Indio City Council
December 6, 2023

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2753 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
37 agency (SCAQMD Resolution No. 08-35). This threshold was adopted based upon an October 2008 staff report and draft interim guidance document that also recommended a threshold for all projects using a tiered approach.

It was recommended by SCAQMD staff that a project’s greenhouse gas emissions would be considered significant if it could not comply with at least one of the following “tiered” tests:
• Tier 1: Is there an applicable exemption?
• Tier 2: Is the project compliant with a greenhouse gas reduction plan that is, at a minimum, consistent with the goals of AB 32?
• Tier 3: Is the project below an absolute threshold (10,000 MTCO2e/year for industrial projects; 3,000 MTCO2e/year for residential and commercial projects)? • Tier 4: Is the project below a (yet to be set) performance threshold? • Tier 5: Would the project achieve a screening level with off-site mitigation? The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will not directly result in GHG emissions.

The following analysis assumes maximum buildout potential of the vacant site at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive under the proposed revisions.

Discussion of Impacts
a, b) Less Than Significant Impact. Future development of the site will generate GHG emissions during both construction and operation. As described in Section III, Air Quality, above, the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2020.4.0 was used to quantify air quality emission projections, including greenhouse gas emissions (Appendix A).

Construction
Construction activities will result in short-term GHG emissions associated with operation of construction equipment, employee commute, material hauling, and other ground disturbing activities. As shown in Table 4, the project will generate 56.61 CO2e metric tons during the 5- month construction period. There are currently no construction-related GHG emission thresholds for projects of this nature. To determine if construction emissions will result in a cumulatively considerable impact, buildout GHG emissions were amortized over a 30-year period and added to annual operational emissions to be compared to applicable GHG thresholds (see Table 4, below).

Operation
At buildout, there are five emission source categories that will be contributing either directly or indirectly to operational GHG emissions, including energy/electricity usage, water usage, solid waste disposal, area emissions (pavement and architectural coating off-gassing), and mobile sources. Table 4 provides a summary of the projected short-term construction and annual operational GHG generation associated with future buildout of the site assuming a 3,500 square foot drive through restaurant/coffee shop. As shown in Table 4, the Project complies with the Tier 3 threshold for commercial projects because emissions will not exceed the SCAQMD 3,000 MT/yr threshold.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2754 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
38 Table 4
Projected GHG Emissions Summary
(Metric Tons)
Phase CO2e (MT/YR)
Construction
Construction Total 56.61
Operation
Area 0.00
Energy 65.30
Mobile 359.81
Waste 20.27
Water 2.71
Construction: 30-year amortized 1 1.88
Total Operational 449.97
Commercial Project Threshold 3,000
Tier Compliance Tier 3

1. Buildout construction GHG emissions were amortized over 30- years then added to buildout operational GHG emissions.

56.61/30 = 1.88
The City of Indio prepared its Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2019. The Plan sets programs and policies to help the City reduce greenhouse gas emissions based on AB 32 and SB 32.

According to the City’s CAP, the residential (31%), commercial (26%), and transportation (33%) sectors are the main sources of GHGs in the City. Currently, these three sectors constitute up to 90% of the GHG sources in the City. Stringent strategies are provided in the Plan to reduce these by up to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. 11 The CAP strategies and
reduction measures are organized in five different categories: clean energy, low-carbon buildings, zero waste, water conservation, and sustainable land use and transportation. Future development of the vacant pad complies with the General Plan land use designation for the site, and is located on a major arterial. The Proposed Project will be required to implement applicable strategies of the CAP as buildings are proposed and constructed on the site. The implementation of these strategies will also comply with SCAQMD’s Tier 2, insofar as the Project will be subject to a greenhouse reduction plan.

The project site is within the IID’s jurisdiction. California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires all utility providers to achieve 33% renewable energy by 2020 and 50% renewable energy by 2030. It is expected that IID will reduce its electricity consumption up to

45.5% by 2030. The City and IID are working together to reduce GHGs by reducing electricity consumption and implementing renewable energy sources. As the City and IID implement 11 City of Indio Climate Action Plan (2019).

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2755 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
39 those strategies, Project-related GHG emissions will automatically be reduced, and thus comply with the CAPs clean energy category.

In conclusion, all components of construction and operation, including equipment, fuels, materials, and management practices, would be subject to the CAP, General Plan policies, and current SCAQMD rules and regulations related to greenhouse gases, as discussed above. Based on these findings, the future development of the project site will not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation with the purpose of reducing GHG emissions and impacts will be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2756 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
40 IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS

MATERIALS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on
a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety
hazard or excessive noise for people
residing or working in the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires?
X
Sources: Indio 2040 General Plan

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2757 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
41 Environmental Setting
The proper management of hazardous materials is a common concern for all communities including the City of Indio. Beginning in the 1970s, governments at the federal, state, and local levels became increasingly concerned about the effects of hazardous materials on human health and the environment.

Numerous laws and regulations were developed to investigate and mitigate these effects. As a result, the storage, use, generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials are highly regulated by federal, state, and local laws and regulations.

Historically, the City was one of the larger farming communities in the Coachella Valley. Today, agricultural areas are mostly adjacent to residential developments north of I-10 and at the southern border of the City limits (south of Avenue 50) with some smaller acreages of active farmland scattered in the center.12 Chemical overspray within areas of active agriculture adjacent to residential neighborhoods is a potential health hazard.

The City of Indio has several businesses that manufacture, transport, store, use, and dispose of hazardous materials; therefore, the City can be affected by a major hazardous material emergency or affected by hazardous materials and waste.

The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will not directly result in impacts relating to hazards or hazards materials. The following analysis assumes maximum buildout potential of the vacant site at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive under the proposed revisions.

Discussion of Impacts
a, b) Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is currently vacant and surrounded by commercial land uses, major roadways, and parkway landscaping. The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments would facilitate the development of a drive through restaurant or coffee shop which would involve use of limited quantities of chemicals such as cleaning and degreasing solvents, fertilizers and pesticides for landscaping, and similar materials. These chemicals will be transported and stored within the Project site. These will occur in limited quantities and will not require a hazardous material handling/storage permit. None of these chemicals will be used in sufficient quantities so as to pose a threat to humans or cause a foreseeable chemical release into the environment.

Future construction would involve the use of heavy equipment, which uses small amounts of oil and fuels and other potential flammable substances. During construction, equipment would require refueling and minor maintenance on site that could lead to fuel and oil spills. The contractor will be required to identify a staging area for storing materials and will be subject to State law relating to the handling, storage and use of hazardous materials during construction.

The proposed Project would not result in a significant risk of explosion or accidental release of hazardous substances, because the cleaners and commercial chemicals used are not 12 Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2758 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
42 explosive and will not be stored in large quantities. The use and handling of hazardous materials during construction activities and long-term operation of future development would occur in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local laws including California Occupational Health and Safety Administration (CalOSHA) requirements. Impacts would be less than significant.
c) No Impact. The nearest school is Amelia Earhart Elementary School, located 0.57 miles southwest of the project site in the City of La Quinta. Future development of the site under the proposed Project will result in the development of commercial uses, such as a drive through restaurant, which are not expected to emit any hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste to jeopardize schools. No impact is expected. d) No Impact. The Project site is currently vacant. There are no hazardous materials or waste sites located on or near the site, and the site is not included on a list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The Proposed Project will not create a significant hazard to the public or environment. No impact is anticipated. e) No Impact. The Bermuda Dunes Airport (UDD) is located approximately 1 miles north of the subject property. The Project site is located well outside the airport planning boundary and operational and navigational hazard area. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working at the Project site. No impact is anticipated.
f) No Impact. The Project site is located at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive. Both Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive are designated as “Major Arterials” in the City’s Mobility Element.13 Currently, the Heritage Court shopping center, including the Project site, is accessible via two driveways on Jefferson Street and one driveway on Fred Waring Drive. Both major roadways would also be used as regional emergency evacuation routes to and from the City. Development of the site will not alter the existing circulation pattern in the project area or adversely impact evacuation plans.

The Fire and Police Departments will review the proposed parking and circulation plan for the Project to assure that driveways and roads are adequate for emergency vehicles. In addition, construction traffic management plans will be required to assure that future development activity at the site will not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No Project-related impact is expected. h) No Impact. The Project site is located in an urban area and is not located in a wildland fire hazard zone and is not susceptible to wildfires. Therefore, the Proposed Project will not expose people or structures to significant risks associated with wildfires. No project related impact is expected.

Mitigation Measure: None required;
Monitoring: None required.
13 Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2759 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
43 X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER

QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface
or ground water quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:

X
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site; X
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site;
X
iii) create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
X
iv) impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due to
project inundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management
plan?
X
Sources: Indio 2040 General Plan; Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2760 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
44 Environmental Setting
Domestic Water
The project site is located within the Indio Water Authority (IWA) service area for domestic water.

IWA's primary sources of water supply include groundwater produced by local potable water supply wells. Water supplies for the City of Indio are primarily from the lower aquifer in the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin. Because the Whitewater River Basin is an un-adjudicated basin, IWA does not hold specific water rights, but rather pumps supplies from the aquifer as needed to meet demands within its service area. IWA currently has 20 operational supply wells. Pumping capacities for these wells range from 1,200 gpm to 3,500 gpm, with a total pumping capacity of 74,600 AFY.

IWA’s actual water demand in 2020 was 19,880 AFY and a projected water demand of 30,997 AFY by 2045.14
Water Quality
The City, including the Project site, is located within the Coachella Valley where the water quality is generally good to excellent. The extensive use of septic systems in Indio and elsewhere in the Coachella Valley historically has impacted water resources, but nitrate levels in Indio meet or exceed current standards, and water quality in the City has not been impacted by septic systems. 15 Wastewater Treatment Provider and City’s Sewer System The Project site is located in an area where sewer service is provided by the Valley Sanitary District (VSD). The project will extend on-site sewer lines from the site to connect to the existing sewer lines under Jefferson Street or Fred Waring Drive.

VSD provides wastewater collection and treatment services for the City of Indio and the majority of IWA areas. The collection system for VSD consists of approximately 240 miles of sanitary sewer pipes and 4 pump stations. Currently, VSD discharges treated wastewater to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and provides a small amount of treated wastewater for on-site irrigation and agricultural irrigation for local tribes. VSD currently treats approximately 6.5 million gallons per day through an activated sludge process, and has a capacity of 9.5 million gallons per day. An additional

0.5 million gallons per day is treated through oxidation ponds, which have a capacity of 2.5 million gallons per day.

Floodplain Management
In the City of Indio, local drainage facilities generally convey runoff from local streets and lots to the regional facilities. The local storm drain system consists of gutters, engineered storm drains, and channels. There are limited existing storm drainage facilities in the City. Regional drainage is managed by the Coachella Valley Water District, which maintains the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel.

The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will not directly result in impacts to hydrology. The following analysis assumes maximum buildout potential of the vacant site at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive under the proposed revisions. 14 2020 Coachella Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan. 15 Ibid.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2761 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
45 Discussion of Impacts
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project site is located in the Whitewater River watershed which drains into the Salton Sea and is part of the larger Colorado River Watershed.

All water providers in the watershed are required to comply with Regional Water Quality Control Board standards for the protection of water quality, including the preparation of sitespecific Water Quality Management Plans for surface waters.

Future development of the site facilitated by the proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will generate demand for domestic water and wastewater, which will be governed by both IWA and VSD standard requirements. Construction of on-site connections will be subject to all IWA and VSD requirements. Future development of the site will not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.

Future development will be required to comply with VSD and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations to minimize the pollutant load associated with urban activities. Meeting those standards requires the preparation and approval of a WQMP and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, both of which must be approved by the City prior to the initiation of construction activities. Both plans will include Best Management Practices that will protect surface waters from pollutants in storm flows during both construction and long-term operation of the development. The imposition of conditions of approval and adherence to local, state and federal requirements will assure that impacts associated with water quality standards are less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. Future development of the site facilitated by the proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will require water for domestic use and landscape irrigation. The American Water Works Association Research Foundation (AWWARF) has developed demand factors for land use categories including commercial and restaurant uses. It is assumed that the site would develop to its maximum allowed potential of 3,500 square feet for a drive through restaurant or coffee shop. As shown in the table below, buildout of the site has the potential to generate a demand of 3.55 acre-feet of domestic water per year.

Table 5
Water Demand at the Project Buildout
Proposed
Land Use Max Allowed Water Consumption Factor
Water Demand
(gpy)
Total Water
Demand At
buildout (AFY)
Restaurant 3,500 SF 331 gallons/square
foot/year 1,158,500 gpy 3.55
TOTAL 3.55
The City of Indio’s largest water supply source is groundwater from the Whitewater River Basin. IWA works with CVWD to manage the underground water basins and to better serve the City. IWA and CVWD have access to or are working to obtain other water supply sources to meet projected water needs and help eliminate groundwater overdraft. The proposed text amendments, specifically the proposed permitted land use, is consistent with the land use

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2762 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
46 designation assigned to it in the General Plan, on which, in part, the IWA based its future water demand analysis when preparing its Urban Water Management Plan. The Proposed Project will increase water demand by 0.017% over 2020 baseline demand and 0.011% of IWAs projected water demand in 2045 (30,997 AFY).16 Therefore, Project impacts associated with domestic water demand are expected to be less than significant.

Future development will connect to existing water lines beneath Jefferson Street or Fred Waring Drive. No new wells or additional water infrastructure are proposed.

Future development will be required to comply with the IWA’s water-efficiency requirements, including the use of drought-tolerant planting materials and limited landscaping irrigation.

Implementation of these and other applicable requirements will assure that water-related impacts remain at less than significant levels.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project site is relatively flat and contains no rivers or streams. Future grading and drainage plans for the site will be designed to maintain the historic drainage characteristics. Development of the Proposed Project will increase impermeable surfaces on-site, and therefore increase on-site storm flows.

The site is located in FEMA Flood Zone X in an area determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain (FEMA Map No. 06065C2232G). Per the City of Indio’s requirements, new development must design drainage systems that contain the 100-year storm on-site. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a preliminary hydrology report shall be prepared demonstrating how development of the site will manage on-site stormwater retention for the 100-year, 24-hour storm event, as per the City of Indio requirements. A final hydrologic analysis will be required to demonstrate that the development meets the City’s standards. These standard requirements will assure that impacts associated with storm water retention remain less than significant.

Future development of the site will implement standard Best Management Practices (BMP) through the preparation of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to reduce pollutants of concern and reduce any project-related impacts to water quality, as required by the City in order to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Projectrelated impacts to stormwater drainage will be less than significant.

Approval of the WQMP, SWPPP, and the required BMPs will reduce impacts to surface waters by reducing siltation and eliminating pollutants in storm flows. With the implementation of this standard requirement, the impacts associated with surface water pollution will be less than significant.

Erosion and On- or Off-site Siltation
Adherence to City requirements, including WQMP best management practices, will ensure future site design will not result in erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The City’s requirements 16 2020 Coachella Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan.. Table 7-8.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2763 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
47 include BMPs for the control of silts and other contaminants in flood waters, which will be applicable to future development of the site.

Summary
Future development of the site will be required to comply with the City’s storm water retention requirements, including the approval of a project-specific final hydrology study and water quality management plan prior to the issuance of building permits. Implementation of these and other applicable requirements will assure that the project will not create or contribute water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. d) Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is not located in the vicinity of a water body.

No hazard from dam failure, tsunami or seiche is possible. The Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel runs 1 mile east of the Project site. During a substantial storm event, there is a low potential of inundation if the channel were to breach. However, channel capacity is designed to accommodate a storm larger than a 100-year storm, and the risk for over-topping is therefore very low. A less than significant impact is anticipated. e) No Impact. Future development of the site will be required to comply with all applicable water quality standards and will implement a WQMP approved by the City of Indio and the Regional Water Quality Control Board for both construction activities and long-term operation of the site. Also, the project’s expected water demand will be less than one percent of IWA’s groundwater supplies, meaning impacts to a groundwater management plan will be negligible.

Adherence to the City’s standard requirements related to water quality will ensure there will be no impact to a water quality control plan.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2764 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
48 XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or regulation adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect?
X
Sources: Indio 2040 General Plan; Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update. City’s Zoning Map, City’s Land Use Map; RDP 5 Conceptual Specific Plan 2003; Heritage Palms Retirement Community and Shopping Center Project Project Master Plan 2003.

Environmental Setting
The Project site is within the boundary of the RDP 5 Conceptual Specific Plan (CSP) and is designated Commercial/Neighborhood Shopping Center in the Plan. Within the CSP boundary, the Project site is located within the Heritage Palms Retirement Community and Shopping Center Project Project Master Plan (PMP), which establishes specific performance, design, and development standards to assure the planning area develops in a manner consistent with the intent of the General Plan and CSP.

The Project site is designated as Neighborhood Center on the City’s 2040 General Plan land use map, and is designated Commercial/Neighborhood Shopping Center in the CSP and PMP.

The City of Indio participates in the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), as discussed above under Biological Resources.

The Project site is within the boundary of the RDP 5 Conceptual Specific Plan (CSP) and Heritage Palms Project Master Plan (PMP), which establishes specific performance, design, and development standards to assure the planning area develops in a manner consistent with the intent of the General Plan and CSP.
a) No Impact. The Project site is currently vacant and is located in an area that is predominantly developed with commercial uses, with residential neighborhoods further away in all directions.

These developments operate independently of the subject property and will not be physically divided by the Proposed Project. No impact is anticipated. b) Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is designated as Neighborhood Center on the City’s 2040 General Plan land use map, and is designated Commercial/Neighborhood Shopping Center in the RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP. Currently, the Commercial and Neighborhood Shopping Center designation in the RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP conditionally allow drive through banks, drug stores and supermarkets, but prohibits drive through restaurants.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2765 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
49 The Neighborhood Center designation in the City’s Unified Development Code conditionally allows drive through restaurants. Text amendments are proposed to the RDP 5 CSP and PMP to conditionally allow drive through restaurants and coffee shops of up to 3,500 square feet at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the site. Other text modifications include revisions to architectural themes allowing for creative, high quality eclectic architecture, consistent with the original intent of the RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP, and modifications to the site development standards to reflect current conditions of the site and realistic development potential.

Therefore, the proposed drive through restaurant or coffee land use is considered consistent with the City’s General Plan and Unified Building Code.

Among the Project’s goals are ensuring high-quality development within the RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP planning area, including the subject site. It is also consistent with the following General Plan Land Use Element goals and policies:

Goal LU-2: Active Places. Indio is a City with active and comfortable places that encourage social interaction and community gathering.

LU-2.3 Access to amenities. Strive to create development patterns such that the majority of residents are within one-half to one-mile walking distance of a variety of neighborhood-serving uses, such as parks, grocery stores, restaurants, places of worship, cafes, dry cleaners, laundromats, banks, hair care, pharmacies, civic uses, and similar uses.

Goal LU-4: High-Quality Building Design. A beautiful city with a high-quality architecture and building design.

LU-4.1 Quality design. Use simple, urban building forms made with permanent materials with high-quality detailing that stands the test of time.

The proposed text amendments support the original intent of the RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP documents, as well as the General Plan’s policies regarding access to amenities and highquality building design. The proposed land use amendments are also consistent with City’s General Plan and Unified Development Code which conditionally allow drive through restaurants in the NC zone. Therefore, the Project will be consistent with adopted plans and programs and impacts to land use policy are expected to be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2766 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
50 XII. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be
of value to the region and the residents
of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
X
Sources: Indio 2040 General Plan; Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Environmental Setting
The City’s important mineral resources include sand and gravel (known as aggregate). Sand and gravel are an important component of asphalt, concrete, road base, stucco and plaster, such that 80 percent to 100 percent of these materials can be comprised of aggregate. The City’s aggregate mineral resources (sand and gravel) provide necessary materials for the local economy. Mining generally occurs north of the City, in its Sphere of Influence.

The majority of City lands have been classified as Mineral Zone MRZ-1 “Areas where available geologic information indicates that little likelihood exists for the presence of significant mineral resources.”
The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will not directly result in impacts to mineral resources. The following analysis assumes maximum buildout potential of the vacant site at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive under the proposed revisions.

Discussion of Impacts
a, b) No Impact. There are no permitted mining operations in the vicinity of the project site, nor does this area of the City lend itself to mining activities, as described in the General Plan. The project site is located in an urbanized area designated for neighborhood commercial uses and is not zoned for mineral resource extraction. No impact is expected.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2767 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
51 XIII. NOISE
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? X
c) For a project located within the vicinity
of a private airstrip or an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
X
Sources: Indio 2040 General Plan; Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Environmental Setting
The main sources of noise in an urban environment include road traffic, aircraft, railroads, construction, industry, noise in buildings, and consumer products. According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), in any city, the main sources of traffic noise are the motors and exhaust systems of autos, trucks, buses, and motorcycles. Temporary noise sources include landscape maintenance activities, home stereo systems, and barking dogs, and are governed by the provisions of the City Noise Ordinance and Municipal Code.

The Project site is located in an area which has well-connected and developed roadways. Currently, both Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive are improved with six vehicle lanes, and an existing curb.

Based on the future roadway noise contours, noise levels at the subject site are projected to be between 60 and 70 CNEL on Jefferson Street and Fred Waring.17 The City of Indio has established goals, policies, and programs to limit and reduce the effects of noise intrusion on sensitive land uses and to set acceptable noise levels for varying types of land uses. Per the City of Indio General Plan, noise levels of up to 70 dBA CNEL are “acceptable” for commercial retail uses, and levels up to 75 dBA CNEL are “conditionally acceptable.”
The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will not directly result in impacts related to noise. The following analysis assumes maximum buildout potential of the vacant site at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive under the proposed revisions. 17 Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update. Figure 4.12-4 2040 Noise Contours.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2768 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
52 Discussion of Impacts
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The subject property is currently vacant and undeveloped. The main noise source in the area is vehicular traffic on Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive.

The surrounding area mainly consists of commercial and residential development. The nearest sensitive receptor is a single-family residence located 530 feet northeast of the site across Fred Waring Drive.

Construction Noise
Buildout of the site under proposed RDP 5 text amendments would allow a 3,500 drive through restaurant or coffee shop. Construction activities on the site will comply with the City’s Municipal Code Section § 95C.08 which limits construction times and days as follows:

Pacific Standard Time.
(a) Monday through Friday, 7:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m.
(b) Saturday, 8:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m.
(c) Sunday, 9:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m.
(d) Government Holidays, 9:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m.

Pacific Daylight Time.
(a) Monday through Friday, 6:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m.
(b) Saturday, 7:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m.
(c) Sunday, 9:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m.
(d) Government Holidays, 9:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m.

Future construction activities could generate temporary and periodic elevated noise levels associated with heavy equipment. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the maximum noise level generated by typical construction equipment can reach up to 98 dB(A) at 50 feet.18 These noise levels would diminish rapidly with distance from the construction site. These noise levels would diminish rapidly with distance from the construction site at a rate of approximately 6 dB(A) per doubling of distance. For example, a noise level of 98 dB(A) Leq measured at 50 feet from the noise source to the receptor would reduce to 92 dB(A) Leq at 100 feet from the source to the receptor and reduce by another 6 dB(A) Leq to 86 dB(A) Leq at 200 feet from the source to the receptor. Given that the nearest residence is 530 feet northeast of the site, noise levels are expected to be between 78 and 80 dB(A) Leq. It is also important to note that these noise sources are mobile, and that sustained noise levels will not occur at any one location during the construction process, but rather be moving across the site as the equipment moves.

Noise generating construction activities would include site preparation, excavation, grading, and building construction. Noise levels surrounding the Project site could be elevated for short periods of time, as equipment moves through the site. In addition, these noise levels would be limited to the less sensitive daytime hours and would cease once building construction 18 US Environmental Protection Agency, Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment and Home Appliances, EPA-68-04-0047 (1971).

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2769 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
53 concludes. Compliance with the City’s noise ordinance exempts construction activities from noise infractions, because of their temporary nature. Therefore, impacts associated with construction noise on the Project site would be less than significant.

Operational Noise
At buildout, principal on-site noise sources will include vehicular traffic accessing the site, drive-through speaker phones, grounds maintenance equipment, and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units. However, future development will be required to comply with the noise level limits of Municipal Code Chapter 95C. The proposed land use for the site is consistent with the General Plan designation for the site, and traffic levels are not expected to substantially increase beyond that forecast in the General Plan at build out. Per the City of Indio General Plan, exterior noise levels of up to 70 dBA CNEL are “acceptable” and levels up to 75 dBA CNEL are “conditionally acceptable” for commercial retail uses.

According to the General Plan Final EIR (Figure 4.12-1), existing noise levels at the site are 65 dBA CNEL immediately adjacent to Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, and 60 dBA CNEL throughout the rest of the site.

The General Plan EIR projected future noise levels at General Plan buildout using land use designations assigned by the General Plan land use map, including Neighborhood Center on the Project site. The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments would result in a consistent maximum buildout potential as approved in the Indio 2040 General Plan Update EIR and therefore, impacts would be the same as those analyzed in the EIR for maximum buildout.

Based on the future roadway noise contours, noise levels at the subject site are projected to be between 60 and 65 CNEL on Jefferson Street and Fred Waring.19 These noise projections include future noise generated by buildout of the subject stie. Typical noise levels for drivethrough speakers range from 60-65 dBA Leq at a distance of 30 feet. Drive-through speaker systems are typically controlled with Automatic Volume Controls (AVC) that can reduce the outbound sound pressure level based on ambient noise levels. When AVC is active, the outbound level can be reduced to a level that is 15 dB above the ambient noise level at the speaker post microphone. Noise levels are further reduced by intervening vehicles, landscaping and berms, and distance from the point source. These noise levels are within the normally acceptable noise range for commercial retail uses (maximum of 75 dBA CNEL). Therefore, Project operational noise will increase noise levels in the area, but they will not exceed General Plan standards. Impacts will be less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. Groundborne vibration would produce groundborne noise, which is a rumbling sound. During construction of the site, ground-borne vibration and/or ground-borne noise would be generated, which could be felt by adjacent land uses.

Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type. 19 Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update. Figure 4.12-4 2040 Noise Contours.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2770 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
54 It is expected that ground-borne vibration from future construction activities would cause only intermittent, localized intrusion due to heavy construction equipment and trucks. The Municipal Code exempts construction activities from short-term, short-duration noise standards when they are conducted during permitted time frames. The City will require that construction activity comply with Section § 95C.08 of the Municipal Code20, which limits construction activity to the less sensitive daylight hours. These requirements will reduce impacts to less sensitive daytime hours and assure that short-term ground-borne impacts will be less than significant. Long-term operation of the project is not expected to generate groundborne vibrations or noise. Impacts will be less than significant. c) No impact. The Bermuda Dunes Airport is located approximately 1 mile north of the subject property. Its noise contours are localized, and do not extend to the vicinity of the proposed project site. No impacts will occur.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.
20 City’s Municipal Code Chapter 95c: Noise Control.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2771 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
55 XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
X
Sources: Indio 2040 General Plan.

Environmental Setting
The City of Indio is situated in Riverside County, which has experienced rapid population growth over the last two decades.21 The City of Indio had a population of approximately 89,137 persons in 2022.22 Its population is expected to increase to 123,300 persons by 2045.23 Currently, the City is composed of a mix of single-family, multi-family, and mobile homes development, but the predominant housing unit type is single-family homes (72.4%).24
Discussion of Impacts
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The Project proposes RDP 5 CSP and PMP text amendments that would conditionally allow drive through restaurants and coffee shops on the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, and will not directly induce population growth. Construction and operation of future development will generate jobs. However, construction is expected to be fulfilled by the local labor market. Given the current labor market, it is more likely that the new jobs will be filled by existing residents than new residents attracted to the area by development as the result the proposed Project. Impacts will be less than significant.
b) No Impact. The subject property is vacant, and development of the Project site would not displace any existing housing or require replacement housing elsewhere. No impact will occur.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.
21 City of Indio Housing Element Update, 2022. 22 U.S. Department of Finance, Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2022, Table E-5 23 2020-2045 RTPSCS Demographics and Growth Forecast by Southern California Association of Governments. 24 Single-family detached and attached homes, according to the City of Indio Housing Element Update, 2022.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2772 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
56 XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the Project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
Sources: Indio 2040 General Plan; Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Environmental Setting
Fire Protection
Fire protection and emergency medical services to the City of Indio are provided by the Indio Fire Department.25 The nearest Indio fire station is Fire Station #3, located at 46-621 Madison Street, approximately 1.63 miles southeast of the subject site. The station is staffed by 10 firefighters, who operate a fire engine and paramedic ambulance, as well as a reserve ambulance. The national standard for fire services is one firefighter per 1,000 City residents.

Police Protection
Police protection services are provided by the Indio Police Department. The Indio Police Station is located at 46-800 Jackson Street, approximately 3.3 miles southeast of the subject site. The police department has various crime programs including a Citizens Online Police reporting system, a police K-9 program, police dispatch, community outreach, and neighborhood watch programs. Response times are approximately 5 minutes within the 5 beat system.

Schools
Indio receives educational services from two K-12 school districts (Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) and Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD)) and one community college district. The Proposed Project is located within the DSUSD boundaries.26 25 Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update. 26 Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2773 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
57 Parks
The City has dedicated approximately 1,926 acres of land for the open space/recreation/horse facilities.

The nearest Indio park to the project site is Burr Park located at 42811 Burr Street, approximately 0.73 miles northeast of the site.

The Proposed Project will have limited impact on Public Services, as discussed below.

Discussion of Impacts
a) Less Than Significant Impact. Future development of the site will increase the demand for fire services in the City due to the permanent new structure. The project proponent will be required to pay the City’s development impact fees for fire facilities and apparatus. This fee is designed to allow new development to pay its fair share of future facilities.

In accordance with standard City practices, the Fire Department would review project plans before permits are issued to ensure compliance with all applicable fire and building code standards and to ensure that adequate fire and life safety measures are incorporated into the project in compliance with all applicable state and city fire safety regulations. Emergency access will be provided to the site via the existing public roadway network, and a continuous driveway through the site will provide access to all structures.

Because future development would be required to comply with City standards and the Proposed Project is not anticipated to generate substantial additional demand for fire protection services, and would not result in the need for new or expanded facilities, the project’s potential impact on fire protection services would be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The ultimate development of the site will result in a marginal increase in demand for police services. Police personnel will be able to access the site using Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive. Future development will be required to comply with all Police Department regulations and procedures. No construction of new or expanded police services or facilities are required for the Project. Impacts will be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would facilitate the development of an up to 3,500 square foot of drive through restaurant or coffee shop. Future development will be subject to the DSUSD developer fees in place at the time development occurs, which currently stand at $0.78 per square foot of commercial space.27 Payment of the developer fee would mitigate potential significant impacts to school resources to less than significant levels. d, e) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments would conditionally permit drive through restaurants and coffee shops of up to 3,500 square feet at the project site. It is expected that future development will be staffed by existing and future residents occurring as a result of annual growth. The Project does not propose residential uses, which would directly increase the city’s population and demand for recreational resources 27 Desert Sands Unified School District – School Impact/Developer Fees. August 8, 2022.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2774 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
58 or other public facilities. The proposed Project will not increase use of public facilities such that new or expanded facilities would be required. Impacts will be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2775 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
59 XVI. RECREATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the Project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities
such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the Project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
X
Sources: Indio 2040 General Plan.

Environmental Setting
The City owns and maintains 107 acres of public parks, community centers, and a municipal golf course. The City is located in the Desert Recreation District (DRD), which covers over 1,800 square miles from Rancho Mirage east to the Salton Sea, and provides recreational services to more than 380,000 residents throughout the Coachella Valley. DRD is responsible for over 30 recreational facilities that include community and fitness centers, sports fields, swimming pools, a golf course and driving range, and various parks and open spaces.

The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will not directly result in impacts to recreational resources. The following analysis assumes maximum buildout potential of the vacant site at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive under the proposed revisions.

Discussion of Impacts
a, b) Less Than Significant Impact. It is expected that future development of the Project site will be staffed by existing and future residents occurring as a result of annual growth. The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments do not propose residential uses, which would directly increase the city’s population and demand for recreational resources. Future buildout of the site will not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, nor will it result in a noticeable increase of use, if any. Project-related impacts are expected to be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2776 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
60 XVII. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities?
X
b) Would the project conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access? X
Sources: Indio 2040 General Plan; Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update; Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis, prepared by Urban Crossroads June 2023; Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening, prepared by Urban Crossroads June 2023.

Environmental Setting
In the City of Indio, the circulation system consists of roadways, freeways, bus lines, sidewalks, and bike lanes. The different modes of transportation include vehicular travel, public transit, walking, bicycling, and golf carts.

All roadways in the City are classified into various roadway types based on number of lanes and other facilities, including bicycle lanes, sidewalks and parkways. The City’s acceptable Level of Service (LOS) for both roadway segments and intersection operations in LOS D or better. All area roadways and intersections in Indio currently operate at LOS D or better.28 The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will not directly result in impacts to transportation or traffic. The following analysis assumes maximum buildout potential of the vacant site at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive under the proposed revisions.

Urban Crossroads, Inc. prepared a focused traffic analysis for the Project in June 2023 (Appendix B).

Urban Crossroads also prepared a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) screening analysis for the Project in June 2023 (Appendix C).
28 City of Indio EIR for the 2040 General Plan Update, Table 4.15-1.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2777 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
61 Based on consultation with the City’s Traffic Engineer, and the approval of a scoping agreement, the traffic impact analysis considered 4 area intersections, and the potential impacts the Project could have on those intersections in the long term.

Table 6
Intersection Analysis Locations
ID Intersection Location Jurisdiction
1 Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive City of Indio / City of La Quinta 2 Heritage Ct. Main Dwy./ Fred Waring Drive City of Indio 3 Jefferson Street / RIRO Dwy City of Indio / City of La Quinta 4 Jefferson Street / LI-RIRO Dwy. City of Indio/City of La Quinta Discussion of Impacts
a) Less Than Significant Impact.

Existing Traffic Conditions in the Project Vicinity
The Project site is currently vacant and generates no traffic. The surrounding main roads include Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, which are operating at acceptable LOS as shown in the Table 7 below.

Table 7
Existing Intersection Delay and Levels of Service
Study Intersection Traffic
Control1
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay2 LOS3 Delay LOS

1. Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive TS 49.6 D 39.5 D

2. Heritage Ct. Main Dwy./ Fred Waring Drive TS 13.6 B 12.5 B

3. Jefferson Street / RIRO Dwy CSS 17.9 C 16.2 C

4. Jefferson Street / LI-RIRO Dwy. CSS 32.2 D 27.3 D
(1) TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross Street Stop
(2) Delay is represented by seconds. Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 11 analysis software. (3) LOS = Level of Service
Project Trip Generation
In order to compare the traffic characteristics of the site under currently approved conditions and proposed Project conditions, trip-generation statistics published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021) manual are utilized. ITE Land Use Code 911 – Walk-in Bank is used for the approved 10,429 square foot building to represent current maximum buildout under the existing RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP.

ITE Land Use Code 937 – Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window is used for the 3,500 square foot building per the proposed text amendments, which is evaluated as a coffee shop to ensure a “conservative worse case” scenario, since coffee shops generate higher number of trips than restaurants when both have drive throughs.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2778 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
62 As shown in Table 8, the approved bank building is anticipated to generate a net total of 604 trip-ends per day with 60 AM peak hour trips and 127 PM peak hour trips. The proposed Project is anticipated to generate a net total of 1,494 external trip-ends per day with 240 AM peak hour external trips and 110 PM peak hour external trips. Compared to existing conditions, the Project would increase the total number of daily trips generated by the site at buildout by 890 trips per day.

Table 8
Project Trip Generation Summary
Trip Generation Rates
Land Use ITE
Code Unit
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily % In %
Out Rate % In % Out Rate
Walk-in Bank 911 TSF 3.33 2.41 5.74 5.34 6.79 12.13 57.94 Coffee/Donut Shop w/
Drive-Through 937 TSF 43.80 42.08 85.88 19.50 19.49 38.99 533.57 Trips Generated
Land Use Quantity Unit AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Walk-in Bank 10.429 TSF 35 25 60 56 71 127 604
Coffee/Donut Shop w/
Drive-Through
(after pass-by reduction)

3.5 TSF 123 117 240 55 55 110 1,494
Comparison/Difference 88 92 180 -1 -16 -17 890
Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017).

DU = Dwelling Units; TSF = Thousand Square Feet
Traffic Analysis
The Project site is anticipated to be served by:
(1) the adjacent right-in/right-out (RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of Fred Waring Drive,
(2) the full access (signalized) driveway along Fred Waring Drive east of Jefferson Street, and (3) the existing left-in/right-in/right-out (LI-RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of the RIRO access.

Per City requirements, the following two scenarios were analyzed during the weekday AM and PM peak hours:
• General Plan Buildout (2040) without Project (10,429 SF walk-in bank) • General Plan Buildout (2040) with Project (3,500 SF coffee shop with drive-through) As shown in Table 9, LOS calculations were conducted for the study intersections to evaluate their operations under General Plan Buildout (2040) traffic conditions. The intersection analysis results indicate that the intersection of Jefferson Street/Fred Waring Drive (#1) is anticipated to operate at unacceptable LOS during the peak hours without and with Project conditions. This would represent a potentially significant impact, regardless of implementation

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2779 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
63 of the Project. Providing right turn overlap signal phasing for the northbound, southbound, and eastbound approaches is shown to improve the intersection to operate at an acceptable LOS for future conditions.

General Plan Buildout (2040) conditions without and with the Project also indicate that the intersection of Jefferson Street at the LI/RIRO Driveway (#4) is anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS (LOS “F”) during the AM and PM peak hours with inbound left turns permitted at this location for long term future conditions. According to the traffic analysis, a potential future solution to this cumulative deficiency which occurs regardless of implementation of the Project would be the prohibition of southbound left turns, converting this driveway to allow right-in/right-out (RIRO) movements without a median break. However, as identified in the traffic impact analysis, monitoring of the status of the left turn pocket’s usage is recommended, regardless of the implementation of the Project. The southbound left turning vehicles would be diverted to the Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive (#1) intersection.

As shown in Table 9, the Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive (#1) intersection is able to accommodate this potential future traffic diversion with acceptable LOS.

Table 9
General Plan Buildout (2040) With and Without Project
Intersection Delay and Levels of Service
Study Intersection Traffic
Control1
Without Project
(10,49 SF Bank)
With Project
(3,500 SF Drive Through)
Delay2 LOS Delay2 LOS

AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM

1. Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive
− Without Improvements TS 62.2 70.4 E E 63.3 71.5 E E
− With Signal Modifications TS 50.9 49.1 D D 51.7 50.3 D D − With Signal Modifications & SB
Left Turn Adjustment3
TS 50.5 48.2 D D 51.6 49.5 D D

2. Heritage Ct. Main Dwy./ Fred Waring
Drive
− Without EB Right Turn Adjustment TS 15.4 16.1 B B 15.5 16.2 B B − With EB Right Turn Adjustment TS 15.6 16.6 B B 15.7 17.0 B B

3. Jefferson Street / RIRO Dwy CS 24.3 28.2 C D 28.8 28.1 D D

4. Jefferson Street / LI-RIRO Dwy.
• With Inbound SB Left Turns
Permitted
CSS 69.0 122.2 F F 83.9 119.9 F F
• With SB Left Turn Restriction
(RIRO only)
CSS 31.2 34.1 D D 31.9 34.1 D D
(1) TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross Street Stop
(2) Delay is represented by seconds. Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 11 analysis software. (3) With redistribution of traffic associated with restriction of southbound left-turn in at intersection #4 (Jefferson St./LI-RIRO Dwy.).

The LOS deficiencies shown in Table 9 would occur with or without the project, and the Project would not worsen LOS conditions compared to existing General Plan buildout

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2780 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
64 conditions. The City will monitor LOS conditions at these locations and deficiencies will be addressed as they occur. Future development specific to the site may be conditioned to contribute its fair share to the signal phase modifications proposed in Table 9, however they are not Project specific impacts and will not require mitigation at this time. Therefore, because the Project would not worsen existing General Plan buildout conditions, impacts are considered less than significant.

Alternative Transportation Planning
In the Project area, there are currently Class II bicycle lanes on Fred Waring Drive and Class IV cycle track route facility on Jefferson Street within the study area. SunLine Transit Agency provides bus transit services to the Coachella Valley, including the cities of Indio and La Quinta. The Proposed Project site is currently served by SunLine with bus services along Fred Waring drive via Route 6. There is an existing bus stop for Route 6 on the southeast corner of Heritage Court Main Driveway at Fred Waring Drive.

The Proposed Project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. No project related impact is anticipated.

Summary
Based on the traffic analysis, the Project site would generate up to 1,494 daily vehicle trips with the proposed land use modifications, which is 890 more trips than under currently approved conditions. The LOS deficiencies and recommended improvements shown in Table 9 would occur with or without the project, and the proposed Project is not anticipated to result in any significant traffic level of service effects. Impacts are less than significant. b) Less than Significant Impact. As of 2018, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines require the use of Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) as a measure for identifying transportation impacts, as a replacement to LOS. The City of Indio has not adopted regulations or thresholds pertaining to VMT, but uses guidelines from the County of Riverside Transportation Analysis Guidelines for Level of Service, Vehicle Miles Traveled. These guidelines are based on the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts on CEQA.

The Riverside County guidelines establish criteria which, if met, a Project is not required to submit detailed VMT analysis. These criteria include the following:
• Small projects;
• Local serving retail;
• Affordable housing;
• Local essential service;
• Map Based Screening, and;
• Redevelopment Projects
The VMT screening analysis prepared for the Project determined that screening the Project as local serving retail is appropriate. The addition of drive-through features in combination with

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2781 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
65 reducing the building size will allow for uses such as retail and coffee/donut shop with drivethru, drive-in bank, and fast-food restaurant with drive-thru. These drive-thru uses serve traffic interacting with the local area in the following ways:
• Travelers on Jefferson Street or Fred Waring Drive passing-by the site. • Travelers attracted to the site from nearby residences and businesses. • Existing Heritage Court Shopping Center patrons
With drive-thru features, this Project reduces the center’s northwest building pad from 10,429 square feet (bank, no drive-thru) to a building not-to-exceed 3, 500 square feet (with drivethru), represented as a coffee shop. These changes allow residents to interact with local businesses rather than traveling farther to locate the convenience food or services they wish to purchase. Therefore, the Project satisfies the County-recommended criteria for local serving retail, and impacts are considered less than significant. The project will not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b). c, d) No Impact. As described above, access to the Project site will be served by (1) the adjacent right-in/right-out (RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of Fred Waring Drive, (2) the full access (signalized) driveway along Fred Waring Drive east of Jefferson Street, and (3) the existing left-in/right-in/right-out (LI-RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of the RIRO access. Regional access to the site will be provided via the I-10 freeway, major arterials, secondary arterials and a variety of local roads.

Prior to construction of future development, both the Fire Department and Police Department will review the site plan to ensure safety measures are addressed, including emergency access and geometric design. Therefore, the Proposed Project will not result in inadequate emergency access or increase hazards due to a geometric design feature.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2782 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
66 XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL

RESOURCES
a) Would the Project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, defined in Public
Resources Code section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size
and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or
object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported
by substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resources Code Section 5024.1,
the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.

X
Sources: 2040 Indio General Plan.

Environmental Setting
As discussed in the Section V, Cultural Resources, Cahuilla Indians are known to have lived in the Coachella Valley for thousands of years. They were Takic-speaking people who lived in various groups in the area. Today, Native Americans of Pass or Desert Cahuilla heritage are mostly affiliated with one or more of the Indian reservations in and near the Coachella Valley, including the Cabazon, Augustine, Torres Martinez, Twenty-nine Palms, Agua Caliente, and Morongo.

Numerous cultural resources are found throughout the valley which are considered non-renewable resources because they provide important information about the past.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2783 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
67 Discussion of Impacts
a, i, ii) Less Than Significant Impact.

The City is conducting Tribal consultation, as required by AB 52. The results of consultation will be included either as mitigation prior to the adoption of the Initial Study, or as conditions of approval for future development of the site. Due to the requirements of AB 52 consultation, impacts are considered less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2784 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
68 XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE

SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which
could cause significant environmental
effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition
to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State
or local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
X
Sources: Indio 2040 General Plan; Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Environmental Setting
Domestic Water
The project site is located within the Indio Water Authority (IWA) service area for domestic water.

IWA's primary sources of water include groundwater produced by local potable water supply wells.

Water supplies for the City of Indio are primarily from the lower aquifer in the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin. Because the Whitewater River Basin is an un-adjudicated basin, IWA does not hold specific water rights, but rather pumps supplies from the aquifer as needed to meet demands within its service area. IWA currently has 20 operational supply wells. Pumping capacities for these wells range

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2785 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
69 from 1,200 gpm to 3,500 gpm, with a total pumping capacity of 74,600 AFY. IWA’s actual water demand in 2020 was 19,880 AFY.29
Wastewater Treatment
The project site is located in an area where sewer service is provided by the Valley Sanitary District (VSD). The project will extend on-site sewer lines from the site to connect to the existing sewer lines under Jefferson Street and Fred Waring.

VSD provides wastewater collection and treatment services for the City of Indio and the majority of IWA areas. The collection system for VSD consists of approximately 240 miles of sanitary sewer pipes and 4 pump stations. Currently, VSD discharges treated wastewater to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and provides a small amount of treated wastewater for on-site irrigation and agricultural irrigation for local tribes. VSD currently treats approximately 6.5 million gallons per day through an activated sludge process, and has a capacity of 9.5 million gallons per day. An additional

0.5 million gallons per day is treated through oxidation ponds, which have a capacity of 2.5 million gallons per day.

Floodplain Management
In the City of Indio, local drainage facilities generally convey runoff from local streets and lots to the regional facilities. The local storm drain system consists of gutters, engineered storm drains, and channels. There are limited existing storm drainage facilities in the City. Regional drainage is managed by the Coachella Valley Water District, which maintains the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel.

Solid Waste Management
Residential and commercial areas in the City of Indio are served by Burrtec Waste and Recycling Services. Residential garbage and recyclables are collected on a weekly basis. Trash is taken to the Indio/Coachella Valley Waste Transfer Station in Coachella. That transfer station currently has a permitted maximum tonnage of 1,100 tons per day (tpd) of solid waste and a maximum capacity of 12,685 cubic yards per day. The facility can receive agricultural, construction and demolition, green material, industrial, inert, metal, mixed municipal, and tire wastes. Once waste enters the Indio/Coachella Valley Waste Transfer Station, it enters the Riverside County waste stream, is sorted, and sent to one of the Riverside County landfills (Badlands, Blythe, Desert Center, El Sobrante, Lamb Canyon, Mecca Landfill II, and Oasis), which have a remaining combined capacity of 181,783,284 cubic yards.30
The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will not directly result in impacts to utilities.

The following analysis assumes maximum buildout potential of the vacant site at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive under the proposed revisions. 29 2020 Coachella Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan. 30 Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2786 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
70 Discussion of Impacts
a-c) Less Than Significant Impact.

Water
Future development of the Project site will be connected to the existing domestic water pipelines. As discussed in Table 5 under Hydrology and Water Quality, buildout of the site under the proposed text amendments would have a total water demand of 3.55 acre-feet per year, which represents 0.017% over 2020 baseline demand and 0.011% of IWAs projected water demand in 2045 (30,997 AFY).31 The City of Indio’s largest water supply source is groundwater from the Whitewater River Basin. IWA works with CVWD to manage the underground water basins and to better serve the City. IWA and CVWD have access to or are working to obtain other water supply sources to meet projected water needs and help eliminate groundwater overdraft. Although drive through restaurants are not permitted in the current RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP, the proposed amendments are consistent with the land use designation assigned to the site in the Indio 2040 General Plan, on which, in part, the IWA based its future water demand analysis when preparing its planning documents, including its Urban Water Management Plan. To reduce water consumption, future development of the site will be required to implement all water conservation measures imposed by IWA under both normal and drought conditions. Therefore, project impacts associated with domestic water demand are expected to be less than significant.

Wastewater Treatment
The project site is served by VSD for wastewater collection and treatment services. The project site does not currently contain any wastewater infrastructure. Future development of the site will require construction of on-site sewer infrastructure to connect to the existing sewer mains located under Jefferson Street and or Fred Waring rights-of-way. Sewage will be conveyed to the VSD wastewater treatment plant located at 45500 Van Buren Street. The Project wastewater discharges will be typical of commercial and restaurant uses and would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the VSD or Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Drainage System
Compared to current conditions, future development of the site will increase the amount of impervious surfaces, including building and pavement. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a preliminary hydrology report shall be prepared demonstrating how development of the site will manage on-site stormwater retention for the 100-year, 24-hour storm event, as per the City of Indio requirements. A final hydrologic analysis will be required to demonstrate that the development meets the City’s standards. These standard requirements will assure that impacts associated with storm water retention remain less than significant.

Future development of the site will implement standard Best Management Practices (BMP) through the preparation of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to reduce pollutants of concern and reduce any project-related impacts to water quality, as required by the City in 31 2020 Coachella Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Table 7-8.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2787 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
71 order to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Projectrelated impacts to stormwater drainage will be less than significant.

Electricity
Future development of the site will provide local connections to the existing IID infrastructure in the project area. The project will not require the addition or expansion of electric power facilities.

Natural Gas
Future development of the site will provide local connections to the existing SoCalGas infrastructure in the project area. The project will not require the addition or expansion of natural gas facilities.

Telecommunications
Future development of the site will provide local connections to the existing Spectrum and or Frontier Communications infrastructure in the project area. The project will not require to the addition or expansion of telecommunication facilities.
d, e) Less than Significant Impact. As discussed above, Burrtec Waste and Recycling Services (Burrtec) provides solid waste services to the City of Indio. Solid waste generated by the city is either recycled, reused, or transformed at a waste-to-energy facility32, or disposed of at one of county’s landfills. County landfills have a combined remaining capacity of 181,783,284 cubic yard, with a maximum permitted capacity of 266,159,998 cubic yard.33 The project will generate 1.6 tons of solid waste per year as shown below.

Table 10
Estimated Solid Waste Disposal at the Project Buildout
Land Use CalRecycle Disposal
Rates Proposed
Solid Waste
Disposal (pounds
per day)
Solid Waste
Disposal (tons
per year)
Restaurant 0.005 pounds/square
foot/day 3,500 SF 17.5 3.19
TOTAL 3.19
TOTAL (with 50% diversion) 1.60
Source: Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates by CalRecycle, https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates, Accessed June 2023.

At buildout, development of the site under proposed text amendments will contribute less than

0.001% of the County’s remaining capacity. Commingled recyclable materials (e.g., paper, plastic, glass, cardboard, aluminum) will be transported to Burrtec’s material recovery facilities for recycling and reuse.
32 Riverside County Nondisposal Facility Element by Riverside County Department of Waste Resources (2015, amended May 2020). 33 Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2788 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
72 Burrtec is responsible for maintaining standards that assure that all waste is handled in a manner that meets local, state and federal standards. These requirements will assure that impacts associated with solid waste disposal remain less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2789 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
73 XX. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks,
and thereby expose project occupants
to, pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or maintenance
of associated infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities)
that may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or landslides,
as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
Sources: Indio 2040 General Plan; Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Environmental Setting
Due to weather, topography, and native vegetation, large areas of the state of California are susceptible to fires. Wildfires can occur in undeveloped areas and spread to urban areas where the landscape and structures are not designed and maintained to be ignition resistant. A wildland-urban interface is an area where urban development is located in proximity to open space or “wildland” areas. The potential for wildland fires represents a hazard where development is adjacent to open space or within close proximity to wildland fuels or designated fire severity zones.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) has mapped areas of significant fire hazards in the state through its Fire and Resources Assessment Program (FRAP). The City of Indio is not affected by wildfires and risk is generally considered “moderate” throughout the City.34 34 Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2790 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
74 The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will not directly result in impacts related to wildfire. The following analysis assumes maximum buildout potential of the vacant site at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive under the proposed revisions.

Discussion of Impacts
a) No Impact. The primary emergency evacuation routes in the City include Interstate 10, State Route 86, Highway 111, Jefferson Street, Monroe Street, and Jackson Street. The project site is located along Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, which provides access in an emergency. Development on the subject property would not substantially impair the City’s adopted emergency evacuation and response plans35 as the Project is not proposing to amend these routes to impede emergency evacuation. No impact is anticipated. b, c) No Impact. The Project area is not located within a wildfire hazard severity zone nor a wildland-urban interface (WUI). The Project is located in an urban environment, and miles from an area of wildland fire potential. Urban roadways exist surrounding the Project, and no new wildfire risk infrastructure will be required. No impact is anticipated. c) No Impact. The Project site is located on the valley floor where there is no potential for flooding, landslide, or post-fire slope instability. Therefore, future development of the Project site would not expose people or structures to significant risks such as downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. No impact is anticipated.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Monitoring: None required.
35 Final EIR for the City of Indio 2040 General Plan Update.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2791 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
75 XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
NOTE: If there are significant
environmental impacts which cannot be
mitigated and no feasible project
alternatives are available, then complete
the mandatory findings of significance
and attach to this initial study as an
appendix. This is the first step for starting
the environmental impact report (EIR)
process.

Does the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or
prehistory?
X
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental
effects, which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
a) Less Than Significant Impact The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text amendments will not directly result in impacts to biological or cultural resources. The following analysis assumes maximum buildout potential of the vacant site at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive under the proposed revisions.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2792 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
76 The Project site is not located within a CVMSHCP-designated conservation area and does not contain any wildlife corridors or biological linkage areas. Due to extensive site disturbance and urban location, pre-construction surveys will not be required for nesting birds covered by the MBTA or burrowing owl. Future development of the site is subject to payment of the Development Mitigation Fee to mitigate potential impacts to covered species under the CVMSHCP. Development of the site will not significantly reduce fish or wildlife habitat or otherwise adversely impact a fish or wildlife species.

No cultural resources are known to exist within or adjacent to the project site due to previous grading activities and extensive site disturbance. Overall, there will be no significant environmental impacts. Project related impacts, including cumulative impacts, are considered less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. A significant impact could occur if the project, in conjunction with related projects, would result in impacts that would be less than significant when viewed separately, but would be significant when viewed together. Here, however, the impacts of future development of the site are individually limited and not cumulatively considerable. The proposed RDP 5 CSP and HP PMP text revisions are consistent with the development envisioned for this area of the City in the RDP 5 CSP, HP PMP and City’s 2040 General Plan.

All environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the project would be less than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures included herein, and when viewed in conjunction with other closely related past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects, would not be significant.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project will not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of the City’s Municipal Code, other standard requirements and requirements of law, and the mitigation measures included in this document.

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2793 of 3061 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
A
Appendix A
Air Quality and GHG Modeling

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2794 of 3061 Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments
Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - 3,500SF drive through coffee/restaurant on 0.7 AC lot.

Construction Phase - Assumes a 5.5 month buildout.

On-road Fugitive Dust - All roads in project area are paved.

Vehicle Trips - Assumes 1,494 daily trips per project Traffic Report (2023).

Road Dust - All roads are and will be paved.

Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Standard dust control measures per SCAQMD Rule 403.1.

Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps -

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 3.50 1000sqft 0.70 3,500.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
10 Wind Speed (m/s) 3.4 Precipitation Freq (Days) 20

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Imperial Irrigation District
Operational Year 2023
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
189.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadMoistureContent 0 0.5 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 40 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.08 0.70
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblRoadDust RoadPercentPave 50 100
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 426.85
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 426.85
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 426.85
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
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
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.0596 0.3530 0.3883 6.4000e0046.7000e0030.0174 0.0241 2.9000e0030.0160 0.0189 0.0000 56.1442 56.1442 0.0175 1.2000e00456.6171 Maximum 0.0596 0.3530 0.3883 6.4000e0046.7000e0030.0174 0.0241 2.9000e0030.0160 0.0189 0.0000 56.1442 56.1442 0.0175 1.2000e00456.6171 Unmitigated Construction
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
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.0596 0.3530 0.3883 6.4000e0043.6300e0030.0174 0.0210 1.4700e0030.0160 0.0175 0.0000 56.1442 56.1442 0.0175 1.2000e00456.6170 Maximum 0.0596 0.3530 0.3883 6.4000e0043.6300e0030.0174 0.0210 1.4700e0030.0160 0.0175 0.0000 56.1442 56.1442 0.0175 1.2000e00456.6170 Mitigated Construction
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 45.82 0.00 12.74 49.31 0.00 7.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 6-12-2023 9-11-2023 0.2002 0.2002
2 9-12-2023 9-30-2023 0.0481 0.0481
Highest 0.2002 0.2002

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 tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.0161 0.0000 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 7.0000e005 Energy 5.1500e0030.0468 0.0393 2.8000e0043.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0030.0000 64.8478 64.8478 3.3900e0031.2300e00365.2982 Mobile 0.5698 0.4511 2.6818 3.7900e0030.3365 3.5200e0030.3400 0.0898 3.2900e0030.0931 0.0000 350.0319 350.0319 0.0400 0.0295 359.8090 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.1846 0.0000 8.1846 0.4837 0.0000 20.2770 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.3370 1.2570 1.5940 0.0348 8.4000e0042.7164 Total 0.5910 0.4979 2.7211 4.0700e0030.3365 7.0800e0030.3436 0.0898 6.8500e0030.0967 8.5216 416.1368 424.6584 0.5619 0.0315 448.1006 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.0161 0.0000 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 7.0000e005 Energy 5.1500e0030.0468 0.0393 2.8000e0043.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0030.0000 64.8478 64.8478 3.3900e0031.2300e00365.2982 Mobile 0.5698 0.4511 2.6818 3.7900e0030.3365 3.5200e0030.3400 0.0898 3.2900e0030.0931 0.0000 350.0319 350.0319 0.0400 0.0295 359.8090 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.1846 0.0000 8.1846 0.4837 0.0000 20.2770 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.3370 1.2570 1.5940 0.0348 8.4000e0042.7164 Total 0.5910 0.4979 2.7211 4.0700e0030.3365 7.0800e0030.3436 0.0898 6.8500e0030.0967 8.5216 416.1368 424.6584 0.5619 0.0315 448.1006 Mitigated Operational

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 6/12/2023 6/12/2023 5 1 2 Grading Grading 6/27/2023 6/28/2023 5 2
3 Building Construction Building Construction 6/29/2023 11/15/2023 5 100 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 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

4 Paving Paving 11/16/2023 11/22/2023 5 5
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 11/23/2023 11/29/2023 5 5 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 6.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 6.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 130 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
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 2 5.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 5,250; Non-Residential Outdoor: 1,750; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 1.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 2.7000e0040.0000 2.7000e0043.0000e0050.0000 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7000e0043.0900e0031.9600e0030.0000 1.1000e0041.1000e0041.0000e0041.0000e0040.0000 0.4275 0.4275 1.4000e0040.0000 0.4309 Total 2.7000e0043.0900e0031.9600e0030.0000 2.7000e0041.1000e0043.8000e0043.0000e0051.0000e0041.3000e0040.0000 0.4275 0.4275 1.4000e0040.0000 0.4309 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Grading 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 5 1.00 1.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
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 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 0.0000 Worker 1.0000e0051.0000e0057.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0162 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0163 Total 1.0000e0051.0000e0057.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0162 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0163 Unmitigated Construction Off-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 tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.2000e0040.0000 1.2000e0041.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7000e0043.0900e0031.9600e0030.0000 1.1000e0041.1000e0041.0000e0041.0000e0040.0000 0.4275 0.4275 1.4000e0040.0000 0.4309 Total 2.7000e0043.0900e0031.9600e0030.0000 1.2000e0041.1000e0042.3000e0041.0000e0051.0000e0041.1000e0040.0000 0.4275 0.4275 1.4000e0040.0000 0.4309 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
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 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 0.0000 Worker 1.0000e0051.0000e0057.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0162 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0163 Total 1.0000e0051.0000e0057.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0162 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0163 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 5.3100e0030.0000 5.3100e0032.5700e0030.0000 2.5700e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 9.3000e0040.0102 5.5500e0031.0000e0054.2000e0044.2000e0043.9000e0043.9000e0040.0000 1.2381 1.2381 4.0000e0040.0000 1.2481 Total 9.3000e0040.0102 5.5500e0031.0000e0055.3100e0034.2000e0045.7300e0032.5700e0033.9000e0042.9600e0030.0000 1.2381 1.2381 4.0000e0040.0000 1.2481 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
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 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 0.0000 Worker 3.0000e0052.0000e0052.3000e0040.0000 7.0000e0050.0000 7.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 0.0518 0.0518 0.0000 0.0000 0.0523 Total 3.0000e0052.0000e0052.3000e0040.0000 7.0000e0050.0000 7.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 0.0518 0.0518 0.0000 0.0000 0.0523 Unmitigated Construction Off-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 tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 2.3900e0030.0000 2.3900e0031.1600e0030.0000 1.1600e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 9.3000e0040.0102 5.5500e0031.0000e0054.2000e0044.2000e0043.9000e0043.9000e0040.0000 1.2381 1.2381 4.0000e0040.0000 1.2481 Total 9.3000e0040.0102 5.5500e0031.0000e0052.3900e0034.2000e0042.8100e0031.1600e0033.9000e0041.5500e0030.0000 1.2381 1.2381 4.0000e0040.0000 1.2481 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
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 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 0.0000 Worker 3.0000e0052.0000e0052.3000e0040.0000 7.0000e0050.0000 7.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 0.0518 0.0518 0.0000 0.0000 0.0523 Total 3.0000e0052.0000e0052.3000e0040.0000 7.0000e0050.0000 7.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 0.0518 0.0518 0.0000 0.0000 0.0523 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0316 0.3209 0.3549 5.7000e0040.0160 0.0160 0.0147 0.0147 0.0000 50.1042 50.1042 0.0162 0.0000 50.5093 Total 0.0316 0.3209 0.3549 5.7000e0040.0160 0.0160 0.0147 0.0147 0.0000 50.1042 50.1042 0.0162 0.0000 50.5093 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
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 0.0000 Vendor 7.0000e0051.5300e0038.4000e0041.0000e0052.5000e0041.0000e0052.6000e0047.0000e0051.0000e0058.0000e0050.0000 0.7033 0.7033 1.0000e0051.0000e0040.7328 Worker 1.8000e0041.1000e0041.4200e0030.0000 4.1000e0040.0000 4.2000e0041.1000e0040.0000 1.1000e0040.0000 0.3237 0.3237 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.3269 Total 2.5000e0041.6400e0032.2600e0031.0000e0056.6000e0041.0000e0056.8000e0041.8000e0041.0000e0051.9000e0040.0000 1.0270 1.0270 2.0000e0051.1000e0041.0597 Unmitigated Construction Off-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 tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0316 0.3209 0.3549 5.7000e0040.0160 0.0160 0.0147 0.0147 0.0000 50.1042 50.1042 0.0162 0.0000 50.5093 Total 0.0316 0.3209 0.3549 5.7000e0040.0160 0.0160 0.0147 0.0147 0.0000 50.1042 50.1042 0.0162 0.0000 50.5093 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
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 0.0000 Vendor 7.0000e0051.5300e0038.4000e0041.0000e0052.5000e0041.0000e0052.6000e0047.0000e0051.0000e0058.0000e0050.0000 0.7033 0.7033 1.0000e0051.0000e0040.7328 Worker 1.8000e0041.1000e0041.4200e0030.0000 4.1000e0040.0000 4.2000e0041.1000e0040.0000 1.1000e0040.0000 0.3237 0.3237 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.3269 Total 2.5000e0041.6400e0032.2600e0031.0000e0056.6000e0041.0000e0056.8000e0041.8000e0041.0000e0051.9000e0040.0000 1.0270 1.0270 2.0000e0051.1000e0041.0597 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Paving - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 1.5300e0030.0138 0.0176 3.0000e0056.6000e0046.6000e0046.2000e0046.2000e0040.0000 2.3498 2.3498 6.8000e0040.0000 2.3669 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.5300e0030.0138 0.0176 3.0000e0056.6000e0046.6000e0046.2000e0046.2000e0040.0000 2.3498 2.3498 6.8000e0040.0000 2.3669 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
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 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 0.0000 Worker 1.6000e0041.0000e0041.2800e0030.0000 3.7000e0040.0000 3.7000e0041.0000e0040.0000 1.0000e0040.0000 0.2913 0.2913 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2942 Total 1.6000e0041.0000e0041.2800e0030.0000 3.7000e0040.0000 3.7000e0041.0000e0040.0000 1.0000e0040.0000 0.2913 0.2913 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2942 Unmitigated Construction Off-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 tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 1.5300e0030.0138 0.0176 3.0000e0056.6000e0046.6000e0046.2000e0046.2000e0040.0000 2.3498 2.3498 6.8000e0040.0000 2.3669 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.5300e0030.0138 0.0176 3.0000e0056.6000e0046.6000e0046.2000e0046.2000e0040.0000 2.3498 2.3498 6.8000e0040.0000 2.3669 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
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 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 0.0000 Worker 1.6000e0041.0000e0041.2800e0030.0000 3.7000e0040.0000 3.7000e0041.0000e0040.0000 1.0000e0040.0000 0.2913 0.2913 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2942 Total 1.6000e0041.0000e0041.2800e0030.0000 3.7000e0040.0000 3.7000e0041.0000e0040.0000 1.0000e0040.0000 0.2913 0.2913 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2942 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0243 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.8000e0043.2600e0034.5300e0031.0000e0051.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.0000 0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e0050.0000 0.6393 Total 0.0248 3.2600e0034.5300e0031.0000e0051.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.0000 0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e0050.0000 0.6393 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
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 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 0.0000 Worker 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 0.0000 Total 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 0.0000 Unmitigated Construction Off-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 tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0243 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.8000e0043.2600e0034.5300e0031.0000e0051.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.0000 0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e0050.0000 0.6393 Total 0.0248 3.2600e0034.5300e0031.0000e0051.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.0000 0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e0050.0000 0.6393 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
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 tons/yr MT/yr
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 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 0.0000 Worker 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 0.0000 Total 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 0.0000 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.5698 0.4511 2.6818 3.7900e0030.3365 3.5200e0030.3400 0.0898 3.2900e0030.0931 0.0000 350.0319 350.0319 0.0400 0.0295 359.8090 Unmitigated 0.5698 0.4511 2.6818 3.7900e0030.3365 3.5200e0030.3400 0.0898 3.2900e0030.0931 0.0000 350.0319 350.0319 0.0400 0.0295 359.8090

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
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 1,493.98 1,493.98 1493.98 885,932 885,932 Total 1,493.98 1,493.98 1,493.98 885,932 885,932
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 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

12.50 4.20 5.40 2.20 78.80 19.00 29 21 50

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

0.515135 0.060169 0.185335 0.147842 0.025432 0.007034 0.010598 0.020349 0.000855 0.000237 0.021941 0.000925 0.004146 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 13.9222 13.9222 2.4200e0032.9000e00414.0700 Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 13.9222 13.9222 2.4200e0032.9000e00414.0700 NaturalGas
Mitigated

5.1500e0030.0468 0.0393 2.8000e0043.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0030.0000 50.9256 50.9256 9.8000e0049.3000e00451.2282 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

5.1500e0030.0468 0.0393 2.8000e0043.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0030.0000 50.9256 50.9256 9.8000e0049.3000e00451.2282

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 tons/yr MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
954310 5.1500e0030.0468 0.0393 2.8000e0043.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0030.0000 50.9256 50.9256 9.8000e0049.3000e00451.2282 Total 5.1500e0030.0468 0.0393 2.8000e0043.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0030.0000 50.9256 50.9256 9.8000e0049.3000e00451.2282 Unmitigated
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 tons/yr MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
954310 5.1500e0030.0468 0.0393 2.8000e0043.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0030.0000 50.9256 50.9256 9.8000e0049.3000e00451.2282 Total 5.1500e0030.0468 0.0393 2.8000e0043.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0033.5600e0030.0000 50.9256 50.9256 9.8000e0049.3000e00451.2282 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
161560 13.9222 2.4200e0032.9000e00414.0700
Total 13.9222 2.4200e0032.9000e00414.0700
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
161560 13.9222 2.4200e0032.9000e00414.0700
Total 13.9222 2.4200e0032.9000e00414.0700
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0161 0.0000 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 7.0000e005 Unmitigated 0.0161 0.0000 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 7.0000e005

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 tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

2.4300e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.0137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 7.0000e005 Total 0.0161 0.0000 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 7.0000e005 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

2.4300e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.0137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 7.0000e005 Total 0.0161 0.0000 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 7.0000e005 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 1.5940 0.0348 8.4000e0042.7164
Unmitigated 1.5940 0.0348 8.4000e0042.7164

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

1.06237 /

0.0678107

1.5940 0.0348 8.4000e0042.7164
Total 1.5940 0.0348 8.4000e0042.7164
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

1.06237 /

0.0678107

1.5940 0.0348 8.4000e0042.7164
Total 1.5940 0.0348 8.4000e0042.7164
Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 8.1846 0.4837 0.0000 20.2770
Unmitigated 8.1846 0.4837 0.0000 20.2770
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

40.32 8.1846 0.4837 0.0000 20.2770
Total 8.1846 0.4837 0.0000 20.2770
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

40.32 8.1846 0.4837 0.0000 20.2770
Total 8.1846 0.4837 0.0000 20.2770
Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

11.0 Vegetation

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Emergency Generator 0 0 0 0 0.73
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 27 of 27 Date: 6/23/2023 12:41 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments
Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - 3,500SF drive through coffee/restaurant on 0.7 AC lot.

Construction Phase - Assumes a 5.5 month buildout.

On-road Fugitive Dust - All roads in project area are paved.

Vehicle Trips - Assumes 1,494 daily trips per project Traffic Report (2023).

Road Dust - All roads are and will be paved.

Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Standard dust control measures per SCAQMD Rule 403.1.

Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps -

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 3.50 1000sqft 0.70 3,500.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
10 Wind Speed (m/s) 3.4 Precipitation Freq (Days) 20

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Imperial Irrigation District
Operational Year 2023
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
189.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadMoistureContent 0 0.5 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 40 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.08 0.70
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblRoadDust RoadPercentPave 50 100
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 426.85
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 426.85
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 426.85
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
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
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 9.9252 10.1969 7.6614 0.0147 5.3789 0.4204 5.7993 2.5863 0.3868 2.9731 0.0000 1,427.388 3 1,427.388
3 0.4432 3.8800e0031,438.982
4 Maximum 9.9252 10.1969 7.6614 0.0147 5.3789 0.4204 5.7993 2.5863 0.3868 2.9731 0.0000 1,427.388 3 1,427.388
3 0.4432 3.8800e0031,438.982
4 Unmitigated Construction
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
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 9.9252 10.1969 7.6614 0.0147 2.4573 0.4204 2.8777 1.1736 0.3868 1.5604 0.0000 1,427.388 3 1,427.388
3 0.4432 3.8800e0031,438.982
4 Maximum 9.9252 10.1969 7.6614 0.0147 2.4573 0.4204 2.8777 1.1736 0.3868 1.5604 0.0000 1,427.388 3 1,427.388
3 0.4432 3.8800e0031,438.982
4 Mitigated Construction
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 54.32 0.00 50.38 54.62 0.00 47.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Energy 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Mobile 4.3394 2.4306 16.4270 0.0222 1.8710 0.0193 1.8903 0.4990 0.0181 0.5170 2,259.073 7 2,259.073
7 0.2334 0.1814 2,318.979
5 Total 4.4558 2.6869 16.6427 0.0237 1.8710 0.0388 1.9098 0.4990 0.0375 0.5365 2,566.668 4 2,566.668
4 0.2393 0.1871 2,628.402
1 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 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Energy 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Mobile 4.3394 2.4306 16.4270 0.0222 1.8710 0.0193 1.8903 0.4990 0.0181 0.5170 2,259.073 7 2,259.073
7 0.2334 0.1814 2,318.979
5 Total 4.4558 2.6869 16.6427 0.0237 1.8710 0.0388 1.9098 0.4990 0.0375 0.5365 2,566.668 4 2,566.668
4 0.2393 0.1871 2,628.402
1 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 6/12/2023 6/12/2023 5 1 2 Grading Grading 6/27/2023 6/28/2023 5 2
3 Building Construction Building Construction 6/29/2023 11/15/2023 5 100 4 Paving Paving 11/16/2023 11/22/2023 5 5
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 11/23/2023 11/29/2023 5 5 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 6.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 6.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 231 0.29
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: 5,250; Non-Residential Outdoor: 1,750; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 1.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 130 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
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 2 5.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 5 1.00 1.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
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 0.5303 0.0000 0.5303 0.0573 0.0000 0.0573 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2266 0.2266 0.2084 0.2084 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Total 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.5303 0.2266 0.7568 0.0573 0.2084 0.2657 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 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 0.0218 0.0113 0.1779 3.9000e0040.0418 2.1000e0040.0420 0.0111 1.9000e0040.0113 39.1356 39.1356 1.1200e0031.0800e00339.4851 Total 0.0218 0.0113 0.1779 3.9000e0040.0418 2.1000e0040.0420 0.0111 1.9000e0040.0113 39.1356 39.1356 1.1200e0031.0800e00339.4851 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
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 0.2386 0.0000 0.2386 0.0258 0.0000 0.0258 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2266 0.2266 0.2084 0.2084 0.0000 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Total 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2386 0.2266 0.4652 0.0258 0.2084 0.2342 0.0000 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 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 0.0218 0.0113 0.1779 3.9000e0040.0418 2.1000e0040.0420 0.0111 1.9000e0040.0113 39.1356 39.1356 1.1200e0031.0800e00339.4851 Total 0.0218 0.0113 0.1779 3.9000e0040.0418 2.1000e0040.0420 0.0111 1.9000e0040.0113 39.1356 39.1356 1.1200e0031.0800e00339.4851 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
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 5.3119 0.0000 5.3119 2.5686 0.0000 2.5686 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 0.4201 0.4201 0.3865 0.3865 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Total 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 5.3119 0.4201 5.7320 2.5686 0.3865 2.9550 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
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 0.0350 0.0180 0.2846 6.2000e0040.0669 3.3000e0040.0673 0.0178 3.0000e0040.0181 62.6170 62.6170 1.7900e0031.7300e00363.1762 Total 0.0350 0.0180 0.2846 6.2000e0040.0669 3.3000e0040.0673 0.0178 3.0000e0040.0181 62.6170 62.6170 1.7900e0031.7300e00363.1762 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
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 2.3904 0.0000 2.3904 1.1559 0.0000 1.1559 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 0.4201 0.4201 0.3865 0.3865 0.0000 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Total 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 2.3904 0.4201 2.8105 1.1559 0.3865 1.5423 0.0000 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
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 0.0350 0.0180 0.2846 6.2000e0040.0669 3.3000e0040.0673 0.0178 3.0000e0040.0181 62.6170 62.6170 1.7900e0031.7300e00363.1762 Total 0.0350 0.0180 0.2846 6.2000e0040.0669 3.3000e0040.0673 0.0178 3.0000e0040.0181 62.6170 62.6170 1.7900e0031.7300e00363.1762 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Total 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
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 1.4800e0030.0289 0.0166 1.5000e0045.0200e0032.2000e0045.2500e0031.4500e0032.1000e0041.6600e00315.4814 15.4814 1.2000e0042.1700e00316.1308 Worker 4.3700e0032.2500e0030.0356 8.0000e0058.3700e0034.0000e0058.4100e0032.2200e0034.0000e0052.2600e0037.8271 7.8271 2.2000e0042.2000e0047.8970 Total 5.8500e0030.0311 0.0522 2.3000e0040.0134 2.6000e0040.0137 3.6700e0032.5000e0043.9200e00323.3085 23.3085 3.4000e0042.3900e00324.0278 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 0.0000 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Total 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 0.0000 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
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 1.4800e0030.0289 0.0166 1.5000e0045.0200e0032.2000e0045.2500e0031.4500e0032.1000e0041.6600e00315.4814 15.4814 1.2000e0042.1700e00316.1308 Worker 4.3700e0032.2500e0030.0356 8.0000e0058.3700e0034.0000e0058.4100e0032.2200e0034.0000e0052.2600e0037.8271 7.8271 2.2000e0042.2000e0047.8970 Total 5.8500e0030.0311 0.0522 2.3000e0040.0134 2.6000e0040.0137 3.6700e0032.5000e0043.9200e00323.3085 23.3085 3.4000e0042.3900e00324.0278 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
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 0.6112 5.5046 7.0209 0.0113 0.2643 0.2643 0.2466 0.2466 1,036.087 8 1,036.087
8 0.3018 1,043.633
1 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.6112 5.5046 7.0209 0.0113 0.2643 0.2643 0.2466 0.2466 1,036.087 8 1,036.087
8 0.3018 1,043.633
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 0.0000 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 0.0786 0.0405 0.6404 1.3900e0030.1506 7.4000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.8000e0040.0406 140.8882 140.8882 4.0400e0033.8800e003142.1464 Total 0.0786 0.0405 0.6404 1.3900e0030.1506 7.4000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.8000e0040.0406 140.8882 140.8882 4.0400e0033.8800e003142.1464 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
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 0.6112 5.5046 7.0209 0.0113 0.2643 0.2643 0.2466 0.2466 0.0000 1,036.087 8 1,036.087
8 0.3018 1,043.633
1 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.6112 5.5046 7.0209 0.0113 0.2643 0.2643 0.2466 0.2466 0.0000 1,036.087 8 1,036.087
8 0.3018 1,043.633
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 0.0000 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 0.0786 0.0405 0.6404 1.3900e0030.1506 7.4000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.8000e0040.0406 140.8882 140.8882 4.0400e0033.8800e003142.1464 Total 0.0786 0.0405 0.6404 1.3900e0030.1506 7.4000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.8000e0040.0406 140.8882 140.8882 4.0400e0033.8800e003142.1464 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
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 9.7335 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e0030.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 9.9252 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e0030.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 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 0.0000 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 Total 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 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
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 9.7335 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e0030.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 9.9252 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e0030.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 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 0.0000 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 Total 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 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 4.3394 2.4306 16.4270 0.0222 1.8710 0.0193 1.8903 0.4990 0.0181 0.5170 2,259.073 7 2,259.073
7 0.2334 0.1814 2,318.979
5 Unmitigated 4.3394 2.4306 16.4270 0.0222 1.8710 0.0193 1.8903 0.4990 0.0181 0.5170 2,259.073 7 2,259.073
7 0.2334 0.1814 2,318.979
5 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
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 1,493.98 1,493.98 1493.98 885,932 885,932 Total 1,493.98 1,493.98 1,493.98 885,932 885,932
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 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

12.50 4.20 5.40 2.20 78.80 19.00 29 21 50

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

0.515135 0.060169 0.185335 0.147842 0.025432 0.007034 0.010598 0.020349 0.000855 0.000237 0.021941 0.000925 0.004146 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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

0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218

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
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
2614.55 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Total 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Unmitigated

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area 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
Mitigated 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Unmitigated 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004

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
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

2.61455 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Total 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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

0.0133 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0749 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 3.0000e0050.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Total 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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

0.0133 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0749 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 3.0000e0050.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Total 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 Emergency Generator 0 0 0 0 0.73
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 22 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:44 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments
Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - 3,500SF drive through coffee/restaurant on 0.7 AC lot.

Construction Phase - Assumes a 5.5 month buildout.

On-road Fugitive Dust - All roads in project area are paved.

Vehicle Trips - Assumes 1,494 daily trips per project Traffic Report (2023).

Road Dust - All roads are and will be paved.

Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Standard dust control measures per SCAQMD Rule 403.1.

Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps -

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 3.50 1000sqft 0.70 3,500.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
10 Wind Speed (m/s) 3.4 Precipitation Freq (Days) 20

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Imperial Irrigation District
Operational Year 2023
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
189.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadMoistureContent 0 0.5 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 40 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.08 0.70
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust HaulingPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust VendorPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblOnRoadDust WorkerPercentPave 50.00 100.00
tblRoadDust RoadPercentPave 50 100
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 426.85
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 426.85
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 426.85
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
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
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 9.9252 10.1973 7.4780 0.0146 5.3789 0.4204 5.7993 2.5863 0.3868 2.9731 0.0000 1,418.143 6 1,418.143
6 0.4432 3.9300e0031,429.743
8 Maximum 9.9252 10.1973 7.4780 0.0146 5.3789 0.4204 5.7993 2.5863 0.3868 2.9731 0.0000 1,418.143 6 1,418.143
6 0.4432 3.9300e0031,429.743
8 Unmitigated Construction
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
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 9.9252 10.1973 7.4780 0.0146 2.4573 0.4204 2.8777 1.1736 0.3868 1.5604 0.0000 1,418.143 6 1,418.143
6 0.4432 3.9300e0031,429.743
8 Maximum 9.9252 10.1973 7.4780 0.0146 2.4573 0.4204 2.8777 1.1736 0.3868 1.5604 0.0000 1,418.143 6 1,418.143
6 0.4432 3.9300e0031,429.743
8 Mitigated Construction
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 54.32 0.00 50.38 54.62 0.00 47.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Energy 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Mobile 2.5453 2.5823 15.2928 0.0200 1.8710 0.0194 1.8904 0.4990 0.0181 0.5171 2,034.052 2 2,034.052
2 0.2674 0.1835 2,095.432
9 Total 2.6617 2.8386 15.5085 0.0215 1.8710 0.0389 1.9099 0.4990 0.0376 0.5366 2,341.646 9 2,341.646
9 0.2733 0.1892 2,404.855
4 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 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Energy 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Mobile 2.5453 2.5823 15.2928 0.0200 1.8710 0.0194 1.8904 0.4990 0.0181 0.5171 2,034.052 2 2,034.052
2 0.2674 0.1835 2,095.432
9 Total 2.6617 2.8386 15.5085 0.0215 1.8710 0.0389 1.9099 0.4990 0.0376 0.5366 2,341.646 9 2,341.646
9 0.2733 0.1892 2,404.855
4 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 6/12/2023 6/12/2023 5 1 2 Grading Grading 6/27/2023 6/28/2023 5 2
3 Building Construction Building Construction 6/29/2023 11/15/2023 5 100 4 Paving Paving 11/16/2023 11/22/2023 5 5
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 11/23/2023 11/29/2023 5 5 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 6.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 6.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 231 0.29
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: 5,250; Non-Residential Outdoor: 1,750; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 1.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 130 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
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 2 5.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 5 1.00 1.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 5.40 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
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 0.5303 0.0000 0.5303 0.0573 0.0000 0.0573 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2266 0.2266 0.2084 0.2084 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Total 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.5303 0.2266 0.7568 0.0573 0.2084 0.2657 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 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 0.0167 0.0116 0.1270 3.3000e0040.0418 2.1000e0040.0420 0.0111 1.9000e0040.0113 33.3577 33.3577 1.1200e0031.0900e00333.7110 Total 0.0167 0.0116 0.1270 3.3000e0040.0418 2.1000e0040.0420 0.0111 1.9000e0040.0113 33.3577 33.3577 1.1200e0031.0900e00333.7110 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
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 0.2386 0.0000 0.2386 0.0258 0.0000 0.0258 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2266 0.2266 0.2084 0.2084 0.0000 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Total 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2386 0.2266 0.4652 0.0258 0.2084 0.2342 0.0000 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 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 0.0167 0.0116 0.1270 3.3000e0040.0418 2.1000e0040.0420 0.0111 1.9000e0040.0113 33.3577 33.3577 1.1200e0031.0900e00333.7110 Total 0.0167 0.0116 0.1270 3.3000e0040.0418 2.1000e0040.0420 0.0111 1.9000e0040.0113 33.3577 33.3577 1.1200e0031.0900e00333.7110 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
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 5.3119 0.0000 5.3119 2.5686 0.0000 2.5686 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 0.4201 0.4201 0.3865 0.3865 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Total 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 5.3119 0.4201 5.7320 2.5686 0.3865 2.9550 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
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 0.0267 0.0185 0.2032 5.3000e0040.0669 3.3000e0040.0673 0.0178 3.0000e0040.0181 53.3723 53.3723 1.7900e0031.7500e00353.9376 Total 0.0267 0.0185 0.2032 5.3000e0040.0669 3.3000e0040.0673 0.0178 3.0000e0040.0181 53.3723 53.3723 1.7900e0031.7500e00353.9376 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
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 2.3904 0.0000 2.3904 1.1559 0.0000 1.1559 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 0.4201 0.4201 0.3865 0.3865 0.0000 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Total 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 2.3904 0.4201 2.8105 1.1559 0.3865 1.5423 0.0000 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
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 0.0267 0.0185 0.2032 5.3000e0040.0669 3.3000e0040.0673 0.0178 3.0000e0040.0181 53.3723 53.3723 1.7900e0031.7500e00353.9376 Total 0.0267 0.0185 0.2032 5.3000e0040.0669 3.3000e0040.0673 0.0178 3.0000e0040.0181 53.3723 53.3723 1.7900e0031.7500e00353.9376 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Total 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
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 1.3600e0030.0314 0.0173 1.5000e0045.0200e0032.3000e0045.2500e0031.4500e0032.2000e0041.6600e00315.5378 15.5378 1.2000e0042.1800e00316.1910 Worker 3.3300e0032.3100e0030.0254 7.0000e0058.3700e0034.0000e0058.4100e0032.2200e0034.0000e0052.2600e0036.6715 6.6715 2.2000e0042.2000e0046.7422 Total 4.6900e0030.0337 0.0427 2.2000e0040.0134 2.7000e0040.0137 3.6700e0032.6000e0043.9200e00322.2093 22.2093 3.4000e0042.4000e00322.9332 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
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 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 0.0000 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Total 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 0.0000 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
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 1.3600e0030.0314 0.0173 1.5000e0045.0200e0032.3000e0045.2500e0031.4500e0032.2000e0041.6600e00315.5378 15.5378 1.2000e0042.1800e00316.1910 Worker 3.3300e0032.3100e0030.0254 7.0000e0058.3700e0034.0000e0058.4100e0032.2200e0034.0000e0052.2600e0036.6715 6.6715 2.2000e0042.2000e0046.7422 Total 4.6900e0030.0337 0.0427 2.2000e0040.0134 2.7000e0040.0137 3.6700e0032.6000e0043.9200e00322.2093 22.2093 3.4000e0042.4000e00322.9332 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
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 0.6112 5.5046 7.0209 0.0113 0.2643 0.2643 0.2466 0.2466 1,036.087 8 1,036.087
8 0.3018 1,043.633
1 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.6112 5.5046 7.0209 0.0113 0.2643 0.2643 0.2466 0.2466 1,036.087 8 1,036.087
8 0.3018 1,043.633
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 0.0000 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 0.0600 0.0416 0.4571 1.1900e0030.1506 7.4000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.8000e0040.0406 120.0877 120.0877 4.0300e0033.9300e003121.3596 Total 0.0600 0.0416 0.4571 1.1900e0030.1506 7.4000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.8000e0040.0406 120.0877 120.0877 4.0300e0033.9300e003121.3596 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
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 0.6112 5.5046 7.0209 0.0113 0.2643 0.2643 0.2466 0.2466 0.0000 1,036.087 8 1,036.087
8 0.3018 1,043.633
1 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.6112 5.5046 7.0209 0.0113 0.2643 0.2643 0.2466 0.2466 0.0000 1,036.087 8 1,036.087
8 0.3018 1,043.633
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 0.0000 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 0.0600 0.0416 0.4571 1.1900e0030.1506 7.4000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.8000e0040.0406 120.0877 120.0877 4.0300e0033.9300e003121.3596 Total 0.0600 0.0416 0.4571 1.1900e0030.1506 7.4000e0040.1513 0.0400 6.8000e0040.0406 120.0877 120.0877 4.0300e0033.9300e003121.3596 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
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 9.7335 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e0030.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 9.9252 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e0030.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 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 0.0000 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 Total 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 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
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 9.7335 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e0030.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 9.9252 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e0030.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 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 0.0000 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 Total 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 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 2.5453 2.5823 15.2928 0.0200 1.8710 0.0194 1.8904 0.4990 0.0181 0.5171 2,034.052 2 2,034.052
2 0.2674 0.1835 2,095.432
9 Unmitigated 2.5453 2.5823 15.2928 0.0200 1.8710 0.0194 1.8904 0.4990 0.0181 0.5171 2,034.052 2 2,034.052
2 0.2674 0.1835 2,095.432
9 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
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 1,493.98 1,493.98 1493.98 885,932 885,932 Total 1,493.98 1,493.98 1,493.98 885,932 885,932
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 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

12.50 4.20 5.40 2.20 78.80 19.00 29 21 50

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

0.515135 0.060169 0.185335 0.147842 0.025432 0.007034 0.010598 0.020349 0.000855 0.000237 0.021941 0.000925 0.004146 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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

0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218

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
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
2614.55 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Total 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Unmitigated

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area 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
Mitigated 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Unmitigated 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004

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
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

2.61455 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Total 0.0282 0.2563 0.2153 1.5400e0030.0195 0.0195 0.0195 0.0195 307.5939 307.5939 5.9000e0035.6400e003309.4218 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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

0.0133 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0749 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 3.0000e0050.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Total 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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

0.0133 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0749 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 3.0000e0050.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Total 0.0883 0.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.7000e0047.7000e0040.0000 8.2000e004 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

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 Emergency Generator 0 0 0 0 0.73
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 22 of 22 Date: 6/23/2023 12:45 PM Heritage Court CSP and PMP Amendments - Salton Sea Air Basin, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
City of Indio RDP 5 CSP and Heritage Palms PMP Text Amendments June 2023 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
B
Appendix B
Traffic Analysis

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2866 of 3061

HERITAGE PALMS SP/MP

AMENDMENT

FOCUSED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Reference Number Agency Date
13915-07 Report.docx City of Indio June 23, 2023
PREPARED BY: Janette Cachola | [email protected] Marlie Whiteman, P.E. | [email protected]
John Kain, AICP | [email protected]

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2867 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................................ i List of Exhibits ................................................................................................................................................................ iii List of Tables .................................................................................................................................................................. iv List of Abbreviated Terms ............................................................................................................................................ v 1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 Description of Proposed Project...................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Study Area and Analysis Scenarios ................................................................................................. 4

1.4 Criteria for Determining Significant Effects .................................................................................... 4

1.5 Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................................ 5 2 Proposed Development ..................................................................................................................................... 7

2.1 Land Use and Intensity ..................................................................................................................... 7

2.2 Project Access..................................................................................................................................... 7 3 Area Conditions ................................................................................................................................................... 9

3.1 Study Area .......................................................................................................................................... 9

3.2 Existing Land Uses ............................................................................................................................. 9

3.3 Area Roadway System ....................................................................................................................... 9

3.4 Transit Service .................................................................................................................................. 13

3.5 Truck Access ..................................................................................................................................... 13

3.6 Active Transportation Facilities ...................................................................................................... 13

3.7 Traffic Volumes and Conditions..................................................................................................... 13

3.8 Level of Service Definitions and Analysis Methodologies .......................................................... 17

3.9 Existing Intersection Level of Service ............................................................................................ 19

3.10 Roadway Segment Traffic Conditions ........................................................................................... 19 4 Projected Future Traffic ................................................................................................................................... 23

4.1 Project Trip Generation .................................................................................................................. 23

4.2 Project Trip Distribution ................................................................................................................. 25

4.3 Modal Split ........................................................................................................................................ 25

4.4 Trip Assignment ............................................................................................................................... 25 5 Traffic Analysis .................................................................................................................................................. 31

5.1 Analysis Scenarios ........................................................................................................................... 31 6 Summary and Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 37

6.1 Project Access................................................................................................................................... 37

6.2 Project Traffic ................................................................................................................................... 37

6.3 Traffic Analysis Results .................................................................................................................... 37

6.4 Recommendations .......................................................................................................................... 38 7 References ......................................................................................................................................................... 39

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2868 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
ii

APPENDICES
Appendix 1.1: Approved Traffic Study Scoping Agreement
Appendix 3.1: Existing (2023) Traffic Counts
Appendix 3.2: Existing (2023) Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets Appendix 5.1: General Plan Buildout (2040) Without Project Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets
Appendix 5.2: General Plan Buildout (2040) With Project Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2869 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
iii

LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1-1: Approved Tentative Parcel Map ............................................................................................................. 2 Exhibit 1-2: Traffic Review Area ................................................................................................................................... 3 Exhibit 3-1: Existing Number of Through Lanes and Intersection Controls .................................................... 10 Exhibit 3-2: City of Indio General Plan Roadway Designations .......................................................................... 11 Exhibit 3-3: City of Indio Street Attributes .............................................................................................................. 12 Exhibit 3-4: Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities .......................................................................................... 14 Exhibit 3-5: City of Indio Planned Bicycle Network ............................................................................................... 15 Exhibit 3-6: Existing (2023) Traffic Volumes With Seasonal Adjustment .......................................................... 16 Exhibit 4-1: Proposed Site Trip Distribution ........................................................................................................... 26 Exhibit 4-2: Approved Walk-In Bank Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................... 27 Exhibit 4-3: Proposed Coffee Shop With Drive-Through Traffic Volumes ....................................................... 28 Exhibit 4-4: Traffic Volume Differences With Project ........................................................................................... 29 Exhibit 5-1: General Plan Buildout (2040) Without Project Traffic Volumes .................................................... 32 Exhibit 5-2: General Plan Buildout (2040) With Project Traffic Volumes .......................................................... 33

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2870 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
iv

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Intersection Analysis Locations ................................................................................................................ 4 Table 1-2: Level of Service Summary ......................................................................................................................... 6 Table 3-1: Signalized Intersection LOS Thresholds............................................................................................... 18 Table 3-2: Unsignalized Intersection Description of LOS .................................................................................... 19 Table 3-3: Intersection Analysis for Existing (2023) Conditions ......................................................................... 20 Table 3-4: Roadway Segment Capacity Thresholds ............................................................................................. 21 Table 3-5: Roadway Segment Analysis for Existing (2023) Conditions ............................................................. 22 Table 4-1: Project Trip Generation Summary ........................................................................................................ 24 Table 5-1: Intersection Analysis for General Plan Buildout (2040) Conditions ............................................... 34 Table 5-2: Roadway Segment Analysis for general plan buildout (2040) Conditions .................................... 36

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2871 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
v

LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS
(1) Reference
ADT Average Daily Traffic
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CVAG Coachella Valley Association of Governments
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
LOS Level of Service
MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
PHF Peak Hour Factor
Project Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment
RIRO Right-In/Right-Out Only
LI-RIRO Left-In/Right-In/Right-Out Only
sf Square Feet
TA Traffic Analysis
tsf Thousand Square Feet
V/C Volume-to-Capacity
VMT Vehicles Miles Traveled
VPH Vehicles per Hour

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2872 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
1 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the focused traffic analysis (TA) for the proposed Amendment to Conceptual Specific Plan RPD-5 and the Heritage Palms Project Master Plan (“Project”). The amendment adds drive-through retail and restaurants to the allowable land uses at the Heritage Court Shopping Center portion of the Specific Plan and Project Master Plan, located at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive in the City of Indio.

The purpose of this TA is to evaluate the potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed amendment, and to recommend improvements to achieve acceptable circulation system operational conditions.

Urban Crossroads, Inc. has prepared this traffic analysis through coordination with City of Indio staff, including discussion of key traffic study assumptions to ensure that that the jurisdictional requirements are addressed in the report. The TA Scope (see Appendix 1.1) provides an outline of the Project study area, trip generation, trip distribution, and analysis methodology.

1.2 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT
No specific project is proposed at this time. The current application only seeks to modify the allowable land uses on the property. Should a specific project be proposed in the future, it would require review for its specific design, including on-site queueing for drive-through lanes.

The Heritage Court Shopping Center currently exists, and includes a grocery store, stand-alone drugstore and in-line shops. The shopping center was approved in 2006, and allowed at that time to develop up to 126,591 square feet of retail uses. The “hard corner” pad was identified as allowing up to 10,429 square feet, and at the time was called out as a bank in the City staff report. All other pads and buildings on the site have been constructed, and the existing center contains approximately 105,615 square feet of space in total.

The approved tentative parcel map is shown on Exhibit 1-1. Exhibit 1-2 depicts the proposed intersection analysis locations for this assessment. The drive-thru pad is anticipated to be served by (1) the adjacent right-in/right-out (RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of Fred Waring Drive, (2) the full access (signalized) driveway along Fred Waring Drive east of Jefferson Street, and (3) the existing left-in/right-in/right-out (LI-RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of the RIRO access.

With drive-thru features, this Project reduces the building pad from 10,429 square feet (bank, no drive-thru) to a building not-to-exceed 3,500 square feet (with drive-thru), which is evaluated as a coffee shop to ensure a “conservative worse case” scenario.

The proposed Project is anticipated to generate a net total of 1,494 external trip-ends per day with 240 AM peak hour external trips and 110 PM peak hour external trips. 1

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2873 of 3061 2

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2874 of 3061 3

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2875 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
4 1.3 STUDY AREA AND ANALYSIS SCENARIOS

1.3.1 INTERSECTIONS
The following 4 study area intersections shown on Exhibit 1-2 and listed in Table 1-1 were selected for this TIA based on consultation with City of Indio and City of La Quinta staff.

TABLE 1-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS LOCATIONS
# Intersection Jurisdiction
1 Jefferson St. / Fred Waring Dr. City of Indio / City of La Quinta 2 Heritage Ct. Main Dwy. / Fred Waring Dr. City of Indio 3 Jefferson St. / RIRO Dwy. City of Indio / City of La Quinta 4 Jefferson St. / LI-RIRO Dwy. City of Indio / City of La Quinta

1.3.2 ROADWAY SEGMENTS
Daily volume-to-capacity (V/C) roadway analyses have been evaluated for the roadway segments within the study area.

1.3.3 ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
Per discussion with City of Indio and as documented in Appendix 1.1 of this focused traffic analysis, this study has analyzed the following scenarios:
 Existing (2023) Conditions
 General Plan Buildout (2040) Without Project (10,429 sf walk-in bank)  General Plan Buildout (2040) With Project (3,500 sf coffee shop with drive-through) Detailed descriptions of each analysis scenario can be found in Section 5.1 Scenarios of this TIA. The proposed Project land use is consistent with the City’s General Plan.

1.4 CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
Intersections are evaluated for both potentially significant Project effects and cumulative deficiencies. The potentially significant Project effects and cumulative deficiency intersection criteria are described below.

Potentially Significant Project Effects
A deficiency occurs at study area intersections if the pre-Project condition is at or better than LOS D (i.e., acceptable LOS), and the addition of project trips causes the peak hour LOS of the study area intersection to operate at unacceptable LOS (i.e., LOS E or F).

Deficient Cumulative Condition
A cumulative deficiency is defined to occur at any study area intersection that is operating at LOS E or LOS F without the Project.
4

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2876 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
5 1.5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The intersection analysis results for the study area intersections for Existing and General Plan Buildout (2040) traffic conditions are summarized in Table 1-2.

Based on the results discussed in detail on Section 5 Traffic Analysis, the development of the proposed Project is not anticipated to result in any significant traffic level of service effects.

1.5.1 EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS
Intersections
As shown in Table 1-2, the intersection analysis for Existing (2023) conditions indicate that the study area intersections are operating an acceptable LOS during the peak hours.

Roadway Segments
The study area roadway segments are estimated to operate at acceptable LOS under Existing traffic conditions.

1.5.2 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (2040) CONDITIONS
Intersections
As shown in Table 1-2, the intersection analysis for General Plan Buildout (2040) without and with Project conditions indicate that the intersection of Jefferson Street/Fred Waring Drive (#1) is anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS (LOS “E”) during the AM and PM peak hours without upgrades to the traffic signal at this location. Signal modifications to provide right turn overlap phase for the northbound right turns, southbound right turns, and eastbound right turns are anticipated to improve to the intersection LOS to operate at acceptable conditions (LOS “D” or better) during the peak hours.

General Plan Buildout (2040) conditions without and with the Project also indicate that the intersection of Jefferson Street at LI/RIRO Driveway (#4) is anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS (LOS “F”) during the AM and PM peak hours with inbound left turns permitted at this location for long term future conditions. A potential future solution to this cumulative deficiency would be the prohibition of southbound left turns, converting this driveway to allow right-in/right-out (RIRO) movements without a median break. The southbound left turning vehicles would therefore be diverted to the Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive (#1) intersection. As shown in Table 1-2, the Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive (#1) intersection is able to accommodate this potential future traffic diversion with acceptable LOS.

Roadway Segments
All study roadway segments analyzed are anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS under General Plan Buildout (2040) traffic conditions.
5

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2877 of 3061 # Intersection AM PM AM PM AM PM
1 Jefferson St. / Fred Waring Dr.
- Without Improvements
- With Signal Modifications1 N/A N/A
- With Signal Modifications & SB Left Turn Adjustment1,2 N/A N/A 2 Heritage Ct. Main Dwy. / Fred Waring Dr.
- Without EB Right Turn Adjustment
- With EB Right Turn Adjustment2 N/A N/A
3 Jefferson St. / RIRO Dwy.
4 Jefferson St. / LI-RIRO Dwy.
- With Inbound SB Left Turns Permitted
- With SB Left Turn Restriction (RIRO Only)2 N/A N/A
1 With right-turn overlap phase provided for the northbound, southbound and eastbound right turn lanes. 2 With redistribution of traffic associated with restriction of southbound left-turn in at intersection #4 (Jefferson St./LI-RIRO Dwy.).

Legend:
= A - D = E = F
N/A = Not Applicable
F:\UXRjobs\_13600-14000\_13900\13915\Excel\[13915-07 - Report.xlsx]1-2_LOS Summary TABLE 1-2: LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) SUMMARY
Existing
(2023)
GPBO (2040)
w/o Project
(w/ Approved Walk-In Bank)
GPBO (2040)
w/ Project
(w/ Proposed Project)
6

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2878 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
7 2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The amendment adds drive-through retail and restaurants to the allowable land uses at the Heritage Court Shopping Center portion of the Specific Plan and Project Master Plan, located at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive in the City of Indio.

2.1 LAND USE AND INTENSITY
No specific project is proposed at this time. The current application only seeks to modify the allowable land uses on the property. Should a specific project be proposed in the future, it would require review for its specific design, including on-site queueing for drive-through lanes.

The Heritage Court Shopping Center currently exists, and includes a grocery store, stand-alone drugstore and in-line shops. The shopping center was approved in 2006, and allowed at that time to develop up to 126,591 square feet of retail uses. The “hard corner” pad was identified as allowing up to 10,429 square feet, and at the time was called out as a bank in the City staff report. All other pads and buildings on the site have been constructed, and the existing center contains approximately 105,615 square feet of space in total.

With drive-thru features, this Project reduces the building pad from 10,429 square feet (bank, no drive-thru) to a building not-to-exceed 3,500 square feet (with drive-thru), which is evaluated as a coffee shop to ensure a “conservative worse case” scenario.

2.2 PROJECT ACCESS
Exhibit 1-2 depicts the proposed intersection analysis locations for this assessment. The drive-thru pad is anticipated to be served by (1) the adjacent right-in/right-out (RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of Fred Waring Drive, (2) the full access (signalized) driveway along Fred Waring Drive east of Jefferson Street, and (3) the existing left-in/right-in/right-out (LI-RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of the RIRO access.
7

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2879 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
8 This Page Intentionally Left Blank
8

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2880 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
9 3 AREA CONDITIONS
This section provides a summary of the existing study area, the City of Indio and City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Networks and a review of existing peak hour intersection operations, roadway segment capacity, and traffic signal warrant analyses.

3.1 STUDY AREA
Pursuant to the agreement with City of Indio staff (Appendix 1.1), the focused study area includes four (4) study area intersections. The locations of these intersections were shown previously on Exhibit 1-2.

3.2 EXISTING LAND USES
The existing land uses adjacent to the Project site are as follows:
 North – Residential
 South – Residential
 East – Residential
 West – Commercial

3.3 AREA ROADWAY SYSTEM
Exhibit 3-1 illustrates the study area intersections located near the proposed Project and identifies the number of through traffic lanes for existing roadways and intersection traffic controls.

3.3.1 EXISTING ROADWAY CONFIGURATIONS
Jefferson Street
Jefferson Street is north-south roadway that provides connections to Highway 111, I-10 freeway, residential neighborhoods, and other community features. Jefferson Street within the study area exists as a six‐lane divided roadway with bike lanes in each direction.

Fred Waring Drive
Fred Waring Drive is an east-west six-lane roadway divided by a raised median with an eastbound bike lane, west of Jefferson Street and bike lanes in both direction, east of Jefferson Street.

3.3.2 GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT
Exhibit 3-2 shows the City of Indio General Plan Circulation Element, and Exhibit 3-3 describes the attributes for City of Indio General Plan Roadways.
9

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2881 of 3061 10

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2882 of 3061 11

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2883 of 3061 12

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2884 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
13 The General Plan Circulation Element serves to identify the City of Indio’s future vision and implementation plan for transportation for the next 20 to 30 years. The City’s General Plan including Mobility Element (to replace the Circulation Element) was adopted in September 2019. (2) (3) Arterials are six-lane roadway divided by either a raised median with turn pockets or a center left‐turn lane. Vehicular efficiency is prioritized, traffic signals are coordinated, bicycle lanes or offstreet pathways can be provided, and parking is prohibited along these corridors. Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive are classified as Major Arterials within the study area.

3.4 TRANSIT SERVICE
The study area is currently served by the SunLine Transit Agency with bus services along Fred Waring Drive via Route 6 (formerly Route 54). There is an existing bus stop for Route 6 on the southeast corner of Heritage Court Main Driveway at Fred Waring Drive.

3.5 TRUCK ACCESS
Truck access to the Project site is provided via Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive.

3.6 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
The existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities within the study area are shown on Exhibit 3-4.

Exhibit 3-5 shows the City of Indio Planned Bicycle Network. As shown on Exhibit 3-5, Class II bicycle lanes is shown on Fred Waring Drive and Class IV cycle track route facility is shown along on Jefferson Street within the study area.

3.7 TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND CONDITIONS
The intersection LOS analysis is based on the traffic volumes observed during the peak hour conditions using traffic count data collected in May 2023. The following weekday peak hours were selected for analysis:
 Weekday AM Peak Hour (peak hour between 7:00 AM & 9:00 AM)  Weekday PM Peak Hour (peak hour between 4:00 PM & 6:00 PM) The 2023 weekday AM and weekday PM peak hour count data is representative of typical weekday peak hour traffic conditions in the study area. There were no observations made in the field that would indicate atypical traffic conditions on the count dates, such as construction activity or detour routes and nearby schools were in session and operating on normal schedules. In accordance with the City of La Quinta’s traffic study guidelines, a 10% seasonal variation factor has been applied to the May 2023 traffic count data.

Existing AM and PM peak hour and daily volumes are shown on Exhibit 3-6. The raw manual peak hour turning movement traffic count data sheets are included in Appendix 3.1. 13

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2885 of 3061 14

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2886 of 3061 INDIO INTERIM FINAL GENERAL PLAN | CHAPTER 4. MOBILITY
4-7
Figure 4-1: Planned Bicycle Network
15

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2887 of 3061 16

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2888 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
17 Where actual 24-hour tube count data was not available, Existing ADT volumes were based upon factored intersection peak hour counts collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. using the following formula for each intersection leg:

PM Peak Hour (Approach Volume + Exit Volume) x 12.987= Leg Volume A comparison of the PM peak hour and daily traffic volumes of various roadway segments within the study area indicated that the peak-to-daily relationship is approximately 7.70 percent. As such, the above equation utilizing a factor of 12.987 estimates the ADT volumes on the study area roadway segments assuming a peak-to-daily relationship of approximately 7.70 percent (i.e., 1/0.0770 =

12.987) and was assumed to sufficiently estimate ADT volumes for planning-level analyses.

3.8 LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS AND ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES

3.8.1 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
The City of Indio and City of La Quinta require signalized intersection operations analysis based on the methodology described in the HCM 6th Edition. (4) Intersection LOS operations are based on an intersection’s average control delay. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue moveup time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. For signalized intersections LOS is related to the average control delay per vehicle and is correlated to a LOS designation as described in Table 3-

1. A saturation flow rate of 1900 vehicles per hour green per lane (vphgpl) has been utilized for all intersections for all scenarios.

The traffic modeling and signal timing optimization software package Synchro (Version 11) has been utilized to analyze signalized intersections. Synchro is a macroscopic traffic software program that is based on the signalized intersection capacity analysis as specified in the HCM. Macroscopic level models represent traffic in terms of aggregate measures for each movement at the study intersections. Equations are used to determine measures of effectiveness such as delay and queue length. The level of service and capacity analysis performed by Synchro takes into consideration optimization and coordination of signalized intersections within a network.

The peak hour traffic volumes have been adjusted using a peak hour factor (PHF) to reflect peak 15- minute volumes. Customary practice for LOS analysis is to use a peak 15-minute rate of flow.

However, flow rates are typically expressed in vehicles per hour. The PHF is the relationship between the peak 15-minute flow rate and the full hourly volume (e.g., PHF = [Hourly Volume] / [4 x Peak 15-minute Flow Rate]). The use of a 15-minute PHF produces a more detailed analysis as compared to analyzing vehicles per hour. Existing PHFs have been used for all analysis scenarios.

Per the HCM, PHF values over 0.95 often are indicative of high traffic volumes with capacity constraints on peak hour flows while lower PHF values are indicative of greater variability of flow during the peak hour. (4)
17

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2889 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
18 TABLE 3-1: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LOS THRESHOLDS

Description
Average Control Delay
(Seconds), V/C ≤ 1.0
Level of Service,
V/C ≤ 1.01
Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression and/or short cycle length.
0 to 10.00 A
Operations with low delay occurring with good progression and/or short cycle lengths.

10.01 to 20.00 B
Operations with average delays resulting from fair
progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear.

20.01 to 35.00 C
Operations with longer delays due to a combination of
unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable.

35.01 to 55.00 D
Operations with high delay values indicating poor
progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios.

Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay.

55.01 to 80.00 E
Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers
occurring due to over saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths.

80.01 and up F
Source: HCM, 6th Edition
1 If V/C is greater than 1.0 then LOS is F per HCM.
18

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2890 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
19 3.8.2 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
The City of Indio and City of La Quinta require the operations of unsignalized intersections be evaluated using the methodology described in the HCM 6th Edition. (4) The LOS rating is based on the weighted average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle (see Table 3-2).

At two-way or side-street stop-controlled intersections, LOS is calculated for each controlled movement and for the left turn movement from the major street, as well as for the intersection as a whole. For all-way stop and roundabout intersections, the delay is computed as the average of all movements in that lane.

TABLE 3-2: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION DESCRIPTION OF LOS

3.9 EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
Existing peak hour traffic operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections based on the analysis methodologies presented in Section 3.8 Level of Service Definitions and Analysis Methodologies of this report. The intersection operations analysis results are summarized in Table 3- 3 which indicates that study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS during the peak hours. The intersection operations analysis worksheets are included in Appendix 3.2 of this TA.

3.10 ROADWAY SEGMENT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
The capacities utilized to evaluate segment traffic conditions are consistent with the maximum daily capacity thresholds provided in the City of Indio General Plan and are summarized in Table 3-4.

Description Average Control Delay
(Seconds), V/C ≤ 1.0
Level of Service,
V/C ≤ 1.01
Little or no delays. 0 to 10.00 A
Short traffic delays. 10.01 to 15.00 B
Average traffic delays. 15.01 to 25.00 C
Long traffic delays. 25.01 to 35.00 D
Very long traffic delays. 35.01 to 50.00 E
Extreme traffic delays with intersection capacity exceeded. > 50.00 F Source: HCM, 6th Edition
1 If V/C is greater than 1.0 then LOS is F per HCM.
19

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2891 of 3061 Delay3 Level of
Traffic Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound (secs.) Service # Intersection Control1 L T R L T R L T R L T R AM PM AM PM 1 Jefferson St. / Fred Waring Dr. TS 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 49.6 39.5 D D 2 Heritage Ct. Main Dwy. / Fred Waring Dr. TS 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 3 0 13.6 12.5 B B 3 Jefferson St. / RIRO Dwy. CSS 0 3 d 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17.9 16.2 C C 4 Jefferson St. / LI-RIRO Dwy. CSS 0 3 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 32.2 27.3 D D 1 TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross-street Stop
2 When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
3 Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control.

For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown.

Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 11 analysis software.

F:\UXRjobs\_13600-14000\_13900\13915\Excel\[13915-07 - Report.xlsx]3-3 L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; d = Defacto Right Turn Lane TABLE 3-3: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS Intersection Approach Lanes2
20

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2892 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
21 TABLE 3-4: ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITY THRESHOLDS
Roadway Classification Lane Configuration Capacity (Vehicles per Day) Local 2-Lane Undivided 9,000
Collector 2-Lane Undivided 14,000
Modified Secondary 2-Lane Divided 19,000
Secondary 4-Lane Undivided 28,000
Primary 4-Lane Divided 42,600
Major 6-Lane Divided 61,100
Augmented Major 8-Lane Divided 76,000
These roadway capacities are “rule of thumb” estimates for planning purposes and are affected by such factors as intersections (spacing, configuration and control features), degree of access control, roadway grades, design geometrics (horizontal and vertical alignment standards), sight distance, vehicle mix (truck and bus traffic) and pedestrian bicycle traffic. As such, where the ADT volume based roadway segment analysis indicates a deficiency (unacceptable LOS), a review of the more detailed peak hour intersection analysis and progression analysis are undertaken. The more detailed peak hour intersection analysis explicitly accounts for factors that affect roadway capacity.

Therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, roadway widening is typically only recommended if the peak hour intersection analysis indicates the need for additional through lanes.

The roadway segment capacities are approximate figures only, and are used at the General Plan level to assist in determining the roadway functional classification (number of through lanes) needed to meet traffic demand.

Table 3-5 provides a summary of the Existing conditions roadway segment capacity analysis based on the roadway segment capacity thresholds identified on Table 3-4. As shown on Table 3-5, all study area roadway segments analyzed are currently operating at acceptable LOS.

21

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2893 of 3061 Roadway Segment
Roadway
Designation
Through
Travel
Lanes1 ADT3
Volume/
Capacity
Ratio
north of Fred Waring Dr. Major Arterial 6 61,100 37,700 0.62 South of Fred Waring Dr. Major Arterial 6 61,100 37,400 0.61 South of RIRO Dwy. Major Arterial 6 61,100 37,900 0.62
South of LI/RIRO Dwy. Major Arterial 6 61,100 36,900 0.60 West of Jefferson Street Major Arterial 6 61,100 30,300 0.50 East of Jefferson Street Major Arterial 6 61,100 24,200 0.40 East of Heritage Ct. Main Dwy. Major Arterial 6 61,100 24,500 0.40 F:\UXRjobs\_13600-14000\_13900\13915\Excel\[13915-07 - Report.xlsx]3-5 TABLE 3-5: ROADWAY VOLUME/CAPACITY ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS Capacity2
Fred Waring Dr.
1 Existing Number of Through lanes
2 Source: City of Indio General Plan (September 2019) 3 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) expressed in vehicles per day.

Jefferson St.
22

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2894 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
23 4 PROJECTED FUTURE TRAFFIC
This section presents the traffic volumes estimated to be generated by the Project, as well as the Project’s trip assignment onto the study area roadway network.

The proposed Amendment to Conceptual Specific Plan RPD-5 and the Heritage Palms Project Master Plan (“Project”) adds drive-through retail and restaurants to the allowable land uses at the Heritage Court Shopping Center portion of the Specific Plan and Project Master Plan. As mentioned previously, no specific project is proposed at this time. The current application only seeks to modify the allowable land uses on the property.

The Project focuses on a “hard corner” pad which was identified as allowing up to 10,429 square feet, and at the time of approval was called out as a bank in the City staff report. All other pads and buildings on the site have been constructed, and the existing center contains approximately 105,615 square feet of space in total.

With drive-thru features, this Project reduces the building pad from 10,429 square feet (bank, no drive-thru) to a building not-to-exceed 3,500 square feet (with drive-thru), which is evaluated as a coffee shop to ensure a “conservative worse case” scenario.

4.1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic which is both attracted to and produced by a development. Determining traffic generation for a specific project is therefore based upon forecasting the amount of traffic that is expected to be both attracted to and produced by the specific land uses being proposed for a given development.

In order to compare the traffic characteristics of the approved building pad and proposed Project, trip-generation statistics published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021) manual are utilized. (5) ITE Land Use Code 911 – Walk-in Bank is used for the approved 10,429 square foot building. ITE Land Use Code 937 – Coffee/Donut Shop with DriveThrough Window is used for the proposed 3,500 square foot building.

Table 4-1 presents the trip generation rates and resulting trip generation summary for the approved bank building and proposed Project. As shown in Table 4-1, the approved bank building is anticipated to generate a net total of 604 trip-ends per day with 60 AM peak hour trips and 127 PM peak hour trips.

As shown on Table 4-1, the proposed project (Coffee/Donut shop with Drive-Through) is anticipated to generate a net total of 1,494 external trip-ends per day with 240 AM peak hour external trips and 110 PM peak hour external trips.

23

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2895 of 3061 In Out Total In Out Total
Walk-in Bank 911 3.33 2.41 5.74 5.34 6.79 12.13 57.94
Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window 937 43.80 42.08 85.88 19.50 19.49 38.99 533.57 In Out Total In Out Total
Walk-in Bank 911 10.429 TSF 35 25 60 56 71 127 604
In Out Total In Out Total
Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window 937 3.5 TSF 153 147 300 68 68 136 1,867 (30) (30) (60) (13) (13) (26) (373)
Proposed Project Total External Trips 123 117 240 55 55 110 1,494 In Out Total In Out Total
Approved Land Use (Walk-in Bank) 10.429 TSF 35 25 60 56 71 127 604 Proposed Land Use (Coffee/Donut Shop w/ Drive Thru) 3.5 TSF 123 117 240 55 55 110 1,494 88 92 180 -1 -16 -17 890
2 TSF = Thousand Square Feet 3 Based upon ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021), the pass-by percentages for similar land use (ITE 938 - Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive Through and No Indoor Seating) are within a range of 83% to 100%. A conservatively lower pass-by percentage of 20% is utilized in this analysis.

F:\UXRjobs\_13600-14000\_13900\13915\Excel\[13915-07 - Report.xlsx]4-1 TG Land Use
TSF
TSF
Land Use
- Pass-By Reduction 3
Land Use
Land Use
1 Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021).

DELTA (Proposed - Approved)
Quantity2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
Project Trip Generation Comparison
ITE LU
Code Quantity2
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
PM Peak Hour
Daily
Proposed Project Trip Generation Results
Approved Land Use Trip Generation Results
ITE LU
Code Quantity2
AM Peak Hour
TABLE 4-1: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Trip Generation Rates1
ITE LU
Code Quantity2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
24

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2896 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
25 4.2 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
The trip distribution pattern is heavily influenced by the geographical location of the site, the location of surrounding uses, and the access to adjacent roadways. Exhibit 4-1 presents the proposed trip distribution pattern for the Project site.

4.3 MODAL SPLIT
Although the use of public transit, walking, and/or bicycling have the proposed to reduce Projectrelated traffic, such reductions have not been taken into considerations in this traffic study in order to provide a conservative analysis of the Project’s proposed to contribute to circulation system deficiencies.

4.4 TRIP ASSIGNMENT
The assignment of traffic from the Project area to the adjoining roadway system is based upon the Project trip generation, trip distribution, and the adjacent roadway network.

Based on the identified traffic generation and trip distribution, the resulting daily and peak hour traffic volumes associated with the approved bank building are shown on Exhibit 4-2.

Exhibit 4-3 presents the traffic volumes for the Project (coffee shop with drive-thru). Project pass-by traffic volumes (intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a primary trip destination without a route diversion) are also shown on Exhibit 4-3.

Exhibit 4-4 illustrates the traffic volume differences associated with the change of land use from a 10,429 square foot walk-in bank building to 3,500 square foot coffee-shop building with drive-thru.

25

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2897 of 3061 26

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2898 of 3061 27

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2899 of 3061 28

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2900 of 3061 29

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2901 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
30 This Page Intentionally Left Blank

30

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2902 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
31 5 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
This section discusses the criteria used to determine potentially significant Project impacts and potentially significant cumulative impacts.

5.1 ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
Per discussions with the City of Indio staff, and as documented in Appendix 1.1 of this Focused TA, this study has analyzed the following future scenarios:
 General Plan Buildout (2040) Without Project (10,429 sf walk-in bank)  General Plan Buildout (2040) With Project (3,500 sf coffee shop with drive-through)

5.1.1 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (2040) CONDITIONS
Future horizon year 2040 traffic projections were derived from the City of Indio Mobility Technical Report, May 2016. (3) General plan buildout traffic volumes from the City of Indio were reviewed and necessary adjustments were made to ensure that the volume projections exceed the 2023 traffic volumes. Projections from the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RivTAM) have also been considered. Exhibit 5-1 shows the resulting General Plan Buildout (2040) traffic volume projections at the study area intersections.

For the intersections of Heritage Court Main Driveway/Fred Waring Drive (#2) and Jefferson Street/RIRO Driveway (#3), the 2023 volumes which interact with the Heritage Court Shopping Center have been retained for the future Horizon Year 2040 traffic projections. However, adjustments were made for the conservation of projected 2040 peak hour traffic flows along Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street to and from intersection #1. These 2040 adjustments affect the eastbound and westbound peak hour through volumes on Fred Waring Drive at intersection #2, as well as the northbound and southbound peak hour through volumes on Jefferson Street at intersections #3 and #4.

Exhibit 5-2 shows the General Plan Buildout (2040) with Project (coffee shop with drive through) traffic volume projections.

5.2.1 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
LOS calculations were conducted for the study intersections to evaluate their operations under General Plan Buildout (2040) traffic conditions. The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 5-1, which indicates that the intersection of Jefferson Street/Fred Waring Drive (#1) is anticipated to operate at unacceptable LOS during the peak hours without and with Project conditions. Providing right turn overlap phase for the northbound, southbound, and eastbound approaches are anticipated to improve the intersection to operate at an acceptable LOS for future conditions.
31

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2903 of 3061 32

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2904 of 3061 33

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2905 of 3061 Delay3 Level of Delay3 Level of
Traffic Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound (secs.) Service (secs.) Service Control1 L T R L T R L T R L T R AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 1 Jefferson St. / Fred Waring Dr.
- Without Improvements TS 2 3 1 231 231 2 3 0 62.2 70.4 EE 63.3 71.5 EE - With Signal Modifications TS 2 3 1> 23 1> 23 1> 2 3 0 50.9 49.1 D D 51.7 50.3 D D - W/ Signal Modifications & SB Left Turn Adjustment4 TS 2 3 1> 23 1> 23 1> 2 3 0 50.5 48.2 D D 51.6 49.5 D D 2 Heritage Ct. Main Dwy. / Fred Waring Dr.
- Without EB Right Turn Adjustment TS 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 3 0 15.4 16.1 B B 15.5 16.2 B B - With EB Right Turn Adjustment4 TS 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 3 0 15.6 16.9 B B 15.7 17.0 B B 3 Jefferson St. / RIRO Dwy. CSS 0 3 d 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 24.3 28.2 C D 28.8 28.1 D D 4 Jefferson St. / LI-RIRO Dwy.
- With Inbound SB Left Turns Permitted CSS 0 3 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 69.0 122.2 FF 83.9 119.9 FF - With SB Left Turn Restriction (RIRO Only)4 CSS 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 31.2 34.1 D D 31.9 34.1 D D 1 TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross-street Stop
2 When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
3 Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control.

For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown.

Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 11 analysis software.

BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS). 4 With redistribution of traffic associated with restriction of southbound left-turn in at intersection #4 (Jefferson St./LI-RIRO Dwy.).

F:\UXRjobs\_13600-14000\_13900\13915\Excel\[13915-07 - Report.xlsx]5-1 TABLE 5-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (2040) CONDITIONS Without Project
(w/ Approved Walk-In Bank)
With Project
(Proposed Project)
Intersection Approach Lanes2
# Intersection
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; d = Defacto Right Turn Lane; > = Right-Turn Overlap Phasing; 1 = Improvement 34

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2906 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
35 General Plan Buildout (2040) conditions without and with the Project also indicate that the intersection of Jefferson Street at LI/RIRO Driveway (#4) is anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS (LOS “F”) during the AM and PM peak hours with inbound left turns permitted at this location for long term future conditions. A potential future solution to this cumulative deficiency would be the prohibition of southbound left turns, converting this driveway to allow right-in/right-out (RIRO) movements without a median break. The southbound left turning vehicles would therefore be diverted to the Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive (#1) intersection. As shown in Table 5-1, the Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive (#1) intersection is able to accommodate this potential future traffic diversion with acceptable LOS.

The intersection operations analysis worksheets for General Plan Buildout (2040) Without Project traffic conditions are included in Appendix 5.1 of this TA. General Plan Buildout (2040) With Project traffic conditions are included in Appendix 5.2.

5.2.2 ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The roadway segment capacities are approximate figures only; they are typically used at the General Plan level to assist in determining the roadway functional classification (number of through lanes) needed to meet future forecasted traffic demand. Table 5-2 provides a summary of the General Plan Buildout (2040) Without Project and With Project traffic conditions roadway segment capacity analysis based on the City of Indio and City of La Quinta’s roadway segment capacity thresholds identified previously in Table 3-5. As shown on Table 5-2, study area roadway segments are anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS for General Plan Buildout (2040) traffic conditions.

35

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2907 of 3061 ADT3
Volume/
Capacity
Ratio ADT3
Volume/
Capacity
Ratio
north of Fred Waring Dr. Major Arterial 6 61,100 41,500 0.68 41,800 0.68 South of Fred Waring Dr. Major Arterial 6 61,100 45,000 0.74 45,300 0.74 South of RIRO Dwy. Major Arterial 6 61,100 44,900 0.73 45,200 0.74 South of LI/RIRO Dwy. Major Arterial 6 61,100 44,100 0.72 44,300 0.73 West of Jefferson Street Major Arterial 6 61,100 35,000 0.57 35,200 0.58 East of Jefferson Street Major Arterial 6 61,100 30,000 0.49 30,400 0.50 East of Heritage Ct. Main Dwy. Major Arterial 6 61,100 29,900 0.49 30,100 0.49 F:\UXRjobs\_13600-14000\_13900\13915\Excel\[13915-07 - Report.xlsx]5-2 Jefferson St.

Fred Waring Dr.
1 Existing Number of Through lanes
2 Source: City of Indio General Plan (September 2019)
3 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) expressed in vehicles per day.

TABLE 5-2: ROADWAY VOLUME/CAPACITY ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (2040) CONDITIONS Roadway Segment
Roadway
Designation
Through
Travel Lanes1 Capacity2
Without Project
(w/ Approved Walk-In Bank)
With Project
(Proposed Project)
36

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2908 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
37 6 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 PROJECT ACCESS
The drive-thru pad is anticipated to be served by (1) the adjacent right-in/right-out (RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of Fred Waring Drive, (2) the full access (signalized) driveway along Fred Waring Drive east of Jefferson Street, and (3) the existing left-in/right-in/right-out (LI-RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of the RIRO access.

6.2 PROJECT TRAFFIC
The Heritage Court Shopping Center currently exists, and includes a grocery store, stand-alone drugstore and in-line shops. The Project focuses on a “hard corner” pad which was identified as allowing up to 10,429 square feet, and at the time of approval was called out as a bank in the City staff report. All other pads and buildings on the site have been constructed, and the existing center contains approximately 105,615 square feet of space in total.

With drive-thru features, this Project reduces the building pad from 10,429 square feet (bank, no drivethru) to a building not-to-exceed 3,500 square feet (with drive-thru), which is evaluated as a coffee shop to ensure a “conservative worse case” scenario.

The proposed Project is anticipated to generate a net total of 1,494 external trip-ends per day with 240 AM peak hour external trips and 110 PM peak hour external trips.

6.3 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS RESULTS
The intersection of Jefferson Street/Fred Waring Drive (#1) is anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS during the evening peak hours for General Plan Buildout (2040) Without and With Project Conditions, with existing geometry. Providing the following signal modifications are anticipated to improve the intersection to operate at an acceptable LOS (LOS “D” or better) for long range future conditions:

Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive (#1)
 Provide a northbound right turn overlap phase.
 Provide a southbound right turn overlap phase.
 Provide a eastbound right turn overlap phase.

General Plan Buildout (2040) conditions without and with the Project also indicate that the intersection of Jefferson Street at LI/RIRO Driveway (#4) is anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS (LOS “F”) during the AM and PM peak hours with inbound left turns permitted at this location for long term future conditions. A potential future solution to this cumulative deficiency would be the prohibition of southbound left turns, converting this driveway to allow right-in/right-out (RIRO) movements without a median break. The southbound left turning vehicles would therefore be diverted to the 37

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2909 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
38 Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive (#1) intersection. As shown in Table 1-1, the Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive (#1) intersection is able to accommodate this potential future traffic diversion with acceptable LOS.

An analysis of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) associated with the Project has been prepared in a separate letter “Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Assessment”, dated June 7, 2023.

6.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
No specific development is proposed at this time. The current application only seeks to modify the allowable land uses on the property. Should a specific project be proposed in the future, it would require review for its specific design, including on-site queueing for drive-through lanes. Based on the results discussed in detail on Section 5 Traffic Analysis, the development of the proposed Project is not anticipated to result in any significant traffic level of service effects.

The results of this analysis indicate that signal modifications will ultimately be needed at the intersection of Jefferson Street/Fred Waring Drive (#1), without or with the Project.

Lengthy delays may occur during peak hours in the future at the southbound left turn lane approaching the intersection of Jefferson Street at LI/RIRO Driveway (#4), without or with the Project.

Converting this driveway to allow right-in/right-out only (RIRO) movements without a median break would provide acceptable traffic operations. However, this change is not needed or recommended at this time, and southbound left turn peak hour queues should instead be monitored to determine if elimination of the median break at this location is ultimately needed.

38

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2910 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
39 7 REFERENCES

1. County of Riverside. Transportation Analysis Guidelines for Level of Service, Vehicle Miles Traveled.

County of Riverside : s.n., December 2020.

2. City of Indio. General Plan. s.l. : City of Indio, September, 2019.

3. —. General Plan Update ‐ Mobility Technical Report. City of Indio : s.n., May 2016.

4. Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). s.l. : National Academy of Sciences, 6th Edition.

5. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Manual. 11th Edition. 2021. 39

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2911 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report.docx
40 This page intentionally left blank
40

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2912 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report
1 APPENDIX 1.1: APPROVED TRAFFIC STUDY SCOPING AGREEMENT

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2913 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report
2 This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2914 of 3061 13915-06 TA & VMT Scope.docx
April 28, 2023
Mr. Mark Greenwood
City of Indio
100 Civic Center Mall
Indio, CA 92201
SUBJECT: HERITAGE PALMS SP/MP AMENDMENT FOCUSED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS SCOPING

AGREEMENT
Dear Mr. Mark Greenwood:

Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit this updated scoping letter to the City of Indio regarding a revised approach to the Focused Traffic Analysis for the proposed Amendment to Conceptual Specific Plan RPD‐5 and the Heritage Palms Project Master Plan, located at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive.

During 2021, Urban Crossroads submitted a scoping agreement to evaluate a drive‐through building at the northwest corner of the Heritage Court Shopping Center.   Due to Covid conditions which were impacting traffic flows at that time, the 2021 scope included the use of older available traffic counts with adjustments to estimate non‐Covid conditions.  The 2021 scope was approved on March 2, 2021 (see Attachment 1).

The current application seeks to modify the allowable land uses on the property to allow a drive‐through building, to be represented as a coffee shop with up to 3,500 sf as a “conservative worse case” scenario.  This revised scope focuses on the use of updated traffic counts, to be conducted during May 2023.

The amendment adds drive‐through retail and restaurants to the allowable land uses at the Heritage Court Shopping Center portion of the Specific Plan and Project Master Plan. No specific project is proposed currently.  Should a specific project be proposed in the future, it would require review of its specific design, including on‐site queueing for drive‐through lanes.

The Heritage Court Shopping Center currently exists, and includes a grocery store, stand‐ alone drugstore and in‐line shops.  The shopping center was approved in 2006 and allowed at that time to develop up to 126,591 square feet of retail uses.  The “hard corner” pad was identified as allowing up to 10,429 square feet, and at the time was called out as a bank in the City staff report.  All other pads and buildings on the site have been constructed, and the existing center contains approximately 105,615 square feet of space in total.

The remainder of this letter describes the proposed analysis methodology, Project trip generation, trip distribution, and Project traffic assignment/project trips on the surrounding roadway network.

1.1-1

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2915 of 3061 The following scoping assumptions have been prepared in accordance with the County of Riverside’s Transportation Analysis Guidelines for Level of Service & Vehicle Miles Traveled (December 2020) as the City of Indio utilizes these guidelines.

The approved tentative parcel map is shown on Exhibit 1.  Exhibit 2 depicts the proposed intersection analysis locations for this assessment.  The drive‐thru pad is anticipated to be served by (1) the adjacent right‐in/right‐out (RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of Fred Waring Drive, (2) the full access (signalized) driveway along Fred Waring Drive east of Jefferson Street, (3) the left‐in/right‐in/right‐out (LI/RIRO) access along Jefferson Street south of the RIRO access.  With drive‐thru features, this Project reduces the building pad from 10,429 square feet (bank, no drive‐thru) to a Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive‐Through building not‐to‐exceed 3,500 square feet.

TRIP GENERATION
In order to compare the traffic characteristics of the approved building pad and potential drive‐ thru alternatives, trip‐generation statistics published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (11th Edition, 2021) manual are utilized.  ITE Land Use Code 911 – Walk‐in Bank is used forthe approved 10,429 square foot building.  ITE LandUse Code 937 – Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive‐Through Window is used for the potential 3,500 square foot building.

Table 1 presents the trip generation rates and resulting trip generation summary for the approved bank building and proposed Project.   As shown in Table 1, the approved bank building is anticipated to generate a net total of 604 trip‐ends per day with 60 AM peak hour trips and 127 PM peak hour trips.

The proposed project (Coffee/Donut shop with Drive‐Through) is anticipated to generate a net total of 1,494 external trip‐ends per day with 240 AM peak hour external trips and 110 PM peak hour external trips.

Based on the comparison results presented on Table 1, the proposed Project is estimated to generate the following differences when compared to the approved walk‐in bank building:
 890 more external trip‐ends per day.
 180 more AM peak hour external trips.
 17 fewer PM external peak hour trips.

TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
The trip distribution pattern is heavily influenced by the geographical location of the site, the location of surrounding uses, and the access to adjacent roadways.  Exhibit 3 presents the potential trip distribution pattern for the Project site.  The resulting daily and peak hour traffic volumes associated with the approved bank building are shown on Exhibit 4.

1.1-2

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2916 of 3061

1.1-3

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2917 of 3061

1.1-4

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2918 of 3061 In Out Total In Out Total
Walk-in Bank 911 3.33 2.41 5.74 5.34 6.79 12.13 57.94
Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window 937 43.80 42.08 85.88 19.50 19.49 38.99 533.57 In Out Total In Out Total
Walk-in Bank 911 10.429 TSF 35 25 60 56 71 127 604
In Out Total In Out Total
Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window 937 3.5 TSF 153 147 300 68 68 136 1,867 (30) (30) (60) (13) (13) (26) (373)
Proposed Project Total External Trips 123 117 240 55 55 110 1,494 In Out Total In Out Total
Approved Land Use (Walk-in Bank) 10.429 TSF 35 25 60 56 71 127 604 Proposed Land Use (Coffee/Donut Shop w/ Drive Thru) 3.5 TSF 123 117 240 55 55 110 1,494 88 92 180 -1 -16 -17 890
2 TSF = Thousand Square Feet
3 Based upon ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021), the pass-by percentages for similar land use (ITE 938 - Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive Through and No Indoor Seating) are within a range of 83% to 100%. A conservatively lower pass-by percentage of 20% is utilized in this analysis.

F:\UXRjobs\_13600-14000\_13900\13915\Excel\[13915-02 - Scope.xlsx]1 Land Use
TSF
TSF
Land Use
- Pass-By Reduction 3
Land Use
Land Use
1 Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021).

DELTA (Proposed - Approved)
Quantity2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
Project Trip Generation Comparison
PM Peak Hour
Daily
Proposed Project Trip Generation Results
ITE LU
Code Quantity2
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
Approved Land Use Trip Generation Results
ITE LU
Code Quantity2
AM Peak Hour
ITE LU
Code Quantity2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
TABLE 1: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Trip Generation Rates1

1.1-5

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2919 of 3061

1.1-6

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2920 of 3061

1.1-7

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2921 of 3061 Exhibit 5 presents the ADT and peak hour intersection turning movement volumes for the proposed Project (Coffee/Donut shop with Drive‐Through).   Exhibit 6 illustrates the traffic volume differences associated with the change of land use from walk‐in bank to 3,500 square foot building with drive‐thru.

ANALYSIS SCENARIOS AND STUDY AREA
No specific project is proposed at this time, and the current application only seeks to modify the allowable land uses on the property.  Should a specific project be proposed in the future, opening year scenarios will be evaluated in conjunction with the assessment of specific design features.

The proposed Amendment to Conceptual Specific Plan RPD‐5 and the Heritage Palms Project Master Plan adds drive‐through retail and restaurants to the allowable land uses at the Heritage Court Shopping Center portion of the Specific Plan and Project Master Plan.

This focused traffic analysis therefore includes the following analysis scenarios:
 Existing (2023) Conditions
 General Plan Buildout (2040) Without Project (10,429 sf walk‐in bank)  General Plan Buildout (2040) With proposed Project (coffee shop with up to 3,500 sf as a “conservative worse case” scenario)
The City of Indio General Plan Circulation Element is depicted on Exhibit 7.

For the purposes of this focused traffic analysis, the following intersections will be evaluated as shown on Exhibit 2.

ID Intersection Location
1 Jefferson Street / Fred Waring Drive
2 Heritage Court / Fred Waring Drive
3 Jefferson Street / RIRO Driveway
4 Jefferson Street / LI/RIRO Driveway

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) CRITERIA
Per the City of Indio’s General Plan, LOS D is the threshold for acceptable traffic conditions on the circulation network.

PREFERRED ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
For the purposes of this focused assessment, signalized intersection operations analysis will be based on the methodology described in the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition).

1.1-8

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2922 of 3061

1.1-9

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2923 of 3061

1.1-10

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2924 of 3061

1.1-11

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2925 of 3061 Intersection LOS operations are based on an intersection’s average control delay.

Unsignalized intersections will be evaluated using the methodology described in the HCM 6th Edition.

At two‐way or side‐street stop‐controlled intersections, LOS is calculated for each controlled movement and for the left turn movement from the major street, as well as for the intersection as a whole.  For approaches composed of a single lane, the delay is computed as the average of all movements in that lane.

EXISTING 2023 TRAFFIC COUNTS
For the four study area intersections, new traffic counts will be collected on May 10th, 2023 during the following timeframes: 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM.  New 24‐ hour roadway segment counts will also be collected on Fred Waring Drive east of Jefferson Street, and on Jefferson Street south of Fred Waring Drive.

GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRAFFIC
Future horizon year 2040 traffic projections are derived from the City of Indio Mobility Technical Report, May 2016.  Projections from the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RivTAM) will also be considered.

For the intersections of Heritage Court Main Driveway/Fred Waring Drive (#2), Jefferson Street/RIRO Driveway (#3), and Jefferson Street/LIRIRO Driveway (#4), the 2023 volumes which interact with the Heritage Court Shopping Center will be retained for the future Horizon Year 2040 traffic projections.   However, adjustments will be made for the conservation projected 2040 peak hour traffic flows along Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street to and from intersection #1.  These 2040 adjustments will affect the eastbound and westbound peak hour through volumes on Fred Waring Drive at intersection #2, as well as the northbound and southbound peak hour through volumes on Jefferson Street at intersections #3 and #4.

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT)
A VMT screening assessment will be prepared under separate cover in accordance with SB743 and consistent with the methodology and thresholds outlined in the County of Riverside’s December 2020 VMT methodology guidelines.

The County of Riverside Guidelines include Local Serving Retail in the list of project types which can be presumed to have non‐significant VMT impacts.  In effect, the introduction of new Local‐serving retail has been determined to reduce VMT by shortening trips that will occur.   This determination can be made for retail buildings which do not exceed 50,000 square feet.

1.1-12

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2926 of 3061 A VMT screening assessment letter will be provided under separate cover.

Please review this updated scoping agreement let us know if it is acceptable, or if the City requests any changes to this proposed scope of work.  If you have any questions, please contact John Kain at (949) 375‐2435 or Marlie Whiteman (714) 585‐0574.

Respectfully submitted,
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.

John Kain, AICP                                                                   Marlie Whiteman, PE Principal   Senior Associate

1.1-13

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2927 of 3061 ATTACHMENT 1

1.1-14

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2928 of 3061 1 Janette Cachola
From: Mark Greenwood <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2021 1:15 PM
To: Janette Cachola; Juan Raya
Cc: Leila Namvar; Nicole Criste; John Kain; Marlie Whiteman Subject: Re: Heritage Court Traffic Scoping Letter
Attachments: image001.png
Janette,
The scoping agreement is approved.

Mark Greenwood, P.E.

Consultant Transportation Engineer
________________________________
From: Janette Cachola <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 10:58:54 AM
To: Mark Greenwood; Juan Raya
Cc: Leila Namvar; Nicole Criste; John Kain; Marlie Whiteman Subject: RE: Heritage Court Traffic Scoping Letter
WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links.

Pursuant to further discussions with Mark Greenwood, the attached LOS and VMT scope has been modified (see attached pdf).  The word doc is also attached in track changes mode so that text edits can be clearly seen. The scope exhibits (3 to 6, 8, and 9) have also been changed, so careful review of the entire document is recommended.  Don’t hesitate to contact John Kain at (949) 375‐2435 or myself at (714) 785‐1407 if you have further questions or comments.

Sincerely,

JANETTE CACHOLA
Senior Analyst
urbanxroads.com<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2furbanxroads.com&c=E,1,fIhKSswUfGEzVHcVY d9SSboorZxPDBBxM7jq5Kh15xXlbe7YOm0Vn‐
MDXptqLT3Vr0J2g3ZeQSq4ZYqDRLN0REyYBmS9yGIhi21EuOMG8_E2GXvkGdz5rLo,&typo=1&ancr_add=1> [Signature09]

1.1-15

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2929 of 3061 This Page Intentionally Left Blank

1.1-16

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2930 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report
3 APPENDIX 3.1: EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2931 of 3061 Heritage Palms SP/MP Amendment Focused Traffic Analysis 13915-07 Report
4 This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2932 of 3061 File Name : 01_IND_JEFF_FW AM
Site Code : 05123427
Start Date : 5/10/2023
Page No : 1
City of Indio
N/S: Jefferson Street
E/W: Fred Waring Drive
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Jefferson Street
Southbound
Fred Waring Drive
Westbound
Jefferson Street
Northbound
Fred Waring Drive
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 13 224 56 293 38 118 17 173 41 184 11 236 52 66 20 138 840 07:15 AM 7 267 87 361 36 210 15 261 60 218 29 307 49 55 22 126 1055 07:30 AM 14 266 103 383 52 270 18 340 64 258 23 345 62 97 31 190 1258 07:45 AM 17 302 130 449 70 216 24 310 48 238 43 329 76 111 32 219 1307 Total 51 1059 376 1486 196 814 74 1084 213 898 106 1217 239 329 105 673 4460 08:00 AM 18 348 142 508 94 249 22 365 55 255 30 340 75 117 44 236 1449 08:15 AM 18 304 143 465 45 177 30 252 70 227 32 329 79 118 24 221 1267 08:30 AM 13 258 94 365 35 160 19 214 52 223 29 304 75 125 25 225 1108 08:45 AM 12 271 80 363 42 149 9 200 54 166 23 243 47 66 22 135 941 Total 61 1181 459 1701 216 735 80 1031 231 871 114 1216 276 426 115 817 4765 Grand Total 112 2240 835 3187 412 1549 154 2115 444 1769 220 2433 515 755 220 1490 9225 Apprch % 3.5 70.3 26.2 19.5 73.2 7.3 18.2 72.7 9 34.6 50.7 14.8 Total % 1.2 24.3 9.1 34.5 4.5 16.8 1.7 22.9 4.8 19.2 2.4 26.4 5.6 8.2 2.4 16.2 Jefferson Street
Southbound
Fred Waring Drive
Westbound
Jefferson Street
Northbound
Fred Waring Drive
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM
07:30 AM 14 266 103 383 52 270 18 340 64 258 23 345 62 97 31 190 1258 07:45 AM 17 302 130 449 70 216 24 310 48 238 43 329 76 111 32 219 1307 08:00 AM 18 348 142 508 94 249 22 365 55 255 30 340 75 117 44 236 1449 08:15 AM 18 304 143 465 45 177 30 252 70 227 32 329 79 118 24 221 1267 Total Volume 67 1220 518 1805 261 912 94 1267 237 978 128 1343 292 443 131 866 5281 % App. Total 3.7 67.6 28.7 20.6 72 7.4 17.6 72.8 9.5 33.7 51.2 15.1 PHF .931 .876 .906 .888 .694 .844 .783 .868 .846 .948 .744 .973 .924 .939 .744 .917 .911 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268

3.1-1

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2933 of 3061 File Name : 01_IND_JEFF_FW AM
Site Code : 05123427
Start Date : 5/10/2023
Page No : 2
City of Indio
N/S: Jefferson Street
E/W: Fred Waring Drive
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Street
Fred Waring Drive
Fred Waring Drive
Jefferson Street
Right
518
Thru
1220
Left
67 Out In Total
1364 1805 3169
Right
94 Thru
912
Left
261
Out Total In
638 1267 1905
Left
237
Thru
978
Right
128
Out In Total
1612 1343 2955
Left
292
Thru
443
Right
131
Total Out In
1667 866 2533
Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:30 AM 07:15 AM 07:30 AM 07:45 AM
+0 mins. 14 266 103 383 36 210 15 261 64 258 23 345 76 111 32 219 +15 mins. 17 302 130 449 52 270 18 340 48 238 43 329 75 117 44 236 +30 mins. 18 348 142 508 70 216 24 310 55 255 30 340 79 118 24 221 +45 mins. 18 304 143 465 94 249 22 365 70 227 32 329 75 125 25 225 Total Volume 67 1220 518 1805 252 945 79 1276 237 978 128 1343 305 471 125 901 % App. Total 3.7 67.6 28.7 19.7 74.1 6.2 17.6 72.8 9.5 33.9 52.3 13.9 PHF .931 .876 .906 .888 .670 .875 .823 .874 .846 .948 .744 .973 .965 .942 .710 .954 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268

3.1-2

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2934 of 3061 File Name : 01_IND_JEFF_FW PM
Site Code : 05123427
Start Date : 5/10/2023
Page No : 1
City of Indio
N/S: Jefferson Street
E/W: Fred Waring Drive
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Jefferson Street
Southbound
Fred Waring Drive
Westbound
Jefferson Street
Northbound
Fred Waring Drive
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 04:00 PM 28 313 82 423 43 106 27 176 42 224 48 314 107 189 54 350 1263 04:15 PM 26 220 56 302 51 107 29 187 60 206 41 307 68 178 53 299 1095 04:30 PM 13 259 52 324 37 116 19 172 55 218 42 315 74 176 47 297 1108 04:45 PM 29 260 58 347 43 115 15 173 48 188 36 272 70 154 41 265 1057 Total 96 1052 248 1396 174 444 90 708 205 836 167 1208 319 697 195 1211 4523 05:00 PM 23 261 54 338 50 103 24 177 64 203 44 311 73 149 44 266 1092 05:15 PM 19 233 70 322 28 128 31 187 45 196 47 288 50 213 52 315 1112 05:30 PM 33 249 53 335 52 116 17 185 49 176 31 256 62 164 56 282 1058 05:45 PM 19 205 48 272 38 110 19 167 42 160 41 243 55 148 36 239 921 Total 94 948 225 1267 168 457 91 716 200 735 163 1098 240 674 188 1102 4183 Grand Total 190 2000 473 2663 342 901 181 1424 405 1571 330 2306 559 1371 383 2313 8706 Apprch % 7.1 75.1 17.8 24 63.3 12.7 17.6 68.1 14.3 24.2 59.3 16.6 Total % 2.2 23 5.4 30.6 3.9 10.3 2.1 16.4 4.7 18 3.8 26.5 6.4 15.7 4.4 26.6 Jefferson Street
Southbound
Fred Waring Drive
Westbound
Jefferson Street
Northbound
Fred Waring Drive
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:00 PM
04:00 PM 28 313 82 423 43 106 27 176 42 224 48 314 107 189 54 350 1263 04:15 PM 26 220 56 302 51 107 29 187 60 206 41 307 68 178 53 299 1095 04:30 PM 13 259 52 324 37 116 19 172 55 218 42 315 74 176 47 297 1108 04:45 PM 29 260 58 347 43 115 15 173 48 188 36 272 70 154 41 265 1057 Total Volume 96 1052 248 1396 174 444 90 708 205 836 167 1208 319 697 195 1211 4523 % App. Total 6.9 75.4 17.8 24.6 62.7 12.7 17 69.2 13.8 26.3 57.6 16.1 PHF .828 .840 .756 .825 .853 .957 .776 .947 .854 .933 .870 .959 .745 .922 .903 .865 .895 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268

3.1-3

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2935 of 3061 File Name : 01_IND_JEFF_FW PM
Site Code : 05123427
Start Date : 5/10/2023
Page No : 2
City of Indio
N/S: Jefferson Street
E/W: Fred Waring Drive
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Street
Fred Waring Drive
Fred Waring Drive
Jefferson Street
Right
248
Thru
1052
Left
96 Out In Total
1245 1396 2641
Right
90 Thru
444
Left
174
Out Total In
960 708 1668
Left
205
Thru
836
Right
167
Out In Total
1421 1208 2629
Left
319
Thru
697
Right
195
Total Out In
897 1211 2108
Peak Hour Begins at 04:00 PM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
04:00 PM 04:45 PM 04:00 PM 04:00 PM
+0 mins. 28 313 82 423 43 115 15 173 42 224 48 314 107 189 54 350 +15 mins. 26 220 56 302 50 103 24 177 60 206 41 307 68 178 53 299 +30 mins. 13 259 52 324 28 128 31 187 55 218 42 315 74 176 47 297 +45 mins. 29 260 58 347 52 116 17 185 48 188 36 272 70 154 41 265 Total Volume 96 1052 248 1396 173 462 87 722 205 836 167 1208 319 697 195 1211 % App. Total 6.9 75.4 17.8 24 64 12 17 69.2 13.8 26.3 57.6 16.1 PHF .828 .840 .756 .825 .832 .902 .702 .965 .854 .933 .870 .959 .745 .922 .903 .865 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268

3.1-4

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2936 of 3061 File Name : 02_IND_HC_FW AM
Site Code : 05123427
Start Date : 5/10/2023
Page No : 1
City of Indio
N/S: Heritage Court Main Driveway
E/W: Fred Waring Drive
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Fred Waring Drive
Westbound
Heritage Court Main Driveway
Northbound
Fred Waring Drive
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru App. Total Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 6 165 171 10 7 17 82 10 92 280
07:15 AM 13 273 286 3 6 9 94 4 98 393
07:30 AM 16 324 340 14 10 24 126 13 139 503
07:45 AM 14 337 351 10 6 16 159 15 174 541
Total 49 1099 1148 37 29 66 461 42 503 1717
08:00 AM 20 308 328 16 12 28 151 23 174 530
08:15 AM 14 246 260 10 10 20 157 16 173 453
08:30 AM 11 213 224 10 9 19 151 14 165 408
08:45 AM 15 171 186 11 9 20 93 12 105 311
Total 60 938 998 47 40 87 552 65 617 1702
Grand Total 109 2037 2146 84 69 153 1013 107 1120 3419
Apprch % 5.1 94.9 54.9 45.1 90.4 9.6
Total % 3.2 59.6 62.8 2.5 2 4.5 29.6 3.1 32.8
Fred Waring Drive
Westbound
Heritage Court Main Driveway
Northbound
Fred Waring Drive
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru App. Total Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM
07:30 AM 16 324 340 14 10 24 126 13 139 503
07:45 AM 14 337 351 10 6 16 159 15 174 541
08:00 AM 20 308 328 16 12 28 151 23 174 530
08:15 AM 14 246 260 10 10 20 157 16 173 453
Total Volume 64 1215 1279 50 38 88 593 67 660 2027
% App. Total 5 95 56.8 43.2 89.8 10.2
PHF .800 .901 .911 .781 .792 .786 .932 .728 .948 .937
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268

3.1-5

Resolution No. 10408 – Text Amendments to the RPD 5 Conceptual Specific ... Page 2937 of 3061 File Name : 02_IND_HC_FW AM
Site Code : 05123427
Start Date : 5/10/2023
Page No : 2
City of Indio
N/S: Heritage Court Main Driveway
E/W: Fred Waring Drive
Weather: Clear
Fred Waring Drive
Fred Waring Drive
Heritage Court Main Driveway
Thru
1215
Left
64 Out Total In
631 1279 1910
Left
50 Right
38 Out In Total
131 88 219
Thru
593
Right
67 Total Out In
1265 660 1925
Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:15 AM 07:30 AM 07:45 AM
+0 mins. 13 273 286 14 10 24 159 15 174
+15 mins. 16 324 340 10 6 16 151 23 174
+30 mins. 14 337 351 16 12 28 157 16 173
+45 mins. 20 308 328 10 10 20 151 14 165
Total Volume 63 1242 1305 50 38 88 618 68 686
% App. Total 4.8 95.2 56.8 43.2 90.1 9.9
PHF .788 .921 .929 .781 .792 .786 .972 .739 .986
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268

3.1-6