cover. Local water conservation and/or landscaping requirements should be considered; approval is based on the discretion of the local land use authority. (4) Includes proprietary stormwater treatment devices as listed in the CASQA Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbooks, other stormwater treatment BMPs not specifically listed in this WQMP (including proprietary filters, hydrodynamic separators, inserts, etc.), or newly developed/emerging stormwater treatment technologies. (5) Expected performance should be based on evaluat ion of unit processes provided by BMP and available testing data. Approval is based on the discretion of the local land use authority. (6) When used for primary treatment as opposed to pre-treatment, requires site-specific approval by the local land use authority. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-11 V.1.A SITE DESIGN BMP CONCEPTS AND LID/SITE DESIGN BMPS This section documents the Site Design BMP concepts and LID/Site Design BMPs that will be implemented on this project to comply with the requirements detailed in Section 3.5.1 of the WQMP Guidance document. • Table 3 herein documents the implementation of the Site Design BMP Concepts described in sub-sections 3.5.1.3 and 3.5.1.4. • Table 4 herein documents the extent to which this project has implemented the LID/Site Design goals described in sub-section 3.5.1.1. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-12 Table 3. Implementation of Site Design BMP Concepts Included Brief Reason for BMPs Indicated as No or N/A Design Concept Technique Specific BMP Yes No N/A Site Design BMP Concept 1 Minimize Urban Runoff, Minimize Impervious Footprint, and Conserve Natural Areas (See WQMP Section 3.5.1.3) Conserve natural areas by concentrating or clustering development on the least environmentally sensitive portions of a site while leaving the remaining land in a natural, undisturbed condition. New development areas are concentrated and clustered development. Conserve natural areas by incorporating the goals of the Multi- Species Habitat Conservation Plan or other natural resource plans. The site is currently an vacant land and does not have any natural areas, current zoning of planned residential. Preserve natural drainage features and natural depressional storage areas on the site. Natural drainage is preserved on site. Maximize canopy interception and water conservation by preserving existing native trees and shrubs, and planting additional native or drought tolerant trees and large shrubs. Additional native or drought tolerant plans are proposed in landscape plan. Use natural drainage systems. The project follows natural drainage slope. Where applicable, incorporate Self-Treating Areas Self-treating areas are provided on the South of DMA 1. Where applicable, incorporate Self-Retaining Areas Self-retaining areas are provided on the South of DMA 1, and on the infiltration/retention basin. Increase the building floor to area ratio (i.e., number of stories above or below ground). 2 and 3 stories buildings are proposed on site. Construct streets, sidewalks and parking lot aisles to minimum widths necessary, provided that public safety and a walkable environment for pedestrians are not compromised. All streets, sidewalks, parking lot aisles are design to meet minimum width. Reduce widths of streets where off-street parking is available. Off-street parking is not available on site. Minimize the use of impervious surfaces, such as decorative concrete, in the landscape design. Decorative pavers are proposed in landscape plan. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-13 Table 3. Site Design BMP Concepts (continued) Included Brief Reason for Each BMP Indicated as No or N/A Design Concept Technique Specific BMP Yes No N/A Site Design BMP Concept 2 Minimize Directly Connected Impervious Area (See WQMP Section 3.5.1.4) Design residential and commercial sites to contain and infiltrate roof runoff, or direct roof runoff to landscaped swales or buffer areas. All drainage on site is directed to the infiltration basin. Drain impervious sidewalks, walkways, trails, and patios into adjacent landscaping. All proposed impervious sidewalks are cross slope at a minimum of 2% to the adjacent landscaping. Incorporate landscaped buffer areas between sidewalks and streets. Landscaped buffer areas are proposed between sidewalks, streets, and parking. Use natural or landscaped drainage swales in lieu of underground piping or imperviously lined swales. Landscaped drainage swales are proposed around the project. Where soil conditions are suitable, use perforated pipe or gravel filtration pits for low flow infiltration. Low flow infiltration in infiltration basin is sufficient. Maximize the permeable area by constructing walkways, trails, patios, overflow parking, alleys, driveways, low-traffic streets, and other low- traffic areas with open-jointed paving materials or permeable surfaces such as pervious concrete, porous asphalt, unit pavers, and granular materials. All walkways are proposed with open joined paving materials. Use one or more of the following: Rural swale system: street sheet flows to landscaped swale or gravel shoulder, curbs used at street corners, and culverts used under driveways and street crossings. The site is within a planned residential. Rural swale system is not a practical BMP for implementation. Urban curb/swale system: street slopes to curb; periodic swale inlets drain to landscaped swale or biofilter. The site will incorporate a dual drainage system as part of the LID BMP design. Dual drainage system: first flush captured in street catch basins and discharged to adjacent vegetated swale or gravel shoulder; high flows connect directly to MS4s. Project is designed to captured first flush in street catch basin, and emergency overflow is designed to Technology Drive. Use one or more of the following for design of driveways and private residential parking areas: Design driveways with shared access, flared (single lane at street), or wheel strips (paving only under the tires). All driveways are designed to be shared access. Uncovered temporary or guest parking on residential lots paved with a permeable surface, or designed to drain into landscaping. Uncovered parking lots will be treated in the proposed infiltration basin. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-14 Table 3. Site Design BMP Concepts (continued) Included Brief Reason for Each BMP Indicated as No or N/A Design Concept Technique Specific BMP Yes No N/A Use one or more of the following for design of parking areas: Where landscaping is proposed in parking areas, incorporate parking area landscaping into the drainage design. The drainage in the parking area landscape is designed to capture by the drainage design. Overflow parking (parking stalls provided in excess of the Permittee 's minimum parking requirements) may be constructed with permeable pavement. The site has been designed with the minimum required of parking stalls to maximize the site’s pervious area. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-15 Project Site Design BMP Concepts: Infiltration Basin Alternative Project Site Design BMP Concepts: N/A 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-16 Table 4. LID/Site Design BMPs Meeting the LID/Site Design Measurable Goal (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) DRAINAGE SUB-AREA ID OR NO. LID/SITE DESIGN BMP TYPE* POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN WITHIN DRAINAGE SUB- AREA POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS WITHIN SUB-AREA CAUSING RECEIVING WATER IMPAIRMENTS EFFECTIVENESS OF LID/SITE DESIGN BMP AT ADDRESSING IDENTIFIED POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS BMP MEETS WHICH DESIGN CRITERIA? TOTAL AREA WITHIN DRAINAGE SUB-AREA (See Table 2) (Refer to Table 1) (Refer to Table 1) (U, L, M, H/M, H; see Table 2) (Identify as VBMP OR QBMP) (Nearest 0.1 acre) DMA 1 INFILTRATION BASIN BACTERIA/VIRUS, NUTRIENTS, SEDIMENT/TURBID ITY, TRASH & DEBRIS, OIL & GREASE ANIMAL/HUMAN FECAL WASTES, FERTILIZERS AND ERODED SOIL, LANDSCAPE AREA, HOUSEHOLD WASTE, UNCOVERED PARKING AREAS H VBMP 5.9 ACRE DMA 2 INFILTRATION BASIN BACTERIA/VIRUS, NUTRIENTS, SEDIMENT/TURBID ITY, TRASH & DEBRIS, OIL & GREASE ANIMAL/HUMAN FECAL WASTES, FERTILIZERS AND ERODED SOIL, LANDSCAPE AREA, HOUSEHOLD WASTE, UNCOVERED PARKING AREAS H VBMP 4.5 ACRE TOTAL PROJECT AREA TREATED WITH LID/SITE DESIGN BMPs (NEAREST 0.1 ACRE) 10.4 ACRE * LID/Site Design BMPs listed in this table are those that completely address the 'Treatment Control BMP requirement' for their drainage sub-area. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-17 Justification of infeasibility for sub-areas not addressed with LID/Site Design BMPs N/A V.1.B TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS Conventional Treatment Control BMPs shall be implemented to address the project's Pollutants of Concern as required in WQMP Section 3.5.1 where, and to the extent that, Section V.1.A has demonstrated that it is infeasible to meet these requirements through implementation of LID/Site Design BMPs. The LID/Site Design BMPs described in Section V.1.A of this project-specific WQMP completely address the 'Treatment Control BMP requirement' for the entire project site (and where applicable, entire existing site) as required in Section 3.5.1.1 of the WQMP Guidance document. Supporting documentation for the sizing of these LID/Site Design BMPs is included in Appendix F. *Section V.1.B does not need to be completed. The LID/Site Design BMPs described in Section V.1.A of this project-specific WQMP do NOT completely address the 'Treatment Control BMP requirement' for the entire project site (or where applicable, entire existing site) as required in Section 3.5.1.1 of the WQMP. *Section V.1.B must be completed. The Treatment Control BMPs identified in this section are selected, sized and implemented to treat the design criteria of VBMP and/or QBMP for all project (and if required, existing site) drainage sub-areas which were not fully addressed using LID/Site Design BMPs. Supporting documentation for the sizing of these Treatment Control BMPs is included in Appendix F. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-18 Table 5: Treatment Control BMP Summary (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) DRAINAGE SUB-AREA ID OR NO. TREATMENT CONTROL BMP TYPE* POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN WITHIN DRAINAGE SUB-AREA POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS WITHIN SUB-AREA CAUSING RECEIVING WATER IMPAIRMENTS EFFECTIVENESS OF TREATMENT CONTROL BMP AT ADDRESSING IDENTIFIED POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS BMP MEETS WHICH DESIGN CRITERIA? TOTAL AREA WITHIN DRAINAGE SUB-AREA (See Table 2) (Refer to Table 1) (Refer to Table 1) (U, L, M, H/M, H; see Table 2) (Identify as VBMP OR QBMP) (Nearest 0.1 acre) TOTAL PROJECT AREA TREATED WITH TREATMENT CONTROL BMPs (NEAREST 0.1 ACRE) - 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-19 V.1.C MEASURABLE GOAL SUMMARY This section documents the extent to which this project has met the measurable goal described in WQMP Section 3.5.1.1 of addressing 100% of the project's 'Treatment Control BMP requirement' with LID/Site Design BMPs. Projects required to retain Urban Runoff onsite in conformance with local ordinance are considered to have met the measurable goal; for these instances, '100%' is entered into Column 3 of the Table. Table 6: Measurable Goal Summary (1) (2) (3) Total Area Treated with LID/Site Design BMPs Total Area Treated with Treatment Control BMPs % of Treatment Control BMP Requirement addressed with LID/Site Design BMPs (Last row of Table 4) (Last row of Table 5) 10.4 acre - 100% 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-20 V.2 SOURCE CONTROL BMPS This section identifies and describes the Source Control BMPs applicable and implemented on this project. Table 7. Source Control BMPs BMP Name Check One If not applicable, state brief reason Included Not Applicable Non-Structural Source Control BMPs Education for Property Owners, Operators, Tenants, Occupants, or Employees Activity Restrictions Irrigation System and Landscape Maintenance Common Area Litter Control Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots Drainage Facility Inspection and Maintenance Structural Source Control BMPs Storm Drain Inlet Stenciling and Signage Landscape and Irrigation System Design Protect Slopes and Channels The site does not contain any existing natural / engineered slopes that need to be maintained / protected as part of this development. Provide Community Car Wash Racks None proposed as part of development. Properly Design*: Fueling Areas None proposed as part of development. Air/Water Supply Area Drainage None proposed as part of development. Trash Storage Areas Loading Docks None proposed as part of development. Maintenance Bays None proposed as part of development. Vehicle and Equipment Wash Areas None proposed as part of development. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-21 Outdoor Material Storage Areas None proposed as part of development. Outdoor Work Areas or Processing Areas None proposed as part of development. Provide Wash Water Controls for Food Preparation Areas *Details demonstrating proper design must be included in Appendix F. Appendix D includes copies of the educational materials (described in Section 3.5.2.1 of the WQMP Guidance document) that will be used in implementing this project-specific WQMP. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-22 V.3 EQUIVALENT TREATMENT CONTROL BMP ALTERNATIVES Not applicable. The existing retention basin located at the south end of the site previously constructed for high flow drainage attenuation as part of the shopping center development will remain in place. The proposed site is expected to decrease stormwater runoff as a direct result in the increase of pervious area at the site. Therefore it is reasonable to assume the off -site retention basin is adequately sized to convey stormwater runoff from the proposed development V.4 REGIONALLY-BASED BMPS Not applicable 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-23 VI. Operation and Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs Appendix G of this project-specific WQMP includes copies of CC&Rs, Covenant and Agreements, BMP Maintenance Agreement and/or other mechanisms used to ensure the ongoing operation, maintenance, funding, transfer and implementation of the project-specific WQMP requirements. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA 12/17/2021 1-24 Funding Project and maintenance of all BMPs shall be incorporated into the ongoing site maintenance budget for the property owner. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA Appendix A Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Resolution TBD Dated TBD 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA Appendix B Vicinity Map, WQMP Site Plan, and Receiving Waters Map GERALD FORD DR.TECHNOLOGY DR.DINAH SHORE DR.PHASE I PHASE I I 1 5.91 2 4.52 NORTH STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMP NOTES NON-STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMP NOTES · · · · · · STRUCTURAL BMP NOTES © E NRI EENGIANOI LA SEFSRPD EERRSIGETNo. C57667 O OIFFCAL RT S ATEO N PROJECT LOCATION LEGEND X XXX TREATMENT CONTROL BMP NOTES 12/20/21, 2:38 PM Water Quality Planning Tool https://svctenvims.dot.ca.gov/wqpt/wqpt.aspx 1/4 Information Hover over a layer name for a description. Additional information, tables, coordinates, and links are below the map. Help Caltrans Water Quality Planning Tool The Water Quality Planning Tool was created to help planners and designers comply with environmental permits. It uses a map interface to find information based on a project’s location. This application is being updated for digital accessibility and will continue to function while updates are in progress. Watershed Information CALWATER WATERSHED Hydrologic Unit WHITEWATER Hydrologic Area Coachella Hydrologic Sub-Area #719.47 Hydrologic Sub-Area Name Indio Planning Watershed 10719470000 HSA Area (acres)540057 Latitude, Longitude 33.7877, -116.3619 WATERSHED BOUNDARY DATASET Watershed Upper Whitewater River Subwatershed Town of Thousand Palms- Whitewater River Hydrologic Unit Code 181002010602 Average Annual Precipitation (inches)3.72 Layers 303(d) List and TMDLs 2014-2016 (Legend) Areas of Special Biological Significance Arid and Semi-Arid Regions Caltrans Districts Caltrans Facilities Caltrans Tier 1 Monitoring Sites Calwater Watersheds Coastal Zone Counties Geologic Map (L d) Search Box Report a map errorMap data ©2021 Google, INEGI 12/20/21, 2:38 PM Water Quality Planning Tool https://svctenvims.dot.ca.gov/wqpt/wqpt.aspx 2/4 TMDLs & 303(d) Listed Water Bodies (2014 - 2016 List) Key: Water body on 303(d) list Water body with a TMDL Name Pollutant Size Status Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) 24.75 Miles TMDL required Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel Dieldrin 24.75 Miles TMDL required Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel Indicator Bacteria 24.75 Miles Being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) 24.75 Miles TMDL required Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) 24.75 Miles TMDL required Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel Toxaphene 24.75 Miles TMDL required Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel Toxicity 24.75 Miles TMDL required Salton Sea Arsenic 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Salton Sea Chloride 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Salton Sea Chlorpyrifos 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Salton Sea DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Salton Sea Enterococcus 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Salton Sea Low Dissolved Oxygen 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Salton Sea Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Salton Sea Nutrients 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Salton Sea Salinity 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Salton Sea Toxicity 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Water Quality Objectives The following waterbodies are in or near HSA 719.47. Click on the waterbody to get information on water quality objectives and beneficial uses Waterbody Name Beneficial Uses Sediment-Sensitive Waterbody All American Canal System AGR, AQUA, FRSH, GWR, IND, MUN, POW, RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Andreas Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Azalea Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Banner Creek AGR, GWR, IND, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Bautista Creek - Headwaters to Debris Dam AGR, COLD, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WILD False Black Mountain Stream - Tributaries to Black Mountain Stream Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Black Mountain Stream - Tributary to San Jacinto River AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Boundary Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Brown Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Chino Canyon Creek GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Coachella Canal AGR, GWR, MUN, RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Coachella Valley Drains FRSH, RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel 4 FRSH, RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Coyote Creek GWR, MUN, RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Coyote Creek (within Santa Ana Regional boundary) - San Gabriel River Drainage MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Crystal Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Dutch Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Falls Creek COLD, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WILD False Finney Lake RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Fuller Mill Creek AGR, COLD, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WILD False Fulmore, Lake ALL False Grapevine Canyon Creek GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Hathaway Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Haughtelin Lake AGR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Hemet, Lake ALL False Hurkey Stream - Tributaries to Black Hurkey Stream AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Indian Hurkey Stream - Trbutary to San Jacinto River AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False 12/20/21, 2:38 PM Water Quality Planning Tool https://svctenvims.dot.ca.gov/wqpt/wqpt.aspx 3/4 Indian Stream - Tributaries to Black Indian Stream AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Juaro Canyon Streams - Tributaries to Black Juaro Canyon Streams AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Juaro Canyon Streams - Tributary to San Jacinto River AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Lake Cahuilla AGR, COLD, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Lake Fulmor - San Jacinto River Basin AGR, COLD, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Lake Hemet - San Jacinto River Basin AGR, COLD, GWR, MUN, POW, REC1, REC2, SPWN, WARM, WILD False Logan Stream - Tributaries to Logan Stream AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Logan Stream - Tributary to San Jacinto River AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Millard Canyon Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False MWD Aqueduct and Associated Reservoirs GWR, MUN, POW, REC1, WARM, WILD False Offshore Zone - Water between Nearshore Zone and Limit of State Waters COMM, IND, MAR, MUN, NAV, RARE, REC1, REC2, SPWN, WILD False Palm Canyon Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Poppet Stream - Tributaries to Black Poppet Stream AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Poppet Stream - Tributary to San Jacinto River AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Potrero Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Protrero Creeks - Tributaries to Black Protrero Creeks AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Protrero Creeks - Tributary to San Jacinto River AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Salt Creek FRSH, GWR, RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Salton Sea AQUA, IND, RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False San Jacinto River ALL False San Jacinto River Reach 5 - North-South Mid-Section Line, T4S/R1W-S8, to Confluence with Poppet Cr GWR, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False San Jacinto River Reach 5 - North-South Mid-Section Line, T4S/R1W-S8, to Confluence with Poppet Cr AGR False San Jacinto River Reach 6 - Popper Creek to Cranston Bridge AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False San Jacinto River Reach 7 - Cranston Bridge to Lake Hemet AGR, COLD, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WILD False Snow Creek COLD, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WILD False Stone Creek AGR, COLD, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WILD False Strawberry Creek and San Jacinto River, North Fork AGR, COLD, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WILD False Sunbeam Lake AGR, COLD, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Tahquitz Creek COLD, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WILD False Thousand Palms Canyon Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Tubb Canyon Creek GWR, MUN, RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Tule Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Twin Pines Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Walker Creek AGR, GWR, MUN, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False West Pond MUN, RARE, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Whitewater River 10 AGR, COLD, GWR, MUN, POW, REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD False Caltrans Facilities MAINTENANCE STATIONS Name Address Indio 83-997 Indio Blvd FREEWAYS AND HIGHWAYS Route Length (miles) 10 27.1 74 22.7 86 42.9 111 50.2 195 7.3 PARK & RIDE LOTS Name District County Route Post Mile REST AREAS Name District County Route Post Mile WHITEWATER 8 RIV 10 26.200 12/20/21, 2:38 PM Water Quality Planning Tool https://svctenvims.dot.ca.gov/wqpt/wqpt.aspx 4/4 WHITEWATER 8 RIV 10 26.200 Additional Information Help for the Water Quality Planning Tool TMDL information from the SWRCB Construction General Permit information from the SWRCB Groundwater Depth information from the California Department of Water Resouces R Factor erosivity calculations 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA Appendix C Supporting Detail Related to Hydrologic Conditions of Concern 12/20/21, 2:45 PM Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel Details https://svctenvims.dot.ca.gov/wqpt/WB303d.aspx?WB=CAR7194700019990205111415 1/1 Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel TMDLS & 303(D) LIST (2014 - 2016) FOR COACHELLA VALLEY STORM WATER CHANNEL Key: Pollutant on 303(d) list Pollutant with a TMDL Pollutant Source Size Status Comments DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) Source Unknown 24.75 Miles TMDL required This listing for DDT only applies to a 2 mile area of the Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel from Lincoln Street to the Salton Sea. Dieldrin Source Unknown 24.75 Miles TMDL required This listing for Dieldrin only applies to a 2 mile area of the Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel from Lincoln Street to the Salton Sea. Indicator Bacteria Source Unknown 24.75 Miles Being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL This listing for pathogens only applies to a 17 mile area of the Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel from Dillion Road to the Salton Sea. Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) Source Unknown 24.75 Miles TMDL required PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) Source Unknown 24.75 Miles TMDL required This listing for PCBs only applies to a 2 mile area of the Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel from Lincoln Street to the Salton Sea. Toxaphene Source Unknown 24.75 Miles TMDL required This listing for toxaphene only applies to a 2 mile area of the Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel from Lincoln Street to the Salton Sea. Toxicity Source Unknown 24.75 Miles TMDL required Report a map errorImagery ©2021 TerraMetrics 12/20/21, 2:43 PM Salton Sea Details https://svctenvims.dot.ca.gov/wqpt/WB303d.aspx?WB=CAS7280000019990205133504 1/1 Salton Sea TMDLS & 303(D) LIST (2014 - 2016) FOR SALTON SEA Key: Pollutant on 303(d) list Pollutant with a TMDL Pollutant Source Size Status Comments Arsenic Source Unknown 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Chloride Source Unknown 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Chlorpyrifos Source Unknown 233044.81 Acres TMDL required DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) Source Unknown 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Enterococcus Source Unknown 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Low Dissolved Oxygen Source Unknown 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) Source Unknown 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Nutrients Source Unknown 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Salinity Source Unknown 233044.81 Acres TMDL required TMDL development will not be effective in addressing this problem, which will require an engineering solution with federal, local, and state cooperation. Toxicity Source Unknown 233044.81 Acres TMDL required Report a map errorImagery ©2021 TerraMetrics 1 REGION WATER BODY NAME POLLUTANT POLLUTANT CATEGORY POTENTIAL SOURCES SOURCE CATEGORY 7 Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)Pesticides Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel Dieldrin Pesticides Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)Other Organics Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel Toxaphene Pesticides Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Salton Sea Arsenic Metals/Metalloids Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Salton Sea Chlorpyrifos Pesticides Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Salton Sea DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)Pesticides Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Salton Sea Enterococcus Fecal Indicator Bacteria Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Salton Sea Nutrients Nutrients Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Salton Sea Salinity Salinity Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel Indicator Bacteria Fecal Indicator Bacteria Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)Nutrients Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel Toxicity Toxicity Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Salton Sea Chloride Salinity Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Salton Sea Low Dissolved Oxygen Nutrients Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Salton Sea Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)Nutrients Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 7 Salton Sea Toxicity Toxicity Source Unknown A SOURCE UNKNOWN 2014_2016_303d_SWRCB_Approved_List_with_sources_final.xls Palm Villas at Millenium Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report Parcel 8 – Parcel Map No. 36792 P MB 239/9-15 NE corner of Gerald Ford Dr and Dinah Shore Dr Palm Desert, CA 92211 Prepared for: Palm Communities 100 Pacifica, Suite 203 Irvine, CA 92618 Prepared By: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 3880 Lemon Street, Suite 420 Riverside, CA 92501 June 2022 Palm Villas at Millenium Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report INTRODUCTION The scope of the Project is to complete a preliminary hydrology and hydraulic analysis for the storm drain improvements associated with the proposed residential development in Palm Desert, CA. The Project is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Gerald Ford Dr, and Dinah Shore Dr. The Project consist of a multi-family planned residential development. The site will propose 10 multi-family buildings, uncovered parking spaces, recreational park, trash enclosure, utility improvements, and retention basins . The total project limits of disturbance makes up approximately 10.4 acres. Figure 1: Project Location P a g e | 2 HYDR OLOG Y The preliminary hydrology and hydraulic analyses were completed in accordance with the Riverside County Hydrology Manual. A rational method analysis in accordance with the Manual was completed to calculate the peak discharges for proposed project conditions. Per City standards, proposed developments are required to retain each storm event up to the 100 - year, 24-hour, therefore an existing conditions analysis was not completed for this preliminary analysis. A review of the Design-Phase Geotechnical Investigation Reports dated November 16, 2021 prepared by Petra Geosciences, Inc found that subsurface soils at the site consisted of hydrologic soil group A which have high infiltration capacities . Infiltration rates for the site of 9.18 in/hr were calculated using a factor of s afety of 3. Based on historical data and guidance from the City of Palm Desert, the project will be using a 2 in/hr infiltration rate. Per the Riverside County Hydrology Manual, antecedent moisture condition (AMC) of 2 was used for the 100-year storm event. Land use for proposed drainage areas were selected based on actual imperviousness for each drainage area. Storm depths from NOAA 14 were used for the analyses. The Advance Engineering Software (AES) Hydrosoft package was used to complete the rational me thod analysis. Proposed Conditions The project improvements include 10 multi-family buildings, uncovered parking spaces, recreational park, trash enclosure, utility improvements, and retention basins . Under proposed conditions, two drainage areas (A and B) have been proposed . Drainage area A consists of the southern lots, and driveway, northeast parking lot, laundry and community buildings, and hardscape/landscape improvements on the east corner of th e site. Drainage area A will discharge to the proposed retention basin #1 through surface plow and pipe inlets. Drainage area B consists of the western proposed driveway and street connection to Dinah Shore Dr., buildings, hardscape, and landscape on the n orthwest corner of the property, and the proposed playground. Drainage area B will discharge to the retention basin #2 via sheet flow and pipe inlets. As-builts for the existing storm drain can be found in Appendix C. Rational peak flow rates were used to size pipes. Table 1 includes a summary of the proposed conditions peak flow rate calculations. Refer to Appendix A for full calculations. P a g e | 3 Table 1 – Proposed Conditions Summary Drainage Area Area (ac) Imperviousness (%) Time of Concentration (min) 100-year, 24- hour flow (cfs) A 5.91 73 15 11.94 B 4.52 92 13 10.24 Total 10.43 81 - 22.18 HYDR AULICS The project proposes to retain up to the 100 -year, 24-hour storm event in each basin. The unit hydrograph for each drainage area was developed using CivilD software using the Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method. Each hydrograph was then import ed to a Pondpack model to complete the routing calculations. Geometry of each basin was developed based on preliminary grading information. The infiltration rate per the historical data was also utilized in the model to account for the volume losses due to infiltration during the storm event. Table 2 includes a summary of the proposed basin sizing. Refer to Appendix B for full calculations. Table 2 – Detention Summary Drainage Area Required Basin Volume (cf) Maximum basin storage (cf) 100-year Water Surface Elevation (ft) 100-year overflow (cfs) A 3,433 39,994 170.8 0 B 2,625 30,093 172.2 0 CONCLUSION As a result of the preliminary hydrology and hydraulic analysis, the proposed Project demonstrates compliance with the following: 1. Sizing of the Project retention systems to the extent necessary to retain all flows up to the 100-year, 24-hour storm event. Additional analyses will be required during final design for the project and will include: 1. Catch basin capacity calculations 2. Storm drain capacity calculations 3. Velocity dissipation calculations Palm Villas at Milleniu m Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report APPENDIX A : P ROPOSED RATIONAL METHOD CALCULATIONS GERALD FORD DR.TECHNOLOGY DR.DINAH SHORE DR.PHASE I PHASE I I A 5.91 B 4.52 NORTH © E NRI EENGIANOI LA SEFSRPD EERRSIGETNo. C57667 O OIFFCAL RT S ATEO N PROJECT LOCATION LEGEND X XXX ____________________________________________________________________________ **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM BASED ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFC&WCD) 1978 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2011 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) (Rational Tabling Version 18.0) Release Date: 07/01/2011 License ID 1499 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * Palm Villas at Millenium * * 100 yr, 24 hr storm Proposed Conditions * * Kimley-Horn * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: MILLPROP.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 14:54 12/16/2021 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 8.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 10-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.530 10-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 0.695 100-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.230 100-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.470 SLOPE OF 10-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE = 0.4404112 SLOPE OF 100-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE = 0.4393556 COMPUTED RAINFALL INTENSITY DATA: STORM EVENT = 100.00 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.470 SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE = 0.4394 RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: COMPUTE CONFLUENCE VALUES ACCORDING TO RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL AND IGNORE OTHER CONFLUENCE COMBINATIONS FOR DOWNSTREAM ANALYSES *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ============================================================================ ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS CONDOMINIUM TC = K*[(LENGTH**3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**.2 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 725.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 178.70 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 173.40 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 5.30 TC = 0.359*[( 725.00**3)/( 5.30)]**.2 = 13.387 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.841 CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7427 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A" SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.24 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.85 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.24 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 4.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ============================================================================ ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS CONDOMINIUM TC = K*[(LENGTH**3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**.2 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 962.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 178.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 171.40 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 7.10 TC = 0.359*[( 962.00**3)/( 7.10)]**.2 = 14.962 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.706 CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7389 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A" SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.94 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.97 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.94 ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 6.0 TC(MIN.) = 14.96 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 11.94 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS Palm Villas at Millenium Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report APPENDIX B: R ETENTION CALCULATIONS U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 2018, Version 9.0 Study date 12/16/21 File: MILL124100.out ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC & WCD Manual date - April 1978 Program License Serial Number 6443 --------------------------------------------------------------------- English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format --------------------------------------------------------------------- Palm Villas at Millenium 100-Year, 24-Hour Proposed Unit Hydrograph Kimley-Horn -------------------------------------------------------------------- Drainage Area = 4.85(Ac.) = 0.008 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area for Depth-Area Areal Adjustment = 4.85(Ac.) = 0.008 Sq. Mi. USER Entry of lag time in hours Lag time = 0.178 Hr. Lag time = 10.68 Min. 25% of lag time = 2.67 Min. 40% of lag time = 4.27 Min. Unit time = 5.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(s) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.)[1] Rainfall(In)[2] Weighting[1*2] 4.85 1.13 5.48 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.)[1] Rainfall(In)[2] Weighting[1*2] 4.85 4.51 21.87 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 100.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.130(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.510(In) Point rain (area averaged) = 4.510(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 % Adjusted average point rain = 4.510(In) Sub-Area Data: Area(Ac.) Runoff Index Impervious % 4.850 32.00 0.700 Total Area Entered = 4.85(Ac.) RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F AMC2 AMC-3 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec.) (In/Hr) 32.0 52.0 0.552 0.700 0.204 1.000 0.204 Sum (F) = 0.204 Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.204 Minimum soil loss rate ((In/Hr)) = 0.102 (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.340 --------------------------------------------------------------------- U n i t H y d r o g r a p h DESERT S-Curve -------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Hydrograph Data --------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit time period Time % of lag Distribution Unit Hydrograph (hrs) Graph % (CFS) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.083 46.816 3.554 0.174 2 0.167 93.633 23.188 1.133 3 0.250 140.449 30.745 1.503 4 0.333 187.266 14.015 0.685 5 0.417 234.082 8.124 0.397 6 0.500 280.899 5.355 0.262 7 0.583 327.715 3.899 0.191 8 0.667 374.532 2.731 0.134 9 0.750 421.348 2.149 0.105 10 0.833 468.165 1.633 0.080 11 0.917 514.981 1.268 0.062 12 1.000 561.798 0.917 0.045 13 1.083 608.614 0.575 0.028 14 1.167 655.431 0.531 0.026 15 1.250 702.247 0.561 0.027 16 1.333 749.064 0.415 0.020 17 1.417 795.880 0.340 0.017 Sum = 100.000 Sum= 4.888 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The following loss rate calculations reflect use of the minimum calculated loss rate subtracted from the Storm Rain to produce the maximum Effective Rain value Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max | Low (In/Hr) 1 0.08 0.07 0.036 ( 0.362) 0.012 0.024 2 0.17 0.07 0.036 ( 0.360) 0.012 0.024 3 0.25 0.07 0.036 ( 0.359) 0.012 0.024 4 0.33 0.10 0.054 ( 0.358) 0.018 0.036 5 0.42 0.10 0.054 ( 0.356) 0.018 0.036 6 0.50 0.10 0.054 ( 0.355) 0.018 0.036 7 0.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.353) 0.018 0.036 8 0.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.352) 0.018 0.036 9 0.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.351) 0.018 0.036 10 0.83 0.13 0.072 ( 0.349) 0.025 0.048 11 0.92 0.13 0.072 ( 0.348) 0.025 0.048 12 1.00 0.13 0.072 ( 0.347) 0.025 0.048 13 1.08 0.10 0.054 ( 0.345) 0.018 0.036 14 1.17 0.10 0.054 ( 0.344) 0.018 0.036 15 1.25 0.10 0.054 ( 0.342) 0.018 0.036 16 1.33 0.10 0.054 ( 0.341) 0.018 0.036 17 1.42 0.10 0.054 ( 0.340) 0.018 0.036 18 1.50 0.10 0.054 ( 0.338) 0.018 0.036 19 1.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.337) 0.018 0.036 20 1.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.336) 0.018 0.036 21 1.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.334) 0.018 0.036 22 1.83 0.13 0.072 ( 0.333) 0.025 0.048 23 1.92 0.13 0.072 ( 0.332) 0.025 0.048 24 2.00 0.13 0.072 ( 0.330) 0.025 0.048 25 2.08 0.13 0.072 ( 0.329) 0.025 0.048 26 2.17 0.13 0.072 ( 0.328) 0.025 0.048 27 2.25 0.13 0.072 ( 0.326) 0.025 0.048 28 2.33 0.13 0.072 ( 0.325) 0.025 0.048 29 2.42 0.13 0.072 ( 0.324) 0.025 0.048 30 2.50 0.13 0.072 ( 0.322) 0.025 0.048 31 2.58 0.17 0.090 ( 0.321) 0.031 0.060 32 2.67 0.17 0.090 ( 0.320) 0.031 0.060 33 2.75 0.17 0.090 ( 0.318) 0.031 0.060 34 2.83 0.17 0.090 ( 0.317) 0.031 0.060 35 2.92 0.17 0.090 ( 0.316) 0.031 0.060 36 3.00 0.17 0.090 ( 0.314) 0.031 0.060 37 3.08 0.17 0.090 ( 0.313) 0.031 0.060 38 3.17 0.17 0.090 ( 0.312) 0.031 0.060 39 3.25 0.17 0.090 ( 0.311) 0.031 0.060 40 3.33 0.17 0.090 ( 0.309) 0.031 0.060 41 3.42 0.17 0.090 ( 0.308) 0.031 0.060 42 3.50 0.17 0.090 ( 0.307) 0.031 0.060 43 3.58 0.17 0.090 ( 0.305) 0.031 0.060 44 3.67 0.17 0.090 ( 0.304) 0.031 0.060 45 3.75 0.17 0.090 ( 0.303) 0.031 0.060 46 3.83 0.20 0.108 ( 0.302) 0.037 0.071 47 3.92 0.20 0.108 ( 0.300) 0.037 0.071 48 4.00 0.20 0.108 ( 0.299) 0.037 0.071 49 4.08 0.20 0.108 ( 0.298) 0.037 0.071 50 4.17 0.20 0.108 ( 0.296) 0.037 0.071 51 4.25 0.20 0.108 ( 0.295) 0.037 0.071 52 4.33 0.23 0.126 ( 0.294) 0.043 0.083 53 4.42 0.23 0.126 ( 0.293) 0.043 0.083 54 4.50 0.23 0.126 ( 0.291) 0.043 0.083 55 4.58 0.23 0.126 ( 0.290) 0.043 0.083 56 4.67 0.23 0.126 ( 0.289) 0.043 0.083 57 4.75 0.23 0.126 ( 0.288) 0.043 0.083 58 4.83 0.27 0.144 ( 0.286) 0.049 0.095 59 4.92 0.27 0.144 ( 0.285) 0.049 0.095 60 5.00 0.27 0.144 ( 0.284) 0.049 0.095 61 5.08 0.20 0.108 ( 0.283) 0.037 0.071 62 5.17 0.20 0.108 ( 0.282) 0.037 0.071 63 5.25 0.20 0.108 ( 0.280) 0.037 0.071 64 5.33 0.23 0.126 ( 0.279) 0.043 0.083 65 5.42 0.23 0.126 ( 0.278) 0.043 0.083 66 5.50 0.23 0.126 ( 0.277) 0.043 0.083 67 5.58 0.27 0.144 ( 0.275) 0.049 0.095 68 5.67 0.27 0.144 ( 0.274) 0.049 0.095 69 5.75 0.27 0.144 ( 0.273) 0.049 0.095 70 5.83 0.27 0.144 ( 0.272) 0.049 0.095 71 5.92 0.27 0.144 ( 0.271) 0.049 0.095 72 6.00 0.27 0.144 ( 0.269) 0.049 0.095 73 6.08 0.30 0.162 ( 0.268) 0.055 0.107 74 6.17 0.30 0.162 ( 0.267) 0.055 0.107 75 6.25 0.30 0.162 ( 0.266) 0.055 0.107 76 6.33 0.30 0.162 ( 0.265) 0.055 0.107 77 6.42 0.30 0.162 ( 0.263) 0.055 0.107 78 6.50 0.30 0.162 ( 0.262) 0.055 0.107 79 6.58 0.33 0.180 ( 0.261) 0.061 0.119 80 6.67 0.33 0.180 ( 0.260) 0.061 0.119 81 6.75 0.33 0.180 ( 0.259) 0.061 0.119 82 6.83 0.33 0.180 ( 0.258) 0.061 0.119 83 6.92 0.33 0.180 ( 0.256) 0.061 0.119 84 7.00 0.33 0.180 ( 0.255) 0.061 0.119 85 7.08 0.33 0.180 ( 0.254) 0.061 0.119 86 7.17 0.33 0.180 ( 0.253) 0.061 0.119 87 7.25 0.33 0.180 ( 0.252) 0.061 0.119 88 7.33 0.37 0.198 ( 0.251) 0.067 0.131 89 7.42 0.37 0.198 ( 0.249) 0.067 0.131 90 7.50 0.37 0.198 ( 0.248) 0.067 0.131 91 7.58 0.40 0.216 ( 0.247) 0.074 0.143 92 7.67 0.40 0.216 ( 0.246) 0.074 0.143 93 7.75 0.40 0.216 ( 0.245) 0.074 0.143 94 7.83 0.43 0.235 ( 0.244) 0.080 0.155 95 7.92 0.43 0.235 ( 0.243) 0.080 0.155 96 8.00 0.43 0.235 ( 0.242) 0.080 0.155 97 8.08 0.50 0.271 ( 0.240) 0.092 0.179 98 8.17 0.50 0.271 ( 0.239) 0.092 0.179 99 8.25 0.50 0.271 ( 0.238) 0.092 0.179 100 8.33 0.50 0.271 ( 0.237) 0.092 0.179 101 8.42 0.50 0.271 ( 0.236) 0.092 0.179 102 8.50 0.50 0.271 ( 0.235) 0.092 0.179 103 8.58 0.53 0.289 ( 0.234) 0.098 0.191 104 8.67 0.53 0.289 ( 0.233) 0.098 0.191 105 8.75 0.53 0.289 ( 0.232) 0.098 0.191 106 8.83 0.57 0.307 ( 0.230) 0.104 0.202 107 8.92 0.57 0.307 ( 0.229) 0.104 0.202 108 9.00 0.57 0.307 ( 0.228) 0.104 0.202 109 9.08 0.63 0.343 ( 0.227) 0.117 0.226 110 9.17 0.63 0.343 ( 0.226) 0.117 0.226 111 9.25 0.63 0.343 ( 0.225) 0.117 0.226 112 9.33 0.67 0.361 ( 0.224) 0.123 0.238 113 9.42 0.67 0.361 ( 0.223) 0.123 0.238 114 9.50 0.67 0.361 ( 0.222) 0.123 0.238 115 9.58 0.70 0.379 ( 0.221) 0.129 0.250 116 9.67 0.70 0.379 ( 0.220) 0.129 0.250 117 9.75 0.70 0.379 ( 0.219) 0.129 0.250 118 9.83 0.73 0.397 ( 0.218) 0.135 0.262 119 9.92 0.73 0.397 ( 0.217) 0.135 0.262 120 10.00 0.73 0.397 ( 0.216) 0.135 0.262 121 10.08 0.50 0.271 ( 0.214) 0.092 0.179 122 10.17 0.50 0.271 ( 0.213) 0.092 0.179 123 10.25 0.50 0.271 ( 0.212) 0.092 0.179 124 10.33 0.50 0.271 ( 0.211) 0.092 0.179 125 10.42 0.50 0.271 ( 0.210) 0.092 0.179 126 10.50 0.50 0.271 ( 0.209) 0.092 0.179 127 10.58 0.67 0.361 ( 0.208) 0.123 0.238 128 10.67 0.67 0.361 ( 0.207) 0.123 0.238 129 10.75 0.67 0.361 ( 0.206) 0.123 0.238 130 10.83 0.67 0.361 ( 0.205) 0.123 0.238 131 10.92 0.67 0.361 ( 0.204) 0.123 0.238 132 11.00 0.67 0.361 ( 0.203) 0.123 0.238 133 11.08 0.63 0.343 ( 0.202) 0.117 0.226 134 11.17 0.63 0.343 ( 0.201) 0.117 0.226 135 11.25 0.63 0.343 ( 0.200) 0.117 0.226 136 11.33 0.63 0.343 ( 0.199) 0.117 0.226 137 11.42 0.63 0.343 ( 0.198) 0.117 0.226 138 11.50 0.63 0.343 ( 0.197) 0.117 0.226 139 11.58 0.57 0.307 ( 0.196) 0.104 0.202 140 11.67 0.57 0.307 ( 0.195) 0.104 0.202 141 11.75 0.57 0.307 ( 0.194) 0.104 0.202 142 11.83 0.60 0.325 ( 0.193) 0.110 0.214 143 11.92 0.60 0.325 ( 0.192) 0.110 0.214 144 12.00 0.60 0.325 ( 0.191) 0.110 0.214 145 12.08 0.83 0.451 ( 0.191) 0.153 0.298 146 12.17 0.83 0.451 ( 0.190) 0.153 0.298 147 12.25 0.83 0.451 ( 0.189) 0.153 0.298 148 12.33 0.87 0.469 ( 0.188) 0.159 0.310 149 12.42 0.87 0.469 ( 0.187) 0.159 0.310 150 12.50 0.87 0.469 ( 0.186) 0.159 0.310 151 12.58 0.93 0.505 ( 0.185) 0.172 0.333 152 12.67 0.93 0.505 ( 0.184) 0.172 0.333 153 12.75 0.93 0.505 ( 0.183) 0.172 0.333 154 12.83 0.97 0.523 ( 0.182) 0.178 0.345 155 12.92 0.97 0.523 ( 0.181) 0.178 0.345 156 13.00 0.97 0.523 ( 0.180) 0.178 0.345 157 13.08 1.13 0.613 0.179 ( 0.209) 0.434 158 13.17 1.13 0.613 0.178 ( 0.209) 0.435 159 13.25 1.13 0.613 0.178 ( 0.209) 0.436 160 13.33 1.13 0.613 0.177 ( 0.209) 0.437 161 13.42 1.13 0.613 0.176 ( 0.209) 0.438 162 13.50 1.13 0.613 0.175 ( 0.209) 0.439 163 13.58 0.77 0.415 ( 0.174) 0.141 0.274 164 13.67 0.77 0.415 ( 0.173) 0.141 0.274 165 13.75 0.77 0.415 ( 0.172) 0.141 0.274 166 13.83 0.77 0.415 ( 0.171) 0.141 0.274 167 13.92 0.77 0.415 ( 0.170) 0.141 0.274 168 14.00 0.77 0.415 ( 0.170) 0.141 0.274 169 14.08 0.90 0.487 ( 0.169) 0.166 0.321 170 14.17 0.90 0.487 ( 0.168) 0.166 0.321 171 14.25 0.90 0.487 ( 0.167) 0.166 0.321 172 14.33 0.87 0.469 ( 0.166) 0.159 0.310 173 14.42 0.87 0.469 ( 0.165) 0.159 0.310 174 14.50 0.87 0.469 ( 0.164) 0.159 0.310 175 14.58 0.87 0.469 ( 0.164) 0.159 0.310 176 14.67 0.87 0.469 ( 0.163) 0.159 0.310 177 14.75 0.87 0.469 ( 0.162) 0.159 0.310 178 14.83 0.83 0.451 ( 0.161) 0.153 0.298 179 14.92 0.83 0.451 ( 0.160) 0.153 0.298 180 15.00 0.83 0.451 ( 0.159) 0.153 0.298 181 15.08 0.80 0.433 ( 0.159) 0.147 0.286 182 15.17 0.80 0.433 ( 0.158) 0.147 0.286 183 15.25 0.80 0.433 ( 0.157) 0.147 0.286 184 15.33 0.77 0.415 ( 0.156) 0.141 0.274 185 15.42 0.77 0.415 ( 0.155) 0.141 0.274 186 15.50 0.77 0.415 ( 0.155) 0.141 0.274 187 15.58 0.63 0.343 ( 0.154) 0.117 0.226 188 15.67 0.63 0.343 ( 0.153) 0.117 0.226 189 15.75 0.63 0.343 ( 0.152) 0.117 0.226 190 15.83 0.63 0.343 ( 0.151) 0.117 0.226 191 15.92 0.63 0.343 ( 0.151) 0.117 0.226 192 16.00 0.63 0.343 ( 0.150) 0.117 0.226 193 16.08 0.13 0.072 ( 0.149) 0.025 0.048 194 16.17 0.13 0.072 ( 0.148) 0.025 0.048 195 16.25 0.13 0.072 ( 0.148) 0.025 0.048 196 16.33 0.13 0.072 ( 0.147) 0.025 0.048 197 16.42 0.13 0.072 ( 0.146) 0.025 0.048 198 16.50 0.13 0.072 ( 0.145) 0.025 0.048 199 16.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.145) 0.018 0.036 200 16.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.144) 0.018 0.036 201 16.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.143) 0.018 0.036 202 16.83 0.10 0.054 ( 0.142) 0.018 0.036 203 16.92 0.10 0.054 ( 0.142) 0.018 0.036 204 17.00 0.10 0.054 ( 0.141) 0.018 0.036 205 17.08 0.17 0.090 ( 0.140) 0.031 0.060 206 17.17 0.17 0.090 ( 0.140) 0.031 0.060 207 17.25 0.17 0.090 ( 0.139) 0.031 0.060 208 17.33 0.17 0.090 ( 0.138) 0.031 0.060 209 17.42 0.17 0.090 ( 0.137) 0.031 0.060 210 17.50 0.17 0.090 ( 0.137) 0.031 0.060 211 17.58 0.17 0.090 ( 0.136) 0.031 0.060 212 17.67 0.17 0.090 ( 0.135) 0.031 0.060 213 17.75 0.17 0.090 ( 0.135) 0.031 0.060 214 17.83 0.13 0.072 ( 0.134) 0.025 0.048 215 17.92 0.13 0.072 ( 0.133) 0.025 0.048 216 18.00 0.13 0.072 ( 0.133) 0.025 0.048 217 18.08 0.13 0.072 ( 0.132) 0.025 0.048 218 18.17 0.13 0.072 ( 0.131) 0.025 0.048 219 18.25 0.13 0.072 ( 0.131) 0.025 0.048 220 18.33 0.13 0.072 ( 0.130) 0.025 0.048 221 18.42 0.13 0.072 ( 0.130) 0.025 0.048 222 18.50 0.13 0.072 ( 0.129) 0.025 0.048 223 18.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.128) 0.018 0.036 224 18.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.128) 0.018 0.036 225 18.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.127) 0.018 0.036 226 18.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.126) 0.012 0.024 227 18.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.126) 0.012 0.024 228 19.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.125) 0.012 0.024 229 19.08 0.10 0.054 ( 0.125) 0.018 0.036 230 19.17 0.10 0.054 ( 0.124) 0.018 0.036 231 19.25 0.10 0.054 ( 0.123) 0.018 0.036 232 19.33 0.13 0.072 ( 0.123) 0.025 0.048 233 19.42 0.13 0.072 ( 0.122) 0.025 0.048 234 19.50 0.13 0.072 ( 0.122) 0.025 0.048 235 19.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.121) 0.018 0.036 236 19.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.121) 0.018 0.036 237 19.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.120) 0.018 0.036 238 19.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.120) 0.012 0.024 239 19.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.119) 0.012 0.024 240 20.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.119) 0.012 0.024 241 20.08 0.10 0.054 ( 0.118) 0.018 0.036 242 20.17 0.10 0.054 ( 0.117) 0.018 0.036 243 20.25 0.10 0.054 ( 0.117) 0.018 0.036 244 20.33 0.10 0.054 ( 0.116) 0.018 0.036 245 20.42 0.10 0.054 ( 0.116) 0.018 0.036 246 20.50 0.10 0.054 ( 0.115) 0.018 0.036 247 20.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.115) 0.018 0.036 248 20.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.114) 0.018 0.036 249 20.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.114) 0.018 0.036 250 20.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.114) 0.012 0.024 251 20.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.113) 0.012 0.024 252 21.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.113) 0.012 0.024 253 21.08 0.10 0.054 ( 0.112) 0.018 0.036 254 21.17 0.10 0.054 ( 0.112) 0.018 0.036 255 21.25 0.10 0.054 ( 0.111) 0.018 0.036 256 21.33 0.07 0.036 ( 0.111) 0.012 0.024 257 21.42 0.07 0.036 ( 0.110) 0.012 0.024 258 21.50 0.07 0.036 ( 0.110) 0.012 0.024 259 21.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.110) 0.018 0.036 260 21.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.109) 0.018 0.036 261 21.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.109) 0.018 0.036 262 21.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.108) 0.012 0.024 263 21.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.108) 0.012 0.024 264 22.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.108) 0.012 0.024 265 22.08 0.10 0.054 ( 0.107) 0.018 0.036 266 22.17 0.10 0.054 ( 0.107) 0.018 0.036 267 22.25 0.10 0.054 ( 0.107) 0.018 0.036 268 22.33 0.07 0.036 ( 0.106) 0.012 0.024 269 22.42 0.07 0.036 ( 0.106) 0.012 0.024 270 22.50 0.07 0.036 ( 0.106) 0.012 0.024 271 22.58 0.07 0.036 ( 0.105) 0.012 0.024 272 22.67 0.07 0.036 ( 0.105) 0.012 0.024 273 22.75 0.07 0.036 ( 0.105) 0.012 0.024 274 22.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.105) 0.012 0.024 275 22.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.104) 0.012 0.024 276 23.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.104) 0.012 0.024 277 23.08 0.07 0.036 ( 0.104) 0.012 0.024 278 23.17 0.07 0.036 ( 0.104) 0.012 0.024 279 23.25 0.07 0.036 ( 0.103) 0.012 0.024 280 23.33 0.07 0.036 ( 0.103) 0.012 0.024 281 23.42 0.07 0.036 ( 0.103) 0.012 0.024 282 23.50 0.07 0.036 ( 0.103) 0.012 0.024 283 23.58 0.07 0.036 ( 0.103) 0.012 0.024 284 23.67 0.07 0.036 ( 0.102) 0.012 0.024 285 23.75 0.07 0.036 ( 0.102) 0.012 0.024 286 23.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.102) 0.012 0.024 287 23.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.102) 0.012 0.024 288 24.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.102) 0.012 0.024 (Loss Rate Not Used) Sum = 100.0 Sum = 35.9 Flood volume = Effective rainfall 2.99(In) times area 4.8(Ac.)/[(In)/(Ft.)] = 1.2(Ac.Ft) Total soil loss = 1.52(In) Total soil loss = 0.613(Ac.Ft) Total rainfall = 4.51(In) Flood volume = 52681.2 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 26718.9 Cubic Feet -------------------------------------------------------------------- Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 2.061(CFS) -------------------------------------------------------------------- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 24 - H O U R S T O R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h -------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrograph in 5 Minute intervals ((CFS)) -------------------------------------------------------------------- Time(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 0+ 5 0.0000 0.00 Q | | | | 0+10 0.0002 0.03 Q | | | | 0+15 0.0007 0.07 Q | | | | 0+20 0.0013 0.09 Q | | | | 0+25 0.0020 0.11 Q | | | | 0+30 0.0029 0.13 Q | | | | 0+35 0.0039 0.15 Q | | | | 0+40 0.0050 0.15 Q | | | | 0+45 0.0061 0.16 Q | | | | 0+50 0.0072 0.16 Q | | | | 0+55 0.0085 0.18 Q | | | | 1+ 0 0.0099 0.20 Q | | | | 1+ 5 0.0113 0.21 Q | | | | 1+10 0.0127 0.20 Q | | | | 1+15 0.0140 0.19 Q | | | | 1+20 0.0153 0.18 Q | | | | 1+25 0.0165 0.18 Q | | | | 1+30 0.0177 0.18 Q | | | | 1+35 0.0190 0.18 Q | | | | 1+40 0.0202 0.18 Q | | | | 1+45 0.0214 0.18 Q | | | | 1+50 0.0226 0.18 Q | | | | 1+55 0.0240 0.19 Q | | | | 2+ 0 0.0254 0.21 Q | | | | 2+ 5 0.0269 0.22 Q | | | | 2+10 0.0284 0.22 Q | | | | 2+15 0.0300 0.22 Q | | | | 2+20 0.0315 0.23 QV | | | | 2+25 0.0331 0.23 QV | | | | 2+30 0.0347 0.23 QV | | | | 2+35 0.0363 0.23 QV | | | | 2+40 0.0380 0.25 QV | | | | 2+45 0.0398 0.26 |Q | | | | 2+50 0.0417 0.27 |Q | | | | 2+55 0.0436 0.28 |Q | | | | 3+ 0 0.0455 0.28 |Q | | | | 3+ 5 0.0475 0.28 |Q | | | | 3+10 0.0495 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+15 0.0515 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+20 0.0534 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+25 0.0554 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+30 0.0574 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+35 0.0594 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+40 0.0614 0.29 |QV | | | | 3+45 0.0634 0.29 |QV | | | | 3+50 0.0654 0.29 |QV | | | | 3+55 0.0676 0.31 |QV | | | | 4+ 0 0.0698 0.32 |QV | | | | 4+ 5 0.0721 0.33 |QV | | | | 4+10 0.0744 0.34 |QV | | | | 4+15 0.0768 0.34 |QV | | | | 4+20 0.0791 0.34 |QV | | | | 4+25 0.0816 0.36 |QV | | | | 4+30 0.0842 0.38 |QV | | | | 4+35 0.0869 0.39 |QV | | | | 4+40 0.0896 0.39 |QV | | | | 4+45 0.0923 0.40 |Q V | | | | 4+50 0.0951 0.40 |Q V | | | | 4+55 0.0980 0.42 |Q V | | | | 5+ 0 0.1010 0.44 |Q V | | | | 5+ 5 0.1040 0.44 |Q V | | | | 5+10 0.1069 0.42 |Q V | | | | 5+15 0.1096 0.39 |Q V | | | | 5+20 0.1122 0.38 |Q V | | | | 5+25 0.1149 0.38 |Q V | | | | 5+30 0.1176 0.40 |Q V | | | | 5+35 0.1204 0.40 |Q V | | | | 5+40 0.1233 0.42 |Q V | | | | 5+45 0.1263 0.44 |Q V | | | | 5+50 0.1293 0.45 |Q V | | | | 5+55 0.1325 0.45 |Q V | | | | 6+ 0 0.1356 0.46 |Q V | | | | 6+ 5 0.1388 0.46 |Q V | | | | 6+10 0.1421 0.48 |Q V | | | | 6+15 0.1455 0.50 |Q V | | | | 6+20 0.1489 0.50 | Q V | | | | 6+25 0.1524 0.51 | Q V | | | | 6+30 0.1560 0.51 | Q V | | | | 6+35 0.1595 0.52 | Q V | | | | 6+40 0.1632 0.53 | Q V | | | | 6+45 0.1670 0.55 | Q V | | | | 6+50 0.1709 0.56 | Q V | | | | 6+55 0.1748 0.57 | Q V | | | | 7+ 0 0.1788 0.57 | Q V | | | | 7+ 5 0.1827 0.57 | Q V | | | | 7+10 0.1867 0.58 | Q V | | | | 7+15 0.1907 0.58 | Q V | | | | 7+20 0.1947 0.58 | Q V | | | | 7+25 0.1988 0.60 | Q V | | | | 7+30 0.2030 0.61 | Q V | | | | 7+35 0.2073 0.62 | Q V | | | | 7+40 0.2118 0.64 | Q V | | | | 7+45 0.2163 0.66 | Q V | | | | 7+50 0.2210 0.68 | Q V | | | | 7+55 0.2258 0.70 | Q V | | | | 8+ 0 0.2308 0.72 | Q V | | | | 8+ 5 0.2358 0.74 | Q V | | | | 8+10 0.2411 0.77 | Q V | | | | 8+15 0.2467 0.81 | Q V | | | | 8+20 0.2524 0.83 | Q V | | | | 8+25 0.2582 0.84 | Q V | | | | 8+30 0.2641 0.85 | Q V | | | | 8+35 0.2700 0.86 | Q V | | | | 8+40 0.2760 0.88 | Q V| | | | 8+45 0.2822 0.90 | Q V| | | | 8+50 0.2885 0.91 | Q V| | | | 8+55 0.2949 0.93 | Q V| | | | 9+ 0 0.3015 0.95 | Q V| | | | 9+ 5 0.3081 0.97 | Q V | | | 9+10 0.3150 1.00 | Q V | | | 9+15 0.3222 1.04 | Q V | | | 9+20 0.3296 1.07 | Q V | | | 9+25 0.3371 1.09 | Q |V | | | 9+30 0.3448 1.12 | Q |V | | | 9+35 0.3526 1.13 | Q |V | | | 9+40 0.3605 1.16 | Q |V | | | 9+45 0.3687 1.18 | Q | V | | | 9+50 0.3769 1.20 | Q | V | | | 9+55 0.3853 1.22 | Q | V | | | 10+ 0 0.3938 1.24 | Q | V | | | 10+ 5 0.4023 1.24 | Q | V | | | 10+10 0.4103 1.15 | Q | V | | | 10+15 0.4174 1.03 | Q | V | | | 10+20 0.4241 0.98 | Q | V | | | 10+25 0.4307 0.95 | Q | V | | | 10+30 0.4371 0.93 | Q | V | | | 10+35 0.4434 0.93 | Q | V | | | 10+40 0.4502 0.98 | Q | V | | | 10+45 0.4575 1.06 | Q | V | | | 10+50 0.4651 1.10 | Q | V | | | 10+55 0.4728 1.12 | Q | V | | | 11+ 0 0.4806 1.13 | Q | V | | | 11+ 5 0.4884 1.14 | Q | V | | | 11+10 0.4962 1.13 | Q | V | | | 11+15 0.5039 1.12 | Q | V | | | 11+20 0.5115 1.11 | Q | V | | | 11+25 0.5192 1.11 | Q | V | | | 11+30 0.5268 1.11 | Q | V | | | 11+35 0.5344 1.10 | Q | V | | | 11+40 0.5418 1.08 | Q | V | | | 11+45 0.5490 1.04 | Q | V | | | 11+50 0.5560 1.03 | Q | V | | | 11+55 0.5631 1.03 | Q | V | | | 12+ 0 0.5703 1.04 | Q | V | | | 12+ 5 0.5776 1.06 | Q | V| | | 12+10 0.5856 1.16 | Q | V| | | 12+15 0.5944 1.28 | Q | V| | | 12+20 0.6036 1.34 | Q | V| | | 12+25 0.6132 1.39 | Q | V | | 12+30 0.6230 1.43 | Q | V | | 12+35 0.6331 1.46 | Q | V | | 12+40 0.6434 1.50 | Q | |V | | 12+45 0.6540 1.55 | Q | |V | | 12+50 0.6649 1.57 | Q | |V | | 12+55 0.6759 1.60 | Q | | V | | 13+ 0 0.6871 1.63 | Q | | V | | 13+ 5 0.6986 1.66 | Q | | V | | 13+10 0.7108 1.78 | Q | | V | | 13+15 0.7240 1.92 | Q | | V | | 13+20 0.7377 1.99 | Q | | V | | 13+25 0.7517 2.03 | Q | | V | | 13+30 0.7659 2.06 | Q | | V | | 13+35 0.7801 2.05 | Q | | V | | 13+40 0.7931 1.88 | Q | | V | | 13+45 0.8044 1.65 | Q | | V | | 13+50 0.8150 1.54 | Q | | V | | 13+55 0.8253 1.49 | Q | | V | | 14+ 0 0.8353 1.45 | Q | | V | | 14+ 5 0.8451 1.43 | Q | | V | | 14+10 0.8552 1.46 | Q | | V | | 14+15 0.8656 1.52 | Q | | V | | 14+20 0.8762 1.54 | Q | | V | | 14+25 0.8868 1.54 | Q | | V| | 14+30 0.8973 1.52 | Q | | V| | 14+35 0.9078 1.52 | Q | | V | 14+40 0.9182 1.52 | Q | | V | 14+45 0.9286 1.51 | Q | | V | 14+50 0.9390 1.51 | Q | | |V | 14+55 0.9493 1.50 | Q | | |V | 15+ 0 0.9595 1.48 | Q | | |V | 15+ 5 0.9696 1.47 | Q | | | V | 15+10 0.9796 1.45 | Q | | | V | 15+15 0.9895 1.43 | Q | | | V | 15+20 0.9992 1.42 | Q | | | V | 15+25 1.0089 1.40 | Q | | | V | 15+30 1.0184 1.38 | Q | | | V | 15+35 1.0277 1.36 | Q | | | V | 15+40 1.0366 1.30 | Q | | | V | 15+45 1.0450 1.22 | Q | | | V | 15+50 1.0532 1.18 | Q | | | V | 15+55 1.0612 1.16 | Q | | | V | 16+ 0 1.0691 1.15 | Q | | | V | 16+ 5 1.0767 1.11 | Q | | | V | 16+10 1.0828 0.89 | Q | | | V | 16+15 1.0871 0.62 | Q | | | V | 16+20 1.0905 0.49 |Q | | | V | 16+25 1.0934 0.42 |Q | | | V | 16+30 1.0960 0.37 |Q | | | V | 16+35 1.0982 0.33 |Q | | | V | 16+40 1.1003 0.29 |Q | | | V | 16+45 1.1020 0.26 |Q | | | V | 16+50 1.1036 0.23 Q | | | V | 16+55 1.1051 0.22 Q | | | V | 17+ 0 1.1065 0.20 Q | | | V | 17+ 5 1.1079 0.20 Q | | | V | 17+10 1.1094 0.22 Q | | | V | 17+15 1.1112 0.25 |Q | | | V | 17+20 1.1130 0.26 |Q | | | V | 17+25 1.1148 0.27 |Q | | | V | 17+30 1.1167 0.28 |Q | | | V | 17+35 1.1187 0.28 |Q | | | V | 17+40 1.1206 0.28 |Q | | | V | 17+45 1.1226 0.28 |Q | | | V | 17+50 1.1245 0.28 |Q | | | V | 17+55 1.1264 0.27 |Q | | | V | 18+ 0 1.1281 0.25 |Q | | | V | 18+ 5 1.1298 0.25 Q | | | V | 18+10 1.1315 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+15 1.1332 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+20 1.1348 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+25 1.1365 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+30 1.1381 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+35 1.1397 0.23 Q | | | V | 18+40 1.1412 0.22 Q | | | V | 18+45 1.1426 0.20 Q | | | V | 18+50 1.1439 0.19 Q | | | V | 18+55 1.1451 0.17 Q | | | V | 19+ 0 1.1461 0.15 Q | | | V | 19+ 5 1.1471 0.14 Q | | | V | 19+10 1.1481 0.15 Q | | | V | 19+15 1.1492 0.16 Q | | | V | 19+20 1.1504 0.17 Q | | | V | 19+25 1.1517 0.19 Q | | | V | 19+30 1.1531 0.20 Q | | | V | 19+35 1.1545 0.21 Q | | | V | 19+40 1.1559 0.20 Q | | | V | 19+45 1.1572 0.19 Q | | | V | 19+50 1.1585 0.18 Q | | | V | 19+55 1.1596 0.16 Q | | | V | 20+ 0 1.1606 0.15 Q | | | V | 20+ 5 1.1616 0.14 Q | | | V | 20+10 1.1626 0.15 Q | | | V | 20+15 1.1637 0.16 Q | | | V | 20+20 1.1648 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+25 1.1660 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+30 1.1672 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+35 1.1684 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+40 1.1695 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+45 1.1707 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+50 1.1719 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+55 1.1730 0.16 Q | | | V | 21+ 0 1.1740 0.14 Q | | | V | 21+ 5 1.1749 0.13 Q | | | V | 21+10 1.1759 0.14 Q | | | V | 21+15 1.1770 0.16 Q | | | V | 21+20 1.1781 0.16 Q | | | V | 21+25 1.1791 0.15 Q | | | V | 21+30 1.1801 0.14 Q | | | V| 21+35 1.1810 0.13 Q | | | V| 21+40 1.1819 0.14 Q | | | V| 21+45 1.1830 0.16 Q | | | V| 21+50 1.1841 0.16 Q | | | V| 21+55 1.1852 0.15 Q | | | V| 22+ 0 1.1861 0.14 Q | | | V| 22+ 5 1.1870 0.13 Q | | | V| 22+10 1.1880 0.14 Q | | | V| 22+15 1.1890 0.16 Q | | | V| 22+20 1.1901 0.16 Q | | | V| 22+25 1.1912 0.15 Q | | | V| 22+30 1.1921 0.14 Q | | | V| 22+35 1.1930 0.13 Q | | | V| 22+40 1.1939 0.12 Q | | | V| 22+45 1.1947 0.12 Q | | | V| 22+50 1.1955 0.12 Q | | | V| 22+55 1.1964 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+ 0 1.1972 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+ 5 1.1980 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+10 1.1988 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+15 1.1996 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+20 1.2004 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+25 1.2012 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+30 1.2020 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+35 1.2028 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+40 1.2036 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+45 1.2044 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+50 1.2053 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+55 1.2061 0.12 Q | | | V| 24+ 0 1.2069 0.12 Q | | | V| 24+ 5 1.2076 0.11 Q | | | V| 24+10 1.2082 0.09 Q | | | V| 24+15 1.2086 0.05 Q | | | V| 24+20 1.2088 0.03 Q | | | V| 24+25 1.2089 0.02 Q | | | V| 24+30 1.2091 0.02 Q | | | V| 24+35 1.2092 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+40 1.2092 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+45 1.2093 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+50 1.2093 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+55 1.2093 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+ 0 1.2094 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+ 5 1.2094 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+10 1.2094 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+15 1.2094 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+20 1.2094 0.00 Q | | | V ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Project Summary Millenium 100- yearTitle Engineer Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Company 6/16/2022Date 1. Inflow hydrographs calculated based on Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Hydrology Manual (April 1978) using CivilD software. 2. Flow-through basin analysis completed using modfified Pul's (storage indication routing). Notes Page 1 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc 24Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond) Basin2 31Pond Inflow Summary Basin1 (IN) 30Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out) Basin1 (OUT) 27Pond Infiltration Hydrograph Basin1 (INF) 26Level Pool Pond Routing Summary 25Pond Infiltration Calculations Basin1 (IN) 24Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond) Basin1 21Volume Equations 20Elevation-Area Volume Curve Basin2 21Volume Equations 20Elevation-Area Volume Curve Basin1 14Time vs. Volume Basin2 14Time vs. Volume Basin1 8Time vs. Elevation Basin2 (IN) 8Time vs. Elevation Basin1 (IN) 4Read Hydrograph DA-B 4Read Hydrograph DA-A 3Master Network Summary 2User Notifications Table of Contents Table of Contents 31Pond Inflow Summary Basin2 (IN) 30Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out) Basin2 (OUT) 27Pond Infiltration Hydrograph Basin2 (INF) 26Level Pool Pond Routing Summary 25Pond Infiltration Calculations Basin2 (IN) Subsection: User Notifications User Notifications WarningSource Mass balance for routing volumes vary by more than 0.5 %. (3.1 % of Inflow Volume))Message (N/A)Time Basin2Label 16Element Id PondElement Type BaseScenario 40Message Id WarningSource Mass balance for routing volumes vary by more than 0.5 %. (2.1 % of Inflow Volume))Message (N/A)Time Basin1Label 71Element Id PondElement Type BaseScenario 40Message Id Page 2 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Subsection: Master Network Summary Catchments Summary Peak Flow (ft³/s) Time to Peak (min) Hydrograph Volume (ft³) Return Event (years) ScenarioLabel 2.53571810.00064,856.0000BaseDA-A 2.06000810.00052,689.0000BaseDA-B Pond Summary Maximum Pond Storage (ft³) Maximum Water Surface Elevation (ft) Peak Flow (ft³/s) Time to Peak (min) Hydrograph Volume (ft³) Return Event (years) ScenarioLabel (N/A)(N/A)2.53571810.00064,702.0000BaseBasin1 (IN) 39,994.0003.7960.000000.0000.0000BaseBasin1 (OUT) (N/A)(N/A)2.06000810.00052,564.0000BaseBasin2 (IN) 30,093.0003.6550.000000.0000.0000BaseBasin2 (OUT) Page 3 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: DA-A Scenario: BaseSubsection: Read Hydrograph ft³/s2.53571Peak Discharge min810.000Time to Peak ft³64,856.357Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 5.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.110780.086160.036930.000000.000000.000 0.196950.184640.184640.160020.1354025.000 0.246190.258490.246190.221570.1969550.000 0.221570.221570.221570.221570.2338875.000 0.258490.233880.221570.221570.22157100.000 0.283110.283110.270800.270800.27080125.000 0.332350.320040.307730.283110.28311150.000 0.356970.356970.344660.344660.34466175.000 0.356970.356970.356970.356970.35697200.000 0.406210.393900.381590.356970.35697225.000 0.467750.443130.418520.418520.41852250.000 0.516990.492370.492370.480060.48006275.000 0.467750.480060.516990.541610.54161300.000 0.541610.516990.492370.492370.46775325.000 0.590850.566230.566230.553920.55392350.000 0.640080.627770.627770.615460.61546375.000 0.701630.701630.689320.677010.65239400.000 0.738560.713940.713940.713940.70163425.000 0.837030.812410.787790.763180.75087450.000 0.997050.947810.910890.886270.86165475.000 1.083221.058601.046291.033981.02167500.000 1.194001.169381.144761.120141.10784525.000 1.378641.341711.317091.280161.23093550.000 1.501731.477111.452491.427881.39095575.000 1.206311.267861.415571.526351.52635600.000 1.304781.206311.144761.144761.16938625.000 1.390951.403261.390951.378641.35402650.000 1.354021.366331.366331.366331.37864675.000 1.280161.267861.267861.280161.32940700.000 1.710991.649441.575591.427881.30478725.000 1.932561.907941.846391.797151.76023750.000 2.363382.191052.043342.006411.96948775.000 2.314142.523402.535712.498782.44955800.000 1.760231.784851.834081.895632.03103825.000 1.871011.895631.895631.871011.79715850.000 1.846391.858701.858701.871011.87101875.000 1.747921.760231.784851.809461.82177900.000 1.501731.600211.674061.698681.72330925.000 1.095531.366331.415571.427881.45249950.000 Page 4 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: DA-A Scenario: BaseSubsection: Read Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 5.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.406210.455440.516990.603150.76318975.000 0.246190.270800.283110.320040.356971,000.000 0.332350.320040.307730.270800.246191,025.000 0.344660.344660.344660.344660.344661,050.000 0.295420.295420.307730.307730.332351,075.000 0.270800.283110.295420.295420.295421,100.000 0.172330.184640.209260.233880.246191,125.000 0.246190.233880.209260.196950.184641,150.000 0.196950.221570.233880.246190.258491,175.000 0.209260.196950.184640.172330.184641,200.000 0.209260.209260.209260.209260.209261,225.000 0.172330.160020.172330.196950.209261,250.000 0.160020.172330.184640.196950.196951,275.000 0.172330.184640.196950.196950.172331,300.000 0.184640.196950.196950.172330.160021,325.000 0.147710.147710.147710.160020.172331,350.000 0.147710.147710.147710.147710.147711,375.000 0.147710.147710.147710.147710.147711,400.000 0.135400.147710.147710.147710.147711,425.000 0.024620.024620.036930.061550.110781,450.000 0.000000.012310.012310.012310.012311,475.000 0.000000.000000.000000.000000.000001,500.000 Page 5 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: DA-B Scenario: BaseSubsection: Read Hydrograph ft³/s2.06000Peak Discharge min810.000Time to Peak ft³52,689.000Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 5.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.090000.070000.030000.000000.000000.000 0.160000.150000.150000.130000.1100025.000 0.200000.210000.200000.180000.1600050.000 0.180000.180000.180000.180000.1900075.000 0.210000.190000.180000.180000.18000100.000 0.230000.230000.220000.220000.22000125.000 0.270000.260000.250000.230000.23000150.000 0.290000.290000.280000.280000.28000175.000 0.290000.290000.290000.290000.29000200.000 0.330000.320000.310000.290000.29000225.000 0.380000.360000.340000.340000.34000250.000 0.420000.400000.400000.390000.39000275.000 0.380000.390000.420000.440000.44000300.000 0.440000.420000.400000.400000.38000325.000 0.480000.460000.460000.450000.45000350.000 0.520000.510000.510000.500000.50000375.000 0.570000.570000.560000.550000.53000400.000 0.600000.580000.580000.580000.57000425.000 0.680000.660000.640000.620000.61000450.000 0.810000.770000.740000.720000.70000475.000 0.880000.860000.850000.840000.83000500.000 0.970000.950000.930000.910000.90000525.000 1.120001.090001.070001.040001.00000550.000 1.220001.200001.180001.160001.13000575.000 0.980001.030001.150001.240001.24000600.000 1.060000.980000.930000.930000.95000625.000 1.130001.140001.130001.120001.10000650.000 1.100001.110001.110001.110001.12000675.000 1.040001.030001.030001.040001.08000700.000 1.390001.340001.280001.160001.06000725.000 1.570001.550001.500001.460001.43000750.000 1.920001.780001.660001.630001.60000775.000 1.880002.050002.060002.030001.99000800.000 1.430001.450001.490001.540001.65000825.000 1.520001.540001.540001.520001.46000850.000 1.500001.510001.510001.520001.52000875.000 1.420001.430001.450001.470001.48000900.000 1.220001.300001.360001.380001.40000925.000 0.890001.110001.150001.160001.18000950.000 Page 6 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: DA-B Scenario: BaseSubsection: Read Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 5.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.330000.370000.420000.490000.62000975.000 0.200000.220000.230000.260000.290001,000.000 0.270000.260000.250000.220000.200001,025.000 0.280000.280000.280000.280000.280001,050.000 0.240000.240000.250000.250000.270001,075.000 0.220000.230000.240000.240000.240001,100.000 0.140000.150000.170000.190000.200001,125.000 0.200000.190000.170000.160000.150001,150.000 0.160000.180000.190000.200000.210001,175.000 0.170000.160000.150000.140000.150001,200.000 0.170000.170000.170000.170000.170001,225.000 0.140000.130000.140000.160000.170001,250.000 0.130000.140000.150000.160000.160001,275.000 0.140000.150000.160000.160000.140001,300.000 0.150000.160000.160000.140000.130001,325.000 0.120000.120000.120000.130000.140001,350.000 0.120000.120000.120000.120000.120001,375.000 0.120000.120000.120000.120000.120001,400.000 0.110000.120000.120000.120000.120001,425.000 0.020000.020000.030000.050000.090001,450.000 0.000000.010000.010000.010000.010001,475.000 0.000000.000000.000000.000000.000001,500.000 Page 7 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 0.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.000 0.0110.0090.0060.0040.00315.000 0.0270.0240.0200.0170.01430.000 0.0450.0410.0380.0340.03145.000 0.0680.0630.0590.0540.05060.000 0.0870.0830.0800.0760.07275.000 0.1060.1020.0980.0950.09190.000 0.1240.1200.1170.1130.109105.000 0.1460.1420.1370.1330.129120.000 0.1690.1640.1600.1550.151135.000 0.1920.1870.1820.1780.173150.000 0.2180.2130.2080.2020.197165.000 0.2460.2400.2350.2290.224180.000 0.2740.2680.2630.2570.252195.000 0.3010.2950.2900.2840.279210.000 0.3280.3220.3170.3110.306225.000 0.3580.3520.3460.3400.334240.000 0.3900.3830.3770.3700.364255.000 0.4250.4180.4110.4040.396270.000 0.4620.4540.4470.4390.432285.000 0.5010.4930.4860.4780.470300.000 0.5340.5270.5210.5140.508315.000 0.5680.5610.5540.5470.540330.000 0.6060.5990.5910.5830.576345.000 0.6460.6380.6300.6220.614360.000 0.6890.6800.6720.6630.655375.000 0.7330.7240.7150.7060.698390.000 0.7800.7710.7610.7520.742405.000 0.8280.8190.8090.8000.790420.000 0.8770.8670.8570.8480.838435.000 0.9280.9180.9070.8970.887450.000 0.9850.9730.9620.9500.939465.000 1.0481.0351.0221.0090.997480.000 1.1181.1041.0901.0751.061495.000 1.1921.1771.1621.1471.133510.000 1.2691.2541.2381.2231.207525.000 1.3521.3351.3181.3021.286540.000 1.4431.4251.4061.3881.370555.000 1.5411.5211.5011.4821.463570.000 1.6431.6221.6021.5811.561585.000 1.7441.7261.7061.6851.664600.000 1.8191.8051.7911.7761.761615.000 1.8871.8721.8591.8461.832630.000 Page 8 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 1.9691.9521.9351.9181.902645.000 2.0422.0292.0152.0021.986660.000 2.1062.0932.0802.0682.055675.000 2.1682.1562.1442.1312.118690.000 2.2242.2132.2022.1912.179705.000 2.2852.2712.2592.2472.236720.000 2.3672.3492.3322.3162.300735.000 2.4602.4412.4222.4032.385750.000 2.5632.5412.5212.5002.480765.000 2.6752.6512.6282.6062.584780.000 2.8122.7842.7562.7282.701795.000 2.9512.9262.8982.8702.841810.000 3.0523.0333.0142.9942.974825.000 3.1413.1233.1053.0883.070840.000 3.2373.2183.1983.1793.160855.000 3.3323.3133.2943.2753.256870.000 3.4253.4063.3883.3693.350885.000 3.5143.4963.4793.4613.443900.000 3.5983.5823.5653.5483.531915.000 3.6763.6613.6463.6303.614930.000 3.7393.7273.7153.7023.689945.000 3.7903.7833.7743.7633.751960.000 3.7943.7953.7963.7953.794975.000 3.7813.7843.7873.7903.792990.000 3.7593.7643.7683.7733.7771,005.000 3.7353.7393.7443.7493.7541,020.000 3.7153.7183.7223.7263.7301,035.000 3.6973.7003.7043.7083.7111,050.000 3.6793.6833.6863.6903.6931,065.000 3.6583.6623.6673.6713.6751,080.000 3.6373.6413.6463.6503.6541,095.000 3.6153.6203.6243.6293.6331,110.000 3.5903.5953.6003.6053.6101,125.000 3.5613.5663.5723.5783.5841,140.000 3.5343.5393.5443.5503.5551,155.000 3.5103.5153.5203.5243.5291,170.000 3.4843.4903.4953.5003.5051,185.000 3.4553.4613.4673.4733.4781,200.000 3.4293.4343.4393.4453.4501,215.000 3.4023.4083.4133.4183.4231,230.000 3.3763.3813.3873.3923.3971,245.000 3.3473.3533.3583.3643.3701,260.000 3.3203.3253.3313.3363.3411,275.000 Page 9 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 3.2913.2973.3023.3083.3141,290.000 3.2643.2703.2753.2803.2861,305.000 3.2363.2413.2473.2533.2581,320.000 3.2093.2143.2203.2253.2301,335.000 3.1803.1863.1923.1983.2031,350.000 3.1513.1563.1623.1683.1741,365.000 3.1213.1273.1333.1393.1451,380.000 3.0923.0983.1033.1093.1151,395.000 3.0623.0683.0743.0803.0861,410.000 3.0333.0393.0453.0513.0571,425.000 (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)3.0281,440.000 Page 10 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 0.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.000 0.0130.0100.0080.0050.00315.000 0.0320.0280.0240.0200.01730.000 0.0540.0490.0450.0400.03645.000 0.0790.0740.0690.0640.05960.000 0.1020.0970.0930.0890.08475.000 0.1230.1190.1140.1100.10690.000 0.1440.1390.1350.1310.127105.000 0.1680.1630.1580.1530.148120.000 0.1930.1880.1830.1780.173135.000 0.2180.2130.2080.2030.198150.000 0.2470.2410.2350.2300.224165.000 0.2770.2710.2650.2590.253180.000 0.3070.3010.2950.2890.283195.000 0.3360.3300.3250.3190.313210.000 0.3650.3590.3530.3470.342225.000 0.3970.3900.3840.3770.371240.000 0.4300.4230.4170.4100.404255.000 0.4680.4600.4530.4450.438270.000 0.5070.4990.4910.4830.476285.000 0.5480.5410.5320.5240.515300.000 0.5820.5750.5690.5620.555315.000 0.6170.6090.6020.5950.589330.000 0.6560.6480.6400.6320.624345.000 0.6970.6880.6800.6720.664360.000 0.7410.7320.7230.7140.705375.000 0.7860.7770.7680.7590.750390.000 0.8350.8250.8150.8050.795405.000 0.8840.8740.8640.8540.844420.000 0.9330.9230.9130.9030.893435.000 0.9850.9740.9640.9530.943450.000 1.0431.0311.0191.0080.996465.000 1.1081.0941.0811.0681.056480.000 1.1821.1671.1521.1371.122495.000 1.2581.2421.2271.2121.197510.000 1.3391.3221.3061.2901.274525.000 1.4241.4071.3891.3721.355540.000 1.5131.5001.4811.4621.443555.000 1.5781.5651.5511.5381.525570.000 1.6491.6351.6201.6061.592585.000 1.7211.7081.6941.6791.664600.000 1.7741.7641.7541.7441.733615.000 1.8221.8121.8021.7921.783630.000 Page 11 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 1.8821.8701.8571.8451.833645.000 1.9461.9331.9211.9081.895660.000 2.0081.9961.9841.9711.959675.000 2.0682.0572.0452.0332.021690.000 2.1232.1122.1012.0912.080705.000 2.1822.1692.1562.1452.134720.000 2.2612.2442.2282.2122.196735.000 2.3522.3332.3152.2972.279750.000 2.4532.4322.4122.3922.372765.000 2.5632.5392.5162.4952.473780.000 2.6972.6692.6412.6142.588795.000 2.8332.8082.7812.7532.725810.000 2.9312.9132.8952.8752.855825.000 3.0183.0012.9832.9662.949840.000 3.1123.0933.0743.0553.037855.000 3.2043.1863.1673.1493.130870.000 3.2953.2773.2593.2413.222885.000 3.3823.3653.3483.3303.313900.000 3.4643.4483.4323.4153.398915.000 3.5393.5253.5113.4953.480930.000 3.6013.5893.5773.5653.553945.000 3.6503.6433.6343.6243.613960.000 3.6533.6543.6553.6553.653975.000 3.6383.6423.6453.6483.651990.000 3.6163.6213.6263.6303.6341,005.000 3.5913.5953.6003.6063.6111,020.000 3.5703.5743.5783.5823.5861,035.000 3.5513.5553.5593.5623.5661,050.000 3.5323.5363.5403.5443.5471,065.000 3.5113.5153.5193.5243.5281,080.000 3.4893.4933.4983.5023.5061,095.000 3.4663.4713.4753.4803.4841,110.000 3.4403.4453.4513.4563.4611,125.000 3.4103.4163.4223.4283.4341,140.000 3.3833.3883.3933.3993.4041,155.000 3.3583.3633.3683.3733.3781,170.000 3.3313.3373.3423.3483.3531,185.000 3.3023.3083.3143.3203.3251,200.000 3.2743.2803.2853.2913.2961,215.000 3.2473.2533.2583.2643.2691,230.000 3.2203.2263.2313.2373.2421,245.000 3.1913.1973.2023.2083.2141,260.000 3.1633.1683.1743.1803.1851,275.000 Page 12 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 3.1343.1393.1453.1513.1571,290.000 3.1063.1113.1173.1223.1281,305.000 3.0773.0833.0883.0943.1001,320.000 3.0493.0553.0613.0663.0711,335.000 3.0203.0263.0323.0383.0441,350.000 2.9902.9963.0023.0083.0141,365.000 2.9602.9662.9722.9782.9841,380.000 2.9302.9362.9422.9482.9541,395.000 2.9002.9062.9122.9182.9241,410.000 2.8702.8762.8822.8882.8941,425.000 (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)2.8641,440.000 Page 13 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 11.0004.0000.0000.0000.0000.000 97.00075.00055.00038.00022.00015.000 237.000207.000178.000149.000122.00030.000 398.000363.000330.000299.000267.00045.000 592.000554.000514.000475.000436.00060.000 764.000730.000697.000663.000628.00075.000 928.000895.000863.000830.000797.00090.000 1,092.0001,058.0001,025.000993.000960.000105.000 1,285.0001,246.0001,207.0001,167.0001,129.000120.000 1,485.0001,445.0001,404.0001,364.0001,324.000135.000 1,692.0001,648.0001,606.0001,566.0001,526.000150.000 1,927.0001,878.0001,830.0001,783.0001,737.000165.000 2,172.0002,122.0002,073.0002,024.0001,976.000180.000 2,419.0002,370.0002,321.0002,272.0002,222.000195.000 2,662.0002,614.0002,565.0002,517.0002,468.000210.000 2,906.0002,855.0002,805.0002,757.0002,710.000225.000 3,178.0003,122.0003,066.0003,012.0002,958.000240.000 3,464.0003,404.0003,347.0003,290.0003,235.000255.000 3,785.0003,720.0003,655.0003,590.0003,526.000270.000 4,121.0004,051.0003,983.0003,917.0003,850.000285.000 4,476.0004,409.0004,339.0004,266.0004,193.000300.000 4,778.0004,719.0004,660.0004,601.0004,540.000315.000 5,094.0005,028.0004,964.0004,902.0004,839.000330.000 5,446.0005,375.0005,304.0005,233.0005,163.000345.000 5,814.0005,737.0005,663.0005,591.0005,518.000360.000 6,212.0006,131.0006,051.0005,972.0005,892.000375.000 6,622.0006,538.0006,455.0006,373.0006,293.000390.000 7,066.0006,975.0006,885.0006,796.0006,709.000405.000 7,517.0007,426.0007,336.0007,246.0007,156.000420.000 7,975.0007,881.0007,789.0007,698.0007,608.000435.000 8,463.0008,362.0008,263.0008,166.0008,070.000450.000 9,004.0008,891.0008,781.0008,673.0008,567.000465.000 9,605.0009,478.0009,356.0009,236.0009,119.000480.000 10,286.00010,147.00010,009.0009,872.0009,737.000495.000 11,000.00010,853.00010,710.00010,567.00010,426.000510.000 11,757.00011,602.00011,449.00011,298.00011,148.000525.000 12,570.00012,401.00012,236.00012,074.00011,914.000540.000 13,475.00013,288.00013,104.00012,922.00012,744.000555.000 14,448.00014,248.00014,051.00013,858.00013,665.000570.000 15,480.00015,269.00015,061.00014,854.00014,650.000585.000 16,509.00016,322.00016,119.00015,908.00015,694.000600.000 17,276.00017,134.00016,989.00016,838.00016,680.000615.000 17,974.00017,825.00017,685.00017,549.00017,413.000630.000 Page 14 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 18,824.00018,647.00018,472.00018,300.00018,133.000645.000 19,589.00019,452.00019,313.00019,175.00019,003.000660.000 20,263.00020,129.00019,995.00019,861.00019,725.000675.000 20,922.00020,794.00020,664.00020,531.00020,397.000690.000 21,526.00021,406.00021,287.00021,167.00021,046.000705.000 22,179.00022,032.00021,897.00021,770.00021,647.000720.000 23,067.00022,876.00022,691.00022,512.00022,341.000735.000 24,090.00023,876.00023,667.00023,463.00023,263.000750.000 25,227.00024,993.00024,762.00024,534.00024,310.000765.000 26,493.00026,217.00025,957.00025,709.00025,466.000780.000 28,054.00027,728.00027,406.00027,092.00026,786.000795.000 29,657.00029,364.00029,049.00028,719.00028,386.000810.000 30,844.00030,625.00030,401.00030,168.00029,923.000825.000 31,904.00031,688.00031,477.00031,268.00031,058.000840.000 33,051.00032,819.00032,587.00032,356.00032,127.000855.000 34,198.00033,968.00033,739.00033,510.00033,281.000870.000 35,336.00035,110.00034,882.00034,654.00034,426.000885.000 36,437.00036,221.00036,002.00035,782.00035,559.000900.000 37,489.00037,283.00037,074.00036,864.00036,651.000915.000 38,467.00038,284.00038,092.00037,894.00037,693.000930.000 39,273.00039,119.00038,963.00038,804.00038,639.000945.000 39,917.00039,832.00039,714.00039,574.00039,425.000960.000 39,972.00039,987.00039,994.00039,988.00039,966.000975.000 39,801.00039,846.00039,886.00039,920.00039,949.000990.000 39,524.00039,584.00039,643.00039,699.00039,752.0001,005.000 39,213.00039,271.00039,333.00039,396.00039,461.0001,020.000 38,960.00039,007.00039,056.00039,106.00039,158.0001,035.000 38,733.00038,778.00038,823.00038,869.00038,914.0001,050.000 38,504.00038,552.00038,598.00038,643.00038,688.0001,065.000 38,245.00038,298.00038,351.00038,402.00038,454.0001,080.000 37,979.00038,032.00038,085.00038,138.00038,192.0001,095.000 37,703.00037,761.00037,817.00037,872.00037,926.0001,110.000 37,383.00037,451.00037,517.00037,581.00037,643.0001,125.000 37,020.00037,092.00037,165.00037,239.00037,312.0001,140.000 36,687.00036,750.00036,814.00036,881.00036,950.0001,155.000 36,390.00036,450.00036,508.00036,567.00036,626.0001,170.000 36,068.00036,136.00036,202.00036,266.00036,328.0001,185.000 35,715.00035,784.00035,856.00035,927.00035,998.0001,200.000 35,384.00035,449.00035,514.00035,580.00035,647.0001,215.000 35,061.00035,125.00035,190.00035,255.00035,319.0001,230.000 34,736.00034,803.00034,868.00034,932.00034,997.0001,245.000 34,384.00034,453.00034,524.00034,596.00034,667.0001,260.000 34,052.00034,119.00034,186.00034,251.00034,317.0001,275.000 Page 15 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 33,704.00033,772.00033,843.00033,913.00033,983.0001,290.000 33,377.00033,444.00033,509.00033,574.00033,638.0001,305.000 33,035.00033,102.00033,171.00033,241.00033,310.0001,320.000 32,713.00032,779.00032,843.00032,907.00032,970.0001,335.000 32,369.00032,440.00032,510.00032,579.00032,647.0001,350.000 32,015.00032,085.00032,156.00032,227.00032,298.0001,365.000 31,663.00031,733.00031,803.00031,874.00031,944.0001,380.000 31,315.00031,384.00031,454.00031,523.00031,593.0001,395.000 30,969.00031,038.00031,107.00031,176.00031,245.0001,410.000 30,626.00030,694.00030,763.00030,831.00030,900.0001,425.000 (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)30,557.0001,440.000 Page 16 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 7.0002.0000.0000.0000.0000.000 64.00049.00036.00025.00015.00015.000 156.000136.000117.00098.00080.00030.000 262.000238.000217.000196.000176.00045.000 388.000364.000338.000312.000286.00060.000 500.000479.000457.000435.000412.00075.000 606.000585.000564.000543.000522.00090.000 712.000690.000669.000648.000627.000105.000 837.000811.000786.000760.000736.000120.000 966.000940.000914.000888.000862.000135.000 1,100.0001,072.0001,045.0001,018.000993.000150.000 1,254.0001,222.0001,190.0001,159.0001,129.000165.000 1,414.0001,382.0001,349.0001,318.0001,286.000180.000 1,576.0001,544.0001,512.0001,480.0001,447.000195.000 1,734.0001,703.0001,672.0001,640.0001,608.000210.000 1,893.0001,860.0001,828.0001,796.0001,765.000225.000 2,074.0002,036.0001,999.0001,963.0001,928.000240.000 2,264.0002,224.0002,185.0002,148.0002,111.000255.000 2,480.0002,436.0002,392.0002,349.0002,305.000270.000 2,708.0002,660.0002,614.0002,569.0002,525.000285.000 2,953.0002,907.0002,858.0002,808.0002,758.000300.000 3,154.0003,115.0003,076.0003,036.0002,995.000315.000 3,368.0003,323.0003,280.0003,238.0003,196.000330.000 3,610.0003,561.0003,512.0003,463.0003,415.000345.000 3,865.0003,812.0003,761.0003,710.0003,660.000360.000 4,146.0004,089.0004,033.0003,977.0003,921.000375.000 4,438.0004,378.0004,319.0004,261.0004,203.000390.000 4,758.0004,693.0004,628.0004,563.0004,500.000405.000 5,087.0005,020.0004,955.0004,889.0004,824.000420.000 5,421.0005,352.0005,285.0005,219.0005,153.000435.000 5,784.0005,709.0005,635.0005,563.0005,492.000450.000 6,195.0006,109.0006,025.0005,942.0005,862.000465.000 6,663.0006,563.0006,467.0006,374.0006,284.000480.000 7,207.0007,095.0006,984.0006,874.0006,767.000495.000 7,786.0007,667.0007,549.0007,434.0007,320.000510.000 8,412.0008,283.0008,156.0008,031.0007,908.000525.000 9,098.0008,954.0008,814.0008,677.0008,543.000540.000 9,822.0009,718.0009,558.0009,401.0009,247.000555.000 10,372.00010,258.00010,146.00010,037.0009,929.000570.000 10,970.00010,847.00010,725.00010,605.00010,488.000585.000 11,578.00011,467.00011,347.00011,222.00011,095.000600.000 12,029.00011,946.00011,860.00011,771.00011,678.000615.000 12,445.00012,356.00012,271.00012,190.00012,110.000630.000 Page 17 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 12,967.00012,857.00012,749.00012,644.00012,542.000645.000 13,525.00013,413.00013,301.00013,189.00013,077.000660.000 14,071.00013,962.00013,853.00013,745.00013,635.000675.000 14,604.00014,501.00014,395.00014,288.00014,179.000690.000 15,092.00014,995.00014,898.00014,801.00014,704.000705.000 15,620.00015,500.00015,391.00015,288.00015,189.000720.000 16,341.00016,186.00016,035.00015,890.00015,751.000735.000 17,173.00016,999.00016,829.00016,663.00016,500.000750.000 18,100.00017,908.00017,720.00017,535.00017,352.000765.000 19,131.00018,907.00018,695.00018,492.00018,294.000780.000 20,406.00020,139.00019,877.00019,620.00019,370.000795.000 21,715.00021,476.00021,218.00020,949.00020,677.000810.000 22,680.00022,503.00022,320.00022,131.00021,931.000825.000 23,541.00023,365.00023,194.00023,025.00022,854.000840.000 24,474.00024,285.00024,097.00023,909.00023,723.000855.000 25,405.00025,219.00025,033.00024,847.00024,661.000870.000 26,330.00026,146.00025,962.00025,776.00025,591.000885.000 27,224.00027,049.00026,871.00026,692.00026,512.000900.000 28,077.00027,910.00027,741.00027,570.00027,398.000915.000 28,869.00028,721.00028,566.00028,405.00028,242.000930.000 29,520.00029,396.00029,270.00029,141.00029,008.000945.000 30,037.00029,969.00029,875.00029,763.00029,642.000960.000 30,069.00030,085.00030,093.00030,090.00030,075.000975.000 29,917.00029,957.00029,992.00030,022.00030,048.000990.000 29,677.00029,729.00029,780.00029,829.00029,875.0001,005.000 29,410.00029,460.00029,513.00029,568.00029,623.0001,020.000 29,190.00029,232.00029,274.00029,318.00029,363.0001,035.000 28,992.00029,032.00029,071.00029,111.00029,150.0001,050.000 28,793.00028,834.00028,874.00028,914.00028,953.0001,065.000 28,568.00028,615.00028,660.00028,705.00028,749.0001,080.000 28,338.00028,384.00028,430.00028,476.00028,522.0001,095.000 28,101.00028,150.00028,199.00028,246.00028,293.0001,110.000 27,826.00027,885.00027,941.00027,996.00028,049.0001,125.000 27,518.00027,579.00027,641.00027,704.00027,766.0001,140.000 27,233.00027,287.00027,342.00027,400.00027,458.0001,155.000 26,978.00027,030.00027,080.00027,130.00027,181.0001,170.000 26,703.00026,762.00026,818.00026,873.00026,926.0001,185.000 26,403.00026,463.00026,523.00026,584.00026,644.0001,200.000 26,121.00026,177.00026,232.00026,288.00026,345.0001,215.000 25,846.00025,901.00025,956.00026,011.00026,066.0001,230.000 25,569.00025,626.00025,681.00025,736.00025,791.0001,245.000 25,270.00025,328.00025,389.00025,450.00025,510.0001,260.000 24,987.00025,045.00025,101.00025,157.00025,213.0001,275.000 Page 18 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 24,692.00024,750.00024,810.00024,870.00024,929.0001,290.000 24,414.00024,471.00024,526.00024,581.00024,636.0001,305.000 24,124.00024,181.00024,239.00024,298.00024,357.0001,320.000 23,850.00023,906.00023,961.00024,015.00024,069.0001,335.000 23,558.00023,618.00023,678.00023,736.00023,794.0001,350.000 23,258.00023,318.00023,378.00023,438.00023,498.0001,365.000 22,961.00023,020.00023,080.00023,139.00023,199.0001,380.000 22,666.00022,725.00022,784.00022,843.00022,902.0001,395.000 22,373.00022,432.00022,490.00022,549.00022,607.0001,410.000 22,083.00022,141.00022,199.00022,257.00022,315.0001,425.000 (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)22,025.0001,440.000 Page 19 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Elevation-Area Volume Curve Volume (Total) (ft³) Volume (ft³) A1+A2+sqr (A1*A2) (ft²) Area (ft²) Planimeter (ft²) Elevation (ft) 0.0000.00008,7310.00.000 19,151.00019,151.00028,72710,4460.02.000 56,438.00037,287.00037,28714,5230.05.000 Page 20 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Volume Equations Pond Volume Equations * Incremental volume computed by the Conic Method for Reservoir Volumes. Volume = (1/3) * (EL2 - El1) * (Area1 + Area2 + sqr(Area1 * Area2)) Lower and upper elevations of the incrementwhere:EL1, EL2 Areas computed for EL1, EL2, respectivelyArea1, Area2 Incremental volume between EL1 and EL2Volume Page 21 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Elevation-Area Volume Curve Volume (Total) (ft³) Volume (ft³) A1+A2+sqr (A1*A2) (ft²) Area (ft²) Planimeter (ft²) Elevation (ft) 0.0000.00004,8140.00.000 9,718.0009,718.00019,4368,3010.01.500 45,505.00035,787.00030,67512,2780.05.000 Page 22 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Volume Equations Pond Volume Equations * Incremental volume computed by the Conic Method for Reservoir Volumes. Volume = (1/3) * (EL2 - El1) * (Area1 + Area2 + sqr(Area1 * Area2)) Lower and upper elevations of the incrementwhere:EL1, EL2 Areas computed for EL1, EL2, respectivelyArea1, Area2 Incremental volume between EL1 and EL2Volume Page 23 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond) Infiltration Average Infiltration Rate Infiltration Method (Computed) in/h2.0000Infiltration Rate (Average) Initial Conditions ft0.000Elevation (Water Surface, Initial) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Outlet) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial, Total) min3.000Time Increment 2S/t + O (ft³/s) Flow (Total) (ft³/s) Infiltration (ft³/s) Area (ft²) Storage (ft³) Outflow (ft³/s) Elevation (ft) 0.000000.000000.000008,7310.0000.000000.000 213.276800.483610.4836110,44619,151.3870.000002.000 627.761340.672380.6723814,52356,438.0060.000005.000 Page 24 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Calculations Average Infiltration Rating Table Flow (Infiltration) (ft³/s) Area (Total) (ft²) Elevation (Water Surface) (ft) 0.000008,731.00.000 0.4836110,446.02.000 0.6723814,523.55.000 Page 25 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Level Pool Pond Routing Summary Infiltration Average Infiltration Rate Infiltration Method (Computed) in/h2.0000Infiltration Rate (Average) Initial Conditions ft0.000Elevation (Water Surface, Initial) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Outlet) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial, Total) min3.000Time Increment Inflow/Outflow Hydrograph Summary ft³/s2.53571Flow (Peak In)min810.000Time to Peak (Flow, In) ft³/s0.59661Infiltration (Peak)min981.000Time to Peak (Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Peak Outlet)min0.000Time to Peak (Flow, Outlet) ft3.796Elevation (Water Surface, Peak) ft³39,993.742Volume (Peak) Mass Balance (ft³) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³64,702.000Volume (Total Inflow) ft³32,878.000Volume (Total Infiltration) ft³0.000Volume (Total Outlet Outflow) ft³30,464.000Volume (Retained) ft³-1,360.000Volume (Unrouted) %2.1Error (Mass Balance) Page 26 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph ft³/s0.59661Peak Discharge min981.000Time to Peak ft³32,779.004Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.003370.002690.002080.001530.0010418.000 0.007400.006550.005730.004910.0041233.000 0.012040.011000.010030.009120.0082648.000 0.017330.016330.015290.014210.0131163.000 0.021970.021060.020150.019230.0183078.000 0.026460.025570.024680.023780.0228893.000 0.031080.030080.029130.028230.02734108.000 0.036420.035350.034280.033200.03213123.000 0.041910.040810.039710.038600.03750138.000 0.047660.046440.045250.044110.04301153.000 0.054150.052820.051500.050190.04891168.000 0.060810.059470.058120.056780.05547183.000 0.067470.066150.064830.063490.06216198.000 0.073970.072690.071390.070090.06878213.000 0.080660.079250.077870.076550.07526228.000 0.088070.086560.085050.083560.08210243.000 0.095870.094210.092610.091070.08957258.000 0.104500.102750.101020.099300.09757273.000 0.113600.111680.109820.108030.10626288.000 0.122790.121110.119330.117460.11554303.000 0.130690.129070.127510.125960.12439318.000 0.139190.137390.135650.133970.13233333.000 0.148510.146630.144760.142900.14104348.000 0.158280.156230.154240.152310.15041363.000 0.168690.166600.164500.162420.16035378.000 0.179470.177240.175060.172910.17079393.000 0.191020.188690.186360.184040.18175408.000 0.202630.200300.197970.195650.19334423.000 0.214450.212020.209620.207270.20495438.000 0.227110.224480.221900.219380.21690453.000 0.241090.238190.235340.232540.22980468.000 0.256660.253360.250170.247070.24405483.000 0.273940.270440.266960.263490.26005498.000 0.291900.288220.284590.281010.27746513.000 0.310840.306970.303140.299360.29562528.000 0.331210.326950.322810.318750.31477543.000 0.353640.349020.344480.339990.33556558.000 0.377420.372550.367740.363000.35831573.000 0.402410.397320.392280.387280.38233588.000 Page 27 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.425810.421770.417330.412530.40751603.000 0.443080.439850.436530.433110.42955618.000 0.459940.456230.452750.449460.44626633.000 0.480160.476030.471920.467850.46384648.000 0.487060.486240.485420.484590.48375663.000 0.491060.490270.489470.488670.48787678.000 0.494900.494170.493420.492640.49186693.000 0.498440.497730.497020.496320.49561708.000 0.502480.501540.500680.499890.49915723.000 0.507820.506690.505590.504520.50348738.000 0.513810.512560.511330.510140.50897753.000 0.520350.519010.517680.516380.51509768.000 0.527720.526100.524560.523110.52172783.000 0.536530.534720.532930.531160.52942798.000 0.544870.543440.541850.540140.53835813.000 0.550940.549800.548630.547430.54618828.000 0.556600.555420.554280.553160.55206843.000 0.562650.561450.560240.559020.55780858.000 0.568590.567410.566220.565030.56384873.000 0.574400.573260.572100.570930.56976888.000 0.579950.578870.577770.576660.57554903.000 0.585190.584170.583140.582090.58102918.000 0.589920.589060.588150.587190.58620933.000 0.593810.593060.592300.591520.59073948.000 0.596480.596230.595810.595230.59455963.000 0.596390.596500.596580.596610.59658978.000 0.595420.595660.595880.596080.59625993.000 0.593990.594300.594590.594880.595161,008.000 0.592490.592760.593050.593350.593671,023.000 0.591280.591510.591740.591990.592231,038.000 0.590160.590380.590610.590830.591061,053.000 0.588990.589240.589480.589710.589941,068.000 0.587690.587950.588220.588480.588741,083.000 0.586360.586620.586890.587160.587421,098.000 0.584940.585240.585530.585820.586091,113.000 0.583280.583640.583980.584310.584631,128.000 0.581460.581810.582180.582540.582911,143.000 0.579820.580130.580450.580770.581111,158.000 0.578320.578630.578930.579230.579521,173.000 0.576640.576990.577340.577670.578001,188.000 0.574850.575200.575550.575910.576281,203.000 0.573180.573510.573840.574170.574511,218.000 0.571520.571850.572180.572510.572841,233.000 0.569830.570180.570530.570860.571191,248.000 Page 28 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.568020.568370.568720.569090.569461,263.000 0.566300.566650.567000.567340.567681,278.000 0.564510.564850.565200.565570.565931,293.000 0.562800.563150.563500.563840.564171,308.000 0.561030.561360.561720.562080.562441,323.000 0.559330.559680.560020.560360.560691,338.000 0.557500.557870.558250.558610.558981,353.000 0.555640.556010.556380.556750.557131,368.000 0.553780.554150.554520.554890.555261,383.000 0.551940.552300.552670.553040.553411,398.000 0.550100.550460.550830.551200.551571,413.000 0.548270.548630.549000.549370.549731,428.000 Page 29 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (OUT) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out) ft³/s0.00000Peak Discharge min480.000Time to Peak ft³0.000Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)0.000000.000000.000 Page 30 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Inflow Summary Summary for Hydrograph Addition at 'Basin1' Upstream NodeUpstream Link DA-A<Catchment to Outflow Node> Node Inflows Flow (Peak) (ft³/s) Time to Peak (min) Volume (ft³) ElementInflow Type 2.53571810.00064,856.357DA-AFlow (From) 2.53571810.00064,701.998Basin1Flow (In) Page 31 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond) Infiltration Average Infiltration Rate Infiltration Method (Computed) in/h2.0000Infiltration Rate (Average) Initial Conditions ft0.000Elevation (Water Surface, Initial) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Outlet) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial, Total) min3.000Time Increment 2S/t + O (ft³/s) Flow (Total) (ft³/s) Infiltration (ft³/s) Area (ft²) Storage (ft³) Outflow (ft³/s) Elevation (ft) 0.000000.000000.000004,8140.0000.000000.000 108.364710.384310.384318,3019,718.2360.000001.500 506.181590.568430.5684312,27845,505.1850.000005.000 Page 32 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Calculations Average Infiltration Rating Table Flow (Infiltration) (ft³/s) Area (Total) (ft²) Elevation (Water Surface) (ft) 0.000004,814.00.000 0.384318,301.01.500 0.5684312,278.05.000 Page 33 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Level Pool Pond Routing Summary Infiltration Average Infiltration Rate Infiltration Method (Computed) in/h2.0000Infiltration Rate (Average) Initial Conditions ft0.000Elevation (Water Surface, Initial) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Outlet) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial, Total) min3.000Time Increment Inflow/Outflow Hydrograph Summary ft³/s2.06000Flow (Peak In)min810.000Time to Peak (Flow, In) ft³/s0.49767Infiltration (Peak)min981.000Time to Peak (Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Peak Outlet)min0.000Time to Peak (Flow, Outlet) ft3.655Elevation (Water Surface, Peak) ft³30,092.517Volume (Peak) Mass Balance (ft³) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³52,564.000Volume (Total Inflow) ft³28,977.000Volume (Total Infiltration) ft³0.000Volume (Total Outlet Outflow) ft³21,947.000Volume (Retained) ft³-1,640.000Volume (Unrouted) %3.1Error (Mass Balance) Page 34 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph ft³/s0.49767Peak Discharge min981.000Time to Peak ft³28,894.619Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.003400.002630.001930.001320.0007815.000 0.008240.007210.006190.005190.0042630.000 0.013760.012560.011440.010360.0092945.000 0.020330.019060.017730.016380.0150460.000 0.026070.024970.023860.022730.0215675.000 0.031450.030390.029320.028240.0271690.000 0.036780.035660.034600.033550.03250105.000 0.043010.041750.040470.039210.03796120.000 0.049420.048130.046830.045530.04427135.000 0.055960.054570.053250.051970.05070150.000 0.063400.061860.060330.058840.05738165.000 0.071080.069520.067980.066460.06493180.000 0.078730.077220.075700.074170.07263195.000 0.086120.084660.083190.081720.08023210.000 0.093470.091930.090440.089000.08756225.000 0.101700.100000.098320.096670.09506240.000 0.110270.108470.106750.105060.10339255.000 0.119890.117950.116000.114060.11214270.000 0.129900.127820.125800.123830.12186285.000 0.140450.138480.136400.134250.13206300.000 0.149050.147370.145710.144020.14228315.000 0.158020.156140.154320.152550.15079330.000 0.168070.166040.164020.161990.15998345.000 0.178500.176330.174230.172180.17012360.000 0.189800.187520.185260.183000.18074375.000 0.201350.198980.196650.194350.19208390.000 0.213830.211290.208760.206260.20378405.000 0.226390.223870.221360.218860.21635420.000 0.238980.236400.233870.231380.22889435.000 0.252390.249600.246890.244220.24159450.000 0.267270.264170.261130.258150.25523465.000 0.283870.280360.276970.273670.27044480.000 0.302740.298900.295070.291270.28752495.000 0.322310.318320.314380.310480.30660510.000 0.342930.338720.334570.330460.32637525.000 0.364930.360350.355890.351510.34719540.000 0.384960.384310.379350.374450.36963555.000 0.388430.387710.387010.386320.38564570.000 0.392170.391400.390640.389890.38915585.000 Page 35 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.395930.395250.394500.393730.39295600.000 0.398700.398190.397670.397120.39655615.000 0.401250.400700.400190.399690.39920630.000 0.404410.403750.403100.402460.40184645.000 0.407780.407110.406430.405760.40508660.000 0.411040.410390.409740.409090.40844675.000 0.414210.413590.412970.412330.41169690.000 0.417080.416510.415940.415370.41480705.000 0.420170.419480.418840.418240.41765720.000 0.424360.423460.422590.421750.42094735.000 0.429150.428150.427170.426220.42528750.000 0.434420.433330.432270.431210.43017765.000 0.440210.438950.437770.436630.43551780.000 0.447270.445800.444350.442930.44154795.000 0.454400.453110.451710.450240.44875810.000 0.459600.458650.457670.456650.45557825.000 0.464180.463250.462340.461440.46053840.000 0.469090.468110.467110.466120.46514855.000 0.473950.472990.472020.471040.47007870.000 0.478720.477780.476830.475870.47491885.000 0.483300.482400.481500.480580.47966900.000 0.487610.486770.485920.485050.48418915.000 0.491590.490850.490070.489270.48845930.000 0.494830.494210.493590.492950.49228945.000 0.497390.497060.496590.496030.49544960.000 0.497550.497630.497670.497660.49758975.000 0.496800.496990.497170.497320.49745990.000 0.495610.495870.496120.496360.496591,005.000 0.494280.494530.494800.495070.495341,020.000 0.493190.493400.493610.493830.494051,035.000 0.492200.492400.492600.492790.492991,050.000 0.491210.491410.491610.491810.492011,065.000 0.490080.490310.490540.490770.490991,080.000 0.488930.489160.489390.489620.489851,095.000 0.487730.487980.488230.488460.488701,110.000 0.486350.486640.486930.487200.487471,125.000 0.484790.485100.485410.485730.486041,140.000 0.483340.483610.483900.484190.484481,155.000 0.482040.482310.482560.482820.483081,170.000 0.480640.480940.481220.481500.481781,185.000 0.479100.479410.479710.480030.480341,200.000 0.477650.477940.478220.478510.478801,215.000 0.476230.476520.476800.477080.477371,230.000 0.474800.475090.475380.475660.475951,245.000 Page 36 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.473250.473550.473870.474180.474491,260.000 0.471780.472080.472370.472660.472951,275.000 0.470240.470540.470850.471160.471471,290.000 0.468780.469080.469370.469660.469941,305.000 0.467260.467560.467860.468170.468481,320.000 0.465820.466110.466400.466680.466971,335.000 0.464270.464590.464900.465210.465521,350.000 0.462680.463000.463320.463630.463951,365.000 0.461100.461410.461730.462050.462361,380.000 0.459520.459840.460150.460470.460781,395.000 0.457950.458270.458580.458890.459211,410.000 0.456390.456700.457010.457330.457641,425.000 (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)0.456081,440.000 Page 37 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (OUT) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out) ft³/s0.00000Peak Discharge min480.000Time to Peak ft³0.000Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)0.000000.000000.000 Page 38 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Inflow Summary Summary for Hydrograph Addition at 'Basin2' Upstream NodeUpstream Link DA-B<Catchment to Outflow Node> Node Inflows Flow (Peak) (ft³/s) Time to Peak (min) Volume (ft³) ElementInflow Type 2.06000810.00052,689.000DA-BFlow (From) 2.06000810.00052,563.600Basin2Flow (In) Page 39 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Index User Notifications...2 U Master Network Summary...3 M DA-B (Read Hydrograph)... DA-A (Read Hydrograph)... D Basin2 (Volume Equations)... Basin2 (Time vs. Volume)... Basin2 (OUT) (Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out))... Basin2 (INF) (Pond Infiltration Hydrograph)... Basin2 (IN) (Time vs. Elevation)... Basin2 (IN) (Pond Inflow Summary)... Basin2 (IN) (Pond Infiltration Calculations)... Basin2 (IN) (Level Pool Pond Routing Summary)... Basin2 (Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond))... Basin2 (Elevation-Area Volume Curve)... Basin1 (Volume Equations)... Basin1 (Time vs. Volume)... Basin1 (OUT) (Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out))... Basin1 (INF) (Pond Infiltration Hydrograph)... Basin1 (IN) (Time vs. Elevation)... Basin1 (IN) (Pond Inflow Summary)... Basin1 (IN) (Pond Infiltration Calculations)... Basin1 (IN) (Level Pool Pond Routing Summary)... Basin1 (Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond))... Basin1 (Elevation-Area Volume Curve)... B Page 40 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Palm Villas at Milleniu m Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report APPENDIX C : REFERENCES 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA Appendix D Educational Materials Non-Stormwater Discharges SC-10 Objectives Cover Contain Educate Reduce/Minimize Product Substitution Targeted Constituents Sediment Nutrients Trash Metals Bacteria Oil and Grease Organics Description Non-stormwater discharges are those flows that do not consist entirely of stormwater. Some non-stormwater discharges do not include pollutants and may be discharged to the storm drain. These include uncontaminated groundwater and natural springs. There are also some non-stormwater discharges that typically do not contain pollutants and may be discharged to the storm drain with conditions. These include car washing, air conditioner condensate, etc. However there are certain non-stormwater discharges that pose environmental concern. These discharges may originate from illegal dumping or from internal floor drains, appliances, industrial processes, sinks, and toilets that are connected to the nearby storm drainage system. These discharges (which may include: process waste waters, cooling waters, wash waters, and sanitary wastewater) can carry substances such as paint, oil, fuel and other automotive fluids, chemicals and other pollutants into storm drains. They can generally be detected through a combination of detection and elimination. The ultimate goal is to effectively eliminate non- stormwater discharges to the stormwater drainage system through implementation of measures to detect, correct, and enforce against illicit connections and illegal discharges of pollutants on streets and into the storm drain system and creeks. Approach Initially the industry must make an assessment of non- stormwater discharges to determine which types must be eliminated or addressed through BMPs. The focus of the following approach is in the elimination of non-stormwater discharges. January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 1 of 6 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-10 Non-Stormwater Discharges Pollution Prevention Ensure that used oil, used antifreeze, and hazardous chemical recycling programs are being implemented. Encourage litter control. Suggested Protocols Recommended Complaint Investigation Equipment Field Screening Analysis -pH paper or meter -Commercial stormwater pollutant screening kit that can detect for reactive phosphorus, nitrate nitrogen, ammonium nitrogen, specific conductance, and turbidity -Sample jars -Sample collection pole -A tool to remove access hole covers Laboratory Analysis -Sample cooler -Ice -Sample jars and labels -Chain of custody forms Documentation -Camera -Notebook -Pens -Notice of Violation forms -Educational materials General Develop clear protocols and lines of communication for effectively prohibiting non- stormwater discharges, especially those that are not classified as hazardous. These are often not responded to as effectively as they need to be. Stencil or demarcate storm drains, where applicable, to prevent illegal disposal of pollutants. Storm drain inlets should have messages such as³Dump No Waste Drains to Stream´ stenciled or demarcated next to them to warn against ignorant or intentional dumping of pollutants into the storm drainage system. 2 of 6 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com Non-Stormwater Discharges SC-10 See SC44 Stormwater Drainage System Maintenance for additional information. Illicit Connections Locate discharges from the industrial storm drainage system to the municipal storm drain system through review of ³as-built´ piping schematics. Isolate problem areas and plug illicit discharge points. Locate and evaluate all discharges to the industrial storm drain system. Visual Inspection and Inventory Inventory and inspect each discharge point during dry weather. Keep in mind that drainage from a storm event can continue for a day or two following the end of a storm and groundwater may infiltrate the underground stormwater collection system. Also, non-stormwater discharges are often intermittent and may require periodic inspections. Review Infield Piping A review of the ³as-built´ piping schematic is a way to determine if there are any connections to the stormwater collection system. Inspect the path of floor drains in older buildings. Smoke Testing Smoke testing of wastewater and stormwater collection systems is used to detect connections between the two systems. During dry weather the stormwater collection system is filled with smoke and then traced to sources. The appearance of smoke at the base of a toilet indicates that there may be a connection between the sanitary and the stormwater system. Dye Testing A dye test can be performed by simply releasing a dye into either your sanitary or process wastewater system and examining the discharge points from the stormwater collection system for discoloration. TV Inspection of Drainage System TV Cameras can be employed to visually identify illicit connections to the industrial storm drainage system. Illegal Dumping Regularly inspect and clean up hot spots and other storm drainage areas where illegal dumping and disposal occurs. On paved surfaces, clean up spills with as little water as possible. Use a rag for small spills, a damp mop for general cleanup, and absorbent material for larger spills. If the spilled material is hazardous, then the used cleanup materials are also hazardous and must be sent to a certified laundry (rags) or disposed of as hazardous waste. January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 3 of 6 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-10 Non-Stormwater Discharges Never hose down or bury dry material spills. Sweep up the material and dispose of properly. Use adsorbent materials on small spills rather than hosing down the spill. Remove the adsorbent materials promptly and dispose of properly. For larger spills, a private spill cleanup company or Hazmat team may be necessary. Once a site has been cleaned: Post ³No Dumping´ signs with a phone number for reporting dumping and disposal. Landscaping and beautification efforts of hot spots may also discourage future dumping, as well as provide open space and increase property values. Lighting or barriers may also be needed to discourage future dumping. See fact sheet SC11 Spill Prevention, Control, and Cleanup. Inspection Regularly inspect and clean up hot spots and other storm drainage areas where illegal dumping and disposal occurs. Conduct field investigations of the industrial storm drain system for potential sources of non-stormwater discharges. Pro-actively conduct investigations of high priority areas. Based on historical data, prioritize specific geographic areas and/or incident type for pro-active investigations. Reporting A database is useful for defining and tracking the magnitude and location of the problem. Report prohibited non-stormwater discharges observed during the course of normal daily activities so they can be investigated, contained, and cleaned up or eliminated. Document that non-stormwater discharges have been eliminated by recording tests performed, methods used, dates of testing, and any on-site drainage points observed. Document and report annually the results of the program. Maintain documentation of illicit connection and illegal dumping incidents, including significant conditionally exempt discharges that are not properly managed. Training Training of technical staff in identifying and documenting illegal dumping incidents is required. Consider posting the quick reference table near storm drains to reinforce training. Train employees to identify non-stormwater discharges and report discharges to the appropriate departments. 4 of 6 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com Non-Stormwater Discharges SC-10 Educate employees about spill prevention and cleanup. Well-trained employees can reduce human errors that lead to accidental releases or spills. The employee should have the tools and knowledge to immediately begin cleaning up a spill should one occur. Employees should be familiar with the Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan. Determine and implement appropriate outreach efforts to reduce non-permissible non- stormwater discharges. Conduct spill response drills annually (if no events occurred to evaluate your plan) in cooperation with other industries. When a responsible party is identified, educate the party on the impacts of his or her actions. Spill Response and Prevention See SC11 Spill Prevention Control and Cleanup. Other Considerations Many facilities do not have accurate, up-to-date schematic drawings. Requirements Costs (including capital and operation & maintenance) The primary cost is for staff time and depends on how aggressively a program is implemented. Cost for containment and disposal is borne by the discharger. Illicit connections can be difficult to locate especially if there is groundwater infiltration. Indoor floor drains may require re-plumbing if cross-connections to storm drains are detected. Maintenance (including administrative and staffing) Illegal dumping and illicit connection violations requires technical staff to detect and investigate them. Supplemental Information Further Detail of the BMP Illegal Dumping Substances illegally dumped on streets and into the storm drain systems and creeks include paints, used oil and other automotive fluids, construction debris, chemicals, fresh concrete, leaves, grass clippings, and pet wastes. All of these wastes cause stormwater and receiving water quality problems as well as clog the storm drain system itself. Establish a system for tracking incidents. The system should be designed to identify the following: -Illegal dumping hot spots January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 5 of 6 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-10 Non-Stormwater Discharges 6 of 6 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com -Types and quantities (in some cases) of wastes -Patterns in time of occurrence (time of day/night, month, or year) -Mode of dumping (abandoned containers, ³midnight dumping´ from moving vehicles, direct dumping of materials, accidents/spills) -Responsible parties One of the keys to success of reducing or eliminating illegal dumping is increasing the number of people at the facility who are aware of the problem and who have the tools to at least identify the incident, if not correct it. Therefore, train field staff to recognize and report the incidents. What constitutes a ³non-stormwater´ discharge? Non-stormwater discharges to the stormwater collection system may include any water used directly in the manufacturing process (process wastewater), air conditioning condensate and coolant, non-contact cooling water, cooling equipment condensate, outdoor secondary containment water, vehicle and equipment wash water, sink and drinking fountain wastewater, sanitary wastes, or other wastewaters. Permit Requirements Facilities subject to stormwater permit requirements must include a certification that the stormwater collection system has been tested or evaluated for the presence of non- stormwater discharges. The State¶s General Industrial Stormwater Permit requires that non- stormwater discharges be eliminated prior to implementation of the facility¶s SWPPP. Performance Evaluation Review annually internal investigation results; assess whether goals were met and what changes or improvements are necessary. Obtain feedback from personnel assigned to respond to, or inspect for, illicit connections and illegal dumping incidents. References and Resources California¶s Nonpoint Source Program Plan http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/nps/index.html Clark County Storm Water Pollution Control Manual http://www.co.clark.wa.us/pubworks/bmpman.pdf King County Storm Water Pollution Control Manual http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/dss/spcm.htm Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program http://www.scvurppp.org The Storm Water Managers Resource Center http://www.stormwatercenter.net/ Waste Handling & Disposal SC-34 Objectives „ Cover „ Contain „ Educate „ Reduce/Minimize „ Product Substitution Targeted Constituents Sediment Nutrients Trash Metals  Bacteria  Oil and Grease  Organics  Description Improper storage and handling of solid wastes can allow toxic compounds, oils and greases, heavy metals, nutrients, suspended solids, and other pollutants to enter stormwater runoff. The discharge of pollutants to stormwater from waste handling and disposal can be prevented and reduced by tracking waste generation, storage, and disposal; reducing waste generation and disposal through source reduction, reuse, and recycling; and preventing run-on and runoff. Approach Pollution Prevention „ Accomplish reduction in the amount of waste generated using the following source controls: - Production planning and sequencing - Process or equipment modification - Raw material substitution or elimination - Loss prevention and housekeeping - Waste segregation and separation - Close loop recycling „ Establish a material tracking system to increase awareness about material usage. This may reduce spills and minimize contamination, thus reducing the amount of waste produced. „ Recycle materials whenever possible. January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 1 of 5 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-34 Waste Handling & Disposal Suggested Protocols General „ Cover storage containers with leak proof lids or some other means. If waste is not in containers, cover all waste piles (plastic tarps are acceptable coverage) and prevent stormwater run-on and runoff with a berm. The waste containers or piles must be covered except when in use. „ Use drip pans or absorbent materials whenever grease containers are emptied by vacuum trucks or other means. Grease cannot be left on the ground. Collected grease must be properly disposed of as garbage. „ Check storage containers weekly for leaks and to ensure that lids are on tightly. Replace any that are leaking, corroded, or otherwise deteriorating. „ Sweep and clean the storage area regularly. If it is paved, do not hose down the area to a storm drain. „ Dispose of rinse and wash water from cleaning waste containers into a sanitary sewer if allowed by the local sewer authority. Do not discharge wash water to the street or storm drain. „ Transfer waste from damaged containers into safe containers. „ Take special care when loading or unloading wastes to minimize losses. Loading systems can be used to minimize spills and fugitive emission losses such as dust or mist. Vacuum transfer systems can minimize waste loss. Controlling Litter „ Post “No Littering” signs and enforce anti-litter laws. „ Provide a sufficient number of litter receptacles for the facility. „ Clean out and cover litter receptacles frequently to prevent spillage. Waste Collection „ Keep waste collection areas clean. „ Inspect solid waste containers for structural damage regularly. Repair or replace damaged containers as necessary. „ Secure solid waste containers; containers must be closed tightly when not in use. „ Do not fill waste containers with washout water or any other liquid. „ Ensure that only appropriate solid wastes are added to the solid waste container. Certain wastes such as hazardous wastes, appliances, fluorescent lamps, pesticides, etc., may not be disposed of in solid waste containers (see chemical/ hazardous waste collection section below). 2 of 5 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com Waste Handling & Disposal SC-34 „ Do not mix wastes; this can cause chemical reactions, make recycling impossible, and complicate disposal. Good Housekeeping „ Use all of the product before disposing of the container. „ Keep the waste management area clean at all times by sweeping and cleaning up spills immediately. „ Use dry methods when possible (e.g., sweeping, use of absorbents) when cleaning around restaurant/food handling dumpster areas. If water must be used after sweeping/using absorbents, collect water and discharge through grease interceptor to the sewer. Chemical/Hazardous Wastes „ Select designated hazardous waste collection areas on-site. „ Store hazardous materials and wastes in covered containers and protect them from vandalism. „ Place hazardous waste containers in secondary containment. „ Make sure that hazardous waste is collected, removed, and disposed of only at authorized disposal areas. „ Stencil or demarcate storm drains on the facility’s property with prohibitive message regarding waste disposal. Run-on/Runoff Prevention „ Prevent stormwater run-on from entering the waste management area by enclosing the area or building a berm around the area. „ Prevent waste materials from directly contacting rain. „ Cover waste piles with temporary covering material such as reinforced tarpaulin, polyethylene, polyurethane, polypropyleneor hypalon. „ Cover the area with a permanent roof if feasible. „ Cover dumpsters to prevent rain from washing waste out of holes or cracks in the bottom of the dumpster. „ Move the activity indoor after ensuring all safety concerns such as fire hazard and ventilation are addressed. Inspection „ Inspect and replace faulty pumps or hoses regularly to minimize the potential of releases and spills. „ Check waste management areas for leaking containers or spills. January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 3 of 5 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-34 Waste Handling & Disposal „ Repair leaking equipment including valves, lines, seals, or pumps promptly. Training „ Train staff in pollution prevention measures and proper disposal methods. „ Train employees and contractors in proper spill containment and cleanup. The employee should have the tools and knowledge to immediately begin cleaning up a spill should one occur. „ Train employees and subcontractors in proper hazardous waste management. Spill Response and Prevention „ Keep your Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan up-to-date. „ Have an emergency plan, equipment and trained personnel ready at all times to deal immediately with major spills „ Collect all spilled liquids and properly dispose of them. „ Store and maintain appropriate spill cleanup materials in a location known to all near the designated wash area. „ Ensure that vehicles transporting waste have spill prevention equipment that can prevent spills during transport. Spill prevention equipment includes: - Vehicles equipped with baffles for liquid waste - Trucks with sealed gates and spill guards for solid waste Other Considerations (Limitations and Regulations) Hazardous waste cannot be reused or recycled; it must be disposed of by a licensed hazardous waste hauler. Requirements Costs Capital and O&M costs for these programs will vary substantially depending on the size of the facility and the types of waste handled. Costs should be low if there is an inventory program in place. Maintenance „ None except for maintaining equipment for material tracking program. Supplemental Information Further Detail of the BMP Land Treatment System Minimize runoff of polluted stormwater from land application by: „ Choosing a site where slopes are under 6%, the soil is permeable, there is a low water table, it is located away from wetlands or marshes, and there is a closed drainage system 4 of 5 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com Waste Handling & Disposal SC-34 January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 5 of 5 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com „ Avoiding application of waste to the site when it is raining or when the ground is saturated with water „ Growing vegetation on land disposal areas to stabilize soils and reduce the volume of surface water runoff from the site „ Maintaining adequate barriers between the land application site and the receiving waters (planted strips are particularly good) „ Using erosion control techniques such as mulching and matting, filter fences, straw bales, diversion terracing, and sediment basins „ Performing routine maintenance to ensure the erosion control or site stabilization measures are working Examples The port of Long Beach has a state-of-the-art database for identifying potential pollutant sources, documenting facility management practices, and tracking pollutants. References and Resources California’s Nonpoint Source Program Plan http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/nps/index.html Clark County Storm Water Pollution Control Manual http://www.co.clark.wa.us/pubworks/bmpman.pdf Solid Waste Container Best Management Practices – Fact Sheet On-Line Resources – Environmental Health and Safety. Harvard University. 2002. King County Storm Water Pollution Control Manual http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/dss/spcm.htm Pollution from Surface Cleaning Folder. 1996. Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA). http://www.basmaa.org Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program http://www.scvurppp.org The Storm Water Managers Resource Center http://www.stormwatercenter.net/ Building & Grounds Maintenance SC-41 Objectives „ Cover „ Contain „ Educate „ Reduce/Minimize „ Product Substitution Targeted Constituents Sediment  Nutrients  Trash Metals  Bacteria  Oil and Grease Organics Description Stormwater runoff from building and grounds maintenance activities can be contaminated with toxic hydrocarbons in solvents, fertilizers and pesticides, suspended solids, heavy metals, abnormal pH, and oils and greases. Utilizing the protocols in this fact sheet will prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants to stormwater from building and grounds maintenance activities by washing and cleaning up with as little water as possible, following good landscape management practices, preventing and cleaning up spills immediately, keeping debris from entering the storm drains, and maintaining the stormwater collection system. Approach Reduce potential for pollutant discharge through source control pollution prevention and BMP implementation. Successful implementation depends on effective training of employees on applicable BMPs and general pollution prevention strategies and objectives. Pollution Prevention „ Switch to non-toxic chemicals for maintenance when possible. „ Choose cleaning agents that can be recycled. „ Encourage proper lawn management and landscaping, including use of native vegetation. January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 1 of 5 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-41 Building & Grounds Maintenance „ Encourage use of Integrated Pest Management techniques for pest control. „ Encourage proper onsite recycling of yard trimmings. „ Recycle residual paints, solvents, lumber, and other material as much as possible. Suggested Protocols Pressure Washing of Buildings, Rooftops, and Other Large Objects „ In situations where soaps or detergents are used and the surrounding area is paved, pressure washers must use a water collection device that enables collection of wash water and associated solids. A sump pump, wet vacuum or similarly effective device must be used to collect the runoff and loose materials. The collected runoff and solids must be disposed of properly. „ If soaps or detergents are not used, and the surrounding area is paved, wash runoff does not have to be collected but must be screened. Pressure washers must use filter fabric or some other type of screen on the ground and/or in the catch basin to trap the particles in wash water runoff. „ If you are pressure washing on a grassed area (with or without soap), runoff must be dispersed as sheet flow as much as possible, rather than as a concentrated stream. The wash runoff must remain on the grass and not drain to pavement. Landscaping Activities „ Dispose of grass clippings, leaves, sticks, or other collected vegetation as garbage, or by composting. Do not dispose of collected vegetation into waterways or storm drainage systems. „ Use mulch or other erosion control measures on exposed soils. Building Repair, Remodeling, and Construction „ Do not dump any toxic substance or liquid waste on the pavement, the ground, or toward a storm drain. „ Use ground or drop cloths underneath outdoor painting, scraping, and sandblasting work, and properly dispose of collected material daily. „ Use a ground cloth or oversized tub for activities such as paint mixing and tool cleaning. „ Clean paintbrushes and tools covered with water-based paints in sinks connected to sanitary sewers or in portable containers that can be dumped into a sanitary sewer drain. Brushes and tools covered with non-water-based paints, finishes, or other materials must be cleaned in a manner that enables collection of used solvents (e.g., paint thinner, turpentine, etc.) for recycling or proper disposal. „ Use a storm drain cover, filter fabric, or similarly effective runoff control mechanism if dust, grit, wash water, or other pollutants may escape the work area and enter a catch basin. This is particularly necessary on rainy days. The containment device(s) must be in place at the beginning of the work day, and accumulated dirty runoff and solids must be collected and disposed of before removing the containment device(s) at the end of the work day. 2 of 5 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com Building & Grounds Maintenance SC-41 „ If you need to de-water an excavation site, you may need to filter the water before discharging to a catch basin or off-site. If directed off-site, you should direct the water through hay bales and filter fabric or use other sediment filters or traps. „ Store toxic material under cover during precipitation events and when not in use. A cover would include tarps or other temporary cover material. Mowing, Trimming, and Planting „ Dispose of leaves, sticks, or other collected vegetation as garbage, by composting or at a permitted landfill. Do not dispose of collected vegetation into waterways or storm drainage systems. „ Use mulch or other erosion control measures when soils are exposed. „ Place temporarily stockpiled material away from watercourses and drain inlets, and berm or cover stockpiles to prevent material releases to the storm drain system. „ Consider an alternative approach when bailing out muddy water: do not put it in the storm drain; pour over landscaped areas. „ Use hand weeding where practical. Fertilizer and Pesticide Management „ Follow all federal, state, and local laws and regulations governing the use, storage, and disposal of fertilizers and pesticides and training of applicators and pest control advisors. „ Use less toxic pesticides that will do the job when applicable. Avoid use of copper-based pesticides if possible. „ Do not use pesticides if rain is expected. „ Do not mix or prepare pesticides for application near storm drains. „ Use the minimum amount needed for the job. „ Calibrate fertilizer distributors to avoid excessive application. „ Employ techniques to minimize off-target application (e.g., spray drift) of pesticides, including consideration of alternative application techniques. „ Apply pesticides only when wind speeds are low. „ Fertilizers should be worked into the soil rather than dumped or broadcast onto the surface. „ Irrigate slowly to prevent runoff and then only as much as is needed. „ Clean pavement and sidewalk if fertilizer is spilled on these surfaces before applying irrigation water. „ Dispose of empty pesticide containers according to the instructions on the container label. January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 3 of 5 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-41 Building & Grounds Maintenance „ Use up the pesticides. Rinse containers, and use rinse water as product. Dispose of unused pesticide as hazardous waste. „ Implement storage requirements for pesticide products with guidance from the local fire department and County Agricultural Commissioner. Provide secondary containment for pesticides. Inspection „ Inspect irrigation system periodically to ensure that the right amount of water is being applied and that excessive runoff is not occurring. Minimize excess watering and repair leaks in the irrigation system as soon as they are observed. Training „ Educate and train employees on pesticide use and in pesticide application techniques to prevent pollution. „ Train employees and contractors in proper techniques for spill containment and cleanup. „ Be sure the frequency of training takes into account the complexity of the operations and the nature of the staff. Spill Response and Prevention „ Keep your Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan up-to-date. „ Place a stockpile of spill cleanup materials, such as brooms, dustpans, and vacuum sweepers (if desired) near the storage area where it will be readily accessible. „ Have employees trained in spill containment and cleanup present during the loading/unloading of dangerous wastes, liquid chemicals, or other materials. „ Familiarize employees with the Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan. „ Clean up spills immediately. Other Considerations Alternative pest/weed controls may not be available, suitable, or effective in many cases. Requirements Costs „ Cost will vary depending on the type and size of facility. „ Overall costs should be low in comparison to other BMPs. Maintenance Sweep paved areas regularly to collect loose particles. Wipe up spills with rags and other absorbent material immediately, do not hose down the area to a storm drain. 4 of 5 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com Building & Grounds Maintenance SC-41 January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 5 of 5 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com Supplemental Information Further Detail of the BMP Fire Sprinkler Line Flushing Building fire sprinkler line flushing may be a source of non-stormwater runoff pollution. The water entering the system is usually potable water, though in some areas it may be non-potable reclaimed wastewater. There are subsequent factors that may drastically reduce the quality of the water in such systems. Black iron pipe is usually used since it is cheaper than potable piping, but it is subject to rusting and results in lower quality water. Initially, the black iron pipe has an oil coating to protect it from rusting between manufacture and installation; this will contaminate the water from the first flush but not from subsequent flushes. Nitrates, poly- phosphates and other corrosion inhibitors, as well as fire suppressants and antifreeze may be added to the sprinkler water system. Water generally remains in the sprinkler system a long time (typically a year) and between flushes may accumulate iron, manganese, lead, copper, nickel, and zinc. The water generally becomes anoxic and contains living and dead bacteria and breakdown products from chlorination. This may result in a significant BOD problem and the water often smells. Consequently dispose fire sprinkler line flush water into the sanitary sewer. Do not allow discharge to storm drain or infiltration due to potential high levels of pollutants in fire sprinkler line water. References and Resources California’s Nonpoint Source Program Plan http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/nps/index.html Clark County Storm Water Pollution Control Manual http://www.co.clark.wa.us/pubworks/bmpman.pdf King County Storm Water Pollution Control Manual http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/dss/spcm.htm Mobile Cleaners Pilot Program: Final Report. 1997. Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA). http://www.basmaa.org/ Pollution from Surface Cleaning Folder. 1996. Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA). http://www.basmaa.org/ Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program http://www.scvurppp.org The Storm Water Managers Resource Center http://www.stormwatercenter.net/ Drainage System Maintenance SC-44 Objectives Cover Contain Educate Reduce/Minimize Targeted Constituents Sediment Nutrients Trash Metals Bacteria Oil and Grease Organics Description As a consequence of its function, the stormwater conveyance system collects and transports urban runoff and stormwater that may contain certain pollutants. The protocols in this fact sheet are intended to reduce pollutants reaching receiving waters through proper conveyance system operation and maintenance. Approach Pollution Prevention Maintain catch basins, stormwater inlets, and other stormwater conveyance structures on a regular basis to remove pollutants, reduce high pollutant concentrations during the first flush of storms, prevent clogging of the downstream conveyance system, restore catch basins¶ sediment trapping capacity, and ensure the system functions properly hydraulically to avoid flooding. Suggested Protocols Catch Basins/Inlet Structures Staff should regularly inspect facilities to ensure compliance with the following: -Immediate repair of any deterioration threatening structural integrity. -Cleaning before the sump is 40% full. Catch basins should be cleaned as frequently as needed to meet this standard. -Stenciling of catch basins and inlets (see SC34 Waste Handling and Disposal). January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 1 of 6 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-44 Drainage System Maintenance Clean catch basins, storm drain inlets, and other conveyance structures before the wet season to remove sediments and debris accumulated during the summer. Conduct inspections more frequently during the wet season for problem areas where sediment or trash accumulates more often. Clean and repair as needed. Keep accurate logs of the number of catch basins cleaned. Store wastes collected from cleaning activities of the drainage system in appropriate containers or temporary storage sites in a manner that prevents discharge to the storm drain. Dewater the wastes if necessary with outflow into the sanitary sewer if permitted. Water should be treated with an appropriate filtering device prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer. If discharge to the sanitary sewer is not allowed, water should be pumped or vacuumed to a tank and properly disposed. Do not dewater near a storm drain or stream. Storm Drain Conveyance System Locate reaches of storm drain with deposit problems and develop a flushing schedule that keeps the pipe clear of excessive buildup. Collect and pump flushed effluent to the sanitary sewer for treatment whenever possible. Pump Stations Clean all storm drain pump stations prior to the wet season to remove silt and trash. Do not allow discharge to reach the storm drain system when cleaning a storm drain pump station or other facility. Conduct routine maintenance at each pump station. Inspect, clean, and repair as necessary all outlet structures prior to the wet season. Open Channel Modify storm channel characteristics to improve channel hydraulics, increase pollutant removals, and enhance channel/creek aesthetic and habitat value. Conduct channel modification/improvement in accordance with existing laws. Any person, government agency, or public utility proposing an activity that will change the natural (emphasis added) state of any river, stream, or lake in California, must enter into a Steam or Lake Alteration Agreement with the Department of Fish and Game. The developer-applicant should also contact local governments (city, county, special districts), other state agencies (SWRCB, RWQCB, Department of Forestry, Department of Water Resources), and Federal Corps of Engineers and USFWS. Illicit Connections and Discharges Look for evidence of illegal discharges or illicit connections during routine maintenance of conveyance system and drainage structures: -Is there evidence of spills such as paints, discoloring, etc? 2 of 6 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com Drainage System Maintenance SC-44 -Are there any odors associated with the drainage system? -Record locations of apparent illegal discharges/illicit connections? -Track flows back to potential dischargers and conduct aboveground inspections. This can be done through visual inspection of upgradient manholes or alternate techniques including zinc chloride smoke testing, fluorometric dye testing, physical inspection testing, or television camera inspection. -Eliminate the discharge once the origin of flow is established. Stencil or demarcate storm drains, where applicable, to prevent illegal disposal of pollutants. Storm drain inlets should have messages such as³Dump No Waste Drains to Stream´ stenciled next to them to warn against ignorant or intentional dumping of pollutants into the storm drainage system. Refer to fact sheet SC-10 Non-Stormwater Discharges. Illegal Dumping Inspect and clean up hot spots and other storm drainage areas regularly where illegal dumping and disposal occurs. Establish a system for tracking incidents. The system should be designed to identify the following: -Illegal dumping hot spots -Types and quantities (in some cases) of wastes -Patterns in time of occurrence (time of day/night, month, or year) -Mode of dumping (abandoned containers, ³midnight dumping´ from moving vehicles, direct dumping of materials, accidents/spills) -Responsible parties Post ³No Dumping´ signs in problem areas with a phone number for reporting dumping and disposal. Signs should also indicate fines and penalties for illegal dumping. Refer to fact sheet SC-10 Non-Stormwater Discharges. Training Train crews in proper maintenance activities, including record keeping and disposal. Allow only properly trained individuals to handle hazardous materials/wastes. Have staff involved in detection and removal of illicit connections trained in the following: -OSHA-required Health and Safety Training (29 CFR 1910.120) plus annual refresher training (as needed). January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 3 of 6 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-44 Drainage System Maintenance -OSHA Confined Space Entry training (Cal-OSHA Confined Space, Title 8 and Federal OSHA 29 CFR 1910.146). -Procedural training (field screening, sampling, smoke/dye testing, TV inspection). Spill Response and Prevention Investigate all reports of spills, leaks, and/or illegal dumping promptly. Clean up all spills and leaks using ³dry´ methods (with absorbent materials and/or rags) or dig up, remove, and properly dispose of contaminated soil. Refer to fact sheet SC-11 Spill Prevention, Control, and Cleanup. Other Considerations (Limitations and Regulations) Clean-up activities may create a slight disturbance for local aquatic species. Access to items and material on private property may be limited. Trade-offs may exist between channel hydraulics and water quality/riparian habitat. If storm channels or basins are recognized as wetlands, many activities, including maintenance, may be subject to regulation and permitting. Storm drain flushing is most effective in small diameter pipes (36-inch diameter pipe or less, depending on water supply and sediment collection capacity). Other considerations associated with storm drain flushing may include the availability of a water source, finding a downstream area to collect sediments, liquid/sediment disposal, and prohibition against disposal of flushed effluent to sanitary sewer in some areas. Regulations may include adoption of substantial penalties for illegal dumping and disposal. Local municipal codes may include sections prohibiting discharge of soil, debris, refuse, hazardous wastes, and other pollutants into the storm drain system. Requirements Costs An aggressive catch basin cleaning program could require a significant capital and O&M budget. The elimination of illegal dumping is dependent on the availability, convenience, and cost of alternative means of disposal. The primary cost is for staff time. Cost depends on how aggressively a program is implemented. Other cost considerations for an illegal dumping program include: -Purchase and installation of signs. -Rental of vehicle(s) to haul illegally-disposed items and material to landfills. -Rental of heavy equipment to remove larger items (e.g., car bodies) from channels. -Purchase of landfill space to dispose of illegally-dumped items and material. 4 of 6 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com Drainage System Maintenance SC-44 Methods used for illicit connection detection (smoke testing, dye testing, visual inspection, and flow monitoring) can be costly and time-consuming. Site-specific factors, such as the level of impervious area, the density and ages of buildings, and type of land use will determine the level of investigation necessary. Maintenance Two-person teams may be required to clean catch basins with vactor trucks. Teams of at least two people plus administrative personnel are required to identify illicit discharges, depending on the complexity of the storm sewer system. Arrangements must be made for proper disposal of collected wastes. Technical staff are required to detect and investigate illegal dumping violations. Supplemental Information Further Detail of the BMP Storm Drain Flushing Flushing is a common maintenance activity used to improve pipe hydraulics and to remove pollutants in storm drainage systems. Flushing may be designed to hydraulically convey accumulated material to strategic locations, such as an open channel, another point where flushing will be initiated, or the sanitary sewer and the treatment facilities,thus preventing resuspension and overflow of a portion of the solids during storm events. Flushing prevents ³plug flow´discharges of concentrated pollutant loadings and sediments. Deposits can hinder the designed conveyance capacity of the storm drain system and potentially cause backwater conditions in severe cases of clogging. Storm drain flushing usually takes place along segments of pipe with grades that are too flat to maintain adequate velocity to keep particles in suspension. An upstream manhole is selected to place an inflatable device that temporarily plugs the pipe. Further upstream, water is pumped into the line to create a flushing wave. When the upstream reach of pipe is sufficiently full to cause a flushing wave, the inflated device is rapidly deflated with the assistance of a vacuum pump, thereby releasing the backed up water and resulting in the cleaning of the storm drain segment. To further reduce impacts of stormwater pollution, a second inflatable device placed well downstream may be used to recollect the water after the force of the flushing wave has dissipated. A pump may then be used to transfer the water and accumulated material to the sanitary sewer for treatment. In some cases, an interceptor structure may be more practical or required to recollect the flushed waters. It has been found that cleansing efficiency of periodic flush waves is dependent upon flush volume, flush discharge rate, sewer slope, sewer length, sewer flow rate, sewer diameter, and population density. As a rule of thumb, the length of line to be flushed should not exceed 700 feet. At this maximum recommended length, the percent removal efficiency ranges between 65- 75% for organics and 55-65% for dry weather grit/inorganic material. The percent removal efficiency drops rapidly beyond that. Water is commonly supplied by a water truck, but fire hydrants can also supply water. To make the best use of water, it is recommended that reclaimed water be used or that fire hydrant line flushing coincide with storm sewer flushing. January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 5 of 6 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-44 Drainage System Maintenance 6 of 6 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com References and Resources California¶s Nonpoint Source Program Plan http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/nps/index.html Clark County Storm Water Pollution Control Manual http://www.co.clark.wa.us/pubworks/bmpman.pdf Ferguson, B.K. 1991. Urban Stream Reclamation, p. 324-322, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. King County Storm Water Pollution Control Manual http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/dss/spcm.htm Oregon Association of Clean Water Agencies. Oregon Municipal Stormwater Toolbox for Maintenance Practices. June 1998. Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program http://www.scvurppp.org The Storm Water Managers Resource Center http://www.stormwatercenter.net United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2002. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Storm Drain System Cleaning. On line: http://www.epa.gov/npdes/menuofbmps/poll_16.htm Site Design & Landscape Planning SD-10 January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 1 of 4 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com Description Each project site possesses unique topographic, hydrologic, and vegetative features, some of which are more suitable for development than others. Integrating and incorporating appropriate landscape planning methodologies into the project design is the most effective action that can be done to minimize surface and groundwater contamination from stormwater. Approach Landscape planning should couple consideration of land suitability for urban uses with consideration of community goals and projected growth. Project plan designs should conserve natural areas to the extent possible, maximize natural water storage and infiltration opportunities, and protect slopes and channels. Suitable Applications Appropriate applications include residential, commercial and industrial areas planned for development or redevelopment. Design Considerations Design requirements for site design and landscapes planning should conform to applicable standards and specifications of agencies with jurisdiction and be consistent with applicable General Plan and Local Area Plan policies. Design Objectives ; Maximize Infiltration ; Provide Retention ; Slow Runoff ; Minimize Impervious Land Coverage Prohibit Dumping of Improper Materials Contain Pollutants Collect and Convey SD-10 Site Design & Landscape Planning 2 of 4 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com Designing New Installations Begin the development of a plan for the landscape unit with attention to the following general principles: „ Formulate the plan on the basis of clearly articulated community goals. Carefully identify conflicts and choices between retaining and protecting desired resources and community growth. „ Map and assess land suitability for urban uses. Include the following landscape features in the assessment: wooded land, open unwooded land, steep slopes, erosion-prone soils, foundation suitability, soil suitability for waste disposal, aquifers, aquifer recharge areas, wetlands, floodplains, surface waters, agricultural lands, and various categories of urban land use. When appropriate, the assessment can highlight outstanding local or regional resources that the community determines should be protected (e.g., a scenic area, recreational area, threatened species habitat, farmland, fish run). Mapping and assessment should recognize not only these resources but also additional areas needed for their sustenance. Project plan designs should conserve natural areas to the extent possible, maximize natural water storage and infiltration opportunities, and protect slopes and channels. Conserve Natural Areas during Landscape Planning If applicable, the following items are required and must be implemented in the site layout during the subdivision design and approval process, consistent with applicable General Plan and Local Area Plan policies: „ Cluster development on least-sensitive portions of a site while leaving the remaining land in a natural undisturbed condition. „ Limit clearing and grading of native vegetation at a site to the minimum amount needed to build lots, allow access, and provide fire protection. „ Maximize trees and other vegetation at each site by planting additional vegetation, clustering tree areas, and promoting the use of native and/or drought tolerant plants. „ Promote natural vegetation by using parking lot islands and other landscaped areas. „ Preserve riparian areas and wetlands. Maximize Natural Water Storage and Infiltration Opportunities Within the Landscape Unit „ Promote the conservation of forest cover. Building on land that is already deforested affects basin hydrology to a lesser extent than converting forested land. Loss of forest cover reduces interception storage, detention in the organic forest floor layer, and water losses by evapotranspiration, resulting in large peak runoff increases and either their negative effects or the expense of countering them with structural solutions. „ Maintain natural storage reservoirs and drainage corridors, including depressions, areas of permeable soils, swales, and intermittent streams. Develop and implement policies and Site Design & Landscape Planning SD-10 January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 3 of 4 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com regulations to discourage the clearing, filling, and channelization of these features. Utilize them in drainage networks in preference to pipes, culverts, and engineered ditches. „ Evaluating infiltration opportunities by referring to the stormwater management manual for the jurisdiction and pay particular attention to the selection criteria for avoiding groundwater contamination, poor soils, and hydrogeological conditions that cause these facilities to fail. If necessary, locate developments with large amounts of impervious surfaces or a potential to produce relatively contaminated runoff away from groundwater recharge areas. Protection of Slopes and Channels during Landscape Design „ Convey runoff safely from the tops of slopes. „ Avoid disturbing steep or unstable slopes. „ Avoid disturbing natural channels. „ Stabilize disturbed slopes as quickly as possible. „ Vegetate slopes with native or drought tolerant vegetation. „ Control and treat flows in landscaping and/or other controls prior to reaching existing natural drainage systems. „ Stabilize temporary and permanent channel crossings as quickly as possible, and ensure that increases in run-off velocity and frequency caused by the project do not erode the channel. „ Install energy dissipaters, such as riprap, at the outlets of new storm drains, culverts, conduits, or channels that enter unlined channels in accordance with applicable specifications to minimize erosion. Energy dissipaters shall be installed in such a way as to minimize impacts to receiving waters. „ Line on-site conveyance channels where appropriate, to reduce erosion caused by increased flow velocity due to increases in tributary impervious area. The first choice for linings should be grass or some other vegetative surface, since these materials not only reduce runoff velocities, but also provide water quality benefits from filtration and infiltration. If velocities in the channel are high enough to erode grass or other vegetative linings, riprap, concrete, soil cement, or geo-grid stabilization are other alternatives. „ Consider other design principles that are comparable and equally effective. Redeveloping Existing Installations Various jurisdictional stormwater management and mitigation plans (SUSMP, WQMP, etc.) define “redevelopment” in terms of amounts of additional impervious area, increases in gross floor area and/or exterior construction, and land disturbing activities with structural or impervious surfaces. The definition of “ redevelopment” must be consulted to determine whether or not the requirements for new development apply to areas intended for redevelopment. If the definition applies, the steps outlined under “designing new installations” above should be followed. SD-10 Site Design & Landscape Planning 4 of 4 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com Redevelopment may present significant opportunity to add features which had not previously been implemented. Examples include incorporation of depressions, areas of permeable soils, and swales in newly redeveloped areas. While some site constraints may exist due to the status of already existing infrastructure, opportunities should not be missed to maximize infiltration, slow runoff, reduce impervious areas, disconnect directly connected impervious areas. Other Resources A Manual for the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, May 2002. Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, Washington State Department of Ecology, August 2001. Model Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) for San Diego County, Port of San Diego, and Cities in San Diego County, February 14, 2002. Model Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District, and the Incorporated Cities of Orange County, Draft February 2003. Ventura Countywide Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures, July 2002. Efficient Irrigation SD-12 January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 1 of 2 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com Description Irrigation water provided to landscaped areas may result in excess irrigation water being conveyed into stormwater drainage systems. Approach Project plan designs for development and redevelopment should include application methods of irrigation water that minimize runoff of excess irrigation water into the stormwater conveyance system. Suitable Applications Appropriate applications include residential, commercial and industrial areas planned for development or redevelopment. (Detached residential single-family homes are typically excluded from this requirement.) Design Considerations Designing New Installations The following methods to reduce excessive irrigation runoff should be considered, and incorporated and implemented where determined applicable and feasible by the Permittee: „ Employ rain-triggered shutoff devices to prevent irrigation after precipitation. „ Design irrigation systems to each landscape area’s specific water requirements. „ Include design featuring flow reducers or shutoff valves triggered by a pressure drop to control water loss in the event of broken sprinkler heads or lines. „ Implement landscape plans consistent with County or City water conservation resolutions, which may include provision of water sensors, programmable irrigation times (for short cycles), etc. Design Objectives ; Maximize Infiltration ; Provide Retention ; Slow Runoff Minimize Impervious Land Coverage Prohibit Dumping of Improper Materials Contain Pollutants Collect and Convey SD-12 Efficient Irrigation 2 of 2 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com „ Design timing and application methods of irrigation water to minimize the runoff of excess irrigation water into the storm water drainage system. „ Group plants with similar water requirements in order to reduce excess irrigation runoff and promote surface filtration. Choose plants with low irrigation requirements (for example, native or drought tolerant species). Consider design features such as: - Using mulches (such as wood chips or bar) in planter areas without ground cover to minimize sediment in runoff - Installing appropriate plant materials for the location, in accordance with amount of sunlight and climate, and use native plant materials where possible and/or as recommended by the landscape architect - Leaving a vegetative barrier along the property boundary and interior watercourses, to act as a pollutant filter, where appropriate and feasible - Choosing plants that minimize or eliminate the use of fertilizer or pesticides to sustain growth „ Employ other comparable, equally effective methods to reduce irrigation water runoff. Redeveloping Existing Installations Various jurisdictional stormwater management and mitigation plans (SUSMP, WQMP, etc.) define “redevelopment” in terms of amounts of additional impervious area, increases in gross floor area and/or exterior construction, and land disturbing activities with structural or impervious surfaces. The definition of “ redevelopment” must be consulted to determine whether or not the requirements for new development apply to areas intended for redevelopment. If the definition applies, the steps outlined under “designing new installations” above should be followed. Other Resources A Manual for the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, May 2002. Model Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) for San Diego County, Port of San Diego, and Cities in San Diego County, February 14, 2002. Model Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District, and the Incorporated Cities of Orange County, Draft February 2003. Ventura Countywide Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures, July 2002. Storm Drain Signage SD-13 January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 1 of 2 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com Description Waste materials dumped into storm drain inlets can have severe impacts on receiving and ground waters. Posting notices regarding discharge prohibitions at storm drain inlets can prevent waste dumping. Storm drain signs and stencils are highly visible source controls that are typically placed directly adjacent to storm drain inlets. Approach The stencil or affixed sign contains a brief statement that prohibits dumping of improper materials into the urban runoff conveyance system. Storm drain messages have become a popular method of alerting the public about the effects of and the prohibitions against waste disposal. Suitable Applications Stencils and signs alert the public to the destination of pollutants discharged to the storm drain. Signs are appropriate in residential, commercial, and industrial areas, as well as any other area where contributions or dumping to storm drains is likely. Design Considerations Storm drain message markers or placards are recommended at all storm drain inlets within the boundary of a development project. The marker should be placed in clear sight facing toward anyone approaching the inlet from either side. All storm drain inlet locations should be identified on the development site map. Designing New Installations The following methods should be considered for inclusion in the project design and show on project plans: „ Provide stenciling or labeling of all storm drain inlets and catch basins, constructed or modified, within the project area with prohibitive language. Examples include “NO DUMPING Design Objectives Maximize Infiltration Provide Retention Slow Runoff Minimize Impervious Land Coverage ; Prohibit Dumping of Improper Materials Contain Pollutants Collect and Convey SD-13 Storm Drain Signage 2 of 2 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com – DRAINS TO OCEAN” and/or other graphical icons to discourage illegal dumping. „ Post signs with prohibitive language and/or graphical icons, which prohibit illegal dumping at public access points along channels and creeks within the project area. Note - Some local agencies have approved specific signage and/or storm drain message placards for use. Consult local agency stormwater staff to determine specific requirements for placard types and methods of application. Redeveloping Existing Installations Various jurisdictional stormwater management and mitigation plans (SUSMP, WQMP, etc.) define “redevelopment” in terms of amounts of additional impervious area, increases in gross floor area and/or exterior construction, and land disturbing activities with structural or impervious surfaces. If the project meets the definition of “redevelopment”, then the requirements stated under “ designing new installations” above should be included in all project design plans. Additional Information Maintenance Considerations „ Legibility of markers and signs should be maintained. If required by the agency with jurisdiction over the project, the owner/operator or homeowner’s association should enter into a maintenance agreement with the agency or record a deed restriction upon the property title to maintain the legibility of placards or signs. Placement „ Signage on top of curbs tends to weather and fade. „ Signage on face of curbs tends to be worn by contact with vehicle tires and sweeper brooms. Supplemental Information Examples „ Most MS4 programs have storm drain signage programs. Some MS4 programs will provide stencils, or arrange for volunteers to stencil storm drains as part of their outreach program. Other Resources A Manual for the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, May 2002. Model Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) for San Diego County, Port of San Diego, and Cities in San Diego County, February 14, 2002. Model Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District, and the Incorporated Cities of Orange County, Draft February 2003. Ventura Countywide Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures, July 2002. Trash Storage Areas SD-32 January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 1 of 2 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com Description Trash storage areas are areas where a trash receptacle (s) are located for use as a repository for solid wastes. Stormwater runoff from areas where trash is stored or disposed of can be polluted. In addition, loose trash and debris can be easily transported by water or wind into nearby storm drain inlets, channels, and/or creeks. Waste handling operations that may be sources of stormwater pollution include dumpsters, litter control, and waste piles. Approach This fact sheet contains details on the specific measures required to prevent or reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff associated with trash storage and handling. Preventative measures including enclosures, containment structures, and impervious pavements to mitigate spills, should be used to reduce the likelihood of contamination. Suitable Applications Appropriate applications include residential, commercial and industrial areas planned for development or redevelopment. (Detached residential single-family homes are typically excluded from this requirement.) Design Considerations Design requirements for waste handling areas are governed by Building and Fire Codes, and by current local agency ordinances and zoning requirements. The design criteria described in this fact sheet are meant to enhance and be consistent with these code and ordinance requirements. Hazardous waste should be handled in accordance with legal requirements established in Title 22, California Code of Regulation. Wastes from commercial and industrial sites are typically hauled by either public or commercial carriers that may have design or access requirements for waste storage areas. The design criteria in this fact sheet are recommendations and are not intended to be in conflict with requirements established by the waste hauler. The waste hauler should be contacted prior to the design of your site trash collection areas. Conflicts or issues should be discussed with the local agency. Designing New Installations Trash storage areas should be designed to consider the following structural or treatment control BMPs: „ Design trash container areas so that drainage from adjoining roofs and pavement is diverted around the area(s) to avoid run-on. This might include berming or grading the waste handling area to prevent run-on of stormwater. „ Make sure trash container areas are screened or walled to prevent off-site transport of trash. Design Objectives Maximize Infiltration Provide Retention Slow Runoff Minimize Impervious Land Coverage Prohibit Dumping of Improper Materials ; Contain Pollutants Collect and Convey SD-32 Trash Storage Areas 2 of 2 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com „ Use lined bins or dumpsters to reduce leaking of liquid waste. „ Provide roofs, awnings, or attached lids on all trash containers to minimize direct precipitation and prevent rainfall from entering containers. „ Pave trash storage areas with an impervious surface to mitigate spills. „ Do not locate storm drains in immediate vicinity of the trash storage area. „ Post signs on all dumpsters informing users that hazardous materials are not to be disposed of therein. Redeveloping Existing Installations Various jurisdictional stormwater management and mitigation plans (SUSMP, WQMP, etc.) define “redevelopment” in terms of amounts of additional impervious area, increases in gross floor area and/or exterior construction, and land disturbing activities with structural or impervious surfaces. The definition of “ redevelopment” must be consulted to determine whether or not the requirements for new development apply to areas intended for redevelopment. If the definition applies, the steps outlined under “designing new installations” above should be followed. Additional Information Maintenance Considerations The integrity of structural elements that are subject to damage (i.e., screens, covers, and signs) must be maintained by the owner/operator. Maintenance agreements between the local agency and the owner/operator may be required. Some agencies will require maintenance deed restrictions to be recorded of the property title. If required by the local agency, maintenance agreements or deed restrictions must be executed by the owner/operator before improvement plans are approved. Other Resources A Manual for the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, May 2002. Model Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) for San Diego County, Port of San Diego, and Cities in San Diego County, February 14, 2002. Model Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District, and the Incorporated Cities of Orange County, Draft February 2003. Ventura Countywide Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures, July 2002. Vortex Separator MP-51 January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 1 of 5 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com Description Vortex separators: (alternatively, swirl concentrators) are gravity separators, and in principle are essentially wet vaults. The difference from wet vaults, however, is that the vortex separator is round, rather than rectangular, and the water moves in a centrifugal fashion before exiting. By having the water move in a circular fashion, rather than a straight line as is the case with a standard wet vault, it is possible to obtain significant removal of suspended sediments and attached pollutants with less space. Vortex separators were originally developed for combined sewer overflows (CSOs), where it is used primarily to remove coarse inorganic solids. Vortex separation has been adapted to stormwater treatment by several manufacturers. California Experience There are currently about 100 installations in California. Advantages „ May provide the desired performance in less space and therefore less cost. „ May be more cost-effective pre-treatment devices than traditional wet or dry basins. „ Mosquito control may be less of an issue than with traditional wet basins. Limitations „ As some of the systems have standing water that remains between storms, there is concern about mosquito breeding. „ It is likely that vortex separators are not as effective as wet vaults at removing fine sediments, on the order 50 to 100 microns in diameter and less. „ The area served is limited by the capacity of the largest models. „ As the products come in standard sizes, the facilities will be oversized in many cases relative to the design treatment storm, increasing the cost. „ The non-steady flows of stormwater decreases the efficiency of vortex separators from what may be estimated or determined from testing under constant flow. „ Do not remove dissolved pollutants. „ A loss of dissolved pollutants may occur as accumulated organic Design Considerations „ Service Area „ Settling Velocity „ Appropriate Sizing „ Inlet Pipe Diameter Targeted Constituents  Sediment ▲  Nutrients z  Trash  Metals z Bacteria  Oil and Grease  Organics Legend (Removal Effectiveness) z Low „ High ▲ Medium MP-51 Vortex Separator 2 of 5 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com matter (e.g., leaves) decomposes in the units. Design and Sizing Guidelines The stormwater enters, typically below the effluent line, tangentially into the basin, thereby imparting a circular motion in the system. Due to centrifugal forces created by the circular motion, the suspended particles move to the center of the device where they settle to the bottom. There are two general types of vortex separation: free vortex and dampened (or impeded) vortex. Free vortex separation becomes dampened vortex separation by the placement of radial baffles on the weir-plate that impede the free vortex-flow pattern It has been stated with respect to CSOs that the practical lower limit of vortex separation is a particle with a settling velocity of 12 to 16.5 feet per hour (0.10 to 0.14 cm/s). As such, the focus for vortex separation in CSOs has been with settleable solids generally 200 microns and larger, given the presence of the lighter organic solids. For inorganic sediment, the above settling velocity range represents a particle diameter of 50 to 100 microns. Head loss is a function of the size of the target particle. At 200 microns it is normally minor but increases significantly if the goal is to remove smaller particles. The commercial separators applied to stormwater treatment vary considerably with respect to geometry, and the inclusion of radial baffles and internal circular chambers. At one extreme is the inclusion of a chamber within the round concentrator. Water flows initially around the perimeter between the inner and outer chambers, and then into the inner chamber, giving rise to a sudden change in velocity that purportedly enhances removal efficiency. The opposite extreme is to introduce the water tangentially into a round manhole with no internal parts of any kind except for an outlet hood. Whether the inclusion of chambers and baffles gives better performance is unknown. Some contend that free vortex, also identified as swirl concentration, creates less turbulence thereby increasing removal efficiency. One product is unique in that it includes a static separator screen. „ Sized is based on the peak flow of the design treatment event as specified by local government. „ If an in-line facility, the design peak flow is four times the peak of the design treatment event. „ If an off-line facility, the design peak flow is equal to the peak of the design treatment event. „ Headloss differs with the product and the model but is generally on the order of one foot or less in most cases. Construction/Inspection Considerations No special considerations. Performance Manufacturer’s differ with respect to performance claims, but a general statement is that the manufacturer’s design and rated capacity (cfs) for each model is based on and believed to achieve an aggregate reduction of 90% of all particles with a specific gravity of 2.65 (glacial sand) down to 150 microns, and to capture the floatables, and oil and grease. Laboratory tests of two products support this claim. The stated performance expectation therefore implies that a Vortex Separator MP-51 January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 3 of 5 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com lesser removal efficiency is obtained with particles less than 150 microns, and the lighter, organic settleables. Laboratory tests of one of the products found about 60% removal of 50 micron sand at the expected average operating flow rate Experience with the use of vortex separators for treating combined sewer overflows (CSOs), the original application of this technology, suggests that the lower practical limit for particle removal are particles with a settling velocity of 12 feet per hour (Sullivan, 1982), which represents a particle diameter of 100 to 200 microns, depending on the specific gravity of the particle. The CSO experience therefore seems consistent with the limited experience with treating stormwater, summarized above Traditional treatment technologies such as wet ponds and extended detention basins are generally believed to be more effective at removing very small particles, down to the range of 10 to 20 microns. Hence, it is intuitively expected that vortex separators do not perform as well as the traditional wet and dry basins, and filters. Whether this matters depends on the particle size distribution of the sediments in stormwater. If the distribution leans towards small material, there should be a marked difference between vortex separators and, say, traditional wet vaults. There are little data to support this conjecture In comparison to other treatment technologies, such as wet ponds and grass swales, there are few studies of vortex separators. Only two of manufactured products currently available have been field tested. Two field studies have been conducted. Both achieved in excess of 80% removal of TSS. However, the test was conducted in the Northeast (New York state and Maine) where it is possible the stormwater contained significant quantities of deicing sand. Consequently, the influent TSS concentrations and particle size are both likely considerably higher than is found in California stormwater. These data suggest that if the stormwater particles are for the most part fine (i.e., less than 50 microns), vortex separators will not be as efficient as traditional treatment BMPs such as wet ponds and swales, if the latter are sized according to the recommendations of this handbook. There are no equations that provide a straightforward determination of efficiency as a function of unit configuration and size. Design specifications of commercial separators are derived from empirical equations that are unique and proprietary to each manufacturer. However, some general relationships between performance and the geometry of a separator have been developed. CSO studies have found that the primary determinants of performance of vortex separators are the diameters of the inlet pipe and chamber with all other geometry proportional to these two. Sullivan et al. (1982) found that performance is related to the ratios of chamber to inlet diameters, D2/D1, and height between the inlet and outlet and the inlet diameter, H1/D1, shown in Figure 3. The relationships are: as D2/D1 approaches one, the efficiency decreases; and, as the H1/D1 ratio decreases, the efficiency decreases. These relationships may allow qualitative comparisons of the alternative designs of manufacturers. Engineers who wish to apply these concepts should review relevant publications presented in the References. Siting Criteria There are no particularly unique siting criteria. The size of the drainage area that can be served by vortex separators is directly related to the capacities of the largest models. MP-51 Vortex Separator 4 of 5 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com Additional Design Guidelines Vortex separators have two capacities if positioned as in-line facilities, a treatment capacity and a hydraulic capacity. Failure to recognize the difference between the two may lead to significant under sizing; i.e., too small a model is selected. This observation is relevant to three of the five products. These three technologies all are designed to experience a unit flow rate of about 24 gallons/square foot of separator footprint at the peak of the design treatment event. This is the horizontal area of the separator zone within the container, not the total footprint of the unit. At this unit flow rate, laboratory tests by these manufacturers have established that the performance will meet the general claims previously described. However, the units are sized to handle 100 gallons/square foot at the peak of the hydraulic event. Hence, in selecting a particular model the design engineer must be certain to match the peak flow of the design event to the stated treatment capacity, not the hydraulic capacity. The former is one-fourth the latter. If the unit is positioned as an off-line facility, the model selected is based on the capacity equal to the peak of the design treatment event. Maintenance Maintenance consists of the removal of accumulated material with an eductor truck. It may be necessary to remove and dispose the floatables separately due to the presence of petroleum product. Maintenance Requirements Remove all accumulated sediment, and litter and other floatables, annually, unless experience indicates the need for more or less frequent maintenance. Cost Manufacturers provide costs for the units including delivery. Installation costs are generally on the order of 50 to 100 % of the manufacturer’s cost. For most sites the units are cleaned annually. Cost Considerations The different geometry of the several manufactured separators suggests that when comparing the costs of these systems to each other, that local conditions (e.g., groundwater levels) may affect the relative cost-effectiveness. References and Sources of Additional Information Field, R., 1972, The swirl concentrator as a combined sewer overflow regulator facility, EPA/R2- 72-008, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. Field, R., D. Averill, T.P. O’Connor, and P. Steel, 1997, Vortex separation technology, Water Qual. Res. J. Canada, 32, 1, 185 Manufacturers technical materials Sullivan, R.H., et al., 1982, Design manual – swirl and helical bend pollution control devices, EPA-600/8-82/013, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. Sullivan, R.H., M.M. Cohn, J.E. Ure, F.F. Parkinson, and G. Caliana, 1974, Relationship between diameter and height for the design of a swirl concentrator as a combined sewer overflow regulator, EPA 670/2-74-039, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. Vortex Separator MP-51 January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 5 of 5 New Development and Redevelopment www.cabmphandbooks.com Sullivan, R.H., M.M. Cohn, J.E. Ure, F.F. Parkinson, and G. Caliana, 1974, The swirl concentrator as a grit separator device, EPA670/2-74-026, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. Sullivan, R.H., M.M. Cohn, J.E. Ure, F.F. Parkinson, and G. Caliana, 1978, Swirl primary separator device and pilot demonstration, EPA600/2-78-126, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. Whatisstormwaterrunoff? Whyisstormwaterrunoff aproblem? Theeffectsofpollution Stormwater runoff occurs when precipitation from rain or snowmelt flows over the ground. Impervious surfaces like driveways, sidewalks, and streets prevent stormwater from naturally soaking into the ground. Stormwater can pick up debris, chemicals, dirt, and other pollutants and flow into a storm sewer system or directly to a lake, stream, river, wetland, or coastal water. Anything that enters a storm sewer system is discharged untreated into the waterbodies we use for swimming, fishing, and providing drinking water. Polluted stormwater runoff can have many adverse effects on plants, fish, animals, and people. Sediment can cloud the water and make it difficult or impossible for aquatic plants to grow. Sediment also can .destroy aquatic habitats Excess nutrients can cause algae blooms. When algae die, they sink to the bottom and decompose in a process that removes oxygen from the water. Fish and other aquatic organisms can’t exist in water with low dissolved oxygen levels. Bacteria and other pathogens can wash into swimming areas and create health hazards, often making beach closures necessary. Debris—plastic bags, six-pack rings, bottles, and cigarette butts—washed into waterbodies can choke, suffocate, or disable aquatic life like ducks, fish, turtles, and birds. Household hazardous wastes like insecticides, pesticides, paint, solvents, used motor oil, and other auto fluids can poison aquatic life. Land animals and people can become sick or die from eating diseased fish and shellfish or ingesting polluted water. Polluted stormwater often affects drinking water sources. This, in turn, can affect human health and increase drinking water treatment costs.AftertheStormEPA 833-B-03-002January 2003For more information contact:or visitwww.epa.gov/npdes/stormwaterwww.epa.gov/npsACitizen’sGuidetoUnderstandingStormwaterWHEN IT RAINSIT DRAINSWHEN IT RAINSIT DRAINSInternet Address (URL) HTTP://www.epa.govRecycled/Recyclable Printed With VegetableOil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer,Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper●● Auto care Washing your car and degreasing auto parts at home can send detergents and other contaminants through the storm sewer system. Dumping automotive fluids into storm drains has the same result as dumping the materials directly into a waterbody. Pet waste Pet waste can be a major source of bacteria and excess nutrients in local waters. When walking your pet, remember to pick up the waste and dispose of it properly. Flushing pet waste is the best disposal method. Leaving pet waste on the ground increases public health risks by allowing harmful bacteria and nutrients to wash into the storm drain and eventually into local waterbodies. Septic systems Leaking and poorly maintained septic systems release nutrients and pathogens (bacteria and viruses) that can be picked up by stormwater and discharged into nearby waterbodies. Pathogens can cause public health problems and environmental concerns. Lawn care Excess fertilizers and pesticides applied to lawns and gardens wash off and pollute streams. In addition, yard clippings and leaves can wash into storm drains and contribute nutrients and organic matter to streams. Education is essential to changing people's behavior. Signs and markers near storm drains warn residents that pollutants entering the drains will be carried untreated into a local waterbody.Recycle or properly dispose of household products that contain chemicals, such as insecticides, pesticides, paint, solvents, and used motor oil and other auto fluids. Don’t pour them onto the ground or into storm drains. Use a commercial car wash that treats or recycles its wastewater, or wash your car on your yard so the water infiltrates into the ground. Repair leaks and dispose of used auto fluids and batteries at designated drop-off or recycling locations. Don’t overwater your lawn. Consider using a soaker hose instead of a sprinkler. Use pesticides and fertilizers sparingly. When use is necessary, use these chemicals in the recommended amounts. Use organic mulch or safer pest control methods whenever possible. Compost or mulch yard waste. Don’t leave it in the street or sweep it into storm drains or streams. Cover piles of dirt or mulch being used in landscaping projects. Inspect your system every 3 years and pump your tank as necessary (every 3 to 5 years). Don't dispose of household hazardous waste in sinks or toilets. Dirt, oil, and debris that collect in parking lots and paved areas can be washed into the storm sewer system and eventually enter local waterbodies. Sweep up litter and debris from sidewalks, driveways and parking lots, especially around storm drains. Cover grease storage and dumpsters and keep them clean to avoid leaks. Report any chemical spill to the local hazardous waste cleanup team. They’ll know the best way to keep spills from harming the environment. Erosion controls that aren’t maintained can cause excessive amounts of sediment and debris to be carried into the stormwater system. Construction vehicles can leak fuel, oil, and other harmful fluids that can be picked up by stormwater and deposited into local waterbodies. Divert stormwater away from disturbed or exposed areas of the construction site. Install silt fences, vehicle mud removal areas, vegetative cover, and other sediment and erosion controls and properly maintain them, especially after rainstorms. Prevent soil erosion by minimizing disturbed areas during construction projects, and seed and mulch bare areas as soon as possible. Uncovered fueling stations allow spills to be washed into storm drains. Cars waiting to be repaired can leak fuel, oil, and other harmful fluids that can be picked up by stormwater. Clean up spills immediately and properly dispose of cleanup materials. Provide cover over fueling stations and design or retrofit facilities for spill containment. Properly maintain fleet vehicles to prevent oil, gas, and other discharges from being washed into local waterbodies. Install and maintain oil/water separators. Lack of vegetation on streambanks can lead to erosion. Overgrazed pastures can also contribute excessive amounts of sediment to local waterbodies. Excess fertilizers and pesticides can poison aquatic animals and lead to destructive algae blooms. Livestock in streams can contaminate waterways with bacteria, making them unsafe for human contact. Keep livestock away from streambanks and provide them a water source away from waterbodies. Store and apply manure away from waterbodies and in accordance with a nutrient management plan. Vegetate riparian areas along waterways. Rotate animal grazing to prevent soil erosion in fields. Apply fertilizers and pesticides according to label instructions to save money and minimize pollution. Permeable Pavement Rain Barrels Rain Gardens and Grassy Swales Vegetated Filter Strips —Traditional concrete and asphalt don’t allow water to soak into the ground. Instead these surfaces rely on storm drains to divert unwanted water. Permeable pavement systems allow rain and snowmelt to soak through, decreasing stormwater runoff. —You can collect rainwater from rooftops in mosquito- proof containers. The water can be used later on lawn or garden areas. —Specially designed areas planted with native plants can provide natural places for rainwater to collect and soak into the ground. Rain from rooftop areas or paved areas can be diverted into these areas rather than into storm drains. —Filter strips are areas of native grass or plants created along roadways or streams. They trap the pollutants stormwater picks up as it flows across driveways and streets. Residential landscaping Improperly managed logging operations can result in erosion and sedimentation. Conduct preharvest planning to prevent erosion and lower costs. Use logging methods and equipment that minimize soil disturbance. Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads to minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing the forest floor. Construct stream crossings so that they minimize erosion and physical changes to streams. Expedite revegetation of cleared areas. Commercial StormwaterPollutionSolutions Construction Agriculture Automotive Facilities Forestry 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA Appendix E Soils Report ENGINEERS + GEOLOGISTS + ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTSREVISED DESIGN-PHASE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT PROPOSED PALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUM APARTMENT COMPLEX 10-ACRE SITE NORTH OF GERALD FORD DRIVE EAST OF THE PACIFIC AVENUE INTERSECTION ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER )APN) 694-120-028 CITY OF PALM DESERT, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 J.N. 21-308 ENGINEERS + GEOLOGISTS + ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS Offices Strategically Positioned Throughout Southern California DESERT REGION OFFICE 42-240 Green Way, Suite E, Palm Desert, CA 92211 T: 760.340.5303 F: 760.340.5096 For more information visit us online at www.petra-inc.com November 16, 2021 J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 PALM COMMUNITIES 100 Pacifica, Suite 203 Irvine, California 92618 Attention: Mr. Erik Halter Subject: Revised Design-Phase Geotechnical Investigation Report, Proposed Palm Villas at Millennium Apartment Complex, 10-acre Site North of Gerald Ford Drive, East of the Pacific Avenue Intersection, Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 694-120-028, City of Palm Desert, Riverside County, California References: See Attached List Dear Mr. Halter: Petra Geosciences, Inc. (Petra) is submitting herewith our revised design-phase geotechnical investigation report for the proposed Palm Villas at Millennium development the city of Palm Desert in Riverside County, California. Our services were performed in accordance with the scope of services outlined in our Proposal No. 21-308P, dated July 2, 2021. This report presents the results of our field exploration, laboratory testing, and our engineering judgment, opinions, conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical aspects of the development of the proposed 241-unit apartment complex. This report has been revised to accommodate 3-story structures and, therefore, supersedes our previous report dated October 21, 2021. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions regarding the contents of this report or require additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. Alan Pace, CEG Vice President PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................................1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION .....................................................................................................................1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND GRADING ......................................................................................................1 SITE RECONNAISSANCE AND SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION .........................................................................2 Percolation/Infiltration Testing ..........................................................................................................................2 LABORATORY TESTING ..........................................................................................................................................3 FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................................................................3 Regional Geologic Setting .................................................................................................................................3 Local Geology and Subsurface Soil Conditions .................................................................................................4 Groundwater .......................................................................................................................................................4 Faulting ..............................................................................................................................................................4 Secondary Seismic Hazards .................................................................................................................................... 5 Seismically Induced Landsliding .......................................................................................................................5 Seismically Induced Flooding ............................................................................................................................5 Seismically Induced Liquefaction and Dry Sand Settlement .............................................................................5 Site-Specific Liquefaction and Dry Sand Settlement Hazard Analysis ..............................................................7 Dry Sand Settlement Analyses Using SPT Results ............................................................................................7 Geotechnical Issues Not Related to Seismicity ....................................................................................................... 8 Wind Erosion .....................................................................................................................................................8 Subsidence .........................................................................................................................................................8 Hydro-Collapsible Soils .....................................................................................................................................9 Expansive Soils ................................................................................................................................................ 10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................... 10 General .................................................................................................................................................................. 10 Grading Plan Review ............................................................................................................................................ 10 Effect of Proposed Grading on Adjacent Properties ............................................................................................. 10 PRIMARY GEOTECHNICAL CONCERNS ............................................................................................................. 10 Seismic Shaking ............................................................................................................................................... 10 Seismically-Induced Settlement ....................................................................................................................... 11 Existing Unsuitable Materials .......................................................................................................................... 11 Earthwork ............................................................................................................................................................. 11 General Earthwork Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 11 Geotechnical Observations and Testing ........................................................................................................... 11 Clearing and Grubbing ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Ground Preparation – Structural and Pavement Areas ..................................................................................... 12 Cut Areas.......................................................................................................................................................... 13 Fill Placement and Testing ............................................................................................................................... 13 Imported Soils .................................................................................................................................................. 13 Geotechnical Observations ............................................................................................................................... 13 Shrinkage and Subsidence .................................................................................................................................... 14 Post-Grading Considerations ................................................................................................................................ 14 Site Drainage .................................................................................................................................................... 14 Utility Trench Backfill ..................................................................................................................................... 15 FOUNDATION DESIGN GUIDELINES ................................................................................................................... 16 Faulting ............................................................................................................................................................ 16 Seismic Design Parameters .............................................................................................................................. 17 Discussion - General ........................................................................................................................................ 19 Allowable Soil Bearing Capacities................................................................................................................... 20 PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Lateral Resistance ............................................................................................................................................ 20 Estimated Footing Settlement .......................................................................................................................... 20 Guidelines for Footings and Slabs on-Grade Design and Construction ................................................................ 20 Conventional Slabs on-Grade System .............................................................................................................. 21 Post-Tensioned Slab-on-Ground System (Optional) ........................................................................................ 23 Footing Observations ....................................................................................................................................... 26 General Corrosivity Screening .............................................................................................................................. 26 Infiltration Rate ..................................................................................................................................................... 27 Masonry Block Walls ........................................................................................................................................... 28 Exterior Concrete Flatwork ................................................................................................................................... 28 General ............................................................................................................................................................. 28 Subgrade Preparation ....................................................................................................................................... 29 Thickness and Joint Spacing ............................................................................................................................ 29 Reinforcement .................................................................................................................................................. 30 Edge Beams (Optional) .................................................................................................................................... 30 Drainage ........................................................................................................................................................... 30 Tree Wells ........................................................................................................................................................ 31 FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS ..................................................................................................................................... 31 REPORT LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 31 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................................ 33 ATTACHMENTS FIGURE 1 – SITE LOCATION MAP FIGURE 2 – SLOPE LOCATION MAP APPENDIX A – EXPLORATION LOGS APPENDIX B – LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES / LABORATORY TEST DATA APPENDIX C – SEISMIC DESIGN ANALYSIS APPENDIX D –PERCOLATION TEST SUMMARY APPENDIX E – EARTHQUAKE INDUCED SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS APPENDIX F – STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS REVISED DESIGN-PHASE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT PROPOSED PALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUM APARTMENT COMPLEX 10-ACRE SITE NORTH OF GERALD FORD DRIVE EAST OF THE PACIFIC AVENUE INTERSECTION ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER )APN) 694-120-028 CITY OF PALM DESERT, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION Petra Geosciences, Inc. (Petra) is presenting herein the results of our design-phase geotechnical investigation for the proposed Palm Villas at Millennium development, a 241-apartment complex and associated improvements proposed for construction on a 10-acre undeveloped site located on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive in the city of Palm Desert in Riverside County, California. This investigation included a review of published and unpublished literature, site reconnaissance and subsurface exploration, as well as a review of geotechnical maps pertaining to geologic hazards which may have an impact on the design and construction of the proposed project. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The subject site is an irregularly shaped, approximately 10-acre property, located on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive, east of the intersection with Pacific Avenue, in the city of Palm Desert, California. The site is bounded by Gerald Ford Drive to the south and vacant undeveloped land to the west, north and east. Interstate 10 is located just north of the subject site and runs southeast. The site is essentially vacant land exhibiting sandy desert scrub. The location of the site is shown on Figure 1. Topographically, the site is essentially flat with site elevations ranging from a high of approximately 171 feet above mean sea level (msl) near the northwest property corner to a low of approximately 167 feet msl near the southeast corner. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND GRADING As of the date of this report, no rough grading plans have been provided. Based on our conversations with Mr. Halter, it is our understanding that the subject site will be developed as a 241-unit apartment complex. The multi-family buildings are understood to be as much as three stories in height. Associated site improvements are expected to include access roads, walkways, surface and subsurface drainage controls, landscaped areas and on-site storm water retention. Excluding remedial removals, preliminary grading estimates anticipate cuts and fills to be on the order of 3 to 5 feet to achieve level pad grades. Recommendations for site grading and for the design and construction of building foundations are presented in the “Conclusions and Recommendations” section of this report. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 2 SITE RECONNAISSANCE AND SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our firm performed a site reconnaissance on September 10, 2021, which included the visual evaluation of the existing surface conditions. Existing surface conditions within the site that were observed during our site reconnaissance are described in the “Site Location and Description” section of this report. Our firm subsequently performed a subsurface exploration on September 20, 2021. Our subsurface exploration of the subject site included the advancement of four borings (identified herein as Borings B- 1 through B-4) with a truck-mounted, hollow-stem auger drill rig to depths ranging from approximately 16.5 to 66.5 feet below the ground surface. The locations of our borings are shown on Figure 2 and descriptive exploration logs are provided in Appendix A. Earth materials encountered in each of the exploratory borings were field classified and logged in accordance with Unified Soil Classification System procedures. In addition, our subsurface exploration included the collection of bulk samples and relatively undisturbed samples of the subsurface soils and bedrock for laboratory testing purposes. Bulk samples consisted of selected earth materials obtained at various depth intervals from selected borings. Relatively undisturbed samples were collected using a 3- inch, outside-diameter, modified California split-spoon soil sampler lined with 1-inch high brass rings. The modified sampler was driven with successive 30-inch drops of a free-fall, 140-pound automatic trip hammer. Blow counts for each 6-inch driving increment were recorded on the field logs. The central portions of the driven core samples were placed in sealed containers and transported to our laboratory for testing. Logs of the borings are presented in Appendix A. Percolation/Infiltration Testing A single percolation test was conducted to determine a infiltration rate of the near-surface onsite soils for preliminary design of detention basins to manage stormwater runoff. This test was performed in general accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFCWCD, 2014) guidelines for percolation testing. The field percolation test was performed via an 8-inch diameter borehole excavated to a depth of approximately 10 feet below existing grade. Testing was conducted in a perforated-cased borehole (with pea gravel surrounding the pipe) on 10-minute intervals for a period of approximately 1 hour. The percolation tests were conducted in the lower 5± feet of the borehole and the falling-head percolation test data was utilized in determining the test infiltration rate, It, expressed in units of inches/hour, utilizing the Porchet Method (RCFCWCD, 2014). PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 3 The approximate location of the percolation/infiltration test boring (Boring P-1) is depicted on the attached Figure 2. The exploration log for Boring P-1 is included in Appendix A of this report. Detailed percolation test results are provided on Plate D (Appendix D). These results are subject to review by the controlling authorities for the subject project. LABORATORY TESTING To evaluate the engineering properties of site soils, several laboratory tests were performed on selected samples considered representative of the fill and bedrock materials encountered during our investigation. Laboratory tests included the determination of maximum dry density and optimum moisture content, expansion potential, grain size analyses, soluble sulfate and chloride content, pH and minimum resistivity. In-place moisture content and unit dry density were also determined for select samples of the fill samples retrieved. A description of laboratory test procedures and summaries of the test data are presented in Appendix B and in our exploration logs (Appendix A). An evaluation of the test data is reflected throughout the “Conclusions and Recommendations” section of this report. FINDINGS Regional Geologic Setting The proposed project is located near the northern boundary of the Coachella Valley, which is part of the Salton Trough geomorphic province of California. The Salton Trough geomorphic province encompasses the Coachella, Imperial and Mexicali Valleys, which extend from northeast of Palm Springs near San Gorgonio Pass to the Gulf of California. The geologic structure of the trough is a result of extensional forces within the earth’s crust. The Coachella Valley is generally bounded by the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains on the west, the San Bernardino and the Little San Bernardino Mountains on the north, the Cottonwood Mountains and the Mecca Hills on the east, and the Salton Sea on the south. Alluvial, aeolian, and lacustrine sediments are the dominant geologic units of the Coachella Valley. The watershed of the Coachella Valley empties into the Salton Sea at the lowest part of the basin. This basin was periodically filled with water to form the ancient Lake Cahuilla, depending on which side of its delta the Colorado River would drain. The sediments of the delta form a topographic high that separates the Salton basin, which is below sea level, from the Gulf of California (Sea of Cortez). More specifically, the sites lie near the northern boundary of the old meandering shoreline of ancient Lake Cahuilla and between approximately 21 miles from the present-day Salton Sea. The current level of the Salton Sea is about -238 feet below msl. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 4 Local Geology and Subsurface Soil Conditions The project site is underlain by alluvial and aeolian (dune) deposits consisting of poorly-graded sands, silty sands, and to lesser extent, sandy silts. In general, the alluvial and aeolian deposits were generally found to be dry to slightly moist, loose near the surface, becoming medium dense to very dense/stiff with depth. Groundwater The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) was contacted with respect to historic groundwater levels within the site vicinity. CVWD provided groundwater level data for wells in the “Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit.” The closest well (State Well No. 337775N1163545W001), located less than a mile southeast of the subject site near the intersection of Berger Drive and Cook Street, was utilized for our evaluation. The highest measured groundwater level below existing ground surface was approximately 182 feet in 2005, by 2021 groundwater levels were measured at approximately 187 feet below existing ground surface. In addition, groundwater was not encountered within our exploratory borings, at least to the maximum depth explored of 66.5 feet. Thus, based on our review, the regional groundwater table is estimated to be approximately 180 feet, or greater, below the ground surface and is not anticipated to impact development of the subject site. Faulting The Coachella Valley is a seismically active area and numerous northwest-trending active faults have been documented within the area. The San Andreas fault zone is the most prominent fault within the Coachella Valley, and is considered to be “active”. An “active” fault is defined as a fault that has had displacement within the Holocene epoch, or last 11,000± years. Based on our review of the referenced geologic maps and literature, no active faults are known to project through the property. Furthermore, the site does not lie within the boundaries of an “Earthquake Fault Zone” as defined by the State of California in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (CGS, 2018) and the County of Riverside Map My County System. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (AP Act) defines an active fault as one that “has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years).” The main objective of the AP Act is to prevent the construction of dwellings on top of active faults that could displace the ground surface resulting in loss of life and property. However, it should be noted that according to the USGS Unified Hazard Tool website and the 2010 CGS Fault Activity Map of California, the San Andreas Fault, located approximately 3½ miles northeast of the site, would probably generate the most severe site ground motions and, therefore, is the majority PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 5 contributor to the deterministic minimum component of the ground motion models. As such, the site should be considered as a Near-Fault Site in accordance with ASCE 7-16, Section 11.4.1. The most recent surface-rupturing earthquake on the Coachella segment of the San Andreas fault likely occurred in the late 1600’s (Fumal et al., 2002). Prior to that, apparently five paleo earthquakes occurred on the Coachella segment in about A.D. 825, 982, 1231, 1502, and 1680 based on a trenching study at Thousand Palms Oasis (Fumal et al., 2002). These data indicate that the average repeat time for surface- rupturing earthquakes on the Coachella-Indio segment of the San Andreas fault is approximately 215 +/- 25 years, and that the last surface-rupturing event occurred approximately 325 years ago (Fumal et al., 2002). Our review of recent and historic Google Earth imagery, dating back to 1996, indicated that several strong north-west trending photo lineaments are located northwest of the subject site. However, these photo lineaments are clearly attributed to linear aeolian dune features associated with prevailing wind patterns, and not active faulting. Therefore, based on the above, the potential for onsite faulting is likely low. Secondary Seismic Hazards Seismically Induced Landsliding The site exhibits a generally flat topography and no landslides exist within or near the site. Based on the topography across the site, the potential for landsliding is considered negligible. Seismically Induced Flooding The types of seismically-induced flooding that are generally considered as potential hazards to a particular site normally include flooding due to a tsunami (seismic sea wave), a seiche, or failure of a major reservoir or other water retention structure upstream of the site. The Salton Sea is situated approximately 21 miles southeast of the site with an elevation approximately 300 feet lower than the subject site. In addition, no major reservoir is located near, or upstream of the site. Therefore, the potential for seiche or inundation is considered negligible. Because of the inland location of the site, flooding due to a tsunami is also considered negligible at the site. Seismically Induced Liquefaction and Dry Sand Settlement General Liquefaction occurs when strong seismic shaking of a saturated sand or silt causes intergranular fluid (pore-water) pressures to increase to levels where grain-to-grain contact is lost, and material temporarily PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 6 behaves as a viscous fluid. Liquefaction can cause settlement of the ground surface, loss of bearing, settlement and tilting of structures, flotation and buoyancy of buried structures and fissuring of the ground surface. A common surface manifestation of liquefaction is the formation of sand boils – short-lived fountains of soil and water that emerge from fissures or vents and leave freshly deposited, usually conical mounds of sand or silt on the ground surface. For sandy soils above the water table, strong seismic shaking can also result in rearrangement of the granular soil structure leading to densification of sandy soils, ground settlement and settlement and tilting of superstructures. Assessment of liquefaction or dry sand settlement potential for a particular site requires knowledge of a number of regional as well as site-specific parameters, including the estimated design earthquake magnitude, and the associated probable peak horizontal ground acceleration at the site, subsurface stratigraphy and soil characteristics. Parameters such as estimated probable peak horizontal ground acceleration can readily be determined using published references, or by utilizing a commercially available computer program specifically designed to perform a probabilistic analysis. On the other hand, stratigraphy and soil characteristics can only be accurately determined by means of a site-specific subsurface investigation combined with appropriate laboratory analysis of representative samples of onsite soils. Governmental Approach In April 1991, the State of California enacted the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (Public Resources Code, Division 2, Chapters 7-8). This act requires an assessment of liquefaction among other seismic hazards prior to new construction for most projects where geological conditions warrant. The purpose of the Act is to protect the public safety from the effects of strong ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, or other ground failure. Where liquefaction potential is established, it is required to be mitigated to acceptable levels of risk. The Act defines mitigation as “… those measures that are consistent with established practice and reduce seismic risk to acceptable levels.” Acceptable level of risk is defined as “that level that provides reasonable protection of the public safety, though it does not necessarily ensure continued structural integrity and functionality of the project [California Code of Regulations; Section 3721 (a)].” It is, therefore, interpreted that in the context of the Act, mitigation of the potential liquefaction hazards at the site, to appropriate levels of risk, can be accomplished through appropriate foundation and/or subsurface improvement design. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 7 More specifically, the 2019 California Building Code in Section 1803.5.11 and 1803.5.12, for structures within Seismic Design Categories C through F, requires the specific assessment of liquefaction hazards at a site. It also requires provision of recommendations for mitigation if a hazard exists. Site-Specific Liquefaction and Dry Sand Settlement Hazard Analysis Review of the County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521 (public review draft) indicates that the property is located within an area that has been designated as having a Moderate potential for earthquake-induced liquefaction (Riverside County, 2014). However, based upon a relatively deep historic high groundwater level (180+ feet), the liquefaction potential at the site is considered negligible. As such, surface manifestation of liquefaction such as ground fissures, sand boils, loss of bearing, liquefaction-induced settlement, etc. is considered negligible. Due to the absence of water and based on our site exploration, the most likely scenario for dynamic settlements is the dry sand settlement. This is due primarily to the presence of partially consolidated granular sandy soils and to the proximity of seismic sources. For this reason, a site-specific dry sand settlement analysis was performed as part of this study. Dry Sand Settlement Analyses Using SPT Results Propagating earthquake waves induce shearing stresses and strains in soil materials during strong ground shaking. This process rearranges the structure of granular soils such that there is an increase in density, with a corresponding decrease in volume, which results in vertical settlement. Dynamic settlement has been well documented in wet, sandy deposits undergoing liquefaction (see Tokimatsu and Seed, 1987) and in relatively dry sediments as well (Stewart et al, 1996). Specific methods to analyze potential wet and dry dynamic settlement are reported in Tokimatsu and Seed (1987), and specifically dry settlement in Pradel (1998) and Stewart et al. (2001; 2002) respectively. Most of the referenced papers focus on the seismic effects on dry, clean sands of a uniform grain size, though several reports extend the literature to fine-grained soils (Stewart et al., 2001 & 2002). State guidelines for evaluating dynamic settlement are provided in the California Geological Survey Special Publication 117A (CGS, 2008). Dry sand settlement was evaluated by using the data from the deepest boring (B-4). The field exploration was conducted using both a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler and a modified California sampler (Cal Mod). For the purpose of running seismic settlement analysis, all the Cal Mod resultant blow counts were converted to the equivalent SPT blow by multiplying by a factor of 0.65. We feel this is a conservative conversion factor based on our past experience with correlations between SPT and Cal Mod PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 8 data that we have observed. In our analyses, we utilized a PGAM value of 0.809g which was calculated to have a 2 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years, a moment magnitude Mw of 7.5 and a conservative, assumed groundwater depth of 70 feet. Dry sand settlement was calculated using a spreadsheet utilizing the following methods: • D. Pradel - Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy Soils • K. Tokimatsu, H. B. Seed - Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking, ASCE JGE Vol. 113, No. 8, August 1986 Based on our analysis and the depth weighting function suggested by Cetin (2009), the seismically induced total settlement is estimated as follows: • Total Unweighted Free Field Settlement was Approximately 2.05 inches • Total Depth Weighted Free Field Settlement was Approximately 1.34 inches Tabulated results of the estimated settlements are provided in Appendix E of this report. It should be noted that our estimated settlement is for free field condition. Depending on proposed structures foundation, height and stiffness, the actual settlement during the design earthquake may vary appreciably from those estimated herein due to soil-structure interaction. Differential Dynamic Settlement As stated above total seismic settlements are estimated to be on the order of 1.3 inches. Differential dynamic settlement is estimated to be less than 0.7 inch over a span of 40 feet. This can also be expressed as an angular distortion ratio of 1:69 in the vicinity of a building. Geotechnical Issues Not Related to Seismicity Wind Erosion Figure 4.12.6 of the County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521 indicates that the site is located in an area that is categorized as “High” for wind erodibility (County of Riverside, 2014). Development plans should account for the potential effects of wind-blown sand. Subsidence Subsidence is the settlement or deformation of the land surface caused by several different conditions (including tectonic activity and petroleum production); however, it is most commonly associated with changes in groundwater levels. Long-term withdrawal of groundwater in the area of the subject site has PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 9 lowered the water table considerably, and this has resulted in 50 or more feet of subsidence in some areas of the Coachella Valley (Sneed 2001, 2007, 2014). Although partial recovery of the settlement may be possible if the water table is recharged and if the vertical stress increases induced at the groundwater low point were not generally higher than the past pressure, most subsidence is not recoverable when the stress has increased beyond the highest past pressure. According to Section 4.12 of the County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521 (public review draft dated March 2014), the subject site lies within a susceptible area to subsidence. According to Chapter 6.0 of the County of Riverside General Plan (County of Riverside, 2008), Policy S-3.8, requires that a geotechnical evaluation of subsidence be performed if a site lies within a documented subsidence area, or an area that is susceptible to subsidence as shown on Figure S-7 of that document. As stated in the plan “differential displacement and fissures occur at or near the valley margin, and along faults. In the County of Riverside, the worst damage to structures, as a result of regional subsidence, may be expected at the valley margins”. We note the following findings in relation to our assessment of the subsidence hazard at the site: • As shown on Figure S-7 of mentioned document and based on our review of published USGS reports, the site appears to be located several miles away from the edge of the deepest section of documented subsidence. • As discussed previously, the highest historical groundwater level has been determined to be greater than 70 feet. On this site, subsidence of the ground surface from groundwater withdrawal is not expected to have any significant effect on the proposed development. • The site does lie within the active subsidence areas and site soil has been identified as unconsolidated deposits as documented by Sneed (2001, 2007, 2014). • Measured subsidence in the site area from subsidence related to groundwater withdrawal has reached approximately a few 10’s of mm (less than 30 mm) according to data presented in the latest USGS report on this local topic (Figure 8 - Sneed, 2014). Provided that our recommendation presented in this report are implemented properly during site development, the potential for ground subsidence to affect development of the site is expected to be low. Hydro-Collapsible Soils Based on our subsurface investigations conducted onsite (i.e., hollow-stem auger), the relative density of the underlying alluvial materials encountered at depth, and anticipated remedial grading prior to site development, the potential for hydro-consolidation to affect the site is considered low. This potential PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 10 would generally be no greater than that for other existing commercial structures and irrigated residential developments in the immediate site vicinity. Expansive Soils Our visual classification and laboratory testing of onsite soil materials indicates that expansive soils are not present at the site near the surface. If importing soil material will be required to construct the proposed pads, it is possible that expansive soils could become incorporated into onsite fills. Specifications for import soils are discussed in a subsequent section of this report CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General From a soils engineering and engineering geologic standpoint, the subject property is considered suitable for the proposed development provided grading and construction are performed in accordance with local ordinances and codes, current standards of practice in the area, and recommendations provided in this report. Grading Plan Review The following earthwork and foundation design recommendations have been prepared without a grading plan. As such, the recommendations provided in this report should be considered tentative until grading and foundation plans are finalized and reviewed by our firm. Additional recommendations and/or modification of the recommendations provided herein may be necessary depending upon the results of our grading and foundation plan review. Effect of Proposed Grading on Adjacent Properties It is our opinion that the proposed grading and construction will not adversely affect the stab ility of adjoining properties provided that grading and construction are performed in accordance with the recommendations presented herein. PRIMARY GEOTECHNICAL CONCERNS Seismic Shaking The site is located within an active tectonic area with several significant faults capable of producing moderate to strong earthquakes. The San Andreas, the Banning-Mission Creek fault, Indio Hills fault, and the Hidden Springs fault are all in close proximity to the site and capable of producing strong ground PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 11 motions. Structures within the site should therefore be designed and constructed to resist the effects of strong ground motion in accordance with the current edition of the California Building Code. Seismically-Induced Settlement While groundwater conditions at the site preclude the potential for liquefaction, our analysis using SPT data, has resulted in an estimate of less than an inch of seismically-induced (dynamic) total settlement should be anticipated after remedial grading, with a corresponding differential settlement of approximately 0.7 inches or less over a distant of 30 feet. Therefore, the foundations for the proposed site structures should be designed to accommodate this magnitude of movement. Geotechnical design parameters for foundation design are provided in the “Foundation Design Guidelines” section of this report. Existing Unsuitable Materials The existing weathered native near surface soils to an approximate depth of 1 to 2 feet are generally loose and dry and in their present condition are not suitable as a bearing media for new fill or structure foundations. Therefore, in order create a uniform fill mat across the site, and to reduce the potential of distress to the proposed building footings, floor slabs, and exterior improvements due to the effects of differential settlement, all weathered near surface native materials should be removed down to competent native deposits and then replaced as engineered fill. Recommendations for remedial grading are provided in the “Earthwork” section of this report. Earthwork General Earthwork Recommendations Earthwork should be performed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the 2019 CBC and all applicable requirements of the County of Riverside. Grading should also be performed in accordance with the following site-specific recommendations prepared by Petra based on the proposed construction. Geotechnical Observations and Testing Prior to the start of earthwork, a meeting should be held at the site with the owner, contractor and geotechnical consultant to discuss the work schedule and geotechnical aspects of the grading. Earthwork, which in this instance will generally entail over-excavation and re-compaction of low density near surface soils for structures supported by mat or shallow foundations, should be accomplished under full -time observation and testing of the geotechnical consultant. A representative of the project geotechnical PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 12 consultant should be present onsite during earthwork operations to document the placement of engineered fills, as well as to document compliance with the other recommendations presented herein. Clearing and Grubbing All vegetation onsite and any trash or debris in areas to be graded should be removed from the site. During site grading, fill soils should be cleared of any deleterious materials that are missed during the initial clearing and grubbing operations. Any cavities or excavations created upon removal of subsurface structures should be cleared of loose soil, shaped to provide access for backfilling and compaction equipment and then backfilled with properly compacted fill. The project geotechnical consultant should provide periodic observation and testing services during clearing and grubbing operations to document compliance with the above recommendations. In addition, should any unusual or adverse soil conditions be encountered during grading that are not described herein, these conditions should be brought to the immediate attention of the project geotechnical consultant for corrective recommendations. Ground Preparation – Structural and Pavement Areas Based on soil conditions observed in the exploratory borings, surface soils over the majority of the site are loose in the upper approximately 1 to 2 feet, as evidenced by dense native soils being encountered in the soil sampling program at the initial 2-foot depth interval in all borings during the subsurface exploration. In all structural and pavement areas, any undocumented fill, as well as the existing ground surface should be over-excavated to depths that expose competent native soils exhibiting an in-place relative compaction of 85 percent or more, based on Test Method ASTM D 1557. As noted above, the minimum required depth of over-excavation is anticipated to be on the order of 2 feet, excluding any undocumented fill. The horizontal limits of over-excavation should extend to a minimum distance of 5 feet beyond the proposed perimeter foundation lines or to a horizontal distance equal to the depth of over- excavation, whichever is greater. Due to the potential variability of the surficial soil conditions, the required depths of over-excavation will have to be determined during grading. Therefore, prior to placing compacted fill, the exposed bottom surfaces in all over-excavated areas should be observed and approved by the project geotechnical consultant. Following this approval, the exposed bottom surfaces should be scarified to a depth of approximately 6 to 8 inches, watered as necessary to achieve a moisture content that is equal to or slightly above optimum moisture content, and then compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 13 percent of the applicable laboratory maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557. Cut Areas Cuts that extend to depths greater than approximately 2 feet below existing grade are anticipated to expose, competent native soils. However, due to variability in moisture content and cohesionless nature of the earth materials encountered across the site, cuts in structural areas should be over -excavated to a minimum depth of 3 feet and replaced with fill compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Shallower removals may be appropriate where exposed soil conditions, following the cut, are deemed to be suitable as determined by the geotechnical consultant. Pavement areas do not require such over-excavation. Fill Placement and Testing All fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 6 inches in thickness, watered as necessary to achieve a moisture content that is equal to or slightly above optimum moisture content, and then compacted in- place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of the applicable laboratory maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557. Each fill lift should be treated in a similar manner. Subsequent lifts should not be placed until the preceding lift has been approved by the project geotechnical consultant. The laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for each change in soil type should be determined in accordance with Test Method ASTM D 1557. Imported Soils If imported soils are required to complete the planned grading, these soils should consist of clean materials devoid of rock exceeding a maximum dimension of 2 inches, as well as organics, trash and similar deleterious materials. Imported soils should also exhibit an expansion index of 20 or less , i.e., non-expansive. Prospective import soils should be observed, tested and approved by our firm prior to importing the soils to the site. It is recommended that the project environmental consultant should also be notified so that they can confirm the suitability of the proposed import material from an environmental standpoint. Geotechnical Observations The project geotechnical consultant should be present on site during grading operations to observe and document engineered fill placement and moisture-conditioning, as well as to document compliance with the other recommendations presented herein. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 14 Shrinkage and Subsidence Volumetric changes in earth quantities will occur when excavated onsite soils are replaced as properly compacted fill. Accordingly, it is estimated that a shrinkage factor on the order of 0 to 5 percent will occur when onsite soils are excavated and placed as compacted fill. Subsidence from scarification and re-compaction of exposed bottom surfaces in over-excavated areas is expected to be minimal. The above estimates of shrinkage and subsidence are intended as aids for the project planners in determining earthwork quantities. However, these values should not be considered as absolute values and some contingencies should be made for balancing earthwork quantities on the basis of actual shrinkage and subsidence that occur during grading. Post-Grading Considerations Site Drainage Surface drainage systems consisting of sloping concrete flatwork and graded earth swales are anticipated to be constructed on the subject lots to collect and direct all surface water to the adjacent street. In addition, the ground surface around the proposed buildings should be sloped to provide a positive drainage gradient away from the structures. The purpose of the drainage systems is to prevent ponding of surface water within the level areas of the site and against building foundations and associated site improvements. The drainage systems should be properly maintained throughout the life of the proposed development. Section 1804.4 of the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) requires that "The ground immediately adjacent to the foundation shall be sloped away from the building at a slope of not less than one unit vertical in 20 units horizontal (5 percent slope) for a minimum distance of 10 feet (3048 mm) measured perpendicular to the face of the wall." Further, “Swales used for this purpose shall be sloped a minimum of 2 percent where located within 10 feet (3048 mm) of the building foundation”. These provisions fall under the purview of the Design Civil Engineer. However, exceptions to allow modifications to these criteria are provided within the same section of the code as "Where climatic or soil conditions warrant, the slope of the ground away from the building foundations is permitted to be reduced to not less than one unit in 48 units horizontal (2 percent slope)”. This exemption provision appears to fall under the purview of the Geotechnical Engineer-of-Record (Petra, 2021). PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 15 It is our understanding that the state-of-practice for projects in various cities and unincorporated areas of Riverside County, as well as throughout Southern California, has been to construct earthen slopes at 2 percent gradient away from the foundations and at 1 percent minimum for earthen swale gradients. Structures constructed and properly maintained under those criteria have performed satisfactorily. Therefore, considering the semi-arid climate, site soil conditions and an appropriate irrigation regime, Petra considers that the implementation of 2 percent slopes away from the structures and 1 percent swales to be suitable for the subject lots. It should be emphasized that the homeowners are cautioned that the slopes away from the structures and swales to be properly maintained, not to be obstructed, and that future improvements not to alter established gradients unless replaced with suitable alternative drainage systems. Further, whe re the flow line of the swale exists within five feet of the structure, adjacent footings shall be deepened appropriately to maintain minimum embedment requirements, measured from the flow line of the swale. Utility Trench Backfill All utility trench backfill should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Onsite soils cannot be densified adequately by flooding and jetting techniques; therefore, trench backfill materials should be placed in lifts no greater than approximately 6 inches in thickness, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve a uniform moisture content that is equal to or slightly above optimum moisture, and then mechanically compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. A representative of the project geotechnical consultant should probe and test the backfills to document that adequate compaction has been achieved. Utility-trench sidewalls deeper than about 5 feet should be laid back at a ratio of 1:1 (h:v) or flatter or shored. A trench box may be used in lieu of shoring. If shoring is anticipated, the project geotechnical consultant should be contacted to provide design parameters. For shallow trenches where pipe may be damaged by mechanical compaction equipment, such as under the building floor slab, imported clean sand exhibiting a sand equivalent value (SE) of 30 or greater may be utilized. The sand backfill materials should be watered to achieve near opt imum moisture conditions and then tamped in place. No specific relative compaction will be required; however, observation, probing, and, if deemed necessary, testing should be performed by a representative of the project geotechnical consultant to document that the sand backfill is adequately compacted and will not be subject to excessive settlement. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 16 Where utility trenches enter the footprint of the building, they should be backfilled through their entire depths with on-site fill materials, sand-cement slurry or concrete rather than with any sand or gravel shading. This “plug” of less- or non-permeable materials will mitigate the potential for water to migrate through the backfilled trenches from outside of the building to the areas beneath the foundations and floor slabs. If clean, imported sand is to be used for backfill of exterior utility trenches, it is recommended that the upper 12 inches of trench backfill materials consist of compacted on-site soil materials. This is to reduce infiltration of irrigation and rainwater into granular trench backfill materials. Where an interior or exterior utility trench is proposed parallel to a building footing, the bottom of the trench should not be located below a 1:1 plane projected downward from the outside bottom edge of the adjacent footing. Where this condition exists, the adjacent footing should be deepened such that the bottom of the utility trench is located above the 1:1 projection. FOUNDATION DESIGN GUIDELINES Faulting Based on our review of the referenced geologic maps and literature, no active faults are known to project through the property. Furthermore, the site does not lie within the boundaries of an “Earthquake Fault Zone” as defined by the State of California in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (CGS, 2018). The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (AP Act) defines an active fault as one that “has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years).” The main objective of the AP Act is to prevent the construction of dwellings on top of active faults that could displace the ground surface resulting in loss of life and property. However, it should be noted that according to the USGS Unified Hazard Tool website and/or 2010 CGS Fault Activity Map of California, the San Andreas Fault, located approximately 3.7 miles northeast of the site, would probably generate the most severe site ground motions and, therefore, is the majority contributor to the deterministic minimum component of the ground motion models. The subject site is located at a distance of less than 4.0 miles (6.5 km) from the surface projection of this fault system, which is capable of producing a magnitude 7 or larger events with a slip rate along the fault greater than 0.04 inch per year. As such, the site should be considered as a Near-Fault Site in accordance with ASCE 7- 16, Section 11.4.1. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 17 Seismic Design Parameters Earthquake loads on earthen structures and buildings are a function of ground acceleration which may be determined from the site-specific ground motion analysis. Alternatively, a design response spectrum can be developed for certain sites based on the code guidelines. To provide the design team with the parameters necessary to construct the design acceleration response spectrum for this project, we used two computer applications. Specifically, the first computer application, which was jointly developed by Structural Engineering Association of California (SEAOC) and California’s Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD), the SEA/OSHPD Seismic Design Maps Tool website, https://seismicmaps.org, is used to calculate the ground motion parameters. The second computer application, the United Stated Geological Survey (USGS) Unified Hazard Tool website, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/, is used to estimate the earthquake magnitude and the distance to surface projection of the fault. To run the above computer applications, site latitude and longitude, seismic risk category and knowledge of site class are required. The site class definition depends on the direct measurement and the ASCE 7- 16 recommended procedure for calculating average small-strain shear wave velocity, Vs30, within the upper 30 meters (approximately 100 feet) of site soils. A seismic risk category of II was assigned to the proposed building in accordance with 2019 CBC, Table 1604.5. Blow counts from the deep boring were utilized to estimate the site class applicable for the upper 100 feet from the ASCE 7-16, Article 20.4.2 procedure. The average Standard Penetration blow count was 40. As such, in accordance with ASCE 7-16, Table 20.3-1, Site Class D (D- Stiff Soil as per SEA/OSHPD software) has been assigned to the subject site. The following table, Table 1, provides parameters required to construct the seismic response coefficient, Cs, curve based on ASCE 7-16, Article 12.8 guidelines. A printout of the computer output is attached in Appendix C. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 18 TABLE 1 Seismic Design Parameters Ground Motion Parameters Specific Reference Parameter Value Unit Site Latitude (North) - 33.78741 ° Site Longitude (West) - -116.3618 ° Site Class Definition Section 1613.2.2 (1), Chapter 20 (2) D-Stiff (4) - Assumed Seismic Risk Category Table 1604.5 (1) II - Mw - Earthquake Magnitude USGS Unified Hazard Tool (3) 7.49 (3) - R – Distance to Surface Projection of Fault USGS Unified Hazard Tool (3) 6.11 (3) km Ss - Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Short Period (0.2 second) Figure 1613.2.1(1) (1) 1.882 (4) g S1 - Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Long Period (1.0 second) Figure 1613.2.1(2) (1) 0.778 (4) g Fa – Short Period (0.2 second) Site Coefficient Table 1613.2.3(1) (1) 1 (4) - Fv – Long Period (1.0 second) Site Coefficient Table 1613.2.3(2) (1) Null (4) - SMS – MCER Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter Adjusted for Site Class Effect (0.2 second) Equation 16-36 (1) 2.259 (4) g SM1 - MCER Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter Adjusted for Site Class Effect (1.0 second) Equation 16-37 (1) Null (4) g SDS - Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-s Equation 16-38 (1) 1.506 (4) g SD1 - Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-s Equation 16-39 (1) Null (4) g To = 0.2 SD1/ SDS Section 11.4.6 (2) Null s Ts = SD1/ SDS Section 11.4.6 (2) Null s TL - Long Period Transition Period Figure 22-14 (2) 8 (4) s PGA - Peak Ground Acceleration at MCEG (*) Figure 22-9 (2) 0.809 g FPGA - Site Coefficient Adjusted for Site Class Effect (2) Table 11.8-1 (2) 1.1 (4) - PGAM –Peak Ground Acceleration (2) Adjusted for Site Class Effect Equation 11.8-1 (2) 0.97 (4) g Design PGA ≈ (⅔ PGAM) - Slope Stability (†) Similar to Eqs. 16-38 & 16-39 (2) 0.647 g Design PGA ≈ (0.4 SDS) – Short Retaining Walls (‡) Equation 11.4-5 (2) 0.602 g CRS - Short Period Risk Coefficient Figure 22-18A (2) 0.895(4) - CR1 - Long Period Risk Coefficient Figure 22-19A (2) 0.881 (4) - SDC - Seismic Design Category (§) Section 1613.2.5 (1) Null (4) - References: (1) California Building Code (CBC), 2019, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume I and II. (2) American Society of Civil Engineers/Structural Engineering Institute (ASCE/SEI), 2016, Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, Standards 7-16. (3) USGS Unified Hazard Tool - https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ (4) SEI/OSHPD Seismic Design Map Application – https://seismicmaps.org Related References: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2015, NEHERP (National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program) Recommended Seismic Provision for New Building and Other Structures (FEMA P-1050). Notes: * PGA Calculated at the MCE return period of 2475 years (2 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years). † PGA Calculated at the Design Level of ⅔ of MCE; approximately equivalent to a return period of 475 years (10 percent chance o f exceedance in 50 years). ‡ PGA Calculated for short, stubby retaining walls with an infinitesimal (zero) fundamental period. § The designation provided herein may be superseded by the structural engineer in accordance with Section 1613.2.5.1, if applic able. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 19 Discussion - General Owing to the characteristics of the subsurface soils, as defined by Site Class D-Stiff Soil designation, and proximity of the site to the sources of major ground shaking, the site is expected to experience strong ground shaking during its anticipated life span. Under these circumstances, where the code-specified design response spectrum may not adequately characterize site response, the 2019 CBC typically requires a site-specific seismic response analysis to be performed. This requirement is signified/identified by the “null” values that are output using SEA/OSHPD software in determination of short period, but mostly, in determination of long period seismic parameters, see Table 1. For conditions where a “null” value is reported for the site, a variety of design approaches are permitted by 2019 CBC and ASCE 7-16 in lieu of a site-specific seismic hazard analysis. For any specific site, these alternative design approaches, which include Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF) procedure, Modal Response Spectrum Analysis (MRSA) procedure, Linear Response History Analysis (LRHA) procedure and Simplified Design procedure, among other methods, are expected to provide results that may or may not be more economical than those that are obtained if a site-specific seismic hazards analysis is performed. These design approaches and their limitations should be evaluated by the project structural engineer. Discussion – Seismic Design Category Please note that the Seismic Design Category, SDC, is also designated as “null” in Table 1. For Risk Category I, II or III structures, where the mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at 1 – second period, S1, is greater than or equal to 0.75, the 2019 CBC, Section 1613.2.5.1 requires that these structures be assigned to Seismic Design Category E. Discussion – Equivalent Lateral Force Method Should the Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF) method be used for seismic design of structural elements, the value of Constant Velocity Domain Transition Period, Ts, is estimated to be 0.70 seconds and the value of Long Period Transition Period, TL, is provided in Table 1 for construction of Seismic Response Coefficient – Period (Cs -T) curve that is used in the ELF procedure. As stated herein, the subject site is considered to be within a Site Class D-Stiff Soil. A site-specific ground motion hazard analysis is not required for structures on Site Class D-Stiff Soil with S1 > 0.2 provided that the Seismic Response Coefficient, Cs, is determined in accordance with ASCE 7-16, Article 12.8 and structural design is performed in accordance with Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF) procedure. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 20 Allowable Soil Bearing Capacities Provided that remedial grading is performed within the site as recommended in the “Earthwork” section of this report, an allowable bearing value of 1,500 pounds per square foot may be used for 24-inch-wide pad footings and 12-inch-wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches into compacted fill. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional foot of depth and by 10 percent for each additional foot of width, to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot. Recommended allowable bearing values include both dead and live loads and may be increased by one - third for short duration wind and seismic forces. Lateral Resistance A passive earth pressure of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square-foot, may be used to resist lateral loads. In addition, a coefficient of friction of 0.3 5 times the dead load forces may be used between concrete and the supporting soils to determine lateral sliding resistance. The above values may be combined without reduction. An increase of one-third of the above values may also be used when designing for short duration wind or s eismic forces. These valves are based on footings placed directly against compacted fill. In the case where footing sides are formed, all backfill placed against the footings should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the applicable laboratory maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557. Estimated Footing Settlement Based on the allowable bearing values provided above, maximum total static settlement of the footings under the anticipated loads is expected to be on the order of 3/4 inch. Differential settlement is expected to be less than ½ inch over a horizontal span of 30 feet. The majority of settlement is likely to take place as footing loads are applied or shortly thereafter. In addition, based on our analysis using SPT data, approximately 1.3 inches of seismically induced (dynamic) total settlement should be anticipated after remedial grading, with a corresponding differential settlement of approximately 0.7 inches or less over a distant of 30 feet. The dynamic settlement should be utilized to evaluate structural integrity in the event of a strong ground motion seismic event. Guidelines for Footings and Slabs on-Grade Design and Construction The results of our laboratory tests performed on representative samples of near-surface soils within the site during our investigation indicate that these materials predominantly exhibit expansion indices that are less than 20. As indicated in Section 1803.5.3 of 2019 California Building Code (2019 CBC), these PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 21 soils are considered non-expansive and, as such, the design of slabs on-grade is considered to be exempt from the procedures outlined in Sections 1808.6.2 of the 2019 CBC and may be performed using any method deemed rational and appropriate by the project structural engineer . However, the following minimum recommendations are presented herein for conditions where the project design team may require geotechnical engineering guidelines for design and construction of footings and slabs on -grade the project site. The design and construction guidelines that follow are based on the above soil conditions and may be considered for reducing the effects of variability in fabric, composition and, therefore, the detrimental behavior of the site soils such as excessive short- and long-term total and differential heave or settlement. These guidelines have been developed on the basis of the previous experience of this firm on projects with similar soil conditions . Although construction performed in accordance with these guidelines has been found to reduce post-construction movement and/or distress, they generally do not positively eliminate all potential effects of variability in soils characteristics and future heave or settlement. It should also be noted that the suggestions for dimension and reinforcement provided herein are performance-based and intended only as preliminary guidelines to achieve adequate performance under the anticipated soil conditions. However, they should not be construed as replacement for structural engineering analyses, experience and judgment. The project structural engineer, architect and/or civil engineer should make appropriate adjustments to slab and footing dimensions, and reinforcement type, size and spacing to account for internal concrete forces (e.g., thermal, shrinkage and expansion) as well as external forces (e.g., applied loads) as deemed necessary. Consideration should also be given to minimum design criteria as dictated by local building code requirements. Conventional Slabs on-Grade System Given the expansion index of less than 20, as exhibited by onsite soils, we recommend that footings and floor slabs be designed and constructed in accordance with the following minimum criteria. Footings 1. Exterior continuous footings supporting one- and two-story structures should be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade, respectively. Exterior continuous footings supporting three-and four-story structures should be founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade, respectively. Interior continuous footings may be founded at a minimum depth of 10 inches below the top of the adjacent finish floor slabs. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 22 2. In accordance with Table 1809.7 of 2019 CBC for light-frame construction, all continuous footings should have minimum widths of 12 inches for one- and two-story construction. All continuous footings should have minimum widths of 15 and 18 inches for three and four-story construction, respectively. We recommend all continuous footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. 3. A minimum 12-inch-wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across the garage entrances or similar openings (such as large doors or bay windows). The grade beam should be reinforced with a similar manner as provided above. 4. Interior isolated pad footings, if required, should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the bottoms of the adjacent floor slabs for one- and two-story buildings. Interior isolated pad footings for three- and four-story buildings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 15 inches below the bottoms of the adjacent floor slabs. Pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, placed near the bottoms of the footings. 5. Exterior isolated pad footings intended for support of roof overhangs such as second-story decks, patio covers and similar construction for one- and two-story buildings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. Exterior isolated pad footings for three- and four-story buildings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 24 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, placed near the bottoms of the footings. Exterior isolated pad footings may need to be connected to adjacent pad and/or continuous footings via tie beams at the discretion of the project structural engineer. 6. The minimum footing dimensions and reinforcement recommended herein may be modified (increased or decreased subject to the constraints of Chapter 18 of the 2019 CBC) by the structural engineer responsible for foundation design based on his/her calculations, engineering experience and judgment. Building Floor Slabs 1. Concrete floor slabs should be a minimum 4 inches thick and reinforced with No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 24 inches on centers, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or brick to ensure the desired placement near mid-depth. Slab dimension, reinforcement type, size and spacing need to account for internal concrete forces (e.g., thermal, shrinkage and expansion) as well as external forces (e.g., applied loads), as deemed necessary. 2. Living area concrete floor slabs and areas to receive moisture sensitive floor covering should be underlain with a moisture vapor retarder consisting of a minimum 10-mil-thick polyethylene or polyolefin membrane that meets the minimum requirements of ASTM E96 and ASTM E1745 for vapor retarders (such as Husky Yellow Guard®, Stego® Wrap, or equivalent). All laps within the membrane should be sealed, and at least 2 inches of clean sand should be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. To reduce the potential for punctures, the membrane should be placed on a pad surface that has been graded smooth without any sharp protrusions . If a smooth surface cannot be achieved by grading, consideration should be given to lowering the pad PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 23 finished grade an additional inch and then placing a 1-inch-thick leveling course of sand across the pad surface prior to the placement of the membrane. At the present time, some slab designers, geotechnical professionals and concrete experts view the sand layer below the slab (blotting sand) as a place for entrapment of excess moisture that could adversely impact moisture-sensitive floor coverings. As a preventive measure, the potential for moisture intrusion into the concrete slab could be reduced if the concrete is placed directly on the vapor retarder. However, if this sand layer is omitted, appropriate curing methods must be implemented to ensure that the concrete slab cures uniformly. A qualified materials engineer with experience in slab design and construction should provide recommendations for alternative methods of curing and supervise the construction process to ensure uniform slab curing. Additional steps would also need to be taken to prevent puncturing of the vapor retarder during concrete placement. 3. Garage floor slabs should be a minimum 4 inches thick and reinforced in a similar manner as living area floor slabs. Garage slabs should also be poured separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained using ¾-inch-minimum felt expansion joint material. To control the propagation of shrinkage cracks, garage floor slabs should be quartered with weakened plane joints. Consideration should be given to placement of a moisture vapor retarder below the garage slab, similar to that provided in Item 2 above, should the garage slab be overlain with moisture sensitive floor covering. 4. Presaturation of the subgrade below floor slabs will not be required; however, prior to placing concrete, the subgrade below all dwelling and garage floor slab areas should be thoroughly moistened to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal to or slightly greater than optimum moisture content. This moisture content should penetrate to a minimum depth of 12 inches below the bottoms of the slabs. 5. The minimum dimensions and reinforcement recommended herein for building floor slabs may be modified (increased or decreased subject to the constraints of Chapter 18 of the 2019 CBC) by the structural engineer responsible for foundation design based on his/her calculations, engineering experience and judgment. Post-Tensioned Slab-on-Ground System (Optional) The use of a post-tension system should be viewed as optional in this instance. In consideration of the expansion index of less than 20, as predominantly exhibited by onsite soils, any rational and appropriate procedure may be chosen by the project structural engineer for the design of post-tensioned slab-on- ground system. Should the design engineer choose to follow the latest Code-adopted edition of the procedure published by the Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI DC 10.5), the following minimum design criteria are provided Table 2, below. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 24 TABLE 2 Presumptive Post-Tensioned Slab on-Grade Design Parameters for PTI Procedure Soil Information Approximate Depth of Constant Suction, feet 9 Approximate Soil Suction, pF 3.9 Inferred Thornthwaite Index: -20 Average Edge Moisture Variation Distance, em in feet: Center Lift Edge Lift 9.0 4.7 Anticipated Swell, ym in inches: Center Lift Edge Lift 0.25 0.45 Modulus of Subgrade Reaction The modulus of subgrade reaction for design of load bearing elements depends on the size of the element and soil-structure interaction. However, as a first level of approximation, this value may be assumed to be 125 pounds per cubic inch. Minimum Design Recommendations The soil values provided above may be utilized by the project structural engineer to design post-tensioned slabs on-ground in accordance with Section 1808.6.2 of the 2019 CBC and the PTI publication. Thicker floor slabs and larger footing sizes may be required for structural reasons and should govern the design if more restrictive than the minimum recommendations provided below: 1. Exterior continuous footings for one- and two-story structures should be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent finished ground surface. Exterior continuous footings for three- and four-story structures should be founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished ground surface. Interior footings may be founded at a minimum depth of 10 inches below the tops of the adjacent finish floor slabs. 2. In accordance with Table 1809.7 of 2019 CBC for light-frame construction, all continuous footings should have minimum widths of 12 inches for one- and two-story construction. All continuous footings should have minimum widths of 15 and 18 inches for three-and four-story construction. We recommend all continuous footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. Alternatively, post-tensioned tendons may be utilized in the perimeter continuous footings in lieu of the reinforcement bars. 3. A minimum 12-inch-wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across the garage entrances or similar openings (such as large doors or bay windows). The grade beam should be reinforced in a similar manner as provided above. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 25 4. Interior isolated pad footings, if required, should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the bottoms of the adjacent floor slabs for one- and two- story buildings. Interior isolated pad footings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 15 inches below the bottoms of the adjacent floor slabs for three- and four-story buildings. Pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, placed near the bottoms of the footings. 5. Exterior isolated pad footings intended for support of roof overhangs such as second-story decks, patio covers and similar construction for one- and two-story buildings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. Exterior isolated pad footings for three- and four-story buildings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 24 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, placed near the bottoms of the footings . Exterior isolated pad footings may need to be connected to adjacent pad and/or continuous footings via tie beams at the discretion of the project structural engineer. 6. The thickness of the floor slabs should be determined by the project structural engineer with consideration given to the expansion index of the onsite soils; however; we recommend that a minimum slab thickness of 4 inches be considered. 7. As an alternative to designing 4-inch-thick post-tensioned slabs with perimeter footings as described in Items 1 and 2 above, the structural engineer may design the foundation system using a thickened slab design. The minimum thickness of this uniformly thick slab should be 7.5 inches. The engineer in charge of post-tensioned slab design may also opt to use any combination of slab thickness and footing embedment depth as deemed appropriate based on their engineering experience and judgment. 8. Living area concrete floor slabs and areas to receive moisture sensitive floor covering should be underlain with a moisture vapor retarder consisting of a minimum 10-mil-thick polyethylene or polyolefin membrane that meets the minimum requirements of ASTM E96 and ASTM E1745 for vapor retarders (such as Husky Yellow Guard®, Stego® Wrap, or equivalent). All laps within the membrane should be sealed, and at least 2 inches of clean sand should be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. To reduce the potential for punctures, the membrane should be placed on a pad surface that has been graded smooth without any sharp protrusions. If a smooth surface cannot be achieved by grading, consideration should be given to lowering the pad finished grade an additional inch and then placing a 1-inch-thick leveling course of sand across the pad surface prior to the placement of the membrane. At the present time, some slab designers, geotechnical professionals and concrete experts view the sand layer below the slab (blotting sand) as a place for entrapment of excess moisture that could adversely impact moisture-sensitive floor coverings. As a preventive measure, the potential for moisture intrusion into the concrete slab could be reduced if the concrete is placed directly on the vapor retarder. However, if this sand layer is omitted, appropriate curing methods must be implemented to ensure that the concrete slab cures uniformly. A qualified materials engineer with experience in slab design and construction should provide recommendations for alternative methods of curing and supervise the construction process to ensure uniform slab curing. Additional steps would also need to be taken to prevent puncturing of the vapor retarder during concrete placement. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 26 9. Garage floor slabs should be designed in a similar manner as living area floor slabs. Consideration should be given to placement of a moisture vapor retarder below the garage sla b, similar to that provided in Item 6 above, should the garage slab be overlain with moisture sensitive floor covering. 10. Presaturation of the subgrade below floor slabs will not be required; however, prior to placing concrete, the subgrade below all dwelling and garage floor slab areas should be thoroughly moistened to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal to or slightly greater than optimum moisture content. This moisture content should penetrate to a minimum depth of 12 inches below the bottoms of the slabs. 11. The minimum footing dimensions and reinforcement recommended herein may be modified (increased or decreased subject to the constraints of Chapter 18 of the 2019 CBC) by the structural engineer responsible for foundation design based on his/her calculations, engineering experience and judgment. Footing Observations Foundation excavations should be observed by a representative of the project geotechnical consultant to verify that they have been excavated into competent materials to the minimum depths recommended herein. These observations should be performed prior to the placement of forms or reinforcement. The excavations should be trimmed neat, level and square. All loose, sloughed or moisture-softened materials and/or any construction debris should be removed prior to the placement of concrete. Excavated soils derived from footing and utility trenches should not be placed in building pad or parking lot areas unless they are compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. General Corrosivity Screening As a screening level study, limited chemical and electrical tests were performed on samples considered representative of the onsite soils to identify potential corrosive characteristics of these soils. The common indicators associated with soil corrosivity include water-soluble sulfate and chloride levels, pH (a measure of acidity), and minimum electrical resistivity. It should be noted that Petra does not practice corrosion engineering; therefore, the test results, opinion and engineering judgment provided herein should be considered as general guidelines only. Additional analyses would be warranted, especially, for cases where buried metallic building materials (such as copper and cast or ductile iron pipes) in contact with site soils are planned for the project. In many cases, the project geotechnical engineer may not be informed of these choices. Therefore, for conditions where such elements are considered, we recommend that other, relevant project design professionals (e.g., the architect, landscape architect, civil and/or structural engineer) also consider recommending a qualified corrosion engineer to conduct PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 27 additional sampling and testing of near-surface soils during the final stages of site grading to provide a complete assessment of soil corrosivity. Recommendations to mitigate the detrimental effects of corrosive soils on buried metallic and other building materials that may be exposed to corrosive soils should be provided by the corrosion engineer as deemed appropriate. In general, a soil’s water-soluble sulfate levels and pH relate to the potential for concrete degradation; water-soluble chlorides in soils impact ferrous metals embedded or encased in concrete, e.g., reinforcing steel; and electrical resistivity is a measure of a soil’s corrosion potential to a variety of buried metals used in the building industry, such as copper tubing and cast or ductile iron pipes. Table 3, below, presents a single value of individual test results with an interpretation of current code indicators and guidelines that are commonly used in this industry. The table includes the code-related classifications of the soils as they relate to the various tests, as well as a general recommendation for possible mitigation measures in view of the potential adverse impact on various components of the proposed structures in direct contact with site soils. The guidelines provided herein should be evaluated and confirmed, or modified, in their entirety by the project structural engineer, corrosion engineer and/or the contractor responsible for concrete placement for structural concrete used in exterior and interior footings, interior slabs on-ground, garage slabs, wall foundations and concrete exposed to weather such as driveways, patios, porches, walkways, ramps, steps, curbs, etc. TABLE 3 Soil Corrosivity Screening Results Test Test Results Classification General Recommendations Soluble Sulfates (Cal 417) 0.0006 % S01 Min. f’c= 2,500 psi pH (Cal 643) 9.17 Strongly Alkaline Type I-P (MS) Modified or Type II Modified cement Soluble Chloride (Cal 422) 105 ppm C12 No max water/cement ratio, f’c = 2,500 psi Resistivity (Cal 643) 13,000 ohm-cm Corrosive3 Protective wrapping/coating of buried pipes; corrosion resistant materials; or cathodic protection Notes: 1. ACI 318-14, Section 19.3 2. ACI 318-14, Section 19.3 3. Pierre R. Roberge, “Handbook of Corrosion Engineering” Infiltration Rate The percolation test conducted on-site yielded a test infiltration rate, It, of 9.68 in./hr. This rate is unfactored and should be considered preliminary in nature. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 28 It should be noted that a prolonged period of infiltration, e.g. the first time use of infiltration facility, is expected to significantly reduce the infiltration rate. Further, standard percolation/infiltration tests are performed using clean, potable water. However, surface runoff carries fines and debris with it, which may reduce the percolation/infiltration rates further. Additional testing should be performed once the basin location(s) have been determined to finalize the design infiltration rate, Id. Masonry Block Walls Footings for masonry block walls proposed on level ground may be designed in accordance with the bearing and lateral resistance values provided previously for building footings. However, as a minimum, the wall footings should be embedded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The footings should also be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. In order to minimize the potential for unsightly cracking related to the possible e ffects of differential settlement and/or expansion, positive separations (construction joints) should also be provided in the block walls at each corner and at horizontal intervals of approximately 20 to 25 feet. The separations should be provided in the blocks and not extend through the footings. The footings should be poured monolithically with continuous rebars to serve as effective “grade beams” below the walls. Exterior Concrete Flatwork General Near-surface engineered fill soils within the site are expected to exhibit a range of expansion indices that classify them as non-expansive, i.e. Expansion Index, EI, < 20. Therefore, we recommend that all exterior concrete flatwork such as sidewalks, patio slabs, large decorative slabs, concrete subslabs that will be covered with decorative pavers, private and/or public vehicular parking, driveways and/or access roads within and adjacent to the site be designed by the project architect, civil and/or structural engineer with consideration given to mitigating the potential for cracking, curling, etc. that can potentially develop as a result of being underlain with soils that essentially exhibiting expansion index values that fall in the non- expansive category. The guidelines that follow should be considered as minimums and are subject to review and revision by the project architect, civil engineer, structural engineer and/or landscape consultant as deemed appropriate. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 29 Subgrade Preparation Compaction To reduce the potential for distress to concrete flatwork, the subgrade soils below concrete flatwork areas to a minimum depth of 12 inches (or deeper, as either prescribed elsewhere in this report or determined in the field) should be moisture conditioned to at least equal to, or slightly greater than, the optimum moisture content and then compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Where concrete public roads, concrete segments of roads and/or concrete access driveways and heavy recreational vehicles parking are proposed, the upper 6 inches of subgrade soil should be compacted to a minimum 95 percent relative compaction. Pre-Moistening As a further measure to reduce the potential for concrete flatwork distress, subgrade soils should be thoroughly moistened prior to placing concrete. The moisture content of the soils should be at least 1.1 times the optimum moisture content and penetrate to a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade . Flooding or ponding of the subgrade is not considered feasible to achieve the above moisture conditions since this method would likely require construction of numerous earth berms to contain the water. Therefore, moisture conditioning may be achieved with sprinklers or a light spray applied to the subgrade over a period of several hours to few days just prior to pouring concrete. Pre-watering of the soils is intended to promote uniform curing of the concrete, reduce the development of shrinkage cracks and reduce the potential for differential expansion pressure on freshly poured flatwork. A representative of the project geotechnical consultant should observe and verify the density and moisture content of the soils, and the depth of moisture penetration prior to pouring concrete. Thickness and Joint Spacing To reduce the potential of unsightly cracking, concrete walkways, patio-type slabs, large decorative slabs and concrete subslabs to be covered with decorative pavers should be at least 4 inches thick and provided with construction joints or expansion joints every 6 feet or less . Private driveways that will be designed for the use of passenger cars for access to private garages should also be at least 4 inches thick and provided with construction joints or expansion joints every 10 feet or less . Concrete pavement that will be designed based on an unlimited number of applications of an 18-kip single-axle load in public access areas, segments of road that will be paved with concrete (such as bus stops and cross-walks) or access roads and driveways, which serve multiple residential units or garages, that will be subject to heavy truck loadings and parking of recreational vehicles should have a minimum thickness of 5 inches and be PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 30 provided with control joints spaced at maximum 10-foot intervals. A modulus of subgrade reaction of 125 pounds per cubic foot may be used for design of the public and access roads. Reinforcement All concrete flatwork having their largest plan-view panel dimensions exceeding 10 feet should be reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 bars spaced 18 inches for 4-inch-thick slabs and No. 4 bars spaced 24 inches for 5-inch-thick slabs on centers, both ways. The reinforcement should be properly positioned near the middle of the slabs. All foot and equipment traffic on the reinforcement should be avoided or reduced to a minimum. The reinforcement recommendations provided herein are intended as a guideline to achieve adequate performance for anticipated soil conditions. As such, this guideline may not satisfy certain acceptable approaches, e.g. the area of reinforcement to be equal to or greater that 0.2 percent of the area of concrete. The project architect, civil and/or structural engineer should make appropriate adjustments in reinforcement type, size and spacing to account for concrete internal (e.g., shrinkage and thermal) and external (e.g., applied loads) forces as deemed necessary. Edge Beams (Optional) Where the outer edges of concrete flatwork are to be bordered by landscaping, it is recommended that considerations be given to the use of edge beams (thickened edges) to prevent excessive infiltration and accumulation of water under the slabs. Edge beams, if used, should be 6 to 8 inches wide, extend 8 inches below the tops of the finish slab surfaces. Edge beams are not mandatory; however, their inclusion in flatwork construction adjacent to landscaped areas is intended to reduce the potential for vertical and horizontal movement and subsequent cracking of the flatwork related to uplift forces that can develop in expansive soils. Drainage Drainage from patios and other flatwork areas should be directed to local area drains and/or graded earth swales designed to carry runoff water to the adjacent streets or other approved drainage structures . The concrete flatwork should be sloped at a minimum gradient as discussed earlier in the Site Drainage section of this report, or as prescribed by project civil engineer or local codes, away from building foundations, retaining walls, masonry garden walls and slope areas. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 31 Tree Wells Tree wells are not recommended in concrete flatwork areas because they typically introduce excessive water into the subgrade soils and allow root invasion, both of which can cause heaving and cracking of the flatwork. FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS Should any new structures or improvements be proposed at any time in the future other than those discussed herein, our firm should be notified so that we may provide geotechnical design recommendations. Geotechnical design recommendations are particularly critical for any new improvements that may interfere with the proposed permanent drainage facilities. Potential problems can develop when drainage on the pad is altered in any way (i.e., excavations or placement of fills associated with construction of new walkways, patios, block walls and planters). Therefore, it is recommended that we be engaged to review the final design drawings, specifications and preliminary grading plan prior to any new construction. If we are not given the opportunity to review these documents with respect to the geotechnical aspects of new construction and grading, it should not be assumed that the recommendations provided herein are wholly or in part applicable to the new construction or grading. REPORT LIMITATIONS This report is based on the proposed project and geotechnical data as described herein. The materials encountered on the project site, described in other literature, and utilized in our laboratory investigation are believed representative of the project area, and the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are presented on that basis. However, soil materials can vary in characteristics between points of exploration, both laterally and vertically, and those variations could affect the conclusions and recommendations contained herein. In addition, it is recommended that our firm be contracted for observation and testing services during the grading and construction phases of the project as it is essential in confirming the basis of this report. This report has been prepared consistent with that level of care being provided by other professionals providing similar services at the same locale and time period. The contents of this report are professional opinions and as such, are not to be considered a guarantee or warranty. This report should be reviewed and updated after a period of one year or if the project concept changes from that described herein. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 32 The information contained herein has not been prepared for use by parties or projects other than those named or described herein. This report may not contain sufficient information for other parties or other purposes. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please call Alan Pace at (760) 250-9747. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. ______________________________ ______________________________ 11/16/21 Grayson R. Walker Alan Pace Principal Engineer Senior Associate Geologist GE 871 CEG 1952 KTM/GRW/AP/lv W:\2020-2025\2021\300\21-308\Reports\21-308 110 Design-Phase Geotechnical Investigation Report Revision 1.docx PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 33 REFERENCES American Concrete Institute, 2014, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318 -14) and Commentary, Committee 318. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2016, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (Standard 7-16). California Building Standards Commission, 2019, California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, dated July. _______, 2019, California Plumbing Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 5, dated July. California Emergency Management Agency, 2009, Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, State of California, County of Orange, Newport Beach Quadrangle: map prepared in cooperation with the California Geologic Survey and the University of Southern California, dated March 15. California Geological Survey, 2010, ‘Fault Activity Map of California, Geologic Data Map No. 6, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/. California Geological Survey, 2018, Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners/Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California, Special Publication 42. California Department of Water Resources (CDWR), 1964, Coachella Valley Investigation, Bulletin No. 108, dated July. _______, 2020, Groundwater Data Library Website, https://wdl.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/ Caltrans, 2003, Bridge Design Specifications, Section 8 – Reinforced Concrete, dated September. Cao, T., et al., 2003, Revised 2002 California Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps, June 2003: California Geological Survey. Cetin et. al., 2009, Probabilistic Model for the Assessment of Cyclically Induced Reconsolidation (Volumetric) Settlements, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Mach 2009, Volume 135, No. 3. County of Riverside, 2014a, Low Impact Development BMP Design Handbook, June. _______, 2014b, Riverside County General Plan (effective dated 12/9/14). , 2015, County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521, Public Review Draft, Section 4.12, Geology and Soils, dated February. , 2017, Parcel Report System, Map My County System, APN’s 607050045-1, 607050044-0, 607032016-9, 607050017-6, 607050018-7, and 607050019-8, https://gis.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/?viewer=MMC_Public Dibblee, T.W., 1953, “Generalized geologic map of Imperial Valley region, California”: in Jahns, R.A., (ed.), 1954, Geology of southern California: California Division of Mines and Geology Bulletin 170 (scale 1” = 6 miles). Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2009, NEHERP (Nation al Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program) Recommended Seismic Provision for New Building and Other Structures (FEMA P-750). PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 34 REFERENCES Fumal, T. E., Rymer, M.J., Seitz, G.G., 2002, Timing of Large Earthquakes Since A.D. 800 on the Mission Creek Strand of the San Andreas Fault Zone at Thousand Palms Oasis, Near Palm Springs, California." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America v. 92(no. 7): p. 2841-2860. Ishihara, K., 1985, Stability of Natural Deposits During Earthquakes, 11th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Proceedings, San Francisco, Vol. 1., pp. 321-376. Jennings, C. W., 1994, "Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, with Locations and ages of Recent Volcanic Eruptions, Divisions of Mines and Geology": California Division of Mines and Geology Map No. 6 (scale 1: 750,000). Powell, R. E., (Ed.), 1993, "Balanced Palinspastic Reconstruction of Pre-late Cenozoic Paleogeology, Southern California: Geologic and Kinematic Constraints on Evolution of the San Andreas Fault System. The San Andreas Fault System: Displacement, Palinspastic Reconstruction, and Geologic Evolution. Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Memoir 178". Pradel, D., 1998, Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake -Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy Soils: in Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering: Vol. 124, No. 4. Post-Tensioning Institute, 2012, Standard Requirements for Design and Analysis of Shallow Post-Tensioned Concrete Foundation on Expansive Soils, Publication PTI DC1010.5-12. Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) – Colorado River Basin, 1986, Colorado River Hydrologic Basin Planning Area, West Colorado and East Colorado River Basins Map. Rymer, M. J. (2000). Triggered surface slips in the Coachella Valley area associated with the 1992 Joshua Tree and Landers, California Earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America v. 90(No. 4): p. 832-848. SEAOC & OSHPD Seismic Design Maps Web Application – https://seismicmaps.org/ Seed, H.B., and Whitman, R.V., 1970, Design of Earth Retaining Structures for Dynamic Lo ads, Lateral Stresses in the ground and design of earth retaining structures, ASCE, New York, 103 -107. Sieh, K. E., and WILLIAMS, P.L., 1990, "Behavior of the southernmost San Andreas fault during the past 300 years." Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 95(n. B5): p. 6629-6645. Sitar, N., Geraili Mikola, R., and Candia, G., 2012, Seismically Induced Lateral Earth Pressures on Retaining Structures and Basement Walls, Keynote Lecture, Geotechnical Engineering State of the Art and Practice, Keynote Lectures from GeoCongress 2012, GSP 226, ASCE, 2012. Sneed, M., 2001, Detection and Measurement of Land Subsidence Using Global Positioning System and Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar, Coachella Valley, California, 1996 -1998, U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4193. , 2007, Detection and Measurement of Land Subsidence Using Global Positioning System Surveying and Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar, Coachella Valley, California, 1996–2005, Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5251, United States Geological Survey. Sneed, M., Brandt, J.T., Solt, M., 2014, Land Subsidence, Groundwater Levels, and Geology in the Coachella Valley, California, 1993-2010, USGS, Scientific Investigation Report 2014-5075. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 35 REFERENCES Tokimatsu, K. and Seed, H.B., 1987; Evaluation of Settlements in Sands due to Earthquake Shaking: in Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 113, No. 8, p. 861-879. Towhata, Ikuo, 2008, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Springer, Publisher. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2014, Unified Hazard Tool, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ Wire Reinforcement Institute (WRI), 1996, Design of Slabs on Ground. FIGURES Scale: 1” = 2,000’ Base Map: Portions of USGS Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Myoma, Rancho Mirage, and La Quinta Quadrangles 7.5-Minute Topographic Series, 2015 N 3186 Airway Avenue, Suite K Costa Mesa, California 92626 PHONE: (714) 549-8921 COSTA MESA TEMECULA VALENCIA PALM DESERT CORONA SITE LOCATION MAP Gerald Ford Drive Palm Desert, California DATE: October, 2021 J.N.: 21-308 Figure 1 PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. SITE 3186 Airway Avenue, Suite K Costa Mesa, California 92626 PHONE: (714) 549-8921 COSTA MESA TEMECULA VALENCIA PALM DESERT CORONA SLOPE LOCATION MAP Gerald Ford Drive Palm Desert, California DATE: October, 2021 J.N.: 21-308 Figure 2 PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. N af HA-1 TD=8’ HA-2 TD=8’ af Qes B-1 TD=16.5’ B-2 TD=26.5’ B-3 TD=26.5’ B-4 TD=26.5’ 365365TP-1 TD=5’ TP-2 TD=5’ Qyf af B-1 TD=5’ B-2 TD=21.5’ B-3 TD=61.5’ 0 10 20 Scale: 1” = 20’ N B-2 TD=16.5’ B-4 TD=66.5’ B-3 TD=16.5’ P-1 TD=10’ Approximate Site Limits EXPLANATION Approximate Location of Exploratory Boring TD= Total depth Approximate Location of Infiltration Test TD= Total Depth B-4 TD=16.5’ P-1 TD=10’ Base Map: Google Earth, 2021. APPENDIX A EXPLORATION LOGS 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 DUNE SAND DEPOSITS (Qs)Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, loose, very fine- to fine- grained sand. Becomes very dense. Silty sand (SM): Gray, dry, very dense, very fine- to medium- grained. Becomes medium-dense. ALLUVIUM (Qal)Sand with Silt (SP-SM): gray, dry, medium-dense, fine- to coarse- grained. Silty Sand (SM): gray, dry, medium-dense, very fine- to fine- grained. Total Depth= 16.5' No groundwater encountered Boring backfilled with cuttings. 3150/5" 3550/5" 71118 111420 51012 1.0 0.7 1.4 1.0 2.0 110.0 120.9 109.8 115.9 99.7 Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:B-1 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±171' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 DUNE SAND DEPOSITS (Qs)Sand with silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, loose, fine- to medium-grained. Becomes medium-dense and very fine- to fine-grained. Same as above. ALLUVIUM (Qal)Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray to off-white, dry, medium-dense, fine- to medium-grained. Same as above. Total Depth= 16.5' No groundwater encountered Boring backfilled with cuttings. 363550/6" 101012 111012 121418 101317 1.3 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.1 122.4 103.2 94.7 113.8 110.0 Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:B-2 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±171' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 DUNE SAND DEPOSITS (Qs)Sand (SP): Gray, dry, loose, fine-grained. Becomes very dense. Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, dense, very fine- to fine- grained. Silty Sand (SM): Gray, dry, medium-dense, fine-grained. ALLUVIUM (Qal)Silty Sand (SM): Olive gray, slightly moist, medium-dense. Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, medium-dense, fine- to medium-grained. Total Depth= 16.5' No groundwater encountered Boring backfilled with cuttings. 2650/3" 172433 7916 669 1117 3.8 1.5 4.3 2.4 1.7 121.4 120.8 104.8 99.1 111.4 Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:B-3 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±167' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 DUNE SAND DEPOSITS (Qs)Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, loose, fine- to medium- grained. Becomes very dense. Becomes medium-dense to dense. Silty Sand (SM): Grayish-brown, dry, medium-dense, fine- grained. ALLUVIUM (Qal)Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Off-white to gray, dry, medium-dense. Same as above. Sand (SP): Gray, dry, medium-dense, very fine- to fine-grained. Same as above. Becomes very dense. 3450/4" 182428 111418 111320 5611 81217 81616 184050/2" 1.4 0.9 3.4 1.2 10.2 1.1 0.7 124.6 115.3 110.0 112.2 90.2 106.8 111.1 Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:B-4 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±171' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-4 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Becomes medium-dense. Becomes dense. Same as above. Silty Sand (SM): Gray, slightly moist, dense, very fine-grained. Sand (SP): Off-white to gray, dry, very dense, fine-grained. Same as above. Total depth= 66.5' No groundwater encountered Boring backfilled with cuttings. 131622 133050/6" 91217 101533 152140 2650/6" 212750/6" 0.6 0.7 1.2 98.6 104.6 Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:B-4 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±171' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-4 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 DUNE SAND DEPOSITS (Qs)Sand (SP): Gray, dry, loose, fine-grained, . Becomes very dense. Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, dense, very fine- to fine- grained. Silty Sand (SM): Gray, dry, medium-dense, fine-grained. Total Depth= 10' No groundwater encountered Infiltration test installed within boring and presoaked prior to testing. Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:P-1 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±167' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-5 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES LABORATORY DATA SUMMARY _____________________________________________________ ______________________________________ PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. Laboratory Address: 1251 W. Pomona Road, Unit 103, Corona, CA, 92882 J.N. 21-308 LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES Soil Classification Soil materials encountered within the property were classified and described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System and in general accordance with the current version of Test Method ASTM D 2488. The assigned group symbols are presented in the exploration logs, Appendix A. In Situ Moisture Content and Dry Unit Weight In-place moisture content and dry unit weight of selected, relatively undisturbed soil samples were determined in accordance with the current version of the Test Method ASTM D 2435 and Test Method ASTM D 2216, respectively. Test data are presented on the exploration logs, Appendix A. Laboratory Maximum Dry Unit Weight and Optimum Moisture Content The maximum dry unit weight and optimum moisture content of the on-site soils were determined for selected bulk sample in accordance with current version of ASTM D 1557. The results of these tests are presented on Plate B-1. Expansion Index Expansion index testing was performed on selected bulk samples of the on-site soils in accordance with the current version of Test Method ASTM D 4829. The test results are presented on Plate B-1. Corrosivity Screening Chemical and electrical analyses were performed on selected bulk samples of onsite soils to determine their soluble sulfate content, chloride content, pH (acidity), and minimum electrical resistivity. These tests were performed in accordance with the current versions of California Test Method Nos. CTM 417, CTM 422 and CTM 643, respectively. The results of these tests are included on Plate B-1. Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve Selected samples were run through a number 200 sieve in general accordance with the current version of Test Method ASTM D 1140. The results of these tests are included on Plate B-1. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. Laboratory Address: 1251 W. Pomona Road, Unit 103, Corona, CA, 92882 J.N. 21-308 PLATE B-1 LABORATORY DATA SUMMARY Boring Number Sample Depth (ft) Soil/Bedrock Description Max. Dry Density 1 (pcf) Optimum Moisture1 (%) Expansion Index2 Expansion Potential3 Atterberg Limits4 Sulfate Content5 (%) Chloride Content6 (ppm) pH7 Minimum Resistivity7 (Ohm-cm) % Passing No. 200 Sieve8 LL PL PI B-4 0-5 Silty Sand (SM) 129.5 6.5 0 Very Low - - - 0.0006 105 9.17 13,000 - B-2 7 Sand (SP) - - - - - - - - - - - 6.9 B-4 15 Silty Sand (SM) - - - - - - - - - - - 15.6 B-4 25 Sand (SP) - - - - - - - - - - - 7.5 B-4 35 Sand (SP) - - - - - - - - - - - 8.1 B-4 45 Sand (SP) - - - - - - - - - - - 9.1 B-4 55 Silty Sand (SM) - - - - - - - - - - - 15.4 B-4 65 Sand (SP) - - - - - - - - - - - 9.0 Test Procedures: 1 Per ASTM Test Method D 1557 5 Per California Test Method 417 2 Per ASTM Test Method D 4829 6 Per California Test Method 422 3 Per ASTM Test Method D 4829 7 Per California Test Method 643 4 Per ASTM Test Method D 4318 8 Per ASTM Test Method D 1140 APPENDIX C SEISMIC DESIGN ANALYSIS Palm Communities Latitude, Longitude: 33.787414, -116.361886 Date 10/13/2021, 9:08:31 PM Design Code Reference Document ASCE7-16 Risk Category II Site Class D - Default (See Section 11.4.3) Type Value Description SS 1.882 MCER ground motion. (for 0.2 second period) S1 0.778 MCER ground motion. (for 1.0s period) SMS 2.259 Site-modified spectral acceleration value SM1 null -See Section 11.4.8 Site-modified spectral acceleration value SDS 1.506 Numeric seismic design value at 0.2 second SA SD1 null -See Section 11.4.8 Numeric seismic design value at 1.0 second SA Type Value Description SDC null -See Section 11.4.8 Seismic design category Fa 1.2 Site amplification factor at 0.2 second Fv null -See Section 11.4.8 Site amplification factor at 1.0 second PGA 0.809 MCEG peak ground acceleration FPGA 1.2 Site amplification factor at PGA PGAM 0.97 Site modified peak ground acceleration TL 8 Long-period transition period in seconds SsRT 2.201 Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (0.2 second) SsUH 2.459 Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration SsD 1.882 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (0.2 second) S1RT 0.872 Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (1.0 second) S1UH 0.99 Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration. S1D 0.778 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (1.0 second) PGAd 0.809 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (Peak Ground Acceleration) CRS 0.895 Mapped value of the risk coefficient at short periods CR1 0.881 Mapped value of the risk coefficient at a period of 1 s DISCLAIMER While the information presented on this website is believed to be correct, SEAOC /OSHPD and its sponsors and contributors assume no responsibility or liability for its accuracy. The material presented in this web application should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by engineers or other licensed professionals. SEAOC / OSHPD do not intend that the use of this information replace the sound judgment of such competent professionals, having experience and knowledge in the field of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the results of the seismic data provided by this website. Users of the information from this website assume all liability arising from such use. Use of the output of this website does not imply approval by the governing building code bodies responsible for building code approval and interpretation for the building site described by latitude/longitude location in the search results of this website. Unied Hazard Tool Input U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program Please do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for the design code reference documents covered by the U.S. Seismic Design Maps web tools (e.g., the International Building Code and the ASCE 7 or 41 Standard). The values returned by the two applications are not identical.  Edition Dynamic: Conterminous U.S. 2014 (u… Latitude Decimal degrees 33.787414 Longitude Decimal degrees, negative values for western longitudes -116.361886 Site Class 760 m/s (B/C boundar y) Spectral Period Peak Ground Acceleration Time Horizon Return period in years 2475 Hazard Curve View Raw Data Hazard Curves Time Horizon 2475 years Peak Ground Acceleration 0.10 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.20 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.30 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.50 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.75 Second Spectral Acceleration 1.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 2.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 3.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 4.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 5.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 Ground Motion (g) 1e-12 1e-11 1e-10 1e-9 1e-8 1e-7 1e-6 1e-5 1e-4 1e-3 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 Annual Frequency of ExceedenceUniform Hazard Response Spectrum 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Spectral Period (s) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Ground Motion (g)Spectral Period (s): PGA Ground Motion (g): 0.9375 Component Curves for Peak Ground Acceleration Time Horizon 2475 years System Grid Interface Fault 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 Ground Motion (g) 1e-12 1e-11 1e-10 1e-9 1e-8 1e-7 1e-6 1e-5 1e-4 1e-3 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 Annual Frequency of Exceedence Deaggregation Component Total ε = (-∞ .. -2.5) ε = [-2.5 .. -2) ε = [-2 .. -1.5) ε = [-1.5 .. -1) ε = [-1 .. -0.5) ε = [-0.5 .. 0) ε = [0 .. 0.5) ε = [0.5 .. 1) ε = [1 .. 1.5) ε = [1.5 .. 2) ε = [2 .. 2.5) ε = [2.5 .. +∞) 5 10 15 20 25 Closest Distance, rRup (km) 30 35 40 45 50 5598.587.5M agnitud e (M w )76.565.554.5510% Contribution to Hazard1520255 10 15 20 25 30 35 Closest Distance, rRup (km) 40 45 50 55 98.587.576.5M agnitud e (M w )65.554.5 Summary statistics for, Deaggregation: Total Deaggregation targets Return period:2475 yrs Exceedance rate:0.0004040404 yr⁻¹ PGA ground motion:0.93746559 g Recovered targets Return period:3027.3552 yrs Exceedance rate:0.00033032133 yr⁻¹ Totals Binned:100 % Residual:0 % Trace:0.07 % Mean (over all sources) m:7.42 r:6.57 km ε₀:1.53 σ Mode (largest m-r bin) m:7.49 r:6.11 km ε₀:1.47 σ Contribution:19.3 % Mode (largest m-r-ε₀ bin) m:7.49 r:6.07 km ε₀:1.44 σ Contribution:15.12 % Discretization r:min = 0.0, max = 1000.0, Δ = 20.0 km m:min = 4.4, max = 9.4, Δ = 0.2 ε:min = -3.0, max = 3.0, Δ = 0.5 σ Epsilon keys ε0:[-∞ .. -2.5) ε1:[-2.5 .. -2.0) ε2:[-2.0 .. -1.5) ε3:[-1.5 .. -1.0) ε4:[-1.0 .. -0.5) ε5:[-0.5 .. 0.0) ε6:[0.0 .. 0.5) ε7:[0.5 .. 1.0) ε8:[1.0 .. 1.5) ε9:[1.5 .. 2.0) ε10:[2.0 .. 2.5) ε11:[2.5 .. +∞] Deaggregation Contributors Source Set  Source Type r m ε0 lon lat az % UC33brAvg_FM31 System 43.82 San Andreas (San Gorgonio Pass-Garnet HIll) [1]6.03 7.60 1.45 116.329°W 33.833°N 30.82 36.85 San Andreas (North Branch Mill Creek) [11]7.36 7.88 1.33 116.310°W 33.832°N 43.97 4.59 San Andreas (Coachella) rev [0]10.69 7.23 2.07 116.246°W 33.788°N 89.47 1.09 UC33brAvg_FM32 System 43.75 San Andreas (San Gorgonio Pass-Garnet HIll) [1]6.03 7.60 1.45 116.329°W 33.833°N 30.82 36.66 San Andreas (North Branch Mill Creek) [11]7.36 7.85 1.34 116.310°W 33.832°N 43.97 4.84 UC33brAvg_FM31 (opt)Grid 6.22 PointSourceFinite: -116.362, 33.819 5.91 5.86 1.85 116.362°W 33.819°N 0.00 1.72 PointSourceFinite: -116.362, 33.819 5.91 5.86 1.85 116.362°W 33.819°N 0.00 1.72 UC33brAvg_FM32 (opt)Grid 6.22 PointSourceFinite: -116.362, 33.819 5.91 5.86 1.85 116.362°W 33.819°N 0.00 1.72 PointSourceFinite: -116.362, 33.819 5.91 5.86 1.85 116.362°W 33.819°N 0.00 1.72 APPENDIX D PERCOLATION TEST DATA Total Depth of Boring, Dt (ft):10 Diameter of Hole, D (in):6 Diameter of Pipe, d (in):2 Agg. Correction (% Voids):0 Pre-soak depth (ft):5 1st Reading 2nd Reading 10 6.05 9.52 41.64 0.24 22.19 10 5.50 8.90 40.80 0.25 17.39 10 5.50 8.90 40.80 0.25 17.39 10 5.55 8.85 39.60 0.25 16.88 10 5.50 8.75 39.00 0.26 16.21 10 5.55 8.75 38.40 0.26 16.10 Percolation Rate:0.26 Minutes/Inch 16.1 gal/day/ft2 Infiltration Rate:9.7 Inches/Hour* (Porchet Method) r = D / 2 Ho = Dt - Do Hf = Dt - Df DH = ΔD = Ho - Hf Havg = (Ho + Hf) / 2 *Raw Number, Does Not Include a Factor of Safety Reference: RCFCWCD, Design Handbook for LID, dated June, 2014 or SARWQCB, Technical Guidance Document Appendix VII, dated December 20, 2013 or DATE: Oct., 2021 CofSBASP, Technical Guidance Document Appendix D, dated May 19, 2011 or J.N.: 21-308 Test Number: P-1 3186 Airway Avenue, Suite K Costa Mesa, California 92626 PHONE: (714) 549-8921 Perc. Rate (gal/day/ft^2) Deep Percolation Test Method Time Interval (min) Depth to Water Surface Dw (ft) Change in Head (in) Perc. Rate (min/in) where Infiltration Rate, It =DH (60r) / Dt (r + 2Havg ) Plate D Gerald Ford Drive Palm Desert, California PERCOLATION TEST SUMMARY PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. COSTA MESA TEMECULA VALENCIA PALM DESERT CORONA APPENDIX E EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS APPENDIX C: LIQUEFACTION AND DRY SAND SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS 21-308 Palm Desert Apartments0.00inches2.05inches2.05inches190no liquefactionno waterfeet66.50feet0.00feetEarthquake loading: M 7.49PGA 0.809 Depth to Use for Depth Weighting Depth (ft) = 59.0feet feetin in in in0 5 100 5 no liq0.00 0.00 2.05 1.345 7 36 5 no liq0.02 0.01 2.05 1.337 10 22 7 0.750.13 0.11 2.03 1.3210 15 23 16 1.380.17 0.13 1.91 1.2115 20 12 16 0.360.90 0.63 1.74 1.0820 25 20 8 0.440.50 0.31 0.84 0.4525 30 32 8 0.970.19 0.10 0.34 0.1430 35 100 8 no liq0.02 0.01 0.15 0.0435 40 38 8 no liq0.04 0.02 0.13 0.0340 45 80 8 no liq0.01 0.00 0.09 0.0145 50 29 9 0.510.04 0.01 0.08 0.0150 55 48 9 no liq0.02 0.00 0.04 0.0055 60 61 16 no liq0.01 0.00 0.02 0.0060 65 76 9 no liq0.01 0.00 0.01 0.0065 66.5 77 9 no liq0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0 100 10 no liq0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0 100 10 no liq0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0 100 10 no liq0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0 100 10 no liq0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Total Free Field Settlement (Unweighted) = 2.05Total Depth Weighted Settlement = 1.34Depth to first groundwaterDepth Weighted SettlementCumulative Free Field SettlementCumulative Depth Weighted SettlementNot liquefiableNot liquefiableNot liquefiableInterpreted Factor of Safetyagainst liquefaction- no groundwaterFree Field SettlementNot liquefiableNot liquefiableNot liquefiableNot liquefiableTotal thickness of evaluated profileFSSPT.cs,KσDepth to Layer Top Depth to Layer BottomSPT - NFines %Not liquefiableNot liquefiable- no groundwaterNot liquefiable- no groundwater- no groundwater- no groundwaterNot liquefiable- no groundwaterNot liquefiable- no groundwater- no groundwater- no groundwater- no groundwater- no groundwaterNot liquefiableNumber of potentially liquefiable intervalsAverage Factor of SafetyTotal dry sand settlementTotal earthquake-induced settlementNumber of evaluated intervalsB-4 References:T.L.Youd, I.M.Idriss - Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of SoilsD. Pradel - Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy SoilsK.Tokimatsu, H.B.Seed - Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking, ASCE JGE Vol.113, No.8, August 1986G.Zhang, P.K.Robertson, R.W.I.Brachman - Estimating Liquefaction-Induced Ground Settlements From CPT for Level Ground (CGJ39,2002)BoringSummary of analysisTotal liquefaction settlementNot liquefiable- no groundwater- no groundwater- no groundwaterProfile thickness susceptible to liquefactionNot liquefiable- no groundwater- no groundwaterNot liquefiable- no groundwaterNot liquefiableNot liquefiableNot liquefiable- no groundwater- no groundwater0102030405060700 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Depth (ft)Settlement (in)CumulativeSettlementDepth WeightedSettlementFirst groundwater atno waterfeetB-4 0102030405060700.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0Depth (ft)Factor of Safety against LiquefactionFirst groundwater atno waterfeetB-4 FS = 1.3LIQUEFACTIONNO LIQUEFACTION APPENDIX F STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 1 These specifications present the usual and minimum requirements for projects on which Petra Geosciences, Inc. (Petra) is the geotechnical consultant. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except where specifically superseded in the preliminary geology and soils report, or in other written communication signed by the Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist of record (Geotechnical Consultant). I. GENERAL A. The Geotechnical Consultant is the Owner's or Builder's representative on the project. For the purpose of these specifications, participation by the Geotechnical Consultant includes that observation performed by any person or persons employed by, and responsible to, the licensed Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist signing the soils report. B. The contractor should prepare and submit to the Owner and Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "spreads" and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork to be performed prior to the commencement of grading. This work plan should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Consultant to schedule personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing as necessary. C. All clearing, site preparation, or earthwork performed on the project shall be conducted by the Contractor in accordance with the recommendations presented in the geotechnical report and under the observation of the Geotechnical Consultant. D. It is the Contractor's responsibility to prepare the ground surface to receive the fills to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Consultant and to place, spread, mix, water, and compact the fill in accordance with the specifications of the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall also remove all material considered unsatisfactory by the Geotechnical Consultant. E. It is the Contractor's responsibility to have suitable and sufficient compaction equipment on the job site to handle the amount of fill being placed. If necessary, excavation equipment will be shut down to permit completion of compaction to project specifications. Sufficient watering apparatus will also be provided by the Contractor, with due consideration for the fill material, rate of placement, and time of year. F. After completion of grading a report will be submitted by the Geotechnical Consultant. II. SITE PREPARATION A. Clearing and Grubbing 1. All vegetation such as trees, brush, grass, roots, and deleterious material shall be disposed of offsite. This removal shall be concluded prior to placing fill. 2. Any underground structures such as cesspools, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, septic tanks, wells, pipe lines, etc., are to be removed or treated in a manner prescribed by the Geotechnical Consultant. STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 2 III. FILL AREA PREPARATION A. Remedial Removals/Overexcavations 1. Remedial removals, as well as overexcavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Remedial removal depths presented in the geotechnical report and shown on the geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal should be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the conditions exposed during grading. All soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as determined by the Geotechnical Consultant. 2. Soil, alluvium, or bedrock materials determined by the Soils Engineer as being unsuitable for placement in compacted fills shall be removed from the site. Any material incorporated as a part of a compacted fill must be approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. 3. Should potentially hazardous materials be encountered, the Contractor should stop work in the affected area. An environmental consultant specializing in hazardous materials should be notified immediately for evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing work in the affected area. B. Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide sufficient survey control for determining locations and elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches. C. Processing After the ground surface to receive fill has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant, it shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches and until the ground surface is uniform and free from ruts, hollows, hummocks, or other uneven features which may prevent uniform compaction. The scarified ground surface shall then be brought to optimum moisture, mixed as required, and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. D. Subdrains Subdrainage devices shall be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency, and/or with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. (Typical Canyon Subdrain details are given on Plate SG-1). E. Cut/Fill & Deep Fill/Shallow Fill Transitions In order to provide uniform bearing conditions in cut/fill and deep fill/shallow fill transi tion lots, the cut and shallow fill portions of the lot should be overexcavated to the depths and the horizontal limits discussed in the approved geotechnical report and replaced with compacted fill. (Typical details are given on Plate SG-7.) STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 3 IV. COMPACTED FILL MATERIAL A. General Materials excavated on the property may be utilized in the fill, provided each material has been determined to be suitable by the Geotechnical Consultant. Material to be used for fill shall be essentially free of organic material and other deleterious substances. Roots, tree branches, and other matter missed during clearing shall be removed from the fill as recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Material that is spongy, subject to decay, or otherwise considered unsuitable shall not be used in the compacted fill. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. B. Oversize Materials Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches in diameter, shall be taken offsite or placed in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal (Typical details for Rock Disposal are given on Plate SG-4). Rock fragments less than 12 inches in diameter may be utilized in the fill provided, they are not nested or placed in concentrated pockets; they are surrounded by compacted fine grained soil material and the distribution of rocks is approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. C. Laboratory Testing Representative samples of materials to be utilized as compacted fill shall be analyzed by the laboratory of the Geotechnical Consultant to determine their physical properties. If any material other than that previously tested is encountered during grading, the appropriate analysis of this material shall be conducted by the Geotechnical Consultant as soon as possible. D. Import If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material should meet the requirements of the previous section. The import source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 2 working days prior to importing so that appropriate tests can be performed and its suitability determined. V. FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION A. Fill Layers Material used in the compacting process shall be evenly spread, watered, processed, and compacted in thin lifts not to exceed 6 inches in thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer . The fill shall be placed and compacted on a horizontal plane, unless otherwise approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 4 B. Moisture Conditioning Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly above optimum moisture content. C. Compaction Each layer shall be compacted to 90 percent of the maximum density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental agency. (In general, ASTM D 1557- 02, will be used.) If compaction to a lesser percentage is authorized by the controlling governmental agency because of a specific land use or expansive soils condition, the area to received fill compacted to less than 90 percent shall either be delineated on the grading plan or appropriate reference made to the area in the soils report. D. Failing Areas If the moisture content or relative density varies from that required by the Geotechnical Consultant, the Contractor shall rework the fill until it is approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. E. Benching All fills shall be keyed and benched through all topsoil, colluvium, alluvium or creep material, into sound bedrock or firm material where the slope receiving fill exceeds a ratio of 5 horizontal to 1 vertical, in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. VI. SLOPES A. Fill Slopes The contractor will be required to obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent out to the finish slope face of fill slopes, buttresses, and stabilization fills. This may be achieved by either overbuilding the slope and cutting back to the compacted core, or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment, or by any other procedure that produces the required compaction. B. Side Hill Fills The key for side hill fills shall be a minimum of 15 feet within bedrock or firm materials, unless otherwise specified in the soils report. (See detail on Plate SG-5.) C. Fill-Over-Cut Slopes Fill-over-cut slopes shall be properly keyed through topsoil, colluvium or creep material into rock or firm materials, and the transition shall be stripped of all soils prior to placing fill. (see detail on Plate SG-6). STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 5 D. Landscaping All fill slopes should be planted or protected from erosion by other methods specified in the soils report. E. Cut Slopes 1. The Geotechnical Consultant should observe all cut slopes at vertical intervals not exceeding 10 feet. 2. If any conditions not anticipated in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joints or fault planes are encountered during grading, these conditions shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant, and recommendations shall be made to treat these problems (Typical details for stabilization of a portion of a cut slope are given in Plates SG-2 and SG-3.). 3. Cut slopes that face in the same direction as the prevailing drainage shall be protected from slope wash by a non-erodible interceptor swale placed at the top of the slope. 4. Unless otherwise specified in the soils and geological report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies. 5. Drainage terraces shall be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies, or with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. VII. GRADING OBSERVATION A. General All cleanouts, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, subdrains, and rock disposals must be observed and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placing any fill. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to notify the Geotechnical Consultant when such areas are ready. B. Compaction Testing Observation of the fill placement shall be provided by the Geotechnical Consultant during the progress of grading. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultants discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations may be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be susceptible to inadequate compaction. C. Frequency of Compaction Testing In general, density tests should be made at intervals not exceeding 2 feet of fill height or every 1000 cubic yards of fill placed. This criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and the size of the job. In any event, an adequate number of field density tests shall be made to verify that the required compaction is being achieved. STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 6 VIII. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS A. Erosion control measures, when necessary, shall be provided by the Contractor during grading and prior to the completion and construction of permanent drainage controls. B. Upon completion of grading and termination of observations by the Geotechnical Consultant, no further filling or excavating, including that necessary for footings, foundations, large tree wells, retaining walls, or other features shall be performed without the approval of the Geotechnical Consultant. C. Care shall be taken by the Contractor during final grading to preserve any berms, drainage terraces, interceptor swales, or other devices of permanent nature on or adjacent to the property. S:\!BOILERS-WORK\REPORT INSERTS\STANDARD GRADING SPECS 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA Appendix F Structural BMP and/or Retention Facility Sizing Calculations and Design Details Date Enter the Area Tributary to this Feature (ATRIB)ATRIB =5.91 acres AIMP =3.54 acres If =0.60 Use the following equation based on the WEF/ASCE Method CBMP = 0.858If 3 - 0.78If 2 + 0.774If + 0.04 CBMP =0.41 Vu =0.16 VBMP (ft3)=VBMP =3,433 ft3 Whitewater Watershed BMP Design Volume, VBMP (Rev. 06-2014) Legend:Required Entries Calculated Cells Company Name Kimley-Horn 06.14.2022 Designed by Lupita Astorga Contreras County/City Case No Company Project Number/Name Palm Villas at Millenium Calculate the design storage volume of the BMP, VBMP. Drainage Area Number/Name DMA #1 Determine the Impervious Area Ratio Determine the Impervious Area within ATRIB (AIMP) Calculate Impervious Area Ratio (If) VU (in-ac/ac) x AT (ac) x 43,560 (ft2/ac) 12 (in/ft) Notes: If = AIMP/ATRIB Calculate the composite Runoff Coefficient, C for the BMP Tributary Area Determine Design Storage Volume, VBMP Calculate VU, the 80% Unit Storage Volume VU= 0.40 x CBMP (in*ac)/ac Date Enter the Area Tributary to this Feature (ATRIB)ATRIB =4.52 acres AIMP =2.67 acres If =0.59 Use the following equation based on the WEF/ASCE Method CBMP = 0.858If 3 - 0.78If 2 + 0.774If + 0.04 CBMP =0.40 Vu =0.16 VBMP (ft3)=VBMP =2,625 ft3 Designed by Lupita Astorga Contreras Company Name Kimley-Horn County/City Case No Drainage Area Number/Name Whitewater Watershed BMP Design Volume, VBMP (Rev. 06-2014) Legend: Determine Design Storage Volume, VBMP Calculate the design storage volume of the BMP, VBMP. 06.14.2022 Required Entries Calculated Cells Palm Villas at Millenium DMA #2 Determine the Impervious Area Ratio Company Project Number/Name Calculate Impervious Area Ratio (If) If = AIMP/ATRIB Determine the Impervious Area within ATRIB (AIMP) (in*ac)/ac Notes: Calculate the composite Runoff Coefficient, C for the BMP Tributary Area 12 (in/ft) Calculate VU, the 80% Unit Storage Volume VU= 0.40 x CBMP VU (in-ac/ac) x AT (ac) x 43,560 (ft2/ac) Company Name:Date: Designed by:County/City Case No.: ATRIB =5.91 acres VBMP=3,433 ft3 I =2 in/hr FS =1 D1 =D1 =8.0 ft 1 ft 182 ft 65 ft D2 =59.0 ft DMAX =8.0 ft z =3 :1 dB =4 ft AS =858 ft2 AD =8731 ft2 Volume =17 ft3 Depth =1 ft Area =17 ft2 2.0 in Notes: d) Proposed Design Surface Area Forebay a) Forebay volume (minimum 0.5% VBMP) b) Forebay depth (height of berm/splashwall. 1 foot min.) c) Forebay surface area (minimum) d) Full height notch-type weir Width (W) = c) Minimum bottom surface area of basin (AS= VBMP/dB) g) D2 is the smaller of: Depth to groundwater - (10 ft + freeboard) and Depth to impermeable layer - (5 ft + freeboard) h) DMAX is the smaller value of D1 and D2 but shall not exceed 5 feet Basin Geometry a) Basin side slopes (no steeper than 4:1)Slope no steeper than 4:1 b) Proposed basin depth (excluding freeboard) b) Enter VBMP determined from Section 4.3 of this Handbook Maximum Depth a) Infiltration rate b) Factor of Safety (See Table 1, Appendix B: "Infiltration Testing" from this BMP Handbook) c) Calculate D1 I (in/hr) x 48 hrs 12 (in/ft) x FS d) Enter the depth of freeboard (at least 1 ft) e) Enter depth to historic high ground water (measured from top of basin) f) Enter depth to top of bedrock or impermeable layer (measured from top of basin) a) Tributary Drainage Area (BMP subarea) Infiltration Basin - Design Procedure (Rev. 06-2014) BMP ID Legend:Required Entries DMA 1 Calculated Cells Kimley-Horn 06.14.22 Lupita Astorga Contreras Design Volume Company Name:Date: Designed by:County/City Case No.: ATRIB =4.52 acres VBMP=2,625 ft3 I =2 in/hr FS =1 D1 =D1 =8.0 ft 1 ft 182 ft 65 ft D2 =59.0 ft DMAX =8.0 ft z =3 :1 dB =4 ft AS =656 ft2 AD =4814 ft2 Volume =13 ft3 Depth =1 ft Area =13 ft2 12.0 in Notes: b) Proposed basin depth (excluding freeboard) Forebay c) Forebay surface area (minimum) Width (W) = b) Forebay depth (height of berm/splashwall. 1 foot min.) a) Forebay volume (minimum 0.5% VBMP) d) Full height notch-type weir d) Proposed Design Surface Area c) Minimum bottom surface area of basin (AS= VBMP/dB) Calculated Cells Kimley-Horn 06.14.22 Lupita Astorga Contreras Infiltration Basin - Design Procedure (Rev. 06-2014) BMP ID Legend:Required Entries DMA 2 a) Basin side slopes (no steeper than 4:1)Slope no steeper than 4:1 Maximum Depth a) Infiltration rate b) Factor of Safety (See Table 1, Appendix B: "Infiltration Testing" from this BMP Handbook) c) Calculate D1 Basin Geometry f) Enter depth to top of bedrock or impermeable layer (measured from top of basin) I (in/hr) x 48 hrs 12 (in/ft) x FS Depth to groundwater - (10 ft + freeboard) and Depth to impermeable layer - (5 ft + freeboard) a) Tributary Drainage Area (BMP subarea) b) Enter VBMP determined from Section 4.3 of this Handbook e) Enter depth to historic high ground water (measured from top of basin) h) DMAX is the smaller value of D1 and D2 but shall not exceed 5 feet Design Volume g) D2 is the smaller of: d) Enter the depth of freeboard (at least 1 ft) Riverside County Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice  Whitewater River Region Design Handbook for Low Impact Development    June 2014 95  A.7 Infiltration Basin Treatment Mechanisms Infiltration, Evapotranspiration (when vegetated),Evaporation, Sedimentation  Maximum Drainage Area 50 acres  Other Names Biofiltration Basin, Retention Basin  A.7.1 General  An infiltration basin is a flat earthen basin designed to  capture the design capture volume, VBMP.  The  stormwater infiltrates through the bottom of the  basin into the underlying soil over a 48 hour  drawdown period.  Flows exceeding VBMP must  discharge to a downstream conveyance system.   Trash and sediment accumulate within the forebay as  stormwater passes into the basin.  Infiltration basins  are highly effective in removing all targeted  pollutants from stormwater runoff.   A.7.2 Siting Consideration  Important Note: It is recommended that the design procedure for infiltration basins described in this  Handbook not be used when a project is subject to a local land use authority onsite retention ordinance.   Table 4 in Section 6.1 lists the Whitewater River Region local land use authorities with onsite retention  requirements.  The use of infiltration basins may be restricted by concerns over ground water  contamination, soil permeability, and clogging at the site.  See the applicable WQMP for any specific  feasibility considerations for using infiltration BMPs.  Where this BMP is being used, the soil beneath the  basin must be thoroughly evaluated in a geotechnical report since the underlying soils are critical to the  basin’s long‐term performance.  To protect the basin from erosion, the sides and bottom of the basin  must be vegetated, preferably with native or low water use plant species.  In addition, these basins may not be appropriate for the following site conditions:   Industrial sites or locations where spills of toxic materials may occur;   Sites with very low soil infiltration rates;   Sites with high groundwater tables or excessively high soil infiltration rates, where pollutants  can affect ground water quality;   Sites with un‐stabilized soil or construction activity upstream;   On steeply sloping terrain; and/or   Infiltration basins  located in  a  fill  condition should  refer  to  Appendix B  of  this Handbook for  details on special requirements/restrictions.  Figure 1 – Infiltration Basin  Riverside County Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice  Whitewater River Region Design Handbook for Low Impact Development    June 2014 96  A.7.3 Infiltration Basin Design Criteria  Table 1 ‐ Infiltration Basin Design and Sizing Criteria   Design Parameter Infiltration Basin  Design Volume VBMP  Forebay Volume 0.5% VBMP  Drawdown Time (maximum) 48 hours  Maximum Tributary Area 50 acres  Minimum Infiltration Rate Must be sufficient to drain the basin within the  required Drawdown time over the life of the BMP.   Maximum Depth 5 feet  Spillway Erosion Control Energy dissipaters to reduce velocities  Basin Slope 0%  Freeboard (minimum) 1 foot  Historic High Groundwater Setback (min) 10 feet  Bedrock/Impermeable Layer Setback (min) 5 feet  Tree Setbacks Mature tree drip line must not overhang the basin  Setback from wells, tanks or springs 100 feet  Setback from foundations As recommended in Geotechnical Report  Embankment Side Slope (H:V)  4:1 or flatter inside slope/ 3:1 or flatter outside slope  (without retaining walls), or as approved by the local  land use authority  Maintenance Access Ramp Slope (H:V) 10:1 or flatter, or as approved by the local land use  authority  Vegetation Side slopes and bottom (may require irrigation in the  summer)  Note: The information contained in this BMP Factsheet is intended to be a summary of design  considerations and requirements.  Information herein may be superseded by other guidelines issued  by the local land use authority.     Riverside County Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice  Whitewater River Region Design Handbook for Low Impact Development    June 2014 97  Setbacks  Always  consult  your  geotechnical  engineer  for  site‐specific  recommendations  regarding setbacks for  infiltration trenches.  Recommended setbacks are needed to protect buildings, existing trees, walls,  onsite or nearby wells, streams, and tanks.  Setbacks should be considered early in the design process  since they can affect where infiltration facilities may be placed and how deep they are allowed to be.    For instance, depth setbacks can dictate fairly shallow facilities that will have a larger footprint, and in  some cases, may make an infiltration basin infeasible.  In that instance, another BMP must be selected.  Infiltration basins typically must be set back:   10 feet from the historic high groundwater (measured vertically from the bottom of the  basin, as shown in Figure 2)   5 feet from bedrock or impermeable surface layer (measured vertically from the bottom of  the basin, as shown in Figure 2)   From all existing mature tree drip lines as indicated in Figure 2 (to protect their root  structure)   100 feet horizontally from wells, tanks or springs  Setbacks to walls and foundations must be included as part of the Geotechnical Report.           Figure 2 – Setback Requirements  Riverside County Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice  Whitewater River Region Design Handbook for Low Impact Development    June 2014 98  Forebay  A concrete forebay should be provided to reduce sediment clogging and to reduce erosion.  The forebay  should have a design volume of at least 0.5% VBMP and a minimum one foot high concrete splash  wall/berm.  Full height notch‐type weir(s), offset from the line of flow from the basin inlet to prevent  short circuiting, shall be used to outlet the forebay.  It is recommended that two weirs be used and that  they be located on opposite sides of the forebay (see Figure 2).  Overflow  Flows exceeding VBMP must discharge to an acceptable downstream conveyance system. Where an  adequate outlet is present, an overflow structure may be used.  Where an embankment is present, an  emergency spillway may be used instead.  Overflows must be placed just above the design water surface  for VBMP and be near the outlet of the system.  The overflow structure shall be similar to the District’s  Standard Drawing CB 110, which can be found at:  http://rcflood.org/downloads/Standard%20Drawings/CB110.pdf.       Figure 3 – Infiltration Basin  Riverside County Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice  Whitewater River Region Design Handbook for Low Impact Development    June 2014 99  Landscaping Requirements  Basin  vegetation  provides  erosion  protection,  improves  sediment  removal,  and  assists  in allowing  infiltration to occur.   The basin surface and side slopes should be planted with desert appropriate native  landscaping.  Proper landscape management is also required to ensure that the vegetation does not  contribute to water pollution through pesticides, herbicides, or fertilizers.  Landscaping should be in  accordance with County of Riverside Ordinance 859, or other guidelines issued by the local land use  authority.  See table in Section 6.2 for local land use authority requirements.  Maintenance  Normal maintenance of an infiltration basin includes the maintenance of landscaping, debris and trash  removal from the surface of the basin, and tending to problems associated with standing water (vectors,  odors, etc.). Significant ponding, especially more than 48 hours after an event, may indicate that the  basin surface is no longer providing sufficient infiltration and requires aeration.   Table 2 ‐ Inspection and Maintenance Schedule  Schedule Inspection and Maintenance Activity               Ongoing including just  before annual storm  seasons and following  rainfall events.   Maintain vegetation as needed. Use of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides should  be strenuously avoided to ensure they don’t contribute to water pollution. If  appropriate native plant selections and other IPM methods are used, such products  shouldn’t be needed. If such projects are used,  o Products shall be applied in accordance with their labeling, especially  in relation to application to water, and in areas subjected to flooding.  o Fertilizers should not be applied within 15 days before, after, or  during the rainy season.   Remove debris and litter from the entire basin to minimize clogging and improve  aesthetics.   Check for obvious problems and repair as needed. Address odor, insects, and  overgrowth issues associated with stagnant or standing water in the basin bottom.  There should be no long‐term ponding water.   Check for erosion and sediment laden areas in the basin. Repair as needed. Clean  forebay if needed.   Re‐vegetate side slopes where needed.            Annually. If possible,  schedule these inspections  within 48 hours after a  significant rainfall.   Inspection of hydraulic and structural facilities. Examine the inlet for blockage, the  embankment and spillway integrity, as well as damage to any structural element.   Check for erosion, slumping and overgrowth. Repair as needed.   Check basin depth for sediment build up and reduced total capacity. Scrape bottom  as needed and remove sediment. Restore to original cross‐section and infiltration  rate. Replant basin vegetation.   Verify the basin bottom is allowing acceptable infiltration. Use a disc or other  method to aerate basin bottom only if there is actual significant loss of infiltrative  capacity, rather than on a routine basis1.   No water should be present 48 hours after an event. No long term standing water  should be present at all. No algae formation should be visible.  Correct problem as  needed.  Riverside County Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice  Whitewater River Region Design Handbook for Low Impact Development    June 2014 100  A.7.4 Infiltration Basin Design Procedure  1. Find the Design Volume, VBMP.  a) Enter the Tributary Drainage Area, ATRIB.  b) Enter the Design Volume, VBMP, determined from Worksheet 1 of this Handbook.  2. Determine the Maximum Depth.  a) Enter the infiltration rate. The infiltration rate should be established as described in  Appendix B: “Infiltration Testing Guidelines”.  b) Enter the design Factor of Safety from Table 1 in Appendix B: “Infiltration Testing  Guidelines”.  c) The spreadsheet will determine D1, the maximum allowable depth of the basin based on  the infiltration rate along with the maximum drawdown time (48 hours) and the Factor  of Safety.  D1 = [(t) x (I)] / 12(FS)  Where I = site infiltration rate (in/hr)   FS = safety factor   t = drawdown time (maximum 48 hours)  d) Enter the depth of freeboard.  e) Enter the depth to the historic high groundwater level measured from the top of the  basin.  f) Enter the depth to the top of bedrock or other impermeable layer measured from the  finished grade.  g) The spreadsheet will determine D2, the total basin depth (including freeboard, if used) of  the basin, based on restrictions to the depth by groundwater and an impermeable layer.  D2 = Depth to groundwater – (10 + freeboard) (ft);  or  D2 = Depth to impermeable layer – (five + freeboard) (ft)  Whichever is least.  h) The spreadsheet will determine the maximum allowable effective depth of basin, DMAX,  based on the smallest value between D1 and D2. DMAX is the maximum depth of water  only and does not include freeboard. DMAX shall not exceed five feet.  3. Basin Geometry  a) Enter the basin side slopes, z (no steeper than 4:1, unless allowed by local land use  authority).  b) Enter the proposed basin depth, dB excluding freeboard.  c) The spreadsheet will determine the minimum required surface area of the basin: As =  VBMP/dB  Riverside County Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice  Whitewater River Region Design Handbook for Low Impact Development    June 2014 101  Where  As = minimum area required (ft2)    VBMP = volume of the infiltration basin (ft3)    dB= proposed depth not to exceed maximum allowable depth, DMAX (ft)  d) Enter the proposed bottom surface area. This area should not be less than the  minimum required surface area.  4. Forebay  A concrete forebay with a design volume of at least 0.5% VBMP and a minimum one foot  high concrete splash wall shall be provided.  Full‐height rectangular weir(s) should be used to  outlet the forebay.  The weir(s) must be offset from the line of flow from the basin inlet. It is  recommended that two weirs be used and that they be located on opposite sides of the forebay  (see Figure 2).  a) The spreadsheet will determine the minimum required forebay volume based on 0.5%  VBMP.  b) Enter the proposed depth of the forebay berm/splash wall (one foot minimum).  c) The spreadsheet will determine the minimum required forebay surface area.  d) Enter the width of rectangular weir to be used (minimum 1.5 inches).  Weir width should  be established based on a five minute drawdown time.     Riverside County Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice  Whitewater River Region Design Handbook for Low Impact Development    June 2014 115  Table 1 ‐ Infiltration Testing Requirements  WQMP Stage  Testing  Options  Ring  Infiltrometer  Tests1  Percolation  Test2  Test Pits or  Boring Logs3  Final  Report4  Hydrology  Manual5  Factor  of  Safety  Preliminary  WQMP  Option  1►  two tests  minimum with  at least one  per BMP  location6  ‐  one boring or  test pit per  BMP location  Required ‐ FS ≥ 3  Option  2► ‐  four tests  min. with at  least two per  BMP  location6  one boring or  test pit per  BMP location  Required ‐ FS ≥ 3  Option  37► ‐  ‐  one boring or  test pit per  BMP location  Required ‐ FS ≥ 6  Option  47► ‐  ‐  one representative boring or test  pit per site  ‐ Only FS ≥ 10  Final  WQMP  Option  1►  two tests  minimum with  at least one  per BMP  location6  ‐  one boring or  test pit per  BMP location  Required ‐ FS ≥ 3  Option  2► ‐  four tests  minimum  with at least  two per BMP  location6  one boring or  test pit per  BMP location  Required ‐ FS ≥ 3  Table Footnotes:  (1) Ring infiltrometer tests per Section 2.2  (2) Percolation tests per Section 2.3 and well permeameter test per Section 2.4  (3) Test pits or boring logs per Section 2.5  (4) Final Report per Section 1.6  (5) See Plate E‐6.2 of the District’s Hydrology Manual  (6) For BMPs with a wetted footprint in excess of 10,000 ft2, provide one  (1) ring infiltrometer test or two (2)  percolation tests for each additional 10,000 ft2  (7) This option is limited to BMPs with a tributary drainage area ≤ five acres.    1.7 ‐ Final Report  Where a final report is required, a civil engineer, geotechnical engineer, certified engineering geologist  or certified hydrogeologist shall establish whether the location is suitable for the proposed infiltration  facility.  At least five feet of permeable soil must be present below the infiltration facility and a minimum  2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA Appendix G AGREEMENTS – CC&RS, COVENANT AND AGREEMENTS, BMP MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS AND/OR OTHER MECHANISMS FOR ENSURING ONGOING OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, FUNDING AND TRANSFER OF REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT-SPECIFIC WQMP Riverside County Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice  Whitewater River Region Design Handbook for Low Impact Development    June 2014 99  Landscaping Requirements  Basin  vegetation  provides  erosion  protection,  improves  sediment  removal,  and  assists  in allowing  infiltration to occur.   The basin surface and side slopes should be planted with desert appropriate native  landscaping.  Proper landscape management is also required to ensure that the vegetation does not  contribute to water pollution through pesticides, herbicides, or fertilizers.  Landscaping should be in  accordance with County of Riverside Ordinance 859, or other guidelines issued by the local land use  authority.  See table in Section 6.2 for local land use authority requirements.  Maintenance  Normal maintenance of an infiltration basin includes the maintenance of landscaping, debris and trash  removal from the surface of the basin, and tending to problems associated with standing water (vectors,  odors, etc.). Significant ponding, especially more than 48 hours after an event, may indicate that the  basin surface is no longer providing sufficient infiltration and requires aeration.   Table 2 ‐ Inspection and Maintenance Schedule  Schedule Inspection and Maintenance Activity               Ongoing including just  before annual storm  seasons and following  rainfall events.   Maintain vegetation as needed. Use of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides should  be strenuously avoided to ensure they don’t contribute to water pollution. If  appropriate native plant selections and other IPM methods are used, such products  shouldn’t be needed. If such projects are used,  o Products shall be applied in accordance with their labeling, especially  in relation to application to water, and in areas subjected to flooding.  o Fertilizers should not be applied within 15 days before, after, or  during the rainy season.   Remove debris and litter from the entire basin to minimize clogging and improve  aesthetics.   Check for obvious problems and repair as needed. Address odor, insects, and  overgrowth issues associated with stagnant or standing water in the basin bottom.  There should be no long‐term ponding water.   Check for erosion and sediment laden areas in the basin. Repair as needed. Clean  forebay if needed.   Re‐vegetate side slopes where needed.            Annually. If possible,  schedule these inspections  within 48 hours after a  significant rainfall.   Inspection of hydraulic and structural facilities. Examine the inlet for blockage, the  embankment and spillway integrity, as well as damage to any structural element.   Check for erosion, slumping and overgrowth. Repair as needed.   Check basin depth for sediment build up and reduced total capacity. Scrape bottom  as needed and remove sediment. Restore to original cross‐section and infiltration  rate. Replant basin vegetation.   Verify the basin bottom is allowing acceptable infiltration. Use a disc or other  method to aerate basin bottom only if there is actual significant loss of infiltrative  capacity, rather than on a routine basis1.   No water should be present 48 hours after an event. No long term standing water  should be present at all. No algae formation should be visible.  Correct problem as  needed.  WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CA 92260 ________________________________________________________________________ WATER QUALITY MANAGE MENT PLAN AND STORMW ATER BMP MAINTENANCE AND RIGHT OF ENTRY AGREEMENT THIS WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN AND STORMWATER BMP MAINTENANCE AND RIGHT OF ENTRY AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into in the City of Palm Desert, California, this day of , 20___ by and between , hereinafter referred to as “Owner” and the City of Palm Desert (“City”), a municipal corporation. This Agreement applies to property located at , APN No. in the County of Riverside, State of California. The Agreement is subject to the following recitals: RECITALS WHEREAS, the Owner owns real property (“Property”) in the City of Palm Desert, County of Riverside, State of California, more specifically described in Exhibit “A” and depicted in Exhibit “B”, each of which exhibits is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; WHEREAS, at the time of initial approval of Owner’s development project known as within the Property, the City required the project to employ Best Management Practices, hereinafter referred to as “BMPs,” to minimize pollutants in urban runoff; WHEREAS, the Owner has chosen to install and/or implement BMPs as described in the Water Quality Management Plan, on file with the City, hereinafter referred to as “WQMP”, to minimize pollutants in urban runoff and to minimize other adverse impacts of urban runoff; WHEREAS, the WQMP has been certified by the Owner and reviewed and approved by the City; WHEREAS, the BMPs, with installation and/or implementation on private property and draining only private property, are part of a private facility with all maintenance or replacement, therefore, the sole responsibility of the Owner in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; -2- WHEREAS, the Owner is aware that periodic and continuous maintenance, including, but not necessarily limited to, filter material replacement and sediment removal, is required to assure peak performance of all BMPs in the WQMP and that, furthermore, such maintenance activity will require compliance with all Local, State, or Federal laws and regulations, including those pertaining to confined space and waste disposal methods, in effect at the time such maintenance occurs; NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually stipulated and agreed as follows: 1. Responsibility for Operation and Maintenance of BMPs 2. : Owner shall diligently maintain all BMPs in a manner assuring peak performance at all times. All reasonable precautions shall be exercised by Owner and Owner’s representative or contractor in the removal and extraction of any material(s) from the BMPs and the ultimate disposal of the material(s) in a manner consistent with all relevant laws and regulations in effect at the time. As may be requested from time to time by the City, the Owner shall provide the City with documentation identifying the material(s) removed, the quantity, and disposal destination. Right of Access 3. : Owner hereby provides the City or City’s designee complete access, of any duration, to the BMPs and their immediate vicinity at any time, upon reasonable notice, or in the event of emergency, as determined by City’s Director of Public Works (“Director”), no advance notice, for the purpose of inspection, sampling, testing of the BMPs, and in case of emergency, to undertake, in the City’s sole discretion, necessary repairs or other preventative measures at Owner’s expense as provided in paragraph 3 below. City shall make every effort at all times to minimize or avoid interference with Owner’s use of the Property. City Maintenance at Owner’s Expense 4. : In the event Owner, or its successors or assigns, fails to accomplish the necessary maintenance contemplated by this Agreement, within five (5) days of being given written notice by the City, the City is hereby authorized to cause any maintenance necessary to be done and charge the entire cost and expense to the Owner or Owner’s successors or assigns, including administrative costs, attorneys fees and interest thereon at the maximum rate authorized by the Civil Code from the date of the notice of expense until paid in full. The City, at its sole election, may make these costs to be a lien upon the property that may be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary municipal taxes as provided in Government Code section 38773.5. Nothing in this section or this Agreement creates an obligation by the City to maintain or repair any BMP, nor does this section prohibit the City from pursuing other legal recourse against Owner. Recording: This Agreement shall be recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Riverside County, California, at the expense of the Owner and -3- shall constitute notice to all successors and assigns of the title to said Property of the obligation herein set forth, and also a lien in such amount as will fully reimburse the City, including interest as herein above set forth, subject to foreclosure in event of default in payment. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Attorney’s Fees: In event of legal action occasioned by any default or action of the Owner, or its successors or assigns, the Owner and its successors or assigns agree(s) to pay all costs incurred by the City in enforcing the terms of this Agreement, including reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, and that the same shall become a part of the lien against said Property. Covenant: It is the intent of the parties hereto that burdens and benefits herein undertaken shall constitute covenants that run with said Property and constitute a lien there against. Binding on Successors: The obligations herein undertaken shall be binding upon the heirs, successors, executors, administrators and assigns of the parties hereto. The term “Owner” shall include not only the present Owner, but also its heirs, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns. Owner shall notify any successor to title of all or part of the Property about the existence of this Agreement. Owner shall provide such notice prior to such successor obtaining an interest in all or part of the Property. Owner shall provide a copy of such notice to the City at the same time such notice is provided to the successor. Indemnity and Insurance: The Owner, its heirs, successors, executors, administrators and assigns agree to defend, indemnify and holds harmless the City, its officials, employees and its authorized agents from any and all damages, accidents, casualties, occurrences or claims which might arise or be asserted against the City and which are in any way connected with the construction, operation, presence, existence or maintenance of the BMP by the Owner, or from any personal injury or property damage that may result from the City or other public entities entering the Property under Sections 2 or 3 of this Agreement. Time of the Essence: Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement. Notice: Any notice to a party required or called for in this Agreement shall be served in person, or by deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid, to the address set forth below. Notice(s) shall be deemed effective upon receipt, or seventy-two (72) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, -4- whichever is earlier. A party may change a notice address only by providing written notice thereof to the other party. IF TO CITY: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 IF TO OWNER: IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have affixed their signatures as of the date first written above. CITY: City of Palm Desert By: Its: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney ATTEST: City Clerk Date OWNER: By: Name Title: OWNER: By: Name Title: -5- NOTARIES PAGE Exhibit A-1- EXHIBIT A (L EGAL DESCRIPTION) Exhibit B-1- EXHIBIT B (MAP/ILLUSTRATION/O&M PORTION OF WQMP ) 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA Appendix H PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT – SUMMARY OF SITE REMEDIATION CONDUCTED AND USE RESTRICTIONS Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Assessor’s Parcel Number 694-120-028 Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Drive and Pacific Avenue, Palm Desert, California 92211 Palm Communities 100 Pacific, Suite 203 Irvine, California 92618 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290 San Diego, CA 92123 858-571-5500 01219277.03 | September 20, 2021 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com i September 20, 2021 Project Number: 01219277.03 Mr. Erik Halter Palm Communities 100 Pacifica, Suite 203 Irvine, California 92618 Subject: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Assessment) Site: Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 694-120-028 Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Drive and Pacific Avenue, Palm Desert, California 92211 Dear Mr. Halter: SCS Engineers (SCS) is pleased to present this report (Report) of the Assessment of the above-described Site. This Report summarizes the results of the Assessment that was conducted in order to evaluate the Site’s current environmental conditions. The work described in this Report was performed by SCS in general accordance with Agreement for Services 010798221 (herein referred to as Exhibit 03) to the Consultant Agreement (Contract) between SCS and Palm Communities (Client). The Contract was fully executed with as an attached exhibit on August 24, 2021. Because your full understanding of the Assessment is important to us, SCS recommends that you read the Report in its entirety. However, if time does not allow you a complete reading, summaries may be found in text boxes at the end of each section (pages 10, 15, and 17), and our conclusions may be found on page 17. A glossary of terms commonly used in environmental assessments is also provided in the Appendices to this Report. SCS enjoyed working with you on this project. Providing economical environmental solutions to meet your needs is more than our goal—it is our mission and the measure of our success. If we may assist you in any way, now or in the future, please call our office at (858) 571-5500. Sincerely, Allison O’Neal Luke Montague, MESM, PG 8071 Staff Professional Vice President SCS ENGINEERS SCS ENGINEERS Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com ii Table of Contents Section Page 1 Background ................................................................................................................................... 4 2 Standards Background ................................................................................................................. 4 3 Objective ....................................................................................................................................... 6 4 Scope of Services .......................................................................................................................... 6 Site Reconnaissance ......................................................................................................................... 6 General Information ................................................................................................................. 6 Site Buildings ............................................................................................................................ 7 Site Grounds ............................................................................................................................. 7 Hazardous Materials/Petroleum Products ............................................................................. 7 Hazardous Wastes.................................................................................................................... 7 Indications of Releases of Hazardous Materials/Wastes or Petroleum Products ............... 7 On-Site Utilities ......................................................................................................................... 7 Site Research ..................................................................................................................................... 8 Department of Environmental Health (DEH) File Review ....................................................... 8 Client-Provided Document ....................................................................................................... 8 Fire Department Records Review ............................................................................................ 8 Building Department Records Review .................................................................................... 8 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Records Review .......................... 8 Palm Desert Industrial Wastewater Program (IWP) Records Review .................................... 8 Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Records Review ......................................... 8 Interviews ........................................................................................................................................... 8 User Requirements ............................................................................................................................ 9 Data Gaps in Connection With Current Site Land Use ................................................................. 10 Topography, Geology, Hydrogeology, and Water Quality Survey .................................................. 10 Topography ............................................................................................................................ 10 Geology ................................................................................................................................... 10 Hydrogeology ......................................................................................................................... 10 Water Quality Survey ............................................................................................................. 11 Site Vicinity Reconnaissance and Off-Site Source Survey ............................................................ 11 Current Site Vicinity Conditions ............................................................................................ 11 Environmental Regulatory Database Report ....................................................................... 12 California Division of Oil and Gas ............................................................................ 14 Data Gaps in Connection With Off-Site Sources ........................................................................... 15 Historical Land Use Review ............................................................................................................ 15 Historical Site Land Use ........................................................................................................ 15 Historical Site Vicinity Land Use ........................................................................................... 16 Data Gaps in Connection With the Historical Site Land Use ........................................................ 16 5 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................17 6 Report Usage and Future Site Conditions ...................................................................................17 7 Likelihood Statements ................................................................................................................18 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com iii 8 Special Contractual Conditions Between User and Environmental Professional .......................18 9 Endnotes .....................................................................................................................................18 Figures Figure 1 Three-Way Site Location Map Figure 2 Site and Site Vicinity Plan Figures 3a–3f Photographic Plates Appendices Glossary Department of Environmental Health Correspondence City of Palm Desert Correspondence regarding Fire, Building, and Industrial Wastewater Records Air Quality Management District Correspondence Regional Water Quality Control Board Correspondence Environmental Regulatory Database Report Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps – Unmapped Area Department of Environmental Health Correspondence for the Site Vicinity Résumés Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 4 1 BACKGROUND Based on conversations with Palm Communities (Client) and a review of in-house databases, SCS Engineers (SCS) understands that the site consists of one vacant parcel of land with no current address and identified with APN 694-120-028, situated northeast of the intersection of Gerald Ford Drive and Pacific Avenue in Palm Desert, California 92260 (Figure 1) (Site). The Site consists of approximately 10 acres of vacant, undeveloped land. The Client is proposing to purchase the Site to develop a proposed 241-unit affordable housing apartment project. A review of the in-house ParcelQuest database of information from the Riverside County Assessor’s Office provided the following information in connection with the Site. APN Address Area Description 694-120-028 Not reported 10.00 acres Commercial – Vacant Land 2 STANDARDS BACKGROUND This Assessment was conducted in general accordance with the following: • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 312, Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries; Final Rule (AAI) • American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice for Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process E1527-13 • The scope, conditions, and limitations of Exhibit 03 The Client understands that the above-referenced EPA and ASTM standards were not developed to identify all environmental risk to property. The standards were developed to allow a user (Client) to qualify for the innocent purchaser defense, bona fide prospective purchaser defense, and contiguous property owner defense to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA, a.k.a. Superfund) liability. This Assessment is intended to constitute an appropriate inquiry into the previous ownership and uses of the property consistent with good commercial or customary practice, as part of the due diligence process required by CERCLA, the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, and the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002 (collectively, Acts). While this Assessment may initially qualify the Client for a CERCLA defense, after purchase, there may be continuing obligations that must be implemented in order to preserve this defense through the term of property ownership. There may be additional requirements under state law that also apply. The Client should contact qualified legal counsel regarding matters of liability, interpretation of the Acts, and potential continuing obligations. Although it is outside the scope of this Assessment, SCS would be pleased to work with the Client’s legal counsel to develop and implement a strategy to preserve the Client’s CERCLA liability defenses through the term of its ownership. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 5 This Assessment focused on potential sources of hazardous substances and petroleum products that could be considered either a recognized environmental condition,1 controlled recognized environmental condition,2 or historical recognized environmental condition,3 and potentially a liability due to their presence in significant concentrations (e.g., above acceptable limits set by the federal, state, or local government) or due to the potential for exposure and risk due to contaminant migration and complete exposure pathways (e.g., soil vapor inhalation or groundwater ingestion). Materials that contain substances that are not currently deemed hazardous by the EPA or the California Environmental Protection Agency were not considered as part of this Assessment. Unless specifically included in SCS’ scope of services, building materials such as asbestos, lead- based paint, urea formaldehyde, and pressure-treated lumber, as well as lead in drinking water, are not considered in this Assessment, nor are building issues such as fire safety, indoor air quality (with the possible exception of vapor intrusion), mold, or similar matters. SCS did not evaluate the Site for compliance with land use, zoning, wetlands, or similar laws. This Assessment also excludes regulatory compliance, cultural and historic resources, industrial hygiene, health and safety, ecological resources, endangered species, and high-voltage power lines. This Assessment is not intended to be an environmental compliance audit. Hazardous substances occurring naturally in plants, soils, and rocks (e.g., heavy metals, naturally occurring asbestos, and radon) are not typically considered in these investigations. Similarly, construction debris (e.g., discarded concrete, asphalt) is not considered, unless obvious indications suggest that hazardous substances are likely to be present in significant concentrations or likely to migrate. An evaluation of business environmental risk associated with a parcel of commercial real estate may necessitate investigation beyond that included herein. 1 Recognized environmental conditions, as defined by ASTM, include the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. However, the term is not intended to include de minimis conditions (a condition that generally does not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be subject to an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies). A condition considered de minimis is not a recognized environmental condition. 2 Controlled recognized environmental condition, as defined by ASTM, is a recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority (for example, as evidenced by the issuance of a no further action letter or equivalent, or meeting risk-based criteria established by regulatory authority), with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls (for example, property use restrictions, activity use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls). 3 Historical recognized environmental condition, as defined by ASTM, is a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls (for example, property use restrictions, activity and use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 6 3 OBJECTIVE The objective of the scope of services was to assess the likelihood that recognized environmental conditions are present at the Site as a result of the current or historical Site land use or from a known and reported off-Site source. 4 SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services designed and conducted to meet the objective was as follows: • Site Reconnaissance, Site Research, Interviews, and User Requirements • Topography, Geology, Hydrogeology, and Water Quality Survey • Site Vicinity Reconnaissance and Off-Site Source Survey • Historical Site and Site Vicinity Land Use Review • Identification of Data Gaps • Data Evaluation, Figure Preparation, and Assessment Report Preparation SITE RECONNAISSANCE On August 27, 2021, SCS personnel conducted a Site reconnaissance to observe and document existing Site conditions.i The general Site location is shown in Figure 1, and a Site and Site Vicinity Plan is shown in Figure 2. Selected color photographs of the Site and Site vicinity are presented as Figures 3a through 3f. The Site grounds and Site perimeter were systematically traversed on foot during the Site reconnaissance. SCS observed the features unaccompanied. General Information The following table summarizes general information in connection with the Site. APN 694-120-028 Address Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Drive and Pacific Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92211 Area 10 acres Site Land Use Reported as Commercial – Vacant Land Occupant None Figure Reference Figures 3a-1 through 3d-2 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 7 Site Buildings No buildings were observed on Site. Site Grounds The Site grounds were observed to be vacant, undeveloped land (Figures 2 and 3a-1 through 3c-2). Sparse dry shrubs and sandy soils were observed to comprise the majority of the Site grounds. A pile of household trash debris was observed on the southwest portion of the Site (Figures 2, 3d-1, 3d-2). Hazardous Materials/Petroleum Products No obvious indications of the storage or use of hazardous materials and/or petroleum products were observed at the Site during the Site reconnaissance. Hazardous Wastes No obvious indications of the generation of hazardous wastes were observed at the Site during the Site reconnaissance. Indications of Releases of Hazardous Materials/Wastes or Petroleum Products With the exception of minor household debris observed in the southwest portion of the Site, no obvious indications were observed that a release of hazardous materials/wastes or petroleum products had occurred at the Site. The minor debris releases identified above on are considered likely to be de minimis as defined by ASTM. On-Site Utilities Gas and Electricity None High-power Transmission Lines None Storm Drains None observed to be located at the Site Source of Heating and Cooling None Potable Water Source None Wastewater Conveyance None No transformers were observed to be located at the Site. No obvious indications of wells, cisterns, pits, sumps, dry wells, or bulk storage tanks were observed at the Site. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 8 SITE RESEARCH Department of Environmental Health (DEH) File Review The County of Riverside DEH was contacted ii regarding facilities storing hazardous materials, generating hazardous wastes, and discharging unauthorized releases and reported that the Site records request could not be searched by parcel number. Specific search criteria, such as an address, are not available for the Site. A copy of the correspondence is included in the Appendices. Client-Provided Document The Client provided a report titled Preliminary Title Report, APN 694-120-028, Vacant Land, Palm Desert, CA which was prepared by Fidelity National Title Company and dated March 12, 2021. This report indicated that the Site does not have deed restrictions or activity use limitations. Fire Department Records Review The City of Palm Desert Fire Department (PDFD) was contacted regarding hazardous materials/waste or UST records for Site.iii The PDFD indicated that there are no records maintained for the Site. A copy of the correspondence is included in the Appendices. Building Department Records Review Palm Desert Building Department (PDBD) records were requested for the Site.iv The PDBD indicated that there are no records maintained for the Site. A copy of the correspondence is included in the Appendices. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Records Review The SCAQMD was contacted v regarding records for the Site. Ms. Michelle Card of the SCAQMD reported that the Site records request could not be searched by parcel number. Specific search criteria, such as an address, are not available for the Site. A copy of the correspondence is included in the Appendices. Palm Desert Industrial Wastewater Program (IWP) Records Review The IWP was contactedvi regarding records for the Site. The IWP indicated that there are no records maintained for the Site. A copy of the correspondence is included in the Appendices. Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Records Review The Colorado River RWQCB was contactedvii regarding records for the Site. According to the RWQCB, no records are maintained for the Site. A copy of the correspondence is included in the Appendices. INTERVIEWS The previously referenced EPA and ASTM standards require that attempts be made to conduct interviews with past and present owners and occupants of the Site to obtain information indicating Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 9 recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Site. As part of this Assessment, the following contacts were either interviewed or attempts were made to conduct interviews. Contact Affiliation to Site Description Interview Date Ms. Jessica Gonzales Current Site owner representative Discussed below September 15, 2021 Ms. Gonzales of the City of Palm Desert, Site owner’s representative who has been familiar with the Site for 15 years, stated that, to her knowledge, hazardous materials and petroleum products were not used or stored at the Site and that hazardous wastes were not generated at the Site. Also, to her knowledge, there have been no releases of hazardous materials, petroleum products, and/or hazardous waste at the Site. Ms. Gonzales stated that she was not aware of environmental cleanup liens or activity and use limitations (e.g., engineering controls, deed restrictions) that have been recorded for the Site. She was not aware of pending or threatened litigation or administrative proceedings relevant to hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or from the Site. She was not aware of notices from governmental entities regarding possible violations of environmental laws or possible liability relating to hazardous substances or petroleum products at the Site. USER REQUIREMENTS In order to qualify for one of the landowner liability protections offered by the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2001 (discussed in the “Background” section), 40 CFR 312 requires that the user (Client) provide the following information to the environmental professional. Mr. Danavon L. Horn, President of Palm Communities, completed the User Questionnaire on August 24, 2021. The following table summarizes the responses by the Client. Question Response Have environmental cleanup liens been filed or recorded against the Site? No Are activity or land use limitations in place at the Site, or have they been filed or recorded in the registry? No Does the user have specialized knowledge or experience in connection with the Site? No Does the purchase price being paid for the Site reasonably reflect the fair market value of the Site? Yes Is the Client aware of commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the Site that would indicate releases or threatened releases? No Are there obvious indications that point to the presence of contamination at the Site? No Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 10 DATA GAPS IN CONNECTION WITH CURRENT SITE LAND USE Based on observations and research, and with the possible exceptions discussed below, there are no obvious indications of data gaps in connection with the current Site land use: • The current Site owner did not have contact information for previous owners or tenants of the Site. Additionally, SCS was unable to find contact information for previous Site owners or tenants via online searches. Therefore, interviews were not conducted with previous Site owners or tenants. This data gap is not a significant data gap in our opinion based on the availability of other relevant information. Findings and Opinions—Current Site Land Use Based on observations and research, it is our opinion that there are no recognized environmental conditions at the Site as a result of the current Site land use. TOPOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY, HYDROGEOLOGY, AND WATER QUALITY SURVEY Topography A topographic map for the Site vicinity was reviewed and is summarized in the following table. Reported Elevation 165 feet above mean sea level Reported Slope Direction Area is generally flat Source United States Geological Survey 7.5 Minute Topographic Map, Myoma Quadrangle, California – Riverside County, 2018 Geology A geological map for the Site vicinity was reviewed and is summarized in the following table. Reported Formation Quaternary Deposits, Marine and Non-marine (Continental) Sedimentary Rocks (Qs) Pleistocene-Holocene-aged Reported Description Extensive marine and non-marine sand deposits, generally near the coast or desert playas Source Jennings, Charles W., Gutierrez, Carlos, et al., Geologic Map of California, California Geological Survey, 1977, updated 2015 Hydrogeology Data regarding depth to groundwater and flow direction for the Site were not readily available. In the absence of Site-specific data, depth to groundwater and flow direction information was reviewed for properties within the Site vicinity using the State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker database. The following table summarizes the results of this review. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 11 Property Location Approximately 4.5 miles to the southwest of the Site at 44775 San Pablo Avenue Reported Depth to Groundwater 234.35 to 237.50 feet below grade Reported Groundwater Flow Direction South Source Quarterly Status Summary Report – Second Quarter 2012, Circle K Store No. 0642, 44775 San Pablo Avenue, Palm Desert, California prepared by ATC Associates Inc. and prepared on July 5, 2012 Many variables influence depth to groundwater and flow direction and the actual depth to groundwater and flow direction at the Site may be different than presented in this section. Water Quality Survey The following table summarizes the reported water quality in the Site vicinity. Reported Hydrologic Subarea Indio (719.47) Reported Hydrologic Area Coachella (719.40) Reported Hydrologic Unit Whitewater (719.00) Reported Beneficial Use Municipal, agricultural, and industrial Source California RWQCB, Colorado River Basin Region, Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin, with amendments effective prior to January 8, 2019 SITE VICINITY RECONNAISSANCE AND OFF-SITE SOURCE SURVEY Current Site Vicinity Conditions The following table summarizes land use and observations in the immediate Site vicinity.viii For the purpose of this Report, the immediate Site vicinity includes those properties judged to be adjacent4 to the Site. Direction Land Use Comments North Vacant land (APN 694-120- 031) (Figure 3e-2) 4 Adjacent is defined by ASTM E1527-13 as any real property or properties the border of which is contiguous or partially contiguous with that of the Site or that would be contiguous or partially contiguous with that of the Site but for a street, road, or other public thoroughfare separating them. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 12 Direction Land Use Comments East Vacant land (APN 694-190- 087) (Figure 3f-1) No obvious indications of the use, storage, or generation of hazardous materials/wastes or petroleum products were observed. South Vacant land (APN 694-190- 055) (Figure 3f-2) West Vacant land (APN 694-120- 029) (Figure 3e-1) Environmental Regulatory Database Report An environmental regulatory database report (Radius Map™ report ix) was prepared by EDR for the Site. Local, state, and federal regulatory databases were reviewed for the Site and for those facilities within up to 1 mile of the Site. The Radius Map™ report was reported to have been prepared in general accordance with the ASTM standard for the regulatory database review for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments. The locations of the referenced facilities relative to the Site are shown on the overview maps, included in the Radius Map™ report. A description of the various databases, as well as the date each database was most recently updated, is included in the Radius Map™ report. The Radius Map™ report is included in the Appendices to this Report. Based on a review of the Radius Map™ report, the following table summarizes the facilities within the selected search radii and whether the Site or a facility that was interpreted to be adjacent to the Site was listed on each database. Federal or State Government Database Search Radius Number of Reported Facilities On Site Adjacent to the Site National Priorities List (NPL) 1.00 mile 0 No No NPL Delisted 1.00 mile 0 No No Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) 0.50 mile 0 No No No Further Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP) 0.50 mile 0 No No Resource Conservation and Recovery Act– Corrective Action (RCRA COR ACT) 1.00 mile 0 No No RCRA Treatment and Disposal Facilities (RCRA TSD) 0.50 mile 0 No No RCRA Generators (RCRA GEN) 0.25 mile 0 No No Federal Engineering and Institutional Controls (IC/EC) 0.50 mile 0 No No Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) 0.12 mile 0 No No Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 13 Federal or State Government Database Search Radius Number of Reported Facilities On Site Adjacent to the Site State/Tribal-Equivalent NPL 1.00 mile 0 No No State/Tribal-Equivalent CERCLIS (ENVIROSTOR) 1.00 mile 2 No No State/Tribal Solid Waste List (SWL) 0.50 mile 0 No No State/Tribal Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST, Spills, Leaks, Investigation, and Cleanup [SLIC]) 0.50 mile 0 No No State/Tribal Underground/Aboveground Storage Tanks (USTs/ASTs) 0.25 mile 0 No No State/Tribal Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) 0.50 mile 0 No No Federal Brownfields 0.50 mile 0 No No Local Lists of Landfill/Solid Waste Disposal Sites Various 0 No No Local Lists of Hazardous Waste/Contaminated Sites (CERZ HAZ WASTE) Various 1 No No Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks (Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System [SWEEPS UST], Historic UST, CA Facility Inventory Database [FID] UST) 0.25 mile 0 No No Local Land Records (DEED) 0.50 mile 0 No No Records of Emergency Release Reports 0.001 mile 0 No No Other (RCRA NonGen, HAZNET) Various 0 No No EDR High Risk Historical Records (Historic Auto, Historic Cleaner, Manufactured Gas Plant [MGP]) 0.125 mile 0 No No Exclusive Recovered Government Archines 0.001 mile 0 No No The Site was not listed on any of the regulatory databases reviewed. In addition, regulatory agency files were requested and were reportedly not available for the Site, as discussed in the “Site Research” section above. Off-Site facilities listed in the Radius Map™ report were evaluated as to their potential to impact the Site. The databases included in the Radius Map™ report can be grouped into two general categories: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 14 databases reporting unauthorized releases of hazardous substances or petroleum products (e.g., LUSTs, RCRA COR ACT facilities, National Priorities List [a.k.a. Superfund] sites) and databases reporting permitted hazardous materials users and hazardous waste generators for which a release has not been reported to, and recorded by, the regulatory agency. SCS evaluated each of the off-Site facilities listed in the Radius Map™ report as to their potential to impact the Site, based on the following factors: • Reported distance of the facility from the Site 5 • The nature of the database on which the facility is listed, and/or whether the facility was listed on a database reporting unauthorized releases of hazardous materials, petroleum products, or hazardous wastes • Reported case type (e.g., soil only, failed UST test only) • Reported substance released (e.g., chlorinated solvents, gasoline, metals) • Reported regulatory agency status (e.g., case closed, “no further action”) • Location of the facility with respect to the reported groundwater flow direction and depth to groundwater (discussed in the “Hydrogeology” section of this Report) Based on one or more of the factors listed above, there is a low likelihood that the off-Site facilities listed in the Radius Map™ report represent a recognized environmental condition in connection with the Site. EDR listed one facility as being an “orphan,” which is a facility for which EDR does not have sufficient information to accurately locate it on a map. Based on a review of the orphan, it is interpreted that the facility is not within the requisite search radii for its reported database listing. California Division of Oil and Gas SCS personnel reviewed the California Division of Oil and Gas Map regarding oil and gas well locations within 1 mile of the Site.x There were no wells interpreted to be located within a 1-mile radius of the Site. 5 Based on “Technical Justification for Groundwater Media-Specific Criteria,” (Groundwater Study) (March 2012) developed to support the state of California “Low Threat Closure Policy” (adopted May 2012), “plume length studies recognize that petroleum plumes stabilize in length due to natural attenuation.” The Groundwater Study goes on to cite Shih et al., 2004, that a peer-reviewed study of plume lengths at 500 petroleum UST sites in the Los Angeles area is widely accepted as representative of plume lengths at California UST sites. Shih et al. reports methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), with 90th percentile maximum plume lengths of 540 feet. Therefore, the detailed review radius for open groundwater cases has been conservatively established by SCS at 0.20 mile (approximately 1,000 feet). For non- release cases (e.g., permitted facilities), only those facilities that were judged to be immediately adjacent to the Site were interpreted to have the potential to represent a recognized environmental condition. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 15 DATA GAPS IN CONNECTION WITH OFF-SITE SOURCES Based on the Site vicinity reconnaissance and off-Site source survey, there are no obvious indications of data gaps in connection with off-Site sources. Findings and Opinions—Off-Site Source Survey Based on the off-Site source survey, no facilities in the Site vicinity were reported to have had releases of hazardous materials/waste or petroleum products. HISTORICAL LAND USE REVIEW In accordance with the ASTM Standard and AAI rule, numerous reasonably ascertainable standard historical information sources were reviewed, and an attempt was made to interpret the historical Site and Site vicinity land use back to the obvious first developed use of the Site. Historical information was reviewed for current Site APN. The following table summarizes the historical resources reviewed as part of this Assessment. Resource Source Years Available Aerial Photographs NETR Online http://www.historicaerials.com/ Google Earth 1972, 1985, 1996, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2021 City Directories NA None, no addresses to review Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps EDR Unmapped area Topographic Maps NETR Online http://www.historicaerials.com/ 1944, 1957, 1959, 1960, 1964, 1967, 1973, 1975, 1991, 2012, 2015, 2018 Interviews Not applicable Discussed in the “Interviews” section above Historical Site Land Use The following table provides a chronology of the apparent historical Site land uses, as interpreted from a review of information from the sources referenced. Year Interpreted Site Tenants Interpreted Site Use 1944 to 2021 Vacant, undeveloped land None Because many of the dates listed above are based on a limited selection of historical resources, they are considered to be approximations only; the actual beginning/ending dates for many of the Site uses listed above may have been earlier or later than indicated. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 16 No obvious historical facilities, features of concern, or land uses indicative of the use, storage, or generation of hazardous materials/wastes or petroleum products were found in the historical resources reviewed. Historical Site Vicinity Land Use The following table provides a chronology of the apparent historical Site vicinity land uses as interpreted from a review of information from the sources referenced. Years Interpreted Site Vicinity Tenants Interpreted Site Vicinity Use APN 694-120-031 (North) 1944 to 2021 Vacant, undeveloped land None APN 694-190-087 (East) 1944 to 2021 Vacant, undeveloped land None APN 694-190-055 (South) 1944 to 2021 Vacant, undeveloped land None APN 694-120-029 (West) 1944 to 2021 Vacant, undeveloped land None Because many of the dates listed above are based on a limited selection of historical resources, they are considered to be approximations only; the actual beginning/ending dates for many of the Site vicinity uses/development described above may have been earlier or later than indicated. No obvious historical facilities, features of concern, or land uses indicative of the use, storage, or generation of hazardous materials/wastes or petroleum products were found in the historical resources reviewed. DATA GAPS IN CONNECTION WITH THE HISTORICAL SITE LAND USE Based on a review of historical sources, and with the possible exceptions below, there are no obvious indications of data gaps in connection with the historical Site and Site vicinity land use. Readily available historical information was limited, and information was not available that would provide 5-year data intervals between the following years: 1944 and 1957, 1985 and 1991, 1996 and 2002. Based on the corroborating data from the historical information reviewed (i.e., the Site was interpreted to have been vacant, undeveloped land in each of these years), SCS judged it likely that the historical Site land use during this time period was not significantly different from the interpretation presented in the table above. Additionally, historical information prior to 1944 was not readily available. Thus, SCS is unable to determine the Site usage back to 1940 or from the date of first development, whichever is earlier, as Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 17 recommended by ASTM. Based on SCS’ experience and available historical information, the Site was interpreted to have remained as vacant and undeveloped land. Findings and Opinions—Historical Site and Site Vicinity Land Use Based on a review of historical resources, it is our opinion that there are no recognized environmental conditions at the Site as a result of a release of hazardous materials/wastes or petroleum products from a known or interpreted historical Site or Site vicinity land use. 5 CONCLUSION SCS has performed an Assessment of Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Drive and Pacific Avenue, Palm Desert, California, Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 694-120-028 (Site), in general conformance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice for Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process E 1527-13 and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 312, Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries, Final Rule (AAI). Any exceptions to, or deletions from, the ASTM and AAI Scope of Work were previously described in this Report where applicable. This Assessment has revealed no evidence of a recognized environmental condition in connection with the Site. This Assessment has been conducted by an environmental professional whose qualifications6 were made known to the Client. The conclusions presented above are based on the review of readily available data obtained as part of this Assessment, current regulatory guidelines, the Site and Site vicinity reconnaissance, and SCS’ experience. 6 REPORT USAGE AND FUTURE SITE CONDITIONS This Report is intended for the sole usage of the Client and other parties designated by SCS. The methodology used during this Assessment was in general conformance with the requirements of the Client and the specifications and limitations presented in the Consulting Agreement (Contract) between the Client and SCS. This Report contains information from a variety of public and other sources, and SCS makes no representation or warranty about the accuracy, reliability, suitability, or completeness of the information. Any use of this Report, whether by the Client or by a third party, shall be subject to the provisions of the Contract between the Client and SCS. Any misuse of or reliance upon the Report shall be without risk or liability to SCS. Assessments are qualitative, not comprehensive, in nature and may not identify all environmental problems or eliminate all risk. For every property, but especially for properties in older downtown or urban areas, it is possible for there to be unknown, unreported recognized environmental conditions, USTs, or other features of concern that might become apparent through demolition, construction, or excavation activities, etc. In addition, the scope of services for this project was limited to those items 6 SCS declares that, to the best of its professional knowledge and belief, the reviewer meets the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in section 312.10 of 40 CFR 312 and has the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. SCS has developed and performed All Appropriate Inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR 312. The qualifications of the report preparers are included in the Appendices. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 18 specifically named in the scope of services for this Report. Environmental issues not specifically addressed in the scope of services for this project are not included in this Report. Land use, condition of the properties within the Site, and other factors may change over time. The information and conclusions of this Report are judged to have been relevant at the time the work described in this Report was conducted. This Report should not be relied upon to represent future Site conditions unless a qualified consultant familiar with the practice of Phase I Environmental Site Assessments in the County of Riverside is consulted to assess the necessity of updating this Report. The property owners at the Site are solely responsible for notifying all governmental agencies and the public of the existence, release, or disposal of any hazardous materials/wastes or petroleum products at the Site, whether before, during, or after the performance of SCS’ services. SCS assumes no responsibility or liability for any claim, loss of property value, damage, or injury that results from hazardous materials/wastes or petroleum products being present or encountered within the Site. Although this Assessment has attempted to assess the likelihood that the Site has been impacted by a hazardous material/waste release, potential sources of impact may have escaped detection for reasons that include, but are not limited to, (1) inadequate or inaccurate information rightfully provided to SCS by third parties, such as public agencies and other outside sources; (2) the limited scope of this Assessment; and (3) the presence of undetected, unknown, or unreported environmental releases. 7 LIKELIHOOD STATEMENTS Statements of “likelihood” have been made in this report. Likelihood statements are based on professional judgments of SCS. The term “likelihood,” as used herein, pertains to the probability of a match between the prediction for an event and its actual occurrence. The likelihood statement assigns a measure for a “degree of belief” for the match between the prediction for the event and the actual occurrence of the event. The likelihood statements in this Report are made qualitatively (expressed in words). The qualitative terms can be approximately related to quantitative percentages. The term “low likelihood” is used by SCS to approximate a range of 10 to 20 percent; the term “moderate likelihood” refers to an approximate range of 40 to 60 percent; and the term “high likelihood” refers to an approximate range of 80 to 90 percent. 8 SPECIAL CONTRACTUAL CONDITIONS BETWEEN USER AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL There were no special contractual conditions between the user of this Assessment, the environmental professional, and SCS. 9 ENDNOTES i Site reconnaissance conducted by Allison O’Neal (SCS) on August 27, 2021. ii Records request—County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health by Allison O’Neal (SCS) on August 26, 2021. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment www.scsengineers.com 19 iii Records request—City of Palm Desert Fire Department by Allison O’Neal (SCS) on August 26, 2021. iv Records request—City of Palm Desert Building Department by Allison O’Neal (SCS) on August 26, 2021. v Records request—South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) by Allison O’Neal on August 26, 2021. vi Records request—City of Palm Desert Industrial Waste Program by Allison O’Neal on August 26, 2021. vii Records request—Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) by Allison O’Neal on August 30, 2021. viii Site vicinity reconnaissance conducted by Allison O’Neal (SCS) on August 27, 2021. ix EDR, “Radius Map™ Report,” unpublished report prepared for APN 694-120-028, Palm Desert, CA 92260, dated August 26, 2021. x California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources Online Mapping System, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doms/doms-app.html. FIGURES Disclaimer: This figure is based on available data. Actualconditions may differ. All locations and dimensions are approximate.THREE-WAY SITE LOCATION MAPPalm CommunitiesNortheast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Roadand Pacific Avenue, APN 694-120-028Palm Desert, CaliforniaReference:U.S.G.S. 7.5 Minute Quadrangle MapMyoma, CaliforniaReference:U.S.G.S. 7.5 Minute Quadrangle MapMyoma, CaliforniaReference:Google Earth Aerial PhotographPalm Desert, California - June 20212-DIMENSIONAL SITE LOCATION 3-DIMENSIONAL SITE LOCATIONSITE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHNorth(No Scale)North(No Scale)North(No Scale)Figure 1Project No.:01219277.03Date Drafted:9/1/21S C S E N G I N E E R SEnvironmental Consultants8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290San Diego, California 92123ProjectSiteProjectSiteProjectSitePacific DrivePacific DrivePacific DriveGerald Ford DriveGerald Ford DriveGerald Ford Drive Disclaimer: This figure is based on available data. Actualconditions may differ. All locations and dimensions are approximate. S C S E N G I N E E R SEnvironmental Consultants8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290San Diego, California 92123Figure 2Project No.:01219277.03SITE AND SITE VICINITY PLANPalm CommunitiesNortheast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Roadand Pacific Avenue, APN 694-120-028Palm Desert, CaliforniaDate Drafted:9/2/21NorthNot to ScaleLEGENDApproximate Site boundaryLocation and direction of Site photographReference: Google Earth Aerial PhotographPalm Desert, California - June 20213e-2APN 694-120-031(Vacant Land)APN 694-120-031(Vacant Land)APN 694-120-031(Vacant Land)APN 694-120-029(Vacant Land)APN 694-120-029(Vacant Land)APN 694-120-029(Vacant Land)APN 694-190-055(Vacant Land)APN 694-190-055(Vacant Land)APN 694-190-055(Vacant Land)APN 694-190-087(Vacant Land)APN 694-190-087(Vacant Land)APN 694-190-087(Vacant Land)Northeast corner of Gerald Ford Driveand Pacific Avenue, APN 694-120-028Vacant Land(Site)Northeast corner of Gerald Ford Driveand Pacific Avenue, APN 694-120-028Vacant Land(Site)Northeast corner of Gerald Ford Driveand Pacific Avenue, APN 694-120-028Vacant Land(Site)DebrispilePacific DrivePacific DrivePacific DriveGerald Ford DriveGerald Ford DriveGerald Ford Drive3a-13f-13a-23d-13f-23e-13d-23b-23c-13c-23e-23b-1 Project No.: 01219277.03 Date Drafted: 9/1/21 S C S E N G I N E E R S Environmental Consultants 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290 San Diego, California 92123 PHOTOGRAPHIC PLATE Palm Communities Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Road and Pacific Avenue, APN 694-120-028 Palm Desert, California 2) View of the Site looking southeast. 1) View of the Site looking east. Figure 3a Project No.: 01219277.03 Date Drafted: 9/1/21 S C S E N G I N E E R S Environmental Consultants 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290 San Diego, California 92123 PHOTOGRAPHIC PLATE Palm Communities Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Road and Pacific Avenue, APN 694-120-028 Palm Desert, California 2) View of the Site looking west. 1) View of the western portion fo the Site looking south. Figure 3b Project No.: 01219277.03 Date Drafted: 9/1/21 S C S E N G I N E E R S Environmental Consultants 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290 San Diego, California 92123 PHOTOGRAPHIC PLATE Palm Communities Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Road and Pacific Avenue, APN 694-120-028 Palm Desert, California 2) View of the eastern portion of the Site looking north. 1) View of the Site looking northwest. Figure 3c PHOTOGRAPHIC PLATE Palm Communities Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Road and Pacific Avenue, APN 694-120-028 Palm Desert, California Project No.: 01219277.03 Date Drafted: 9/1/21 S C S E N G I N E E R S Environmental Consultants 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290 San Diego, California 92123 2) Closer view of the debris pile. 1) View of the debris pile observed on Site. Figure 3d Project No.: 01219277.03 Date Drafted: 9/1/21 S C S E N G I N E E R S Environmental Consultants 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290 San Diego, California 92123 PHOTOGRAPHIC PLATE Palm Communities Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Road and Pacific Avenue, APN 694-120-028 Palm Desert, California 2) View of the north adjacent property. 1) View of the west adjacent property. Figure 3e Project No.: 01219277.03 Date Drafted: 9/1/21 S C S E N G I N E E R S Environmental Consultants 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290 San Diego, California 92123 PHOTOGRAPHIC PLATE Palm Communities Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Gerald Ford Road and Pacific Avenue, APN 694-120-028 Palm Desert, California 2) View of the south adjacent property. 1) View of the east adjacent property. Figure 3f APPENDICES 1 Revised December 7, 2012 GLOSSARY adjacent property. Any real property or properties the border of which is contiguous or partially contiguous with that of the Site or that would be contiguous or partially contiguous with that of the Site but for a street, road, or other public thoroughfare separating them. aerial photographs. Photographs taken from an airplane or helicopter of areas encompassing the Site. asbestos. Six naturally occurring fibrous minerals found in certain types of rock formations. Of the six, the minerals chrysotile, amosite, and crocidolite have been the most commonly used in building products. When inhaled in sufficient quantities, asbestos fibers can cause serious health problems. asbestos-containing material (ACM). Any material or product that contains more than 1% asbestos. construction debris. Any concrete, brick, asphalt, and other building materials discarded in the construction of a building or other improvement to property. Controlled recognized environmental conditions. A recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority (for example, as evidenced by the issuance of a no further action letter or equivalent, or meeting risk-based criteria established by regulatory authority), with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls (for example, property use restrictions, activity use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls). de minimis condition. A condition that generally does not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be subject to an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies). A condition considered de minimis is not a recognized environmental condition. drum. A container (typically, but not necessarily, holding 55 gallons of liquid) that may be used to store hazardous substances or petroleum products. dry well. Underground areas where soil has been removed and replaced with pea gravel, coarse sand, or large rocks. Dry wells are used for drainage, to control storm runoff, for the collection of spilled liquids (spilled intentionally or not), and for wastewater disposal (often illegal). fill dirt. Dirt, soil, sand, or other earth that is obtained off site and that is used to fill holes or depressions, create mounds, or otherwise artificially change the grade or elevation of real property. It does not include material that is used in limited quantities for normal landscaping activities. fire insurance map. Maps produced for private fire insurance map companies that indicate uses of properties at specified dates and that encompass the property. hazardous material. Any material that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical and chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment. Hazardous materials include, but are not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous waste, and any material which a handler or the administering agency has a reasonable basis for believing would be injurious to the health or safety of persons or harmful to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment. hazardous substance. Pursuant to CERCLA, hazardous substances include the following: 2 Revised December 7, 2012 1) All toxic pollutants and hazardous substances listed under the Clean Water Act 2) Hazardous wastes regulated under RCRA 3) Any hazardous air pollutant under the Clean Air Act 4) Chemicals designated as “immediately hazardous” under the Toxic Substance Control Act The EPA is also allowed to designate additional substances as hazardous if they present a substantial danger to the public health or welfare or the environment when released. hazardous waste. A substance defined pursuant to the Solid Waste Disposal Act amended by RCRA, a hazardous waste is a solid waste, or a combination of solid wastes, which because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics, may contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating illness or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, or disposed of, or otherwise managed. historical recognized environmental condition. A past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls (for example, property use restrictions, activity and use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls). landfill. A place or area of land used for the disposal of solid wastes as defined by state solid waste regulations. Synonymous with the term solid waste disposal site, a landfill is also known as a garbage dump or trash dump. likelihood. As used in this Report, the term likelihood pertains to the probability of a match between the prediction of an event and its actual occurrence. As used by SCS Engineers, the term low likelihood approximates a percentage range to 10 to 20 percent; moderate likelihood approximates 40 to 60 percent; and high likelihood approximates 80 to 90 percent. Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS). Written or printed material concerning a hazardous substance which is prepared by chemical manufacturers, importers, and employers for hazardous chemicals pursuant to OSHA standards. obvious. That which is plain or evident. The term refers to a condition or fact that could not be ignored or overlooked by a reasonable observer while physically observing the property. PCE. Perchloroethene/perchloroethylene, or “Perc”; also tetrachloroethene/tetrachloroethylene; commonly used as a solvent for dry-cleaning. petroleum products. Petroleum, including crude oil, natural gas, natural gas liquids, liquefied natural gas, synthetic gas usable for fuel, kerosene, diesel oil, jet fuels, motor oil, hydraulic oil, gear oils, and fuel oil. recognized environmental conditions (RECs). Recognized environmental conditions, as defined by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), include the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. However, the term is 3 Revised December 7, 2012 not intended to include de minimis conditions. retail quantities (RQs). Quantities of hazardous materials usually less than 50 gallons, 100 pounds, or 200 cubic feet of gas (under the regulatory reporting limits). small retail quantities (SRQs). Quantities of hazardous materials in containers of 5 gallons or less, and less than 50 gallons in aggregate. solvent. A chemical compound that is capable of dissolving another substance and is itself a hazardous substance, such as TCE, TCA, PCE, Stoddard solvent, paint thinner, mineral spirits, and acetone. Solvents are used in a number of manufacturing or industrial processes. TCA. Trichloroethane; also 1,1,1 TCA; a commonly used industrial solvent for degreasing/cleaning. underground storage tank (UST). Any tank, including underground piping connected to the tank, that is or has been used to contain hazardous substances or petroleum products and the volume of which is 10 percent or more beneath the surface of the ground. visually and/or physically observed. This term refers to observations made by vision during the Site visit while walking through the Site or Site building(s), and observations made by the sense of smell, particularly awareness of noxious or foul odors. ACRONYMS :g/kg micrograms per kilogram :g/L micrograms per liter ARAR Applicable, Relevant, and Appropriate Requirements ASPIS Abandoned Sites Program Information System APCD Air Pollution Control District ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers AST aboveground storage tank ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials BAT Best Available Technology bg below grade bgs below ground surface BMP Best Management Practice BTEX benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes Cal-EPA California Environmental Protection Agency CCDC Centre City Development Corporation CCR California Code of Regulations CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 CGI Combustible Gas Indicator CHSP Community Health and Safety Plan CIR Compliance Inspection Report 4 Revised December 7, 2012 CoCs Constituents of Concern CPT Cone Penetration Testing CREC Controlled Recognized Environmental Condition DAF Dilution and Attenuation Factor DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane DEED RSTR California Department of Health Services Deed Restriction DEH County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health DTSC Department of Toxic Substance Control EPA Environmental Protection Agency ERNS Emergency Response Notification System ESA Environmental Site Assessment FoPC Features of Potential Concern HREC Historical Recognized Environmental Condition HMMD Hazardous Materials Management Division, County of San Diego HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning HVOCs halogenated volatile organic compounds HWSSL Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List IDW investigation-derived wastes IPM integrated pest management JURMP Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program LEL lower explosive limit LESA Limited Environmental Site Assessment LNAPL Light Nonaqueous Phase Liquid LOA Letter of Authorization LUFT leaking underground fuel tank LUST leaking underground storage tank mg/kg milligrams per kilogram MIWD Metropolitan Industrial Wastewater Division MSCP Multiple Species Conservation Plan MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet MTBE methyl tertiary butyl ether; also methyl tert-butyl ether NA not applicable NCP National Contingency Plan ND not detected NESSHAPS National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants NFA no further action NFRAP No Further Remedial Action Plan NOI Notice of Intent 5 Revised December 7, 2012 NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NPL National Priorities List OLS ordinary least squared OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls PCE perchloroethene/perchloroethylene, or “Perc”; also tetrachloroethene/tetrachloroethylene PEAR Preliminary Environmental Assessments Required PID photoionization detector PMP Property Mitigation Plan PAHs polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons PRG Preliminary Remediation Goals PRP potentially responsible party (pursuant to CERCLA) PSH phase-separated hydrocarbons QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RCRA VIOL Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act–hazardous waste generators violations/enforcement actions RCRIS-G Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Information System–Generators (hazardous waste) REC recognized environmental condition RF remote fill RNA remediation by natural attenuation RQs retail quantities RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SAM Site Assessment and Mitigation Program (San Diego County Department of Environmental Health) SAP Site Assessment Protocol SCL Department of Toxic Substance Control database SDG&E San Diego Gas and Electric SI site inspection SRQs small retail quantities SMP Soil Management Plan SPCC Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure STLC Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration SWAT Solid Waste Assessment Test SWIS Solid Waste Information System SWLF Solid Waste Landfills SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board TCA Trichloroethane; also 1,1,1 TCA 6 Revised December 7, 2012 TCE trichloroethene; trichloroethylene TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure THF Tetrahydrofuran TPH total petroleum hydrocarbons TPHg TPH as gasoline TPHd TPH as diesel TPHext TPH extended range TPHo TPH oil range TRIS Toxic Release Information System TRPH total recoverable petroleum hydrocarbons TTLCs Total Threshold Limit Concentrations UAR unauthorized release USGS United States Geological Survey UST underground storage tank VAP Voluntary Action Plan VES Vapor Extraction System WDR Waste Discharge Requirements WET Waste Extraction Test WMUDS Waste Management Unit Database System COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH RECORDS FOR THE SITE EPO-159 (REV 10/17) For our office locations call us at (888) 722-4234 or visit our website at www.rivcoeh.org Environmental Protection & Oversight Division Hazardous Materials Management Branch REQUEST FOR RECORDS Requests for review of records are processed on a first come, first serve basis and the processing time is approximately 2-4 weeks. As required by California Public Records Act Section 6250 et seq., a response will be given within ten (10) business days to confirm receipt of your request. Pursuant to California Government Code, Section 6254 (f), records of pending investigations and informant’s names, addresses, and telephone numbers, will not be released. For access to electronic records available online, visit the Public Information section at www.rivcoeh.org for more details. REQUESTOR INFORMATION NAME: DATE OF REQUEST: BUSINESS NAME (IF ANY): RETURN LEGAL MAILING ADDRESS: CITY: STATE: ZIP: PHONE: The following information is required. List each street address separately. SITE STREET ADDRESS (NO APNs) CITY 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Requests must be made in writing and submitted by mail, email, or in person to the following office: 4065 County Circle Drive, Room 104, Riverside, CA 92503 Phone: (951) 358-5055 Email: DEHRecordsMgmt@rivco.org Mailing Address: P.O. Box 7909, Riverside, CA 92513-7909 Allison O'Neal 8/26/2021 SCS Engineers 8799 Balboa Avenue, #290 San Diego CA 92123 3 APN 694-120-028 APe APN 694-120-031 Riversde APN 694-120-029 Rivrside APN 694-190-055 Rierside APN 694-190-087 Rierside Rivrside Rivrside 858-287-0277 Palm Desert Palm Desert Palm Desert Palm Desert Palm Desert County of Riverside DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH KEITH JONES, DIRECTOR 2275 S. Main Street, Ste. 204 Corona, CA 92882 (951) 273-9143 (951) 520-8319 Fax 800 S. Sanderson Avenue, Ste. 102 Hemet, CA 92545 (951) 766-6524 (951) 791-1778 Fax 47950 Arabia Street, Ste. A Indio, CA 92201 (760) 863-8976 (760) 863-8303 Fax 4065 County Circle Dr., Ste. 104 Riverside, CA 92503 (951)358-5055 (951) 358-5342 Fax 3880 Lemon Street, Ste. 200 Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 955-8980 (951) 955-8988 Fax Department Web Site – www.rivcoeh.org Incomplete Records Request Notice September 1, 2021 Request No: 52215 SCS Engineers 8799 Balboa Ave., #290 San Diego, CA 92123 Attn: Allison O’Neal Request Date: 8/26/2021 Re: APNS: 694-120-028, 694-120-031, 694-120-029, 694-190-055, 694- 190-087 We have received your request for records however a search of our records cannot be conducted based on the information provided. Please reference a specific site address(s) of inquiry and resubmit the records request. The Hazardous Materials Management Division is unable to provide information about sites based on APN’s or similar geographic site data. Please direct questions or correspondence to: Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Management Division 4065 County Circle Dr., Rm. 104 P.O. Box 7909 Riverside, CA 92513-7909 Attention: Records Management Telephone: 951-358-5055 Fax: 951-358-5017 You may also visit our website at www.rivcoeh.org Note: Records for disclosure information of the cities of Corona 951-736-2220, and Riverside 951-826-5737 will need to be directed to the City Fire Department. County of Riverside DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH KEITH JONES, DIRECTOR 2275 S. Main Street, Ste. 204 Corona, CA 92882 (951) 273-9143 (951) 520-8319 Fax 800 S. Sanderson Avenue, Ste. 102 Hemet, CA 92545 (951) 766-6524 (951) 791-1778 Fax 47950 Arabia Street, Ste. A Indio, CA 92201 (760) 863-8976 (760) 863-8303 Fax 4065 County Circle Dr., Ste. 104 Riverside, CA 92503 (951)358-5055 (951) 358-5342 Fax 3880 Lemon Street, Ste. 200 Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 955-8980 (951) 955-8988 Fax Department Web Site – www.rivcoeh.org - September 1, 2021 Due to the ongoing COVID-19 national state of emergency, and Orders by the Riverside County Health Officer, the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health has closed all of our offices to the public and requested that our employees work remotely to support you. Records Request services will continue to be available but please be patient with us and understand that staff is limited. Responses will be provided temporarily via email and will resume to response via US Mail once the pandemic has rectified. During this time records will be provided in four different ways after fees are paid. 1) Email – Only small files no larger than ¼ inch qualify 2) US Mail – files that are appropriately sized for mailing will qualify 3) USPS / FedEx – larger files that are unable to be mailed via US Mail will be shipped at the requestor’s expense 4) Pick Up – By appointment only For questions please call (951) 358-5055 or visit our website for information www.rivcoeh.org Environmental Protection & Oversight Division Hazardous Materials Management Branch Attn: Records Management P.O. Box 7909 Riverside, CA 92513-7909 Ph: (951) 358-5055 Fax (951) 358-5342 *additional fees may include costs for appt. cancellation/no show, time per service, scan/fax/mail of documents, cd/dvd CITY OF PALM DESERT RECORDS REQUEST 1 O'Neal, Allison From:Sandra Ruiz-Serrano <sruiz@cityofpalmdesert.org> Sent:Wednesday, September 15, 2021 4:14 PM To:O'Neal, Allison Subject:RE: Request for Public Records - Allison O'Neil - APN 694-120-028 Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Good afternoon, I was just informed that you have not received a response back since my last email. A staff member from the Building and Safety responded to your email on 8/27 with the following message, but it must have not gone through: The City of Palm Desert does not have any records for this parcel or the surrounding parcels. I suggest checking with the County of Riverside and their phone number is 760-863-8277. Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Please let me know if there is anything else I can help you with. Have a wonderful day. Thank you, Sandra Ruiz-Serrano Office Specialist II Ph: 760.346.0611 Direct: 760.776.6302 sruiz@cityofpalmdesert.org From: O'Neal, Allison <AONeal@scsengineers.com> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2021 2:47 PM To: Sandra Ruiz-Serrano <sruiz@cityofpalmdesert.org> Subject: RE: Request for Public Records - Allison O'Neil - APN 694-120-028 Got it, Thank you! Allison O’Neal SCS Engineers San Diego, CA 858-583-7763 (W) 858-287-0277 (C) aoneal@scsengineers.com www.scsengineers.com From: sruiz@cityofpalmdesert.org <sruiz@cityofpalmdesert.org> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2021 1:06 PM To: O'Neal, Allison <AONeal@scsengineers.com> Subject: Request for Public Records - Allison O'Neil - APN 694-120-028 This email originated from outside of SCS Engineers. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 2 PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST The City of Palm Desert is in receipt of your Public Records Act Request and will forward your request to the corresponding Department. The City prides itself in providing above excellent service and always strives to minimize the turnaround time for records request. I shall notify you as soon as possible if additional time is needed to produce the records responsive to your request. In the meantime, if you have any questions or require additional information, please to not hesitate to contact me. Sandra Ruiz-Serrano Office Specialist II Ph: 760.346.0611 Direct: 760.776.6302 sruiz@cityofpalmdesert.org www.cityofpalmdesert.org Install the Palm Desert In Touch app to stay in touch with your community Android Apple Mobile Web This email originated from outside of SCS Engineers. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. This email originated from outside of SCS Engineers. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:sruiz@cityofpalmdesert.org To:O"Neal, Allison Subject:Request for Public Records - Allison O"Neil - APN 694-120-028 Date:Friday, August 27, 2021 1:06:06 PM PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST The City of Palm Desert is in receipt of your Public Records Act Request and will forward your request to the corresponding Department. The City prides itself in providing above excellent service and always strives to minimize the turnaround time for records request. I shall notify you as soon as possible if additional time is needed to produce the records responsive to your request. In the meantime, if you have any questions or require additional information, please to not hesitate to contact me. <!--[if !vml]--><!--[endif]--> Sandra Ruiz-Serrano Office Specialist II Ph: 760.346.0611 Direct: 760.776.6302 sruiz@cityofpalmdesert.org www.cityofpalmdesert.org Install the Palm Desert In Touch app to stay in touch with your community Android Apple Mobile Web From:O"Neal, Allison To:nalley@cityofpalmdesert.org Subject:City of Palm Desert Records Request - APN 694-120-028 Date:Thursday, August 26, 2021 9:10:00 AM Hello, Please send all building permits you have on file for APN 694-120-028 in Palm Desert, CA 92260 from 1900 to present. Also please send all Fire and wastewater department records in regards to hazardous materials/wastes, underground or above ground storage tanks, and/or any unauthorized release or spill from 1900 to present. Thank you, Allison O’Neal Staff Professional SCS Engineers 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290 San Diego, CA 92123 USA 858-583-7763 (W) 858-287-0277 (C) aoneal@scsengineers.com Driven by Client Success www.scsengineers.com A I R QUA LI TY MANAGEMENT DIS T R IC T This email originated from outside of SCS Engineers. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:mcard@aqmd.gov To:O"Neal, Allison Cc:ob_pr_support_docs@aqmd.gov Subject:SCAQMD Public Records Request# 1407848, -- Rejection Letter Date:Thursday, August 26, 2021 1:57:55 PM Allison Oneal Scs Engineers 8799 Balboa Suite 290 San Diego, Ca 92123 Ref: Request for Records; Control No. 1407848, Received 8/26/2021 RE: P/O'S, NOV'S, COMPLAINTS, ASBESTOS RECORDS FOR APN 694-120-028, PALM DESERT, CA, FROM 1/1/1900-8/26/2021 The District is unable to process your request as submitted because the record you have requested: Cannot be searched by Tract, Lot or Parcel numbers. Please submit with specifics (i.e. Facility I.D. Number, Facility Name, Facility Address, Permit or Application Number) Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (909) 396-3700,Tuesday through Friday, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Sincerely, Michelle Card For Colleen Paine Public Records Coordinator Information Management From:PublicRecordsRequests@aqmd.gov To:O"Neal, Allison Subject:SCAQMD Public Records Request Submittal Acknowledgement Date:Thursday, August 26, 2021 9:07:57 AM This email originated from outside of SCS Engineers. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Allison Oneal Scs Engineers 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290 San Diego, Ca 92123 RE: Request for Records Request: Hello, please send permits, notices of violation, complaints, and asbestos records for APN 694-120-028 in Palm Desert, CA 92260. Thank you. Your request for records has been received by the Public Records Unit and will be assigned for processing. A Control Number will be issued for your request and should be referenced in all future communications and correspondence. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (909) 396- 3700, Tuesday through Friday, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. 4:30 p.m. Sincerely, COLLEEN PAINE For Colleen Paine Public Records Coordinator 116199 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD RECORDS This email originated from outside of SCS Engineers. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:WB-RB7-PRA To:O"Neal, Allison Subject:RE: RWQCB Records Request - Palm Desert Date:Tuesday, September 7, 2021 9:50:16 AM Attachments:image002.png The Colorado River Basin Regional Water Board has received your request for records pertaining to APN 694-120-028 in Palm Desert, California 92260. We do not keep or organize records by APN, there for a complete search of our records could not be conducted. Using the information provided, it was determined we do not have records for the site in question. Thank you, From: O'Neal, Allison <AONeal@scsengineers.com> Sent: Monday, August 30, 2021 12:35 PM To: WB-RB7-PRA <RB7-PRA@Waterboards.ca.gov> Subject: RWQCB Records Request - Palm Desert EXTERNAL: Hello, Please send all records you have on file for APN 694-120-028 in Palm Desert, CA 92260 or let me know if there are no records. Thank you, Allison O’Neal Staff Professional SCS Engineers 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290 San Diego, CA 92123 USA 858-583-7763 (W) 858-287-0277 (C) aoneal@scsengineers.com Driven by Client Success www.scsengineers.com ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY DATABASE REPORT FORM-LBF-DVV tropeR ™paM suidaR RDE ehT 6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor Shelton, CT 06484 Toll Free: 800.352.0050 www.edrnet.com Palm Desert Parcel APN 694-120-028 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Inquiry Number: 6637229.2s August 26, 2021 SECTION PAGE Executive Summary ES1 Overview Map 2 Detail Map 3 Map Findings Summary 4 Map Findings 9 Orphan Summary 14 Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1 GEOCHECK ADDENDUM GeoCheck - Not Requested TC6637229.2s Page 1 Thank you for your business. Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050 with any questions or comments. Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice. Copyright 2020 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC6637229.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR). The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate. TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION ADDRESS APN 694-120-028 PALM DESERT, CA 92260 COORDINATES 33.7877050 - 33˚ 47’ 15.73’’Latitude (North): 116.3626120 - 116˚ 21’ 45.40’’Longitude (West): Zone 11Universal Tranverse Mercator: 559009.2UTM X (Meters): 3738606.2UTM Y (Meters): 173 ft. above sea levelElevation: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY 5639322 MYOMA, CATarget Property Map: 2012Version Date: 5639316 CATHEDRAL CITY, CAWest Map: 2012Version Date: AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT 20140521, 20140519Portions of Photo from: USDASource: 6637229.2s Page 2 2 PALM ELEMENTARY/MIDD GERALD FORD DRIVE/MO ENVIROSTOR, SCH Higher 4638, 0.878, West 1 UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHO GERALD FORD DRIVE/PO ENVIROSTOR, SCH Higher 1049, 0.199, WNW MAPPED SITES SUMMARY Target Property Address: APN 694-120-028 PALM DESERT, CA 92211 Click on Map ID to see full detail. MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.) ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTIONSITE NAME ADDRESS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC6637229.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR. DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the following databases: STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list NPL National Priority List Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens Federal Delisted NPL site list Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions Federal CERCLIS list FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing SEMS Superfund Enterprise Management System Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list SEMS-ARCHIVE Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list CORRACTS Corrective Action Report Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal Federal RCRA generators list RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators RCRA-SQG RCRA - Small Quantity Generators RCRA-VSQG RCRA - Very Small Quantity Generators (Formerly Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators) Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries LUCIS Land Use Control Information System EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC6637229.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List US INST CONTROLS Institutional Controls Sites List Federal ERNS list ERNS Emergency Response Notification System State- and tribal - equivalent NPL RESPONSE State Response Sites State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists SWF/LF Solid Waste Information System State and tribal leaking storage tank lists LUST Geotracker’s Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Report INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land CPS-SLIC Statewide SLIC Cases State and tribal registered storage tank lists FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing UST Active UST Facilities AST Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing VCP Voluntary Cleanup Program Properties State and tribal Brownfields sites BROWNFIELDS Considered Brownfieds Sites Listing ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites WMUDS/SWAT Waste Management Unit Database SWRCY Recycler Database HAULERS Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations ODI Open Dump Inventory IHS OPEN DUMPS Open Dumps on Indian Land Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites US HIST CDL Delisted National Clandestine Laboratory Register EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC6637229.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 HIST Cal-Sites Historical Calsites Database CDL Clandestine Drug Labs CERS HAZ WASTE CERS HAZ WASTE Toxic Pits Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites US CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register PFAS PFAS Contamination Site Location Listing Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks SWEEPS UST SWEEPS UST Listing HIST UST Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database CA FID UST Facility Inventory Database CERS TANKS California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Tanks Local Land Records LIENS Environmental Liens Listing LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information DEED Deed Restriction Listing Records of Emergency Release Reports HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System CHMIRS California Hazardous Material Incident Report System LDS Land Disposal Sites Listing MCS Military Cleanup Sites Listing SPILLS 90 SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch Other Ascertainable Records RCRA NonGen / NLR RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites DOD Department of Defense Sites SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing US FIN ASSUR Financial Assurance Information EPA WATCH LIST EPA WATCH LIST 2020 COR ACTION 2020 Corrective Action Program List TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems ROD Records Of Decision RMP Risk Management Plans RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System PRP Potentially Responsible Parties PADS PCB Activity Database System ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database RADINFO Radiation Information Database HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC6637229.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations FUSRAP Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites LEAD SMELTERS Lead Smelter Sites US AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem US MINES Mines Master Index File ABANDONED MINES Abandoned Mines FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Registry System ECHO Enforcement & Compliance History Information UXO Unexploded Ordnance Sites DOCKET HWC Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing FUELS PROGRAM EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing CA BOND EXP. PLAN Bond Expenditure Plan Cortese "Cortese" Hazardous Waste & Substances Sites List CUPA Listings CUPA Resources List DRYCLEANERS Cleaner Facilities EMI Emissions Inventory Data ENF Enforcement Action Listing Financial Assurance Financial Assurance Information Listing HAZNET Facility and Manifest Data ICE ICE HIST CORTESE Hazardous Waste & Substance Site List HWP EnviroStor Permitted Facilities Listing HWT Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database MINES Mines Site Location Listing MWMP Medical Waste Management Program Listing NPDES NPDES Permits Listing PEST LIC Pesticide Regulation Licenses Listing PROC Certified Processors Database Notify 65 Proposition 65 Records UIC UIC Listing UIC GEO UIC GEO (GEOTRACKER) WASTEWATER PITS Oil Wastewater Pits Listing WDS Waste Discharge System WIP Well Investigation Program Case List MILITARY PRIV SITES MILITARY PRIV SITES (GEOTRACKER) PROJECT PROJECT (GEOTRACKER) WDR Waste Discharge Requirements Listing CIWQS California Integrated Water Quality System CERS CERS NON-CASE INFO NON-CASE INFO (GEOTRACKER) OTHER OIL GAS OTHER OIL & GAS (GEOTRACKER) PROD WATER PONDS PROD WATER PONDS (GEOTRACKER) SAMPLING POINT SAMPLING POINT (GEOTRACKER) WELL STIM PROJ Well Stimulation Project (GEOTRACKER) MINES MRDS Mineral Resources Data System HWTS Hazardous Waste Tracking System EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS EDR Exclusive Records EDR MGP EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC6637229.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 EDR Hist Auto EDR Exclusive Historical Auto Stations EDR Hist Cleaner EDR Exclusive Historical Cleaners EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives RGA LF Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List RGA LUST Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases. Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property. Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed data on individual sites can be reviewed. Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases. Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis. STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS ENVIROSTOR: The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s (SMBRP’s) EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites. A review of the ENVIROSTOR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/23/2021 has revealed that there are 2 ENVIROSTOR sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property. PageMap IDDirection / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHO GERALD FORD DRIVE/PO WNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.199 mi.) 1 9 Facility Id: 33650018 Status: No Action Required PALM ELEMENTARY/MIDD GERALD FORD DRIVE/MO W 1/2 - 1 (0.878 mi.) 2 11 Facility Id: 33650015 Status: No Action Required EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC6637229.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites SCH: This category contains proposed and existing school sites that are being evaluated by DTSC for possible hazardous materials contamination. In some cases, these properties may be listed in the CalSites category. depending on the level of threat to public health and safety or the. environment they pose. A review of the SCH list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/23/2021 has revealed that there is 1 SCH site within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property. PageMap IDDirection / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHO GERALD FORD DRIVE/PO WNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.199 mi.) 1 9 Facility Id: 33650018 Status: No Action Required EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC6637229.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9 Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped. Count: 1 records. Site Name Database(s)____________ ____________ LOWES OF PALM DESERT NPDES, CIWQS EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.110 kV200 20 024 0280 200 28 0 24024 0 24 0 20 0 20 0 20 0 EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc. 2 0 0 MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search TargetDistance Total Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000NPL 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Proposed NPL 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000NPL LIENS Federal Delisted NPL site list 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Delisted NPL Federal CERCLIS list 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500FEDERAL FACILITY 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SEMS Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SEMS-ARCHIVE Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CORRACTS Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500RCRA-TSDF Federal RCRA generators list 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-LQG 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-SQG 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-VSQG Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LUCIS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US ENG CONTROLS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US INST CONTROLS Federal ERNS list 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001ERNS State- and tribal - equivalent NPL 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000RESPONSE State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS 2 NR 1 0 1 0 1.000ENVIROSTOR State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SWF/LF State and tribal leaking storage tank lists 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LUST TC6637229.2s Page 4 MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search TargetDistance Total Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN LUST 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500CPS-SLIC State and tribal registered storage tank lists 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250FEMA UST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250UST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250AST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250INDIAN UST State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN VCP 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500VCP State and tribal Brownfields sites 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500BROWNFIELDS ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US BROWNFIELDS Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500WMUDS/SWAT 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SWRCY 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001HAULERS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN ODI 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500DEBRIS REGION 9 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500ODI 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500IHS OPEN DUMPS Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001US HIST CDL 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000HIST Cal-Sites 1 NR NR NR 1 0 0.250SCH 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001CDL 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250CERS HAZ WASTE 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Toxic Pits 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001US CDL 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500PFAS Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250SWEEPS UST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250HIST UST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250CA FID UST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250CERS TANKS Local Land Records 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001LIENS TC6637229.2s Page 5 MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search TargetDistance Total Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001LIENS 2 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500DEED Records of Emergency Release Reports 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001HMIRS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001CHMIRS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001LDS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001MCS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001SPILLS 90 Other Ascertainable Records 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA NonGen / NLR 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000FUDS 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000DOD 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SCRD DRYCLEANERS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001US FIN ASSUR 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001EPA WATCH LIST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.2502020 COR ACTION 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001TSCA 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001TRIS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001SSTS 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000ROD 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001RMP 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001RAATS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001PRP 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001PADS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001ICIS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001FTTS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001MLTS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001COAL ASH DOE 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500COAL ASH EPA 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001PCB TRANSFORMER 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001RADINFO 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001HIST FTTS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001DOT OPS 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CONSENT 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000INDIAN RESERV 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000FUSRAP 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500UMTRA 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001LEAD SMELTERS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001US AIRS 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250US MINES 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250ABANDONED MINES 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001FINDS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001ECHO 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000UXO 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001DOCKET HWC 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250FUELS PROGRAM 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CA BOND EXP. PLAN 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500Cortese 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250CUPA Listings TC6637229.2s Page 6 MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search TargetDistance Total Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250DRYCLEANERS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001EMI 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001ENF 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001Financial Assurance 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001HAZNET 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001ICE 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500HIST CORTESE 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000HWP 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250HWT 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250MINES 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250MWMP 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001NPDES 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001PEST LIC 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500PROC 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Notify 65 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001UIC 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001UIC GEO 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500WASTEWATER PITS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001WDS 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250WIP 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001MILITARY PRIV SITES 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001PROJECT 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001WDR 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001CIWQS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001CERS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001NON-CASE INFO 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001OTHER OIL GAS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001PROD WATER PONDS 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001SAMPLING POINT 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001WELL STIM PROJ 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001MINES MRDS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPHWTS EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS EDR Exclusive Records 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000EDR MGP 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.125EDR Hist Auto 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.125EDR Hist Cleaner EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001RGA LF 0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001RGA LUST 3 0 1 0 2 0 0- Totals -- TC6637229.2s Page 7 MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search TargetDistance Total Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted NOTES: TP = Target Property NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance Sites may be listed in more than one database TC6637229.2s Page 8 MAP FINDINGSMap ID Direction EDR ID NumberDistance EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation Not reportedComments: 04/19/2004Completed Date: Phase 1Completed Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Not reportedComments: 05/03/2004Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout MemoCompleted Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID NumberAlias Type: 33650018Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code)Alias Type: 404493Alias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOLAlias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: PALM SPRINGS USD-UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOLAlias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTAlias Name: NMAPotential Description: NONE SPECIFIEDConfirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED No Contaminants foundPotential COC: NONEPast Use: NONE SPECIFIEDAPN: -116.3679Longitude: 33.7887Latitude: School DistrictFunding: NONE SPECIFIEDSite Mgmt Req: NORestricted Use: Not reportedSpecial Program: 28Senate: 42Assembly: Southern California Schools & Brownfields OutreachDivision Branch: Yolanda GarzaSupervisor: Not reportedProgram Manager: DTSCLead Agency: DTSCRegulatory Agencies: NONPL: 34Acres: SchoolSite Type Detailed: School InvestigationSite Type: 404493Site Code: 04/19/2004Status Date: No Action RequiredStatus: 33650018Facility ID: PALM DESERT, CA 92211City,State,Zip: GERALD FORD DRIVE/PORTOLA AVENUEAddress: UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOLName: ENVIROSTOR: 1049 ft. 0.199 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 184 ft. 1/8-1/4 PALM DESERT, CA 92211 WNW SCHGERALD FORD DRIVE/PORTOLA AVENUE N/A 1 ENVIROSTORUNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOL S118756741 TC6637229.2s Page 9 MAP FINDINGSMap ID Direction EDR ID NumberDistance EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation Cost Recovery Closeout MemoCompleted Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID NumberAlias Type: 33650018Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code)Alias Type: 404493Alias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOLAlias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: PALM SPRINGS USD-UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOLAlias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTAlias Name: NMAPotential Description: NONE SPECIFIEDConfirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED, No Contaminants foundPotential COC: NONEPast Use: NONE SPECIFIEDAPN: -116.3679Longitude: 33.7887Latitude: School DistrictFunding: NORestricted Use: 04/19/2004Status Date: No Action RequiredStatus: Not reportedSpecial Program Status: 28Senate: 42Assembly: 404493Site Code: Southern California Schools & Brownfields OutreachDivision Branch: Yolanda GarzaSupervisor: Not reportedProject Manager: * DTSCLead Agency Description: DTSCLead Agency: DTSCCleanup Oversight Agencies: NONational Priorities List: 34Acres: NONE SPECIFIEDSite Mgmt. Req.: SchoolSite Type Detail: School InvestigationSite Type: 33650018Facility ID: PALM DESERT, CA 92211City,State,Zip: GERALD FORD DRIVE/PORTOLA AVENUEAddress: UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOLName: SCH: Not reportedSchedule Revised Date: Not reportedSchedule Due Date: Not reportedSchedule Document Type: Not reportedSchedule Sub Area Name: Not reportedSchedule Area Name: Not reportedFuture Due Date: Not reportedFuture Document Type: Not reportedFuture Sub Area Name: Not reportedFuture Area Name: UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOL (Continued) S118756741 TC6637229.2s Page 10 MAP FINDINGSMap ID Direction EDR ID NumberDistance EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation Not reportedSchedule Revised Date: Not reportedSchedule Due Date: Not reportedSchedule Document Type: Not reportedSchedule Sub Area Name: Not reportedSchedule Area Name: Not reportedFuture Due Date: Not reportedFuture Document Type: Not reportedFuture Sub Area Name: Not reportedFuture Area Name: Not reportedComments: 04/19/2004Completed Date: Phase 1Completed Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Not reportedComments: 05/03/2004Completed Date: UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOL (Continued) S118756741 PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTAlias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: PALM ELEMENTARY/MIDDLE SCHOOLAlias Name: NMAPotential Description: NONE SPECIFIEDConfirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED No Contaminants foundPotential COC: NONEPast Use: NONE SPECIFIEDAPN: -116.3797Longitude: 33.7892Latitude: School DistrictFunding: NONE SPECIFIEDSite Mgmt Req: NORestricted Use: Not reportedSpecial Program: 28Senate: 42Assembly: Southern California Schools & Brownfields OutreachDivision Branch: Shahir HaddadSupervisor: Not reportedProgram Manager: DTSCLead Agency: DTSCRegulatory Agencies: NONPL: 24Acres: SchoolSite Type Detailed: School InvestigationSite Type: 404494Site Code: 11/21/2003Status Date: No Action RequiredStatus: 33650015Facility ID: PALM DESERT, CA 92211City,State,Zip: GERALD FORD DRIVE/MONTEREY AVENUEAddress: PALM ELEMENTARY/MIDDLE SCHOOLName: ENVIROSTOR: 4638 ft. 0.878 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 295 ft. 1/2-1 PALM DESERT, CA 92211 West SCHGERALD FORD DRIVE/MONTEREY AVENUE N/A 2 ENVIROSTORPALM ELEMENTARY/MIDDLE SCHOOL S118756738 TC6637229.2s Page 11 MAP FINDINGSMap ID Direction EDR ID NumberDistance EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation 28Senate: 42Assembly: 404494Site Code: Southern California Schools & Brownfields OutreachDivision Branch: Shahir HaddadSupervisor: Not reportedProject Manager: * DTSCLead Agency Description: DTSCLead Agency: DTSCCleanup Oversight Agencies: NONational Priorities List: 24Acres: NONE SPECIFIEDSite Mgmt. Req.: SchoolSite Type Detail: School InvestigationSite Type: 33650015Facility ID: PALM DESERT, CA 92211City,State,Zip: GERALD FORD DRIVE/MONTEREY AVENUEAddress: PALM ELEMENTARY/MIDDLE SCHOOLName: SCH: Not reportedSchedule Revised Date: Not reportedSchedule Due Date: Not reportedSchedule Document Type: Not reportedSchedule Sub Area Name: Not reportedSchedule Area Name: Not reportedFuture Due Date: Not reportedFuture Document Type: Not reportedFuture Sub Area Name: Not reportedFuture Area Name: Not reportedComments: 11/21/2003Completed Date: Phase 1Completed Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Not reportedComments: 11/12/2003Completed Date: Site Inspections/Visit (Non LUR)Completed Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Not reportedComments: 11/26/2003Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout MemoCompleted Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID NumberAlias Type: 33650015Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code)Alias Type: 404494Alias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: PALM SPRINGS USD-PALM ELEM/MID SCHOOLAlias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: PALM ELEMENTARY/MIDDLE SCHOOL (Continued) S118756738 TC6637229.2s Page 12 MAP FINDINGSMap ID Direction EDR ID NumberDistance EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation Not reportedSchedule Revised Date: Not reportedSchedule Due Date: Not reportedSchedule Document Type: Not reportedSchedule Sub Area Name: Not reportedSchedule Area Name: Not reportedFuture Due Date: Not reportedFuture Document Type: Not reportedFuture Sub Area Name: Not reportedFuture Area Name: Not reportedComments: 11/21/2003Completed Date: Phase 1Completed Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Not reportedComments: 11/12/2003Completed Date: Site Inspections/Visit (Non LUR)Completed Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Not reportedComments: 11/26/2003Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout MemoCompleted Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID NumberAlias Type: 33650015Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code)Alias Type: 404494Alias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: PALM SPRINGS USD-PALM ELEM/MID SCHOOLAlias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTAlias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: PALM ELEMENTARY/MIDDLE SCHOOLAlias Name: NMAPotential Description: NONE SPECIFIEDConfirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED, No Contaminants foundPotential COC: NONEPast Use: NONE SPECIFIEDAPN: -116.3797Longitude: 33.7892Latitude: School DistrictFunding: NORestricted Use: 11/21/2003Status Date: No Action RequiredStatus: Not reportedSpecial Program Status: PALM ELEMENTARY/MIDDLE SCHOOL (Continued) S118756738 TC6637229.2s Page 13 ORPHAN SUMMARYCityEDR IDSite NameSite AddressZipDatabase(s)Count: 1 records.PALM DESERT S117704318LOWES OF PALM DESERTNEC MONTEREY AVE & GERALD FORD92211NPDES, CIWQSTC6637229.2s Page 14 To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required. Number of Days to Update:Provides confirmation that EDR is reporting records that have been updated within 90 days from the date the government agency made the information available to the public. STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list NPL: National Priority List National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) and regional EPA offices. Date of Government Version: 04/27/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly NPL Site Boundaries Sources: EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) Telephone: 202-564-7333 EPA Region 1 EPA Region 6 Telephone 617-918-1143 Telephone: 214-655-6659 EPA Region 3 EPA Region 7 Telephone 215-814-5418 Telephone: 913-551-7247 EPA Region 4 EPA Region 8 Telephone 404-562-8033 Telephone: 303-312-6774 EPA Region 5 EPA Region 9 Telephone 312-886-6686 Telephone: 415-947-4246 EPA Region 10 Telephone 206-553-8665 Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites A site that has been proposed for listing on the National Priorities List through the issuance of a proposed rule in the Federal Register. EPA then accepts public comments on the site, responds to the comments, and places on the NPL those sites that continue to meet the requirements for listing. Date of Government Version: 04/27/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by CERCLA of 1980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner received notification of potential liability. USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens. TC6637229.2s Page GR-1 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 10/15/1991 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/02/1994 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/1994 Number of Days to Update: 56 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-4267 Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned Federal Delisted NPL site list Delisted NPL: National Priority List Deletions The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. Date of Government Version: 04/27/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal CERCLIS list FEDERAL FACILITY: Federal Facility Site Information listing A listing of National Priority List (NPL) and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) sites found in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) Database where EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office is involved in cleanup activities. Date of Government Version: 02/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/30/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/17/2021 Number of Days to Update: 79 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-603-8704 Last EDR Contact: 06/23/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies SEMS: Superfund Enterprise Management System SEMS (Superfund Enterprise Management System) tracks hazardous waste sites, potentially hazardous waste sites, and remedial activities performed in support of EPA’s Superfund Program across the United States. The list was formerly know as CERCLIS, renamed to SEMS by the EPA in 2015. The list contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities, private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). This dataset also contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List (NPL) and the sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. Date of Government Version: 04/27/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: EPA Telephone: 800-424-9346 Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list SEMS-ARCHIVE: Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive TC6637229.2s Page GR-2 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING SEMS-ARCHIVE (Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive) tracks sites that have no further interest under the Federal Superfund Program based on available information. The list was formerly known as the CERCLIS-NFRAP, renamed to SEMS ARCHIVE by the EPA in 2015. EPA may perform a minimal level of assessment work at a site while it is archived if site conditions change and/or new information becomes available. Archived sites have been removed and archived from the inventory of SEMS sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list the site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. The decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that. based upon available information, the location is not judged to be potential NPL site. Date of Government Version: 04/27/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: EPA Telephone: 800-424-9346 Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 57 Source: EPA Telephone: 800-424-9346 Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list RCRA-TSDF: RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Transporters are individuals or entities that move hazardous waste from the generator offsite to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the waste. TSDFs treat, store, or dispose of the waste. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 57 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal RCRA generators list RCRA-LQG: RCRA - Large Quantity Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 57 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC6637229.2s Page GR-3 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING RCRA-SQG: RCRA - Small Quantity Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 57 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RCRA-VSQG: RCRA - Very Small Quantity Generators (Formerly Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators) RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Very small quantity generators (VSQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 57 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries LUCIS: Land Use Control Information System LUCIS contains records of land use control information pertaining to the former Navy Base Realignment and Closure properties. Date of Government Version: 05/10/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/13/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/03/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Department of the Navy Telephone: 843-820-7326 Last EDR Contact: 08/05/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/22/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies US ENG CONTROLS: Engineering Controls Sites List A listing of sites with engineering controls in place. Engineering controls include various forms of caps, building foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental media or effect human health. Date of Government Version: 05/17/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/21/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/11/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-603-0695 Last EDR Contact: 08/23/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies US INST CONTROLS: Institutional Controls Sites List A listing of sites with institutional controls in place. Institutional controls include administrative measures, such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions, property use restrictions, and post remediation care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants remaining on site. Deed restrictions are generally required as part of the institutional controls. Date of Government Version: 05/17/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/21/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/11/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-603-0695 Last EDR Contact: 08/23/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC6637229.2s Page GR-4 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Federal ERNS list ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. Date of Government Version: 06/14/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/17/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/17/2021 Number of Days to Update: 61 Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard Telephone: 202-267-2180 Last EDR Contact: 06/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State- and tribal - equivalent NPL RESPONSE: State Response Sites Identifies confirmed release sites where DTSC is involved in remediation, either in a lead or oversight capacity. These confirmed release sites are generally high-priority and high potential risk. Date of Government Version: 04/23/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 07/22/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS ENVIROSTOR: EnviroStor Database The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s (SMBRP’s) EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites. Date of Government Version: 04/23/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 07/22/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists SWF/LF (SWIS): Solid Waste Information System Active, Closed and Inactive Landfills. SWF/LF records typically contain an inve ntory of solid waste disposal facilities or landfills. These may be active or i nactive facilities or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal sites. Date of Government Version: 05/10/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/11/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/27/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Telephone: 916-341-6320 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/22/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State and tribal leaking storage tank lists TC6637229.2s Page GR-5 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING LUST REG 6L: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 09/09/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/10/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/07/2003 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Lahontan Region (6) Telephone: 530-542-5572 Last EDR Contact: 09/12/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/26/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 5: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Database Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Alameda, Alpine, Amador, Butte, Colusa, Contra Costa, Calveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Modoc, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Solano, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yolo, Yuba counties. Date of Government Version: 07/01/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/22/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2008 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region (5) Telephone: 916-464-4834 Last EDR Contact: 07/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/17/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 4: Underground Storage Tank Leak List Los Angeles, Ventura counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 09/07/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/07/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2004 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region (4) Telephone: 213-576-6710 Last EDR Contact: 09/06/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/19/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 3: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Database Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz counties. Date of Government Version: 05/19/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/19/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/02/2003 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region (3) Telephone: 805-542-4786 Last EDR Contact: 07/18/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/31/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 2: Fuel Leak List Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma counties. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/20/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/2004 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region (2) Telephone: 510-622-2433 Last EDR Contact: 09/19/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/02/2012 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 1: Active Toxic Site Investigation Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake, Mendocino, Modoc, Siskiyou, Sonoma, Trinity counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 02/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2001 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/29/2001 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board North Coast (1) Telephone: 707-570-3769 Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/14/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC6637229.2s Page GR-6 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING LUST REG 6V: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, San Bernardino counties. Date of Government Version: 06/07/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/07/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/29/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Victorville Branch Office (6) Telephone: 760-241-7365 Last EDR Contact: 09/12/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/26/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (8). For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/28/2005 Number of Days to Update: 41 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (8) Telephone: 909-782-4496 Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 9: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Report Orange, Riverside, San Diego counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 03/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2001 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/21/2001 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region (9) Telephone: 858-637-5595 Last EDR Contact: 09/26/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/09/2012 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST: Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Report (GEOTRACKER) Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Sites included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater. Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: see region list Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LUST REG 7: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Imperial, Riverside, San Diego, Santa Barbara counties. Date of Government Version: 02/26/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/24/2004 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Colorado River Basin Region (7) Telephone: 760-776-8943 Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/14/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned INDIAN LUST R10: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington. Date of Government Version: 11/12/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 86 Source: EPA Region 10 Telephone: 206-553-2857 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R5: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land Leaking underground storage tanks located on Indian Land in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin. TC6637229.2s Page GR-7 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 10/07/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 86 Source: EPA, Region 5 Telephone: 312-886-7439 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R9: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Nevada Date of Government Version: 10/01/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 86 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 415-972-3372 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming. Date of Government Version: 10/09/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 86 Source: EPA Region 8 Telephone: 303-312-6271 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R7: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska Date of Government Version: 09/30/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/22/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: EPA Region 7 Telephone: 913-551-7003 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R4: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Florida, Mississippi and North Carolina. Date of Government Version: 10/02/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/18/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: EPA Region 4 Telephone: 404-562-8677 Last EDR Contact: 06/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R1: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land A listing of leaking underground storage tank locations on Indian Land. Date of Government Version: 10/01/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 86 Source: EPA Region 1 Telephone: 617-918-1313 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R6: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in New Mexico and Oklahoma. Date of Government Version: 04/08/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/20/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/12/2020 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: EPA Region 6 Telephone: 214-665-6597 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC6637229.2s Page GR-8 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CPS-SLIC: Statewide SLIC Cases (GEOTRACKER) Cleanup Program Sites (CPS; also known as Site Cleanups [SC] and formerly known as Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups [SLIC] sites) included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater. Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies SLIC REG 1: Active Toxic Site Investigations The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 04/03/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/07/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/25/2003 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region (1) Telephone: 707-576-2220 Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/14/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 2: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/20/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/2004 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region (2) Telephone: 510-286-0457 Last EDR Contact: 09/19/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/02/2012 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 3: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 05/18/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/18/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/15/2006 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region (3) Telephone: 805-549-3147 Last EDR Contact: 07/18/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/31/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 4: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 11/17/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/18/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/04/2005 Number of Days to Update: 47 Source: Region Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region (4) Telephone: 213-576-6600 Last EDR Contact: 07/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/17/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 5: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/05/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/21/2005 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region (5) Telephone: 916-464-3291 Last EDR Contact: 09/12/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/26/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC6637229.2s Page GR-9 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING SLIC REG 6V: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 05/24/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/25/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/16/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board, Victorville Branch Telephone: 619-241-6583 Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 6L: SLIC Sites The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/07/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/07/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2004 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region Telephone: 530-542-5574 Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 7: SLIC List The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 11/24/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/29/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/04/2005 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: California Regional Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region Telephone: 760-346-7491 Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/14/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 8: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 04/03/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/03/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2008 Number of Days to Update: 11 Source: California Region Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (8) Telephone: 951-782-3298 Last EDR Contact: 09/12/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/26/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 9: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/10/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/11/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/28/2007 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region (9) Telephone: 858-467-2980 Last EDR Contact: 08/08/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/21/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned State and tribal registered storage tank lists FEMA UST: Underground Storage Tank Listing A listing of all FEMA owned underground storage tanks. Date of Government Version: 01/29/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/17/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/22/2021 Number of Days to Update: 33 Source: FEMA Telephone: 202-646-5797 Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC6637229.2s Page GR-10 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING MILITARY UST SITES: Military UST Sites (GEOTRACKER) Military ust sites Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies UST CLOSURE: Proposed Closure of Underground Storage Tank (UST) Cases UST cases that are being considered for closure by either the State Water Resources Control Board or the Executive Director have been posted for a 60-day public comment period. UST Case Closures being proposed for consideration by the State Water Resources Control Board. These are primarily UST cases that meet closure criteria under the decisional framework in State Water Board Resolution No. 92-49 and other Board orders. UST Case Closures proposed for consideration by the Executive Director pursuant to State Water Board Resolution No. 2012-0061. These are cases that meet the criteria of the Low-Threat UST Case Closure Policy. UST Case Closure Review Denials and Approved Orders. Date of Government Version: 03/05/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/09/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/01/2021 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-327-7844 Last EDR Contact: 06/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies UST: Active UST Facilities Active UST facilities gathered from the local regulatory agencies Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: SWRCB Telephone: 916-341-5851 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually AST: Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities A listing of aboveground storage tank petroleum storage tank locations. Date of Government Version: 07/06/2016 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/12/2016 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/19/2016 Number of Days to Update: 69 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 916-327-5092 Last EDR Contact: 06/08/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/27/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R8: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 8 (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and 27 Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 10/09/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 86 Source: EPA Region 8 Telephone: 303-312-6137 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R4: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 4 (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Tribal Nations) Date of Government Version: 10/02/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/18/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: EPA Region 4 Telephone: 404-562-9424 Last EDR Contact: 06/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC6637229.2s Page GR-11 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING INDIAN UST R6: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 6 (Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas and 65 Tribes). Date of Government Version: 04/08/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/20/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/12/2020 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: EPA Region 6 Telephone: 214-665-7591 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R10: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 10 (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 11/12/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 86 Source: EPA Region 10 Telephone: 206-553-2857 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R1: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 1 (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont and ten Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 10/01/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 86 Source: EPA, Region 1 Telephone: 617-918-1313 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R9: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 9 (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, the Pacific Islands, and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 10/01/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 86 Source: EPA Region 9 Telephone: 415-972-3368 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R5: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 5 (Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 10/07/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 86 Source: EPA Region 5 Telephone: 312-886-6136 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R7: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 7 (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and 9 Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 09/30/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/22/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: EPA Region 7 Telephone: 913-551-7003 Last EDR Contact: 06/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC6637229.2s Page GR-12 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites INDIAN VCP R1: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 1. Date of Government Version: 07/27/2015 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/29/2015 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2016 Number of Days to Update: 142 Source: EPA, Region 1 Telephone: 617-918-1102 Last EDR Contact: 06/15/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned INDIAN VCP R7: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Lisitng A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 7. Date of Government Version: 03/20/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2008 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: EPA, Region 7 Telephone: 913-551-7365 Last EDR Contact: 07/08/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/20/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned VCP: Voluntary Cleanup Program Properties Contains low threat level properties with either confirmed or unconfirmed releases and the project proponents have request that DTSC oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities and have agreed to provide coverage for DTSC’s costs. Date of Government Version: 04/23/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 07/22/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State and tribal Brownfields sites BROWNFIELDS: Considered Brownfieds Sites Listing A listing of sites the SWRCB considers to be Brownfields since these are sites have come to them through the MOA Process. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/10/2021 Number of Days to Update: 79 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-323-7905 Last EDR Contact: 06/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Cleaning up and reinvesting in these properties takes development pressures off of undeveloped, open land, and both improves and protects the environment. Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) stores information reported by EPA Brownfields grant recipients on brownfields properties assessed or cleaned up with grant funding as well as information on Targeted Brownfields Assessments performed by EPA Regions. A listing of ACRES Brownfield sites is obtained from Cleanups in My Community. Cleanups in My Community provides information on Brownfields properties for which information is reported back to EPA, as well as areas served by Brownfields grant programs. Date of Government Version: 06/10/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/10/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/17/2021 Number of Days to Update: 68 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-566-2777 Last EDR Contact: 06/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/27/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually TC6637229.2s Page GR-13 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites WMUDS/SWAT: Waste Management Unit Database Waste Management Unit Database System. WMUDS is used by the State Water Resources Control Board staff and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards for program tracking and inventory of waste management units. WMUDS is composed of the following databases: Facility Information, Scheduled Inspections Information, Waste Management Unit Information, SWAT Program Information, SWAT Report Summary Information, SWAT Report Summary Data, Chapter 15 (formerly Subchapter 15) Information, Chapter 15 Monitoring Parameters, TPCA Program Information, RCRA Program Information, Closure Information, and Interested Parties Information. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2000 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/10/2000 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/10/2000 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-227-4448 Last EDR Contact: 07/20/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SWRCY: Recycler Database A listing of recycling facilities in California. Date of Government Version: 03/09/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/09/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/31/2021 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: 916-323-3836 Last EDR Contact: 06/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HAULERS: Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing A listing of registered waste tire haulers. Date of Government Version: 11/23/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/23/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/08/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: Integrated Waste Management Board Telephone: 916-341-6422 Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/22/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN ODI: Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands Location of open dumps on Indian land. Date of Government Version: 12/31/1998 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/03/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/24/2008 Number of Days to Update: 52 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-308-8245 Last EDR Contact: 07/20/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned DEBRIS REGION 9: Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations A listing of illegal dump sites location on the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation located in eastern Riverside County and northern Imperial County, California. Date of Government Version: 01/12/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/21/2009 Number of Days to Update: 137 Source: EPA, Region 9 Telephone: 415-947-4219 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned ODI: Open Dump Inventory An open dump is defined as a disposal facility that does not comply with one or more of the Part 257 or Part 258 Subtitle D Criteria. Date of Government Version: 06/30/1985 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/09/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/17/2004 Number of Days to Update: 39 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 800-424-9346 Last EDR Contact: 06/09/2004 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC6637229.2s Page GR-14 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING IHS OPEN DUMPS: Open Dumps on Indian Land A listing of all open dumps located on Indian Land in the United States. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2014 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/06/2014 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2015 Number of Days to Update: 176 Source: Department of Health & Human Serivces, Indian Health Service Telephone: 301-443-1452 Last EDR Contact: 07/20/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites US HIST CDL: National Clandestine Laboratory Register A listing of clandestine drug lab locations that have been removed from the DEAs National Clandestine Laboratory Register. Date of Government Version: 05/18/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/18/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/03/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Telephone: 202-307-1000 Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HIST CAL-SITES: Calsites Database The Calsites database contains potential or confirmed hazardous substance release properties. In 1996, California EPA reevaluated and significantly reduced the number of sites in the Calsites database. No longer updated by the state agency. It has been replaced by ENVIROSTOR. Date of Government Version: 08/08/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/03/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2006 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: Department of Toxic Substance Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 02/23/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/25/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SCH: School Property Evaluation Program This category contains proposed and existing school sites that are being evaluated by DTSC for possible hazardous materials contamination. In some cases, these properties may be listed in the CalSites category depending on the level of threat to public health and safety or the environment they pose. Date of Government Version: 04/23/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 07/22/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs A listing of drug lab locations. Listing of a location in this database does not indicate that any illegal drug lab materials were or were not present there, and does not constitute a determination that the location either requires or does not require additional cleanup work. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/20/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/08/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-255-6504 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TOXIC PITS: Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites Toxic PITS Cleanup Act Sites. TOXIC PITS identifies sites suspected of containing hazardous substances where cleanup has not yet been completed. Date of Government Version: 07/01/1995 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/30/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/26/1995 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-227-4364 Last EDR Contact: 01/26/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/27/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC6637229.2s Page GR-15 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CERS HAZ WASTE: CERS HAZ WASTE List of sites in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal which fall under the Hazardous Chemical Management, Hazardous Waste Onsite Treatment, Household Hazardous Waste Collection, Hazardous Waste Generator, and RCRA LQ HW Generator programs. Date of Government Version: 04/19/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/20/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/07/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: CalEPA Telephone: 916-323-2514 Last EDR Contact: 07/15/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly US CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example, contacting local law enforcement and local health departments. Date of Government Version: 05/18/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/18/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/03/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Telephone: 202-307-1000 Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PFAS: PFAS Contamination Site Location Listing A listing of PFAS contaminated sites included in the GeoTracker database. Date of Government Version: 02/24/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/24/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/14/2021 Number of Days to Update: 79 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks SWEEPS UST: SWEEPS UST Listing Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System. This underground storage tank listing was updated and maintained by a company contacted by the SWRCB in the early 1990’s. The listing is no longer updated or maintained. The local agency is the contact for more information on a site on the SWEEPS list. Date of Government Version: 06/01/1994 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/07/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/11/2005 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2005 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HIST UST: Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database The Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database is a historical listing of UST sites. Refer to local/county source for current data. Date of Government Version: 10/15/1990 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/1991 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/12/1991 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-341-5851 Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2001 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SAN FRANCISCO AST: Aboveground Storage Tank Site Listing Aboveground storage tank sites TC6637229.2s Page GR-16 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 05/06/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/23/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: San Francisco County Department of Public Health Telephone: 415-252-3896 Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/14/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies CA FID UST: Facility Inventory Database The Facility Inventory Database (FID) contains a historical listing of active and inactive underground storage tank locations from the State Water Resource Control Board. Refer to local/county source for current data. Date of Government Version: 10/31/1994 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/05/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/29/1995 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 916-341-5851 Last EDR Contact: 12/28/1998 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned CERS TANKS: California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Tanks List of sites in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal which fall under the Aboveground Petroleum Storage and Underground Storage Tank regulatory programs. Date of Government Version: 04/19/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/20/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/07/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 916-323-2514 Last EDR Contact: 07/15/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Local Land Records LIENS: Environmental Liens Listing A listing of property locations with environmental liens for California where DTSC is a lien holder. Date of Government Version: 05/27/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/28/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/20/2021 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies LIENS 2: CERCLA Lien Information A Federal CERCLA (’Superfund’) lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent Superfund monies. These monies are spent to investigate and address releases and threatened releases of contamination. CERCLIS provides information as to the identity of these sites and properties. Date of Government Version: 04/27/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-6023 Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually DEED: Deed Restriction Listing TC6637229.2s Page GR-17 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program Facility Sites with Deed Restrictions & Hazardous Waste Management Program Facility Sites with Deed / Land Use Restriction. The DTSC Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program (SMBRP) list includes sites cleaned up under the program’s oversight and generally does not include current or former hazardous waste facilities that required a hazardous waste facility permit. The list represents deed restrictions that are active. Some sites have multiple deed restrictions. The DTSC Hazardous Waste Management Program (HWMP) has developed a list of current or former hazardous waste facilities that have a recorded land use restriction at the local county recorder’s office. The land use restrictions on this list were required by the DTSC HWMP as a result of the presence of hazardous substances that remain on site after the facility (or part of the facility) has been closed or cleaned up. The types of land use restriction include deed notice, deed restriction, or a land use restriction that binds current and future owners. Date of Government Version: 05/28/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/28/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/20/2021 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: DTSC and SWRCB Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 05/28/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Records of Emergency Release Reports HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/24/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/17/2021 Number of Days to Update: 85 Source: U.S. Department of Transportation Telephone: 202-366-4555 Last EDR Contact: 06/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly CHMIRS: California Hazardous Material Incident Report System California Hazardous Material Incident Reporting System. CHMIRS contains information on reported hazardous material incidents (accidental releases or spills). Date of Government Version: 04/04/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/20/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/07/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Office of Emergency Services Telephone: 916-845-8400 Last EDR Contact: 07/15/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually LDS: Land Disposal Sites Listing (GEOTRACKER) Land Disposal sites (Landfills) included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater. Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Qualilty Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly MCS: Military Cleanup Sites Listing (GEOTRACKER) Military sites (consisting of: Military UST sites; Military Privatized sites; and Military Cleanup sites [formerly known as DoD non UST]) included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater. Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC6637229.2s Page GR-18 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING SPILLS 90: SPILLS90 data from FirstSearch Spills 90 includes those spill and release records available exclusively from FirstSearch databases. Typically, they may include chemical, oil and/or hazardous substance spills recorded after 1990. Duplicate records that are already included in EDR incident and release records are not included in Spills 90. Date of Government Version: 06/06/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/03/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/22/2013 Number of Days to Update: 50 Source: FirstSearch Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 01/03/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned Other Ascertainable Records RCRA NonGen / NLR: RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 57 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly FUDS: Formerly Used Defense Sites The listing includes locations of Formerly Used Defense Sites properties where the US Army Corps of Engineers is actively working or will take necessary cleanup actions. Date of Government Version: 05/04/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/18/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/11/2021 Number of Days to Update: 85 Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Telephone: 202-528-4285 Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies DOD: Department of Defense Sites This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/10/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: USGS Telephone: 888-275-8747 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies FEDLAND: Federal and Indian Lands Federally and Indian administrated lands of the United States. Lands included are administrated by: Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, National Wild and Scenic River, National Wildlife Refuge, Public Domain Land, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Area, Wildlife Management Area, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, Department of Justice, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service. Date of Government Version: 04/02/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/11/2018 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/06/2019 Number of Days to Update: 574 Source: U.S. Geological Survey Telephone: 888-275-8747 Last EDR Contact: 07/09/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: N/A SCRD DRYCLEANERS: State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing The State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. It is comprised of representatives of states with established drycleaner remediation programs. Currently the member states are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. TC6637229.2s Page GR-19 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 01/01/2017 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/03/2017 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017 Number of Days to Update: 63 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 615-532-8599 Last EDR Contact: 08/06/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/22/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies US FIN ASSUR: Financial Assurance Information All owners and operators of facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste are required to provide proof that they will have sufficient funds to pay for the clean up, closure, and post-closure care of their facilities. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/17/2021 Number of Days to Update: 86 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-566-1917 Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly EPA WATCH LIST: EPA WATCH LIST EPA maintains a "Watch List" to facilitate dialogue between EPA, state and local environmental agencies on enforcement matters relating to facilities with alleged violations identified as either significant or high priority. Being on the Watch List does not mean that the facility has actually violated the law only that an investigation by EPA or a state or local environmental agency has led those organizations to allege that an unproven violation has in fact occurred. Being on the Watch List does not represent a higher level of concern regarding the alleged violations that were detected, but instead indicates cases requiring additional dialogue between EPA, state and local agencies - primarily because of the length of time the alleged violation has gone unaddressed or unresolved. Date of Government Version: 08/30/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/21/2014 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/17/2014 Number of Days to Update: 88 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 617-520-3000 Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned 2020 COR ACTION: 2020 Corrective Action Program List The EPA has set ambitious goals for the RCRA Corrective Action program by creating the 2020 Corrective Action Universe. This RCRA cleanup baseline includes facilities expected to need corrective action. The 2020 universe contains a wide variety of sites. Some properties are heavily contaminated while others were contaminated but have since been cleaned up. Still others have not been fully investigated yet, and may require little or no remediation. Inclusion in the 2020 Universe does not necessarily imply failure on the part of a facility to meet its RCRA obligations. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2017 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/08/2018 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/20/2018 Number of Days to Update: 73 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-308-4044 Last EDR Contact: 08/06/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant site. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2016 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/17/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/10/2020 Number of Days to Update: 85 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-260-5521 Last EDR Contact: 06/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/27/2021 Data Release Frequency: Every 4 Years TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313. TC6637229.2s Page GR-20 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 12/31/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/14/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/04/2020 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-566-0250 Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March 1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year. Date of Government Version: 04/19/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/20/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/16/2021 Number of Days to Update: 87 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-4203 Last EDR Contact: 07/19/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually ROD: Records Of Decision Record of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical and health information to aid in the cleanup. Date of Government Version: 04/27/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: EPA Telephone: 703-416-0223 Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually RMP: Risk Management Plans When Congress passed the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, it required EPA to publish regulations and guidance for chemical accident prevention at facilities using extremely hazardous substances. The Risk Management Program Rule (RMP Rule) was written to implement Section 112(r) of these amendments. The rule, which built upon existing industry codes and standards, requires companies of all sizes that use certain flammable and toxic substances to develop a Risk Management Program, which includes a(n): Hazard assessment that details the potential effects of an accidental release, an accident history of the last five years, and an evaluation of worst-case and alternative accidental releases; Prevention program that includes safety precautions and maintenance, monitoring, and employee training measures; and Emergency response program that spells out emergency health care, employee training measures and procedures for informing the public and response agencies (e.g the fire department) should an accident occur. Date of Government Version: 05/07/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/13/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/03/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-8600 Last EDR Contact: 07/14/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database. Date of Government Version: 04/17/1995 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/03/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/07/1995 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-4104 Last EDR Contact: 06/02/2008 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/01/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC6637229.2s Page GR-21 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING PRP: Potentially Responsible Parties A listing of verified Potentially Responsible Parties Date of Government Version: 12/30/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/14/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/05/2021 Number of Days to Update: 50 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-6023 Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PADS: PCB Activity Database System PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers of PCB’s who are required to notify the EPA of such activities. Date of Government Version: 11/19/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/08/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/22/2021 Number of Days to Update: 73 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-566-0500 Last EDR Contact: 07/09/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually ICIS: Integrated Compliance Information System The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) supports the information needs of the national enforcement and compliance program as well as the unique needs of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Date of Government Version: 11/18/2016 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/23/2016 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017 Number of Days to Update: 79 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-2501 Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned FTTS: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA, TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act). To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis. Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances Telephone: 202-566-1667 Last EDR Contact: 08/18/2017 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/04/2017 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned FTTS INSP: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) A listing of FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) inspections and enforcements. Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-566-1667 Last EDR Contact: 08/18/2017 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/04/2017 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis. Date of Government Version: 03/08/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/11/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2021 Number of Days to Update: 61 Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Telephone: 301-415-7169 Last EDR Contact: 07/14/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC6637229.2s Page GR-22 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING COAL ASH DOE: Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data A listing of power plants that store ash in surface ponds. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/01/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/09/2021 Number of Days to Update: 70 Source: Department of Energy Telephone: 202-586-8719 Last EDR Contact: 05/27/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies COAL ASH EPA: Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List A listing of coal combustion residues surface impoundments with high hazard potential ratings. Date of Government Version: 01/12/2017 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/05/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/11/2019 Number of Days to Update: 251 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 05/27/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies PCB TRANSFORMER: PCB Transformer Registration Database The database of PCB transformer registrations that includes all PCB registration submittals. Date of Government Version: 09/13/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/06/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2020 Number of Days to Update: 96 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-566-0517 Last EDR Contact: 08/06/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies RADINFO: Radiation Information Database The Radiation Information Database (RADINFO) contains information about facilities that are regulated by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations for radiation and radioactivity. Date of Government Version: 07/01/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/01/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/23/2019 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-343-9775 Last EDR Contact: 06/22/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HIST FTTS: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing A complete administrative case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated. Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-2501 Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2007 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HIST FTTS INSP: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Inspection & Enforcement Case Listing A complete inspection and enforcement case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated. TC6637229.2s Page GR-23 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-2501 Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2008 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned DOT OPS: Incident and Accident Data Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Incident and Accident data. Date of Government Version: 01/02/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/28/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/17/2020 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Telephone: 202-366-4595 Last EDR Contact: 07/23/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly CONSENT: Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters. Date of Government Version: 06/30/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/14/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/16/2021 Number of Days to Update: 2 Source: Department of Justice, Consent Decree Library Telephone: Varies Last EDR Contact: 07/02/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies BRS: Biennial Reporting System The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LQG) and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2017 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/22/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/20/2020 Number of Days to Update: 151 Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: 800-424-9346 Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Biennially INDIAN RESERV: Indian Reservations This map layer portrays Indian administered lands of the United States that have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2014 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/14/2015 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/10/2017 Number of Days to Update: 546 Source: USGS Telephone: 202-208-3710 Last EDR Contact: 07/02/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies FUSRAP: Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program DOE established the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) in 1974 to remediate sites where radioactive contamination remained from Manhattan Project and early U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) operations. Date of Government Version: 08/08/2017 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/11/2018 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/14/2018 Number of Days to Update: 3 Source: Department of Energy Telephone: 202-586-3559 Last EDR Contact: 07/23/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies UMTRA: Uranium Mill Tailings Sites Uranium ore was mined by private companies for federal government use in national defense programs. When the mills shut down, large piles of the sand-like material (mill tailings) remain after uranium has been extracted from the ore. Levels of human exposure to radioactive materials from the piles are low; however, in some cases tailings were used as construction materials before the potential health hazards of the tailings were recognized. TC6637229.2s Page GR-24 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 08/30/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/15/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/28/2020 Number of Days to Update: 74 Source: Department of Energy Telephone: 505-845-0011 Last EDR Contact: 08/12/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies LEAD SMELTER 1: Lead Smelter Sites A listing of former lead smelter site locations. Date of Government Version: 04/27/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-603-8787 Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies LEAD SMELTER 2: Lead Smelter Sites A list of several hundred sites in the U.S. where secondary lead smelting was done from 1931and 1964. These sites may pose a threat to public health through ingestion or inhalation of contaminated soil or dust Date of Government Version: 04/05/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/27/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/02/2010 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: American Journal of Public Health Telephone: 703-305-6451 Last EDR Contact: 12/02/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned US AIRS (AFS): Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem (AFS) The database is a sub-system of Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). AFS contains compliance data on air pollution point sources regulated by the U.S. EPA and/or state and local air regulatory agencies. This information comes from source reports by various stationary sources of air pollution, such as electric power plants, steel mills, factories, and universities, and provides information about the air pollutants they produce. Action, air program, air program pollutant, and general level plant data. It is used to track emissions and compliance data from industrial plants. Date of Government Version: 10/12/2016 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/26/2016 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/03/2017 Number of Days to Update: 100 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-2496 Last EDR Contact: 09/26/2017 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/08/2018 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned US AIRS MINOR: Air Facility System Data A listing of minor source facilities. Date of Government Version: 10/12/2016 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/26/2016 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/03/2017 Number of Days to Update: 100 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-2496 Last EDR Contact: 09/26/2017 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/08/2018 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned US MINES: Mines Master Index File Contains all mine identification numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971. The data also includes violation information. Date of Government Version: 05/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/25/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/11/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration Telephone: 303-231-5959 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually MINES VIOLATIONS: MSHA Violation Assessment Data Mines violation and assessment information. Department of Labor, Mine Safety & Health Administration. TC6637229.2s Page GR-25 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 05/27/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/27/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/10/2021 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: DOL, Mine Safety & Health Admi Telephone: 202-693-9424 Last EDR Contact: 08/25/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly US MINES 2: Ferrous and Nonferrous Metal Mines Database Listing This map layer includes ferrous (ferrous metal mines are facilities that extract ferrous metals, such as iron ore or molybdenum) and nonferrous (Nonferrous metal mines are facilities that extract nonferrous metals, such as gold, silver, copper, zinc, and lead) metal mines in the United States. Date of Government Version: 05/06/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/27/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/13/2020 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: USGS Telephone: 703-648-7709 Last EDR Contact: 05/27/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies US MINES 3: Active Mines & Mineral Plants Database Listing Active Mines and Mineral Processing Plant operations for commodities monitored by the Minerals Information Team of the USGS. Date of Government Version: 04/14/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/08/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2011 Number of Days to Update: 97 Source: USGS Telephone: 703-648-7709 Last EDR Contact: 05/27/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies ABANDONED MINES: Abandoned Mines An inventory of land and water impacted by past mining (primarily coal mining) is maintained by OSMRE to provide information needed to implement the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The inventory contains information on the location, type, and extent of AML impacts, as well as, information on the cost associated with the reclamation of those problems. The inventory is based upon field surveys by State, Tribal, and OSMRE program officials. It is dynamic to the extent that it is modified as new problems are identified and existing problems are reclaimed. Date of Government Version: 06/15/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/16/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/17/2021 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: Department of Interior Telephone: 202-208-2609 Last EDR Contact: 06/14/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and ’pointers’ to other sources that contain more detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System). Date of Government Version: 05/05/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/18/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/17/2021 Number of Days to Update: 91 Source: EPA Telephone: (415) 947-8000 Last EDR Contact: 05/18/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly ECHO: Enforcement & Compliance History Information ECHO provides integrated compliance and enforcement information for about 800,000 regulated facilities nationwide. Date of Government Version: 04/04/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/06/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/25/2021 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-2280 Last EDR Contact: 07/01/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC6637229.2s Page GR-26 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING UXO: Unexploded Ordnance Sites A listing of unexploded ordnance site locations Date of Government Version: 12/31/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/02/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/17/2020 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: Department of Defense Telephone: 703-704-1564 Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies DOCKET HWC: Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing A complete list of the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Facilities. Date of Government Version: 05/06/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/21/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/11/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-0527 Last EDR Contact: 05/21/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies FUELS PROGRAM: EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing This listing includes facilities that are registered under the Part 80 (Code of Federal Regulations) EPA Fuels Programs. All companies now are required to submit new and updated registrations. Date of Government Version: 05/14/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/14/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/03/2021 Number of Days to Update: 81 Source: EPA Telephone: 800-385-6164 Last EDR Contact: 08/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly CA BOND EXP. PLAN: Bond Expenditure Plan Department of Health Services developed a site-specific expenditure plan as the basis for an appropriation of Hazardous Substance Cleanup Bond Act funds. It is not updated. Date of Government Version: 01/01/1989 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/27/1994 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/02/1994 Number of Days to Update: 6 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: 916-255-2118 Last EDR Contact: 05/31/1994 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned CORTESE: "Cortese" Hazardous Waste & Substances Sites List The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board (LUST), the Integrated Waste Board (SWF/LS), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (Cal-Sites). Date of Government Version: 03/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/10/2021 Number of Days to Update: 79 Source: CAL EPA/Office of Emergency Information Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 06/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly CUPA LIVERMORE-PLEASANTON: CUPA Facility Listing list of facilities associated with the various CUPA programs in Livermore-Pleasanton Date of Government Version: 05/01/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/14/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/17/2019 Number of Days to Update: 64 Source: Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department Telephone: 925-454-2361 Last EDR Contact: 08/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/22/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies DRYCLEAN SOUTH COAST: South Coast Air Quality Management District Drycleaner Listing A listing of dry cleaners in the South Coast Air Quality Management District TC6637229.2s Page GR-27 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 05/18/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/19/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/05/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District Telephone: 909-396-3211 Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies DRYCLEANERS: Cleaner Facilities A list of drycleaner related facilities that have EPA ID numbers. These are facilities with certain SIC codes: power laundries, family and commercial; garment pressing and cleaner’s agents; linen supply; coin-operated laundries and cleaning; drycleaning plants, except rugs; carpet and upholster cleaning; industrial launderers; laundry and garment services. Date of Government Version: 05/25/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/28/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/20/2021 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: Department of Toxic Substance Control Telephone: 916-327-4498 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually DRYCLEAN AVAQMD: Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District Drycleaner Listing A listing of dry cleaners in the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District. Date of Government Version: 05/25/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/26/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/18/2021 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District Telephone: 661-723-8070 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies EMI: Emissions Inventory Data Toxics and criteria pollutant emissions data collected by the ARB and local air pollution agencies. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/28/2020 Number of Days to Update: 73 Source: California Air Resources Board Telephone: 916-322-2990 Last EDR Contact: 06/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/27/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies ENF: Enforcement Action Listing A listing of Water Board Enforcement Actions. Formal is everything except Oral/Verbal Communication, Notice of Violation, Expedited Payment Letter, and Staff Enforcement Letter. Date of Government Version: 04/16/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/20/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/07/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: State Water Resoruces Control Board Telephone: 916-445-9379 Last EDR Contact: 07/15/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies Financial Assurance 1: Financial Assurance Information Listing Financial Assurance information Date of Government Version: 04/14/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/15/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/06/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-255-3628 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies Financial Assurance 2: Financial Assurance Information Listing A listing of financial assurance information for solid waste facilities. Financial assurance is intended to ensure that resources are available to pay for the cost of closure, post-closure care, and corrective measures if the owner or operator of a regulated facility is unable or unwilling to pay. TC6637229.2s Page GR-28 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 05/13/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/13/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/26/2021 Number of Days to Update: 74 Source: California Integrated Waste Management Board Telephone: 916-341-6066 Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/22/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies HAZNET: Facility and Manifest Data Facility and Manifest Data. The data is extracted from the copies of hazardous waste manifests received each year by the DTSC. The annual volume of manifests is typically 700,000 - 1,000,000 annually, representing approximately 350,000 - 500,000 shipments. Data are from the manifests submitted without correction, and therefore many contain some invalid values for data elements such as generator ID, TSD ID, waste category, and disposal method. This database begins with calendar year 1993. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/15/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/02/2020 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 916-255-1136 Last EDR Contact: 07/09/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually ICE: ICE Contains data pertaining to the Permitted Facilities with Inspections / Enforcements sites tracked in Envirostor. Date of Government Version: 05/14/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/14/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/27/2021 Number of Days to Update: 74 Source: Department of Toxic Subsances Control Telephone: 877-786-9427 Last EDR Contact: 08/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HIST CORTESE: Hazardous Waste & Substance Site List The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board [LUST], the Integrated Waste Board [SWF/LS], and the Department of Toxic Substances Control [CALSITES]. This listing is no longer updated by the state agency. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/22/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/08/2009 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 01/22/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HWP: EnviroStor Permitted Facilities Listing Detailed information on permitted hazardous waste facilities and corrective action ("cleanups") tracked in EnviroStor. Date of Government Version: 05/14/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/14/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/27/2021 Number of Days to Update: 74 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 08/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HWT: Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database A listing of hazardous waste transporters. In California, unless specifically exempted, it is unlawful for any person to transport hazardous wastes unless the person holds a valid registration issued by DTSC. A hazardous waste transporter registration is valid for one year and is assigned a unique registration number. Date of Government Version: 04/05/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/06/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/23/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-440-7145 Last EDR Contact: 07/01/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC6637229.2s Page GR-29 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING MINES: Mines Site Location Listing A listing of mine site locations from the Office of Mine Reclamation. Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: 916-322-1080 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly MWMP: Medical Waste Management Program Listing The Medical Waste Management Program (MWMP) ensures the proper handling and disposal of medical waste by permitting and inspecting medical waste Offsite Treatment Facilities (PDF) and Transfer Stations (PDF) throughout the state. MWMP also oversees all Medical Waste Transporters. Date of Government Version: 05/06/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/28/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/20/2021 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: 916-558-1784 Last EDR Contact: 05/28/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies NPDES: NPDES Permits Listing A listing of NPDES permits, including stormwater. Date of Government Version: 05/10/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/11/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/27/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-445-9379 Last EDR Contact: 08/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/22/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PEST LIC: Pesticide Regulation Licenses Listing A listing of licenses and certificates issued by the Department of Pesticide Regulation. The DPR issues licenses and/or certificates to: Persons and businesses that apply or sell pesticides; Pest control dealers and brokers; Persons who advise on agricultural pesticide applications. Date of Government Version: 05/28/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/28/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/20/2021 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: Department of Pesticide Regulation Telephone: 916-445-4038 Last EDR Contact: 05/28/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PROC: Certified Processors Database A listing of certified processors. Date of Government Version: 03/09/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/09/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/31/2021 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: 916-323-3836 Last EDR Contact: 06/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly NOTIFY 65: Proposition 65 Records Listings of all Proposition 65 incidents reported to counties by the State Water Resources Control Board and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This database is no longer updated by the reporting agency. Date of Government Version: 03/12/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/16/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/01/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-445-3846 Last EDR Contact: 06/08/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/27/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC6637229.2s Page GR-30 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING UIC: UIC Listing A listing of wells identified as underground injection wells, in the California Oil and Gas Wells database. Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/25/2021 Number of Days to Update: 83 Source: Deaprtment of Conservation Telephone: 916-445-2408 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies UIC GEO: Underground Injection Control Sites (GEOTRACKER) Underground control injection sites Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Resource Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies WASTEWATER PITS: Oil Wastewater Pits Listing Water officials discovered that oil producers have been dumping chemical-laden wastewater into hundreds of unlined pits that are operating without proper permits. Inspections completed by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board revealed the existence of previously unidentified waste sites. The water boards review found that more than one-third of the region’s active disposal pits are operating without permission. Date of Government Version: 11/19/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/07/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/09/2020 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: RWQCB, Central Valley Region Telephone: 559-445-5577 Last EDR Contact: 07/01/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies WDS: Waste Discharge System Sites which have been issued waste discharge requirements. Date of Government Version: 06/19/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/20/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/29/2007 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-341-5227 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned WIP: Well Investigation Program Case List Well Investigation Program case in the San Gabriel and San Fernando Valley area. Date of Government Version: 07/03/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/21/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/03/2009 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Los Angeles Water Quality Control Board Telephone: 213-576-6726 Last EDR Contact: 06/15/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned MILITARY PRIV SITES: Military Privatized Sites (GEOTRACKER) Military privatized sites Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies PROJECT: Project Sites (GEOTRACKER) Projects sites TC6637229.2s Page GR-31 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies WDR: Waste Discharge Requirements Listing In general, the Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Program (sometimes also referred to as the "Non Chapter 15 (Non 15) Program") regulates point discharges that are exempt pursuant to Subsection 20090 of Title 27 and not subject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Exemptions from Title 27 may be granted for nine categories of discharges (e.g., sewage, wastewater, etc.) that meet, and continue to meet, the preconditions listed for each specific exemption. The scope of the WDRs Program also includes the discharge of wastes classified as inert, pursuant to section 20230 of Title 27. Date of Government Version: 03/09/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/09/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/31/2021 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-341-5810 Last EDR Contact: 06/07/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly CIWQS: California Integrated Water Quality System The California Integrated Water Quality System (CIWQS) is a computer system used by the State and Regional Water Quality Control Boards to track information about places of environmental interest, manage permits and other orders, track inspections, and manage violations and enforcement activities. Date of Government Version: 05/19/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/19/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 85 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-794-4977 Last EDR Contact: 05/19/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies CERS: CalEPA Regulated Site Portal Data The CalEPA Regulated Site Portal database combines data about environmentally regulated sites and facilities in California into a single database. It combines data from a variety of state and federal databases, and provides an overview of regulated activities across the spectrum of environmental programs for any given location in California. These activities include hazardous materials and waste, state and federal cleanups, impacted ground and surface waters, and toxic materials Date of Government Version: 04/19/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/20/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/07/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 916-323-2514 Last EDR Contact: 07/15/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies NON-CASE INFO: Non-Case Information Sites (GEOTRACKER) Non-Case Information sites Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies OTHER OIL GAS: Other Oil & Gas Projects Sites (GEOTRACKER) Other Oil & Gas Projects sites Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC6637229.2s Page GR-32 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING PROD WATER PONDS: Produced Water Ponds Sites (GEOTRACKER) Produced water ponds sites Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies SAMPLING POINT: Sampling Point ? Public Sites (GEOTRACKER) Sampling point - public sites Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies WELL STIM PROJ: Well Stimulation Project (GEOTRACKER) Includes areas of groundwater monitoring plans, a depiction of the monitoring network, and the facilities, boundaries, and subsurface characteristics of the oilfield and the features (oil and gas wells, produced water ponds, UIC wells, water supply wells, etc?) being monitored Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/25/2021 Number of Days to Update: 83 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies MINES MRDS: Mineral Resources Data System Mineral Resources Data System Date of Government Version: 04/06/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/21/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/24/2019 Number of Days to Update: 3 Source: USGS Telephone: 703-648-6533 Last EDR Contact: 05/27/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies HWTS: Hazardous Waste Tracking System DTSC maintains the Hazardous Waste Tracking System that stores ID number information since the early 1980s and manifest data since 1993. The system collects both manifest copies from the generator and destination facility. Date of Government Version: 04/08/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/09/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/20/2021 Number of Days to Update: 11 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-324-2444 Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies PCS: Permit Compliance System PCS is a computerized management information system that contains data on National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit holding facilities. PCS tracks the permit, compliance, and enforcement status of NPDES facilities. Date of Government Version: 07/14/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/05/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/29/2011 Number of Days to Update: 55 Source: EPA, Office of Water Telephone: 202-564-2496 Last EDR Contact: 06/30/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC6637229.2s Page GR-33 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING PCS INACTIVE: Listing of Inactive PCS Permits An inactive permit is a facility that has shut down or is no longer discharging. Date of Government Version: 11/05/2014 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2015 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/06/2015 Number of Days to Update: 120 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-2496 Last EDR Contact: 06/30/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned PCS ENF: Enforcement data No description is available for this data Date of Government Version: 12/31/2014 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/05/2015 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2015 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-2497 Last EDR Contact: 06/30/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS EDR Exclusive Records EDR MGP: EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants The EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plant Database includes records of coal gas plants (manufactured gas plants) compiled by EDR’s researchers. Manufactured gas sites were used in the United States from the 1800’s to 1950’s to produce a gas that could be distributed and used as fuel. These plants used whale oil, rosin, coal, or a mixture of coal, oil, and water that also produced a significant amount of waste. Many of the byproducts of the gas production, such as coal tar (oily waste containing volatile and non-volatile chemicals), sludges, oils and other compounds are potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. The byproduct from this process was frequently disposed of directly at the plant site and can remain or spread slowly, serving as a continuous source of soil and groundwater contamination. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned EDR Hist Auto: EDR Exclusive Historical Auto Stations EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential gas station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR’s review was limited to those categories of sources that might, in EDR’s opinion, include gas station/filling station/service station establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to gas, gas station, gasoline station, filling station, auto, automobile repair, auto service station, service station, etc. This database falls within a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical Records", or HRHR. EDR’s HRHR effort presents unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental concerns, but may not show up in current government records searches. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies EDR Hist Cleaner: EDR Exclusive Historical Cleaners EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential dry cleaner sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR’s review was limited to those categories of sources that might, in EDR’s opinion, include dry cleaning establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to dry cleaners, cleaners, laundry, laundromat, cleaning/laundry, wash & dry etc. This database falls within a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical Records", or HRHR. EDR’s HRHR effort presents unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental concerns, but may not show up in current government records searches. TC6637229.2s Page GR-34 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives RGA LF: Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List The EDR Recovered Government Archive Landfill database provides a list of landfills derived from historical databases and includes many records that no longer appear in current government lists. Compiled from Records formerly available from the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery in California. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/01/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/13/2014 Number of Days to Update: 196 Source: Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 06/01/2012 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies RGA LUST: Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank The EDR Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank database provides a list of LUST incidents derived from historical databases and includes many records that no longer appear in current government lists. Compiled from Records formerly available from the State Water Resources Control Board in California. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/01/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/30/2013 Number of Days to Update: 182 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 06/01/2012 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies COUNTY RECORDS ALAMEDA COUNTY: CS ALAMEDA: Contaminated Sites A listing of contaminated sites overseen by the Toxic Release Program (oil and groundwater contamination from chemical releases and spills) and the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program (soil and ground water contamination from leaking petroleum USTs). Date of Government Version: 01/09/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/11/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/05/2019 Number of Days to Update: 53 Source: Alameda County Environmental Health Services Telephone: 510-567-6700 Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually UST ALAMEDA: Underground Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Alameda county. Date of Government Version: 03/17/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/18/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/25/2021 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: Alameda County Environmental Health Services Telephone: 510-567-6700 Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually AMADOR COUNTY: TC6637229.2s Page GR-35 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA AMADOR: CUPA Facility List Cupa Facility List Date of Government Version: 02/02/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/04/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/23/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Amador County Environmental Health Telephone: 209-223-6439 Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies BUTTE COUNTY: CUPA BUTTE: CUPA Facility Listing Cupa facility list. Date of Government Version: 04/21/2017 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/25/2017 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/09/2017 Number of Days to Update: 106 Source: Public Health Department Telephone: 530-538-7149 Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned CALVERAS COUNTY: CUPA CALVERAS: CUPA Facility Listing Cupa Facility Listing Date of Government Version: 06/15/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/16/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/02/2021 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Calveras County Environmental Health Telephone: 209-754-6399 Last EDR Contact: 06/15/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly COLUSA COUNTY: CUPA COLUSA: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list. Date of Government Version: 04/06/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/10/2020 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Health & Human Services Telephone: 530-458-0396 Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually CONTRA COSTA COUNTY: SL CONTRA COSTA: Site List List includes sites from the underground tank, hazardous waste generator and business plan/2185 programs. Date of Government Version: 04/21/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 81 Source: Contra Costa Health Services Department Telephone: 925-646-2286 Last EDR Contact: 07/20/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually DEL NORTE COUNTY: TC6637229.2s Page GR-36 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA DEL NORTE: CUPA Facility List Cupa Facility list Date of Government Version: 12/17/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/28/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/16/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Del Norte County Environmental Health Division Telephone: 707-465-0426 Last EDR Contact: 07/20/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies EL DORADO COUNTY: CUPA EL DORADO: CUPA Facility List CUPA facility list. Date of Government Version: 05/10/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/12/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/26/2021 Number of Days to Update: 75 Source: El Dorado County Environmental Management Department Telephone: 530-621-6623 Last EDR Contact: 07/20/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies FRESNO COUNTY: CUPA FRESNO: CUPA Resources List Certified Unified Program Agency. CUPA’s are responsible for implementing a unified hazardous materials and hazardous waste management regulatory program. The agency provides oversight of businesses that deal with hazardous materials, operate underground storage tanks or aboveground storage tanks. Date of Government Version: 01/14/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/05/2021 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: Dept. of Community Health Telephone: 559-445-3271 Last EDR Contact: 06/23/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually GLENN COUNTY: CUPA GLENN: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list Date of Government Version: 01/22/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/24/2018 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/14/2018 Number of Days to Update: 49 Source: Glenn County Air Pollution Control District Telephone: 830-934-6500 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HUMBOLDT COUNTY: CUPA HUMBOLDT: CUPA Facility List CUPA facility list. Date of Government Version: 05/17/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/18/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/20/2021 Number of Days to Update: 2 Source: Humboldt County Environmental Health Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually IMPERIAL COUNTY: TC6637229.2s Page GR-37 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA IMPERIAL: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list. Date of Government Version: 04/14/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/15/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/06/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: San Diego Border Field Office Telephone: 760-339-2777 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies INYO COUNTY: CUPA INYO: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list. Date of Government Version: 04/02/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/03/2018 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/14/2018 Number of Days to Update: 72 Source: Inyo County Environmental Health Services Telephone: 760-878-0238 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies KERN COUNTY: CUPA KERN: CUPA Facility List A listing of sites included in the Kern County Hazardous Material Business Plan. Date of Government Version: 04/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/30/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: Kern County Public Health Telephone: 661-321-3000 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies UST KERN: Underground Storage Tank Sites & Tank Listing Kern County Sites and Tanks Listing. Date of Government Version: 07/06/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/12/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/18/2021 Number of Days to Update: 6 Source: Kern County Environment Health Services Department Telephone: 661-862-8700 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly KINGS COUNTY: CUPA KINGS: CUPA Facility List A listing of sites included in the county’s Certified Unified Program Agency database. California’s Secretary for Environmental Protection established the unified hazardous materials and hazardous waste regulatory program as required by chapter 6.11 of the California Health and Safety Code. The Unified Program consolidates the administration, permits, inspections, and enforcement activities. Date of Government Version: 12/03/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Kings County Department of Public Health Telephone: 559-584-1411 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies LAKE COUNTY: TC6637229.2s Page GR-38 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA LAKE: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list Date of Government Version: 05/10/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/12/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/26/2021 Number of Days to Update: 75 Source: Lake County Environmental Health Telephone: 707-263-1164 Last EDR Contact: 07/06/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies LASSEN COUNTY: CUPA LASSEN: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list Date of Government Version: 07/31/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/21/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/09/2020 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: Lassen County Environmental Health Telephone: 530-251-8528 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies LOS ANGELES COUNTY: AOCONCERN: Key Areas of Concerns in Los Angeles County San Gabriel Valley areas where VOC contamination is at or above the MCL as designated by region 9 EPA office. Date of Government Version: 3/30/2009 Exide Site area is a cleanup plan of lead-impacted soil surrounding the former Exide Facility as designated by the DTSC. Date of Government Version: 7/17/2017 Date of Government Version: 03/30/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/31/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/23/2009 Number of Days to Update: 206 Source: N/A Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 06/08/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/27/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HMS LOS ANGELES: HMS: Street Number List Industrial Waste and Underground Storage Tank Sites. Date of Government Version: 04/08/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/13/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/28/2021 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: Department of Public Works Telephone: 626-458-3517 Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually LF LOS ANGELES: List of Solid Waste Facilities Solid Waste Facilities in Los Angeles County. Date of Government Version: 04/12/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/13/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/28/2021 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: La County Department of Public Works Telephone: 818-458-5185 Last EDR Contact: 07/09/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies LF LOS ANGELES CITY: City of Los Angeles Landfills Landfills owned and maintained by the City of Los Angeles. Date of Government Version: 01/01/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/18/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/10/2021 Number of Days to Update: 81 Source: Engineering & Construction Division Telephone: 213-473-7869 Last EDR Contact: 07/06/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC6637229.2s Page GR-39 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING LOS ANGELES AST: Active & Inactive AST Inventory A listing of active & inactive above ground petroleum storage tank site locations, located in the City of Los Angeles. Date of Government Version: 06/01/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/25/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/22/2019 Number of Days to Update: 58 Source: Los Angeles Fire Department Telephone: 213-978-3800 Last EDR Contact: 06/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies LOS ANGELES CO LF METHANE: Methane Producing Landfills This data was created on April 30, 2012 to represent known disposal sites in Los Angeles County that may produce and emanate methane gas. The shapefile contains disposal sites within Los Angeles County that once accepted degradable refuse material. Information used to create this data was extracted from a landfill survey performed by County Engineers (Major Waste System Map, 1973) as well as historical records from CalRecycle, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and Los Angeles County Department of Public Health Date of Government Version: 02/04/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/21/2021 Number of Days to Update: 5 Source: Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Telephone: 626-458-6973 Last EDR Contact: 07/12/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LOS ANGELES HM: Active & Inactive Hazardous Materials Inventory A listing of active & inactive hazardous materials facility locations, located in the City of Los Angeles. Date of Government Version: 04/19/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/17/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/28/2021 Number of Days to Update: 11 Source: Los Angeles Fire Department Telephone: 213-978-3800 Last EDR Contact: 06/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies LOS ANGELES UST: Active & Inactive UST Inventory A listing of active & inactive underground storage tank site locations and underground storage tank historical sites, located in the City of Los Angeles. Date of Government Version: 06/01/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/25/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/22/2019 Number of Days to Update: 58 Source: Los Angeles Fire Department Telephone: 213-978-3800 Last EDR Contact: 06/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies SITE MIT LOS ANGELES: Site Mitigation List Industrial sites that have had some sort of spill or complaint. Date of Government Version: 03/02/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/06/2021 Number of Days to Update: 81 Source: Community Health Services Telephone: 323-890-7806 Last EDR Contact: 07/09/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually UST EL SEGUNDO: City of El Segundo Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in El Segundo city. Date of Government Version: 01/21/2017 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/19/2017 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/10/2017 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: City of El Segundo Fire Department Telephone: 310-524-2236 Last EDR Contact: 07/06/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC6637229.2s Page GR-40 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING UST LONG BEACH: City of Long Beach Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in the city of Long Beach. Date of Government Version: 04/22/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/27/2019 Number of Days to Update: 65 Source: City of Long Beach Fire Department Telephone: 562-570-2563 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies UST TORRANCE: City of Torrance Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in the city of Torrance. Date of Government Version: 02/02/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/28/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/13/2021 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: City of Torrance Fire Department Telephone: 310-618-2973 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually MADERA COUNTY: CUPA MADERA: CUPA Facility List A listing of sites included in the county’s Certified Unified Program Agency database. California’s Secretary for Environmental Protection established the unified hazardous materials and hazardous waste regulatory program as required by chapter 6.11 of the California Health and Safety Code. The Unified Program consolidates the administration, permits, inspections, and enforcement activities. Date of Government Version: 08/10/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/12/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/23/2020 Number of Days to Update: 72 Source: Madera County Environmental Health Telephone: 559-675-7823 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies MARIN COUNTY: UST MARIN: Underground Storage Tank Sites Currently permitted USTs in Marin County. Date of Government Version: 09/26/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/04/2018 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/02/2018 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: Public Works Department Waste Management Telephone: 415-473-6647 Last EDR Contact: 06/22/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned MENDOCINO COUNTY: UST MENDOCINO: Mendocino County UST Database A listing of underground storage tank locations in Mendocino County. Date of Government Version: 03/24/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/07/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: 707-463-4466 Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually MERCED COUNTY: TC6637229.2s Page GR-41 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA MERCED: CUPA Facility List CUPA facility list. Date of Government Version: 05/13/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/14/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/26/2021 Number of Days to Update: 73 Source: Merced County Environmental Health Telephone: 209-381-1094 Last EDR Contact: 08/09/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies MONO COUNTY: CUPA MONO: CUPA Facility List CUPA Facility List Date of Government Version: 02/22/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/02/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Mono County Health Department Telephone: 760-932-5580 Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/06/3021 Data Release Frequency: Varies MONTEREY COUNTY: CUPA MONTEREY: CUPA Facility Listing CUPA Program listing from the Environmental Health Division. Date of Government Version: 06/23/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/23/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 1 Source: Monterey County Health Department Telephone: 831-796-1297 Last EDR Contact: 06/22/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies NAPA COUNTY: LUST NAPA: Sites With Reported Contamination A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Napa county. Date of Government Version: 01/09/2017 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/11/2017 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/02/2017 Number of Days to Update: 50 Source: Napa County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-253-4269 Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned UST NAPA: Closed and Operating Underground Storage Tank Sites Underground storage tank sites located in Napa county. Date of Government Version: 09/05/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/09/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/31/2019 Number of Days to Update: 52 Source: Napa County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-253-4269 Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned NEVADA COUNTY: CUPA NEVADA: CUPA Facility List CUPA facility list. TC6637229.2s Page GR-42 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 04/28/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/29/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/15/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: Community Development Agency Telephone: 530-265-1467 Last EDR Contact: 07/20/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies ORANGE COUNTY: IND_SITE ORANGE: List of Industrial Site Cleanups Petroleum and non-petroleum spills. Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/30/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: 714-834-3446 Last EDR Contact: 07/29/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually LUST ORANGE: List of Underground Storage Tank Cleanups Orange County Underground Storage Tank Cleanups (LUST). Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/03/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: 714-834-3446 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly UST ORANGE: List of Underground Storage Tank Facilities Orange County Underground Storage Tank Facilities (UST). Date of Government Version: 04/29/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/30/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 80 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: 714-834-3446 Last EDR Contact: 07/29/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PLACER COUNTY: MS PLACER: Master List of Facilities List includes aboveground tanks, underground tanks and cleanup sites. Date of Government Version: 05/25/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/26/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/01/2021 Number of Days to Update: 6 Source: Placer County Health and Human Services Telephone: 530-745-2363 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually PLUMAS COUNTY: CUPA PLUMAS: CUPA Facility List Plumas County CUPA Program facilities. Date of Government Version: 03/31/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/26/2019 Number of Days to Update: 64 Source: Plumas County Environmental Health Telephone: 530-283-6355 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies RIVERSIDE COUNTY: TC6637229.2s Page GR-43 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING LUST RIVERSIDE: Listing of Underground Tank Cleanup Sites Riverside County Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST). Date of Government Version: 06/29/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/30/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/14/2021 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 951-358-5055 Last EDR Contact: 06/08/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/27/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly UST RIVERSIDE: Underground Storage Tank Tank List Underground storage tank sites located in Riverside county. Date of Government Version: 06/29/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/30/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/14/2021 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 951-358-5055 Last EDR Contact: 06/07/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/27/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SACRAMENTO COUNTY: CS SACRAMENTO: Toxic Site Clean-Up List List of sites where unauthorized releases of potentially hazardous materials have occurred. Date of Government Version: 03/30/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/01/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/23/2021 Number of Days to Update: 83 Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management Telephone: 916-875-8406 Last EDR Contact: 07/01/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly ML SACRAMENTO: Master Hazardous Materials Facility List Any business that has hazardous materials on site - hazardous material storage sites, underground storage tanks, waste generators. Date of Government Version: 03/30/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/01/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/25/2021 Number of Days to Update: 85 Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management Telephone: 916-875-8406 Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN BENITO COUNTY: CUPA SAN BENITO: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list Date of Government Version: 04/28/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/29/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/03/2021 Number of Days to Update: 4 Source: San Benito County Environmental Health Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: PERMITS SAN BERNARDINO: Hazardous Material Permits This listing includes underground storage tanks, medical waste handlers/generators, hazardous materials handlers, hazardous waste generators, and waste oil generators/handlers. TC6637229.2s Page GR-44 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 05/19/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/19/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/07/2021 Number of Days to Update: 19 Source: San Bernardino County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division Telephone: 909-387-3041 Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN DIEGO COUNTY: HMMD SAN DIEGO: Hazardous Materials Management Division Database The database includes: HE58 - This report contains the business name, site address, business phone number, establishment ’H’ permit number, type of permit, and the business status. HE17 - In addition to providing the same information provided in the HE58 listing, HE17 provides inspection dates, violations received by the establishment, hazardous waste generated, the quantity, method of storage, treatment/disposal of waste and the hauler, and information on underground storage tanks. Unauthorized Release List - Includes a summary of environmental contamination cases in San Diego County (underground tank cases, non-tank cases, groundwater contamination, and soil contamination are included.) Date of Government Version: 05/28/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/28/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/20/2021 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: Hazardous Materials Management Division Telephone: 619-338-2268 Last EDR Contact: 05/28/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LF SAN DIEGO: Solid Waste Facilities San Diego County Solid Waste Facilities. Date of Government Version: 10/01/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/23/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/08/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: 619-338-2209 Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies SAN DIEGO CO LOP: Local Oversight Program Listing A listing of all LOP release sites that are or were under the County of San Diego’s jurisdiction. Included are closed or transferred cases, open cases, and cases that did not have a case type indicated. The cases without a case type are mostly complaints; however, some of them could be LOP cases. Date of Government Version: 07/14/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/16/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/29/2020 Number of Days to Update: 75 Source: Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 858-505-6874 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies SAN DIEGO CO SAM: Environmental Case Listing The listing contains all underground tank release cases and projects pertaining to properties contaminated with hazardous substances that are actively under review by the Site Assessment and Mitigation Program. Date of Government Version: 03/23/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: San Diego County Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 619-338-2371 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY: CUPA SAN FRANCISCO CO: CUPA Facility Listing Cupa facilities TC6637229.2s Page GR-45 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 05/06/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/23/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: San Francisco County Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 415-252-3896 Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies LUST SAN FRANCISCO: Local Oversite Facilities A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in San Francisco county. Date of Government Version: 09/19/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/19/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/29/2008 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: Department Of Public Health San Francisco County Telephone: 415-252-3920 Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned UST SAN FRANCISCO: Underground Storage Tank Information Underground storage tank sites located in San Francisco county. Date of Government Version: 05/06/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/23/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: 415-252-3920 Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY: UST SAN JOAQUIN: San Joaquin Co. UST A listing of underground storage tank locations in San Joaquin county. Date of Government Version: 06/22/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/26/2018 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/11/2018 Number of Days to Update: 15 Source: Environmental Health Department Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 06/08/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/27/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY: CUPA SAN LUIS OBISPO: CUPA Facility List Cupa Facility List. Date of Government Version: 05/07/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/11/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/14/2021 Number of Days to Update: 3 Source: San Luis Obispo County Public Health Department Telephone: 805-781-5596 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies SAN MATEO COUNTY: BI SAN MATEO: Business Inventory List includes Hazardous Materials Business Plan, hazardous waste generators, and underground storage tanks. Date of Government Version: 02/20/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/20/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/24/2020 Number of Days to Update: 64 Source: San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division Telephone: 650-363-1921 Last EDR Contact: 06/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually TC6637229.2s Page GR-46 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING LUST SAN MATEO: Fuel Leak List A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in San Mateo county. Date of Government Version: 03/29/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/29/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/29/2019 Number of Days to Update: 61 Source: San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division Telephone: 650-363-1921 Last EDR Contact: 06/02/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SANTA BARBARA COUNTY: CUPA SANTA BARBARA: CUPA Facility Listing CUPA Program Listing from the Environmental Health Services division. Date of Government Version: 09/08/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/09/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/07/2011 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Santa Barbara County Public Health Department Telephone: 805-686-8167 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SANTA CLARA COUNTY: CUPA SANTA CLARA: Cupa Facility List Cupa facility list Date of Government Version: 02/24/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 408-918-1973 Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies HIST LUST SANTA CLARA: HIST LUST - Fuel Leak Site Activity Report A listing of open and closed leaking underground storage tanks. This listing is no longer updated by the county. Leaking underground storage tanks are now handled by the Department of Environmental Health. Date of Government Version: 03/29/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/30/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/21/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Santa Clara Valley Water District Telephone: 408-265-2600 Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST SANTA CLARA: LOP Listing A listing of leaking underground storage tanks located in Santa Clara county. Date of Government Version: 03/03/2014 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/05/2014 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/18/2014 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 408-918-3417 Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/06/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SAN JOSE HAZMAT: Hazardous Material Facilities Hazardous material facilities, including underground storage tank sites. Date of Government Version: 11/03/2020 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/05/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/26/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: City of San Jose Fire Department Telephone: 408-535-7694 Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually SANTA CRUZ COUNTY: TC6637229.2s Page GR-47 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA SANTA CRUZ: CUPA Facility List CUPA facility listing. Date of Government Version: 01/21/2017 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/22/2017 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/23/2017 Number of Days to Update: 90 Source: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Telephone: 831-464-2761 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies SHASTA COUNTY: CUPA SHASTA: CUPA Facility List Cupa Facility List. Date of Government Version: 06/15/2017 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/19/2017 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/09/2017 Number of Days to Update: 51 Source: Shasta County Department of Resource Management Telephone: 530-225-5789 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies SOLANO COUNTY: LUST SOLANO: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Solano county. Date of Government Version: 06/04/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/06/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/13/2019 Number of Days to Update: 68 Source: Solano County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-784-6770 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned UST SOLANO: Underground Storage Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Solano county. Date of Government Version: 03/23/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/25/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/10/2021 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: Solano County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-784-6770 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/12/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SONOMA COUNTY: CUPA SONOMA: Cupa Facility List Cupa Facility list Date of Government Version: 07/02/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/06/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/14/2021 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: County of Sonoma Fire & Emergency Services Department Telephone: 707-565-1174 Last EDR Contact: 06/28/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies LUST SONOMA: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Sonoma county. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/01/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/23/2021 Number of Days to Update: 83 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: 707-565-6565 Last EDR Contact: 06/15/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/04/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly STANISLAUS COUNTY: TC6637229.2s Page GR-48 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA STANISLAUS: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list Date of Government Version: 05/14/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/17/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/03/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Stanislaus County Department of Ennvironmental Protection Telephone: 209-525-6751 Last EDR Contact: 07/06/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies SUTTER COUNTY: UST SUTTER: Underground Storage Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Sutter county. Date of Government Version: 05/25/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/26/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/18/2021 Number of Days to Update: 84 Source: Sutter County Environmental Health Services Telephone: 530-822-7500 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/13/2021 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually TEHAMA COUNTY: CUPA TEHAMA: CUPA Facility List Cupa facilities Date of Government Version: 01/13/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/14/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/06/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Tehama County Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 530-527-8020 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TRINITY COUNTY: CUPA TRINITY: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list Date of Government Version: 04/14/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/15/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/06/2021 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 760-352-0381 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TULARE COUNTY: CUPA TULARE: CUPA Facility List Cupa program facilities Date of Government Version: 04/26/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/28/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/13/2021 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: Tulare County Environmental Health Services Division Telephone: 559-624-7400 Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/15/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies TUOLUMNE COUNTY: TC6637229.2s Page GR-49 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA TUOLUMNE: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list Date of Government Version: 04/23/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/25/2018 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/25/2018 Number of Days to Update: 61 Source: Divison of Environmental Health Telephone: 209-533-5633 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies VENTURA COUNTY: BWT VENTURA: Business Plan, Hazardous Waste Producers, and Operating Underground Tanks The BWT list indicates by site address whether the Environmental Health Division has Business Plan (B), Waste Producer (W), and/or Underground Tank (T) information. Date of Government Version: 03/29/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 81 Source: Ventura County Environmental Health Division Telephone: 805-654-2813 Last EDR Contact: 07/15/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LF VENTURA: Inventory of Illegal Abandoned and Inactive Sites Ventura County Inventory of Closed, Illegal Abandoned, and Inactive Sites. Date of Government Version: 12/01/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/01/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/19/2012 Number of Days to Update: 49 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: 805-654-2813 Last EDR Contact: 06/22/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST VENTURA: Listing of Underground Tank Cleanup Sites Ventura County Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST). Date of Government Version: 05/29/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/24/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2008 Number of Days to Update: 37 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: 805-654-2813 Last EDR Contact: 08/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/22/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned MED WASTE VENTURA: Medical Waste Program List To protect public health and safety and the environment from potential exposure to disease causing agents, the Environmental Health Division Medical Waste Program regulates the generation, handling, storage, treatment and disposal of medical waste throughout the County. Date of Government Version: 03/29/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/21/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/23/2021 Number of Days to Update: 2 Source: Ventura County Resource Management Agency Telephone: 805-654-2813 Last EDR Contact: 07/15/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/01/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly UST VENTURA: Underground Tank Closed Sites List Ventura County Operating Underground Storage Tank Sites (UST)/Underground Tank Closed Sites List. Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/09/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/31/2021 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: 805-654-2813 Last EDR Contact: 06/04/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly YOLO COUNTY: TC6637229.2s Page GR-50 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING UST YOLO: Underground Storage Tank Comprehensive Facility Report Underground storage tank sites located in Yolo county. Date of Government Version: 03/26/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/01/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/23/2021 Number of Days to Update: 83 Source: Yolo County Department of Health Telephone: 530-666-8646 Last EDR Contact: 06/22/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/11/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually YUBA COUNTY: CUPA YUBA: CUPA Facility List CUPA facility listing for Yuba County. Date of Government Version: 04/21/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2021 Number of Days to Update: 20 Source: Yuba County Environmental Health Department Telephone: 530-749-7523 Last EDR Contact: 07/20/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Varies OTHER DATABASE(S) Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report. CT MANIFEST: Hazardous Waste Manifest Data Facility and manifest data. Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a tsd facility. Date of Government Version: 03/24/2021 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/11/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/28/2021 Number of Days to Update: 78 Source: Department of Energy & Environmental Protection Telephone: 860-424-3375 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/22/2021 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned NJ MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/10/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/16/2019 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: Department of Environmental Protection Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 07/09/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/18/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually NY MANIFEST: Facility and Manifest Data Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a TSD facility. Date of Government Version: 01/01/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/29/2020 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/10/2020 Number of Days to Update: 72 Source: Department of Environmental Conservation Telephone: 518-402-8651 Last EDR Contact: 07/29/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2021 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC6637229.2s Page GR-51 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING PA MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 06/30/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/19/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/10/2019 Number of Days to Update: 53 Source: Department of Environmental Protection Telephone: 717-783-8990 Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/25/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually RI MANIFEST: Manifest information Hazardous waste manifest information Date of Government Version: 12/31/2019 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/11/2021 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/24/2021 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 401-222-2797 Last EDR Contact: 08/11/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/29/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually WI MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 05/31/2018 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/19/2019 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/03/2019 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: Department of Natural Resources Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2021 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/20/2021 Data Release Frequency: Annually Oil/Gas Pipelines Source: Endeavor Business Media Petroleum Bundle (Crude Oil, Refined Products, Petrochemicals, Gas Liquids (LPG/NGL), and Specialty Gases (Miscellaneous)) N = Natural Gas Bundle (Natural Gas, Gas Liquids (LPG/NGL), and Specialty Gases (Miscellaneous)). This map includes information copyrighted by Endeavor Business Media. This information is provided on a best effort basis and Endeavor Business Media does not guarantee its accuracy nor warrant its fitness for any particular purpose. Such information has been reprinted with the permission of Endeavor Business Media. Electric Power Transmission Line Data Source: Endeavor Business Media This map includes information copyrighted by Endeavor Business Media. This information is provided on a best effort basis and Endeavor Business Media does not guarantee its accuracy nor warrant its fitness for any particular purpose. Such information has been reprinted with the permission of Endeavor Business Media. Sensitive Receptors: There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children. While the location of all sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities - schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers, and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located. AHA Hospitals: Source: American Hospital Association, Inc. Telephone: 312-280-5991 The database includes a listing of hospitals based on the American Hospital Association’s annual survey of hospitals. Medical Centers: Provider of Services Listing Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Telephone: 410-786-3000 A listing of hospitals with Medicare provider number, produced by Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services, a federal agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Nursing Homes Source: National Institutes of Health Telephone: 301-594-6248 Information on Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes in the United States. Public Schools Source: National Center for Education Statistics Telephone: 202-502-7300 The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on elementary and secondary public education in the United States. It is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts, which contains data that are comparable across all states. TC6637229.2s Page GR-52 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Private Schools Source: National Center for Education Statistics Telephone: 202-502-7300 The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on private school locations in the United States. Daycare Centers: Licensed Facilities Source: Department of Social Services Telephone: 916-657-4041 Flood Zone Data: This data was obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. It includes the National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) which incorporates Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) data and Q3 data from FEMA in areas not covered by NFHL. Source: FEMA Telephone: 877-336-2627 Date of Government Version: 2003, 2015 NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2002, 2005 and 2010 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. State Wetlands Data: Wetland Inventory Source: Department of Fish and Wildlife Telephone: 916-445-0411 Current USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Source: U.S. Geological Survey STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION © 2015 TomTom North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material. TC6637229.2s Page GR-53 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING SANBORN FIRE INSURANCE MAPS - no coverage letter Certified Sanborn® Map Report Inquiry Number: 6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor Shelton, CT 06484 Toll Free: 800.352.0050 www.edrnet.com Palm Desert Parcel APN 694-120-028 Palm Desert, CA 92260 August 26, 2021 6637229.5 Certified Sanborn® Map Report Certified Sanborn Results: Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. page- The Sanborn Library includes more than 1.2 million fire insurance maps from Sanborn, Bromley, Perris & Browne, Hopkins, Barlow and others which track historical property usage in approximately 12,000 American cities and towns. Collections searched: Library of Congress University Publications of America EDR Private Collection The Sanborn Library LLC Since 1866™ Limited Permission To Make Copies Sanborn® Library search results Contact:EDR Inquiry # Site Name: Client Name: Certification # PO # Project 08/26/21 APN 694-120-028 Palm Desert Parcel SCS Engineers 8799 Balboa Avenue Palm Desert, CA 92260 6637229.5 San Diego, CA 92123 Allison Oneal The Sanborn Library has been searched by EDR and maps covering the target property location as provided by SCS Engineers were identified for the years listed below. The Sanborn Library is the largest, most complete collection of fire insurance maps. The collection includes maps from Sanborn, Bromley, Perris & Browne, Hopkins, Barlow, and others. Only Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) is authorized to grant rights for commercial reproduction of maps by the Sanborn Library LLC, the copyright holder for the collection. Results can be authenticated by visiting www.edrnet.com/sanborn. The Sanborn Library is continually enhanced with newly identified map archives. This report accesses all maps in the collection as of the day this report was generated. D361-4FD6-BEA7 01219277.03 UNMAPPED PROPERTY Palm Desert Parcel This report certifies that the complete holdings of the Sanborn Library, LLC collection have been searched based on client supplied target property information, and fire insurance maps covering the target property were not found. Certification #: D361-4FD6-BEA7 SCS Engineers (the client) is permitted to make up to FIVE photocopies of this Sanborn Map transmittal and each fire insurance map accompanying this report solely for the limited use of its customer. No one other than the client is authorized to make copies. Upon request made directly to an EDR Account Executive, the client may be permitted to make a limited number of additional photocopies. This permission is conditioned upon compliance by the client, its customer and their agents with EDR's copyright policy; a copy of which is available upon request. This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice. Copyright 2021 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. 6637229 5 2 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH RECORDS FOR THE SITE VICINITY EPO-159 (REV 10/17) For our office locations call us at (888) 722-4234 or visit our website at www.rivcoeh.org Environmental Protection & Oversight Division Hazardous Materials Management Branch REQUEST FOR RECORDS Requests for review of records are processed on a first come, first serve basis and the processing time is approximately 2-4 weeks. As required by California Public Records Act Section 6250 et seq., a response will be given within ten (10) business days to confirm receipt of your request. Pursuant to California Government Code, Section 6254 (f), records of pending investigations and informant’s names, addresses, and telephone numbers, will not be released. For access to electronic records available online, visit the Public Information section at www.rivcoeh.org for more details. REQUESTOR INFORMATION NAME: DATE OF REQUEST: BUSINESS NAME (IF ANY): RETURN LEGAL MAILING ADDRESS: CITY: STATE: ZIP: PHONE: The following information is required. List each street address separately. SITE STREET ADDRESS (NO APNs) CITY 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Requests must be made in writing and submitted by mail, email, or in person to the following office: 4065 County Circle Drive, Room 104, Riverside, CA 92503 Phone: (951) 358-5055 Email: DEHRecordsMgmt@rivco.org Mailing Address: P.O. Box 7909, Riverside, CA 92513-7909 Allison O'Neal 8/26/2021 SCS Engineers 8799 Balboa Avenue, #290 San Diego CA 92123 3 APN 694-120-028 APe APN 694-120-031 Riversde APN 694-120-029 Rivrside APN 694-190-055 Rierside APN 694-190-087 Rierside Rivrside Rivrside 858-287-0277 Palm Desert Palm Desert Palm Desert Palm Desert Palm Desert County of Riverside DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH KEITH JONES, DIRECTOR 2275 S. Main Street, Ste. 204 Corona, CA 92882 (951) 273-9143 (951) 520-8319 Fax 800 S. Sanderson Avenue, Ste. 102 Hemet, CA 92545 (951) 766-6524 (951) 791-1778 Fax 47950 Arabia Street, Ste. A Indio, CA 92201 (760) 863-8976 (760) 863-8303 Fax 4065 County Circle Dr., Ste. 104 Riverside, CA 92503 (951)358-5055 (951) 358-5342 Fax 3880 Lemon Street, Ste. 200 Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 955-8980 (951) 955-8988 Fax Department Web Site – www.rivcoeh.org Incomplete Records Request Notice September 1, 2021 Request No: 52215 SCS Engineers 8799 Balboa Ave., #290 San Diego, CA 92123 Attn: Allison O’Neal Request Date: 8/26/2021 Re: APNS: 694-120-028, 694-120-031, 694-120-029, 694-190-055, 694- 190-087 We have received your request for records however a search of our records cannot be conducted based on the information provided. Please reference a specific site address(s) of inquiry and resubmit the records request. The Hazardous Materials Management Division is unable to provide information about sites based on APN’s or similar geographic site data. Please direct questions or correspondence to: Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Management Division 4065 County Circle Dr., Rm. 104 P.O. Box 7909 Riverside, CA 92513-7909 Attention: Records Management Telephone: 951-358-5055 Fax: 951-358-5017 You may also visit our website at www.rivcoeh.org Note: Records for disclosure information of the cities of Corona 951-736-2220, and Riverside 951-826-5737 will need to be directed to the City Fire Department. County of Riverside DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH KEITH JONES, DIRECTOR 2275 S. Main Street, Ste. 204 Corona, CA 92882 (951) 273-9143 (951) 520-8319 Fax 800 S. Sanderson Avenue, Ste. 102 Hemet, CA 92545 (951) 766-6524 (951) 791-1778 Fax 47950 Arabia Street, Ste. A Indio, CA 92201 (760) 863-8976 (760) 863-8303 Fax 4065 County Circle Dr., Ste. 104 Riverside, CA 92503 (951)358-5055 (951) 358-5342 Fax 3880 Lemon Street, Ste. 200 Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 955-8980 (951) 955-8988 Fax Department Web Site – www.rivcoeh.org - September 1, 2021 Due to the ongoing COVID-19 national state of emergency, and Orders by the Riverside County Health Officer, the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health has closed all of our offices to the public and requested that our employees work remotely to support you. Records Request services will continue to be available but please be patient with us and understand that staff is limited. Responses will be provided temporarily via email and will resume to response via US Mail once the pandemic has rectified. During this time records will be provided in four different ways after fees are paid. 1) Email – Only small files no larger than ¼ inch qualify 2) US Mail – files that are appropriately sized for mailing will qualify 3) USPS / FedEx – larger files that are unable to be mailed via US Mail will be shipped at the requestor’s expense 4) Pick Up – By appointment only For questions please call (951) 358-5055 or visit our website for information www.rivcoeh.org Environmental Protection & Oversight Division Hazardous Materials Management Branch Attn: Records Management P.O. Box 7909 Riverside, CA 92513-7909 Ph: (951) 358-5055 Fax (951) 358-5342 *additional fees may include costs for appt. cancellation/no show, time per service, scan/fax/mail of documents, cd/dvd RÉSUMÉS SCS Resume – O’Neal www.scsengineers.com 1 ALLISON O’NEAL Education BS – Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, 2018 Specialty Certifications 40-Hour OSHA EPA-Approved Hazardous Waste Operations & Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) Training Professional Affiliation San Diego Association of Geologists – Member Professional Experience Ms. O’Neal is an environmental professional with specialized experience in site assessment, subsurface investigation, and due diligence reporting. She is responsible for performing site reconnaissance, reviewing regulatory agency records and historical documents, interpreting evidence related to historical land use, monitoring soil management, collecting data (soil, groundwater, soil vapor sampling, etc.), and generating maps for soil boring/well logs, groundwater gradients, and hydrocarbon iso-concentrations. She also oversees drilling and groundwater monitoring well installations, writes reports for Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs), and ensures that groundwater monitoring reports meet regulatory agency standards. Her project experience is summarized below. Mission Village Shopping Center, Former Dry Cleaning Facility, San Diego, CA. Ms. O’Neal conducted soil and groundwater assessments to determine the attenuation of a plume of constituents of concern while meeting requirements of the Department of Environmental Health. She oversaw six well installations that included properly documenting well log data. She also assisted with the technical writing of the Subsurface Assessment Report, and created groundwater gradient and constituents of concern iso-concentration maps. Villa de Vida Project, Special Needs Residential Community, Phase I and II ESA, San Diego, CA. Ms. O’Neal performed a Phase I ESA on the property and analyzed the status of potential Recognized Environmental Concerns (RECs), such as a release from on-site underground storage tanks (USTs) (the tanks were used when the site was a Public Works Road Station). The Phase I ESA recommended a subsurface site assessment because of the close proximity to the former USTs. During the Phase II investigation, soil samples detected elevated concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons. Ms. O’Neal oversaw excavation of the contaminated soil and collected soil confirmation samples at the edges of the excavation. Former Country Hills Dry Cleaners, In Situ Chemical Reduction Feasibility Study, Diamond Bar, CA. Ms. O’Neal oversaw drilling and direct push injection of the appropriate amendments to remediate constituents of concern associated with a former dry cleaner at the site. She created SCS Resume – O’Neal www.scsengineers.com 2 boring logs, collected waste characterization samples, and helped manage site safety. In addition, she assisted in obtaining the regulatory permits required for the site from the City of Diamond Bar. Community HousingWorks San Marcos, Affordable Housing Development, Phase I and II ESAs, San Marcos, CA. Ms. O’Neal performed a Phase I ESA on the property and analyzed the status of RECs, such as a release from a dry cleaning facility adjacent to the site. After completing the Phase I ESA, SCS recommended a subsurface assessment regarding a historically documented release of constituents of concern. During the Phase II investigation, Ms. O’Neal organized the utility mark-out, mapped boring locations, and oversaw the installation and retrieval of soil vapor samples that were collected. She wrote technical reports for both phases of the environmental investigation. Clairemont Village Shopping Center, Phase I ESA, San Diego, CA. Ms. O’Neal completed a Phase I ESA investigation that included extensive historical research on several automotive repair facilities adjacent to the site, and historic releases from a former gas station and dry cleaning facility also on site. In addition, the client required asbestos, radon, lead-based paint, and mold inspections at the property, using their specific guidance. After completing the Phase I ESA, SCS recommended additional soil vapor sampling in the areas of the former dry cleaner and gas station. SCS Resume – Montague www.scsengineers.com 1 LUKE MONTAGUE, PG Education MS – Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, 2004 BS – Geology, University of California, Santa Barbara, 1998 Professional Licenses Professional Geologist – California (No. 8071) General Building Contractor, B Classification – California (No. 981618) Specialty Certifications Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) 40-Hour Training Real Estate Entitlement, Development, and Design, University of San Diego, 2010 Real Estate Finance, Investments, and Development, University of San Diego, 2010 Professional Experience Mr. Montague is a Professional Geologist (PG) and licensed contractor with a Masters in Environmental Science and Management, with 15 years of experience in environmental consulting, and 4 years of experience in general contracting and development for commercial and residential developments. He has performed and reviewed over 500 Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs), and has completed and overseen a large amount of Phase II subsurface investigations, Human Health Risk Assessments (HHRAs), Remedial Action Plans (RAPs), and site remediation activities. Luke also has two additional years of experience performing other consulting services including geotechnical investigations, asbestos and lead-based paint (LBP) surveys, and asbestos air monitoring. His development, general contracting, and property and asset management experience includes managing construction through lease-up; lease administration and property operations and maintenance; contract procurement and administration; oversight of subcontractors and staff; and interfacing with clients, owners, tenants, and regulatory agencies. Mr. Montague’s project experience is summarized below. Manchester Financial Group, Redevelopment of Eight City Blocks for the Manchester Pacific Gateway Project, San Diego, CA. As Project Manager, he oversaw assessment and construction remedial planning involving soil excavation and export of up to 800,000 cubic yards of soil on land owned by the Department of the Navy. Soil export is to accommodate the construction of two levels of subterranean parking across eight city blocks located adjacent to San Diego Bay, which are currently being redeveloped into office, hotel, retail, park, and other uses. Remedial construction activities are anticipated to be completed by mid-2019. Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians, Due Diligence Services for Tribal Properties, Valley Center, CA. Mr. Montague has served as a Project Manager on Phase I and II ESAs supporting the due diligence process of various properties for the Tribe. He also served as an expert witness in tribal court Luke Montague, PG SCS Resume – Montague www.scsengineers.com 2 regarding the Tribe’s oversight of a property within the Reservation, in support of protecting Tribal resources that included soil and groundwater. Frontera Real Estate, Redevelopment of Former County Road Station with Self-Storage Facility, Spring Valley, CA. Mr. Montague served as Project Manager overseeing the assessment, remedial planning, and remediation consisting of oversight, segregation, and on-site burial of residual petroleum hydrocarbon (PHC)-impacted soils from a former unauthorized release of gasoline from underground storage tanks (USTs) previously operated by a County Road Station. Brixton Capital, Gasoline Service Station Redevelopment with Retail Buildings, Chula Vista, CA. As Project Manager, Mr. Montague oversaw the assessment, remedial planning, and remediation consisting of oversight, segregation, and on-site burial of residual PHC-impacted soils from a former gasoline service station release property redeveloped with new retail buildings. RD Brown Company, Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Case Assessment and Remediation, City of Imperial, CA. As Project Manager, Mr. Montague oversaw several on- and off- site soil, soil vapor, and groundwater assessments, and is currently overseeing ongoing remediation and monitoring of a proposed senior living facility at a former gasoline service station. San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA), Environmental Consulting Services, San Diego, CA. As Project Manager, Mr. Montague completed several ESAs and subsurface assessments to assist the SDCWA in obtaining easements required to complete the Carlsbad Desalination Project. City of Encinitas, Site Investigation and Planning, Encinitas Community Park, Encinitas, CA. As Project Geologist, Mr. Montague provided oversight for mitigation and monitoring activities involving pesticides in soil from the Hall Property, which consists of 43 acres of coastal bluff that was formerly used as a nursery and was redeveloped into a community park. Under the oversight of the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health (DEH), work consisted of Phase II ESAs, remedial planning and implementation of on-site reuse/burial of 45,000 cubic yards of pesticide-impacted soil in a Soil Management Zone, and creation of a land-use covenant. SCS received an award for this project with the Industrial Environmental Association (IEA). Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), Assessment and Remediation, Various Locations in Los Angeles County, CA. Mr. Montague managed and performed the environmental characterization and cleanup of various proposed school redevelopment projects overseen by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) that required Phase I ESAs, preliminary environmental assessments or subsurface investigations, and preparation and implementation of removal action work plans to obtain “no further action” status prior to redevelopment. City Heights Revitalization Corporation, Brownfields Assessment and Remediation, City Heights, CA. Mr. Montague managed a subsurface investigation for an entire Brownfields city block planned for redevelopment. The investigation included extensive drilling, trenching, and hand auguring to estimate the volume of lead- and hydrocarbon-impacted soil from residual contamination from a former service station and from lead-based paint. Work also included negotiation of cleanup levels with the local regulatory agency. Casmalia Steering Committee, Remedial Investigation, Casmalia, CA. Mr. Montague managed and performed soil vapor sampling at the Casmalia Hazardous Waste Management Facility, a Class I hazardous waste site, for a remedial investigation and feasibility study of soil gas impacts submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Soil gas impacts to ecological receptors were assessed, considering specific regulatory guidance, including the joint DTSC and Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) Advisory on Active Soil Gas Investigations. SCS Resume – Montague www.scsengineers.com 3 The Boeing Company, UST Assessment, Long Beach, CA. Mr. Montague performed subsurface vapor intrusion to indoor air analysis at a former aeronautics manufacturing facility. Soil, soil vapor, and sub-slab soil vapor extraction (SVE) assessments were conducted to determine appropriate corrective actions associated with former solvent USTs. Work was performed under the corrective action consent agreement with the DTSC. Trihydro Corporation, Soil Vapor Sampling, Hooven, OH. Mr. Montague performed SVE sampling from indoor air probes and outdoor multi-level probes at residences in Hooven, OH. This project focused on helping to evaluate the potential for subsurface vapor intrusion to indoor air from volatilization of PHCs in groundwater, or light, non-aqueous phase liquid petroleum product originating from an adjacent former fuel and asphalt petroleum refinery. The vapor intrusion pathway was evaluated based on a request by the U.S. EPA, Region V, and was performed in accordance with the EPA-issued document, Draft Guidance for Evaluating the Vapor Intrusion to Indoor Air Pathway from Groundwater and Soil, 2002. CSK Auto, Phase I ESAs, Various Sites in the Western U.S. Mr. Montague conducted Phase I ESAs, subsurface investigations, and geotechnical investigations for the development of auto parts chain stores in the western U.S. Work included site investigations, drilling operations, and records research. AT&T/Gianni & Associates, Phase I ESAs and Geotechnical Investigations, San Diego, CA. Mr. Montague completed Phase I ESAs, transaction screen assessments, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reports, asbestos surveys, and geotechnical investigations involving the development of wireless communications sites. Ford Mance Company, Construction and Property Management, Mixed-Use Building at 111 Chesterfield Drive, Encinitas, CA. Mr. Montague served as Project Manager during the development and construction phases of a 2-story, Type V, 3,874-square-foot mixed-use building with subterranean parking. Responsibilities included managing all phases of construction and shell and tenant improvements, and assisting in construction supervision activities and lease-up. Development activities included oversight and collaboration of architectural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing plans preparation, assisting with design research and decisions, obtaining various permits, and preparing cost and budgets. After construction, Mr. Montague also served as the Property and Asset Manager. Ford Mance Company, Construction and Property Management, Del Norte Medical Plaza, Carlsbad, CA. Mr. Montague served as Project Manager during the development and construction of a 2-story, Type II, medical building with subterranean parking. Responsibilities included contracting out all phases of shell construction of 22,000 square feet of rentable area for medical use, collaborative oversight concerning architectural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing plans preparation, assisting with design research and decision-making, obtaining various permits, and preparing costs and budgets. After construction, he also served as Property and Asset Manager. California Department of Fish and Game, Carpinteria Creek Watershed Plan, Carpinteria, CA. Mr. Montague collaborated with local and state government representatives, and various stakeholders, to aid in preparing the Carpinteria Creek Watershed Plan under the Cachuma Resource Conservation District for the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). Work consisted of research, meetings, various field assessments, report writing, and map creation. The Plan served as an amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coast Region. SCS Resume – Montague www.scsengineers.com 4 Affordable Housing San Diego Housing Commission, Phase I and II ESAs, San Diego, CA. As Project Manager, Mr. Montague oversaw the assessment of several sites that were redeveloped for affordable housing purposes. Community HousingWorks, Phase I and II ESAs and Soil Mitigation, San Diego, CA. Mr. Montague was the Project Manager for several affordable housing developments, including working on San Diego’s first LGBT senior housing project, where lead-bearing soil was safely buried or reused under building improvements during grading activities. Mercy Housing Corporation, Phase I and II ESAs and Soil Mitigation, San Diego, CA. Mr. Montague managed the environmental assessment and cleanup portion of the redevelopment of a creek-front Poway site with a former LUST case into Villa de Vida, a home for adults with developmental disabilities. SCS investigated, identified, and remediated left-in-place impacted soil from several former LUSTs, as well as from lead-bearing soil. BRIDGE Housing, Phase I and II Site Assessments, Southern California. Mr. Montague has managed several affordable housing projects that have included subsurface assessment and soil characterization, with soil mitigation planning and implementation to be completed at a later date. 2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP Palm Villas at Millenium - Palm Desert, CA Appendix I PROJECT-SPECIFIC WQMP SUMMARY DATA FORM Project-Specific WQMP Summary Data Form Applicant Information Name and Title Mike Sutton, P.E. – Civil Engineer Company Kimley-Horn and Associates Phone (760) 565-5103 Email Mike.sutton@kimley-horn.com Project Information Project Name (as shown on project application/project-specific WQMP) Palm Villas at Millenium Street Address N/A Nearest Cross Streets Gerald Ford Dr and Dinah Shore Dr Municipality (City or Unincorporated County) City of Palm Desert Zip Code 92211 Tract Number(s) and/or Assessor Parcel Number(s) Parcel 8 - Parcel Map No. 36792 PMB 239 / 9-15 Other (other information to help identify location of project) Indicate type of project. Priority Development Projects (Use an "X" in cell preceding project type): SF hillside residence; impervious area ≥ 10,000 sq. ft.; Slope ≥ 25% SF hillside residence; impervious area ≥ 10,000 sq. ft.; Slope ≥ 10% & erosive soils Commercial or Industrial ≥ 100,000 sq. ft. Automotive repair shop Retail Gasoline Outlet disturbing > 5,000 sq. ft. Restaurant disturbing > 5,000 sq. ft. X Home subdivision ≥ 10 housing units X Parking lot ≥ 5,000 sq. ft. or ≥ 25 parking spaces Date Project-Specific WQMP Submitted Size of Project Area (nearest 0.1 acre) 10.4 acre Will the project replace more than 50% of the impervious surfaces on an existing developed site? Yes Project Area managed with LID/Site Design BMPs (nearest 0.1 acre) 10.4 acre Are Treatment Control BMPs required? Yes Is the project subject to onsite retention by ordinance or policy? Yes Did the project meet the 100% LID/Site Design Measurable Goal? Yes Name of the entity that will implement, operate, and maintain the post-construction BMPs To be provided Contact Name To be provided Street or Mailing Address To be provided City To be provided Zip Code To be provided Phone To be provided Space Below for Use by City/County Staff Only Preceding Information Verified by (consistent with information in project-specific WQMP) Name: Date: Date Project-Specific WQMP Approved: Data Entered by Name: Date: Other Comments Palm Villas at Millenium Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report Parcel 8 – Parcel Map No. 36792 P MB 239/9-15 NE corner of Gerald Ford Dr and Dinah Shore Dr Palm Desert, CA 92211 Prepared for: Palm Communities 100 Pacifica, Suite 203 Irvine, CA 92618 Prepared By: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 3880 Lemon Street, Suite 420 Riverside, CA 92501 June 2022 Palm Villas at Millenium Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report INTRODUCTION The scope of the Project is to complete a preliminary hydrology and hydraulic analysis for the storm drain improvements associated with the proposed residential development in Palm Desert, CA. The Project is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Gerald Ford Dr, and Dinah Shore Dr. The Project consist of a multi-family planned residential development. The site will propose 10 multi-family buildings, uncovered parking spaces, recreational park, trash enclosure, utility improvements, and retention basins . The total project limits of disturbance makes up approximately 10.4 acres. Figure 1: Project Location P a g e | 2 HYDR OLOG Y The preliminary hydrology and hydraulic analyses were completed in accordance with the Riverside County Hydrology Manual. A rational method analysis in accordance with the Manual was completed to calculate the peak discharges for proposed project conditions. Per City standards, proposed developments are required to retain each storm event up to the 100 - year, 24-hour, therefore an existing conditions analysis was not completed for this preliminary analysis. A review of the Design-Phase Geotechnical Investigation Reports dated November 16, 2021 prepared by Petra Geosciences, Inc found that subsurface soils at the site consisted of hydrologic soil group A which have high infiltration capacities . Infiltration rates for the site of 9.18 in/hr were calculated using a factor of s afety of 3. Based on historical data and guidance from the City of Palm Desert, the project will be using a 2 in/hr infiltration rate. Per the Riverside County Hydrology Manual, antecedent moisture condition (AMC) of 2 was used for the 100-year storm event. Land use for proposed drainage areas were selected based on actual imperviousness for each drainage area. Storm depths from NOAA 14 were used for the analyses. The Advance Engineering Software (AES) Hydrosoft package was used to complete the rational me thod analysis. Proposed Conditions The project improvements include 10 multi-family buildings, uncovered parking spaces, recreational park, trash enclosure, utility improvements, and retention basins . Under proposed conditions, two drainage areas (A and B) have been proposed . Drainage area A consists of the southern lots, and driveway, northeast parking lot, laundry and community buildings, and hardscape/landscape improvements on the east corner of th e site. Drainage area A will discharge to the proposed retention basin #1 through surface plow and pipe inlets. Drainage area B consists of the western proposed driveway and street connection to Dinah Shore Dr., buildings, hardscape, and landscape on the n orthwest corner of the property, and the proposed playground. Drainage area B will discharge to the retention basin #2 via sheet flow and pipe inlets. As-builts for the existing storm drain can be found in Appendix C. Rational peak flow rates were used to size pipes. Table 1 includes a summary of the proposed conditions peak flow rate calculations. Refer to Appendix A for full calculations. P a g e | 3 Table 1 – Proposed Conditions Summary Drainage Area Area (ac) Imperviousness (%) Time of Concentration (min) 100-year, 24- hour flow (cfs) A 5.91 73 15 11.94 B 4.52 92 13 10.24 Total 10.43 81 - 22.18 HYDR AULICS The project proposes to retain up to the 100 -year, 24-hour storm event in each basin. The unit hydrograph for each drainage area was developed using CivilD software using the Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method. Each hydrograph was then import ed to a Pondpack model to complete the routing calculations. Geometry of each basin was developed based on preliminary grading information. The infiltration rate per the historical data was also utilized in the model to account for the volume losses due to infiltration during the storm event. Table 2 includes a summary of the proposed basin sizing. Refer to Appendix B for full calculations. Table 2 – Detention Summary Drainage Area Required Basin Volume (cf) Maximum basin storage (cf) 100-year Water Surface Elevation (ft) 100-year overflow (cfs) A 3,433 39,994 170.8 0 B 2,625 30,093 172.2 0 CONCLUSION As a result of the preliminary hydrology and hydraulic analysis, the proposed Project demonstrates compliance with the following: 1. Sizing of the Project retention systems to the extent necessary to retain all flows up to the 100-year, 24-hour storm event. Additional analyses will be required during final design for the project and will include: 1. Catch basin capacity calculations 2. Storm drain capacity calculations 3. Velocity dissipation calculations Palm Villas at Milleniu m Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report APPENDIX A : P ROPOSED RATIONAL METHOD CALCULATIONS GERALD FORD DR.TECHNOLOGY DR.DINAH SHORE DR.PHASE I PHASE I I A 5.91 B 4.52 NORTH © E NRI EENGIANOI LA SEFSRPD EERRSIGETNo. C57667 O OIFFCAL RT S ATEO N PROJECT LOCATION LEGEND X XXX ____________________________________________________________________________ **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM BASED ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFC&WCD) 1978 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2011 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) (Rational Tabling Version 18.0) Release Date: 07/01/2011 License ID 1499 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * Palm Villas at Millenium * * 100 yr, 24 hr storm Proposed Conditions * * Kimley-Horn * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: MILLPROP.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 14:54 12/16/2021 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 8.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 10-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.530 10-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 0.695 100-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.230 100-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.470 SLOPE OF 10-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE = 0.4404112 SLOPE OF 100-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE = 0.4393556 COMPUTED RAINFALL INTENSITY DATA: STORM EVENT = 100.00 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.470 SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE = 0.4394 RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: COMPUTE CONFLUENCE VALUES ACCORDING TO RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL AND IGNORE OTHER CONFLUENCE COMBINATIONS FOR DOWNSTREAM ANALYSES *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ============================================================================ ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS CONDOMINIUM TC = K*[(LENGTH**3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**.2 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 725.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 178.70 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 173.40 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 5.30 TC = 0.359*[( 725.00**3)/( 5.30)]**.2 = 13.387 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.841 CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7427 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A" SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.24 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.85 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.24 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 4.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ============================================================================ ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS CONDOMINIUM TC = K*[(LENGTH**3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**.2 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 962.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 178.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 171.40 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 7.10 TC = 0.359*[( 962.00**3)/( 7.10)]**.2 = 14.962 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.706 CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7389 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A" SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.94 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.97 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.94 ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 6.0 TC(MIN.) = 14.96 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 11.94 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS Palm Villas at Millenium Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report APPENDIX B: R ETENTION CALCULATIONS U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 2018, Version 9.0 Study date 12/16/21 File: MILL124100.out ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC & WCD Manual date - April 1978 Program License Serial Number 6443 --------------------------------------------------------------------- English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format --------------------------------------------------------------------- Palm Villas at Millenium 100-Year, 24-Hour Proposed Unit Hydrograph Kimley-Horn -------------------------------------------------------------------- Drainage Area = 4.85(Ac.) = 0.008 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area for Depth-Area Areal Adjustment = 4.85(Ac.) = 0.008 Sq. Mi. USER Entry of lag time in hours Lag time = 0.178 Hr. Lag time = 10.68 Min. 25% of lag time = 2.67 Min. 40% of lag time = 4.27 Min. Unit time = 5.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(s) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.)[1] Rainfall(In)[2] Weighting[1*2] 4.85 1.13 5.48 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.)[1] Rainfall(In)[2] Weighting[1*2] 4.85 4.51 21.87 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 100.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.130(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.510(In) Point rain (area averaged) = 4.510(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 % Adjusted average point rain = 4.510(In) Sub-Area Data: Area(Ac.) Runoff Index Impervious % 4.850 32.00 0.700 Total Area Entered = 4.85(Ac.) RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F AMC2 AMC-3 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec.) (In/Hr) 32.0 52.0 0.552 0.700 0.204 1.000 0.204 Sum (F) = 0.204 Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.204 Minimum soil loss rate ((In/Hr)) = 0.102 (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.340 --------------------------------------------------------------------- U n i t H y d r o g r a p h DESERT S-Curve -------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Hydrograph Data --------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit time period Time % of lag Distribution Unit Hydrograph (hrs) Graph % (CFS) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.083 46.816 3.554 0.174 2 0.167 93.633 23.188 1.133 3 0.250 140.449 30.745 1.503 4 0.333 187.266 14.015 0.685 5 0.417 234.082 8.124 0.397 6 0.500 280.899 5.355 0.262 7 0.583 327.715 3.899 0.191 8 0.667 374.532 2.731 0.134 9 0.750 421.348 2.149 0.105 10 0.833 468.165 1.633 0.080 11 0.917 514.981 1.268 0.062 12 1.000 561.798 0.917 0.045 13 1.083 608.614 0.575 0.028 14 1.167 655.431 0.531 0.026 15 1.250 702.247 0.561 0.027 16 1.333 749.064 0.415 0.020 17 1.417 795.880 0.340 0.017 Sum = 100.000 Sum= 4.888 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The following loss rate calculations reflect use of the minimum calculated loss rate subtracted from the Storm Rain to produce the maximum Effective Rain value Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max | Low (In/Hr) 1 0.08 0.07 0.036 ( 0.362) 0.012 0.024 2 0.17 0.07 0.036 ( 0.360) 0.012 0.024 3 0.25 0.07 0.036 ( 0.359) 0.012 0.024 4 0.33 0.10 0.054 ( 0.358) 0.018 0.036 5 0.42 0.10 0.054 ( 0.356) 0.018 0.036 6 0.50 0.10 0.054 ( 0.355) 0.018 0.036 7 0.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.353) 0.018 0.036 8 0.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.352) 0.018 0.036 9 0.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.351) 0.018 0.036 10 0.83 0.13 0.072 ( 0.349) 0.025 0.048 11 0.92 0.13 0.072 ( 0.348) 0.025 0.048 12 1.00 0.13 0.072 ( 0.347) 0.025 0.048 13 1.08 0.10 0.054 ( 0.345) 0.018 0.036 14 1.17 0.10 0.054 ( 0.344) 0.018 0.036 15 1.25 0.10 0.054 ( 0.342) 0.018 0.036 16 1.33 0.10 0.054 ( 0.341) 0.018 0.036 17 1.42 0.10 0.054 ( 0.340) 0.018 0.036 18 1.50 0.10 0.054 ( 0.338) 0.018 0.036 19 1.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.337) 0.018 0.036 20 1.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.336) 0.018 0.036 21 1.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.334) 0.018 0.036 22 1.83 0.13 0.072 ( 0.333) 0.025 0.048 23 1.92 0.13 0.072 ( 0.332) 0.025 0.048 24 2.00 0.13 0.072 ( 0.330) 0.025 0.048 25 2.08 0.13 0.072 ( 0.329) 0.025 0.048 26 2.17 0.13 0.072 ( 0.328) 0.025 0.048 27 2.25 0.13 0.072 ( 0.326) 0.025 0.048 28 2.33 0.13 0.072 ( 0.325) 0.025 0.048 29 2.42 0.13 0.072 ( 0.324) 0.025 0.048 30 2.50 0.13 0.072 ( 0.322) 0.025 0.048 31 2.58 0.17 0.090 ( 0.321) 0.031 0.060 32 2.67 0.17 0.090 ( 0.320) 0.031 0.060 33 2.75 0.17 0.090 ( 0.318) 0.031 0.060 34 2.83 0.17 0.090 ( 0.317) 0.031 0.060 35 2.92 0.17 0.090 ( 0.316) 0.031 0.060 36 3.00 0.17 0.090 ( 0.314) 0.031 0.060 37 3.08 0.17 0.090 ( 0.313) 0.031 0.060 38 3.17 0.17 0.090 ( 0.312) 0.031 0.060 39 3.25 0.17 0.090 ( 0.311) 0.031 0.060 40 3.33 0.17 0.090 ( 0.309) 0.031 0.060 41 3.42 0.17 0.090 ( 0.308) 0.031 0.060 42 3.50 0.17 0.090 ( 0.307) 0.031 0.060 43 3.58 0.17 0.090 ( 0.305) 0.031 0.060 44 3.67 0.17 0.090 ( 0.304) 0.031 0.060 45 3.75 0.17 0.090 ( 0.303) 0.031 0.060 46 3.83 0.20 0.108 ( 0.302) 0.037 0.071 47 3.92 0.20 0.108 ( 0.300) 0.037 0.071 48 4.00 0.20 0.108 ( 0.299) 0.037 0.071 49 4.08 0.20 0.108 ( 0.298) 0.037 0.071 50 4.17 0.20 0.108 ( 0.296) 0.037 0.071 51 4.25 0.20 0.108 ( 0.295) 0.037 0.071 52 4.33 0.23 0.126 ( 0.294) 0.043 0.083 53 4.42 0.23 0.126 ( 0.293) 0.043 0.083 54 4.50 0.23 0.126 ( 0.291) 0.043 0.083 55 4.58 0.23 0.126 ( 0.290) 0.043 0.083 56 4.67 0.23 0.126 ( 0.289) 0.043 0.083 57 4.75 0.23 0.126 ( 0.288) 0.043 0.083 58 4.83 0.27 0.144 ( 0.286) 0.049 0.095 59 4.92 0.27 0.144 ( 0.285) 0.049 0.095 60 5.00 0.27 0.144 ( 0.284) 0.049 0.095 61 5.08 0.20 0.108 ( 0.283) 0.037 0.071 62 5.17 0.20 0.108 ( 0.282) 0.037 0.071 63 5.25 0.20 0.108 ( 0.280) 0.037 0.071 64 5.33 0.23 0.126 ( 0.279) 0.043 0.083 65 5.42 0.23 0.126 ( 0.278) 0.043 0.083 66 5.50 0.23 0.126 ( 0.277) 0.043 0.083 67 5.58 0.27 0.144 ( 0.275) 0.049 0.095 68 5.67 0.27 0.144 ( 0.274) 0.049 0.095 69 5.75 0.27 0.144 ( 0.273) 0.049 0.095 70 5.83 0.27 0.144 ( 0.272) 0.049 0.095 71 5.92 0.27 0.144 ( 0.271) 0.049 0.095 72 6.00 0.27 0.144 ( 0.269) 0.049 0.095 73 6.08 0.30 0.162 ( 0.268) 0.055 0.107 74 6.17 0.30 0.162 ( 0.267) 0.055 0.107 75 6.25 0.30 0.162 ( 0.266) 0.055 0.107 76 6.33 0.30 0.162 ( 0.265) 0.055 0.107 77 6.42 0.30 0.162 ( 0.263) 0.055 0.107 78 6.50 0.30 0.162 ( 0.262) 0.055 0.107 79 6.58 0.33 0.180 ( 0.261) 0.061 0.119 80 6.67 0.33 0.180 ( 0.260) 0.061 0.119 81 6.75 0.33 0.180 ( 0.259) 0.061 0.119 82 6.83 0.33 0.180 ( 0.258) 0.061 0.119 83 6.92 0.33 0.180 ( 0.256) 0.061 0.119 84 7.00 0.33 0.180 ( 0.255) 0.061 0.119 85 7.08 0.33 0.180 ( 0.254) 0.061 0.119 86 7.17 0.33 0.180 ( 0.253) 0.061 0.119 87 7.25 0.33 0.180 ( 0.252) 0.061 0.119 88 7.33 0.37 0.198 ( 0.251) 0.067 0.131 89 7.42 0.37 0.198 ( 0.249) 0.067 0.131 90 7.50 0.37 0.198 ( 0.248) 0.067 0.131 91 7.58 0.40 0.216 ( 0.247) 0.074 0.143 92 7.67 0.40 0.216 ( 0.246) 0.074 0.143 93 7.75 0.40 0.216 ( 0.245) 0.074 0.143 94 7.83 0.43 0.235 ( 0.244) 0.080 0.155 95 7.92 0.43 0.235 ( 0.243) 0.080 0.155 96 8.00 0.43 0.235 ( 0.242) 0.080 0.155 97 8.08 0.50 0.271 ( 0.240) 0.092 0.179 98 8.17 0.50 0.271 ( 0.239) 0.092 0.179 99 8.25 0.50 0.271 ( 0.238) 0.092 0.179 100 8.33 0.50 0.271 ( 0.237) 0.092 0.179 101 8.42 0.50 0.271 ( 0.236) 0.092 0.179 102 8.50 0.50 0.271 ( 0.235) 0.092 0.179 103 8.58 0.53 0.289 ( 0.234) 0.098 0.191 104 8.67 0.53 0.289 ( 0.233) 0.098 0.191 105 8.75 0.53 0.289 ( 0.232) 0.098 0.191 106 8.83 0.57 0.307 ( 0.230) 0.104 0.202 107 8.92 0.57 0.307 ( 0.229) 0.104 0.202 108 9.00 0.57 0.307 ( 0.228) 0.104 0.202 109 9.08 0.63 0.343 ( 0.227) 0.117 0.226 110 9.17 0.63 0.343 ( 0.226) 0.117 0.226 111 9.25 0.63 0.343 ( 0.225) 0.117 0.226 112 9.33 0.67 0.361 ( 0.224) 0.123 0.238 113 9.42 0.67 0.361 ( 0.223) 0.123 0.238 114 9.50 0.67 0.361 ( 0.222) 0.123 0.238 115 9.58 0.70 0.379 ( 0.221) 0.129 0.250 116 9.67 0.70 0.379 ( 0.220) 0.129 0.250 117 9.75 0.70 0.379 ( 0.219) 0.129 0.250 118 9.83 0.73 0.397 ( 0.218) 0.135 0.262 119 9.92 0.73 0.397 ( 0.217) 0.135 0.262 120 10.00 0.73 0.397 ( 0.216) 0.135 0.262 121 10.08 0.50 0.271 ( 0.214) 0.092 0.179 122 10.17 0.50 0.271 ( 0.213) 0.092 0.179 123 10.25 0.50 0.271 ( 0.212) 0.092 0.179 124 10.33 0.50 0.271 ( 0.211) 0.092 0.179 125 10.42 0.50 0.271 ( 0.210) 0.092 0.179 126 10.50 0.50 0.271 ( 0.209) 0.092 0.179 127 10.58 0.67 0.361 ( 0.208) 0.123 0.238 128 10.67 0.67 0.361 ( 0.207) 0.123 0.238 129 10.75 0.67 0.361 ( 0.206) 0.123 0.238 130 10.83 0.67 0.361 ( 0.205) 0.123 0.238 131 10.92 0.67 0.361 ( 0.204) 0.123 0.238 132 11.00 0.67 0.361 ( 0.203) 0.123 0.238 133 11.08 0.63 0.343 ( 0.202) 0.117 0.226 134 11.17 0.63 0.343 ( 0.201) 0.117 0.226 135 11.25 0.63 0.343 ( 0.200) 0.117 0.226 136 11.33 0.63 0.343 ( 0.199) 0.117 0.226 137 11.42 0.63 0.343 ( 0.198) 0.117 0.226 138 11.50 0.63 0.343 ( 0.197) 0.117 0.226 139 11.58 0.57 0.307 ( 0.196) 0.104 0.202 140 11.67 0.57 0.307 ( 0.195) 0.104 0.202 141 11.75 0.57 0.307 ( 0.194) 0.104 0.202 142 11.83 0.60 0.325 ( 0.193) 0.110 0.214 143 11.92 0.60 0.325 ( 0.192) 0.110 0.214 144 12.00 0.60 0.325 ( 0.191) 0.110 0.214 145 12.08 0.83 0.451 ( 0.191) 0.153 0.298 146 12.17 0.83 0.451 ( 0.190) 0.153 0.298 147 12.25 0.83 0.451 ( 0.189) 0.153 0.298 148 12.33 0.87 0.469 ( 0.188) 0.159 0.310 149 12.42 0.87 0.469 ( 0.187) 0.159 0.310 150 12.50 0.87 0.469 ( 0.186) 0.159 0.310 151 12.58 0.93 0.505 ( 0.185) 0.172 0.333 152 12.67 0.93 0.505 ( 0.184) 0.172 0.333 153 12.75 0.93 0.505 ( 0.183) 0.172 0.333 154 12.83 0.97 0.523 ( 0.182) 0.178 0.345 155 12.92 0.97 0.523 ( 0.181) 0.178 0.345 156 13.00 0.97 0.523 ( 0.180) 0.178 0.345 157 13.08 1.13 0.613 0.179 ( 0.209) 0.434 158 13.17 1.13 0.613 0.178 ( 0.209) 0.435 159 13.25 1.13 0.613 0.178 ( 0.209) 0.436 160 13.33 1.13 0.613 0.177 ( 0.209) 0.437 161 13.42 1.13 0.613 0.176 ( 0.209) 0.438 162 13.50 1.13 0.613 0.175 ( 0.209) 0.439 163 13.58 0.77 0.415 ( 0.174) 0.141 0.274 164 13.67 0.77 0.415 ( 0.173) 0.141 0.274 165 13.75 0.77 0.415 ( 0.172) 0.141 0.274 166 13.83 0.77 0.415 ( 0.171) 0.141 0.274 167 13.92 0.77 0.415 ( 0.170) 0.141 0.274 168 14.00 0.77 0.415 ( 0.170) 0.141 0.274 169 14.08 0.90 0.487 ( 0.169) 0.166 0.321 170 14.17 0.90 0.487 ( 0.168) 0.166 0.321 171 14.25 0.90 0.487 ( 0.167) 0.166 0.321 172 14.33 0.87 0.469 ( 0.166) 0.159 0.310 173 14.42 0.87 0.469 ( 0.165) 0.159 0.310 174 14.50 0.87 0.469 ( 0.164) 0.159 0.310 175 14.58 0.87 0.469 ( 0.164) 0.159 0.310 176 14.67 0.87 0.469 ( 0.163) 0.159 0.310 177 14.75 0.87 0.469 ( 0.162) 0.159 0.310 178 14.83 0.83 0.451 ( 0.161) 0.153 0.298 179 14.92 0.83 0.451 ( 0.160) 0.153 0.298 180 15.00 0.83 0.451 ( 0.159) 0.153 0.298 181 15.08 0.80 0.433 ( 0.159) 0.147 0.286 182 15.17 0.80 0.433 ( 0.158) 0.147 0.286 183 15.25 0.80 0.433 ( 0.157) 0.147 0.286 184 15.33 0.77 0.415 ( 0.156) 0.141 0.274 185 15.42 0.77 0.415 ( 0.155) 0.141 0.274 186 15.50 0.77 0.415 ( 0.155) 0.141 0.274 187 15.58 0.63 0.343 ( 0.154) 0.117 0.226 188 15.67 0.63 0.343 ( 0.153) 0.117 0.226 189 15.75 0.63 0.343 ( 0.152) 0.117 0.226 190 15.83 0.63 0.343 ( 0.151) 0.117 0.226 191 15.92 0.63 0.343 ( 0.151) 0.117 0.226 192 16.00 0.63 0.343 ( 0.150) 0.117 0.226 193 16.08 0.13 0.072 ( 0.149) 0.025 0.048 194 16.17 0.13 0.072 ( 0.148) 0.025 0.048 195 16.25 0.13 0.072 ( 0.148) 0.025 0.048 196 16.33 0.13 0.072 ( 0.147) 0.025 0.048 197 16.42 0.13 0.072 ( 0.146) 0.025 0.048 198 16.50 0.13 0.072 ( 0.145) 0.025 0.048 199 16.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.145) 0.018 0.036 200 16.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.144) 0.018 0.036 201 16.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.143) 0.018 0.036 202 16.83 0.10 0.054 ( 0.142) 0.018 0.036 203 16.92 0.10 0.054 ( 0.142) 0.018 0.036 204 17.00 0.10 0.054 ( 0.141) 0.018 0.036 205 17.08 0.17 0.090 ( 0.140) 0.031 0.060 206 17.17 0.17 0.090 ( 0.140) 0.031 0.060 207 17.25 0.17 0.090 ( 0.139) 0.031 0.060 208 17.33 0.17 0.090 ( 0.138) 0.031 0.060 209 17.42 0.17 0.090 ( 0.137) 0.031 0.060 210 17.50 0.17 0.090 ( 0.137) 0.031 0.060 211 17.58 0.17 0.090 ( 0.136) 0.031 0.060 212 17.67 0.17 0.090 ( 0.135) 0.031 0.060 213 17.75 0.17 0.090 ( 0.135) 0.031 0.060 214 17.83 0.13 0.072 ( 0.134) 0.025 0.048 215 17.92 0.13 0.072 ( 0.133) 0.025 0.048 216 18.00 0.13 0.072 ( 0.133) 0.025 0.048 217 18.08 0.13 0.072 ( 0.132) 0.025 0.048 218 18.17 0.13 0.072 ( 0.131) 0.025 0.048 219 18.25 0.13 0.072 ( 0.131) 0.025 0.048 220 18.33 0.13 0.072 ( 0.130) 0.025 0.048 221 18.42 0.13 0.072 ( 0.130) 0.025 0.048 222 18.50 0.13 0.072 ( 0.129) 0.025 0.048 223 18.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.128) 0.018 0.036 224 18.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.128) 0.018 0.036 225 18.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.127) 0.018 0.036 226 18.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.126) 0.012 0.024 227 18.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.126) 0.012 0.024 228 19.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.125) 0.012 0.024 229 19.08 0.10 0.054 ( 0.125) 0.018 0.036 230 19.17 0.10 0.054 ( 0.124) 0.018 0.036 231 19.25 0.10 0.054 ( 0.123) 0.018 0.036 232 19.33 0.13 0.072 ( 0.123) 0.025 0.048 233 19.42 0.13 0.072 ( 0.122) 0.025 0.048 234 19.50 0.13 0.072 ( 0.122) 0.025 0.048 235 19.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.121) 0.018 0.036 236 19.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.121) 0.018 0.036 237 19.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.120) 0.018 0.036 238 19.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.120) 0.012 0.024 239 19.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.119) 0.012 0.024 240 20.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.119) 0.012 0.024 241 20.08 0.10 0.054 ( 0.118) 0.018 0.036 242 20.17 0.10 0.054 ( 0.117) 0.018 0.036 243 20.25 0.10 0.054 ( 0.117) 0.018 0.036 244 20.33 0.10 0.054 ( 0.116) 0.018 0.036 245 20.42 0.10 0.054 ( 0.116) 0.018 0.036 246 20.50 0.10 0.054 ( 0.115) 0.018 0.036 247 20.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.115) 0.018 0.036 248 20.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.114) 0.018 0.036 249 20.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.114) 0.018 0.036 250 20.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.114) 0.012 0.024 251 20.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.113) 0.012 0.024 252 21.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.113) 0.012 0.024 253 21.08 0.10 0.054 ( 0.112) 0.018 0.036 254 21.17 0.10 0.054 ( 0.112) 0.018 0.036 255 21.25 0.10 0.054 ( 0.111) 0.018 0.036 256 21.33 0.07 0.036 ( 0.111) 0.012 0.024 257 21.42 0.07 0.036 ( 0.110) 0.012 0.024 258 21.50 0.07 0.036 ( 0.110) 0.012 0.024 259 21.58 0.10 0.054 ( 0.110) 0.018 0.036 260 21.67 0.10 0.054 ( 0.109) 0.018 0.036 261 21.75 0.10 0.054 ( 0.109) 0.018 0.036 262 21.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.108) 0.012 0.024 263 21.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.108) 0.012 0.024 264 22.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.108) 0.012 0.024 265 22.08 0.10 0.054 ( 0.107) 0.018 0.036 266 22.17 0.10 0.054 ( 0.107) 0.018 0.036 267 22.25 0.10 0.054 ( 0.107) 0.018 0.036 268 22.33 0.07 0.036 ( 0.106) 0.012 0.024 269 22.42 0.07 0.036 ( 0.106) 0.012 0.024 270 22.50 0.07 0.036 ( 0.106) 0.012 0.024 271 22.58 0.07 0.036 ( 0.105) 0.012 0.024 272 22.67 0.07 0.036 ( 0.105) 0.012 0.024 273 22.75 0.07 0.036 ( 0.105) 0.012 0.024 274 22.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.105) 0.012 0.024 275 22.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.104) 0.012 0.024 276 23.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.104) 0.012 0.024 277 23.08 0.07 0.036 ( 0.104) 0.012 0.024 278 23.17 0.07 0.036 ( 0.104) 0.012 0.024 279 23.25 0.07 0.036 ( 0.103) 0.012 0.024 280 23.33 0.07 0.036 ( 0.103) 0.012 0.024 281 23.42 0.07 0.036 ( 0.103) 0.012 0.024 282 23.50 0.07 0.036 ( 0.103) 0.012 0.024 283 23.58 0.07 0.036 ( 0.103) 0.012 0.024 284 23.67 0.07 0.036 ( 0.102) 0.012 0.024 285 23.75 0.07 0.036 ( 0.102) 0.012 0.024 286 23.83 0.07 0.036 ( 0.102) 0.012 0.024 287 23.92 0.07 0.036 ( 0.102) 0.012 0.024 288 24.00 0.07 0.036 ( 0.102) 0.012 0.024 (Loss Rate Not Used) Sum = 100.0 Sum = 35.9 Flood volume = Effective rainfall 2.99(In) times area 4.8(Ac.)/[(In)/(Ft.)] = 1.2(Ac.Ft) Total soil loss = 1.52(In) Total soil loss = 0.613(Ac.Ft) Total rainfall = 4.51(In) Flood volume = 52681.2 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 26718.9 Cubic Feet -------------------------------------------------------------------- Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 2.061(CFS) -------------------------------------------------------------------- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 24 - H O U R S T O R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h -------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrograph in 5 Minute intervals ((CFS)) -------------------------------------------------------------------- Time(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 0+ 5 0.0000 0.00 Q | | | | 0+10 0.0002 0.03 Q | | | | 0+15 0.0007 0.07 Q | | | | 0+20 0.0013 0.09 Q | | | | 0+25 0.0020 0.11 Q | | | | 0+30 0.0029 0.13 Q | | | | 0+35 0.0039 0.15 Q | | | | 0+40 0.0050 0.15 Q | | | | 0+45 0.0061 0.16 Q | | | | 0+50 0.0072 0.16 Q | | | | 0+55 0.0085 0.18 Q | | | | 1+ 0 0.0099 0.20 Q | | | | 1+ 5 0.0113 0.21 Q | | | | 1+10 0.0127 0.20 Q | | | | 1+15 0.0140 0.19 Q | | | | 1+20 0.0153 0.18 Q | | | | 1+25 0.0165 0.18 Q | | | | 1+30 0.0177 0.18 Q | | | | 1+35 0.0190 0.18 Q | | | | 1+40 0.0202 0.18 Q | | | | 1+45 0.0214 0.18 Q | | | | 1+50 0.0226 0.18 Q | | | | 1+55 0.0240 0.19 Q | | | | 2+ 0 0.0254 0.21 Q | | | | 2+ 5 0.0269 0.22 Q | | | | 2+10 0.0284 0.22 Q | | | | 2+15 0.0300 0.22 Q | | | | 2+20 0.0315 0.23 QV | | | | 2+25 0.0331 0.23 QV | | | | 2+30 0.0347 0.23 QV | | | | 2+35 0.0363 0.23 QV | | | | 2+40 0.0380 0.25 QV | | | | 2+45 0.0398 0.26 |Q | | | | 2+50 0.0417 0.27 |Q | | | | 2+55 0.0436 0.28 |Q | | | | 3+ 0 0.0455 0.28 |Q | | | | 3+ 5 0.0475 0.28 |Q | | | | 3+10 0.0495 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+15 0.0515 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+20 0.0534 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+25 0.0554 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+30 0.0574 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+35 0.0594 0.29 |Q | | | | 3+40 0.0614 0.29 |QV | | | | 3+45 0.0634 0.29 |QV | | | | 3+50 0.0654 0.29 |QV | | | | 3+55 0.0676 0.31 |QV | | | | 4+ 0 0.0698 0.32 |QV | | | | 4+ 5 0.0721 0.33 |QV | | | | 4+10 0.0744 0.34 |QV | | | | 4+15 0.0768 0.34 |QV | | | | 4+20 0.0791 0.34 |QV | | | | 4+25 0.0816 0.36 |QV | | | | 4+30 0.0842 0.38 |QV | | | | 4+35 0.0869 0.39 |QV | | | | 4+40 0.0896 0.39 |QV | | | | 4+45 0.0923 0.40 |Q V | | | | 4+50 0.0951 0.40 |Q V | | | | 4+55 0.0980 0.42 |Q V | | | | 5+ 0 0.1010 0.44 |Q V | | | | 5+ 5 0.1040 0.44 |Q V | | | | 5+10 0.1069 0.42 |Q V | | | | 5+15 0.1096 0.39 |Q V | | | | 5+20 0.1122 0.38 |Q V | | | | 5+25 0.1149 0.38 |Q V | | | | 5+30 0.1176 0.40 |Q V | | | | 5+35 0.1204 0.40 |Q V | | | | 5+40 0.1233 0.42 |Q V | | | | 5+45 0.1263 0.44 |Q V | | | | 5+50 0.1293 0.45 |Q V | | | | 5+55 0.1325 0.45 |Q V | | | | 6+ 0 0.1356 0.46 |Q V | | | | 6+ 5 0.1388 0.46 |Q V | | | | 6+10 0.1421 0.48 |Q V | | | | 6+15 0.1455 0.50 |Q V | | | | 6+20 0.1489 0.50 | Q V | | | | 6+25 0.1524 0.51 | Q V | | | | 6+30 0.1560 0.51 | Q V | | | | 6+35 0.1595 0.52 | Q V | | | | 6+40 0.1632 0.53 | Q V | | | | 6+45 0.1670 0.55 | Q V | | | | 6+50 0.1709 0.56 | Q V | | | | 6+55 0.1748 0.57 | Q V | | | | 7+ 0 0.1788 0.57 | Q V | | | | 7+ 5 0.1827 0.57 | Q V | | | | 7+10 0.1867 0.58 | Q V | | | | 7+15 0.1907 0.58 | Q V | | | | 7+20 0.1947 0.58 | Q V | | | | 7+25 0.1988 0.60 | Q V | | | | 7+30 0.2030 0.61 | Q V | | | | 7+35 0.2073 0.62 | Q V | | | | 7+40 0.2118 0.64 | Q V | | | | 7+45 0.2163 0.66 | Q V | | | | 7+50 0.2210 0.68 | Q V | | | | 7+55 0.2258 0.70 | Q V | | | | 8+ 0 0.2308 0.72 | Q V | | | | 8+ 5 0.2358 0.74 | Q V | | | | 8+10 0.2411 0.77 | Q V | | | | 8+15 0.2467 0.81 | Q V | | | | 8+20 0.2524 0.83 | Q V | | | | 8+25 0.2582 0.84 | Q V | | | | 8+30 0.2641 0.85 | Q V | | | | 8+35 0.2700 0.86 | Q V | | | | 8+40 0.2760 0.88 | Q V| | | | 8+45 0.2822 0.90 | Q V| | | | 8+50 0.2885 0.91 | Q V| | | | 8+55 0.2949 0.93 | Q V| | | | 9+ 0 0.3015 0.95 | Q V| | | | 9+ 5 0.3081 0.97 | Q V | | | 9+10 0.3150 1.00 | Q V | | | 9+15 0.3222 1.04 | Q V | | | 9+20 0.3296 1.07 | Q V | | | 9+25 0.3371 1.09 | Q |V | | | 9+30 0.3448 1.12 | Q |V | | | 9+35 0.3526 1.13 | Q |V | | | 9+40 0.3605 1.16 | Q |V | | | 9+45 0.3687 1.18 | Q | V | | | 9+50 0.3769 1.20 | Q | V | | | 9+55 0.3853 1.22 | Q | V | | | 10+ 0 0.3938 1.24 | Q | V | | | 10+ 5 0.4023 1.24 | Q | V | | | 10+10 0.4103 1.15 | Q | V | | | 10+15 0.4174 1.03 | Q | V | | | 10+20 0.4241 0.98 | Q | V | | | 10+25 0.4307 0.95 | Q | V | | | 10+30 0.4371 0.93 | Q | V | | | 10+35 0.4434 0.93 | Q | V | | | 10+40 0.4502 0.98 | Q | V | | | 10+45 0.4575 1.06 | Q | V | | | 10+50 0.4651 1.10 | Q | V | | | 10+55 0.4728 1.12 | Q | V | | | 11+ 0 0.4806 1.13 | Q | V | | | 11+ 5 0.4884 1.14 | Q | V | | | 11+10 0.4962 1.13 | Q | V | | | 11+15 0.5039 1.12 | Q | V | | | 11+20 0.5115 1.11 | Q | V | | | 11+25 0.5192 1.11 | Q | V | | | 11+30 0.5268 1.11 | Q | V | | | 11+35 0.5344 1.10 | Q | V | | | 11+40 0.5418 1.08 | Q | V | | | 11+45 0.5490 1.04 | Q | V | | | 11+50 0.5560 1.03 | Q | V | | | 11+55 0.5631 1.03 | Q | V | | | 12+ 0 0.5703 1.04 | Q | V | | | 12+ 5 0.5776 1.06 | Q | V| | | 12+10 0.5856 1.16 | Q | V| | | 12+15 0.5944 1.28 | Q | V| | | 12+20 0.6036 1.34 | Q | V| | | 12+25 0.6132 1.39 | Q | V | | 12+30 0.6230 1.43 | Q | V | | 12+35 0.6331 1.46 | Q | V | | 12+40 0.6434 1.50 | Q | |V | | 12+45 0.6540 1.55 | Q | |V | | 12+50 0.6649 1.57 | Q | |V | | 12+55 0.6759 1.60 | Q | | V | | 13+ 0 0.6871 1.63 | Q | | V | | 13+ 5 0.6986 1.66 | Q | | V | | 13+10 0.7108 1.78 | Q | | V | | 13+15 0.7240 1.92 | Q | | V | | 13+20 0.7377 1.99 | Q | | V | | 13+25 0.7517 2.03 | Q | | V | | 13+30 0.7659 2.06 | Q | | V | | 13+35 0.7801 2.05 | Q | | V | | 13+40 0.7931 1.88 | Q | | V | | 13+45 0.8044 1.65 | Q | | V | | 13+50 0.8150 1.54 | Q | | V | | 13+55 0.8253 1.49 | Q | | V | | 14+ 0 0.8353 1.45 | Q | | V | | 14+ 5 0.8451 1.43 | Q | | V | | 14+10 0.8552 1.46 | Q | | V | | 14+15 0.8656 1.52 | Q | | V | | 14+20 0.8762 1.54 | Q | | V | | 14+25 0.8868 1.54 | Q | | V| | 14+30 0.8973 1.52 | Q | | V| | 14+35 0.9078 1.52 | Q | | V | 14+40 0.9182 1.52 | Q | | V | 14+45 0.9286 1.51 | Q | | V | 14+50 0.9390 1.51 | Q | | |V | 14+55 0.9493 1.50 | Q | | |V | 15+ 0 0.9595 1.48 | Q | | |V | 15+ 5 0.9696 1.47 | Q | | | V | 15+10 0.9796 1.45 | Q | | | V | 15+15 0.9895 1.43 | Q | | | V | 15+20 0.9992 1.42 | Q | | | V | 15+25 1.0089 1.40 | Q | | | V | 15+30 1.0184 1.38 | Q | | | V | 15+35 1.0277 1.36 | Q | | | V | 15+40 1.0366 1.30 | Q | | | V | 15+45 1.0450 1.22 | Q | | | V | 15+50 1.0532 1.18 | Q | | | V | 15+55 1.0612 1.16 | Q | | | V | 16+ 0 1.0691 1.15 | Q | | | V | 16+ 5 1.0767 1.11 | Q | | | V | 16+10 1.0828 0.89 | Q | | | V | 16+15 1.0871 0.62 | Q | | | V | 16+20 1.0905 0.49 |Q | | | V | 16+25 1.0934 0.42 |Q | | | V | 16+30 1.0960 0.37 |Q | | | V | 16+35 1.0982 0.33 |Q | | | V | 16+40 1.1003 0.29 |Q | | | V | 16+45 1.1020 0.26 |Q | | | V | 16+50 1.1036 0.23 Q | | | V | 16+55 1.1051 0.22 Q | | | V | 17+ 0 1.1065 0.20 Q | | | V | 17+ 5 1.1079 0.20 Q | | | V | 17+10 1.1094 0.22 Q | | | V | 17+15 1.1112 0.25 |Q | | | V | 17+20 1.1130 0.26 |Q | | | V | 17+25 1.1148 0.27 |Q | | | V | 17+30 1.1167 0.28 |Q | | | V | 17+35 1.1187 0.28 |Q | | | V | 17+40 1.1206 0.28 |Q | | | V | 17+45 1.1226 0.28 |Q | | | V | 17+50 1.1245 0.28 |Q | | | V | 17+55 1.1264 0.27 |Q | | | V | 18+ 0 1.1281 0.25 |Q | | | V | 18+ 5 1.1298 0.25 Q | | | V | 18+10 1.1315 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+15 1.1332 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+20 1.1348 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+25 1.1365 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+30 1.1381 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+35 1.1397 0.23 Q | | | V | 18+40 1.1412 0.22 Q | | | V | 18+45 1.1426 0.20 Q | | | V | 18+50 1.1439 0.19 Q | | | V | 18+55 1.1451 0.17 Q | | | V | 19+ 0 1.1461 0.15 Q | | | V | 19+ 5 1.1471 0.14 Q | | | V | 19+10 1.1481 0.15 Q | | | V | 19+15 1.1492 0.16 Q | | | V | 19+20 1.1504 0.17 Q | | | V | 19+25 1.1517 0.19 Q | | | V | 19+30 1.1531 0.20 Q | | | V | 19+35 1.1545 0.21 Q | | | V | 19+40 1.1559 0.20 Q | | | V | 19+45 1.1572 0.19 Q | | | V | 19+50 1.1585 0.18 Q | | | V | 19+55 1.1596 0.16 Q | | | V | 20+ 0 1.1606 0.15 Q | | | V | 20+ 5 1.1616 0.14 Q | | | V | 20+10 1.1626 0.15 Q | | | V | 20+15 1.1637 0.16 Q | | | V | 20+20 1.1648 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+25 1.1660 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+30 1.1672 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+35 1.1684 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+40 1.1695 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+45 1.1707 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+50 1.1719 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+55 1.1730 0.16 Q | | | V | 21+ 0 1.1740 0.14 Q | | | V | 21+ 5 1.1749 0.13 Q | | | V | 21+10 1.1759 0.14 Q | | | V | 21+15 1.1770 0.16 Q | | | V | 21+20 1.1781 0.16 Q | | | V | 21+25 1.1791 0.15 Q | | | V | 21+30 1.1801 0.14 Q | | | V| 21+35 1.1810 0.13 Q | | | V| 21+40 1.1819 0.14 Q | | | V| 21+45 1.1830 0.16 Q | | | V| 21+50 1.1841 0.16 Q | | | V| 21+55 1.1852 0.15 Q | | | V| 22+ 0 1.1861 0.14 Q | | | V| 22+ 5 1.1870 0.13 Q | | | V| 22+10 1.1880 0.14 Q | | | V| 22+15 1.1890 0.16 Q | | | V| 22+20 1.1901 0.16 Q | | | V| 22+25 1.1912 0.15 Q | | | V| 22+30 1.1921 0.14 Q | | | V| 22+35 1.1930 0.13 Q | | | V| 22+40 1.1939 0.12 Q | | | V| 22+45 1.1947 0.12 Q | | | V| 22+50 1.1955 0.12 Q | | | V| 22+55 1.1964 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+ 0 1.1972 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+ 5 1.1980 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+10 1.1988 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+15 1.1996 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+20 1.2004 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+25 1.2012 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+30 1.2020 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+35 1.2028 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+40 1.2036 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+45 1.2044 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+50 1.2053 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+55 1.2061 0.12 Q | | | V| 24+ 0 1.2069 0.12 Q | | | V| 24+ 5 1.2076 0.11 Q | | | V| 24+10 1.2082 0.09 Q | | | V| 24+15 1.2086 0.05 Q | | | V| 24+20 1.2088 0.03 Q | | | V| 24+25 1.2089 0.02 Q | | | V| 24+30 1.2091 0.02 Q | | | V| 24+35 1.2092 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+40 1.2092 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+45 1.2093 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+50 1.2093 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+55 1.2093 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+ 0 1.2094 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+ 5 1.2094 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+10 1.2094 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+15 1.2094 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+20 1.2094 0.00 Q | | | V ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Project Summary Millenium 100- yearTitle Engineer Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Company 6/16/2022Date 1. Inflow hydrographs calculated based on Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Hydrology Manual (April 1978) using CivilD software. 2. Flow-through basin analysis completed using modfified Pul's (storage indication routing). Notes Page 1 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc 24Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond) Basin2 31Pond Inflow Summary Basin1 (IN) 30Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out) Basin1 (OUT) 27Pond Infiltration Hydrograph Basin1 (INF) 26Level Pool Pond Routing Summary 25Pond Infiltration Calculations Basin1 (IN) 24Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond) Basin1 21Volume Equations 20Elevation-Area Volume Curve Basin2 21Volume Equations 20Elevation-Area Volume Curve Basin1 14Time vs. Volume Basin2 14Time vs. Volume Basin1 8Time vs. Elevation Basin2 (IN) 8Time vs. Elevation Basin1 (IN) 4Read Hydrograph DA-B 4Read Hydrograph DA-A 3Master Network Summary 2User Notifications Table of Contents Table of Contents 31Pond Inflow Summary Basin2 (IN) 30Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out) Basin2 (OUT) 27Pond Infiltration Hydrograph Basin2 (INF) 26Level Pool Pond Routing Summary 25Pond Infiltration Calculations Basin2 (IN) Subsection: User Notifications User Notifications WarningSource Mass balance for routing volumes vary by more than 0.5 %. (3.1 % of Inflow Volume))Message (N/A)Time Basin2Label 16Element Id PondElement Type BaseScenario 40Message Id WarningSource Mass balance for routing volumes vary by more than 0.5 %. (2.1 % of Inflow Volume))Message (N/A)Time Basin1Label 71Element Id PondElement Type BaseScenario 40Message Id Page 2 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Subsection: Master Network Summary Catchments Summary Peak Flow (ft³/s) Time to Peak (min) Hydrograph Volume (ft³) Return Event (years) ScenarioLabel 2.53571810.00064,856.0000BaseDA-A 2.06000810.00052,689.0000BaseDA-B Pond Summary Maximum Pond Storage (ft³) Maximum Water Surface Elevation (ft) Peak Flow (ft³/s) Time to Peak (min) Hydrograph Volume (ft³) Return Event (years) ScenarioLabel (N/A)(N/A)2.53571810.00064,702.0000BaseBasin1 (IN) 39,994.0003.7960.000000.0000.0000BaseBasin1 (OUT) (N/A)(N/A)2.06000810.00052,564.0000BaseBasin2 (IN) 30,093.0003.6550.000000.0000.0000BaseBasin2 (OUT) Page 3 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: DA-A Scenario: BaseSubsection: Read Hydrograph ft³/s2.53571Peak Discharge min810.000Time to Peak ft³64,856.357Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 5.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.110780.086160.036930.000000.000000.000 0.196950.184640.184640.160020.1354025.000 0.246190.258490.246190.221570.1969550.000 0.221570.221570.221570.221570.2338875.000 0.258490.233880.221570.221570.22157100.000 0.283110.283110.270800.270800.27080125.000 0.332350.320040.307730.283110.28311150.000 0.356970.356970.344660.344660.34466175.000 0.356970.356970.356970.356970.35697200.000 0.406210.393900.381590.356970.35697225.000 0.467750.443130.418520.418520.41852250.000 0.516990.492370.492370.480060.48006275.000 0.467750.480060.516990.541610.54161300.000 0.541610.516990.492370.492370.46775325.000 0.590850.566230.566230.553920.55392350.000 0.640080.627770.627770.615460.61546375.000 0.701630.701630.689320.677010.65239400.000 0.738560.713940.713940.713940.70163425.000 0.837030.812410.787790.763180.75087450.000 0.997050.947810.910890.886270.86165475.000 1.083221.058601.046291.033981.02167500.000 1.194001.169381.144761.120141.10784525.000 1.378641.341711.317091.280161.23093550.000 1.501731.477111.452491.427881.39095575.000 1.206311.267861.415571.526351.52635600.000 1.304781.206311.144761.144761.16938625.000 1.390951.403261.390951.378641.35402650.000 1.354021.366331.366331.366331.37864675.000 1.280161.267861.267861.280161.32940700.000 1.710991.649441.575591.427881.30478725.000 1.932561.907941.846391.797151.76023750.000 2.363382.191052.043342.006411.96948775.000 2.314142.523402.535712.498782.44955800.000 1.760231.784851.834081.895632.03103825.000 1.871011.895631.895631.871011.79715850.000 1.846391.858701.858701.871011.87101875.000 1.747921.760231.784851.809461.82177900.000 1.501731.600211.674061.698681.72330925.000 1.095531.366331.415571.427881.45249950.000 Page 4 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: DA-A Scenario: BaseSubsection: Read Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 5.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.406210.455440.516990.603150.76318975.000 0.246190.270800.283110.320040.356971,000.000 0.332350.320040.307730.270800.246191,025.000 0.344660.344660.344660.344660.344661,050.000 0.295420.295420.307730.307730.332351,075.000 0.270800.283110.295420.295420.295421,100.000 0.172330.184640.209260.233880.246191,125.000 0.246190.233880.209260.196950.184641,150.000 0.196950.221570.233880.246190.258491,175.000 0.209260.196950.184640.172330.184641,200.000 0.209260.209260.209260.209260.209261,225.000 0.172330.160020.172330.196950.209261,250.000 0.160020.172330.184640.196950.196951,275.000 0.172330.184640.196950.196950.172331,300.000 0.184640.196950.196950.172330.160021,325.000 0.147710.147710.147710.160020.172331,350.000 0.147710.147710.147710.147710.147711,375.000 0.147710.147710.147710.147710.147711,400.000 0.135400.147710.147710.147710.147711,425.000 0.024620.024620.036930.061550.110781,450.000 0.000000.012310.012310.012310.012311,475.000 0.000000.000000.000000.000000.000001,500.000 Page 5 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: DA-B Scenario: BaseSubsection: Read Hydrograph ft³/s2.06000Peak Discharge min810.000Time to Peak ft³52,689.000Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 5.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.090000.070000.030000.000000.000000.000 0.160000.150000.150000.130000.1100025.000 0.200000.210000.200000.180000.1600050.000 0.180000.180000.180000.180000.1900075.000 0.210000.190000.180000.180000.18000100.000 0.230000.230000.220000.220000.22000125.000 0.270000.260000.250000.230000.23000150.000 0.290000.290000.280000.280000.28000175.000 0.290000.290000.290000.290000.29000200.000 0.330000.320000.310000.290000.29000225.000 0.380000.360000.340000.340000.34000250.000 0.420000.400000.400000.390000.39000275.000 0.380000.390000.420000.440000.44000300.000 0.440000.420000.400000.400000.38000325.000 0.480000.460000.460000.450000.45000350.000 0.520000.510000.510000.500000.50000375.000 0.570000.570000.560000.550000.53000400.000 0.600000.580000.580000.580000.57000425.000 0.680000.660000.640000.620000.61000450.000 0.810000.770000.740000.720000.70000475.000 0.880000.860000.850000.840000.83000500.000 0.970000.950000.930000.910000.90000525.000 1.120001.090001.070001.040001.00000550.000 1.220001.200001.180001.160001.13000575.000 0.980001.030001.150001.240001.24000600.000 1.060000.980000.930000.930000.95000625.000 1.130001.140001.130001.120001.10000650.000 1.100001.110001.110001.110001.12000675.000 1.040001.030001.030001.040001.08000700.000 1.390001.340001.280001.160001.06000725.000 1.570001.550001.500001.460001.43000750.000 1.920001.780001.660001.630001.60000775.000 1.880002.050002.060002.030001.99000800.000 1.430001.450001.490001.540001.65000825.000 1.520001.540001.540001.520001.46000850.000 1.500001.510001.510001.520001.52000875.000 1.420001.430001.450001.470001.48000900.000 1.220001.300001.360001.380001.40000925.000 0.890001.110001.150001.160001.18000950.000 Page 6 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: DA-B Scenario: BaseSubsection: Read Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 5.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.330000.370000.420000.490000.62000975.000 0.200000.220000.230000.260000.290001,000.000 0.270000.260000.250000.220000.200001,025.000 0.280000.280000.280000.280000.280001,050.000 0.240000.240000.250000.250000.270001,075.000 0.220000.230000.240000.240000.240001,100.000 0.140000.150000.170000.190000.200001,125.000 0.200000.190000.170000.160000.150001,150.000 0.160000.180000.190000.200000.210001,175.000 0.170000.160000.150000.140000.150001,200.000 0.170000.170000.170000.170000.170001,225.000 0.140000.130000.140000.160000.170001,250.000 0.130000.140000.150000.160000.160001,275.000 0.140000.150000.160000.160000.140001,300.000 0.150000.160000.160000.140000.130001,325.000 0.120000.120000.120000.130000.140001,350.000 0.120000.120000.120000.120000.120001,375.000 0.120000.120000.120000.120000.120001,400.000 0.110000.120000.120000.120000.120001,425.000 0.020000.020000.030000.050000.090001,450.000 0.000000.010000.010000.010000.010001,475.000 0.000000.000000.000000.000000.000001,500.000 Page 7 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 0.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.000 0.0110.0090.0060.0040.00315.000 0.0270.0240.0200.0170.01430.000 0.0450.0410.0380.0340.03145.000 0.0680.0630.0590.0540.05060.000 0.0870.0830.0800.0760.07275.000 0.1060.1020.0980.0950.09190.000 0.1240.1200.1170.1130.109105.000 0.1460.1420.1370.1330.129120.000 0.1690.1640.1600.1550.151135.000 0.1920.1870.1820.1780.173150.000 0.2180.2130.2080.2020.197165.000 0.2460.2400.2350.2290.224180.000 0.2740.2680.2630.2570.252195.000 0.3010.2950.2900.2840.279210.000 0.3280.3220.3170.3110.306225.000 0.3580.3520.3460.3400.334240.000 0.3900.3830.3770.3700.364255.000 0.4250.4180.4110.4040.396270.000 0.4620.4540.4470.4390.432285.000 0.5010.4930.4860.4780.470300.000 0.5340.5270.5210.5140.508315.000 0.5680.5610.5540.5470.540330.000 0.6060.5990.5910.5830.576345.000 0.6460.6380.6300.6220.614360.000 0.6890.6800.6720.6630.655375.000 0.7330.7240.7150.7060.698390.000 0.7800.7710.7610.7520.742405.000 0.8280.8190.8090.8000.790420.000 0.8770.8670.8570.8480.838435.000 0.9280.9180.9070.8970.887450.000 0.9850.9730.9620.9500.939465.000 1.0481.0351.0221.0090.997480.000 1.1181.1041.0901.0751.061495.000 1.1921.1771.1621.1471.133510.000 1.2691.2541.2381.2231.207525.000 1.3521.3351.3181.3021.286540.000 1.4431.4251.4061.3881.370555.000 1.5411.5211.5011.4821.463570.000 1.6431.6221.6021.5811.561585.000 1.7441.7261.7061.6851.664600.000 1.8191.8051.7911.7761.761615.000 1.8871.8721.8591.8461.832630.000 Page 8 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 1.9691.9521.9351.9181.902645.000 2.0422.0292.0152.0021.986660.000 2.1062.0932.0802.0682.055675.000 2.1682.1562.1442.1312.118690.000 2.2242.2132.2022.1912.179705.000 2.2852.2712.2592.2472.236720.000 2.3672.3492.3322.3162.300735.000 2.4602.4412.4222.4032.385750.000 2.5632.5412.5212.5002.480765.000 2.6752.6512.6282.6062.584780.000 2.8122.7842.7562.7282.701795.000 2.9512.9262.8982.8702.841810.000 3.0523.0333.0142.9942.974825.000 3.1413.1233.1053.0883.070840.000 3.2373.2183.1983.1793.160855.000 3.3323.3133.2943.2753.256870.000 3.4253.4063.3883.3693.350885.000 3.5143.4963.4793.4613.443900.000 3.5983.5823.5653.5483.531915.000 3.6763.6613.6463.6303.614930.000 3.7393.7273.7153.7023.689945.000 3.7903.7833.7743.7633.751960.000 3.7943.7953.7963.7953.794975.000 3.7813.7843.7873.7903.792990.000 3.7593.7643.7683.7733.7771,005.000 3.7353.7393.7443.7493.7541,020.000 3.7153.7183.7223.7263.7301,035.000 3.6973.7003.7043.7083.7111,050.000 3.6793.6833.6863.6903.6931,065.000 3.6583.6623.6673.6713.6751,080.000 3.6373.6413.6463.6503.6541,095.000 3.6153.6203.6243.6293.6331,110.000 3.5903.5953.6003.6053.6101,125.000 3.5613.5663.5723.5783.5841,140.000 3.5343.5393.5443.5503.5551,155.000 3.5103.5153.5203.5243.5291,170.000 3.4843.4903.4953.5003.5051,185.000 3.4553.4613.4673.4733.4781,200.000 3.4293.4343.4393.4453.4501,215.000 3.4023.4083.4133.4183.4231,230.000 3.3763.3813.3873.3923.3971,245.000 3.3473.3533.3583.3643.3701,260.000 3.3203.3253.3313.3363.3411,275.000 Page 9 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 3.2913.2973.3023.3083.3141,290.000 3.2643.2703.2753.2803.2861,305.000 3.2363.2413.2473.2533.2581,320.000 3.2093.2143.2203.2253.2301,335.000 3.1803.1863.1923.1983.2031,350.000 3.1513.1563.1623.1683.1741,365.000 3.1213.1273.1333.1393.1451,380.000 3.0923.0983.1033.1093.1151,395.000 3.0623.0683.0743.0803.0861,410.000 3.0333.0393.0453.0513.0571,425.000 (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)3.0281,440.000 Page 10 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 0.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.000 0.0130.0100.0080.0050.00315.000 0.0320.0280.0240.0200.01730.000 0.0540.0490.0450.0400.03645.000 0.0790.0740.0690.0640.05960.000 0.1020.0970.0930.0890.08475.000 0.1230.1190.1140.1100.10690.000 0.1440.1390.1350.1310.127105.000 0.1680.1630.1580.1530.148120.000 0.1930.1880.1830.1780.173135.000 0.2180.2130.2080.2030.198150.000 0.2470.2410.2350.2300.224165.000 0.2770.2710.2650.2590.253180.000 0.3070.3010.2950.2890.283195.000 0.3360.3300.3250.3190.313210.000 0.3650.3590.3530.3470.342225.000 0.3970.3900.3840.3770.371240.000 0.4300.4230.4170.4100.404255.000 0.4680.4600.4530.4450.438270.000 0.5070.4990.4910.4830.476285.000 0.5480.5410.5320.5240.515300.000 0.5820.5750.5690.5620.555315.000 0.6170.6090.6020.5950.589330.000 0.6560.6480.6400.6320.624345.000 0.6970.6880.6800.6720.664360.000 0.7410.7320.7230.7140.705375.000 0.7860.7770.7680.7590.750390.000 0.8350.8250.8150.8050.795405.000 0.8840.8740.8640.8540.844420.000 0.9330.9230.9130.9030.893435.000 0.9850.9740.9640.9530.943450.000 1.0431.0311.0191.0080.996465.000 1.1081.0941.0811.0681.056480.000 1.1821.1671.1521.1371.122495.000 1.2581.2421.2271.2121.197510.000 1.3391.3221.3061.2901.274525.000 1.4241.4071.3891.3721.355540.000 1.5131.5001.4811.4621.443555.000 1.5781.5651.5511.5381.525570.000 1.6491.6351.6201.6061.592585.000 1.7211.7081.6941.6791.664600.000 1.7741.7641.7541.7441.733615.000 1.8221.8121.8021.7921.783630.000 Page 11 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 1.8821.8701.8571.8451.833645.000 1.9461.9331.9211.9081.895660.000 2.0081.9961.9841.9711.959675.000 2.0682.0572.0452.0332.021690.000 2.1232.1122.1012.0912.080705.000 2.1822.1692.1562.1452.134720.000 2.2612.2442.2282.2122.196735.000 2.3522.3332.3152.2972.279750.000 2.4532.4322.4122.3922.372765.000 2.5632.5392.5162.4952.473780.000 2.6972.6692.6412.6142.588795.000 2.8332.8082.7812.7532.725810.000 2.9312.9132.8952.8752.855825.000 3.0183.0012.9832.9662.949840.000 3.1123.0933.0743.0553.037855.000 3.2043.1863.1673.1493.130870.000 3.2953.2773.2593.2413.222885.000 3.3823.3653.3483.3303.313900.000 3.4643.4483.4323.4153.398915.000 3.5393.5253.5113.4953.480930.000 3.6013.5893.5773.5653.553945.000 3.6503.6433.6343.6243.613960.000 3.6533.6543.6553.6553.653975.000 3.6383.6423.6453.6483.651990.000 3.6163.6213.6263.6303.6341,005.000 3.5913.5953.6003.6063.6111,020.000 3.5703.5743.5783.5823.5861,035.000 3.5513.5553.5593.5623.5661,050.000 3.5323.5363.5403.5443.5471,065.000 3.5113.5153.5193.5243.5281,080.000 3.4893.4933.4983.5023.5061,095.000 3.4663.4713.4753.4803.4841,110.000 3.4403.4453.4513.4563.4611,125.000 3.4103.4163.4223.4283.4341,140.000 3.3833.3883.3933.3993.4041,155.000 3.3583.3633.3683.3733.3781,170.000 3.3313.3373.3423.3483.3531,185.000 3.3023.3083.3143.3203.3251,200.000 3.2743.2803.2853.2913.2961,215.000 3.2473.2533.2583.2643.2691,230.000 3.2203.2263.2313.2373.2421,245.000 3.1913.1973.2023.2083.2141,260.000 3.1633.1683.1743.1803.1851,275.000 Page 12 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Elevation Time vs. Elevation (ft) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Time (min) 3.1343.1393.1453.1513.1571,290.000 3.1063.1113.1173.1223.1281,305.000 3.0773.0833.0883.0943.1001,320.000 3.0493.0553.0613.0663.0711,335.000 3.0203.0263.0323.0383.0441,350.000 2.9902.9963.0023.0083.0141,365.000 2.9602.9662.9722.9782.9841,380.000 2.9302.9362.9422.9482.9541,395.000 2.9002.9062.9122.9182.9241,410.000 2.8702.8762.8822.8882.8941,425.000 (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)2.8641,440.000 Page 13 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 11.0004.0000.0000.0000.0000.000 97.00075.00055.00038.00022.00015.000 237.000207.000178.000149.000122.00030.000 398.000363.000330.000299.000267.00045.000 592.000554.000514.000475.000436.00060.000 764.000730.000697.000663.000628.00075.000 928.000895.000863.000830.000797.00090.000 1,092.0001,058.0001,025.000993.000960.000105.000 1,285.0001,246.0001,207.0001,167.0001,129.000120.000 1,485.0001,445.0001,404.0001,364.0001,324.000135.000 1,692.0001,648.0001,606.0001,566.0001,526.000150.000 1,927.0001,878.0001,830.0001,783.0001,737.000165.000 2,172.0002,122.0002,073.0002,024.0001,976.000180.000 2,419.0002,370.0002,321.0002,272.0002,222.000195.000 2,662.0002,614.0002,565.0002,517.0002,468.000210.000 2,906.0002,855.0002,805.0002,757.0002,710.000225.000 3,178.0003,122.0003,066.0003,012.0002,958.000240.000 3,464.0003,404.0003,347.0003,290.0003,235.000255.000 3,785.0003,720.0003,655.0003,590.0003,526.000270.000 4,121.0004,051.0003,983.0003,917.0003,850.000285.000 4,476.0004,409.0004,339.0004,266.0004,193.000300.000 4,778.0004,719.0004,660.0004,601.0004,540.000315.000 5,094.0005,028.0004,964.0004,902.0004,839.000330.000 5,446.0005,375.0005,304.0005,233.0005,163.000345.000 5,814.0005,737.0005,663.0005,591.0005,518.000360.000 6,212.0006,131.0006,051.0005,972.0005,892.000375.000 6,622.0006,538.0006,455.0006,373.0006,293.000390.000 7,066.0006,975.0006,885.0006,796.0006,709.000405.000 7,517.0007,426.0007,336.0007,246.0007,156.000420.000 7,975.0007,881.0007,789.0007,698.0007,608.000435.000 8,463.0008,362.0008,263.0008,166.0008,070.000450.000 9,004.0008,891.0008,781.0008,673.0008,567.000465.000 9,605.0009,478.0009,356.0009,236.0009,119.000480.000 10,286.00010,147.00010,009.0009,872.0009,737.000495.000 11,000.00010,853.00010,710.00010,567.00010,426.000510.000 11,757.00011,602.00011,449.00011,298.00011,148.000525.000 12,570.00012,401.00012,236.00012,074.00011,914.000540.000 13,475.00013,288.00013,104.00012,922.00012,744.000555.000 14,448.00014,248.00014,051.00013,858.00013,665.000570.000 15,480.00015,269.00015,061.00014,854.00014,650.000585.000 16,509.00016,322.00016,119.00015,908.00015,694.000600.000 17,276.00017,134.00016,989.00016,838.00016,680.000615.000 17,974.00017,825.00017,685.00017,549.00017,413.000630.000 Page 14 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 18,824.00018,647.00018,472.00018,300.00018,133.000645.000 19,589.00019,452.00019,313.00019,175.00019,003.000660.000 20,263.00020,129.00019,995.00019,861.00019,725.000675.000 20,922.00020,794.00020,664.00020,531.00020,397.000690.000 21,526.00021,406.00021,287.00021,167.00021,046.000705.000 22,179.00022,032.00021,897.00021,770.00021,647.000720.000 23,067.00022,876.00022,691.00022,512.00022,341.000735.000 24,090.00023,876.00023,667.00023,463.00023,263.000750.000 25,227.00024,993.00024,762.00024,534.00024,310.000765.000 26,493.00026,217.00025,957.00025,709.00025,466.000780.000 28,054.00027,728.00027,406.00027,092.00026,786.000795.000 29,657.00029,364.00029,049.00028,719.00028,386.000810.000 30,844.00030,625.00030,401.00030,168.00029,923.000825.000 31,904.00031,688.00031,477.00031,268.00031,058.000840.000 33,051.00032,819.00032,587.00032,356.00032,127.000855.000 34,198.00033,968.00033,739.00033,510.00033,281.000870.000 35,336.00035,110.00034,882.00034,654.00034,426.000885.000 36,437.00036,221.00036,002.00035,782.00035,559.000900.000 37,489.00037,283.00037,074.00036,864.00036,651.000915.000 38,467.00038,284.00038,092.00037,894.00037,693.000930.000 39,273.00039,119.00038,963.00038,804.00038,639.000945.000 39,917.00039,832.00039,714.00039,574.00039,425.000960.000 39,972.00039,987.00039,994.00039,988.00039,966.000975.000 39,801.00039,846.00039,886.00039,920.00039,949.000990.000 39,524.00039,584.00039,643.00039,699.00039,752.0001,005.000 39,213.00039,271.00039,333.00039,396.00039,461.0001,020.000 38,960.00039,007.00039,056.00039,106.00039,158.0001,035.000 38,733.00038,778.00038,823.00038,869.00038,914.0001,050.000 38,504.00038,552.00038,598.00038,643.00038,688.0001,065.000 38,245.00038,298.00038,351.00038,402.00038,454.0001,080.000 37,979.00038,032.00038,085.00038,138.00038,192.0001,095.000 37,703.00037,761.00037,817.00037,872.00037,926.0001,110.000 37,383.00037,451.00037,517.00037,581.00037,643.0001,125.000 37,020.00037,092.00037,165.00037,239.00037,312.0001,140.000 36,687.00036,750.00036,814.00036,881.00036,950.0001,155.000 36,390.00036,450.00036,508.00036,567.00036,626.0001,170.000 36,068.00036,136.00036,202.00036,266.00036,328.0001,185.000 35,715.00035,784.00035,856.00035,927.00035,998.0001,200.000 35,384.00035,449.00035,514.00035,580.00035,647.0001,215.000 35,061.00035,125.00035,190.00035,255.00035,319.0001,230.000 34,736.00034,803.00034,868.00034,932.00034,997.0001,245.000 34,384.00034,453.00034,524.00034,596.00034,667.0001,260.000 34,052.00034,119.00034,186.00034,251.00034,317.0001,275.000 Page 15 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 33,704.00033,772.00033,843.00033,913.00033,983.0001,290.000 33,377.00033,444.00033,509.00033,574.00033,638.0001,305.000 33,035.00033,102.00033,171.00033,241.00033,310.0001,320.000 32,713.00032,779.00032,843.00032,907.00032,970.0001,335.000 32,369.00032,440.00032,510.00032,579.00032,647.0001,350.000 32,015.00032,085.00032,156.00032,227.00032,298.0001,365.000 31,663.00031,733.00031,803.00031,874.00031,944.0001,380.000 31,315.00031,384.00031,454.00031,523.00031,593.0001,395.000 30,969.00031,038.00031,107.00031,176.00031,245.0001,410.000 30,626.00030,694.00030,763.00030,831.00030,900.0001,425.000 (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)30,557.0001,440.000 Page 16 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 7.0002.0000.0000.0000.0000.000 64.00049.00036.00025.00015.00015.000 156.000136.000117.00098.00080.00030.000 262.000238.000217.000196.000176.00045.000 388.000364.000338.000312.000286.00060.000 500.000479.000457.000435.000412.00075.000 606.000585.000564.000543.000522.00090.000 712.000690.000669.000648.000627.000105.000 837.000811.000786.000760.000736.000120.000 966.000940.000914.000888.000862.000135.000 1,100.0001,072.0001,045.0001,018.000993.000150.000 1,254.0001,222.0001,190.0001,159.0001,129.000165.000 1,414.0001,382.0001,349.0001,318.0001,286.000180.000 1,576.0001,544.0001,512.0001,480.0001,447.000195.000 1,734.0001,703.0001,672.0001,640.0001,608.000210.000 1,893.0001,860.0001,828.0001,796.0001,765.000225.000 2,074.0002,036.0001,999.0001,963.0001,928.000240.000 2,264.0002,224.0002,185.0002,148.0002,111.000255.000 2,480.0002,436.0002,392.0002,349.0002,305.000270.000 2,708.0002,660.0002,614.0002,569.0002,525.000285.000 2,953.0002,907.0002,858.0002,808.0002,758.000300.000 3,154.0003,115.0003,076.0003,036.0002,995.000315.000 3,368.0003,323.0003,280.0003,238.0003,196.000330.000 3,610.0003,561.0003,512.0003,463.0003,415.000345.000 3,865.0003,812.0003,761.0003,710.0003,660.000360.000 4,146.0004,089.0004,033.0003,977.0003,921.000375.000 4,438.0004,378.0004,319.0004,261.0004,203.000390.000 4,758.0004,693.0004,628.0004,563.0004,500.000405.000 5,087.0005,020.0004,955.0004,889.0004,824.000420.000 5,421.0005,352.0005,285.0005,219.0005,153.000435.000 5,784.0005,709.0005,635.0005,563.0005,492.000450.000 6,195.0006,109.0006,025.0005,942.0005,862.000465.000 6,663.0006,563.0006,467.0006,374.0006,284.000480.000 7,207.0007,095.0006,984.0006,874.0006,767.000495.000 7,786.0007,667.0007,549.0007,434.0007,320.000510.000 8,412.0008,283.0008,156.0008,031.0007,908.000525.000 9,098.0008,954.0008,814.0008,677.0008,543.000540.000 9,822.0009,718.0009,558.0009,401.0009,247.000555.000 10,372.00010,258.00010,146.00010,037.0009,929.000570.000 10,970.00010,847.00010,725.00010,605.00010,488.000585.000 11,578.00011,467.00011,347.00011,222.00011,095.000600.000 12,029.00011,946.00011,860.00011,771.00011,678.000615.000 12,445.00012,356.00012,271.00012,190.00012,110.000630.000 Page 17 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 12,967.00012,857.00012,749.00012,644.00012,542.000645.000 13,525.00013,413.00013,301.00013,189.00013,077.000660.000 14,071.00013,962.00013,853.00013,745.00013,635.000675.000 14,604.00014,501.00014,395.00014,288.00014,179.000690.000 15,092.00014,995.00014,898.00014,801.00014,704.000705.000 15,620.00015,500.00015,391.00015,288.00015,189.000720.000 16,341.00016,186.00016,035.00015,890.00015,751.000735.000 17,173.00016,999.00016,829.00016,663.00016,500.000750.000 18,100.00017,908.00017,720.00017,535.00017,352.000765.000 19,131.00018,907.00018,695.00018,492.00018,294.000780.000 20,406.00020,139.00019,877.00019,620.00019,370.000795.000 21,715.00021,476.00021,218.00020,949.00020,677.000810.000 22,680.00022,503.00022,320.00022,131.00021,931.000825.000 23,541.00023,365.00023,194.00023,025.00022,854.000840.000 24,474.00024,285.00024,097.00023,909.00023,723.000855.000 25,405.00025,219.00025,033.00024,847.00024,661.000870.000 26,330.00026,146.00025,962.00025,776.00025,591.000885.000 27,224.00027,049.00026,871.00026,692.00026,512.000900.000 28,077.00027,910.00027,741.00027,570.00027,398.000915.000 28,869.00028,721.00028,566.00028,405.00028,242.000930.000 29,520.00029,396.00029,270.00029,141.00029,008.000945.000 30,037.00029,969.00029,875.00029,763.00029,642.000960.000 30,069.00030,085.00030,093.00030,090.00030,075.000975.000 29,917.00029,957.00029,992.00030,022.00030,048.000990.000 29,677.00029,729.00029,780.00029,829.00029,875.0001,005.000 29,410.00029,460.00029,513.00029,568.00029,623.0001,020.000 29,190.00029,232.00029,274.00029,318.00029,363.0001,035.000 28,992.00029,032.00029,071.00029,111.00029,150.0001,050.000 28,793.00028,834.00028,874.00028,914.00028,953.0001,065.000 28,568.00028,615.00028,660.00028,705.00028,749.0001,080.000 28,338.00028,384.00028,430.00028,476.00028,522.0001,095.000 28,101.00028,150.00028,199.00028,246.00028,293.0001,110.000 27,826.00027,885.00027,941.00027,996.00028,049.0001,125.000 27,518.00027,579.00027,641.00027,704.00027,766.0001,140.000 27,233.00027,287.00027,342.00027,400.00027,458.0001,155.000 26,978.00027,030.00027,080.00027,130.00027,181.0001,170.000 26,703.00026,762.00026,818.00026,873.00026,926.0001,185.000 26,403.00026,463.00026,523.00026,584.00026,644.0001,200.000 26,121.00026,177.00026,232.00026,288.00026,345.0001,215.000 25,846.00025,901.00025,956.00026,011.00026,066.0001,230.000 25,569.00025,626.00025,681.00025,736.00025,791.0001,245.000 25,270.00025,328.00025,389.00025,450.00025,510.0001,260.000 24,987.00025,045.00025,101.00025,157.00025,213.0001,275.000 Page 18 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Time vs. Volume Time vs. Volume (ft³) Output Time increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Volume (ft³) Time (min) 24,692.00024,750.00024,810.00024,870.00024,929.0001,290.000 24,414.00024,471.00024,526.00024,581.00024,636.0001,305.000 24,124.00024,181.00024,239.00024,298.00024,357.0001,320.000 23,850.00023,906.00023,961.00024,015.00024,069.0001,335.000 23,558.00023,618.00023,678.00023,736.00023,794.0001,350.000 23,258.00023,318.00023,378.00023,438.00023,498.0001,365.000 22,961.00023,020.00023,080.00023,139.00023,199.0001,380.000 22,666.00022,725.00022,784.00022,843.00022,902.0001,395.000 22,373.00022,432.00022,490.00022,549.00022,607.0001,410.000 22,083.00022,141.00022,199.00022,257.00022,315.0001,425.000 (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)22,025.0001,440.000 Page 19 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Elevation-Area Volume Curve Volume (Total) (ft³) Volume (ft³) A1+A2+sqr (A1*A2) (ft²) Area (ft²) Planimeter (ft²) Elevation (ft) 0.0000.00008,7310.00.000 19,151.00019,151.00028,72710,4460.02.000 56,438.00037,287.00037,28714,5230.05.000 Page 20 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Volume Equations Pond Volume Equations * Incremental volume computed by the Conic Method for Reservoir Volumes. Volume = (1/3) * (EL2 - El1) * (Area1 + Area2 + sqr(Area1 * Area2)) Lower and upper elevations of the incrementwhere:EL1, EL2 Areas computed for EL1, EL2, respectivelyArea1, Area2 Incremental volume between EL1 and EL2Volume Page 21 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Elevation-Area Volume Curve Volume (Total) (ft³) Volume (ft³) A1+A2+sqr (A1*A2) (ft²) Area (ft²) Planimeter (ft²) Elevation (ft) 0.0000.00004,8140.00.000 9,718.0009,718.00019,4368,3010.01.500 45,505.00035,787.00030,67512,2780.05.000 Page 22 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Volume Equations Pond Volume Equations * Incremental volume computed by the Conic Method for Reservoir Volumes. Volume = (1/3) * (EL2 - El1) * (Area1 + Area2 + sqr(Area1 * Area2)) Lower and upper elevations of the incrementwhere:EL1, EL2 Areas computed for EL1, EL2, respectivelyArea1, Area2 Incremental volume between EL1 and EL2Volume Page 23 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond) Infiltration Average Infiltration Rate Infiltration Method (Computed) in/h2.0000Infiltration Rate (Average) Initial Conditions ft0.000Elevation (Water Surface, Initial) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Outlet) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial, Total) min3.000Time Increment 2S/t + O (ft³/s) Flow (Total) (ft³/s) Infiltration (ft³/s) Area (ft²) Storage (ft³) Outflow (ft³/s) Elevation (ft) 0.000000.000000.000008,7310.0000.000000.000 213.276800.483610.4836110,44619,151.3870.000002.000 627.761340.672380.6723814,52356,438.0060.000005.000 Page 24 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Calculations Average Infiltration Rating Table Flow (Infiltration) (ft³/s) Area (Total) (ft²) Elevation (Water Surface) (ft) 0.000008,731.00.000 0.4836110,446.02.000 0.6723814,523.55.000 Page 25 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Level Pool Pond Routing Summary Infiltration Average Infiltration Rate Infiltration Method (Computed) in/h2.0000Infiltration Rate (Average) Initial Conditions ft0.000Elevation (Water Surface, Initial) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Outlet) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial, Total) min3.000Time Increment Inflow/Outflow Hydrograph Summary ft³/s2.53571Flow (Peak In)min810.000Time to Peak (Flow, In) ft³/s0.59661Infiltration (Peak)min981.000Time to Peak (Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Peak Outlet)min0.000Time to Peak (Flow, Outlet) ft3.796Elevation (Water Surface, Peak) ft³39,993.742Volume (Peak) Mass Balance (ft³) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³64,702.000Volume (Total Inflow) ft³32,878.000Volume (Total Infiltration) ft³0.000Volume (Total Outlet Outflow) ft³30,464.000Volume (Retained) ft³-1,360.000Volume (Unrouted) %2.1Error (Mass Balance) Page 26 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph ft³/s0.59661Peak Discharge min981.000Time to Peak ft³32,779.004Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.003370.002690.002080.001530.0010418.000 0.007400.006550.005730.004910.0041233.000 0.012040.011000.010030.009120.0082648.000 0.017330.016330.015290.014210.0131163.000 0.021970.021060.020150.019230.0183078.000 0.026460.025570.024680.023780.0228893.000 0.031080.030080.029130.028230.02734108.000 0.036420.035350.034280.033200.03213123.000 0.041910.040810.039710.038600.03750138.000 0.047660.046440.045250.044110.04301153.000 0.054150.052820.051500.050190.04891168.000 0.060810.059470.058120.056780.05547183.000 0.067470.066150.064830.063490.06216198.000 0.073970.072690.071390.070090.06878213.000 0.080660.079250.077870.076550.07526228.000 0.088070.086560.085050.083560.08210243.000 0.095870.094210.092610.091070.08957258.000 0.104500.102750.101020.099300.09757273.000 0.113600.111680.109820.108030.10626288.000 0.122790.121110.119330.117460.11554303.000 0.130690.129070.127510.125960.12439318.000 0.139190.137390.135650.133970.13233333.000 0.148510.146630.144760.142900.14104348.000 0.158280.156230.154240.152310.15041363.000 0.168690.166600.164500.162420.16035378.000 0.179470.177240.175060.172910.17079393.000 0.191020.188690.186360.184040.18175408.000 0.202630.200300.197970.195650.19334423.000 0.214450.212020.209620.207270.20495438.000 0.227110.224480.221900.219380.21690453.000 0.241090.238190.235340.232540.22980468.000 0.256660.253360.250170.247070.24405483.000 0.273940.270440.266960.263490.26005498.000 0.291900.288220.284590.281010.27746513.000 0.310840.306970.303140.299360.29562528.000 0.331210.326950.322810.318750.31477543.000 0.353640.349020.344480.339990.33556558.000 0.377420.372550.367740.363000.35831573.000 0.402410.397320.392280.387280.38233588.000 Page 27 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.425810.421770.417330.412530.40751603.000 0.443080.439850.436530.433110.42955618.000 0.459940.456230.452750.449460.44626633.000 0.480160.476030.471920.467850.46384648.000 0.487060.486240.485420.484590.48375663.000 0.491060.490270.489470.488670.48787678.000 0.494900.494170.493420.492640.49186693.000 0.498440.497730.497020.496320.49561708.000 0.502480.501540.500680.499890.49915723.000 0.507820.506690.505590.504520.50348738.000 0.513810.512560.511330.510140.50897753.000 0.520350.519010.517680.516380.51509768.000 0.527720.526100.524560.523110.52172783.000 0.536530.534720.532930.531160.52942798.000 0.544870.543440.541850.540140.53835813.000 0.550940.549800.548630.547430.54618828.000 0.556600.555420.554280.553160.55206843.000 0.562650.561450.560240.559020.55780858.000 0.568590.567410.566220.565030.56384873.000 0.574400.573260.572100.570930.56976888.000 0.579950.578870.577770.576660.57554903.000 0.585190.584170.583140.582090.58102918.000 0.589920.589060.588150.587190.58620933.000 0.593810.593060.592300.591520.59073948.000 0.596480.596230.595810.595230.59455963.000 0.596390.596500.596580.596610.59658978.000 0.595420.595660.595880.596080.59625993.000 0.593990.594300.594590.594880.595161,008.000 0.592490.592760.593050.593350.593671,023.000 0.591280.591510.591740.591990.592231,038.000 0.590160.590380.590610.590830.591061,053.000 0.588990.589240.589480.589710.589941,068.000 0.587690.587950.588220.588480.588741,083.000 0.586360.586620.586890.587160.587421,098.000 0.584940.585240.585530.585820.586091,113.000 0.583280.583640.583980.584310.584631,128.000 0.581460.581810.582180.582540.582911,143.000 0.579820.580130.580450.580770.581111,158.000 0.578320.578630.578930.579230.579521,173.000 0.576640.576990.577340.577670.578001,188.000 0.574850.575200.575550.575910.576281,203.000 0.573180.573510.573840.574170.574511,218.000 0.571520.571850.572180.572510.572841,233.000 0.569830.570180.570530.570860.571191,248.000 Page 28 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.568020.568370.568720.569090.569461,263.000 0.566300.566650.567000.567340.567681,278.000 0.564510.564850.565200.565570.565931,293.000 0.562800.563150.563500.563840.564171,308.000 0.561030.561360.561720.562080.562441,323.000 0.559330.559680.560020.560360.560691,338.000 0.557500.557870.558250.558610.558981,353.000 0.555640.556010.556380.556750.557131,368.000 0.553780.554150.554520.554890.555261,383.000 0.551940.552300.552670.553040.553411,398.000 0.550100.550460.550830.551200.551571,413.000 0.548270.548630.549000.549370.549731,428.000 Page 29 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (OUT) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out) ft³/s0.00000Peak Discharge min480.000Time to Peak ft³0.000Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)0.000000.000000.000 Page 30 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin1 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Inflow Summary Summary for Hydrograph Addition at 'Basin1' Upstream NodeUpstream Link DA-A<Catchment to Outflow Node> Node Inflows Flow (Peak) (ft³/s) Time to Peak (min) Volume (ft³) ElementInflow Type 2.53571810.00064,856.357DA-AFlow (From) 2.53571810.00064,701.998Basin1Flow (In) Page 31 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 Scenario: BaseSubsection: Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond) Infiltration Average Infiltration Rate Infiltration Method (Computed) in/h2.0000Infiltration Rate (Average) Initial Conditions ft0.000Elevation (Water Surface, Initial) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Outlet) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial, Total) min3.000Time Increment 2S/t + O (ft³/s) Flow (Total) (ft³/s) Infiltration (ft³/s) Area (ft²) Storage (ft³) Outflow (ft³/s) Elevation (ft) 0.000000.000000.000004,8140.0000.000000.000 108.364710.384310.384318,3019,718.2360.000001.500 506.181590.568430.5684312,27845,505.1850.000005.000 Page 32 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Calculations Average Infiltration Rating Table Flow (Infiltration) (ft³/s) Area (Total) (ft²) Elevation (Water Surface) (ft) 0.000004,814.00.000 0.384318,301.01.500 0.5684312,278.05.000 Page 33 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Level Pool Pond Routing Summary Infiltration Average Infiltration Rate Infiltration Method (Computed) in/h2.0000Infiltration Rate (Average) Initial Conditions ft0.000Elevation (Water Surface, Initial) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Outlet) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Initial, Total) min3.000Time Increment Inflow/Outflow Hydrograph Summary ft³/s2.06000Flow (Peak In)min810.000Time to Peak (Flow, In) ft³/s0.49767Infiltration (Peak)min981.000Time to Peak (Infiltration) ft³/s0.00000Flow (Peak Outlet)min0.000Time to Peak (Flow, Outlet) ft3.655Elevation (Water Surface, Peak) ft³30,092.517Volume (Peak) Mass Balance (ft³) ft³0.000Volume (Initial) ft³52,564.000Volume (Total Inflow) ft³28,977.000Volume (Total Infiltration) ft³0.000Volume (Total Outlet Outflow) ft³21,947.000Volume (Retained) ft³-1,640.000Volume (Unrouted) %3.1Error (Mass Balance) Page 34 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph ft³/s0.49767Peak Discharge min981.000Time to Peak ft³28,894.619Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.003400.002630.001930.001320.0007815.000 0.008240.007210.006190.005190.0042630.000 0.013760.012560.011440.010360.0092945.000 0.020330.019060.017730.016380.0150460.000 0.026070.024970.023860.022730.0215675.000 0.031450.030390.029320.028240.0271690.000 0.036780.035660.034600.033550.03250105.000 0.043010.041750.040470.039210.03796120.000 0.049420.048130.046830.045530.04427135.000 0.055960.054570.053250.051970.05070150.000 0.063400.061860.060330.058840.05738165.000 0.071080.069520.067980.066460.06493180.000 0.078730.077220.075700.074170.07263195.000 0.086120.084660.083190.081720.08023210.000 0.093470.091930.090440.089000.08756225.000 0.101700.100000.098320.096670.09506240.000 0.110270.108470.106750.105060.10339255.000 0.119890.117950.116000.114060.11214270.000 0.129900.127820.125800.123830.12186285.000 0.140450.138480.136400.134250.13206300.000 0.149050.147370.145710.144020.14228315.000 0.158020.156140.154320.152550.15079330.000 0.168070.166040.164020.161990.15998345.000 0.178500.176330.174230.172180.17012360.000 0.189800.187520.185260.183000.18074375.000 0.201350.198980.196650.194350.19208390.000 0.213830.211290.208760.206260.20378405.000 0.226390.223870.221360.218860.21635420.000 0.238980.236400.233870.231380.22889435.000 0.252390.249600.246890.244220.24159450.000 0.267270.264170.261130.258150.25523465.000 0.283870.280360.276970.273670.27044480.000 0.302740.298900.295070.291270.28752495.000 0.322310.318320.314380.310480.30660510.000 0.342930.338720.334570.330460.32637525.000 0.364930.360350.355890.351510.34719540.000 0.384960.384310.379350.374450.36963555.000 0.388430.387710.387010.386320.38564570.000 0.392170.391400.390640.389890.38915585.000 Page 35 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.395930.395250.394500.393730.39295600.000 0.398700.398190.397670.397120.39655615.000 0.401250.400700.400190.399690.39920630.000 0.404410.403750.403100.402460.40184645.000 0.407780.407110.406430.405760.40508660.000 0.411040.410390.409740.409090.40844675.000 0.414210.413590.412970.412330.41169690.000 0.417080.416510.415940.415370.41480705.000 0.420170.419480.418840.418240.41765720.000 0.424360.423460.422590.421750.42094735.000 0.429150.428150.427170.426220.42528750.000 0.434420.433330.432270.431210.43017765.000 0.440210.438950.437770.436630.43551780.000 0.447270.445800.444350.442930.44154795.000 0.454400.453110.451710.450240.44875810.000 0.459600.458650.457670.456650.45557825.000 0.464180.463250.462340.461440.46053840.000 0.469090.468110.467110.466120.46514855.000 0.473950.472990.472020.471040.47007870.000 0.478720.477780.476830.475870.47491885.000 0.483300.482400.481500.480580.47966900.000 0.487610.486770.485920.485050.48418915.000 0.491590.490850.490070.489270.48845930.000 0.494830.494210.493590.492950.49228945.000 0.497390.497060.496590.496030.49544960.000 0.497550.497630.497670.497660.49758975.000 0.496800.496990.497170.497320.49745990.000 0.495610.495870.496120.496360.496591,005.000 0.494280.494530.494800.495070.495341,020.000 0.493190.493400.493610.493830.494051,035.000 0.492200.492400.492600.492790.492991,050.000 0.491210.491410.491610.491810.492011,065.000 0.490080.490310.490540.490770.490991,080.000 0.488930.489160.489390.489620.489851,095.000 0.487730.487980.488230.488460.488701,110.000 0.486350.486640.486930.487200.487471,125.000 0.484790.485100.485410.485730.486041,140.000 0.483340.483610.483900.484190.484481,155.000 0.482040.482310.482560.482820.483081,170.000 0.480640.480940.481220.481500.481781,185.000 0.479100.479410.479710.480030.480341,200.000 0.477650.477940.478220.478510.478801,215.000 0.476230.476520.476800.477080.477371,230.000 0.474800.475090.475380.475660.475951,245.000 Page 36 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (INF) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Infiltration Hydrograph HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) 0.473250.473550.473870.474180.474491,260.000 0.471780.472080.472370.472660.472951,275.000 0.470240.470540.470850.471160.471471,290.000 0.468780.469080.469370.469660.469941,305.000 0.467260.467560.467860.468170.468481,320.000 0.465820.466110.466400.466680.466971,335.000 0.464270.464590.464900.465210.465521,350.000 0.462680.463000.463320.463630.463951,365.000 0.461100.461410.461730.462050.462361,380.000 0.459520.459840.460150.460470.460781,395.000 0.457950.458270.458580.458890.459211,410.000 0.456390.456700.457010.457330.457641,425.000 (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)0.456081,440.000 Page 37 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (OUT) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out) ft³/s0.00000Peak Discharge min480.000Time to Peak ft³0.000Hydrograph Volume HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES (ft³/s) Output Time Increment = 3.000 min Time on left represents time for first value in each row. Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Flow (ft³/s) Time (min) (N/A)(N/A)(N/A)0.000000.000000.000 Page 38 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Label: Basin2 (IN) Scenario: BaseSubsection: Pond Inflow Summary Summary for Hydrograph Addition at 'Basin2' Upstream NodeUpstream Link DA-B<Catchment to Outflow Node> Node Inflows Flow (Peak) (ft³/s) Time to Peak (min) Volume (ft³) ElementInflow Type 2.06000810.00052,689.000DA-BFlow (From) 2.06000810.00052,563.600Basin2Flow (In) Page 39 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Index User Notifications...2 U Master Network Summary...3 M DA-B (Read Hydrograph)... DA-A (Read Hydrograph)... D Basin2 (Volume Equations)... Basin2 (Time vs. Volume)... Basin2 (OUT) (Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out))... Basin2 (INF) (Pond Infiltration Hydrograph)... Basin2 (IN) (Time vs. Elevation)... Basin2 (IN) (Pond Inflow Summary)... Basin2 (IN) (Pond Infiltration Calculations)... Basin2 (IN) (Level Pool Pond Routing Summary)... Basin2 (Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond))... Basin2 (Elevation-Area Volume Curve)... Basin1 (Volume Equations)... Basin1 (Time vs. Volume)... Basin1 (OUT) (Pond Routed Hydrograph (total out))... Basin1 (INF) (Pond Infiltration Hydrograph)... Basin1 (IN) (Time vs. Elevation)... Basin1 (IN) (Pond Inflow Summary)... Basin1 (IN) (Pond Infiltration Calculations)... Basin1 (IN) (Level Pool Pond Routing Summary)... Basin1 (Elevation-Volume-Flow Table (Pond))... Basin1 (Elevation-Area Volume Curve)... B Page 40 of 4027 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 6/20/2022 PondPack CONNECT Edition [10.02.00.01] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterMillenium-3 to 1, 2 in hr.ppc Palm Villas at Milleniu m Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report APPENDIX C : REFERENCES Palm Villas at Milleniu m Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report APPENDIX D : GEOTECH NICAL REPORT ENGINEERS + GEOLOGISTS + ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTSREVISED DESIGN-PHASE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT PROPOSED PALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUM APARTMENT COMPLEX 10-ACRE SITE NORTH OF GERALD FORD DRIVE EAST OF THE PACIFIC AVENUE INTERSECTION ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER )APN) 694-120-028 CITY OF PALM DESERT, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 J.N. 21-308 ENGINEERS + GEOLOGISTS + ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS Offices Strategically Positioned Throughout Southern California DESERT REGION OFFICE 42-240 Green Way, Suite E, Palm Desert, CA 92211 T: 760.340.5303 F: 760.340.5096 For more information visit us online at www.petra-inc.com November 16, 2021 J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 PALM COMMUNITIES 100 Pacifica, Suite 203 Irvine, California 92618 Attention: Mr. Erik Halter Subject: Revised Design-Phase Geotechnical Investigation Report, Proposed Palm Villas at Millennium Apartment Complex, 10-acre Site North of Gerald Ford Drive, East of the Pacific Avenue Intersection, Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 694-120-028, City of Palm Desert, Riverside County, California References: See Attached List Dear Mr. Halter: Petra Geosciences, Inc. (Petra) is submitting herewith our revised design-phase geotechnical investigation report for the proposed Palm Villas at Millennium development the city of Palm Desert in Riverside County, California. Our services were performed in accordance with the scope of services outlined in our Proposal No. 21-308P, dated July 2, 2021. This report presents the results of our field exploration, laboratory testing, and our engineering judgment, opinions, conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical aspects of the development of the proposed 241-unit apartment complex. This report has been revised to accommodate 3-story structures and, therefore, supersedes our previous report dated October 21, 2021. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions regarding the contents of this report or require additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. Alan Pace, CEG Vice President PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................................1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION .....................................................................................................................1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND GRADING ......................................................................................................1 SITE RECONNAISSANCE AND SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION .........................................................................2 Percolation/Infiltration Testing ..........................................................................................................................2 LABORATORY TESTING ..........................................................................................................................................3 FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................................................................3 Regional Geologic Setting .................................................................................................................................3 Local Geology and Subsurface Soil Conditions .................................................................................................4 Groundwater .......................................................................................................................................................4 Faulting ..............................................................................................................................................................4 Secondary Seismic Hazards .................................................................................................................................... 5 Seismically Induced Landsliding .......................................................................................................................5 Seismically Induced Flooding ............................................................................................................................5 Seismically Induced Liquefaction and Dry Sand Settlement .............................................................................5 Site-Specific Liquefaction and Dry Sand Settlement Hazard Analysis ..............................................................7 Dry Sand Settlement Analyses Using SPT Results ............................................................................................7 Geotechnical Issues Not Related to Seismicity ....................................................................................................... 8 Wind Erosion .....................................................................................................................................................8 Subsidence .........................................................................................................................................................8 Hydro-Collapsible Soils .....................................................................................................................................9 Expansive Soils ................................................................................................................................................ 10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................... 10 General .................................................................................................................................................................. 10 Grading Plan Review ............................................................................................................................................ 10 Effect of Proposed Grading on Adjacent Properties ............................................................................................. 10 PRIMARY GEOTECHNICAL CONCERNS ............................................................................................................. 10 Seismic Shaking ............................................................................................................................................... 10 Seismically-Induced Settlement ....................................................................................................................... 11 Existing Unsuitable Materials .......................................................................................................................... 11 Earthwork ............................................................................................................................................................. 11 General Earthwork Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 11 Geotechnical Observations and Testing ........................................................................................................... 11 Clearing and Grubbing ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Ground Preparation – Structural and Pavement Areas ..................................................................................... 12 Cut Areas.......................................................................................................................................................... 13 Fill Placement and Testing ............................................................................................................................... 13 Imported Soils .................................................................................................................................................. 13 Geotechnical Observations ............................................................................................................................... 13 Shrinkage and Subsidence .................................................................................................................................... 14 Post-Grading Considerations ................................................................................................................................ 14 Site Drainage .................................................................................................................................................... 14 Utility Trench Backfill ..................................................................................................................................... 15 FOUNDATION DESIGN GUIDELINES ................................................................................................................... 16 Faulting ............................................................................................................................................................ 16 Seismic Design Parameters .............................................................................................................................. 17 Discussion - General ........................................................................................................................................ 19 Allowable Soil Bearing Capacities................................................................................................................... 20 PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Lateral Resistance ............................................................................................................................................ 20 Estimated Footing Settlement .......................................................................................................................... 20 Guidelines for Footings and Slabs on-Grade Design and Construction ................................................................ 20 Conventional Slabs on-Grade System .............................................................................................................. 21 Post-Tensioned Slab-on-Ground System (Optional) ........................................................................................ 23 Footing Observations ....................................................................................................................................... 26 General Corrosivity Screening .............................................................................................................................. 26 Infiltration Rate ..................................................................................................................................................... 27 Masonry Block Walls ........................................................................................................................................... 28 Exterior Concrete Flatwork ................................................................................................................................... 28 General ............................................................................................................................................................. 28 Subgrade Preparation ....................................................................................................................................... 29 Thickness and Joint Spacing ............................................................................................................................ 29 Reinforcement .................................................................................................................................................. 30 Edge Beams (Optional) .................................................................................................................................... 30 Drainage ........................................................................................................................................................... 30 Tree Wells ........................................................................................................................................................ 31 FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS ..................................................................................................................................... 31 REPORT LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 31 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................................ 33 ATTACHMENTS FIGURE 1 – SITE LOCATION MAP FIGURE 2 – SLOPE LOCATION MAP APPENDIX A – EXPLORATION LOGS APPENDIX B – LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES / LABORATORY TEST DATA APPENDIX C – SEISMIC DESIGN ANALYSIS APPENDIX D –PERCOLATION TEST SUMMARY APPENDIX E – EARTHQUAKE INDUCED SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS APPENDIX F – STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS REVISED DESIGN-PHASE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT PROPOSED PALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUM APARTMENT COMPLEX 10-ACRE SITE NORTH OF GERALD FORD DRIVE EAST OF THE PACIFIC AVENUE INTERSECTION ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER )APN) 694-120-028 CITY OF PALM DESERT, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION Petra Geosciences, Inc. (Petra) is presenting herein the results of our design-phase geotechnical investigation for the proposed Palm Villas at Millennium development, a 241-apartment complex and associated improvements proposed for construction on a 10-acre undeveloped site located on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive in the city of Palm Desert in Riverside County, California. This investigation included a review of published and unpublished literature, site reconnaissance and subsurface exploration, as well as a review of geotechnical maps pertaining to geologic hazards which may have an impact on the design and construction of the proposed project. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The subject site is an irregularly shaped, approximately 10-acre property, located on the north side of Gerald Ford Drive, east of the intersection with Pacific Avenue, in the city of Palm Desert, California. The site is bounded by Gerald Ford Drive to the south and vacant undeveloped land to the west, north and east. Interstate 10 is located just north of the subject site and runs southeast. The site is essentially vacant land exhibiting sandy desert scrub. The location of the site is shown on Figure 1. Topographically, the site is essentially flat with site elevations ranging from a high of approximately 171 feet above mean sea level (msl) near the northwest property corner to a low of approximately 167 feet msl near the southeast corner. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND GRADING As of the date of this report, no rough grading plans have been provided. Based on our conversations with Mr. Halter, it is our understanding that the subject site will be developed as a 241-unit apartment complex. The multi-family buildings are understood to be as much as three stories in height. Associated site improvements are expected to include access roads, walkways, surface and subsurface drainage controls, landscaped areas and on-site storm water retention. Excluding remedial removals, preliminary grading estimates anticipate cuts and fills to be on the order of 3 to 5 feet to achieve level pad grades. Recommendations for site grading and for the design and construction of building foundations are presented in the “Conclusions and Recommendations” section of this report. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 2 SITE RECONNAISSANCE AND SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our firm performed a site reconnaissance on September 10, 2021, which included the visual evaluation of the existing surface conditions. Existing surface conditions within the site that were observed during our site reconnaissance are described in the “Site Location and Description” section of this report. Our firm subsequently performed a subsurface exploration on September 20, 2021. Our subsurface exploration of the subject site included the advancement of four borings (identified herein as Borings B- 1 through B-4) with a truck-mounted, hollow-stem auger drill rig to depths ranging from approximately 16.5 to 66.5 feet below the ground surface. The locations of our borings are shown on Figure 2 and descriptive exploration logs are provided in Appendix A. Earth materials encountered in each of the exploratory borings were field classified and logged in accordance with Unified Soil Classification System procedures. In addition, our subsurface exploration included the collection of bulk samples and relatively undisturbed samples of the subsurface soils and bedrock for laboratory testing purposes. Bulk samples consisted of selected earth materials obtained at various depth intervals from selected borings. Relatively undisturbed samples were collected using a 3- inch, outside-diameter, modified California split-spoon soil sampler lined with 1-inch high brass rings. The modified sampler was driven with successive 30-inch drops of a free-fall, 140-pound automatic trip hammer. Blow counts for each 6-inch driving increment were recorded on the field logs. The central portions of the driven core samples were placed in sealed containers and transported to our laboratory for testing. Logs of the borings are presented in Appendix A. Percolation/Infiltration Testing A single percolation test was conducted to determine a infiltration rate of the near-surface onsite soils for preliminary design of detention basins to manage stormwater runoff. This test was performed in general accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFCWCD, 2014) guidelines for percolation testing. The field percolation test was performed via an 8-inch diameter borehole excavated to a depth of approximately 10 feet below existing grade. Testing was conducted in a perforated-cased borehole (with pea gravel surrounding the pipe) on 10-minute intervals for a period of approximately 1 hour. The percolation tests were conducted in the lower 5± feet of the borehole and the falling-head percolation test data was utilized in determining the test infiltration rate, It, expressed in units of inches/hour, utilizing the Porchet Method (RCFCWCD, 2014). PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 3 The approximate location of the percolation/infiltration test boring (Boring P-1) is depicted on the attached Figure 2. The exploration log for Boring P-1 is included in Appendix A of this report. Detailed percolation test results are provided on Plate D (Appendix D). These results are subject to review by the controlling authorities for the subject project. LABORATORY TESTING To evaluate the engineering properties of site soils, several laboratory tests were performed on selected samples considered representative of the fill and bedrock materials encountered during our investigation. Laboratory tests included the determination of maximum dry density and optimum moisture content, expansion potential, grain size analyses, soluble sulfate and chloride content, pH and minimum resistivity. In-place moisture content and unit dry density were also determined for select samples of the fill samples retrieved. A description of laboratory test procedures and summaries of the test data are presented in Appendix B and in our exploration logs (Appendix A). An evaluation of the test data is reflected throughout the “Conclusions and Recommendations” section of this report. FINDINGS Regional Geologic Setting The proposed project is located near the northern boundary of the Coachella Valley, which is part of the Salton Trough geomorphic province of California. The Salton Trough geomorphic province encompasses the Coachella, Imperial and Mexicali Valleys, which extend from northeast of Palm Springs near San Gorgonio Pass to the Gulf of California. The geologic structure of the trough is a result of extensional forces within the earth’s crust. The Coachella Valley is generally bounded by the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains on the west, the San Bernardino and the Little San Bernardino Mountains on the north, the Cottonwood Mountains and the Mecca Hills on the east, and the Salton Sea on the south. Alluvial, aeolian, and lacustrine sediments are the dominant geologic units of the Coachella Valley. The watershed of the Coachella Valley empties into the Salton Sea at the lowest part of the basin. This basin was periodically filled with water to form the ancient Lake Cahuilla, depending on which side of its delta the Colorado River would drain. The sediments of the delta form a topographic high that separates the Salton basin, which is below sea level, from the Gulf of California (Sea of Cortez). More specifically, the sites lie near the northern boundary of the old meandering shoreline of ancient Lake Cahuilla and between approximately 21 miles from the present-day Salton Sea. The current level of the Salton Sea is about -238 feet below msl. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 4 Local Geology and Subsurface Soil Conditions The project site is underlain by alluvial and aeolian (dune) deposits consisting of poorly-graded sands, silty sands, and to lesser extent, sandy silts. In general, the alluvial and aeolian deposits were generally found to be dry to slightly moist, loose near the surface, becoming medium dense to very dense/stiff with depth. Groundwater The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) was contacted with respect to historic groundwater levels within the site vicinity. CVWD provided groundwater level data for wells in the “Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit.” The closest well (State Well No. 337775N1163545W001), located less than a mile southeast of the subject site near the intersection of Berger Drive and Cook Street, was utilized for our evaluation. The highest measured groundwater level below existing ground surface was approximately 182 feet in 2005, by 2021 groundwater levels were measured at approximately 187 feet below existing ground surface. In addition, groundwater was not encountered within our exploratory borings, at least to the maximum depth explored of 66.5 feet. Thus, based on our review, the regional groundwater table is estimated to be approximately 180 feet, or greater, below the ground surface and is not anticipated to impact development of the subject site. Faulting The Coachella Valley is a seismically active area and numerous northwest-trending active faults have been documented within the area. The San Andreas fault zone is the most prominent fault within the Coachella Valley, and is considered to be “active”. An “active” fault is defined as a fault that has had displacement within the Holocene epoch, or last 11,000± years. Based on our review of the referenced geologic maps and literature, no active faults are known to project through the property. Furthermore, the site does not lie within the boundaries of an “Earthquake Fault Zone” as defined by the State of California in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (CGS, 2018) and the County of Riverside Map My County System. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (AP Act) defines an active fault as one that “has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years).” The main objective of the AP Act is to prevent the construction of dwellings on top of active faults that could displace the ground surface resulting in loss of life and property. However, it should be noted that according to the USGS Unified Hazard Tool website and the 2010 CGS Fault Activity Map of California, the San Andreas Fault, located approximately 3½ miles northeast of the site, would probably generate the most severe site ground motions and, therefore, is the majority PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 5 contributor to the deterministic minimum component of the ground motion models. As such, the site should be considered as a Near-Fault Site in accordance with ASCE 7-16, Section 11.4.1. The most recent surface-rupturing earthquake on the Coachella segment of the San Andreas fault likely occurred in the late 1600’s (Fumal et al., 2002). Prior to that, apparently five paleo earthquakes occurred on the Coachella segment in about A.D. 825, 982, 1231, 1502, and 1680 based on a trenching study at Thousand Palms Oasis (Fumal et al., 2002). These data indicate that the average repeat time for surface- rupturing earthquakes on the Coachella-Indio segment of the San Andreas fault is approximately 215 +/- 25 years, and that the last surface-rupturing event occurred approximately 325 years ago (Fumal et al., 2002). Our review of recent and historic Google Earth imagery, dating back to 1996, indicated that several strong north-west trending photo lineaments are located northwest of the subject site. However, these photo lineaments are clearly attributed to linear aeolian dune features associated with prevailing wind patterns, and not active faulting. Therefore, based on the above, the potential for onsite faulting is likely low. Secondary Seismic Hazards Seismically Induced Landsliding The site exhibits a generally flat topography and no landslides exist within or near the site. Based on the topography across the site, the potential for landsliding is considered negligible. Seismically Induced Flooding The types of seismically-induced flooding that are generally considered as potential hazards to a particular site normally include flooding due to a tsunami (seismic sea wave), a seiche, or failure of a major reservoir or other water retention structure upstream of the site. The Salton Sea is situated approximately 21 miles southeast of the site with an elevation approximately 300 feet lower than the subject site. In addition, no major reservoir is located near, or upstream of the site. Therefore, the potential for seiche or inundation is considered negligible. Because of the inland location of the site, flooding due to a tsunami is also considered negligible at the site. Seismically Induced Liquefaction and Dry Sand Settlement General Liquefaction occurs when strong seismic shaking of a saturated sand or silt causes intergranular fluid (pore-water) pressures to increase to levels where grain-to-grain contact is lost, and material temporarily PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 6 behaves as a viscous fluid. Liquefaction can cause settlement of the ground surface, loss of bearing, settlement and tilting of structures, flotation and buoyancy of buried structures and fissuring of the ground surface. A common surface manifestation of liquefaction is the formation of sand boils – short-lived fountains of soil and water that emerge from fissures or vents and leave freshly deposited, usually conical mounds of sand or silt on the ground surface. For sandy soils above the water table, strong seismic shaking can also result in rearrangement of the granular soil structure leading to densification of sandy soils, ground settlement and settlement and tilting of superstructures. Assessment of liquefaction or dry sand settlement potential for a particular site requires knowledge of a number of regional as well as site-specific parameters, including the estimated design earthquake magnitude, and the associated probable peak horizontal ground acceleration at the site, subsurface stratigraphy and soil characteristics. Parameters such as estimated probable peak horizontal ground acceleration can readily be determined using published references, or by utilizing a commercially available computer program specifically designed to perform a probabilistic analysis. On the other hand, stratigraphy and soil characteristics can only be accurately determined by means of a site-specific subsurface investigation combined with appropriate laboratory analysis of representative samples of onsite soils. Governmental Approach In April 1991, the State of California enacted the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (Public Resources Code, Division 2, Chapters 7-8). This act requires an assessment of liquefaction among other seismic hazards prior to new construction for most projects where geological conditions warrant. The purpose of the Act is to protect the public safety from the effects of strong ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, or other ground failure. Where liquefaction potential is established, it is required to be mitigated to acceptable levels of risk. The Act defines mitigation as “… those measures that are consistent with established practice and reduce seismic risk to acceptable levels.” Acceptable level of risk is defined as “that level that provides reasonable protection of the public safety, though it does not necessarily ensure continued structural integrity and functionality of the project [California Code of Regulations; Section 3721 (a)].” It is, therefore, interpreted that in the context of the Act, mitigation of the potential liquefaction hazards at the site, to appropriate levels of risk, can be accomplished through appropriate foundation and/or subsurface improvement design. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 7 More specifically, the 2019 California Building Code in Section 1803.5.11 and 1803.5.12, for structures within Seismic Design Categories C through F, requires the specific assessment of liquefaction hazards at a site. It also requires provision of recommendations for mitigation if a hazard exists. Site-Specific Liquefaction and Dry Sand Settlement Hazard Analysis Review of the County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521 (public review draft) indicates that the property is located within an area that has been designated as having a Moderate potential for earthquake-induced liquefaction (Riverside County, 2014). However, based upon a relatively deep historic high groundwater level (180+ feet), the liquefaction potential at the site is considered negligible. As such, surface manifestation of liquefaction such as ground fissures, sand boils, loss of bearing, liquefaction-induced settlement, etc. is considered negligible. Due to the absence of water and based on our site exploration, the most likely scenario for dynamic settlements is the dry sand settlement. This is due primarily to the presence of partially consolidated granular sandy soils and to the proximity of seismic sources. For this reason, a site-specific dry sand settlement analysis was performed as part of this study. Dry Sand Settlement Analyses Using SPT Results Propagating earthquake waves induce shearing stresses and strains in soil materials during strong ground shaking. This process rearranges the structure of granular soils such that there is an increase in density, with a corresponding decrease in volume, which results in vertical settlement. Dynamic settlement has been well documented in wet, sandy deposits undergoing liquefaction (see Tokimatsu and Seed, 1987) and in relatively dry sediments as well (Stewart et al, 1996). Specific methods to analyze potential wet and dry dynamic settlement are reported in Tokimatsu and Seed (1987), and specifically dry settlement in Pradel (1998) and Stewart et al. (2001; 2002) respectively. Most of the referenced papers focus on the seismic effects on dry, clean sands of a uniform grain size, though several reports extend the literature to fine-grained soils (Stewart et al., 2001 & 2002). State guidelines for evaluating dynamic settlement are provided in the California Geological Survey Special Publication 117A (CGS, 2008). Dry sand settlement was evaluated by using the data from the deepest boring (B-4). The field exploration was conducted using both a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler and a modified California sampler (Cal Mod). For the purpose of running seismic settlement analysis, all the Cal Mod resultant blow counts were converted to the equivalent SPT blow by multiplying by a factor of 0.65. We feel this is a conservative conversion factor based on our past experience with correlations between SPT and Cal Mod PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 8 data that we have observed. In our analyses, we utilized a PGAM value of 0.809g which was calculated to have a 2 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years, a moment magnitude Mw of 7.5 and a conservative, assumed groundwater depth of 70 feet. Dry sand settlement was calculated using a spreadsheet utilizing the following methods: • D. Pradel - Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy Soils • K. Tokimatsu, H. B. Seed - Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking, ASCE JGE Vol. 113, No. 8, August 1986 Based on our analysis and the depth weighting function suggested by Cetin (2009), the seismically induced total settlement is estimated as follows: • Total Unweighted Free Field Settlement was Approximately 2.05 inches • Total Depth Weighted Free Field Settlement was Approximately 1.34 inches Tabulated results of the estimated settlements are provided in Appendix E of this report. It should be noted that our estimated settlement is for free field condition. Depending on proposed structures foundation, height and stiffness, the actual settlement during the design earthquake may vary appreciably from those estimated herein due to soil-structure interaction. Differential Dynamic Settlement As stated above total seismic settlements are estimated to be on the order of 1.3 inches. Differential dynamic settlement is estimated to be less than 0.7 inch over a span of 40 feet. This can also be expressed as an angular distortion ratio of 1:69 in the vicinity of a building. Geotechnical Issues Not Related to Seismicity Wind Erosion Figure 4.12.6 of the County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521 indicates that the site is located in an area that is categorized as “High” for wind erodibility (County of Riverside, 2014). Development plans should account for the potential effects of wind-blown sand. Subsidence Subsidence is the settlement or deformation of the land surface caused by several different conditions (including tectonic activity and petroleum production); however, it is most commonly associated with changes in groundwater levels. Long-term withdrawal of groundwater in the area of the subject site has PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 9 lowered the water table considerably, and this has resulted in 50 or more feet of subsidence in some areas of the Coachella Valley (Sneed 2001, 2007, 2014). Although partial recovery of the settlement may be possible if the water table is recharged and if the vertical stress increases induced at the groundwater low point were not generally higher than the past pressure, most subsidence is not recoverable when the stress has increased beyond the highest past pressure. According to Section 4.12 of the County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521 (public review draft dated March 2014), the subject site lies within a susceptible area to subsidence. According to Chapter 6.0 of the County of Riverside General Plan (County of Riverside, 2008), Policy S-3.8, requires that a geotechnical evaluation of subsidence be performed if a site lies within a documented subsidence area, or an area that is susceptible to subsidence as shown on Figure S-7 of that document. As stated in the plan “differential displacement and fissures occur at or near the valley margin, and along faults. In the County of Riverside, the worst damage to structures, as a result of regional subsidence, may be expected at the valley margins”. We note the following findings in relation to our assessment of the subsidence hazard at the site: • As shown on Figure S-7 of mentioned document and based on our review of published USGS reports, the site appears to be located several miles away from the edge of the deepest section of documented subsidence. • As discussed previously, the highest historical groundwater level has been determined to be greater than 70 feet. On this site, subsidence of the ground surface from groundwater withdrawal is not expected to have any significant effect on the proposed development. • The site does lie within the active subsidence areas and site soil has been identified as unconsolidated deposits as documented by Sneed (2001, 2007, 2014). • Measured subsidence in the site area from subsidence related to groundwater withdrawal has reached approximately a few 10’s of mm (less than 30 mm) according to data presented in the latest USGS report on this local topic (Figure 8 - Sneed, 2014). Provided that our recommendation presented in this report are implemented properly during site development, the potential for ground subsidence to affect development of the site is expected to be low. Hydro-Collapsible Soils Based on our subsurface investigations conducted onsite (i.e., hollow-stem auger), the relative density of the underlying alluvial materials encountered at depth, and anticipated remedial grading prior to site development, the potential for hydro-consolidation to affect the site is considered low. This potential PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 10 would generally be no greater than that for other existing commercial structures and irrigated residential developments in the immediate site vicinity. Expansive Soils Our visual classification and laboratory testing of onsite soil materials indicates that expansive soils are not present at the site near the surface. If importing soil material will be required to construct the proposed pads, it is possible that expansive soils could become incorporated into onsite fills. Specifications for import soils are discussed in a subsequent section of this report CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General From a soils engineering and engineering geologic standpoint, the subject property is considered suitable for the proposed development provided grading and construction are performed in accordance with local ordinances and codes, current standards of practice in the area, and recommendations provided in this report. Grading Plan Review The following earthwork and foundation design recommendations have been prepared without a grading plan. As such, the recommendations provided in this report should be considered tentative until grading and foundation plans are finalized and reviewed by our firm. Additional recommendations and/or modification of the recommendations provided herein may be necessary depending upon the results of our grading and foundation plan review. Effect of Proposed Grading on Adjacent Properties It is our opinion that the proposed grading and construction will not adversely affect the stab ility of adjoining properties provided that grading and construction are performed in accordance with the recommendations presented herein. PRIMARY GEOTECHNICAL CONCERNS Seismic Shaking The site is located within an active tectonic area with several significant faults capable of producing moderate to strong earthquakes. The San Andreas, the Banning-Mission Creek fault, Indio Hills fault, and the Hidden Springs fault are all in close proximity to the site and capable of producing strong ground PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 11 motions. Structures within the site should therefore be designed and constructed to resist the effects of strong ground motion in accordance with the current edition of the California Building Code. Seismically-Induced Settlement While groundwater conditions at the site preclude the potential for liquefaction, our analysis using SPT data, has resulted in an estimate of less than an inch of seismically-induced (dynamic) total settlement should be anticipated after remedial grading, with a corresponding differential settlement of approximately 0.7 inches or less over a distant of 30 feet. Therefore, the foundations for the proposed site structures should be designed to accommodate this magnitude of movement. Geotechnical design parameters for foundation design are provided in the “Foundation Design Guidelines” section of this report. Existing Unsuitable Materials The existing weathered native near surface soils to an approximate depth of 1 to 2 feet are generally loose and dry and in their present condition are not suitable as a bearing media for new fill or structure foundations. Therefore, in order create a uniform fill mat across the site, and to reduce the potential of distress to the proposed building footings, floor slabs, and exterior improvements due to the effects of differential settlement, all weathered near surface native materials should be removed down to competent native deposits and then replaced as engineered fill. Recommendations for remedial grading are provided in the “Earthwork” section of this report. Earthwork General Earthwork Recommendations Earthwork should be performed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the 2019 CBC and all applicable requirements of the County of Riverside. Grading should also be performed in accordance with the following site-specific recommendations prepared by Petra based on the proposed construction. Geotechnical Observations and Testing Prior to the start of earthwork, a meeting should be held at the site with the owner, contractor and geotechnical consultant to discuss the work schedule and geotechnical aspects of the grading. Earthwork, which in this instance will generally entail over-excavation and re-compaction of low density near surface soils for structures supported by mat or shallow foundations, should be accomplished under full -time observation and testing of the geotechnical consultant. A representative of the project geotechnical PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 12 consultant should be present onsite during earthwork operations to document the placement of engineered fills, as well as to document compliance with the other recommendations presented herein. Clearing and Grubbing All vegetation onsite and any trash or debris in areas to be graded should be removed from the site. During site grading, fill soils should be cleared of any deleterious materials that are missed during the initial clearing and grubbing operations. Any cavities or excavations created upon removal of subsurface structures should be cleared of loose soil, shaped to provide access for backfilling and compaction equipment and then backfilled with properly compacted fill. The project geotechnical consultant should provide periodic observation and testing services during clearing and grubbing operations to document compliance with the above recommendations. In addition, should any unusual or adverse soil conditions be encountered during grading that are not described herein, these conditions should be brought to the immediate attention of the project geotechnical consultant for corrective recommendations. Ground Preparation – Structural and Pavement Areas Based on soil conditions observed in the exploratory borings, surface soils over the majority of the site are loose in the upper approximately 1 to 2 feet, as evidenced by dense native soils being encountered in the soil sampling program at the initial 2-foot depth interval in all borings during the subsurface exploration. In all structural and pavement areas, any undocumented fill, as well as the existing ground surface should be over-excavated to depths that expose competent native soils exhibiting an in-place relative compaction of 85 percent or more, based on Test Method ASTM D 1557. As noted above, the minimum required depth of over-excavation is anticipated to be on the order of 2 feet, excluding any undocumented fill. The horizontal limits of over-excavation should extend to a minimum distance of 5 feet beyond the proposed perimeter foundation lines or to a horizontal distance equal to the depth of over- excavation, whichever is greater. Due to the potential variability of the surficial soil conditions, the required depths of over-excavation will have to be determined during grading. Therefore, prior to placing compacted fill, the exposed bottom surfaces in all over-excavated areas should be observed and approved by the project geotechnical consultant. Following this approval, the exposed bottom surfaces should be scarified to a depth of approximately 6 to 8 inches, watered as necessary to achieve a moisture content that is equal to or slightly above optimum moisture content, and then compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 13 percent of the applicable laboratory maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557. Cut Areas Cuts that extend to depths greater than approximately 2 feet below existing grade are anticipated to expose, competent native soils. However, due to variability in moisture content and cohesionless nature of the earth materials encountered across the site, cuts in structural areas should be over -excavated to a minimum depth of 3 feet and replaced with fill compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Shallower removals may be appropriate where exposed soil conditions, following the cut, are deemed to be suitable as determined by the geotechnical consultant. Pavement areas do not require such over-excavation. Fill Placement and Testing All fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 6 inches in thickness, watered as necessary to achieve a moisture content that is equal to or slightly above optimum moisture content, and then compacted in- place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of the applicable laboratory maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557. Each fill lift should be treated in a similar manner. Subsequent lifts should not be placed until the preceding lift has been approved by the project geotechnical consultant. The laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for each change in soil type should be determined in accordance with Test Method ASTM D 1557. Imported Soils If imported soils are required to complete the planned grading, these soils should consist of clean materials devoid of rock exceeding a maximum dimension of 2 inches, as well as organics, trash and similar deleterious materials. Imported soils should also exhibit an expansion index of 20 or less , i.e., non-expansive. Prospective import soils should be observed, tested and approved by our firm prior to importing the soils to the site. It is recommended that the project environmental consultant should also be notified so that they can confirm the suitability of the proposed import material from an environmental standpoint. Geotechnical Observations The project geotechnical consultant should be present on site during grading operations to observe and document engineered fill placement and moisture-conditioning, as well as to document compliance with the other recommendations presented herein. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 14 Shrinkage and Subsidence Volumetric changes in earth quantities will occur when excavated onsite soils are replaced as properly compacted fill. Accordingly, it is estimated that a shrinkage factor on the order of 0 to 5 percent will occur when onsite soils are excavated and placed as compacted fill. Subsidence from scarification and re-compaction of exposed bottom surfaces in over-excavated areas is expected to be minimal. The above estimates of shrinkage and subsidence are intended as aids for the project planners in determining earthwork quantities. However, these values should not be considered as absolute values and some contingencies should be made for balancing earthwork quantities on the basis of actual shrinkage and subsidence that occur during grading. Post-Grading Considerations Site Drainage Surface drainage systems consisting of sloping concrete flatwork and graded earth swales are anticipated to be constructed on the subject lots to collect and direct all surface water to the adjacent street. In addition, the ground surface around the proposed buildings should be sloped to provide a positive drainage gradient away from the structures. The purpose of the drainage systems is to prevent ponding of surface water within the level areas of the site and against building foundations and associated site improvements. The drainage systems should be properly maintained throughout the life of the proposed development. Section 1804.4 of the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) requires that "The ground immediately adjacent to the foundation shall be sloped away from the building at a slope of not less than one unit vertical in 20 units horizontal (5 percent slope) for a minimum distance of 10 feet (3048 mm) measured perpendicular to the face of the wall." Further, “Swales used for this purpose shall be sloped a minimum of 2 percent where located within 10 feet (3048 mm) of the building foundation”. These provisions fall under the purview of the Design Civil Engineer. However, exceptions to allow modifications to these criteria are provided within the same section of the code as "Where climatic or soil conditions warrant, the slope of the ground away from the building foundations is permitted to be reduced to not less than one unit in 48 units horizontal (2 percent slope)”. This exemption provision appears to fall under the purview of the Geotechnical Engineer-of-Record (Petra, 2021). PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 15 It is our understanding that the state-of-practice for projects in various cities and unincorporated areas of Riverside County, as well as throughout Southern California, has been to construct earthen slopes at 2 percent gradient away from the foundations and at 1 percent minimum for earthen swale gradients. Structures constructed and properly maintained under those criteria have performed satisfactorily. Therefore, considering the semi-arid climate, site soil conditions and an appropriate irrigation regime, Petra considers that the implementation of 2 percent slopes away from the structures and 1 percent swales to be suitable for the subject lots. It should be emphasized that the homeowners are cautioned that the slopes away from the structures and swales to be properly maintained, not to be obstructed, and that future improvements not to alter established gradients unless replaced with suitable alternative drainage systems. Further, whe re the flow line of the swale exists within five feet of the structure, adjacent footings shall be deepened appropriately to maintain minimum embedment requirements, measured from the flow line of the swale. Utility Trench Backfill All utility trench backfill should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Onsite soils cannot be densified adequately by flooding and jetting techniques; therefore, trench backfill materials should be placed in lifts no greater than approximately 6 inches in thickness, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve a uniform moisture content that is equal to or slightly above optimum moisture, and then mechanically compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. A representative of the project geotechnical consultant should probe and test the backfills to document that adequate compaction has been achieved. Utility-trench sidewalls deeper than about 5 feet should be laid back at a ratio of 1:1 (h:v) or flatter or shored. A trench box may be used in lieu of shoring. If shoring is anticipated, the project geotechnical consultant should be contacted to provide design parameters. For shallow trenches where pipe may be damaged by mechanical compaction equipment, such as under the building floor slab, imported clean sand exhibiting a sand equivalent value (SE) of 30 or greater may be utilized. The sand backfill materials should be watered to achieve near opt imum moisture conditions and then tamped in place. No specific relative compaction will be required; however, observation, probing, and, if deemed necessary, testing should be performed by a representative of the project geotechnical consultant to document that the sand backfill is adequately compacted and will not be subject to excessive settlement. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 16 Where utility trenches enter the footprint of the building, they should be backfilled through their entire depths with on-site fill materials, sand-cement slurry or concrete rather than with any sand or gravel shading. This “plug” of less- or non-permeable materials will mitigate the potential for water to migrate through the backfilled trenches from outside of the building to the areas beneath the foundations and floor slabs. If clean, imported sand is to be used for backfill of exterior utility trenches, it is recommended that the upper 12 inches of trench backfill materials consist of compacted on-site soil materials. This is to reduce infiltration of irrigation and rainwater into granular trench backfill materials. Where an interior or exterior utility trench is proposed parallel to a building footing, the bottom of the trench should not be located below a 1:1 plane projected downward from the outside bottom edge of the adjacent footing. Where this condition exists, the adjacent footing should be deepened such that the bottom of the utility trench is located above the 1:1 projection. FOUNDATION DESIGN GUIDELINES Faulting Based on our review of the referenced geologic maps and literature, no active faults are known to project through the property. Furthermore, the site does not lie within the boundaries of an “Earthquake Fault Zone” as defined by the State of California in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (CGS, 2018). The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (AP Act) defines an active fault as one that “has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years).” The main objective of the AP Act is to prevent the construction of dwellings on top of active faults that could displace the ground surface resulting in loss of life and property. However, it should be noted that according to the USGS Unified Hazard Tool website and/or 2010 CGS Fault Activity Map of California, the San Andreas Fault, located approximately 3.7 miles northeast of the site, would probably generate the most severe site ground motions and, therefore, is the majority contributor to the deterministic minimum component of the ground motion models. The subject site is located at a distance of less than 4.0 miles (6.5 km) from the surface projection of this fault system, which is capable of producing a magnitude 7 or larger events with a slip rate along the fault greater than 0.04 inch per year. As such, the site should be considered as a Near-Fault Site in accordance with ASCE 7- 16, Section 11.4.1. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 17 Seismic Design Parameters Earthquake loads on earthen structures and buildings are a function of ground acceleration which may be determined from the site-specific ground motion analysis. Alternatively, a design response spectrum can be developed for certain sites based on the code guidelines. To provide the design team with the parameters necessary to construct the design acceleration response spectrum for this project, we used two computer applications. Specifically, the first computer application, which was jointly developed by Structural Engineering Association of California (SEAOC) and California’s Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD), the SEA/OSHPD Seismic Design Maps Tool website, https://seismicmaps.org, is used to calculate the ground motion parameters. The second computer application, the United Stated Geological Survey (USGS) Unified Hazard Tool website, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/, is used to estimate the earthquake magnitude and the distance to surface projection of the fault. To run the above computer applications, site latitude and longitude, seismic risk category and knowledge of site class are required. The site class definition depends on the direct measurement and the ASCE 7- 16 recommended procedure for calculating average small-strain shear wave velocity, Vs30, within the upper 30 meters (approximately 100 feet) of site soils. A seismic risk category of II was assigned to the proposed building in accordance with 2019 CBC, Table 1604.5. Blow counts from the deep boring were utilized to estimate the site class applicable for the upper 100 feet from the ASCE 7-16, Article 20.4.2 procedure. The average Standard Penetration blow count was 40. As such, in accordance with ASCE 7-16, Table 20.3-1, Site Class D (D- Stiff Soil as per SEA/OSHPD software) has been assigned to the subject site. The following table, Table 1, provides parameters required to construct the seismic response coefficient, Cs, curve based on ASCE 7-16, Article 12.8 guidelines. A printout of the computer output is attached in Appendix C. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 18 TABLE 1 Seismic Design Parameters Ground Motion Parameters Specific Reference Parameter Value Unit Site Latitude (North) - 33.78741 ° Site Longitude (West) - -116.3618 ° Site Class Definition Section 1613.2.2 (1), Chapter 20 (2) D-Stiff (4) - Assumed Seismic Risk Category Table 1604.5 (1) II - Mw - Earthquake Magnitude USGS Unified Hazard Tool (3) 7.49 (3) - R – Distance to Surface Projection of Fault USGS Unified Hazard Tool (3) 6.11 (3) km Ss - Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Short Period (0.2 second) Figure 1613.2.1(1) (1) 1.882 (4) g S1 - Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Long Period (1.0 second) Figure 1613.2.1(2) (1) 0.778 (4) g Fa – Short Period (0.2 second) Site Coefficient Table 1613.2.3(1) (1) 1 (4) - Fv – Long Period (1.0 second) Site Coefficient Table 1613.2.3(2) (1) Null (4) - SMS – MCER Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter Adjusted for Site Class Effect (0.2 second) Equation 16-36 (1) 2.259 (4) g SM1 - MCER Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter Adjusted for Site Class Effect (1.0 second) Equation 16-37 (1) Null (4) g SDS - Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-s Equation 16-38 (1) 1.506 (4) g SD1 - Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-s Equation 16-39 (1) Null (4) g To = 0.2 SD1/ SDS Section 11.4.6 (2) Null s Ts = SD1/ SDS Section 11.4.6 (2) Null s TL - Long Period Transition Period Figure 22-14 (2) 8 (4) s PGA - Peak Ground Acceleration at MCEG (*) Figure 22-9 (2) 0.809 g FPGA - Site Coefficient Adjusted for Site Class Effect (2) Table 11.8-1 (2) 1.1 (4) - PGAM –Peak Ground Acceleration (2) Adjusted for Site Class Effect Equation 11.8-1 (2) 0.97 (4) g Design PGA ≈ (⅔ PGAM) - Slope Stability (†) Similar to Eqs. 16-38 & 16-39 (2) 0.647 g Design PGA ≈ (0.4 SDS) – Short Retaining Walls (‡) Equation 11.4-5 (2) 0.602 g CRS - Short Period Risk Coefficient Figure 22-18A (2) 0.895(4) - CR1 - Long Period Risk Coefficient Figure 22-19A (2) 0.881 (4) - SDC - Seismic Design Category (§) Section 1613.2.5 (1) Null (4) - References: (1) California Building Code (CBC), 2019, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume I and II. (2) American Society of Civil Engineers/Structural Engineering Institute (ASCE/SEI), 2016, Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, Standards 7-16. (3) USGS Unified Hazard Tool - https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ (4) SEI/OSHPD Seismic Design Map Application – https://seismicmaps.org Related References: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2015, NEHERP (National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program) Recommended Seismic Provision for New Building and Other Structures (FEMA P-1050). Notes: * PGA Calculated at the MCE return period of 2475 years (2 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years). † PGA Calculated at the Design Level of ⅔ of MCE; approximately equivalent to a return period of 475 years (10 percent chance o f exceedance in 50 years). ‡ PGA Calculated for short, stubby retaining walls with an infinitesimal (zero) fundamental period. § The designation provided herein may be superseded by the structural engineer in accordance with Section 1613.2.5.1, if applic able. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 19 Discussion - General Owing to the characteristics of the subsurface soils, as defined by Site Class D-Stiff Soil designation, and proximity of the site to the sources of major ground shaking, the site is expected to experience strong ground shaking during its anticipated life span. Under these circumstances, where the code-specified design response spectrum may not adequately characterize site response, the 2019 CBC typically requires a site-specific seismic response analysis to be performed. This requirement is signified/identified by the “null” values that are output using SEA/OSHPD software in determination of short period, but mostly, in determination of long period seismic parameters, see Table 1. For conditions where a “null” value is reported for the site, a variety of design approaches are permitted by 2019 CBC and ASCE 7-16 in lieu of a site-specific seismic hazard analysis. For any specific site, these alternative design approaches, which include Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF) procedure, Modal Response Spectrum Analysis (MRSA) procedure, Linear Response History Analysis (LRHA) procedure and Simplified Design procedure, among other methods, are expected to provide results that may or may not be more economical than those that are obtained if a site-specific seismic hazards analysis is performed. These design approaches and their limitations should be evaluated by the project structural engineer. Discussion – Seismic Design Category Please note that the Seismic Design Category, SDC, is also designated as “null” in Table 1. For Risk Category I, II or III structures, where the mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at 1 – second period, S1, is greater than or equal to 0.75, the 2019 CBC, Section 1613.2.5.1 requires that these structures be assigned to Seismic Design Category E. Discussion – Equivalent Lateral Force Method Should the Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF) method be used for seismic design of structural elements, the value of Constant Velocity Domain Transition Period, Ts, is estimated to be 0.70 seconds and the value of Long Period Transition Period, TL, is provided in Table 1 for construction of Seismic Response Coefficient – Period (Cs -T) curve that is used in the ELF procedure. As stated herein, the subject site is considered to be within a Site Class D-Stiff Soil. A site-specific ground motion hazard analysis is not required for structures on Site Class D-Stiff Soil with S1 > 0.2 provided that the Seismic Response Coefficient, Cs, is determined in accordance with ASCE 7-16, Article 12.8 and structural design is performed in accordance with Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF) procedure. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 20 Allowable Soil Bearing Capacities Provided that remedial grading is performed within the site as recommended in the “Earthwork” section of this report, an allowable bearing value of 1,500 pounds per square foot may be used for 24-inch-wide pad footings and 12-inch-wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches into compacted fill. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional foot of depth and by 10 percent for each additional foot of width, to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot. Recommended allowable bearing values include both dead and live loads and may be increased by one - third for short duration wind and seismic forces. Lateral Resistance A passive earth pressure of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square-foot, may be used to resist lateral loads. In addition, a coefficient of friction of 0.3 5 times the dead load forces may be used between concrete and the supporting soils to determine lateral sliding resistance. The above values may be combined without reduction. An increase of one-third of the above values may also be used when designing for short duration wind or s eismic forces. These valves are based on footings placed directly against compacted fill. In the case where footing sides are formed, all backfill placed against the footings should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the applicable laboratory maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557. Estimated Footing Settlement Based on the allowable bearing values provided above, maximum total static settlement of the footings under the anticipated loads is expected to be on the order of 3/4 inch. Differential settlement is expected to be less than ½ inch over a horizontal span of 30 feet. The majority of settlement is likely to take place as footing loads are applied or shortly thereafter. In addition, based on our analysis using SPT data, approximately 1.3 inches of seismically induced (dynamic) total settlement should be anticipated after remedial grading, with a corresponding differential settlement of approximately 0.7 inches or less over a distant of 30 feet. The dynamic settlement should be utilized to evaluate structural integrity in the event of a strong ground motion seismic event. Guidelines for Footings and Slabs on-Grade Design and Construction The results of our laboratory tests performed on representative samples of near-surface soils within the site during our investigation indicate that these materials predominantly exhibit expansion indices that are less than 20. As indicated in Section 1803.5.3 of 2019 California Building Code (2019 CBC), these PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 21 soils are considered non-expansive and, as such, the design of slabs on-grade is considered to be exempt from the procedures outlined in Sections 1808.6.2 of the 2019 CBC and may be performed using any method deemed rational and appropriate by the project structural engineer . However, the following minimum recommendations are presented herein for conditions where the project design team may require geotechnical engineering guidelines for design and construction of footings and slabs on -grade the project site. The design and construction guidelines that follow are based on the above soil conditions and may be considered for reducing the effects of variability in fabric, composition and, therefore, the detrimental behavior of the site soils such as excessive short- and long-term total and differential heave or settlement. These guidelines have been developed on the basis of the previous experience of this firm on projects with similar soil conditions . Although construction performed in accordance with these guidelines has been found to reduce post-construction movement and/or distress, they generally do not positively eliminate all potential effects of variability in soils characteristics and future heave or settlement. It should also be noted that the suggestions for dimension and reinforcement provided herein are performance-based and intended only as preliminary guidelines to achieve adequate performance under the anticipated soil conditions. However, they should not be construed as replacement for structural engineering analyses, experience and judgment. The project structural engineer, architect and/or civil engineer should make appropriate adjustments to slab and footing dimensions, and reinforcement type, size and spacing to account for internal concrete forces (e.g., thermal, shrinkage and expansion) as well as external forces (e.g., applied loads) as deemed necessary. Consideration should also be given to minimum design criteria as dictated by local building code requirements. Conventional Slabs on-Grade System Given the expansion index of less than 20, as exhibited by onsite soils, we recommend that footings and floor slabs be designed and constructed in accordance with the following minimum criteria. Footings 1. Exterior continuous footings supporting one- and two-story structures should be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade, respectively. Exterior continuous footings supporting three-and four-story structures should be founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade, respectively. Interior continuous footings may be founded at a minimum depth of 10 inches below the top of the adjacent finish floor slabs. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 22 2. In accordance with Table 1809.7 of 2019 CBC for light-frame construction, all continuous footings should have minimum widths of 12 inches for one- and two-story construction. All continuous footings should have minimum widths of 15 and 18 inches for three and four-story construction, respectively. We recommend all continuous footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. 3. A minimum 12-inch-wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across the garage entrances or similar openings (such as large doors or bay windows). The grade beam should be reinforced with a similar manner as provided above. 4. Interior isolated pad footings, if required, should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the bottoms of the adjacent floor slabs for one- and two-story buildings. Interior isolated pad footings for three- and four-story buildings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 15 inches below the bottoms of the adjacent floor slabs. Pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, placed near the bottoms of the footings. 5. Exterior isolated pad footings intended for support of roof overhangs such as second-story decks, patio covers and similar construction for one- and two-story buildings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. Exterior isolated pad footings for three- and four-story buildings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 24 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, placed near the bottoms of the footings. Exterior isolated pad footings may need to be connected to adjacent pad and/or continuous footings via tie beams at the discretion of the project structural engineer. 6. The minimum footing dimensions and reinforcement recommended herein may be modified (increased or decreased subject to the constraints of Chapter 18 of the 2019 CBC) by the structural engineer responsible for foundation design based on his/her calculations, engineering experience and judgment. Building Floor Slabs 1. Concrete floor slabs should be a minimum 4 inches thick and reinforced with No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 24 inches on centers, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or brick to ensure the desired placement near mid-depth. Slab dimension, reinforcement type, size and spacing need to account for internal concrete forces (e.g., thermal, shrinkage and expansion) as well as external forces (e.g., applied loads), as deemed necessary. 2. Living area concrete floor slabs and areas to receive moisture sensitive floor covering should be underlain with a moisture vapor retarder consisting of a minimum 10-mil-thick polyethylene or polyolefin membrane that meets the minimum requirements of ASTM E96 and ASTM E1745 for vapor retarders (such as Husky Yellow Guard®, Stego® Wrap, or equivalent). All laps within the membrane should be sealed, and at least 2 inches of clean sand should be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. To reduce the potential for punctures, the membrane should be placed on a pad surface that has been graded smooth without any sharp protrusions . If a smooth surface cannot be achieved by grading, consideration should be given to lowering the pad PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 23 finished grade an additional inch and then placing a 1-inch-thick leveling course of sand across the pad surface prior to the placement of the membrane. At the present time, some slab designers, geotechnical professionals and concrete experts view the sand layer below the slab (blotting sand) as a place for entrapment of excess moisture that could adversely impact moisture-sensitive floor coverings. As a preventive measure, the potential for moisture intrusion into the concrete slab could be reduced if the concrete is placed directly on the vapor retarder. However, if this sand layer is omitted, appropriate curing methods must be implemented to ensure that the concrete slab cures uniformly. A qualified materials engineer with experience in slab design and construction should provide recommendations for alternative methods of curing and supervise the construction process to ensure uniform slab curing. Additional steps would also need to be taken to prevent puncturing of the vapor retarder during concrete placement. 3. Garage floor slabs should be a minimum 4 inches thick and reinforced in a similar manner as living area floor slabs. Garage slabs should also be poured separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained using ¾-inch-minimum felt expansion joint material. To control the propagation of shrinkage cracks, garage floor slabs should be quartered with weakened plane joints. Consideration should be given to placement of a moisture vapor retarder below the garage slab, similar to that provided in Item 2 above, should the garage slab be overlain with moisture sensitive floor covering. 4. Presaturation of the subgrade below floor slabs will not be required; however, prior to placing concrete, the subgrade below all dwelling and garage floor slab areas should be thoroughly moistened to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal to or slightly greater than optimum moisture content. This moisture content should penetrate to a minimum depth of 12 inches below the bottoms of the slabs. 5. The minimum dimensions and reinforcement recommended herein for building floor slabs may be modified (increased or decreased subject to the constraints of Chapter 18 of the 2019 CBC) by the structural engineer responsible for foundation design based on his/her calculations, engineering experience and judgment. Post-Tensioned Slab-on-Ground System (Optional) The use of a post-tension system should be viewed as optional in this instance. In consideration of the expansion index of less than 20, as predominantly exhibited by onsite soils, any rational and appropriate procedure may be chosen by the project structural engineer for the design of post-tensioned slab-on- ground system. Should the design engineer choose to follow the latest Code-adopted edition of the procedure published by the Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI DC 10.5), the following minimum design criteria are provided Table 2, below. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 24 TABLE 2 Presumptive Post-Tensioned Slab on-Grade Design Parameters for PTI Procedure Soil Information Approximate Depth of Constant Suction, feet 9 Approximate Soil Suction, pF 3.9 Inferred Thornthwaite Index: -20 Average Edge Moisture Variation Distance, em in feet: Center Lift Edge Lift 9.0 4.7 Anticipated Swell, ym in inches: Center Lift Edge Lift 0.25 0.45 Modulus of Subgrade Reaction The modulus of subgrade reaction for design of load bearing elements depends on the size of the element and soil-structure interaction. However, as a first level of approximation, this value may be assumed to be 125 pounds per cubic inch. Minimum Design Recommendations The soil values provided above may be utilized by the project structural engineer to design post-tensioned slabs on-ground in accordance with Section 1808.6.2 of the 2019 CBC and the PTI publication. Thicker floor slabs and larger footing sizes may be required for structural reasons and should govern the design if more restrictive than the minimum recommendations provided below: 1. Exterior continuous footings for one- and two-story structures should be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent finished ground surface. Exterior continuous footings for three- and four-story structures should be founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished ground surface. Interior footings may be founded at a minimum depth of 10 inches below the tops of the adjacent finish floor slabs. 2. In accordance with Table 1809.7 of 2019 CBC for light-frame construction, all continuous footings should have minimum widths of 12 inches for one- and two-story construction. All continuous footings should have minimum widths of 15 and 18 inches for three-and four-story construction. We recommend all continuous footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. Alternatively, post-tensioned tendons may be utilized in the perimeter continuous footings in lieu of the reinforcement bars. 3. A minimum 12-inch-wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across the garage entrances or similar openings (such as large doors or bay windows). The grade beam should be reinforced in a similar manner as provided above. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 25 4. Interior isolated pad footings, if required, should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the bottoms of the adjacent floor slabs for one- and two- story buildings. Interior isolated pad footings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 15 inches below the bottoms of the adjacent floor slabs for three- and four-story buildings. Pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, placed near the bottoms of the footings. 5. Exterior isolated pad footings intended for support of roof overhangs such as second-story decks, patio covers and similar construction for one- and two-story buildings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. Exterior isolated pad footings for three- and four-story buildings should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 24 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, placed near the bottoms of the footings . Exterior isolated pad footings may need to be connected to adjacent pad and/or continuous footings via tie beams at the discretion of the project structural engineer. 6. The thickness of the floor slabs should be determined by the project structural engineer with consideration given to the expansion index of the onsite soils; however; we recommend that a minimum slab thickness of 4 inches be considered. 7. As an alternative to designing 4-inch-thick post-tensioned slabs with perimeter footings as described in Items 1 and 2 above, the structural engineer may design the foundation system using a thickened slab design. The minimum thickness of this uniformly thick slab should be 7.5 inches. The engineer in charge of post-tensioned slab design may also opt to use any combination of slab thickness and footing embedment depth as deemed appropriate based on their engineering experience and judgment. 8. Living area concrete floor slabs and areas to receive moisture sensitive floor covering should be underlain with a moisture vapor retarder consisting of a minimum 10-mil-thick polyethylene or polyolefin membrane that meets the minimum requirements of ASTM E96 and ASTM E1745 for vapor retarders (such as Husky Yellow Guard®, Stego® Wrap, or equivalent). All laps within the membrane should be sealed, and at least 2 inches of clean sand should be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. To reduce the potential for punctures, the membrane should be placed on a pad surface that has been graded smooth without any sharp protrusions. If a smooth surface cannot be achieved by grading, consideration should be given to lowering the pad finished grade an additional inch and then placing a 1-inch-thick leveling course of sand across the pad surface prior to the placement of the membrane. At the present time, some slab designers, geotechnical professionals and concrete experts view the sand layer below the slab (blotting sand) as a place for entrapment of excess moisture that could adversely impact moisture-sensitive floor coverings. As a preventive measure, the potential for moisture intrusion into the concrete slab could be reduced if the concrete is placed directly on the vapor retarder. However, if this sand layer is omitted, appropriate curing methods must be implemented to ensure that the concrete slab cures uniformly. A qualified materials engineer with experience in slab design and construction should provide recommendations for alternative methods of curing and supervise the construction process to ensure uniform slab curing. Additional steps would also need to be taken to prevent puncturing of the vapor retarder during concrete placement. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 26 9. Garage floor slabs should be designed in a similar manner as living area floor slabs. Consideration should be given to placement of a moisture vapor retarder below the garage sla b, similar to that provided in Item 6 above, should the garage slab be overlain with moisture sensitive floor covering. 10. Presaturation of the subgrade below floor slabs will not be required; however, prior to placing concrete, the subgrade below all dwelling and garage floor slab areas should be thoroughly moistened to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal to or slightly greater than optimum moisture content. This moisture content should penetrate to a minimum depth of 12 inches below the bottoms of the slabs. 11. The minimum footing dimensions and reinforcement recommended herein may be modified (increased or decreased subject to the constraints of Chapter 18 of the 2019 CBC) by the structural engineer responsible for foundation design based on his/her calculations, engineering experience and judgment. Footing Observations Foundation excavations should be observed by a representative of the project geotechnical consultant to verify that they have been excavated into competent materials to the minimum depths recommended herein. These observations should be performed prior to the placement of forms or reinforcement. The excavations should be trimmed neat, level and square. All loose, sloughed or moisture-softened materials and/or any construction debris should be removed prior to the placement of concrete. Excavated soils derived from footing and utility trenches should not be placed in building pad or parking lot areas unless they are compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. General Corrosivity Screening As a screening level study, limited chemical and electrical tests were performed on samples considered representative of the onsite soils to identify potential corrosive characteristics of these soils. The common indicators associated with soil corrosivity include water-soluble sulfate and chloride levels, pH (a measure of acidity), and minimum electrical resistivity. It should be noted that Petra does not practice corrosion engineering; therefore, the test results, opinion and engineering judgment provided herein should be considered as general guidelines only. Additional analyses would be warranted, especially, for cases where buried metallic building materials (such as copper and cast or ductile iron pipes) in contact with site soils are planned for the project. In many cases, the project geotechnical engineer may not be informed of these choices. Therefore, for conditions where such elements are considered, we recommend that other, relevant project design professionals (e.g., the architect, landscape architect, civil and/or structural engineer) also consider recommending a qualified corrosion engineer to conduct PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 27 additional sampling and testing of near-surface soils during the final stages of site grading to provide a complete assessment of soil corrosivity. Recommendations to mitigate the detrimental effects of corrosive soils on buried metallic and other building materials that may be exposed to corrosive soils should be provided by the corrosion engineer as deemed appropriate. In general, a soil’s water-soluble sulfate levels and pH relate to the potential for concrete degradation; water-soluble chlorides in soils impact ferrous metals embedded or encased in concrete, e.g., reinforcing steel; and electrical resistivity is a measure of a soil’s corrosion potential to a variety of buried metals used in the building industry, such as copper tubing and cast or ductile iron pipes. Table 3, below, presents a single value of individual test results with an interpretation of current code indicators and guidelines that are commonly used in this industry. The table includes the code-related classifications of the soils as they relate to the various tests, as well as a general recommendation for possible mitigation measures in view of the potential adverse impact on various components of the proposed structures in direct contact with site soils. The guidelines provided herein should be evaluated and confirmed, or modified, in their entirety by the project structural engineer, corrosion engineer and/or the contractor responsible for concrete placement for structural concrete used in exterior and interior footings, interior slabs on-ground, garage slabs, wall foundations and concrete exposed to weather such as driveways, patios, porches, walkways, ramps, steps, curbs, etc. TABLE 3 Soil Corrosivity Screening Results Test Test Results Classification General Recommendations Soluble Sulfates (Cal 417) 0.0006 % S01 Min. f’c= 2,500 psi pH (Cal 643) 9.17 Strongly Alkaline Type I-P (MS) Modified or Type II Modified cement Soluble Chloride (Cal 422) 105 ppm C12 No max water/cement ratio, f’c = 2,500 psi Resistivity (Cal 643) 13,000 ohm-cm Corrosive3 Protective wrapping/coating of buried pipes; corrosion resistant materials; or cathodic protection Notes: 1. ACI 318-14, Section 19.3 2. ACI 318-14, Section 19.3 3. Pierre R. Roberge, “Handbook of Corrosion Engineering” Infiltration Rate The percolation test conducted on-site yielded a test infiltration rate, It, of 9.68 in./hr. This rate is unfactored and should be considered preliminary in nature. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 28 It should be noted that a prolonged period of infiltration, e.g. the first time use of infiltration facility, is expected to significantly reduce the infiltration rate. Further, standard percolation/infiltration tests are performed using clean, potable water. However, surface runoff carries fines and debris with it, which may reduce the percolation/infiltration rates further. Additional testing should be performed once the basin location(s) have been determined to finalize the design infiltration rate, Id. Masonry Block Walls Footings for masonry block walls proposed on level ground may be designed in accordance with the bearing and lateral resistance values provided previously for building footings. However, as a minimum, the wall footings should be embedded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The footings should also be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. In order to minimize the potential for unsightly cracking related to the possible e ffects of differential settlement and/or expansion, positive separations (construction joints) should also be provided in the block walls at each corner and at horizontal intervals of approximately 20 to 25 feet. The separations should be provided in the blocks and not extend through the footings. The footings should be poured monolithically with continuous rebars to serve as effective “grade beams” below the walls. Exterior Concrete Flatwork General Near-surface engineered fill soils within the site are expected to exhibit a range of expansion indices that classify them as non-expansive, i.e. Expansion Index, EI, < 20. Therefore, we recommend that all exterior concrete flatwork such as sidewalks, patio slabs, large decorative slabs, concrete subslabs that will be covered with decorative pavers, private and/or public vehicular parking, driveways and/or access roads within and adjacent to the site be designed by the project architect, civil and/or structural engineer with consideration given to mitigating the potential for cracking, curling, etc. that can potentially develop as a result of being underlain with soils that essentially exhibiting expansion index values that fall in the non- expansive category. The guidelines that follow should be considered as minimums and are subject to review and revision by the project architect, civil engineer, structural engineer and/or landscape consultant as deemed appropriate. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 29 Subgrade Preparation Compaction To reduce the potential for distress to concrete flatwork, the subgrade soils below concrete flatwork areas to a minimum depth of 12 inches (or deeper, as either prescribed elsewhere in this report or determined in the field) should be moisture conditioned to at least equal to, or slightly greater than, the optimum moisture content and then compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Where concrete public roads, concrete segments of roads and/or concrete access driveways and heavy recreational vehicles parking are proposed, the upper 6 inches of subgrade soil should be compacted to a minimum 95 percent relative compaction. Pre-Moistening As a further measure to reduce the potential for concrete flatwork distress, subgrade soils should be thoroughly moistened prior to placing concrete. The moisture content of the soils should be at least 1.1 times the optimum moisture content and penetrate to a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade . Flooding or ponding of the subgrade is not considered feasible to achieve the above moisture conditions since this method would likely require construction of numerous earth berms to contain the water. Therefore, moisture conditioning may be achieved with sprinklers or a light spray applied to the subgrade over a period of several hours to few days just prior to pouring concrete. Pre-watering of the soils is intended to promote uniform curing of the concrete, reduce the development of shrinkage cracks and reduce the potential for differential expansion pressure on freshly poured flatwork. A representative of the project geotechnical consultant should observe and verify the density and moisture content of the soils, and the depth of moisture penetration prior to pouring concrete. Thickness and Joint Spacing To reduce the potential of unsightly cracking, concrete walkways, patio-type slabs, large decorative slabs and concrete subslabs to be covered with decorative pavers should be at least 4 inches thick and provided with construction joints or expansion joints every 6 feet or less . Private driveways that will be designed for the use of passenger cars for access to private garages should also be at least 4 inches thick and provided with construction joints or expansion joints every 10 feet or less . Concrete pavement that will be designed based on an unlimited number of applications of an 18-kip single-axle load in public access areas, segments of road that will be paved with concrete (such as bus stops and cross-walks) or access roads and driveways, which serve multiple residential units or garages, that will be subject to heavy truck loadings and parking of recreational vehicles should have a minimum thickness of 5 inches and be PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 30 provided with control joints spaced at maximum 10-foot intervals. A modulus of subgrade reaction of 125 pounds per cubic foot may be used for design of the public and access roads. Reinforcement All concrete flatwork having their largest plan-view panel dimensions exceeding 10 feet should be reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 bars spaced 18 inches for 4-inch-thick slabs and No. 4 bars spaced 24 inches for 5-inch-thick slabs on centers, both ways. The reinforcement should be properly positioned near the middle of the slabs. All foot and equipment traffic on the reinforcement should be avoided or reduced to a minimum. The reinforcement recommendations provided herein are intended as a guideline to achieve adequate performance for anticipated soil conditions. As such, this guideline may not satisfy certain acceptable approaches, e.g. the area of reinforcement to be equal to or greater that 0.2 percent of the area of concrete. The project architect, civil and/or structural engineer should make appropriate adjustments in reinforcement type, size and spacing to account for concrete internal (e.g., shrinkage and thermal) and external (e.g., applied loads) forces as deemed necessary. Edge Beams (Optional) Where the outer edges of concrete flatwork are to be bordered by landscaping, it is recommended that considerations be given to the use of edge beams (thickened edges) to prevent excessive infiltration and accumulation of water under the slabs. Edge beams, if used, should be 6 to 8 inches wide, extend 8 inches below the tops of the finish slab surfaces. Edge beams are not mandatory; however, their inclusion in flatwork construction adjacent to landscaped areas is intended to reduce the potential for vertical and horizontal movement and subsequent cracking of the flatwork related to uplift forces that can develop in expansive soils. Drainage Drainage from patios and other flatwork areas should be directed to local area drains and/or graded earth swales designed to carry runoff water to the adjacent streets or other approved drainage structures . The concrete flatwork should be sloped at a minimum gradient as discussed earlier in the Site Drainage section of this report, or as prescribed by project civil engineer or local codes, away from building foundations, retaining walls, masonry garden walls and slope areas. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 31 Tree Wells Tree wells are not recommended in concrete flatwork areas because they typically introduce excessive water into the subgrade soils and allow root invasion, both of which can cause heaving and cracking of the flatwork. FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS Should any new structures or improvements be proposed at any time in the future other than those discussed herein, our firm should be notified so that we may provide geotechnical design recommendations. Geotechnical design recommendations are particularly critical for any new improvements that may interfere with the proposed permanent drainage facilities. Potential problems can develop when drainage on the pad is altered in any way (i.e., excavations or placement of fills associated with construction of new walkways, patios, block walls and planters). Therefore, it is recommended that we be engaged to review the final design drawings, specifications and preliminary grading plan prior to any new construction. If we are not given the opportunity to review these documents with respect to the geotechnical aspects of new construction and grading, it should not be assumed that the recommendations provided herein are wholly or in part applicable to the new construction or grading. REPORT LIMITATIONS This report is based on the proposed project and geotechnical data as described herein. The materials encountered on the project site, described in other literature, and utilized in our laboratory investigation are believed representative of the project area, and the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are presented on that basis. However, soil materials can vary in characteristics between points of exploration, both laterally and vertically, and those variations could affect the conclusions and recommendations contained herein. In addition, it is recommended that our firm be contracted for observation and testing services during the grading and construction phases of the project as it is essential in confirming the basis of this report. This report has been prepared consistent with that level of care being provided by other professionals providing similar services at the same locale and time period. The contents of this report are professional opinions and as such, are not to be considered a guarantee or warranty. This report should be reviewed and updated after a period of one year or if the project concept changes from that described herein. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 32 The information contained herein has not been prepared for use by parties or projects other than those named or described herein. This report may not contain sufficient information for other parties or other purposes. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please call Alan Pace at (760) 250-9747. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. ______________________________ ______________________________ 11/16/21 Grayson R. Walker Alan Pace Principal Engineer Senior Associate Geologist GE 871 CEG 1952 KTM/GRW/AP/lv W:\2020-2025\2021\300\21-308\Reports\21-308 110 Design-Phase Geotechnical Investigation Report Revision 1.docx PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 33 REFERENCES American Concrete Institute, 2014, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318 -14) and Commentary, Committee 318. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2016, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (Standard 7-16). California Building Standards Commission, 2019, California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, dated July. _______, 2019, California Plumbing Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 5, dated July. California Emergency Management Agency, 2009, Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, State of California, County of Orange, Newport Beach Quadrangle: map prepared in cooperation with the California Geologic Survey and the University of Southern California, dated March 15. California Geological Survey, 2010, ‘Fault Activity Map of California, Geologic Data Map No. 6, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/. California Geological Survey, 2018, Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners/Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California, Special Publication 42. California Department of Water Resources (CDWR), 1964, Coachella Valley Investigation, Bulletin No. 108, dated July. _______, 2020, Groundwater Data Library Website, https://wdl.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/ Caltrans, 2003, Bridge Design Specifications, Section 8 – Reinforced Concrete, dated September. Cao, T., et al., 2003, Revised 2002 California Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps, June 2003: California Geological Survey. Cetin et. al., 2009, Probabilistic Model for the Assessment of Cyclically Induced Reconsolidation (Volumetric) Settlements, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Mach 2009, Volume 135, No. 3. County of Riverside, 2014a, Low Impact Development BMP Design Handbook, June. _______, 2014b, Riverside County General Plan (effective dated 12/9/14). , 2015, County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521, Public Review Draft, Section 4.12, Geology and Soils, dated February. , 2017, Parcel Report System, Map My County System, APN’s 607050045-1, 607050044-0, 607032016-9, 607050017-6, 607050018-7, and 607050019-8, https://gis.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/?viewer=MMC_Public Dibblee, T.W., 1953, “Generalized geologic map of Imperial Valley region, California”: in Jahns, R.A., (ed.), 1954, Geology of southern California: California Division of Mines and Geology Bulletin 170 (scale 1” = 6 miles). Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2009, NEHERP (Nation al Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program) Recommended Seismic Provision for New Building and Other Structures (FEMA P-750). PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 34 REFERENCES Fumal, T. E., Rymer, M.J., Seitz, G.G., 2002, Timing of Large Earthquakes Since A.D. 800 on the Mission Creek Strand of the San Andreas Fault Zone at Thousand Palms Oasis, Near Palm Springs, California." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America v. 92(no. 7): p. 2841-2860. Ishihara, K., 1985, Stability of Natural Deposits During Earthquakes, 11th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Proceedings, San Francisco, Vol. 1., pp. 321-376. Jennings, C. W., 1994, "Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, with Locations and ages of Recent Volcanic Eruptions, Divisions of Mines and Geology": California Division of Mines and Geology Map No. 6 (scale 1: 750,000). Powell, R. E., (Ed.), 1993, "Balanced Palinspastic Reconstruction of Pre-late Cenozoic Paleogeology, Southern California: Geologic and Kinematic Constraints on Evolution of the San Andreas Fault System. The San Andreas Fault System: Displacement, Palinspastic Reconstruction, and Geologic Evolution. Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Memoir 178". Pradel, D., 1998, Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake -Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy Soils: in Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering: Vol. 124, No. 4. Post-Tensioning Institute, 2012, Standard Requirements for Design and Analysis of Shallow Post-Tensioned Concrete Foundation on Expansive Soils, Publication PTI DC1010.5-12. Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) – Colorado River Basin, 1986, Colorado River Hydrologic Basin Planning Area, West Colorado and East Colorado River Basins Map. Rymer, M. J. (2000). Triggered surface slips in the Coachella Valley area associated with the 1992 Joshua Tree and Landers, California Earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America v. 90(No. 4): p. 832-848. SEAOC & OSHPD Seismic Design Maps Web Application – https://seismicmaps.org/ Seed, H.B., and Whitman, R.V., 1970, Design of Earth Retaining Structures for Dynamic Lo ads, Lateral Stresses in the ground and design of earth retaining structures, ASCE, New York, 103 -107. Sieh, K. E., and WILLIAMS, P.L., 1990, "Behavior of the southernmost San Andreas fault during the past 300 years." Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 95(n. B5): p. 6629-6645. Sitar, N., Geraili Mikola, R., and Candia, G., 2012, Seismically Induced Lateral Earth Pressures on Retaining Structures and Basement Walls, Keynote Lecture, Geotechnical Engineering State of the Art and Practice, Keynote Lectures from GeoCongress 2012, GSP 226, ASCE, 2012. Sneed, M., 2001, Detection and Measurement of Land Subsidence Using Global Positioning System and Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar, Coachella Valley, California, 1996 -1998, U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4193. , 2007, Detection and Measurement of Land Subsidence Using Global Positioning System Surveying and Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar, Coachella Valley, California, 1996–2005, Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5251, United States Geological Survey. Sneed, M., Brandt, J.T., Solt, M., 2014, Land Subsidence, Groundwater Levels, and Geology in the Coachella Valley, California, 1993-2010, USGS, Scientific Investigation Report 2014-5075. PALM COMMUNITIES November 16, 2021 Palm Villas at Millennium / Palm Desert J.N. 21-308 Revision 1 Page 35 REFERENCES Tokimatsu, K. and Seed, H.B., 1987; Evaluation of Settlements in Sands due to Earthquake Shaking: in Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 113, No. 8, p. 861-879. Towhata, Ikuo, 2008, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Springer, Publisher. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2014, Unified Hazard Tool, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ Wire Reinforcement Institute (WRI), 1996, Design of Slabs on Ground. FIGURES Scale: 1” = 2,000’ Base Map: Portions of USGS Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Myoma, Rancho Mirage, and La Quinta Quadrangles 7.5-Minute Topographic Series, 2015 N 3186 Airway Avenue, Suite K Costa Mesa, California 92626 PHONE: (714) 549-8921 COSTA MESA TEMECULA VALENCIA PALM DESERT CORONA SITE LOCATION MAP Gerald Ford Drive Palm Desert, California DATE: October, 2021 J.N.: 21-308 Figure 1 PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. SITE 3186 Airway Avenue, Suite K Costa Mesa, California 92626 PHONE: (714) 549-8921 COSTA MESA TEMECULA VALENCIA PALM DESERT CORONA SLOPE LOCATION MAP Gerald Ford Drive Palm Desert, California DATE: October, 2021 J.N.: 21-308 Figure 2 PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. N af HA-1 TD=8’ HA-2 TD=8’ af Qes B-1 TD=16.5’ B-2 TD=26.5’ B-3 TD=26.5’ B-4 TD=26.5’ 365365TP-1 TD=5’ TP-2 TD=5’ Qyf af B-1 TD=5’ B-2 TD=21.5’ B-3 TD=61.5’ 0 10 20 Scale: 1” = 20’ N B-2 TD=16.5’ B-4 TD=66.5’ B-3 TD=16.5’ P-1 TD=10’ Approximate Site Limits EXPLANATION Approximate Location of Exploratory Boring TD= Total depth Approximate Location of Infiltration Test TD= Total Depth B-4 TD=16.5’ P-1 TD=10’ Base Map: Google Earth, 2021. APPENDIX A EXPLORATION LOGS 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 DUNE SAND DEPOSITS (Qs)Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, loose, very fine- to fine- grained sand. Becomes very dense. Silty sand (SM): Gray, dry, very dense, very fine- to medium- grained. Becomes medium-dense. ALLUVIUM (Qal)Sand with Silt (SP-SM): gray, dry, medium-dense, fine- to coarse- grained. Silty Sand (SM): gray, dry, medium-dense, very fine- to fine- grained. Total Depth= 16.5' No groundwater encountered Boring backfilled with cuttings. 3150/5" 3550/5" 71118 111420 51012 1.0 0.7 1.4 1.0 2.0 110.0 120.9 109.8 115.9 99.7 Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:B-1 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±171' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 DUNE SAND DEPOSITS (Qs)Sand with silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, loose, fine- to medium-grained. Becomes medium-dense and very fine- to fine-grained. Same as above. ALLUVIUM (Qal)Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray to off-white, dry, medium-dense, fine- to medium-grained. Same as above. Total Depth= 16.5' No groundwater encountered Boring backfilled with cuttings. 363550/6" 101012 111012 121418 101317 1.3 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.1 122.4 103.2 94.7 113.8 110.0 Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:B-2 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±171' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 DUNE SAND DEPOSITS (Qs)Sand (SP): Gray, dry, loose, fine-grained. Becomes very dense. Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, dense, very fine- to fine- grained. Silty Sand (SM): Gray, dry, medium-dense, fine-grained. ALLUVIUM (Qal)Silty Sand (SM): Olive gray, slightly moist, medium-dense. Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, medium-dense, fine- to medium-grained. Total Depth= 16.5' No groundwater encountered Boring backfilled with cuttings. 2650/3" 172433 7916 669 1117 3.8 1.5 4.3 2.4 1.7 121.4 120.8 104.8 99.1 111.4 Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:B-3 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±167' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 DUNE SAND DEPOSITS (Qs)Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, loose, fine- to medium- grained. Becomes very dense. Becomes medium-dense to dense. Silty Sand (SM): Grayish-brown, dry, medium-dense, fine- grained. ALLUVIUM (Qal)Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Off-white to gray, dry, medium-dense. Same as above. Sand (SP): Gray, dry, medium-dense, very fine- to fine-grained. Same as above. Becomes very dense. 3450/4" 182428 111418 111320 5611 81217 81616 184050/2" 1.4 0.9 3.4 1.2 10.2 1.1 0.7 124.6 115.3 110.0 112.2 90.2 106.8 111.1 Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:B-4 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±171' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-4 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Becomes medium-dense. Becomes dense. Same as above. Silty Sand (SM): Gray, slightly moist, dense, very fine-grained. Sand (SP): Off-white to gray, dry, very dense, fine-grained. Same as above. Total depth= 66.5' No groundwater encountered Boring backfilled with cuttings. 131622 133050/6" 91217 101533 152140 2650/6" 212750/6" 0.6 0.7 1.2 98.6 104.6 Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:B-4 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±171' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-4 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 DUNE SAND DEPOSITS (Qs)Sand (SP): Gray, dry, loose, fine-grained, . Becomes very dense. Sand with Silt (SP-SM): Gray, dry, dense, very fine- to fine- grained. Silty Sand (SM): Gray, dry, medium-dense, fine-grained. Total Depth= 10' No groundwater encountered Infiltration test installed within boring and presoaked prior to testing. Project:Desert Apartments Boring No.:P-1 Location:Palm Desert Elevation:±167' Job No.:21-308 Client:Palm Communities Date:9/20/2021 Drill Method:8" Hollow Stem Auger Driving Weight:140lbs/30"Logged By:KTM Depth (Feet) Lith- ology Material Description W A T E R Blows per 6 in. Samples C o r e B u l k Moisture Content (%) Laboratory Tests Dry Density (pcf) Other Lab Tests E X P L O R A T I O N L O G Petra Geosciences, Inc. PLATE A-5 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES LABORATORY DATA SUMMARY _____________________________________________________ ______________________________________ PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. Laboratory Address: 1251 W. Pomona Road, Unit 103, Corona, CA, 92882 J.N. 21-308 LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES Soil Classification Soil materials encountered within the property were classified and described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System and in general accordance with the current version of Test Method ASTM D 2488. The assigned group symbols are presented in the exploration logs, Appendix A. In Situ Moisture Content and Dry Unit Weight In-place moisture content and dry unit weight of selected, relatively undisturbed soil samples were determined in accordance with the current version of the Test Method ASTM D 2435 and Test Method ASTM D 2216, respectively. Test data are presented on the exploration logs, Appendix A. Laboratory Maximum Dry Unit Weight and Optimum Moisture Content The maximum dry unit weight and optimum moisture content of the on-site soils were determined for selected bulk sample in accordance with current version of ASTM D 1557. The results of these tests are presented on Plate B-1. Expansion Index Expansion index testing was performed on selected bulk samples of the on-site soils in accordance with the current version of Test Method ASTM D 4829. The test results are presented on Plate B-1. Corrosivity Screening Chemical and electrical analyses were performed on selected bulk samples of onsite soils to determine their soluble sulfate content, chloride content, pH (acidity), and minimum electrical resistivity. These tests were performed in accordance with the current versions of California Test Method Nos. CTM 417, CTM 422 and CTM 643, respectively. The results of these tests are included on Plate B-1. Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve Selected samples were run through a number 200 sieve in general accordance with the current version of Test Method ASTM D 1140. The results of these tests are included on Plate B-1. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. Laboratory Address: 1251 W. Pomona Road, Unit 103, Corona, CA, 92882 J.N. 21-308 PLATE B-1 LABORATORY DATA SUMMARY Boring Number Sample Depth (ft) Soil/Bedrock Description Max. Dry Density 1 (pcf) Optimum Moisture1 (%) Expansion Index2 Expansion Potential3 Atterberg Limits4 Sulfate Content5 (%) Chloride Content6 (ppm) pH7 Minimum Resistivity7 (Ohm-cm) % Passing No. 200 Sieve8 LL PL PI B-4 0-5 Silty Sand (SM) 129.5 6.5 0 Very Low - - - 0.0006 105 9.17 13,000 - B-2 7 Sand (SP) - - - - - - - - - - - 6.9 B-4 15 Silty Sand (SM) - - - - - - - - - - - 15.6 B-4 25 Sand (SP) - - - - - - - - - - - 7.5 B-4 35 Sand (SP) - - - - - - - - - - - 8.1 B-4 45 Sand (SP) - - - - - - - - - - - 9.1 B-4 55 Silty Sand (SM) - - - - - - - - - - - 15.4 B-4 65 Sand (SP) - - - - - - - - - - - 9.0 Test Procedures: 1 Per ASTM Test Method D 1557 5 Per California Test Method 417 2 Per ASTM Test Method D 4829 6 Per California Test Method 422 3 Per ASTM Test Method D 4829 7 Per California Test Method 643 4 Per ASTM Test Method D 4318 8 Per ASTM Test Method D 1140 APPENDIX C SEISMIC DESIGN ANALYSIS Palm Communities Latitude, Longitude: 33.787414, -116.361886 Date 10/13/2021, 9:08:31 PM Design Code Reference Document ASCE7-16 Risk Category II Site Class D - Default (See Section 11.4.3) Type Value Description SS 1.882 MCER ground motion. (for 0.2 second period) S1 0.778 MCER ground motion. (for 1.0s period) SMS 2.259 Site-modified spectral acceleration value SM1 null -See Section 11.4.8 Site-modified spectral acceleration value SDS 1.506 Numeric seismic design value at 0.2 second SA SD1 null -See Section 11.4.8 Numeric seismic design value at 1.0 second SA Type Value Description SDC null -See Section 11.4.8 Seismic design category Fa 1.2 Site amplification factor at 0.2 second Fv null -See Section 11.4.8 Site amplification factor at 1.0 second PGA 0.809 MCEG peak ground acceleration FPGA 1.2 Site amplification factor at PGA PGAM 0.97 Site modified peak ground acceleration TL 8 Long-period transition period in seconds SsRT 2.201 Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (0.2 second) SsUH 2.459 Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration SsD 1.882 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (0.2 second) S1RT 0.872 Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (1.0 second) S1UH 0.99 Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration. S1D 0.778 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (1.0 second) PGAd 0.809 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (Peak Ground Acceleration) CRS 0.895 Mapped value of the risk coefficient at short periods CR1 0.881 Mapped value of the risk coefficient at a period of 1 s DISCLAIMER While the information presented on this website is believed to be correct, SEAOC /OSHPD and its sponsors and contributors assume no responsibility or liability for its accuracy. The material presented in this web application should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by engineers or other licensed professionals. SEAOC / OSHPD do not intend that the use of this information replace the sound judgment of such competent professionals, having experience and knowledge in the field of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the results of the seismic data provided by this website. Users of the information from this website assume all liability arising from such use. Use of the output of this website does not imply approval by the governing building code bodies responsible for building code approval and interpretation for the building site described by latitude/longitude location in the search results of this website. Unied Hazard Tool Input U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program Please do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for the design code reference documents covered by the U.S. Seismic Design Maps web tools (e.g., the International Building Code and the ASCE 7 or 41 Standard). The values returned by the two applications are not identical.  Edition Dynamic: Conterminous U.S. 2014 (u… Latitude Decimal degrees 33.787414 Longitude Decimal degrees, negative values for western longitudes -116.361886 Site Class 760 m/s (B/C boundar y) Spectral Period Peak Ground Acceleration Time Horizon Return period in years 2475 Hazard Curve View Raw Data Hazard Curves Time Horizon 2475 years Peak Ground Acceleration 0.10 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.20 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.30 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.50 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.75 Second Spectral Acceleration 1.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 2.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 3.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 4.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 5.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 Ground Motion (g) 1e-12 1e-11 1e-10 1e-9 1e-8 1e-7 1e-6 1e-5 1e-4 1e-3 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 Annual Frequency of ExceedenceUniform Hazard Response Spectrum 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Spectral Period (s) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Ground Motion (g)Spectral Period (s): PGA Ground Motion (g): 0.9375 Component Curves for Peak Ground Acceleration Time Horizon 2475 years System Grid Interface Fault 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 Ground Motion (g) 1e-12 1e-11 1e-10 1e-9 1e-8 1e-7 1e-6 1e-5 1e-4 1e-3 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 Annual Frequency of Exceedence Deaggregation Component Total ε = (-∞ .. -2.5) ε = [-2.5 .. -2) ε = [-2 .. -1.5) ε = [-1.5 .. -1) ε = [-1 .. -0.5) ε = [-0.5 .. 0) ε = [0 .. 0.5) ε = [0.5 .. 1) ε = [1 .. 1.5) ε = [1.5 .. 2) ε = [2 .. 2.5) ε = [2.5 .. +∞) 5 10 15 20 25 Closest Distance, rRup (km) 30 35 40 45 50 5598.587.5M agnitud e (M w )76.565.554.5510% Contribution to Hazard1520255 10 15 20 25 30 35 Closest Distance, rRup (km) 40 45 50 55 98.587.576.5M agnitud e (M w )65.554.5 Summary statistics for, Deaggregation: Total Deaggregation targets Return period:2475 yrs Exceedance rate:0.0004040404 yr⁻¹ PGA ground motion:0.93746559 g Recovered targets Return period:3027.3552 yrs Exceedance rate:0.00033032133 yr⁻¹ Totals Binned:100 % Residual:0 % Trace:0.07 % Mean (over all sources) m:7.42 r:6.57 km ε₀:1.53 σ Mode (largest m-r bin) m:7.49 r:6.11 km ε₀:1.47 σ Contribution:19.3 % Mode (largest m-r-ε₀ bin) m:7.49 r:6.07 km ε₀:1.44 σ Contribution:15.12 % Discretization r:min = 0.0, max = 1000.0, Δ = 20.0 km m:min = 4.4, max = 9.4, Δ = 0.2 ε:min = -3.0, max = 3.0, Δ = 0.5 σ Epsilon keys ε0:[-∞ .. -2.5) ε1:[-2.5 .. -2.0) ε2:[-2.0 .. -1.5) ε3:[-1.5 .. -1.0) ε4:[-1.0 .. -0.5) ε5:[-0.5 .. 0.0) ε6:[0.0 .. 0.5) ε7:[0.5 .. 1.0) ε8:[1.0 .. 1.5) ε9:[1.5 .. 2.0) ε10:[2.0 .. 2.5) ε11:[2.5 .. +∞] Deaggregation Contributors Source Set  Source Type r m ε0 lon lat az % UC33brAvg_FM31 System 43.82 San Andreas (San Gorgonio Pass-Garnet HIll) [1]6.03 7.60 1.45 116.329°W 33.833°N 30.82 36.85 San Andreas (North Branch Mill Creek) [11]7.36 7.88 1.33 116.310°W 33.832°N 43.97 4.59 San Andreas (Coachella) rev [0]10.69 7.23 2.07 116.246°W 33.788°N 89.47 1.09 UC33brAvg_FM32 System 43.75 San Andreas (San Gorgonio Pass-Garnet HIll) [1]6.03 7.60 1.45 116.329°W 33.833°N 30.82 36.66 San Andreas (North Branch Mill Creek) [11]7.36 7.85 1.34 116.310°W 33.832°N 43.97 4.84 UC33brAvg_FM31 (opt)Grid 6.22 PointSourceFinite: -116.362, 33.819 5.91 5.86 1.85 116.362°W 33.819°N 0.00 1.72 PointSourceFinite: -116.362, 33.819 5.91 5.86 1.85 116.362°W 33.819°N 0.00 1.72 UC33brAvg_FM32 (opt)Grid 6.22 PointSourceFinite: -116.362, 33.819 5.91 5.86 1.85 116.362°W 33.819°N 0.00 1.72 PointSourceFinite: -116.362, 33.819 5.91 5.86 1.85 116.362°W 33.819°N 0.00 1.72 APPENDIX D PERCOLATION TEST DATA Total Depth of Boring, Dt (ft):10 Diameter of Hole, D (in):6 Diameter of Pipe, d (in):2 Agg. Correction (% Voids):0 Pre-soak depth (ft):5 1st Reading 2nd Reading 10 6.05 9.52 41.64 0.24 22.19 10 5.50 8.90 40.80 0.25 17.39 10 5.50 8.90 40.80 0.25 17.39 10 5.55 8.85 39.60 0.25 16.88 10 5.50 8.75 39.00 0.26 16.21 10 5.55 8.75 38.40 0.26 16.10 Percolation Rate:0.26 Minutes/Inch 16.1 gal/day/ft2 Infiltration Rate:9.7 Inches/Hour* (Porchet Method) r = D / 2 Ho = Dt - Do Hf = Dt - Df DH = ΔD = Ho - Hf Havg = (Ho + Hf) / 2 *Raw Number, Does Not Include a Factor of Safety Reference: RCFCWCD, Design Handbook for LID, dated June, 2014 or SARWQCB, Technical Guidance Document Appendix VII, dated December 20, 2013 or DATE: Oct., 2021 CofSBASP, Technical Guidance Document Appendix D, dated May 19, 2011 or J.N.: 21-308 Test Number: P-1 3186 Airway Avenue, Suite K Costa Mesa, California 92626 PHONE: (714) 549-8921 Perc. Rate (gal/day/ft^2) Deep Percolation Test Method Time Interval (min) Depth to Water Surface Dw (ft) Change in Head (in) Perc. Rate (min/in) where Infiltration Rate, It =DH (60r) / Dt (r + 2Havg ) Plate D Gerald Ford Drive Palm Desert, California PERCOLATION TEST SUMMARY PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC. COSTA MESA TEMECULA VALENCIA PALM DESERT CORONA APPENDIX E EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS APPENDIX C: LIQUEFACTION AND DRY SAND SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS 21-308 Palm Desert Apartments0.00inches2.05inches2.05inches190no liquefactionno waterfeet66.50feet0.00feetEarthquake loading: M 7.49PGA 0.809 Depth to Use for Depth Weighting Depth (ft) = 59.0feet feetin in in in0 5 100 5 no liq0.00 0.00 2.05 1.345 7 36 5 no liq0.02 0.01 2.05 1.337 10 22 7 0.750.13 0.11 2.03 1.3210 15 23 16 1.380.17 0.13 1.91 1.2115 20 12 16 0.360.90 0.63 1.74 1.0820 25 20 8 0.440.50 0.31 0.84 0.4525 30 32 8 0.970.19 0.10 0.34 0.1430 35 100 8 no liq0.02 0.01 0.15 0.0435 40 38 8 no liq0.04 0.02 0.13 0.0340 45 80 8 no liq0.01 0.00 0.09 0.0145 50 29 9 0.510.04 0.01 0.08 0.0150 55 48 9 no liq0.02 0.00 0.04 0.0055 60 61 16 no liq0.01 0.00 0.02 0.0060 65 76 9 no liq0.01 0.00 0.01 0.0065 66.5 77 9 no liq0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0 100 10 no liq0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0 100 10 no liq0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0 100 10 no liq0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0 100 10 no liq0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Total Free Field Settlement (Unweighted) = 2.05Total Depth Weighted Settlement = 1.34Depth to first groundwaterDepth Weighted SettlementCumulative Free Field SettlementCumulative Depth Weighted SettlementNot liquefiableNot liquefiableNot liquefiableInterpreted Factor of Safetyagainst liquefaction- no groundwaterFree Field SettlementNot liquefiableNot liquefiableNot liquefiableNot liquefiableTotal thickness of evaluated profileFSSPT.cs,KσDepth to Layer Top Depth to Layer BottomSPT - NFines %Not liquefiableNot liquefiable- no groundwaterNot liquefiable- no groundwater- no groundwater- no groundwaterNot liquefiable- no groundwaterNot liquefiable- no groundwater- no groundwater- no groundwater- no groundwater- no groundwaterNot liquefiableNumber of potentially liquefiable intervalsAverage Factor of SafetyTotal dry sand settlementTotal earthquake-induced settlementNumber of evaluated intervalsB-4 References:T.L.Youd, I.M.Idriss - Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of SoilsD. Pradel - Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy SoilsK.Tokimatsu, H.B.Seed - Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking, ASCE JGE Vol.113, No.8, August 1986G.Zhang, P.K.Robertson, R.W.I.Brachman - Estimating Liquefaction-Induced Ground Settlements From CPT for Level Ground (CGJ39,2002)BoringSummary of analysisTotal liquefaction settlementNot liquefiable- no groundwater- no groundwater- no groundwaterProfile thickness susceptible to liquefactionNot liquefiable- no groundwater- no groundwaterNot liquefiable- no groundwaterNot liquefiableNot liquefiableNot liquefiable- no groundwater- no groundwater0102030405060700 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Depth (ft)Settlement (in)CumulativeSettlementDepth WeightedSettlementFirst groundwater atno waterfeetB-4 0102030405060700.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0Depth (ft)Factor of Safety against LiquefactionFirst groundwater atno waterfeetB-4 FS = 1.3LIQUEFACTIONNO LIQUEFACTION APPENDIX F STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 1 These specifications present the usual and minimum requirements for projects on which Petra Geosciences, Inc. (Petra) is the geotechnical consultant. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except where specifically superseded in the preliminary geology and soils report, or in other written communication signed by the Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist of record (Geotechnical Consultant). I. GENERAL A. The Geotechnical Consultant is the Owner's or Builder's representative on the project. For the purpose of these specifications, participation by the Geotechnical Consultant includes that observation performed by any person or persons employed by, and responsible to, the licensed Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist signing the soils report. B. The contractor should prepare and submit to the Owner and Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "spreads" and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork to be performed prior to the commencement of grading. This work plan should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Consultant to schedule personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing as necessary. C. All clearing, site preparation, or earthwork performed on the project shall be conducted by the Contractor in accordance with the recommendations presented in the geotechnical report and under the observation of the Geotechnical Consultant. D. It is the Contractor's responsibility to prepare the ground surface to receive the fills to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Consultant and to place, spread, mix, water, and compact the fill in accordance with the specifications of the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall also remove all material considered unsatisfactory by the Geotechnical Consultant. E. It is the Contractor's responsibility to have suitable and sufficient compaction equipment on the job site to handle the amount of fill being placed. If necessary, excavation equipment will be shut down to permit completion of compaction to project specifications. Sufficient watering apparatus will also be provided by the Contractor, with due consideration for the fill material, rate of placement, and time of year. F. After completion of grading a report will be submitted by the Geotechnical Consultant. II. SITE PREPARATION A. Clearing and Grubbing 1. All vegetation such as trees, brush, grass, roots, and deleterious material shall be disposed of offsite. This removal shall be concluded prior to placing fill. 2. Any underground structures such as cesspools, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, septic tanks, wells, pipe lines, etc., are to be removed or treated in a manner prescribed by the Geotechnical Consultant. STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 2 III. FILL AREA PREPARATION A. Remedial Removals/Overexcavations 1. Remedial removals, as well as overexcavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Remedial removal depths presented in the geotechnical report and shown on the geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal should be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the conditions exposed during grading. All soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as determined by the Geotechnical Consultant. 2. Soil, alluvium, or bedrock materials determined by the Soils Engineer as being unsuitable for placement in compacted fills shall be removed from the site. Any material incorporated as a part of a compacted fill must be approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. 3. Should potentially hazardous materials be encountered, the Contractor should stop work in the affected area. An environmental consultant specializing in hazardous materials should be notified immediately for evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing work in the affected area. B. Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide sufficient survey control for determining locations and elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches. C. Processing After the ground surface to receive fill has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant, it shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches and until the ground surface is uniform and free from ruts, hollows, hummocks, or other uneven features which may prevent uniform compaction. The scarified ground surface shall then be brought to optimum moisture, mixed as required, and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. D. Subdrains Subdrainage devices shall be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency, and/or with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. (Typical Canyon Subdrain details are given on Plate SG-1). E. Cut/Fill & Deep Fill/Shallow Fill Transitions In order to provide uniform bearing conditions in cut/fill and deep fill/shallow fill transi tion lots, the cut and shallow fill portions of the lot should be overexcavated to the depths and the horizontal limits discussed in the approved geotechnical report and replaced with compacted fill. (Typical details are given on Plate SG-7.) STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 3 IV. COMPACTED FILL MATERIAL A. General Materials excavated on the property may be utilized in the fill, provided each material has been determined to be suitable by the Geotechnical Consultant. Material to be used for fill shall be essentially free of organic material and other deleterious substances. Roots, tree branches, and other matter missed during clearing shall be removed from the fill as recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Material that is spongy, subject to decay, or otherwise considered unsuitable shall not be used in the compacted fill. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. B. Oversize Materials Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches in diameter, shall be taken offsite or placed in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal (Typical details for Rock Disposal are given on Plate SG-4). Rock fragments less than 12 inches in diameter may be utilized in the fill provided, they are not nested or placed in concentrated pockets; they are surrounded by compacted fine grained soil material and the distribution of rocks is approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. C. Laboratory Testing Representative samples of materials to be utilized as compacted fill shall be analyzed by the laboratory of the Geotechnical Consultant to determine their physical properties. If any material other than that previously tested is encountered during grading, the appropriate analysis of this material shall be conducted by the Geotechnical Consultant as soon as possible. D. Import If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material should meet the requirements of the previous section. The import source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 2 working days prior to importing so that appropriate tests can be performed and its suitability determined. V. FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION A. Fill Layers Material used in the compacting process shall be evenly spread, watered, processed, and compacted in thin lifts not to exceed 6 inches in thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer . The fill shall be placed and compacted on a horizontal plane, unless otherwise approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 4 B. Moisture Conditioning Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly above optimum moisture content. C. Compaction Each layer shall be compacted to 90 percent of the maximum density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental agency. (In general, ASTM D 1557- 02, will be used.) If compaction to a lesser percentage is authorized by the controlling governmental agency because of a specific land use or expansive soils condition, the area to received fill compacted to less than 90 percent shall either be delineated on the grading plan or appropriate reference made to the area in the soils report. D. Failing Areas If the moisture content or relative density varies from that required by the Geotechnical Consultant, the Contractor shall rework the fill until it is approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. E. Benching All fills shall be keyed and benched through all topsoil, colluvium, alluvium or creep material, into sound bedrock or firm material where the slope receiving fill exceeds a ratio of 5 horizontal to 1 vertical, in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. VI. SLOPES A. Fill Slopes The contractor will be required to obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent out to the finish slope face of fill slopes, buttresses, and stabilization fills. This may be achieved by either overbuilding the slope and cutting back to the compacted core, or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment, or by any other procedure that produces the required compaction. B. Side Hill Fills The key for side hill fills shall be a minimum of 15 feet within bedrock or firm materials, unless otherwise specified in the soils report. (See detail on Plate SG-5.) C. Fill-Over-Cut Slopes Fill-over-cut slopes shall be properly keyed through topsoil, colluvium or creep material into rock or firm materials, and the transition shall be stripped of all soils prior to placing fill. (see detail on Plate SG-6). STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 5 D. Landscaping All fill slopes should be planted or protected from erosion by other methods specified in the soils report. E. Cut Slopes 1. The Geotechnical Consultant should observe all cut slopes at vertical intervals not exceeding 10 feet. 2. If any conditions not anticipated in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joints or fault planes are encountered during grading, these conditions shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant, and recommendations shall be made to treat these problems (Typical details for stabilization of a portion of a cut slope are given in Plates SG-2 and SG-3.). 3. Cut slopes that face in the same direction as the prevailing drainage shall be protected from slope wash by a non-erodible interceptor swale placed at the top of the slope. 4. Unless otherwise specified in the soils and geological report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies. 5. Drainage terraces shall be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies, or with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. VII. GRADING OBSERVATION A. General All cleanouts, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, subdrains, and rock disposals must be observed and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placing any fill. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to notify the Geotechnical Consultant when such areas are ready. B. Compaction Testing Observation of the fill placement shall be provided by the Geotechnical Consultant during the progress of grading. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultants discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations may be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be susceptible to inadequate compaction. C. Frequency of Compaction Testing In general, density tests should be made at intervals not exceeding 2 feet of fill height or every 1000 cubic yards of fill placed. This criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and the size of the job. In any event, an adequate number of field density tests shall be made to verify that the required compaction is being achieved. STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 6 VIII. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS A. Erosion control measures, when necessary, shall be provided by the Contractor during grading and prior to the completion and construction of permanent drainage controls. B. Upon completion of grading and termination of observations by the Geotechnical Consultant, no further filling or excavating, including that necessary for footings, foundations, large tree wells, retaining walls, or other features shall be performed without the approval of the Geotechnical Consultant. C. Care shall be taken by the Contractor during final grading to preserve any berms, drainage terraces, interceptor swales, or other devices of permanent nature on or adjacent to the property. S:\!BOILERS-WORK\REPORT INSERTS\STANDARD GRADING SPECS CITY OF PALM DESERT ATTENDANCE REPORT Advisory Body: Prepared By: Year Month Date 4-Jan 18-Jan 1-Feb 15-Feb 1-Mar 15-Mar 5-Apr 19-Apr 3-May 17-May 7-Jun 21-Jun 5-Jul 19-Jul 2-Aug 16-Aug 6-Sep 20-Sep 4-Oct 18-Oct 1-Nov 15-Nov 6-Dec 20-Dec DeLuna, Nancy -P P -P P -P P -P -P --0 0 Greenwood, John -P P -P P -A P -P -P --1 1 Gregory, Ron -P P -P P -A P -P -P --1 1 Holt, Lindsay -P P -P P -P P -P -P --0 0 Pradetto, Joseph -P A -P P -P P -A -P --2 2 Palm Desert Municipal Code 2.34.010: P Present A Absent E Excused -No meeting Twice Monthly: Six unexcused absences from regular meetings in any twelve-month period shall constitute an automatic resignation of members holding office on boards that meet twice monthly. Total Unexcused Absences Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 2022 2022 2022 2022 2022 Total Absences Oct Nov Dec Planning Commission M. O'Reilly 2022 202220222022202220222022