AGENDA ITEM #
STAFF REPORT
TO: City Council DATE: April 18, 2024
FROM: Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Catana Specific Plan - Environmental Assessment Case No. EA23-0006; General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA23-0002; Specific Plan Case No.
SP23-0002; Development Agreement Case No. DA23-0002; Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM23-0004 (Tentative Parc el Map 38834); and Preliminary Development Plan Case Nos. PDP23-0006 and PDP23-0007
SPECIFIC REQUEST OR RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council:
a) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-(Next-in-Order), approving the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH#2023120616) for the Proposed Project based on Environmental Assessment Case No. EA23-0006.
b) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-(Next-in-Order), approving General Plan Zoning Map Amendment (GPZMA23-0002), to change the Hi gh Density Residential land use designation to General Commercial for 8.3 acres fronting Ramon Road, and apply the Affordable Housing Overlay to 3.3± acres.
c) Introduce and adopt Ordinance No. (Next-in-Order), approving Specific Plan (SP23-0002) to establish the development standards and guidelines for three (3) Planning Areas within the 36± acre site.
d) Introduce and adopt Ordinance No. (Next- in-Order), approving the Development Agreement by and between McKeller McGowan Holdings, LLC. and Ramon & Rattler Partners, LLC. and the City of Rancho Mirage (DA23-0002).
e) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-(Next-in-Order), approving Tentative Parcel Map (TPM23- 0004) to subdivide the 36± acres into thr ee parcels corresponding to the three (3) Planning Areas and Preliminary Development Plans Case Nos. PDP23-0006 and PDP23- 0007 for the single-family residential neighborhood in Planning Area 1 and the affordable apartments in Planning Area 2.
JUSTIFICATION OR INFORMATION
PROJECT SUMMARY
The Catana Specific Plan proposes a mixed- use neighborhood on 36± ac res located at the northwest corner of Ramon Road and Rattler Road. Three Planning Areas are proposed to guide 7-1
CIN OF~ MIRAG~
~ ~
DATE: April 18, 2024 Page 2 of 5
EA23-0006, GPZMA23-0002, DA23-0002, SP23-0002, TPM23-0004, PDP23-0006 & PDP23-0007
JUSTIFICATION OR INFORMATION CONTINUED
AGENDA ITEM #
the project sites development. Planning Area 1 (Preliminary Development Plan Case No.
PDP23-0007) proposes 210 single-family rental homes with amenities, Planning Area 2 (Preliminary Development Plan Case No. PDP23-0006) proposes 94 affordable apartments and a central recreation area, and Planning Area 3 proposes up to 75,000 square feet of commercial uses. Additional Development Plan(s) will be submitted for Planning Area 3 in the future.
The following applications comprise the enti tlement package: Environmental Assessment, General Plan Zoning Map Amendment, Development Agreem ent, Specific Plan, Tentative Parcel Map, and two Preliminary Development Plans.
1. Environmental Assessment Case No. EA23-0006 for environmental determination pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
2. General Plan and Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA23-0002 to change the High Density Residential (R-H) land use designati on to General Commercial (C-G) land use designation for 8.3± acres fronting Ramo n Road, and apply the Affordable Housing Overlay to 3.3± acres (Planning Area 2).
3. Specific Plan Case No. SP23-0002 to establish the development standards and guidelines for 3 Planning Areas within the 36± acre site.
4. Development Agreement Case No. DA23- 0002 to establish development timelines and responsibilities of the applicant and developer in the development of the project.
5. Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM23-0004 (Tentative Parcel Map 38834) to subdivide the 36± acres into three parcels corresponding to the three (3) Planning Areas.
6. Preliminary Development Plans Case No s. PDP23-0006 and PDP23-0007 for the single family residential neighborhood in Planning Area 1 (PA 1) and the affordable apartments in Planning Area 2 (PA 2).
PLANNING COMMISSION
On March 28, 2024, the Planni ng Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project. Staff presented an overview of the pr oposed project. The applicant presented their vision for the Catana Specific Plan and shared a video of the proposed project.
As summarized in the minutes attached to this report, the Commissioner s’ asked questions to which staff answered. The applicant’s representatives answered questions related to the overall circulation as well as the affordable apartments’ funding and development. As part of the public testimony, one resident from th e Tuscany community cited concerns on increased density and three residents from the Mira Vista community spoke about the potential of increased traffic and noise associated with Ramon R oad. The Planning Commission sta ff report and draft minutes are included in Attachments 14 and 15.
After due consideration of the staff report, present ation, and public testimony, the Planning Commission made the following motion:
7-2
DATE: April 18, 2024 Page 3 of 5
EA23-0006, GPZMA23-0002, DA23-0002, SP23-0002, TPM23-0004, PDP23-0006 & PDP23-0007
JUSTIFICATION OR INFORMATION CONTINUED
AGENDA ITEM #
MOVED/SECONDED BY CURRAN/AGOSTINI TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2024-PC- [NEXT-IN-ORDER] RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL TAKE THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS:
A. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2024-(NEXT-I N-ORDER) APPROVING THE MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGR AM AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (SCH#2023120616) FOR TH E PROPOSED PROJECT BASED ON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CASE NO. EA23-0006;
B. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2024-(NEXT-I N-ORDER) APPROVING GENERAL PLAN ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (GPZMA23-0002) TO CHANG E THE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL FOR 8.3
ACRES FRONTING RAMON ROAD, AND APPLY THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY TO 3.3± ACRES;
C. INTRODUCE AND ADOPT ORDINANC E NO. (NEXT-IN-OR DER), APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN (SP23-0002) TO ESTABLISH THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR THREE (3) PLANNING AREAS WITHIN THE 36± ACRE SITE;
D. INTRODUCE AND ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. (NEXT-IN -ORDER), APPROVING THE
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN MCKELLAR MCGOWAN
HOLDINGS, LLC. AND RAMON & RATTLER PARTNERS, LLC. AND THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE (DA23-0002); AND
E. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2024-(NEXT -IN-ORDER), APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (TPM23-0004) TO SUBDIVIDE THE 36± ACRES INTO THREE PARCELS CORRESPONDING TO THE THREE (3) PLANNING AREAS AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANS CASE NOS. PDP23-0006 AND PDP23-0007 FOR THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IN PLANNING AREA 1 AND THE AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS IN PLANNING AREA 2.
MOTION CARRIED 4/0
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CASE NO. EA23-0006
An environmental assessment application was submitted for the proposed project and the determination was made that the project required an Initial Study . An Initial Study has been prepared resulting in the reco mmendation to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND).
Mitigation measures were reco mmended for Biological Resources, Cultural & Tribal Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, and Transportation/Traffic. A Notice of Determination will be filed with the Riverside County Clerk once a final determination has been made by the City Council.
The complete Initial Study, along with the Mi tigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, is included in Attachment 3 – Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. 7-3
DATE: April 18, 2024 Page 4 of 5
EA23-0006, GPZMA23-0002, DA23-0002, SP23-0002, TPM23-0004, PDP23-0006 & PDP23-0007
JUSTIFICATION OR INFORMATION CONTINUED
AGENDA ITEM #
An Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for a 30-day public review period starting on December 22, 2023, to January 22, 2024, and the City received one comment letter.
The City received a comment letter from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) commenting on the document reques ting additional mitigation measures to be incorporated.
While the City is not required to respond to comments, Sections 21091(d)(1) and 21092.5 of the Public Resources Code (PRC) and Section 150874 (b) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines require that before project approval a Lead Agency must consider all comments received before making a final determination. With due consideration of the proposed mitigation measures, the City included a response to comments which was included as Appendix F in the Draft IS/MND (Attachment 3). A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was published in the Desert Sun on December 17, 2023, and distributed to interested parties.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Section 17.74.020, Hearing and notice, requires that all property owners, as shown on the county’s latest equalized assessment roll, within a 500-foot radius of the boundaries of the subject parcel(s) be notified of matters r equiring a public hearing. If the number of property owners to w hom the notice would be mailed to is less than 25, then the mailing radius is required to be increased to 1000 feet as measured from the exterior boundaries of the subject parcel.
On April 3, 2024, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 500-foot radius of the parcel boundary and posted at the City’s designated community posting sites pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 17.74 of the Municipal Code. Notification of the public hearing was published in The Desert Sun on Ap ril 7, 2024. Any information addr essed to the City Council, but received after the completion of this final report, will be distributed at the public hearing. No new public comments have been received as of the publication date of this report.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Aerial
2. Public Hearing Notice
3. Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
4. Draft Specific Plan
5. Draft Development Agreement
6. Resolution of the Planning Commission recommending that the City Council Approve Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve a Statutory Development Agreement, a General Plan Zoning Map Amendment, a Specif ic Plan, Tentative Parcel Map, and Preliminary Development Plans for the Catana Specific Plan.
7. Resolution approving and adopting the Miti gation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH#2023120616) for the Proposed Project based on Environmental Assessment Case No. EA23-0006.
7-4
DATE: April 18, 2024 Page 5 of 5
EA23-0006, GPZMA23-0002, DA23-0002, SP23-0002, TPM23-0004, PDP23-0006 & PDP23-0007
JUSTIFICATION OR INFORMATION CONTINUED
AGENDA ITEM #
8. Resolution approving proposed General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No.
GPZMA23-0002 to change the High-Density Residential land use designation to General Commercial for 8.3 acres fronting Ramon Road, and apply the Affordable Housing Overlay to 3.3± acres.
9. Ordinance (Next-in-Order) approving the Development Agreement (DA23-0002) by and between the Developer and the City of Rancho Mirage.
10. Ordinance (Next-in-Order) approving Specific Plan ( SP23-0002) to establish the development standards and guidelines for three Planning Areas within the 36± acre site;
11. Resolution approving the proposed Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM23-0004 (TPM38834) and the Preliminary Development Plans Case Nos. PDP23-0006 and PDP23-0007 for the si ngle-family residential neighborhood in Planning Area 1 and the apartments in Planning Area 2.
12. City Attorney’s Independent Analysis
13. Draft Notice of Determination
14. Planning Commission Staff Report dated March 28, 2024 (Without Attachments)
15. Planning Commission Draft Meeting Minutes dated March 28, 2024
16. General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA23-0002 Exhibit
17. PDP23-0006 Exhibit Booklet
18. PDP23-0007 Exhibit Booklet
19. Tentative Parcel Map No. 38834 Exhibit
20. Public Comments
7-5
Catana Specific Plan - Aerial
Environmental Assessment Case No. EA23-0006; Development Agreement Case No. DA23-0002; General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA23-0002; Specific Plan Case No. SP23-0002; Tentative Parcel Map Case No.
TPM23-0004 (Tentative Parcel Map 38834); and Preliminary Development Plan Case Nos. PDP23-0 006 and PDP23-0007
ATTACHMENT 1
7-6
Planning Division
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
[email protected]
(760) 328-2266
P U B L I C H E A R I N G N O T I C E
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Thursday, April 18, 2024 – 1:00 p.m.
Envi
ronmental Assessment Case No. EA23- 0006; Development Agreement Case No.
DA23-0002; General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No. GPZMA23 -0002; Specific Plan Case No. SP23- 0002; Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM23- 0004 (Tentative Parcel Map 38834); Preliminary Development Plan Case Nos. PDP23-0006 and PDP23-0007 Applicant: McKellar McGowan Holdings, LLC
Request: Consideration of a specific plan with three (3) planning areas for the development of a mixed -use neighborhood on 36± acres located at the northwest corner of Ramon Road and Rattler Road. General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No.
GPZMA23-0002 proposes to change the High Density Residential (R-H) land use designation to General Commercial (C -G) for 8.3± acres (Planning Area 3) fronting Ramon Road, and apply the Affordable Housing Overlay to 3.3± acres (Planning Area 2) in the west-central portion of the site while preserving the R-H designation on 24.5± acres (Planning Area 1). Planning Area 1 (PDP23 -0007) proposes 210 single -family rental homes with amenities, Planning Area 2 (PDP23-0006) proposes 94 affordable apartments and a central recreation area, and Planning Area 3 proposes up to 75,000 square feet of commercial uses.
Additional Development Plan(s) will be submitted for Planning Area 3 in the future.
Location: Northwest corner of Ramon Road and Rattler Road – APN: 670-230-021 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the City of Rancho Mirage CITY COUNCIL RE: consideration of the above-referenced application pursuant to Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Title 17. An environmental assessment application was submitted for the subject project and the determination was made that the project required an initial study. An Initial Study has been prepared to result in the recommendation to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was published in the Desert Sun on December 17, 2023, and distributed to interested parties. The 30-day public ATTACHMENT 2
7-7
~ CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE
EA23-0006, GPZMA23-0002, SP23-0002, DA23-0002, TPM23-0004, PDP23-0006 & PDP23-0007 April 18, 2024
review period for the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was from December 22, 2023, to January 22, 2024.
The Public Hearing will be held on Thursday, April 18, 2024, at 1:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California, at which time and place pertinent testimony will be heard. The file, including all environmental information, is available for public inspection at City Hall, Monday through Friday, between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.
Written testimony may be submitted to the City Clerk via email to [email protected]
, or mailed to City of Rancho Mirage, ATTN: City Clerk, 69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270. Written testimony must be received no later than 10:00 a.m. on the day of the meeting to be considered by the City Council.
GOVERNMENT CODE § 65009 NOTICE: If you challenge this proposed activity in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council sufficiently prior to the Public Hearing to enable its consideration by them.
V
ICINITY MAP
7-8
~
JOTH AVE
/RIO/UM WAY
l l
C, ~
~ ~
3 ~ [:i ~
a' 1'i ~ §?
I,,! ~
IX>
0 1'i IX>
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
Cit
y of Rancho Mirage 1
CATANA SPECIFIC PLAN
Initial Study
Lead Ag
ency:
City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, California 92270
Prepar
ed by:
TERRA NOVA PLANNING & RESEARCH, INC.
42635 MELANIE PLACE, SUITE 101
PALM DESERT, CA 92211
December 2023
ATTACHMENT 3
7-9
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 2
ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY
CATANA SPECIFIC PLAN
Project Title: Catana Specific Plan
City Project No: Environmental Assessment Case No. EA23 -0006; General Plan Zoning Map Amendment Case No.
GPZMA23-0002; Specific Plan Case No. SP23-
0002; Development Agreement Case No. DA23-
0002, Tentative Parcel Map Case No. TPM23-0004
(Tentative Parcel Map 38834) and P reliminary
Development Permit Case Nos. PDP23 -0006 and
PDP23-0007
Lead Agency Name and
Address:
City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, California 92270
Phone: (760) 328-2266 Fax: (760) 324-9851
Applicant: McKellar McGowan Holdings, LLC
5120 Shoreham Place, Suite 280
San Diego, CA 92122
Contact Person: Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
Phone Number: (760) 328-2266 Ext. 208
Project Location: Northwest corner of Ramon Road and Rattler Road Project Area: 36± acres
Accessor Parcel
Number:
670-230-021
Existing
General Plan
Designation:
High Density Residential (H-R)
Proposed
General Plan / Zoning
Designation:
Catana Specific Plan; High Density Residential (H-
R), General Commercial (C-G); High Density
Residential/Affordable Housing Overlay (H-R/AHO)
7-10
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY .......................................................................................... 2 CATANA SPECIFIC PLAN ......................................................................................................... 2 CHAPTER 1: PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................... 7 Project Location ................................................................................................................... 7 Access ................................................................................................................................. 8 Utilities ................................................................................................................................. 8 Environmental Setting and Surrounding Land Uses ............................................................. 8 Other public agencies whose approval is required................................................................ 8 CHAPTER 2: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION ....................................14 1 - Aesthetics ......................................................................................................................17
1.1 Setting ........................................................................................................................17
1.2 Discussion of Impacts: ................................................................................................18
1.3 Mitigation Measures: ..................................................................................................20 2 - Agriculture and Forestry Resources ...............................................................................21
2.1 Setting ........................................................................................................................21
2.2 Discussion of Impacts: ................................................................................................22
2.3 Mitigation Measures: ..................................................................................................22 3 - Air Quality ......................................................................................................................23
3.1 Setting ........................................................................................................................23
3.2 Discussion of Impacts: ................................................................................................24
3.3 Mitigation Measures: ..................................................................................................29 4 - Biological Resources ......................................................................................................30
4.1 Setting ........................................................................................................................31
4.2 Discussion of Impacts: ................................................................................................31
4.3 Mitigation Measures: ..................................................................................................33 5 - Cultural Resources .........................................................................................................34
5.1 Setting ........................................................................................................................34
5.2 Discussion of Impacts: ................................................................................................35
5.3 Mitigation Measures: ..................................................................................................37 6 - Energy ...........................................................................................................................39
6.1 Setting ........................................................................................................................39
6.2 Discussion of Impacts: ...............................................................................................40
6.3 Mitigation Measures: ..................................................................................................41 7-11
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 4
7 - Geology and Soils ..........................................................................................................42
7.1 Setting ........................................................................................................................43
7.2 Discussion of Impacts: ................................................................................................43
7.3 Mitigation Measures: ..................................................................................................45 8 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...........................................................................................46
8.1 Setting ........................................................................................................................46
8.2 Discussion of Impacts: ................................................................................................48
8.3 Mitigation Measures: ..................................................................................................50 9 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................................51
9.1 Setting ........................................................................................................................52
9.2 Discussion of Impacts: ................................................................................................52
9.3 Mitigation Measures: ..................................................................................................53 10 - Hydrology and Water Quality ........................................................................................54
10.1 Setting ......................................................................................................................54
10.2 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................55
10.3 Mitigation Measures: ................................................................................................58 11 - Land Use and Planning ................................................................................................59
11.1 Setting ......................................................................................................................59
11.2 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................59
11.3 Mitigation Measures: ................................................................................................64 12 - Mineral Resources .......................................................................................................65
12.1 Setting ......................................................................................................................65
12.2 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................65
12.3 Mitigation Measures: ................................................................................................65 13 - Noise ............................................................................................................................66
13.1 Setting ......................................................................................................................66
13.2 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................67
13.3 Mitigation Measures: ................................................................................................68 14 - Population and Housing ...............................................................................................69
14.1 Setting ......................................................................................................................69
14.2 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................69
14.3 Mitigation Measures: ................................................................................................70 15 - Public Services.............................................................................................................71
15.1 Setting ......................................................................................................................71
15.2 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................72
15.3 Mitigation Measures: ................................................................................................73 7-12
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 5
16 - Recreation ....................................................................................................................74
16.1 Setting ......................................................................................................................74
16.2 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................74
16.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................. 74 17 - Transportation ..............................................................................................................75
17.1 Setting ......................................................................................................................75
17.2 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................76
17.3 Mitigation Measures: ................................................................................................83 18 - Tribal Cultural Resources .............................................................................................85
18.1 Setting ......................................................................................................................85
18.2 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................85
18.3 Mitigation Measures: ................................................................................................86 19 - Utilities and Service Systems .......................................................................................87
19.1 Setting ......................................................................................................................87
19.2 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................88
19.3 Mitigation Measures: ................................................................................................90 20 - Wildfire .........................................................................................................................91
20.1 Setting ......................................................................................................................91
20.2 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................91
20.3 Mitigation Measures: ................................................................................................92 21 - Mandatory Findings of Significance ..............................................................................93
21.1 Discussion of Impacts: ..............................................................................................93
21.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................. 95 Chapter 3: References ..............................................................................................................96 Chapter 4: Appendices .............................................................................................................97 Chapter 5: Report Preparers .....................................................................................................97
TABLES
Table 1 Maximum Daily Construction-Related Emissions Summary (pounds per day) .........25 Table 2 Maximum Daily Operational-Related Emissions Summary (pounds per day) ...........26 Table 3 Localized Significance Thresholds 25 Meters, 5 Acres (pounds per day) .................27 Table 4 Projected GHG Emissions Summary .......................................................................48 Table 5 Consistency with Applicable ....................................................................................50 Table 6 Water Demand at the Project Buildout .....................................................................56 Table 7 Project Trip Generation Summary ............................................................................77 Table 8 Existing Intersection Delay and Levels of Service ....................................................78 Table 9 Intersection Analysis for EAP (2025) Conditions ......................................................79 Table 10 Intersection Analysis for EAPC (2025) Conditions ...................................................80 Table 11 Intersection Analysis for Horizon Year (2040) Conditions ........................................82 7-13
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 6
Table 12 Estimated Solid Waste Disposal at Buildout.............................................................90 Table 13 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program .........................................................95
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 Regional Location Map ............................................................................................. 9 Exhibit 2 Project Vicinity Map ................................................................................................. 10 Exhibit 3 Project Location Map ...............................................................................................11 Exhibit 4 Conceptual Site Plan ...............................................................................................12 Exhibit 5 Land Use Map Amendment .....................................................................................13
APPENDICES
Appendix A CalEEMod Modeling ..............................................................................................98 Appendix B Biological Resources Assessment & Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Compliance Report ....................................................................99 Appendix C Phase I Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey (Including Tribal Consultation letters and responses) ........................................................................................... 100 Appendix D Traffic Analysis .................................................................................................... 101 Appendix E Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis ............................................... 102 Appendix F Response to Comments – California Department of Fish and Wildlife ……...……103
7-14
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 7
CHAPTER 1: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Location
The Catana Specific Plan (referred to hereafter as SP and/or the Proposed Project) area is located on the northwest corner of Ramon Road and Rattler Road in the City of Rancho Mirage, California (Exhibit 1 and 2). The site is currently vacant and designated as High Density Residential (R -H) on the City’s Land Use and Zoning Map, which allows a residential density of up to 9 DU/AC. The site is bounded by the Rancho Mirage High School to the north, Rattler Road and vacant land to the east, Ramon Road and residential development to the south, and vacant land to the west.
The site consists of Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 670-230-021 and is approximately 36 acres.
Project Description
The Catana Specific Plan proposes a mixed- use neighborhood on 36± acres located at the northwest corner of Ramon Road and Rattler Road. Catana provides much- needed housing for the City’s residents and expands the City’s commercial base. The residences at Catana will all be leased units catering to families and seniors who pref er to rent or are currently not able to purchase a home. Of the 305 potential units, up to 210 will be single family homes with front patios and private rear yards available at market rates, and up to 95 will be apartments in multiple buildings affordable to lower income households.
The community will be governed by a Specific Plan which establishes Project-specific standards and guidelines that provide flexibility for development of three distinct product types: single family homes, apartments and general commercial uses which are defined by Planning Area:
Planning Area 1 pr
ovides for up to 210 single family homes with a central clubhouse, pool, gym and interconnected paseos that bring internal connectivity to the residents and provides their homes a garden setting. This planning area is being developed consistent with the currently allowed density of 9 units per acre allowed under the High Density Residential designation.
Planning Area 2 allo
ws up to 95 apartments affordable to lower income households, and including a central recreation area. This Planning Area will apply an Affordable Housing Overlay to allow a density of up to 28 units per acre.
Planning Area 3 is
proposed to include up to 75,000 square feet of retail and office uses ranging from restaurants to medical offices. This Planning Area will be developed using the General Commercial land use designation.
The SP includes development standards for building height, building setbacks, development dens
ity, landscaping and parking. These standards prevail over City of Rancho Mirage Municipal Code standards, with the Municipal Code standards remaining applicable where provided in the Specific Plan.
The Catana Project consists of the following applications:
1. E
nvironmental Assessment Case No. EA23- 0006 fo r environmental determination pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
2. General Plan and Zoning Map Amendment C ase No. GPZMA23-0002to change the High Density Residential land use designation to General Commercial for 8.3 acres fronting Ramon Road, and apply the Affordable Housing Overlay to 3.3± acres (see Exhibit 5). 7-15
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 8
3. Specific Plan Case No. SP23-0002 to establish the development standards and guidelines for 3 Planning Areas within the 36± acre site.
4. Development Agreement Ca se No. DA23-0002 to establish development timelines, and responsibilities of the applicant and developer in the development of the phased project
5. Tentative Tract Map C ase No. TPM23-0004 (Tentative Parcel Map 38834) to subdivide the 36± acres into three parcels corresponding to the 3 Planning Areas.
6. Preliminary Development Plans Ca se Nos. PDP23-0006 and PDP23-0007 for the single family residential neighborhood in Planning Area 1 and the apartments in Planning Area
2. Additional Development Plan(s) will be submitted for Planning Area 3 in the future.
Access
The P
roject will take access from Ramon Road and Rattler Road. Please see Exhibit 4.
Utilities
Electricity: Southern California Edison
Natural Gas: The Gas Company
Domestic Water: Coachella Valley Water District
Sanitary Sewer: Coachella Valley Water District
Environmental Setting and Surrounding Land Uses
West: Vacant lands designated for Mixed Use (M-U)
North: Rancho Mirage High School
South: Ramon Road, Mission Hills North Country Club golf course and single family residential East: Rattler Road, vacant lands designated Medium Density Residential (R-M)
Other public agencies whose approval is required.
None.
7-16
7-17
r-- ..,
~ ~TERRANOVA
®
PLANNING & RESEARCH, INC.
North Palm
Springs
Project
Site
SUNRISE
STA CHINO
rings @
ijj
Coachella
®
Thermal
Valerie
Catana Specific Plan
Regional Location Map
Rancho Mirage, California
@
Mecca
@
®
Oasis
Desert Camp
Mortmar
North Shore
Salton
A 06.13.23
Exhibit
~
7-18
Source: Google Maps, 2022
r-- ..,
~ ~TERRANOVA
®
PLANNING & RESEARCH, INC.
•• • p·rojecf Site .
Catana Specific Plan
Vicinity Map
Rancho Mirage, California
06.13.23 Exhibit
0 7-19
Source: Google Earth Image, 06.11.2021 06.13.23
~..,
®
..._. ~TERRANOVA
Catana Specific Plan Exhibit
Project Location Map 0
Rancho Mirage, California 3
-----
PLANNING & RESEARCH, INC.
7-20
N
Source: McKellar McGowan Real Estate Development , 02.08.2023 A 06.13.23 Exhibit
Catana Specific Plan G
Conceptual Site Plan 4
Rancho Mirage, California
-----
r--- ..., ®
..._. ~TERRANOVA
PLANNING & RESEARCH, INC.
7-21
Existing Land Use Map
~~r~1'~11;i---'~~2;~,~ -'C::~h?l'tG1.l~~:;~fl fJ1,
~
;1=~~-:_~'-:,= --= s;:;- • --• ma i; _c-c,_,,.,t...,L1\~ 1": ~-J.-4...• 1~1 , t.....:.:~ .,•,_,•,·.• .. -f~'-~::'.~:'.:~-,.~:.,'-~-~:j_S~'+-f-Ti~~-''. ~ ~ ~t::P.~-~ Source: City of Rancho Mirage Land Use and Zoning Map
r---.,
~ ~TERRANOVA
®
PLANNING & RESEARCH, INC.
Catana Specific Plan
Land Use Map Amendment
Rancho Mirage, California
Proposed Land Use Map
N
A 07.26.23
Exhibit
0 Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 14
CHAPTER 2: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this Project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture and
Forestry Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas
Em
issions Hazards & Hazardous
Ma
terials
Hydrology / Water
Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities / Service
Syst
ems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of
Si
gnificance
7-22
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 15
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on - site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 7-23
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 16
9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
Determination: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation:
______________________________________________________
Pilar Lopez, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
_________________
Date:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing fur ther is required.
7-24
□
~
□
□
□
7-25
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
Determ ination: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation:
D I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[gj I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
D I find that the proposed project MAY have a s ignificant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
D I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
D I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequate ly in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARAT ION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
~ , Sen ior Planner
ancho Mirage
City of Rancho Mirage 16
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 17
Environmental Checklist and Discussion:
The following checklist evaluates the proposed Project’s potential adverse impacts. For those environmental topics for which a potential adverse impact may exist, a discussion of the existing site environment related to the topic is presented followed by an analysis of the Project’s potential adverse impacts. When the Project does not have any potential for adverse impacts for an environmental topic, the reasons why there are no potential adverse impacts are described.
1 - Aesthetics
AESTHETICS -- Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect
on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic
highway?
c) In non-urbanized areas,
substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings?
(Public views are those that are
experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project
conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic
quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare, which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017; Rancho Mirage Zoning Ordinance, as amended; Officially Designated State Scenic Highways Map, Caltrans.
1.1 Setting:
The City of Rancho Mirage, including the project site, is located in Coachella Valley which is a desert valley that extends approximately 45 miles in Riverside County, southeast from the San Bernardino Mountains to the northern shore of the Salton Sea. The Project site occurs in an urban environment in the northern portion of the city. The current urban environment includes a high school, single family homes, commercial services, vacant lands, and a major roadway. 7-26
□ □ IZI □
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ IZI □
□ □ IZI □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 18
The San Bernardino, San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountain ranges provide scenic views throughout the city. The San Bernardino range is to the north, the San Jacinto range is to the west, and the Santa Rosas to the south and southwest of the city.
The segment of Highway 111 within the city is eligible for designation as a state scenic highway in the California State Scenic Highway Program and is located 3 miles south of the project site.
Ramon Road is a major roadway along the southern boundary of the project site and is designated a View Corridor in the General Plan (General Plan Exhibit 32).
The project site is currently vacant and undeveloped. Ultimate development of the project site will result in the construction of single- and multi-family residential units and a commercial shopping center which could include general commercial, retail, offices and restaurants.
The Aesthetic impacts of the project are discussed below.
1.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a) Less Than Significant Impact. A significant impact may occur if the Project introduces incompatible visual elements within a field of view containing a scenic vista or substantially blocks views of a scenic vista. Scenic vistas are generally described in two ways: panoramic views (visual access to a large geographic area, for which the field of view can be wide and extend into the distance) and focal views (visual access to a particular object, scene, or feature of interest).
The Project site is located in a largely urbanized area of Rancho Mirage that supports a mix of residential and commercial land uses. The Project site is currently vacant and bounded by Rancho Mirage High School to the north, Rattler Road and vacant lands to the east, Ramon Road and residential development to the south, and vacant lands to the west. The City of Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Section 17.18.090, View Protection, establishes development standards for the protection of scenic resources. Ramon Road is a designated view corridor in the General Plan (Exhibit 32).
From the subject property, scenic views of the San Bernardino Mountains are to the north and northeast, views of the Santa Rosa Mountains are to the south, and views of the San Jacinto Mountains are to the west. The Project site is located approximately 2.2 miles south of the San Bernardino Mountain foothills, approximately 3 miles north of the Santa Rosa Mountain foothills, and approximately 6.6 miles east of the San Jacinto Mountain foothills. From the Project site, views of the lower elevations of the mountains to the north, south and west are blocked by intervening developments. However, middle and upper elevations of the mountains are visible above.
Future construction of the Project site would require the use of heavy equipment for grading, paving and excavation, and building. Construction activities would be visible from the surrounding streets and urban developments; however, impacts from construction are temporary.
The Project proposes residential building heights of up to 24 feet in PA 1 and 37 feet in PA 2, and commercial/retail building heights of up to 28 feet tall in PA 3. Currently the City allows building heights of up to 1 story or 20 feet in height in the High Density Residential zone. The proposed buildings would be taller than what is allowed under the current zoning designation, and taller than the adjacent residential uses to the northwest and south of the project site.
7-27
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 19
Currently, the residents to the northwest (Tuscany) have middle and upper views of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the south and Little San Bernardino Mountains to the east. The Proposed Project will not affect those views. There are limited visual resources to the southeast where the Project is located, and the visual quality of existing viewsheds is already obstructed by intervening development and distance from the foothills. Furthermore, the residential units proposed in PA 1 (nearest to Tuscany) are designed with building heights of up to 24 feet, and with only partial second stories, which will provide breaks in structure massing. In addition, a setback of 45 feet is proposed for second story features along the north boundary of the Project. The 37 foot structures proposed in PA 2 will occur at a distance of 500 feet at their closes point to the southeast corner of Tuscany, which will limit their visibility when separated by the PA 1 homes intervening. While the Project has the potential to impact views of the lower elevations of the San Bernardino and Santa Rosa Mountains to the southeast, the views to the east and south from Tuscany would remain unaffected.
Residents to the south of the site have distant views of the San Bernardino Mountains to the north; however, these views are partially obstructed by existing intervening landsc aping and fencing.
The closest home to the Project site is located south of a golf course hole, over 400 feet from the Project. The proposed Project would partially obstruct views of the lower mountain elevations to the north; however, the SP requires 25-foot setbacks for commercial uses along Ramon Road. In addition, the maximum allowed height of 28 feet for commercial uses in PA 3 is limited to no more than 50% of all structures, with a 24 -foot height average required PA-wide. These development standards would limit the mass and scale of proposed structures along Ramon Road. Therefore, existing homes to the south may have views of the lower elevations somewhat obstructed, however views of the upper elevations would remain.
Viewers from the north will not experience a change in northerly or westerly views but could experience view blockage of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the south. The upper elevations of the mountains would be visible above buildings within the Project, because of the setback requirements included in the SP and distance from the mountains.
Future residential development to the east of the Project will not experience a change in northerly or southerly views but could experience view blockage of the foothills to the west. However the upper elevations of the San Jacinto mountains would remain visible due to the limited height allowed in PA 1 (24 feet), and the distance from these homes to the Project across Rattler Road.
Future residential development to the west of the Project will not experience a change in northerly, southerly, or westerly views, but could experience view blockage of the foothills to the east.
However, the upper elevations of the San Bernardino mountains would remain.
Public views from Ramon Road and Rattler Road for travelers on these roadways would be impacted in a similar manner, with northerly views of the San Bernardino foothills obstructed, but the ridgelines visible above due to distance for travelers on Ramon Road. From Rattler Road views to the west would be similarly affected, but the higher elevations of the San Jacinto Mountains to the west would remain visible.
With development of the proposed Project, views of the foothills will be reduced but not eliminated, views of the mid -range and tops of the surrounding mountains will remain, and impacts will be less than significant.
7-28
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 20
b) No Impact. The proposed SP area does not contain any scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings. No impact to these resources will occur.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. The SP area is currently vacant. The ultimate development of the site will result in the construction of a residential structures up to 24 feet in PA 1 and 37 feet in PA 2, and commercial/retail structures up to 28 feet tall in PA 3. The SP proposes a Desert Modern theme, which blends contemporary and Mid- Century styles. Buildings must have clean lines, play off horizontal and vertical planes, and incorporate natural materials. The proposed Project requires landscaping and high-quality design features to minimize any visual degradation of the site. Furthermore, the SP includes development standards and guidelines that require building articulation, quality construction, and a coordinated architectural style. The visual character along Ramon Road includes a mix of commercial, institutional and residential development of similar character, mass and scale to that proposed in the SP. Therefore, impacts associated with visual character are expected to be less than significant.
d) Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is located in an urban environment that includes existing sources of light and glare associated with nearby land uses. Nearby sources of light include exterior lighting at the high school and on commercial and residential buildings, street lighting on the adjacent Ramon Road, passing vehicle headlights, and outdoor lighting on surface parking lots. Currently, there are no existing sources of light on the project site.
The ultimate development of the Project site can be expected to generate increased levels of light and glare from interior and exterior building lighting, safety and security lighting, landscape lighting, and vehicles accessing the site during the day and nighttime; however, the SP does not propose the use of high intensity outdoor lighting. Glare can also be expected from building windows during the day and nighttime. However, lighting and glare levels are not expected to exceed typical levels within the surrounding urban environment. The Catana SP does not allow the use of highly reflective materials in the architectural design. The proposed Project will be designed in accordance with City of Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Section 17.18.050, Exterior Glare, Heat, and Light, and will properly shield light fixtures to minimize spillage onto adjacent properties. The Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) design standards will be incorporated into Project PDPs to assure that the proposed Project’s light and glare impacts will be less than significant.
1.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Monitoring: None required.
7-29
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 21
2 - Agriculture and Forestry Resources
AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY
RESOURCES – In determining whether
impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by
the California Dept. of Conservation as
an optional model to use in assessing
impacts on agriculture and farmland.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of forest land,
timberland, or timberland zoned
Timberland Production?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non forest
use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their
location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to
non-agricultural use?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017; California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program, 2018.
2.1 Setting:
The City of Rancho Mirage contains no agricultural or forest lands, and no lands are designated for agricultural or forestry purposes in the General Plan. Agricultural production occurs in the eastern Coachella Valley, more than 10 miles east of the City. 7-30
□ □ □ ~
□ □ □ ~
□ □ □ ~
□ □ □ ~
□ □ □ ~
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 22
2.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a-e) No Impact. The site is currently vacant and designated as High Density Residential (R -H) on the City’s Land Use and Zoning Map, which allows a residential density of up to 9 DU/AC.
There are no existing or mapped agricultural or forestry resources within or in proximity to the Project site, and such uses are not proposed as part of the Catana Specific Plan. No agricultural lands will be impacted by the Project.
Prime Farmland: A ccording to the California Important Farmlands mapping provided by the California Department of Conservation, the Project site is designated as “Other Land.” No prime or unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance exists on the Project site or in the Project vicinity. The Project site is not located on or near any property zoned or otherwise intended for agricultural uses. As such, the Project would not convert farmland to nonagricultural use. No impact would occur.
Williamson Act: The
Project site and surrounding properties are designated for urban uses in the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map. No land on or near the Project site is under a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with any zoning for agricultural uses or a Williamson Act Contract. No impact would occur.
Forest Land: The
Project site is located on the desert floor, designated High Density Residential, and surrounded by urban development and vacant land designated for urban uses. The sub ject site does not contain forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned for timberland production.
Therefore, the Project would not rezone forest land or timberland as defined by the Public Resources Code. It would not result in the conversion of forest land to non-forest uses or changes to the environment that could result in such a conversion. No impact would occur.
2.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None
Monitoring: None
7-31
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 23
3 - Air Quality
AIR QUALITY – Where available, the
significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or
air pollution control district may be
relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of
people?
Sources: SCAQMD AQMP, 2022; 2020- 2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report, Southern California Association of Governments, adopted September 3, 2020; “Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology,” prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Revised, July 2008; “2003 Coachella Valley PM
10 State Implementation Plan,” August 1, 2003; CalEEMod Version 2022. 1.1.14 (Appendix A); Project materials.
3.1 Setting:
Background:
The Coachella Valley is in the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB), which includes part of Riverside County and all of Imperial County. The SSAB is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). All development within the SSAB is subject to the 2022 SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), and the Coachella Valley region is subject to the 2003 Coachella Valley PM 10 State Implementation Plan (CV PM 10 SIP). SCAQMD operates and maintains regional air quality monitoring stations at numerous locations throughout its jurisdiction. The Project site is within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes monitoring stations in Palm Springs, Indio, and Mecca.
Criteria air pollutants are contaminants for which state and federal air quality standards have been established. The SSAB exceeds state and federal standards for fugitive dust (PM 10) and ozone
(O3), and is in attainment for PM2.5, except the City of Calexico. Ambient air quality in the SSAB, including the Project site, does not exceed state and federal standards for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxides, sulfur dioxide, lead, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, or vinyl chloride. 7-32
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ IZI □
□ □ IZI □
□ □ IZI □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 24
Buildout of the proposed Project will result in air quality impacts during construction and operation.
The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2022.1.1.14 was used to project air quality emissions that will be generated by the Project (Appendix A).
3.2 Discussion of Impacts:
Discussion of Impacts
a) No Impact. According to CEQA, a significant air quality impact could occur if the proposed project is not consistent with the applicable Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) or would obstruct the implementation of the policies or hinder reaching the goals of that plan. The Project site is within the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) and will be subject to SCAQMD’s 2022 AQMP and the 2003 Coachella Valley PM
10 SIP. The AQMP is a comprehensive plan that establishes control strategies and guidance on regional emission reductions for air pollutants. The AQMP is based, in part, on the land use plans of jurisdictions in the region.
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) adopted the 2020- 2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020 RTP/SCS) to comply with metropolitan planning organization (MPO) requirements under the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act. The RTP/SCS Growth Management chapter forms the basis of land use and transportation controls of the AQMP. Projects that are consistent with the population forecasts are considered consistent with the AQMP. SCAG forecasts that the City’s population will be 25,200 in 2045.
A project is considered to be in conformity with adopted air quality plans if it adheres to the requirements of the SCAQMD Rule Book, AQMP, and adopted and forthcoming control measures, and is consistent with growth forecasts in the applicable plan(s) (or is directly included in the applicable plan). Conformity with growth forecasts can be established by demonstrating that a project is consistent with the land use plan that was used to generate the growth forecast.
A non- conforming project would be one that increases the gross number of dwelling units, increases the number of vehicle trips, and/or increases the overall vehicle miles traveled in an affected area relative to the applicable land use plan.
The 36-acre Project site is currently designated High Density Residential which allows up to 9 DU/AC. The Catana Specific Plan proposes up to 305 single- and multi-family residential units and 75,000 square feet of commercial/retail uses across three planning areas (PAs). PA 1 proposes up to 210 dwelling units on 24.5 acres and PA 2 proposes up to 95 affordable housing units on 3.3 acres, which are densities of 9 DU/AC and 27 DU/AC, respectively. When considered as whole, the average density for the entire 36- acre project site is 9 DU/AC, which is consistent with the sites underlying land use and zoning designation. Therefore, the Project conforms to regional growth forecasts that were included in the local land use plans and SCAG RTP/SCS.
Furthermore, a VMT screening analysis was prepared that found the Project conforms to the City’s VMT policy, which complies with State law SB 743. The analysis found that due to the mix of local serving retail with a high percentage of affordable housing units, the Project allows for on- site interaction between residents, jobs, and retail services which will reduce VMTs by encouraging pedestrian and bicycle activity (see Section 17, Transportation, for detailed VMT analysis).
7-33
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 25
In summary, the Project will be part of anticipated growth, does not increase the residential land use assumptions used in the SCAG analysis, and conforms to the City’s VMT policy. The proposed Project would be implemented in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations contained in these plans to meet the applicable air quality standards. Therefore, the Project will be consistent with the AQMP and will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the plan. No conflict will occur.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. A project is considered to have significant impacts if there is a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. As previously stated, the SSAB is currently a non-attainment area for PM 10 and ozone. Therefore, if the Project’s
construction and/or operational emissions exceed SCAQMD thresholds for PM 10 and ozone precursors, which include carbon monoxide (CO), nitrous oxides (NO x), and volatile/reactive organic compounds/gases (VOC or ROG), then impacts would be cumulatively considerable and significant.
The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2022.1.1.14 was used to project air quality emissions that will be generated by the proposed Project (Appendix A). Criteria air pollutants will be released during both the construction and operational phases of the Project, as shown in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1 summarizes short -term construction-related emissions, and Table 2 summarizes ongoing emissions generated during operation.
Construction Emissions
For analysis purposes, P roject buildout is anticipated to take up to 2 years. The construction period includes all aspects of Project development, including site preparation, grading, paving, building construction, and application of architectural coatings.
As shown in Table 1, emissions generated by construction activities will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for any criteria pollutant. The analysis assumes cut and fill material will balance on - site and will not require the import or export of grading material. Applicable standard requirements and best management practices include, but are not limited to, the implementation of a dust control and management plan in conformance with SCAQMD Rules 403 and 403.1, phased application of architectural coatings, and the use of low-polluting architectural paint and coatings per SCAQMD Rule 1113.
Table 1
Maximum Daily Construction-Related Emissions Summary
(pounds per day)
Construction Emissions1 CO NOx ROG SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Daily Maximum 52.10 47.80 25.10 0.09 9.61 5.63
SCAQMD Thresholds 550.00 100.00 75.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 Exceeds? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.14 (output tables provided in Appendix A).
Given that criteria pollutant thresholds will not be exceeded, and standard best management practices will be applied during construction, impacts will be less than significant.
7-34
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 26
Operational Emissions
Operational emissions are ongoing emissions that will occur over the life of the Project. They include area source emissions, emissions from energy demand (electricity), and mobile source (vehicle) emissions.
According to the Project traffic impact analysis (Appendix D ), the Project will generate approximately 5,680 daily trips (see Section 17 Transportation). Table 2 summarizes projected emissions during operation of the Project at build out. As shown, operational emissions will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance for any criteria pollutants for operations. Impacts will be less than significant.
Table 2
Maximum Daily Operational-Related Emissions Summary
(pounds per day)
Operational Emissions1 CO NOx ROG SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Daily Maximum 143.0 21.3 39.9 0.26 16.8 4.83
SCAQMD Thresholds 550.00 100.00 75.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 Exceeds? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.14 (output tables provided in Appendix A).
Cumulative Contribution
A significant impact could occur if the Project would make a considerable cumulative contribution to federal or state non -attainment pollutants. The Coachella Valley portion of the SSAB is classified as a “non- attainment” area for PM 10 and ozone. Cumulative air quality analysis is evaluated on a regional scale (rather than a neighborhood or city scale, for example), given the dispersing nature of pollutant emissions and aggregate impacts from surrounding jurisdictions and air management districts. Any development project or activity resulting in emissions of PM10, ozone, or ozone precursors will contribute, to some degree, to regional non- attainment designations of ozone and PM10.
The SCAQMD does not currently recommend quantified analyses of construction and/or operational emissions from multiple development projects, nor does it provide methodologies or thresholds of significance to be used to assess the significance of cumulative emissions generated by multiple cumulative projects. However, it is recommended that a project’s potential contribution to cumulative impacts be assessed utilizing the same significance criteri a as those for project -specific impacts. Furthermore, SCAQMD states that if an individual development project generates less than significant construction or operational emissions, then the project would not generate a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment.
As shown in the tables above, Project-related PM
10, CO, NOx, and ROG emissions are projected
to be below established SCAQMD thresholds. Therefore, the proposed Project will result in incremental, but not cumulatively considerable impacts on regional PM 10 or ozone levels.
Summary
As shown above, both construction and operation of the Project will result in criteria emissions below the SCAQMD significance thresholds, and neither would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Impacts related to 7-35
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 27
construction and operation will be less than significant and are not cumulatively considerable from a non-attainment standpoint.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, retirement homes, hospitals, and other land uses occupied by individuals who are potentially more sensitive to pollutants than the average. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are the single-family residences (Tuscany) located immediately northwest of the site.
To determine if a project has the potential to generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts, SCAQMD offers Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) analysis. Analysis of LSTs by a local government is voluntary and is designed for projects that are less than or equal to 5 acres.
Although the total Project area is greater than 5 acres, the area of daily disturbance (for purposes of LST analysis only) can be expected to be 5 acres or less per day at any given location. As such, the 5-acre Mass Rate Look-Up table is appropriate under the SCAQMD’s methodology to screen for potential localized air quality impacts.1
The Mass Rate Look-Up tables for LSTs were used to determine if the proposed Project would have the potential to generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts during construction and operation. The LST for Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30 (Coachella Valley) was used to determine LST emission thresholds. The distance from the emission source and the maximum daily site disturbance also determines the emission thresholds. The nearest sensitive receptors are the single-family residences located immediately northwest of the Project site. For analysis purposes, the scenario of a sensitive receptor being within 25 meters was used, which is the shortest available receptor distance.
Operation of the proposed Project will not involve any substantial stationary sources, such as industrial or heavy agricultural uses, that might result in substantial pollutant concentrations.
Therefore, operational emissions will not be further analyzed using LSTs. Table 3 shows that LST thresholds are not expected to be exceeded for any criteria pollutant during construction. Impacts to sensitive receptors will be less than significant.
Table 3
Localized Significance Thresholds
25 Meters, 5 Acres
(pounds per day)
CO NOx PM10 PM2.5
Construction Emissions 52.10 47.80 9.61 5.63
LST Threshold 2,292 304 14 8
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Source of Emission Data: CalEEMod version 2022.1.1.14 (output tables provided in Appendix A).
Source of LST Threshold: LST Mass Rate Look-up Table, 25 meters, 5 acres, SCAQMD
1 SCAQMD “Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds.” 7-36
- _l==l==l==I-
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 28
Health Impacts
As shown in Tables 1 and 2, construction and operation of the proposed Project will result in criteria emissions that are below the SCAQMD significance thresholds, and neither would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.
It is not scientifically possible to calculate the degree to which exposure to various levels of criteria pollutant emissions will impact an individual’s health. There are several factors that make predicting a Project-specific numerical impact difficult:
• Not all individuals will be affected equally due to medical history. Some may have medical pre-dispositions, and diet and exercise levels tend to vary across a population. • Due to the dispersing nature of pollutants, it is difficult to locate and identify which group of individuals will be impacted, either directly or indirectly. • There are currently no approved methodologies or studies to base assumptions on, such as baseline health levels or emission level-to-health risk ratios.
Due to these limitations, the extent to which the Project poses a health risk is uncertain but unavoidable. However, the application of the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds indicates that construction of the Project would have less than significant impacts to sensitive receptors.
Likewise, the overall emissions expected to result from the Project based on projections developed using CalEEMod indicate that the development -related emissions will fall below the SCAQMD mass rate thresholds.
Pursuant to Rule 1401, 1401.1, and 212 of the SCAQMD rulebook, the District requires the preparation of a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) for facilities associated with high levels of toxic air contaminants. To reduce exposure to toxic air contaminants (TACs), CARB recommends minimum separation distances between new sensitive land uses, such as residences, and eight categories of existing sources of TACs: high- traffic freeways and roads, distribution centers, rail yards, ports, refineries, chrome plating facilities, perchloroethylene dry cleaners, and large gas stations.
2 The proposed Project neither proposes the development of any such facilities, nor is it situated in proximity to any such facility. While the Project is bound by a major arterial roadway to the south (Ramon Road), CARB defines freeways and high traffic roads as including rural roads with 50,000 vehicles per day. As shown in the Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix D) prepared for the Project by Urban Crossroads, nearby roadways have maximum daily traffic (ADT) volumes of up to 31,100 vehicles per day in 2025 with Project and ambient growth weekday conditions. 3 The
preparation of an HRA is therefore not required.
Based on these findings, it is therefore anticipated that the Project’s impacts and associated health effects resulting from criteria pollutants will overall be less than significant. The Project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
d) Less Than Significant Impact. A significant impact could occur if objectionable odors are generated that would adversely impact sensitive receptors. Odors are typically associated with industrial projects involving the use of chemicals, solvents, petroleum products, and other strong- smelling elements used in manufacturing processes, as well as in sewage treatment facilities and
2 CalEPA and CARB, Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (April 2005).
3 Catana Specific Plan Traffic Analysis, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (June 30, 2023), Exhibit 6- 1: EAPC (2025) Traffic Volumes.
7-37
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 29
landfills. The Project proposes a mixed use development consisting of residential units and a commercial center. Odors from these uses could include cooking odors and similar odors associated with daily living and shopping opportunities. None of these types of odors are either objectionable or long term, and no odors from industrial uses are anticipated.
During construction, odors associated with construction activities, particularly paving, will be generated. However, any such odors would be short-term and quickly dispersed below detectable levels as distance from the construction site increases. The SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance), and SCAQMD Best Available Control Technology Guidelines would limit potential objectionable odor impacts from residential and commercial uses during the Project’s long -term operations phase.
Therefore, impacts from objectionable odors will be less than significant.
3.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required
Monitoring: None required
7-38
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 30
4 - Biological Resources
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would
the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or US
Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined
by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede
the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan,
or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017; Ramon Rattler Project, Biological Resources Assessment and Coachella Valley Multiple Specifics Habitat Conservation Plan Compliance Report, prepared by WSP, March 2023 (Appendix B).
7-39
□ IZI □ □
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ IZI □
□ □ IZI □
□ □ IZI □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 31
4.1 Setting:
The Coachella Valley is located within the Sonoran Desert which is a subdivision of the Colorado Desert. The Sonoran Desert contains a wide range of biological resources that are highly specialized and endemic to the region. A wide range of common plant species, such as mesquite, smoke tree, desert holly, creosote bush, and palo verde, are supported by the conditions present in the valley. A variety of wildlife species including those endemic to the valley are present, and some have been listed as threatened or endangered by federal and state agencies. Regional sensitive wildlife species include the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard, Peninsular bighorn sheep, Casey’s June beetle, arroyo southwestern toad, and mountain yellow-legged frog. Several sensitive bird species are found in the valley, including the Least Bell’s vireo and southwestern flycatcher, both listed as endangered. Plant species that are federally listed as endangered include the Coachella Valley milkvetch and triple-ribbed milkvetch.
The Proposed Project is within the boundaries of and subject to the provisions of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP).
4 The CVMSHCP is a comprehensive
regional plan that balances growth in the Coachella Valley with the requirements of federal and State endangered species laws. The project site is not located within or adjacent to a CVMSHCP Conservation Area.
4.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a) Less than Significant with Mitigation. The Project site is currently vacant and is surrounded by a mix of developed and undeveloped lands. The proposed Project site is relatively flat and contains two types of Myoma fine sand [0 to 5 percent slopes (MaB) and 5 to 15 percent slopes (MaD)]. The Project site was previously cleared in 2018, and currently consists of largely open ground with a scant cover of plant species that have regrown since 2018. The native vegetation on site is described a disturbed “Dicoria canescens – Abronia villosa Sparsely Vegetated Alliance Desert dunes” (Holland type “desert sand fields).
A Biological Resources Assessment was prepared for the Project in March 2023 (WSP) that reported a list of 63 special status species with the potential to occur on the project site or within the project vicinity (3 -mile radius). The Assessment included a field survey that was conducted on January 24, 2023. Of the 63 special status species listed, 49 have no potential of occurrence.
No species listed as threatened or endangered were observed on the site.
CVMSHCP Covered Species
There are six CVMSHCP covered species with a potential to occur on the project site including:
Coachella Valley milk -vetch, Coachella giant sand treader cricket, Coachella Valley Jerusalem cricket, burrowing owl, Palm Springs pocket mouse, and Coachella Valley (Palm Springs) round- tailed ground squirrel. Participation in the CVMSHCP, payment of the required CVMSHCP development/mitigation fee and participation in the plan will fully mitigate project related impacts (although none are anticipated) to all of the CVMSHCP covered species with the exception of burrowing owl.
4 Recirculated Final Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan; Figure 8-3 . 7-40
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 32
Burrowing Owl
Burrowing owl is a State species of special concern that resides in open dry grasslands and desert areas. Since the site is currently vacant and covered sparsely with vegetation, there is a very low potential for burrowing owl to occur onsite. None were identified during the site survey, nor were their sign or suitable burrows sighted. The CVMSHCP and State law prohibit the take of burrowing owl. Should burrowing owl be found on the property prior to construction, a significant impact would occur. In order to assure that this impact is mitigated, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 is provided below, which requires pre- construction surveys to assure that the species is not present, or to protect the species should it be identified on-site. With implementation of this mitigation measure, impacts to burrowing owls will be less than significant.
Non-CV MSHCP Species
There are eight species not covered by the CVMSHCP with a potential to occur on the project site. Two bird species, the prairie falcon and golden eagle, are expected to have a low probability to forage over the site. Prairie falcon is not listed as threatened or endangered by either State or Federal agencies but is considered a “Species of Special Concern” by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The golden eagle is not listed as threatened or endangered but is a fully protected species under CDFW. Five plant species have a low probability of growing on the site, including Chaparral sand- verbena, Abram’s spurge, Arizona spurge, flat- seeded spurge, and slender cottonheads. None of these plant species are listed as threatened or endangered and are generally not expected to occur on the site considering the past history of disturbance on this parcel, including grubbing and use of soil binders.
One special status bird species was observed immediately adjacent to the site during the assessment: loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) designated as a California Species of Special Concern (SSC) by the CDFW. No suitable nesting habitat occurs on the Project site, but the species could forage on the site. Loggerhead shrike is protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as described below.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The existing vegetation on and adjacent to the property would have the potential to provide nesting opportunities for birds covered under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). As the subject site is vacant, these species would reside s easonally within the subject site. Nesting activities would occur between February and August of any year. Under the provisions of the MBTA, impacts to covered nesting birds would be considered a significant impact. In order to assure that impacts to bird nests covered under the MBTA are reduced to less than significant levels, a pre- construction survey is required if any activity to remove vegetation is proposed during the nesting season, as provided in Mitigation Measure BIO -2, below. With implementation of this mitigation measure, impacts to birds covered by the MBTA will be less than significant. b, c) No Impact . The Project site does not contain any streams, riparian habitat, marshes, protected wetlands, vernal pools or sensitive natural communities protected by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. No Project related impacts will occur.
d) Less than Significant. According to the Project-specific Biological Resource Assessment, no wildlife corridors or biological linkages are mapped on or adjacent to the Project site. Therefore, development of the site will not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory species. The site is not known to be a native wildlife nursery site; however, the Project could result in potential impacts to nesting birds, as discussed in a) above. Impacts will be less than significant.
7-41
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 33
e, f) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the boundaries of the CVMSHCP, and is therefore su bject to payment of the Development Mitigation Fee, which will mitigate potential impacts to covered species as a standard requirement imposed by the City.
The site is not within or adjacent to a CVMSHCP-designated Conservation Area, so no additional mitigation measures or provisions are required. The project will not conflict with any policies or ordinances that protect biological species, or any habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans. Impacts are expected to be less than significant.
4.3 Mitigation Measures:
BIO-1 A preconstruction survey following CDFG’s Staff Report for Burrowing Owl (2012) must be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to initiating construction. Unless avoidable, all burrowing owls present must be relocated prior to any ground disturbing activities. If burrowing owls are identified on-site, a Burrowing Owl Relocation and Management Plan will be prepared to describe and outline how the burrowing owl will be actively or passively relocated per CDFW protocol. Prior to construction, any owls occurring on- site will be relocated prior to vegetation removal. Relocation will require prior permission from the CDFW, at a minimum.
BIO-2 To avoid impacting nesting birds, either avoidance of project -related disturbance during the nesting season (1 February through 31 August) or nesting bird surveys conducted by a qualified ornithologist or biologist immediately prior to on- site disturbance during the nesting season shall be required. If nesting birds are found, no work would be permitted near the nest until young have fledged. There is no established protocol for nest avoidance, however, when consulted the CDFW generally recommends avoidance buffers of about 500 feet for birds-of-prey and species listed as threatened or endangered, and 100–300 feet for unlisted songbirds.
Mitigation Monitoring:
BIO-A Prior to the issuance of any permit to allow ground disturbance on the site, the Project Proponent shall furnish the City with pre-construction surveys for burrowing owl and MBTA covered birds.
Responsible Parties: Project applicant, project biologist, Planning Department.
7-42
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 34
5 - Cultural Resources
CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would
the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in
§15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
Sources: Phase 1 Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey, William Warren Group Project (Catana SP), prepared by CRM TECH. December 17, 2022 (Appendix C).
5.1 Setting:
The City of Rancho Mirage is located in the Coachella Valley where the Cahuilla Indians settled centuries ago. The Cahuilla Indians were a Takic -speaking people of hunters and gatherers generally divided into three groups by geographic setting: the Pass Cahuilla of the San Gorgonio Pass – Palm Springs area; the Mountain Cahuilla of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains and the Cahuilla Valley; and the Desert Cahuilla of the eastern Coachella Valley.
In 1823, the first noted group of European explorers traveled through the Coachella Valley mainly along established trails due to the harsh environment. As railroad lines and stations were completed, non -Indian settlement arrived in the Coachella Valley and expanded in the next decade after the Homestead Act, the Desert Land Act, and other federal land laws opened public land for claims. Agriculture became the dominant economic activity with the development of extensive groundwater resources (mainly artesian wells). From 1920s on, a new industry began to develop focusing on winter resorts, hotels and winter camps. By the mid-20 th century, country
clubs began to develop and have since spread throughout the Valley, making it a premier winter retreat in southern California. The first settlement activities were noted in the 1910s-1920s in the Rancho Mirage area. The community gained its name in the 1930s and rapid growth after the WWII.
A standard Phase I Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey was performed for the Project site in 2022 under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. That study consisted of a historical/archaeological resources records search, historical background research, Native American consultation, and an intensive-level field survey. The results of the Phase 1 study are further discussed below.
7-43
□ □ ~ □
□ ~ □ □
□ □ □ ~
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 35
5.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a, b) Less than Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation. Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines generally defines a historic resource as a resource that is:
(1) Listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register);
(2) Included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code); or
(3) Identified as significant in an historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code).
Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register. The California Register automatically includes all properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) and those formally determined to be eligible for listing in the National Register.
Section 15064.5(a)(3)(D) of the CEQA Guidelines generally defines archaeological resources as any resource that “has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.” Archaeological resources are features, such as tools, utensils, carvings, fabric, building foundations, etc., that document evidence of past human endeavors and that may be historically or culturally important to a significant earlier community.
Eastern Information Center (EIC) Record’s Search
A CRM TECH archaeologist conducted a cultural resources records search on March 30, 2022, at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) University of California, Riverside. Within a half -mile radius of the project boundary, EIC records identify at least nine other previous studies on various tracts of land and linear features, including adjacent properties to the west and the south. One historical/ archaeological site and two isolates —i.e., localities with fewer than three artifacts — were previously recorded within the half -mile radius of the project site. The nearest among the three known cultural resources was located just outside of the northern project boundary in an area now occupied by Rancho Mirage High School. Since none of the previously recorded cultural resources was located within the project site, none of them require further consideration.
Historical Record Search
Review of recent and historical aerial photographs found that the project site has remained undeveloped despite commercial and residential development occurring on surrounding properties.
Field Inspection
A field survey of the Project site was conducted on March 8, 2022, by a CRM Tech archaeologist.
As a result of the field survey, a previously undocumented archaeological site from the historic period was recorded in the project area and given the temporary designation of Site 3817- 1H, pending assignment of an official identification number in the California Historical Resources Inventory. No other cultural resources, either prehistoric or historical in origin, were found during the survey.
7-44
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 36
Site 3817-1H measures roughly 10 feet by 9 feet in size and consists of a very small refuse scatter of four crushed metal cans. Light refuse deposits like this represent one of the most common types of historic -period archaeological remains found in the southern California desert region, typically the results of incidental trash discarding. Without an exceptional quantity or quality of artifacts, Site 3817-1H holds little promise for any new or important archaeological data. Based on these considerations, Site 3817-1H does not appear eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources and does not meet CEQA definition of a “historical resource.”
Native American Consultation
On December 7, 2021, CRM TECH submitted a written request to the State of C alifornia Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a records search in the commission’s Sacred Lands File. In addition, CRM TECH contacted the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians to invite tribal participation in the field survey.
In response to CRM TECH’s inquiry, the NAHC states in a letter dated February 2, 2022, that the Sacred Lands File identified no Native American cultural resources in the project vicinity; however, the NAHC recommended that local Native American groups be consulted for f urther information and provided a referral list of 16 individuals associated with 11 local Native American groups who may have knowledge of such resources. The NAHC’s reply has been provided to the City for reference during their tribal consultation efforts.
In addition to the consultation undertaken by the Project archaeologist, California Government Code Section 65352.3 (adopted pursuant to the requirements of Senate Bill 18 [SB 18]) requires local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with tribal organizations prior to making a decision to adopt or amend a general or specific plan. The tribal organizations eligible to consult have traditional lands in a local government’s jurisdiction, and are identified, upon request, by the NAHC. As noted in the California Office of Planning and Research’s Tribal Consultation Guidelines (2005), “The intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places.”.
Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) requires lead agencies to notify their local tribes about development projects. It also mandates lead agencies consult with Tribes if requested and sets the princi pals for conducting and concluding the required consultation process. Pursuant to AB 52 and SB 18 consultation requirements, the City of Rancho Mirage initiated a SB18 and AB52 consultation process. The City conducted a 90- day tribal consultation period from September 20, 2023 to December 20, 2023. As a result of that consultation, the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI), requested the addition of Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and CUL-3. See Section 18, Tribal Cultural Resources, for further discussion.
Summary:
No historical resources exist within or adjacent to the project site, and thus the proposed Project will not cause a substantial adverse change to any known “historical resources.”
No archaeological resources were identified on the site from records searches or site investigation. However, the potential for buried resources does exist on the site. To protect the potential archaeological resources under the site and reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels, Mitigation Measure CUL-1 is included at the end of this section, consistent with the findings of the cultural resource investigation. The mitigation measure requires the presence of archaeological and Native American monitors during earth moving activities, to assure that 7-45
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 37
subsurface resources are identified and protected during the grading and excavation of the proposed Project. In addition, the ACBCI requested the addition of Mitigation Measure CUL-2, to educate construction personnel prior to the initiation of earth moving activities to further lower the risk of impact. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, potential impacts associated with archaeological resources will be reduced to less than significant levels.
c) Less than Significant with Mitigation. No cemeteries or human remains are known to occur on-site. It is unlikely that human remains will be uncovered during project development. Should human remains be uncovered during grading of the site, and consistent with California law Mitigation Measure CUL-3 requires that all activity stop, that the coroner be notified, that he or she determine the nature of the remains, and whether Native American consultation will be required. This measure, consistent with the requirement of law assures that impacts to cemeteries or human remains will be reduced to less than significant levels.
5.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures:
CUL-1 Earth-moving activities including grading, grubbing, trenching, or excavations at the site shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist and approved Agua Caliente Native American Cultural Resource Monitor(s).
Should cultural materials be discovered, they shall be recorded and evaluated in the field.
The monitors shall be prepared to recover artifacts quickly to avoid construction delays but must have the power to temporarily halt or divert construction equipment to allow for controlled archaeological recovery if a substantial cultural deposit is encountered. The Native American Monitor may request that destructive construction halt and the Monitor shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines) to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer and Agua Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation Office. . If artifacts are discovered, these shall be processed, catalogued, analyzed, and prepared for permanent curation in a repository with permanent retrievable storage that would allow for additional research in the future. Archaeological site records shall be prepared to document the cultural remains discovered during monitoring and submitted to the California Historical Resources Information System.
CUL-2 A qualified archaeologist and/or approved Agua Caliente Native American Cultural Resource Monitor(s) shall provide preconstruction training for all earthmoving construction personnel prior to the start of any ground disturbing activities, regarding how to recognize the types of Tribal Cultural Resources and/or archaeological resources that may be encountered and to instruct personnel about actions to be taken in the event of a discovery.
CUL-3 In the unexpected event human remains are uncovered during construction activities, all construction work taking place within the vicinity of the discovered remains must cease and the necessary steps to ensure the integrity of the immediate area must be taken , consistent with State law. The County Coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the discovery of human remains. If the remains discovered are determined by the Coroner to be of Native American descent, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heri tage 7-46
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 38
Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The NAHC would in turn contact the Most Likely Descendant (MLD), who would determine further action to be taken. The MLD would have 48 hours to access the site and make a recommendation regarding disposition of the remains.
Monitoring:
CUL-A Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the site, the applicant shall provide a fully executed Tribal monitoring agreement as requested by the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) to the City which includes a pre-construction education component.
Within 30 days of the completion of ground disturbing activities on the project site, a report of findings shall be filed with the City. The report will summarize the methods and results of the monitoring program, including an itemized inventory and a detailed analysis of recovered artifacts, upon completion of the field and laboratory work. The report should include an interpretation of the cultural activities represented by the artifacts and a discussion of the significance of all archaeological finds.
Responsible Parties: Project applicant, Planning Department, Project archaeologist, Agua Caliente Native American Cultural Resource Monitor(s).
7-47
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 39
6 - Energy
ENERGY – Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017.
6.1 Setting:
Background
Primary energy sources include fossil fuels (oil, coal, and natural gas), nuclear energy, and renewable sources like wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower. Southern California Edison (SCE) provides electric services to the City of Rancho Mirage . Currently, SCE serves approximately 4.4 million residential service accounts and 520,000 commercial service accounts, which use up to 69% of the electricity generated by SCE in its service area. 5 Natural gas is
provided to Rancho Mi rage by the Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas). Its service territory encompasses approximately 24,000 square miles in Central and Southern California, from the City of Visalia to the Mexican border.6
Both SCE and SoCalGas have existing underground utilities along Ramon Road.
The Rancho Mirage Energy Authority (RMEA) is a locally run, not -for-profit power program created by the City of Rancho Mirage. RMEA purchases power directly from power providers, pays consultants for compliance functions, and sets electricity rates based on its costs. Each SCE customer that resides within the City of Rancho Mirage is automatically enrolled in the Base Choice program which allows 31.7% of each customers energy to be provided by renewable energy sources. Customers additionally have an option to enroll in RMEA’s Premium Renewable Choice program which allows 100% of each customers energy to be provided by renewable energy sources.
5 Errata to Southern California Edison Company’s Amended Energy Efficiency Rolling Portfolio Business Plan For 2018-2025 by SCE (May 15, 2017) – Page 42 and 43. 6 SoCalGas Company Profile, https://www.socalgas.com/about-us/company-profile, accessed July 2023.
7-48
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 40
The City adopted an Energy Action Plan in 2012 through the CVAG Green for Life a roadmap of actions for both municipal and community implementation to help reduce energy consumption, to reduce operating costs, and increase energy awareness. It focuses on ways the City can reduce costs while enhancing energy conservation. The City established a 10 percent energy reduction target.
6.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a, b) Less Than Significant Impact. Energy resources would be utilized during both construction and operational activities. Construction related energy demand comes from the operation of construction equipment and the manufacturing of construction materials. Fuel consumed by construction equipment, such as petroleum and diesel, would be the primary energy resource expended over the course of construction. However, petroleum and diesel use during construction would be temporary and minimal and would not be wasteful or inefficient.
Operational energy demand primarily comes from building/site lighting and HVAC systems. The proposed development will be subject to Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which requires energy efficient building practices and the installation of roof -top solar panels on new residential and commercial development. All structures will be constructed in accordance with the Building Code, California Green Building Code, and Energy Code in effect at the time that development occurs, to ensure the most efficient construction/building technologies are used, which will benefit overall building operations, ensure energy efficiency and reduce wasteful and unnecessary consumption of energy resources. The Project is also required to comply w ith the City’s Energy Action Plan, implementing energy reduction strategies as applicable for residential and commercial components of the Project. These requirements of law assure that future buildings on the site will not waste energy.
Operation would also result in the consumption of petroleum -based fuels related to vehicular travel to and from the Project site. Although the Project will result in a direct increase in City VMTs, the Project will not interfere with increased fuel efficiency standards and will not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of transportation energy resources during operation. The Project proposes a mixed-use development that places multi-family residential within a half-mile to commercial uses, transit, and employment opportunities which reduces vehicle trips, trip length and the consumption of fuel. Impacts were determined to be less than significant (see also Section 17 Transportation).
SCE is committed to promoting renewable energy generation for its own operations and throughout the State and local communities SCE’s Pathway 2045 provides a roadmap to achieving statewide carbon neutrality that requires decarbonization of the State’s economy, including the electric sector, natural gas and low -carbon fuels, transportation, and building construction and operation efficiencies.
7 SoCalGas is also committed to energy and climate
sustainability and investing in a diverse portfolio of technologies and applications to decarbonize, including the use of cleaner fuels like renewable natural gas. SoCalGas aspires to achieve net zero GHG emissions in both operations and delivery of energy by 2045.
The Project will comply with the solar and energy requirements in the California Building Code in effect when construction occurs, and will not interfere with any state or local plan that promotes renewable energy or energy efficiency. Adherence to the applicable state standards enforced by
7 “Pathway 2045,” by Southern California Edison, November 2019. https://www.edison.com/home/our- perspective/pathway-2045.html. Accessed July 2023.
7-49
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 41
SCE and SoCalGas will ensure the development is consistent with current energy standards and conservation goals laid out in the City’s Sustainability Plan. Therefore, impacts related to energy will be less than significant.
6.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Monitoring: None required.
7-50
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 42
7 - Geology and Soils
GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the
project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause
potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or
soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or
property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of
wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a
unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017.
7-51
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ IZI □
□ IZI □ □
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ IZI □
□ IZI □ □
□ IZI □ □
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ □ IZI
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 43
7.1 Setting:
Geologic Setting
The Project is located in the City of Rancho Mirage which is part of the Coachella Valley. The geology and seismicity of the Coachella Valley is primarily influenced by the tectonics of the San Andrea and San Jacinto fault systems. The San Andreas Fault is a continental trans verse fault that extends roughly 750 miles through California. It forms the tectonic boundary between the Pacific Plate and the North American Plate, and its motion is right -lateral strike-slip (horizontal).
The San Jacinto Fault Zone (SJFZ) is a major strike -slip fault zone that runs through San Bernardino, Riverside, San Diego, and Imperial Counties in Southern California. The SJFZ is a component of the larger San Andreas transform system and is considered to be the most seismically active fault zone in the area.
The Coachella Valley is located in the northwestern portion of the Salton Trough which is bounded by the San Bernardino Mountains on the northwest, San Jacinto Mountains on the west, Santa Rosa Mountains on the south, and Little San Bernardino Mountains and Indio Hills on the north and northeast. Regional soils range from rocky outcrops within the mountains bordering the valley to coarse gravels of mountain canyons and recently laid fine- and medium-grained alluvial (stream deposited) and aeolian (wind deposited) sediments on the central valley floor. Episodic flooding of major regional drainages, including the Whitewater River, results in the deposition of sand and gravel on the valley floor. Strong sustained winds emanating from the San Gorgonio Pass cause wind erosion and transport and deposit dry, finely granulated, sandy soils on the central valley floor. The base of the Santa Rosa Mountains consists of alluvial and stream -washed deposits, which are coarse sands and gravels.
Paleontological Resources
Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of prehistoric animals and plants, created more than 12,000 years ago in the Pleistocene era. Fossils are usually buried resources, and often cannot be identified on the surface. A relatively thick sequence (20,000 feet) of sediment has been deposited in the Coachella Valley portion of the Salton Trough from the Miocene era to present times. These sediments are predominantly terrestrial in nature with some lacustrine (lake) and minor marine deposits. The major contributor of these sediments has been the Colorado River. The mountains surrounding the Coachella Valley are composed primarily of Precambrian metamorphic and Mesozoic "granitic" rock. According to the Riverside County Map My County GIS database, the City and Project site contain recent alluvium soils which have a low potential to contain significant paleontological resources.
8 7.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a.i) No Impact. The subject property is not located within or adjacent to an Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The nearest earthquake fault is the San Andreas Fault Zone, approximately 3.3 miles northeast of the site. This active fault is capable of generating earthquakes of magnitude 7.4. There are no active faults in the vicinity of the subject property.
Fault rupture is not expected on the project site because it does not occur on any of these faults.
No impact is anticipated.
8 Riverside County Map My County, https://gis1.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/index.html?viewer=MMC_Public.
Accessed July 2023.
7-52
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 44
a.ii) Less Than Significant Impact . The Project site is located in a seismically active region where earthquakes originating on local and regional seismic faults can produce severe ground shaking. Buildings proposed for the site will be required to conform to the most recent edition of the California Building Code (CBC) to provide collapse-resistant design. These building standards are designed to minimize the catastrophic failure of buildings, thereby lowering the potential impacts to life and property. According to the CBC, Site Class D may be used to estimate design seismic loading for the proposed structures. As a result of these standards, Project -related impacts associated with seismic ground shaking will be less than significant.
a.iii) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. Liquification occurs when 3 conditions exist: (1) liquefaction- susceptible soils; (2) groundwater within 50 feet or less below ground surface; and (3) strong seismic shaking. According to the Rancho Mirage General Plan Safety Element, the Project site is located in an area that has a moderate liquefaction susceptibility.
Therefore, the potential for liquefaction at the project site exists.
The City requires, as part of its building permit process, the preparation of site -specific soils analysis and geotechnical report. This standard requirement, as set forth in Mitigation Measure GEO-1, will assure that a qualified geologist studies all geotechnical and soil issues at the project site based on the actual construction proposed. As a result of this standard requirement, impacts associated with liquefaction are expected to be less than significant.
a.iv) No Impact. The Project site is on the Coachella Valley floor. It predominantly consists of sand and is surrounded by relatively flat terrain. The nearest hillsides slope of the Santa Rosa mountains are approximately 2.9 miles southwest of the subject property. Due to distance from the nearest hillside, no impacts associated with landslides will occur.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the Project site has the potential to result in the erosion of soils during site preparation, grading, and building construction. The subject property is located in an area susceptible to very severe and severe wind according to the Rancho Mirage General Plan (GP Exhibit 25 Wind Erosion Hazards). Soils on the site consist of Myoma fine sand, which are prone to wind and water erosion. The site is essentially flat, thus minimizing the potential for water erosion. The site will be mostly covered by buildings, pavement or landscaping at build out, minimizing long-term wind erosion potential.
Grading and construction may require removal of the topsoil; however, they would occur in accordance with erosion control requirements, including grading and dust control measu res imposed by the City pursuant to grading permit regulations, including adherence to SCAQMD Rule 403.1, that requires a fugitive dust control plan. Specifically, Project construction would be required to comply with the City’s Municipal Code, including submittal and approval of grading permits, site and building plans, and inspections to ensure that the Project does not generate excessive soil erosion. In addition, the Project will be required to prepare a Project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) (See Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality). As part of the WQMP, Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented during grading and construction to reduce sedimentation and soil erosion to the maximum extent practicable.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The site is undeveloped, and grading will be conducted in compliance with City’s standards. The City will require project -specific geotechnical engineering analysis as part of the building permit process (Mitigation Measure GEO-1) to determine whether additional soil remediation or compaction is required to mitigate 7-53
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 45
impacts from lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. The recommendations set forth in the Project-specific geotechnical report shall be integrated into grading and building plans that the City will review and approve prior to the issuance of grading and building permits, which will assure that impacts associated with unstable soils remain less than significant.
d) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Expansive soils typically contain large amounts of clay that expands when water is absorbed and shrinks when it dries.
The City will require project -specific geotechnical engineering analysis as part of the building permit process (Mitigation Measure GEO-1) to determine whether additional soil remediation or compaction is required to mitigate impacts from expansive soils. The recommendations set forth in the Project-specific geotechnical report shall be integrated into grading and building plans that the City will review and approve prior to the issuance of grading and building permits, which will assure that impacts associated with soils remain less than significant.
e) No Impact. The Project area is readily served by sewage infrastructure. The Project would not require the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems or result in impacts related to the ability of soils to support septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.
No impacts would occur and no mitigation measures would be required.
f) No Impact. Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of organisms that lived in a region in the geologic past and whose remains are found in the accompanying geologic strata.
This type of fossil record represents the primary source of information on ancient life forms, most of which are now extinct. The Project site is not known to contain unique paleontological features.
Also, there are no unique geological features (rivers, lakes, hills, faults, folds, etc.) located onsite that would directly or indirectly be destroyed by the proposed Project. The surface soils consist of recently deposited alluvial sand and gravel that are not conducive to the location of paleontological resources. Therefore, potentially sensitive paleontological resources are not expected to occur on site and there will be no impact to such resources.
7.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures:
GEO-1 Development of the Project shall adhere to the recommendations set forth in the Project- specific geotechnical engineering report required by the City prior to issuance of grading and building permits.
Monitoring:
GEO-A The City shall review a project -specific soils study concurrent with grading and building plans prior to the issuance of ground disturbing permits to ensure plans adhere to the recommendations set forth in the Project Geotechnical Engineering Investigation.
Responsible Parties: Project applicant, construction manager, Planning Department, City Engineer.
7-54
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 46
8 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GREENHOUSE EMISSIONS –
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan,
policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017; “2013 Sustainability Action Plan,” prepared by EcoMotion, March 2013; “2012 Greenhouse Gas Inventory,” prepared by EcoMotion, September 2012; CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.14 (Appendix A).
8.1 Setting:
Background
Air quality has become an increasing concern because of human health issues, but also because greenhouse gas emissions are contributing to global warming and climate change. The primary contributor to greenhouse gas emissions is the burning of fossil fuels through the use of automobiles, power and heat generators, and industrial processes.
The principal greenhouse gases (GHGs) include carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH4), nitrous
oxide (N 2O), ozone (O 3), and water vapor (H 2O), which are generated by both mobile and stationary sources, including vehicles, electricity and natural gas consumption, and emissions associated with water pumping and application of fertilizers.
The State of California has taken a leading role to curb GHG emissions and has developed laws and regulations to reduce these emissions. State legislation and regulations call for better integrated land use planning and curtailing energy production away from nonrenewable sources and toward new renewable sources, such as solar and wind. California SB 375 in part implements greenhouse gas reduction targets set forth in AB 32 and encourages regional land use planni ng to reduce vehicle miles traveled; it also requires jurisdictions to adopt a sustainable communities strategy. The California Air Resources Board continues to draft regulations to implement the Scoping Plan. Senate Bill 350 requires that, by the year 2020, 50% of the electricity used in California is from renewables to help reduce statewide GHG emissions.
State law mandates that all cities decrease their GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020.
Executive Order B -30-15 set an interim target goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 to keep California on its trajectory toward meeting or exceeding the long- term goal of reducing GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050, as set forth in Executive Order S-3-05.
7-55
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 47
City of Rancho Mirage Sustainability Plan, Energy Action Plan, and GHG Inventory The City of Rancho Mirage completed its Sustainability Plan in March 2013 in an effort to address climate change at the local level by reducing greenhouse gas emissions within its own operations and the overall community. The Sustainability Plan provides a framework for the development and implementation of policies and programs that will reduce the City’s emissions and is tracked via the City’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory. In addition to the Sustainability Plan, the City prepared an Energy Action Plan (2013) to identify energy saving options and actions necessary to meet the City’s future energy needs, consistent with the energy policies set forth by the State of California.
In 2010, Rancho Mirage was over its 1990 baseline emissions value (220,061 tonnes) by 57,637 tonnes CO
2e. “Business as usual” emissions with the impacts of federal and state programs could reach 274,333 tonnes CO2e by 2020. To achieve the AB 32 target by 2020, the City would have to cut GHG emissions by 19.8%, or 54,272 tonnes from the business -as-usual estimate. The following is a summary of major findings in the 2012 Greenhouse Gas Inventory:
• Communitywide emissions in 2010, using guidelines approved by the California Air Resources Board, total 277,698 tonnes CO
2e.
• This level is 26.2% above 1990 target levels referenced in AB 32—220,061 tonnes CO2e. • The municipal contribution to the community’s emissions footprint is 0.78%, or 2,145 tonnes CO
2e.
• Electricity—predominantly used for air conditioning—is responsible for 43.2% of the community’s emissions.
• At 16.1 tonnes per capita (2010), Rancho Mirage has high emissions relative to its neighboring cities.
• Transportation emissions are the second highest source for the City as a whole. The per capita regional transportation emissions value of 2.8 tonnes CO 2, when added to City
emissions, puts Rancho Mirage’s total emissions per capita at 18.9 tonnes CO2e (2010).
GHG Thresholds
On December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD formally adopted a greenhouse gas significance threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e/yr that only applies to industrial uses’ stationary sources where SCAQMD is the lead 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? 7-56
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 48
8.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a, b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project will generate GHG emissions during both construction and operation. As described in Section 3 Air Quality, above, the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2022.1.1.14 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 1,251 CO2e metric tons during the 2-year 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 m obile sources. Table 4 provides a summary of the projected short -term con struction and annual operational GHG generation associated with buildout of the proposed Project.
Table 4
Projected GHG Emissions Summary
(Metric Tons)
Phase CO2e (MT/YR)
Construction
Construction Total 1,251
Operation
Area 78
Energy 1,352
Mobile 3,151
Waste 102
Water 94
Construction: 30-year amortized 1 42
Total Operational 4,819
1. Buildout construction GHG emissions were amortized over 30- years then added to buildout operational GHG emissions. 1,251/30 = 41.7 or 42.
7-57
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 49
According to the SCAQMD’s recommended threshold Tier 2, a project would have a less than significant impact if it would be consistent with an approved plan for the reduction of GHG that is, at a minimum, consistent with the goals of AB 32. The City’s 2012 GHG Inventory provides baseline emission data, consistent with the reduction targets of AB 32, from which future developments within the City are to be measured.
For the City to achieve the goals of AB 32 by 2020 it would need to reduce community - wide emissions to 220,061 tons of annual CO2e. In 2020, the City’s had a total population of 16,990
9. To be consistent with AB 32, the per capita GHG emission rate would therefore need to be, at most, 12.95 MT CO2e/yr. Based on the Project’s annual GHG emissions of 4,819 MT CO 2e/yr and estimated population of 565 10, the Project’s per capita GHG emission rate is 8.53 MT CO2e/yr, which is 34% reduction in per capita emissions required to achieve the goals of AB 32. While the City’s GHG inventory has not been updated in recent years, the 1990 GHG emissions baseline from the 2012 GHG inventory has not changed; therefore, it is reasonable to assume that that Project per capita emission of
8.53 MT CO2e/yr is consistent with, and exceeds, the goals of AB 32.
The accompanying 2013 Sustainability Plan identifies efficiency and saving measures that inform both City staff and developers on ways to reduce GHG emissions in compliance with these reduction targets. The Sustainability Plan set forth lists of 82 “saving measures” that cover seven spheres of daily activity – live, work, build, mobility, govern, recreate, learn – that represents 60,411 tons of annual CO2e savings, which is 10% over the required 54,272 tons to reach compliance with AB 32 2020 levels. If the pr oject is not consistent with the saving measures or if the measures are not otherwise binding, they must be incorporated as mitigation measures applicable to the project. Table 5 compares the proposed Project with the applicable saving measures. As shown i n the table, the proposed Project would implement applicable GHG reduction measures and therefore would be consistent with the Sustainability Plan. It should be noted that the majority of reduction measures provided in the Plan are dependent on third party actions, including the City and utility companies. Nevertheless, the proposed Project will be constructed in conformance with the current California Building Code, which sets for stringent energy efficiency requirements and standards for new development that support the goals of the Statewide GHG reduction plans. Therefore, the Project is considered consistent with local and state GHG reduction measures, and impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation would not be required.
9 U.S. Census QuickFacts.
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/ranchomiragecitycalifornia/PST045222 . 10 State of California Department of Finance, Table E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2021-2023, with a 2020 Benchmark. 1.85 persons per household for Rancho Mirage, 2023.
7-58
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 50
Table 5
Consistency with Applicable
Sustainability Plan GHG Saving Measures
Measure Consistency
Build-3: New and Efficient Construction:
Promote the Savings by Design Program from
SCE for new commercial buildings.
Consistent: The proposed Project would
meet Title 24 California Building Code
Energy Efficiency standards for which the
Savings by Design Program is based.
Build-5: Green Building Program: Promote
Voluntary Green Building Program to prepare
for enhanced Title 24 requirements and green
building standards.
Consistent: The city has adopted the
California Building Code as Part 2 of Title 24
of the California Code of Regulations. The
Project is required to meet the standards of
the Title 24 requirements.
Build-8: Affordable Housing: Promote the
construction of energy-efficient affordable
housing with private-sector partners.
Consistent: The proposed Project would
provide new affordable housing options
designed to meet Title 24 California Building
Code Energy Efficiency standards.
Mobility-4: Charging Stations: Foster public/
private partnerships to promote EV charging
stations with public access.
Consistent: The proposed Project would
meet Title 24 California Building Code
Energy Efficiency standards, which sets
forth electric vehicle charging stations
requirements and standards for new
commercial and multi-family residential
construction (Chapter 4.106.4).
Mobility-6: Biking and Walking: Expand
bikeways, trails, and walking paths connecting
residential neighborhoods and commerce.
Consistent: The project site design
includes pedestrian walkways throughout
the site and along Ramon Road that will
provide residents convenient access to the
project’s commercial uses as well as other
commercial uses in the area.
Govern-13: Solar Ready Ordinance: Develop
and implement an ordinance requiring 100%
of new homes be solar ready (PV).
Consistent: The proposed Project would
meet Title 24 California Building Code
mandatory solar-ready requirements for new
buildings.
Source: “2013 Sustainability Action Plan,” prepared by EcoMotion, March 2013.
8.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Monitoring: None required.
7-59
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 51
9 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS – Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
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?
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?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
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?
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 for people residing or
working in the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
Sources: 2017 Rancho Mirage General Plan; California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor; State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker database. 7-60
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ □ ~
□ □ □ ~
□ □ ~ □
□ □ □ ~
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 52
9.1 Setting:
The proper management of hazardous materials is a common concern for all communities within the Coachella Valley. 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. The City is responsible for coordinating with the appropriate agencies in the identification of hazardous material sites and regulation of their timely cleanup. Hazardous materials transport, storage, and use in the City is strictly regulated for large quantity users, such as industrial processes and commercial dry cleaners.
The Project site is surrounded by vacant lands , residential development and a high school. The site is currently vacant, and no chemical or hazardous waste disposal has been documented on the site. There are no known underground tanks or buried materials on the site.
Proposed development would bring a variety of commonly used but potentially hazardous materials, including chlorine for pools and chemicals typical of restaurant, retail and residential developments.
9.2 Discussion of Impacts:
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) Less than Significant Impact. Construction of the Project would involve the use of heavy equipment and vehicles, which will use limited quantities of oil and fuels and other potentially flammable substances. During construction, equipment could 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 laws regarding the handling, storage, and use of hazardous materials during construction.
During long- term operation, the Project would involve use of limited quantities of hazardous materials such as cleaning and degreasing solvents, fertilizers, pesticides, 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. The manner in which commercial chemicals are stored and handled is highly regulated by the Fire Department, County and State. These standard requirements will assure that impacts associated with commercial quantities of chemicals will be less than significant.
c) Less than Significant Impact. The nearest school is Rancho Mirage High School located immediately north of the Project site. While the Project site is within ¼ mile of a sc hool, the use and storage of hazardous materials during Project construction and operation would be in accordance with manufacturers’ instructions and handled in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations. No significant amount of hazardous materials would be stored or transported to the site, because the Project consists of residential and commercial uses that are typical of development in the City, which use limited amounts of cleaning products in daily activities. Adherence to standard regulations would ensure impacts would be less than significant. 7-61
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 53
d) No Impact. According to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor database and the State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker database, the Project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, the proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. No impact will occur.
e) No Impact. The subject property is not within the boundaries of an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public or private airstrip. The site is approximately 3.3 miles east of the Palm Springs International Airport and 9.6 miles northwest of the Bermuda Dunes Airport. Therefore, the Project will not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people in the Project area. No impact will occur.
f) Less Than Significant. The City of Rancho Mirage has a Multi -Hazard Functional Plan, originally adopted in 1994, which is continually updated. The two main evacuation routes in the City include I- 10 and Highway 111, along with primary and minor arterial streets serving as secondary routes. Since earthquakes, floods, fires, or other disasters may render certain routes impassible, specific evacuation routes are not identified in the plan because they can change depending upon the type of emergency.
Future development and improvements facilitated by the proposed Specific Plan may require temporary lane closures, detours, or re- routing. However, Construction Traffic Control Plans would be prepared when necessary, and emergency/secondary access would be established and preserved during all construction activities. At buildout, the Project will take access from Ramon Road and Rattler Road. The Project will be required to comply with police and fire department regulations to assure adequate emergency access and vehicle turn-around space. Therefore, the Specific Plan will have a less than significant impact on the adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan.
g) No Impact. The Project site is not within or near a wildland fire hazard zone. The site is sparsely vegetated with sandy soils and provides no substantial fire fuel source. The Project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk associated with wildfire hazards. No impact will occur.
9.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required
Monitoring: None required
7-62
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 54
10 - Hydrology and Water Quality
HYDROLOGY AND WATER
QUALITY – Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the
basin?
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:
i) Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site?
ii) Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
offsite?
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?
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due to
project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
Sources: 2017 Rancho Mirage General Pan.
10.1 Setting:
Domestic Water
The Project site is within the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) service area for domestic water. The District’s primary water source is groundwater extracted through a system of wells from the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin. In addition to groundwater, CVWD relies on 7-63
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ □ ~
□ □ □ ~
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 55
imported water that is recharged into the groundwater basin at three facilities: Whitewater River Groundwater Recharge Facility (GRF), Thomas A. Levy GRF, and Palm Desert GRF. CVWD’s domestic water system includes 97 groundwater production wells and 65 enclosed reservoirs. In 2020, it pumped 99,843 acre-feet per year (AFY) of groundwater from the Indio and Mission Creek Subbasins. CVWD also owns and operates the water distribution system, which is generally located under existing streets in the public right ‐of-way. There are existing 18- inch water lines beneath Ramon Road and Rattler Road in the Project vicinity.
CVWD is responsible, under the California Water Code, for analyzing its current and future water supply, and assuring that sufficient supply is available to serve land uses within the District through the preparation of an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). CVWD is required to periodically update the UWMP. In 2020, CVWD collaborated with other water purveyors in the Coachella Valley to prepare a regional UWMP.
11 Wastewater Treatment
CVWD provides sewer service to the City of Rancho Mirage, including the Project area. CVWD maintains sewer trunk lines ranging from 6 to 36 inches in diameter and 28 lift stations and associated force mains. Effluent from Palm Desert is conveyed to CVWD’s Cook Street treatment plant (Water Reclamation Plant No. 10), which has a total capacity of 18 million gallons per day (mgd), including 15 mgd of tertiary treatment capacity. CVWD also implements the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board pertaining to domestic water quality and wastewater discharge.
The Project site is in an urban area where sewer lines are installed under the main roads. The Project will connect to existing sewer lines located in the Ramon Road and Rattler Road right of ways.
Flood Control
The Project site is located in the Coachella Valley where the average rainfall is approximately
3.76 inches per year. Several watersheds drain the adjoining elevated terrain of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains towards the valley floor. The proposed Project will not discharge into either regional or local drainages. Rather, it will manage stormwater on-site with a retention basin and potentially an underground system.
The Project area is subject to City requirements relating to flood control. The City implements standard requirements for the retention of storm flows, and participates in the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to protect surface waters from pollution.
10.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a) Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is in the Whitewater River watershed. All water providers in the watershed are required to comply with Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) standards for the protection of water quality, including the preparation of project - specific Water Quality Management Plans (WQMP) for surface waters. CVWD is required to meet water quality requirements in its production and delivery of domestic water.
11 2020 Coachella Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan, Water Systems Consulting, Inc., June 30, 2021.
7-64
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 56
Development within the Specific Plan planning area will connect to the existing CVWD sewer system that will minimize impacts to regional groundwater quality. Installation of water lines on the Project site will comply with CVWD and RWQCB standards for water conveyance.
Development of the site will be required to prepare a WQMP per the Colorado River Basin Regional Board. To minimize the pollutant load associated with urban runoff, it will also be required to comply with NPDES regulations, including preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Adherence to conditions of approval and local, state, and federal standard requirements will assure that the Project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or conflict with any water quality control plan or sustainable ground water management plan. Project impacts will be less than significant. b) Less than Significant Impact. During construction, water demand will be limited and temporary and used for dust control purposes, including the routine spraying of ground surfaces and construction equipment. During operation, water will be used for residential uses, commercial uses, and drought-tolerant landscape irrigation.
The American Water Works Association Research Foundation (AWWARF) has developed demand factors for land use categories including residential and commercial uses. As shown in the table below, the Project has the potential to generate a demand of 76.91 acre-feet per year.
Table 6
Water Demand at the Project Buildout
Proposed Land
Use Unit
Water
Consumption
Factor
Water Demand
(gpd)
Total Water
Demand At
buildout (AFY)
Residential 565
occupants
55 gallons per
occupant per day 31,075 34.8
*Commercial/Office 37,500 SF 35 gallons per SF
per year 3,596 4.02
*Restaurant 37,500 SF 331 gallons per SF
per year 34,007 38.09
TOTAL 76.91
*Assumes PA 3 will develop with 50% commercial/office and 50% restaurant uses.
According to the 2020 Coachella Valley Regional UWMP 12, the projected 2025 regional water supply is 137,061 AFY, and the projected 2045 regional water supply is 164,966 AFY (UWMP Table 4-22). Approximately 90% of water supplies are expected to be groundwater and 10% are expected to be recycled water. Projections are based on existing water sources and expected future water supply projects or programs. The proposed Project’s water demand (76.91 AFY) is
0.05% of projected 2025 regional water supplies and 0.04% of projected 2045 regional water supplies. The Project will result in a change in land use designation, but not a substantial change in water demand. Therefore, the Project will not substantially decrease local groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that it would impede sustainable management of the basin. The Project includes irrigation requirements, including the use of water -efficient fixtures and drought-tolerant landscape materials, which will help reduce water demand over the long term. Impacts will be less than significant.
12 2020 Coachella Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan, Water Systems Consulting, Inc., June 30, 2021.
7-65
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 57
c) i -iii) Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is generally flat. The ground surface consists of mostly wind-blown fine-grained sand and contains no rivers or streams. On-site soils consist primarily of Myoma find sand which is categorized as hydrologic soil group A in the National Cooperative Soil Survey and represent well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands with high infiltration rates (low runoff potential) and high rates of water transmission.
Pursuant to Policy 2.7 of the General Plan Safety Element, the proposed development’s on -site stormwater retention facilities must have adequate capacity to retain flows from the 100-year, 24- hour storm. In Planning Area 1, stormwater will be retained on site in the two retention ponds provided in the northeastern and northwestern corners of Planning Area 1. Additional underground storage may be provided on -site if required. PA 2 and 3 will also develop on- site drainage facilities, likely consisting of a combination of above-ground retention, and underground detention facilities. A Hydrology Report and Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) will be prepared for each Planning Area as it develops within the Catana Specific Plan, consistent with City standard requirements.
The Project will also be required to comply with conditions of approval pertaining to discharge, standard stormwater management requirements, and project -specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) that are subject to approval by the City Engineer and required by the City’s NPDES implementation agreement.
Implementation of the WQMP and BMPs will reduce impacts to surface waters by reducing siltation and reducing or eliminating pollutants in storm flows, including pathogens (bacteria/virus) generally associated with human activities but also present in the environment. With the implementation of these measures, impacts associated with surface water pollution will be less than significant.
Adherence to City requirements, including WQMP BMPs, will ensure the Project will not result in erosion or siltation on- or off-site. 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.
c) iv) Less than Significant Impact. The subject property is designated Zone X, which represents areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain on FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). The site is not located in a 100-year or 500-year FEMA Flood Zone.
Implementation of the proposed onsite drainage retention facilities will further ensure that the Project will have a less than significant impact on impeding or redirecting flood flows. d) No Impact. The Project site is inland and not subject to tsunami. It is not in the vicinity of a water body, levee, dam, or above -ground water reservoir (General Plan Exhibit 26 Flood Map).
The Project site is not within a 100- year or 500- year floodplain. There will be no impacts associated with Project inundation from being in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone. e) No Impact. The Project will be required to comply with all applicable water quality standard s and implement a WQMP approved by the city and the RWQCB for both construction activities and long-term operation. The Project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation assigned to the Project site, and its anticipated water demand is addressed in the 2020 Coachella Valley regional UWMP. Therefore, it will not conflict with a sustainable groundwater management plan. Adherence to the City’s standard requirements related to water quality will ensure there will be no impacts to a water quality control plan.
7-66
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 58
10.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required
Monitoring: None required
7-67
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 59
11 - Land Use and Planning
LAND USE AND URBAN
PLANNING – Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Physically divide an
established community?
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?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017.
11.1 Setting:
Background
The site is currently vacant and designated as High Density Residential (R-H) on the City’s Land Use and Zoning Map, which allows a residential density of up to 9 DU/AC. A General Plan and Zoning Map Amendment is proposed to change the High Density Residential land use designation to General Commercial for 8.3 acres fronting Ramon Road, and apply the Affordable Housing Overlay to 3.3± acres.
11.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a) No Impact. The Project site is currently vacant and is located in an area that is predominantly developed with residential uses and a high school. 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 Rancho Mirage General Plan, as required by the California Government Code, establishes direction for future growth and development within the City. The California Government Code (under Sections 65451.b and 65454) states that a “specific plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the specific plan to the general plan, and further, that it may not be adopted or amended unless found to be consistent with the general plan.”
Per the Rancho Mirage General Plan land use plan and zoning map, the project site is designated as High Density Residential (R-H), which allows a residential density of up to 9 DU/AC. The SP would modify the proposed permitted uses on the site to allow a mix of high- density residential and commercial uses.
The California Government Code provides authority for a city to adopt a specific plan by ordinance (as a regulatory plan) or resolution (as a policy plan). The SP would be adopted by the Rancho Mirage City Council as an ordinance and would function as the regulatory document that serves as the zoning for the project site; the SP establishes the prevailing land use regulations for all development activities within the project site.
7-68
□ □ □ ~
□ □ ~ □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 60
Proposed site development plans or other similar entitlements would be required to be consistent with the regulations set forth in the SP. As also noted above, future site plan approvals, building permits, or any other actions requiring ministerial or discretionary approval applicable to the project site would be required to be consistent with the intent and objectives of the SP.
General Plan Consistency
An analysis of applicable goals, policies and programs contained in the General Plan was conducted and is provided below, demonstrating that the Project will not conflict with the City’s General Plan. Impacts will be less than significant.
LAND USE
GOAL LU 1: A resort residential community of desirable neighborhoods, a variety of community facilities, and high-quality development.
GOAL LU 2: A balanced mix of functionally integrated land uses, meeting the general social and economic needs of the community through simplified, compatible, and consistent land use and zoning designations.
GOAL LU 3: The preservation and enhancement of the predominantly low -density, high- quality residential character of Rancho Mirage.
GOAL LU 4: High-quality commercial land uses conveniently and appropriately distributed throughout Rancho Mirage, to meet the community’s current and future needs and to take full advantage of emerging development and economic opportunities.
Consistency: The
proposed Catana Specific Plan provides guidance to ensure the phased, logical, and cost-effective development of the subject site. The standards and guidelines provided in the Specific Plan will ensure that the resulting residential and commercial development is high quality, providing ample shared residential amenities, access to commercial resources, as well as adequate privacy via buffering and screening. The proposed land use will ensure that the commercial development will be highly visible on Ramon Road, the residential development will be screened from the major arterial by the commercial uses, and that the two land uses are functionally integrated. The proposed land use pattern incorporates concepts described in the SCAG’s RTP/SCS, such as facilitating multimodal access to work, educational, and other destinations, as well as prioritizing infill to increase amenities and connectivity with existing neighborhoods. The Project will involve outreach to the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians for consultation, as well as consultation with other local Tribes and jurisdictions, as applicable.
See Section 18, Tribal Cultural Resources, for further discussion.
The proposed residential development will be consistent with the residential character of the City and of
adjacent residential neighborhoods. The proposed site plan and building massing will be designed complement the character of surrounding neighborhoods, while considering issues such as view preservation, lot coverage, vegetation, safety, and access. The proposed affordable housing component of the SP will be compatible with the surrounding market -rate attached and detached single family homes on-site.
The Project proposes commercial development in the southern portion of the site, along the Ramon Road frontage. The proposed high- quality commercial center would be conveniently located for residents of the Project, as well as for residents of existing residential neighborhoods in the area. In addition to providing commercial services to the community, the proposed commercial center would provide revenue to the City.
7-69
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 61
CIRCULATION
GOAL CIR 1: A safe, efficient, attractive, and economical circulation network meeting current and future demands in a manner consistent with the resort residential character of community.
Consistency: T he Project proposes one primary access point for each of the planning areas as well as secondary ingress/egress. The SP will ensure that these access points are designed to minimize potential impacts to traffic flow and public safety. Meandering sidewalks and bicycle lanes are provided on the public streets surrounding the subject site in accordance with complete streets concepts. Internal streets will also be designed based on complete streets concepts, with sidewalks and landscaped curb bump- outs to ensure that circulation within the site is safely accessible for all modes of transportation. The internal residential streets will be developed in accordance with the standards established in the City’s Zoning Ordinance as well as those set forth in the Specific Plan. All streets will be signed and striped consistent with the vehicle code.
HOUSING
GOA
L H 1: A variety of housing types that meet the needs of residents in Rancho Mirage.
GOAL H 2: Housing to meet the needs of Rancho Mirage’s lower income households.
Consistency: The Specific Plan proposed a combination of market -rate and affordable housing.
The site will include both attached and detached single family rental housing, as well as low rise multi-family apartments. The standards and guidelines provided in the SP will ensure that this diversity of housing types will adhere to the General Plan’s community design policies.
CONSERVATION + OPEN SPACE
GOA
L COS 3: The protection and preservation of biological resources in Rancho Mirage, especially sensitive and special status wildlife species and their natural habitats.
GOAL COS 4: The conservation, efficient use, and thoughtful management of energy sources and mineral deposits.
GOAL COS 5: The long-term viability of limited and non-renewable resources.
GOAL COS 7: An informed public that respects Rancho Mirage’s finite water resources and maximizes protection and conservation efforts for the benefit of the entire community.
GOAL COS 8: The preservation, maintenance, continuity, and enhancement of cultural heritage and resources in Rancho Mirage, including historic and prehistoric sites, objects, landscapes, and structures.
Consistency: A biological resources assessment report will be prepared for the proposed Project in order to evaluate and mitigate any potential impacts to protected species and/or habitat on the subject site. This will ensure that the proposed development is consistent with local and regional efforts to protect natural habitats and endangered species. The design guidelines provided in the Specific Plan promote the use of native and drought-resistant plants and landscaping.
The proposed development will be subject to Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which r
equires energy efficient building practices and the installation of roof -top solar panels on new residential and commercial development. The Project site has access to public transportation, with SunLine Route 4 operating on Ramon Road, including a bus stop at the Ramon and Rattler Road intersection. This will provide a convenient and safe transit option for residents of the Project as well as employees of the commercial center. The configuration of proposed land uses will 7-70
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 62
support efficient daily circulation, with the proposed commercial center and existing Rancho Mirage High School both in walking distance from the proposed residential development. Overall, the use of energy efficient building practices, inclusion of on-site solar facilities, and the availability of alternative modes of transportation, will ensure that the Project is efficient in its use of energy and therefore mindful of the long-term viability of limited and non-renewable resources.
The Specific Plan promotes the use of water conservation measures where practicable. The design guidelines established in the SP encourage the use of native, drought tolerant plants, consistent with the CVWD Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). A hydrology study and WQMP will be prepared for the proposed development which will be subject to approval by the City, thereby ensuring that the Project will not result in groundwater contamination. As discussed in Section 10 Hydrology and Water Quality, CVWD has adequate supplies to meet the Project’s water demand.
An archaeological and historic resources assessment was prepared for the proposed Project that found no significant resources on site . Nonetheless, a qualified archeologist and Tribal Monitor will be present on- site during ground disturbing activities to ensure cultural resources are not impacted by development of the property.
AIR QUALITY
GOAL AQ 1: Preservation and enhancement of regional air quality for the protection of the health and welfare of the community as a whole.
Consistency: A
n air quality analysis was prepared for the Project that determined the projected pollutant emissions would not exceed the daily maximum thresholds established by SCAQMD (See Section 3 Air Quality). The proposed development will provide commercial amenities in convenient proximity to the residential portion of the development and will include internal and external sidewalks in order to promote alternative modes of transportation and provide a safe and comfortable environment for pedestrians. Bicycle lanes on Ramon Road will also provide access to the site.
NOISE
GOA
L N 1: A noise environment providing peace and quiet that complements and is consistent with Rancho Mirage’s resort residential character.
Consistency: The proposed development would be configured such that the commercial center would screen the residential developments from traffic noise emanating from Ramon Road, which is designated as a Major Arterial in the General Plan. As discussed in Section 13 Noise analysis will be conducted for the proposed Project, at which point design measures can be recommended if necessary to ensure that residential interior noise levels would not exceed 45 dBA.
SAFETY
GOA
L SAFE 1: A community that plans for and is protected from the effects of seismic and geological hazards.
GOAL SAFE 2: Protection of lives, property, and essential facilities from flooding and other hydrologic hazards in Rancho Mirage.
Consistency: The Specific Plan includes design features, such as a perimeter wall to screen the proposed development from wind and blowing sand, as well as the use of drought -resistant landscaping to reduce erosion. Also, as described in the SP, stormwater retention ponds will be 7-71
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 63
provided on site, consistent with standards provided by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Geotechnical analysis will be prepared for the proposed Project , including analysis of the site’s risk of erosion, wind- blown sand, as well as potential hazards related to seismic events. If necessary, the geotechnical analysis will provide measures to mitigate identified impacts.
PUBLIC SERVICES + FACILITIES
GOAL PS&F 3: A city-wide sewer system that serves all residences and businesses.
GOAL PS&F 6: A high level of police and fire protection and paramedic service.
Consistency:
The proposed development will be connected to the exis ting CVWD sewer line in Rattler Road. The Specific Plan provides development standards to ensure that the Project will include adequate fire, police, and paramedic access within the site, as well as design guidelines that encourage the integration of defensible space. Final site plans will be reviewed by the City to ensure that adequate police and fire protection services will be available to service the Project.
COMMUNITY DESIGN
G
OAL CD 1: Preservation and promotion of the special identity of Rancho Mirage as an “Oasis in the Desert,” combing quality development with scenic, natural, and open space amenities.
GOAL CD 3: Scenic roadways that impart a sense of place and are attractively landscapes, provide visual continuity along adjacent uses, preserve views, and create focused intersection landscaping.
GOAL CD 5: Walls and fences that act as attractive elements of the streetscape, while providing privacy and views, creative design, and visual continuity.
GOAL CD 6: Signage of the highest level of design and construction quality.
GOAL CD 7: Protection of the star-studded desert night sky from excessive glare.
GOAL CD 8: Architecture that is sensitive to its context, blending quality materials, distinctive detailing, and a strong sense of living with natural.
GOAL CD 9: Retail centers in Rancho Mirage that are visually attractive, people-friendly, and economically successful.
GOAL CD 10: Distinctly designed parking areas in Rancho Mirage’s commercial centers that incorporate rich paving materials, drought and heat -tolerant landscaping, clear and safe pedestrian and vehicular access, and protection from the desert climate through the use of well-placed trees and/or carports.
GOAL CD 11: Parking areas that are screened from public streets to the greatest extent possible.
Consistency: The development standards and design guidelines provided in the Specific Plan promote a distinct and high- quality residential and commercial development that is compatible with the character of nearby residential developments and of the City as a whole. Shared neighborhood community spaces will be provided on-site, including a club house, pool, and paseo for the single-family rental housing, as well as shared outdoor amenities including pools for the affordable housing. The Specific Plan provides standards to ensure the adequate provision of parking, the screening of trash enclosures and other services areas, a comprehensive 7-72
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 64
landscaping plan that is consistent with the MWELO, and perimeter walls with integrated landscaping to provide screening.
The Specific Plan provides standards requiring signage to be high quality, attractive, and informative. The standards require lighting to be shielded and directed downward in order to reduce glare, preserve dark night skies, while still providing directional, safety, and informational functions.
The Specific Plan provides standards and guidelines to ensure high- quality, context sensitive design, while allowing flexibility for future tenants. The SP includes guidelines to ensure cohesive yet visually-interesting schemes in building materials, color palettes, landscaping, signage, and lighting. Proposed development plans include pedestrian amenities on the Ramon Road and Rattler Road frontages as well as within the property, with internal pedestrian connections and a paseo. Entrances to the development will be distinct and easily indefinable entrances, supported by monument signage, accent landscaping and lighting. Development will be required to comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, ensuring energy efficient design and the integration of roof-mounted photovoltaic panels.
The Specific Plan includes development standards and design guidelines instructing the development of parking, landscaping, and lighting on the subject site. Parking for the commercial center will allow for free flow of vehicle traffic, and will be easily accessible via ingress/egress onto Ramon Road, as well as secondary access points on Ramon Road and Rattler Road. The configuration of the commercial component of the Project places parking to the rear of commercial buildings, thereby screening the parking from view from Ramon Road. On- street parking for the affordable housing component of the Project will be placed in the western portion of the site, shielded from view from Ramon Road and Rattler Road. The landscape guidelines promote the use of greenery at varying scales, including trees, low shrubs, and groundcover. Lighting will be required to be shielded and directed downwards, in order to minimize glare.
ECONOMIC + FISCAL
GOAL E&F 1: A growing and balanced economic base that serves the needs of Rancho Mirage residents, businesses, and visitors while maintaining the City’s high standards of development and environmental protection.
Consistency: The
proposed Project includes residential and commercial development. The adjacent uses proposed for the site will provide c onvenience for residents, while situating the commercial center in a highly visible location on a major arterial road. The commercial uses will support the City’s economic base. The development standards and design guidelines will ensure that both the residential and commercial uses will be consistent with the City’s high standard for development and environmental protection.
ARTS + CULTURE
GOA
L A&C 3: Night sky protection.
Consistency: Design guidelines provided in the Specific Plan require the use of shielded outdoor lighting in order to reduce light pollution and glare, consistent with §17.18.050 of the City’s zoning code.
11.3 M
itigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Monitoring: None required.
7-73
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 65
12 - Mineral Resources
MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the
project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
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?
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?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017. Updated Mineral Land Classification Map for Portland Cement Concrete- Grade Aggregate in the Palm Springs Production- Consumption Region, Riverside County, California by Lawrence L. Busch, 2007.
12.1 Setting:
In the Coachella Valley, mineral resources are largely limited to aggregates, such as sand, gravel, and crushed stone. These are major components of concrete, plaster, stucco, road base and fill, which are essential to the construction industry. There are important deposits of these materials that occur within the region that are being actively developed.
Other mineral deposits in the region are generally limited to rocky outcroppings within the Little San Bernardino and Santa Rosa Mountains and have not been mined. These resources include copper, limestone, specialty sands, and tungsten. There are decorative stone deposits that are being mined on public land in the Painted Hills area west of Desert Hot Springs, as well as clay deposits at the base of the Mecca Hills east of Thermal on public and private land. These may be used as an impermeable layer for lining landfills, ponds, and similar construction applications, and some of these deposits have been permitted for mining.
12.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a,b) No Impact. The Project site is located within Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) 3, defined as areas containing known or inferred mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resource significance. Nowhere in the specific plan area are areas designated, used, or planned for mineral resource extraction or development. The proposed Specific Plan would result in no impacts to mineral resources.
12.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required
Monitoring: None required
7-74
□ □ □ ~
□ □ □ ~
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 66
13 - Noise
NOISE – Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
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?
b) Generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
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?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017.
13.1 Setting:
Noise can be defined as “unwanted sound.” Excessive and/or sustained noise can contribute to both temporary and permanent physical impairments, such as hearing loss and increased fatigue, as well as stress, annoyance, anxiety, and other psychological reactions in humans. The evaluation and mitigation of noise in a community is essential to protecting the health and welfare of the general public, and preserving the inherent value of recreation, open space, and conservation lands. Furthermore, it can help define the need for additional remedial measures that mitigate noise problems. Noise propagation can also be affected by terrain and surrounding development.
Noise Standards
Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Section 17.18.060 states that all “uses, activities, and processes shall not generate or emit any noise or sound beyond the property line of the subject parcel, which exceeds the maximum level identified in the Municipal Code Chapter 8.45 (Noise).” Chapter 8.45 (Noise Ordinance) establishes exterior noise level limits (dBA CNEL) for land use zones throughout the City. Acceptable exterior noise levels for single -family residential development range from 45 to 55 dBA CNEL, for multi-family residential range from 50 to 60 dBA CNEL, and for commercial development range from 55 to 65 dBA CNEL. These noise levels do not include construction-related noise levels, as construction activities generate temporary noise. 7-75
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 67
Vibration Standards
The Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Section 17.18.080 addresses vibration in all new and modified uses and structures and states that “no vibration associated with any use shall be allowed which is discernible beyond the boundary line of the subject property.” However, the city has not adopted specific, quantified vibration level standards.
13.2 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 Ramon Road and Rattler Road. The surrounding area mainly consists of roadways, residential and institutional (high school) development, and vacant lands. The nearest sensitive receptors are the single-family residences (Tuscany) immediately northwest of the site.
Off-S
ite Construction Noise Impacts
Noise generating construction activities would include site preparation, excavation, grading, and the construction and finishing of the proposed buildings. Noise levels surrounding the Project site could be elevated for short periods of time, as equipment moves through the site. These noise levels would be limited to the less sensitive daytime hours and would cease once building construction began. Construction activities will comply with the City’s Municipal Code Section §
15.04.030 which limits construction times and days between the hours of 7 p.m. of each day and 7 a.m. of the next succeeding day or on Sundays and holidays, without written permission of the Building Official being first obtained. The Building Official may grant permission to work during those periods under appropriate circumstances after first having determined that such work will not unduly or unreasonably interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of property adjacent to such work.
Noise levels surrounding the Project site could be elevated for short periods of time, as equipment moves through the site. These noise levels would be limited to the less sensitive daytime hours and would cease once building construction began. 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 project-related noise sources will include vehicular traffic accessing the site, grounds maintenance equipment, and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units. As discussed above, residential development, a high school, and vacant lands surround the subject site, so the vehicle mix will be comparable with existing vehicles on surrounding roads.
According to the General Plan Draft EIR, noise levels are expected to reach up to 75 dBA CNEL at 50 feet from the centerline of roadways used by heavy trucks, including Ramon Road. 13 According to Figure 5.10-5 of the EIR (Future Noise Contours), a portion of the Project site fronting Ramon Road is located within a 65 dBA CNEL future noise contour. The portion of the site within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour is the frontage of PA 3 and is planned for General Commercial uses, for which an exterior noise level of 65 dBA CNEL is considered acceptable. The 65 dBA CNEL would fall at a distance of 158 feet from the centerline, 14 and since noise decreases rapidly
13 Rancho Mirage General Plan Update Draft EIR. pg. 5-237 14 Ibid.
7-76
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 68
with distance, residential users of the Project in PAs 1 and 2 that are more than 500 feet from the centerline will experience noise levels within the City’s acceptable range for residential uses (55- 60 dBA CNEL). Furthermore, with typical building construction and a windows -closed condition, a minimum 20 dBA CNEL reduction is achievable for new dwelling units and in other noise - sensitive uses. Typical methods used to lower interior noise levels include weather -stripping exterior doors and dual glazed windows.
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 High Density Residential on the Project site. Although the Project proposes a General Plan Amendment to allow General Commercial uses, which could result in increased noise levels due to vehicle trips, this use is limited to the portion fronting Ramon Road and thus creates a noise buffer for the residential uses planned in PAs 1 and 2. In conclusion, 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. Ground-borne vibration and/or ground-borne noise would be generated during on- site construction, which could be felt by adjacent land uses. Lands surrounding the proposed SP consist of developed (residential development, a high school, and roadways) and undeveloped lands. The primary source of ground-borne vibration will be operation of heavy equipment, such as bulldozers; however, the impacts will be temporary and will end once construction is complete. 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 § 15.04.030 of the Municipal Code, which limits construction activity to the less sen sitive daylight hours. These requirements will reduce vibration impacts to less sensitive daytime hours and assure that short-term construction noise impacts will be less than significant levels.
The SP does not propose any land uses (e.g. concert hall, drilling, blasting, or high-speed transit systems etc.) which could generate ground- borne vibrations or noise. At buildout, the project would not generate any ground -borne vibration or noise to adversely affect the surrounding developments. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. c) Less Than Significant Impact . The proposed SP is not located within noise contour boundaries of an airport and therefore will not expose future employees to excessive airport related noise levels.
15 The SP area is located more than three miles east the Palm Springs Airport, so the project will not expose people living or working in the area to excessive noise levels.
13.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Monitoring: None required.
15 Palm Springs International Airport Master Plan, Figure 2-6 2002 Noise Exposure Map. 7-77
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 69
14 - Population and Housing
POPULATION AND HOUSING –
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
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)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017; 2020 -2045 RTP/SCS, Demographics & Growth Forecast Appendix, Southern California Association of Governments.
14.1 Setting:
Background:
According to the California Department of Finance, the population of the City of Rancho Mirage was estimated to be 17,012 (2023). 16 The City housing stock is composed of a mix of single- family and multi-family development, but the majority of housing units are single-family detached homes. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) estimates that the City will have a total population of 25,200 in 2045.17
14.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would result in the construction of 305 new single- and multi -family residential units and commercial development. Given the City’s average household size of 1.85 persons
18, the 305 new units could potentially include a permanent population of approximately 565 persons. This represents 2.24% of the City’s anticipated 2045 population of 25,200, which would have a less than significant impact on the overall population of the area. The subject property is currently designated for High Density Residential development in the Land Use and Zoning map and, therefore, onsite population growth is planned and part of the City’s vision for this site.
16 California Department of Finance 2023 data on City/County Population and Housing Estimates. 17 2020- 2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), Appendix:
Demographics & Growth Forecast, Table 14 , Southern California Association of Governments, September 2020.
18 1.85 persons per household in Ranch Mirage, based on California Department of Finance 2023 data on City/County Population and Housing Estimates.
7-78
□ □ ~ □
□ □ □ ~
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 70
The Project will generate a variety of new jobs, including construction and retail jobs and could attract new residents to the city. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) estimates that the city will have a total employment of 21,200 in 2045. Most jobs are expected to be filled by people already living in the valley or future residents coming to the area as part of expected growth, and the Project is not expected to attract a substantial number of new residents to the area. Project impacts on population growth and housing demand are expected to be less than significant.
The site is currently vacant and undeveloped. The proposed Project occurs on the City’s existing street grid, and will tie into existing utility systems. Since existing streets, utilities and public facilities are located adjacent to the project site along Ramon Road and Rattler Road, the project will not result in the construction or expansion of new infrastructure. Overall, less than significant impacts are anticipated.
b) No Impact. The subject property is currently vacant and the proposed Project would not displace any existing housing or persons or require the construction of housing elsewhere. No impact will occur.
14.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Monitoring: None required.
7-79
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 71
15 - Public Services
PUBLIC SERVICES – Would the
project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) 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:
i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017.
15.1 Setting:
Fire Protection Services
Fire protection, first response, emergency medical services, and natural disaster preparedness services in the City are provided by the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) under contract to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire). The City is a member of the Cove Communities Services Commission, which includes the cities of Palm Desert, Rancho Mirage, and Indian Wells. The Fire Department has 27 sworn, 2 full time non- sworn and 1 part time non-sworn personnel, serving 24.7 square miles and ~18,799 persons.
Police Protection
Police protection in Rancho Mirage is provided on a service contract basis by the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department that operates out of the Palm Desert Station. Daily staffing is comprised of 7 officers that work in two, 12- hour shifts. Four deputy patrol officers work the day shift, and 3 deputy patrol officers work the night shift. The City currently provides 1.77 officers per 1,000 residents.
7-80
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 72
Schools
Two school districts, Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) and Palm Springs Unified School District (PSUSD), serve the City. One private school, the Palm Valley School, also provides K-12 education in the City.
Parks
The City of Rancho Mirage offers a wide variety of recreational opportunities, including golf courses, bikeways, and parkland. The City is also located near thousands of acres of National Park and National Monument lands, and U.S. Forest Service wilderness lands, as well as state, regional, and tribal parks, within which are miles of hiking, biking and equestrian trails. The nearest public park to the Project site is Desert Memorial Park located 0.25 miles west of the subject property.
15.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a) Fi
re Protection
Less Than Significant Impact. Fire protection and emergency services in the City are provided by the Riverside County Fire Department, under City contract. The nearest Riverside County Fire Department is located approximately 2 miles east of the Project site at 31920 Robert Road in the community of Thousand Palms. The nearest City fire department is the Cathedral City Fire Department located at 32100 Desert Vista Road approximately 1.45 miles west of the Project site.
Fire and emergency personnel will be able to access the site using multiple entrances, including those on Rattler Road and Ramon Road. Emergency and secondary roadway access may be temporarily affected during construction of projects facilitated by the Specific Plan. However, project-specific construction traffic control plans implemented during construction will assure that impacts to mobility and accessibility in the area will be less than significant. Additional structures and population in the planning area, as facilitated by the Specific Plan, may increase the demand for fire protection services. However, Project development will be in accordance with all state and local (Municipal Code and RCFD) fire standards to assure adequate fire safety and emergency access. The Project will be required to pay City development impact fees to contribute its fair share of costs for future fire facilities, personnel, and apparatus. Therefore, Project impacts will be less than significant.
Police Protection
Less Than Significant Impact. Police protection in the City is provided by the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department, under City contract. The Riverside County Sheriff’s Palm Desert station is located at 3.7 miles southeast of the Project site at 73705 Gerald Ford Drive in the City of Palm Desert. Buildout of the planning area in accordance with the Specific Plan may result in additional demand for police protection services. However, the Project will be required to comply with all Police Department regulations and procedures, and Project plans will be reviewed by the Police Department to assure adequate emergency access is provided. The Project is not expected to require the construction of new or expanded police services or facilities. Impacts will be less than significant.
7-81
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 73
Schools
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is located within the Palm Springs Unified School District. The Rancho Mirage High School is located immediately north of the planning area. The proposed Project will be subject to the PSUSD developer fees in place at the time development occurs, which currently stand at $4.79 per square foot of residential development and $0.78 per square foot of commercial development19. Payment of the developer fee would mitigate potential significant impacts to school resources to less than significant levels.
Parks
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Specific Plan could generate an estimated permanent population of 565 residents (1.85 persons per household for Rancho Mirage, based on California Department of Finance 2023 City/County Population and Housing Estimates). The single-family residences in PA 1 will have private backyards, as well as access to the community’s central Clubhouse/recreation facilities. The Clubhouse will include a pool and spa with lounge chairs and cabanas, a gym and central leasing office. The multi -family units in PA 2 will have access to a central recreation area that includes a playground, community room, and leasing office. PA 3 is planned for commercial uses and will not generate demand for recreational amenities or services. The Project will generate a marginal increase in population, which is likely to occasionally visit City parks, however, with the payment of Developer Impact Fees, the increased population, which is consistent with what is planned for the site in the General Plan, will not impact parks.
Other Public Facilities
Less Than Significant Impact. The project’s increase in permanent population has the potential to marginally increase the use of existing public facilities. However, no additional public facilities are required for the proposed Project. Increase in demand for the city’s existing facilities will be less than significant.
15.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Monitoring: None required
19 Website. Palm Springs Unified School District, Level 1 Fee Structure. https://www.psusd.us/Page/2400. Accessed July 2023.
7-82
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 74
16 - Recreation
RECREATION – Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
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?
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?
Source: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017.
16.1 Setting
The City of Rancho Mirage offers a wide variety of recreational opportunities, including golf courses, bikeways, and parkland. The City is also located near thousands of acres of National Park and National Monument lands, and U.S. Forest Service wilderness lands, as well as state, regional, and tribal parks, within which are miles of hiking, biking and equestrian trails. The nearest City park to the Project site is the City’s dog park located 2.5 miles southeast of the subject property.
16.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a, b) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed Specific Plan could generate an estimated permanent population of 565 residents (1.85 persons per household for Rancho Mirage, based on California Department of Finance 2023 City/County Population and Housing Estimates). The single-family residences in PA 1 will have private backyards, as well as access to the community’s central Clubhouse/recreation facilities. The Clubhouse will include a pool and spa with lounge chairs and cabanas, a gym and central leasing office. The multi -family units in PA 2 will have access to a central recreation area that includes a playground, community room, and leasing office. PA 3 is planned for commercial uses and will not generate demand for recreational amenities or services.
The proposed SP will not induce substantial population growth that would result in significant impacts such as physical deterioration or construction of new recreational facilities to existing parks or recreational facilities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
16.3 Mitigation Measures
:
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Monitoring: None required.
7-83
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 75
17 - Transportation
TRANSPORTATION – Would the
project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
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?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due
to a geometric design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access?
Source: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017; Traffic Impact Analysis for the Catana Specific Plan, Urban Crossroads, Inc., June 2023; Catana Specific Plan Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., June 2023.
17.1 Setting:
In the City of Rancho Mirage, the circulation system consists of roadways, freeways, bus lines, sidewalks, and bike lanes. The Rancho Mirage General Plan Circulation Element establishes a street classification system based on cross sections and the configuration and width of right -of- way features, such as medians, bike lanes, landscaped parkways, and sidewalks. Ramon Road is classified as a Major Arterial (6 lane) and Rattler Road is cl assified as a Major Collector (4 lane).
The City of Rancho Mirage is currently served by the SunLine Transit Agency (STA), a public transit agency serving various jurisdictions throughout Coachella Valley. STA Route 4 runs along Ramon Road adjacent to the Project site . Existing on-street bike lanes occur on both sides of Ramon Road between Da Vall Drive and Los Alamos Road within the Project area. Sidewalks currently exist adjacent to the site on Rattler Road and Ramon Road.
Level of Service Thresholds
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 currently operate at LOS D or better, with the exception of two of the school access points on Rattler Road, which have morning and midday LOS deficiencies due to high school traffic. 7-84
□ IZI □ □
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ □ IZI
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 76
VMT Analysis
Effective July 1, 2020, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines require lead agencies to adopt Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as a replacement for automobile delay -based LOS as the measure for identifying transportation impacts for land use projects. City of Rancho Mirage Resolution 2021-06 (City Guidelines) aligns the City’s VMT analysis policy with SB 743 and the City’s goals as set forth in the General Plan Update (2017). The purpose of the policy is to comply with State laws while maintaining the resort residential character of the community.
17.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a) Less Than Significant with Mitigation. The Specific Plan proposes development of up to 305 residential dwelling units and 75,000 square feet of general commercial uses. The Project proposes four access points and one emergency access point. The single- family rentals (PA 1) will have one emergency only access and one full access (both gated) driveways along Rattler Road and access onto the westerly driveway for residents, while the affordable apartments (PA 2) will be accessed from the project driveway on the west side of the site, from Ramon Road. The commercial portion of the Project (PA 3) will have one full access driveway along Rattler Road, and two restricted access driveways along Ramon Road.
The westerly driveway serves as the primary access to the affordable apartment, and also connects to the commercial and single- family portions of the Project. The westerly driveway is proposed as a Right -In/Right-Out with Left- In-Only (no left out) median configuration at the southwest driveway access to the site. This access provides the only eastbound left -in access opportunity from Ramon Road to the site.
The Traffic Analysis recommends the following site access improvements to be implemented as part of Project design.
• Access 1 serves the single -family rental home neighborhood of the Project (PA 1) and is located approximately 335 feet north of Access 2, measured from the south curb of Access 1 to the north curb of Access 2 along Rattler Road. Northbound left turns into the site will be accommodated within the existing two- way left turn lane (TWLTL) striped median on Rattler Road.
• Access 2 serves the commercial retail portion of the Project (PA 3) and is located approximately 280 feet north of Ramon Road, measured from the south curb of Access 2 to the north curb of Ramon Road along Rattler Road. Because the retail parcel is also served by two other direct connections to Ramon Road, northbound left turns into the site at Access 2 from Rattler Road are minimal (16 AM peak hour vehicles and 40 PM peak hour vehicles).
These low left turn volumes can be accommodated in the short northbound storage length available at this location within the existing two- way left turn lane (TWLTL) striped median on Rattler Road.
• Access 3 serves the commercial retail portion of the Project (PA 3) from Ramon Road and is located approximately 590 feet west of Rattler Road, measured from the east curb of Access 3 to the west curb of Rattler Road along Ramon Road. This commercial driveway location will be restricted as right- in/right-out only access (no median break on R amon Road).
• Access 4: In conjunction with development of either the affordable apartment dwelling units (PA 2) or the commercial retail parcel (PA 3), construct median improvements on Ramon 7-85
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 77
Road to accommodate a 150-foot eastbound left turn pocket. Provide a Left-In-Only (no left out) median configuration which allows left-in/right-in/right-out only access at Access 4. • On-site traffic signing and striping should be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the Project site. Sight distance at each project access point should be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans and City of Rancho Mirage sight distance standards at the time of preparation of final grading, landscape and street improvement plans.
As shown in the following table, the Project is forecast to generate approximately 5,680 daily vehicle trips at buildout, including 215 trips during the AM peak hour and 443 trips during the PM peak hour.
Table 7
Project Trip Generation Summary
Trip Generation Rates1
Land Use ITE
Code
Unit
2 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Single Family Rental 220 215 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.32 0.19 0.51 6.74 Affordable Apartments 223 90 0.10 0.26 0.36 0.27 0.19 0.46 4.81 Shopping Center (40-150k) 821 75 1.07 0.66 1.73 2.54 2.65 5.19 67.52 Project Trips Generated
Land Use
Quantity
Unit2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Rental 215 DU 22 65 87 69 41 110 1,449
Affordable Apartments 90 DU 9 23 32 24 17 41 433
Residential interaction
w/ commercial -3 -4 -7 -10 -10 -20 -253
Residential Subtotal 28 84 112 83 48 131 1,629
Shopping Center 75 TSF 80 50 130 191 199 390 5,064
Commercial Pass-By
(15%) -10 -10 -20 -29 -29 -58 -760
Commercial interaction
w/ residential -4 -3 -7 -10 -10 -20 -253
Commercial Subtotal 66 38 104 152 160 312 4,051
Total: 94 121 215 235 208 443 5,680
1 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th edition, 2021. 2 TSF = thousand square feet; DU = Dwelling unit
Based on consultation with City staff, the traffic impact analysis studied the following 15 intersections to evaluate Project impacts on the circulation network:
1. Date Palm Dr/ Ramon Rd.
2. Da Vall Dr/ Ramon Rd
3. Da Vall Dr/ Dinah Shore Dr
4. Rattler Rd/ School Access 1
5. Ratter Rd/ Ramon Rd
6. Los Alamos Rd/ Ramon Rd
7. Bob Hope Dr/ I-10 WB Ramps
8. Bob Hope Dr/ I-10 EB Ramps
9. Bob Hope Dr/ Ramon Rd
10. Rattler Rd/ Access 1
7-86
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 78
11. Rattler Rd/ Access 2
12. Access 3/ Ramon Rd
13. Access 4/ Ramon Rd
14. Rattler Rd/ School Access 2 (exit only)
15. Rattler Rd/ School Access 3
The following scenarios were analyzed:
• Existing (2023) Conditions
• Existing plus Ambient Growth plus Project (EAP) (2025) • Existing plus Ambient Growth plus Project Plus Cumulative (EAPC) (2025) • Horizon Year 2040 Without Project
• Horizon Year 2040 With Project
In addition, due to the Project’s proximity to Rancho Mirage High School, the City requested that analysis of the mid-day peak associated with school departures be analyzed, in order to determine whether those impacts would be significant with addition of the Project to area roadways.
Existing Conditions
The analysis of Existing Conditions establishes the baseline for the Project’s traffic analysis, and consideration of impacts. Under Existing Conditions, except for the intersections of Rattler Rd/ School Access 1 (#4), which operates at LOS E (unacceptable level) in the AM, and Rattler Rd/ School Access 3 (#15), which operates at LOS E and F in the AM and mid-day (MD), respectively.
All other studied intersections operate at LOS D or better, as shown in Table 8.
Table 8
Existing Intersection Delay and Levels of Service
Study Intersection
Traffic
Control1
Level of Service
AM MD PM
1. Date Palm Dr/ Ramon Rd. TS D -- D
2. Da Vall Dr/ Ramon Rd TS C -- C
3. Da Vall Dr/ Dinah Shore Dr TS D -- C
4. Rattler Rd/ School Access 1 CSS E C B
5. Ratter Rd/ Ramon Rd TS B B B
6. Los Alamos Rd/ Ramon Rd TS B -- B
7. Bob Hope Dr/ I-10 WB Ramps TS B -- C
8. Bob Hope Dr/ I-10 EB Ramps TS B -- B
9. Bob Hope Dr/ Ramon Rd TS C -- D
10. Rattler Rd/ Access 1 Future Intersection
11. Rattler Rd/ Access 2 Future Intersection
12. Access 3/ Ramon Rd Future Intersection
13. Access 4/ Ramon Rd Future Intersection
14. Rattler Rd/ School Access 2 (exit
only) CSS B C B
15. Rattler Rd/ School Access 3 CSS E F B
1 TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross‐street Stop; RDB = Roundabout 7-87
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 79
EAP (2025) Conditions
EAP traffic conditions represent Existing Conditions, plus the addition of ambient traffic growth (in this case an ambient growth factor of 4.04% was added to Existing Conditions volumes), plus the addition of the Project. EAP projections assume that these conditions occur in 2025.
As shown in the following table, the intersection analysis results indicates that there are no new intersections operating at an unacceptable LOS with the addition of Project traffic. For the existing deficient intersections of Rattler Road / School Access 1 (#4) and Rattler Road / School Access 3 (#15), improvements are not recommended for EAP conditions since the worst movement that causes both intersections to fail are due to the high eastbound outbound school traffic (minor approach) and not anticipated to impede the flow of traffic for the northbound and southbound through traffic (major approaches). Providing additional capacity (adding eastbound turn lanes) is not anticipated to improve intersection delay at these school driveways, and this condition is solely associated with High School traffic.
Table 9
Intersection Analysis for EAP (2025) Conditions
Study Intersection
Traffic
Control1
Level of Service
AM MD PM
1. Date Palm Dr/ Ramon Rd. TS D -- D
2. Da Vall Dr/ Ramon Rd TS C -- C
3. Da Vall Dr/ Dinah Shore Dr TS D -- C
4. Rattler Rd/ School Access 1 CSS F C B
5. Ratter Rd/ Ramon Rd TS B B B
6. Los Alamos Rd/ Ramon Rd TS B -- B
7. Bob Hope Dr/ I-10 WB Ramps TS B -- C
8. Bob Hope Dr/ I-10 EB Ramps TS B -- B
9. Bob Hope Dr/ Ramon Rd TS D -- D
10. Rattler Rd/ Access 1 CSS B B B
11. Rattler Rd/ Access 2 CSS B B B
12. Access 3/ Ramon Rd CSS C -- C
13. Access 4/ Ramon Rd CSS C -- C
14. Rattler Rd/ School Access 2
(exit only) CSS B C B
15. Rattler Rd/ School Access 3 CSS F F C
1 TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross‐street Stop; RDB = Roundabout
EAPC Conditions
Under EAPC (2025) conditions, with the inclusion of the proposed Project, ambient growth, known cumulative projects, as shown in the following table, the intersection analysis results indicate that there are no new intersections operating at an unacceptable LOS with the addition of Project and cumulative traffic under EAPC conditions.
7-88
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 80
Similar to EAP conditions, for the existing deficient intersections of Rattler Road / School Access 1 (#4) and Rattler Road / School Access 3 (#15), improvements are not recommended for EAPC conditions since the worst movement that causes both intersections to fail are due to the high eastbound outbound school traffic (minor approach) and not anticipated to impede the flow of traffic for the northbound and southbound through traffic (major approaches). Providing additional capacity (adding eastbound turn lanes) is not anticipated to improve intersection delay at these school access driveways, as described above.
Table 10
Intersection Analysis for EAPC (2025) Conditions
Study Intersection
Traffic
Control1
Level of Service
AM MD PM
1. Date Palm Dr/ Ramon Rd. TS D -- D
2. Da Vall Dr/ Ramon Rd TS C -- C
3. Da Vall Dr/ Dinah Shore Dr TS D -- D
4. Rattler Rd/ School Access 1 CSS F D C
5. Ratter Rd/ Ramon Rd TS B B B
6. Los Alamos Rd/ Ramon Rd TS B -- B
7. Bob Hope Dr/ I-10 WB Ramps TS B -- D
8. Bob Hope Dr/ I-10 EB Ramps TS B -- B
9. Bob Hope Dr/ Ramon Rd TS D -- D
10. Rattler Rd/ Access 1 CSS B B B
11. Rattler Rd/ Access 2 CSS B B B
12. Access 3/ Ramon Rd CSS C -- C
13. Access 4/ Ramon Rd CSS C -- C
14. Rattler Rd/ School Access 2
(exit only) CSS C C B
15. Rattler Rd/ School Access 3 CSS F F C
1 TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross‐street Stop; RDB = Roundabout
Horizon Year (2040) Without and With Project Conditions Future horizon year 2040 traffic projections were sourced from the following analyses:
• City of Rancho Mirage General Plan Update Traffic Impact Analysis, 2017 prepared by Urban Crossroads Inc.,
• Draft Section 31 Specific Plan Transportation Impact Study, 2019, prepared by Fehr & Peers, and
• City of Cathedral City Draft Comprehensive General Plan, July 2019, prepared by Terra Nova Planning & Research.
7-89
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 81
For intersections without 2040 data, a minimum growth of 10% over existing (2023) was applied to turn movements in addition to traffic data from known cumulative projects in the area.
As shown in the following table, the analysis found that no new study area intersections would operate at an acceptable level of service with the exception of Date Palm Drive/ Ramon Road (#1) and Da Vall Drive/ Ramon Road (#2). Similar to EAP and EAPC conditions, for the existing deficient intersections of Rattler Road / School Access 1 (#4) and Rattler Road / School Access 3 (#15), improvements are not recommended for EAPC conditions since the worst movement that causes both intersections to fail are due to the high eastbound outbound school traffic (minor approach) and not anticipated to impede the flow of traffic for the northbound and southbound through traffic (major approaches). Providing additional capacity (adding eastbound turn lanes) is not anticipated to improve intersection delay at these school access driveways.
To achieve acceptable circulation system performance without or with the Project consist of the following:
Date Palm Drive/ Ramon Road (#1)
• Modify existing NB right turn lane by striping to a shared through/right lane. The 3rd NB receiving lane exists.
• Provide a separate EB right turn lane.
• Provide a separate WB right turn lane.
Da Vall Drive/ Ramon Road (#2)
• Modify traffic signal phasing to provide overlap phase to the existing WB right turn lane. • Provide a 2nd SB left turn lane.
As shown in the Table, impacts occur whether the Project is constructed or not in the horizon year condition. To reduce project impacts to less than significant levels, the Project will be required to pay a fair share contribution for the above intersection improvements (Mitigation Measures TRA- 1). The Project’s fair share of cumulative traffic amounts to 5.7% towards the 2040 lane re-striping improvements at Date Palm Drive / Ramon Road (#1) and 8.2% towards the 2040 ultimate lane improvements and signal modification at Da Vall Drive / Ramon Road (#2). Project participation may include fee payments to established programs (e.g., TUMF), payment of a fair share contribution toward future improvements, or a combination of these approaches.
With the implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA.1, impacts associated with build out of the proposed Project will be less than significant.
7-90
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 82
Table 11
Intersection Analysis for Horizon Year (2040) Conditions
Study Intersection
Traffic
Control1
Without Project
Level of Service
With Project
Level of Service
AM MD PM AM MD PM
1. Date Palm Dr/ Ramon Rd.
without Project improvements TS D -- E E -- E
with Project improvements D -- D D -- D
2. Da Vall Dr/ Ramon Rd
without Project improvements TS E -- E E -- E
with Project improvements TS D -- A D -- D
3. Da Vall Dr/ Dinah Shore Dr TS D -- D D -- D
4. Rattler Rd/ School Access 1 CSS F E C F E C
5. Ratter Rd/ Ramon Rd TS B B B B C B
6. Los Alamos Rd/ Ramon Rd TS C -- B C -- B
7. Bob Hope Dr/ I-10 WB
Ramps TS D -- D D -- D
8. Bob Hope Dr/ I-10 EB Ramps TS D -- C D -- D
9. Bob Hope Dr/ Ramon Rd TS D -- D D -- D
10. Rattler Rd/ Access 1 CSS A A A B B B
11. Rattler Rd/ Access 2 CSS A A A B B B
12. Access 3/ Ramon Rd CSS A -- A C -- D
13. Access 4/ Ramon Rd CSS A -- A D -- D
14. Rattler Rd/ School Access 2
(exit only) CSS C D B C D C
15. Rattler Rd/ School Access 3 CSS F F C F F C
1 TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross‐street Stop; RDB = Roundabout
Alternative Transportation
Existing on-street bike lanes are located on both sides of the roadways along Ramon Road in front of the Project site. The City will require the applicant to restore site -adjacent sidewalks to excellent condition by the project prior to opening day. Crosswalks at Project access points will be provided in conjunction with the development of the Project. The Project would not conflict with plans or policies addressing multimodal facilities.
The Project area is currently served by the Sunline with bus services along Ramon Road via route 4, and there is one transit stop within 400 feet of the Project site. SunLine periodically reviews and updates its services and facilities based on ridership, budget, and community demand. The Project would have no impact on plans or policies addressing transit facilities.
b) No Impact. SB 743 requires amendments to the CEQA Guidelines (pre- 2019) to provide an alternative to LOS for evaluating transportation impacts. CEQA Guidelines were amended to require all lead agencies to adopt vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as a replacement for automobile delay-based level of service (LOS) for identifying transportation impacts. This statewide mandate went into effect July 1, 2020.
7-91
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 83
A Project-specific VMT Screening Analysis was prepared by Urban Crossroads in June 2023. The City’s VMT policy establishes VMT as the metric to measure transportation impacts in conformance with CEQA. Exhibit A of Resolution 2021- 06 sets forth screening criteria under which Projects are not required to submit detailed VMT analysis.
Of the seven (7) screening steps, the VMT analysis found that the Project meets two of the screening criteria:
1. S mall Project Screening: Does not meet;
2. Project’s Near High Quality Transit: Does not meet;
3. Local Serving Retail: Meets for retail component. The proposed Catana Specific Plan Project includes six buildings that have a combined square footage of 75,000 square feet, each of which is anticipated to be less than 25,000 square feet. The addition of these retail shops at this location, with building sizes well under the 50,000 square feet threshold, will allow residents to interact with local businesses rather than traveling farther to serve their retail needs.
4. Affordable Housing: Meets for residential component. Of the 305 Project residential units, 90 dwelling units are affordable housing. This equates to 29.5% of the dwelling units. In comparison, recent residential projects in Rancho Mirage have not included an affordable housing component, meaning the Project proposes a high percentage of affordable housing units compared to existing trends in the City.
5. Local Essential Service: Does not meet;
6. Map Based Screening: Does not meet; and
7. Redevelopment Project: Does not meet.
Therefore, the Project, per the City’s VMT guidelines, can be determined to have less than significant impacts on circulation. The Project will not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b).
c) No Impact. The Project is proposed to have access from Ramon Road and Rattler Road. As discussed in subsection a) above, roadway improvements will be constructed in compliance with City standards and will not cause significant traffic delays or increased traffic hazards. No sharp curves, dangerous intersections, or hazardous geometric features are proposed. The Project vehicle mix will be consistent with the existing mix in the Project area. Construction plans will be coordinated with the city so that construction activity does not interfere with traffic on adjacent and nearby roads.
d) No Impact. There is one dedicated emergency access point proposed for PA 1 on Rattler Road, and a second proposed between PA 1 and PA 2, however all Project driveways can serve as emergency access routes, since they are open to emergency vehicles. Prior to construction, the Fire and Police Departments will review the site plan to ensure safety measures are addressed, including emergency access and vehicle turnaround space. Construction plans will be coordinated with the city and emergency providers, as needed, to assure that emergency access is maintained throughout all stages of development. No impact will occur.
17.3 Mitigation Measures:
TRA.1 In addition to paying the requisite CVAG TUMF fee, and to remedy intersection LOS deficiencies, the Project’s fair share of cumulative traffic amount is 5.7% towards the 2040 lane re-striping improvements at Date Palm Drive / Ramon Road (#1) and 8.2% towards 7-92
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 84
the 2040 ultimate lane improvements and signal modification at Da Vall Drive / Ramon Road (#2).
Monitoring:
TRA.A The Project applicant shall coordinate with the City and CVAG the payment of CVAG’s TUMF fee and the agreed upon fair share contribution for improvements to the intersection of Date Palm Drive / Ramon Road (#1) and Da Vall Drive / Ramon Road (#2).
Responsible Parties: Project applicant, CVAG, City Engineer.
7-93
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 85
18 - Tribal Cultural Resources
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES –
Would the project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of
a tribal cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code § 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
Incorporation
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
section5020.1(k), or
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 § 5024.1. In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resource Code § 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance
of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
Source: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017.
18.1 Setting
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 t he valley which are considered non- renewable resources because they provide important information about the past.
18.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a. i), ii) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on historical/ archaeological resources record searches and historical background research conducted by 7-94
□ ~ □ □
□ ~ □ □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 86
qualified professional archaeologists, no historical or archaeological resources were identified, nor are any expected on the Project site that would be 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).
Pursuant to AB 52 and SB 18 consultation requirements, the City of Rancho Mirage initiated a consultation process for a 90-day period from September 20, 2023 to December 20, 2023. The City contacted 16 tribes and their representatives provided by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). During the consultation period, the City received one comment letter from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI). ACBCI responded that the project area is not located within the boundaries of the ACBCI Reservation, but it is within the Tribe’s Traditional Use Area. ACBCI requested any copies of cultural resource documentation generated in connection with the proposed Project be provided. During consultation, ACBCI requested the addition of CUL-2, in order to assure that impacts be further reduced by assuring that construction personnel is knowledgeable regarding what potential resources might be uncovered during grading and excavation. In addition, in order to highlight the requirements of State law, the Tribe requested the addition of CUL-3, which requires the implementation of State law if human remains are uncovered during earth moving activities.
The City received a meeting request from the Cahuilla Band of Indians to further understand project. After the meeting, the Tribe deferred to ACBCI. No additional correspondence or requests for formal consultation were received and the SB 18 and AB 52 noticing period was concluded.
18.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: See Section V Cultural.
Monitoring: See Section V Cultural.
7-95
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 87
19 - Utilities and Service Systems
UTILITIES AND SERVICE
SYSTEMS – Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation
or construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment or storm
drainage, electric power, natural gas,
or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which
could cause significant environmental
effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
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
projects projected demand in addition
to the providers existing
commitments?
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?
e) Comply with federal, state, and
local management and reduction
statues and regulations related to
solid waste?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017.
19.1 Setting:
Domestic Water
The Project site is within the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) service area for domestic water. Its primary water source is groundwater extracted through a system of wells from the Whitewater River subbasin. In addition to groundwater, CVWD relies on imported water brought to the region by canals. CVWD’s domestic water system includes 97 wells with a total daily pumping capacity of 244 million gallons. CVWD has a total of 64 reservoirs, with an average storage capacity of 153.2 million gallons. CVWD also owns and operates the water distribution system, which is generally located under existing streets in the public right‐of-way.
7-96
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 88
CVWD is responsible, under the California Water Code, for analyzing its current and future water supply and assuring that sufficient supply is available to serve land uses within the District, through the preparation of an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). CVWD is required to periodically update the Plan.
Wastewater Treatment
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) also provides sewer service to the City of Rancho Mirage, including the Project area. The Project site is located in an urban area where the main sewer lines were laid out under the main roads and streets. Effluent from the City is conveyed to CVWD’s Cook Street treatment plant (Water Reclamation Plant No. 10), which has a total capacity of 18 million gallons per day (mgd), including 15 mgd tertiary treatment capacity. CVWD also implements the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board pertaining to domestic water quality and wastewater discharge.
Electric Power and Natural Gas
Southern California Edison (SCE) provides electrical services to the City of Rancho Mirage.
Natural gas is provided by the Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas).
Solid Waste
The City contracts with Burrtec for provision of solid waste management and disposal services.
Burrtec offers services for businesses, construction- related activities , and special events , in addition to a variety of residential services. Most landfill waste is taken to the Edom Hill Transfer Station in northern Cathedral City. The Edom Hill Transfer Station has a maximum permitted throughput of 3,500 tons per day for general waste (e.g, agricultural, construction/demolition, food wastes, green m aterials, industrial, metals, tires). In addition, it has a separate area for composting (construction/demolition and green materials) with a maximum permitted throughput of 500 tons per day and a permitted capacity of 10,221 cubic yards. Recyclables are transported to a Material Recovery Facility (MRF) for sorting and processing, and then shipped to destinations for reuse and repurposing. The closest MRF to Rancho Mirage is the West Valley Transfer Station/MRF in Fontana.20
Landfill facilities serving the City of Rancho Mirage are Lamb Canyon Sanitary Landfill and Badlands Sanitary Landfill. Lamb Canyon has a maximum permitted throughput of 5,000 tons per day and had a remaining capacity of 19,242,950 cubic yards as of 2015 (latest available data).21 Badlands Landfill has a maximum permitted throughput of 5,000 tons per day and had a remaining capacity of 7,800,00 cubic yards as of 2020 (latest available data).22
19.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a-c) Less Than Significant.
Water
The proposed Project will connect to the existing 18-inch water lines located in the Ramon Road and Rattler Road right of ways. As discussed in Table 6 under Hydrology and Water Quality, the total water demand for the proposed SP would be 76.91 acre- feet per year. This assumption is
20 Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017, – Chapter 9 Public Services and Facilities, p.102. 21 CalRecycle SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2246?siteID=2368 22 CalRecycle SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2245?siteID=2367 7-97
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 89
based on full buildout of the SP area. The City of Rancho Mirage’s largest water supply source is groundwater from the Whitewater River Basin, which is managed by CVWD. The Proposed Project water demand is 0.05% of the projected 2025 regional water supplies, and 0.04% of the projected 2045 regional water supplies . The Project would not substantially decrease local groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that it would impede sustainable management of the basin. Therefore, project impacts associated with domestic water demand are expected to be less than significant.
To reduce water consumption, the p roposed Project will be required to implement all water conservation measures imposed by CVWD under both normal and drought conditions over the life of the proposed Project.
Wastewater Treatment
The Project site is served by CVWD for wastewater collection and treatment services. The project site does not currently contain any wastewater infrastructure but will connect to the existing sewer lines located in the Ramon Road and Rattler Road right of ways. T he Specific Plan would accommodate a total of up to 305 new residential units and 75,000 square feet of commercial uses. Future development under the Specific Plan would be required to connect to existing main wastewater treatment lines. To ensure adequate sewer system capacity to meet the growing needs of the City and the entire service area, CVWD has plans in place which would be updated based on future demands in their jurisdictions. The wastewater treatment plant serving the planning area, WRP-10, has a current average annual flow of 10.8 million gallons per day (mgd), and the CVWD 2010 Urban Water Management Plan projects wastewater treatment at WRP-10 to be 15.53 mgd in year 2045.
The Project wastewater discharges will be typical of commercial and residential uses and would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of CVWD or the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Therefore, buildout of the proposed Specific Plan update would result in a less than significant impacts related to wastewater treatment facilities; no mitigation is required.
Stormwater Drainage
The Project is subject to the City of Rancho Mirage Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Chapter 7.03). The implementation of the General Plan goals, policies, and programs regarding drainage and flood control will occur through the use and enforcement of City, CVWD and (where applicable) FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Plan (NFIP) guidelines and mitigation measures, as well as NPDES requirements.
Pursuant to Policy 2.7 of the General Plan Safety Element, the proposed development’s on -site stormwater retention facilities must have adequate capacity to retain flows from the 100-year, 24- hour storm. In Planning Area 1, stormwater will be retained on site in the two retention ponds provided in the northeastern and northwestern corners of Planning Area 1. Additional underground storage may be provided on -site if required. PA 2 and 3 will also develop on- site drainage facilities, likely consisting of a combination of above-ground retention, and underground detention facilities. A Hydrology Report and Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) will be prepared for each Planning Area as it develops within the Catana Specific Plan. As discussed above in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Resources, development of the Project site will incorporate BMPs for construction and post -construction conditions, designed to control pollutants that enter the on-site and off-site system, and is not expected to affect water quality. A final hydrologic analysis will be required to demonstrate that the Projec t meets the City’s standards. These standard requirements will assure that impacts associated with storm water retention remain less than significant.
7-98
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 90
Other Utilities
The proposed Project will require construction of on -site electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications infrastructure to connect to the existing infrastructure located adjacent to the Project site. The Project would not result in the construction of new electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities off-site that could cause significant environmental effects.
d, e) Less than Significant Impact. Burrtec provides solid waste services to the City of Rancho Mirage. Solid waste is recycled, reused, or transformed at a waste-to-energy facility 23, or disposed
of at County landfills. The Lamb Canyon regional landfill has a remaining capacity of 19,242,950 cubic yards as of 2015 (latest data available).
As shown in the following table, the Project would develop up to 305 residential dwelling units and 75,000 square feet of commercial uses, and generate an estimated 522.7 tons of solid waste per year. This equals 4,181.6 cubic yards per year
24, which is approximately 0.02% of the Lamb
Canyon landfill’s remaining capacity. Therefore, the Project will not exceed the available capacity of the landfill and Project impacts will be less than significant.
Table 12
Estimated Solid Waste Disposal at Buildout
Proposed
Land Use Disposal Rate* Proposed
Units
Solid Waste
Disposal
(lbs/day)
Projected Solid
Waste Disposal
(tons/year)
Shopping
Center 2.5 lbs./100 SF/day 75,000 SF 1,875 342.2
Residential
12.23 pounds/dwelling
unit/day
315 DU 3,853 703.2
Subtotal: 1,045.4
Total (with 50% diversion): 522.7
*Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates by CalRecycle,
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates, accessed July 2023.
Recyclable materials (e.g., paper, plastic, glass, cardboard, aluminum) will be transported to Burrtec’s material recovery facilities for recycling and reuse. 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.
19.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Monitoring: None required.
23 Riverside County Nondisposal Facility Element by Riverside County Department of Waste Resources (2015), https://www.rcwaste.org/Portals/0/Files/Planning/CIWMP/NDFE.PDF. 24 Assumes 1 cubic yard of uncompacted residential, institutional and commercial solid waste equals 250 lbs. “Volume-to-Weight Conversion Factors,” US EPA Office of Resource Conversion and Recovery, April 2016.
7-99
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 91
20 - Wildfire
WILDFIRE – Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
If located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands
classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
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?
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?
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?
Sources: Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017; Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones mapping, CalFire 2023 https://calfireforestry.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id= 988d431a42b242b29d89597ab693d008.
20.1 Setting:
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire) ranks fire hazard of wildland areas of the state using four main criteria: fuels, weather, assets at risk, and level of service. The historical record indicates that the wildland fire hazard in Rancho Mirage is relatively low. Recent (2023) CalFire mapping shows there are no Fire Threat Zones in Rancho Mirage.
20.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a) No Impact . The primary emergency evacuation routes in the City include Interstate 10 , Highway 111, along with primary and minor arterial streets serving as secondary routes. The project site is located along Ramon Road, which provides access in an emergency. Development on the subject property would not substantially impair the City’s adopted e mergency evacuation 7-100
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ □ IZI
□ □ □ IZI
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 92
and response plan as the Project is not proposing to amend these routes to impede emergency evacuation. The City maintains a Multi-Hazard Functional Plan that addresses the planned response to extraordinary emergency situations, including natural or human- caused disasters.
The Specific Plan would not impair the adopted emergency response plan. No impact is anticipated.
b, c) No Impact. According to updated CalFire mapping (2023), t he 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 P roject, 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, the proposed Project 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.
20.3 Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Monitoring: None required.
7-101
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 93
21 - Mandatory Findings of Significance
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
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?
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)?
c) Does the project have
environmental effects, which will
cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
21.1 Discussion of Impacts:
a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated.
Biological Resources : The project site is not located within the CVMSHCP -designated conservation area and does not contain any wildlife corridors or biological linkage areas.
However, on-site vegetation could provide habitat for nesting birds; therefore, a pre-construction survey will be required to avoid impacts to nesting birds covered by the MBTA and to burrowing owl. In addition, the site is subject to payment of the Development Mitigation Fee to mitigate potential impacts to covered species under the CVMSHCP.
7-102
□ ~ □ □
□ □ ~ □
□ □ ~ □
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 94
The Proposed Project will not significantly reduce fish or wildlife habitat or otherwise adversely impact a fish or wildlife species. The construction of the project has the potential to impact nesting birds, but the mitigation measures included in this document will reduce those impacts to less than significant levels.
Cultural Resources: N o cultural resources are known to exist within or adjacent to the project site.
Since the project will require excavation, there is a small potential for unknown resources to be uncovered. Mitigation measures provided in this document will ensure that impacts to cultural and/or tribal resources are less than significant in the unlikely event that resources are discovered during project development.
O
verall, there will be no significant environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated. Project related impacts, including cumulative impacts, are considered less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. A significant impact could occur if the Proposed 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 the Proposed Project are individually limited and not cumulatively considerable. The Proposed Project is consistent with the development envisioned for this area of the City in its General Plan.
The project involves the implementation of a Catana Specific Plan which will not significantly intensify land use in the area beyond what is envisioned in the City’s General Plan. All environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the proposed 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.
7-103
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 95
21.3 Mitigation Measures
Table 13: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure Responsible
Agency Timing
Verification
(Date and
Initials)
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIO-1 A preconstruction survey following CDFG’s Staff Report for Burrowing Owl (2012) must be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to initiating construction. Unless avoidable, all burrowing owls present must be relocated prior to any ground disturbing activities. If burrowing owls are identified on-
site, a Burrowing Owl Relocation and
Management Plan will be prepared to describe and outline how the burrowing owl will be actively or passively relocated per CDFW protocol. Prior to construction, any owls occurring on-site will be relocated prior to vegetation removal. Relocation will require prior permission from the CDFW, at a minimum.
Planning
Department
Prior to any
earth moving
activity
BIO-2 To avoid impacting nesting birds, either avoidance of project-related disturbance during the nesting season (1 February through 31 August) or nesting bird surveys conducted by a qualified ornithologist or biologist immediately prior to on- site disturbance during the nesting season shall be required. If nesting birds are found, no work would be permitted near the nest until young have fledged.
There is no established protocol for nest avoidance, however, when consulted the CDFW generally recommends avoidance buffers of about 500 feet for birds -of-prey and species listed as threatened or endangered, and 100–300 feet for unlisted songbirds.
Planning
Department
Prior to any
earth moving
activity
CULTURAL & TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL-1 Earth-moving activities including grading, grubbing, trenching, or excavations at the site shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist and approved Tribal Monitor(s) if requested.
Should cultural materials be discovered, they shall be recorded and evaluated in the field. The monitors shall be prepared to recover artifacts quickly to avoid construction delays but must have the power to temporarily hal
t or divert construction equipment to allow for
controlled archaeological recovery if a substantial cultural deposit is encountered. The Native American Monitor may request that destructive construction halt and the Monitor shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines) to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer and Tribal Historic Preservation Office. If artifacts are discovered, these shall be processed, catalogued, analyzed, and prepared for permanent curation in a repository with permanent retrievable storage that would allow for additional research in the future. Archaeological site records shall be prepared to document the cultural remains discovered during monitoring and submitted to the California Historical Resources Information System.
Public Works
Inspectors
During earth
moving
activities.
CUL-2 A qualified archaeologist and/or approved Agua Caliente Native American Cultura l Resource Monitor(s) shall provide preconstruction training for all earthmoving construction personnel prior to the start of any ground disturbing activities, regarding how to recognize the types of Tribal Cultural Resources and/or archaeological resources that may be encountered and to instruct personnel about actions to be taken in the event of a discovery.
Planning
Department
Prior to any
earth moving
activity
CUL-3 In the unexpected event human remains are uncovered during construction activities, all construction work taking place within the vicinity of the discovered remains must cease and the necessary steps to ensure the integrity of the immediate area must be taken. The County Coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the discovery of human remains. If the remains discovered are determined by the Planning
Department
During earth
moving
activities.
7-104
r- -1
- -I I I
I I I - -
-
I I I -
-
-
- I I T
- -
- -
I I I I _J
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 96
CHAPTER 3: REFERENCES
• 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan, August 1, 2003. • 2012 Greenhouse Gas Inventory, prepared by EcoMotion, September 2012. • 2013 Sustainability Action Plan, prepared by EcoMotion, March 2013. • 2017 Rancho Mirage General Plan; California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor; State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker database. • 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, Demographics & Growth Forecast Appendix, Southern California Association of Governments.
• CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.14.
• California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program, 2018. • Catana Specific Plan Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., June 2023.
• Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Revised, July 2008.
• Officially Designated State Scenic Highways Map, Caltrans. • Phase 1 Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey, William Warren Group Project (Catana SP), prepared by CRM TECH. December 17, 2022.
• Ramon Rattler Project, Biological Resources Assessment and Coachella Valley Multiple Specifics Habitat Conservation Plan Compliance Report, prepared by WSP, March 2023.
Coroner to be of Native American descent, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours.
The NAHC would in turn contact the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) would determine further action to be taken. The MLD would have 48 hours to access the site and make a recommendation regarding disposition of the remains.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
GEO-1 Development of the Project shall adhere to the
recommendations set forth in the Project -specific geotechnical engineering report required by the City prior to issuance of grading and building permits.
City Engineer Improvement plan
review.
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
TRA.1 In addition to paying the requisite CVAG TUMF fee, and to remedy intersection LOS deficiencies, the Project’s fair share of cumulative traffic amount is 5.7% towards the 2040 lane re- striping improvements at Date Palm Drive / Ramon Road (#1) and 8.2% towards the 2040 ultimate lane improvements and signal modification at Da Vall Drive / Ramon Road (#2).
City Engineer Prior to issuance
of grading permit.
7-105
I I I I I
I I I -
- -I I I
-
-
- T -r I -
I I I I ___!
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 97
• Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017; Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones mapping, CalFire 2023 https://calfireforestry.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id= 988d431a42b242b29d89597ab693d008.
• Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017.
• Rancho Mirage General Plan 2017. Updated Mineral Land Classification Map for Portland Cement Concrete-Grade Aggregate in the Palm Springs Production-Consumption Region, Riverside County, California by Lawrence L. Busch, 2007. • Rancho Mirage Zoning Ordinance, as amended.
• SCAQMD AQMP, 2022; 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report, Southern California Association of Governments, adopted September 3, 2020. • Traffic Impact Analysis for the Catana Specific Plan, Urban Crossroads, Inc., June 2023.
CHAPTER 4: APPENDICES
Appendix A CalEEMod Modeling
Appendix B Biological Resources Assessment & Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Compliance Report
Appendix C Phase I Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey (including Tribal Consultation letters and responses)
Appendix D Traffic Analysis
Appendix E
Appendix F
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis
Response to Comments - California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CHAPTER 5: REPORT PREPARERS
Lead Agency
City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, California 92270
Phone: (760) 328-2266 Fax: (760) 324-9851
CEQA Consultant
Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc.
42635 Melanie Place, Suite 101
Palm Desert, CA 92211
Phone: (760) 341-4800 Fax: (761) 341-4455
7-106
City of Rancho Mirage 98
Appendix A
CalEEMod Modeling
7-107
City of Rancho Mirage 99
Appendix B
Biological Resources Assessment & Coachella Valley
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Compliance Report 7-108
City of Rancho Mirage 100
Appendix C
Phase I Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey
(Including Tribal Consultation letters and responses)
7-109
City of Rancho Mirage 101
Appendix D
Traffic Analysis
7-110
City of Rancho Mirage 102
Appendix E
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis
7-111
Catana Specific Plan
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2023
City of Rancho Mirage 103
Appendix F
Response to Comments – California Department of Fish and Wildlife 7-112
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
1 / 53
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Site Preparation (2023) - Unmitigated
3.3. Grading (2023) - Unmitigated
3.5. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
7-113
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
2 / 53
3.9. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
3.11. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated
3.13. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.2. Unmitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.2. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.2. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
7-114
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
3 / 53
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
5.4. Vehicles
7-115
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
4 / 53
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
5.5. Architectural Coatings
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
5.7. Construction Paving
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
7-116
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
5 / 53
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
7-117
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
6 / 53
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
7-118
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
7 / 53
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Catana Specific Plan
Construction Start Date 9/1/2023
Operational Y ear 2025
Lead Agency Rancho Mirage
Land Use Scale Plan/community
Analysis Level for Defaults Air Basin
Windspeed (m/s) 3.30
Precipitation (days) 10.0
Location 33.81836587134663, -116.43480618105977
County Riverside-Salton Sea
City Rancho Mirage
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin Salton Sea
TAZ 5674
EDFZ 11
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.14
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq
ft)
Population Description
7-119
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
8 / 53
Apartments Low
Rise
90.0 Dwelling Unit 2.00 95,400 19,602 — 291 Affordable housing units
Single Family
Housing
215 Dwelling Unit 25.0 419,250 2,518,264 — 694 Single family attached and
detached
residences
Regional Shopping
Center
75.0 1000sqft 5.00 75,000 52,272 — — Commercial/Office/R etail/Restaurants
Parking Lot 3.00 Acre 3.00 0.00 0.00 — — —
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 25.1 39.8 37.0 0.05 1.81 7.80 9.61 1.66 3.97 5.63 — 6,673 6,673 0.25 0.24 6,761 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 24.9 47.8 52.1 0.09 1.96 7.80 9.61 1.81 3.97 5.63 — 11,546 11,546 0.47 0.29 11,643 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 11.8 11.6 18.0 0.03 0.46 1.39 1.80 0.43 0.66 1.03 — 3,801 3,801 0.15 0.16 3,854 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.15 2.12 3.28 < 0.005 0.08 0.25 0.33 0.08 0.12 0.19 — 629 629 0.02 0.03 638 7-120 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
9 / 53
2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Y ear ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 4.06 39.8 36.9 0.05 1.81 7.80 9.61 1.66 3.97 5.63 — 5,462 5,462 0.22 0.05 5,482 2024 3.32 21.1 37.0 0.05 0.90 1.69 2.60 0.83 0.41 1.24 — 6,673 6,673 0.25 0.24 6,761 2025 25.1 13.3 28.2 0.03 0.47 1.84 2.31 0.44 0.44 0.88 — 5,405 5,405 0.20 0.23 5,488 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 4.03 39.8 36.3 0.06 1.81 7.80 9.61 1.66 3.97 5.63 — 6,759 6,759 0.28 0.06 6,784 2024 5.60 47.8 52.1 0.09 1.96 5.32 7.28 1.81 1.84 3.65 — 11,546 11,546 0.47 0.29 11,643 2025 24.9 13.5 22.8 0.03 0.47 1.84 2.31 0.44 0.44 0.88 — 5,134 5,134 0.21 0.23 5,208 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 0.94 9.23 8.26 0.01 0.41 1.39 1.80 0.37 0.66 1.03 — 1,453 1,453 0.06 0.01 1,459 2024 1.69 11.6 18.0 0.03 0.46 1.25 1.71 0.43 0.33 0.75 — 3,801 3,801 0.15 0.16 3,854 2025 11.8 5.66 10.4 0.01 0.20 0.78 0.98 0.18 0.19 0.37 — 2,210 2,210 0.09 0.10 2,242 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 0.17 1.68 1.51 < 0.005 0.07 0.25 0.33 0.07 0.12 0.19 — 241 241 0.01 < 0.005 242 2024 0.31 2.12 3.28 < 0.005 0.08 0.23 0.31 0.08 0.06 0.14 — 629 629 0.02 0.03 638 2025 2.15 1.03 1.90 < 0.005 0.04 0.14 0.18 0.03 0.03 0.07 — 366 366 0.01 0.02 371
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e 7-121 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
10 / 53
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 39.9 20.5 143 0.26 0.78 16.0 16.8 0.76 4.06 4.83 211 36,220 36,431 23.2 1.31 37,476 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 32.1 21.3 94.9 0.23 0.76 16.0 16.8 0.75 4.06 4.82 211 33,789 34,000 23.3 1.34 34,989 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 34.2 15.6 105 0.20 0.38 15.1 15.5 0.37 3.82 4.19 211 27,667 27,878 23.1 1.25 28,861 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 6.24 2.86 19.1 0.04 0.07 2.75 2.82 0.07 0.70 0.77 35.0 4,581 4,616 3.82 0.21 4,778
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 23.7 12.8 119 0.21 0.16 16.0 16.2 0.15 4.06 4.21 — 21,181 21,181 1.23 1.17 21,631 Area 16.1 5.26 22.7 0.03 0.42 — 0.42 0.42 — 0.42 0.00 6,482 6,482 0.12 0.01 6,489 Energy 0.14 2.44 1.09 0.02 0.20 — 0.20 0.20 — 0.20 — 8,141 8,141 0.59 0.04 8,168 Water — — — — — — — — — — 34.6 417 451 3.57 0.09 566
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 177 0.00 177 17.7 0.00 618
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 4.05
Total 39.9 20.5 143 0.26 0.78 16.0 16.8 0.76 4.06 4.83 211 36,220 36,431 23.2 1.31 37,476 7-122 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
11 / 53
————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Mobile 18.0 13.8 91.6 0.18 0.16 16.0 16.2 0.15 4.06 4.21 — 18,810 18,810 1.38 1.20 19,204 Area 14.0 5.06 2.15 0.03 0.41 — 0.41 0.41 — 0.41 0.00 6,422 6,422 0.12 0.01 6,429 Energy 0.14 2.44 1.09 0.02 0.20 — 0.20 0.20 — 0.20 — 8,141 8,141 0.59 0.04 8,168 Water — — — — — — — — — — 34.6 417 451 3.57 0.09 566
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 177 0.00 177 17.7 0.00 618
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 4.05
Total 32.1 21.3 94.9 0.23 0.76 16.0 16.8 0.75 4.06 4.82 211 33,789 34,000 23.3 1.34 34,989 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 19.3 12.8 93.3 0.18 0.15 15.1 15.2 0.14 3.82 3.96 — 18,641 18,641 1.24 1.12 19,034 Area 14.8 0.44 10.3 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 0.00 469 469 0.01 < 0.005 470 Energy 0.14 2.44 1.09 0.02 0.20 — 0.20 0.20 — 0.20 — 8,141 8,141 0.59 0.04 8,168 Water — — — — — — — — — — 34.6 417 451 3.57 0.09 566
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 177 0.00 177 17.7 0.00 618
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 4.05
Total 34.2 15.6 105 0.20 0.38 15.1 15.5 0.37 3.82 4.19 211 27,667 27,878 23.1 1.25 28,861 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.52 2.33 17.0 0.03 0.03 2.75 2.78 0.03 0.70 0.72 — 3,086 3,086 0.20 0.19 3,151 Area 2.69 0.08 1.87 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.00 77.7 77.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 77.8 Energy 0.03 0.44 0.20 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 1,348 1,348 0.10 0.01 1,352 Water — — — — — — — — — — 5.72 69.0 74.7 0.59 0.01 93.8 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 29.2 0.00 29.2 2.92 0.00 102
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.67
Total 6.24 2.86 19.1 0.04 0.07 2.75 2.82 0.07 0.70 0.77 35.0 4,581 4,616 3.82 0.21 4,778 7-123
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
12 / 53
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Site Preparation (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
3.95 39.7 35.5 0.05 1.81 — 1.81 1.66 — 1.66 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 5,314 Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — 7.67 7.67 — 3.94 3.94 — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
3.95 39.7 35.5 0.05 1.81 — 1.81 1.66 — 1.66 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 5,314 Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — 7.67 7.67 — 3.94 3.94 — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.49 4.90 4.37 0.01 0.22 — 0.22 0.20 — 0.20 — 653 653 0.03 0.01 655 Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — 0.95 0.95 — 0.49 0.49 — — — — — —
7-124 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
13 / 53
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.09 0.89 0.80 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 108 108 < 0.005 < 0.005 108 Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — 0.17 0.17 — 0.09 0.09 — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.11 0.08 1.39 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 166 166 0.01 0.01 169 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.09 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 141 141 0.01 0.01 143 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 18.6 18.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 18.9 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.09 3.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.13 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7-125
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
14 / 53
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.3. Grading (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
3.72 37.3 31.4 0.06 1.59 — 1.59 1.47 — 1.47 — 6,598 6,598 0.27 0.05 6,621 Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — 3.59 3.59 — 1.42 1.42 — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.43 4.31 3.63 0.01 0.18 — 0.18 0.17 — 0.17 — 762 762 0.03 0.01 764 Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — 0.41 0.41 — 0.16 0.16 — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.08 0.79 0.66 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 126 126 0.01 < 0.005 127 7-126 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
15 / 53
——————0.030.03—0.080.08—————Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.09 0.10 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 161 161 0.01 0.01 163 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 19.9 19.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 20.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.30 3.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.35 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.5. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
7-127 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
16 / 53
————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
3.52 34.3 30.2 0.06 1.45 — 1.45 1.33 — 1.33 — 6,598 6,598 0.27 0.05 6,621 Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — 3.59 3.59 — 1.42 1.42 — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.17 1.68 1.48 < 0.005 0.07 — 0.07 0.07 — 0.07 — 323 323 0.01 < 0.005 324 Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — 0.18 0.18 — 0.07 0.07 — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.03 0.31 0.27 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 53.4 53.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 53.6 Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — 0.03 0.03 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
7-128
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
17 / 53
————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.09 0.09 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 157 157 0.01 0.01 160 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.25 8.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 8.37 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.37 1.37 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.39 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.20 11.2 13.1 0.02 0.50 — 0.50 0.46 — 0.46 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 2,406 Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
7-129 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
18 / 53
Off-Road
Equipment
1.20 11.2 13.1 0.02 0.50 — 0.50 0.46 — 0.46 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 2,406 Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.80 7.51 8.78 0.02 0.33 — 0.33 0.31 — 0.31 — 1,605 1,605 0.07 0.01 1,610 Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.15 1.37 1.60 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 266 266 0.01 < 0.005 267 Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.95 0.67 12.1 0.00 0.00 1.29 1.29 0.00 0.30 0.30 — 1,542 1,542 0.07 0.05 1,565 Vendor 0.05 1.32 0.66 0.01 0.01 0.28 0.30 0.01 0.08 0.09 — 1,083 1,083 0.01 0.15 1,131 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.75 0.75 7.27 0.00 0.00 1.29 1.29 0.00 0.30 0.30 — 1,308 1,308 0.08 0.05 1,327 Vendor 0.05 1.43 0.68 0.01 0.01 0.28 0.30 0.01 0.08 0.09 — 1,084 1,084 0.01 0.15 1,130 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.54 0.50 5.91 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.86 0.00 0.20 0.20 — 938 938 0.05 0.04 952 Vendor 0.03 0.94 0.45 0.01 0.01 0.19 0.20 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 725 725 0.01 0.10 756 7-130
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
19 / 53
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.10 0.09 1.08 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 155 155 0.01 0.01 158 Vendor 0.01 0.17 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 120 120 < 0.005 0.02 125 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.9. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 2,406 Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 2,406 Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.47 4.35 5.44 0.01 0.18 — 0.18 0.17 — 0.17 — 999 999 0.04 0.01 1,003 Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
7-131 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
20 / 53
Off-Road
Equipment
0.09 0.79 0.99 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 165 165 0.01 < 0.005 166 Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.90 0.62 11.1 0.00 0.00 1.29 1.29 0.00 0.30 0.30 — 1,508 1,508 0.07 0.05 1,532 Vendor 0.05 1.26 0.62 0.01 0.01 0.28 0.30 0.01 0.08 0.09 — 1,064 1,064 0.01 0.14 1,110 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.70 0.70 6.68 0.00 0.00 1.29 1.29 0.00 0.30 0.30 — 1,281 1,281 0.08 0.05 1,299 Vendor 0.04 1.37 0.63 0.01 0.01 0.28 0.30 0.01 0.08 0.09 — 1,065 1,065 0.01 0.14 1,109 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.32 0.27 3.38 0.00 0.00 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.13 0.13 — 572 572 0.03 0.02 580 Vendor 0.02 0.56 0.26 < 0.005 0.01 0.12 0.12 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 444 444 0.01 0.06 462 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 94.7 94.7 0.01 < 0.005 96.1 Vendor < 0.005 0.10 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 73.5 73.5 < 0.005 0.01 76.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.11. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e 7-132I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
21 / 53
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.85 7.81 10.0 0.01 0.39 — 0.39 0.36 — 0.36 — 1,512 1,512 0.06 0.01 1,517 Paving 0.17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.85 7.81 10.0 0.01 0.39 — 0.39 0.36 — 0.36 — 1,512 1,512 0.06 0.01 1,517 Paving 0.17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.10 0.96 1.24 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.04 — 0.04 — 186 186 0.01 < 0.005 187 Paving 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.02 0.18 0.23 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 30.9 30.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 31.0 Paving < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
7-133
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
22 / 53
————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.09 0.06 1.09 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 139 139 0.01 < 0.005 141 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 118 118 0.01 < 0.005 120 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.6 15.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 15.8 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.58 2.58 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.62 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.13. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
7-134 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
23 / 53
134< 0.0050.01134134—0.03—0.030.03—0.03< 0.0051.140.880.13Off-Road Equipment
Architectu
ral
Coatings
22.7 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings
22.7 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.06 0.42 0.54 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 63.7 63.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 63.9 Architectu
ral
Coatings
10.8 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.08 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 10.5 10.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.6 Architectu
ral
Coatings
1.98 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
7-135
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
24 / 53
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.18 0.12 2.23 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 — 302 302 0.01 0.01 306 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.14 0.14 1.34 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 — 256 256 0.02 0.01 260 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.06 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 131 131 0.01 0.01 133 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 21.7 21.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 22.0 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e 7-136I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
25 / 53
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
1.64 0.97 9.28 0.02 0.01 1.32 1.34 0.01 0.34 0.35 — 1,731 1,731 0.09 0.09 1,766 Single
Family
Housing
5.94 3.51 33.6 0.06 0.05 4.79 4.83 0.04 1.21 1.26 — 6,261 6,261 0.33 0.33 6,387 Regional
Shopping
Center
16.1 8.30 76.4 0.13 0.10 9.93 10.0 0.09 2.52 2.61 — 13,189 13,189 0.81 0.75 13,478 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 23.7 12.8 119 0.21 0.16 16.0 16.2 0.15 4.06 4.21 — 21,181 21,181 1.23 1.17 21,631 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
1.25 1.06 6.93 0.02 0.01 1.32 1.34 0.01 0.34 0.35 — 1,535 1,535 0.10 0.09 1,565 Single
Family
Housing
4.52 3.82 25.1 0.05 0.05 4.79 4.83 0.04 1.21 1.26 — 5,552 5,552 0.36 0.33 5,661 Regional
Shopping
Center
12.2 8.97 59.7 0.11 0.10 9.93 10.0 0.09 2.52 2.61 — 11,723 11,723 0.92 0.77 11,977 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 18.0 13.8 91.6 0.18 0.16 16.0 16.2 0.15 4.06 4.21 — 18,810 18,810 1.38 1.20 19,204 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
0.24 0.18 1.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 0.23 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 — 256 256 0.01 0.01 261 7-137
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
26 / 53
9530.050.05935935—0.220.210.010.850.850.010.014.770.650.87Single Family
Housing
Regional
Shopping
Center
2.41 1.51 10.9 0.02 0.02 1.68 1.69 0.02 0.42 0.44 — 1,895 1,895 0.14 0.12 1,937 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 3.52 2.33 17.0 0.03 0.03 2.75 2.78 0.03 0.70 0.72 — 3,086 3,086 0.20 0.19 3,151
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 898 898 0.06 0.01 902
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 2,927 2,927 0.18 0.02 2,938
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — 1,067 1,067 0.07 0.01 1,071
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 167 167 0.01 < 0.005 167
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 5,058 5,058 0.31 0.04 5,077 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
7-138 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
27 / 53
Apartment
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 898 898 0.06 0.01 902
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 2,927 2,927 0.18 0.02 2,938
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — 1,067 1,067 0.07 0.01 1,071
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 167 167 0.01 < 0.005 167
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 5,058 5,058 0.31 0.04 5,077 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 149 149 0.01 < 0.005 149
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 485 485 0.03 <
0.005 486
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — 177 177 0.01 < 0.005 177
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 27.6 27.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 27.7
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 837 837 0.05 0.01 841
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
0.02 0.39 0.16 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 489 489 0.04 < 0.005 491 7-139 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
28 / 53
Single
Family
Housing
0.11 1.93 0.82 0.01 0.16 — 0.16 0.16 — 0.16 — 2,451 2,451 0.22 <
0.005 2,457
Regional
Shopping
Center
0.01 0.12 0.10 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 142 142 0.01 < 0.005 143 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.14 2.44 1.09 0.02 0.20 — 0.20 0.20 — 0.20 — 3,082 3,082 0.27 0.01 3,091 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
0.02 0.39 0.16 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 489 489 0.04 < 0.005 491 Single
Family
Housing
0.11 1.93 0.82 0.01 0.16 — 0.16 0.16 — 0.16 — 2,451 2,451 0.22 <
0.005 2,457
Regional
Shopping
Center
0.01 0.12 0.10 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 142 142 0.01 < 0.005 143 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.14 2.44 1.09 0.02 0.20 — 0.20 0.20 — 0.20 — 3,082 3,082 0.27 0.01 3,091 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
< 0.005 0.07 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 81.0 81.0 0.01 < 0.005 81.3 Single
Family
Housing
0.02 0.35 0.15 <
0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 406 406 0.04 < 0.005 407 Regional
Shopping
Center
< 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 23.6 23.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 23.6 7-140
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
29 / 53
0.000.000.000.000.00—0.00—0.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.00Parking Lot
Total 0.03 0.44 0.20 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 510 510 0.05 < 0.005 512
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.30 5.06 2.15 0.03 0.41 — 0.41 0.41 — 0.41 0.00 6,422 6,422 0.12 0.01 6,429 Consumer
Products
12.6 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings
1.08 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landscap
e
Equipmen
t
2.09 0.20 20.5 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 59.7 59.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 59.9 Total 16.1 5.26 22.7 0.03 0.42 — 0.42 0.42 — 0.42 0.00 6,482 6,482 0.12 0.01 6,489 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.30 5.06 2.15 0.03 0.41 — 0.41 0.41 — 0.41 0.00 6,422 6,422 0.12 0.01 6,429 Consumer
Products
12.6 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings
1.08 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 14.0 5.06 2.15 0.03 0.41 — 0.41 0.41 — 0.41 0.00 6,422 6,422 0.12 0.01 6,429 7-141 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
30 / 53
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.00 72.8 72.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 72.9 Consumer
Products
2.30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landscap
e
Equipmen
t
0.19 0.02 1.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.87 4.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.89 Total 2.69 0.08 1.87 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.00 77.7 77.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 77.8
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 7.06 27.7 34.7 0.73 0.02 58.0
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 16.9 346 363 1.75 0.04 419
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 10.6 43.2 53.8 1.09 0.03 89.0
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 34.6 417 451 3.57 0.09 566
7-142 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
31 / 53
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 7.06 27.7 34.7 0.73 0.02 58.0
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 16.9 346 363 1.75 0.04 419
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 10.6 43.2 53.8 1.09 0.03 89.0
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 34.6 417 451 3.57 0.09 566
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 1.17 4.58 5.75 0.12 < 0.005 9.61
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 2.79 57.2 60.0 0.29 0.01 69.4
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 1.76 7.15 8.91 0.18 < 0.005 14.7
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 5.72 69.0 74.7 0.59 0.01 93.8
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 7-143
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
32 / 53
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 34.2 0.00 34.2 3.42 0.00 120
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 99.9 0.00 99.9 9.99 0.00 350
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 42.4 0.00 42.4 4.24 0.00 148
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 177 0.00 177 17.7 0.00 618
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 34.2 0.00 34.2 3.42 0.00 120
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 99.9 0.00 99.9 9.99 0.00 350
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 42.4 0.00 42.4 4.24 0.00 148
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 177 0.00 177 17.7 0.00 618
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 5.67 0.00 5.67 0.57 0.00 19.8
7-144 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
33 / 53
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 16.5 0.00 16.5 1.65 0.00 57.9
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 7.03 0.00 7.03 0.70 0.00 24.6
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 29.2 0.00 29.2 2.92 0.00 102
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 3.00
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.36
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 4.05
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68
7-145 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
34 / 53
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 3.00
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.36
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 4.05
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartment
s
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.11
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.50
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.06
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.67
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipmen
t
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
7-146
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
35 / 53
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipmen
t
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipmen
t
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e 7-147
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
36 / 53
————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetation ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e 7-148 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
37 / 53
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequester
ed
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
7-149 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
38 / 53
————————————————Sequester
ed
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequester
ed
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 9/1/2023 11/2/2023 5.00 45.0 — Grading Grading 11/3/2023 1/25/2024 5.00 60.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 1/25/2024 8/1/2025 5.00 397 — Paving Paving 2/25/2024 4/26/2024 5.00 45.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/1/2025 9/1/2025 5.00 174 —
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
7-150
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
39 / 53
5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 11.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
7-151
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
40 / 53
Site Preparation Vendor — 7.55 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 20.0 11.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 7.55 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 166 11.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 44.9 7.55 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 15.0 11.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 7.55 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 33.2 11.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 7.55 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
7-152
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
41 / 53
Control Strategies Applied PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water unpaved roads twice daily 55% 55%
Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 25 mph 44% 44%
5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq
ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 1,042,166 347,389 112,500 37,500 7,841
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Site Preparation — — 67.5 0.00 —
Grading — — 180 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.37
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 2 61% 61%
5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Apartments Low Rise — 0%
Single Family Housing 2.37 0%
Regional Shopping Center 0.00 0%
7-153
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
42 / 53
Parking Lot 3.00 100%
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Y ear and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Y ear kWh per Y ear CO2 CH4 N2O
2023 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2024 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2025 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear Apartments Low
Rise
389 373 295 136,187 1,874 1,796 1,423 656,572
Single Family
Housing
1,385 1,406 1,193 496,523 6,675 6,779 5,753 2,393,792
Regional Shopping
Center
3,900 3,900 3,900 1,423,500 12,582 14,058 14,058 4,746,265 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Apartments Low Rise —
7-154
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
43 / 53
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 90
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 0
Conventional Wood Stoves 0
Catalytic Wood Stoves 5
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 5
Pellet Wood Stoves 0
Single Family Housing —
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 215
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 0
Conventional Wood Stoves 0
Catalytic Wood Stoves 11
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 11
Pellet Wood Stoves 0
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
1042166.25 347,389 112,500 37,500 7,841
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
7-155
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
44 / 53
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Apartments Low Rise 616,211 532 0.0330 0.0040 1,527,320 Single Family Housing 2,007,937 532 0.0330 0.0040 7,646,328 Regional Shopping Center 731,880 532 0.0330 0.0040 444,163 Parking Lot 114,476 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Apartments Low Rise 3,683,306 472,973
Single Family Housing 8,799,009 60,762,674
Regional Shopping Center 5,555,439 1,031,940
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Apartments Low Rise 63.5 —
7-156
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
45 / 53
Single Family Housing 185 —
Regional Shopping Center 78.8 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Apartments Low Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential
A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Apartments Low Rise Household refrigerators
and/or freez
ers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
Single Family Housing Average room A/C &
Other residential
A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Single Family Housing Household refrigerators
and/or freez
ers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
Regional Shopping
Center
Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Regional Shopping
Center
Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
7-157
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
46 / 53
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Y ear Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
— —
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year) 7-158
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
47 / 53
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will
continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 23.3 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 0.40 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.09 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical
data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day
or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different increments of
sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation,
population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 1 1 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought 5 3 0 N/A
7-159
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
48 / 53
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure
.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 1 1 1 2
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought 5 3 1 5
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure
.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
7-160
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
49 / 53
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 88.7
AQ-PM 6.29
AQ-DPM 42.2
Drinking Water 45.4
Lead Risk Housing 2.86
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 2.66
Traffic 75.4
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 22.1
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 26.7
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 52.9
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 17.9
Cardio-vascular 15.1
Low Birth Weights 0.35
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 21.7
Housing 51.4
Linguistic 12.3
Poverty 28.6
Unemployment 55.0
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7-161
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
50 / 53
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 69.75490825
Employed 13.55062235
Median HI 79.18644938
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 77.86475042
High school enrollment 10.47093545
Preschool enrollment 43.9753625
Transportation —
Auto Access 76.73553189
Active commuting 13.58911844
Social —
2-parent households 18.91441037
Voting 76.46605928
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 93.43000128
Park access 10.50943154
Retail density 12.87052483
Supermarket access 24.17554215
Tree canopy 40.61337097
Housing —
Homeownership 93.750802
Housing habitability 64.63492878
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 32.22122418 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 12.38290774
Uncrowded housing 91.95431798
7-162
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
51 / 53
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 75.63197742
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 85.8
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 32.6
Cognitively Disabled 85.7
Physically Disabled 29.8
Heart Attack ER Admissions 79.9
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 65.7
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
7-163
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
52 / 53
Children 97.9
Elderly 0.7
English Speaking 87.7
Foreign-born 25.4
Outdoor Workers 86.9
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 76.6
Traffic Density 47.3
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 23.1
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 84.1
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 9.00 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 51.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7-164
Catana Specific Plan Detailed Report, 7/19/2023
53 / 53
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Characteristics: Project Details Assumes a 2-year build out.
Land Use Assumes 15% landscaping coverage for retail and low-rise apartments. Parking lot assumes 1 acre for
apartments and 2 acres for shopping center.
Construction: Construction Phases Assumes 2 year project build out with operation beginning in 2025.
Construction: On-Road Fugitive Dust All roads accessing the project site are paved.
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip rates adjusted to account for internal capture, based on project specific traffic report. 5,680 daily trips
total. Trip lengths shortened due to the project's urban setting and proximity to jobs and services.
Operations: Road Dust All roads are paved.
Operations: Hearths No wood burning appliances are proposed. 7-165
City of Rancho Mirage 99
Appendix B
Biological Resources Assessment & Coachella Valley
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Compliance Report 7-166
RAMON RATTLER PROJECT
Ass
essor's Parcel Number 670-230-021
Biological Resources Assessment & Coachella Valley
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Compliance Report
CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA
Prepared f
or:
Terra Nova Planning and Research, Inc.
42635 Melanie Place, Suite 101
Palm Desert, CA 92211
Tel: (760) 341-4800
FAX: (760) 341-4455
Contact: Nicole Criste
E-mail: [email protected]
Prepared by:
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc 1845 Chicago Avenue, Suite D Riverside, CA 92507
(951) 369-8060
WSP Job #322520137
Principal Field Investigator:
Nathan Moorhatch
Report Author:
Nathan Moorhatch
Survey: 24 January 2023
7-167
Terra Nova: Ramon Rattler Project
Biological Resources Assessment
City of Rancho Mirage, CA
March 2023
Page ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION / DESCRIPTION ......................................................................... 1
3.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ....................................................................................... 1
3.1 Federal ................................................................................................................ 1
3.2 State .................................................................................................................... 2
3.3 Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan.............................. 4
4.0 METHODS ...................................................................................................................... 5
4.1 Literature Review ................................................................................................. 5
4.2 Field Assessment ................................................................................................. 5
5.0 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................... 6
5.1 Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan.............................. 6
5.2 Weather Conditions ............................................................................................. 6
5.3 Topography and Soils .......................................................................................... 6
5.4 Vegetation............................................................................................................ 6
5.5 Wildlife ................................................................................................................. 7
5.6 Special Status Biological Resources .................................................................... 7
5.7 Discussion of the Special-status Species Tables ............................................... 21
5.7.1 CVMSHCP Covered Species ............................................................................. 21
5.7.2 Potentially Occurring Species Not Covered Under the CVMSHCP and USFWS IPAC Species .................................................................................... 21
6.0 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................ 22
6.1 Protection of Nesting Birds ................................................................................. 23
6.2 Burrowing Owl ................................................................................................... 23
7.0 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 23
8. 0 LITERATURE CITED AND REFERENCES .................................................................. 24
7-168
Terra Nova: Ramon Rattler Project
Biological Resources Assessment
City of Rancho Mirage, CA
March 2023
Page iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Special Status Plants ................................................................................................. 8 Table 2. Special Status Vegetation Communities .................................................................. 11 Table 3. Special Status Wildlife ............................................................................................. 12
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A. Figures
Figure 1. Project Location
Figure 2. USGS Topo
Figure 3. Site Vicinity
Figure 4. Soils
Figure 5. Vegetation
Figure 6. CVMSHCP
Appendix B. Plants and Vertebrate Wildlife Observed
Appendix C. Site Photos
Appendix D. Coachella Valley Native Plants Recommended for Landscaping Appendix E. Prohibited Invasive Ornamental Plants
Appendix F. USFWS IPaC Report
7-169
Terra Nova: Ramon Rattler Project
Biological Resources Assessment
City of Rancho Mirage, CA
March 2023