Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3A Public Hearing - Palm Communities - Staff report and attachments (72MB)Page 1 of 20 CITY OF PALM DESERT STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: October 13, 2022 PREPARED BY: Nick Melloni, Senior Planner REQUEST: ADOPT A RESOLUTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND APPROVE A PRECISE PLAN, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 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: 1.Find no further environmental review is required for the project under CEQA pursuant to 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.Approve Precise Plan (PP) 22-0003, Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 38366, and Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-0003 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, subject to findings and Conditions of Approval. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On April 12, 2022, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed the proposed project, including architecture and landscaping. 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. 6): 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 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). Item 3A-1 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 2 of 20 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 Applicant has incorporated the conditions of approval of the Notice of Action dated April 22, 2022, into the design of the project. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On August 16, 2022, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed project. No public comments were received at the public hearing. The comments received for the public record were provided by residents at a community engagement meeting held by the applicant on July 27, 2022. The Commission waived further reading and adopted Planning Resolution No. 2817, recommending approval of the project to City Council in a 4-0 vote with Chair De Luna absent. Commissioners included the following comments as a part of the approval: 1) The Applicant should consider incorporating access to the retention basin for recreational use. This comment has been addressed by the applicant. The applicant evaluated the feasibility of incorporating passive recreational amenities within the two stormwater infiltration/retention basins. The contemplated amenities would have included the addition of live turf area and paved walkways within the basin. The applicant determined that the addition of these features was not feasible due to drainage and accessibility requirements and would have substantially altered the site plan. Staff accepted this assessment. 2) The City of Palm Desert to consult with SunLine Transit Agency to assess future transit facility needs at this project location. If said transit facilities are needed, the project Applicant shall determine if adequate space is available to meet the future requirement. This comment has been addressed. City Staff met with representatives of the Sunline Transit Agency September 8th, 2022. STA reprehensive indicated that there were no immediate plans to establish new transit lines within the project area, and that no new transit facilities would be required of the project approval at this time. The attached letter dated September 15, 2022, outlines the STA’s determination. Item 3A-2 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 3 of 20 3) The Applicant should consider the inclusion of a water feature that is accessible to all residents of the Palm Villas community. This comment has been addressed by the applicant. The concern was previously raised by the public, staff, and the Planning Commission. The applicant has revised the central amenity area by adding a swimming pool for use by all residents of the project. In addition to the pool, the applicant has added pool bathrooms, and provided additional shading over the picnic tables and tot lot area. Revisions to the project have been incorporated in response to the Commissioners comments. A summary of the Applicant’s response to these items is listed on Pages 14 to 16 of this staff report. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: Strategic Plan: • Land Use, Housing & Open Space: “Priority 2: Facility development of high-quality housing for people of all income levels.” Executive Summary: The Applicant, Palm Communities, requests a PP, TPM, EA, and an affordable housing density bonus to develop an apartment community on a 10.49-acre site located at the northwest corner of Gerald Ford Drive and the planned extension of Technology Drive within the Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan (MSP). The project proposes a total of 241 multi-family residential units within ten (10) three-story buildings, one (1) two-story community building, open-space amenities, and site improvements. The apartments will consist of 30 one-bedroom units, 150 two-bedroom units, and 61 three-bedroom units. The project will be 100% affordable, except for two on-site managers units. The project requires the approval of three entitlements, consisting of: 1. Precise Plan (PP) 22-0003: To allow the development of the 241-unit apartment development (100% affordable), 350 parking spaces, 4,277-square-foot community building, open space amenities, including a swimming pool, shade structures, tot-lots, and picnic areas, and related off-site improvements, to be developed in two phases: A. Phase 1: Development of 121 units, 177 parking spaces, central amenities and community building, and temporary access on Parcel 1 (6.02-acres) B. Phase 2: Development of remaining 120 units, 173 parking spaces, and expansion of amenity area on Parcel 2 (4.47-acres). 2. Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 38366: To subdivide the 10.49-acre site into two parcels. 3. Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-0003: For an exemption finding, no further review is Item 3A-3 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 4 of 20 required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 for projects consistent with an adopted General Plan or Community Plan. The project includes a housing Density Bonus request to allow a five percent (5%) density increase (10 units) above the allowed maximum density of 22 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) allowed by the MSP pursuant to Government Code Section 65915 and Palm Desert Municipal Code (PCMD) Section 25.34.040, a design concession for the infiltration basin, and a reduction of parking requirements pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(p)(1). The project has been reviewed for consistency with the General Plan land use designation and conformance with the requirements for the MSP and is consistent with applicable zoning requirements. The adoption of the draft resolution will approve the project. The project site is City-owned and subject to an Exclusive Negotiations Agreement (ENA) Contract No. C41030C between the City and the Applicant. The project will require separate Council actions for a Housing Agreement (and Development and Disposition Loan Agreement (DDLA). Property Description: The project site is a vacant 10.49-acre property located at the northwest corner of Gerald Ford Drive and the planned extension of Technology Drive (Parcel 8 and a portion of Parcel 9 of Parcel Map 36792, Assessor’s Parcel Number 694-120-028 and 694-120-029). The site is generally flat, with a high point of 177’ above mean sea level (MSL) at the southwestern corner of the site and gradually sloping in an easterly direction to 173’ MSL at the corner of Gerald Ford Drive and Technology Drive. Gerald Ford Drive fronts along the southern edge of the property and developed at full road width, with curb, gutter, and 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 circulation 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. Item 3A-4 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 5 of 20 Figure 1 – Millennium Specific Plan – Planning Area and Land Use Map – MSP Pg. 18 The proposed project is located on Planning Area 8 of the MSP, 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 and is envisioned as a portion of a future open space area. The site is owned by the City of Palm Desert, and per the current adopted General Plan Housing Element (6th Cycle 2021-2029), this site is required to provide 239 units of affordable housing. Table 1 – Adjacent Land Use and Designations Existing Uses General Plan Zoning Project Site Vacant Town Center Neighborhood (TCN) 7-40 Dwelling Units Per Acre Millennium Specific Plan (MSP) Planning Area (PA) 8 / Planned Residential (PR) 22 North Vacant Open Space (OS) / TCN MSP – PA 9 / Open Space (OS) South Vacant Approved Single- Family TCN University Neighborhood Specific Plan (UNSP) / PR-18 East Vacant Approved Multi- Family Apartment TCN MSP PA 7 / PR-22 West Single-Family Residential Tract - Genesis TCN MSP PA 1 / PR-6 Project Description: Palm Villas at Millennium 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 Housing Authority (HA). The remaining two Item 3A-5 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 6 of 20 (2) 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. • Central common open space amenity area featuring a swimming pool, pool restrooms, shaded tot-lot, and barbeque areas with shading and picnic benches. • One detached single-story accessory structure for a maintenance building and laundry room containing 16 washing machines and 16 dryers. • Off-site improvements consist of the following: o Street frontage improvements along Technology Drive. 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 containing 16 washers and 16 dryers. • Additional expansions to landscape and shaded picnic areas within the common open Item 3A-6 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 7 of 20 space. 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 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 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 the 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 Drive, Gerald Ford Drive, Dinah Shore Drive, and on the north side of the project. Pedestrian access gates will feature lighting, Item 3A-7 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 8 of 20 decorative pilasters, and arbor trellises. 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. Item 3A-8 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 9 of 20 Table 2 – 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. 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 that 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 Item 3A-9 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 10 of 20 a windscreen fence along the parcel boundary of Phase 1 and the northern property line of Phase 2. 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 4 – 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 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 administratively 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 Item 3A-10 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 11 of 20 development, subject to the approval of a PP by the Planning Commission under Chapter 25.72 of the PDMC. 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 Item 3A-11 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 12 of 20 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. 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 12 summarizes the project’s conformance with development standards for the MSP. Table 3 – 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 pursuant to Density Bonus Law GC 69515 State Density Bonus Law The proposed project includes a density bonus request pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915 and Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 25.34.040, in exchange for dedication a minimum percentage of the Project’s base units for affordable housing, the project is eligible for concessions including density increase, reduction in parking, and a waiver to allow relief from development standards for stormwater retention. The applicant is restricting a minimum of 10% of the base density, or 24 units, as Very Low-Income units, and is therefore allowed up to two concessions. Project Density The project is requesting a density bonus to allow a five percent (5%) density increase (10 units) above the allowed maximum allowed density of 22 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) allowed by the MSP. 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. Item 3A-12 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 13 of 20 Stormwater Infiltration The Palm Desert Municipal code generally requires stormwater retention to utilize an infiltration rate of up to 1 inch per hour in determining on-site storm water retention. The applicant has requested a concession from the City to allow a rate of up 2 inches per hour to facilitate development of the site plan and reduce the area of infiltration basins. Based on hydrology tests provided by the applicant, and opinion of the City Engineer, the request is acceptable and can be approved. 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. Parking reductions pursuant to State Density Bonus law are not counted as incentives, waivers or concessions, and cannot be restricted at the City’s discretion. 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 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. Table 4 – 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. Item 3A-13 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 14 of 20 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. On September 29, 2022, the City Council readopted the housing element in accordance with the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Guidelines. The current Housing Element identifies this site as Letter “C” on Page III-92 under Table III-47 allocating a total of 240 affordable units to the site. This project is providing 239 affordable units, one unit below the minimum number of affordable units required. On June 7, 2022, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2813, approving a 150-unit multi-family (affordable housing) development adjacent to Spanish Walk. The 150-unit project was allocated 21 affordable units in the Housing Element (5th and 6th Cycles). The applicant provided 149 affordable units for a surplus of 128 affordable units that may be applied toward future projects identified in the Housing Element. On July 5, 2022, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2814, approving a 176-unit affordable housing development at the southeast corner of Dick Kelly Drive, and Gateway Drive. The project approval resulted in a net loss of 43 affordable units leaving a surplus of 85 affordable to be applied to future projects. To cover this project’s net loss of 1 affordable unit, staff is allocating 1 of the remaining 85 surplus affordable units to cover the net loss. This will leave a remaining surplus of 84 affordable units that may be applied to future projects. A condition of approval of this project will require approval of a Housing Agreement by the City Council assuring affordability restrictions and density bonus provisions. Public Input: Public Notification Public noticing was conducted for the October 13th, City Council 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 Sunday, October 2, 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 Item 3A-14 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 15 of 20 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. 5. 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. Transit Access During the July 27, 2022, meeting, residents 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. At the August 16, 2022, meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to seek additional direction from STA. On September 8, 2022, Palm Desert Planning Staff met with representatives of the Sunline Transit Agency to determine future plans to expand the agency’s transit network adjacent to the project site and assess if improvements are needed by the project to accommodate transit amenities, such as bus stops. City staff presented current planned development projects throughout Palm Desert and STA identified that current ridership levels did not warrant expansions to the system, though future analysis is planned. STA staff confirmed there are no plans to establish transit lines in the immediate vicinity of the site and, as such, no new transit amenities are required of the project. This determination is outlined in the September 15th letter provided by STA, incorporated as Attachment No. 9. STA will conduct future analyses to determine if establishment of new transit routes is warranted. At the time new routes are planned, STA will coordinate with the city for analyzing the placement and design of new transit amenities. STA operates existing services in near proximity to the site at Cook Street. The nearest existing STA route is Route 5, approximately 4,000 feet to the east from the site on Cook Street near the Item 3A-15 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 16 of 20 Cal State University San Bernardino satellite campus. Pedestrian connections between the site and existing amenities are incomplete, however planned developments will extend the sidewalk along Gerald Ford Drive, expanding pedestrian connectivity from the site to existing transit. Additionally, the site is located within an area serviced by SunRide, which provides on demand rideshare service for transit users. Community Amenities At the July 27, 2022, community engagement meeting, residents expressed concerns that the project did not include a swimming pool for the future residents of the apartments. This concern was shared by the Planning Commission who recommended that the applicant consider installing a water feature, such as a swimming pool or splash pad during the August 16th public hearing. The applicant has revised the plans in response to the concerns raised by the Planning Commission and public and has complied. In response to these concerns, the applicants have revised the project plans to include the construction of a swimming pool within the central amenity area of the site. In addition to the pool, the applicant is revised the amenity pool bathrooms, permanent shade canopies over the proposed tot lot areas, and picnic benches. The swimming pool and majority of amenities i will be constructed as a part of Phase 1 of the project and will be made accessible to all residents of both development phases. Refer to Figure 5 below. Figure 5 – Revised Central Amenity Area Item 3A-16 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 17 of 20 Additionally, the Planning Commission directed the applicant to consider utilizing the proposed infiltration basins as passive open space. The applicant’s design team examined the feasibility of utilizing the infiltration basins by incorporating walking paths and turf. The applicant has indicated that the inclusion of open space amenities would reduce the stormwater percolation/infiltration rate of the basins and would require additional modifications to the site plan. Additionally, the applicant has requested a concession of 2 inches per hour per the density bonus request, which has found to be acceptable for the project design. 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. Schools Item 3A-17 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 18 of 20 During the July 27, 2022, community engagement 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: Table 5 – Project Site Distance from Existing School Facilities 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. 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. At the Planning Commission meeting, Commissioners felt the project architecture is well designed and articulated. 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 Item 3A-18 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 19 of 20 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-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 the Resolution, attached to this staff report. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The project site is owned by the City of Palm Desert. The project will require a separate action including a Development Disposition and Loan Agreement (DDLA) and Housing Agreement Item 3A-19 City of Palm Desert Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 Palm Villas at Millennium Page 20 of 20 which will include a financial contribution and loan to the project applicant from the Housing Asset Fund. No financial impact to the City’s General Fund is anticipated with this action. REVIEWED BY: Department Director: Chris Escobedo City Attorney: Robert Hargreaves Finance Director: Veronica Chavez Assistant City Manager: Chris Escobedo City Manager: Todd Hilemam ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2817 dated August 16, 2022 3. Meeting Minutes of August 16, 2022 – Planning Commission 4. Public Hearing Notice 5. Community Engagement Plan 6. ARC Notice of Action and Minutes of April 12, 2022 7. CEQA Notice of Exemption 8. Project Initial Study/15183 Analysis and Noise Study 9. Sunline Letter dated September 15, 2022 10. Density Bonus Request 11. Project Plans Item 3A-20 RESOLUTION NO. 2022- ____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 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 APPROVAL OF 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/EA22-003 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 two (2) on-site manager’s unit, outdoor recreation areas, landscaping, 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 22 (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 (MSP). 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; 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 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; and 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 Item 3A-21 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 2 2 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 WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on April 12, 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, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on August 16, 2022, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by the Applicant and adopted Resolution No. 2817, recommending that the City Council approve the above-noted project request subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval; and WHEREAS, the Applicant will enter into a housing agreement with the Palm Desert Housing Authority and Housing Agreement to secure a housing Density Bonus Request pursuant to Government Code Section; 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 City Council of the City of Palm Desert, did on the 13th day of October 2022, hold a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council opened the public hearing, the City Council considered the request by the Applicant for the development of the affordable housing community and Tentative Parcel Map; 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 City Council 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 City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: SECTION 1. Recitals. The City Council hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as substantive findings of this Resolution. Item 3A-22 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 3 3 SECTION 2. Findings on Tentative Parcel Map. Under PDMC Section 26.20.100(C), the findings for the tentative map are the following: 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 Palm Desert 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. 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 are 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 Item 3A-23 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 4 4 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 activities are conditioned to prepare plans to control fugitive dust. The access locations to the subdivision have been evaluated in accordance with the MSP and will not adversely affect public health. SECTION 3. Density Bonus Findings. Pursuant to California Government Code 65915 and PDMC Section 25.34.040, in exchange for the dedication of a minimum percentage of the Project’s base units for affordable housing, the Project is eligible for concessions, including density increase, reduction in parking, and a waiver to allow relief from development standards for stormwater retention. The Applicant is restricting a minimum of 10% of the base density, or 24 units, as very low-income units to receive up to two incentives, waivers, and/or concessions. The Project includes a five percent (5%) density increase (10 units) above the allowed maximum allowed density of 22 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) allowed by the MSP to Government Code Section 65915. The Applicant will utilize Government Code Section 65915(p)(1) to provide parking for the Project at a rate of one (1) parking space per each one-bedroom unit and 1.5 parking spaces per each two- and three-bedroom units for a total of 350 on-site parking spaces. The Applicant is requesting a design concession to increase the infiltration rate of the stormwater basins to modify the design, as accepted by the City Engineer, in order to accommodate the proposed project density. The requested density bonus concessions are consistent with the requirements of the City’s local ordinances and state law. The Applicant shall enter into a housing agreement to ensure the units remain affordable to qualified households. Staff finds that the requested concessions are necessary to provide for affordable housing and will not result in damage to public health or the physical environment or affect any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. Additionally, the concessions are not contrary to state or federal law. Item 3A-24 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 5 5 SECTION 4. CEQA Findings. 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 5. Project Approval. The City Council approves Precise Plan 22-0003 and Tentative Parcel Map 38366; and SECTION 6. Approval. The City Council approves and adopts the Project, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit “A.” Item 3A-25 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 6 6 ADOPTED ON ________________, 20__. JAN C. HARNIK MAYOR ATTEST: ANTHONY J. MEJIA CITY CLERK Item 3A-26 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 7 7 I, Anthony J. Mejia, City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2022-__ is a full, true, and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Desert on _______________________, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RECUSED: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Desert, California, on ______________, 20__. ANTHONY J. MEJIA CITY CLERK Item 3A-27 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 8 8 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. Item 3A-28 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 9 9 5. The PP approval is for a two-phase, 241-unit apartment development, however, may be constructed as a single phase in the future: 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. Item 3A-29 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 10 10 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. 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. Item 3A-30 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 11 11 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. 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. Item 3A-31 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 12 12 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 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 be 12” in diameter and 36” in depth for end posts and eight inches (8”) in diameter and 36” in 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 MSP Mitigated Negative Declaration. Item 3A-32 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 13 13 36. The Applicant shall incorporate all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Plan Desert General Plan EIR (SCH# 2015081020). 37. The Applicant shall provide payment for filing fees for the Notice of Exemption within five (5) days of the City Council’s approval. 38. 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 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. 39. The Applicant shall construct a swimming pool within the central amenity area in conjunction with Phase 1 of the project. The swimming pool shall be constructed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for Building A (Community Building). The size of the pool shall be adequately sized to serve residents of the project at full build-out. 40. The Applicant shall construct shade structures to fully shade picnic areas and playground equipment located within the central amenity area. At a minimum, this shall include: A. Phase 1: i. One (1) shade structure for playground equipment ii. Two (2) shade structures for picnic area. B. Phase 2: i. Two (2) shade structures for picnic area. 41. The Applicant shall provide a minimum of 32 washers and 32 dryer machines within laundry facilities for the development. Half of the laundry facilities shall be provided with Phase 1. 42. The Applicant shall enter into a Disposition Development Loan Agreement (DDLA) with the City of Palm Desert and Palm Desert Housing Authority. A. The DDALA shall provide Temporary Easement Agreements for interim access improvements across Parcel 2. The Applicant shall execute Item 3A-33 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 14 14 agreements providing for reciprocal access for common area usage, maintenance, and drainage facilities between Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: 43. 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. 44. 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 during technical plan review. 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. 45. 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. 46. 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. 47. The Applicant shall pay all signalization fees per the City’s Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55. 48. Prior to map approval, the Applicant shall pay all appropriate drainage fees per PDMC Section 26.49.050 and Palm Desert Ordinance No. 653. 49. The Applicant shall pay all appropriate park fees per PDMC Section 26.48.060. 50. The Applicant shall comply with Pam Desert Ordinance No. 843, Section 24.20 Stormwater Management and Discharge. Item 3A-34 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 15 15 51. All utility extensions within the site shall be placed underground unless otherwise specified or allowed by the respective utility purveyor. 52. 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. 53. 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. 54. 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. 55. Pad elevations, as shown on the conceptual exhibit, are subject to review and modification per Chapter 27 of the PDMC. 56. 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. 57. 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. 58. 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. 59. 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. 60. 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. Item 3A-35 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 16 16 61. 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. 62. Where grading involves import or export, the Applicant shall obtain permits from the Public Works Department, including import/export quantities and hauling route. 63. 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. 64. 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. 65. 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. 66. 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. 67. 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. 68. 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. 69. 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 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. Item 3A-36 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 17 17 70. 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. 71. 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 two (2) inches/hour has been specifically approved for this Project. 72. 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. 73. 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. 74. 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. The location and design shall be per the approved conceptual exhibits and the Palm Desert Standard Drawings and Specifications. Item 3A-37 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 18 18 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. 75. Technology Drive is identified in the MSP 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. 76. 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. 77. 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. 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. Item 3A-38 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 19 19 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. 78. 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. 79. 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. 80. 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. 81. 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. 82. 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. 83. Abutter’s rights along Parcel 8 of Parcel Map No. 36792 shall be perpetuated on the final map. 84. 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. 85. 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 Item 3A-39 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 20 20 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. 86. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall provide the City’s 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. 87. 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. 88. 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. 89. The Applicant shall be responsible for the erosion and dust control of the entire site, including both Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall provide for review and approval by the City Engineer, a Phase 2-specific soil stabilization plan which shall include specifications for soil binder, and a cost estimate for the cost of installation and upkeep of the erosion and dust control improvements for a until the completion of construction of Phase 2. 90. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall provide the City a cash bond for the Phase 2-specific soil stabilization plan per the approved cost estimate. The bond shall be held by the City until such time that Phase 2 of the site is developed. In the event that the implemented erosion and dust control measures fail and/or are determined to be insufficient by the City Engineer, the City may use the bond in order to place appropriate BMPs. 91. Prior to the start of the grading activities, the Applicant shall install all erosion and dust control mechanisms for the site, Phase 1 and Phase 2. For Phase 2 of the site, the Applicant is responsible for the soil stabilization as approved by the City Engineer. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION: 92. 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. Item 3A-40 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 21 21 H. Title 24, California Code of Regulations. I. California Fire Code and its appendices and standards. 93. This project will fall under the review and compliance of Chapters 11-A and Chapter 11-B of the 2019 California Building Code. 94. 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 95. 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. 96. 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. 97. All contractors and subcontractors shall have a current City of Palm Desert Business License before permit issuance per PDMC, Title 5. 98. 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. 99. 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: 100. 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 Item 3A-41 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 22 22 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. 101. 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. 102. 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. 103. 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) 104. 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) 105. 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. 106. 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) Item 3A-42 Resolution No. 2022-____ Page 23 23 107. 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) 108. 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) 109. 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 access. Ref. CFC 505.1 and County of Riverside Office of the Fire Marshal Standard No. 07-01. 110. 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 Item 3A-43 Item 3A-44 Item 3A-45 Item 3A-46 Item 3A-47 Item 3A-48 Item 3A-49 Item 3A-50 Item 3A-51 Item 3A-52 Item 3A-53 Item 3A-54 Item 3A-55 Item 3A-56 Item 3A-57 Item 3A-58 Item 3A-59 Item 3A-60 Item 3A-61 Item 3A-62 Item 3A-63 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 16, 2022 3 Commissioner Pradetto moved to waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2816, adopting a Notice of Exemption and approving Case No. CUP22-004. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gregory and carried by a 4-0 vote (AYES: DeLuna, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: Greenwood). Commissioner Greenwood returned to the meeting at 6:23 p.m. 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. Chair DeLuna announced that she is employed by the applicant. She recused herself and left the meeting at 6:23 p.m. Senior Planner Melloni gave a PowerPoint presentation reviewing the staff report and responded to Commissioner’s inquiries. Vice-Chair Pradetto opened the public hearing. Ms. Lauren Horn, asset manager for Palm Communities, Irvine, California, thanked staff and the Planning Commission. She briefly spoke about their company and introduced their team. Mr. Bill Atkins, project’s architect, Irvine, California, addressed the following items: •Fire access road •Noise mitigation and materials for the upper floor balconies •Transit facility for bus line •Proposed future park and how it interacts with the proposed project •Water Quality Management Plan and the retention basin •Shade for the tot pad and lack of a water feature, such as a swimming pool or splash pad •Solar panels •Architecture Mr. Whitney voiced his concern about the wide streets in the University Park area, which make them unsafe, and no public transportation near the project. Item 3A-64 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 16, 2022 4 During the course of deliberations, the Planning Commission was in unanimous agreement on the following points: • It is a nice project • Lacks amenities such as a pool/splash pad and shading elements • Incorporating access to the retention basin • Assess the potential for future transit facilities at the site • Incorporating a water feature into the project accessible to the residents Commissioner Holt moved to waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2817, approving a recommendation to the City Council to approve Case Nos. PP22-0003/TPM 38366 contingent upon that City Staff communicate to the City Council with the following Planning Commission’s concerns: 1) The applicant to incorporate access to the retention basin for recreational use; 2) the City of Palm Desert to consult with SunLine Transit Agency to assess future transit needs at this project location; and 3) the inclusion of a water feature that is accessible to all residents of the Palm Villas community. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gregory and carried by a 4-0 vote (AYES: Greenwood, Gregory, Holt, and Pradetto; NOES: None; ABSENT: DeLuna). Chair DeLuna returned to the meeting at 7:36 p.m. IX. MISCELLANEOUS None X. SUMMARY OF CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS None XI. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. Cultural Arts Committee None B. Parks and Recreation Commission Senior Planner Melloni reported that the Commission selected a consultant to recommend to the City Council for the north sphere park. XII. REPORTS AND REMARKS None XIII. INFORMATION ITEMS A. Attendance Record Item 3A-65 G:\Planning\Case Files\PP\PP 22-0003 - Palm Villas at Millennnium\CC\PP 22-0003 - Public Hearing Notice (10.13.22).docx CITY OF PALM DESERT PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CASE NO. PP22-0003/TPM 38366/EA22-0003 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, TO CONSIDER A REQUEST BY PALM COMMUNITIES, FOR ADOPTION OF A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION AND APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 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 EXTENSION OF 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 pursuant to 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 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, landscaping, 350 parking spaces, private open space amenities, including a swimming pool on a vacant 10.49-acre site, and related off-site improvements. The project includes a Density Bonus Request pursuant to Government Code Section 65915 to increase the site density by five percent (5%), parking reduction, and concessions. The Tentative Parcel Map will subdivide the site into two parcels to establish two phases for the project development. Recommendation: Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the project to the City Council, subject to findings and Conditions. Public Hearing: The public hearing will be held before the City Council on Thursday, October 13, 2022, at 4:00 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/mayor-and-city- council-/city-council-meeting-information-center. Public Review: The plans 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/Land Development 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 City Council 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 ANTHONY J. MEJIA, CITY CLERK OCTOBER 2, 2022 PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL Item 3A-66 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. Item 3A-67 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) Item 3A-68 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 Item 3A-69 Palm Villas at Millennium Item 3A-70 Item 3A-71 Item 3A-72 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. Item 3A-73 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) Item 3A-74 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. Item 3A-75 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. Item 3A-76 Item 3A-77 Item 3A-78 Item 3A-79 Item 3A-80 Item 3A-81 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). Item 3A-82 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 Item 3A-83 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 Item 3A-84 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. Item 3A-85 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: Item 3A-86 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. Item 3A-87 Item 3A-88 Item 3A-89 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 Item 3A-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 Item 3A-91 Item 3A-92 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 Item 3A-93 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. Item 3A-94 Item 3A-95 Item 3A-96 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. Item 3A-97 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. Item 3A-98 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 Item 3A-99 Item 3A-100 Item 3A-101 Item 3A-102 Item 3A-103 Item 3A-104 Item 3A-105 Item 3A-106 Item 3A-107 Item 3A-108 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. Item 3A-109 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. Item 3A-110 Item 3A-111 Item 3A-112 Item 3A-113 Item 3A-114 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. Item 3A-115 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 Item 3A-116 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: Item 3A-117 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 Item 3A-118 Item 3A-119 Item 3A-120 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 Item 3A-121 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. Item 3A-122 Item 3A-123 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, Item 3A-124 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, Item 3A-125 Item 3A-126 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. Item 3A-127 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. Item 3A-128 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. Item 3A-129 Item 3A-130 Item 3A-131 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. Item 3A-132 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 Item 3A-133 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. Item 3A-134 Item 3A-135 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 Item 3A-136 Item 3A-137 Item 3A-138 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. Item 3A-139 Item 3A-140 Item 3A-141 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. Item 3A-142 Item 3A-143 Item 3A-144 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. Item 3A-145 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: Item 3A-146 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. Item 3A-147 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 Item 3A-148 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. Item 3A-149 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. Item 3A-150 Item 3A-151 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. Item 3A-152 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. Item 3A-153 Item 3A-154 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. Item 3A-155 Item 3A-156 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. Item 3A-157 Item 3A-158 Item 3A-159 Item 3A-160 Item 3A-161 Item 3A-162 Item 3A-163 Item 3A-164 Item 3A-165 Item 3A-166 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. Item 3A-167 Item 3A-168 Item 3A-169 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. Item 3A-170 Item 3A-171 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. Item 3A-172 Item 3A-173 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 Item 3A-174 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. Item 3A-175 Item 3A-176 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. Item 3A-177 Item 3A-178 Item 3A-179 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 Item 3A-180 Item 3A-181 Item 3A-182 Item 3A-183 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. Item 3A-184 Item 3A-185 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 Item 3A-186 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? Item 3A-187 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 Item 3A-188 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. Item 3A-189 Item 3A-190 Item 3A-191 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. Item 3A-192 Item 3A-193 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 Item 3A-194 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 Item 3A-195 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 Item 3A-196 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 Item 3A-197 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. Item 3A-198 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 Item 3A-199 !"`$ UNIO N P A C I F I C R R G eral d F or dDri veCollege DrivePacific AvenueDina h S h o r e D r i v e 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 Item 3A-200 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 Item 3A-201 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. Item 3A-202 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 L eq 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. Item 3A-203 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. Item 3A-204 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 Item 3A-205 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. Item 3A-206 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. Item 3A-207 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. Item 3A-208 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. Item 3A-209 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. Item 3A-210 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. Item 3A-211 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. Item 3A-212 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. Item 3A-213 !"`$ UNIO N P A C I F I C R R G eral d F or dDri veCollege DrivePacific AvenueDina h S h o r e D r i v e 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 Item 3A-214 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. Item 3A-215 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 BUIL D I N G 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 Item 3A-216 !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( BUILDING 1 BUILDING 10 BUILDING 9 BUILDING 8 BUILDING 7 BUILDING 6 BUIL D I N G 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 Item 3A-217 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. Item 3A-218 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. Item 3A-219 BUILDING 1 BUILDING 10 BUILDING 9 BUILDING 8 BUILDING 7 BUILDING 6 BUIL D I N G 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 Item 3A-220 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 BUIL D I N G 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 Item 3A-221 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. Item 3A-222 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 BUIL D I N G 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 Item 3A-223 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. Item 3A-224 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. Item 3A-225 Appendix A Existing Ambient Noise Measurements Item 3A-226 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 Item 3A-227 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 Item 3A-228 Item 3A-229 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 Item 3A-230 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 Item 3A-231 Item 3A-232 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 Item 3A-233 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 Item 3A-234 Item 3A-235 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 Item 3A-236 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 Item 3A-237 Item 3A-238 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 Item 3A-239 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 Item 3A-240 Item 3A-241 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 Item 3A-242 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 Item 3A-243 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 Item 3A-244 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 Item 3A-245 Appendix B Traffic Noise Modeling Data Item 3A-246 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 Item 3A-247 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 Item 3A-248 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 Item 3A-249 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 Item 3A-250 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 Item 3A-251 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. Item 3A-252 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. Item 3A-253 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 Item 3A-254 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. Item 3A-255 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 Item 3A-256 129 167 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 Item 3A-257 202 274 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 Item 3A-258 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. Item 3A-259 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 Item 3A-260 125 161 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 Item 3A-261 196 266 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 Item 3A-262 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. Item 3A-263 151 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 Item 3A-264 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. Item 3A-265 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 Item 3A-266 125 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 Item 3A-267 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. Item 3A-268 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 Item 3A-269 119 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 Item 3A-270 Appendix C Train Noise Modeling Data Item 3A-271 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 Item 3A-272 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. Item 3A-273 Appendix D Composite Noise Modeling Results Item 3A-274 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 Item 3A-275 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 Item 3A-276 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 Item 3A-277 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 Item 3A-278 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 Item 3A-279 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. Item 3A-280 Item 3A-281 Item 3A-282 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. Item 3A-283 Item 3A-284 Item 3A-285 Item 3A-286 Item 3A-287 Item 3A-288 Item 3A-289 Item 3A-290 Item 3A-291 Item 3A-292 Item 3A-293 Item 3A-294 Item 3A-295 Item 3A-296 Item 3A-297 Item 3A-298 Item 3A-299 Item 3A-300 Item 3A-301 Item 3A-302 Item 3A-303 Item 3A-304 Item 3A-305 Item 3A-306 Item 3A-307 Item 3A-308 Item 3A-309 Item 3A-310 Item 3A-311 Item 3A-312 Item 3A-313 Item 3A-314 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 DRIVET E C H N O L O G Y D R .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 DRIVEItem 3A-315 PRELIMINARY GRADING & UTILITY PLANPALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUMPARCEL 8 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 36792 IN THECITY OF PALM DESERTPROJECTLOCATIONNORTH22 3LEGAL 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 DRIVET E C H N O L O G Y D R .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 DRIVEItem 3A-316 PRELIMINARY GRADING & UTILITY PLANPALM VILLAS AT MILLENNIUMPARCEL 8 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 36792 IN THECITY OF PALM DESERT33 3SECTION 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 DRIVEItem 3A-317 INTERSTATE 10UNION PACIFIC RAILROADDINAH SHORE DRIVEDINAH SHORE DRIVEGERALD FORD DRIVET E C H N O L O G 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 PROVIDERSItem 3A-318 Palm 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 Item 3A-319 PARCEL8 PARCEL10 PARCEL9 G G.1 G.2 Item 3A-320 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 Item 3A-321 G G.1 G.2 Item 3A-322 G G.1 G.2 Item 3A-323 Item 3A-324 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 Item 3A-731 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 Item 3A-732 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. Item 3A-733 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 Item 3A-734 Palm Villas at Milleniu m Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report APPENDIX A : P ROPOSED RATIONAL METHOD CALCULATIONS Item 3A-735 GERALD FORD DR.TECHNOLOGY DR.DINAH SHORE DR . PHASE I PHASE II A 5.91 B 4.52 NORTH © E N RI EENGIANOI LA SEFSRPD EERRSIGETNo. C57667 O OIFFCAL RTS ATEO NPROJECT LOCATION LEGEND X XXX Item 3A-736 ____________________________________________________________________________ **************************************************************************** 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 Item 3A-737 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 Item 3A-738 Palm Villas at Millenium Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report APPENDIX B: R ETENTION CALCULATIONS Item 3A-739 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: Item 3A-740 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 Item 3A-741 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 Item 3A-742 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 Item 3A-743 138 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 Item 3A-744 200 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 Item 3A-745 262 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 | | | | Item 3A-746 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 | | | | Item 3A-747 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 | | | Item 3A-748 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 | Item 3A-749 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| Item 3A-750 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 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Item 3A-751 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 Item 3A-752 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 Item 3A-753 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) Item 3A-754 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 Item 3A-755 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 Item 3A-756 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 Item 3A-757 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 Item 3A-758 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 Item 3A-759 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 Item 3A-760 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 Item 3A-761 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 Item 3A-762 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 Item 3A-763 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 Item 3A-764 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 Item 3A-765 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 Item 3A-766 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 Item 3A-767 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 Item 3A-768 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 Item 3A-769 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 Item 3A-770 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 Item 3A-771 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 Item 3A-772 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 Item 3A-773 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 Item 3A-774 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 Item 3A-775 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 Item 3A-776 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 Item 3A-777 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 Item 3A-778 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 Item 3A-779 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 Item 3A-780 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 Item 3A-781 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 Item 3A-782 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 Item 3A-783 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 Item 3A-784 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 Item 3A-785 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 Item 3A-786 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 Item 3A-787 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 Item 3A-788 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 Item 3A-789 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 Item 3A-790 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 Item 3A-791 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 Item 3A-792 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 Item 3A-793 Palm Villas at Milleniu m Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report APPENDIX C : REFERENCES Item 3A-794 Item 3A-795 Item 3A-796 Item 3A-797 Item 3A-798 Item 3A-799 Item 3A-800 Palm Villas at Milleniu m Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report APPENDIX D : GEOTECH NICAL REPORT Item 3A-801 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 Item 3A-802 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 Item 3A-803 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 Item 3A-804 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 Item 3A-805 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. Item 3A-806 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). Item 3A-807 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. Item 3A-808 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 Item 3A-809 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 Item 3A-810 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. Item 3A-811 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 Item 3A-812 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 Item 3A-813 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 Item 3A-814 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 Item 3A-815 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 Item 3A-816 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 Item 3A-817 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. Item 3A-818 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). Item 3A-819 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. Item 3A-820 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. Item 3A-821 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. Item 3A-822 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. Item 3A-823 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. Item 3A-824 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 Item 3A-825 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. Item 3A-826 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 Item 3A-827 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. Item 3A-828 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. Item 3A-829 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. Item 3A-830 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 Item 3A-831 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. Item 3A-832 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. Item 3A-833 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 Item 3A-834 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. Item 3A-835 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. Item 3A-836 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 Item 3A-837 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). Item 3A-838 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. Item 3A-839 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. Item 3A-840 FIGURES Item 3A-841 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 92626PHONE: (714) 549-8921COSTA 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 Item 3A-842 3186 Airway Avenue, Suite K Costa Mesa, California 92626PHONE: (714) 549-8921COSTA 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. Item 3A-843 APPENDIX A EXPLORATION LOGS Item 3A-844 Item 3A-845 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 Item 3A-846 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 Item 3A-847 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 Item 3A-848 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 Item 3A-849 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 Item 3A-850 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 Item 3A-851 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES LABORATORY DATA SUMMARY Item 3A-852 _____________________________________________________ ______________________________________ 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. Item 3A-853 _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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 Item 3A-854 APPENDIX C SEISMIC DESIGN ANALYSIS Item 3A-855 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 Item 3A-856 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. Item 3A-857 Unied Hazard Tool Input U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program Please do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for thedesign code reference documents covered by the U.S. Seismic Design Maps web tools (e.g., the InternationalBuilding Code and the ASCE 7 or 41 Standard). The values returned by the two applications are not identical. Please do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for thePlease do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for the 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 boundary) Spectral Period Peak Ground Acceleration Time Horizon Return period in years 2475 Item 3A-858 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 ExceedenceItem 3A-859 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 Clos e s t D i s t a n c e , r R u p ( k m ) 30 35 40 45 50 5598.587.5Magnitu de ( M w)76.565.554.5510% Contribution to Hazard1520255 10 15 20 25 30 35 Clo s e s t D i s t a n c e , r R u p ( k m ) 40 45 50 55 98.587.576.5Magnitu de ( M w)65.554.5Item 3A-860 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 .. +∞] Item 3A-861 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 Item 3A-862 APPENDIX D PERCOLATION TEST DATA Item 3A-863 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 Item 3A-864 APPENDIX E EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS Item 3A-865 APPENDIX C: LIQUEFACTION AND DRY SAND SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS 21-308 Palm Desert Apartments0.00inches2.05inches2.05inches190no liquefactionno waterfeet66.50feet0.00feetEarthquake loading: M 7.49PGA 0.809Depth 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 0102030405060700.00.51.01.52.0Depth (ft)Factor of Safety against LiquefactionFirst groundwater atno waterfeetB-4 FS = 1.3LIQUEFACTIONNO LIQUEFACTIONItem 3A-866 APPENDIX F STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Item 3A-867 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. Item 3A-868 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.) Item 3A-869 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. Item 3A-870 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). Item 3A-871 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. Item 3A-872 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 Item 3A-873 Item 3A-874 Item 3A-875 Item 3A-876 Item 3A-877 Item 3A-878 Item 3A-879 Item 3A-880 Item 3A-881 Item 3A-882