Desert Hot Springs City Council
December 12, 2024

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.94 0.00 47.87 53.35 0.00 46.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 0.6190 2.2000e0040.0241 0.0000 9.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0050.0519 0.0519 1.3000e0040.0552 Energy 0.0172 0.1559 0.1310 9.4000e0040.0119 0.0119 0.0119 0.0119 187.0909 187.0909 3.5900e0033.4300e003188.2027 Mobile 11.8927 13.1403 82.9699 0.1528 16.9464 0.1348 17.0813 4.5203 0.1261 4.6464 15,588.58 30 15,588.58
30 1.2687 1.0226 15,925.02
54 Total 12.5288 13.2964 83.1250 0.1538 16.9464 0.1468 17.0932 4.5203 0.1380 4.6584 15,775.72 58 15,775.72
58 1.2724 1.0260 16,113.28
33 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 0.6190 2.2000e0040.0241 0.0000 9.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0050.0519 0.0519 1.3000e0040.0552 Energy 0.0172 0.1559 0.1310 9.4000e0040.0119 0.0119 0.0119 0.0119 187.0909 187.0909 3.5900e0033.4300e003188.2027 Mobile 11.8927 13.1403 82.9699 0.1528 16.9464 0.1348 17.0813 4.5203 0.1261 4.6464 15,588.58 30 15,588.58
30 1.2687 1.0226 15,925.02
54 Total 12.5288 13.2964 83.1250 0.1538 16.9464 0.1468 17.0932 4.5203 0.1380 4.6584 15,775.72 58 15,775.72
58 1.2724 1.0260 16,113.28
33 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 11/1/2024 11/14/2024 5 10 2 Grading Grading 11/15/2024 12/12/2024 5 20
3 Building Construction Building Construction 12/13/2024 10/30/2025 5 230 4 Paving Paving 10/31/2025 11/27/2025 5 20
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 11/28/2025 12/25/2025 5 20 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 26,952; Non-Residential Outdoor: 8,984; Striped Parking Area: 13,016 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 15
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 20
Acres of Paving: 4.98
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 97.00 39.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 19.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.2 Site Preparation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.6570 0.0000 19.6570 10.1025 0.0000 10.1025 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6609 27.1760 18.3356 0.0381 1.2294 1.2294 1.1310 1.1310 3,688.010 0 3,688.010
0 1.1928 3,717.829
4 Total 2.6609 27.1760 18.3356 0.0381 19.6570 1.2294 20.8864 10.1025 1.1310 11.2335 3,688.010 0 3,688.010
0 1.1928 3,717.829
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0482 0.0301 0.3966 1.1700e0030.1506 6.9000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.4000e0040.0406 118.2681 118.2681 3.3200e0033.2600e003119.3241 Total 0.0482 0.0301 0.3966 1.1700e0030.1506 6.9000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.4000e0040.0406 118.2681 118.2681 3.3200e0033.2600e003119.3241 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.2 Site Preparation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.8457 0.0000 8.8457 4.5461 0.0000 4.5461 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6609 27.1760 18.3356 0.0381 1.2294 1.2294 1.1310 1.1310 0.0000 3,688.010 0 3,688.010
0 1.1928 3,717.829
4 Total 2.6609 27.1760 18.3356 0.0381 8.8457 1.2294 10.0750 4.5461 1.1310 5.6771 0.0000 3,688.010 0 3,688.010
0 1.1928 3,717.829
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0482 0.0301 0.3966 1.1700e0030.1506 6.9000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.4000e0040.0406 118.2681 118.2681 3.3200e0033.2600e003119.3241 Total 0.0482 0.0301 0.3966 1.1700e0030.1506 6.9000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.4000e0040.0406 118.2681 118.2681 3.3200e0033.2600e003119.3241 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.0826 0.0000 7.0826 3.4247 0.0000 3.4247 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.6617 17.0310 14.7594 0.0297 0.7244 0.7244 0.6665 0.6665 2,873.054 1 2,873.054
1 0.9292 2,896.284
2 Total 1.6617 17.0310 14.7594 0.0297 7.0826 0.7244 7.8070 3.4247 0.6665 4.0912 2,873.054 1 2,873.054
1 0.9292 2,896.284
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0402 0.0251 0.3305 9.8000e0040.1255 5.8000e0040.1261 0.0333 5.3000e0040.0338 98.5567 98.5567 2.7700e0032.7200e00399.4367 Total 0.0402 0.0251 0.3305 9.8000e0040.1255 5.8000e0040.1261 0.0333 5.3000e0040.0338 98.5567 98.5567 2.7700e0032.7200e00399.4367 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 3.1872 0.0000 3.1872 1.5411 0.0000 1.5411 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.6617 17.0310 14.7594 0.0297 0.7244 0.7244 0.6665 0.6665 0.0000 2,873.054 1 2,873.054
1 0.9292 2,896.284
2 Total 1.6617 17.0310 14.7594 0.0297 3.1872 0.7244 3.9116 1.5411 0.6665 2.2076 0.0000 2,873.054 1 2,873.054
1 0.9292 2,896.284
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0402 0.0251 0.3305 9.8000e0040.1255 5.8000e0040.1261 0.0333 5.3000e0040.0338 98.5567 98.5567 2.7700e0032.7200e00399.4367 Total 0.0402 0.0251 0.3305 9.8000e0040.1255 5.8000e0040.1261 0.0333 5.3000e0040.0338 98.5567 98.5567 2.7700e0032.7200e00399.4367 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0370 1.1704 0.5124 5.4100e0030.1957 8.7200e0030.2044 0.0564 8.3500e0030.0647 573.7592 573.7592 6.2200e0030.0849 599.2134 Worker 0.2600 0.1621 2.1372 6.3100e0030.8116 3.7300e0030.8153 0.2153 3.4300e0030.2187 637.3334 637.3334 0.0179 0.0176 643.0243 Total 0.2969 1.3325 2.6496 0.0117 1.0073 0.0125 1.0197 0.2716 0.0118 0.2834 1,211.092 5 1,211.092
5 0.0241 0.1025 1,242.237
6 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0370 1.1704 0.5124 5.4100e0030.1957 8.7200e0030.2044 0.0564 8.3500e0030.0647 573.7592 573.7592 6.2200e0030.0849 599.2134 Worker 0.2600 0.1621 2.1372 6.3100e0030.8116 3.7300e0030.8153 0.2153 3.4300e0030.2187 637.3334 637.3334 0.0179 0.0176 643.0243 Total 0.2969 1.3325 2.6496 0.0117 1.0073 0.0125 1.0197 0.2716 0.0118 0.2834 1,211.092 5 1,211.092
5 0.0241 0.1025 1,242.237
6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0365 1.1614 0.5072 5.3100e0030.1957 8.7300e0030.2044 0.0564 8.3500e0030.0647 563.6477 563.6477 6.4400e0030.0832 588.6129 Worker 0.2432 0.1456 1.9934 6.0900e0030.8116 3.5400e0030.8151 0.2153 3.2600e0030.2185 615.7633 615.7633 0.0162 0.0164 621.0686 Total 0.2797 1.3070 2.5006 0.0114 1.0073 0.0123 1.0196 0.2716 0.0116 0.2832 1,179.411 0 1,179.411
0 0.0227 0.0997 1,209.681
5 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0365 1.1614 0.5072 5.3100e0030.1957 8.7300e0030.2044 0.0564 8.3500e0030.0647 563.6477 563.6477 6.4400e0030.0832 588.6129 Worker 0.2432 0.1456 1.9934 6.0900e0030.8116 3.5400e0030.8151 0.2153 3.2600e0030.2185 615.7633 615.7633 0.0162 0.0164 621.0686 Total 0.2797 1.3070 2.5006 0.0114 1.0073 0.0123 1.0196 0.2716 0.0116 0.2832 1,179.411 0 1,179.411
0 0.0227 0.0997 1,209.681
5 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.5 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Paving 0.4664 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3815 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0376 0.0225 0.3083 9.4000e0040.1255 5.5000e0040.1261 0.0333 5.0000e0040.0338 95.2211 95.2211 2.5100e0032.5400e00396.0415 Total 0.0376 0.0225 0.3083 9.4000e0040.1255 5.5000e0040.1261 0.0333 5.0000e0040.0338 95.2211 95.2211 2.5100e0032.5400e00396.0415 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.5 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 0.0000 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Paving 0.4664 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3815 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 0.0000 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0376 0.0225 0.3083 9.4000e0040.1255 5.5000e0040.1261 0.0333 5.0000e0040.0338 95.2211 95.2211 2.5100e0032.5400e00396.0415 Total 0.0376 0.0225 0.3083 9.4000e0040.1255 5.5000e0040.1261 0.0333 5.0000e0040.0338 95.2211 95.2211 2.5100e0032.5400e00396.0415 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 28.3616 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 28.5324 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0476 0.0285 0.3905 1.1900e0030.1590 6.9000e0040.1597 0.0422 6.4000e0040.0428 120.6134 120.6134 3.1800e0033.2200e003121.6526 Total 0.0476 0.0285 0.3905 1.1900e0030.1590 6.9000e0040.1597 0.0422 6.4000e0040.0428 120.6134 120.6134 3.1800e0033.2200e003121.6526 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 28.3616 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 28.5324 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e0030.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0476 0.0285 0.3905 1.1900e0030.1590 6.9000e0040.1597 0.0422 6.4000e0040.0428 120.6134 120.6134 3.1800e0033.2200e003121.6526 Total 0.0476 0.0285 0.3905 1.1900e0030.1590 6.9000e0040.1597 0.0422 6.4000e0040.0428 120.6134 120.6134 3.1800e0033.2200e003121.6526 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 11.8927 13.1403 82.9699 0.1528 16.9464 0.1348 17.0813 4.5203 0.1261 4.6464 15,588.58 30 15,588.58
30 1.2687 1.0226 15,925.02
54 Unmitigated 11.8927 13.1403 82.9699 0.1528 16.9464 0.1348 17.0813 4.5203 0.1261 4.6464 15,588.58 30 15,588.58
30 1.2687 1.0226 15,925.02
54 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 6,393.06 6,393.06 6393.06 7,098,506 7,098,506 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 935.00 935.00 935.00 924,414 924,414 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 7,328.06 7,328.06 7,328.06 8,022,920 8,022,920
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps

12.50 4.20 5.40 0.80 80.20 19.00 67.14 0 32.86
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

12.50 4.20 5.40 2.20 78.80 19.00 58 0 42
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 12.50 4.20 5.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Parking Lot 12.50 4.20 5.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps

0.542916 0.056689 0.174450 0.134041 0.024680 0.006960 0.011589 0.018600 0.000608 0.000298 0.023389 0.001091 0.004689 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

0.542916 0.056689 0.174450 0.134041 0.024680 0.006960 0.011589 0.018600 0.000608 0.000298 0.023389 0.001091 0.004689 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.542916 0.056689 0.174450 0.134041 0.024680 0.006960 0.011589 0.018600 0.000608 0.000298 0.023389 0.001091 0.004689 Parking Lot 0.542916 0.056689 0.174450 0.134041 0.024680 0.006960 0.011589 0.018600 0.000608 0.000298 0.023389 0.001091 0.004689

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.0172 0.1559 0.1310 9.4000e0040.0119 0.0119 0.0119 0.0119 187.0909 187.0909 3.5900e0033.4300e003188.2027 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0172 0.1559 0.1310 9.4000e0040.0119 0.0119 0.0119 0.0119 187.0909 187.0909 3.5900e0033.4300e003188.2027

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps

96.2455 1.0400e0039.4400e0037.9300e0036.0000e0057.2000e0047.2000e0047.2000e0047.2000e00411.3230 11.3230 2.2000e0042.1000e00411.3903 Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
1494.03 0.0161 0.1465 0.1230 8.8000e0040.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 175.7679 175.7679 3.3700e0033.2200e003176.8124 Other NonAsphalt Surfaces0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0172 0.1559 0.1310 9.4000e0040.0119 0.0119 0.0119 0.0119 187.0909 187.0909 3.5900e0033.4300e003188.2027 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps

0.0962455 1.0400e0039.4400e0037.9300e0036.0000e0057.2000e0047.2000e0047.2000e0047.2000e00411.3230 11.3230 2.2000e0042.1000e00411.3903 Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

1.49403 0.0161 0.1465 0.1230 8.8000e0040.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 175.7679 175.7679 3.3700e0033.2200e003176.8124 Other NonAsphalt Surfaces0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0172 0.1559 0.1310 9.4000e0040.0119 0.0119 0.0119 0.0119 187.0909 187.0909 3.5900e0033.4300e003188.2027 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 0.6190 2.2000e0040.0241 0.0000 9.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0050.0519 0.0519 1.3000e0040.0552 Unmitigated 0.6190 2.2000e0040.0241 0.0000 9.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0050.0519 0.0519 1.3000e0040.0552

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

0.1554 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.4614 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 2.2200e0032.2000e0040.0241 0.0000 9.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0050.0519 0.0519 1.3000e0040.0552 Total 0.6190 2.2000e0040.0241 0.0000 9.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0050.0519 0.0519 1.3000e0040.0552 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

0.1554 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.4614 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 2.2200e0032.2000e0040.0241 0.0000 9.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0050.0519 0.0519 1.3000e0040.0552 Total 0.6190 2.2000e0040.0241 0.0000 9.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0059.0000e0050.0519 0.0519 1.3000e0040.0552 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

11.0 Vegetation

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 26 Date: 5/31/2024 2:01 PM Beyond Desert Hot Springs - Riverside-Salton Sea County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item Number: 1.

GASOLINE DISPENSING SERVICE STATION AN:
(Procedure Version 8.1 & Package N, September 1, 2017 ) - Risk Tool V1.105 Facility Name:

Deem Complete Date:

Storage Tank Type Underground MET Station
Annual Throughput 2.5 million gallons /year Distance to Resident 185 meter T-BACT YES Distance to Commercial 500 meter
MICR Calculation: MICR = MICR per 1 Million gallons/yr x Annual Throughput (Million gallons/yr) HIA & HIC Calculation: Negligible compared to Cancer risk and is not calculated.

MICR Result
MICR
MICR ≤ 10
Interpolation for MICR from Nearest Distances Residential Commercial near actual far near actual far
100 185 200 500 500 1000

0.467 0.1925 0.144 0.003 0.003 0.001
Look up from Table 12 - MICR for Underground Storage Tank Station Receptor 25 50 75 100 200 300 500 1000
Resident 3.363 1.352 0.736 0.467 0.144 0.073 0.031 0.010 Commercial 0.277 0.111 0.061 0.038 0.012 0.006 0.003 0.001 Palm Springs Airport
Palm Springs Airport
Downwind Distance (m)
Resident

0.481
PASS
Commercial

0.008
PASS
Distance (meter)
MICR (per 1 million gasoline
gallon throughput per year)
Gas Station -
Risk Assessment 4/12/2024
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT,

JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND

CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE

NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD

CITY OF DESERT HOT SPRINGS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for:

Amir Butt
1461 Tahoe St.

Beaumont, CA 92223
Prepared by:

Jennings Environmental, LLC
35414 Acacia Ave.

Yucaipa, CA 92399
909-534-4547
July 2022, Updated June 2024
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Contents
SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................3

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION.............................................................................................................................................3

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................................................3

2.0 – METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................................................3

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................................................................................3

2.2 SOILS....................................................................................................................................................................4

2.3 BIOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE-LEVEL SURVEY ..................................................................................................4

2.4 JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES.................................................................................................................................4

2.5 COACHELLA VALLEY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (CVMSHCP) .......................................4

2.6 VEGETATION........................................................................................................................................................5

2.7 WILDLIFE..............................................................................................................................................................6 SECTION 3.0 – RESULTS .................................................................................................................................................6

3.1 LITERATURE REVIEW RESULTS.............................................................................................................................6

3.1.1 SOILS ............................................................................................................................................................6

3.1.2 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS ............................................................................................................................6

3.1.3 HYDROLOGY AND HYDROLOGIC CONNECTIVITY .........................................................................................7

3.1.4 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES BACKGROUND .....................................................................................................7

3.1.5 CVMSHCP .....................................................................................................................................................8

3.2 FIELD STUDY RESULTS .........................................................................................................................................8

3.2.1 HABITAT .......................................................................................................................................................8

3.2.2 WILDLIFE ......................................................................................................................................................9

3.2.3 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES..............................................................................................................................9

3.2.4 NESTING BIRDS.............................................................................................................................................9

3.2.5 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS ..........................................................................................................................10

3.2.6 WETLANDS .................................................................................................................................................10

3.3 CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS...................................................................................................................10 SECTION 4.0 - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................................................10 Section 5 – REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................................13 Appendix A - Figures....................................................................................................................................................14 Appendix B - Photos ....................................................................................................................................................20 Appendix C – Regulatory Framework ..........................................................................................................................23 Appendix D – Tables ....................................................................................................................................................31 Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 3
SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION
Jennings Environmental, LLC (Jennings) was retained by Amir Butt (Owner) to conduct a literature review and reconnaissance-level survey for the proposed New Commercial Development Project (Project) located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Indian Canyon and Pierson Blvd in the city of Desert Hot Springs. The survey identified vegetation communities, the potential for the occurrence of special status species, or habitats that could support special status wildlife species, and recorded all plants and animals observed or detected within the Project boundary. This biological resources assessment is designed to address potential effects of the proposed project on designated critical habitats and/or any species currently listed or formally proposed for listing as endangered or threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) or species designated as sensitive by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or the California Native Plant Society (CNPS).

Information contained in this document is in accordance with accepted scientific and technical standards that are consistent with the requirements of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and CDFW. Additionally, the site was surveyed for any drainage features that would meet the definition of the Waters of the US (WOUS), Waters of the State (WOS), or CDFW jurisdiction. Additionally, the project is located within the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). As such, this report also contains the results of the consistency analysis performed for the project.

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The project is generally located in the southwest corner of Section 26, Township 2 South, Range 4 East, and is depicted on the Desert Hot Springs U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map.

More specifically the project is located within APN 664-080-017, within the city of Desert Hot Springs, Riverside County, California. The site is surrounded by open space to the north, east, and west, with rural residential developments to the south. (Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix A).

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project is to develop the site with a gas station, car wash, convenience store, and drivethrough style restaurants. The gas station canopy will be approximately 5,971 square feet, the convenience store will be approximately 7,460 square feet, the car wash will be approximately 1,790 square feet, and the two restaurants will each be approximately 2,00 square feet.

2.0 – METHODOLOGY

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW
Prior to performing the field survey, existing documentation relevant to the Project site was reviewed.

The most recent records of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) managed by CDFW (CDFW 2022), the USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper (USFWS 2022), and the California Native Plant Society’s Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2022) were reviewed for the following quadrangles containing and surrounding the Project site: Desert Hot Springs and Morongo Valley, USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle. The Morongo Valley quad was included in the search Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 4
due to the site’s proximity to its border. These databases contain records of reported occurrences of federal- or state-listed endangered or threatened species, California Species of Concern (SSC), or otherwise special status species or habitats that may occur within or in the immediate vicinity of the Project site.

2.2 SOILS
Before conducting the surveys, soil maps for Riverside County were referenced online to determine the types of soil found within the Project site. Soils were determined in accordance with categories set forth by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service and by referencing the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (USDA 2022).

2.3 BIOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE-LEVEL SURVEY
Jennings biologist, Gene Jennings, conducted the general reconnaissance survey within the Project site to identify the potential for the occurrence of special status species, vegetation communities, or habitats that could support special status wildlife species. The surveys were conducted on foot, throughout the Project site between 0730 and 0845 hours on July 18, 2022. Weather conditions during the survey included temperatures ranging from 80.2 to 83.7 degrees Fahrenheit, with no cloud cover, no precipitation, and 3.3 to 9.5 mile per hour winds. Photographs of the Project site were taken to document existing conditions (Appendix B) with a photo point map (Figure 3) in Appendix A.

2.4 JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES
A general assessment of jurisdictional waters regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and CDFW was conducted for the proposed Project area. Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, USACE regulates the discharge of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States. The State of California (State) regulates the discharge of material into waters of the State pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act and the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (California Water Code, Division 7, §13000 et seq.). Pursuant to Division 2, Chapter 6, Sections 1600-1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, CDFW regulates all substantial diversions, obstructions, or changes to the natural flow or bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake, which supports fish or wildlife. The initial assessment was conducted by a desktop survey through the USGS National Hydrography Dataset for hydrological connectivity. Additional assessment findings are discussed in Sections 3.1.2 and 3.2.5. A discussion of the regulatory framework is provided in Appendix C.

2.5 COACHELLA VALLEY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (CVMSHCP) The CVMSHCP is a regional multi-agency conservation plan that provides for the long-term conservation of approximately 240,000 acres of open space and 27 plant and animal species in the Coachella Valley.

The stated overall goal of the CVMSHCP is, “… to enhance and maintain biological diversity and ecosystem processes while allowing future economic growth.” The CVMSHCP balances environmental protection and economic development objectives in the plan area and simplifies compliance with endangered species laws.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 5
The Plan is subdivided according to specific resource conservation goals that have been organized according to geographic areas defined as Conservation Areas that serve as natural habitat for covered species. These areas are identified as Core, Essential, or Other Conserved Habitat for special-status plant, invertebrate, amphibian, reptile, bird, and mammal species, Essential Ecological Process Areas, and Biological Corridors and Linkages. For each Conservation Area, Conservation Objectives and required measures are articulated for conserving Core Habitat for covered species, Essential Ecological Processes necessary to maintain habitat viability, Biological Corridors, and Linkages as needed, and the less common Conserved Natural Communities.

Conservation Goals are managed within the Conservation Areas as a Reserve System. The Conservation Goals of the CVMSHCP Reserve System are:
- Represent native ecosystem types or natural communities across their natural range of variation in a system of conserved areas.
- Maintain or restore self-sustaining populations or metapopulations of the species included in the Plan to ensure permanent Conservation so that Take Authorization can be obtained for currently Listed Species (animal species) and Non-listed Species can be covered in case they are listed in the future.
- Sustain ecological and evolutionary processes necessary to maintain the functionality of the conserved natural communities and Habitats for the species included in the Plan. - Maximize connectivity among populations and avoid Habitat fragmentation within Conservation Areas to conserve biological diversity, ecological balance, and connected populations of Covered Species.
- Minimize adverse impacts from OHV use, illegal dumping, edge effects, exotic species, and other disturbances in accordance with the Management and Monitoring Programs. - Manage the Conservation Areas adaptively to be responsive to short-term and long-term environmental change and new science.

Under the CVMSHCP, a Take Authorization, except for three of the covered species, is allowed for covered activities in accordance with the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act. Covered activities include development permitted or approved by local permittees, which includes new projects approved pursuant to county and city general plans.

Take activities are limited within Conservation Areas.

Mitigation for the impacts of development on the covered species and their habitats is through payment of a fee to the City of Desert Hot Springs which is in turn used by the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission to minimize and mitigate impacts of the Taking and provide for the conservation of the covered and non-covered species through the acquisition and maintenance of habitat.

2.6 VEGETATION
All plant species observed within the Project site were recorded. Vegetation communities within the Project site were identified, qualitatively described, and mapped onto a high-resolution imagery aerial photograph. Plant communities were determined in accordance with the Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition (Sawyer et al. 2009). Plant nomenclature follows that of The Jepson Manual, Second Edition (Baldwin et al. 2012). A comprehensive list of the plant species observed during the survey is provided in Appendix D.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 6

2.7 WILDLIFE
All wildlife and wildlife signs observed and detected, including tracks, scat, carcasses, burrows, excavations, and vocalizations, were recorded. Additional survey time was spent in those habitats most likely to be utilized by wildlife (native vegetation, wildlife trails, etc.) or in habitats with the potential to support state- and/or federally listed or otherwise special status species. Notes were made on the general habitat types, species observed, and the conditions of the Project site. A comprehensive list of the wildlife species observed during the survey is provided in Appendix D.

SECTION 3.0 – RESULTS

3.1 LITERATURE REVIEW RESULTS
According to the CNDDB and CNPSEI, 48 sensitive species were documented in the CNDDB and 4 were documented in the CNPSEI. Including 7 listed species and 3 sensitive habitats, have been documented in the Desert Hot Springs and Morongo Valley quads. This list of sensitive species and habitats includes any State and/or federally listed threatened or endangered species, CDFW designated Species of Special Concern (SSC), and otherwise Special Animals. “Special Animals” is a general term that refers to all of the taxa the CNDDB is interested in tracking, regardless of their legal or protection status. This list is also referred to as the list of “species at risk” or “special status species.” The CDFW considers the taxa on this list to be those of greatest conservation need.

An analysis of the likelihood for the occurrence of all CNDDB and CNPSEI sensitive species documented in the Desert Hot Springs and Morongo Valley quads is provided in Table 2, in Appendix D. This analysis takes into account species range as well as documentation within the vicinity of the project area and includes the habitat requirements for each species and the potential for their occurrence on the site, based on required habitat elements and range relative to the current site conditions. According to the databases, no USFWS designated critical habitat occurs within or adjacent to the project site.

3.1.1 SOILS
After a review of the USDA Soil Conservation Service and by referencing the USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey (USDA 2021), it was determined that the Project site is located within the Riverside County, Coachella Valley Area, California (Area CA680). The Project site contains two (2) soil types (Figure 4 in Appendix A):

Carsitas fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (CkB). This soil is excessively drained with a high to very high capacity to transmit water. This soil consists of sandy alluvium derived from granite, typically ranges in elevations around 800 feet above mean sea level (amsl), and is not considered prime farmland.

Myoma fines sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (MaB). This soil is somewhat excessively drained with a high to very high capacity to transmit water. This soil consists of windblown sandy alluvium, typically ranges in elevation from -200 to 1,800 feet amsl, and is considered prime farmland if irrigated.

3.1.2 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
Aerial imagery of the site was examined and compared with the surrounding USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle maps to identify drainage features within the survey area as indicated by Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 7
topographic changes, blue-line features, or visible drainage patterns. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Program “My Waters” data layers were also reviewed to determine whether any hydrologic features and wetland areas had been documented within the vicinity of the site. Similarly, the Soil maps from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) - Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (USDA 2021) were reviewed to identify the soil series on-site and to check if they have been identified regionally as hydric soils. Upstream and downstream connectivity of waterways (if present) was reviewed in the field, on aerial imagery, and topographic maps to determine jurisdictional status. No obvious signs of jurisdictional features were observed during the literature review.

3.1.3 HYDROLOGY AND HYDROLOGIC CONNECTIVITY
Hydrologically, the project site is located within the Mission Creek Hydrologic Sub-Area (HSA 719.42) which comprises a 73,873-acre drainage area within the larger Headwaters Whitewater River Hydrologic Area (Hydrologic Unit Code [HUC10] 1810020103) (CalTrans, 2022). The Headwaters Whitewater River watershed inDesert Springsis bordered to the north by the Headwaters Santa Ana River watershed, to the east by the Little Morongo Creek-Morongo Wash watershed, to south by the Upper Whitewater River and Palm Canyon Wash watersheds, and to the west by the San Gorgonio River watershed (Figure 4 in Appendix A).

3.1.4 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES BACKGROUND
Desert Tortoise
The desert tortoise is a State and federally listed threatened species. Throughout its range, it is threatened by habitat loss, domestic grazing, predation, collections, and increased mortality rates. The desert tortoise is typically found in creosote bush scrub. They are most often found on level or sloped ground where the substrate is firm but not too rocky. Tortoise burrows are typically found at the base of shrubs, in the sides of washes and hillsides. Because a single tortoise may have many burrows distributed throughout its home range, it is not possible to predict the exact numbers of individuals on a site based upon burrow numbers.

In 1992 the US Bureau of Land Management issued the California Statewide Desert Tortoise Management Policy which included categorizing habitat into three levels of classification. The management goal for Category I areas is to maintain stable, viable populations and to increase the population where possible. The management goal for Category II areas is to maintain stable, viable populations. The management goal for Category III areas is to limit population declines to the extent feasible. In April 1993, the BLM amended the CDCA plan to delineate these three categories of desert tortoise habitat on public lands. Although habitat categories apply only to public lands administered by the BLM, regulatory agencies typically determine habitat compensation ratios based on the nearest BLM habitat categories (Desert Tortoise Compensation Team 1991). With the adoption of the West Mojave Plan (U.S. Bureau of Land Management 2005), all lands that are outside Desert Wildlife Management Areas, including the subject parcel, are characterized as Category 3 Habitat, which is the lowest priority management area for viable populations of the desert tortoise.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 8
Burrowing owl (BUOW)
The BUOW is a state and federal SSC. This owl is a mottled, brownish and sand-colored, dove-sized raptor, with large, yellow eyes, a rounded head lacking ear tufts, white eyebrows, and long legs compared to other owl species. It is a ground-dwelling owl typically found in arid prairies, fields, and open areas where vegetation is sparse and low to the ground. The BUOW is heavily dependent upon the presence of mammal burrows, with ground squirrel burrows being a common choice, in its habitat to provide shelter from predators, inclement weather, and to provide a nesting place (Coulombe 1971). They are also known to make use of human-created structures, such as cement culverts and pipes, for burrows.

BUOW spends a great deal of time standing on dirt mounds at the entrance to a burrow or perched on a fence post or other low to the ground perch from which they hunt for prey. BUOW frequently hunt by hovering in place above the ground and dropping on their prey from above. They feed primarily on insects such as grasshoppers, June beetles, and moths, but will also take small rodents, birds, and reptiles. They are active during the day and night but are considered a crepuscular owl; generally observed in the early morning hours or at twilight. The breeding season for BUOW is February 1 through August 31. Up to 11, but typically 7 to 9, eggs are laid in a burrow, abandoned pipe, or other subterranean hollows where incubation is complete in 28-30 days. Young BUOW fledges in 44 days. The BUOW is considered a migratory species in portions of its range, which includes western North America from Canada to Mexico, and east to Texas and Louisiana. BUOW populations in California are considered to be sedentary or locally migratory.

Throughout its range, the BUOW is vulnerable to habitat loss, predation, vehicular collisions, and destruction of burrow sites, and the poisoning of ground squirrels (Grinnell and Miller 1944, Zarn 1974, Remsen 1978). BUOW has disappeared from significant portions of their range in the last 15 years and, overall, nearly 60% of the breeding groups of owls known to have existed in California during the 1980s had disappeared by the early 1990s (Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993). The BUOW is not listed under the state or federal Endangered Species Act but is considered both a federal and state Species of Special Concern. The BUOW is a migratory bird protected by the international treaty under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and by State law under the California Fish and Game Code (CDFG Code #3513 & #3503.5).

3.1.5 CVMSHCP
Prior to the field visit, the CVMSHCP website and databases were searched. This includes the CVMSHCP plan itself and any relevant protocol survey requirements. The database also includes a mapping program that contains site-specific information related to criteria cell location, special survey areas for plants and animals, and vegetation mapping.

3.2 FIELD STUDY RESULTS

3.2.1 HABITAT
The habitat on-site consists of a mix of Larrea tridentata - Ambrosia dumosa Shrubland Alliance (Creosote bush – white bursage scrub) and bare ground. Table 1 in Appendix D contains a list of all plants found onsite. The site is relatively undisturbed with the exception of the dirt roads that transect the property. There was also evidence of human disturbance in the form of foot traffic and bicycle traffic.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 9

3.2.2 WILDLIFE
Species observed or otherwise detected on or in the vicinity of the project site during the surveys included; mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) and common raven (Corvus corax). Table 1 in Appendix D contains a list of all animal species found on-site.

3.2.3 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES
Desert Tortoise
No suitable habitat for desert tortoises exists within the Project site . There are documented desert tortoise occurrences within 5 miles the Project site. However, these occurrences are within suitable habitat This species are not expected to occur within the Project area. Additionally, the Project site is outside of the Designated Critical Habitat for this species. Therefore, no potential direct or indirect impacts on desert tortoise can be identified, and presence/absence surveys for this species are not warranted or recommended.

Burrowing owl (BUOW)
Based on the July 2022 field survey, the site does not contain suitable habitat for this species. No burrowing owls were observed during the site visit. No burrows of any kind were located within the Project site. No portion of the Project site showed any evidence of past or present BUOW activity. No feathers, whitewash, or castings were found and no suitable burrow surrogate species are present onsite. Therefore, no suitable habitat exists on-site and no focused surveys are required.

Designated Critical Habitat
The site is not located within or adjacent to any USFWS designated Critical Habitat. No further action is required.

3.2.4 NESTING BIRDS
The Project site and immediate surrounding area does contain habitat suitable for nesting birds. As such the Project is subject to the following nesting bird regulations. Recommendations for avoidance and minimization are in section 4.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. This Act implements four international conservation treaties that the U.S. entered into with Canada in 1916, Mexico in 1936, Japan in 1972, and Russia in 1976. It is intended to ensure the sustainability of populations of all protected migratory bird species. The Act has been amended with the signing of each treaty, as well as when any of the treaties were amended, such as with Mexico in 1976 and Canada in 1995. The Act prohibits the take (including killing, capturing, selling, trading, and transport) of protected migratory bird species without prior authorization by the Department of Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 10
California Fish and Game Code
The Project site is also subject to Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of the Fish and Game Code. Section 3503 states, “It is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto”. And Section 3503.5 states, “It is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds-ofprey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto”.

3.2.5 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
Waters of the United States and Waters of the State
The USACE has the authority to permit the discharge of dredged or fill material in Waters of the U.S. (WOUS) under Section 404 CWA. While the Regional Water Quality Board has authority over the discharge of dredged or fill material in Waters of the State under Section 401 CWA as well as the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. The Project area was surveyed with 100 percent visual coverage and no drainage features were present on site that met the definition for WOUS. As such, the subject parcel does not contain any wetlands, Waters of the U.S., or Waters of the State.

Fish and Game Code Section 1602 - State Lake and/or Streambed The CDFW asserts jurisdiction over any drainage feature that contains a definable bed and bank or associated riparian vegetation. The Project area was surveyed with 100 percent visual coverage and no definable bed or bank features exist on the project site. As such, the subject parcel does not contain any areas under CDFW jurisdiction.

3.2.6 WETLANDS
NWI maps did not identify portions within the Project site as a Riverine/Riparian system. Additionally, none of the requirements for wetland designation (hydric vegetation, hydric soils, and/or wetland hydrology) were present on site. As such, there are no wetlands currently present on site.

3.3 CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
The entire subject parcel falls within the boundaries of the CVMSHCP. However, the project site is not located within a Conservation Area (Figure 5 in Appendix A). As such, there are no conservation requirements for the Project under the CVMSHCP. However, every Project completed within the boundaries of the CVMSHCP is required to pay a Development Impact Fee to the City or County, depending on location, prior to obtaining permits. Because this Project is within the boundaries of the CVMSHCP, it will be required to submit this fee to the City. The amount of the fee will be determined by the City.

SECTION 4.0 - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the literature review and personal observations made in the immediate vicinity, no State and/or federally listed threatened or endangered species are documented/or expected to occur within the Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 11
Project site. Additionally, no plant species with the California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) of 1 or 2 were observed on-site or documented/expected to occur on-site.

Jurisdictional Delineation
There are no streams, channels, washes, or swales that meet the definitions of Section 1600 of the State of California Fish and Game Code (FGC) under the jurisdiction of the CDFW, Section 401 (“Waters of the State” ) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) under the jurisdiction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), or “Waters of the United States” (WoUS) as defined by Section 404 of the CWA under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) within the subject parcel. Therefore, no permit from any regulatory agency will be required.

Nesting Birds
Since there is some habitat within the Project site and adjacent area that is suitable for nesting birds in general, the following mitigation measure should be implemented.

Nesting bird nesting season generally extends from February 1 through September 15 in southern California and specifically, March 15 through August 31 for migratory passerine birds. To avoid impacts to nesting birds (common and special status) during the nesting season, a qualified Avian Biologist will conduct pre‐construction Nesting Bird Surveys (NBS) no more than 3-days prior to Project‐related disturbance to nestable vegetation to identify any active nests. If no active nests are found, no further action will be required.

If an active nest is found, the biologist will set appropriate no‐work buffers around the nest which will be based upon the nesting species, its sensitivity to disturbance, nesting stage, and expected types, intensity, and duration of the disturbance. The nests and buffer zones shall be field-checked weekly by a qualified biological monitor. The approved no‐work buffer zone shall be clearly marked in the field, within which no disturbance activity shall commence until the qualified biologist has determined the young birds have successfully fledged and the nest is inactive.

CVMSHCP
The Project is considered consistent with the CVMSHCP as long as the Development Impact Fees are paid to the City, prior to obtaining permits.

I hereby certify that the statements furnished herein, and in the attached exhibits present data and information required for this analysis to the best of my ability, and the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. This report was prepared in accordance with professional requirements and standards. Fieldwork conducted for this assessment was performed by me. I certify that I have not signed a non-disclosure or consultant confidentiality agreement with the project proponent and that I have no financial interest in the project.

Please do not hesitate to contact me at 909-534-4547 should you have any questions or require further information.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 12
Sincerely,
Gene Jennings
Principal/Regulatory Specialist
Appendices:

Appendix A – Figures
Appendix B – Site Photos
Appendix C – Regulatory Framework
Appendix D – Tables
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 13
Section 5 – REFERENCES
Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, and T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken (editors) 2012 The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Barbour, M.G., J.H. Burk, W.D. Pitts, F.S. Gilliam, and M.W. Schwartz. 1999 Terrestrial Plant Ecology, Third Edition. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. Menlo Park, CA.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
2020 California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). RareFind Version 3.1.0. Database Query, California USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles. Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch. [Accessed July 2022]
California Department of Fish and Game. 1995. Staff report on burrowing owl mitigation. Memo from C.F. Raysbrook, Interim Director to Biologist, Environmental Services Division, Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. State of California Natural Resources Agency. March 7, 2012.

California Department of Transportation. Water Quality Planning Tool. http://svctenvims.dot.ca.gov/wqpt/wqpt.aspx (Accessed July 2022) California Native Plant Society (CNPS)
2020 Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v8-03 0.39). Rare Plant Scientific Advisory Committee, California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. Website http://www.rareplants.cnps.org; [Accessed July 2022].

Sawyer, J.O., Jr., T. Keeler-Wolf, J. Evens
2009 A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
2020 Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Descriptions [Online Edition]. Website https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx [Accessed May 2021].

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 14
Appendix A - Figures
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 15
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 16
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 17
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 18
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 19
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 20
Appendix B - Photos
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 21
Photo 1 –
Southeast corner
of parcel, facing
northwest.

Showing bare
ground and
Creosote bush –
white bursage
scrub.

Photo 2 –
Northeast corner
of parcel, facing
southwest.

Showing bare
ground, ruderal
vegetation, and
Creosote bush –
white bursage
scrub.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 22
Photo 3 –
Northwest corner
of parcel, facing
southeast.

Showing bare
ground, ruderal
vegetation, and
Creosote bush –
white bursage
scrub.

Photo 4 – Eastern
edge of parcel, in
the center facing
west. Showing
bareground and
Creosote bush –
white bursage
scrub.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 23
Appendix C – Regulatory Framework
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 24

1.1 FEDERAL JURISDICTION

1.1.1 United States Army Corps of Engineers
Activities within inland streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in California are regulated by agencies at the federal, state, and regional levels. At the federal level, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Regulatory Program regulates activities within wetlands and waters of the US pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA).

At the state level, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) regulates activities within the bed, bank, and associated habitat of a stream under the Fish and Game Code §§ 1600– 1616. The California State Water Resources Board (SWRB) delegates authority at the regional level to Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) that are responsible for regulating discharge into waters of the US under Section 401 of the federal CWA and waters of the State under the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act.

The CWA was implemented to maintain and restore the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Waters of the United States (33 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 328 Section 328.3). “Waters of the US” are defined as follows:
(a) Jurisdictional waters. For purposes of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. and its implementing regulations, subject to the exclusions in paragraph (b) of this section, the term ‘‘waters of the United States’’ means:
(1) The territorial seas, and waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; (2) Tributaries;
(3) Lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters; and (4) Adjacent wetlands.
(b) Non-jurisdictional waters. The following are not ‘‘waters of the United States’’:
(1) Waters or water features that are not identified in paragraph (a)(1), (2), (3), or (4) of this section;
(2) Groundwater, including groundwater drained through subsurface drainage systems;
(3) Ephemeral features, including ephemeral streams, swales, gullies, rills, and pools;
(4) Diffuse stormwater run-off and directional sheet flow over upland; (5) Ditches that are not waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section, and those portions of ditches constructed in waters identified in paragraph (a)(4) of this section that do not satisfy the conditions of paragraph (c)(1) of this section; (6) Prior converted cropland;
(7) Artificially irrigated areas, including fields flooded for agricultural production, that would revert to upland should application of irrigation water to that area cease;Artificial lakes and ponds, including water storage reservoirs and farm, irrigation, stock watering, and log cleaning ponds, constructed or excavated in Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 25
upland or in nonjurisdictional waters, so long as those artificial lakes and ponds are not impoundments of jurisdictional waters that meet the conditions of paragraph (c)(6) of this section;
(8) Water-filled depressions constructed or excavated in upland or in nonjurisdictional waters incidental to mining or construction activity, and pits excavated in upland or in nonjurisdictional waters for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel;
(9) Stormwater control features constructed or excavated in upland or in nonjurisdictional waters to convey, treat, infiltrate, or store stormwater runoff; (10) Groundwater recharge, water reuse, and wastewater recycling structures, including detention, retention, and infiltration basins and ponds, constructed or excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters; and (11) Waste treatment systems.
(c) Definitions. In this section, the following definitions apply:
(1) Adjacent wetlands. The term adjacent wetlands means wetlands that:
(i) Abut, meaning to touch at least at one point or side of, a water identified in paragraph (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section; (ii) Are inundated by flooding from a water identified in paragraph (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section in a typical year;
(iii) Are physically separated from a water identified in paragraph (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section only by a natural berm, bank, dune, or similar natural feature; or
(iv) Are physically separated from a water identified in paragraph (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section only by an artificial dike, barrier, or similar artificial structure so long as that structure allows for a direct hydrologic surface connection between the wetlands and the water identified in paragraph (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section in a typical year, such as through a culvert, flood or tide gate, pump, or similar artificial feature. An adjacent wetland is jurisdictional in its entirety when a road or similar artificial structure divides the wetland, as long as the structure allows for a direct hydrologic surface connection through or over that structure in a typical year. (2) Ditch. The term ditch means a constructed or excavated channel used to convey water.
(3) Ephemeral. The term ephemeral means surface water flowing or pooling only in direct response to precipitation (e.g., rain or snow fall). (4) High tide line. The term high tide line means the line of intersection of the land with the water's surface at the maximum height reached by a rising tide. The high tide line may be determined, in the absence of actual data, by a line of oil or scum along shore objects, a more or less continuous deposit of fine shell or debris on the foreshore or berm, other physical markings or characteristics, vegetation lines, tidal gages, or other suitable means that delineate the general height reached by a rising tide. The line encompasses spring high tides and other high tides that occur with periodic frequency but does not include storm surges in which there is a Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 26
departure from the normal or predicted reach of the tide due to the piling up of water against a coast by strong winds, such as those accompanying a hurricane or other intense storm.
(5) Intermittent. The term intermittent means surface water flowing continuously during certain times of the year and more than in direct response to precipitation (e.g., seasonally when the groundwater table is elevated or when snowpack melts).
(6) Lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters. The term lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters means standing bodies of open water that contribute surface water flow to a water identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section in a typical year either directly or through one or more waters identified in paragraph (a)(2), (3), or (4) of this section. A lake, pond, or impoundment of a jurisdictional water does not lose its jurisdictional status if it contributes surface water flow to a downstream jurisdictional water in a typical year through a channelized non-jurisdictional surface water feature, through a culvert, dike, spillway, or similar artificial feature, or through a debris pile, boulder field, or similar natural feature. A lake or pond, or impoundment of a jurisdictional water Start Printed Page 22339is also jurisdictional if it is inundated by flooding from a water identified in paragraph (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section in a typical year.
(7) Ordinary high water mark. The term ordinary high water mark means that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.
(8) Perennial. The term perennial means surface water flowing continuously yearround. (9) Prior converted cropland. The term prior converted cropland means any area that, prior to December 23, 1985, was drained or otherwise manipulated for the purpose, or having the effect, of making production of an agricultural product possible. EPA and the Corps will recognize designations of prior converted cropland made by the Secretary of Agriculture. An area is no longer considered prior converted cropland for purposes of the Clean Water Act when the area is abandoned and has reverted to wetlands, as defined in paragraph (c)(16) of this section. Abandonment occurs when prior converted cropland is not used for, or in support of, agricultural purposes at least once in the immediately preceding five years. For the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the EPA Administrator shall have the final authority to determine whether prior converted cropland has been abandoned.
(10) Snowpack. The term snowpack means layers of snow that accumulate over extended periods of time in certain geographic regions or at high elevation (e.g., in northern climes or mountainous regions).

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 27
(11) Tidal waters and waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. The terms tidal waters and waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide mean those waters that rise and fall in a predictable and measurable rhythm or cycle due to the gravitational pulls of the moon and sun. Tidal waters and waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide end where the rise and fall of the water surface can no longer be practically measured in a predictable rhythm due to masking by hydrologic, wind, or other effects.
(12) Tributary. The term tributary means a river, stream, or similar naturally occurring surface water channel that contributes surface water flow to a water identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section in a typical year either directly or through one or more waters identified in paragraph (a)(2), (3), or (4) of this section. A tributary must be perennial or intermittent in a typical year. The alteration or relocation of a tributary does not modify its jurisdictional status as long as it continues to satisfy the flow conditions of this definition. A tributary does not lose its jurisdictional status if it contributes surface water flow to a downstream jurisdictional water in a typical year through a channelized nonjurisdictional surface water feature, through a subterranean river, through a culvert, dam, tunnel, or similar artificial feature, or through a debris pile, boulder field, or similar natural feature. The term tributary includes a ditch that either relocates a tributary, is constructed in a tributary, or is constructed in an adjacent wetland as long as the ditch satisfies the flow conditions of this definition. (13) Typical year. The term typical year means when precipitation and other climatic variables are within the normal periodic range (e.g., seasonally, annually) for the geographic area of the applicable aquatic resource based on a rolling thirtyyear period. (14) Upland. The term upland means any land area that under normal circumstances does not satisfy all three wetland factors (i.e., hydrology, hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils) identified in paragraph (c)(16) of this section, and does not lie below the ordinary high water mark or the high tide line of a jurisdictional water.
(15) Waste treatment system. The term waste treatment system includes all components, including lagoons and treatment ponds (such as settling or cooling ponds), designed to either convey or retain, concentrate, settle, reduce, or remove pollutants, either actively or passively, from wastewater prior to discharge (or eliminating any such discharge).
(16) Wetlands. The term wetlands means areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water 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. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.

Section 404 (b)(1) compliance must be demonstrated before a Section 404 permit can be issued.

Guidelines for a Section 404(b)(1) analysis were developed by the EPA in conjunction with USACE Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 28
(40 CFR Parts 230). The guidelines allow the discharge of dredged or fill material into the aquatic system only if there is no practicable alternative that would have less adverse impacts.

1.2 STATE JURISDICTION
The State of California (State) regulates discharge of material into waters of the State pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA as well as the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne; California Water Code, Division 7, §13000 et seq.). Waters of the State are defined by Porter-Cologne as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” (Water Code Section 13050(e)). Waters of the State broadly includes all waters within the State’s boundaries (public or private), including waters in both natural and artificial channels.

1.2.1 Regional Water Quality Control Board
Under Porter-Cologne, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the local Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) regulate the discharge of waste into waters of the State.

Discharges of waste include “fill, any material resulting from human activity, or any other ‘discharge’ that may directly or indirectly impact ‘waters of the state.’” Porter-Cologne reserves the right for the State to regulate activities that could affect the quantity and/or quality of surface and/or groundwaters, including isolated wetlands, within the State. Wetlands were defined as waters of the State if they demonstrated both wetland hydrology and hydric soils. Waters of the State determined to be jurisdictional for these purposes require, if impacted, waste discharge requirements (WDRs).

When an activity results in fill or discharge directly below the OHWM of jurisdictional waters of the United States (federal jurisdiction), including wetlands, a CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification is required. If a proposed project is not subject to CWA Section 401 certification but involves activities that may result in a discharge to waters of the State, the project may still be regulated under Porter-Cologne and may be subject to waste discharge requirements. In cases where waters apply to both CWA and Porter-Cologne, RWQCB may consolidate permitting requirements to one permit.

1.2.2 California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Pursuant to Division 2, Chapter 6, Sections 1600-1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) regulates all diversions, obstructions, or changes to the natural flow or bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake, which supports fish or wildlife.

CDFW defines a “stream” (including creeks and rivers) as “a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having surface or subsurface flow that supports or has Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 29
supported riparian vegetation” (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 1.72). The jurisdiction of CDFW may include areas in or near intermittent streams, ephemeral streams, rivers, creeks, dry washes, sloughs, blue-line streams that are indicated on USGS maps, watercourses that may contain subsurface flows, or within the flood plain of a water body.

CDFW’s definition of “lake” includes “natural lakes or man-made reservoirs.” CDFW limits of jurisdiction typically include the maximum extents of the uppermost bank-to-bank distance and/or the outermost extent of riparian vegetation dripline, whichever measurement is greater.

In a CDFW guidance of stream processes and forms in dryland watersheds (Vyverberg 2010), streams are identified as having one or more channels that may all be active or receive water only during some high flow event. Subordinate features, such as low flow channels, active channels, banks associated with secondary channels, floodplains, and stream-associated vegetation, may occur within the bounds of a single, larger channel. The water course is defined by the topography or elevations of land that confine a stream to a definite course when its waters rise to their highest level. A watercourse is defined as a stream with boundaries defined by the maximal extent or expression on the landscape even though flow may otherwise be intermittent or ephemeral.

Artificial waterways such as ditches (including roadside ditches), canals, aqueducts, irrigation ditches, and other artificially created water conveyance systems also may be under the jurisdiction of CDFW. CDFW may claim jurisdiction over these features based on the presence of habitat characteristics suitable to support aquatic life, riparian vegetation, and/or streamdependent terrestrial wildlife. As with natural waterways, the limit of CDFW jurisdiction of artificial waterways includes the uppermost bank-to-bank distance and/or the outermost extent of riparian vegetation dripline, whichever measurement is greater.

CDFW does not have jurisdiction over wetlands but has jurisdiction to protect against a net loss of wetlands. CDFW supports the wetland criteria recognized by USFWS; one or more indicators of wetland conditions must exist for wetlands conditions to be considered present. The following is the USFWS accepted definition of a wetland:

Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water. For purposes of this classification, wetlands must have one or more of the following three attributes:
(1) at least periodically, the lands supports hydrophytes, (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; and (3) the substrate is nonsoil and is saturated withwater or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year (Cowardin et al. 1979).

In A Clarification of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Wetland Definition (Tiner 1989), the USFWS definition was further clarified “that in order for any area to be classified as wetland by the Service, the area must be periodically saturated or covered by shallow water, whether wetland vegetation and/or hydric soils are present or not; this hydrologic requirement is Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 30
addressed in the first sentence of the definition.” When considering whether an action would result in a net loss of wetlands, CDFW will extend jurisdiction to USFWS-defined wetland conditions where such conditions exist within the riparian vegetation that is associated with a stream or lake and does not depend on whether those features meet the three-parameter USACE methodology of wetland determination. If impacts to wetlands under the jurisdiction of CDFW are unavoidable, a mitigation plan will be implemented in coordination with CDFW to support the CDFW policy of “no net loss” of wetland habitat.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 31
Appendix D – Tables
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY

ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON

AND PIERSON BLVD
Jennings Environmental Page | 32
Table 1. Species Observed On-Site
Common Name Scientific Name
Plants
White bursage Ambrosia dumosa
Creosote bush Larrea tridentata
Schismus grass Schismus sp.

London rocket Sisymbrium irio
4-winged saltbush Atriplex canescens
Golden cholla Salvia columbariae
Brittlebush Encelia farinosa
Birds
Mourning dove Zenaida macroura
Common raven Corvus corax
Mammals
Black-tailed jackrabbit Lepus californicus
Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 33
Table 2 – CNDDB Potential to Occur
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Accipiter cooperii
Cooper's
hawk None, None G5, S4, CDFW-WL
Woodland, chiefly of open,
interrupted or marginal type.

Nest sites mainly in riparian
growths of deciduous trees,
as in canyon bottoms on river
flood-plains; also, live oaks.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Anniella stebbinsi
Southern
California
legless lizard None, None G3, S3, CDFW-SSC
Generally south of the
Transverse Range, extending
to northwestern Baja
California. Occurs in sandy or
loose loamy soils under
sparse vegetation. Disjunct
populations in the Tehachapi
and Piute Mountains in Kern
County. Variety of habitats;
generally in moist, loose soil.

They prefer soils with a high
moisture content.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Antrozous
pallidus pallid bat None, None G4, S3, CDFW-SSC
Deserts, grasslands,
shrublands, woodlands and
forests. Most common in
open, dry habitats with rocky
areas for roosting. Roosts
must protect bats from high
temperatures. Very sensitive
to disturbance of roosting
sites.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 34
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Aquila chrysaetos golden eagle None, None G5, S3, CDFW-FP, CDFW-WL Rolling foothills, mountain
areas, sage-juniper flats, and
desert. Cliff-walled canyons
provide nesting habitat in
most parts of range; also,
large trees in open areas.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Asio otus
long-eared
owl None, None G5, S3?, CDFW-SSC
Riparian bottomlands grown
to tall willows and
cottonwoods; also, belts of
live oak paralleling stream
courses. Require adjacent
open land, productive of mice
and the presence of old nests
of crows, hawks, or magpies
for breeding.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Astragalus
lentiginosus var.
coachellae
Coachella
Valley milkvetch
Endangered,
None G5T1, S1, 1B.2
Sonoran desert scrub, desert
dunes. Sandy flats, washes,
outwash fans, sometimes on
dunes. 35-695 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Astragalus
tricarinatus
triple-ribbed
milk-vetch
Endangered,
None G2, S2, 1B.2
Joshua tree woodland,
Sonoran desert scrub. Hot,
rocky slopes in canyons and
along edge of boulder-strewn
desert washes, with Larrea
and Encelia. 455-1585 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 35
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Athene
cunicularia
burrowing
owl None, None G4, S2, CDFW-SSC
Open, dry annual or perennial
grasslands, deserts, and
scrublands characterized by
low-growing vegetation.

Subterranean nester,
dependent upon burrowing
mammals, most notably, the
California ground squirrel.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Boechera
lincolnensis
Lincoln
rockcress None, None G4G5, S3, 2B.3
Chenopod scrub, Mojavean
desert scrub. On limestone.
880-2410 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Bombus crotchii
Crotch
bumble bee
None,
Candidate
Endangered G2, S2
Coastal California east to the
Sierra-Cascade crest and
south into Mexico. Food plant
genera include Antirrhinum,
Phacelia, Clarkia,
Dendromecon, Eschscholzia,
and Eriogonum.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Calochortus
palmeri var.
palmeri
Palmer's
mariposa-lily None, None G3T2, S2, 1B.2
Meadows and seeps,
chaparral, lower montane
coniferous forest. Vernally
moist places in yellow-pine
forest, chaparral. 195-2530 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 36
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Chaetodipus
fallax pallidus
pallid San
Diego
pocket
mouse None, None G5T3T4, S3S4
Desert border areas in
eastern San Diego County in
desert wash, desert scrub,
desert succulent scrub,
pinyon-juniper, etc. Sandy,
herbaceous areas, usually in
association with rocks or
coarse gravel.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Chorizanthe xanti
var. leucotheca
whitebracted
spineflower None, None G4T3, S3, 1B.2
Mojavean desert scrub,
pinyon and juniper woodland,
coastal scrub (alluvial fans).

Sandy or gravelly places. 365-
1830 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Corynorhinus
townsendii
Townsend's
big-eared
bat None, None G4, S2, CDFW-SSC
Throughout California in a
wide variety of habitats. Most
common in mesic sites.

Roosts in the open, hanging
from walls and ceilings.

Roosting sites limiting.

Extremely sensitive to human
disturbance.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Crotalus ruber
red-diamond
rattlesnake None, None G4, S3, CDFW-SSC
Chaparral, woodland,
grassland, and desert areas
from coastal San Diego
County to the eastern slopes
of the mountains. Occurs in
rocky areas and dense
vegetation. Needs rodent
burrows, cracks in rocks or
surface cover objects.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 37
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Desert Fan Palm
Oasis Woodland
Desert Fan
Palm Oasis
Woodland None, None G3, S3.2 Riparian woodland
This habitat is absent
from the Project site.

Dodecahema
leptoceras
slenderhorned
spineflower
Endangered,
Endangered G1, S1, 1B.1
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, coastal scrub
(alluvial fan sage scrub). Flood
deposited terraces and
washes; associates include
Encelia, Dalea,
Lepidospartum, etc. Sandy
soils. 200-765 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Eremarionta
morongoana
Morongo
(=Colorado)
desertsnail None, None G1G3, S1
Found in the eastern San
Bernardino Mountains, the
Little San Bernardino
Mountains, and Mecca Hills
along the the edge of the
Coachella Valley and southern
Mojave Desert. Occur in
rockslides with deep talus
surrounded by desert scrub,
or under beds of fallen palm
fronds where tumbled rocks
are present at palm oases.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Eriastrum
harwoodii
Harwood's
eriastrum None, None G2, S2, 1B.2
Desert dunes. Sandy soils. 15-
1100m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 38
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Euphorbia misera cliff spurge None, None G5, S2, 2B.2
Coastal bluff scrub, coastal
scrub, Mojavean desert scrub.

Rocky sites. 3-430 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Gopherus
agassizii
desert
tortoise
Threatened,
Endangered G3, S2S3
Most common in desert
scrub, desert wash, and
Joshua tree habitats; occurs in
almost every desert habitat.

Require friable soil for burrow
and nest construction.

Creosote bush habitat with
large annual wildflower
blooms preferred.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Icteria virens
yellowbreasted
chat None, None G5, S4, CDFW-SSC
Summer resident; inhabits
riparian thickets of willow and
other brushy tangles near
watercourses. Nests in low,
dense riparian, consisting of
willow, blackberry, wild
grape; forages and nests
within 10 ft of ground.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Linanthus
maculatus ssp.
maculatus
Little San
Bernardino
Mtns.
linanthus None, None G2T2, S2, 1B.2
Desert dunes, Sonoran desert
scrub, Mojavean desert scrub,
Joshua tree woodland. Sandy
places. Usually in lightcolored quartz sand; often in
wash or bajada. 135-1220 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 39
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Mentzelia
tricuspis
spiny-hair
blazing star None, None G4, S2, 2B.1
Mojavean desert scrub. Sandy
or gravelly slopes and
washes.150-1280 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Mesquite Bosque
Mesquite
Bosque None, None G3, S2.1 Riparian forest
This habitat is absent
from the Project site.

Mojave Riparian
Forest
Mojave
Riparian
Forest None, None G1, S1.1 Riparian forest
This habitat is absent
from the Project site.

Monardella
robisonii
Robison's
monardella None, None G3, S3, 1B.3
Pinyon and juniper woodland.

Rocky desert slopes, often
among granitic boulders. 610-
1615 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Myiarchus
tyrannulus
browncrested
flycatcher None, None G5, S3, CDFW-WL
Inhabits desert riparian areas
along the Colorado River, as
well as other desert oases and
riparian areas NW to
Victorville. Requires riparian
thickets, trees, snags, and
shrubs for foraging perches,
nesting cavities, and cover.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Nemacaulis
denudata var.
gracilis
slender
cottonheads None, None G3G4T3?, S2, 2B.2
Coastal dunes, desert dunes,
Sonoran desert scrub. In
dunes or sand. -45-745 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 40
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Neotoma lepida
intermedia
San Diego
desert
woodrat None, None G5T3T4, S3S4, CDFW-SSC
Coastal scrub of Southern
California from San Diego
County to San Luis Obispo
County. Moderate to dense
canopies preferred. They are
particularly abundant in rock
outcrops, rocky cliffs, and
slopes.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Ovis canadensis
nelsoni
desert
bighorn
sheep None, None G4T4, S3, CDFW-FP
Widely distributed from the
White Mtns in Mono Co. to
the Chocolate Mts in Imperial
Co. Open, rocky, steep areas
with available water and
herbaceous forage.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Ovis canadensis
nelsoni pop. 2
Peninsular
bighorn
sheep DPS
Endangered,
Threatened G4T3Q, S2, CDFW-FP
Eastern slopes of the
Peninsular Ranges below
4,600 ft elevation. This DPS of
the subspecies inhabits the
Peninsular Ranges in southern
California from the San
Jacinto Mountains south to
the US-Mexico International
Border. Optimal habitat
includes steep walled canyons
and ridges bisected by rocky
or sandy washes, with
available water.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Parnopes
borregoensis
Borrego
parnopes
cuckoo wasp None, None G1G2, S1S2
Known from San Diego, San
Bernardino, and Inyo
counties.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 41
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Perognathus
longimembris
bangsi
Palm Springs
pocket
mouse None, None G5T2, S1, CDFW-SSC
Desert riparian, desert scrub,
desert wash and sagebrush
habitats. Most common in
creosote-dominated desert
scrub. Rarely found on rocky
sites. Occurs in all canopy
coverage classes.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Phrynosoma
blainvillii
coast
horned
lizard None, None G4, S4, CDFW-SSC
Frequents a wide variety of
habitats, most common in
lowlands along sandy washes
with scattered low bushes.

Open areas for sunning,
bushes for cover, patches of
loose soil for burial, and
abundant supply of ants and
other insects.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Phrynosoma
mcallii
flat-tailed
horned
lizard None, None G3, S3, CDFW-SSC
Restricted to desert washes
and desert flats in central
Riverside, eastern San Diego,
and Imperial counties. Critical
habitat element is fine sand,
into which lizards burrow to
avoid temperature extremes;
requires vegetative cover and
ants.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 42
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Piranga rubra
summer
tanager None, None G5, S1, CDFW-SSC
Summer resident of desert
riparian along lower Colorado
River, and locally elsewhere in
California deserts. Requires
cottonwood-willow riparian
for nesting and foraging;
prefers older, dense stands
along streams.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Pyrocephalus
rubinus
vermilion
flycatcher None, None G5, S2S3, CDFW-SSC
During nesting, inhabits
desert riparian adjacent to
irrigated fields, irrigation
ditches, pastures, and other
open, mesic areas. Nest in
cottonwood, willow,
mesquite, and other large
desert riparian trees.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Saltugilia latimeri
Latimer's
woodlandgilia None, None G3, S3, 1B.2
Chaparral, Mojavean desert
scrub, pinyon and juniper
woodland. Rocky or sandy
substrate; sometimes in
washes, sometimes
limestone. 120-2200 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Selaginella
eremophila
desert spikemoss None, None G4, S2S3, 2B.2
Sonoran desert scrub,
chaparral. Shaded sites,
gravelly soils; crevices or
among rocks. 225-1570 m.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 43
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Setophaga
petechia
yellow
warbler None, None G5, S3, CDFW-SSC
Riparian plant associations in
close proximity to water. Also
nests in montane shrubbery
in open conifer forests in
Cascades and Sierra Nevada.

Frequently found nesting and
foraging in willow shrubs and
thickets, and in other riparian
plants including cottonwoods,
sycamores, ash, and alders.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Stenopelmatus
cahuilaensis
Coachella
Valley
jerusalem
cricket None, None G1G2, S2
Inhabits a small segment of
the sand and dune areas of
the Coachella Valley, in the
vicinity of Palm Springs.

Found in the large, undulating
dunes piled up at the north
base of Mt San Jacinto.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Taxidea taxus
American
badger None, None G5, S3, CDFW-SSC
Most abundant in drier open
stages of most shrub, forest,
and herbaceous habitats, with
friable soils. Needs sufficient
food, friable soils and open,
uncultivated ground. Preys on
burrowing rodents. Digs
burrows.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 44
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Toxostoma
lecontei
Le Conte's
thrasher None, None G4, S3, CDFW-SSC
Desert resident; primarily of
open desert wash, desert
scrub, alkali desert scrub, and
desert succulent scrub
habitats. Commonly nests in a
dense, spiny shrub or densely
branched cactus in desert
wash habitat, usually 2-8 feet
above ground.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Uma inornata
Coachella
Valley
fringe-toed
lizard
Threatened,
Endangered G1Q, S1
Limited to sandy areas in the
Coachella Valley, Riverside
County. Requires fine, loose,
windblown sand (for
burrowing), interspersed with
hardpan and widely-spaced
desert shrubs.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Vireo bellii
pusillus
least Bell's
vireo
Endangered,
Endangered G5T2, S3
Summer resident of Southern
California in low riparian in
vicinity of water or in dry river
bottoms; below 2000 ft. Nests
placed along margins of
bushes or on twigs projecting
into pathways, usually willow,
Baccharis, mesquite.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Xerospermophilus
tereticaudus
chlorus
Palm Springs
round-tailed
ground
squirrel None, None G5T2Q, S2, CDFW-SSC
Restricted to the Coachella
Valley. Prefers desert
succulent scrub, desert wash,
desert scrub, alkali scrub, and
levees. Prefers open, flat,
grassy areas in fine-textured,
sandy soil. Density correlated
with winter rainfall.

Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 45
Scientific Name Common
Name
Federal/State
Status Other Status Habitat Potential to Occur
Potential To Occur for CNPSEI Species not Found in CNDDB Abronia villosa
var. aurita
chaparral
sandverbena None, None G5T2?, S2, 1B.1
Chaparral, Coastal scrub,
Desert dunes
Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Aloysia wrightii
Wright's
beebrush None, None G5, S4, 4.3
Joshua tree "woodland",
Pinyon and juniper woodland
Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Galium
angustifolium ssp.
gracillimum
slender
bedstraw None, None G5T4, S4, 4.2
Joshua tree "woodland",
Sonoran desert scrub
Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Galium johnstonii
Johnston's
bedstraw None, None G5, S4, 4.3
Chaparral, Lower montane
coniferous forest, Pinyon and
juniper woodland, Riparian
woodland
Suitable habitat for this
species does not occur on
site. As such, this species
is considered absent from
the Project site.

Item Number: 1.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION, AND CVMSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON THE NWC OF INDIAN CANYON AND PIERSON BLVD Jennings Environmental Page | 46
Coding and Terms
E = Endangered T = Threatened C = Candidate FP = Fully Protected SSC = Species of Special Concern R = Rare

State Species of Special Concern: An administrative designation given to vertebrate species that appear to be vulnerable to extinction because of declining populations, limited acreages, and/or continuing threats. Raptor and owls are protected under section 3502.5 of the California Fish and Game code: “It is unlawful to take, possess or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes or to take, possess or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird.”
State Fully Protected: The classification of Fully Protected was the State's initial effort in the 1960's to identify and provide additional protection to those animals that were rare or faced possible extinction. Lists were created for fish, mammals, amphibians and reptiles. Fully Protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time and no licenses or permits may be issued for their take except for collecting these species for necessary scientific research and relocation of the bird species for the protection of livestock.

Global Rankings (Species or Natural Community Level):

G1 = Critically Imperiled – At very high risk of extinction due to extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer populations), very steep declines, or other factors.

G2 = Imperiled – At high risk of extinction due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines, or other factors.

G3 = Vulnerable – At moderate risk of extinction due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors.

G4 = Apparently Secure – Uncommon but not rare; some cause for long-term concern due to declines or other factors.

G5 = Secure – Common; widespread and abundant.
? = Uncertainty in the exact status of an element (could move up or down one direction from current rank) Subspecies Level: Taxa which are subspecies or varieties receive a taxon rank (T-rank) attached to their G-rank. Where the G-rank reflects the condition of the entire species, the T-rank reflects the global situation of just the subspecies. For example: the Point Reyes mountain beaver, Aplodontia rufa ssp. phaea is ranked G5T2. The G-rank refers to the whole species range i.e., Aplodontia rufa. The T-rank refers only to the global condition of ssp. phaea.

State Ranking:

S1 = Critically Imperiled – Critically imperiled in the State because of extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer populations) or because of factor(s) such as very steep declines making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the State.

S2 = Imperiled – Imperiled in the State because of rarity due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines, or other factors making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the State.

S3 = Vulnerable – Vulnerable in the State due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation from the State.

S4 = Apparently Secure – Uncommon but not rare in the State; some cause for long-term concern due to declines or other factors.

S5 = Secure – Common, widespread, and abundant in the State.

California Rare Plant Rankings (CNPS List):
1A = Plants presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere. 1B = Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. 2A = Plants presumed extirpated in California, but common elsewhere. 2B = Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. 3 = Plants about which more information is needed; a review list. 4 = Plants of limited distribution; a watch list.

Threat Ranks:
.1 = Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat) .2 = Moderately threatened in California (20-80% occurrences threatened / moderate degree and immediacy of threat) .3 = Not very threatened in California (less than 20% of occurrences threatened / low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known) Item Number: 1.

A PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
OF
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 22-4
APN 664-080-017
+3.99 ACRES OF LAND IN THE CITY OF DESERT HOT SPRINGS

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
USGS DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA QUADRANGLE, 7.5’ SERIES By
Jean A. Keller, Ph.D.

Cultural Resources Consultant
1042 N. El Camino Real, Suite B-244
Encinitas, California 92024
Prepared For:

Mr. Amir Butt August 2022
1461 Tahoe Street Revised July 2023
Beaumont, CA 92223

CONFIDENTIAL
Item Number: 1.

NTS GEOTECHNICAL 5319 UNIVERSITY DRIVE, IRVINE, CA 92612 WWW.NTSGEO.COM July 29, 2022
Project No. 22293
Mr. Amir Butt
1461 Tahoe Street
Beaumont, CA 92223
Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Proposed Gas Station and Carwash
APN 664-080-017
City of Desert Hot Springs, California

Dear Mr. Butt:

In accordance with your request and authorization, we are presenting the results of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed subject development located at APN 664- 080-017 in the City of Desert Hot Springs, California. The purpose of this investigation has been to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site and to provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for the proposed construction.

Based on our findings, the proposed project is geotechnically feasible, provided that the recommendations in this report are incorporated into the design and are implemented during construction of the project. This report was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the 2019 California Building Code and the City of Desert Hot Springs requirements.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have any questions regarding this report or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (657) 888-4608 or [email protected].

Respectfully submitted,
NTS GEOTECHNICAL, INC.

Nadim Sunna, M.Sc., Q.S.P, P.E., G.E. 3172
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 1
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 3 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................. 3 SCOPE OF WORK.......................................................................................................... 3 Background Review................................................................................................................. 3 Field Exploration....................................................................................................................... 3 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing........................................................................................... 3 GEOLOGIC FINDINGS................................................................................................... 4 Regional Geologic Setting ...................................................................................................... 4 Subsurface Materials............................................................................................................... 4 Groundwater ............................................................................................................................. 4 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS................................................................................................... 4 Faulting and Seismicity ........................................................................................................... 4 Liquefaction and Seismic Settlement.................................................................................... 5 Landslides ................................................................................................................................. 5 Flooding ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Tsunami and Seiches .............................................................................................................. 5 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING FINDINGS................................................................ 6 Expansive Soil .......................................................................................................................... 6 Soil Corrosion ........................................................................................................................... 6 Preliminary Infiltration Testing................................................................................................ 7 Hydroconsolidation .................................................................................................................. 7 Excavation Characteristics ..................................................................................................... 8 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........... 8 Conclusions............................................................................................................................... 8 Site Preparation........................................................................................................................ 9 Remedial Grading .................................................................................................................... 9 Materials for Fill ...................................................................................................................... 10 Compacted Fill........................................................................................................................ 11 Temporary Excavations......................................................................................................... 11 Seismic Design....................................................................................................................... 12 Foundation Design and Construction.................................................................................. 13 Slab-On-Grade Design and Construction .......................................................................... 14 Pole Foundations ................................................................................................................... 14 Moisture Vapor Retarder....................................................................................................... 15 Structural Concrete................................................................................................................ 15 Drainage Control .................................................................................................................... 16 Utility Trench Backfill Considerations.................................................................................. 17 Asphalt Concrete Pavement Design ................................................................................... 18 Exterior Flatwork/Hardscape Design Considerations....................................................... 18 Planters and Trees................................................................................................................. 19 Plans and Specifications Review......................................................................................... 19 Construction Observation and Testing ............................................................................... 20 LIMITATIONS................................................................................................................ 20 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................. 22 Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 2
Attachment(s):

Plate 1 – Location Map
Plate 2 – Geotechnical Map
Appendix A – Field Exploration
Appendix B – Geotechnical Laboratory Test Result
Appendix C – Infiltration Test Result
Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 3

INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering evaluation performed for the proposed project located at APN 664-080-017, in the City of Desert Hot Springs, California. See (Plate 1, Location Map). The purpose of this study has been to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site and to provide geotechnical recommendations related to the design and construction of the proposed improvements.

SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The subject site is located at APN 664-080-017, in the City of Desert Hot Springs, California. The site is located on the northwest corner of Pierson Boulevard and N Indian Canyon Road and is currently a vacant land with native trees and brushes.

The 3.99 acres site is planned to be developed with new service station with C-Story and drive through, carwash facility, trash enclosure, canopy with two future QSR, signage, fuel pump canopy, and underground storage tanks.

SCOPE OF WORK
As part of the preparation of this report, we have performed the following tasks:

Background Review
We reviewed readily available background data including in-house geologic maps, previous reports, and topographic maps relevant to the subject site in preparation of this report.

Field Exploration
The subsurface conditions were evaluated on July 1, 2022 by advancing five (5) hollow-stem-auger borings at various locations within the vicinity of the subject lots. The borings were advanced to a maximum depth of 31.5 feet below the existing grade. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Plate 2, Geotechnical Map. Detailed exploration information of soils borings is presented in Appendix A, Field Exploration.

Geotechnical Laboratory Testing
Laboratory tests were performed on selected samples obtained from the boring in order to aid in the soil classification and to evaluate the engineering properties of the foundation soils. The following tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM standards:

Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 4
• In-situ moisture and density;
• No. 200 sieve wash;
• Sieve Analysis;
• Collapse;
• Direct shear; and
• Corrosion.

A summary of the laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B of this report.

GEOLOGIC FINDINGS
Regional Geologic Setting
According to the Geologic Map of the Desert Hot Springs Quadrangle, the project site is underlain by alluvial sand and gravel of valley areas (Qa).

Subsurface Materials
Earth materials encountered during subsurface investigation consists of alluvium to the total depth of the exploration. In general, the alluvium consists of light gray to brown, dry, medium dense to very dense, silty sands and sands.

Groundwater
Groundwater was not observed during our exploration to a maximum depth of

31.5 feet below the existing grade. Groundwater is believed to be deeper than 100 feet below the existing grade.

Groundwater conditions may vary across the site due to stratigraphic and hydrologic conditions and may change over time as a consequence of seasonal and meteorological fluctuations, or activities by humans at this site and nearby sites. However, based on the above findings, groundwater is unlikely to impact the proposed development.

GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
Faulting and Seismicity
The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and no known active faults are shown on the reviewed geologic maps crossing the site, however, the site is located in the seismically active region of Southern Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 5
California. The nearest known active fault is the S. San Andreas fault system, which is located approximately 4.3 miles from the site.

Liquefaction and Seismic Settlement
Liquefaction occurs when the pore pressures generated within a soil mass approach the effective overburden pressure. Liquefaction of soils may be caused by cyclic loading such as that imposed by ground shaking during earthquakes.

The increase in pore pressure results in a loss of strength, and the soil then can undergo both horizontal and vertical movements, depending on the site conditions. Other phenomena associated with soil liquefaction include sand boils, ground oscillation, and loss of foundation bearing capacity. Liquefaction is generally known to occur in loose, saturated, relatively clean, fine-grained cohesionless soils at depths shallower than approximately 50 feet. Factors to consider in the evaluation of soil liquefaction potential include groundwater conditions, soil type, grain size distribution, relative density, degree of saturation, and both the intensity and duration of ground motion.

Based on our review of the County of Riverside Map My County website, the site is generalized to be within a moderate liquefaction susceptibility zone. However, based on the lack of shallow groundwater, the dense nature of the subsurface soil, the relatively uniform soil stratum across the site, it is our professional opinion that the liquefaction potential at the site is very low.

Landslides
Based on our review of the referenced geologic maps, literature, topographic maps, and our subsurface evaluation, no landslides or related features underlie or are adjacent to the subject site. Due to the relatively level nature of the site and surrounding areas, the potential for landslides at the project site is considered negligible.

Flooding
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has prepared flood insurance rate maps (FIRMs) for use in administering the National Flood Insurance Program. Based on our review of the FEMA flood map, the site is located within a Special Flood Hazard Areas (Zone AO) with a flood depth of 2 feet. The potential for flooding to impact the proposed development should be evaluated by the project designer and considered by the project civil engineer.

Tsunami and Seiches
Tsunamis are waves generated by massive landslides near or under sea water.

The site is not located on any State of California – County of Riverside Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning. The potential for the site to be Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 6
adversely impacted by earthquake-induced tsunamis is considered to be negligible because the site is located several miles inland from the Pacific Ocean shore, at an elevation exceeding the maximum height of potential tsunami inundation.

Seiches are standing wave oscillations of an enclosed water body after the original driving force has dissipated. The potential for the site to be adversely impacted by earthquake-induced seiches is considered to be negligible due to the lack of any significant enclosed bodies of water located in the vicinity of the site.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING FINDINGS
Expansive Soil
Based on our evaluation and experience with similar material types, and laboratory testing, the soils encountered near the ground surface at the site exhibit a very low expansion potential.

Soil Corrosion
The potential for the on-site materials to corrode buried steel and concrete improvements was evaluated. Laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples to evaluate pH, minimum resistivity, and soluble chloride and sulfate contents. The results of our corrosivity testing is presented within Appendix B of this report. General recommendations to address the corrosion potential of the on-site soils are provided below. Imported fill materials, if used, should be tested to evaluate whether their corrosion potential is more severe than those assumed.

Structural Concrete
Laboratory tests indicate that the potential of sulfate attack on concrete in contact with the on-site soils is “negligible” or “S0” exposure in accordance with ACI 318, Table 19.3.1.1. Therefore, restriction on the type of cement, water to cement ratio, and compressive strength is not required.

Ferrous Metal
The results of the laboratory chemical tests performed on a sample of soil collected within the site indicate that the on-site soils are mildly corrosive to ferrous metals. Consequently, metal structures which will be in direct contact with the soil (i.e., underground metal conduits, pipelines, metal sign posts, etc.) and/or in close proximity to the soil (wrought iron fencing, etc.) may be subject to corrosion. The use of special coatings or cathodic protection around buried metal Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 7
structures has been shown to be beneficial in reducing corrosion potential.

Additional provisions will be required to address high chloride contents of the soil per the 2019 CBC to protect the concrete reinforcement. The laboratory testing program performed for this project does not address the potential for corrosion to copper piping. In this regard, a corrosion engineer should be consulted to perform more detailed testing and develop appropriate mitigation measures (if necessary).

The above discussion is provided for general guidance in regards to the corrosiveness of the on-site soils to typical metal structures used for construction.

Detailed corrosion testing and recommendations for protecting buried ferrous metal and/or copper elements are beyond our purview. If detailed testing is required, a corrosion engineer should be consulted to perform the testing and develop appropriate mitigation measures.

Preliminary Infiltration Testing
Three (3) infiltration tests were performed in general conformance with the County of Riverside manual. The borings were excavated to a depth of 5 and 10 feet below the existing grade using a hollow-stem-auger drill rig. Following the drilling, the borings were set up and testing was performed in general accordance with the manual. The result of our infiltration testing is summarized in the table below, which includes a minimum factor of safety of 2. Our infiltration testing calculations are presented in Appendix C of this report.

Preliminary Infiltration Rates Summary
Boring No.

Depth Below
Existing
Grade (feet)
Design Infiltration
Rate (inches/hour)*
P-1 5 1.11
P-2 10 0.94
P-3 5 0.90
*Incorporates a factor of safety of 2.

The infiltration test locations are shown on the attached Plate 2 –Geotechnical Map. Based on our infiltration testing, the design rates only within the upper 10 feet of the site soils have achieved the minimum requirement of 0.3 inches per hour per the County Riverside manual. Therefore, infiltration of stormwater into the site soils is deemed feasible within the upper 10 feet of the site soils.

Hydroconsolidation
Based on our laboratory test results, the potential for hydrocollapse settlement to affect the proposed structures should be considered low.

Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 8
Excavation Characteristics
The majority of the soil materials underlying the site can be excavated with excavators and other conventional grading equipment.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions
Based on the results of our field exploration and engineering analyses, it is our opinion that the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the recommendations in this report are incorporated into the design plans and are implemented during construction.

Based on the geotechnical findings, the following is a summary of our conclusions:
• The proposed structure may be supported on a shallow
spread/continuous footing foundation system underlain by engineered fill.
• Groundwater is not anticipated to directly impact the planned precise grading or during the installation of shallow underground utilities.
• The site is not located within a fault zone, however, the site will experience strong ground shaking due to it’s proximity to the San Andreas fault.
• Based on the lack of shallow groundwater and relatively dense nature of the subsurface soil, the liquefaction potential is considered low.
• The magnitude of total static settlements beneath the structure is expected to be less than 1.0 inch, with differential settlement on the order of ½ -inch over a span of 30 feet.
• The on-site soils has a negligible sulfate exposure to concrete (i.e., as defined by the CBC) and mildly corrosive reinforcement.

Our geotechnical engineering analyses performed for this report were based on the earth materials encountered during the subsurface exploration for the site. If the design substantially changes, then our geotechnical engineering recommendations would be subject to revision based on our evaluation of the changes. The following sections present our conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the engineering design for this project.

Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 9
Site Preparation
Site preparation should begin with the removal of utility lines, asphalt, concrete, vegetation, and other deleterious debris from areas to be graded. Tree stumps and roots should be removed to such a depth that organic material is generally not present. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the outside edges of the proposed excavation and fill areas. We recommend that unsuitable materials such as organic matter or oversized material be selectively removed and disposed offsite. The debris and unsuitable material generated during clearing and grubbing should be removed from areas to be graded and disposed at a legal dump site away from the project area.

Remedial Grading
Due to the dry / loose nature of the near surface soils, we recommend that the upper 5 feet of the site be removed and recompacted to achieve a uniform blanket of properly moisture conditioned and compacted fill material.

It should be noted that the recommendations provided herein are based on our subsurface exploration and knowledge of the on-site geology. Actual removals may vary in configuration and volume based on observations of geologic materials and conditions encountered during grading. The bottom of all corrective grading removals should be observed by a representative of NTS to verify the suitability of in-place soil prior to performing scarification and recompaction.

Corrective grading recommendations are outlined below.

Building Pads
In order to create a firm and stable platform on which to construct the new building pads, we recommend the following:
• The proposed building pads should be excavated to a depth of at least 5 feet from existing grade or 3 feet from bottom of footing, whichever is deeper. The excavation should extend laterally at least 3 feet from the edge of the footings.
• The bottom of the over excavation should then be scarified to a depth of at least 8 inches, thoroughly flooded to raise the moisture content of the underlying soils to at least 2 percent above optimum moisture content, and should be recompacted using heavy vibratory compaction equipment prior to placement of any fill.
• Following the approval of the over-excavation bottom by a representative of NTS, the onsite material may be used as fill material to achieve the planned pad grade.
• The fill material should then be placed in 6- to- 8-inch-thick lifts, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and compacted to achieve 90 percent relative compaction.

Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 10
Pavement
In order to create a firm and stable platform on which to construct the new vehicular pavement, we recommend the following:
• The proposed pavement should be excavated to the planned subgrade (i.e., bottom of aggregate base for pavement).
• The bottom of the excavation should then be excavated to a depth of 12 inches below the planned subgrade.
• The bottom of the over excavation should then be scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches, moisture conditioned to 2 percent above optimum moisture content and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction as determined in accordance with ASTM D1557.
• Following the approval of the over-excavation bottom by a representative of NTS, the onsite material may be used as fill material to achieve the planned pad grade.
• The fill material should then be placed in 6- to- 8-inch-thick lifts, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and compacted to achieve 90 percent relative compaction.

If the existing loose fill materials are found to be disturbed to depths greater than the proposed remedial grading, then the depth of over-excavation and recompaction should be increased accordingly in local areas as recommended by a representative of NTS.

Materials for Fill
On-site soils with an organic content of less than 3 percent by volume (or 1 percent by weight) are suitable for use as fill. Soil material to be used as fill should not contain contaminated materials, rocks, or lumps over 6 inches in largest dimension, and not more than 40 percent larger than ¾ inch. Utility trench backfill material should not contain rocks or lumps over 3 inches in largest dimension. Larger chunks, if generated during excavation, may be broken into acceptably sized pieces or may be disposed offsite.

Any imported fill material should consist of granular soil having a “very low” expansion potential (that is, expansion index of 20 or less). Import material should also have low corrosion potential (that is, chloride content less than 500 parts per million [ppm], soluble sulfate content of less than 0.1 percent, and pH of

5.5 or higher). Materials to be used as fill should be evaluated by a representative of NTS prior to importing or filling.

Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 11
Compacted Fill
Prior to placement of compacted fill, the contractor should request an evaluation of the exposed excavation bottom by NTS. Unless otherwise recommended, the exposed ground surface should then be scarified to a depth of at least 8 inches and watered or dried, as needed, to achieve generally consistent moisture contents 2 percent above optimum moisture content. The scarified materials should then be compacted to 90 percent relative compaction in accordance with the latest version of ASTM Test Method D1557.

Compacted fill should be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 6 to 8 inches in loose thickness. Prior to compaction, each lift should be watered or dried as needed to achieve near optimum moisture condition, mixed, and then compacted by mechanical methods, using sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other appropriate compacting rollers, to a relative compaction of 90 percent as evaluated by ASTM D1557. Successive lifts should be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. Within pavement areas, the upper 12 inches of subgrade soil should be compacted to 95 percent relative compaction evaluated by ASTM D1557.

Personnel from NTS should observe the excavations so that any necessary modifications based on variations in the encountered soil conditions can be made. All applicable safety requirements and regulations, including CalOSHA requirements, should be met.

Temporary Excavations
Temporary excavations for the demolishing, earthwork, footing and utility trench are expected. We anticipate that unsurcharged excavations with vertical side slopes less than 3 feet high will generally be stable; however, sloughing of cohesionless sandy materials encountered at the site should be expected.

Where the space is available, temporary, unsurcharged excavation sides over 3 feet in height should be sloped no steeper than an inclination of 1.5H:1V (horizontal:vertical). Where sloped excavations are created, the tops of the slopes should be barricaded so that vehicles and storage loads do not encroach within 10 feet of the top of the excavated slopes. A greater setback may be necessary when considering heavy vehicles, such as concrete trucks and cranes. NTS should be advised of such heavy vehicle loadings so that specific setback requirements can be established. If the temporary construction slopes are to be maintained during the rainy season, berms are recommended to be graded along the tops of the slopes in order to prevent runoff water from entering the excavation and eroding the slope faces.

Where space for sloped excavations is not available, temporary shoring may be utilized. Geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 12
temporary shoring are presented in the “Temporary Shoring” section of this report. Personnel from NTS should observe the excavation so that any necessary modifications based on variations in the encountered soil conditions can be made. All applicable safety requirements and regulations, including CalOSHA requirements, should be met.

Excavations shall not undermine the existing adjacent building / wall footings.

Where space for sloped excavations is not available, temporary shoring may be utilized.

Seismic Design
Based on subsurface investigation, the site is designated as Site Class D (“stiff” soil profile). The seismic design parameters based on ASCE 7-16 and 2019 CBC are listed in the following table.
2019 CBC and ASCE 7-16 Seismic Design Parameters
Seismic Item Design
Value
2016 ASCE 7-16 or
2019 CBC Reference
Site Class based on soil profile (ASCE 7-16 Table 20.3-1) D(a) ASCE 7-16 Table 20.3-1 Short Period Spectral Acceleration Ss 2.350 (a) CBC Figures 1613.2.1 (1-8)
1-sec. Period Spectral Acceleration S1 0.882(a) CBC Figures 1613.2.1 (1-8)
Site Coefficient Fa (2019 CBC Table 1613.2.3(1)) 1.000(a) CBC Table 1613.2.3 (1) Site Coefficient Fv (2019 CBC Table 1613.2.3(2)) 1.700(b) CBC Table 1613.2.3 (2) Short Period MCE* Spectral Acceleration SMS SMS = Fa Ss 2.350(a) CBC Equation 16-36 1-sec. Period MCE Spectral Acceleration SM1 SM1 = Fv S1 1.499(b) CBC Equation 16-37 Short Period Design Spectral Acceleration SDS SDS = 2/3SMs 1.567(a) CBC Equation 16-38 1-sec. Period Design Spectral Acceleration SD1 SD1 = 2/3SM1 1.000 (b) CBC Equation 16-39 Short Period Transition Period TS (sec) TS = SD1/SDS 0.638(b) ASCE 7-16 Section

11.4.6 Long Period Transition Period Tl (sec) 8(b) ASCE 7-16 Figures 22- 14 to 22-17
MCE(c) Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) 0.994(a) ASCE 7-16 Figures 22-9 to 22-13
Site Coefficient FPGA (ASCE 7-16 Table 11.8-1) 1.100(a) ASCE 7-16 Table 11.8-1 Modified MCE(c) Peak Ground Acceleration (PGAM) 1.093(a) ASCE 7-16 Equation

11.8-1
(a) Design Values Obtained from USGS Earthquake Hazards Program website that are based on the ASCE-7-16 and 2019 CBC and site coordinates of N33.961805o and W116.545464 o. (b) Design Values Determined per ASCE Table 11.4-2 and CBC Equations 16-36 through 16-39. (c) MCE: Maximum Considered Earthquake.

Since the Site Class is designated as D and the S1 value is greater than or equal to 0.2, the 2019 CBC requires either a site-specific seismic hazard analysis per Section 21.2 of ASCE 7-16 or the application of Exception 2 of Section 11.4.8 of Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 13
ASCE 7-16. The project structural engineer should apply all requirements of Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16 to determine if increases to the seismic response coefficient (i.e. increases to the loading of the structure) are required.

It should be recognized that much of southern California is subject to some level of damaging ground shaking as a result of movement along the major active (and potentially active) fault zones that characterize this region. Design utilizing the 2019 CBC is not meant to completely protect against damage or loss of function.

Therefore, the preceding parameters should be considered as minimum design criteria.

Foundation Design and Construction
A shallow foundation system may be used for support of the proposed buildings, provided that all the footings are placed on engineered fill prepared as described in the “Corrective Grading” section of this report. Our geotechnical foundation design parameters are presented in the table below:

Foundation Design Parameters
Bearing Material
 Engineered Fill
Minimum Footing Size
 Width: 12 inches
 Depth: 18 inches below the lowest adjacent soil
grade
Minimum Footing
Reinforcement
 Footings reinforcement should consist of at least four No. 4 bars (two on top and two on bottom).
 Final reinforcement should be determined by the
project structural engineer.

Allowable Bearing Capacity
 2,500 psf for the minimum footing size given above.
 The above value may be increased by 1/3 for
temporary loads such as wind or earthquake.

Static Settlement
 Total static settlement of 1 inch with differential
settlement estimated to be approximately ½ inch over
a span of 40 feet
Allowable Lateral Passive
Resistance
• 300 pcf (equivalent fluid pressure)
Allowable Coefficient of
Friction
• 0.35
Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 14
Slab-On-Grade Design and Construction
The slab-on-grade should be designed and constructed with the minimum recommendations presented below, however, final design of the slab should be determined by the project structural engineer.

Minimum Thickness: The minimum slab thickness should be 5 inches.

Minimum Slab Reinforcement: Minimum slab reinforcement shall not be less than No. 4 bars placed at 18 inches on center. Welded wire mesh is not recommended. Care should be taken to position the reinforcement bars in the center of the slab.

Slab Subgrade:
• The upper 24 inches of the slab subgrade should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of compacted to 90 percent relative compaction in accordance with the latest version of ASTM D1557 prior to placement of Moisture Vapor Retarder.
• A moisture vapor retarder should be placed in accordance with the “Moisture Vapor Retarder” section below.

Pole Foundations
It is expected that the canopy structures and light poles will be supported on pole foundations. As a minimum, the pole foundations should be at least 18 inches in diameter and at least 4 feet deep; however, the actual dimensions should be determined by the project structural engineer based on the following design parameters.

Bearing Materials: The pole foundations may bear into competent native soils approved by a representative from NTS.

Bearing Values: End-bearing capacity may be combined to determine the allowable bearing capacities of the pole foundations. An allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for pole foundations at least 18 inches in diameter and embedded a minimum of 4 feet below the lowest adjacent grade.

Lateral Load Design: Lateral loads may be resisted by passive resistance within the adjacent earth materials. For passive resistance, an allowable passive earth pressure of 300 pounds per foot of pile diameter per foot of depth into competent bearing material may be used; however, passive resistance should be disregarded within the upper foot due to possible disturbance during drilling. The Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 15
passive resistance value may be applied over an area equivalent to two pile diameters.

Moisture Vapor Retarder
A vapor retarder, such as a 15-mil-thick moisture vapor retarder that meets the requirements of ASTM E1745 Class C (Stego Wrap or equivalent) should be placed directly over the prepared soil subgrade to provide protection against vapor transmission through concrete floor slabs thatare anticipated to receive carpet, tile or other moisture sensitive coverings. The use of moisture vapor retarder should be determined by the project architect. At minimum, the vapor retarder should be installed as follows:
o Per the manufacture’s specifications as well as with the applicable recognized installation procedures such as ASTM E1643;
o Joints between the sheets and the openings for utility piping should be lapped and taped. If the barrier is not continuously placed across footings/ribs, the barrier should at minimum be lapped into the side of the footing/rib trenches down to the bottom of the trench; and, o Punctures in the vapor retarder should be repaired prior to concrete placement.

It should be noted that the moisture retarder is intended only to reduce moisture vapor transmissions from the soil beneath the concrete and is consistent with the current standard of the industry in the building construction in Southern California. It is not intended to provide a “waterproof” or “vapor proof” barrier or reduce vapor transmission from sources above the retarder (i.e., concrete). The evaluation of water vapor from any source and its effect on any aspect of the proposed building space above the slab (i.e., floor covering applicability, mold growth, etc.) is beyond our purview and the scope of this report.

Structural Concrete
Based on laboratory test results for the site vicinity, the potential of sulfate attack on concrete in contact with the on-site soils is “negligible” based on ACI 318, Table 19.3.1.1.

The aforementioned recommendations in regards to concrete are made from a soils perspective only. Final concrete mix design is beyond our purview. All applicable codes, ordinances, regulations, and guidelines should be followed in regard to the designing a durable concrete with respect to the potential for sulfate exposure from the on-site soils and/or changes in the environment.

Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 16
Drainage Control
The control of surface water is essential to the satisfactory performance of the building and site improvements. Surface water should be controlled so that conditions of uniform moisture are maintained beneath the improvements, even during periods of heavy rainfall. The following recommendations are considered minimal:
• Ponding and areas of low flow gradients should be avoided. • If bare soil within 5 feet of the structure is not avoidable, then a gradient of 5 percent or more should be provided sloping away from the improvement.

Corresponding paved surfaces should be provided with a gradient of at least 2 percent.
• The remainder of the unpaved areas should be provided with a drainage gradient of at least 2 percent.
• Positive drainage devices, such as graded swales, paved ditches, and/or catch basins should be employed to accumulate and to convey water to appropriate discharge points.
• Concrete walks and flatwork should not obstruct the free flow of surface water.
• Brick flatwork should be sealed by mortar or be placed over an impermeable membrane.
• Area drains should be recessed below grade to allow free flow of water into the basin.
• Enclosed raised planters should be sealed at the bottom and provided with an ample flow gradient to a drainage device. Recessed planters and landscaped areas should be provided with area inlet and subsurface drain pipes.
• Planters should not be located adjacent to the structures wherever possible. If planters are to be located adjacent to the structures, the planters should be positively sealed, should incorporate a subdrain, and should be provided with free discharge capacity to a drainage device. • Planting areas at grade should be provided with positive drainage.

Wherever possible, the grade of exposed soil areas should be established above adjacent paved grades. Drainage devices and curbing should be provided to prevent runoff from adjacent pavement or walks into planted areas.
• Gutter and downspout systems should be provided to capture discharge from roof areas. The accumulated roof water should be conveyed to offsite disposal areas by a pipe or concrete swale system. • Landscape watering should be performed judiciously to preclude either soaking or desiccation of soils. The watering should be such that it just sustains plant growth without excessive watering. Sprinkler systems should be checked.

Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 17
Utility Trench Backfill Considerations
New utility line pipeline trenches should be backfilled with select bedding materials beneath and around the pipes (pipe zone) and compacted soil above the pipe bedding. Recommendations for the types of the materials to be used and the proper placement of these materials are provided in the following sections.

Pipe Zone (Bedding and Shading)
The pipe bedding and shading materials should extend from at least 6 inches below the pipes to at least 12 inches above the crown of the pipes. Pipe bedding and shading should consist of either clean sand with a sand equivalent (SE) of at least 30, or crushed rock. If crushed rock is used, it should consist of ¾-inch crushed rock that conforms to Table 200-1.2.1 (A) of the 2018 “Greenbook.” Pipe bedding and shading should also meet the minimum requirements of the City of Los Angeles. If the requirements of the City are more stringent, they should take precedence over the geotechnical recommendations. Sufficient laboratory testing should be performed to verify the bedding and shading meets the minimum requirements of the Greenbook and City of Desert Hot Springs grading codes.

Granular pipe bedding and shading material should be properly placed in thicknesses not exceeding 3 feet, and then sufficiently flooded or jetted in place.

Crushed rock, if used, should be capped with filter fabric (Mirafi 160N, or equivalent; Mirafi 140N filter fabric is suitable if available) to prevent the migration of fines into the rock.

Trench Backfill
All existing soil material within the limits of the site are considered suitable for use as trench backfill above the pipe bedding and shading zone if care is taken to remove all significant organic and other decomposable debris, moisture condition the soil materials as necessary, and separate and selectively place and/or stockpile any inert materials larger than 6 inches in maximum diameter.

Imported soils are not anticipated for backfill since the on-site soils are suitable.

However, if imported soils are used, the soils should consist of clean, granular materials with physical and chemical characteristics similar to or better than those described herein for on-site soils. Any imported soils to be used as backfill should be evaluated and approved by NTS prior to placement.

Soils to be used as trench backfill should be moistened, dried, or blended as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture content, placed in lifts which, prior to compaction shall not exceed the thickness specified in Section 306-12.3 of the 2018 “Greenbook” for various types of equipment, and mechanically Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 18
compacted/densified to at least 90 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. Jetting is not permitted in this trench zone.

No rock or broken concrete greater than 6 inches in maximum diameter should be utilized in the trench backfills.

Asphalt Concrete Pavement Design
In accordance with Chapter 600 of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, we have performed pavement structural design utilizing assumed traffic indices (TI) of 4, 5.5, and 6.0 and assumed R-value of 20. Based on our analysis, we have developed the pavement structural sections presented in the following table. The subgrade R-value should be confirmed at the completion of rough grading. We note that the assumed TI’s should be reviewed by a traffic engineer to confirm their applicability to the project.

Asphalt Concrete Pavement Structural Sections
Location
Traffic
Index
Asphalt
Concrete
(in.)
Aggregate Base
(in.)*
Parking Stalls 4.5 3.0 4.0
Driveways 5.5 4.0 6.0
Fire Lane 7.0 4.0 8.0
The planned pavement structural sections should consist of the following:
• Aggregate Base materials (AB) consisted of either Crushed Aggregate Base (CAB) or Crushed Miscellaneous Base (CMB).
• Asphalt Concrete (AC) material of a type meeting the minimum City of Desert Hot Springs standards.
• The subgrade soils should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content to a depth of at least 18 inches and compacted to 90 percent relative compaction.
• The AB and AC should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction.

Exterior Flatwork/Hardscape Design Considerations
For exterior flatwork and hardscape planned as part of the proposed development, the following design may be considered by the project civil engineer. These recommendations may be considered as minimal design based on the soils conditions encountered during our investigation. Final design of the Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 19
proposed flatwork and hardscape area should be provided by the project civil engineer. Based on the conditions encountered, we recommend that the subgrade for the subject concrete flatwork and hardscape be moisture conditioned to near optimum to a depth of 18 inches below finish subgrade elevation and compacted to 90 percent relative compaction. A Type II/V cement may be used from a geotechnical perspective. Our flatwork and hardscape design considerations are presented in the table below.

Concrete Flatwork Table
Description Subgrade
Preparation (1)
Minimum
Concrete
Thickness
Cut-Off
Barrier
Or
Edge
Thickness
Joint
Spacing
(Maximum)
Concrete(3)
Concrete
Sidewalks
and
Walkways
(4)
1) 2 percent above
optimum to 12"(1),
2) 2” of sand or
well graded rock
(i.e., Class II base
or equiv.) above
moisture
conditioned
subgrade.
4 inches Not
Required
5 feet Type II/V
(1) The moisture content of the subgrade must be verified by the geotechnical consultant prior to sand/rock placement. (2) Reinforcement to be placed at or above the mid-point of the slab (i.e., a minimum of 2.0 to 2.5 inches above the prepared subgrade).
(3) The site has negligible levels of sulfates as defined by the CBC. Concrete mix design is outside the geotechnical engineer’s purview.
(4) Where flatwork is adjacent a stucco surface, a ¼" to ½" foam separation/expansion joint should be used. (5) If dowels are placed in cored holes, the core holes shall be placed at alternating in-plane angles (i.e., not cored straight into slab).

Planters and Trees
Where new trees or large shrubs are to be located in close proximity to new concrete flatwork, rigid moisture/root barriers should be placed around the perimeter of the flatwork to at least 12 inches in depth in order to offer protection to the adjacent flatwork against potential root and moisture damage. Existing mature trees near flatwork areas should also incorporate a rigid moisture/root barrier placed at least 2 feet in depth below the top of the flatwork.

Plans and Specifications Review
The recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon review of final plans and specifications for the project by NTS. NTS Geotechnical, Inc. should review and verify in writing the compliance of the final grading plan and the final foundation plans with the recommendations presented in this report.

Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 20
Construction Observation and Testing
It is recommended that NTS be retained to provide Geotechnical Consulting services during the earthwork operations and foundation installation process.

This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications and recommendations and to allow for design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated during our subsurface investigation.

It is the responsibility of the owner and their representative to bring any deviations or unexpected conditions observed during construction to the attention of NTS Geotechnical, in order for supplemental recommendations can be made with a minimum delay to the project. Construction should be observed and/or testing at the following stages by NTS Geotechnical, Inc.:
• During all phases of precise grading, including over-excavation, temporary excavations, removals, scarification, ground preparation, moisture condition, proof-rolling, and placement and compaction of all fill material. • All foundation excavation prior to placement of steel • During backfill of underground utilities
• During placement of pavement structural section, including verifying the subgrade prior to placement of aggregate base, testing of aggregate base, and testing of asphalt concrete pavement.
• When unusual conditions are encountered.

If any of these inspections to verify site geotechnical conditions are not performed by NTS Geotechnical, liability for the safety and stability of the project is limited only to the actual portions of the project that is observed and approved by NTS Geotechnical.

LIMITATIONS
All parties reviewing or utilizing this report should recognize that the findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented represent the results of our professional geological and geotechnical engineering efforts and judgments.

Due to the inexact nature of the state of the art of these professions and the possible occurrence of undetected variables in subsurface conditions, we cannot guarantee that the conditions actually encountered during grading and site construction will be identical to those observed, sampled, and interpreted during our study, or that there are no unknown subsurface conditions which could have an adverse effect on the use of the property. We have exercised a degree of care comparable to the standard of practice presently maintained by other professionals in the fields of geotechnical engineering and engineering geology, and believe that our findings present a reasonably representative description of Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 21
geotechnical conditions and their probable influence on the grading and use of the property.

Our conclusions and recommendations are based on the assumption that our firm will act as the geotechnical engineer of record during construction and grading of the project to observe the actual conditions exposed, to verify our design concepts and the grading contractor's general compliance with the project geotechnical specifications, and to provide our revised conclusions and recommendations should subsurface conditions differ significantly from those used as the basis for our conclusions and recommendations presented in this report. Since our conclusions and recommendations are based on a limited amount of current and previous geotechnical exploration and analysis, all parties should recognize the need for possible revisions to our conclusions and recommendations during grading of the project.

It should be further noted that the recommendations presented herein are intended solely to minimize the effects of post-construction soil movements.

Consequently, minor cracking and/or distortion of all on-site improvements should be anticipated.

This report has not been prepared for the use by other parties or projects other than those named or described herein. This report may not contain sufficient information for other parties or other purposes.

Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page | 22

REFERENCES
American Concrete Institute, 2014, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-14).

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2017, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE 7-16.

California Building Standards Commission, 2019, California Building Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Volume 2, dated July.

Coduto, Donald P., 1994, Foundation Design: Principles and Practices: PrenticeHall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

Dibblee, T. W. and Minch, J.A., Geologic Map of the Desert Hot Springs Quadrangle, Riverside County, California, Dibblee Foundation Map DF-121, dated 2004.

Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 1986, NAVFAC Design Manual.

United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2008, Unified Hazard Tool, Dynamic:

Conterminous U.S. 2014 (update) (v4.2.0), Retrieved May 14, 2020, from:
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/
Item Number: 1.

Date:

Project No.:

Plate

LOCATION MAP
22293
July 29, 2022
1 SITE LOCATION
Item Number: 1.

0 60' GEOTECHNICAL LEGEND APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING B-1 GEOTECHNICAL MAP Date: Project No.: Plate: 7/29/2022 22293 2 P-1 B-1 B-2 B-3 P-2 B-4 P-3 B-5 Item Number: 1.

APPENDIX A
Field Investigation
Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page 1
Appendix A
Field Exploration
The subsurface exploration program for the proposed project consisted of advancing eight (8) 8-inch-diameter hollow-stem-auger drill rig borings. The borings were advanced to depths ranging from 8 to 30 feet below the existing grade.

The Boring Logs for five (5) of the borings are presented as Figures A-1 to A-6. The Boring Logs describe the earth materials encountered, samples obtained, and show the field and laboratory tests performed. The log also shows the boring number, drilling date, and the name of the logger and drilling subcontractor. The borings were logged by an engineer using the Unified Soil Classification System. The boundaries between soil types shown on the logs are approximate because the transition between different soil layers may be gradual. Drive samples of representative earth materials were obtained from the borings.

Disturbed samples were obtained using a Standard Penetration Sampler (SPT). This sampler consists of a 2-inch O.D., 1.4-inch I.D. split barrel shaft that is advanced into the soil at the bottom of the drilled hole a total of 12 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler 12 inches is presented on the boring logs. Soil samples obtained by the SPT were retained in plastic bags. A California modified sampler was used to obtain drive samples of the soil encountered. This sampler consists of a 3-inch outside diameter (O.D.), 2.4-inch inside diameter (I.D.) split barrel shaft that was driven a total of 12-inches into the soil at the bottom of the boring. The soil was retained in brass rings for laboratory testing. Additional soil from each drive remaining in the cutting shoe was usually discarded after visually classifying the soil. The number of blows required to drive the sampler 12 inches is presented on the boring logs.

Upon completion of the borings, the boreholes were backfilled with soil from the cuttings.

Item Number: 1.

Project: Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon
Dr
Project Location: APN 664-080-017, Desert
Hot Springs
Project Number: 22293
Key to Log of Boring
Depth (feet)Sample TypeSampling Resistance, blows/ftMaterial TypeGraphic Log

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Water Content, %Dry Unit Weight, pcf

REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS
1 Depth (feet): Depth in feet below the ground surface. 2 Sample Type: Type of soil sample collected at the depth interval shown.
3 Sampling Resistance, blows/ft: Number of blows to advance driven sampler one foot (or distance shown) beyond seating
interval
using the hammer identified on the boring log.
4 Material Type: Type of material encountered.
5 Graphic Log: Graphic depiction of the subsurface material encountered.
6 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Description of material encountered.

May include consistency, moisture, color, and
other descriptive
text.
7 Water Content, %: Water content of the soil sample, expressed as percentage of dry weight of sample.
8 Dry Unit Weight, pcf: Dry weight per unit volume of soil sample measured in laboratory, in pounds per cubic
foot.
9 REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS: Comments and observations
regarding drilling or sampling made by driller or field personnel.

FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS
CHEM: Chemical tests to assess corrosivity
COMP: Compaction test
CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test
LL: Liquid Limit, percent
PI: Plasticity Index, percent
SA: Sieve analysis (percent passing No. 200 Sieve)
UC: Unconfined compressive strength test, Qu, in ksf
WA: Wash sieve (percent passing No. 200 Sieve)

MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
Poorly graded SAND (SP) Poorly graded SAND with Silt (SP-SM)

TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
Auger sampler
Bulk Sample
3-inch-OD California w/
brass rings
CME Sampler
Grab Sample

2.5-inch-OD Modified
California w/ brass liners
Pitcher Sample
2-inch-OD unlined split
spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube (Thin-walled,
fixed head)

OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
Water level (at time of drilling, ATD)
Water level (after waiting, AW)
Minor change in material properties within a
stratum
Inferred/gradational contact between strata
? Queried contact between strata

GENERAL NOTES
1: Soil classifications are based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive, and actual lithologic changes may be gradual. Field descriptions may have been modified to reflect results of lab tests. 2: Descriptions on these logs apply only at the specific boring locations and at the time the borings were advanced. They are not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations or times.

C:\Users\Eduardo R Lemus\AppData\Local\Temp\borings_temp\tmpfile.bgs[NTSGEO.tpl] Figure A-1
Sheet 1 of 1
Item Number: 1.

Project: Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon
Dr
Project Location: APN 664-080-017, Desert
Hot Springs
Project Number: 22293
Log of Boring B-1
Date(s)

Drilled 7/1/2022
Drilling

Method Hollow Stem Auger
Drill Rig

Type CME 75
Groundwater Level

and Date Measured Not Encountered
Borehole

Backfill Backfilled with native
Logged By ERL
Drill Bit

Size/Type 8"
Drilling

Contractor One Way Drilling
Sampling

Method(s) Modified California, SPT
Location APN 664-080-017, Desert Hot Springs
Checked By NS
Total Depth

of Borehole 21 feet
Approximate

Surface Elevation N/A
Hammer

Data 140-lb autohammer
Material Type
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP
SP
SP
Graphic LogWater Content, %

REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS
1 1
Dry Unit Weight, pcf
112
130

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
ALLUVIUM (Qal):

SAND TO SILTY SAND

fine to coarse grained sand, some silt, dry medium dense, light grey to brown
fine-grained sand, some silt, dry, medium dense, light grey SAND, fine to coarse grained sand, some gravel, trace of silt, dry, dense, light grey
dry, very dense
fine to coarse sand, numerous gravel, dry, very dense, light grey
Total Depth =21 feet

Refusal at 21 feet

Groundwater not encountered

Backfilled with native
Depth (feet) 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
Sample TypeSampling Resistance, blows/ft
31 16
50/3"
54 C:\Users\Eduardo R Lemus\AppData\Local\Temp\borings_temp\tmpfile.bgs[NTSGEO.tpl] Figure A-2
Sheet 1 of 1
Item Number: 1.

Project: Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon
Dr
Project Location: APN 664-080-017, Desert
Hot Springs
Project Number: 22293
Log of Boring B-2
Date(s)

Drilled 7/1/2022
Drilling

Method Hollow Stem Auger
Drill Rig

Type CME 75
Groundwater Level

and Date Measured Not Encountered
Borehole

Backfill Backfilled with native
Logged By ERL
Drill Bit

Size/Type 8"
Drilling

Contractor One Way Drilling
Sampling

Method(s) Modified California, SPT
Location APN 664-080-017, Desert Hot Springs
Checked By NS
Total Depth

of Borehole 30 feet
Approximate

Surface Elevation N/A
Hammer

Data 140-lb autohammer
Material Type
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
Graphic LogWater Content, %

REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS
1 3
Dry Unit Weight, pcf
126
125

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
ALLUVIUM (Qal):

SAND

fine-grained sand, few silt, some gravel, dry,, dense, light brown

dry, medium dense
fine to coarse grained sand, numerous gravel, trace of silt, dry, medium dense, light brown to grey
No Recovery at 15 feet
No Recovery 20 feet
fine to coarse grained sand, some gravel, dry, very dense, light grey
Depth (feet) 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
Sample TypeSampling Resistance, blows/ft
31 30
17 69/11"
C:\Users\Eduardo R Lemus\AppData\Local\Temp\borings_temp\tmpfile.bgs[NTSGEO.tpl] Figure A-3
Sheet 1 of 2
Item Number: 1.

Project: Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon
Dr
Project Location: APN 664-080-017, Desert
Hot Springs
Project Number: 22293
Log of Boring B-2
Material Type
SP
Graphic Log

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Water Content, %Dry Unit Weight, pcf

REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS
dry, very dense
Total Depth= 30 feet

Groundwater not encountered

Backfilled with native
Depth (feet)
30 35
40 45
50 55
60 65
Sample TypeSampling Resistance, blows/ft
50/6"
C:\Users\Eduardo R Lemus\AppData\Local\Temp\borings_temp\tmpfile.bgs[NTSGEO.tpl] Figure A-3
Sheet 2 of 2
Item Number: 1.

Project: Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon
Dr
Project Location: APN 664-080-017, Desert
Hot Springs
Project Number: 22293
Log of Boring B-3
Date(s)

Drilled 7/1/2022
Drilling

Method Hollow Stem Auger
Drill Rig

Type CME 75
Groundwater Level

and Date Measured Not Encountered
Borehole

Backfill Backfilled with native
Logged By ERL
Drill Bit

Size/Type 8"
Drilling

Contractor One Way Drilling
Sampling

Method(s) Modified California, SPT
Location APN 664-080-017, Desert Hot Springs
Checked By NS
Total Depth

of Borehole 20 feet
Approximate

Surface Elevation N/A
Hammer

Data 140-lb autohammer
Material Type
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP
SP
SP
Graphic LogWater Content, %

REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS
4 2
Dry Unit Weight, pcf
123
126

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
ALLUVIUM (Qal):

SAND TO SILTY SAND

fine to coarse grained sand, some silt, few gravel, dry to damp, dense, light grey
dry, very dense
SAND, fine to coarse grained, few silt, some gravel, dry, dense, light grey
dry, medium dense
fine to coarse grained, numerous gravel, trace of silt, dry, dense, light grey
Total Depth = 20 feet

Groundwater not encountered

Backfilled with native
Depth (feet) 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
Sample TypeSampling Resistance, blows/ft
37 57
50/3"
24 50
C:\Users\Eduardo R Lemus\AppData\Local\Temp\borings_temp\tmpfile.bgs[NTSGEO.tpl] Figure A-4
Sheet 1 of 1
Item Number: 1.

Project: Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon
Dr
Project Location: APN 664-080-017, Desert
Hot Springs
Project Number: 22293
Log of Boring B-4
Date(s)

Drilled 7/1/2022
Drilling

Method Hollow Stem Auger
Drill Rig

Type CME 75
Groundwater Level

and Date Measured Not Encountered
Borehole

Backfill Backfilled with native
Logged By ERL
Drill Bit

Size/Type 8"
Drilling

Contractor One Way Drilling
Sampling

Method(s) Modified California, SPT
Location APN 664-080-017, Desert Hot Springs
Checked By NS
Total Depth

of Borehole 11 feet
Approximate

Surface Elevation N/A
Hammer

Data 140-lb autohammer
Material Type
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP
Graphic LogWater Content, %

REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS
2 Dry Unit Weight, pcf
123

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
ALLUVIUM (Qal):

SAND TO SILTY SAND

fine to coarse grained sand, some silt, few gravel, dry, medium dense, light grey to brown
dry, medium dense, light grey
SAND, fine to coarse grained, some gravel, trace of silt, dry, very dense, light grey
Total Depth = 11 feet

Refusal at 11 feet

Groundwater not encountered

Backfilled with native
Depth (feet) 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
Sample TypeSampling Resistance, blows/ft
11 32
66/9"
C:\Users\Eduardo R Lemus\AppData\Local\Temp\borings_temp\tmpfile.bgs[NTSGEO.tpl] Figure A-5
Sheet 1 of 1
Item Number: 1.

Project: Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon
Dr
Project Location: APN 664-080-017, Desert
Hot Springs
Project Number: 22293
Log of Boring B-5
Date(s)

Drilled 7/1/2022
Drilling

Method Hollow Stem Auger
Drill Rig

Type CME 75
Groundwater Level

and Date Measured Not Encountered
Borehole

Backfill Backfilled with native
Logged By ERL
Drill Bit

Size/Type 8"
Drilling

Contractor One Way Drilling
Sampling

Method(s) Modified California, SPT
Location APN 664-080-017, Desert Hot Springs
Checked By NS
Total Depth

of Borehole 8 feet
Approximate

Surface Elevation N/A
Hammer

Data 140-lb autohammer
Material Type
SP
SP
Graphic LogWater Content, %

REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS
1 Dry Unit Weight, pcf
115

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
ALLUVIUM (Qal):

SAND

fine to coarse grained sand, some gravel, dry, medium
dense, light grey to brown
dry, medium dense
Total Depth = 8 feet

Refusal at 8 feet

Groundwater not encountered

Backfilled with native
Depth (feet) 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
Sample TypeSampling Resistance, blows/ft
23 19
C:\Users\Eduardo R Lemus\AppData\Local\Temp\borings_temp\tmpfile.bgs[NTSGEO.tpl] Figure A-6
Sheet 1 of 1
Item Number: 1.

APPENDIX B
Geotechnical Laboratory Testing
Item Number: 1.

NTS Project No. 22293 Page 1
Appendix B
Geotechnical Laboratory Testing
Laboratory Moisture Content and Density Tests
The moisture content and dry densities of selected driven samples obtained from the exploratory boring was evaluated in general accordance with the latest version of ASTM D 2937. The test results are presented on the log of the exploratory boring in Appendix A.

Wash Sieve
The amount of fines passing the No. 200 sieve was evaluated by the wash sieve. The test procedure was in general accordance with ASTM D 1140. The results are attached to his Appendix B.

Corrosion Suite
The corrosion potential of typical on-site materials under long-term contact with both metal and concrete was determined by chemical and electrical resistance tests. The soluble sulfate test for potential concrete corrosion was performed in general accordance with California Test Method 417, the minimum resistivity test for potential metal corrosion was performed in general accordance with California Test Method 643, and the concentration of soluble chlorides was determined in general accordance with California Test Method 422. The test results are attached to this Appendix B.

Direct Shear Tests
Direct shear tests were performed on selected remolded and relatively undisturbed soil samples in general accordance with ASTM D 3080 to evaluate the shear strength characteristics of the materials. The samples were inundated during shearing to represent adverse field conditions. Direct shear test results are attached to this Appendix B.

One Dimensional Swell/Collapse of Soil
One Dimensional Swell/Collapse of Soil test was performed to measure magnitude of one-dimensional wetting-induced swell or collapse of unsaturated soils. Vertical pressure of 800 and 1600 psf is applied to the sample then the sample is soaked in distilled water. Deformation was recorded after 24 hours. The results are attached to this Appendix B.

Item Number: 1.

July 13, 2022 Page 2
Project 22293

PROJECT
ADDRESS: Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon Dr
LABORATORY RECAPITULATION 1
Explorations Depth
(ft) Material Dry Density (p.c.f.) Moisture Content (%) B-1 10.0 Qal 112 1

20.0 Qal 130 1
B-2 5.0 Qal 126 1

25.0 Qal 125 3
B-3 2.5 Qal 123 4

10.0 Qal 126 2
B-4 5.0 Qal 123 2
B-5 2.5 Qal 115 1
LABORATORY RECAPITULATION 2
Explorations Depth
(ft) pH As-Is Soil Resistivity (ohm-cm)
Minimum Soil
Resistivity
(ohm-cm)
Chloride
(ppm)
Sulfate
(ppm)
B-1 5.0 9.00 140,000 6,700 30 30
Item Number: 1.

July 13, 2022 Page 3
Project 22293
Item Number: 1.

July 13, 2022 Page 4
Project 22293
Item Number: 1.

July 13, 2022 Page 5
Project 22293
Item Number: 1.

July 13, 2022 Page 6
Project 22293
Item Number: 1.

July 13, 2022 Page 7
Project 22293
Item Number: 1.

July 13, 2022 Page 8
Project 22293
Item Number: 1.

APPENDIX C
Infiltration Testing Results
Item Number: 1.

°F

8.00 inches radius= 4 inches
(min) (min) (ft) (ft) (in) (in) (in) (in) (in/hour)
1 10:25 10:35 10.0 60.0 3.75 4.17 15.00 9.96 5.04 12.48 4.18 2 10:35 10:45 10.0 70.0 4.17 4.42 9.96 6.96 3.00 8.46 3.44 3 10:45 10:55 10.0 80.0 4.42 4.58 6.96 5.04 1.92 6.00 2.88 4 10:55 11:05 10.0 90.0 4.58 4.71 5.04 3.48 1.56 4.26 2.99 5 11:05 11:15 10.0 100.0 4.71 4.79 3.48 2.52 0.96 3.00 2.30 6 11:15 11:25 10.0 110.0 4.79 4.83 2.52 2.04 0.48 2.28 1.35 2 2.21

1.11 Factor
Category
Assigned
Weight
(w)
Factor
Value (v)
Product
(p) = w x
v
Concern
Level
Factor
Value (v)

0.25 3 0.75 Low 1

0.25 1 0.25 Medium 2

0.25 1 0.25 High 3

0.25 1 0.25

1.5 *Factor of safety should not be less than 2. Additional factor of safety in accordance with Table D-7 of the South Orange Falling Head Borehole Infiltration Test
Project Name: Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon Dr, Desert Ho Date: 7/1/2022 Project Number: 22293 Tested By: ERL
Test Hole Number: P-1 USCS Soil Classification: SM
Total Depth : 5.00 feet Water Temperature: N/A
Test Hole Diameter:

Trial Start
Time End Time
∆T Total
Time
Initial
Depth of
Water
Final
Depth of
Water
Depth to groundwater
H0 Hf ∆H Havg
Unfactor
ed
Percolati
Geotechnical Factor of Safety (SA):

County Technical Guidance Document should be applied by the project civil engineer.

SAFETY FACTOR*:

UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATE (IN/HR):

FACTORED INFILTRATION RATE (IN/HR):

Factor Description
Suitability
Assessmen
t
Soil assessment methods
Predominant soil texture
Site soil variablity
NTS Project No. 22293 Page 1
Item Number: 1.

°F

8.00 inches radius= 4 inches
(min) (min) (ft) (ft) (in) (in) (in) (in) (in/hour)
1 12:00 12:10 10.0 60.0 4.50 5.33 66.00 56.04 9.96 61.02 1.90 2 12:10 12:20 10.0 70.0 5.33 6.16 56.04 46.08 9.96 51.06 2.25 3 12:20 12:30 10.0 80.0 6.16 6.83 46.08 38.04 8.04 42.06 2.19 4 12:30 12:40 10.0 90.0 6.83 7.38 38.04 31.44 6.60 34.74 2.16 5 12:40 12:50 10.0 100.0 7.38 7.79 31.44 26.52 4.92 28.98 1.91 6 12:50 1:00 10.0 110.0 7.79 8.08 26.52 23.04 3.48 24.78 1.56 2 1.87

0.94 Factor
Category
Assigned
Weight
(w)
Factor
Value (v)
Product
(p) = w x v
Concern
Level
Factor
Value (v)

0.25 3 0.75 Low 1

0.25 1 0.25 Medium 2

0.25 1 0.25 High 3

0.25 1 0.25

1.5 *Factor of safety should not be less than 2. Additional factor of safety in accordance with Table D-7 of the South Orange Falling Head Borehole Infiltration Test
Project Name: Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon Dr, Desert Hot Date: 7/1/2022 Project Number: 22293 Tested By: ERL
Test Hole Number: P-2 USCS Soil Classification: SP
Total Depth : 10.00 feet Water Temperature: N/A
Test Hole Diameter:

Trial Start
Time End Time
∆T Total
Time
Initial
Depth of
Water
Final
Depth of
Water
Depth to groundwater
H0 Hf ∆H Havg
Unfactored
Percolation
Rate
Geotechnical Factor of Safety (SA):

County Technical Guidance Document should be applied by the project civil engineer.

SAFETY FACTOR*:

UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATE (IN/HR):

FACTORED INFILTRATION RATE (IN/HR):

Factor Description
Suitability
Assessmen
t
Soil assessment methods
Predominant soil texture
Site soil variablity
NTS Project No. 22293 Page 2
Item Number: 1.

°F

8.00 inches radius= 4 inches
(min) (min) (ft) (ft) (in) (in) (in) (in) (in/hour)
1 1:45 1:55 10.0 60.0 3.83 4.25 14.04 9.00 5.04 11.52 4.47 2 1:55 2:05 10.0 70.0 4.25 4.46 9.00 6.48 2.52 7.74 3.10 3 2:05 2:15 10.0 80.0 4.46 4.58 6.48 5.04 1.44 5.76 2.23 4 2:15 2:25 10.0 90.0 4.58 4.67 5.10 3.96 1.14 4.53 2.09 5 2:25 2:35 10.0 100.0 4.67 4.75 3.96 3.00 0.96 3.48 2.10 6 2:35 2:45 10.0 110.0 4.75 4.79 3.00 2.52 0.48 2.76 1.21 2 1.80

0.90 Factor
Category
Assigned
Weight
(w)
Factor
Value (v)
Product (p)
= w x v
Concern
Level
Factor Value
(v)

0.25 3 0.75 Low 1

0.25 1 0.25 Medium 2

0.25 1 0.25 High 3

0.25 1 0.25

1.5 *Factor of safety should not be less than 2. Additional factor of safety in accordance with Table D-7 of the South Orange Falling Head Borehole Infiltration Test
Project Name: Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon Dr, Desert H Date: 7/1/2022 Project Number: 22293 Tested By: ERL
Test Hole Number: P-3 USCS Soil Classification: SM
Total Depth : 5.00 feet Water Temperature: N/A
Test Hole Diameter:

Trial Start
Time End Time
∆T Total
Time
Initial
Depth of
Water
Final
Depth of
Water
Depth to groundwater
H0 Hf ∆H Havg
Unfactor
ed
Percolati
Geotechnical Factor of Safety (SA):

SAFETY FACTOR*:

UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATE (IN/HR):

FACTORED INFILTRATION RATE (IN/HR):

Factor Description
Suitability
Assessmen
t
Soil assessment methods
Predominant soil texture
Site soil variablity
NTS Project No. 22293 Page 3
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA

PHASE I

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT
JULY 6, 2022
APN 664-080-017

DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA

PREPARED FOR

AMIR BUTT
1461 TAHOE STREET
BEAUMONT, CA 92223

PREPARED BY

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (REM)
1015 VIA ROMALES
SAN DIMAS, CA 91773
(626) 378-2714
PROJECT NO. 238622
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA

TABLE OF CONTENTS
_____________________________________________________________________________

1. INTRODUCTION 5

1.1 Objective 5

1.2 Scope of Work 5

2. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 6

2.1 Geographical Description of Property 6

2.2 General Description of the Subject Property 6

2.3 Present Tenants and Business Operation 6

2.4 Past Tenants and Business Operation 6

2.5 Regional Physical Setting 7

2.6 Hydrogeologic Information 8

2.7 Historical Hazardous Substance Usage 8

2.7.1 Record Search Sources 8

2.7.2 List & Quantities of Hazardous Materials 8

2.7.3 Permits, Licenses and Registrations 8

2.7.4 Violation or Non-Compliance Issue 9

2.7.5 Regulatory Database Record Search 9

2.7.6 Environmental Lien Records 9

3. PROPERTY RECONNAISSANCE 10

3.1 Air Quality & Visible Emissions 10

3.2 Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) 10

3.3 Lead Based Paint (LBP) 10

3.4 Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) 10

3.5 Underground Storage Tank (UST) 11

3.6 Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) 11

3.7 Fuel Islands 11

3.8 Hydraulic Hoist Unit 11

3.9 Hazardous Materials/Petroleum Products Storage & Handling 11

3.10 Other Containers 11

3.11 Hazardous Waste Storage 12

3.12 Distress Vegetation 12
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
_____________________________________________________________________________

3.13 Stockpiled Soils 12

3.14 Wastewater Treatment Unit & Clarifiers 12

3.15 Solid Waste Disposal 12

3.16 Wells 12

3.17 Underground Pipelines 13

3.18 Boilers & HVAC Systems 13

3.19 Visual Indication of Spills, Leakage, Staining 13

3.20 Soil Staining or Surface Staining on Natural/Unpaved Land 13

3.21 Pits, Ponds, Lagoons 13

3.22 Herbicides/Pesticides 13

3.23 Radon 13

4. NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES 15

4.1 Adjacent/Adjoining Businesses 15

4.2 Hazardous Substance Usage 15
5 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCH AND 16

POTENTIAL OFF-SITE CONTAMINATION SOURCES

5.1 Historical Background & Scope of Coverage 16

5.2 Database Sources 16
A. Federal Sources 16
B. California State Sources 17
C. Regional Sources 18
D. Other Sources 19

5.3 Case Study References 19
A. Case-Closure 19
B. Lawrence Livermore 19
National Laboratory Reports on LUFT (LUST)’s
C. Groundwater Flow Gradient 20

5.4 Potential Sources of Contamination 20

5.5 UST, Disposal Sites, and Generators 20
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
_________________________________________________________________

6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 21

7. LIMITATIONS AND CERTIFICATION STAMP 22

8. QUALIFICATION STATEMENT FOR PERSONNEL CONDUCTING
THE PHASE I ASSESSMENT 23

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A FIGURES & PHOTOS
FIGURE 1 SITE PHOTOS
FIGURE 2 SITE LOCATION MAP
FIGURE 3 CO. ASSESSOR’S OFFICE SITE RECORDS SUMMARY

INCLUDING RECENT AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING

SITE/ITS VICINITY GENERAL LAYOUT

APPENDIX B HISTORIC AERIAL PHOTO/TOPO MAP RECORDS

APPENDIX C GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCH DATABASE

THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED IN CONFORMANCE TO MEET OR EXCEED THE LIMITATIONS AS SET FORTH BY THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING & MATERIALS (ASTM) STANDARD PRACTICE E 1527-21. IT IS FOR THE EXPRESS USE OF THE CLIENT, AND ITS CONTENTS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE PREVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. ACCEPTANCE OF THIS REPORT CONSTITUTES AN AGREEMENT BY THE CLIENT TO ASSUME FULL LIABILITY FOR INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN. THIS

REPORT IS FOR THE SOLE USE AND INTERPRETATION OF THE CLIENT, AND IT IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED TO OUTSIDE PARTIES. THE INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT IS FURNISHED IN GOOD FAITH AND WAS OBTAINED FROM PUBLIC & PRIVATE SOURCES AND DATABASE CONSIDERED RELIABLE. REM MAKES NO REPRESENTATION OF WARRANTY REGARDING THE ACCURACY, OR RELIABILITY, QUALITY OR COMPLETENESS OF SUCH INFORMATION. IN NO EVENT, SHALL REM BE LIABLE TO ANY PARTY FOR SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXAMPLARY DAMAGES. THE CUSTOMER SHALL ASSUME FULL LIABILITY FOR USE OF THIS REPORT.

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

5 1. INTRODUCTION
______________________________________________________________

1.1 Objective
This report summarizes the results of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the subject property performed by Robin Environmental Management (REM) in July 2022. The purpose of this Environmental Site Assessment is to evaluate the potential for environmental concerns or liabilities due to past and/or current land use practices at the subject site or from nearby properties. This assessment included in this report is solely targeted for CERCLA (Superfund) liability and the “innocent landowner defense”, to permit user to satisfy one of the requirements to qualify for the innocent landowner defense to CERCLA liability, by conducting all appropriate inquiries to identify recognized environmental conditions (REC’s).

1.2 Scope of Work
 Visual investigation of the property to obtain information regarding obvious visual signs of adverse environmental conditions, contamination, hazardous material usage, storage and handling on and in the adjoining sites (only up to one parcel next to the subject property) of the subject property
 Visual survey of the adjoining land uses (only up to one parcel next to the subject property) and determination of any current nearby operations which may potentially impact the subject site
 Government document search of records compiled by various government agencies for on site or nearby operations (past and present) to aid in the identification of any potential contamination sources
 Review of reasonably available historical information such as building permit records from local agency, aerial photographs, historical topographic maps, if available, to identify any potential past on-site operation which may have environmental implications Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

6 2. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
______________________________________________________________________

2.1 Geographical Description of Property
The subject property, APN 664-080-017, is a roughly 4-acre N-S trending rectangular-shaped vacant lot at the northwestern corner of (the E-W trending) Pierson Blvd and (the N-S trending) Indian Canyon Drive in the city of Desert Hot Springs, California. See Figure 1 for Site Photos; Figure 2 for a Site Location Map; and Figure 3 for a Co. Assessor’s Office Parcel Records Summary Including a Recent Aerial Photo Showing Site/Its Vicinity General Layout.

2.2 General Description of the Subject Property
The subject property, APN 664-080-017, is a roughly 4-acre N-S trending rectangular-shaped vacant lot at the northwestern corner of (the E-W trending) Pierson Blvd and (the N-S trending) Indian Canyon Drive in the city of Desert Hot Springs, California. Currently, the subject property is a vacant lot with no improvement structures present on the premise.

There are no ponds, swamps, dry wells, or lagoons observed on the subject property. No apparently significant surface staining was noticed present on the entire unpaved vacant lot of the subject site.

2.3 Present Tenants and Business Operation
At the time of site inspection on July 1, 2022, the subject property was a vacant lot with no improvement structures.

2.4 Past Tenants and Business Operation
Methods of researching historic use of ownership of the subject property employed by REM are as follows.
 Historic Aerial Photograph Records
 Historic Topographic Map Records
 County Assessor’s Office Records
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

7 2.4.1 Historic Aerial Photograph Records
Historic aerial photo records for the site area included in Appendix B showed that the subject site has been vacant/undeveloped lot since prior to 1972.

2.4.2 Historic Topographic Map Records
1944 and 1956 topographic map records for the site area also included in Appendix B, along with 1987 USGS topographic map for the site area included as Figure 2, also revealed that the site was vacant/undeveloped lot in those three years.

2.4.3 County Assessor’s Office Records
Riverside County Assessor’s Office records for the site parcel indicated that the site has not been previously developed.

2.4.4 Site Development/Occupancy History
Based on historic site occupancy data discussed above, the site has never been documented as being developed in the past and has always been vacant raw land historically.

2.5 Regional Physical Setting
The subject property’s physical locations were researched employing a United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle (Quad) Map relevant to the subject property. The USGS 7.5 Minute Quad Map has an approximate scale of 1 inch to 2,000 feet, and shows physical features with environmental significance such as wetlands, water bodies, roadways, mines, and buildings. Please refer to Appendix A, Figure 2.

The physical and natural features illustrated on the Quad Map served as areas of visual emphasis when conducting the site inspection of the subject property. The USGS 7.5 Minute Quad Map was used as the only Standard Physical Setting Source, and is sufficient as a single reference. The surface elevation of the subject site is approximate 1,180 feet above Mean Sea Level and exhibits regional topographic slope generally towards southeast.

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

8 2.6 Hydrogeological Information
The subject site is located in the Coachella Valley, the northwestern half of a broad NW-SE trending basin. Southeast of Coachella Valley is the Imperial Valley; the two Valleys, together with the Salton Sea (a sub-seal level saline lake separated from Gulf of California by Recent/ Tertiary tectonic movements), form the Salton Trough between Peninsular (Coast) Ranges to the southwest and Basin & Range province to the northeast.

Groundwater monitoring data for nearby Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST)/Spills case available via State Water Board GeoTracker website indicated that groundwater occurs at an approximate depth of 300' and exhibits a flow direction generally towards southwest around the site area.

2.7 Historical Hazardous Substance Usage

2.7.1 Records search sources
REM’s field engineer contacted the following public agencies to find any records of former operation of underground storage tank (UST) of gasoline/product or any other hazardous substances on the subject site premise.
 County of Riverside Building Division
 Regional Water Quality Control Board – Colorado River Basin Region No records were found in reference to historical usage or handling of UST on the subject property.

2.7.2 List and quantities of the hazardous materials
During the site inspection, the use, storage, and generation of any quantity of hazardous materials was not observed. No regulatory agency data was found regarding historic or present use of the subject property pertinent to hazardous materials previously or presently used, stored, treated, disposed or generated at the subject property.

2.7.3 Permits, licenses, and registrations
All present and past records of permits, licenses, registrations, certificates of environmentally related operations were searched. No equipment requiring environmentally related licensing was observed. Thus, no environmentally related permits or registrations were necessary for Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

9 the operation of subject business.

2.7.4 Violation or non-compliance notice
No currently pending violation or notice of non-compliance was issued with the present environmental regulations, according to the findings of our environmental assessment on the subject property.

2.7.5 Regulatory database record research
The subject property was not listed on the following environmental regulatory database record research (NETR records search): NPL, RCRA-TSD, CERCLIS, NFRAP, RCRA-G, ERNS, CORRACTS, CORTESE, CALSITES, LUST, UST and SWF.

2.7.6 Environmental lien records
Under current environment regulation, government agency may place an environmental lien on the property with known contamination and no cleanup/mitigation activities apparently intended being conducted by the site owner upon the agency issued the cleanup enforcement order. The conducted government records search shows that there are no environmental liens placed by the federal environmental agency under CERCLA regulations for the subject site. REM staff searched the California State Department of Toxic Substances website EnviroStor data search and found no environmental liens were placed by the State environmental agency for the subject site. City of Desert Hot Springs records also show that there are no environmental liens placed by the local environmental agency for the subject site.

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

10 3. PROPERTY RECONNAISSANCE
______________________________________________________________________ REM’s environmental assessor/geologist performed the field survey of the subject site and adjacent properties on July 1, 2022. A site location map and Co. Assessors’ Office parcel records summary including a recent aerial photograph showing site/its vicinity general layout are included as Figures 2 and 3, respectively.

3.1 Air Quality and Visible Emissions
No unusual smells, obnoxious odors, or visual emissions were observed during the inspection of the subject property. Neither air emission stacks nor paint booth were present, thus no pertinent permits were searched for the previous records of violation history.

3.2 Asbestos-Containing Material (ACM)
Since the subject lot is currently vacant, asbestos-containing building materials are not of environmental concern.

3.3 Lead-Based Paint (LBP)
Since the subject lot is currently vacant with no improvements, lead-based paint is also not a potentially environmental concern.

3.4 Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB’s)
Prior to 1978, PCBs were commonly used in dielectric fluids in transformers, capacitors, and light ballasts due to their desirable thermal characteristics, and hydraulic fluid compactor. Due to their demonstrated toxicity and persistence in the environment, PCB manufacturing in the United States was discontinued.

Pole-mounted transformers were found in the vicinity of the subject building, appearing in good condition without any sign of leakage. No PCB-containing hydraulic fluid trash compactor or concrete pad-mounted transformers were noticed present on the subject site premise.

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

11 3.5 Underground Storage Tank (UST)
The visual inspection of the subject site revealed no evidence of surface or above ground features (e.g., fill pipe, vent pipes, fill connections, concrete pads, saw cuts, sumps, spill containment device, leak detection device, etc.) normally associated with underground storage tanks (UST’s).

3.6 Aboveground Storage Tank
REM’s field officer performed the visual inspection of the subject site to find evidence of surface or above ground features (e.g., fill pipe, vent pipes, fill connections, concrete pads, saw cuts, concrete pad, drains in vicinity, etc.) normally associated with aboveground storage tanks (AST’s). Visual observation also includes the inspection to identify any surface markings indicating the existence of aboveground product pipelines. No evidence on the presence of any on-site aboveground storage tank was identified.

3.7 Fuel Islands
The visual inspection of the subject site revealed no evidence of fuel islands or dispensers either in operation or abandoned.

3.8 Hydraulic Hoist Unit
The visual inspection of the subject site revealed no presence of underground hydraulic hoist units within the subject site premise.

3.9 Hazardous Materials / Petroleum Products Storage & Handling No containers storing automotive or industrial batteries, pesticides, or chemicals seemingly exhibiting toxic hazards at the time of site inspection. No major spills, leakage, or staining were observed throughout the site

3.10 Other Containers
No other containers indicating any sign of environmental concern were observed during the site inspection.

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

12 3.11 Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, Disposal (TSD) No storage, treatment, or disposal of hazardous waste was found during the site investigation. No severely improper waste stream processing or disposal practices were observed on the subject property.

3.12 Distress Vegetation
Planters and vegetation in the vicinity of the subject site were found well maintained on bare soil or within separate planters in relatively good appearance with no sign of chemical stress or unnatural appearance.

3.13 Stockpiled Soils
REM’s site inspection did not reveal any evidence of stockpiled soils on the ground of subject property.

3.14 Wastewater Treatment Unit / Clarifier
No underground industrial wastewater treatment facility, i.e., clarifier was observed on the subject property during the site visit.

Storm water drainage system in the close proximity of the subject area did not identify any abnormal accumulation of petroleum or chemical run-off or foreign materials. No unusual blockage of the storm-water control system was observed during the site visual inspection.

REM recommends no investigation on described storm-water systems at the subject property.

3.15 Solid Waste Disposal
No improper activities of treatment or disposal of hazardous, medical, or toxic wastes are performed on the subject site.

3.16 Wells
REM’s site walk-through did not discover any irrigation wells, injection wells, abandoned wells, groundwater-monitoring wells, dry wells, septic wells oil wells, gas wells, domestic water wells, other monitoring wells on the subject site premise.

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

13 3.17 Underground Pipelines
REM’s site inspection did not reveal any evidence of underground pipelines beneath the ground of subject property, other than public utility lines such as sewer, power, and electric lines, for which public “dig-alert” service would easily identify upon 48-hour telephone notice in advance.

3.18 Boilers & HVAC Systems
The subject lot is current vacant and there are no water heater and HVAC systems present on the site premise.

3.19 Visual Indication of Spills, Leakage, Staining
REM’s site inspection did not reveal any evidence of on-site or off-site spills, leakages, or staining significant enough to pose immediate environmental concern onto the subject property. No significantly stained catch basins, drip pads, or sumps were observed. There were no major spills around surface drains, pipes, gutters, spouts, or tubes, if any, at the time of site investigation.

3.20 Soil Staining or Surface Staining on Unpaved/Natural Lands No staining or surface staining on the bare soil or unpaved lands were identified during the site investigation.

3.21 Pits, Ponds, Lagoons
No visible evidence of wetlands such as pits, ponds, lagoons, or any other water bodies, was observed within the subject property’s boundary lines.

3.22 Herbicides/Pesticides
No evidence of herbicide or pesticide use on the subject property was observed during the inspection.

3.23 Radon
Radon sources can be found from earth and rock beneath building structures, well water, and Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

14 building materials themselves. Though there is no immediate health effect, it is believed to account for approximately 10% of lung cancer deaths in the United States. Estimated national average is 1.5 picocuries per liter of air, however, levels as high as 200 picocuries per liter in some commercial buildings can be found. USEPA and California Department of Health Services’ Radon Survey Interim Results report shows different U.S. regions according to general geological and climate information, where Region 9 includes Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego Counties.

According to the California EPA, Los Angeles and Riverside County is classified as a “Zone 2” county having a predicted average screening level between 2-4 picocuries per liter of air.

Orange and San Diego County is under Zone 3, having the level less than 2 picocuries/L, and Ventura County as Zone 1 has the level greater than 4 picocuries/L.

If a property region reportedly has radon concentration below 4 picocuries per liter of air in

99.5% of homes within the region, then, it is not likely impacted by the presence of radon gas, considering EPA action limit of 4 picocuries per liter of air volume. REM is not contracted to perform the testing of radon level on the subject property, thus the delineation of radon level is beyond the scope of the service covered in this report.

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

15 4. NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES
______________________________________________________________________

4.1 Adjacent/Adjoining Businesses
For the scope of this assessment, properties are defined and categorized based upon their physical proximity to the subject property. An adjoining property is any real estate property whose border is contiguous or partially contiguous with the subject properties, or that would be if the properties were not separated by a roadway, street, public thoroughfare, river, or stream.

Adjoining properties are as follows:

North: By vacant lot
East: Immediately by Indian Canyon Drive, and then by vacant lot South: Immediately by Pierson Blvd, and then by apparently a half-finished auto sales/ shop (with 12021 N Indian Canyon Drive address)
West: By vacant lot

4.2 Hazardous Substance Usage in Neighboring Properties REM’s field engineer contacted the following public agencies to find any records of former operation of Underground Storage Tank (UST) for gasoline/product or any other hazardous substances in the vicinity of the subject site.
 Regional Water Quality Control Board – Colorado River Basin Region  California Dept. of Toxic Substances Control
No locations in the immediate adjacency of the subject site were found to pose any environmental threat to the subject property, based upon the data obtained via NETR governmental records search database and the conducted agency records search.

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

16 5. GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCH AND POTENTIAL OFF-SITE

CONTAMINATION SOURCES
______________________________________________________________________

5.1 Historical Background and Scope of Coverage
Since the early 1970s, environmental agencies have been tracking the compliance of many facilities with the various laws that have been promulgated to halt the pollution of air, land and water. More recently, records have been maintained documenting spills of hazardous materials and the locations of known waste sites or regulated waste handling facilities. The following sections summarizes REM’s review of database search of available records at the local, state and federal level and highlights the approximate location of such sites with respect to the subject property.

The conducted government record search was performed to aid:
1) Identification of facilities, located within a one-mile radius of the subject property, which might pose a potential threat to the subsurface environment at the subject property; and 2) Identification of any environmental violation notices associated with activities conducted at the subject property itself. The following lists were reviewed for sites within one mile of the property:

5.2 Database Sources
A. Federal Sources
 United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS)
 U.S. EPA, National Priority List (NPL)
 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Federal TSD Facilities  Federal Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS)  CERCLA Site Enforcement Tracking System
 RCRA Violators List (CORRACTS)
 U.S. EPA Federal Enforcement Docket
 Toxic Release Inventory System (TRIS)
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

17  No Further Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP)
The CERCLIS is the EPA compilation of sites for which the EPA has evidence of, or is investigating, a release or threatened release, of hazardous substances which may be subject to review in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (Superfund Act). Sites to be included are identified primarily by the reporting requirements of hazardous substances including degreasing solvents, oily waste, acid solutions, alkaline solutions, and heavy metal solutions, Treatment, Storage and Disposal (TSD) facilities and releases larger than specific Reportable Quantities (RQ), established by EPA.

An NPL site is an uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste site identified for priority remedial action under Superfund Program. Such prioritized sites with significant risk to human health and the environment receive remedial funding under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Conservation and Liability Act (CERCLA).

RCRA generator/TSD list is a compilation of hazardous waste generating facilities which have obtained an identification number from EPA.

ERNS database is a national computer database used to store information on unauthorized release of oil and hazardous substances. The program is a cooperative effort of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Transportation Research and Special Program Administration’s National Transportation System Center and the National Response Center. There are primarily five Federal statues that requires release reporting: CERCLA Section 103; the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title III Section 304; the Clean Water Act of 1972 (CWA) Section 311(b)(3); and the Hazardous Material Transportation Act of 1974 (HMTA) Section 1808 (b).

RCRA Violators List (CORRACTS): The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 provides for “Cradle to Grave” regulation of hazardous wastes. RCRA requires regulation of hazardous waste generators, transporters, and TSD sites. Evaluation to potential violations, ranging from manifest requirements to hazardous waste discharges, is typically conducted by the US EPA. This database is also known as Corrective Action Report (CORRACTS).

Toxic Release Inventory System (TRIS): TRIS compiles database for a property having had a release of chemical compound, whose listing reflects permitted air releases rather than a release to soil or groundwater.

B. California State Sources
 State of California Office of Planning and Research (CORTESE), the State of California equivalent of CERCLIS
 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST)
 Solid Waste Information System (SWIS)
 Annual Work Plan (previously known as Bond Expenditure Plan), the State of California equivalent of NPL
 California Historical Abandoned Site Survey Program (CALSITES) Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

18 CALSITES: The Historical Abandoned Site Survey (HASS) Program, formerly the California Abandoned Sites Program Information System – ASPIS, identified certain potential hazardous waste sites. The identification of these sites was generally not made via sampling and site characterization, but as a result of file searches and windshield surveys.

No Further Action sites are also on the CALSITE list which has been marked for no further action by the California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) in accordance with California Health & Safety Code.

CORTESE: This database is a consolidation of information from various sources. It is maintained by the State Office of Planning and Research and lists potential and confirmed hazardous waste or substances sites.

LUST(s): The Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) Information System is maintained by the State Water Resource Board pursuant to California Health & Safety Code.

SWIS (Solid Waste Information System): As legislated under Solid Waste Management and Resource Recovery Act of 1972, the California Waste Management Board maintains list of certain facilities, i.e. Active solid waste disposal sites, Inactive or Closed solid waste disposal sites and Transfer facilities.

AW (Annual Work Plan previously known as Bond Expenditure Plan): The California Health & Safety code requires the California EPA to develop a site-specific expenditure plan as the basis for an appropriation of California Hazardous Substance Cleanup Bond Act of 1984 funds. The Agency is also required to update annually and report any significant adjustments to the Legislature on an ongoing basis. The plan identifies California hazardous waste sites targeted for cleanup by responsible parties, the California and the Federal Environmental Protection Agency over the next coming years.

C. Regional Sources
 LUST - Regional
 Toxic Releases (NT)
 California Regional Water Resources Control Board, Solid Waste Assessment Test (SWAT)
 Well Investigation Program
NT (Toxic Releases): The California Regional Water Quality Control Boards or local Department of Health & Safety Services keeps track of toxic releases to the environment. These lists are known as Unauthorized Releases, Spill, Leaks, Investigation and Cleanups, Non-Tank Releases, Toxic List or similar, depending on the local agency
SWAT (Solid Waste Assessment Test): This program requires that disposal sites with more than 50,000 cubic yards of waste provide sufficient information to the regional water quality control board to determine whether or not the site has discharged hazardous substances which will impact the environment. Site operators are required to file Solid Waste Assessment Test reports on a staggered basis. Operators submit water quality tests to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, describing surface and groundwater quality and supply; and the geology Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

19 within 1 mile of the site. Air quality tests are submitted to the local Air Quality Management District or Air Pollution Control District.

D. Other Sources
 RCRA-Generator
 RCRA-TSD Facilities
 SWLF (Solid Waste Landfill)
RCRA-G: The EPA regulates generators of hazardous material through the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). All hazardous waste generators are required to notify EPA of their existence by submitting the Federal Notification of Regulated Waste Activity Form or a State equivalent form. The notification form provides basic identification information and specific waste activities.

RCRA-D: The EPA regulates the treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous material through the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). All hazardous waste TSD facilities are required to notify EPA of their existence by submitting the Federal Notification of Regulated Waste Activity Form or a State equivalent form.

SWLF: The California Waste Information system database consist both open as well closed and inactive solid waste disposal facilities and transfer stations pursuant to the Solid Waste Management and Resource Recovery Act of 1972. Generally the California Integrated Waste Management Board learns of locations of disposal facilities through permit applications and from local enforcement agencies.

5.3 Case Study References
A. Case-Closure
If sites are listed on the California Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) database with a "case closed (no further remedial actions required)" status, it shall be interpreted as follows.

The identified contamination at such sites was mitigated to a degree that the governing agency believed that these sites do not pose apparent concern/threat to the subsurface environment of the neighboring area.

B. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Reports on LUFT’s According to Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory / University of California Reports on Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFT’s), approximately ninety percent of dissolved petroleum products are found less than 280 feet in distance from the origination source, and most of these plumes are either stable or decreasing in distance. And seventy percent of the plume is in shallow groundwater less than 25 feet below the ground surface.

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

20 C. Groundwater Flow Gradient
Environmentally-concerned sites located not directly at the up-gradient from the subject site can be deleted from anticipated target sites, since contamination from identified sites is unlikely to migrate along the groundwater flow direction to affect the subsurface environment underneath the subject site (Section 2.6 – Hydrogeologic Setting).

5.4 Potential Source of Contamination
Sites identified on referenced agency listing within the one-mile radius from the subject property are tabulated in the Appendix C of this Report. As shown in Appendix C, there are no open Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST)/Cleanup sites or other sites identified as exhibiting potentially environmental concern within the immediate vicinity (< 1/8 mile) of the subject site.

5.5 UST, Disposal Sites, and Generators
As also summarized in Appendix C, there are no sites listed on RCRA hazardous waste generators and Information System facilities databases, no disposal sites, and no sites on permitted Underground Storage Tank (UST) database compiled by the State Water Resources Control Board, located within 1/8-mile radius of the subject property.

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

21 6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
______________________________________________________________________  The subject property, APN 664-080-017, is a roughly 4-acre N-S trending rectangularshaped vacant lot at the northwestern corner of (the E-W trending) Pierson Blvd and (the N-S trending) Indian Canyon Drive in the city of Desert Hot Springs, California.

Currently, the subject property is a vacant lot with no improvement structures present on the premise. There are no ponds, swamps, dry wells, or lagoons observed on the subject property. No apparently significant surface staining was noticed present on the entire unpaved vacant lot of the subject site.
 Based on historic site occupancy data discussed in Section 2.4, the site has never been documented as being developed in the past and has always been vacant raw land historically.
 According to the conducted government records search (NETR database), the subject site is not listed on the following environmental regulatory database record research:

NPL, RCRA-TSD, CERCLIS, NFRAP, RCRA-G, ERNS, CORRACTS, CORTESE, CALSITES, LUST, UST, and SWF. Based on the conducted government records search, there are also no open Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST)/Cleanup sites or other sites identified as exhibiting potentially environmental concern within the immediate vicinity (< 1/8 mile) of the subject site.
 In conclusion, we have performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E-1527-21 of APN 664- 080-017, Desert Hot Springs, CA, the property. As a result of the site reconnaissance, review of federal, state, local reported environmental information regarding the said facilities obtained via computer search, this assessment identified no evidence of recognized environmental conditions, by practices at the subject property and its immediate neighbors that could significantly impact the subject property. No Phase II subsurface investigation is recommended for the subject property.

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

22 7. LIMITATIONS AND CERTIFICATION STAMP
__________________________________________________________________ The opinion expressed herein is based on the information collected during our study, our present understanding of the site conditions and our professional judgment in light of such information at the time of preparation of this opinion. The report is a professional opinion work, and no warranty is either expressed, implied or made as to the conclusions, advice and recommendations offered in this report.

Our investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable Engineers and Geologists practicing in this or similar localities.

The findings, conclusions and recommendations in this report are considered valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of the property can occur with the passage of time, due to natural process or the works of man on this or adjacent properties.

In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standard may occur. REM is not responsible for conditions found at or beneath the subject property or adjacent properties.

Accordingly, portions of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by the changes beyond our control.

This report is prepared for the exclusive use of the client, and opinions/recommendations contained in this report apply only to conditions existing when services were performed and are intended only for the client, purposes, locations, time frames, and project parameters indicated.

Report Prepared by:

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

23 8. QUALIFICATION STATEMENT FOR PERSONNEL CONDUCTING

THE PHASE I ASSESSMENT
_____________________________________________________________________ Since Robin Chang, the personnel conducting the Phase I Environmental assessment is a California State Registered Professional Geologist, Robin Chang declares that, to the best of my professional knowledge and belief, I meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in Sec. 312.10 of 40 CFR. I have the specific qualifications based on education, training, experience, and license to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. I have developed and performed all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

24 APPENDICES
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

25 APPENDIX A

FIGURES & PHOTOS
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

26 FIGURE 1

SITE PHOTOS
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

27 Photo 1
Viewing the site from near its southeastern corner with vacant lot to the north of the site on the background (facing north-northwest)
Photo 2
Vacant lot, across Indian Canyon Drive, to the east of the site (facing northeast) Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

28 Photo 3
Apparently a half-finished auto sales/ shop (with 12021 N Indian Canyon Drive address), across Pierson Blvd, to the south of the site (facing south) Photo 4
Vacant lot to the west of the site (facing northwest)
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
_____________________________________________________________________

ROBIN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA 91773

29 FIGURE 2

SITE LOCATION MAP
Item Number: 1.

pierson blvd & indian canyon dr, desert hot springs purchase image and/or Print /
aerials
topos
T1987
atlases
compare
overlays
measure
+ g0
.A yH
ll
I5
I
li
ti
{}
s
{
**,1r
iiqt
9l
F,ffi,i#ee
1 000
-1
(-
,)
*, ****":?r q**aL, t! g E.s
ili
i:i
{;
r{ t I
\a
{}lilr
rJ
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA
FIGURE 3
CO. ASSESSOR'S OFFICE SITE RECORDS SUMMARY

INCLUDING RECENT AERIAL PHOTO SHOWING SITE/ITS

VICINITY GENERAL LAYOUT
ROBIX EIIVIROil TEIITAL TATIAGETEr|T
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA91773
Item Number: 1.

Property Address: CA
General Information
County:

Parcel # (APN):

Owner:

Mailing Address:

Legal Description:

Use Type:

Tax Rate Area:

RIVERSIDE564-080-017 ffiSee Full Detail
1461 TAHOE ST BEAUMONT CA 92223

3.99 ACRES IN POR I"OT 25 AM OO2/OO1 SUN VATTEY ACRIS 1 AM 49 VACANT014-065
Assetsment
Total Value:

Land:

Structures:

Other:
% Improved:Exempt Amt:

HO Exempt:
$2L4,L78$2L4,L78
See Full DetailN
Sale 1
09/01/2015
0391501
See Full Detaii$330,000

3.990L7t,A04
Year Assd:

Zoning:

Use Code:

Census Tract:

Price/SqFt:
2021See Full Detail
See Full DetailSee Full Detail
Sale 2See Full Detail
See Full DetailSee Full Detail
Fulllretail $14.95 mffi
pLEASg NgIg If a field 15 empty on this page, there is no data avallable'ina tn" ftru *nl also be empty on the sull Dotall prop€rly repoft' Sale Hlstory
Sale 3
See Full Detail
See Full Detail
See Full Detail
Transfer
See Full Detail
See Full Detail
Document Date:

Document Number:

Document Type:

Transfer Amount:

Seller (Grantor):

Property Characteristics
Bedrooms:

Baths (Full):

Baths (Hal0:

Total Rooms:

Bldg/Liv Area:

Lot Acres: . Lot SqFt:

Year Built:

Effective Yeal:

Fireplace:

A/C:

Heating:

Pool:

Park Type:

Spaces:

Garage SqFt:

Units:

Stories:

Quality:

Building Class:

Condition:

Site Influence:

Timber Preserve:

Ag Preserve:
1*Tlre informatir:n plovided lrere is deerned reliable, but is not guarantt-.ed. Additional reports on this prooerU) $fiF datB
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664-080.017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA

APPENDIX B

HISTORIC AERIAL PHOTO/TOPO MAP RECORDS
ROBItr

10.1 EI{VIROT{TET'TAL
5 VIA ROMALES, SAN
TAI{AGETEIIT
DIMAS, CA91773
Item Number: 1.

$
t
*
I
f
!
;
$
$
$
$
!
*
h
t
$
s
&
*
s
$
$
&
&
.{ffi&ffi-.
#sdkffi
$$
**
**
$*
/
ft
*
*
*
i-..i:: ,:'
-i I
Item Number: 1.

Item Number: 1.

1, : :i i.
., ii ,: ,:

A
/
Item Number: 1.

/
T
.*
\
*
!
1 i'il
t11
*
!
* :r {.
; - "'";'
1 !*.
*j
t1
+
i.
;n
Item Number: 1.

Item Number: 1.

', r.' i'r;
l:"tl i ::!
r
r
Item Number: 1.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 664.080-017, DESERT HOT SPRINGS, CA

APPENDIX C

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCH DATABASE
ROBIT{ Eilr,IROIITET{TAL HAIIAGETEilT
1015 VIA ROMALES, SAN DIMAS, CA91773
Item Number: 1.

2055 E. Rio Salado Pkwy
Tempe, AZ 85381
480-967-6752
Pierson Blvd & N Indian Canyon Dr, Desert Hot Springs, CA 92240 prepared for: REM
Ref:
2022-07-06
Environmental Radius Report
page 1 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Summary
Federal
< 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1
Lists of Federal NPL (Superfund) sites 0 0 0
Lists of Federal Delisted NPL sites 0 0 -
Lists of Federal sites subject to CERCLA removals and CERCLA orders 0 0 - Lists of Federal CERCLA sites with NFRAP 0 0 -
Lists of Federal RCRA facilities undergoing Corrective Action 0 0 - Lists of Federal RCRA TSD facilities 0 0 -
Lists of Federal RCRA generators 0 - -
Federal institutional control/engineering control registries 0 - - Federal ERNS list 0 - -
State
< 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1
Lists of state and tribal Superfund equivalent sites 0 0 0 Lists of state and tribal hazardous waste facilities 0 0 - Lists of state and tribal landfills and solid waste disposal facilities 0 0 - Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks 0 0 -
Lists of state and tribal registered storage tanks 0 - - State and tribal institutional control/engineering control registries 0 - - Lists of state and tribal voluntary cleanup sites 0 0 - Lists of state and tribal brownfields sites 0 0 -
Other
< 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information (RCRAInfo) 1 0 - page 2 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of Federal NPL (Superfund) sites
The National Priorities List (NPL) is the list of sites of national priority among the known releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants throughout the United States and its territories. The NPL is intended primarily to guide the EPA in determining which sites warrant further investigation. The NPL is updated periodically, as mandated by CERCLA.

There were no Federal NPL sites found within a one-mile radius of the target property. page 3 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of Federal Delisted NPL sites
The EPA may delete a final NPL site if it determines that no further response is required to protect human health or the environment. Under Section 300.425(e) of the NCP (55 FR 8845, March 8, 1990), a site may be deleted when no further response is appropriate if EPA determines that one of the following criteria has been met: 1) EPA, in conjunction with the state, has determined that responsible parties have implemented all appropriate response action required, 2) EPA, in consultation with the state, has determined that all appropriate Superfund-financed responses under CERCLA have been implemented and that no further response by responsible parties is appropriate, 3) A remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) has shown that the release poses no significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore, remedial measures are not appropriate.

There were no Federal Delisted NPL sites found within a half-mile radius of the target property. page 4 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of Federal sites subject to CERCLA removals and CERCLA orders
CERCLA identifies the classes of parties liable under CERCLA for the cost of responding to releases of hazardous substances. In addition, CERCLA contains provisions specifying when Federal installations must report releases of hazardous substances and the cleanup procedures they must follow. Executive Order No. 12580, Superfund Implementation, delegates response authorities to EPA and the Coast Guard. Generally, the head of the Federal agency has the delegated authority to address releases at the Federal facilities in its jurisdiction.

There were no Federal sites subject to CERCLA removals and/or orders found within a half-mile radius of the target property. page 5 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of Federal CERCLA sites with NFRAP
No Further Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP) is a decision made as part of the Superfund remedial site evaluation process to denote that further remedial assessment activities are not required and that the facility/site does not pose a threat to public health or the environment sufficient to qualify for placement on the National Priorities List (NPL) based on currently available information. These facilities/sites may be re-evaluated if EPA receives new information or learns that site conditions have changed. A NFRAP decision does not mean the facility/site is free of contamination and does not preclude the facility/site from being addressed under another federal, state or tribal cleanup program.

There were no Federal CERCLA sites with No Further Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP) decisions found within a half-mile radius of the target property.
page 6 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of Federal RCRA facilities undergoing Corrective Action Corrective action is a requirement under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) that facilities that treat, store or dispose of hazardous wastes investigate and cleanup hazardous releases into soil, ground water, surface water and air. Corrective action is principally implemented through RCRA permits and orders. RCRA permits issued to TSDFs must include provisions for corrective action as well as financial assurance to cover the costs of implementing those cleanup measures. In addition to the EPA, 44 states and territories are authorized to run the Corrective Action program.

There were no Federal RCRA facilities undergoing corrective action(s) found within a half-mile radius of the target property. page 7 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of Federal RCRA TSD facilities
The final link in RCRA's cradle-to-grave concept is the treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF) that follows the generator and transporter in the chain of waste management activities. The regulations pertaining to TSDFs are more stringent than those that apply to generators or transporters. They include general facility standards as well as unit-specific design and operating criteria.

There were no Federal RCRA treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs) found within a half-mile radius of target property. page 8 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of Federal RCRA generators
A generator is any person who produces a hazardous waste as listed or characterized in part 261 of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Recognizing that generators also produce waste in different quantities, EPA established three categories of generators in the regulations: very small quantity generators, small quantity generators, and large quantity generators. EPA regulates hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) to ensure that these wastes are managed in ways that protet human health and the environment. Generators of hazardous waste are regulated based on the amount of hazardous waste they generate in a calendar month, not the size of their business or facility.

There were no Federal RCRA generators found at the target property and/or adjoining properties. page 9 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Federal institutional control/engineering control registries Institutional Controls (IC) are defined as non-engineered and/or legal controls that minimize the potential human exposure to contamination by limiting land or resource use. Whereas, Engineering Controls (EC) consist of engineering measures (e.g, caps, treatment systems, etc.) designed to minimize the potential for human exposure to contamination by either limiting direct contact with contaminated areas or controlling migration of contaminants through environmental media.

There were no Federal institutional or engineering controls found at the target property. page 10 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Federal ERNS list
The Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) is a database used to store information on notification of oil discharges and hazardous substances releases. The ERNS program is a cooperative data sharing effort encompassing the National Response Center (NRC), operated by the US Coast Guard, EPA HQ and EPA regional offices. ERNS data is used to analyze release notifications, track EPA responses and compliance to environmental laws, support emergency planning efforts, and assist decision-makers in developing spill prevention programs.

There were no Federally recorded releases of oil and/or hazardous substances at the target property. page 11 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of state and tribal Superfund equivalent sites
In order to maintain close coordination with the states and tribes in the NPL listing decision process, the EPA's policy is to determine the position of states and tribes on sites that EPA is considering for listing. Consistent with this policy, since 1996, it has been the EPA's general practice to seek the state or tribe's position on sites under consideration for NPL listing by submitting a written requiest to the governor/state environmental agency or tribe. Various states may have their own program for identifying, investigating and cleaning up sites where consequential amounts of hazardous waste may have been disposed that work in conjunction with the EPA's Superfund remedial program.

There were no State and/or tribal Superfund equivalent sites found within a one-mile radius of target property. page 12 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of state and tribal hazardous waste facilities
EPA established basic hazardous waste management standards for businesses who produce hazardous waste and categorized three businesses based on the volume of hazardous waste produced in a calendar month. On the federal level, there are three generator categories: large quantity generator, small quantity generator, and conditionally exempt small quantity generator. Some states are authorized to establish generator categories that are different from those that federal EPA set up. State regulatory requirements for generators of hazardous waste may be more stringent than the federal program.

There were no State and/or tribal hazardous waste facilities found within a half-mile radius of the target property. page 13 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of state and tribal landfills and solid waste disposal facilities
Title 40 of the CFR parts 239 through 259 contain the regulations for non-hazardous solid waste programs set up by the states. EPA has requirements for state solid waste permit programs, guidelines for the processing of solid waste, guidelines for storage and collection of commercial, residential and institutional solid waste, and the criteria for municipal solid waste landfills. State solid waste programs may be more stringent than the federal code requires.

There were no State and/or tribal landfills or solid waste disposal facilities found within a half-mile radius of the target property. page 14 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks
A typical leaking underground storage tank (LUST) scenario involves the release of a fuel product from an underground storage tank (UST) that can contaminate surrounding soil, groundwater, or surface waters, or affect indoor air spaces. Once a leak is confirmed, immediate response actions must be taken to minimize or eliminate the source of the release and to reduce potential harm to human health, safety, and the environment. Each state has unique requirements for initiating responses to a release, and it is up to the UST owner or operator to conduct actions in compliance with his/her local rules.

There were no State and/or tribal leaking storage tanks found within a half-mile radius of the target property. page 15 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of state and tribal registered storage tanks
EPA initially issued UST regulations in 1988. In 2015, EPA modified the UST regulation, which was effective October 13, 2015 in Indian Country and states without State Program Approval. EPA recognizes that, because of the size and diversity of the regulated community, state and local governments are in the best position to oversee USTs: 1) State and local authorities are closer to the situation in their domain and are in the best position to set priorities, 2) Subtitle I of the Solid Waste Disposal Act allows state UST programs approved by EPA to operate in lieu of the federal program, 3) the state program approval (SPA) regulations set criteria for states to obtain the authority to operate in lieu of the federal program. State programs must be at least as stringent as EPA's. A complete version of the law that governs USTs can be found in U.S. Code, Title 42, Chapter 82, Subchapter IX.

There were no State and/or tribal registered storage tanks found at subject and adjoining properties. page 16 of 22
Item Number: 1.

State and tribal institutional control/engineering control registries
Institutional controls are non-engineered instruments such as administrative and legal controls that help minimize the potential for human exposure to contamination and/or protect the integrity of the remedy. Engineering controls consist of engineering measures (e.g, caps, treatment systems, etc.) designed to minimize the potential for human exposure to contamination by either limiting direct contact with contaminated areas or controlling migration of contaminants through environmental media. It is EPA's expectation that treatment or engineering controls will be used to address principal threat wastes and that groundwater will be returned to its beneficial use whenever practicable.

There were no State and/or tribal institutional and/or engineering controls found filed against the target property. page 17 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of state and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
State cleanup programs play a significant role in assessing and cleaning up contaminated sites. State cleanup programs typically are programs authorized by state statutes to address brownfields and other lower-risk sites that are not of federal interest. The EPA has historically supported the use of state cleanup programs and continues to provide grant funding to establish and enhance the programs.

This approach was codified in 2002 as Section 182 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).

There were no State and/or tribal voluntary cleanup sites found within a half-mile radius of the target property. page 18 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Lists of state and tribal brownfields sites
Since its inception in 1995, EPA's Brownfields and Land Revitalization Program has grown into a proven, results-oriented program that has changed the way communities address and manage contaminated property. The program is designed to empower states, tribes, communities, and other stakeholders to work together to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and sustainably reuse brownfields. Beginning in the mid-1990s, EPA provided small amounts of seed money to local governments that launched hundreds of two-year Brownfields pilot projects and developed guidance and tools to help states, communities and other stakeholders in the cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields sites.

There were no State and/or tribal brownfields sites found within a half-mile radius of the target property. page 19 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
(RCRAInfo)

RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT INFORMATION SYSTEM RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system that supports the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984 through the tracking of events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste.

Please note that RCRAInfo contains all hazardous waste handlers in addition to TSDFs, generators, and facilities undergoing RCRA corrective action. One may encounter duplicate records from the TSDF, generators, and/or the RCRA corrective action sections. This source was searched for all records within a half-mile of the target property. center 33.961459 -116.545022 0.5 mile 1.0 mile

RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT INFORMATION SYSTEM page 20 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Registry ID 110070474264
Name EDDIES SMOG & REPAIR
Address 66-271 PIERSON BLVD
City DESERT HOT SPRINGS
Site Type STATIONARY
Program Acronyms RCRAINFO:CAL000330867
Interest Type OTHER HAZARDOUS WASTE ACTIVITIES
Point of Reference
Description

ENTRANCE POINT OF A FACILITY OR STATION
Date Created 02-JAN-19
FRS Facility Detail Report
URL
Link
distance from center (miles) 0.2372
data source last updated from FACILITY REGISTRY SERVICE

RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT INFORMATION SYSTEM page 21 of 22
Item Number: 1.

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC (NETR). It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. NATIONWIDE ENVIRONMENTAL TITLE RESEARCH, LLC SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY

SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL NATIONWIDE ENVIRONMENTAL TITLE RESEARCH, LLC,

BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER

CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONDEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF NATIONWIDE ENVIRONMENTAL TITLE RESEARCH, LLC, IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this report "AS-IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property.

Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

Copyright 2022 by Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC (NETR). All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC, or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.

Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC (NETR) and its logos are trademarks of Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.

RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT INFORMATION SYSTEM page 22 of 22
Item Number: 1.

2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP
Project Specific
Water Quality Management Plan
For: Desert Hot Springs Commercial Development
NW corner of Pierson & N.

Indian Canyon Rd.,
Desert Hot Springs, CA
DEVELOPMENT NO. TRACT, PARCEL OR OTHER ID NUMBER
DESIGN REVIEW NO. DESIGN REVIEW NO.

Prepared for:

Pegasus Architects
4300 Edison Ave,
Chino, CA 91710
Telephone: Telephone Number
Prepared by:

Angel Cesar, P.E, QSD,
Blue Engineering and Consulting, Inc
9320 Baseline Rd Suite D,
Rancho Cucamonga,
CA 91701
(909)248-6557
Original Date Prepared:
04/18/2022
Revision Date(s): Date
Item Number: 1.

2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP
Desert Hot Springs Commercial
Development

OWNER'S CERTIFICATION
This project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for:

Rabih Sater
by Blue Engineering and Consulting, Inc
for the project known as Desert Hot Springs Commercial Development at NW CNR OF Piersons & N Indian Canyon Rd, Desert Hot Springs, CA.

This WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of Desert Hot Springs for TRACT, PARCEL OR OTHER ID NUMBER, which includes the requirement for the preparation and implementation of a project-specific WQMP.

The undersigned, while owning the property/project described in the preceding paragraph, shall be responsible for the implementation of this WQMP and will ensure that this WQMP is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site. This WQMP will be reviewed with the facility operator, facility supervisors, employees, tenants, maintenance and service contractors, or any other party (or parties) having responsibility for implementing portions of this WQMP. At least one copy of this WQMP will be maintained at the project site or project office in perpetuity.

The undersigned is authorized to certify and to approve implementation of this WQMP. The undersigned is aware that implementation of this WQMP is enforceable under Insert City or County Name Water Quality Ordinance (Municipal Code Section ).

If the undersigned transfers its interest in the subject property/project, the undersigned shall notify the successor in interest of its responsibility to implement this WQMP. "I, the undersigned, certify under penalty of law that I am the owner of the property that is the subject of this WQMP, and that the provisions of this WQMP have been reviewed and accepted and that the WQMP will be transferred to future successors in interest."
ATTEST
Owner's Signature
Owner's Printed Name
Notary Signature
Owner's Title/Position
Printed Name
Date
Street Address
City, State Zip
Telephone Number
Title/Position
Date

THIS FORM SHALL BE NOTARIZED BEFORE ACCEPTANCE OF THE

FINAL PROJECT SPECIFIC WQMP
Date Item Number: 1.

2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP
Desert Hot Springs Commercial
Development
DATE 1-i
Contents

SECTION PAGE
Project Description ...................................................................................................................................... 1 Site Characterization ................................................................................................................................... 4 Pollutants of Concern .................................................................................................................................. 6 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern ........................................................................................................... 7 Best Management Practices ....................................................................................................................... 8 SITE DESIGN BMP CONCEPTS, LID/SITE DESIGN AND TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS ........................................... 8 SITE DESIGN BMP CONCEPTS AND LID/SITE DESIGN BMPS .................................................................................................. 10 TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS ........................................................................................................................................................... 16 MEASURABLE GOAL SUMMARY........................................................................................................................................................ 18 SOURCE CONTROL BMPS ........................................................................................................................................................ 19 EQUIVALENT TREATMENT CONTROL BMP ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................ 21 REGIONALLY-BASED BMPS ................................................................................................................................................... 21 Operation and Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs ........................................................................ 22 Funding ....................................................................................................................................................... 23 TABLES
TABLE 1. POLLUTANT OF CONCERN SUMMARY 6
TABLE 2. BMP SELECTION MATRIX BASED UPON POLLUTANT OF CONCERN REMOVAL EFFICIENCY 9 TABLE 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF SITE DESIGN BMP CONCEPTS 11
TABLE 4. LID/SITE DESIGN BMPS MEETING THE LID/SITE DESIGN MEASURABLE GOAL 15 TABLE 5: TREATMENT CONTROL BMP SUMMARY 17
TABLE 6: MEASURABLE GOAL SUMMARY 18
TABLE 7. SOURCE CONTROL BMPS 19

APPENDICES

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

VICINITY MAP, WQMP SITE PLAN, AND RECEIVING WATERS MAP

SUPPORTING DETAIL RELATED TO HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS OF CONCERN (IF APPLICABLE)

EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS

SOILS REPORT (IF APPLICABLE)

STRUCTURAL BMP AND/OR RETENTION FACILITY SIZING CALCULATIONS AND DESIGN DETAILS AGREEMENTS – CC&RS, COVENANT AND AGREEMENTS, BMP MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS AND/OR

OTHER MECHANISMS FOR ENSURING ONGOING OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, FUNDING AND TRANSFER OF

REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT-SPECIFIC WQMP
PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT – SUMMARY OF SITE REMEDIATION CONDUCTED AND

USE RESTRICTIONS

PROJECT-SPECIFIC WQMP SUMMARY DATA FORM
Item Number: 1.

2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP
Desert Hot Springs Commercial
Development
DATE 1-1
a. Project Description
Project Owner: Rabih Sater
4300 Edison Ave,
Chino, CA 91710
Telephone Number
WQMP Preparer: Angel Cesar, P.E, QSD,
Blue Engineering and Consulting,
Inc. 9320 Baseline Rd Suite D,
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701
(909)248-6557
Project Site Address: NW CNR of Piersons & N. Indian Canyon Rd.

Desert Hot Springs, CA
Planning Area/
Community Name/
Development Name: Insert Planning Area / Community Name/ Development Name, if known
APN Number(s): 664-080-017
Latitude & Longitude: 33.962455, -116.545810
Receiving Water: Enter Receiving Water which project will directly or indirectly discharge to, from Table 2 and/or Figure 2 of the Whitewater River Region WQMP Guidance
Project Site Size: 3.98 ACRES
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code: Insert SIC, code, if applicable Formation of Home Owners' Association (HOA)
or Property Owners Association (POA): Y N
Item Number: 1.

2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP
Desert Hot Springs Commercial
Development
DATE 1-2
Additional Permits/Approvals required for the Project:

AGENCY Permit required
State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish and Game
Code §1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement
Y N
State Water Resources Control Board, Clean Water Act
(CWA) Section 401 Water Quality Certification
Y N
US Army Corps of Engineers, CWA Section 404 permit Y N
US Fish and Wildlife, Endangered Species Act Section 7
biological opinion
Y N
Statewide Construction General Permit Coverage Y N
Statewide Industrial General Permit Coverage Y N
Other (please list in the space below as required)
South Coast Air Quality Management District PM10 Required Item Number: 1.

2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP
Desert Hot Springs Commercial
Development
DATE 1-3
The proposed project Desert Hot Springs Commercial Development is locates on the North West corner of Piersons & N. Indian Canyon Rd, Riverside County. The existing undeveloped 3.98 acres and its assessors parcel number is 665-080-017. The projects is surround by an undeveloped parcel to the west, Scenic Dr to the north, N Indian Canyon Dr to the east and Pierson Blvd to the south.

The project proposes a commercial development that consist of 2 drive thru, 1 carwash a fuel dispensing area and a convenience store. The buildings will be service by required parking stalls, sidewalks and drive aisle as required by the local code. The site is shown to be in the Zone ( ) in the FEMA map panel 06065C0885G.

The mitigation for water that was conditions of approval Appendix A of this project-specific WQMP includes a complete copy of the final Conditions of Approval. Appendix B of this project-specific WQMP includes:
b. A Vicinity Map identifying the project site and surrounding planning areas in sufficient detail; and
c. A Site Plan for the project. The Site Plan included as part of Appendix B depicts the following project features:
d. Location and identification of all structural BMPs, including Source Control, LID/Site Design and Treatment Control BMPs.
e. Landscaped areas.
f. Paved areas and intended uses (i.e., parking, outdoor work area, outdoor material storage area, sidewalks, patios, tennis courts, etc.).
g. Number and type of structures and intended uses (i.e., buildings, tenant spaces, dwelling units, community facilities such as pools, recreation facilities, tot lots, etc.). h. Infrastructure (i.e., streets, storm drains, etc.) that will revert to public agency ownership and operation.
i. Location of existing and proposed public and private storm drainage facilities (i.e., storm drains, channels, basins, etc.), including catch basins and other inlets/outlet structures. Existing and proposed drainage facilities should be clearly differentiated. j. Location(s) of Receiving Waters to which the project directly or indirectly discharges. k. Location of points where onsite (or tributary offsite) flows exit the property/project site. l. Delineation of proposed drainage area boundaries, including tributary offsite areas, for each location where flows exit the project site and existing site (where existing site flows are required to be addressed). Each tributary area should be clearly denoted. m. Pre- and post-project topography.

Appendix I is a one page form that summarizes pertinent information relative to this projectspecific WQMP.

Item Number: 1.

2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP
Desert Hot Springs Commercial
Development
DATE 1-4
n. Site Characterization
Land Use Designation or Zoning: MU-N: Mixed-Use Neighboprhood Current Property Use: Undeveloped vacant lot
Proposed Property Use: Commercial Development
Availability of Soils Report: Y N Note: A soils report is required if infiltration BMPs are utilized. Attach report in Appendix E.

Phase 1 Site Assessment: Y N Note: If prepared, attached remediation summary and use restrictions in Appendix H.

Item Number: 1.

2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP
Desert Hot Springs Commercial
Development
DATE 1-5
Receiving Waters for Urban Runoff from Site
Receiving Waters EPA Approved 303(d) List
Impairments
Designated Beneficial
Uses
Proximity to RARE Beneficial Use Designated
Receiving Waters
Mission Creek
N/A

MUN, AGR,
FWR,
REC1, REC2,

WARM, WILD

NOT A RARE BODY

OF WATER
Whitewater
River
N/A

MUN, AGR,
GWR,
REC1, REC2,

WARM, COLD,

WILD, POW

NOT A RARE BODY

OF WATER
Salton Sea Metals (Arsenic, Selenium);
Pesticides (Chlorpyrifos,
DDT);
Bacteria & Viruses
(Enterococcus); Nutrients
(Nutrients, Salinity);

AQUA, IND,
REC1, REC2,

WARM, WILD,
RARE

RARE WATERBODY
43 miles
Item Number: 1.

2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP
Desert Hot Springs Commercial
Development
DATE 1-6
o. Pollutants of Concern
p. Table 1. Pollutant of Concern Summary
q.

Pollutant Category Potential for Project
and/or Existing Site
Causing Receiving Water
Impairment
Bacteria/Virus X X
Heavy Metals X X
Nutrients X X
Toxic Organic Compounds
Sediment/Turbidity X
Trash & Debris X
Oil & Grease X
Other (specify pollutant):

Pesticides
X X
Other (specify pollutant):

Item Number: 1.

2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP
Desert Hot Springs Commercial
Development
DATE 1-7
r. Hydrologic Conditions of Concern
Local Jurisdiction Requires On-Site Retention of Urban Runoff:

Yes The project will be required to retain urban runoff onsite in conformance with local ordinance (See Table 6 of the WQMP Guidance document, "Local Land use Authorities Requiring Onsite Retention of Stormwater"). This section does not need to be completed; however, retention facility design details and sizing calculations must be included in Appendix F.

No This section must be completed.

This Project meets the following condition:

Condition A: 1) Runoff from the Project is discharged directly to a publicly-owned, operated and maintained MS4 or engineered and maintained channel, 2) the discharge is in full compliance with local land use authority requirements for connections and discharges to the MS4 (including both quality and quantity requirements), 3) the discharge would not significantly impact stream habitat in proximate Receiving Waters, and 4) the discharge is authorized by the local land use authority.

Condition B: The project disturbs less than 1 acre and is not part of a larger common plan of development that exceeds 1 acre of disturbance. The disturbed area calculation must include all disturbances associated with larger plans of development.

Condition C: The project's runoff flow rate, volume, velocity and duration for the post-development condition do not exceed the pre-development condition for the 2- year, 24-hour and 10-year 24-hour rainfall events. This condition can be achieved by, where applicable, complying with the local land use authority's on-site retention ordinance, or minimizing impervious area on a site and incorporating other SiteDesign BMP concepts and LID/Site Design BMPs that assure non-exceedance of pre-development conditions. This condition must be substantiated by hydrologic modeling methods acceptable to the local land use authority.

None: Refer to Section 3.4 of the Whitewater River Region WQMP Guidance document for additional requirements.

Supporting engineering studies, calculations, and reports are included in Appendix C. 2 year – 24 hour 10 year – 24 hour
Precondition Post-condition Precondition Post-condition Discharge (cfs)
Velocity (fps)
Volume (cubic
feet)
Duration (minutes)
Item Number: 1.

2014 Whitewater River Region WQMP
Desert Hot Springs Commercial
Development
DATE 1-8
s. Best Management Practices
This project implements Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address the Pollutants of Concern that may potentially be generated from the use of the Choose one: Project Site. These BMPs have been selected and implemented to comply with Section

3.5 of the WQMP Guidance document, and consist of Site Design BMP concepts, Source Control, LID/Site Design and, if/where necessary, Treatment Control BMPs as described herein. • SITE DESIGN BMP CONCEPTS, LID/SITE DESIGN AND TREATMENT

CONTROL BMPS
Local Jurisdiction Requires On-Site Retention of Urban Runoff:

Yes The project will be required to retain Urban Runoff onsite in conformance with local ordinance (See Table 6 of the WQMP Guidance document, "Local Land use Authorities Requiring Onsite Retention of Stormwater). The LID/Site Design measurable goal has thus been met (100%), and Sections V.1.A and V.1.B do not need to be completed; however, retention facility design details and sizing calculations must be included in Appendix F, and '100%' should be entered into Column 3 of Table 6 below.

No Section V.1 must be completed.

This section of the Project-Specific WQMP documents the LID/Site Design BMPs and, if/where necessary, the Treatment Control BMPs that will be implemented on the project to meet the requirements detailed within Section 3.5.1 of the WQMP Guidance document. Section 3.5.1 includes requirements to implement Site Design Concepts and BMPs, and includes requirements to address Pollutants of Concern with BMPs. Further, sub-section 3.5.1.1 specifically requires that Pollutants of Concern be addressed with LID/Site Design BMPs to the extent feasible.

LID/Site Design BMPs are those BMPs listed within Table 2 below which promote retention and/or feature a natural treatment mechanism; off-site and regionally-based BMPs are also LID/Site Design BMPs, and therefore count towards the measurable goal, if they fit these criteria.

This project incorporates LID/Site Design BMPs to fully address the Treatment Control BMP requirement where and to the extent feasible. If and where it has been acceptably demonstrated to the local land use authority that it is infeasible to fully meet this requirement with LID/Site Design BMPs, Section V.1.B (below) includes a description of the conventional Treatment Control BMPs that will be substituted to meet the same requirements.

In addressing Pollutants of Concern, BMPs are selected using Table 2 below.

Item Number: 1.