Agenda packet — Coachella City Council, October 14, 2026 (part 4 of 6)

Item 28.
3 5 H u g u s A l l e y S u i t e 2 0 0
P a s a d e n a , C a l i f o r n i a 9 1 1 0 3
T : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 4 8 F : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 8 7

04.12.2022 18028TMA
NWC State Highway 86 and Airport Road

COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA
Haagen Co LLC Coachella Airport Business Park
12302 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles CA 90064 A-204
Note: Signage shown on the elevations for graphic purpose only and does not represent the use or actual tenants

ELEVATIONS

Page 471 ends

Item 28.
3 5 H u g u s A l l e y S u i t e 2 0 0
P a s a d e n a , C a l i f o r n i a 9 1 1 0 3
T : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 4 8 F : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 8 7

04.12.2022 18028TMA
NWC State Highway 86 and Airport Road

COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA
Haagen Co LLC Coachella Airport Business Park
12302 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles CA 90064

FLOOR PLAN
A-105
H Y D
1 3
2 3
A205
D
D 1
A205
2 E A205
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
9'-0"
2'-0"
420'-0"
14'-0"
60'-0" 60'-0" 60'-0" 60'-0"
14'-0" 2'-0" 44'-0" 44'-0" 2'-0" 28'-0" 2'-0" 44'-0" 44'-0" 2'-0" 14'-0" 14'-0" 2'-0"
2'-0"
17'-0"
2'-0"
4'-6"
2'-0"
5'-1"
2'-0"
12'-0" 13'-10" 12'-0" 5'-1" 4'-6" 17'-0" 9'-0" 17'-0" 4'-6" 5'-1" 12'-0" 13'-10" 12'-0" 5'-1" 4'-6" 13'-0" 4'-6" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" COL.COL.COL.COL.

PROPOSED

SMALL WAREHOUSE
± 14,400 S.F.

ENTRY / EXIT

SERVICE

ENTRY / EXIT ENTRANCE ROLL UP DOOR

EXIT EXIT

ENTRY / EXIT

SERVICE

ENTRY / EXIT ENTRANCE ROLL UP DOOR

SERVICE

ROLL UP DOOR ENTRANCE

EXIT EXIT

ENTRY / EXIT

SERVICE

ROLL UP DOOR ENTRANCE
EXIT
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN A RI / VAN OP OL / EV

CLEAN A R I / VAN OP OL / EV

CLEAN A RI / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE NO PARKING - FIRE LANE NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE NO PARKING - FIRE LANE NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN A RI / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN A R I / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN A RI / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN A RI / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV
H Y D
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1

TRASH ENCLOSURE
1 A B
3 2
A B
4 A205
6'-11" 2'-0" 12'-0" 2'-0" 5'-1" 2'-0" 4'-6" 2'-0" 17'-0" 2'-0" 9'-0" 2'-0" 60'-0"
2'-0" 28'-0"
40'-0"
80'-0"
40'-0"
COL.

ENTRY / EXIT

SERVICE

ROLL UP DOOR ENTRANCE

EXIT EXIT
Coachella Airport Business Park

COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA
Haagen Co., LLC 12302 EXPOSITION BLVD., LOS ANGELES, CA 90064

04.11.2022 18028TMA

FLOOR PLAN
A-105

FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"

TYPICAL SMALL WAREHOUSE
1 inch = feet

GRAPHIC SCALE
0 11'
8' 4' 8' 16' 24'

KEY PLAN
SW-1 SW-2
SW-4 SW-5
SW-3

Page 472 ends

Item 28.
3 5 H u g u s A l l e y S u i t e 2 0 0
P a s a d e n a , C a l i f o r n i a 9 1 1 0 3
T : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 4 8 F : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 8 7

04.12.2022 18028TMA
NWC State Highway 86 and Airport Road

COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA
Haagen Co LLC Coachella Airport Business Park
12302 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles CA 90064 A-205
Note: Signage shown on the elevations for graphic purpose only and does not represent the use or actual tenants

ELEVATIONS

Page 473 ends

Item 28.
3 5 H u g u s A l l e y S u i t e 2 0 0
P a s a d e n a , C a l i f o r n i a 9 1 1 0 3
T : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 4 8 F : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 8 7

04.12.2022 18028TMA
NWC State Highway 86 and Airport Road

COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA
Haagen Co LLC Coachella Airport Business Park
12302 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles CA 90064

FLOOR PLAN
A-106
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D
H Y D

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN A RI / VAN OP OL / EV

CLEAN A R I / VAN OP OL / EV

CLEAN A RI / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EVCLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN A RI / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN A R I / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN A RI / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN A RI / VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR / VANPOOL / EV
H Y D
1 A

3.1 5
B G H

EXIT ENTRY / EXIT
EXIT

RECEIVING AREA

LOADING DOCK
10' HIGH SCREEN WALL

C D E F
1 32'-0" 50'-0" 50'-0" 50'-0" 50'-0" 36'-0" 20'-0"
288'-0"
10'-0" 4'-6" 21'-0" 4'-6" 5'-0" 4'-6" 21'-0" 4'-6" 21'-0" 4'-0" 20'-0" 4'-0" 52'-0" 4'-0" 40'-0" 4'-0" 40'-0" 40'-0"
163'-9"
2 43'-9" 40'-0"
3 4
5 2
3 4

B C D E F H
COL.COL.COL.COL.COL.

COL.COL.COL.COL.COL.

COL.COL.COL.COL.

PROPOSED

LARGE WAREHOUSE
± 44,500 S.F.
1 20'-0" 20'-0"
7'-0" 33'-0"
13'-0" 5'-0" 18'-0" 5'-0" 18'-0" 5'-0" 18'-0" 5'-0" 67'-0" 4'-0" 40'-0" 4'-0" 12'-0" 2'-0" 24'-0" 2'-0" 12'-0" 4'-0" 4'-0" 28'-0" 4'-0" 40'-0" 4'-0"
8'-0"

S I D E W A L K

TRASH ENCLOSURE
FIRE

HYDRANT

P A R K I N G S T A L L S
S I D
E
W
A L K

P A R K I N G S T A L L S
1 A206
2 A206
3 A206
4 A206
Coachella Airport Business Park

COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA
Haagen Co., LLC 12302 EXPOSITION BLVD., LOS ANGELES, CA 90064

04.11.2022 18028TMA

FLOOR PLAN
A-106

FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"
1 inch = feet

GRAPHIC SCALE
0 11'
8' 4' 8' 16' 24'

TYPICAL LARGE WAREHOUSE

KEY PLAN

LARGE WAREHOUSE
LW-1A LW-1B LW-2
LW-3A LW-3B
LW-4

Page 474 ends

Item 28.
3 5 H u g u s A l l e y S u i t e 2 0 0
P a s a d e n a , C a l i f o r n i a 9 1 1 0 3
T : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 4 8 F : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 8 7

04.12.2022 18028TMA
NWC State Highway 86 and Airport Road

COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA
Haagen Co LLC Coachella Airport Business Park
12302 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles CA 90064 A-206
Note: Signage shown on the elevations for graphic purpose only and does not represent the use or actual tenants

ELEVATIONS

Page 475 ends

Item 28.
3 5 H u g u s A l l e y S u i t e 2 0 0
P a s a d e n a , C a l i f o r n i a 9 1 1 0 3
T : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 4 8 F : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 8 7

04.12.2022 18028TMA
NWC State Highway 86 and Airport Road

COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA
Haagen Co LLC Coachella Airport Business Park
12302 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles CA 90064 SE-01

SITE ELEVATION

LARGE WAREHOUSE
LW-2
±44,500 S.F.

LARGE WAREHOUSE
LW-1A
±44,000 S.F.

SMALL WAREHOUSE
SW-1
±9,600 S.F.
9 5
12 SMALL WAREHOUSE
SW-3
±24,000 S.F.

SMALL WAREHOUSE
6 6
5 SMALL WAREHOUSE
6 14
16 ROAD
6 LARGE WAREHOUSE
LW-1B
±22,400 S.F.

H
D Y
H
D Y
H
D Y
H
D Y
H
D Y H
D Y
H
D Y
H
D Y
H
D Y
FH

FH FH FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
6 10
6 13
6 20

SMALL WAREHOUSE
SW-2
±24,000 S.F.
(E) PRIVATE TILE DRAIN
7 CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

SMALL BUSINESS
SB-18
±4,500 S.F.

SMALL BUSINESS
SB-16
±4,500 S.F.

SB-17

SMALL BUSINESS
±4,500 S.F.

SB-15

SMALL BUSINESS
±4,500 S.F.

MESSAGE BOARD

PROJECT

PYLON SIGN
NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

CLEAN AIR /

VANPOOL / EV

L I N E O F S I G H T

DIESEL REGULAR MID-GRADE PREMIUM
87 89 91

REGULAR MID-GRADE PREMIUM

L I N E O F S I G H T
Coachella Airport Business Park
Coachella, California
Haagen Co, LLC

04.12.2022 18028TMA

SITE ELEVATION
EL07
Site Elevation 1 SCALE: 1" = 30'-0"
Airport Boulevard Site Elevation 2 SCALE: 1" = 30'-0"
State Highway 86
Site Elevation 3 SCALE: 1" = 30'-0"
State Highway 86
Site Elevation 4 SCALE: 1" = 30'-0"
State Highway 86
Site Elevation 5 SCALE: 1" = 30'-0"
State Highway 86
2 SE-01
3 SE-01
4 SE-01

Page 476 ends

Item 28.
3 5 H u g u s A l l e y S u i t e 2 0 0
P a s a d e n a , C a l i f o r n i a 9 1 1 0 3
T : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 4 8 F : 6 2 6.5 8 3.8 3 8 7

04.12.2022 18028TMA
NWC State Highway 86 and Airport Road

COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA
Haagen Co LLC Coachella Airport Business Park
12302 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles CA 90064 TE-01

TRASH ENCLOSURE
6 A300
4 A300
3 A300

CONCRETE APRON
1% SLOPE
6" HIGH x 10"

WIDE SIDE
CONC. CURB
CONC. CURB

PER SITE PLAN
4x4x3/8 STL TUBE POST

WELDED TO BASE STEEL

PLATE AND BEAM
ABOVE, TYP.

PAVEMENT

MARKER AND

STRIPING
(CONC. APRON) - 6" CONC.

SLAB 'NATURAL GRAY'
REINFORCED W/ #4 REBAR
@ 18" O.C. EACH WAY TYP.
8x8x16 CONC. BLOCK WITH
#5 @ 16" O.C. EA. WAY,
GROUT ALL CELLS SOLID.

GROUT TO MATCH WALL
FINISH. (f'm = 1,500 PSI)
20 GA. VERCO METAL PAN
DECKING, SLOPE AT 2% MIN.

SLOPE TO REAR. COLOR TO
MATCH TRELLIS WITH (4) 1/2"
PUDDLE WELDS @ 12" O.C.

EA. WAY BUTTON PUNCH @
24" O.C. SIDE LAP
4x8x1/4" STEEL TRELLIS @
24" O.C., PAINTED. 1/4"

STEEL CLOSURE PLATE
WELDED EA. END, TYP.
6x12x3/8" STEEL BEAM,

PAINTED

NO PARKING
TRASH
BIN
(NIC)

RECYCLE
BIN
(NIC)
10'
40'-10"
13'-4"

CANE BOLT KEEPER

HOLE (DRILLED) WITH

METAL SLEEVE
5 A300
1% MAX.
6" HIGH x 10"

WIDE REAR
CONC. CURB
10"
10"
10"
2% SLOPE
6'-6" 2'-6"
9'
6'-6" 2'-3"
8'-9"
2% SLOPE

METAL DECK ROOF, PAINTED

TO MATCH TRELLIS
4x12x3/8" STEEL BEAM WITH ENDS FILLED

AND GROUND SMOOTH (PAINTED)
COLOR: SW 7048 'URBANE BRONZE'
BY: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
METAL GATE & HARDWARE; PAINT
COLOR: SW 7048 'URBANE BRONZE'
BY: SHERWIN WILLIAMS

SMOOTH STUCCO
COLOR: SW 0077 'CLASSIC FRENCH GRAY'
BY: SHERWIN WILLIAMS

STEEL POST (PAINTED)
COLOR: SW 7048 'URBANE BRONZE'
BY: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
3x8x1/4" STEEL TRELLIS; PAINTED
COLOR: SW 7048 'URBANE BRONZE'
BY: SHERWIN WILLIAMS

SMOOTH STUCCO
COLOR: SW 0077 'CLASSIC FRENCH GRAY'
BY: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
6'-6" 2'-3"
8'-9"
6'-6" 2'-6"
9'
T.E. DOORS
4YD4YD4YD4YD4YD4YD
1% SLOPE
TRASH
BIN
(NIC)
TRASH
BIN
(NIC)
TRASH
BIN
(NIC)
TRASH
BIN
(NIC)

NO PARKING
2% SLOPE2% SLOPE
1% SLOPE

LINE OF ROOF
ABOVE

LANDSCAPED AREA
4'-2"

LANDSCAPED AREA
Trash Enclosure - Floor Plan 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
Trash Enclosure - Roof Plan 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
Front Elevation 3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
Right Side Elevation 3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
Rear Elevation 4 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
Left Side Elevation 5 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"

DECORATIVE WALL CAP

DECORATIVE WALL CAP
Coachella Airport Business Park
Coachella, California
Haagen Co, LLC 12302 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles CA 90064

05.29.2020 18028TMA

TRASH ENCLOSURE
TE-01 Page 477
Item 28.

Page 478 ends

Item 28.

Page 479 ends

Item 28.

Page 480 ends

Item 28.

Page 481 ends

Item 28.

Page 482 ends

Item 28.

Page 483 ends

Item 28.

Page 484 ends

Item 28.

BY-3
±19,200 S.F.

BRICK YARD
BY-4

HAAGEN COMPANY, LLC

COACHELLA, CA

COACHELLA AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK
77-899 WOLF RD.

PH. (760) 777-9131
FAX (760) 777-9132

PALM DESERT, CA
LIC# 2754, EXP 04/30/22
92211

HERMANN DESIGN GROUP
SUITE 102

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN

BRICK YARD AREA
LP-2

Page 485 ends

Item 28.

H Y D
EXIT FSR Electrical Room EXIT
EXIT Electrical Room FSR EXIT

SMALL BUSINESS

HAAGEN COMPANY, LLC

COACHELLA, CA

COACHELLA AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK
77-899 WOLF RD.

PH. (760) 777-9131
FAX (760) 777-9132

PALM DESERT, CA
LIC# 2754, EXP 04/30/22
92211

HERMANN DESIGN GROUP
SUITE 102

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN

ENTRY LANDSCAPE AT AIRPORT BLVD

SMALL BUSINESS PICNIC AREA
LP-3

Page 486 ends

Item 28.

Resolution No. 2026-58
Page
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2026-58

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE COACHELLA

AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2023040106); ADOPTING

ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT; AND ADOPTING A

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Coachella did, on October 14, 2026, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the Coachella Airport Business Park Development Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2023040106), as mandated by State law for the master planned development of 43± acres of vacant land located at the northwest corner of Airport Boulevard and State Highway 86, and identified as Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 763-330-013, 763- 330-018, and 763-330-029; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a properly noticed public hearing on April 1, 2026 at which members of the public were afforded an opportunity to comment upon this Ordinance, the recommendations of staff, and other public testimony; and WHEREAS, following the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted to recommend to the City Council approval of the Environmental Impact Report on a 4-0 vote, with one member absent, and directed staff to prepare Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for consideration by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City published a public hearing notice in The Desert Sun newspaper on October 2, 2026 and a public hearing notice was mailed to property owners within a radius of 300- feet of the subject property on October 1, 2026, pursuant to Section 17.74.010G of the Coachella Municipal Code.; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 21067 of the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub.

Res. Code §§ 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”), and Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal.

Code Regs., Tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), the City of Coachella is the Lead Agency for the Proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) of a Draft EIR for the Airport Business Park on or about September 18, 2023, and it was transmitted to the State Clearinghouse, local and regional agencies, and posted at the Riverside County Clerk’s office for a 30-day comment period where comments and participation were sought from the public and all interested and affected groups and agencies; and
WHEREAS, on or about July 21, 2025, the City published a Notice of Availability (“NOA”) which initiated a 45-day public review and comment period of the Draft EIR for the Proposed Project and released the Draft EIR for public review and comment between July 21 to September 3, 2025; and

Page 487 ends

Item 28.

Resolution No. 2026-58
Page
WHEREAS, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15086, the City consulted with and requested comments from all responsible and trustee agencies, other regulatory agencies, and other interested parties during the 45-day public review and comment period and received 17 comments; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared a Final EIR, consisting of the comments received during the public review and comment period on the Draft EIR, written responses to those comments, revisions to the Draft EIR and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project. For the purposes of this Resolution, the “EIR” shall refer to the Draft EIR, as revised by the Final EIR, together with the other sections of the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, the EIR found that although most environmental impacts of the project can be reduced to less than significant levels, impacts to vehicle miles traveled will remain significant and unavoidable; and
WHEREAS, the environmental impacts identified in the EIR that the Lead Agency finds are of no impact or constitute a less than significant impact and do not require mitigation are described in Sections IV of Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant but which the Lead Agency finds can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the incorporation of feasible Mitigation Measures identified in the EIR are described in Section III of Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant but which the Lead Agency finds cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level, despite the imposition of feasible Mitigation Measures identified in the EIR are described in Section II of Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, alternatives to the Proposed Project that might eliminate or reduce significant environmental impacts are described in Section VII of Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program setting forth the mitigation measures to which the Lead Agency shall bind itself, is attached hereto as Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, prior to taking action, the Lead Agency has heard, been presented with, reviewed and considered all of the information and data in the administrative record, including the EIR, and all oral and written evidence presented to it during all meetings; and WHEREAS, the EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council and is deemed adequate for purposes of making decisions on the merits of the Proposed Project; and

Page 488 ends

Item 28.

Resolution No. 2026-58
Page
WHEREAS, the Lead Agency has not received any comments or additional information that constituted substantial new information requiring recirculation under Public Resources Code Section 21092.1 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of CEQA, and the State CEQA Guidelines, have been satisfied by the City in the EIR, which is sufficiently detailed so that all of the potentially significant environmental effects have been adequately evaluated; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Coachella, California, as follows:

SECTION 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the Findings of the City Council.

SECTION 2. That the City Council does adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in Section VIII of Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herewith by this reference.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is hereby made a condition of approval of the Project. In the event of any inconsistencies between the mitigation measures set forth herein and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program shall control.

SECTION 4. The City Council finds that it has been presented with the EIR, which it has reviewed and considered, and further finds that the EIR is an accurate and objective statement that has been completed in full compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Guidelines and that the EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council.

The City Council declares that no evidence of new significant impacts as defined by the State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 has been received by the City Council after circulation of the Draft EIR which would require recirculation.

Therefore, the City Council hereby certifies the EIR, based on the entirety of the record of proceedings.

SECTION 5. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution has been based are located at the Coachella Civic Center, 53-990 Enterprise Way, Coachella CA 92236. The custodian for these records is the Development Services Director or designee. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2).

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of Coachella City Council, held on October 14, 2026, by the following vote:

Page 489 ends

Item 28.

Resolution No. 2026-58
Page
AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Dr. Frank Figueroa Mayor
ATTEST:

Angela M. Zepeda City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

BEST, BEST & KRIEGER
City Attorney

Page 490 ends

Item 28.

Resolution No. 2026-58
Page
RESOLUTION 2026-58

EXHIBIT A

FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS

Page 491 ends

Item 28.

Resolution No. 2026-58
Page
RESOLUTION 2026-58

EXHIBIT B

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

Page 492 ends

Item 28.

CEQA FINDINGS
and

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS

OF THE CITY OF COACHELLA
for the

COACHELLA AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT

Page 493 ends

Item 28.
2 Table of Contents
Page
I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION................................................................................................. 7 PROJECT COMPONENTS ............................................................................................... 8 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION.......................................................................................... 10 RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES ........................................................................................... 10 PROJECT OBJECTIVES................................................................................................. 12 II. FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS ..... 12 TRANSPORTATION....................................................................................................... 13 III. FINDINGS REGARDING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS

WHICH ARE AVOIDED OR MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT LEVEL ................................................................................................. 17 AESTHETICS................................................................................................................... 17 AIR QUALITY................................................................................................................. 21 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.......................................................................................... 29 CULTURAL RESOURCES............................................................................................. 47 ENERGY RESOURCES .................................................................................................. 50 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ................................................................................................. 57 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS................................................................................. 63 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ............................................................ 68 NOISE............................................................................................................................... 70 TRANSPORTATION....................................................................................................... 75 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES.............................................................................. 83 WILDFIRE ....................................................................................................................... 85 IV. FINDINGS REGARDING IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT................................................................................................................ 87 AESTHETICS................................................................................................................... 87 AIR QUALITY................................................................................................................. 89 CULTURAL ..................................................................................................................... 92 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ................................................................................................. 93 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ............................................................ 95 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY...................................................................... 99 LAND USE AND PLANNING...................................................................................... 105 NOISE............................................................................................................................. 109 POPULATION AND HOUSING................................................................................... 110 PUBLIC SERVICES ...................................................................................................... 111 RECREATION ............................................................................................................... 115 TRANSPORTATION..................................................................................................... 116

Page 494 ends

Item 28.
3 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES............................................................................ 117 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ....................................................................... 118 WILDFIRE ..................................................................................................................... 127 V. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS HAVING NO
IMPACT ........................................................................................................................ 128 AESTHETICS................................................................................................................. 128 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY ............................................................................. 129 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES........................................................................................ 130 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ............................................................................................... 130 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL............................................................. 130 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.................................................................... 130 LAND USE AND PLANNING...................................................................................... 131 MINERAL RESOURCES .............................................................................................. 131 POPULATION AND HOUSING................................................................................... 131 RECREATION ............................................................................................................... 131 WILDFIRE ..................................................................................................................... 132 VI. FINDINGS REGARDING CUMULATIVE IMPACTS........................................... 132 VII. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED IN THE DEIR AND REJECTED.......................................................................................................... 151 VIII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS........................................ 156 IX. FINDINGS REGARDING CERTIFICATION OF FINAL EIR ............................. 158

Page 495 ends

Item 28.
4 Final EIR SCH No. 2023040106
The City of Coachella has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Coachella Airport Business Park Development project (Project) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations § 15000 et seq. as amended).

I. INTRODUCTION
The Project would include the development of a currently vacant and undeveloped approximate

47.96 acres in the southeastern portion of the City of Coachella with approximately 42.36 acres of industrial uses and an Imperial Irrigation District (IID) substation located at the northern 5.6 acres of the Project site.

The Project will require the following entitlements: Change of Zone; Tentative Parcel Map, three Conditional Use Permits, Architectural Review, and a Development Agreement. The Change of Zone is from M-H (Heavy Industrial) to MS (Manufacturing Services) and C-G (General Commercial) to allow for the proposed land uses. The M-H zone allows industrial uses, including standard heavy industrial and manufacturing facilities. Since the Project would not include heavy industrial/manufacturing uses, the requested zone change of 40.8± acres to M-S would allow the warehousing, business park and auto-related uses proposed by the Project. The C-G -General Commercial would allow for retail, offices, and restaurant uses on the south 2.2 acres of the Project.

The City distributed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to prepare a Draft EIR on August 16, 2023 for a 30-day comment period ending on September 18, 2023. The NOP included an evaluation of the environmental topics that would be analyzed within the Draft EIR. The NOP was sent to the State Clearinghouse, all responsible and trustee agencies, and to interested parties. Issues raised by agencies and the public in response to the NOP were considered in the preparation of the Draft EIR. The NOP and comments received are contained in Appendix A of the EIR.

Based on the preliminary review conducted by the City and responses to the NOP, the City found that the project could have potentially significant environmental effects that should be considered in an environmental impact report for all of the following resources: Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire.

The Draft EIR was prepared and circulated for a 45-day public review period from July 21, 2025, to September 3, 2025. The Final EIR for the project consists of the Draft EIR, revisions to the Draft EIR, a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR, comments received on the Draft EIR, and responses to those comments. A copy of the Final EIR was made available for public review and provided to all parties commenting on the Draft EIR at least 10 days prior to certification by the City Council.

Page 496 ends

Item 28.
5 The EIR identified potentially significant environmental effects related to Aesthetics (create new source of light or glare); Air Quality (increase of criteria pollutant, expose sensitive receptors to pollutants); Biological Resources (candidate, sensitive or special status species, riparian habitat, federally protected wetlands, movement of wildlife, consistency with habitat conservation plan); Cultural Resources (unknown archaeological resources, human remains); Energy (consumption of energy resources, consistency with plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency); Geology and Soils (earthquake fault zone, ground-shaking, liquefaction, landslide, unstable geologic unit or soil, impacts to a paleontological resource or geological feature); Greenhouse Gas (emissions, consistency with applicable plan, policy or regulation); Hazards and Hazardous Materials (release of hazardous materials); Noise (consistency with established standards); Transportation (consistency with a circulation system, plan or policy, impact to emergency access); Tribal Cultural Resources (historical resource, tribal cultural resources); and Wildfire (impair an emergency response or evacuation plan). The EIR determined that the potentially significant environmental impacts have been reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the mitigation measures and adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program designed to ensure compliance with mitigation measures throughout implementation of the Project, with the exception of the significant and unavoidable impact discussed in Section II below (transportation).

The EIR identified no impact or less than significant impacts related to Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, and Utilities.

Public Resources Code § 21081 and CEQA Guidelines § 15091 require that the City of Coachella, as lead agency for this project, prepare written findings for any identified significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings under CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects on the environment. (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR.

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(b) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(3), the City finds that the Project will have significant and unavoidable impacts to transportation (vehicle miles travelled) even after all feasible mitigation measures recommended in the Final EIR are implemented. The City finds that for each of the significant effects identified in the Final EIR, other than the transportation impacts identified above, changes or alterations (mitigation measures) have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which will avoid or substantially lessen each of the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. The significant effects (impacts) and mitigation measures are stated fully in the Final EIR. The rationale for this finding for each impact is discussed below.

Page 497 ends

Item 28.
6 After consideration of an EIR, the lead agency may decide whether or how to approve or carry out the project.

For purposes of CEQA and for the Findings set forth herein, the record of proceedings for the City’s Findings and determinations consists of the following documents and testimony, at a minimum:
• The City’s General Plan, as amended, and all environmental documents relating thereto;
• The Draft EIR for the project, including all Appendices thereto and all supporting materials referenced therein;
• The Final EIR for the project, including all comments on the Draft EIR, all responses thereto, and all supporting materials referenced therein; • All testimony and written comments received at any public hearing relating to the project, including the Planning Commission hearing on May 6, 2026, and the City Council hearing on October 14, 2026;
• All reports of the City relating to the project, including reports submitted to the City by expert consultants, and all supporting materials referenced therein;
• These Findings made by the City and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) adopted by the City for the project; • All final City Staff reports relating to the Draft EIR, the Final EIR and/or the project;
• All other public reports, documents, studies, memoranda, maps, or other planning documents relating to the project, the Draft EIR or the Final EIR, prepared by the City, consultants to the City, or responsible or trustee agencies, or submitted to the City prior to the close of the City Council hearing on the project;
• All matters of common knowledge to the City, including but not limited to the City’s policies, guidelines and regulations.

The official custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings is:

Development Services
City of Coachella
53990 Enterprise Way
City of Coachella, California 92236
Phone: (760) 398-3502

Page 498 ends

Item 28.
7 Hours: 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday – Thursday (closed Fridays) Copies of all these documents, which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City’s decision is based, are, and at all relevant times have been, available upon request at the offices of the City, the custodian for such documents. The City made a good faith effort to post the Draft EIR, including all Appendices thereto and all supporting materials referenced therein, to the City’s internet website and immediately provided individually requested documents to the public to ensure that all commenters and the public generally were not deprived of a meaningful opportunity to review and comment on the Draft EIR, all technical studies, and all other materials cited and relied upon in the Draft EIR.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project site is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of State Route 86 (SR 86) and Airport Boulevard in the City of Coachella (City), in the County of Riverside (County), California.

The site is comprised of four (4) parcels totaling approximately 47.96 acres in size. The Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) for the site are 763-330-013, 763-330-018, and 763-330-029 (the 5.6-acre Imperial Irrigation District (IID) substation location does not have an APN). The site is a currently vacant parcel surrounded by SR 86 to the east, Airport Boulevard to the south, the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (CVSC) and Avenue 54 to the approximate west and north, respectively (see Exhibit 2.3: Project Site and Exhibit 2.4: Site Plan). It is located in an area of the City that is mostly vacant to the north and east, with some light industrial uses located to the west and a residential community across Airport Boulevard to the south.

The Project site is located approximately 10.5 miles to the northwest of the Salton Sea and about 79 miles to the east of the Pacific Ocean. The Joshua Tree National Park and its associated mountain ranges are located approximately eight (8) miles to the northeast, while the Santa Rosa Mountains are approximately eight (8) miles to the west/southwest. Interstate 10 (I-10) traverses the City to the north, while SR 86 and SR 111 cut through the central/west portion of the City.

Although the site had been previously utilized for agricultural production from approximately 1953 to 1984, it is currently undeveloped and vacant. The site is relatively flat, with a gentle slope northeast to southwest. Approximately five (5) acres at the northern portion of the Project site is in a native condition; the remainder of the site has been previously farmed, and although some native revegetation has occurred, it consists primarily of low shrubs, tall bushes, and sparse trees scattered throughout the interior of the site.

There are no water features located on the site although the CVSC borders the western edge of the site. Due to its proximity to the CVSC, the site is designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as being located within a floodplain zone AE or special flood hazard area (FEMA Flood Zone Map; accessed November 2023).

Existing utility infrastructure at the Project site consists of a 30-inch Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) waterline that runs parallel to the southern boundary of the site. Additionally, a 16-inch CVWD drainage line (Avenue 55 East Drainage) runs parallel to the northern boundary of the Project site. Three (3) private tile drainage lines underlie the center of the site (Coachella Airport Business Park IS/MND; 2021).

Page 499 ends

Item 28.
8 The Project will require the following entitlements:
• Change of Zone from M-H (Heavy Industrial) to MS (Manufacturing Services) and C-G (General Commercial). The M-H zone allows industrial uses, including standard heavy industrial and manufacturing facilities. Since the Project would not include heavy industrial/manufacturing uses, the requested zone changes to C-G -General Commercial for 2.2± acres would allow for retail, offices, restaurant and public utility facilities, and to MS for

40.8± acres would allow for garages, storage yards and small warehouses, and uses to be developed under the Project.
• Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) in order to show the site’s existing conditions and for the siting of large warehouses, small warehouse, small business development office, self-storage facilities, and personal automobile storage facilities.
• Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a Service Station/Mini Mart under the proposed C-G zoning change.
• CUP under the proposed C-G zone change to allow for the drive through and sit-down restaurant.
• CUP to allow cannabis use, subject to obtaining the required regulatory permits from the City and State.
• Architectural Review of the building design, landscaping, billboard and ancillary facilities throughout the Project site.
• Development Agreement with the purpose of strengthening the public planning process, encouraging private participation in comprehensive planning, and reducing the economic costs of development while providing assurances to the project applicant regarding approval of the project.

PROJECT COMPONENTS
As a new business park development within the City, the Project site would be developed for industrial uses comprised of large and small warehouse, personal vehicle storage and self-storage units, small business use spaces, a small retail and restaurant development, a billboard sign, and a fuel station with a convenience store, with associated landscaping, parking, lighting, and signage as follows:
• The approximate 4,000 sq ft convenience store and fuel station with associated parking would be located at the site’s entrance along Airport Boulevard, with an approximate 4,650 sq ft retail and drive-through restaurant located to the northeast of the site entrance.

Page 500 ends

Item 28.
9 • Eighteen (18) proposed small business buildings, approximately 4,500 sq ft in size each and totaling about 81,000 sq ft, would be located along the site’s eastern frontage along SR 86 and to the north of the fuel station and convenience store site within the southern portion of the Project site. • Four (4) structures for storing personal vehicles averaging 19,200 sq ft (for an estimated total of 76,800 sq ft) with an internal open space area located to the north of the small business buildings and to the west of the proposed small warehouse buildings on site.
• Seventeen (17) self-storage buildings totaling 128,600 sq ft, ranging in size between 5,200 sq ft and 10,400 sq ft, located in the center of the site west of the small warehouse buildings.
• Five (5) small warehouse structures, ranging in size from 9,600 sq ft to 24,000 sq ft (totaling approximately 96,000 sq ft) located along the site’s eastern frontage along SR 86.
• Six (6) large warehouse structures ranging in size from 22,400 sq ft to 48,800 sq ft, totaling approximately 233,100 sq ft of warehouse space would be located along the northern portion of the site, in close proximity to the proposed electric substation.

The proposed buildings on the site would range in height from 24 feet to 50 feet, primarily consisting of one (1) and two (2) story structures, with some four (4) story buildings. All building design and materials would be consistent with the Project Design Guidelines and would be submitted for architectural review to the City.

Proposed Project Components
Building Type Size (in square feet)
Large Warehouse Structures 233,100
Small Warehouse Structures 96,000
Small Business Development Buildings 81,000
Personal Vehicle Storage Facilities 76,800
Self-Storage Facilities 128,600
Service Station/ Mini Mart 4,000
Restaurant and Drive-through Facility 4,650
TOTAL 624,500
An IID substation facility would be located at the northern end of the Project site on a parcel that the Project applicant acquired from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The new 315 foot x 315 foot electrical substation will require at least one 1-25 mega volt ampere (MVA) 92/13.2 kilovolt (kV) transformer bank in order to provide adequate power for the Project.

The final components of the new substation will be determined in consultation with IID and may include additional facilities to improve electrical system resiliency and reliability to the surrounding community. There also would be 92 kV transmission line extensions and associated distribution feeders/backbones and distribution line extensions installed on the substation parcel.

Page 501 ends

Item 28.
10 The Project site has an existing 30-inch CVWD waterline adjacent to the site, that is a “dry line”, that is, it is not connected to any existing water lines. The Coachella Water Authority (CWA) plans to extend their water facilities with a 20” water line from Avenue 54 southerly along Grapefruit Boulevard, then easterly under the existing railroad tracks and the CVSC to the Project site. Until the CWA project is completed, water service will be provided by CVWD on an interim basis.

Since sewer connections exist near the Project site, the existing CVWD sewer line near Orange Street and Airport Boulevard would be extended easterly along Airport Boulevard and then cross the CVSC (either underground or attached to the bridge on Airport Boulevard) and connect to the project site directly on the east side of the CVSC.

A 44-foot-tall electronic billboard sign, with a two-sided sign face measuring 14 feet by 48 feet, would be constructed along the Project’s frontage along SR 86.

The Project proposes a number of design features which are incorporated as Mitigation Measure GHG-1 in this EIR, in order to comply with the City of Coachella Climate Action Plan (CAP).

PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
Following City approvals and issuance of initial building and grading utility permits, the Project is scheduled to be constructed in several phases with the initial Phase I construction estimated to take approximately one (1) to five (5) years following Project approvals, and Phases II and III to occur over approximately five (5) to 10 years and 20 years, as shown below. Since the site is primarily vacant with some sparse shrub and tree coverage across the majority of the site, initial construction activities may involve debris and vegetation removal, grading and Phase I construction activities. During site preparation, all construction equipment would be stored on site within the existing fenced-in area. Construction equipment may include water trucks, semi-trucks and trailers, excavators, front end loaders, shoring installation equipment, bobcats and other small equipment. The contractor would use standard BMP techniques as mandated by the City and CalOSHA to minimize construction noise and dust.

Project Phasing
Phase I – 2027 Phase II – 2030 Phase III - 2035
Large Warehouse Area (sq ft) 110,900 48,800 73,400
Small Warehouse Area (sq ft) 24,000 52,800 19,200
Small Business Area (sq ft) 31,500 22,500 27,000
Self Storage Area (sq ft) 67,300 --- 61,300
Vehicle Storage Area (sq ft) 19,200 19,200 ---
Fuel Center, C-Store Area (sq ft) 4,000 --- ---
Retail - Restaurants (2) Area (sq ft) 4,650 --- ---
Total Area per Phase 261,550 143,300 180,900

RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES
The following are the responsible agencies which may rely on the Final EIR for their discretionary approvals required to implement the project:

Page 502 ends

Item 28.
11 • County of Riverside
• County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health • County of Riverside Airport Land Use Commission
• Coachella Valley Water District
• Imperial Irrigation District
• Regional Water Quality Control Board
• State of California Department of Transportation
• State of California Public Utilities Commission
• State of California Water Resources Control Board
• South Coast Air Quality Management District

Page 503 ends

Item 28.
12 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The Project would develop a currently vacant site comprised of four parcels with light industrial and commercial uses and an IID substation, in an Industrial District in the City of Coachella. The Project proposes the following realistic and achievable objectives:
• Provide development of an underutilized site with existing arterial and roadway access.
• Create new and diverse employment opportunities within the City of Coachella as identified under the City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update, with the development of a wide range of commercial uses. • Contribute to an increase in the City of Coachella’s fiscal health as envisioned under the City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update through the development of a mix of commercial uses including large and small warehouse, office, and commercial retail.
• Promote development consistent with the City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update.
• Provide a site for construction of additional IID electrical facilities to improve the electric grid and enhance reliability to this portion of the City of Coachella.
• Ensure that the scale of the development respects its surroundings and existing land use patterns.

II. FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS This section identifies the significant unavoidable impacts that require a Statement of Overriding Considerations to be issued by the City upon approval of the project. Based on the analysis contained in the Final EIR, impacts to transportation (specifically VMT/consistency with PRC §15064.3(b)) have been determined to be significant and unavoidable after all feasible mitigation measures have been considered and adopted. These unavoidable impacts are overridden by the project benefits.

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081 and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(3), the City Council finds that, for each of the following significant effects, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid these significant effects on the environment to the maximum extent feasible. Nevertheless, the City further finds that for each of the significant effects, specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations as more fully described in Section VIII below, which is hereby incorporated by this reference, make infeasible further mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the Final EIR. These findings are explained below and are supported by substantial evidence in the record of proceedings.

Page 504 ends

Item 28.
13 TRANSPORTATION
Consistency with §15064.3(b)
CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3(b) provides criteria for analyzing traffic related impacts from a proposed project. The criteria further divide projects under Land Use and Transportation projects and provide guidelines for the level and methodology of traffic analysis related to a project.

The Project is within the jurisdiction of the City of Coachella, which has not formally adopted its own guidance on evaluating vehicle miles travelled (VMT) for transportation impacts under CEQA. In the absence of formally adopted guidance from the lead agency, and at the direction of the City, the County Guidelines were used as the basis to evaluate VMT for the Project. The County Guidelines include several project screening criteria. The Project includes multiple nonresidential land uses which is considered a mixed-use project. The County Guidelines recommend evaluation of each land use separately for a mixed-use project. Therefore, each of the Project uses was assessed with screening criteria for Small Projects established in the County Guidelines. The County Guidelines have identified project size thresholds (in thousand square feet [TSF]) for multiple land uses that can be screened out of a detailed VMT analysis. Each of the Project land uses was compared with the criteria established for Small Projects as described below:
• 233.1 TSF large warehouse: Warehouse buildings with less than or equal to 208 TSF can be screened out of VMT analysis. The large warehouse use does not meet this criterion and therefore cannot be screened out of a VMT analysis.
• 96 TSF small warehouse: Warehouse buildings with less than or equal to 208 TSF can be screened out of VMT analysis. The small warehouse building is less than 208 TSF and therefore can be screened out of a VMT analysis.
• 128.6 TSF self-storage: The screening criteria from the County Guidelines do not include a self storage land use. However, this use can be considered as general light industrial in nature. The County Guidelines provide a threshold of 179 TSF for screening out light industrial buildings/projects.

Therefore, based on the screening threshold of 179 TSF, this land use can be screened out of a detailed VMT analysis.
• 76.8 TSF personal vehicle storage: The County Guidelines do not include screening criteria for personal vehicle storage. However, this use can also be considered as a small warehouse based on information received from Project applicant. Therefore, based on the screening threshold of 208 TSF for warehouse buildings, this land use can be screened out of a detailed VMT analysis.
• 81 TSF small business/office: The County Guidelines provide a screening threshold of 165 TSF for general office buildings/uses. The Project’s office

Page 505 ends

Item 28.
14 use is less than 165 TSF and therefore can be screened out of a detailed VMT analysis.
• 8.65 TSF retail: Based on the screening criteria in the County Guidelines, retail buildings with an area less than 60 TSF can be screened out of detailed VMT analysis. The Project’s retail land use can be screened out of detailed VMT analysis under this criterion.

All of the Project land uses except for the large warehouse can be screened out of a VMT analysis, based on the Small Projects screening criteria established in the County Guidelines. However, to ensure an adequate analysis regarding the Project’s total VMT, a full VMT analysis was conducted using RIVCOM3.51, and all of the Project’s land uses were included in the modeling. See Draft EIR pages 4.17-30 through 4.17-33, Final EIR Responses to Comments Nos. 15-5, 16-3, 16-15, 16-16, 16-17, and 16-18, and the supporting technical memo attached to the Final EIR as Appendix I2, at pages 60-63. Although the Project would be required to adhere to all applicable policies in the City’s General Plan, as well as mitigation measure TRA-3, this would only provide a 3.55 percent reduction to project/site employee commute VMT (i.e. homebase work attraction VMT).

This would result in a VMT of approximately 36.5 for the Project in Year 2027. Since this would remain higher than projected regional VMT of 31.1, even with implementation of all feasible mitigation in this rural location, the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable transportation impact related to VMT.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts relating to inconsistency with CEQA Guideline § 15064.3, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

TRA-3 The Project applicant shall require all operators on the site to implement, to the maximum extent feasible (taking into consideration factors such as infrastructure availability, cost effectiveness, and incentive programs), Measure T-11, requiring the implementation of van pools under CAPCOA’s Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that, for the significant transportation impacts related to consistency with §15064.3(b) described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR to the maximum extent feasible. The City Council further finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of diverse employment opportunities, make infeasible any other mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the Final EIR. The mitigation measure listed above has been adopted and will reduce transportation-related impacts to the maximum extent feasible, but not to

Page 506 ends

Item 28.
15 a level that is less than significant. These impacts are overridden by project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations contained in Section VIII below.

Facts in Support of Finding:

The CEQA Guidelines recommend use of homebased work VMT per employee as a metric to evaluate non-residential and non-retail land uses. The home-based work VMT is computed by using attraction VMT for the Home-Based Work trip purpose. Per the Guidelines, the Project will constitute a significant impact if the Project VMT per employee is higher than the Riverside Countywide home-based work VMT per employee. Pursuant to the scoping agreement attached as Appendix A to the TIA (Appendix I to the Final EIR), VMT baseline (2018) and horizon year (2045) model runs were used to estimate Project’s VMT impacts.

The VMT analysis was conducted using RIVCOM3.51. RIVCOM3.51 socioeconomic databases for the scenarios were updated with the Project land uses to calculate Project VMT. Since Phase I of the Project is anticipated to be constructed by 2027, interpolated estimates were utilized to determine the Project VMT and regional average VMT values for Year 2027, based on the projected VMT numbers set forth below for years 2018 and 2045. The interpolated values resulted in a Project VMT of 38.2 and a regional average VMT of 31.1 in Year 2027 without mitigation, which results in the Project VMT that is 122.8 percent of the regional average and is thus considered a significant impact.

At buildout in 2045, the Project VMT would be 30.2 while the regional average would be 29.0.

Since the Project VMT would exceed the regional average, it is considered a significant impact.

Table 4.17-20 in the Final EIR and included below, shows the project VMT metrics and regional VMT thresholds for both baseline (2018) and horizon year (2045) “with-project” model runs.

Project Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
Metric Coachella Airport Business Park Project(a) Riverside County(b) 2018
Total Population - 2,358,439
Total Employment 285 759,857
Homebase Work Attraction (HBWA)
VMT
12,024 24,376,718
HBWA VMT per employee 42.2 32.1
2045
Total Population - 3,424,454
Total Employment 285 1,116,025
HBWA VMT 8,614 32,318,620
HBWA VMT per employee 30.2 29.0
(a)Estimated using RIVCOM3.51 “with project” model runs (b)Estimated using GTS No Project RIVCOM3.51 model r

Page 507 ends

Item 28.
16 The 2021 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (Handbook) provides project type, scale, and locational context factors to determine if a transportation VMT-reducing measure is applicable to a particular project.

Although the CAPCOA recommendations are for GHG reduction, the mitigation measures are also applicable in reducing VMT under acceptable transportation demand (TDM) strategies. The following quantifiable measures are potentially applicable to employee commute VMT at a project scale:
• T-5 Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program (Voluntary) • T-6 Implement Commute Trip Reduction (Mandatory Implementation and Monitoring)
• T-7 Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing
• T-8 Provide Ridesharing Program
• T-9 Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program • T-10 Provide End-of-Trip Bicycle Facilities
• T-11 Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool
• T-12 Price Workplace Parking
• T-13 Implement Employee Parking Cash-Out
Based on CAPCOA’s Handbook, Measure T-11, which requires a Project to provide employer sponsored vanpool services on site, is the only applicable mitigation for the site which is classified as applicable within a rural location. CAPCOA’s Measure T-11 may be addressed by a project through its participation in Employer Services from the IE Commuter Program (Program) as adopted by the Riverside County Transportation Commission. This Program includes items such as commuter rideshare program and support, preferred parking spaces for vanpools and carpools, vanpool and transit subsidies, secure bike parking, ride matching, and bus/rail routing assistance.

Additionally, the Program provides surveys, guides, and access where commuters can log into their own rideshare accounts. The Project’s adherence to CAPCOA Measure T-11 would also satisfy policies in the Public Services + Infrastructure Element of the City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update. Specifically, Policy 11.5 and Policy 11.7 require projects to incorporate TDM measures during project operation and through the creation and participation in transportation management associations.

Although the Project would be required to adhere to all applicable policies in the City’s General Plan, as well as Measure T-11 under the CAPCOA Handbook, this would only provide a 3.55 percent reduction to project/site employee commute VMT (i.e. homebase work attraction VMT).

This would result in a VMT of approximately 36.5 for the Project in Year 2027. Since this would remain higher than projected regional VMT of 31.1, even with implementation of all feasible

Page 508 ends

Item 28.
17 mitigation in this rural location, the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable transportation impact related to VMT.

The City Council considered the comments received by Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency (Comment Letter 3) and Caltrans (Comment Letter 15) and finds that the responses to those comments set forth the Final EIR are thorough and adequately address the issues raised, including making certain minor technical revisions and additions to the Draft EIR, and those responses are hereby incorporated by this reference. The City Council also considered the transportation-related comments made by the Adams Broadwell firm on behalf of Californians Allied for a Responsible Environment (CARE), including but not limited to Comment Nos. 16-15 through 16-19 that assert various inadequacies in the VMT analysis conducted for the Project and described in the Draft EIR and supporting technical study, as well as the letter submitted on or about April 1, 2026. The City Council finds those comments unpersuasive and based on inaccurate facts and assumptions concerning the Project, and instead, the City Council adopts and incorporates by reference the responses to those comments set forth in the Final EIR, as well as the supporting technical analysis provided by the subject matter expert Integrated Engineering Group in FEIR Attachment I2, dated October 14, 2025, and the supplemental responses included as Attachment 12 to the City Council Agenda packet.

III. FINDINGS REGARDING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WHICH

ARE AVOIDED OR MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the following significant effects identified in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid the identified significant effects on the environment, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels. The significant effects and mitigation measures are stated fully in the Final EIR and each of the mitigation measures have been imposed on the project and are enforceable pursuant to the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval. These findings are explained below and are supported by substantial evidence in the record of proceedings.

AESTHETICS
Create a New Source of Light or Glare
The Project site is currently vacant with scattered shrubs and brush over a major portion of the site.

Some tree coverage is located along the western and northern sides of the property. In its present condition, the site itself does not generate any light or glare. However, vehicles travelling along SR 86 to the east and Airport Boulevard to the south, along with a multi-family mobile home development to the south of the Project property do generate sources of daytime glare and nighttime lighting in the immediate vicinity of the site. Implementation of the Project has the potential to generate new sources of daytime glare and nighttime lighting onto and from the Project site from the following sources: glass interposed facades; lighting around and interior to the proposed buildings; internal vehicular circulation; security, walkway and street lighting; signage; and an on-site freeway-oriented electronic billboard that would be visible along SR 86.

Page 509 ends

Item 28.
18 Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative aesthetic impacts associated with light and glare, the following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

AES-1 The construction contractor shall locate construction equipment staging and stockpile areas on the central and western portions of the Project site, away from Airport Boulevard and the neighboring existing residential uses.

Appropriate screening (i.e., temporary fencing with opaque material) shall be used to buffer views of construction equipment and material. The staging and stockpile locations shall be indicated on Grading Plans and shall be subject to approval by the City of Coachella Public Works Department prior to issuance of grading permits.

AES-2 The construction contractor shall locate and aim all construction-related nighttime security lighting away from adjacent uses, including both residential and non-residential areas neighboring the Project site. A construction safety lighting plan shall be submitted to the City of Coachella Public Works Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading permits.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that, for each of the significant effects relating to creation of light and glare described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels through implementation of mitigation measures AES-1 and AES-2 as recommended in the Final EIR, which have been adopted by the City and are enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Construction Impacts
The Project would be implemented in three (3) phases of construction. Graded surfaces, disturbance and stockpiling of soils, construction materials, equipment, and truck traffic will be visible from SR 86, occupied lands west of the CVSC, and Airport Boulevard during the construction period. Although daytime construction-related activities are temporary in nature, the constant movement of construction vehicles and equipment may result in short-term light and glare impacts to the existing residential uses to the south and the scattered industrial uses to the west of the site. The Project would adhere to the City’s construction hour limitations and no nighttime construction would occur. However, there would be nighttime security lighting onsite, which would introduce a new source of nighttime lighting in the Project vicinity on currently vacant land and may result in a significant impact to surrounding receptors. Therefore, to minimize any

Page 510 ends

Item 28.
19 potential light/glare impacts to sensitive uses, mitigation is required. Specifically, as provided for in Mitigation Measures AES-1 and AES-2, construction equipment staging and stockpile areas would be situated on the central and western portions of the Project site, away from Airport Boulevard and the neighboring existing residential uses, and all construction-related lighting would be down-directed toward the work areas and oriented away from adjacent uses and would consist of the minimal wattage necessary to provide safety at the construction site.

Operational Impacts
Under long-term Project operations, the Project would introduce new sources of daytime glare and nighttime lighting and there is the potential for light originating from the Project site spilling over onto adjacent properties or roadways, including existing residential uses to the south and the industrial and commercial uses to the west of the Project site, which could result in daytime glare and nighttime lighting impacts:

Daytime Glare: Potential sources of daytime glare would be from development and associated parking areas that contain reflective materials such as glass, highly polished surfaces, and expanses of pavement. Impacts associated with glare range from simple nuisance to potentially dangerous situations (i.e., if glare is directed into the eyes of motorists). Exterior paint colors and materials used to construct the Project would be nonreflective and there are no exposed metal or other materials proposed that could result in a substantial amount of glare.

Nighttime Lighting: Potential sources of nighttime lighting include sources such as lighting for entryways, walkways, security lighting, and vehicle headlights. Lighting would also occur within the interior of on-site structures. These nighttime lighting sources could result in impacts related to off-site light spill or glare; nighttime light spill could interfere with certain functions including vision, sleep, privacy, and general enjoyment of the natural nighttime condition. In addition, excessive or inappropriately directed lighting can adversely impact nighttime views by reducing the ability to see the night sky and stars.

Project implementation may result in daytime glare and nighttime lighting impacts; however, in accordance with City regulations and standards including the Coachella Municipal Code Chapters

16.28.150(L), Improvements and Grading, and Chapter 17.56.010(J)(2)(e), Glare from Signs, and lighting requirements in Chapter 17.60, Development Standards, all light sources in the site’s parking areas, walkways and on the exterior of proposed buildings would be shielded downwards and use of building materials on the site would be required to minimize glare. These City requirements and Project design features will maintain appropriate and safe lighting levels onsite while minimizing light and glare on adjacent properties.

The Project would construct a freeway-oriented electronic billboard on-site, located along the site’s eastern boundary along SR 86, which would be visible to City residents and guests, and those traveling on SR 86. Illumination from the proposed electronic billboard would result in a new source of artificial light within the Project area; however, there are already multiple existing similar electronic billboards along SR 86 and I-10 within the Project vicinity and throughout the Coachella Valley, and development of the proposed billboard would be consistent in type and scale with other similar existing signage. The sign would be required to comply with Caltrans design requirements regarding wattage and reflective nature of the sign structure. Specifically, Caltrans

Page 511 ends

Item 28.
20 regulates the placement of outdoor advertising displays (including billboards) which are visible from California Highways. Permits from Caltrans are required, and these billboards must conform to the California Business and Professions Code (Outdoor Advertising Act) § 5200 et seq. and § 21466.5 of the Vehicle Code. These codes contain regulations for all billboards and specific regulations pertaining to “changeable electronic messages” (digital signs) including location, proximity to other billboards (digital and traditional), frequency of message changes, illumination and prohibition of animation.

In addition, the proposed sign would be required to comply with the provisions of Coachella’s Municipal Code Chapter 5.48, Outdoor Advertising Signs, and Chapter 17.56, Signs, relating to signage design, including lighting of electronic billboards. Specifically, signs must be illuminated subject to the following restrictions, per § 5.48.070, Lighting:

1. Signs which are not effectively shielded so as to prevent beams or rays from being directed at any portion of the traveled ways and are of such intensity or brilliance to cause glare or impair the vision of the driver of any motor vehicle or which otherwise interferes with any driver’s operation of a motor vehicle are prohibited.

2. No sign shall be so illuminated that it interferes with the effectiveness or obscures an official traffic sign, device or signal.

The proposed sign is also subject to the following special provisions (Chapter 17.56, Signs, § 17.56.010(F)(3)):

3. Special Provisions.
a. Freeway and Expressway Signs for Commercial and Industrial Uses. Any commercial or industrial property which is located within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of a freeway or expressway right-of-way may, as part of an approved sign program for the property, erect one freeway-oriented freestanding sign on the property in addition to those signs allowed under subsection F(1) and (2) of this section, under the following conditions:
i. A freestanding advertising sign is permitted with a maximum height of twenty-five (25) feet and a maximum size of one hundred seventy-five (175) square feet. (For freeway-oriented businesses, defined as those selling food, lodging, and automobile services, and for auto sales businesses, the maximum height is fifty-five (55) feet.)
ii. A larger or higher freestanding sign is permitted for freewayoriented businesses based on a flag test and the following conditions:
(A) The minimum size letter in the text of a sign shall be one foot in vertical or horizontal dimension, and the maximum size letter shall be three feet vertical or horizontal in dimension.

Page 512 ends

Item 28.
21 (B) The text of the sign shall be limited to the name of the owner, name of the business, type of business, and hours and days of operation.
(C) Signs shall be visible a minimum of three-tenths mile from the point where the off-ramp leaves the freeway to serve the business concerned.
iii. No signs shall be erected that will obscure another sign when viewed from the freeway;
iv. No freeway-oriented sign shall be erected that will be closer than one hundred (100) feet from another freeway-oriented sign. v. All freestanding signs shall have underground utility service. vi. The flag test shall be observed by a member of the
community development department, and the required fee shall be paid prior to the test.

Given its location adjacent to SR 86 and the proposed uses within the Project site, the proposed sign is considered a freeway-oriented sign. The sign would be 44 feet above grade, and 40 feet above the freeway grade. This is within the height restriction imposed by the Coachella Municipal Code. Therefore, impacts resulting from the Project’s long-term operation relative to the electronic billboard sign will be less than significant.

AIR QUALITY
Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of any Criteria Pollutant The Project is located within the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB), under jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Criteria pollutants typically consist of Ozone (O3), nitrogen oxide (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur oxide (SOx), lead (Pb), and particulate matter (PM). O3 precursors consist of NOx and volatile organic compounds (VOC). The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) regulates these by developing human healthbased and/or environmentally-based criteria for setting permissible levels. Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) are another group of air pollutants of concern. If the Project were to generate operational or construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s recommended daily thresholds for these pollutants of concern, it would have significant project-specific and cumulative environmental effects.

Mitigation Measures
To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts resulting in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

Page 513 ends

Item 28.
22 GHG-1 The Project shall include, but not be limited to, the following improvements, which shall be incorporated into the Project site plans to ensure consistency with adopted statewide plans and programs that are in effect at the time the Building Permits are issued. The Project applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the following measures, prior to issuance of Building Permits:
o To the maximum extent feasible, all off-road equipment (nonstreet legal), such as forklifts and street sweepers, used onsite for warehouse operations shall be powered by alternative fuels, electrical batteries or other alternative/non-diesel fuels (e.g., propane or compressed natural gas (CNG)) that do not emit diesel particulate matter, and that are low or zero emissions. o The Project applicant shall require that a minimum of 50 percent of the total Project electrical consumption from operation of the Project on an aggregate, site-wide basis is provided by onsite solar photovoltaic (PV) panels or other onsite renewables sources (i.e., wind turbines, geothermal).
o The Project Applicant shall require any business that operates in the proposed project and has 20 or more full-time employees shall implement at least one of the following programs:
• Pre-tax election program to allow employees to exclude wages for commuting costs for transit or vanpools;
• An employer supplied transit pass;
• Employer provided transit; or
• Other, similar demand management programs.
o The Project applicant shall require that temporary power poles are installed in the vicinity of each structure to be installed. The temporary power poles shall be installed after completion of grading and prior to the issuance of each building permit. After electrification of the temporary power poles, the Project applicant shall restrict building contractors from using gas-powered generators, compressors and saws and this restriction shall be incorporated into all contracts with building contractors that will work on the proposed Project.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that, for each of the significant effects relating to cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with adherence to all General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, as recommended

Page 514 ends

Item 28.
23 in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Project-specific and cumulative significance thresholds for air emissions are the same. Projects that do not exceed the project-specific thresholds are generally not considered to be cumulatively significant; on the other hand, projects that exceed the project-specific significance thresholds are considered by the SCAQMD to be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, individual projects that do not generate operational or construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s recommended daily thresholds for project-specific impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the SSAB is in nonattainment, and would not be considered to have a significant, adverse cumulative air quality impact. Alternatively, individual project-related construction and operational emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project-specific impacts would be considered cumulatively considerable.

Construction Emissions
The construction activities for the Project are anticipated to include site preparation and grading of the 47.96-acre site, building construction of the business park, paving of the onsite roads and parking areas and application of architectural coatings. Although the Project is anticipated to be constructed in three phases, in order to provide a conservative or worst-case analysis, the EIR analysis analyzed the entire project being constructed in one phase. The construction emissions are analyzed for both regional and local air quality impacts.

Construction-Related Regional Impacts
The worst-case summer or winter daily construction-related criteria pollutant emissions include the combined regional criteria pollutant emissions from building construction, paving and architectural coating phases of construction. As presented in Final EIR Table 4.3-5, none of the analyzed criteria pollutants from the Project would exceed the regional emissions thresholds during either demolition, grading, or the combined building construction, paving and architectural coatings phases. Therefore, a less than significant regional air quality impact would occur from construction of the Project.

Operational Emissions
The on-going operation of the Project is anticipated to result in a long-term increase in air quality emissions from the project-generated vehicle trips, emissions from energy usage, and onsite area source emissions, created from the on-going uses of the project.

Operations-Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Analysis The operations-related regional criteria air quality impacts created by the Project were analyzed through use of the CalEEMod model. The worst-case summer or winter VOC, NOx, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 daily emissions created from the Project’s long-term operations are summarized in Final EIR Table 4.3-6, and indicate that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the regional emissions thresholds.

Page 515 ends

Item 28.
24 According to the SCAQMD, it may be infeasible to quantify health risks caused by projects similar to the proposed Project, due to many factors. In order to do so, there must be data regarding the sources and types of toxic air contaminants, location of emission points, velocity of emissions, the meteorology and topography of the area, and the location of receptors (worker and residence). It may not be feasible to perform a health risk assessment for airborne toxics that will be emitted by a generic industrial building without knowing the future tenant(s). For projects on a regional scale (unlike the proposed Project), the SCAQMD states that it has been able to correlate potential health outcomes for very large emissions sources as part of their rulemaking activity, specifically 6,620 pounds per day of NOx and 89,180 pounds per day of VOC were expected to result in approximately 20 premature deaths per year and 89,947 school absences due to O3. As calculated in the Final EIR, Project-related construction activities would generate a maximum of 72.06 pounds per day of VOC and 53.85 pounds per day of NOx and operation of the Project would generate 40.62 pounds per day of VOC and 34.85 pounds per day NOx. Since both are O3 precursors, these emissions together fall below the O3 threshold quantities developed by SCAQMD.

Therefore, the Project would not generate daily emissions that would be high enough to use a regional modeling program in order to correlate health effects on a basin-wide level. The Project would be required to adhere to Goal 11 of the Sustainability + Natural Environment Element of the City’s General Plan, which requires the maintenance of healthy indoor and outdoor air quality emissions be maintained through reduced pollutant emissions. The Project would also be required to adhere to Policy 11.1 which requires construction and operation at the site to minimize the creation of new sources of air pollutants; Policy 11.4 which encourages the use of the City’s public transit system as an alternative to the use of single occupant motor vehicles, thereby lessening air quality emissions; and Policy 11.8 which would require construction activities, including on-site construction and the transport of materials, to limit emissions and dust. The Project’s adherence to Policies 11.9, 11.12 and 11.17 would also ensure that it meets the California Green Building Code for indoor air quality performance, limits truck deliveries to on-site businesses to off-peak traffic periods, thereby reducing emissions, and ensures that air quality impacts associated with the proposed Project are mitigated to less than significant levels.

Expose Sensitive Receptors to Pollutant Concentrations
The nearest sensitive receptors that may be impacted by the Project are mobile homes located across Airport Boulevard as near as 50 feet to the south of the Project site. There are also singleand multifamily homes located on both sides of Orange Street approximately 700 feet to the southwest. The local concentrations of criteria pollutant emissions produced in the nearby vicinity of the Project, from vehicular CO emissions and from TAC emissions that include diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions from off-road equipment and from diesel trucks, were calculated for both construction and operations.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts from exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

Page 516 ends

Item 28.
25 GHG-1 The Project shall include, but not be limited to, the following improvements, which shall be incorporated into the Project site plans to ensure consistency with adopted statewide plans and programs that are in effect at the time the Building Permits are issued. The Project applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the following measures, prior to issuance of Building Permits:
o To the maximum extent feasible, all off-road equipment (nonstreet legal), such as forklifts and street sweepers, used onsite for warehouse operations shall be powered by alternative fuels, electrical batteries or other alternative/non-diesel fuels (e.g., propane or compressed natural gas (CNG)) that do not emit diesel particulate matter, and that are low or zero emissions. o The Project applicant shall require that a minimum of 50 percent of the total Project electrical consumption from operation of the Project on an aggregate, site-wide basis is provided by onsite solar photovoltaic (PV) panels or other onsite renewables sources (i.e., wind turbines, geothermal).
o The Project Applicant shall require any business that operates in the proposed project and has 20 or more full-time employees shall implement at least one of the following programs:
• Pre-tax election program to allow employees to exclude wages for commuting costs for transit or vanpools;
• An employer supplied transit pass;
• Employer provided transit; or
• Other, similar demand management programs.
o The Project applicant shall require that temporary power poles are installed in the vicinity of each structure to be installed. The temporary power poles shall be installed after completion of grading and prior to the issuance of each building permit. After electrification of the temporary power poles, the Project applicant shall restrict building contractors from using gas powered generators, compressors and saws and this restriction shall be incorporated into all contracts with building contractors that will work on the proposed Project.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that, for each of the significant effects from exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with adherence to all General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, as recommended in

Page 517 ends

Item 28.
26 the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Construction-Related Local Impacts
Construction-related air emissions at the site 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 SSAB. The local air quality emissions from Project construction were analyzed by using the methodology described in the LST Methodology prepared by SCAQMD, revised October 2009. The LST Methodology found the primary criteria pollutant emissions of concern to be NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. Each phase of Project construction was therefore screened using the SCAQMD’s Mass Rate LST Look-up Tables. The nearest sensitive receptors included in the LST analysis, that may be impacted by the Project, are mobile homes located across Airport Boulevard as near as 50 feet to the south of the Project site.

Final EIR Table 4.3-7 indicates that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the local emissions thresholds during either site preparation, grading, or the combined building construction, paving, and architectural coatings phases for sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project. All construction projects in the SSAB are subject to the SCAQMD rules and regulations in effect at the time of construction, including Rule 403, Fugitive Dust. Therefore, a less than significant local air quality impact would occur from construction of the Project.

Operational Local Air Quality Impacts
The air quality analysis evaluates the Project’s localized impact to air quality for emissions of CO, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 by comparing the Project’s onsite emissions to the SCAQMD’s applicable Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) for sensitive receptors located 50 feet to the south. The Project would not result in emissions that exceeded the SCAQMD’s LSTs, nor would it exceed the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards for emissions of CO, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 (Final EIR Table 4.3-8). Therefore, a less than significant localized air quality impact would occur from operation of the Project.

Project-related air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and Federal air quality standards in the Project site vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the SSAB. The Project has been analyzed for the potential local CO emission impacts from the project-generated vehicular trips and from the potential local air quality impacts from on-site operations.

Local CO Hotspot Impacts from Project-Generated Vehicular Trips CO is typically 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

Page 518 ends

Item 28.
27 CO levels to the State and Federal CO standards of 20 ppm over one hour or 9 ppm over eight hours. Since 2007 and with the use of cleaner fuels and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations in the SSAB and in the state have steadily declined and the SSAB has been designated in attainment for CO under both the California Ambient Air Quality Standard (CAAQS) and National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). Since the nearby intersections to the Project site are much smaller with less traffic than what was analyzed by the SCAQMD, no local CO Hotspots are anticipated to be created from the Project.

A detailed CO analysis was conducted in the Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (CO Plan) for the SCAQMD’s 2003 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The locations selected for microscale modeling in the CO Plan were worst-case intersections in the SSAB and would likely experience the highest CO concentrations. Thus, CO analysis in the CO Plan is used in comparison to the Project, since it represents a worst-case scenario with heavy traffic volumes in the SCAQMD Basin. Of the locations analyzed by SCAQMD for the 2003 AQMP, the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue in the City of Los Angeles experienced the highest CO concentration (4.6 parts per million [ppm]), which is well below the 35-ppm 1-hour CO federal standard. The Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection is one of the most congested intersections in Southern California, with an average daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day. According to the Project TIA, the Project area roadway segment with the highest average daily traffic volume would be Grapefruit Boulevard from Avenue 54 to Tyler Street. This roadway segment is projected to have approximately 30,558 average daily trips in the 2045 buildout year scenario. This is a fraction of the average daily trips studied by SCAQMD in the 2003 hotspot analysis; and therefore, would result in substantially lower CO concentration than the intersections studied by SCAQMD. Therefore, a less than significant long-term air quality impact is anticipated to local air quality with the operational use of the Project.

Local Criteria Pollutant Impacts from Onsite Operations Project-related air emissions from onsite sources such as architectural coating off-gassing, landscaping equipment, and onsite usage of natural gas may have the potential to create localized emissions that 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 SSAB. As indicated in Final EIR Table 4.3-8, on-going operations at the Project site would not exceed the local NOx, CO, PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds of significance. Therefore, the Project would create a less than significant operations-related impact on local air quality due to onsite emissions and would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant.

Toxic Air Contaminants
There is the potential for TAC emissions to be created from operation of the gas station and light industrial uses, which would generate diesel truck emissions, including diesel particulate matter (DPM) from truck traffic and delivery trucks, which are known sources of TACs. TACs are carcinogens and short-term acute and long-term chronic exposure to TACs can cause health effects to the respiratory system. The potential impacts associated with TAC emissions were fully analyzed in the Health Risk Assessment (HRA) included as Appendix B in the EIR.

Page 519 ends

Item 28.
28 The Project includes a 10 fueling position gas station on the southeastern portion of the site that is anticipated to have a maximum throughput of 2.0 million gallons of gasoline per year. Utilizing SCAQMD’s RiskTool (V1.103) that calculates the cancer risk from gasoline stations, it was estimated that the distance from the nearest residential property line to the center of the proposed gas station canopy, measures 265 feet (81 meters). The RiskTool therefore estimated that the Project would create a cancer risk of 1.5 per million persons at the mobile homes to the south.

However, since this level of cancer risk at 1.5 per million persons would be well below the SCAQMD’s threshold of 10 per million, the TAC emissions and associated cancer risks from the proposed gas station would result in a less than significant impact on the nearby residents.

It is anticipated that Project development activities would generate DPM emissions during construction, from off-road diesel-powered equipment and from diesel-powered trucks delivering equipment and building materials. The Project would comply with the City’s CAP through the implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1. This measures requires that, to the maximum extent feasible, all off‐road equipment (non‐street legal), such as forklifts and street sweepers, used onsite for warehouse operations shall be powered by alternative fuels, electrical batteries or other alternative/non‐diesel fuels (e.g., propane or compressed natural gas (CNG)) that do not emit diesel particulate matter, and that are low or zero emission.

Since all off-road equipment utilized during operation of the proposed warehouses would be required to be non-diesel powered per Mitigation Measure GHG-1, no DPM emissions would be created from operational offroad equipment.

Non-Cancer Risks
In addition to the cancer risk from exposure to TAC emissions there is also the potential TAC exposure may result in adverse health impacts from acute and chronic illnesses, such as:

Chronic Health Impacts: Chronic health effects are characterized by prolonged or repeated exposure to a TAC over many days, months, or years. Symptoms from chronic health impacts may not be immediately apparent and are often irreversible. Impacts to sensitive receptors are calculated from the annual average concentrations of PM2.5 at a project site. The Project is anticipated to produce less than the threshold for Project related DPM emissions. This would result in less than significant non-cancer chronic health risk from TAC emissions.

Acute Health Impacts: Acute health effects are characterized by sudden and severe exposure and rapid absorption of a TAC, due to high levels of exposure at a site. However, acute health effects are often treatable and reversible. The model calculations for the Project found that the highest 24-hour concentration at the point of maximum impact (PMI) is 0.0203 μg/m3 for DPM equivalent acute non-cancer risk emissions. This is substantially less than the established criterion for an Acute Health Index of 1.0; on-going operations of the Project would result in a less than significant non-cancer acute health risk from TAC emissions created by the Project.

Overall, the Project would be required to conform to the Sustainability + Natural Environment Element of the City’s General Plan, specifically Policies 11.1 and 11.3, which would require the Project to minimize the creation of new sources of air pollution, to site any land uses that may result in adverse air quality impacts to sensitive receptors. Although there are no identified

Page 520 ends

Item 28.
29 sensitive receptors such as schools, childcare centers or specific senior housing located within 500 feet of the Project, there are residential structures located to the south of the site that may involve health-sensitive seniors. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would reduce potentially significant air quality impacts to a less than significant level. Operations of the Project would result in a less than significant exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

The City Council considered the comments received on the Draft EIR regarding potential Air Quality impacts, including the comment letter received from the South Coast Air Quality Management District dated September 3, 2025, and the letters received by the Adams Broadwell firm on behalf of CARE dated September 11, 2025 and April 1, 2026. The City Council finds that the responses to those comments set forth in the Final EIR and the supporting supplemental technical analysis provided by subject matter expert Vista Environmental and included with the Final EIR as Attachment B2, as well as the supplemental responses included in Attachment 12 to the City Council Staff Report packet, adequately address all comments received concerning the Project’s potential air quality impacts, and hereby incorporates those responses and supporting expert opinion evidence. In particular, the City Council rejects the statements that the Air Quality analysis utilized the incorrect assumed average truck trip length and failed to adequately consider the need for back-up generators, because those comments are based on the incorrect assumption that the Project proposes large warehouse uses accommodating cargo containers and significant amounts of cold storage. As explained in the Final EIR responses to comments incorporated herein, these uses are not proposed for the Project. Likewise, the City Council specifically rejects the comments and any supporting information submitted by the Adams Broadwell firm asserting that the air quality analysis failed to adequately address potential health risks, including to the residents who live on the other side of Airport Boulevard to the south of the Project. Rather, the City Council finds that these impacts are properly evaluated and mitigated to a level of less than significant, and incorporates the Final EIR responses to these comments and the supporting technical analysis provided in Final EIR Attachment B2. Finally, the City Council rejects the assertion that Project construction activities would create a risk of significant health impacts, and instead adopts and incorporates by reference Final EIR Response to Comment No. 16-14 and Attachment B2, which explain that the Coachella Valley has an extremely low incidence rate for Valley Fever and the risk is adequately avoided through compliance with SCAQMD Rules 403 and 403.1, providing the most stringent fugitive dust control measures in the State of California.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Candidate, sensitive or special status species
The Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) describes existing biological resources conditions on the Project site (which includes both the industrial development site and the proposed IID substation site), along with a 300-foot buffer area surrounding the Project site (“Study Area”).

The Study Area is within the planning area of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), a comprehensive, joint Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) that focuses on the long-term conservation of ecological diversity, including the conservation of species and their associated habitats in Coachella Valley.

Page 521 ends

Item 28.
30 Special-status species are those plants and animals listed, proposed for listing, or candidates for listing as Threatened or Endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); those considered Species of Concern by the USFWS; those listed or candidates for listing as Rare, Threatened, or Endangered by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW); animals designated as Fully Protected by the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC); animals listed as Species of Special Concern (SSC) by CDFW; CDFW Special Plants; and, species identified as sensitive or “covered” by the MSHCP (CVMSCHP 2006).

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) is intended to ensure the sustainability of populations of all protected migratory bird species and prohibits the take (including killing, capturing, selling, trading, and transport) of protected migratory bird species without USFWS’s prior authorization.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts to species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by CDFW or USFWS, the following mitigation measures are hereby adopted as revised in the Final EIR and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

BIO-1 Nesting Bird Avoidance/Pre-construction Surveys. Prior to issuance of the Project’s grading permit, the following measures shall be implemented: To avoid disturbance of nesting and special-status bird species protected by the MBTA and CFGC, activities related to the Project, including but not limited to, vegetation removal, ground disturbance, and construction shall not occur during the bird breeding season (January 15 through August 31) unless a pre-construction nesting bird survey is conducted within three days prior to vegetation removal or ground disturbance. A qualified biologist, who is familiar with the identification of avian species in the Coachella Valley, will conduct the preconstruction nesting bird survey within three days prior to vegetation removal or ground disturbance to evaluate the presence/absence, location, and status of any active nests on or adjacent to the Project Area.

The extent of the survey area surrounding the Project Area shall be determined by the qualified biologist to ensure that direct and indirect effects to nesting birds are avoided. Pre-construction surveys shall focus on both direct and indirect evidence of nesting, including nest locations and nesting behavior. The qualified biologist will make every effort to avoid potential nest predation as a result of survey efforts. If an active nest(s) is discovered, a suitable buffer shall be established around the active nests, as determined by the biologist, and construction activity will not occur within the buffer until the biologist has determined that the nest is no longer active.

Page 522 ends

Item 28.
31 qualified biologist has the authority to stop work if nesting pairs exhibit signs of disturbance. If construction activities are delayed or paused for more than 14 days during the nesting season, the nest survey will be reinitiated for areas that still contain potential nesting habitat. No parking, storage of materials, or construction activities shall occur within this buffer until the qualified biologist has confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed, and the young have fledged the nest. Encroachment into this buffer shall occur only at the discretion of the qualified biologist, if it is determined that encroachment will not adversely impact the nesting birds.

BIO-2 Burrowing Owl Pre-construction Survey. In accordance with Section 4.4 Required Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures of the CVMSHCP, pre-construction burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no less than 14 days prior to the start of Project-related activities and within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance, in accordance with the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012 or most recent version). Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted within 500 feet of the Project disturbance footprint to identify burrows that could be utilized by burrowing owl. Potentially suitable burrows shall be checked by a qualified biologist to see if they are occupied or not prior to the start of Project disturbance activities. If the burrow is unoccupied, Project activities shall be immediately halted within 500 feet of the burrow. The qualified biologist shall coordinate with CDFW and USFWS and prepare a Burrowing Owl Avoidance and Monitoring Plan that shall be submitted to the Wildlife Agencies for approval prior to re-commencing Project activities within the restricted area. A burrow is assumed occupied if records indicate that at least one burrowing owl has been observed occupying a burrow on site during the past three years. For ground-disturbing activities, preconstruction surveys should be repeated when there is a pause in construction of more than 30 days.

BIO-3 Emergence Bat Survey. A special-status bat species emergence survey shall be conducted if construction activities are to occur within 300 feet of the California fan palm oasis during the bat maternity season (April 1 through August 31). The emergence survey will be conducted in areas of suitable roosting habitat, including the Airport Boulevard bridge, during the maternity season to document the presence of special-status bat species maternal roosting habitat. The emergence survey will be conducted 30 minutes before sunset and last for up to two hours after sunset. Any specialstatus bat species observed during the maternity roosting season within or adjacent to the Project Area should be avoided and provided a minimum buffer as determined by the qualified biologist (a 100-foot to 300-foot buffer is recommended) prior to the commencement of construction.

BIO-4 Woodrat Middens. Woodrat middens (nests) are large nests or dens made of woody debris, such as sticks, dead cacti, and bark. Middens were

Page 523 ends

Item 28.
32 observed along the northern fence separating the business park and the IID substation Project Areas within the Project impact area. Within 30 days prior to initial site disturbance, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted for woodrat middens. All occupied woodrat middens shall be mapped and flagged for avoidance to the extent feasible, with a minimum of 10-feet surrounding the active midden. If avoidance is not feasible, middens will be “daylighted” by a qualified biologist one night before anticipated vegetation removal to allow for the rats to escape and passively relocate prior to disturbance of the area.

BIO-5 Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP). The Project applicant shall implement a WEAP for the construction crew that will be developed by a qualified biologist. Each employee (including temporary, contractors, and subcontractors) will receive the WEAP presentation on the first day of project work. They will be advised of sensitive species in the area and avoidance measures being implemented to protect them at the site. At a minimum, the WEAP will include the following topics: occurrence of the listed and sensitive species in the area, their general ecology, sensitivity of the species to human activities, legal protection afforded these species, penalties for violations of federal and State laws, reporting requirements, and project features and conditions designed to reduce direct and indirect impacts to these species, role of the qualified biologist, and worker responsibilities to maintain compliance with mitigation measures while working at the site.

BIO-6 CVMSHCP Development Fee. The Project applicant shall pay the CVMSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee pursuant to Chapter 4.48 of the Coachella Municipal Code.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant effects to species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-6, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Special-Status Species
Six special-status species (four birds and two mammals) were determined to have a potential to occur in the Study Area. Of these six species, all six are considered to have a moderate potential

Page 524 ends

Item 28.
33 to occur. Species with a moderate potential to occur and potential for direct or indirect impacts as a result of the Project include:
• Burrowing owl
• Loggerhead shrike
• Vermillion flycatcher
• Crissal thrasher
• Western yellow bat
• San Diego desert woodrat
These species have a potential to occur based on a variety of factors, including suitable habitat (bare ground, trees, vegetation), soils, or other necessary microhabitat conditions, and/or the Project Area location being within the species’ known geographic and/or elevation range(s).

Avian Species: Nesting birds and raptors have the potential to nest in shrubs and trees and/or burrow on bare ground throughout and near the Study Area. These include special status species such as burrowing owl, loggerhead shrike, vermillion flycatcher, and crissal thrasher.

Numerous nests of avian species, including verdins nesting in the mesquite thickets, were observed in the substation parcel. No special status birds or raptors were observed, but suitable open habitats, trees, shrubs, and other vegetation provide the micro habitats for these species to occur throughout the Project Area.

The nests of most native birds and raptors are protected by federal and state laws. Vegetation and open areas within and surrounding the Project Area have the potential to provide refuge cover from predators, perching sites, and favorable conditions for avian nesting that could be affected by the Project. Potential impacts to nesting birds, including common passerine species protected under the MBTA and CFGC, could occur if nests are located on the Project Area and/or in the immediate vicinity during construction activities.

Direct impacts could occur to the avian special-status species (i.e., burrowing owl, loggerhead shrike, vermilion flycatcher, and crissal thrasher) if active nests are present during vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities. Direct impacts may also occur if active nests are located within close proximity to the Project Area and are abandoned due to visual and/or acoustic Projectrelated actions such as construction noise, lighting, and fugitive dust. These impacts could lead to individual mortality and/or harassment that might reduce nesting success. Therefore, impacts to special-status birds and raptors would be potentially significant without mitigation.

Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-5, and BIO-6 would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels by providing for nesting bird avoidance/pre construction nesting bird surveys, burrowing owl pre-construction surveys, and minimization measures, including implementation of a WEAP, and payment of the CVMSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee.

Bats: Several bat species, including the special-status and CVMSHCP covered western yellow bat, may forage and roost in the palm trees and surrounding habitat within the Study Area, as well as the adjacent Airport Boulevard bridge. Bats can roost under broad leaves, under exfoliating bark/tree holes, and crevices. They prefer materials that provide some thermoregulation like thick wood, or crevices in concrete bridges, and signs of bats with staining and guano usually

Page 525 ends

Item 28.
34 indicate their presence. This species was not observed during the site reconnaissance surveys, however suitable roosting and foraging habitat occurs within the proposed IID substation site on an approximate 5.6-acre portion of the site at its northern end. Western yellow bat has a moderate potential to occur in California palm oasis located outside of the Project Area, but within 300-feet of the northernmost boundary.

Impacts to a small amount of foraging habitat would not decrease the regional population below self-sustaining levels. Therefore, impacts on foraging habitat would be less than significant based on the relatively small acreage of habitat that will directly be impacted through vegetation removal.

However, Project construction activities may impact roost structures in mature vegetation. Direct impacts to western yellow bat may occur if an active roost is located within the California fan palm oasis that occurs just north of the Project Area or under the Airport Boulevard bridge, due to visual and/or acoustic Project-related disturbance. Impacts to special-status bat species would be considered significant without mitigation. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO3 would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels by requiring pre-construction bat emergence surveys for any construction activity that would occur within 300-feet of the suitable roosting habitat that was identified to occur within the California fan palm oasis or the Airport Boulevard bridge during bat maternity season (April 1 through August 31).

San Diego Desert Woodrat: San Diego desert woodrat, an SSC species, occurs in coastal scrub of Southern California from San Diego County to San Luis Obispo County. This species prefers moderate to dense canopies. The San Diego desert woodrat is particularly abundant in rock outcrops, rocky cliffs, and slopes and typically associated with cacti patches and dense undergrowth although it can be found in less rocky habitats. Numerous woodrat stick nests “middens” were observed along the northern fence separating the proposed business park and the IID substation Project areas. There were no physical signs of woodrats present in the middens (e.g. presence of droppings outside of midden), thus the active status of the middens is unconfirmed.

The San Diego desert woodrat has a moderate potential to occur in the scrub habitats throughout the IID substation portion of the Project area. This area has moderate to dense canopies within the mesquite thicket and tamarisk thicket habitats. Impact to this species could be significant if San Diego desert woodrats occupy middens within the Project Area. Impacts could potentially occur as a result of vegetation removal and ground disturbances from construction activities. However, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-4, by requiring a woodrat preconstruction survey, avoidance buffers, and a midden “daylighting” process to allow passive relocation of individuals prior to disturbance of the area, impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels.

The City Council considered the comments on the Draft EIR received from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service dated September 2, 2025 (Comment Letter No. 4) and from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife dated September 4, 2025 (Comment Letter No. 14), as well as the responses to those comments set forth in the Final EIR and the supporting technical report provided by subject matter expert Rincon Consultants dated November 3, 2025, and included in the Final EIR as Attachment C2. As recommended in Attachment C2, the City Council approves the proposed revisions to mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-2, and BIO-3 set forth in the Final EIR, and finds that with those revisions, as well as BIO-5 and BIO-6 provided in the Draft EIR, all potential Project impacts on sensitive species will be mitigated to a level of less than significant, including potential impacts to nesting birds, burrowing owl, and bats. The City Council further

Page 526 ends

Item 28.
35 finds that both construction and operational impacts to biological resources from light, glare, noise, and other Project activities will be mitigated to a level of less than significant with implementation of the mitigation measures set forth the Final Eir and compliance with City’s Municipal Code requirements. The City Council incorporates by this reference the responses to comments in the Final EIR concerning potential impacts to biological resources and the expert opinions set forth in Final EIR Attachment C2 and H2 (the supplemental technical report on noise by subject matter expert Ambient Air Quality and Noise Consulting dated October 21, 2025).

Riparian Habitat or Other Sensitive Natural Community
Eight vegetation communities and four land cover types were documented in the Study Area during the field survey and are shown in Final EIR Exhibit 4.4-1, Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types. The following four CDFW sensitive natural communities are in the Study Area: arrow weed thickets, bush seepweed scrub, California fan palm oasis, and mesquite thickets.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts to sensitive natural communities designated as sensitive or protected in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, the following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

BIO-6 CVMSHCP Development Fee. The Project applicant shall pay the CVMSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee pursuant to Chapter 4.48 of the Coachella Municipal Code.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant effects to state sensitive natural communities designated as sensitive or protected in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by CDFW, described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-6, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

No impacts to California fan palm oasis are anticipated to occur as this sensitive vegetation community is located north of the IID substation area and is therefore outside of the Project Area.

Direct impacts through vegetation removal of approximately 6.21 acres of arrow weed thicket, bush seepweed scrub, and mesquite thickets located within the Project Area will occur. All three of these sensitive natural communities are covered by the CVMSHCP, and therefore, impacts to these communities in areas outside of designated Conservation Areas are mitigated through implementation of the CVMSHCP. Since the Project Area is located within the boundaries of the CVMSHCP and outside of any designated Conservation Areas, the Project will be required to pay the Local Development Mitigation Fee (LDMF) to offset the impacts to sensitive vegetation

Page 527 ends

Item 28.
36 communities by providing funding for the acquisition and long-term management of conservation of land. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-6 would mitigate impacts to sensitive vegetation communities to less than significant levels.

State and Federally Protected Wetlands and Waters of the State The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) defines wetlands as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (33 CFR 328.3(c)(1)). The USACE’s delineation procedures identify wetlands in the field based on indicators of three wetland parameters: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. Details regarding these parameters can be found in the BRA report, incorporated herein by this reference.

The lateral limits of USACE jurisdiction in non-tidal waters is defined by the “ordinary high-water mark” (OHWM) unless adjacent wetlands are present. The OHWM is a line on the shore or edge of a channel established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed upon the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of vegetation, or the presence of debris (33 CFR 328.3(c)(4)). If wetlands occur within, or adjacent to, waters of the United States, the lateral limits of USACE jurisdiction extend beyond the OHWM to the outer edge of the wetlands (33 CFR 328.4 (c)). In addition, California’s PorterCologne Water Quality Control Act regulates isolated wetlands and other surface waters falling outside the jurisdiction of the USACE, and requires filing a Report of Waste Discharge with the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board (here, the Colorado River RWQCB) for applicants seeking to fill or impact such wetlands. Under the State Water Resources Control Board’s State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State, such wetlands are defined as having continuous or recurrent saturation of the upper substrate sufficient to cause anaerobic conditions with any vegetation dominated by hydrophytes (see Draft EIR pp. 4.4-20 and 4.4-21 for further details).

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts to protected wetlands, the following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

BIO-7 Invasive Plant Species Control. Invasive plant species, for the purpose of this document shall include all species with a California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) rating of moderate or high. Construction personnel and equipment shall be free of invasive plant seeds, propagules, and any material which may contain them (e.g., soil). Prior to entering the Project Area equipment will be inspected to confirm it is free of mud, dirt, and debris. Track stations will be installed at Project Area entrances and exits.

Staging areas and access routes shall avoid weed infestations and infestations within the work area(s) shall be flagged and avoided to the maximum extent feasible. Only certified wees-free materias (e.g., fiber rolls, straw, and fill) will be used for the Project.

Page 528 ends

Item 28.
37 BIO-8 General Best Management Practices. Standard construction Best Management Practices will be implemented by the contractor to minimize potential impacts to sensitive species. Standard Construction Best Management Practices shall include the following:
• Vehicle speeds will not exceed 10 miles per hour (mph) adjacent to any occupied burrowing owl habitat. Clear signage will be installed and maintained throughout the construction period.
• Placement of drip pans under parked equipment and vehicles. • Regular inspection and maintenance of equipment to avoid spills and immediate containment of any spills.
• Chemicals and pesticides will not be used.
• Pets and firearms will not be allowed at the site.
• Trash will be removed from the site daily or be stored in wildlife proof containers.
• Stormwater protection (i.e. straw waddles, silt fence) will be employed to prevent spills, runoff, or sediment from entering nearby aquatic habitats. These materials will be weed free and no Project debris or rubbish will be allowed to enter into or be placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff in the wetlands.
• Staging/storage areas for equipment and materials will be located at least 100 feet away from the riparian areas. Equipment will be checked and maintained daily to prevent leaks of pollutants into the wetlands. • No equipment maintenance will be carried out within 100 feet of the riparian area.
• All pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a four-inch diameter or greater that are stored on the construction site overnight shall be thoroughly inspected for wildlife or nesting birds before the pipe is subsequently curried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. • To prevent inadvertent entrapment of wildlife during construction, all excavated, wells, steep walled holes or trenches more than two feet deep shall be covered with plywood or similar materials at the close of each working day.
• Any construction lighting will be directed toward the work area and away from adjacent habitats.

Page 529 ends

Item 28.
38 pursued, along with the impacts to the sensitive natural communities. The HMMP will include, at a minimum, the following information:
• Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, and areas to be impacted by habitat type)
• Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project (i.e., the acreage of the mitigated habitat to be restored);
• Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site(s) (i.e., location and size, ownership status, existing conditions of the compensatory mitigation site);
• Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (i.e., rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); • Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate;
• Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site (i.e., performance standards, target acreages to be established and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports);
• Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; • Funding mechanisms; and
• An adaptive management and remedial measure component.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant effects to protected wetlands described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-7, BIO-8 and BIO-9, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

A jurisdictional delineation of the Project study area was conducted on November 1, 2023, which determined that there are no federally protected wetlands or other waters of the United States subject to USACE jurisdiction within the study area (see Draft EIR, Table 4.4-2 and Exhibit 4.4.3, and pages 4.4-13 – 4.4-15 and 4.4-28).

Currently the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) have not established regulations for field determinations of waters of the state except for wetlands. In many cases the RWQCBs interpret the limits of waters of the state to be bounded by the OHWM unless isolated conditions or ephemeral waters are present. However, in the absence of statewide guidance each RWQCB may interpret jurisdictional boundaries within their region and the SWRCB has encouraged applicants to confirm jurisdictional limits with their

Page 530 ends

Item 28.
39 RWQCB before submitting applications. As determined by the Colorado River RWQCB, the lateral limits of waters of the State is consistent with the OHWM, similar to the USACE.

Procedures for defining wetland waters of the State pursuant to the SWRCB’s State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State went into effect May 28, 2020. The SWRCB defines an area as wetland if, under normal circumstances:

1. the area has continuous or recurrent saturation of the upper substrate caused by groundwater, or shallow surface water, or both;

2. the duration of such saturation is sufficient to cause anaerobic conditions in the upper substrate; and

3. the area’s vegetation is dominated by hydrophytes or the area lacks vegetation.

The total area of the potential wetland waters of the State is 929 feet long at its widest point and covers 4.58 acres within the Study Area. Approximately 3.66 acres of direct impacts to RWQCB Jurisdictional wetland waters of the State (within the IID substation area) are anticipated as a result of the Project. Direct impacts are anticipated to occur through vegetation removal and the placement of discharges and/or fill within the wetland to create a building platform for the proposed IID substation. This represents a significant impact that requires mitigation. As required in Mitigation Measure BIO-9, a dredge/fill application must be submitted to the Colorado River RWQCB requesting an Individual Water Discharge Requirement (WDR) permit to authorize impacts to waters of the State per the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Compensatory mitigation is required for permanent impacts to wetland waters of the State to receive a WDR permit. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-7, BIO-8, and BIO-9, the Project would avoid and minimize further impacts to wetland waters of the state by implementing invasive species control, best management practices, preparing an HMMP, and incorporating WDR permit requirements. Therefore, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Movement of Wildlife
The Study Area contains the CVSC, which could support locally and regionally migrating wildlife and is potentially a regional movement corridor due to its interconnecting nature between the Salton Sea and undeveloped riparian woodland, scrub, and desert wash habitat located upstream of the Study Area along the headwaters of the river. The remnant patches of native vegetation communities (i.e., arrow weed thickets, bush seepweed scrub, and quailbush scrub) within the Project Area are not anticipated to support substantial wildlife movement due to their small and isolated nature, their non-structured stature, and lack of suitable cover in some areas (i.e. bush seepweed).

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative interference with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites, the following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

Page 531 ends

Item 28.
40 BIO-1 Nesting Bird Avoidance/Pre-construction Surveys. Prior to issuance of the Project’s grading permit, the following measures shall be implemented: To avoid disturbance of nesting and special-status bird species protected by the MBTA and CFGC, activities related to the Project, including but not limited to, vegetation removal, ground disturbance, and construction shall not occur during the bird breeding season (January 15 through August 31) unless a pre-construction nesting bird survey is conducted within three days prior to vegetation removal or ground disturbance. A qualified biologist, who is familiar with the identification of avian species in the Coachella Valley, will conduct the preconstruction nesting bird survey within three days prior to vegetation removal or ground disturbance to evaluate the presence/absence, location, and status of any active nests on or adjacent to the Project Area.

Buffer size shall consider the species involved and relevant level of tolerance to adjacent activity, the location of the nest relative to proposed activities, and site conditions that naturally buffer the location, such as vegetation screening, topography, etc. Active nests and adequacy of the established buffer distance shall be monitored daily by the qualified biologist until the qualified biologist has determined the young have fledged, the nest is no longer active, or the Project has been completed. The qualified biologist has the authority to stop work if nesting pairs exhibit signs of disturbance. If construction activities are delayed or paused for more than 14 days during the nesting season, the nest survey will be reinitiated for areas that still contain potential nesting habitat. No parking, storage of materials, or construction activities shall occur within this buffer until the qualified biologist has confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed, and the young have fledged the nest. Encroachment into this buffer shall occur only at the discretion of the qualified biologist, if it is determined that encroachment will not adversely impact the nesting birds.

BIO-6 CVMSHCP Development Fee. The Project Applicant shall pay the CVMSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee pursuant to Chapter 4.48 of the Coachella Municipal Code.

Page 532 ends

Item 28.
41 • Vehicle speeds will not exceed 10 miles per hour (mph) adjacent to any occupied burrowing owl habitat. Clear signage will be installed and maintained throughout the construction period.
• Placement of drip pans under parked equipment and vehicles. • Regular inspection and maintenance of equipment to avoid spills and immediate containment of any spills.
• Chemicals and pesticides will not be used.
• Pets and firearms will not be allowed at the site.
• Trash will be removed from the site daily or be stored in wildlife proof containers.
• Stormwater protection (i.e. straw waddles, silt fence) will be employed to prevent spills, runoff, or sediment from entering nearby aquatic habitats. These materials will be weed free and no Project debris or rubbish will be allowed to enter into or be placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff in the wetlands.
• Staging/storage areas for equipment and materials will be located at least 100 feet away from the riparian areas. Equipment will be checked and maintained daily to prevent leaks of pollutants into the wetlands. • No equipment maintenance will be carried out within 100 feet of the riparian area.
• All pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a four-inch diameter or greater that are stored on the construction site overnight shall be thoroughly inspected for wildlife or nesting birds before the pipe is subsequently curried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. • To prevent inadvertent entrapment of wildlife during construction, all excavated, wells, steep walled holes or trenches more than two feet deep shall be covered with plywood or similar materials at the close of each working day.
• Any construction lighting will be directed toward the work area and away from adjacent habitats.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that, for potential significant impacts associated with interference with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or with the use of native wildlife nursery sites described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-6, and BIO-8, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Page 533 ends

Item 28.
42 Facts in Support of Finding:

The channelized river and its associated vegetation community within the Study Area provides water and cover for wildlife species and represents an undeveloped strip of habitat within the largely developed surrounding commercial and agricultural areas. Additionally, the native vegetation communities (i.e., arrow weed thickets, California fan palm oasis, and mesquite thickets) located within the proposed IID substation development area portion of the Project Area contain mature trees and a stratified vegetation community, creating moderate to high-quality shelter for avian species and terrestrial species that may be migrating through the CVSC. In addition, copious mammal tracks were observed within the proposed substation development area and large flocks of avian species were observed within the native vegetation communities during the field surveys, indicating that this area is being utilized for local and potentially regional wildlife movement. However, vegetation within the entire Project Area is not anticipated to support substantial wildlife movement due to the isolated nature, adjacent disturbances, nonstructured stature, and lack of suitable cover in some areas, such as the bush seepweed. Moreover, the Project will not affect use of the CVSC as a potential wildlife migration route.

The Project will directly impact approximately 2.89 acres of the vegetation communities described above and located within the proposed IID substation portion of the Project Area, which contains mature trees and a stratified vegetation community that provides moderate to high-quality shelter for avian species and terrestrial species that may be migrating through the adjacent CVSC corridor.

These vegetation communities will be directly impacted through vegetation removal and grading and therefore, the Project has the potential to impact wildlife movement. However, impacts to these vegetation communities are fully mitigated through payment of the CVMSHCP LDMF, as required by Mitigation Measure BIO-6.

In addition, the impacts would also be mitigated through the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-8 which require implementation of wildlife friendly practices during construction (i.e. speed limits, avoidance buffers, etc.). Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-6, and BIO-8 would reduce potential impacts to wildlife movement to less than a significant level by minimizing the potential for Project construction to result in adverse effects to wildlife movement.

Consistency with Applicable Habitat Conservation Plan
The CVMSHCP and Final EIR/EIS were approved and fully adopted in 2006 with the MSHCP/NCCP Permit issued by CDFW in 2008 and a major amendment approved in 2016. The CVMSHCP is a comprehensive, joint- HCP and NCCP that focuses on the long-term conservation of ecological diversity, which includes the conservation of species and their associated habitats in the Coachella Valley. The CVMSHCP is designed to protect 27 species and their core habitats, 240,000 acres of open space, and 27 sensitive vegetation communities that include protection and conservation of these species and habitats in a reserve system of 21 priority conservation areas.

The CVMSHCP allows the participating jurisdictions (“permittees”) to authorize take of plant and wildlife species identified in the CVMSHCP Plan Area under specific conditions/measures. Under the CVMSHCP, USFWS and CDFW will grant “take authorization” for otherwise lawful actions in exchange for the assembly and management of coordinated CVMSHCP conservation areas.

Page 534 ends

Item 28.
43 Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative interference with the provisions of the CVMSHCP, the following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

BIO-2 Burrowing Owl Pre-construction Survey. In accordance with Section 4.4 Required Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures of the

Page 535 ends

Item 28.
44 CVMSHCP, a pre-construction burrowing owl survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no less than 14 days prior to the start of Projectrelated activities and within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance, in accordance with the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012 or most recent version). Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted within 500 feet of the Project disturbance footprint to identify burrows that could be utilized by burrowing owl. Potentially suitable burrows shall be checked by a qualified biologist to see if they are occupied or not prior to the start of Project disturbance activities. If the burrow is unoccupied, the burrow shall be made inaccessible to burrowing owl, and the Project may proceed. If either a nesting or escape burrow is occupied, Project activities shall be immediately halted within 500 feet of the burrow. The qualified biologist shall coordinate with CDFW and USFWS and prepare a Burrowing Owl Avoidance and Monitoring Plan that shall be submitted to CDFW and USFWS for review and approval prior to re-commencing Project activities within the restricted area. A burrow is assumed occupied if records indicate that at least one burrowing owl has been observed occupying a burrow on site during the past three years. For ground-disturbing activities, preconstruction surveys should be repeated when there is a pause in construction of more than 30 days.

BIO-3 Emergence Bat Survey. A special-status bat species emergence survey shall be conducted if construction activities are to occur within 300 feet of the California fan palm oasis during the bat maternity season (April 1 through August 31). The emergence survey will be conducted in areas of suitable roosting habitat during the maternity season to document the presence of special-status bat species maternal roosting habitat. The emergence survey will be conducted 30 minutes before sunset and last for up to two hours after sunset. Any special-status bat species observed during the maternity roosting season within or adjacent to the Project Area should be avoided and provided a minimum buffer as determined by the qualified biologist (a 100-foot to 300-foot buffer is recommended) prior to the commencement of construction.

BIO-4 Woodrat Middens. Woodrat middens (nests) are large nests or dens made of woody debris, such as sticks, dead cacti, and bark. Middens were observed along the northern fence separating the business park and the IID substation Project Areas within the Project impact area. Within 30 days prior to initial site disturbance, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted for woodrat middens. All occupied woodrat middens shall be mapped and flagged for avoidance to the extent feasible, with a minimum of 10-feet surrounding the active midden. If avoidance is not feasible, middens will be “daylighted” by a qualified biologist one night before anticipated vegetation removal to allow for the rats to escape and passively relocate prior to disturbance of the area.

Page 536 ends

Item 28.
45 BIO-5 Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP). The Project Applicant shall implement a WEAP for the construction crew that will be developed by a qualified biologist. Each employee (including temporary, contractors, and subcontractors) will receive the WEAP presentation on the first day of project work. They will be advised of sensitive species in the area and avoidance measures being implemented to protect them at the site.

At a minimum, the WEAP will include the following topics: occurrence of the listed and sensitive species in the area, their general ecology, sensitivity of the species to human activities, legal protection afforded these species, penalties for violations of federal and State laws, reporting requirements, and project features and conditions designed to reduce direct and indirect impacts to these species, role of the qualified biologist, and worker responsibilities to maintain compliance with mitigation measures while working at the site.

BIO-6 CVMSHCP Development Fee. The Project Applicant shall pay the CVMSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee pursuant to Chapter 4.48 of the Coachella Municipal Code.

BIO-8 General Best Management Practices. Standard construction Best Management Practices will be implemented by the contractor to minimize potential impacts to sensitive species. Standard Construction Best Management Practices shall include the following:
• Vehicle speeds will not exceed 10 miles per hour (mph) adjacent to any occupied burrowing owl habitat. Clear signage will be installed and maintained throughout the construction period.
• Placement of drip pans under parked equipment and vehicles. • Regular inspection and maintenance of equipment to avoid spills and immediate containment of any spills.
• Chemicals and pesticides will not be used.
• Pets and firearms will not be allowed at the site.

Page 537 ends

Item 28.
46 • Trash will be removed from the site daily or be stored in wildlife proof containers.
• Stormwater protection (i.e. straw waddles, silt fence) will be employed to prevent spills, runoff, or sediment from entering nearby aquatic habitats. These materials will be weed free and no Project debris or rubbish will be allowed to enter into or be placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff in the wetlands.
• Staging/storage areas for equipment and materials will be located at least 100 feet away from the riparian areas. Equipment will be checked and maintained daily to prevent leaks of pollutants into the wetlands. • No equipment maintenance will be carried out within 100 feet of the riparian area.
• All pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a four-inch diameter or greater that are stored on the construction site overnight shall be thoroughly inspected for wildlife or nesting birds before the pipe is subsequently curried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. • To prevent inadvertent entrapment of wildlife during construction, all excavated, wells, steep walled holes or trenches more than two feet deep shall be covered with plywood or similar materials at the close of each working day.
• Any construction lighting will be directed toward the work area and away from adjacent habitats.

BIO-9 Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. Mitigation for wetland waters of the state impacts will occur as specified during the WDRs permitting process and may occur at a suitable on-site or off-site location where habitat values meeting or exceeding those on site are achievable, or at an approved Conservation or Mitigation Bank. A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) will be prepared that specifies restoration and monitoring requirements for approval by the City and RWQCB prior to Project initiation. The HMMP will incorporate the WDR permit compensatory mitigation requirements for impacts to the wetland waters of the State, if pursued, along with the impacts to the sensitive natural communities. The HMMP will include, at a minimum, the following information:
• Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, and areas to be impacted by habitat type)
• Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project (i.e., the acreage of the mitigated habitat to be restored);
• Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site(s) (i.e., location and size, ownership status, existing conditions of the compensatory mitigation site);
• Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (i.e., rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]);

Page 538 ends

Item 28.
47 • Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate;
• Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site (i.e., performance standards, target acreages to be established and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports);
• Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; • Funding mechanisms; and
• An adaptive management and remedial measure component.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that the project will not conflict with the provisions of applicable habitat conservation plans described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, because changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 throughBIO-9 as recommended in the Final EIR, which have been adopted by the City and are enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

The Project is located within the CVMSHCP but is not located within a Conservation Area. As a result, proposed activities at the Project site would avoid direct impacts to the CVMSHCP Conservation Areas and would not otherwise conflict with the CVMSHCP Conservation Objectives. Six species (burrowing owl, loggerhead shrike, vermillion fly catcher, crissal thrasher, western yellow bat, and San Diego desert woodrat); and three natural sensitive communities (mesquite thickets, arrow weed scrub, and bush seepweed scrub), all have a moderate potential to occur or are present in the Project Area and are covered by the CVMSHCP. Potential direct and indirect impacts to these species and sensitive vegetation communities would be minimized or mitigated through the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-9, which provide for preconstruction nesting bird/pre-construction nesting bird surveys, pre-construction burrowing owl survey(s), emergence bat survey(s), pre-construction woodrat midden survey(s), an Worker’s Environmental Protection Awareness Program, payment of CVMSHCP Development fees, General Best Management Practices, and a Habitat and Mitigation Monitoring Plan.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with the provisions of the CVMSHCP or other approved NCCP or local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan with mitigation.

CULTURAL RESOURCES
Archaeological Site or Resource
Cultural resources include places, objects, and settlements that reflect group or individual religious, archaeological, or architectural activities. Such resources provide information on scientific progress, environmental adaptations, group ideology, or other human advancements.

CEQA is primarily concerned with two classes of cultural resources: “historical resources,” which

Page 539 ends

Item 28.
48 are defined in Public Resources Code § 21084.1 and CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5, and “unique archaeological resources,” defined in Public Resources Code § 21083.2 as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: (1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; (2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or (3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts to archaeological resources, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

CUL-1 A qualified archaeologist and Tribal monitor(s) from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians shall be present during any ground disturbing activities during the Project construction phase. In the case that archaeological materials are encountered during ground disturbing activities, all work shall be halted in the vicinity of the discovery until a qualified archaeologist can visit the site of discovery and assess the significance of the archaeological resource. The qualified archaeologist and Tribal monitor shall establish all necessary protocols and procedures for the treatment of resources prior to the initiation of earth moving activities.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant effects to archaeological resources described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with adherence to all General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

The records search identified two historic period archaeological sites and 25 historic period builtenvironment resources. However, none of the identified resources are prehistoric and none of them are within the Project site. In addition, cultural resource literature and data review indicated that there are no archaeological resources recorded within the Project site or within one mile of the site.

An archaeological sensitivity model also concluded that the potential for discovering surface cultural resources in this area, including prehistoric resources is low. The potential to discover archeological resources during Project operations would also therefore be low.

According to CVWD’s Subsequent IS/MND (SCH #2019079095), archeological sensitivity of the off-site improvement area also is considered low. However, there is a remote possibility to unearth

Page 540 ends

Item 28.
49 significant archaeological resources during construction activities, which would result in a significant impact and require mitigation. Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would require construction monitoring to be conducted by qualified cultural monitors for all ground disturbance. In addition, the Project would be required to adhere to the Sustainability + Natural Environment Policies 10.3,

10.4, 12.4 and 12.5 which require avoidance, mitigation and preservation of archeological resources, where practical and if not, then documentation of details and design elements of historic resources to be preserved during renovations and remodels of historic resources on and around a site. With adherence to General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, the proposed Project would have less than significant impacts on archaeological resources.

Disturbance of Human Remains
While the proposed Project site does not contain any cemeteries and no indication of human remains were found on the site during the pedestrian surveys conducted on March 2020 and again on December 7, 2023, there is always the possibility that human remains could be uncovered during ground disturbing activities.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts to human remains, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

CUL-2 In the event that human remains are uncovered during ground disturbing activities on the Project site, no further disturbance shall occur and all work shall cease within 100 feet of the discovery until the County Coroner has made a determination of the origin and disposition of the remains.

Ground disturbing activities and excavations shall not resume until the following has been addressed:

1. The County Coroner has been contracted and determined that no investigation of the cause of death is required; and

2. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are of Native American descent, the Coroner shall notify Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will then determine the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and Health and Safety Code 7050.5.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant effects concerning disturbance of human remains described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant

Page 541 ends

Item 28.
50 environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with adherence to all General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-2, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Based on the pedestrian surveys completed on March 30, 2020 and again on December 7, 2023, the likelihood of encountering human remains on the Project site is considered low, but remains possible. Through the implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2, all pre-construction and construction work taking place in the vicinity of any discovered remains must cease and the necessary steps to ensure the integrity of the immediate area must be taken. Mitigation Measure CUL-2 also ensures compliance with Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and Public Resources Code § 5097.98 and, where appropriate, prompt notification of the NAHC and Most Likely Descendant. With implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2, potential impacts relating to the disturbance of human remains would be less than significant.

ENERGY RESOURCES
Consumption of Energy Resources
The Project is anticipated to consume energy through the use of electricity, natural gas and petroleum-based fuel supply as well as distribution systems, during both construction and operation phases of the site development.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts associated with the consumption of energy resources, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

Page 542 ends

Item 28.
51 • The Project Applicant shall require that a minimum of 50 percent of the total Project electrical consumption from operation of the Project on an aggregate, site-wide basis is provided by onsite solar photovoltaic (PV) panels or other onsite renewables sources (i.e., wind turbines, geothermal).
• The Project Applicant shall require any business that operates in the proposed project and has 20 or more full-time employees shall implement at least one of the following programs:
o Pre-tax election program to allow employees to exclude wages for commuting costs for transit or vanpools;
o An employer supplied transit pass;
o Employer provided transit; or
o Other, similar demand management programs.
• The Project Applicant shall require that temporary power poles are installed in the vicinity of each structure to be installed. The temporary power poles shall be installed after completion of grading and prior to the issuance of each building permit. After electrification of the temporary power poles, the Project Applicant shall restrict building contractors from using gas-powered generators, compressors and saws and this restriction shall be incorporated into all contracts with building contractors that will work on the proposed Project.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with compliance with General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Construction Impacts
Construction activities for the Project are anticipated to include site preparation and grading of the

42.69-acre Project site, building construction and application of architectural coatings, and paving of the onsite roads and parking areas. The proposed IID substation facility on an approximate 5.6- acre portion of the site at its northern end would also be developed. Project construction is anticipated to consume energy in three (3) general forms, as described below.

Page 543 ends

Item 28.
52 Construction-Related Petroleum Fuel Use
Petroleum-based fuels are anticipated to be used to power off-road construction vehicles and equipment on the Project site, construction worker travel to and from the Project site, as well as delivery and haul truck trips (e.g. hauling of material to disposal facilities). Petroleum-based fuel usage represents the highest amount of transportation energy potentially consumed during construction. The on-road vehicle trips and off-road construction equipment fuel usage was calculated through use of the off-road equipment assumptions and fuel use assumptions, which concluded that construction of the Project would consume 150,631 gallons of gasoline and 247,694 gallons of diesel fuel (Final EIR page 4.6-8). This equates to 0.015 percent of the gasoline and

0.14 percent of the diesel consumed annually in Riverside County, based on the County’s petroleum consumption data derived from the CEC’s Energy Consumption Database Management (ECDMS) online system. As such, the construction-related petroleum use would be nominal, when compared to current county-wide petroleum usage rates.

Construction activities associated with the Project would be required to adhere to all State and SCAQMD regulations for off-road equipment and on-road trucks, which provide minimum fuel efficiency standards. In particular, Executive Order N-79-20 requires all new trucks in the State to be zero-emission by 2045, with interim targets starting in 2025, and requires all off-road equipment to transition to zero-emission by 2035. In addition, development of the Project site would not result in the need to manufacture construction materials or create new building material facilities specifically to supply the Project. There are no unusual Project characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be less energy-efficient than comparable construction sites in the region or State. Additionally, construction building materials could include recycled materials and products originating from nearby sources in order to reduce costs of transportation. Therefore, it is expected that construction fuel consumption associated with the Project would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than other similar development projects of this nature. Project impacts relative to construction-related petroleum fuel use would be less than significant.

Construction-Related Electricity Use
During construction, the Project would consume electricity to construct the new structures and infrastructure, although such usage would vary depending on intensity and development under each phase of site development. Electricity usage would be associated with the conveyance of water that would be used during Project construction for dust control (supply and conveyance) and electricity to power any necessary lighting during construction, electronic equipment, or other construction activities necessitating electrical power. Based on communication with IID during the preliminary Project design phase, IID has confirmed that electricity would be supplied by IID and would be obtained from site connections to the existing electrical lines in the vicinity of the site and such usage would result in minimizing impacts on fuel consumption. Although it is anticipated to use electricity under various construction activities, such electricity demand would be temporary, nominal and would cease upon the completion of construction. This is therefore not anticipated to have an adverse impact on available electricity supplies and infrastructure.

Compliance with the applicable IID Energy Regulations would further ensure that the Project fulfills its responsibilities relative to infrastructure installation, coordinates any electrical infrastructure removals or relocations, and limits any impacts associated with construction of the

Page 544 ends

Item 28.
53 Project. Therefore, Project impacts relative to construction-related electricity use would be less than significant.

Construction-Related Natural Gas Use
Although energy is typically used in the production of construction materials, such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes, and manufactured or processed materials such as lumber and glass, construction of the Project is not anticipated to involve the consumption of natural gas because natural gas would not be supplied to support construction activities. Thus, there would be no demand generated by construction. Construction related energy usage impacts associated with the installation of natural gas connections for Project operations are expected to be confined to trenching in order to place lines below the surface. In addition, prior to ground disturbance, the proposed Project would notify and coordinate with SoCalGas to identify the locations and depth of all existing gas lines and avoid disruption of gas service. Therefore, Project impacts relative to construction-related natural gas use would be less than significant.

Operational Impacts
The ongoing operation at the Project site would require the use of energy resources for multiple purposes including, but not limited to, heating/ventilating/air conditioning (HVAC), refrigeration, lighting, appliances, and electronics. Energy would also be consumed during operations related to water usage, solid waste disposal, landscape equipment and vehicle trips.

Operational Petroleum Fuel Use
Operation of the Project would result in increased consumption of petroleum-based fuel related to vehicular travel to and from the site. The Project would consume 428,040 gallons of gasoline and 233,863 gallons of diesel fuel per year from vehicle travel (Final EIR, p. 4.6-8). This equates to

0.04 percent of the gasoline and 0.13 percent of the diesel consumed annually in Riverside County, based on the County’s petroleum consumption data derived from the CEC’s ECDMS online system. As such, the operations-related petroleum use would be nominal, when compared to current county-wide petroleum usage rates. In addition, the Project would be required to comply with all State and City requirements related to the promotion of alternative transportation methods, including project specific measures that include designated clean air vehicle parking spaces.

It is anticipated that existing and planned capacity and supplies of transportation fuels would be sufficient to support the site’s development demand. In addition, Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would reduce transportation energy consumption, including PV solar panels and electric vehicle (EV) charging stations for electric vehicles available for employees and guests in compliance with existing CAP requirements, that exceed the minimum required by Title 24, Part 6 standards that will be in effect at the time the building permit is issued. Therefore, the Project would not result in any unusual characteristics that would result in wasteful or excessive long-term operational fuel consumption; impacts relative to operational petroleum fuel use would be less than significant.

Operational Electricity Use
Operation of the Project would result in consumption of electricity at the site for interior and exterior lighting, HVAC, refrigeration, electronics systems, appliances, and security systems,

Page 545 ends

Item 28.
54 among other things. The Project uses would consume 20,660,062 kilowatt-hours per year of electricity, which does not account for the required PV solar panels that will be installed on the site (Final EIR p. 4.6-9). This equates to 0.57 percent of the electricity consumed annually by IID.

As such, the operations-related electricity use would be nominal, when compared to current electricity usage rates in IID’s service area.

In addition, as discussed in Final EIR Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, incorporated herein by this reference, the Project would implement Mitigation Measure GHG-1, which requires the Project applicant to exceed the minimum energy efficiency requirements provided in Title 24, Part

6. The Project applicant would be required to install PV solar panels and EV charging stations that exceed the minimum required by Title 24, Part 6 standards that will be in effect at the time the building permit is issued. Specifically, in order to remain consistent with the City’s CAP, this measure requires the Project applicant to ensure that a minimum of 50 percent of the total Project electrical consumption from Project operation is provided by onsite solar PV panels or other onsite renewables sources (i.e., wind turbines, geothermal). With implementation of this measure, the Project’s operational electricity use would be reduced to less than significant levels.

The Project also would be required to comply with Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which provide minimum efficiency standards related to various building features, including appliances, water and space heating and cooling equipment, building insulation and roofing, and lighting. Implementation of Title 24 standards significantly reduce energy usage. Furthermore, IID is subject to California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) and has met or exceeded all RPS requirements to date, procuring renewable energy from diverse sources, including biomass, biowaste, geothermal, hydroelectric, solar and wind. The RPS requires investor-owned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total procurement by 2020 and to 50 percent of total procurement by 2030. The increase in reliance on such energy resources further ensures that the project would not result in the waste of the finite energy resources.

The Project would result in a less than significant impact relative to electric energy usage with the implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1. Further, the Project would be required to comply with all Federal, State, and City requirements related to the consumption of electricity, including CCR Title 24, Part 6 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CCR Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards. It is anticipated that the Project would be designed and built to minimize electricity use and to ensure that existing and planned electricity capacity and electricity supplies would be sufficient to support the site’s electricity demand. IID would supply electricity to the Project, which would be obtained from the proposed IID substation on the Project site. The IID substation will be designed to exceed the demand for power that is required for the Project to provide added reliability and resiliency to the IID system.

The Project applicant will continue coordination efforts with IID, which has confirmed that it has sufficient electricity capacity for Project construction. The assumptions for the Project’s energy modeling conservatively included full reliance of the IID electric power grid; however, Mitigation Measure GHG-1, in order to remain consistent with the City’s CAP, requires the Project applicant to ensure that a minimum of 50 percent of the total Project electrical consumption from Project operation is provided by onsite solar PV panels or other onsite renewables sources (i.e., wind turbines, geothermal), that exceed the minimum required by the current Title 24, Part 6 standards

Page 546 ends

Item 28.
55 that are in effect at the time the building permit is issued. Therefore, Project impacts relative to operational electricity use would be reduced to less than significant levels.

Operational Natural Gas Use
Operation of the Project would result in increased consumption of natural gas at the site. It is estimated that uses at the site would consume 8,253 MBTU per year of natural gas, which equates to 0.019 percent of the natural gas consumed annually in Riverside County, based on the County’s natural gas consumption data derived from the CEC’s ECDMS online system. The operationsrelated natural gas use would be nominal compared to current natural gas usage rates in the County.

In addition, since uses at the Project site would be required to comply with all Federal, State, and City requirements related to the consumption of natural gas, including CCR Title 24, Part 6 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CCR Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards, all site buildings would be required to incorporate energy efficiency measures into building designs. This may include but will not be limited to, enhanced insulation as well as use of efficient natural gas appliances and HVAC units. It is anticipated the Project will be designed and built to minimize natural gas use and that existing and planned natural gas capacity and natural gas supplies would be sufficient to support the site’s natural gas demand.

With the Project’s adherence to Mitigation Measure GHG-1 and applicable energy efficiencyrelated City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update Policies 2.2, 2.3, 2.5, 2.6, 2.9, 2.10, and 2.12, Project impacts from use of petroleum, electricity and natural gas would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during Project construction or operation. Project impacts would be less than significant.

Consistency with Plan for Renewable Energy or Energy Efficiency The Project would be constructed in accordance with the California Building Energy and Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6) and California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) (Title 24, Part 11). These standards apply to all projects in California and are updated tri-annually with a goal to achieve zero net energy for residential buildings by 2020 and non-residential buildings by 2030. The applicable local energy plan for the Project would be the City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts associated with the project conflicting with a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, the following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

Page 547 ends

Item 28.
56 • To the maximum extent feasible, all off-road equipment (non-street legal), such as forklifts and street sweepers, used onsite for warehouse operations shall be powered by alternative fuels, electrical batteries or other alternative/non-diesel fuels (e.g., propane or compressed natural gas (CNG)) that do not emit diesel particulate matter, and that are low or zero emissions.
• The Project applicant shall require that a minimum of 50 percent of the total Project electrical consumption from operation of the Project on an aggregate, site-wide basis is provided by onsite solar photovoltaic (PV) panels or other onsite renewables sources (i.e., wind turbines, geothermal).
• The Project applicant shall require any business that operates in the proposed project and has 20 or more full-time employees shall implement at least one of the following programs:
o Pre-tax election program to allow employees to exclude wages for commuting costs for transit or vanpools;
o An employer supplied transit pass;
o Employer provided transit; or
o Other, similar demand management programs.
• The Project applicant shall require that temporary power poles are installed in the vicinity of each structure to be installed. The temporary power poles shall be installed after completion of grading and prior to the issuance of each building permit. After electrification of the temporary power poles, the Project Applicant shall restrict building contractors from using gas-powered generators, compressors and saws and this restriction shall be incorporated into all contracts with building contractors that will work on the proposed Project.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant impacts due to the project conflicting with or obstructing a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with compliance with General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

The Project would be required to conform with all State plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The Project is consistent with the applicable energy-related policies in the Sustainability and Natural Environment Element of the General Plan as shown in Final EIR Table

4.6-3, Proposed Project Compliance with City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update Policies. In addition, Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would ensure the Project’s consistency with both the City of Coachella CAP and applicable City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update policies.

Page 548 ends

Item 28.
57 The Project is subject to the City of Coachella CAP measures provided in the Development Review Checklist, which allows the Project to be eligible for streamlining. The applicable Development Review Checklist strategy and design parameters for the proposed Project are provided in Final EIR Table 4.8-4, Project Consistency with the City of Coachella CAP Development Review Checklist, along with a determination of consistency and explanation of how the Project will comply with each measure. Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would ensure the Project’s consistency with applicable project design features in the Development Review Checklist.In conclusion, the Project would be consistent with applicable General Plan policies and the City’s CAP Development Review Checklist and implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct a local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Earthquake Fault Ruptures, Seismic Shaking, Seismic-related Ground Failure or Landslides The Coachella Valley is located on the boundary of the Pacific and the North American tectonic plates. Generally, movement along these two plates causes seismic activity. The surface expression of this tectonic movement is expressed by the northwest trending system of faults known as the San Andreas Fault system, which runs from north of the San Francisco area to the Bombay Beach area of the Salton Sea and includes a Coachella Valley segment located within the eastern portion of the City (City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report; 2014).

The Salton Sea, located southeast of the City, forms the northerly part of the Salton Trough, a topographic depression that is related to the San Andreas Fault system. Faults generally produce damage in two ways: surface rupture and seismically induced ground shaking.

Liquefaction is a hazard typically associated with intense ground shaking. During seismic events, soils can destabilize, particularly when sufficient water is present in the soil, resulting in liquefaction. Liquefaction is generally associated with shallow groundwater conditions and the presence of loose and sandy soils or alluvial deposits.

Landslides often occur along pre-existing zones of weakness within bedrock and have the potential to occur on over-steepened slopes, especially where weak layers, such as thin clay layers, are present and dip out-of slope.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts from earthquake fault ruptures, strong seismic ground shaking, ground failure, or landslides the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

GEO-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a geotechnical investigation specific to building design and liquefaction, in compliance with City of Coachella requirements, shall be prepared by a licensed professional and submitted to the City of Coachella for review. The geotechnical report shall assess potential consequences of any liquefaction and soil strength loss,

Page 549 ends

Item 28.
58 estimation of lateral soil movements or reduction in foundation soil bearing capacity. The geotechnical report shall provide recommended measures to ensure compliance with all applicable geotechnical standards for building design consideration, such as mat foundations, pile foundations, or ground improvement to mitigate the potential liquefaction settlements, and all recommendations shall be incorporated into all improvement plans.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant impacts related to earthquake fault ruptures, seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure or landslides described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with compliance with General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Seismic Hazards and Ground Shaking
The Project site is relatively flat, sloping gently to the south. In general, the north side of the site is approximately eight (8) feet higher than the southern side over a distance of approximately 3,000 feet. Existing ground surface elevations range from about -112 to -120 feet mean sea level (MSL).

Directly adjacent to the western side of the site, an unpaved maintenance road is located at the top of the CVSC on a berm which is approximately two (2) to three (3) feet higher than the Project site at the southern end of the site and approximately eight (8) to 10 feet higher at the northern end.

Although, as with any site in the southern California region, the Project site is susceptible to strong seismic ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake, there are no known active faults crossing through the Project site. Furthermore, major earthquakes typically produce seismic waves that cause ground shaking that can be felt at different strengths based on factors such as the size of the earthquake, distance of the epicenter from a particular location, the topography of the area and the types of soils at a site. The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The closest Fault Zone is located over five (5) miles to the east of the site. Therefore, ground rupture due to faulting is considered unlikely at this site and there is no potential impact from earthquake fault rupture at or near the Project site during construction and operation.

Seismic-related Ground Failure (including Liquefaction) There is the potential for liquefaction to occur at the Project site during a design-level seismic event. The Project site is located within an area mapped by the City as having a potential for soil liquefaction and the site may have the potential for liquefaction, which typically occurs in wet and sandy soils. The Geotechnical Evaluation evaluated the potential for liquefaction according to established industry methods. Based on the preliminary evaluation of the field data, generally isolated and thin layers of silty sands occurring at depths of approximately 10 to 55 feet exhibit a

Page 550 ends

Item 28.
59 potential for liquefaction. The magnitude of seismically induced settlement could be on the order of 2 to 3 inches. Therefore, a potentially significant impact could occur relative to liquefaction with Project implementation. However, the use of mat foundations, pile foundations, or ground improvement may be used to mitigate the potential liquefaction settlements and with implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 in areas of the Project site that may be susceptible for liquefaction, impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels.

Landslides
The Geotechnical Evaluation for the Project concluded that the Project site does not contain substantial natural or man-made slopes, and no slopes are proposed with the Project. As a mandatory condition of final Project approval, all buildings and associated improvements on the site would be required to be constructed in accordance with the California Building Standards Code (CBSC), also known as California Code of Regulations, Title 24 (Part 2), and the City of Coachella Building Code (CBC), which is based on the CBSC with local amendments. The CBSC and the CBC (Chapter 15.32) have been specifically tailored for California earthquake conditions and include building standards to ensure that the design and construction of new structures are engineered to withstand the expected ground acceleration that may occur at this site. Earthquake resistant designs include such measures as concrete framing, flexible building diaphragms, anchoring concrete or masonry wall, framing below the base, building separation, and collector elements for seismic stresses. Therefore, through compliance with the applicable City of Coachella grading and construction guidelines, building codes and compliance with the City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update Polices 1.2, 1.6, 1,7 2.1, 2-3, 2.4, and 2.9 of the Safety Element, which require earthquake resistant building designs, mitigation for ground hazards, slope failures and groundwater resources, as well as conducting field inspections during project grading and construction, potential impacts related to ground shaking and the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault and ground failure hazards, would therefore be less than significant during construction and operation.

Therefore, potential impacts associated with landslides would be less than significant, as confirmed in the Draft EIR at page 4.7-27.

Unstable Geologic Unit or Soil
The site has the potential to be subject to impacts related to instability depending on the placement of building loads, structural loads of minor ancillary structures, or thickness of fill.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts to the project being located on a geologic unit or soil that is or would become unstable and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

GEO-2 During the design level of the Project and prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Project applicant shall prepare subsurface explorations and laboratory testing of soil samples and submit to the City for review and approval, which shall be utilized to provide specific design

Page 551 ends

Item 28.
60 recommendations for the earthwork and structures. Field observation and construction review shall be provided by a licensed professional during grading, excavation, and foundation construction, which shall include recommendations and measures for the removal of surface and near surface soils down to competent materials and their replacement with properly compacted fill.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant impacts related to an unstable geologic unit or unstable soil, including on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse, described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with compliance with General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-2, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Landslide
The Geotechnical Evaluation concluded that the Project site does not contain substantial natural or man-made slopes under existing conditions, and there are no hillsides in the vicinity of the Project site with a potential to expose the site to landslide hazards. In addition, the Project would not construct any permanent slopes onsite. Therefore, potential impacts associated with landslides would be less than significant.

Subsidence
The Geotechnical Evaluation concluded that the potential for subsidence to adversely affect the Project site is considered very low. Therefore, potential impacts associated with subsidence would be less than significant.

Liquefaction and Settlement
The City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update EIR identifies a majority of the City in general, and the Project site in particular, as being located in a high liquefaction zone. Therefore, the associated risk of lateral spreading from liquefied soils at the proposed Project site is high since lateral spreading occurs when soils liquefy. The Project would be required to comply with all City of Coachella construction guidelines, the City’s Building Codes, and the City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update Safety Element Policies 1.6 and 1.7, which require the preparation of liquefaction assessment studies and appropriate mitigation measures. All buildings constructed on the site would be required to be constructed in accordance with the CBSC’s Code of Regulations, Title 24 (Part 2).

Page 552 ends

Item 28.
61 The Geotechnical Evaluation indicated that groundwater was typically encountered on the Project site at 14 to 20 feet in borings drilled at the site during soil investigations. As a result of this shallow groundwater, the Project’s buildings are at risk of damage due to liquefaction, resulting in a potentially significant impact. As part of the analysis conducted for the Project-specific soils report, grading and construction recommendations were provided to mitigate these impacts, and are listed below. The Project would also be required to comply with all City of Coachella construction guidelines, the City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update Sustainability + Natural Environment Element Policies 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3, which require the incorporation of adequate stormwater control measures, pollution and soil erosion prevention measures to be undertaken at a project site. With implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2, and compliance with the City’s standard requirements, impacts associated with liquefaction will be reduced to less than significant levels.

Based on the conditions encountered at subsurface testing locations at the site, the Geotechnical Evaluation determined that the site has the potential to be subject to settlement. The placement of building loads, structural loads of minor ancillary structures, or a significant thickness of fill has the potential to result in ground surface settlement due to the compression of the undocumented fill at the surface. Construction measures will be required to remove the undocumented fills under structural loads during site grading. Preliminary plans indicate that significant fills are not planned for the project. Provided the undocumented fills have been removed, ground improvement or piles are installed under loaded areas, the potential for settlement to adversely affect the project is considered to be low. As a result, a significant impact could occur, and mitigation is required. As described in Mitigation Measure GEO-2, settlement may be attenuated through the removal of surface and near surface soils down to competent materials and replacement with properly compacted fill. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-2, impacts associated with settlement will be reduced to less than significant levels.

Paleontological Resource or Geological Feature
The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) broadly defines significant paleontological resources as fossils and fossiliferous deposits which are generally fossils of large or small identifiable vertebrates. Paleontological resources are typically older than recorded human history (i.e., older than about 5,000 radiocarbon years). Public Resources Code § 5097.5 states “no person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure or deface” any “vertebrate paleontological site” on public lands without the “permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands.” Violation of this section is a misdemeanor.

As used in this code section, “public lands” means lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of the State or any City, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof.

Consequently, public agencies are required to comply with § 5097.5 for their own activities, including construction and maintenance, as well as for permit actions (e.g., encroachment permits) undertaken by others.

Page 553 ends

Item 28.
62 Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts to a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature, the following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

GEO-3 Prior to the start of any and all proposed Project activities, all field personnel shall receive worker’s environmental awareness training on paleontological resources. The training shall be developed by a certified paleontologist familiar with the overall area, the site and specific components of the proposed Project. The training shall: a) provide a description of the laws and ordinances protecting fossil resources; b) provide education and means of identification of the types of fossil resources that may be encountered in the Project area; c) identify the role of the paleontological monitor; d) outline the steps that shall be followed in the event that a fossil discovery is made; and e) provide contact information for the Project paleontologist.

GEO-4 Prior to the commencement of ground-disturbing activities, a certified paleontologist shall be retained to prepare and implement a Paleontological Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (PRMMP) for the proposed Project and submit it to the City for review and approval. The PRMMP shall describe the monitoring required during excavations that extend into Pleistocene age sediments, and the location of areas deemed to have a high paleontological resource potential. Part-time monitoring, or spot checking may be required during shallow ground-disturbances (< 10 feet below ground surface) to confirm that sensitive geologic units are not being impacted. Monitoring shall entail the visual inspection of excavated or graded areas and trench sidewalls.

GEO-5 In the event that a paleontological resource is discovered, the certified paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily divert the construction equipment around the find until it is assessed for scientific significance and, if appropriate, collected and stored according to professional standards and guidelines. If the resource is determined to be of scientific significance, the Project paleontologist shall implement the recovery of resources, as established in the PRMMP.

GEO-6 For all excavations and ground disturbance activity (and curation of fossils if necessary) conducted at depths more than 10 feet or in any areas where the paleontologist determines that older deposits are encountered, the Project paleontologist shall prepare a final mitigation and monitoring report outlining the results of the PRMMP. The report shall include discussion of the location, duration and methods of the monitoring, stratigraphic sections, any recovered fossils, and the scientific significance of those fossils, and where fossils were curated. The final report shall be provided to the City of Coachella.

Page 554 ends

Item 28.
63 Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant impacts to a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature, described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with compliance with General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-3 through GEO-6, as recommended in the Final EIR, which have been adopted by the City and are enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Based on the Paleontological Assessment prepared for the Project, the Project site is immediately underlain by Holocene age surficial alluvial sediments and beneath are older Pleistocene-age Lake Cahuilla deposits. The site and its surroundings are also underlain by surficial sediments of the Holocene period, which are generally too young to contain fossilized material. It was concluded that shallow excavations (approximately 10 feet in depth or less) are unlikely to yield any significant paleontological resources because younger Holocene deposits are void of fossils and near-surface alluvium is usually too young to contain fossils and therefore possess low sensitivity.

As a result, no effects to paleontological resources would occur from earth-moving activities at depths of up to 10 feet at the proposed Project site. However, deeper excavations that may extend into older Pleistocene Lake Cahuilla beds are more likely to unearth fossil remains. Older deposits underlying the Project area are considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity because they have proven to yield significant paleontological resources.

Ground-disturbing activities exceeding depths beyond Holocene soils have the potential to significantly impacts paleontological resources. With incorporation of Mitigation Measures GEO3 through GEO-6, impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced by utilizing certified and trained field personnel to identify, record and preserve any potential paleontological resources discovered on the site. Further, an onsite and qualified paleontologist will be available to monitor and coordinate the use of construction equipment on any portion of the site where paleontological resources are found, thereby reducing further impacts to such resources. Proposed Project impacts would therefore be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
GHG Emissions that may Significantly Impact the Environment Project-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would include emissions from direct and indirect sources associated with construction and operation of the Project. Lead agencies are to make a “good faith effort based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data to describe, calculate or estimate” GHG emissions (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15064[a]) and to consider the extent to which a project would: increase or reduce GHG emissions; exceed a locally applicable threshold of significance; or comply with “regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.” (14 Cal. Code

Page 555 ends

Item 28.
64 Regs. § 15064[b]) A project may be found to have a less than-significant cumulative impact related to GHG emissions if it complies with an adopted plan that includes specific measures to sufficiently reduce GHG emissions (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15064[h][3]).

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

GHG-1 The Project shall include, but not be limited to, the following improvements, which shall be incorporated into the Project site plans to ensure consistency with adopted statewide plans and programs that are in effect at the time the Building Permits are issued. The Project applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the following measures, prior to issuance of Building Permits:
o To the maximum extent feasible, all off-road equipment (nonstreet legal), such as forklifts and street sweepers, used onsite for warehouse operations shall be powered by alternative fuels, electrical batteries or other alternative/non-diesel fuels (e.g., propane or compressed natural gas (CNG)) that do not emit diesel particulate matter, and that are low or zero emissions. o The Project applicant shall require that a minimum of 50 percent of the total Project electrical consumption from operation of the Project on an aggregate, site-wide basis is provided by onsite solar photovoltaic (PV) panels or other onsite renewables sources (i.e., wind turbines, geothermal).
o The Project applicant shall require any business that operates in the proposed project and has 20 or more full-time employees shall implement at least one of the following programs:
• Pre-tax election program to allow employees to exclude wages for commuting costs for transit or vanpools;
• An employer supplied transit pass;
• Employer provided transit; or
• Other, similar demand management programs.
o The Project applicant shall require that temporary power poles are installed in the vicinity of each structure to be installed. The temporary power poles shall be installed after completion of grading and prior to the issuance of each building permit. After electrification of the temporary power poles, the Project applicant shall restrict building contractors from using gas-powered generators, compressors and saws and this restriction shall be incorporated into all contracts with building contractors that will work on the proposed Project.

Page 556 ends

Item 28.
65 Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant effects relating to greenhouse gas emissions described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with adherence to all General Plan policies, project design features and implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

The applicable plan for the Project is the City of Coachella CAP. For a project to be determined as complying with the CAP and eligible for streamlining, the project must comply with all applicable standards presented in the CAP Development Review Checklist, which appears as Appendix B of the CAP. The analysis in the Final EIR quantified GHG emissions for informational purposes only and determination of significance has been based on a determination of whether the Project has implemented all applicable development standards presented in the CAP Development Review Checklist.

The GHG emissions shown in the analysis contained in Section 4.8 of the Final EIR account for the design features described in EIR Section 2.0, Project Description (Subsection 2.5.2, Project Details) included as Mitigation Measure GHG-1. Project consistency with the CAP Development Review Checklist is described in Final EIR Table 4.8-4, which is incorporated herein by this reference.

Construction of the Project would create 123 MTCO2e per year in construction emissions when amortized over 30 years as recommended by the SCAQMD GHG Working Group.. Consistent with that recommendation, construction GHG emissions were added to operational GHG emissions for comparison with the GHG significance thresholds. Project development is expected to result in increased GHG emissions and would result in a potentially significant GHG emissions impact without the incorporation of mitigation, largely due to increased VMT, as well as from construction activities, stationary area sources (i.e., natural gas consumption for space and water heating devices, landscape maintenance equipment operations, and use of consumer products), energy consumption, water supply, and solid waste generation. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, the Project would comply with the CAP and the Project’s operational GHG emissions impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels.

EIR Table 4.8-4, Project Consistency with the City of Coachella CAP Development Review Checklist, outlines the Project’s consistency with the CAP Development Review Checklist, with an explanation of how the Project would comply with each project design feature. The Project would implement all applicable development standards presented in the CAP Development Review Checklist. Therefore, consistent with SCAQMD standards and State law, the Project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions during construction and operation, either directly or

Page 557 ends

Item 28.
66 indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment with implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1. Impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels.

Consistency with Applicable Plan, Policy or Regulation
The regulatory setting related to global climate change is addressed through the efforts of various international, federal, state, regional, and local government agencies. These agencies work jointly, as well as individually, to reduce GHG emissions through legislation, regulations, planning, policymaking, education, and a variety of programs.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts associated with the Project conflicting with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

Page 558 ends

Item 28.
67 and prior to the issuance of each building permit. After electrification of the temporary power poles, the Project Applicant shall restrict building contractors from using gas-powered generators, compressors and saws and this restriction shall be incorporated into all contracts with building contractors that will work on the proposed Project.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for impacts caused by the Project conflicting with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with adherence to all General Plan policies, project design features and implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Findings:
2022 Scoping Plan Consistency
The Project would be required to comply with applicable current and future regulatory requirements under the 2022 Scoping Plan, including the following current transportation sector policies (through vehicle manufacturer compliance): Advanced Clean Cars II, Advanced Clean Trucks, Advanced Clean Fleets, Zero Emission Forklifts, the Off‐Road Zero‐Emission Targeted Manufacturer rule, Clean Off‐Road Fleet Recognition Program, In‐use Off‐Road Diesel‐Fueled Fleets Regulation, Off‐Road Zero‐Emission Targeted Manufacturer rule, Clean Off‐Road Fleet Recognition Program, Amendments to the In‐use Off‐Road Diesel‐Fueled Fleets Regulation, carbon pricing through the Cap‐and‐ Trade Program, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. As such, the Project would be consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan.

Consistency with the Southern California Association of Governments Connect SoCal (2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy) SCAG is responsible for developing long‐range transportation plans and sustainable strategies for the region in accordance with federal and state law and planning requirements. The Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) would meet the applicable 2035 GHG emissions reduction target for automobiles and light trucks of a 19 percent per capita reduction by 2035 relative to 2005 levels. The Project would develop an industrial and business park facility; it would not involve new residential development introducing direct population growth. The Project could generate approximately 741 jobs, but it is reasonable to assume that the new jobs could be filled by existing residents of the City and Coachella Valley region. Therefore, there would not be a substantial growth in population, and the Project would be consistent with the City and regional population growth projections.

Page 559 ends

Item 28.
68 City of Coachella CAP
The Project would be consistent with the City of Coachella CAP since it would implement all applicable development standards presented in the CAP Development Review Checklist.

The Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG1, impacts relative to GHG emissions would be reduced to less than significant.

The City Council considered the comments received on the Draft EIR regarding GHG emissions, including the letter from Advocates for the Environment dated September 3, 2025 (Comment Letter No. 13), which advocates for the City’s adoption of a requirement that the Project be “net zero” with respect to GHG emissions, and asserts that the City’s adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP) is inadequate, inconsistent with CARB 2022 Scoping Plan described above, and fails to satisfy the requirements of a valid GHG emissions reduction plan under CEQA Guidelines §15183.5(b). The City Council rejects these assertions as inaccurate and inconsistent with the City Council’s lawful adoption of the CAP in connection with its adoption of the most recent General Plan Update. This adoption of the CAP reflects the City Council’s careful balancing of the policies supporting GHG emissions reductions, as well as the other important policies reflected in the City’s General Plan, including the creation of additional economic opportunities within the City and the need to generate additional tax revenue to fund vital City services. The City Council finds that the CAP appropriately balances these City policies and properly establishes GHG emissions reduction targets to help the City meet the statewide targets required under SB 32, including exceeding those reduction targets by reducing GHG emissions to a level of 49% below 2010 levels by 2035 and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. The CAP properly adopts specific climate-ready development standards that directly implement the City’s plan to achieve these targets, and the Project implements these established development standards.

The City Council further finds that the Project complies with the CAP and is consistent with the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan. The City Council hereby incorporates the responses to comments in the Final EIR regarding GHG Emissions, including without limitation Response to Comment Nos. 13-2, 13-3, 13-4, 13-8, 13-9, 13-10, 12-16 and 13-7, as well as the supporting technical report by subject matter expert Vista Environmental dated October 2, 2025, and included in the Final EIR as Attachment B2.

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Release of Hazardous Materials
The term “hazardous material” is defined in the State of California’s Health and Safety Code § 25501(n)(1) as: “[Any material] that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment.” “Hazardous materials” include, but are not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous waste, and any material that a handler or the administering agency has a reasonable basis for believing would be injurious to the health and safety of persons or harmful to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment.

Page 560 ends

Item 28.
69 Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts associated with the release of hazardous materials into the environment, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

HAZ-1 Prior to any ground disturbing activity on the site, a soils investigation shall be conducted by a qualified soils engineer to assess the pesticide contamination levels in the Project site’s soils. If the pesticide contamination levels exceed USEPA Regional Screening Levels for pesticides, the Project Applicant shall implement a soils management program to reduce the soil’s pesticide concentration levels to below USEPA Regional Screening Levels through soils excavation, removal and offsite disposal in compliance with all applicable USEPA regulations. All activities shall be coordinated with the City of Coachella and the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for impacts caused by the release of hazardous materials into the environment, described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with implementation of HAZ-1, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Findings:

Construction Impacts
During Project construction, there is a possibility of accidental release of hazardous substances such as petroleum-based fuels or hydraulic fluids used for construction equipment. However, the level of risk associated with the accidental release of hazardous substances is not considered significant due to the small volume and low concentration of hazardous materials utilized during construction. As required by various State laws, the construction contractor is required to use standard construction controls and safety procedures that would avoid and minimize the potential for accidental release of such substances into the environment. Standard construction practices would be observed such that any materials released are appropriately contained and remediated as required by local, State, and Federal law. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.

Operational Impacts
The Project would include uses onsite that are consistent with the City’s industrial zoning and General Plan designation thus allowing for industrial, research and development uses as well as retail and office uses at the site. It is anticipated that long term operations on the site would involve storage of personal vehicles that may require light maintenance work on site and may involve the storage and use of limited quantities of solvents, oils and similar hazardous materials for personal

Page 561 ends

Item 28.
70 vehicle maintenance and upgrades. No commercial or industrial scale automotive repair facilities would be located on the site. In addition, the proposed IID substation at the northern end of the property may include transformers and other components that could contain small quantities of hazardous materials. The City’s zoning for the site is currently MH – Heavy Industrial which would be amended to MS-IP (Manufacturing Services-Industrial Park) and C-G (General Commercial) in order to allow for the uses under the Project.

Although the type and quantity of the materials described above cannot be identified with specificity at this time, most of the land uses at the Project site would not be expected to generate or transport hazardous materials in quantities large enough to present a significant threat to the public or the environment. Those that do would be required to register with the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) as small quantity generators and comply with all applicable regulation regarding storage and transport of hazardous materials under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and other federal, State, and local regulations. Businesses would be required to submit hazardous material Business Plans to the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) or the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health, and update them regularly, and to adhere to all California Fire Code and Building Code requirements for hazardous material storage. The County of Riverside’s Department of Environmental Health requires that facilities storing hazardous materials prepare a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP). The information from the HMBP is made available to first responders in the County for emergency response activities. All handlers are required to disclose hazardous materials in the HMBP.

Compliance with all applicable regulations would ensure that risks from hazardous material storage and use in the proposed commercial areas would be minimized. There would be no significant threat to the public or the environment. Since the potential for the presence of pesticides on the site from past uses has been identified as an REC, adherence to City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update Safety Element Policies 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.8 and 5.11, which address the safe transport, use, disposal and storage of hazardous materials, in addition to limiting the use of pesticides and herbicides would ensure that the proposed Project would limit exposure to hazardous materials to any employees and visitors to the site. In addition, the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA, Appendix F1 of the Draft EIR) for the Project recommends that a soils investigation be done prior to grading permit issuance to assess pesticide concentration levels in the site’s soils. If pesticide concentration levels exceed regulatory agency screening levels, soil remediation would be implemented to ensure pesticide concentration levels would be reduced below the regulatory agency screening levels, using generally accepted methodologies, such as soil excavation and onsite or offsite disposal, as described in Mitigation Measure HAZ-1.

With implementation of this measure, pesticide impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

NOISE
Consistency with Established Standards
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) provides guidelines that can be considered reasonable criteria for construction noise assessment. The State of California’s noise insulation standards for nonresidential uses are codified in the CALGreen. CALGreen noise standards are applied to new

Page 562 ends

Item 28.
71 or renovation construction projects in California to control interior noise levels resulting from exterior noise sources.

The City’s General Plan Noise Element addresses excessive noise exposure and guides community planning for the regulation of noise. The City’s Noise Control Ordinance is contained in the Coachella Municipal Code, Title 7, Chapter 7.04, Noise Control. The Coachella Municipal Code establishes sound level limits related to stationary noise sources to control noise emanating from one property to another.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts associated with the project generating temporary or permanent noise levels in excess of established standards, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

NOI-1 The Project Construction Contractor shall ensure adherence to the following noise reduction requirements during Project construction:
• The use of exhaust mufflers, and engine shrouds, that reduce equipment noise levels by approximately 10 dBA shall be required. • Construction equipment staging areas shall be located the furthest distance possible from nearby noise-sensitive land uses, located on the central and western portions of the Project site, away from Airport Boulevard and the neighboring existing residential uses.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for impacts caused by the project generating temporary or permanent noise levels in excess of established standards, described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with implementation of NOI-1, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Construction Impacts
Construction noise for any project typically occurs intermittently and varies depending upon the nature or phase (e.g., demolition/land clearing, grading, excavation, erection) of construction, and equipment used (such as earth movers, material handlers, and portable generators). Typical noise levels for the construction equipment associated with the Project range from approximately 77 to 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. Typical operating cycles may involve 2 minutes of full power, followed by 3 to 4 minutes at lower settings. Average hourly noise levels associated with construction equipment generally range from approximately 72 to 82 dBA Leq at 50 feet (FHWA 2008). The City has not adopted noise standards that apply to short-term construction activities. However, based on screening noise criteria commonly recommended by the FTA, construction activities are

Page 563 ends

Item 28.
72 generally considered to have a potentially significant impact if average-hourly daytime noise levels exceed 80 dBA Leq or if average-hourly nighttime noise levels exceed 70 dBA Leq at noisesensitive land uses.

There is an existing single-family residential neighborhood directly south of the Project site and Airport Boulevard. There are no other residential land uses in the Project area that are close enough to the Project site to be affected by Project construction noise. Construction noise at the nearest sensitive receptor located approximately 60 feet south of the Project site would range between 86 and 89 dBA Leq. Noise levels will be the loudest during the grading phase. Noise levels at this receptor and others near to it would exceed the FTA daytime standard of 80 dBA. Construction noise is not expected to exceed the nighttime noise standard of 70 dBA Leq because construction is limited to daytime hours per Coachella Municipal Code § 7.04.070, Construction Activities.

Therefore, Mitigation Measure NOI-1 is required to reduce construction noise at the residences located south of the Project site to reduce daytime construction noise levels to 80 dBA Leq or below. The mitigation measure includes muffler and engine shroud requirements, and the location of staging areas at the farthest possible distance from the existing residences to the south. The former will result in a reduction of approximately 10 dB in noise levels, which will reduce the noise levels to less than 80 dBA Leq, consistent with the FTA standard. These measures, combined with the City’s Municipal Code limitations on construction hours, will reduce construction noise impacts to less than significant levels.

Operational Impacts
On-site Stationary Noise Sources
On-site stationary source noise levels of primary concern would include a drive-thru restaurant, commercial-use HVAC units, warehouse mechanical equipment, commercial-use loading docks, and onsite vehicle parking areas, and the electrical substation:

Drive-Thru Restaurant. The Project includes a drive-thru restaurant located near the southern boundary of the site. Noise levels associated with drive-thru restaurants are typically and largely attributable to the operation of the drive-thru speaker box. Based on noise measurement data obtained from similar drive-thru operations, operational noise levels associated with speaker boxes and vehicle idling at the proposed drive-thru restaurant at the site, would result in average noise levels of approximately 55 dBA Leq at 30 feet from the speaker box. Since the Project’s future tenants are unknown at this time, the potential hours of operation of future drive-thru restaurant businesses are unknown. However, there are currently several existing 24-hour drivethru restaurants in the City, as they are not prohibited in the City’s Noise Control Ordinance (contained in the Coachella Municipal Code, Title 7, Chapter 7.04, Noise Control.) Commercial Use Air Conditioning Units. Stationary source noise levels associated with the commercial development would be predominantly associated with the use of exterior air conditioning units. Commercial use air conditioning units would be located on rooftop areas and shielded from direct public exposure. Noise levels associated with commercial air conditioning units can range from 60 to 65 dBA Leq at 3 feet.

Page 564 ends

Item 28.
73 Warehouse Mechanical Equipment. Noise sources commonly associated with warehouse uses include mechanical equipment such as backup power generators, trash compactors, and refrigeration condensing units. Noise levels associated with these types of equipment can vary depending on various factors, including equipment size, location, and hours of operation. Based on measurement data obtained from representative equipment, operational noise levels associated with backup power generators can reach levels of approximately 78 dBA Leq at 50 feet. Refrigeration condensers and trash compactors can generate noise levels of up to approximately 60 dBA Leq at 50 feet.

Warehouse Loading Docks. The Project includes larger warehouses with loading docks located near the northern boundary of the site. Based on representative noise measurement data obtained from similar warehouse uses, noise levels associated with outdoor loading dock operations and material handling activities can generate noise levels of approximately 65 dBA Leq at 50 feet.

On-Site Parking Areas. The Project would include multiple parking areas dispersed throughout the site. Noise levels associated with parking lots typically include vehicle operations, the opening and closing of vehicle doors, and the operation of vehicle sound systems. Parking lot noise levels can vary depending on a number of factors, including the number of parking spaces and site design. Proposed onsite parking areas would range in size from approximately 23 to 179 parking spaces. Assuming that all spaces would be accessed over an approximate one-hour period, average-hourly noise levels associated with parking areas of these sizes would range from approximately 49 to 58 dBA Leq at 50 feet.

Electrical Substation. The Project features an electrical substation located within the northern portion of the site. This IID facility would include a 1-25 megavolt ampere (MVA) 92/13.2 kilovolt (kV) transformer and a 92 kV transmission line and distribution system. The proposed IID substation would likely also require a cooling system. Noise generated by the electrical substation would be predominantly associated with transformers. To a lesser extent, noise would also be generated by transmission lines, switches, and cooling equipment. Based on data obtained for similar facilities, operational noise levels of a similar-sized electrical substation would range from approximately 60 to 80 dBA Leq at 6 feet.

Cumulative On-Site Stationary Noise Sources Impacts
To be conservative, operational impacts associated with the stationary sources at nearby land uses were assessed cumulatively, assuming that all onsite noise sources would operate simultaneously.

Predicted on-site noise levels also include vehicle movement associated with haul trucks traveling to and from the proposed warehouses, as well as vehicle traffic associated with other onsite land uses (e.g, parking areas, gas station, drive-thru restaurant, site entrances). Predicted noise levels were calculated for daytime and nighttime operations. Based on information obtained from the Project Applicant, daytime operations for most on-site land uses, excluding the gas station minimart, would extend from 7:00 am to 9:00 pm. The gas station is anticipated to operate until midnight. Predicted cumulative noise levels at nearby land uses are summarized in EIR Table 4.13- 9 and compared to applicable County noise standards for determination of impact significance.

Predicted cumulative noise levels would not exceed applicable County daytime or nighttime noise standards. As a result, this impact would be considered less than significant.

Page 565 ends

Item 28.
74 Roadway Traffic Noise
The potential for Project generated vehicle traffic to result in substantial increases in ambient noise levels was assessed by calculating the existing and existing plus project noise levels (by project phase) along each affected road segment and determining whether the increase that would result with Project implementation would be considered substantial. Existing and existing plus project traffic noise levels were calculated for four segments of Airport Boulevard for 2027 (opening year conditions), 2030, and 2045. Implementation of the Project would result in predicted increases in existing traffic noise levels of approximately 0.8 dBA CNEL/Ldn, or less; perceptible changes in ambient noise levels do not typically occur at levels below 3 dBA.

Predicted increases in the future year 2030 traffic noise levels along area roadways with the implementation of the Project would be approximately 0.2 dBA CNEL/Ldn or less as shown in Table 4.13.11 of the EIR. Increases in traffic noise along other area roadways would be less.

Implementation of the Project would not result in a readily noticeable increase (i.e., 5 dBA or greater) along area roadways that would exceed applicable standards.

Predicted future year 2045 traffic noise levels, with and without the proposed Project, along area roadways with the implementation of the project would be approximately 0.2 dBA CNEL/Ldn or less as shown in Table 4.13.12 of the EIR. Increases in traffic noise along other area roadways would be less. Implementation of the Project would not result in a readily noticeable increase (i.e., 5 dBA or greater) along area roadways that would exceed applicable standards. Implementation of the Project would not result in substantial increases in either near-term or future traffic noise levels along area roadways. Therefore, impacts related to traffic noise along area roadways would be less than significant.

Compatibility of Proposed Land Uses
The compatibility of proposed land uses was evaluated in comparison to the City’s noise standards for land use compatibility. The compatibility of proposed land uses was evaluated based on predicted future year traffic noise conditions for SR 86 and Airport Boulevard. Future year traffic volumes for SR 86 were derived from the City of Coachella General Plan (City of Coachella 2015).

The City of Coachella’s “Clearly Compatible” noise standards for office uses are 65 dBA CNEL/Ldn and 70 dBA CNEL/Ldn for commercial and industrial uses. Based on the traffic noise modeling conducted for future year conditions, predicted on-site traffic noise levels would range from approximately 68 to 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn. In comparison to the City’s land use compatibility noise standards, predicted exterior noise levels at some proposed on-site office, and warehouse land uses would exceed the City’s “Clearly Compatible” noise standard of 65 and 70 dBA CNEL/Ldn respectively. Predicted noise levels at these land uses would, however, fall within the “Normally Compatible” range. Based on the City’s General Plan, construction of land uses within the “Normally Compatible” range shall only be undertaken after “an analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design are determined.

Conventional construction with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice.” (City of Coachella 2015).

With regard to the proposed on-site commercial and industrial uses, noise-sensitive interior areas would be largely limited to interior offices and meeting rooms. For such areas, an interior noise

Page 566 ends

Item 28.
75 level of 52 dBA Leq is typically recommended (Caltrans 2022). For newer building construction subject to current building insulation requirements, the average exterior-to-interior noise reductions typically range from approximately 25 to 30 dBA. Proposed on-site land uses would be constructed in compliance with current Green Building Code standards and fresh air supply systems incorporated per current regulatory requirements. Based on the predicted noise levels noted below and assuming a minimum exterior-to-interior noise reduction of 25 dBA, predicted interior noise levels of proposed on-site commercial and industrial uses would be approximately 50 dBA Leq, or less. Predicted interior noise levels would not exceed the commonly applied interior noise standard of 52 dBA Leq. In addition, no noise-sensitive outdoor areas (e.g., outdoor seating) are associated with the proposed small businesses or warehouses. As a result, this impact would be less than significant.

The City Council has considered the comments regarding potential noise impacts from the Project, including but not limited to Comment Nos. 16-25 through 16-30 and the supporting materials submitted by the Adams Broadwell firm on behalf of CARE. The City Council finds those comments unpersuasive and rejects the assertion that the Project will have significant and unmitigated noise impacts as being based on inaccurate assumptions. Rather, the City Council finds persuasive and hereby adopts as accurate the Final EIR responses to these comments and the supporting technical analysis by subject matter expert Ambient Air Quality and Noise Consulting, dated October 21, 2025, and included in the Final EIR as Attachment H2, which are incorporated by this reference.

TRANSPORTATION
Consistency with a Circulation System, Plan or Policy
With adoption of SB 743, the CEQA Guidelines replaced Level of Service (LOS) as the metric for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA. The replacement metric for transportation impacts required under CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3 is VMT. Therefore, information related to LOS is provided for informational purposes only and to ensure consistency with the General Plan and is not provided to analyze potentially significant CEQA impacts of the proposed Project.

The study area for the Project was developed in coordination with City staff, consistent with the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Guidelines for LOS and VMT (Guidelines) (December 2020) and included all intersections of “Collector” or higher classification streets at which the proposed Project will add 50 or more peak hour trips, consistent with the City’s policies for the preparation of traffic analyses.

New development projects within the City are required to provide needed infrastructure improvements to meet the demand created by the development and to design any off-site improvements to ensure construction of the local and regional transportation networks to their ultimate classifications. Payment toward the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) is the Project’s fair share contribution to the planned improvements to the roadways and intersections identified as cumulative regional traffic deficiencies.

Page 567 ends

Item 28.
76 Pursuant to Coachella Municipal Code Chapter 4.45, Development Impact Fees, the City collects Development Impact Fees (DIF) for public facilities in order to mitigate environmental impacts derived from projects. The fees are required on applicable residential, commercial and industrial developments and funds collected via these fees are used to construct, expand, or rehabilitate public facilities, including transportation facilities (i.e., roadways), within the City. Payment of the City’s DIF is the Project’s fair share payment toward local roadway and intersection improvements needed to address cumulative traffic increases within the City.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts associated with the project conflicting with program, plan, or policy addressing the City’s circulation system for transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, the following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

TRA-1 All necessary plans, permits or approvals, including but not limited to traffic control plans, encroachment or other permits from Caltrans, Union Pacific Railroad, Imperial Irrigation District and others, shall be prepared by the Construction Contractor for and approved by the City prior to the initiation of site disturbance such as grading, excavation, hauling, paving and other construction activities where public streets may be affected. Prior to the initiation of site improvements, the Project applicant shall confer with the appropriate Coachella Public Works Department, Caltrans and the Union Pacific Railroad to ensure that construction activities and traffic control are carried out in a manner that causes minimal disruption to traffic on adjoining facilities.

TRA-2 The final location and design of construction staging and access shall comply with any applicable City access and design standards, and be reviewed by the Project Engineer. The Project applicant shall submit traffic control plans to the City prior to the issuance of grading and/or construction permits.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for impacts associated with the project conflicting with program, plan, or policy addressing the City’s circulation system for transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with implementation of TRA-1 and TRA-2, as recommended in the Final EIR, which have been adopted by the City and are enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Page 568 ends

Item 28.
77 Facts in Support of Finding:

Construction Impacts
Short-term construction-related traffic impacts would occur with Project implementation along Airport Boulevard and at the on- and off-ramps at SR 86 associated with the delivery of construction materials and equipment, removal of construction debris, and parking for construction workers. Overall, vehicular and truck traffic generated during Project construction would result in total volumes higher than existing conditions, which could result in a potentially significant impact relative to transportation and circulation. However, these construction-related impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of a traffic control plan, to be established prior to issuance of any construction or demolition permits.

Mitigation Measure TRA-1 requires that the Project applicant prepare and submit to the City all necessary plans, permits or approvals, including but not limited to traffic control plans, encroachment or other permits from Caltrans, Union Pacific Railroad, and Imperial Irrigation District, for City approval prior to the initiation of site disturbance such as grading, excavation, hauling, paving and other construction activities where public streets may be affected. In addition, prior to the initiation of site improvements, the Project applicant is required to confer with the Coachella Public Works Department, Caltrans and the Union Pacific Railroad to ensure that construction activities and traffic control are carried out in a manner that causes minimal disruption to traffic on adjoining facilities. Mitigation Measure TRA-2 requires that the final location and design of construction staging areas and access complies with any applicable City access and design standards, and be reviewed by the Project engineer. The Project applicant is required to submit traffic control plans to the City prior to the issuance of grading and/or construction permits.

With implementation of Mitigation Measures TRA-1 and TRA-2, the Project’s constructionrelated transportation impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Operational Impacts
The Project would add an industrial business park to a currently vacant parcel in the City, with improved ingress/egress and access along Airport Boulevard. Consistent with the County guidelines, the Project’s TIA identifies LOS deficiencies for compliance with City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update. Deficiencies and improvements may be incorporated into project conditions of approval as deemed satisfactory to the City Engineer. The City of Coachella has established LOS “D” as the minimum allowable level of service at intersections. Therefore, any intersection operating at LOS “E” or worse is considered deficient.

Opening Year 2027
Under the Opening Year 2027 Plus Project scenario, the Project would be required to construct, as a condition of approval, a signalized intersection at the Airport Boulevard and Project Driveway intersection. As set forth in Table 4.17-5 in the Draft EIR all analyzed intersections would operate at an acceptable LOS under the Opening Year 2027 scenario except for the following:
• Avenue 54 and Grapefruit Boulevard during AM and PM peak hour (LOS F) • Tyler Street and Grapefruit Boulevard during AM and PM peak hour (LOS F)

Page 569 ends

Item 28.
78 These deficiencies occur whether or not the Project is constructed. In order to improve the level of service and ensure that the Project’s operational transportation impacts remain less than significant with regard to conflicts with programs, plans, or policies addressing the City of Coachella’s circulation system, the following transportation improvements are recommended with or without the Project:
• Avenue 54 and Grapefruit Boulevard – Signalize the intersection with no changes to existing configuration of 1 left, 1 through, and 1 right turn lane in northbound, southbound, and westbound directions, and 1 shared left/through/right in eastbound direction. • Tyler Street and Grapefruit Boulevard – Signalize the intersection with no changes to existing configuration of 1 shared left/through lane in northbound direction, 1 right and 1 through lane in southbound direction, and 1 shared left/right lane in eastbound direction.

The Project contributes to the deficiency at Avenue 54 and Grapefruit Boulevard and will contribute toward the improvement via fee payment to City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF programs for Projects B-349 and B-350. The Project contributes to the deficiency at Tyler Street and Grapefruit Boulevard and will also contribute toward this improvement via fee payment to City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF programs for Project B-349.

The Project would have a capacity deficiency under Opening Year 2027 Plus Project Conditions on Grapefruit Boulevard between Avenue 54 and Tyler Street. Widening the roadway to its ultimate 6-lane major arterial classification would increase the capacity of the roadway and result in an acceptable LOS. The Project would contribute toward this improvement via fee payment to City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF programs for Project B-349.

The deficient locations would be improved to delays less than Opening Year 2027 Baseline conditions with the implementation of the proposed improvements. The intersections of Avenue 54 and Grapefruit Boulevard and Tyler Street and Grapefruit Boulevard warrant a traffic signal under Opening Year 2027. Therefore, with implementation of the recommended improvements and payment of the City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF fees, the Project’s operational impacts under Opening Year 2027 Conditions would be less than significant.

Opening Year 2030
The Project proposes a signalized intersection at the Airport Boulevard and Project Driveway intersection under Opening Year 2030 scenarios. As set forth in Table 4.17-9 in the Draft EIR all analyzed intersections would operate at an acceptable LOS under Opening Year 2030 Baseline Conditions except for the following:
• Avenue 54 and Grapefruit Boulevard during AM and PM peak hour (LOS F) • Tyler Street and Grapefruit Boulevard during AM and PM peak hour (LOS F) The following transportation improvements are recommended at the identified deficient locations:
• Avenue 54 and Grapefruit Boulevard – Signalize the intersection with no changes to existing configuration of 1 left, 1 through, and 1 right turn lane in northbound, southbound, and westbound directions, and 1 shared left/through/right in eastbound direction. Project

Page 570 ends

Item 28.
79 will contribute toward this improvement via fee payment to City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF programs for Projects B-349 and B-350.
• Tyler Street and Grapefruit Boulevard – Signalize the intersection signalization with no changes to existing configuration of 1 shared left/through lane in northbound direction, 1 right and 1 through lane in southbound direction, and 1 shared left/right lane in eastbound direction. Project will contribute toward this improvement via fee payment to City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF programs for Project B-349.

The Project would have a capacity deficiency under Opening Year 2030 Plus Project Conditions on Grapefruit Boulevard between Palm Street and Avenue 54 and Avenue 54 and Tyler Street.

Widening the roadway to its ultimate 6-lane major arterial classification would increase the capacity of the roadway and result in an acceptable LOS. The Project would contribute toward this improvement for Project B-349.

After the implementation of the improvements described above, all deficient locations will result in improved capacities to accommodate Opening Year 2030 Plus Project conditions with the implementation of the proposed transportation improvements. The Project will contribute toward this improvement for Project B-349. Therefore, with implementation of the recommended improvements and payment of City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF fees, the Project’s operational impacts under Opening Year 2030 Conditions would be less than significant.

Opening Year 2033
The Project proposes a signalized intersection at the Airport Boulevard and Project Driveway intersection under Opening Year 2033 scenarios. As set forth in Table 4.17-13 in the Draft EIR all analyzed intersections would operate at an acceptable LOS under Opening Year 2033 Baseline Conditions except for the following:
• Airport Boulevard and Filmore Street during AM (LOS E) and PM peak hour (LOS F) • Avenue 54 and Grapefruit Boulevard during AM and PM peak hour (LOS F) • Tyler Street and Grapefruit Boulevard during AM and PM peak hour (LOS F) The following transportation improvements are recommended at the identified deficient locations:
• Airport Boulevard and Filmore Street – Signalize the intersection with no changes to existing configuration of 1 shared left/through/right lane on all approaches. Project will contribute toward this improvement via fee payment to the City of Coachella DIF program and CVAG TUMF.
• Avenue 54 and Grapefruit Boulevard – Signalize the intersection with no changes to existing configuration of 1 left, 1 through, and 1 right turn lane in northbound, southbound, and westbound directions, and 1 shared left/through/right in eastbound direction. Project will contribute toward this improvement via fee payment to City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF programs for Projects B-349 and B-350.
• Tyler Street and Grapefruit Boulevard – Signalize the intersection signalization with no changes to existing configuration of 1 shared left/through lane in northbound direction, 1 right and 1 through lane in southbound direction, and 1 shared left/right lane in eastbound

Page 571 ends

Item 28.
80 direction. Project will contribute toward this improvement via fee payment to City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF programs for Project B-349.

The Project would have a capacity deficiency under Opening Year 2033 Plus Project Conditions on Grapefruit Boulevard between Palm Street and Avenue 54 and Avenue 54 and Tyler Street.

After the implementation of the improvements described above, all deficient locations will be improved to delays less than Opening Year 2033 Baseline conditions with the implementation of the proposed transportation improvements. While the PM peak hour conditions at Intersection Nos. 7 and 8 are still considered deficient until the ultimate General Plan buildout improvements are constructed, consistent with the City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF programs, the identified improvements will improve conditions at these intersections as compared to the 2033 No Project condition with no improvements. In addition to the intersections that already warrant a traffic signal under Opening Year 2027 Conditions, the intersection of Airport Boulevard and Filmore Street warrants a traffic signal under Opening Year 2033 Conditions. Therefore, with implementation of the recommended improvements and payment of City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF fees, the Project’s operational impacts under Opening Year 2033 Conditions would be less than significant.

Buildout Year 2045
The following network improvements are assumed under Buildout 2045 scenarios:
• A signalized intersection at the Airport Boulevard and Project Driveway (warranted in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Figure 4C-103(CA))
• For the purpose of roadway segment capacity analysis only, the buildout classification of 6-lane urban arterial for Airport Boulevard and Grapefruit Boulevard is assumed, consistent with the City of Coachella General Plan.

As set forth in Table 4.17-17 in the Draft EIR all analyzed intersections would operate at an acceptable LOS under Buildout 2045 Baseline Conditions except for the following:
• Airport Boulevard and Filmore Street during AM and PM peak hour (LOS F) • Avenue 54 and Grapefruit Boulevard during AM and PM peak hour (LOS F) • Tyler Street and Grapefruit Boulevard during AM and PM peak hour (LOS F) The following transportation improvements are recommended at the identified deficient locations:
• Airport Boulevard and Filmore Street – Signalize the intersection with no changes to existing configuration of 1 shared left/through/right lane on all approaches. Project will contribute toward this improvement via fee payment to the City of Coachella DIF program and CVAG TUMF.

Page 572 ends

Item 28.
81 • Airport Boulevard and SR 86 SB Ramps – Add 1 exclusive left turn lane in the southbound direction. Project will contribute toward this improvement via fee payment to City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF programs for Project B-503. • Avenue 54 and Grapefruit Boulevard – Signalize the intersection with no changes to existing configuration of 1 left, 1 through, and 1 right turn lane in northbound, southbound, and westbound directions, and 1 shared left/through/right in eastbound direction. Project will contribute toward this improvement via fee payment to City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF programs for Projects B-349 and B-350.
• Tyler Street and Grapefruit Boulevard – Signalize the intersection with 1 right and 1 through lane in southbound direction, 1 shared left/right lane in eastbound direction and reconfigure northbound approach for 1 through lane and add 1 exclusive northbound left turn lane due to greater than 100 left turns per the Guidelines Appendix C. 125 ft storage length is assumed in analysis as determined by methodology in Caltrans Highway Design Manual Index 405.2(2)(e) and Buildout 2045 Plus Project left turn peak hour volume of 131 vehicles. The Project will contribute toward this improvement via fee payment to City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF programs for Project B-349.

All deficient locations will be improved to delays less than Buildout Year 2045 Baseline conditions with the implementation of the proposed transportation improvements (but as explained above will still operate at deficient levels until the full General Plan buildout improvements are completed).

Traffic signal warrant worksheets for deficient intersections that already warrant a traffic signal under Opening Year 2027. All analyzed roadway segments would operate at an acceptable LOS under Buildout 2045 Conditions.

All analyzed roadway segments would operate at an acceptable LOS under Buildout 2045 Conditions. Therefore, with implementation of the recommended improvements and payment of City of Coachella DIF and CVAG TUMF fees, the Project’s operational impacts under Buildout Year 2045 Conditions, would be less than significant.

Transit, Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
The SunLine Transit Agency is the main transit agency servicing the City. Currently, SunLine operates buses on Route 8 along the project frontage. Route 8 operates seven days a week and connects Coachella to Indio to the north and Mecca to the south. Daily service frequency is 60 minutes. Bus stops for Route 8 are currently located along the project frontage. Pedestrian accessibility and connectivity from the Project site to the northbound bus stop will be provided along the north side of Airport Boulevard through construction of sidewalk. There is existing sidewalk along the south side of Airport Boulevard for the southbound bus stop, but crossing is not available at the intersection with Desert Cactus Drive/SR 86 Southbound Ramp.

The Project would not construct any improvements that would affect existing transit service or transit stops within the Project area. Long-term operation of the Project would not reduce transit service or alter access to transit stops within the Project area, including SunLine bus service and stops located along the alignment of Route 8. Therefore, a less than significant impact to transit would occur.

Page 573 ends

Item 28.
82 No bicycle facilities or sidewalks currently exist along the site frontage on Airport Boulevard.

However, pedestrian crosswalks and sidewalks are provided along the south side of Airport Boulevard. Bicycle facilities do not currently exist along Airport Boulevard. The Project would provide half-width right-of-way improvements along the property frontage including a vehicular travel lane, bike lane, curb, gutter, and sidewalk. The Project would comply with the City’s design and development standards. As such, the Project would not interfere with existing or planned bicycle facilities or sidewalks in the City or conflict with applicable plans or policies and a less than significant impact would occur.

Emergency Access
SR 86 forms the site’s eastern boundary while SR 111/Grapefruit Boulevard is approximately 1,580 feet to the west of the site. Primary roadway access to the site would be provided with a newly constructed driveway at the southwest corner of the property along Airport Boulevard. An additional secondary right-turn-in-only driveway or gated emergency access closer to the SR 86 and Airport Boulevard interchange would be provided, subject to Caltrans’ approval.

Grapefruit Boulevard/SR 111 is located to the west of the site and is classified as a major arterial in proximity to the Project site and generally consists of two travel lanes in each direction, with a posted speed limit of 50 miles per hour (mph). Airport Boulevard from Polk Street to Fillmore Street, functions as a 2-lane major arterial. Airport Boulevard consists of 4 lanes from Polk Street to Palm Street, 3 lanes from Palm Street to Orange Street and 2 lanes from Orange Street to Fillmore Street. The posted speed limit on Airport Boulevard is 45 mph between Polk Street and Fillmore Street and 55 mph east and west of this segment.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts associated with the project resulting in inadequate emergency access, the following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

Page 574 ends

Item 28.
83 control plans to the City prior to the issuance of grading and/or construction permits.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for impacts associated with the Project resulting in inadequate emergency access, described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with implementation of TRA-1 and TRA-2, as recommended in the Final EIR, which have been adopted by the City and are enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Construction Impacts
The roadway improvements and installation of driveways that would be implemented during construction of the Project could require the temporary closure of travel lanes along Airport Boulevard. However, full roadway closure and traffic detours are not expected to be necessary during Project construction. As provided for in Mitigation Measure TRA-1, the Project applicant would prepare a traffic control plan for approval by the City prior to the initiation of site disturbance to ensure that construction activities and traffic control are carried out in a manner that causes minimal disruption to traffic on adjoining facilities. As required by Mitigation Measure TRA-2, the final location and design of construction staging and access shall comply with any applicable City access and design standards and be reviewed by the Project engineer. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measures TRA-1 and TRA-2, proposed Project impacts related to emergency access during construction would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Operational Impacts
The Project would not result in inadequate emergency access. Direct access to the Project would be from one major access point along Airport Boulevard and a second access point at the southeast corner of the site, which may be open, or restricted to emergency vehicles only. The Project would also be required to design and construct internal access, and size and location of fire suppression facilities (e.g., hydrants and sprinklers) to conform with the City’s fire protection standards. The Coachella Fire Department would review the development plans prior to approval to ensure adequate emergency access pursuant to the requirements of the California Fire Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations, Part 9). As such, the Project would not result in inadequate access, and impacts would be less than significant.

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impacts to Significant Tribal Cultural Resource
AB 52 established a requirement under CEQA to consider “tribal cultural values, as well as scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation.” Public Resources

Page 575 ends

Item 28.
84 Code § 21074(a) defines “tribal cultural resources” as “[s]ites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe” that are either “[i]ncluded or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR)” or “in a local register of historical resources.” Additionally, defined cultural landscapes, historical resources, and archaeological resources may be considered tribal cultural resources. The City as lead agency may also in its discretion treat a resource as a tribal cultural resource if it is supported with substantial evidence.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts to tribal cultural resources, the following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant impacts to tribal cultural resources described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with adherence to all General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1, as recommended in the Final EIR, which has been adopted by the City and is enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

PaleoWest coordinated with the NAHC as part of the Tribal coordination for the cultural resources report for the proposed Project. The NAHC recommended that 12 tribal groups be contacted to elicit information regarding cultural resources issues related to the proposed Project and its surroundings. PaleoWest received responses from three (3) of the twelve tribes. In addition, the City conducted Tribal Consultation under SB 18 and AB 52, and sent out a total of 23 consultation requests, including five (5) to Tribes whose requests for AB 52 consultation are on file with the City, and those identified by the NAHC when the request for SB 18 consulting tribes list was made.

The City received three (3) responses. The Morongo Band and the Fort Yuma Quechan Tribe declined consultation, while the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) requested

Page 576 ends

Item 28.
85 consultation and met with the City to review the proposed Project. During the consultation meeting, the City indicated that monitoring of the site would be required for all earth moving activities, as provided in Mitigation Measure CUL-1. The Tribe requested that not only an archaeological monitor but also an ACBCI Tribal monitor be present during all digging and soil removal activities during development of the Project, as outlined in Mitigation Measure CUL-1.

The City Council reviewed and considered the comment letter received from the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians (TMDCI), dated July 23, 2025. In response to that letter, the City Council approves and adopts the revision to Mitigation Measure CUL-1 recommended in the Final EIR to include a TMDCI Tribal monitor in addition to the ACBCI Tribal Monitor. Based on the analysis in the Draft EIR, the Final EIR responses to comments, and the supporting technical report from subject matter expert Chronicle Heritage dated October 2, 2025 and included in the Final EIR as Attachment D2, which are incorporated herein, the City Council rejects the TMDCI request for further surface study of the Project site for Tribal Cultural Resources because the studies conducted to date are adequate and support the conclusion that there is a low potential for significant Tribal Cultural Resources to exist on the Project site. Nevertheless, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 will ensure that the unexpected discovery of unknown Tribal Cultural Resources will be mitigated to a level of less than significant.

The Project would also be required to conform to the City of Coachella 2035 General Plan Update policies related to its Sustainability + Natural Environment Element. Specifically, the Project would be required to adhere to Policies 12.1, 12.6 and 12.8 related to the discovery and disturbance of human remains and the application of mitigation measures to reduce impacts to any human remains discovered during Project construction activities, as provided in Mitigation Measure CUL2. The Project would also be required to adhere to Policy 12.2 and notify the appropriate Native American tribe should potential tribal remains be discovered during Project construction activities.

With adherence to the applicable City of Coachella 2035 General Plan update policies and the implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2, impacts to tribal cultural resources will be reduced to less than significant levels.

WILDFIRE
Impair an Emergency Response or Evacuation Plan
The applicable adopted emergency response plans for projects within the City include the 2022 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) and the 2021 Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), which establish the City’s emergency procedures, operations and strategies related to fire hazards or disaster related emergency operations.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate potential project specific and cumulative impacts to an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, the following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented consistent with the MMRP:

Page 577 ends

Item 28.
86 Construction Contractor for and approved by the City prior to the initiation of site disturbance such as grading, excavation, hauling, paving and other construction activities where public streets may be affected. Prior to the initiation of site improvements, the Project applicant shall confer with the appropriate Coachella Public Works Department, Caltrans and the Union Pacific Railroad to ensure that construction activities and traffic control are carried out in a manner that causes minimal disruption to traffic on adjoining facilities.

TRA-2 The final location and design of construction staging and access shall comply with any applicable City access and design standards and be reviewed by the Project engineer. The Project applicant shall submit traffic control plans to the City prior to the issuance of grading and/or construction permits.

Finding:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that for each of the significant impacts to an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan described above and further discussed in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen such significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, and further finds that all such effects will be mitigated to less than significant levels with adherence to all General Plan policies and implementation of Mitigation Measures TRA-1 and TRA-2, as recommended in the Final EIR, which have been adopted by the City and are enforceable through the Development Agreement, MMRP and project conditions of approval.

Facts in Support of Finding:

The purpose of the LHMP is to identify the City’s hazards, review and assess past disaster occurrences, estimate the probability of future occurrences, and set goals to mitigate, reduce or eliminate potential long-term risk to people and property from natural and manmade hazards. The EOP addresses the City’s planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters (including wildfire), technological incidents, and national security emergencies in or affecting the City. The EOP describes the operations of the City Emergency Operations Center (EOC), which is the central management entity responsible for directing and coordinating the various City departments and other agencies in their emergency response activities.

The Project area and surrounding area have access to several fully improved roadways, including SR 86 and Airport Boulevard, which would provide full emergency access to the site. Construction activities, which may temporarily restrict vehicular traffic, would be required to comply with a project-specific construction traffic control plan and construction staging area approval by the City, to facilitate the passage of persons and vehicles through/around any required road closures, as provided for in Mitigation Measures TRA-1 and TRA-2 (EIR Section 4.17, Transportation).

Specifically, during construction of the Project, all equipment staging would occur within the property boundary, and worker vehicles would be parked either on the property or in a designated parking lane along Airport Boulevard, adjacent to the southern boundary of the Project.

Page 578 ends

Coachella City CouncilOctober 14, 2026

Coachella City Council
October 14, 2026