Cathedral City City Council
January 8, 2025

The local air quality emissions from construction were analyzed using the SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Localized Significant Threshold Look-up Tables and the methodology described in Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, prepared by SCAQMD, revised July 2008. The Look-up Tables were developed by the SCAQMD in order to readily determine if the daily emissions of CO, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 from the proposed project could result in a significant impact to the local air quality. The emission thresholds were based on the Coachella Valley source receptor area (SRA 30) and a disturbance of 4 acres per day, to be conservative, at a distance of 25 meters (82 feet).

4.4 Localized Operational Analysis
For operational emissions, as the project is approximately 11.5 acres, the screening tables for a disturbance area of 5 acres per day and a distance of 25 meters were used to determine significance.

The tables were compared to the project’s onsite operational emissions. 34 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Thresholds of Significance

5.0 Thresholds of Significance

5.1 Air Quality Thresholds of Significance

5.1.1 CEQA Guidelines for Air Quality
The CEQA Guidelines define a significant effect on the environment as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment.” To determine if a project would have a significant impact on air quality, the type, level, and impact of emissions generated by the project must be evaluated.

The following air quality significance thresholds are contained in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. A significant impact would occur if the project would:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable national or state ambient air quality standard; c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

While the final determination of whether a project is significant is within the purview of the Lead Agency pursuant to Section 15064(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, SCAQMD recommends that its quantitative air pollution thresholds be used to determine the significance of project emissions. If the Lead Agency finds that the project has the potential to exceed these air pollution thresholds, the project should be considered to have significant air quality impacts. There are daily emission thresholds for construction and operation of a proposed project in the basin.

5.1.2 Regional Significance Thresholds for Construction Emissions The following CEQA significance thresholds for construction emissions are established for the Basin:
•
•
•
75 pounds per day (lbs/day) of VOC
100 lbs/day of NOx
550 lbs/day of CO
•
•
•
150 lbs/day of PM10
55 lbs/day of PM2.5
150 lbs/day of SO2
Projects in the basin with construction-related emissions that exceed any of the emission thresholds are considered to be significant under SCAQMD guidelines. 35 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Thresholds of Significance

5.1.3 Regional Significance Thresholds for Operational Emissions The daily operational emissions significance thresholds for the basin are as follows:
•
•
•
55 pounds per day (lbs/day) of VOC
55 lbs/day of NOx
550 lbs/day of CO
•
•
•
150 lbs/day of PM10
55 lbs/day of PM2.5
150 lbs/day of SO2
Local Microscale Concentration Standards The significance of localized project impacts under CEQA depends on whether ambient CO levels in the vicinity of the project are above or below State and federal CO standards. If ambient levels are below the standards, a project is considered to have a significant impact if project emissions result in an exceedance of one or more of these standards. If ambient levels already exceed a State or federal standard, project emissions are considered significant if they increase 1-hour CO concentrations by 1.0 ppm or more or 8-hour CO concentrations by 0.45 ppm or more. The following are applicable local emission concentration standards for CO:
•
•
California State 1-hour CO standard of 20.0 ppm
California State 8-hour CO standard of 9.0 ppm

5.1.4 Thresholds for Localized Significance
Project-related construction air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and Federal air quality standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the Salton Sea Air Basin. In order to assess local air quality impacts the SCAQMD has developed Localized Significant Thresholds (LSTs) to assess the projectrelated air emissions in the project vicinity. The SCAQMD has also provided Final Localized Significant Threshold Methodology (LST Methodology), June 2003, which details the methodology to analyze local air emission impacts. The Localized Significant Threshold Methodology found that the primary emissions of concern are NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.

The emission thresholds were calculated based on the Coachella Valley source receptor area (SRA 30) and a disturbance of 4 acres per day at a distance of 25 meters (82 feet), for construction and 4 acres a day for screening of localized operational emissions. The 4-acre thresholds are interpolated from the 2- acre and 5-acre thresholds.

5.2 Greenhouse Gas Thresholds of Significance

5.2.1 CEQA Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas
CEQA Guidelines define a significant effect on the environment as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment.” To determine if a project would have a significant impact on greenhouse gases, the type, level, and impact of emissions generated by the project must be evaluated.
36 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Thresholds of Significance
The following greenhouse gas significance thresholds are contained in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, which were amendments adopted into the Guidelines on March 18, 2010, pursuant to SB 97. A significant impact would occur if the project would:
(a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or
(b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

However, despite this, currently neither the CEQA statutes, OPR guidelines, nor the draft proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines prescribe thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an impact analysis; as with most environmental topics, significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency. As previously discussed (Section 2.2.4 of this report), SCAQMD has drafted interim GHG thresholds and the County of Riverside CAP Update has adopted a GHG threshold. The County of Riverside CAP Update screening threshold of 3,000 metric tons per year of CO2e was used in this analysis.

5.3 Toxic Air Contaminants
The threshold for toxic air contaminants (TACs) has a maximum incremental cancer risk of 10 per million and a non-cancer (acute and chronic) hazard index of 1.0 or greater. An exceedance to these values would be considered a significant impact.
37 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact

6.0 Air Quality Emissions Impact

6.1 Construction Air Quality Emissions Impact
The latest version of CalEEMod was used to estimate the onsite and offsite construction emissions. The emissions incorporate Rule 402 and 403. Rule 402 and 403 (fugitive dust) are not considered mitigation measures as the project by default is required to incorporate these rules during construction.

6.1.1 Regional Construction Emissions
The construction emissions for the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD’s daily emission thresholds at the regional level with inclusion of Mitigation Measure 1 as demonstrated in Table 8, and therefore would be considered less than significant. Mitigation Measure 1 limits interior architectural coatings to a VOC content of 45 grams VOC per liter.

Table 8: Regional Significance – Mitigated Construction Emissions (pounds/day) Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Unmitigated
Site Preparation
On-Site2
Off-Site3
Total

3.65 0.07

3.72 35.95

0.11 36.06

32.93 1.03

33.96 0.05

0.00 0.05

6.71 0.23

6.94 4.10

0.05 4.15
Grading
On-Site2
Off-Site3
Total

3.52 0.08

3.60 34.29

0.12 34.41

30.17 1.18

31.35 0.06

0.00 0.06

3.84 0.26

4.10 2.28

0.06 2.34
Building Construction
On-Site2
Off-Site3

1.20 1.04

2.24 11.22

12.39 23.61

13.12 19.05

32.17 0.02

0.01 0.03

0.50 2.65

3.15 0.46

0.65 Total 1.10
Paving
On-Site2
Off-Site3
Total

1.60 0.20

1.80 7.45

0.41 7.87

9.98 1.58

11.56 0.01

0.00 0.02

0.35 0.29

0.63 0.32

0.07 0.39
Architectural Coating
On-Site2
Off-Site3

74.73 0.19

74.92 78.96
75 0.88

0.19 1.07

32.55 100

1.14 3.42

4.56 48.28
550

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.05
150
No

0.03 0.47

0.50 4.28
150
No

0.03 0.11

0.14 1.63
55 Total
Total of overlapping phases4
SCAQMD Thresholds
Exceeds Thresholds Yes No No No
Mitigated
Site Preparation
On-Site2
Off-Site3

3.65 0.07

3.72 35.95

0.11 36.06

32.93 1.03

33.96 0.05

0.00 0.05

6.71 0.23

6.94 4.10

0.05 Total 4.15
38 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Grading
On-Site2
Off-Site3
Total

3.52 0.08

3.60 34.29

0.12 34.41

30.17 1.18

31.35 0.06

0.00 0.06

3.84 0.26

4.10 2.28

0.06 2.34
Building Construction
On-Site2
Off-Site3

1.20 1.04

2.24 11.22

12.39 23.61

13.12 19.05

32.17 0.02

0.01 0.03

0.50 2.65

3.15 0.46

0.65 Total 1.10
Paving
On-Site2
Off-Site3
Total

1.60 0.20

1.80 7.45

0.41 7.87

9.98 1.58

11.56 0.01

0.00 0.02

0.35 0.29

0.63 0.32

0.07 0.39
Architectural Coating
On-Site2
Off-Site3

69.52 0.19

69.71 73.75
75 0.88

0.19 1.07

32.55 100

1.14 3.42

4.56 48.28
550

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.05
150
No

0.03 0.47

0.50 4.28
150
No

0.03 0.11

0.14 1.63
55 Total
Total of overlapping phases4
SCAQMD Thresholds
Exceeds Thresholds No No No No
Notes:
1 Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.20
2 On-site emissions from equipment operated on-site that is not operated on public roads. 3 Off-site emissions from equipment operated on public roads. 4 Construction, architectural coatings and paving phases may overlap.

6.1.2 Localized Construction Emissions
The data provided in Table 9 shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the local emissions thresholds at the nearest sensitive receptors. Therefore, a less than significant local air quality impact would occur from construction of the proposed project.

Table 9: Localized Significance – Construction
On-Site Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)1
Phase NOx

35.95 34.29

11.22 7.45

0.88 19.56
191
CO PM10

6.71 3.84

0.50 0.35

0.03 0.87
7 PM2.5

4.10 2.28

0.46 0.32

0.03 0.80
5 Site Preparation
Grading
Building Construction
Paving
Architectural Coating
Total of overlapping phases

32.93 30.17

13.12 9.98

1.14 24.24
1,299
No
SCAQMD Threshold for 25 meters (82 feet) or less2
Exceeds Threshold? No No No
Notes:
1 Source: Calculated from CalEEMod and SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look-up Tables for two acres in Coachella Valley Source Receptor Area (SRA 30). Project will disturb a maximum of 3.5 acres per day (see Table 7). 2 The nearest sensitive receptor is located adjacent to the east; therefore, the 25-meter threshold has been used. 39 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact

6.1.3 Construction-Related Human Health Impacts
Regarding health effects related to criteria pollutant emissions, the applicable significance thresholds are established for regional compliance with the state and federal ambient air quality standards, which are intended to protect public health from both acute and long-term health impacts, depending on the potential effects of the pollutant. Because regional and local emissions of criteria pollutants during construction of the project would be below the applicable thresholds, it would not contribute to longterm health impacts related to nonattainment of the ambient air quality standards. Therefore, significant adverse acute health impacts as a result of project construction are not anticipated.

6.1.4 Odors
Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the application of materials such as asphalt pavement. The objectionable odors that may be produced during the construction process are of short-term in nature and the odor emissions are expected cease upon the drying or hardening of the odor producing materials. Diesel exhaust and VOCs would be emitted during construction of the project, which are objectionable to some; however, emissions would disperse rapidly from the project site and therefore should not reach an objectionable level at the nearest sensitive receptors. Due to the short-term nature and limited amounts of odor producing materials being utilized, no significant impact related to odors would occur during construction of the proposed project.

The SCAQMD recommends that odor impacts be addressed in a qualitative manner. Such an analysis shall determine whether the project would result in excessive nuisance odors, as defined under the California Code of Regulations and Section 41700 of the California Health and Safety Code, and thus would constitute a public nuisance related to air quality.

Potential sources that may emit odors during the on-going operations of the proposed project would include odor emissions from vehicle emissions. Due to the distance of the nearest receptors from the project site and through compliance with SCAQMD’s Rule 402 no significant impact related to odors would occur during the on-going operations of the proposed project.

6.1.5 Construction-Related Toxic Air Contaminant Impact The greatest potential for toxic air contaminant emissions would be related to diesel particulate emissions associated with heavy equipment operations during construction of the proposed project.

The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has issued the Air Toxic Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines and Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, February 2015 to provide a description of the algorithms, recommended exposure variates, cancer and noncancer health values, and the air modeling protocols needed to perform a health risk assessment (HRA) under the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987.

Hazard identification includes identifying all substances that are evaluated for cancer risk and/or noncancer acute, 8-hour, and chronic health impacts. In addition, identifying any multi-pathway substances that present a cancer risk or chronic non-cancer hazard via non-inhalation routes of exposure.
40 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact Given the relatively limited number of heavy-duty construction equipment and construction schedule, the proposed project would not result in a long-term substantial source of toxic air containment emissions and corresponding individual cancer risk. Furthermore, construction-based particulate matter (PM) emissions (including diesel exhaust emissions) do not exceed any local or regional thresholds. Therefore, no significant short-term toxic air contaminant impacts would occur during construction of the proposed project.

6.2 Operational Air Quality Emissions Impact

6.2.1 Regional Operational Emissions
The operations-related criteria air quality impacts created by the proposed project have been analyzed through the use of CalEEMod model. The operating emissions were based on year 2025, which is the anticipated opening year for the project per the Traffic Scoping Agreement (Integrated Engineering Group). The summer and winter emissions created by the proposed project’s long-term operations were calculated and the highest emissions from either summer or winter are summarized in Table 10. <Table 10, next page>
Table 10: Regional Significance - Unmitigated Operational Emissions (lbs/day) Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)1
Activity
Area Sources2
Energy Usage3
Mobile Sources4
Total Emissions
SCAQMD Thresholds
Exceeds Threshold?
VOC

6.81 0.04

5.37 12.22
55 NOx

0.14 0.66

4.59 5.40
55 CO

14.89 0.28

40.61 55.78
550
SO2

0.00 0.00

0.09 0.09
150
No
PM10

0.01 0.05

6.96 7.02
150
PM2.5

0.01 0.05

1.81 1.87
55 No No No No No
Notes:
1 Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.20
2 Area sources consist of emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment. 3 Energy usage consists of emissions from on-site natural gas usage. 4 Mobile sources consist of emissions from vehicles and road dust.

Table 10 provides the project's unmitigated operational emissions. Table 10 shows that the project does not exceed the SCAQMD daily emission threshold and regional operational emissions are considered to be less than significant.

6.2.2 Localized Operational Emissions
Table 11 shows the calculated emissions for the proposed operational activities compared with appropriate LSTs. The LST analysis only includes on-site sources; however, the CalEEMod software 41 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact outputs do not separate on-site and off-site emissions for mobile sources. For a worst-case scenario assessment, the emissions shown in Table 11 include all on-site project-related stationary sources and 10% of the project-related new mobile sources.3 This percentage is an estimate of the amount of project-related new vehicle traffic that will occur on-site. <Table 11, next page>
Table 11: Localized Significance – Unmitigated Operational Emissions On-Site Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)1
On-Site Emission Source NOx

0.14 0.66

0.46 1.26
304
No
CO

14.89 0.28

4.06 19.23
2,292
No
PM10

0.01 0.05

0.70 0.76
4 PM2.5

0.01 0.05

0.18 0.24
2 Area Sources2
Energy Usage3
On-Site Vehicle Emissions4
Total Emissions
SCAQMD Threshold for 25 meters (82 feet)5
Exceeds Threshold? No No
Notes:
1 Source: Calculated from CalEEMod and SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look-up Tables for 5 acres in Coachella Valley Source Receptor Area (SRA 30). The project will be approximately 11.49 acres.
2 Area sources consist of emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment. 3 Energy usage consists of emissions from generation of electricity and on-site natural gas usage. 4 On-site vehicular emissions based on 1/10 of the gross vehicular emissions and road dust. 5 The nearest sensitive receptor is located adjacent to the east; therefore, the 25-meter threshold has been used.

Table 11 indicates that the local operational emission would not exceed the LST thresholds at the nearest sensitive receptors, located adjacent to the project. Therefore, the project will result in less than significant Localized Operational emissions.
3 The project site is approximately 0.2 miles in length at its longest point; therefore the on-site mobile source emissions represent approximately 1/34th of the shortest CalEEMod default distance of 6.9 miles. Therefore, to be conservative, 1/10th the distance (dividing the mobile source emissions by 10) was used to represent the portion of the overall mobile source emissions that would occur on-site. 42 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact

6.2.3 Operations-Related Human Health Impacts
As stated previously, regarding health effects related to criteria pollutant emissions, the applicable significance thresholds are established for regional compliance with the state and federal ambient air quality standards, which are intended to protect public health from both acute and long-term health impacts, depending on the potential effects of the pollutant. Because regional and local emissions of criteria pollutants during operation of the project would be below the applicable thresholds, it would not contribute to long-term health impacts related to nonattainment of the ambient air quality standards. Therefore, less than significant adverse acute health impacts as a result of project operation are anticipated.

6.3 CO Hot Spot Emissions
CO is the pollutant of major concern along roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor vehicles. For this reason, CO concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by a roadway network and are used as an indicator of potential local air quality impacts. Local air quality impacts can be assessed by comparing future without and with project CO levels to the State and Federal CO standards which were presented in above in Section 5.0.

To determine if the proposed project could cause emission levels in excess of the CO standards discussed above in Section 5.0, a sensitivity analysis is typically conducted to determine the potential for CO “hot spots” at a number of intersections in the general project vicinity. Because of reduced speeds and vehicle queuing, “hot spots” potentially can occur at high traffic volume intersections with a Level of Service E or worse.

Micro-scale air quality emissions have traditionally been analyzed in environmental documents where the air basin was a non-attainment area for CO. However, the SCAQMD has demonstrated in the CO attainment redesignation request to EPA that there are no “hot spots” anywhere in the air basin, even at intersections with much higher volumes, much worse congestion, and much higher background CO levels than anywhere in Riverside County. If the worst-case intersections in the air basin have no “hot spot” potential, any local impacts will be below thresholds.

Traffic analysis from Integrated Engineering Group (2023) showed that the project would generate 1,375 average daily trips. The 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan) showed that an intersection which has a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day would not violate the CO standard. The volume of traffic at project buildout would be well below 100,000 vehicles and below the necessary volume to even get close to causing a violation of the CO standard. Therefore, no CO “hot spot” modeling was performed and less than significant long-term air quality impact is anticipated to local air quality with the on-going use of the proposed project.

6.4 Cumulative Regional Air Quality Impacts
Cumulative projects include local development as well as general growth within the project area.

However, as with most development, the greatest source of emissions is from mobile sources, which travel well out of the local area. Therefore, from an air quality standpoint, the cumulative analysis 43 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact would extend beyond any local projects and when wind patterns are considered, would cover an even larger area. Accordingly, the cumulative analysis for the project’s air quality must be generic by nature.

The project area is out of attainment for both ozone and PM10 particulate matter. Construction and operation of cumulative projects will further degrade the local air quality, as well as the air quality of the Salton Sea Air Basin. The greatest cumulative impact on the quality of regional air cell will be the incremental addition of pollutants mainly from increased traffic from residential, commercial, and industrial development and the use of heavy equipment and trucks associated with the construction of these projects. Air quality will be temporarily degraded during construction activities that occur separately or simultaneously. However, in accordance with the SCAQMD methodology, projects that do not exceed the SCAQMD criteria or can be mitigated to less than criteria levels are not significant and do not add to the overall cumulative impact. The project does not exceed any of the thresholds of significance and therefore is considered less than significant.

6.5 Air Quality Compliance
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a discussion of any inconsistencies between a proposed project and applicable General Plans and Regional Plans (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125).

The regional plan that applies to the proposed project includes the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Therefore, this section discusses any potential inconsistencies of the proposed project with the AQMP.

The purpose of this discussion is to set forth the issues regarding consistency with the assumptions and objectives of the AQMP and discuss whether the proposed project would interfere with the region’s ability to comply with Federal and State air quality standards. If the decision-makers determine that the proposed project is inconsistent, the lead agency may consider project modifications or inclusion of mitigation to eliminate the inconsistency.

The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that "New or amended General Plan Elements (including land use zoning and density amendments), Specific Plans, and significant projects must be analyzed for consistency with the AQMP." Strict consistency with all aspects of the plan is usually not required A proposed project should be considered to be consistent with the AQMP if it furthers one or more policies and does not obstruct other policies. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook identifies two key indicators of consistency:
(1) Whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP. (2) Whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP in 2022 or increments based on the year of project buildout and phase.

Both of these criteria are evaluated in the following sections. 44 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Air Quality Emissions Impact A. Criterion 1 - Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations Based on the air quality modeling analysis contained in this Air Analysis in Tables 8 and 9, short-term construction impacts will not result in significant impacts based on the SCAQMD regional and local thresholds of significance. This Air Analysis also found that, long-term operations impacts will not result in significant impacts based on the SCAQMD local and regional thresholds of significance, shown in Tables 10 and 11.

Therefore, the proposed project is not projected to contribute to the exceedance of any air pollutant concentration standards or to cause a delay in attainment for any pollutant and is found to be consistent with the AQMP for the first criterion.

B. Criterion 2 - Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP?
Consistency with the AQMP assumptions is determined by performing an analysis of the proposed project with the assumptions in the AQMP. The emphasis of this criterion is to ensure that the analyses conducted for the proposed project are based on the same forecasts as the AQMP. Connect SoCal, the 2024–2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy prepared by SCAG, includes chapters on: SoCal today, paying our way forward, and the path to greater mobility and sustainability. These chapters currently respond directly to federal and state requirements placed on SCAG. Local governments are required to use these as the basis of their plans for purposes of consistency with applicable regional plans under CEQA. For this project, the City of Cathedral City defines the assumptions that are represented in the AQMP.

The proposed project has a current land use designation of General Commercial (CG) according to the City of Cathedral City Official General Plan and is zoned Planned Community Commercial (PCC) in the City of Cathedral City Code of Ordinances. The proposed project is to develop the site with an apartment complex. Under the current zoning, allowable uses include restaurants, bars, hotels, and retail, which would all have the potential to generate more trips than a residential use and therefore more emissions.4 As such, a General Plan amendment to accommodate for the project would result in less emissions that originally planned for in the AQMP. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to exceed the AQMP assumptions for the project site and would be found to be consistent with the AQMP for the second criterion.

Based on the above, the proposed project will not result in an inconsistency with the SCAQMD AQMP.

Therefore, a less than significant impact will occur.
4 ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021)
45 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis

7.0 Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis

7.1 Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact
The greenhouse gas emissions from project construction equipment and worker vehicles are shown in Table 12. The emissions are from all phases of construction. The total construction emissions amortized over a period of 30 years are estimated at 32.25 metric tons of CO2e per year. Annual CalEEMod output calculations are provided in Appendix A.

Table 12: Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions (MTCO2e)1
Activity Onsite Offsite Total
Site Preparation
Grading
Building Construction
Paving
Coating

24.10 90.10
328.17

13.76 1.22

1.11 3.81
495.89

4.85 25.21

93.90 824.06

18.61 4.45 5.66
Total 457.34

15.24 510.11

17.00 967.45
Averaged over 30 years 32.25 2
Notes:

1. MTCO2e=metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (includes carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide).

2. The emissions are averaged over 30 years because the average is added to the operational emissions, pursuant to SCAQMD. * CalEEMod output (Appendix A)

7.2 Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact
Operational emissions occur over the life of the project. The operational emissions for the project are 1,991 metric tons of CO2e per year (see Table 13). Furthermore, as shown in Table 13, the project’s total emissions (with incorporation of construction related GHG emissions) would be 2,023 metric tons of CO2e per year. These emissions would not exceed the County of Riverside CAP Update and SCAQMD screening threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e per year. Therefore, the project's GHG emissions impact would be less than significant.
<Table 13 next page>
46 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis Table 13: Opening Year Unmitigated Project-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons/Year)1
Category
Area Sources2
Energy Usage3
Mobile Sources4
Solid Waste5
Water6
Bio-CO2

0.00 0.00

0.00 13.46

2.63 NonBio-CO2

3.65 523.54
1,368.20

0.00 10.14

31.82 1,937.35
CO2

3.65 523.54
1,368.20

13.46 12.77

31.82 1,953.45
CH4

0.00 0.04

0.06 1.35

0.27 0.00

1.72 N2O

0.00 0.00

0.07 0.00

0.01 0.00

0.08 CO2e

3.66 525.38
1,393.00

47.10 21.47

32.25 2,022.86
3,000
No
Construction7
Total Emissions

0.00 16.09
County of Riverside CAP and SCAQMD Draft Screening Threshold Exceeds Threshold?
Notes:
1 Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.20
2 Area sources consist of GHG emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscape equipment. 3 Energy usage consist of GHG emissions from electricity and natural gas usage. 4 Mobile sources consist of GHG emissions from vehicles. 5 Solid waste includes the CO and CH emissions created from the solid waste placed in landfills. 2 4 6 Water includes GHG emissions from electricity used for transport of water and processing of wastewater. 7 Construction GHG emissions based on a 30 year amortization rate.

7.3 Greenhouse Gas Plan Consistency
The proposed project would have the potential to conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. As stated previously, the County of Riverside has adopted a Climate Action Plan; therefore, the project and its GHG emissions have been compared to the goals of the County of Riverside CAP Update.

Consistency with the County of Riverside CAP Update
Per the County’s CAP Update, the County adopted its first CAP in 2015 which set a target to reduce emissions back to 1990 levels by the year 2020 as recommended in the AB 32 Scoping Plan.

Furthermore, the goals and supporting measures within the County’s CAP Update are proposed to reflect and ensure compliance with changes in the local and State policies and regulations such as SB 32 and California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Therefore, compliance with the County’s CAP in turn reflects consistency with the goals of the CARB Scoping Plan, Assembly Bill (AB) 32 and Senate Bill (SB) 32.

Appendix D of the Riverside County CAP Update also states that project's that do not exceed the CAP's screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year are considered to have less than significant GHG emissions and are in compliance with the County's CAP Update. According to the County's CAP Update, projects that do not exceed emissions of 3,000 MTCO2e per year are also required to include the following efficiency measures:
• Energy efficiency matching or exceeding the Title 24 requirements in effect as of January 2017, and
47 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis • Water conservation measures that matches the California Green Building Code in effect as of January 2017.

As stated above, the GHG emissions generated by the proposed project would not exceed the County of Riverside CAP Update screening threshold of 3,000 metric tons per year of CO2e.

City of Cathedral City Climate Action Plan
The City of Cathedral City CAP was adopted in May of 2013. The City of Cathedral City CAP was set in place to guide the City in decisions that lead to the largest and most cost-effective emissions reductions. This plan sets forth goals to reduce emissions to achieve the targets of AB 32. In order to achieve these targets, the CAP presents a number of GHG emissions-reducing programs and policies that are to be implemented by the City. These emissions-reducing measures have been provided for different sectors of the community including transportation, residential buildings, commercial buildings, government incentives, renewable energy, cross-cutting initiatives, solid waste, and water.

As specified in the CAP, these measures are to be implemented in a series of three phases over a course of eight years beginning in 2013. The proposed project would be expected to comply with all applicable emissions-reducing measures identified within the CAP.

Project consistency with applicable measures in the CAP has been assessed. As shown in Table 14, the project is consistent with the applicable measures identified in the CAP. In addition, the proposed project is consistent with the GHG inventory and forecast prepared for the CAP as both the existing and the projected GHG inventories were derived based on the land use designations and associated densities defined in the City’s General Plan, and the proposed project is consistent with the existing General Plan land use designations. Therefore, since the proposed project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and CAP, the project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Impacts are considered to be less than significant.
<Table 14, next page>
48 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis Table 14: City of Cathedral City CAP Applicable Measures Project Comparison CAP Measures to
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions Sector Project Compliance with Measure Sphere - "Where We Live"
Solid Waste Diversion: Increase solid waste Consistent. The project will be required to comply with AB 341 which includes recycling programs that reduces
waste to landfills by up to 75% by 2020.
diversion rate to achieve an average annual
goal of 65% through 2020.

Solid Waste
Landscaper Certification: Require all licensed
landscapers to be certified by CVAG
Consistent. Landscapers used during the project shall
be certified by CVAG. Water
Gray water-Ready Ordinance: Require all new
residential development to be constructed for
easy implementation of gray water systems
that redirect water from wash basins, showers,
and tubs.

Consistent. The project shall be built gray water-ready.

Water
Sphere - " How We Build"
Shade Trees: Promote properly sited and Consistent. The project will comply with current 2022 Residential Title 24 requirements to meet energy compliance.

Buildings
selected shade trees in 100% of new
construction to reduce heat islands and
provide shade to offset air conditioning
Green Building Program: Promote the
voluntary Green Building Program to prepare
for enhanced Title 24 requirements and green
building standards.

Consistent. The California Green Building Standards
Code (proposed Part 11, Title 24) was adopted as part
of the California Building Standards Code in the CCR.

Part 11 establishes voluntary standards, that became
mandatory in the 2010 edition of the Code, on
planning and design for sustainable site development,
energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy
Code requirements), water conservation, material
conservation, and internal air contaminants. The
Proposed Project would be subject to these mandatory
standards. The 2014 Title 24 Code contained
Government
Initiatives
regulations that would be 25% more efficient than the
2010 edition of the Code, and the 2016 Title 24 Code is 5% more efficient than the 2014 edition of the Code in
terms of nonresidential buildings. The 2022 Title 24
Code builds on the 2016 Code.

Notes:
a. Source: City of Cathedral City Climate Action Plan (2013). 49 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Energy Analysis

8.0 Energy Analysis
Information from the CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 Daily and Annual Outputs contained in the air quality and greenhouse gas analyses above was utilized for this analysis. The CalEEMod outputs detail project related construction equipment, transportation energy demands, and facility energy demands. As shown in this Section, the project will not result in wasteful or inefficient use of energy and will therefore have a less than significant impact in regards to energy usage.

8.1 Construction Energy Demand

8.1.1 Construction Equipment Electricity Usage Estimates Electrical service will be provided by Southern California Edison (SCE). Based on the 2017 National Construction Estimator, Richard Pray (2017)5, the typical power cost per 1,000 square feet of building construction per month is estimated to be $2.32. The project plans to develop the site with approximately 300,660 square feet of new residential development over the course of approximately 18 months. Based on Table 15, the total power cost of the on-site electricity usage during the construction of the proposed project is estimated to be approximately $12,556. As shown in Table 15, the total electricity usage from Project construction related activities is estimated to be approximately 228,283 kWh.
6 Table 15: Project Construction Power Cost and Electricity Usage Power Cost (per 1,000 square
foot of building per month of
construction)
Total Building Construction Total Project
Construction
Power Cost
Size (1,000 Duration
Square Foot)1
(months)
$2.32 300.660 18 $12,555.56
Total Project Construction
Cost per kWh Electricity Usage (kWh)
$0.06 228,283
* Assumes the project will be under the GS-1 General Service rate under SCE. 5 Pray, Richard. 2017 National Construction Estimator. Carlsbad: Craftsman Book Company, 2017. 6 LADWP’s Small Commercial & Multi-Family Service (A-1) is approximately $0.06 per kWh of electricity Southern California Edison (SCE). Rates & Pricing Choices: General Service/Industrial Rates. https://library.sce.com/content/dam/sce - doclib/public/regulatory/historical/electric/2020/schedules/general-service-&-industrial-rates/ELECTRIC_SCHEDULES_GS-1_2020.pdf 50 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Energy Analysis

8.1.2 Construction Equipment Fuel Estimates
Using the CalEEMod data input, the project’s construction phase would consume electricity and fossil fuels as a single energy demand, that is, once construction is completed their use would cease. CARB’s 2017 Emissions Factors Tables show that on average aggregate fuel consumption (gasoline and diesel fuel) would be approximately 18.5 hp-hr-gal.7 As presented in Table 16 below, project construction activities would consume an estimated 46,135 gallons of diesel fuel.

Table 16: Construction Equipment Fuel Consumption Estimates Total Fuel
HP
hrs/
day
3,52
3 995
219
485
1,17
4 Consumption
(gal diesel
fuel)1,2
Number
of Days
Amoun Usage Horse Load
Phase Offroad Equipment Type t Hours Power Factor
Site 10 Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8 367 0.4 1,904
Preparation
10 30
30 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
Excavators
Graders
4 2
1 8
8 8
84 36
148

0.37 0.38

0.41 538
355
787
30 30
Rubber Tired Dozers
Scrapers
1 2
8 8
367
423

0.4 1,904
5,268
Grading
3,24
9 0.48
30 300
300
300
300
300
20 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
Cranes
Forklifts
Generator Sets
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
Welders
Pavers
Paving Equipment
Rollers
2 1
3 1
3 1
2 2
2 8
7 8
8 7
8 8
8 8
84 367
82 14
84 46
81 89
36 0.37

0.29 0.2

0.74 0.37

0.45 0.42

0.36 0.38
497
745
394
83 653
166
544
513
219
806
12,081
6,383
1,344
10,584
2,685
588
Building
Construction
Paving 20
20 554
237
Architectural
Coating 20 Air Compressors 1 6 37 0.48 107 115
CONSTRUCTION FUEL DEMAND (gallons of diesel fuel) 46,135 Notes:
1Using Carl Moyer Guidelines Table D-21 Fuel consumption rate factors (bhp-hr/gal) for engines less than 750 hp. (Source: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/guidelines/2017gl/2017_gl_appendix_d.pdf) 2Discrepancies are due to rounding.
7 Aggregate fuel consumption rate for all equipment was estimated at 18.5 hp -hr/day (from CARB’s 2017 Emissions Factors Tables and fuel consumption rate factors as shown in Table D-21 of the Moyer Guidelines:
(https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/guidelines/2017gl/2017_gl_appendix_d.pdf ). 51 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Energy Analysis

8.1.3 Construction Worker Fuel Estimates
It is assumed that all construction worker trips are from light duty autos (LDA) along area roadways.

With respect to estimated VMT, the construction worker trips would generate an estimated 1,027,370 VMT. Vehicle fuel efficiencies for construction workers were estimated in the air quality and greenhouse gas analysis using information generated using CARB’s EMFAC model (see Appendix B for details). Table 17 shows that an estimated 33,195 gallons of fuel would be consumed for construction worker trips.

Table 17: Construction Worker Fuel Consumption Estimates Average
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
Vehicle Fuel
Economy
(mpg)
Estimated Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)2
105
Number of Worker
Trips/Day
Trip Length
(miles)1

18.5 Phase
Site Preparation
Grading
Building Construction
Paving
Days
10 30
18 20
3,238 30.95

18.5 11,100
994,227
5,550

30.95 30.95

30.95 359
32,124
179
300
20 179
15 18.5

18.5 Architectural Coating 20 36 18.5 13,256 30.95 428
Total Construction Worker Fuel Consumption 33,195
Notes:
1Assumptions for the worker trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 defaults. 2Discrepancies are due to rounding.

8.1.4 Construction Vendor/Hauling Fuel Estimates
Tables 18 and 19 show the estimated fuel consumption for vendor and hauling during building construction and architectural coating. With respect to estimated VMT, the vendor trips would generate an estimated 105,249 VMT. No hauling trips are anticipated as no demolition is required and the cut and fill of soil required for grading will balance. For the architectural coatings it is assumed that the contractors would be responsible for bringing coatings and equipment with them in their light duty vehicles.8 Tables 18 and 19 show that an estimated 11,637 gallons of fuel would be consumed for vendor and hauling trips.
<Tables 18 & 19, next page>
8 Vendors delivering construction material or hauling debris from the site during grading would use medium to heavy duty vehicl es with an average fuel consumption of 9.22 mpg for medium heavy -duty trucks and 6.74 mpg for heavy heavy-duty trucks (see Appendix D for details).
52 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Energy Analysis
Table 18: Construction Vendor Fuel Consumption Estimates (MHD Trucks)1 Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
Average Vehicle Estimated Fuel
Number of
Days
Vendor
Trips/Day
Trip Length
(miles)
Fuel Economy
(mpg)
Consumption
Phase (gallons)
Site Preparation
Grading
10 30
0 0

10.2 10.2

10.2 10.2

10.2 0
0 9.22

9.22 9.22

9.22 9.22
0 0
Building Construction
Paving
300
20 34
10 0
105,249
2,040
0 11,415
221
Architectural Coating 20 0
Total Vendor Fuel Consumption 11,637
Notes:
1 Assumptions for the vendor trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 defaults.

Table 19: Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption Estimates (HHD Trucks)1 Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
Average Vehicle Estimated Fuel
Number of
Days
Hauling
Trips/Day
Trip Length
(miles)
Fuel Economy
(mpg)
Consumption
Phase (gallons)
Site Preparation
Grading
10 30
0 0
0 0
0 20
20 20
20 20
0 0
0 0
0 6.74

6.74 6.74

6.74 6.74
0 0
0 0
0 0
Building Construction
Paving
300
20 Architectural Coating 20
Total Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption
Notes:
1Assumptions for the hauling trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 defaults.

8.1.5 Construction Energy Efficiency/Conservation Measures Construction equipment used over the approximately 18-month construction phase would conform to CARB regulations and California emissions standards and is evidence of related fuel efficiencies. In addition, the CARB Airborne Toxic Control Measure limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than five minutes, thereby minimizing unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of construction equipment. Furthermore, the project has been designed in compliance with California’s Energy Efficiency Standards and 2022 CALGreen Standards.

Construction of the proposed residential development would require the typical use of energy resources. There are no unusual project characteristics or construction processes that would require the use of equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable activities; or equipment that would not conform to current emissions standards (and related fuel efficiencies).

Equipment employed in construction of the project would therefore not result in inefficient wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of fuel and a less than significant impact. 53 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Energy Analysis

8.2 Operational Energy Demand
Energy consumption in support of or related to project operations would include transportation energy demands (energy consumed by employee and patron vehicles accessing the project site) and facilities energy demands (energy consumed by building operations and site maintenance activities).

8.2.1 Transportation Fuel Consumption
The largest source of operational energy use would be vehicle operation of customers. The site is located in an urbanized area just in close proximity to transit stops. Using the CalEEMod output, it is assumed that an average trip for autos were assumed to be 16.6 miles, light trucks were assumed to travel an average of 6.9 miles, and 3- 4-axle trucks were assumed to travel an average of 8.4 miles 9 . To
show a worst-case analysis, as the proposed project is a residential project, it was assumed that vehicles would operate 365 days per year. Table 20 shows the worst-case estimated annual fuel consumption for all classes of vehicles from autos to heavy-heavy trucks.10 Table 20 shows that an estimated 227,488 gallons of fuel would be consumed per year for the operation of the proposed project.

Table 20: Estimated Vehicle Operations Fuel Consumption Average
Fuel
Total Annual
Number
of
Vehicles
759.4

79.5 245.1
200.2

37.8 10.4

16.1 26.5
1,375
Average
Trip
(miles)1

16.6 6.9
Total
Gallons
per Day
396.16

20.21 66.07

66.38 22.97

6.15 Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)
144,597
7,376
Daily
VMT
12,606
549
1,691
1,381
317
87 135
223
16,990
Economy
(mpg)

31.82 27.16

25.6 20.81

13.81 14.18

9.58 Vehicle Type
Light Auto
Light Truck
Light Truck
Medium Truck
Light Heavy Truck
Light Heavy Truck 10,000 lbs +
Medium Heavy Truck
Heavy Heavy Truck
Total
Vehicle Mix
Automobile
Automobile
Automobile
Automobile
2-Axle Truck
2-Axle Truck
3-Axle Truck
4-Axle Truck

6.9 6.9

8.4 8.4

8.4 8.4
--
24,114
24,229
8,384
2,244

14.10 5,147

31.22 623.25

7.14 --
11,397
--
Total Annual Fuel Consumption 227,488
Notes:
'1 The trip generation assessment, the project is to generate 1,375 total net new trips after reduction of existing uses. Default CalEEMod vehicle fleet mix utilized. 1Based on the size of the site and relative location, trips were assumed to be local rather than regional.

Trip generation generated by the proposed project are consistent with other similar residential uses of similar scale and configuration as reflected in the traffic analysis (Integrated Engineering Group, 2023).

That is, the proposed project does not propose uses or operations that would inherently result in excessive and wasteful vehicle trips, nor associated excess and wasteful vehicle energy consumption. 9 CalEEMod default distance for H-W (home-work) or C-W (commercial-work) is 16.6 miles; 6.9 miles for H-S (home-shop) or C-C (commercial-customer); and 8.4 miles for H-O (home-other) or C-O (commercial-other). 10 Average fuel economy based on aggregate mileage calculated in EMFAC 2017 for opening year (2023). See Appendix D for EMFAC output. 54 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Energy Analysis
Therefore, project transportation energy consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary.

8.2.2 Facility Energy Demands (Electricity and Natural Gas) The annual natural gas and electricity demands were provided per the CalEEMod output and are provided in Table 21.

Table 21: Project Unmitigated Annual Operational Energy Demand Summary1 Natural Gas Demand
Apartments Mid Rise
kBTU/year
2,630,134
2,630,134
kWh/year
1,154,468
268,910
Total
Total
Electricity Demand
Apartments Mid Rise
Garages
Parking Lot 167,898
1,591,276
Notes:
1Taken from the CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 annual output.

As shown in Table 21, the estimated electricity demand for the proposed project is approximately 1,591,276 kWh per year. In 2022, the residential sector of the County of Riverside consumed approximately 9,061 million kWh of electricity.11 In addition, the estimated natural gas consumption for the proposed project is approximately 2,630,134 kBTU per year. In 2022, the nonresidential sector of the County of Riverside consumed approximately 284 million therms of gas.12 Therefore, the increase in both electricity and natural gas demand from the proposed project is insignificant compared to the County’s 2022 demand.

8.3 Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Plan Consistency Regarding federal transportation regulations, the project site is located in an already developed area.

Access to/from the project site is from existing roads. These roads are already in place so the project would not interfere with, nor otherwise obstruct intermodal transportation plans or projects that may be proposed pursuant to the ISTEA because SCAG is not planning for intermodal facilities in the project area.

Regarding the State’s Energy Plan and compliance with Title 24 CCR energy efficiency standards, the applicant is required to comply with the California Green Building Standard Code requirements for energy efficient buildings and appliances as well as utility energy efficiency programs implemented by the SCE and Southern California Gas Company.
11 California Energy Commission, Electricity Consumption by County. https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx 12 California Energy Commission, Gas Consumption by County. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx 55 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA Energy Analysis
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 Standards require that new buildings reduce water consumption, employ building commissioning to increase building system efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant-emitting finish materials.

The project will be consistent with all relevant renewable energy and energy efficiency plans and will therefore have a less than significant impact.
56 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA References

9.0 References
The following references were used in the preparing this analysis.

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
2009 Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects California Air Resources Board
2008
2008
Resolution 08-43
Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for Greenhouse Gases under the California Environmental Quality Act
2008 ARB Recommended Interim Risk Management Policy for Inhalation-Based Residential Cancer Risk – Frequently Asked Questions
2008
2011
2014
Climate Change Scoping Plan, a framework for change.

Supplement to the AB 32 Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent Document First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, Building on the Framework Pursuant to AB32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. May. 2018 Historical Air Quality, Top 4 Summary
City of Cathedral City
2013 City of Cathedral City General Plan.

County of Riverside
2015 County of Riverside General Plan. December 8.
2019 County of Riverside Climate Action Plan Update. November.

Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
2008 CEQA and Climate: Addressing Climate Change Through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review
2009 CEQA Guideline Sections to be Added or Amended
Integrated Engineering Group
2023 Scoping Agreement for Date Palm Apartments Project. September 22. 57 Date Palm Apartments
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study
City of Cathedral City, CA References
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
2015 Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines South Coast Air Quality Management District
1993
2005
2007
2008
2011
2012
2016
CEQA Air Quality Handbook
Rule 403 Fugitive Dust
2007 Air Quality Management Plan
Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, Revised Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod
Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan
Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan
58 Appendix A:

CalEEMod Output
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated

3.2. Site Preparation (2024) - Mitigated
1 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

3.3. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated

3.4. Grading (2024) - Mitigated

3.5. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated

3.6. Building Construction (2024) - Mitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.8. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated

3.9. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated

3.10. Paving (2025) - Mitigated

3.11. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated

3.12. Architectural Coating (2025) - Mitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.1.2. Mitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
2 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.3.2. Mitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.4.2. Mitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.5.2. Mitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.6.2. Mitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.7.2. Mitigated
3 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.8.2. Mitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.9.2. Mitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated

4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
4 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

5.2.2. Mitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.3.2. Mitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.9.2. Mitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths
5 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.11.2. Mitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.12.2. Mitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.13.2. Mitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.14.2. Mitigated
6 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.15.2. Mitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2.2. Mitigated
7 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data
8 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name
Construction Start Date
Operational Year
Lead Agency
Land Use Scale
Analysis Level for Defaults
Windspeed (m/s)
Precipitation (days)
Location
Date Palm Apartments
1/1/2024
2025
—
Project/site
County

3.30 10.0

33.82807900321953, -116.45758115132628
Riverside-Salton Sea
Cathedral City
County
City
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin Salton Sea
TA Z 5673
EDFZ 11
Electric Utility
Gas Utility
Southern California Edison
Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.20

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq Special Landscape Population Description ft) Area (sq ft)
9 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Apartments Mid Rise 204 Dwelling Unit
Acre

5.37 4.40

1.73 223,860

0.00 0.00 —
—
—
659
—
—
—
—
Parking Lot 4.40
192
45,000
Enclosed Parking 0.00
Structure
Space 76,800 —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Construction
Construction
C-10-A
C-13
Water Exposed Surfaces
Use Low-VOC Paints for Construction

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG
—
NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Unmit.

Mit.

75.0 69.7
7%

13.4 13.4
—

32.2 32.2
—

0.03 0.03
—

0.51 0.51
—

2.64 2.64
—

3.15 3.15
—

0.47 0.47
—

0.63 0.63
—

1.10 1.10
—
—
—
—
6,224
6,224
—
6,224
6,224
—

0.21 0.21
—

0.26 0.26
—

13.1 13.1
—
6,320
6,320
% —
Reduced
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit.

Mit.

3.72 3.72
—

36.1 36.1
—

34.0 34.0
—

0.06 0.06
—

1.60 1.60
—

19.9 5.34
73%

21.5 6.94
68%

1.47 1.47
—

10.2 2.68
74%

11.6 4.15
64%
—
—
—
6,856
6,856
—
6,856
6,856
—

0.28 0.28
—

0.26 0.26
—

0.34 0.34
—
6,882
6,882
% —
Reduced
10 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(Max)
Unmit.

Mit.

4.73 4.44
6%

11.2 11.2
—

18.2 18.2
—

0.02 0.02
—

0.44 0.44
—

2.75 1.79
35%

3.20 2.24
30%

0.41 0.41
—

0.93 0.50
46%

1.33 0.91
32%
—
—
—
3,980
3,980
—
3,980
3,980
—

0.15 0.15
—

0.15 0.15
—

3.15 3.15
—
4,032
4,032
% —
Reduced
Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit.

Mit.

0.86 0.81
6%

2.04 2.04
—

3.32 3.32
—
< 0.005
< 0.005
—

0.08 0.08
—

0.50 0.33
35%

0.58 0.41
30%

0.07 0.07
—

0.17 0.09
46%

0.24 0.17
32%
—
—
—
659
659
—
659
659
—

0.02 0.02
—

0.02 0.02
—

0.52 0.52
—
668
668
% —
Reduced

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year ROG
—
NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily - —
Summer
(Max)
— — —
2024
2025

2.24 75.0
—

13.4 12.5
—

32.2 30.6
—

0.03 0.03
—

0.51 0.45
—

2.64 2.64
—

3.15 3.08
—

0.47 0.41
—

0.63 0.63
—

1.10 1.04
—
—
—
—
6,224
6,146
—
6,224
6,146
—

0.21 0.21
—

0.26 0.25
—

13.1 12.2
—
6,320
6,240
Daily - —
Winter
(Max)
2024
2025

3.72 1.87
—

36.1 12.7
—

34.0 23.3
—

0.06 0.03
—

1.60 0.45
—

19.9 2.64
—

21.5 3.08
—

1.47 0.41
—

10.2 0.63
—

11.6 1.04
—
—
—
—
6,856
5,751
—
6,856
5,751
—

0.28 0.22
—

0.26 0.25
—

0.34 0.32
—
6,882
5,832
Average —
Daily
2024
2025

1.55 4.73

11.2 3.99

18.2 7.95

0.02 0.01

0.44 0.15

2.75 0.77

3.20 0.91

0.41 0.13

0.93 0.18

1.33 0.32
—
—
3,980
1,786
3,980
1,786

0.15 0.07

0.15 0.07

3.15 1.55
4,032
1,812
11 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Annual
2024
— — — — — — — — — — —
—
—
— — — — — —

0.28 0.86

2.04 0.73

3.32 1.45
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.08 0.03

0.50 0.14

0.58 0.17

0.07 0.02

0.17 0.03

0.24 0.06
659
296
659
296

0.02 0.01

0.02 0.01

0.52 0.26
668
2025 300

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year ROG
—
NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily - —
Summer
(Max)
— — —
2024
2025

2.24 69.7
—

13.4 12.5
—

32.2 30.6
—

0.03 0.03
—

0.51 0.45
—

2.64 2.64
—

3.15 3.08
—

0.47 0.41
—

0.63 0.63
—

1.10 1.04
—
—
—
—
6,224
6,146
—
6,224
6,146
—

0.21 0.21
—

0.26 0.25
—

13.1 12.2
—
6,320
6,240
Daily - —
Winter
(Max)
2024
2025

3.72 1.87
—

36.1 12.7
—

34.0 23.3
—

0.06 0.03
—

1.60 0.45
—

5.34 2.64
—

6.94 3.08
—

1.47 0.41
—

2.68 0.63
—

4.15 1.04
—
—
—
—
6,856
5,751
—
6,856
5,751
—

0.28 0.22
—

0.26 0.25
—

0.34 0.32
—
6,882
5,832
Average —
Daily
2024
2025
Annual
2024
2025

1.55 4.44
—

11.2 3.99
—

18.2 7.95
—

0.02 0.44

0.15 —

1.79 0.77
—

2.24 0.91
—

0.41 0.13
—

0.50 0.18
—

0.91 0.32
—
—
—
—
—
—
3,980
1,786
—
3,980
1,786
—

0.15 0.07
—

0.15 0.07
—

3.15 1.55
—
4,032
1,812
—

0.01 —

0.28 0.81

2.04 0.73

3.32 1.45
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.08 0.03

0.33 0.14

0.41 0.17

0.07 0.02

0.09 0.03

0.17 0.06
659 659 0.02

0.01 0.02

0.01 0.52

0.26 668
296 296 300

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 12 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Unmit. 12.2
—

5.05 —

55.8 —

0.09 —

0.13 —

6.90 —

7.02 —

0.12 —

1.75 —

1.87 —

97.2 —
12,127
—
12,224
—

10.4 —

0.48 —

31.0 —
12,658
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Unmit. 9.48
—

5.26 —

29.2 —

0.08 —

0.12 —

6.90 —

7.01 —

0.11 —

1.75 —

1.86 —

97.2 —
11,103
—
11,200
—

10.4 —

0.49 —

2.37 —
11,610
Average —
Daily
(Max)
Unmit. 10.6
—

5.13 —

39.6 —

0.09 —

0.12 —

6.85 —

6.97 —

0.12 —

1.74 —

1.85 —

97.2 —
11,510
—
11,607
—

10.4 —

0.49 —

14.3 —
12,025
Annual —
(Max)
Unmit. 1.93 0.94 7.23 0.02 0.02 1.25 1.27 0.02 0.32 0.34 16.1 1,906 1,922 1.72 0.08 2.37 1,991

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG
—
NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Mobile
Area

5.37 6.81

0.04 —

4.25 0.14

0.66 —

40.6 14.9

0.28 —

0.09 < 0.005
< 0.005
—

0.06 0.01

0.05 —

6.90 —

6.96 0.01

0.05 —

0.06 0.01

0.05 —

1.75 —

1.81 0.01

0.05 —
— 8,858

44.7 3,162

61.3 0.00
—
8,858

44.7 3,162

77.2 81.3
—

0.38 < 0.005

0.22 1.63

8.13 —

0.43 < 0.005

0.02 0.04

0.00 —

29.4 —
9,024
— 44.8
Energy
Water
Waste
Refrig.

Total
— — — — 3,173
— — 15.9 130

81.3 —
—
— — — — — — — — — — — 284
— — — — — — — — — — 1.60

31.0 1.60

12.2 5.05 55.8 0.09 0.13 6.90 7.02 0.12 1.75 1.87 97.2 12,127 12,224 10.4 0.48 12,658 13 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile
Area

4.22 5.22

0.04 —

4.59 —

28.9 —

0.08 —

0.06 —

6.90 —

6.96 —

0.06 —

1.75 —

1.81 —
— 7,879
—
7,879
—

0.41 —

0.44 —

0.76 —
8,021
— —
Energy
Water
Waste
Refrig.

Total

0.66 —

0.28 —
< 0.005
—

0.05 —
— 0.05
—

0.05 —
— 0.05
—
— 3,162

61.3 0.00
—
3,162

77.2 81.3
—

0.22 1.63

8.13 —

0.02 0.04

0.00 —
— 3,173
— — 15.9 130

81.3 —
—
— — — — — — — — — — — 284
— — — — — — — — — — 1.60

2.37 —

1.60 11,610
—

9.48 —

5.26 —

29.2 —

0.08 —

0.12 —

6.90 —

7.01 —

0.11 —

1.75 —

1.86 —

97.2 —
11,103
—
11,200
—

10.4 —

0.49 Average —
Daily
Mobile
Area

4.53 6.00

0.04 —

4.40 0.07

0.66 —

32.0 7.34

0.28 —

0.08 < 0.005
< 0.005
—

0.06 0.01

0.05 —

6.85 —

6.91 0.01

0.05 —

0.06 < 0.005

0.05 —

1.74 —

1.80 < 0.005

0.05 —
— 8,264

22.0 3,162

61.3 0.00
—
8,264

22.0 3,162

77.2 81.3
—

0.39 < 0.005

0.22 1.63

8.13 —

0.43 < 0.005

0.02 0.04

0.00 —

12.7 —
8,414

22.1 3,173
130
—
Energy
Water
Waste
Refrig.

Total
— — — —
— — 15.9

81.3 —
—
— — — — — — — — — — — 284
— — — — — — — — — — 1.60

14.3 —

1.60 12,025
—

10.6 —

5.13 —

39.6 —

0.09 —

0.12 —

6.85 —

6.97 —

0.12 —

1.74 —

1.85 —

97.2 —
11,510
—
11,607
—

10.4 —

0.49 Annual —
Mobile
Area

0.83 1.10

0.01 —

0.80 0.01

0.12 —

5.84 1.34

0.05 —

0.01 < 0.005
< 0.005
—

0.01 < 0.005

0.01 —

1.25 —

1.26 < 0.005

0.01 —

0.01 < 0.005

0.01 —

0.32 —

0.33 < 0.005

0.01 —
— 1,368

3.65 524
1,368

3.65 524

0.06 < 0.005

0.04 0.27

1.35 —

0.07 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.01 0.00
—

2.10 —
1,393

3.66 525
—
Energy
Water
Waste
Refrig.

Total
— — — —
— — 2.63

13.5 —

10.1 0.00
—

12.8 13.5
—
— 21.5

47.1 0.27
1,991
— — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — 0.27

1.93 0.94 7.23 0.02 0.02 1.25 1.27 0.02 0.32 0.34 16.1 1,906 1,922 1.72 0.08 2.37 14 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG
—
NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Mobile
Area

5.37 6.81

0.04 —

4.25 0.14

0.66 —

40.6 14.9

0.28 —

0.09 < 0.005
< 0.005
—

0.06 0.01

0.05 —

6.90 —

6.96 0.01

0.05 —

0.06 0.01

0.05 —

1.75 —

1.81 0.01

0.05 —
— 8,858

44.7 3,162

61.3 0.00
—
8,858

44.7 3,162

77.2 81.3
—

0.38 < 0.005

0.22 1.63

8.13 —

0.43 < 0.005

0.02 0.04

0.00 —

29.4 —
9,024

44.8 3,173
130
—
Energy
Water
Waste
Refrig.

Total
— — — —
— — 15.9

81.3 —
—
— — — — — — — — — — — 284
— — — — — — — — — — 1.60

31.0 —

1.60 12,658
—

12.2 —

5.05 —

55.8 —

0.09 —

0.13 —

6.90 —

7.02 —

0.12 —

1.75 —

1.87 —

97.2 —
12,127
—
12,224
—

10.4 —

0.48 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Mobile
Area

4.22 5.22

0.04 —

4.59 —

28.9 —

0.08 —

0.06 —

6.90 —

6.96 —

0.06 —

1.75 —

1.81 —
— 7,879
—
7,879
—

0.41 —

0.44 —

0.76 —
8,021
— —
Energy
Water
Waste
Refrig.

Total

0.66 —

0.28 —
< 0.005
—

0.05 —
— 0.05
—

0.05 —
— 0.05
—
— 3,162

61.3 0.00
—
3,162

77.2 81.3
—

0.22 1.63

8.13 —

0.02 0.04

0.00 —
— 3,173
— — 15.9 130

81.3 —
—
— — — — — — — — — — — 284
— — — — — — — — — — 1.60

2.37 —

1.60 11,610
—

9.48 —

5.26 —

29.2 —

0.08 —

0.12 —

6.90 —

7.01 —

0.11 —

1.75 —

1.86 —

97.2 —
11,103
—
11,200
—

10.4 —

0.49 Average —
Daily
Mobile
Area

4.53 6.00

0.04 —

4.40 0.07

0.66 —

32.0 7.34

0.28 —

0.08 0.06

0.01 0.05
—

6.85 —

6.91 0.01

0.05 —

0.06 < 0.005

0.05 —

1.74 —

1.80 < 0.005

0.05 —
— 8,264

22.0 8,264

22.0 0.39 0.43 12.7
—
8,414
< 0.005 22.1
< 0.005
—
— < 0.005

0.22 < 0.005
Energy 0.02
Water
— — — 3,162

61.3 3,162

77.2 — 3,173
— — 15.9 1.63 0.04 — 130
15 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Waste
Refrig.

Total
— — — — — — — — — — 81.3
—

0.00 —

81.3 —

8.13 —

0.00 —
— 284
— — — — — — — — — — 1.60

14.3 —

1.60 12,025
—

10.6 —

5.13 —

39.6 —

0.09 —

0.12 —

6.85 —

6.97 —

0.12 —

1.74 —

1.85 —

97.2 —
11,510
—
11,607
—

10.4 —

0.49 Annual —
Mobile
Area

0.83 1.10

0.01 —

0.80 0.01

0.12 —

5.84 1.34

0.05 —

0.01 < 0.005
< 0.005
—

0.01 < 0.005

0.01 —

1.25 —

1.26 < 0.005

0.01 —

0.01 < 0.005

0.01 —

0.32 —

0.33 < 0.005

0.01 —
— 1,368

3.65 524
1,368

3.65 524

0.06 < 0.005

0.04 0.27

1.35 —

0.07 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.01 0.00
—

2.10 —
1,393

3.66 525
—
Energy
Water
Waste
Refrig.

Total
— — — —
— — 2.63

13.5 —

10.1 0.00
—

12.8 13.5
—
— 21.5

47.1 0.27
1,991
— — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — 0.27

1.93 0.94 7.23 0.02 0.02 1.25 1.27 0.02 0.32 0.34 16.1 1,906 1,922 1.72 0.08 2.37

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road 3.65
Equipment

36.0 —

32.9 —

0.05 —

1.60 —
— 1.60

19.7 1.47
—
— 1.47

10.1 —
—
5,296
—
5,296
—

0.21 —

0.04 —
—
—
5,314
Dust — 19.7 10.1 —
From
Material
Movement
16 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —
—
—
—
—

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 Average —
Daily
Off-Road 0.10
Equipment

0.99 —

0.90 —
< 0.005
—

0.04 —
— 0.04

0.54 0.04
—
— 0.04

0.28 145
—
145
—

0.01 —
< 0.005
—
— 146
Dust — 0.54 0.28 — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road 0.02
Equipment

0.18 0.16 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 24.0 24.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 24.1 Dust — — — — — 0.10 0.10 — 0.05 0.05 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.07 0.00

0.00 —

0.11 0.00

0.00 —

1.03 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.23 0.00

0.00 —

0.23 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.05 0.00

0.00 —

0.05 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
226

0.00 0.00
—
226

0.00 0.00
—

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.03 0.00

0.00 —
229

0.00 0.00
Average —
Daily
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.62 6.62 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.71 17 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—
< 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.01 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

1.10 0.00

0.00 1.10

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

1.11 0.00

0.00 3.2. Site Preparation (2024) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road 3.65
Equipment

36.0 —

32.9 —

0.05 —

1.60 —
— 1.60

5.11 1.47
—
— 1.47

2.63 —
—
5,296
—
5,296
—

0.21 —

0.04 —
—
—
5,314
Dust — 5.11 2.63 —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —
—
—
—

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 Average —
Daily
Off-Road 0.10
Equipment

0.99 0.90 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 145 145 0.01 < 0.005 — 146 18 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.14

0.00 0.14

0.00 — 0.07

0.00 0.07

0.00 —
—
— — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road 0.02
Equipment

0.18 0.16 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 24.0 24.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 24.1 Dust — — — — — 0.03 0.03 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.07 0.00

0.00 —

0.11 0.00

0.00 —

1.03 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.23 0.00

0.00 —

0.23 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.05 0.00

0.00 —

0.05 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
226

0.00 0.00
—
226

0.00 0.00
—

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.03 0.00

0.00 —
229

0.00 0.00
Average —
Daily
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.04

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—

6.62 0.00

0.00 —

6.62 0.00

0.00 —
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.01

0.00 0.00
—

6.71 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
— — — — — —
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.01

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 1.10

0.00 1.10

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 1.11

0.00 19 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.3. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road 3.52
Equipment

34.3 —

30.2 —

0.06 —

1.45 —
— 1.45

9.20 1.33
—
— 1.33

3.65 —
—
6,598
—
6,598
—

0.27 —

0.05 —
—
—
6,621
Dust — 9.20 3.65 —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —
—
—
—
—

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 Average —
Daily
Off-Road 0.29
Equipment

2.82 —

2.48 —

0.01 —

0.12 —
— 0.12

0.76 0.11
—
— 0.11

0.30 542
—
542
—

0.02 —
< 0.005
—
— 544
Dust — 0.76 0.30 — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road 0.05
Equipment

0.51 0.45 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 89.8 89.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 90.1 20 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.14

0.00 0.14

0.00 — 0.05

0.00 0.05

0.00 —
—
— — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.08 0.00

0.00 —

0.12 0.00

0.00 —

1.18 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.26 0.00

0.00 —

0.26 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.06 0.00

0.00 —

0.06 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
258

0.00 0.00
—
258

0.00 0.00
—

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.03 0.00

0.00 —
261

0.00 0.00
Average —
Daily
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.12 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.02 0.00

0.00 —

0.02 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

22.7 0.00

0.00 —

22.7 0.00

0.00 —
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.04

0.00 0.00
—

23.0 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00
— —
< 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.02 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

3.76 0.00

0.00 3.76

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.01

0.00 0.00

3.81 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

3.4. Grading (2024) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — — — — —
21 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Off-Road 3.52
Equipment

34.3 —

30.2 —

0.06 —

1.45 —
— 1.45

2.39 1.33
—
— 1.33

0.95 —
—
6,598
—
6,598
—

0.27 —

0.05 —
—
—
6,621
Dust — 2.39 0.95 —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —
—
—
—
—

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 Average —
Daily
Off-Road 0.29
Equipment

2.82 —

2.48 —

0.01 —

0.12 —
— 0.12

0.20 0.11
—
— 0.11

0.08 542
—
542
—

0.02 —
< 0.005
—
— 544
Dust — 0.20 0.08 — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road 0.05
Equipment

0.51 0.45 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 89.8 89.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 90.1 Dust — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —
—
—

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 Offsite —
22 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.08 0.00

0.00 —

0.12 0.00

0.00 —

1.18 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.26 0.00

0.00 —

0.26 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.06 0.00

0.00 —

0.06 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
258

0.00 0.00
—
258

0.00 0.00
—

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.03 0.00

0.00 —
261

0.00 0.00
Average —
Daily
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.12 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.02 0.00

0.00 —

0.02 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

22.7 0.00

0.00 —

22.7 0.00

0.00 —
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.04

0.00 0.00
—

23.0 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00
— —
< 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.02 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

3.76 0.00

0.00 3.76

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.01

0.00 0.00

3.81 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Off-Road 1.20
Equipment

11.2 0.00

13.1 0.00

0.02 0.00

0.50 0.00
— 0.50

0.00 0.46

0.00 — 0.46

0.00 —
—
2,398

0.00 2,398

0.00 0.10

0.00 0.02

0.00 — 2,406
Onsite 0.00
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
23 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road 1.20
Equipment

11.2 0.00
—

13.1 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—

0.50 0.00
—
— 0.50

0.00 —

0.46 0.00
—
— 0.46

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
2,398

0.00 —
2,398

0.00 —

0.10 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—
— 2,406

0.00 —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 —

0.00 Average —
Daily
—
Off-Road 0.66
Equipment

6.13 0.00

7.16 0.00

0.01 0.00

0.27 0.00
— 0.27

0.00 0.25

0.00 — 0.25

0.00 1,309

0.00 1,309

0.00 0.05

0.00 0.01

0.00 — 1,314
Onsite 0.00
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road 0.12
Equipment

1.12 1.31 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 217 217 0.01 < 0.005 217 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.99 0.04

0.00 —

1.02 1.21

0.00 —

18.5 0.54

0.00 —

0.00 0.01

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

2.34 0.29

0.00 —

2.34 0.31

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

0.55 0.08

0.00 —

0.55 0.10

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
2,719
1,107

0.00 —
2,719
1,107

0.00 —

0.10 0.01

0.00 —

0.09 0.15

0.00 —

10.1 3.01

0.00 —
2,758
1,156

0.00 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.74 0.04

0.00 —

1.09 1.30

0.00 —

10.6 0.55

0.00 —

0.00 0.01

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

2.34 0.29

0.00 —

2.34 0.31

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

0.55 0.08

0.00 —

0.55 0.10

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
2,312
1,108

0.00 —
2,312
1,108

0.00 —

0.11 0.01

0.00 —

0.09 0.15

0.00 —

0.26 0.08

0.00 —
2,342
1,154

0.00 Average —
Daily
24 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.47 0.02

0.00 —

0.55 0.69

0.00 —

7.17 0.30

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.01 0.00
—

1.27 0.16

0.00 —

1.27 0.17

0.00 —

0.00 0.01

0.00 —

0.30 0.04

0.00 —

0.30 0.05

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1,350
605

0.00 —
1,350
605

0.00 —

0.06 0.01

0.00 —

0.05 0.08

0.00 —

2.39 0.71

0.00 —
1,368
631

0.00 —
< 0.005

0.00 —

0.09 < 0.005

0.00 0.10

0.13 0.00

1.31 0.05

0.00 0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.23

0.03 0.00

0.23 0.03

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.05

0.01 0.00

0.05 0.01

0.00 223
100

0.00 223
100

0.00 0.01
< 0.005

0.00 0.01

0.01 0.00

0.40 0.12

0.00 227
104

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 3.6. Building Construction (2024) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Off-Road 1.20
Equipment

11.2 0.00
—

13.1 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—

0.50 0.00
—
— 0.50

0.00 —

0.46 0.00
—
— 0.46

0.00 —
—
—
—
2,398

0.00 —
2,398

0.00 —

0.10 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—
— 2,406

0.00 —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 —

0.00 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
—
Off-Road 1.20
Equipment

11.2 0.00
—

13.1 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—

0.50 0.00
—
— 0.50

0.00 —

0.46 0.00
—
— 0.46

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
2,398

0.00 —
2,398

0.00 —

0.10 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—
— 2,406

0.00 —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 —

0.00 Average —
Daily
—
Off-Road 0.66
Equipment

6.13 7.16 0.01 0.27 — 0.27 0.25 — 0.25 1,309 1,309 0.05 0.01 — 1,314 25 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road 0.12
Equipment

1.12 1.31 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 217 217 0.01 < 0.005 217 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.99 0.04

0.00 —

1.02 1.21

0.00 —

18.5 0.54

0.00 —

0.00 0.01

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

2.34 0.29

0.00 —

2.34 0.31

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

0.55 0.08

0.00 —

0.55 0.10

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
2,719
1,107

0.00 —
2,719
1,107

0.00 —

0.10 0.01

0.00 —

0.09 0.15

0.00 —

10.1 3.01

0.00 —
2,758
1,156

0.00 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.74 0.04

0.00 —

1.09 1.30

0.00 —

10.6 0.55

0.00 —

0.00 0.01

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

2.34 0.29

0.00 —

2.34 0.31

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

0.55 0.08

0.00 —

0.55 0.10

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
2,312
1,108

0.00 —
2,312
1,108

0.00 —

0.11 0.01

0.00 —

0.09 0.15

0.00 —

0.26 0.08

0.00 —
2,342
1,154

0.00 Average —
Daily
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.47 0.02

0.00 —

0.55 0.69

0.00 —

7.17 0.30

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.01 0.00
—

1.27 0.16

0.00 —

1.27 0.17

0.00 —

0.00 0.01

0.00 —

0.30 0.04

0.00 —

0.30 0.05

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1,350
605

0.00 —
1,350
605

0.00 —

0.06 0.01

0.00 —

0.05 0.08

0.00 —

2.39 0.71

0.00 —
1,368
631

0.00 —
< 0.005

0.00 —

0.09 < 0.005

0.00 0.10

0.13 0.00

1.31 0.05

0.00 0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.23

0.03 0.00

0.23 0.03

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.05

0.01 0.00

0.05 0.01

0.00 223
100

0.00 223
100

0.00 0.01
< 0.005

0.00 0.01

0.01 0.00

0.40 0.12

0.00 227
104

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 26 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Off-Road 1.13
Equipment

10.4 0.00
—

13.0 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—

0.43 0.00
—
— 0.43

0.00 —

0.40 0.00
—
— 0.40

0.00 —
—
—
—
2,398

0.00 —
2,398

0.00 —

0.10 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—
— 2,406

0.00 —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 —

0.00 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
—
Off-Road 1.13
Equipment

10.4 0.00
—

13.0 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—

0.43 0.00
—
— 0.43

0.00 —

0.40 0.00
—
— 0.40

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
2,398

0.00 —
2,398

0.00 —

0.10 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—
— 2,406

0.00 —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 —

0.00 Average —
Daily
—
Off-Road 0.31
Equipment

2.90 0.00

3.62 0.00

0.01 0.00

0.12 0.00
— 0.12

0.00 0.11

0.00 — 0.11

0.00 666

0.00 666

0.00 0.03

0.00 0.01

0.00 — 669
Onsite 0.00
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road 0.06
Equipment

0.53 0.66 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 110 110 < 0.005 < 0.005 111 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —
—
—

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 Offsite — —
27 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.94 0.04

0.00 —

0.94 1.15

0.00 —

17.1 0.51

0.00 —

0.00 0.01

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

2.34 0.29

0.00 —

2.34 0.31

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

0.55 0.08

0.00 —

0.55 0.10

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
2,660
1,089

0.00 —
2,660
1,089

0.00 —

0.10 0.01

0.00 —

0.09 0.15

0.00 —

9.20 3.00

0.00 —
2,698
1,135

0.00 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.71 0.04

0.00 —

1.01 1.23

0.00 —

9.70 0.52

0.00 —

0.00 0.01

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

2.34 0.29

0.00 —

2.34 0.31

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

0.55 0.08

0.00 —

0.55 0.10

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
2,263
1,090

0.00 —
2,263
1,090

0.00 —

0.11 0.01

0.00 —

0.09 0.15

0.00 —

0.24 0.08

0.00 —
2,293
1,134

0.00 Average —
Daily
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.21 0.01

0.00 —

0.26 0.34

0.00 —

3.38 0.14

0.00 —

0.00 0.00 0.65

0.08 0.00
—

0.65 0.09

0.00 —

0.00 0.15

0.02 0.00
—

0.15 0.03

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
672
303

0.00 —
672
303

0.00 —

0.03 0.02

0.04 0.00
—

1.10 0.36

0.00 —
681
315

0.00 —
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 — — — —

0.04 < 0.005

0.00 0.05

0.06 0.00

0.62 0.03

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12

0.01 0.00

0.12 0.02

0.00 0.00 0.03
< 0.005

0.00 0.03
< 0.005

0.00 111

50.1 0.00
111

50.1 0.00
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.01 0.00

0.18 0.06

0.00 113

52.2 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 3.8. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
28 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Off-Road 1.13
Equipment

10.4 0.00
—

13.0 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—

0.43 0.00
—
— 0.43

0.00 —

0.40 0.00
—
— 0.40

0.00 —
—
—
—
2,398

0.00 —
2,398

0.00 —

0.10 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—
— 2,406

0.00 —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 —

0.00 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
—
Off-Road 1.13
Equipment

10.4 0.00
—

13.0 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—

0.43 0.00
—
— 0.43

0.00 —

0.40 0.00
—
— 0.40

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
2,398

0.00 —
2,398

0.00 —

0.10 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—
— 2,406

0.00 —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 —

0.00 Average —
Daily
—
Off-Road 0.31
Equipment

2.90 0.00

3.62 0.00

0.01 0.00

0.12 0.00
— 0.12

0.00 0.11

0.00 — 0.11

0.00 666

0.00 666

0.00 0.03

0.00 0.01

0.00 — 669
Onsite 0.00
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road 0.06
Equipment

0.53 0.66 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 110 110 < 0.005 < 0.005 111 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.94 0.04

0.00 —

0.94 1.15

0.00 —

17.1 0.51

0.00 —

0.00 0.01

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

2.34 0.29

0.00 —

2.34 0.31

0.00 —

0.00 0.02

0.00 —

0.55 0.08

0.00 —

0.55 0.10

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
2,660
1,089

0.00 —
2,660
1,089

0.00 —

0.10 0.01

0.00 —

0.09 0.15

0.00 —

9.20 3.00

0.00 —
2,698
1,135

0.00 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.71 1.01 9.70 0.00 0.00 2.34 2.34 0.00 0.55 0.55 — 2,263 2,263 0.11 0.09 0.24 2,293 29 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Vendor
Hauling

0.04 0.00
—

1.23 0.00
—

0.52 0.00
—

0.01 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—

0.29 0.00
—

0.31 0.00
—

0.02 0.00
—

0.08 0.00
—

0.10 0.00
—
—
—
—
1,090

0.00 —
1,090

0.00 —

0.01 0.00
—

0.15 0.00
—

0.08 0.00
—
1,134

0.00 Average —
Daily
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.21 0.01

0.00 —

0.26 0.34

0.00 —

3.38 0.14

0.00 —

0.00 0.00 0.65

0.08 0.00
—

0.65 0.09

0.00 —

0.00 0.15

0.02 0.00
—

0.15 0.03

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
672
303

0.00 —
672
303

0.00 —

0.03 0.02

0.04 0.00
—

1.10 0.36

0.00 —
681
315

0.00 —
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 — — — —

0.04 < 0.005

0.00 0.05

0.06 0.00

0.62 0.03

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12

0.01 0.00

0.12 0.02

0.00 0.00 0.03
< 0.005

0.00 0.03
< 0.005

0.00 111

50.1 0.00
111

50.1 0.00
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.01 0.00

0.18 0.06

0.00 113

52.2 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 3.9. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Off-Road 0.80
Equipment

7.45 9.98 0.01 0.35 — 0.35 0.32 — 0.32 — 1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 — 1,517 Paving 0.80

0.00 — — — — — — — — — —
—
— — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Average —
Daily
30 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Off-Road 0.04
Equipment

0.41 0.55 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 82.8 82.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 83.1 Paving 0.04

0.00 — — — — — — — — — —
—
— — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road 0.01
Equipment

0.07 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 13.7 13.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 13.8 Paving 0.01

0.00 — — — — — — — — — —
—
— — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.08 0.01

0.00 —

0.08 0.33

0.00 —

1.43 0.15

0.00 —

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —

0.20 0.09

0.00 —

0.20 0.09

0.00 —

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —

0.05 0.02

0.00 —

0.05 0.03

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
223
316

0.00 —
223
316

0.00 —

0.01 < 0.005

0.00 —

0.01 0.04

0.00 —

0.77 0.87

0.00 —
226
330

0.00 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.02 0.06

0.01 0.00
—

0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
—

11.1 17.3

0.00 —

11.1 17.3

0.00 —
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 0.02 11.2

18.1 0.00
—
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.02

0.00 0.00
— — — — — — — — — — — —
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 0.01
< 0.005

0.00 0.00 0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 1.84

2.87 0.00

1.84 2.87

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 1.86

2.99 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 31 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

3.10. Paving (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Off-Road 0.80
Equipment

7.45 9.98 0.01 0.35 — 0.35 0.32 — 0.32 — 1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 — 1,517 Paving 0.80

0.00 — — — — — — — — — —
—
— — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—
—
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road 0.04
Equipment

0.41 0.55 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 82.8 82.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 83.1 Paving 0.04

0.00 — — — — — — — — — —
—
— — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road 0.01
Equipment

0.07 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 13.7 13.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 13.8 Paving 0.01

0.00 — — — — — — — — — —
—
— — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
32 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.08 0.01

0.00 —

0.08 0.33

0.00 —

1.43 0.15

0.00 —

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —

0.20 0.09

0.00 —

0.20 0.09

0.00 —

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —

0.05 0.02

0.00 —

0.05 0.03

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
223
316

0.00 —
223
316

0.00 —

0.01 < 0.005

0.00 —

0.01 0.04

0.00 —

0.77 0.87

0.00 —
226
330

0.00 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.02 0.06

0.01 0.00
—

0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
—

11.1 17.3

0.00 —

11.1 17.3

0.00 —
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 0.02 11.2

18.1 0.00
—
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.02

0.00 0.00
— — — — — — — — — — — —
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 0.01
< 0.005

0.00 0.00 0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 1.84

2.87 0.00

1.84 2.87

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005

0.00 1.86

2.99 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 3.11. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Off-Road 0.13
Equipment

0.88 —

1.14 —
< 0.005
—

0.03 —
—
—

0.03 —

0.03 —
—
—

0.03 —
—
—
134
—
134
—

0.01 —
< 0.005
—
—
—
134
Architectu 74.6 —
ral
Coatings
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—
—
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — —
—
—
— — —
—
—
— —
—
—
— — — — —
—
—
—
Off-Road 0.01
Equipment

0.05 —

0.06 —
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—

7.32 —

7.32 —
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—

7.34 Architectu 4.09 —
ral
Coatings
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road < 0.005
Equipment

0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.22 Architectu 0.75
ral
Coatings
— — — — — — — — — —
—
— — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.19 0.00

0.00 —

0.19 0.00

0.00 —

3.42 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.47 0.00

0.00 —

0.47 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.11 0.00

0.00 —

0.11 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
532

0.00 0.00
—
532

0.00 0.00
—

0.02 0.00

0.00 —

0.02 0.00

0.00 —

1.84 0.00

0.00 —
540

0.00 0.00
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — —
—
— — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 26.5 26.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 26.9 34 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—

0.00 0.00
—
< 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.02 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

4.39 0.00

0.00 4.39

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.01 0.00

0.00 4.45

0.00 0.00

3.12. Architectural Coating (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Onsite — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Off-Road 0.13
Equipment

0.88 —

1.14 —
< 0.005
—

0.03 —
—
—

0.03 —

0.03 —
—
—

0.03 —
—
—
134
—
134
—

0.01 —
< 0.005
—
—
—
134
Architectu 69.4 —
ral
Coatings
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —
—
—

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 —

0.00 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
— — — — — —
—
—
— — —
—
—
— —
—
—
— — — — —
—
—
—
Off-Road 0.01
Equipment

0.05 —

0.06 —
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—

7.32 —

7.32 —
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—

7.34 Architectu 3.80 —
ral
Coatings
35 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Onsite
truck

0.00 —

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Off-Road < 0.005
Equipment

0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.22 Architectu 0.69
ral
Coatings
— — — — — — — — — —
—
— — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.19 0.00

0.00 —

0.19 0.00

0.00 —

3.42 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.47 0.00

0.00 —

0.47 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.11 0.00

0.00 —

0.11 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
532

0.00 0.00
—
532

0.00 0.00
—

0.02 0.00

0.00 —

0.02 0.00

0.00 —

1.84 0.00

0.00 —
540

0.00 0.00
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.13 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.03 0.00

0.00 —

0.03 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —

0.01 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

26.5 0.00

0.00 —

26.5 0.00

0.00 —
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.04

0.00 0.00
—

26.9 0.00

0.00 —

0.00 0.00
— —
< 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.02 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

4.39 0.00

0.00 4.39

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.01

0.00 0.00

4.45 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00
36 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Apartmen 5.37 4.25 40.6 0.09 0.06 6.90 6.96 0.06 1.75 1.81 — 8,858 8,858 0.38 0.43 29.4 9,024 ts
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 —
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 Enclosed 0.00 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total 5.37
—

4.25 —

40.6 —

0.09 —

0.06 —

6.90 —

6.96 —

0.06 —

1.75 —

1.81 —
—
—
8,858
—
8,858
—

0.38 —

0.43 —

29.4 —
9,024
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Apartmen 4.22 4.59 28.9 0.08 0.06 6.90 6.96 0.06 1.75 1.81 — 7,879 7,879 0.41 0.44 0.76 8,021 ts
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 —
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 Enclosed 0.00 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total 4.22
—

4.59 —

28.9 —

0.08 —

0.06 —

6.90 —

6.96 —

0.06 —

1.75 —

1.81 —
—
—
7,879
—
7,879
—

0.41 —

0.44 —

0.76 —
8,021
Annual —
37 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Apartmen 0.83
Mid Rise

0.80 0.00

0.00 5.84

0.00 0.00

0.01 0.00

0.00 0.01

0.00 0.00

1.25 0.00

0.00 1.26

0.00 0.00

0.01 0.00

0.00 0.32

0.00 0.00

0.33 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
1,368

0.00 0.00
1,368

0.00 0.00

0.06 0.00

0.00 0.07

0.00 0.00

2.10 0.00

0.00 1,393

0.00 0.00
Parking
Lot

0.00 Enclosed 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total 0.83 0.80 5.84 0.01 0.01 1.25 1.26 0.01 0.32 0.33 — 1,368 1,368 0.06 0.07 2.10 1,393

4.1.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Apartmen 5.37 4.25 40.6 0.09 0.06 6.90 6.96 0.06 1.75 1.81 — 8,858 8,858 0.38 0.43 29.4 9,024 ts
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 —
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 Enclosed 0.00 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total 5.37
—

4.25 —

40.6 —

0.09 —

0.06 —

6.90 —

6.96 —

0.06 —

1.75 —

1.81 —
—
—
8,858
—
8,858
—

0.38 —

0.43 —

29.4 —
9,024
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Apartmen 4.22
ts
Mid Rise

4.59 0.00

28.9 0.00

0.08 0.00

0.06 0.00

6.90 0.00

6.96 0.00

0.06 0.00

1.75 0.00

1.81 0.00
—
—
7,879

0.00 7,879

0.00 0.41

0.00 0.44

0.00 0.76

0.00 8,021
Parking 0.00
Lot

0.00 38 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Enclosed 0.00
Parking

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Structure
Total 4.22
—

4.59 —

28.9 —

0.08 —

0.06 —

6.90 —

6.96 —

0.06 —

1.75 —

1.81 —
—
—
—
7,879
—
7,879
—

0.41 —

0.44 —

0.76 —
8,021
Annual —
Apartmen 0.83 0.80 5.84 0.01 0.01 1.25 1.26 0.01 0.32 0.33 1,368 1,368 0.06 0.07 2.10 1,393 ts
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 —
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 Enclosed 0.00 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total 0.83 0.80 5.84 0.01 0.01 1.25 1.26 0.01 0.32 0.33 — 1,368 1,368 0.06 0.07 2.10 1,393

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Apartmen —
ts
— — — — — — — — — — 1,683 1,683 0.10 0.01 — 1,689
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
245
392
245
392

0.02 0.02
< 0.005
< 0.005
—
—
246
Enclosed 393
Parking
Structure
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 2,319 2,319 0.14 0.02 — 2,328 39 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— — — — —
—
—
Apartmen —
ts
1,683 1,683 0.10 0.01 1,689
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
245
392
245
392

0.02 0.02
< 0.005
< 0.005
—
—
246
Enclosed 393
Parking
Structure
Total —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
2,319
—
2,319
—

0.14 —

0.02 —
—
—
—
2,328
Annual —
Apartmen —
ts
279 279 0.02 < 0.005 280
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

40.5 64.9

40.5 64.9
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
—
—

40.7 Enclosed 65.1
Parking
Structure
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 384 384 0.02 < 0.005 — 385

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, — — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
Summer
(Max)
Apartmen —
ts
Mid Rise
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1,683
245
1,683
245

0.10 0.02

0.01 —
—
1,689
Parking 246
Lot
— < 0.005
40 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Enclosed
Parking
— — — — — — — — — — — 392 392 0.02 < 0.005 — 393
Structure
Total —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
2,319
—
2,319
—

0.14 —

0.02 —
—
—
2,328
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Apartmen —
ts
— — — — — — — — — — 1,683 1,683 0.10 0.01 — 1,689
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
245
392
245
392

0.02 0.02
< 0.005
< 0.005
—
—
246
Enclosed 393
Parking
Structure
Total —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
2,319
—
2,319
—

0.14 —

0.02 —
—
—
—
2,328
Annual —
Apartmen —
ts
279 279 0.02 < 0.005 280
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

40.5 64.9

40.5 64.9
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
—
—

40.7 Enclosed 65.1
Parking
Structure
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 384 384 0.02 < 0.005 — 385

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
41 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Apartmen 0.04
Mid Rise

0.66 0.00

0.00 0.28

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.05

0.00 0.00
—
—
—

0.05 0.00

0.00 0.05

0.00 0.00
—
—
—

0.05 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
843 843 0.07

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 —
—
—
845
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Enclosed 0.00 0.00
Parking

0.00 0.00
Structure
Total 0.04
—

0.66 —

0.28 —
< 0.005
—

0.05 —
—
—

0.05 —

0.05 —
—
—

0.05 —
—
—
843
—
843
—

0.07 —
< 0.005
—
—
—
845
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Apartmen 0.04 0.66 0.28 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 843 843 0.07 < 0.005 — 845 ts
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 —
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 Enclosed 0.00 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total 0.04
—

0.66 —

0.28 —
< 0.005
—

0.05 —
—
—
—

0.05 —

0.05 —
—
—
—

0.05 —
—
—
—
843
—
843
—

0.07 —
< 0.005
—
—
—
—
845
Annual —
Apartmen 0.01 0.12 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 140 140 0.01 < 0.005 140 ts
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 —
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 Enclosed 0.00 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total 0.01 0.12 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 140 140 0.01 < 0.005 — 140

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 42 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Land Use ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Apartmen 0.04 0.66 0.28 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 843 843 0.07 < 0.005 — 845 ts
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 —
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 Enclosed 0.00 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total 0.04
—

0.66 —

0.28 —
< 0.005
—

0.05 —
—
—

0.05 —

0.05 —
—
—

0.05 —
—
—
843
—
843
—

0.07 —
< 0.005
—
—
—
845
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Apartmen 0.04 0.66 0.28 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 843 843 0.07 < 0.005 — 845 ts
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 —
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 Enclosed 0.00 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total 0.04
—

0.66 —

0.28 —
< 0.005
—

0.05 —
—
—
—

0.05 —

0.05 —
—
—
—

0.05 —
—
—
—
843
—
843
—

0.07 —
< 0.005
—
—
—
—
845
Annual —
Apartmen 0.01 0.12 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 140 140 0.01 < 0.005 140 ts
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 —
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 Enclosed 0.00 0.00
Parking
Structure
43 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Total 0.01 0.12 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 140 140 0.01 < 0.005 — 140

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG
—
NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
—
—
—
—
— —
Consume 4.81
r
Products
— — — — —
—
—
— — — —
—
—
— — — — —
—
—
—
Architectu 0.41
ral
Coatings
— — — — — — — — — — — —
Landscap 1.59 0.14 14.9 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 44.7 44.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 44.8 e
Equipme
nt
Total 6.81
—

0.14 —

14.9 —
< 0.005
—

0.01 —
—
—

0.01 —

0.01 —
—
—

0.01 —
—
—

44.7 —

44.7 —
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—
—
—

44.8 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Consume 4.81
r
Products
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Architectu 0.41 —
ral
Coatings
Total 5.22
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Annual —
44 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Consume 0.88
r
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Architectu 0.07 —
ral
Coatings
Landscap 0.14
e
Equipme
nt

0.01 1.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.65

3.65 3.65

3.65 < 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
—
—

3.66 Total 1.10 0.01 1.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.66

4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG
—
NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
—
—
—
—
— —
Consume 4.81
r
Products
— — — — —
—
—
— — — —
—
—
— — — — —
—
—
—
Architectu 0.41
ral
Coatings
— — — — — — — — — — — —
Landscap 1.59 0.14 14.9 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 44.7 44.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 44.8 e
Equipme
nt
Total 6.81
—

0.14 —

14.9 —
< 0.005
—

0.01 —
—
—

0.01 —

0.01 —
—
—

0.01 —
—
—

44.7 —

44.7 —
< 0.005
—
< 0.005
—
—
—

44.8 Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Consume 4.81 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
r
Products
45 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Architectu 0.41
Coatings
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 5.22
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Annual
Consume 0.88
r
Products
Architectu 0.07
ral
Coatings
— — — — —
—
— — —
—
— —
—
— — — — —
—
—
Landscap 0.14 0.01 1.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.65 3.65 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.66 e
Equipme
nt
Total 1.10 0.01 1.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.65 3.65 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.66

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Apartmen —
ts
— — — — — — — — — 15.9 57.3 73.2 1.63 0.04 — 126
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 0.00

3.96 0.00

3.96 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —
—

3.98 Enclosed 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total — — — — — — — — — — 15.9 61.3 77.2 1.63 0.04 — 130 46 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— — — — — —
—
—
Apartmen —
ts

15.9 57.3 73.2 1.63 0.04 126
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 0.00

3.96 0.00

3.96 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —
—

3.98 Enclosed 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

15.9 —

61.3 —

77.2 —

1.63 —

0.04 —
—
—
—
130
Annual —
Apartmen —
ts

2.63 9.49 12.1 0.27 0.01 20.8
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 0.00

0.66 0.00

0.66 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —
—

0.66 Enclosed 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total — — — — — — — — — — 2.63 10.1 12.8 0.27 0.01 — 21.5

4.4.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx
—
CO
—
SO2
—
PM10E
—
PM10D
—
PM10T
—
PM2.5E
—
PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2
—
NBCO2
—
CO2T
—
CH4
—
N2O
—
R CO2e
Daily, — — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
Summer
(Max)
Apartmen —
ts
Mid Rise
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

15.9 0.00

57.3 3.96

73.2 3.96

1.63 0.04 —
—
126
Parking
Lot
— < 0.005 < 0.005 3.98
47 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Enclosed
Parking
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Structure
Total —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

15.9 —

61.3 —

77.2 —

1.63 —

0.04 —
—
—
130
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Apartmen —
ts
— — — — — — — — — 15.9 57.3 73.2 1.63 0.04 — 126
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 0.00

3.96 0.00

3.96 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —
—

3.98 Enclosed 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

15.9 —

61.3 —

77.2 —

1.63 —

0.04 —
—
—
—
130
Annual —
Apartmen —
ts

2.63 9.49 12.1 0.27 0.01 20.8
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 0.00

0.66 0.00

0.66 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 —
—

0.66 Enclosed 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total — — — — — — — — — — 2.63 10.1 12.8 0.27 0.01 — 21.5

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 48 / 77
Date Palm Apartments Detailed Report, 10/5/2023
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— — — — — —
—
—
Apartmen —
ts

81.3 0.00 81.3 8.13 0.00 284
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
—
—

0.00 Enclosed 0.00
Parking
Structure
Total —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

81.3 —

0.00 —

81.3 —

8.13 —

0.00 —
—
—
284
Daily, —
Winter
(Max)
Apartmen —
ts
— — — — — — — — — 81.3 0.00 81.3 8.13 0.00 — 284
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—