Rancho Mirage City Council
November 6, 2025

This notice of domestic water and sanitation service availability only applies to the specific property for which it was issued and shall expire three (3) years from date of issuance. Unless or until all requirements for the initiation of service are met, the developer shall not be deemed to have any vested right or other commitment to receive water and/or sanitation service. In the event all of the terms, conditions, fees and charges are not satisfied on or before the expiration date, this notice shall expire. Upon expiration, the developer will be required to submit a new application and otherwise comply with any and all new or amended requirements for the provision of service as may be determined by CVWD pursuant to its rules and regulations.

Domestic water and sanitation service remain at all times subject to changes in regulations adopted by CVWD's Board of Directors including reductions in, or suspensions of, service.

The project lies within the Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit. Groundwater production within the area of benefit is subject to a replenishment assessment in accordance with the State Water Code.

Any entity producing more than 25 acre-feet of water during any year from one or more wells must equip the well(s) with a water -measuring device. A CVWD Water Production Metering Agreement is required to provide CVWD staff with the authority to regularly read and maintain this water - measuring device.

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) is a law requiring that groundwater basins are managed to achieve sustainability. In accordance with the SGMA, CVWD submitted the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan as an alternative to a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (Alternative Plan) for the Indio Subbasin. On July 17, 2019, the Department of Water Resources (DWR) sent a notification approving the Alternative Plan. The goal of the Alternative Plan is to reliably meet current and future water demands in a cost-effective and sustainable manner. This development lies within the Indio Subbasin and will contribute to the total water demand in the subbasin. The elements and actions described in the Alternative Plan shall be incorporated into the design, construction, and operation of this development to reduce its negative impact on the Indio Subbasin.

If you have any questions, please call Tommy Fowlkes, Development Services Supervisor, extension 3535.

Sincerely,
Carrie Oliphant
Director of Engineering
Coachella Valley Water District
P.O. Box 1058 Coachella, CA 92236
Phone (760) 398-2651 Fax (760) 398-3711
901
www.cvwd.org

Joy Tsai, Senior Planner
Development Services Department
City of Rancho Mirage
June 12, 2023

cc: Shantel Bacon
Supervising Environmental Health Specialist
Riverside County Department of Environmental Health
Environmental Protection and Oversight Division
47-950 Arabia Street, Suite A
Indio, CA 92201
TH: al\Eng\Dev Srvs\2023\June\DRL PZ 23-14772 City of Rancho Mirage TTM 38636.doc File: 0163.1, 0421.1, 0721.1, 1150,08
Geo. 040630-2
PZ 23-14772
Coachella Valley Water District
P.O. Box 1058 Coachella, CA 92236
Phone (760) 398-2651 fax (760) 398-3711
902
www.cvwd.org

II

RECEIVED

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPT
06/08/2023 3:41:08 PM

POWER /
A ce11tiun also -vice.

June 8, 2023
Ms. Joy Tsai
Senior Planner
Development Services Department
City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage CA 92270
www.iid.com
Since 1911
SUBJECT: Request for Agency Comments - Tentative Tract Map TTM 38636 in Rancho Mirage
Dear Ms. Tsai:

On May 24, 2023, the Imperial Irrigation District received from the City of Rancho Mirage Development Services Department, a request for agency comments on Tentative Tract Map 38636. The applicant proposes to subdivide a 5.04 -acre parcel into nine (9) single- family residential lots and common area lots. The subject property is located at 72094 Ginger Rogers Road, at the northeast corner of Ginger Rogers Road and Landy Lane, in Rancho Mirage, CA (APN 685-080-002).

IID has reviewed the project information and, although no residential development is being proposed at this time, has the following comments when the project reaches the design and implentation phase:

1. IID will not begin any studies, engineering or estimate costs to provide electrical service to the development project until the applicant submits a customer project application (available at http://www.iid.com/home/showdocument?id=12923 and detailed loading information, panel sizes, project schedule and estimated in- service date. Applicant shall bear all costs associated with providing electrical service to the development project, including but not limited to the construction of distribution backbone feeder and line extensions, underground conduit systems and the re -configuration of distribution lines and related upgrades as well as applicable permits, zoning changes, landscaping (if required by the City) and rights -of -way and easements.

2. However, based on the preliminary information provided to IID, the district can accommodate the power requirements of the project by extending distribution primary backbone lines (conduit and cable) from existing distribution lines running on the south side of the project site, up to the edge of property along Landy Lane.

IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT QaX 937 • IMPERIAL, CA 92251

Joy Tsai
June 8, 2023

3. The district's ability to provide service from existing infrastructure is based on current available capacity, which may be impacted by future development in the area.

4. It is important to note that a detailed and final study will be developed once a customer project application and loading calculations are received. This detailed information will allow IID to perform an accurate assessment and provide a full report of any potential impacts and mitigation measures. The conditions of service could change as a result of the additional studies.

5. Underground infrastructure that includes trenching, conduits, pull boxes, switch boxes and pads should be installed following IID approved plans. Physical field installation of underground infrastructures should be verified and approved by an IID inspector prior to cable installation as per IID Developer's Guide (available at the district website https://www.iid.com/home/showdocument?id=14229) .

6. IID Regulations governing line extensions can be found at:

No. 2 ( http://www.iid.com/home/showdocument?id=2540) , No. 13 ( http://www.iid.com/home/showdocument?id=2553) , No. 15 ( http://www.iid.com/home/showdocument?id=2555) , No. 20 (htta:// www.iid.com/home/showdocument?id=2560) and No. 23 ( https://www.iid.com/home/showdocument?id=17897'

7. For additional information regarding electrical service for the projects, the applicant should be advised to contact the IID Energy - La Quinta Division Customer Operations, 81-600 Avenue 58 La Quinta, CA 92253, at (760) 398-5841 and speak with the project development planner assigned to the area.

8. It is important to note that IID's policy is to extend its electrical facilities only to those projects that have obtained the approval of a city or county planning commission and such other governmental authority or decision -making body having jurisdiction over said projects.

9. The applicant will be required to provide rights -of -way and easements for power line extensions and/or any other infrastructure needed to serve the project.

10.The applicant will be required to provide and bear all costs associated with acquisition of rights of way, easements, and infrastructure relocations deemed necessary to accommodate street or road improvements imposed by the municipality.

11.Any construction or operation on IID property or within its existing and proposed right of way or easements including but not limited to: surface improvements such as proposed new streets, driveways, parking lots, landscape; and all water, sewer, 904

Joy Tsai
June 8, 2023

storm water, or any other above ground or underground utilities; will require an encroachment permit, or encroachment agreement (depending on the circumstances). A copy of the IID encroachment permit application and instructions for its completion are available at https://www.iid.com/about-iid/department- directory/real-estate. The IID Real Estate Section should be contacted at (760) 339-9239 for additional information regarding encroachment permits or agreements.

12. Any new, relocated, modified or reconstructed IID facilities required for and by the project (which can include but is not limited to electrical utility substations, electrical transmission and/or distribution lines, ancillary facilities associated with the conveyance of energy service; the acquisition and dedication of real property, rights of way and/or easements for the siting and construction of electrical utility substations, electrical transmission and/or distribution lines and ancillary facilities associated with the conveyance of energy service, etc.) need to be included as part of the project's California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and/or National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA documentation, environmental impact analysis and mitigation. Failure to do so will result in postponement of any construction and/or modification of IID facilities until such time as the environmental documentation is amended and environmental impacts are fully mitigated. Any mitigation necessary as a result of the construction, relocation and/or upgrade of IID facilities is the responsibility of the project proponent.

13. Dividing a project into two or more pieces and evaluating each piece in a separate environmental document (Piecemealing or Segmenting), rather than evaluating the whole of the project in one environmental document, is explicitly forbidden by CEQA, because dividing a project into a number of pieces would allow a Lead Agency to minimize the apparent environmental impacts of a project by evaluating individual pieces separately, each of which may have a less -than -significant impact on the environment, but which together may result in a significant impact.

Segmenting a project may also hinder developing comprehensive mitigation strategies. In general, if an activity or facility is necessary for the operation of a project, or necessary to achieve the project objectives, or a reasonably foreseeable consequence of approving the project, then it should be considered an integral project component that should be analyzed within the environmental analysis. The project description should include all project components, including those that will have to be approved by responsible agencies. The State CEQA Guidelines define a project under CEQA as "the whole of the action" that may result either directly or indirectly in physical changes to the environment. This broad definition is intended to provide the maximum protection of the environment. CEQA case law has established general principles on project segmentation for different project types.

For a project requiring construction of offsite infrastructure, the offsite infrastructure must be included in the project description. San Joaquin Raptor/Wildlife Rescue Center v. County of Stanislaus (1994) 27 Cal.App. 4th 713. 905

Joy Tsai
June 8, 2023

14.Applicant should be advised that landscaping can be dangerous if items are planted too close to IID's electrical equipment. In the event of an outage, or equipment failure, it is vital that IID personnel have immediate and safe access to its equipment to make the needed repairs. For public safety, and that of the electrical workers, it is important to adhere to standards that limit landscaping around electrical facilities. IID landscaping guidelines are available at https://www.iid.comfenergy/vegetation-management .

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (760) 482-3609 or at dvargas©iid.com. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this matter.

Respectfully,
Donald Vargas
Compliance Administrator II
Sergio Quiroz— Interim General Manager
Mike Pacheco — Manager, Water Dept.

Jamie Asbury — Manager, Energy Dept.

Matthew H Smelser — Deputy Mgr. Energy Dept.

Daryl Buckley— Mgr. of Distribution Srvcs. & Maint. ©prtns., Energy Dept.

Geoffrey Holbrook — General Counsel
Michael P. Kemp — Superintendent General, Fleet Services and Reg. & Environ. Compliance Laura Cervantes. — Supervisor, Real Estate
906

From: Charnoske, John L
To: Joy Tsai
Cc: Diaz Jr., Pedro
Subject: RE: Request for Comments - Tentative Tract Map TTM 38636 City of Rancho Mirage Date: Friday, May 26, 2023 7:55:23 AM
Attachments: image001.pnq
image002.ioq
CAUTION: This email originated from outside The City of Rancho Mirage. DO NOT CLICK (inks or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Good morning Joy,
The Developer can reach out to me now if they like. All Spectrum can do at this early stage is just keep this project on file. We normally start the ball rolling once the developer receive SCE preliminary plans.

Thanks,
John Charnoske I Construction Coordinator II
83-473 Avenue 45 Indio CA 92001
Office: (760) 904-5457
Cell: (760) 250-2952
[email protected]
From: Joy Tsai
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2023 1:17 PM
To: Charnoske, John L
Cc: Diaz Jr., Pedro
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Request for Comments - Tentative Tract Map TTM 38636 City of Rancho Mirage
CAUTION: The e-mail below is from an external source. Please exercise caution before opening attachments, clicking links, or following guidance.

Good afternoon John,
Thank you for your response. The tentative map has not received approval yet. Should the developer reach out to Spectrum now, or waft until after they receive tentative map approval from the City? Joy Tsai
907

City Seal.jpg
Senior Planner
Phone: 760-328-2266 Ext. 256
E-mail:
oyt(aRanchoMirageCAgov
69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California, 92270
wwwRanchoMirageCa.gov

TRANSPARENCY NOTICE
Some or all of the content of this e-mail and its attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Government Code section 6250, et seq.) From: Charnoske, John L
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2023 7:56 AM
To: Joy Tsai
Cc: Diaz Jr., Pedro
Subject: RE: Request for Comments - Tentative Tract Map TTM 38636 City of Rancho Mirage CAUTION: This email originated from outside The City of Rancho Mirage. DO NOT CLICK links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Good Morning Joy,
Thank you for reaching out to us. As part of our construction process. We would like the developer to please contact us so we can start our survey process.

Thank you and have a great day,
John Charnoske I Construction Coordinator III
83-473 Avenue 45 Indio CA 92001
Office: (760) 904-5457
Cell: (760) 250-2952
[email protected]
From: Diaz Jr., Pedro
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2023 7:15 AM
To: Charnoske, John L
Cc: Diaz Jr., Pedro
Subject: FW: Request for Comments - Tentative Tract Map TTM 38636 City of Rancho Mirage 908

God morning
From: Joy Tsai
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2023 4:45 PM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Request for Comments - Tentative Tract Map TTM 38636 City of Rancho Mirage CAUTION: The e-mail below is from an external source. Please exercise caution before opening attachments, clicking inks, or following guidance.

Good afternoon,
For your comment, attached is a tentative tract map application. The Subject Property is located at 72094 Ginger Rogers Road (APN: 685-080-002), at the northeast corner of Ginger Rogers Road and Landy Lane in the City of Rancho Mirage. The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 5.04 -acre parcel into nine (9) single-family residential lots and common area lots. No residential development is being proposed with this request. Please review and return any comments to me by June 8, 2023, to this email (JoyT@RanchoMirageCAgov).

Thank you,
Joy
City Seal.jpg
Joy Tsai
Senior Planner
Phone: 760-328-2266 Ext. 256
E-mail: joyt@RanchoMirageCAcov
69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California, 92270
www.RanchoMirageCa.gov

TRANSPARENCY NOTICE
Some or all of the content of this e-mail and its attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Government Code section 6250, et seq.) 909

9 -Lot Subdivision
72094 Ginger Rogers Road
Tentative Tract Map No. 38636
Final Initial Study/
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Lead Agency:

City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, California 92270
Prepared by:

PGN
PO Box 2473
Menifee, CA 92586-1473
September 2025
910

CEQA Requirements Regarding Comments and Responses
CEQA Guidelines, Section 15204(b), outlines parameters for submitting comments on negative declarations. Persons and public agencies should focus the on the proposed finding that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. If persons and public agencies believe that the project may have a significant effect, they should:

Identify the specific effect,
Explain why they believe the effect would occur, and
Explain why they believe the effect would be significant.

CEQA Guidelines, Section 15204(c), further advises that reviewers should explain the basis for their comments, and should submit data or references offering facts, reasonable assumptions based on facts, or expert opinion supported by facts in support of the comments. Pursuant to Section 15064, an effect shall not be considered significant in the absence of substantial evidence.

Comments and Responses to the Comments on the Draft IS/MND The City received one comment letter on the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed Project. The letter dated July 1, 2025 was from the Kim Freeburn, Environmental Program Manager with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. A response to this comment letter follows.
72094 Ginger Rogers Road — TTM 38636
Responses to Comment Page 1
911

RESPONSE TO COMMENT

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE (CDFW)
COMMENT LETTER A (JULY 1, 2025)

RESPONSE COMMENT
A-1
The comment is noted. This comment is understood as an introductory citation and does not raise any specific environmental concerns. It should be noted that the Project lies within the corporate boundaries of the City of Rancho Mirage and not the City of Coachella as referenced in the July 1, 2025 CDFW letter.

A-2 This is an introductory comment describing CDFW's role as a trustee agency and responsible agency. The comment regarding the regulatory requirements for any "take" of an endangered species is acknowledged. The comment does not raise any issue with the analysis if the IS/MND. For this reason, no further response to this comment is provided.

A-3 This comment provides a summary of the Project and does not identify a specific concern or question regarding the adequacy of the IS/MND in identifying and analyzing the potential environmental impacts of the project. For this reason, no further response to this comment is provided.

A-4 The IS/MND adequately discloses the Project's potentially significant impacts on biological resources, includes a complete and stable project description, provides mitigation measures to reduce biological impacts to less than significant levels, and complies with CEQA's requirements. The Project is the subdivision of land and does not authorize the construction of residential structures. Additional review will be required by the City for any development of the land.

A-5 The IS/MND adequately discloses the Project's environmental setting on page 11 and includes more specific detail within the General Biological Assessment prepared by Natural Resources Assessment, Incorporated (NRAI) for the existing single family residential lot. The Project is the subdivision of land and does not authorize the construction of residential structures. Additional review will be required by the City for any development of the land. See response A-8 for Burrowing owl concerns.

A-6 The commenter's opinion is noted.

A-7 The comment is noted. However, the commenter appears to imply that birds may nest on the site outside of the established nesting period, without providing substantial evidence. The City's responsibility is to assure that nesting birds are not disturbed, and that construction be avoided until the young have fledged. It is important to note that Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) covered species include almost all bird species that could nest on the site, and that since a pre -construction survey will be required, all birds 72094 Ginger Rogers Road — TTM 38636
Responses to Comment
912

nesting on the site will be identified, regardless of MBTA status. The Initial Study mitigates impacts to nesting bird species to less than significant levels as written. The mitigation measure and the Initial Study correctly protect nesting birds, and do not require amendment.

A-8 The comment is noted. However, the commenter provides no evidence to contradict the professional biologist's statement that no owl, sign or appropriate burrows are located on the site. To address CDFW's concerns about the methodology employed the following clarification is provided. Two biologists from Natural Resources Assessment Incorporated (NRAI)—one with approximately 40 years of relevant experience and the other with over 30 years —conducted thorough surveys by walking parallel north -south transects across the entire property. Given the small size of the site and the expertise of the two biologists, they confidently assert that 100% of the area was surveyed.

Additionally, adjacent areas were walked along their edges and scanned using binoculars to check for the presence of burrowing owls or their burrows. The biologists have experience with the species, including recent sightings of burrowing owls during surveys near the Salton Sea, in San Jacinto, Chino, and Rialto, California, where numerous burrowing owls were identified and mapped on the former airport property in Rialto. It is important to note that while they found no suitable conditions for burrowing owls on the project site at the time of the survey, this does not rule out the possibility that burrowing owls could inhabit the site in the future.

The biologists based their conclusion on Burrowing Owl on the following:

1. No owls, sign (i.e., pellets, feathers, or whitewash), or appropriately -sized burrows were detected on the site or on visible parts of the adjacent property;

2. The presence of domesticated dogs and cats in the Project area; and,

3. Myoma fine sand soils formed from wind-blown sand alluvium are not favorable to the species where there is sparse cover as a quick examination of nearby occurrences from the CNDDB overlaid on NRCS soils and digital imagery shows.

As a result, the biologist had good visibility of site conditions, and would have seen owl, sign or burrows if they occurred.

Small mammal burrows, a potential indicator of burrowing owl presence, were not found. Small mammal consumption increases in spring and summer diets in many places but may be less important in parts where small mammals are less common.1'2 In such areas, their diets may be subsidized by human activities that attract a wide array of 'Wingert, C.M., 2012. Seasonal food habits of burrowing owls (Athene cunicularia) in human -altered landscapes.

California Polytechnic State University.
2 York, M.M., Rosenberg, D.K. and Sturm, K.K., 2002. Diet and food -niche breadth of Burrowing Owls (Athene cunicularia) in the Imperial Valley, California. Western North American Naturalist, pp.280-287. 72094 Ginger Rogers Road — TTM 38636
Responses to Comment
913

insects and rodents.3'4 They concluded that burrowing owl may occur on the site if temporary or permanent manufactured structures are placed there prior to construction. The Initial Study fully acknowledges the CDFW's requirements. They generally agree with the recommendations for preconstruction surveys, however, they do not agree that the Project requires a protocol survey based on the above findings.

The City is aware that the species could move onto the site prior to construction and has provided the appropriate mitigation to protect the species from take. The mitigation measure is appropriate and complete, lists performance standards should the species be identified, and no further amendment is required.

A-9 The commenter is incorrect. The collection of sand -dependent species is not required under the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), nor is it recommended by the Project biologist. NRAI's General Biological Assessment included an evaluation of the habitats on site and in surrounding areas to determine whether there are other sensitive resources of concern in this area of Rancho Mirage that may be present on site. In addition to those resources identified by the CVMSHCP, the field team focused on evaluating habitat for these sensitive resources potentially both on and in the surrounding area, including but not limited to those listed, or candidates for listing by the USFWS, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and California Native Plant Society (CNPS). The report concluded that the site is disturbed and that the CVMSHCP did not identify the Project area as required for protection and/or the collection of sand -dependent species. As allowed under CEQA, requirements of law are not mitigation measures, and are assumed to be implemented. Additionally, through the Project's payment of the Local Development Mitigation Fee (LDMF) as noted in Mitigation Measure BIO-3, it will offset its impact on sand -dependent species and will be consistent with the CVMSHCP.

A-10 The commenter's opinion is noted, but provides no substantial evidence that the Project (proposed subdivision) will result in substantial lighting, or that the lighting proposed for the Project will impact biological resources. The proposed Project's lighting must be designed so as to prevent emissions of glare or light beyond the property line in accordance with City Municipal Code Section 17.18.050 and the Community Design Element in the City's General Plan. All exterior lighting at the project site would be conditioned to be Dark -Sky compliant, in order to reduce the amount of light emitted at the project site at night and preserve the desert night sky. Further, the City's construction hour restrictions make it unlikely that construction will occur at night.

Adherence with the Municipal Code and General Plan will help ensure that lighting is consistent with the recommended standards and guidance and therefore, lighting on the 3 Bartok, N.D. and Conway, C.J., 2010. Factors affecting the presence of nesting Burrowing Owls in an agricultural landscape. Journal of Raptor Research, 44(4), pp.286-293

4. Moulton, C.E., Brady, R.S. and Belthoff, J.R., 2006. Association between wildlife and agriculture: underlying mechanisms and implications in Burrowing Owls. The Journal of wildlife management, 70(3), pp.708-716. 72094 Ginger Rogers Road — TTM 38636
Responses to Comment
914

property would not pose significant impacts to wildlife; no change to the IS/MND is required.

A-11 The comment is noted. The Project is the subdivision of land. The landscape lots associated with the proposed Project are landscaped parkways and will be designed to match the existing desert -appropriate landscaped parkways adjacent to the Project site.

The Initial Study noted that future development of the residential lots will require further approvals by the City and will be required to comply with both the City's water efficient landscaping standards and CVWD's water conservation requirements in landscaping, which includes water budgeting for landscaped areas. The subsequent development of the land for residential purposes will therefore be regulated to assure low water use in landscaping, as clearly stated in the Initial Study. No further discussion or additional mitigation is required for the subdivision.

A-12 There were no findings that merit inclusion into the CNDDB, since no special status species or sensitive communities were found. This comment does not address the adequacy or completeness of the IS/MND; does not raise environmental issues; and does not request the incorporation of additional information relevant to environmental issues. Such comments do not require a response, pursuant to Section 15088(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines. No further response is required.

A-13 The Project Applicant shall pay the environmental document filing fee upon filing the Notice of Determination.

A-14 The City thanks the CDFW for their participation in the CEQA process. This comment concludes CDFW's letter stating the IS/MND does not adequately mitigate the Project's impacts to biological resources, is otherwise inadequate, and that the City is required to recirculate the IS/MND. The City disagrees with the conclusion for the reasons discussed in Responses A-1 through A-11 above. CDFW's comments do not present significant new information that would require a revised MND, but merely amplify the conclusions of the IS/MND. There are no recommended changes that warrant recirculation of the IS/MND. The City has prepared an IS/MND which complies with CEQA and which will mitigate the impacts of the Project to less than significant levels. No changes to the document are necessary.
72094 Ginger Rogers Road — TTM 38636
Responses to Comment
915

CALIFORNIA
FISH &

WILDLIFE
❑®= ❑❑❑ ❑IIIIDr❑® ❑ ❑ ❑QLi'❑dR❑W❑r ❑ ❑❑❑®
DE❑❑R❑ME❑❑ El El ❑EM ❑❑D ❑ [LDLEUIE
EUR1❑d D ❑ rEm R❑=
❑❑❑❑ =Ed E ❑ ❑©❑ ❑ ❑❑W rd ❑❑ ❑ ❑
CI El EEO Ed CI0TTEEECIE
LE ❑❑❑❑❑❑
Sent via email
I ❑❑ ❑
DEED- EILDLID.
❑ LR❑❑ ❑ M t=❑❑❑
❑❑ ❑ ELM ❑❑ ❑❑❑
R D❑ ❑ M ©❑❑❑❑I❑
❑❑❑❑❑ W r❑❑ ❑❑ ©❑❑❑
GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director
❑❑
Letter A - California Department of Fish and Wildlife
❑I ❑ ❑❑d ❑ I _ IEEE I ❑r❑LLM ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑❑
MII IDEA ❑❑❑❑ D❑L❑r❑m❑ EM❑D❑
mm ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
D❑a- i❑❑
El
❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ I ram D ❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑d ❑❑❑❑ M wid ❑ ❑ I D ❑
❑❑r ❑❑❑n C❑ ❑ ❑ I r❑El E ❑I
❑❑❑❑❑
EEO ❑
LI ❑
DEEM ❑r❑LIT
Dr H ❑❑

CDFW ROLE
❑❑d ❑ Ed
r❑
u
❑❑❑❑r❑LD
❑ E❑❑ ❑U❑ ❑
m i❑
LI Lir LED ❑❑❑a-LU❑
❑❑ ❑ ❑❑D-❑
I II
r
❑❑❑ ❑❑M
I
R❑LE❑❑❑
D❑❑ ❑r❑ I d ❑ ❑❑ DOME=
=
❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑I I I IEE ❑r❑ll
[LIE❑❑❑❑❑d ❑E❑❑ ❑❑d❑ ❑m
W ❑ E Ic ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑EM ❑❑d r❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑ m r❑❑Erd El❑
ld UI ❑r❑[TTITLfTI❑❑❑ ❑❑ L -PUT ]1❑TI1Tr❑El ❑❑d ❑ Qdl II I❑ LE E❑ ❑❑❑a -W❑ LI D-❑ d ❑ m❑ ❑ ❑❑E r❑❑❑rd ❑m❑
❑❑ D ❑❑ ❑❑❑ I m ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ rD❑❑©❑d L rr❑ DEED- D❑ErDI mIEEEE �❑ ❑❑ ❑ r❑❑❑ElL-❑ ❑Wa-1 I ❑❑d ❑- ED ❑ I ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑❑ ❑D❑❑ Li] ❑❑ ❑El[Trustee Agency DTI I ❑❑d ❑Qd Il r❑
r❑ ID- ❑ TIE IDD ICEIFT I-111 ❑ I❑ ❑❑❑❑UI MILD ❑C❑RT❑I I ❑d ❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑ER ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑❑❑ D❑❑❑❑❑❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑ Tm❑ D ❑❑ EEL I I'TIDE= m❑❑rn-111 nm ❑ m ❑ ❑ rim ❑
r
I
❑ ❑❑d ❑❑Cd ❑ W❑I
❑ ❑❑ ❑d ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑=
❑❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑ LI I Ed LI
r ❑TT1I-TT-r❑E ❑❑
❑❑d ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑ ❑d I _ ❑IJJ1❑ ❑E❑ulu❑❑d ❑❑❑m❑❑❑❑Wr❑ Lir ❑EM❑W E❑❑W ❑❑❑❑E
❑E❑ ❑❑❑D❑❑ El
❑❑❑ I II MED ❑❑
r
❑❑ ❑❑E❑ ❑ Ld. ❑❑ ❑❑❑❑D] ❑ W FlEir ❑D-❑❑ ❑ ❑❑
❑-❑❑d D❑ LU❑ D -DI d ❑❑❑❑ ❑ I lI ❑W❑❑EIEl❑ I I _ ❑ d D -Em ❑❑M ❑❑HIErE rEi E l l i Ii ❑❑ ❑r❑]]I ❑❑d r❑[ LUId
LIE EEO ®md HEEED
El Rd ❑®❑WErE rmurd LW ❑
r
❑E ❑ ❑❑M R ❑
❑❑ ❑ RUE ❑ ❑
Er
❑❑❑d❑®
r
rnIT1E ❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑m❑
-Er ❑ Ed ❑ ❑l:REED ❑rn rum ❑ ❑❑
❑❑ [EEO ❑
E

MUD EEDDE-I
A-1
A-2
Conserving Califor a1's4Vildlife Since 1870

❑❑ ❑
❑ I Dom ❑❑ ❑ Mr=
UI ❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑ ❑❑❑ ❑
1M ELIDE
❑d
r U❑oli
❑❑d ❑ CCd
it
r❑ icr
❑D❑❑ H ❑ I ❑❑ I I❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑El ❑❑ ❑ Responsible Agency ❑❑d❑- ❑E❑ ❑❑ I❑❑❑ R ❑ Er ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑Cd ❑ DID ❑❑❑❑❑= D ❑❑ ❑ ❑ I HEELED ❑❑ ❑❑❑d PED E rI r❑❑❑EIEli-❑ ❑❑mEr-I ❑❑ L -❑ud ❑d ❑❑ EM E ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑❑❑ ❑ D-❑❑❑md ❑a- ❑ I❑ ❑=❑L❑ ❑r❑UIm❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ LLD IUI ❑ D ❑❑ ILL Ill ❑❑d r ❑❑❑ ❑❑d E ELI❑ rDDELITEITE ❑❑ lin I I ❑ ❑ D❑ Ed ❑❑❑ DEED ❑❑ MAID ❑❑' Elm ❑I H EE HI ❑DE ❑❑LEI ❑ ❑❑M❑ ❑r❑[I ❑❑ D-❑❑❑md ❑ ❑❑ r❑ IC= I❑❑❑ d ❑ ALL ❑ ECE DE ❑❑❑❑o m❑ ❑ L -❑El ri ❑❑d ❑r LIM ❑ ❑ IF r❑LIT E ❑d D EIErEd ❑ ❑❑ I ❑ ❑ I ELIDE! I I E ❑ ❑❑ Ed ❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑ I❑ I C❑ ❑r❑L a' ❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ r❑[IDiid U I ❑❑WID ❑ ❑❑ ErEnd ❑d EEEM ❑I ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d❑❑

PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
Proponent: ❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ UIrEr R❑mr❑RDA ELL❑
Objective: ❑❑❑ ❑r❑LE D -❑❑❑I ❑ UI I ❑d LA ❑ ❑E❑ ❑ LI ❑D-❑❑ [ELI ❑[ID❑ r❑ d ❑❑ FED I [EEl rD❑❑E]❑ UI I GI❑❑ ❑❑E❑D I DUE D❑=❑❑ I

❑❑❑M ErDEEmd ❑UI ❑dd ❑ UI E ❑ r❑L❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑d ELI -LE ❑ar WI❑d LID D'❑= E ❑ ❑❑ DEL] ❑❑❑ ErED ❑] I E d ❑❑ ❑I ❑ ❑❑ II
r
MUM
❑❑r
El
❑L❑ ❑
❑L❑
�❑ r❑ ❑❑m❑❑❑❑ D'❑❑❑md ❑r❑UIm❑ ❑❑[d [ r, ❑ r❑❑ LID ❑❑d
C
I❑
r
II
LE
Location: ❑❑❑ LI-MEEEd ❑r❑Im I UI EL I QDd UI UI❑ ❑D L❑❑ rE ❑D'f ❑ L]LJUEILJ ❑ REEF ❑ M [ EEE El LED ❑ ❑❑❑LIE ❑LR I r d ❑❑❑❑❑ ErDEETTli ❑r❑[ IUD End ❑❑E❑ El ❑ E❑ ❑ddr❑ I ❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ UIEEr R❑❑D-❑ R❑❑d Ifs❑❑ ❑ M [ L]EL]❑❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ Dr= ❑ ❑❑md ❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ r ❑d ❑❑EDd EE ❑ LED' ❑ D-7-171 ❑❑ ❑D- ❑❑❑ ❑❑EMDD ❑❑
II I
Timeframe: ❑❑❑ MED D-❑❑❑
E ❑ ❑rD❑7m❑❑Qd

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
❑D❑❑ ❑❑❑ LUTA
❑❑❑d
r
DEDEDErDI
❑ ❑ r LED m❑-i-r
❑ U a ❑❑❑ ❑[m❑
❑I ❑
rE ❑❑❑❑d❑
❑r❑Im
❑ Qd I
❑❑d ❑❑❑
=ODE
❑❑D'❑LDLLIMEE❑d ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑
li
❑❑
❑❑D fir❑ [Er ❑[IDC❑❑
D -❑I Er I ❑ D ❑❑ ELITE ELE❑
�❑ ❑ UI ❑d ❑❑ EEM [d ❑❑
❑ DAZE ❑❑d [LAZE
D- ❑ ❑❑ M ❑ D ❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑d ❑❑❑❑DUI It] ❑❑
�d o❑ ❑ri ©❑ ❑❑d ❑ ❑LI ❑❑❑ =DE
a"❑ r❑dDmd ❑7 III ED= E ❑El
❑❑ ❑❑DE EL ❑
=E - ❑❑
1 DUD
❑r❑Im I ELM
❑ ❑❑DED* TED I
DIr❑
II
El DD
I I
I I
=El DDED=EEI
❑ ❑ ❑❑E ❑❑d
I❑ ❑❑d ❑ ❑I ❑ U❑
L ❑❑ ❑❑ I ❑❑d
❑❑d d Imd El❑
d
D❑
Er
❑❑❑d
❑ D ❑❑ EL ❑ ❑ DEED ❑❑d r❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑ I D❑ ❑❑ U❑ M ❑ D D-❑ ❑ LELl❑d UI ❑ EDEr dal= ❑❑C❑ ❑❑d Eic ❑ ❑r I I r ❑L -❑❑❑ D ❑❑ UI m❑ r❑❑d miDEriai M ❑ D d ❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑d ❑❑❑❑uirn [d ❑❑ I ❑ MED LID ❑r= H ELM ❑WJLr ❑❑E❑ U _ I I ❑ ❑L ❑❑ L ❑UI❑ DDIErDmD-LME D ❑❑ r❑❑❑❑I [ =❑❑❑dd CE❑❑ ETD E I u ❑❑d ❑❑❑I I❑ ❑❑ Odd ❑d 917

E ❑
❑CR❑❑ ❑ Mrim
❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑ ❑❑❑ ❑
ELIErE d M ❑ D ❑❑D❑❑❑ ❑
❑ d❑❑
❑ [d D. r❑d D L ❑MTh Cm uI L1J
E
I I
❑ E ❑❑r❑❑❑❑ DECIELEEDIPE
r
I II
1❑ I ❑
❑❑❑ ❑❑W
r❑❑d EMEHID ❑
I1
❑E❑❑ End

D HEED LEI D
❑❑C❑❑Cm❑ ❑
❑d ❑❑❑❑ ii ❑❑❑
WILi
I I
I ELM I❑]
Ed ❑❑ ❑
❑CCa-❑C❑ d ❑ CI= ❑
DIl ❑ ❑LIE ❑❑❑
Id
I I
❑❑❑❑d ❑
❑Cm
COW ❑ ❑❑Wr❑❑ HEE
❑ EMU] ❑❑d ❑CCCr❑l d ❑I rte❑❑❑ ❑❑[ID❑
❑❑ HE ErEELCWd ❑r❑UI I ❑D❑❑ W
❑ ❑❑ nII ❑❑ ❑❑H II I❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
CM M❑D❑❑D❑❑ ❑D ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ri ❑❑ MD
❑❑❑r❑DII t-ILnal ❑❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑H
r❑❑d HEEL I ❑❑❑❑ I ❑ ❑LW Lid
❑❑MI M ❑ D ❑ ❑❑ Cr❑❑d ❑ ❑❑
❑❑
r
❑D❑ M❑D PIT I ❑ C❑❑ ❑EM ❑Cd ❑❑LI ILL-❑ O Wm ❑❑❑❑❑D[OE❑ I ❑-❑I Cr I❑ ❑DELli [O❑ ❑r❑[ I I ❑❑d rr❑❑❑d ❑D❑ Cr❑❑ ❑ I 1 ❑❑ DI DMIED ❑a r❑❑ DIE ❑❑ LILAthene cunicularia I ❑❑ d I r EU HID ❑ ❑rr❑❑ ❑ ❑❑E -ID ❑❑ I _ ❑ DIM ❑❑d ❑IL I] ❑Cm ❑ I DEEMED ❑❑ r❑❑❑ ELLE I I ❑ ❑❑d ❑r❑LEC LIELLI❑d Ell ❑❑ Cm ❑MEL ❑ r❑ Ed ❑ (ID ❑❑❑d ❑d C❑ ❑❑MI d ❑❑ME ❑❑ErDErT[O ❑ [CID= I SID ❑❑mod ❑ DI❑❑ ❑ ❑❑ r❑❑ Did d ❑❑ ❑❑ r❑W CW❑W❑ ❑ ❑❑ r❑❑ r❑d ❑ I ❑r❑W ILO ❑❑CILU W L H❑❑ ❑I I ❑ I
M
❑ M ❑❑
r❑❑
❑ E ❑ ❑ r❑❑❑ItEL MIMED MILD d[h] ❑ I ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑
En ❑❑I ❑D❑❑ D ❑ r❑Cd PEDDLE ❑ ❑ID❑I ❑ ❑ ❑❑
❑d ❑❑❑❑Cm Cm ❑ Cd Cr r❑d ❑ I W ❑❑ Cm ❑EL= I Cr❑ ❑-
❑❑m ❑D❑ HIEDDr❑Ell
❑C❑❑❑❑I
C]-❑ r[ld LILLd W HI
❑ ❑❑ r❑ Lir ❑❑I _
I
❑❑ErDUE ❑
HEEI ❑ I ❑HED❑❑ r❑ ❑❑❑❑d❑r❑
❑ ❑[rd ❑ ❑❑d ❑Dr❑❑ EM ❑❑ ❑d ❑dd ELL❑ D
JD I ❑ ❑❑d HE ❑ ❑❑ ❑ II ❑ ❑I u ❑ M ❑
❑M❑❑❑❑ II
C]'. _
❑ ❑❑
TED
❑ ELM
1) Nesting Birds
I I
r❑❑ C❑ ❑ [d C]- r❑d ❑ ❑I I ❑❑
r❑❑ Er❑❑❑md FM MILD CrEl ❑❑DELIMELLICIUM D
❑❑I [O ❑ FM I C]'❑. Cr ❑
I❑W❑I I❑W❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑CCr❑❑ CDI
IL ❑ ❑❑ I ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑
I
1101 ❑r❑® LrEEDE❑❑ I r❑I ❑❑ I u I Cm LED ❑ I ❑ LIE I Eli D❑ ❑ r❑dind Cm ❑❑ I I❑ ❑©d ❑ D❑d ❑RI ❑ ❑EEr❑ ❑ I I D❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑ I I ❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑[❑❑Cd ❑❑❑❑ ❑ rd C r= ❑ ❑❑ r❑❑ ❑❑ HUD I I ❑ ❑❑❑❑ W❑ C❑❑❑== ❑❑LE LW Cm ❑ ❑❑ C7 ❑❑❑d ELL d ❑ r ❑❑ Cm❑ ❑❑ C]- ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ ❑©d ❑❑ ❑ u ❑ ❑HErE ❑-❑L[d ❑d ❑❑ ❑ I ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑ ❑- ❑❑❑ r❑❑❑❑IQ❑❑ ❑ ❑d ❑ ❑❑r ❑❑DIEE❑❑o❑❑ ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ IL Cd ❑ WL❑ _ D❑ ❑D❑❑Cm D ❑ ❑ =TEE Cm I ❑7m❑❑❑LLJI Id' d ❑ r❑❑ ❑❑D DIM ❑ [11 CM C] -d[]-❑ ❑❑ 1IL EE ❑❑ Er ❑TEU[❑Lt❑ ❑❑ [IIJ[td I _ r❑ I D. Cm Cm ❑❑❑I II IC]' d r❑❑ ED ❑❑I C]- LIME ❑❑❑❑❑ I ❑©d ❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑[OErLL CrL dal ❑❑ ❑ I ❑ILd ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑ ❑❑❑ r❑❑❑L I II ❑d ❑❑Cmd ❑Cr I❑❑❑tea-❑Cm❑❑ ❑❑d ❑ ❑o ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DEUCED Lm I ❑r ❑❑❑TIl❑❑ ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑r❑Cmr❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑bd ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ Er aid ❑d ❑❑ r❑TU❑ ❑❑d r❑❑❑LLDJM ❑d ❑❑L❑d ❑❑ W❑ ❑❑ErIL ❑ CID[❑ [OWI-1l LAD. C rIE ❑❑ ❑❑W❑ M ETD —A-❑ ❑ [td ❑r❑❑Cm ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑d ❑d ❑ ❑ HE ❑❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑LE= A-4
A-5
A-6
A-7
918

d
D ❑
❑I ❑ERm ❑Mrim
CLU ❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑ ❑❑❑ ❑
❑D'❑
❑❑I
❑r❑❑Ell ❑ I
r❑❑Erd LE IZLI❑ ❑ ❑M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑Et
TIDE ❑ D ❑❑ ❑ E ❑❑
Ed El ❑❑ r❑d❑
ELLE ILEA WE ❑E❑ ❑❑
❑❑d ❑ V I I I ❑ Er
❑ ❑ 1 ❑❑❑❑ W WE
❑ ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑
❑❑d ❑ f1lmTi ❑ ❑❑❑
❑ ❑Er❑❑❑ ❑❑❑ I ❑❑❑d
El El [[d II ❑ ❑D❑❑1IWE
❑ ❑❑=❑ M ❑rDarE ❑ r❑d
❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑d ❑❑❑❑Cm❑
LuErE -❑❑❑ rid ❑I I I❑ ❑ ILL ❑❑d ❑❑mod ❑ ❑ ❑❑ r1 ❑ ❑r❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑-n ❑ ❑❑ r❑❑ Wi El Id i❑ LEI I DMA ❑Id ❑❑EF❑❑EFEM❑d ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑i ❑ ❑©d ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ WE tiDD ❑ ❑❑❑d'❑ ❑ r1 I I❑ ❑ ❑❑ r❑ E❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ LI ❑ I TAME ❑ ❑❑❑ ❑llir ❑❑ I ❑ ❑©d ❑ d ❑= r❑ ❑❑ ❑ I ❑I ❑ L ] ❑ M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑I I ❑ HI ❑❑
❑E ❑d' LE ❑❑
❑❑I ❑EE❑r I _ ❑ ❑❑d ❑r L❑ ❑❑M❑❑❑❑
❑❑M❑❑❑❑❑L❑ ❑ 9 11 mm I DL]
�I d WI❑ I❑ ❑ I ii ❑m ❑ [TI❑ ❑ WIWErEWI
I I
❑❑❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑E❑ ❑r❑[
U❑❑rm❑LE❑ ❑ ❑❑WE❑
❑ m❑❑d HIED I
MIDDLE ❑r❑[E
HI I r❑❑❑ ❑❑d T❑❑
❑❑ WE FM El Ea -WEE
❑❑ I❑ ❑©d El ❑ ❑❑d WE
d ❑ ❑❑ED-❑ ❑
❑❑
rE
❑❑
ED ❑❑
❑ ELEM. ❑d
❑ D-❑ [WEE
E DDT El El I r❑ ❑ ❑❑d r❑❑❑0❑❑ ❑❑E ❑❑E❑
EDDJE❑WE E❑ ❑ EM LIE ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑d E❑ E ❑
I I
I I
❑ ❑❑LI-❑ WEWE❑
r [ _ E❑ ❑d'
r❑❑ ❑❑❑
MELD I
DD EL r❑I
❑❑
❑❑❑ I LE❑ ❑❑L �❑
❑d ❑❑ I I ❑ ❑❑❑ Liar ❑ ❑❑❑d f1[1D ❑ ❑©d
m WEE rr❑❑❑d HE ❑❑ wDEErE❑❑d WE❑ D ❑❑ ❑ rE
❑❑❑❑d❑=M I❑ I❑M❑❑ r❑❑W ter❑ I d
❑I r ❑❑❑T❑I ❑ I ❑ ❑❑ M ❑old ❑I d ❑❑DIA ❑ ❑❑E❑ ❑❑❑❑
❑7❑❑I ❑ tEl ❑ ❑I I I❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ m[d ❑
❑ D'❑ ❑❑LA ❑ WE❑ ❑❑❑❑
❑ ❑ ❑❑I r❑❑❑ D ❑❑ ❑
regardless LEVIED ❑ ❑❑ ❑-
❑❑d ❑❑❑❑ D E ❑ Ld ❑d ❑❑❑❑
r
❑ ❑d ❑❑ WE❑ ❑❑❑ II d ❑ HE I❑ ❑❑d ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑❑ El ❑a- WE❑ I rd ❑❑ I ❑❑d ❑ HO
❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑ E❑ ❑ ❑E ❑ ❑❑❑❑I ❑ ❑©d r
r❑ C❑❑❑W I LEI ❑❑I El Eft ❑ ❑❑d Milt ❑❑
IE
El
❑ r[❑ ❑'❑❑I d ❑❑❑❑d E❑ ❑❑ I tEl 1 I r I I ❑❑ ❑©d I ❑I
❑❑ El ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ a -❑❑❑d EI❑❑ r❑ I ❑E _ I❑❑❑❑❑ IIIIILdr❑❑❑❑E r❑ ❑ED L ❑ ❑"❑ [❑EEEtd El ❑❑ I ❑❑❑❑ r❑❑❑rEl d WI ❑'❑❑d DErEITrE El ED❑ DD"EIDIrDICI =DEEM] Et❑ ❑m❑md d DIM a -❑❑d HE ❑❑d It❑ I❑ ❑❑ rmd E❑❑
❑ I ❑ ❑LLErrWE❑ ❑❑rte ❑❑d
IED ❑r❑WEI I I ❑❑d
Cd❑d any time birds are nesting on -site.
ri
Via-❑❑❑ r❑d ❑
i1
In
�❑
DE
WE 7 HIED I
❑❑❑I
r
®❑ II Mr-❑m❑r1 ❑ I ❑ ❑ r ❑❑❑ ❑❑❑CL ❑ D ❑❑ IEEE
❑❑❑❑ I ❑d I ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑ r❑ I HIE LI❑ ❑❑ I ❑ ❑Od
a- U❑❑❑ rI I❑ I❑ ❑ ❑d❑l' I❑D❑❑ r❑
❑❑❑I IDEA ❑❑I I WE ❑7❑❑7❑ ❑Cr7d ❑ ❑❑d r❑❑❑7❑ ❑
rr❑❑❑d WEE ErEE ❑❑ ❑
❑❑ ❑EEr❑❑ I I ❑] r❑d El ❑ U ❑❑
❑ D ❑❑ r❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑ M ❑ I ❑ M IL
bold ❑❑d r❑❑ ❑ [m TT E Ur
DEED ❑❑Ird❑❑E❑WEI
r❑❑WE❑uCr❑EErd ❑

WILD MEI
E❑ HI]
❑❑❑1
WE
❑ El❑ ❑dd IEEE Ll
2 SocolarJB, Epanchin PN, Beissinger SR and Tingley MW (2017). Phenological shifts conserve thermal niches.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114(49): 12976-12981. 919

❑❑ ❑
❑ I DER DE ❑ M rim
❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑ ❑❑❑ ❑
Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Nesting Birds
To the greatest extent feasible, the Project will avoid construction activities during the peak nesting season (February 1 through September 15). Regardless of the time of year, -g-n❑
❑ILL❑
D _
'En ❑ r❑
❑d
❑ ❑rd mr
E ili
❑❑ ❑❑d ❑❑
rd ❑❑DID❑
I❑
❑❑ ❑❑H
Id
❑ ❑ ❑ r❑ ❑
❑ ❑
r
VI
LID ❑❑
❑DID ❑
r
I EDE CI ElErITIrD DD EDEMA CI
DEIMILL r❑❑ ❑ r Er ❑❑❑d D 1 ❑L❑❑
m❑ ❑❑ ❑❑DID d r❑ ❑❑d Di Dry❑ DADE
❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑®d ❑ ❑ ❑IEU ❑
r
❑❑
Dal DICED C ❑ r❑ UD❑ r I❑ ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ELE[I❑
❑❑L 1111 ld DUE]
D
�❑ II
C❑
II
❑❑
C7❑ LIMLd d ❑-❑ I ❑ Ir❑I ❑ ❑❑ I❑ ❑rd rI ❑
❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑ II ❑ ❑❑IE❑ ❑❑❑ LE❑Wr ID❑ELDrE❑❑ ❑❑d ❑❑❑
MELT Er DD LID- ❑❑I r ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ d ❑00-❑ End ❑❑ Dm❑ ❑❑❑I d DUEL ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑❑md ❑❑ LIE ❑❑d ❑❑
LIE r❑ D-❑ m❑
rr❑❑ffr ❑I
❑ C❑ LIE ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑Cm❑❑ DEEM LIE
❑ ❑❑EDx❑ r❑m❑ LConstruction activities may not occur inside the €e ❑❑LErq which DLL LIE
d
❑❑d a- LED ❑❑ D❑ ❑❑ D❑❑❑D7 ❑
Mali- d
DEEM
❑❑❑ ❑❑❑
End
r
ELI
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑C0 I -❑d d ❑
❑❑❑ d ❑❑7'❑ End ❑❑❑ ❑❑
r DEED ❑ ❑ E❑ ❑❑=D -
❑❑❑m❑
❑❑
❑❑❑
I I
Iu
❑��❑
❑E ❑ELLID CID❑
❑ DEEM ❑
❑DAD ❑Cd ❑d ❑
❑❑ LEE ❑❑❑ II r. ❑CLCm❑CIIM❑
❑❑d Er FED ❑r❑Dm
❑DDIHf1 d
❑❑❑ ❑❑DTI
❑d
r
I I
❑ ❑❑❑
❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑UC❑d ❑

D MIL D EL
LID- I ❑❑= LIED ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑Dd ❑ II _ ❑I ❑ LIELIEE ❑ D ❑❑ ❑❑❑ D -❑❑D -❑d ❑ d r❑CID ❑ �❑ I ❑ ❑ ❑❑ET-IE❑ ❑❑d r❑❑a- ❑ D -❑D7❑❑ LMMR❑❑D❑ ❑i II I m❑ ❑❑❑❑ r❑m❑ ❑ ❑❑dLId rE I ❑❑ CID MM D1ri ❑❑d MM ❑DID IT ❑❑d ❑ D ❑❑ I❑ I ❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑d MM ❑ I ❑❑❑d MM

DIE DID
2) Burrowing Owl
❑ ❑ ❑ DE❑O- ❑❑ a ❑❑❑❑DID❑ ❑
❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ u ❑
❑❑❑❑ ❑dDd❑WI
❑D -r❑❑ TOE ❑❑ DTDELE D-❑=
E ❑d ❑❑❑D -❑d ❑ ❑❑DAD❑ ❑ Dm I ❑ ❑ 1 ❑d ❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑C7r❑❑ CC➢❑ ❑p I LI LL ❑
❑❑d DEED -Ed ❑ I❑ ❑❑d ❑r ❑ E ❑❑ ❑DID❑r❑Dmm❑
rdlid ❑ ❑ D-❑
❑ d ❑I-❑ m]❑d ❑❑ ❑❑❑7-❑
❑ I ❑ ❑❑d D- ED❑ ❑ ❑ r❑EI
D D'[❑❑ DID❑ ❑❑❑d ❑d ❑I
❑ ❑❑ Lir❑❑HDDd ❑❑d
I I
D❑
LE ELI ❑❑❑D -❑D-= DEED ❑❑ccuD- ❑ MTh r DELI
I I
❑D70md
�❑ r❑DmmT❑1❑❑m❑Dd rE
❑ ❑ D-❑ [ILIAD ❑ I ❑❑d
❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑ I ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑m❑❑Dd CID ❑❑CIDDm❑d D-DQ]r C m❑ ❑ DEICED ❑❑❑❑❑❑r❑DI DDD
❑❑I ❑❑❑]d Lai ❑❑ D -r❑❑ LE❑ ❑❑ Cm ❑❑d [Mr ❑❑ I D- ❑❑❑❑ I d ❑ Ed ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑d D-❑❑ELLEd ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑LMEEd ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ d ❑ ❑d El ❑ ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ Ed ❑ I ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑DID❑D FETTILFTTTEl❑ ❑07 ❑ D" ID' ❑CI IIE II DI ❑❑❑DID❑ -I ❑❑ ❑D❑IED❑ D7 II II ❑ I ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑ mrnrn❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑CID❑❑❑d ❑❑❑❑ ❑ d D-= I ❑ ❑❑ r❑❑ ❑❑ =LED LIJW ❑ ❑❑❑❑ II LLD =DD ID❑Cm❑ CIDI ❑❑❑ LLELr ❑❑❑d M] ] d ❑ r ❑❑ C❑ CIE D- ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ Ltd ❑❑❑W❑❑❑❑ ❑CIDC7❑ D ❑ d Ed ❑❑ ❑ I ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑ Dr ❑❑❑ r❑❑❑DmELE❑ ❑ Ed ❑ ❑a- ❑❑WID7❑DID❑❑I I ❑❑d 920

D ❑
❑ L❑R ❑❑ ❑ M moo
LLD ❑❑❑❑❑❑
mm ❑
❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑'❑d ❑ I ❑ ❑❑❑❑L ❑ ❑ ❑ m]❑❑=❑ LI
�❑ ❑rd ❑r❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ a ❑ [[DLI ❑ ❑❑ Lafd
HD ❑❑I Er ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ ❑©d ❑I I❑❑❑❑ ❑W7Dr❑ ❑-❑ c ❑d ❑❑
❑r ❑❑❑ rEMEIE ❑ ❑d ❑❑DId ❑D- ❑❑❑LIID EEEED I I ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ Ed ❑ ❑❑[❑ ELLII L 'Er ❑❑ I ❑❑❑ ❑ arDLErL ❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑©d ❑I ❑
❑❑d r❑❑❑L ❑❑ ❑d ❑❑mod ❑❑ ❑ ❑a -❑fir❑ ❑❑EED❑ ❑❑d ❑r D-❑

ELLUEELLE
M LITLEI ❑ ❑ m ❑r❑❑L ❑
I
❑' WI CM
d ❑LLr❑❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑rd ❑ m]
❑ II ❑r d r❑❑
❑ I ❑❑d IL ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑
❑ ❑r❑ ci ❑d ❑❑ r❑LLU❑
❑❑ ❑❑=
❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑d ❑d I ❑ ❑ E W] ❑o ❑❑❑ ❑❑
r❑❑❑rd L ❑ ❑M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑E❑ ❑ D ❑❑ ❑ ❑�]-❑l
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑r❑ m]❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑FED❑u❑❑ d ❑❑❑ ❑❑
❑❑ r mId ❑❑ ❑❑ Er ❑❑❑ ❑❑ W]❑ ❑TA -
r❑
❑❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑ el ❑ ❑ IUD
d ❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑EIThr II I❑ QD' ❑EI r❑❑ MID
❑ MILLI ❑❑L❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ D'❑ m7 I EEE
Din-EDDIE ❑❑ ❑ L - Auld ❑❑ O ❑ I ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑I
II
rll
❑❑❑❑d r❑m1l-❑EEI❑ =❑❑F❑
❑ ❑LI ❑ ❑ ❑ d ❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑W1❑r ❑❑W ❑❑WID-r❑❑ L❑ ❑❑ LDD LIDDED II Il ❑❑A.Ear❑❑ QD-❑❑❑❑❑❑❑[❑ ❑ ❑M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ L -❑❑❑ ❑❑O ❑ m] ❑❑d ❑ =DEED ❑❑ r I❑ ❑r❑❑ I ❑ D-❑ Il ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ I r❑ LI❑❑❑ I ❑ ❑ELErrte❑ ❑ LIE© LTA EL d ❑ =JD i CUL C❑ I❑❑❑ ❑❑❑r d ❑ r❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑rr❑❑ m]❑ ❑❑ ❑❑]d mId ❑❑❑umLn ❑rr ❑❑❑I ❑ ❑❑ ❑ I ❑CCErrte❑ ❑ I EL W7❑ ❑ ❑M ❑❑ ❑ ❑ Di ❑❑ =D'= I L W7❑ El I _ DE -r= ILL ❑❑ ❑ m]d mrd ❑❑ I Mir II r ❑❑❑D ❑ ❑❑rd ❑❑ DECIDE WJWDd ❑ ❑❑[d ❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ r❑d ❑ ❑❑d ❑r �❑ ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ E - ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑HDHE ❑ I LIM ❑❑ II ❑CA LE ❑❑m ❑ LE❑ ❑r❑LII l I El ❑ ❑ ❑] I❑71-D ❑❑I ❑ ❑ElCr ❑Ed d' Cm❑ ❑ ❑M ❑ ❑ CID I❑ ❑❑7 ❑ I ❑ I r❑ ❑ ❑❑d r❑❑❑ ru _ ❑ ❑❑E DEEM ❑ ❑M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑ ❑❑❑ ❑r❑ I I [l❑❑D-❑❑LI LE❑ ❑ ❑M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑d C❑ MI ❑❑] d TEE ❑ ❑Ill _ ❑I ❑ I I TII❑ ❑ EM❑❑r❑mil ❑L -r❑❑ TEE ❑❑ ❑❑❑ M❑D ❑❑d
❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑
❑❑JI !LAD= mu Dm II d d ❑ ] Il ❑❑ LI❑ ❑ ❑L❑d ❑ ❑❑❑d LI
❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑l ❑❑❑d I ❑❑r ❑Dr ❑❑ ❑ D ❑❑ LI❑ ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑❑E❑
❑ LE ❑❑❑ IID❑ LI❑❑I ❑ ❑IT❑ I r❑ ❑d ❑ r, HD Ord r ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑-❑❑II' ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ Id r ❑❑d ❑❑ OM= II I ❑ ED L TITId ❑rd r ❑ DT frEDDE❑ ❑D ❑❑]❑]❑ lI I ❑❑❑] ErI ❑ ❑ ❑ T❑❑ II I ED -D ❑]❑ I RIDE I❑❑] ❑❑d D' r ❑ d ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑ I r❑I D- I II ❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑=❑ ❑ LLIE= I LW WJ ❑❑❑ ❑]d ❑7❑ I ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑ I ❑ D -r❑❑ CE❑ ❑ ❑ I _ ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑I rE d I _ D -r❑❑ LILJD I ❑ ❑ I❑ ❑ I❑❑ETIT I1T1LI❑m I ❑❑] ❑D I I❑ ❑❑❑ I IM I I I❑ ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑❑❑7❑ ❑ ❑ ID ❑ ❑ I ❑❑❑ECI7LILI CEDE I ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑I I ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑E r❑Ed ❑ EMI* - IDE ❑Err❑❑ ❑ LLI❑ D-❑ ❑❑❑d ❑❑ LI ❑I I HD ❑E umEI D ❑❑ ❑❑❑D•❑ I I I ❑ DIU= Cd ❑I ❑❑W] Mir ❑ Qd II I ❑7 ❑❑ Ed QD' ❑ ❑❑❑ I Cr ❑Er d ❑❑ M❑ D ETD I I Dad ❑ IDE 7I❑❑ ❑❑❑❑I I❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑d r❑ ❑ Il ❑❑d I r ❑❑rr❑❑ L❑ ❑❑ MUTE HIE ❑❑Cd LULL LE Em Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation DI W7❑ ❑❑❑ ❑D- DALE I I❑❑ ❑0 I _ ❑[ ❑❑d ❑ ❑nd ❑IDTDD ❑ ❑ LED ❑r❑Eld ❑❑d rr❑❑❑d CITE ❑ D II ❑r❑ ❑❑I ❑❑ ❑❑❑ ❑ I I ❑ IE ❑❑r❑ [ II El and r E II ❑ E❑ r❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑I d Ed ErEm [EDDA CEDED ❑❑ r ❑ r❑❑d' I ❑ D ❑❑ [1 I 1 11 mIJd LI I
❑ ❑nuirula D ❑❑cr [ ❑❑W❑❑®❑❑d ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ®D ❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ E❑l-❑❑a-❑❑❑ ❑a r❑❑ no mom =CUE ❑❑❑❑ r❑❑ ❑ TITR❑ ❑r• ❑❑❑❑❑❑ 1 ❑❑lu❑®®d❑❑❑®od
❑® ❑ o I I r❑ [d EE®®❑ I®❑ ❑❑d ❑ im n ❑ ❑ ❑❑E❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ®M❑ 921

❑❑ ❑
❑ I DER DE ❑ M tIm
LI ❑❑❑❑❑❑
mm ❑
❑❑ v II I LI ❑ ILd❑ DEEliiiUMMEr
❑ter❑❑ TEE ❑❑ I ❑ MITIEFT1
r❑ riEDE d❑ID❑r❑
❑❑rr❑❑ TEE ❑❑ LED ❑r❑EL
�❑❑
DEE
and
❑I❑d
[m ❑❑d -❑L❑ ❑ [E] r❑d ❑ ❑ U ❑❑ I ED
❑IT[TETIM D ❑E r❑m❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑ =DIM M ❑ D LIT
rl ELEA E❑ rl ❑ r❑❑a-Eil4 LE-
rr❑❑❑d ❑]❑ ErEE =TE M❑ L❑ ❑❑Cd ❑ i ii ❑❑
❑❑ ii ❑d H ❑❑❑❑❑d D DEED Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation MEd mi EITElirED-DE ❑❑ rDI It iEl I [d ❑❑ I v DTP I ❑❑❑❑d ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ r❑❑ EFT ❑❑rr❑❑ �❑ ❑❑ LE
❑ D ❑❑ MED EMU ❑ I 7DLI❑a-❑lTrrDd ❑❑E IrTiTt ❑Etrm❑ LI❑ ❑❑ ❑llErli _ II ❑❑ d'LT I -r IEEE= DEV I _ ODE I r❑❑ 4 ❑❑d liMMD r❑❑ ETD ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑ DEED* F r❑d a-❑ r❑I I Id I m❑❑D ❑❑d ❑❑ Er❑❑ LEM ❑❑h ❑ r❑I I r❑ E ❑D ❑❑d tea-❑ ❑ D ❑m❑❑= ❑Ltr❑❑❑ DDd ClE❑❑UI❑ ❑❑❑ I I❑a-❑ DMA ❑❑ r❑I ❑ ❑❑❑ r I❑ ❑a-[ I ❑❑EErD ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑❑1] ❑®❑❑❑❑TE❑ ED ❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑E Ea-iE❑D❑ ❑r❑D ❑❑d ❑'❑❑❑ ❑7 ❑ ❑m❑❑d I❑E I ❑MM ❑❑❑I ❑❑ r ❑❑ r❑❑❑ IIMEEI I _ ❑D ❑11111 ❑❑d ❑❑m7❑ ❑❑❑f❑ l[Tt ❑lrr❑❑ UT❑ ❑❑ UI❑Drr❑❑ D❑ ❑D Ll ❑ TEEEED ❑ ❑ I TIDE d r❑❑d ❑ EIRE ❑-fir LI ❑❑d d ❑rte❑ I r❑ IEEE ErE ❑d ❑❑mod LI DEEM] ❑ ❑d I Id ❑❑❑ I ' ' ❑D❑❑ I ❑AErD TED ❑r❑llI ❑❑d ❑❑❑r❑❑❑ ED CITE III ❑❑d m0O ❑❑ MIT= ❑❑ I I ❑❑d DirEETE ❑❑❑ ❑ED- ❑Etr❑❑ LI❑ ❑❑ C❑ Er
❑❑❑ M LID U r, ❑❑ M I ❑ I ❑ M ❑❑m-❑ ❑ E Elit ❑Ltr❑❑ ED ❑❑ ED ❑ LII r, ❑❑ ET ED-UE E ❑❑I ME I ❑❑I r❑arr EtI I ❑ r❑ I DI r I ❑❑rr❑❑ETD ❑❑ L ❑ ❑❑ ❑I r❑❑ DLO I I r❑ I❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑ =❑❑LE and ❑Err❑❑ LI❑ ❑❑ 111111r I I ❑d ❑ ❑mod❑❑ I ❑ E❑ Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation ID-LI I ❑ MICA a-❑ ❑d ❑❑❑❑E MID ❑I I ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑rr❑❑ ED II r❑II❑ ❑E Ems'❑ ❑❑D-❑D-mimi ❑ Cd ❑❑I ❑ ❑ En I I❑ II ❑d ❑ I MID ❑ ❑❑ r❑I ❑❑d L ErE d ❑ I I❑❑ ❑ D- [ME ❑ I ❑❑d ❑r❑= ❑r❑❑❑❑❑❑❑LI ❑L❑ ❑❑d LI ❑M ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑ r❑❑ ED LIED-LI El D d LI ❑❑ EU ❑❑rr❑❑ TEE ❑❑ d [Mb ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑d ❑❑ L'❑l" C❑ III r❑ ❑ ❑ ICI El I I ❑ D ❑❑ m❑ d a-❑ M ❑ ❑ M ❑❑ r❑ ❑III I El ❑❑ LE I DEICE I❑❑ ❑❑d DID EU d
° OE ❑r❑❑a'all ❑ IT -17d D d EITTITIT1
❑❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑d ❑❑ ITTMT-TmO ODDEr
❑❑= Drm i ❑rd r❑W❑
❑a-rm mTrr❑❑ rm ❑❑
❑ ❑®r❑® ❑ ELErEvEDEEr
❑❑❑❑❑d[DID I _ ErW❑R❑❑a-
❑ ❑o[TE I _ EM
❑❑d ❑ ®❑d ❑ T
❑❑❑❑ 1 CO
❑ rr
I
❑ar❑❑ O ❑❑ EE 01 ❑❑ ❑or
° ❑❑MU DOLE IDCIII❑L FM r❑dRIE❑❑IT
❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑ L J Ld ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑WLt❑ ❑arr❑❑ ®❑ ❑❑
❑❑ r ❑ ❑ ❑I❑d ❑ ❑❑d r❑ l V I t =❑❑ ®d rnVrm❑
r d❑m-rm❑Frmrm❑❑nm❑dm❑d❑ roil] ❑❑❑ummrdErwin
❑❑ WERE ❑❑ mID ❑ ❑ HI I m rlml>Tm ❑EE Eirr REA
Ed ❑o -r❑❑ MID ❑❑ MUFTI ❑m mi ❑❑ ❑ma-rm ®❑ EL ERWEFI Tr ❑❑m-md ❑ D❑®❑❑W ❑DD❑❑m[d'AIL= ELril a• ❑ ❑r❑ m>rm-❑ ECM E
®❑ ❑D❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑❑Lrm❑ ❑❑rr❑❑®❑ E ❑bbl®❑ I _ E
d❑
❑ELLd M u _ EM a-110 ❑ otr❑❑ no ❑❑ r [Speotyto cunicularia u ❑ ❑❑ ❑ [17d ❑ ❑ I a'® ❑ ❑ Er[TTITI❑❑ ❑ C O❑ ❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑ I -E I DUE 1 ❑®d ❑ rn=❑ Ed ❑❑❑ ❑❑ ErITTM ❑r❑®❑®❑ 11ITIErlD EL❑®❑m®J 1 ❑❑❑
DIDLK❑R❑m❑❑ErEER❑❑ m❑®❑❑m❑m❑ 1 EL ❑W ❑❑d ❑❑ 1 d❑ ❑
Im' Ed DrO At u M ❑❑❑❑❑❑
MIMED DO ❑®m❑TDER❑ ❑❑d ❑❑❑
W ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑d Dr
❑❑WI
DATE r®m❑ ❑M
❑❑EE❑❑❑
r
LEE
❑R❑❑nr R❑ LEr
❑❑ DEEM
° ❑ ❑❑®❑ ❑❑m W m❑❑❑m❑❑❑❑ID- ❑❑d ❑❑❑❑E ❑ ❑mom❑❑ ❑®❑ ❑o -r❑] ❑ ❑ ISpeotyto cunicularia❑I➢ UM ED ❑❑rEm ❑ ❑ ❑ r❑® ❑❑d ❑r =❑❑❑❑❑❑
922

D ❑
❑ I ❑❑R❑❑ ❑ M ©❑❑❑
CLU ❑❑❑❑❑❑
DEED D
r❑d ❑ IL ❑❑ El ❑D r❑❑ ❑❑
M ❑I ❑M❑❑ r❑❑LME r❑
❑�

LIED LEM
I❑ELI❑D❑❑ r❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑d❑
d
ED AEI] TEE ❑dd
❑❑ EE bold ❑❑d r❑❑ ❑
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Burrowing Owl Focused and Pre -Construction Surveys Suitable burrowing owl habitat has been confirmed on the site; therefore, focused burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist in accordance with the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012 or most recent version) prior to vegetation removal or ground -disturbing activities. If burrowing owls are detected during the focused surveys, the qualified biologist and Project proponent shall begin coordination with CDFW and USFWS immediately, and shall prepare a Burrowing Owl Avoidance and Monitoring Plan that shall be submitted to CDFW for review and approval prior to commencing Project activities. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall describe proposed avoidance and monitoring actions, including measures necessary to avoid take of burrowing owl individuals, nests, and eggs. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall include the number and location of occupied burrow sites (occupied site means at least one burrowing owl or its sign has been observed within the last three years; may be indicated by owl sign including feathers, pellets, prey remains, eggshell fragments, or excrement at or near a burrow entrance or perch site), acres of burrowing owl habitat that will be impacted, details of site monitoring, and details on proposed buffers and other avoidance measures. If impacts to occupied burrowing owl habitat or burrow(s) or burrowing owl individuals, nests, or eggs cannot be avoided, appropriate CESA authorization (i.e., Incidental Take Permit under Fish and Game Code section 2081) should be obtained from CDFW prior to commencement of Project activities.

Preconstruction burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days prior to the start of Project -related activities and within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance, in accordance with the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012 or most recent version). Preconstruction surveys should be repeated when there is a pause in construction of more than 30 days. Preconstruction surveys shall be performed by a qualified biologist following the recommendations and guidelines provided in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. If the preconstruction surveys confirm occupied burrowing owl habitat, Project activities shall be immediately halted. The qualified biologist shall coordinate with CDFW and prepare a Burrowing Owl Avoidance and Monitoring Plan that shall be submitted to CDFW and USFWS for review and approval prior to commencing Project activities. r ❑ CITE ❑d❑❑ITd u❑
=E ❑17 d ❑ ❑ [Er r ❑➢d ■mmm ❑d LEE ❑- ❑r it
-7 ❑r aid =T- d EMIR Er ❑-r ED
M LED= D a- r
ErET ❑d DTd MI r ❑d ❑d ti ®❑
E Ed ❑d EIE R D DT CD L
CI] Er
923

D ❑
EERIE ❑ M ©❑❑❑
CLU ❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑ ❑❑❑ ❑
Drr r
EEEnd DTI EEL tE D ❑d C❑ Ed E
d It] ❑d ❑D• W D- and
D ❑rEPrL L r
3) Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ❑ ❑I I❑❑ ❑❑❑ ❑Ed D ❑❑❑mil ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑s L d ❑ ❑❑ ❑
❑ ❑ I❑ ❑WIC ❑❑C❑ ❑ ❑M DEED ❑ I I EDE ❑❑L ❑ ErD I❑m EW❑ WI❑❑❑ CE ❑❑d ❑❑❑A ❑ ❑ ❑❑ rrTLEL ❑r❑❑❑ ❑ ❑d -I ❑] ❑❑❑r❑md hr D ❑ M❑❑ ❑nnTTID ❑❑r❑ II I ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑ma-❑❑❑ EL ❑❑❑DWI❑ El I❑❑ ❑ ❑ rid Ed Cd ❑❑❑❑d ❑❑❑ El ❑ WI ❑❑❑❑rd ❑❑ I ❑ ED El ❑D❑ ❑❑MME M ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑ ❑r❑Hl [m❑ME❑ ❑ ❑M ELIDE ❑ ❑d ❑❑Id ❑❑❑❑ IIIr ❑ ❑❑I El I ❑❑ ❑ TLI❑❑11111111d rd rlita inornatal II I I I r. ❑Ern -d rd LPhrynosoma mcalliii ❑❑❑ I ❑D•mi❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ I rPerognathus longimembris bangsi ❑ ❑❑I ❑ ❑❑ I II FE r❑❑❑d l d D -❑❑❑d ❑d"❑ECCerospermophilus tereticaudus chlorus I ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑I ❑ I ❑❑ I ❑ ❑ rAstragalus lentiginosus mr❑coachellaeLUI❑❑ ❑❑ m❑ I I ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑M CIE ❑ ❑ r❑❑❑©❑❑ ❑❑ I❑ D ❑❑ rE I ❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑ =DIM ❑ LW E J d ❑ LIM ❑ r❑ I r MID =EDII _ IELI❑❑ FIE ❑❑❑❑ r❑❑
(I
I I
Mitigation Measure BIO-[A]: Salvage of Sand -Dependent Covered Species Prior to vegetation removal or ground -disturbing activities, the City will collaborate with the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission to plan and implement a salvage of sand -dependent Covered Species within the Project site. 4) Artificial Nighttime Lighting
❑❑❑ ❑r❑❑] I I EEO Elai Ed [FEMME ❑E-❑❑❑ [❑ ❑❑I ❑d
d ❑ r❑m-o❑ ❑ELEM I❑❑❑r❑ d ❑ =ET ❑❑rr❑❑ TEIMD ❑❑r❑❑
❑©d I ❑ ❑riarD ❑©d ❑ LEL❑❑ ❑❑❑DI❑L❑❑d ❑❑J❑r
r❑M❑❑] ❑❑❑
D'❑❑❑
❑❑
❑❑7❑
❑r ❑Qd
�I
II
❑I
r
❑❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑EM M ❑ D
CITE ❑D I I❑E ❑❑d 17-17-r
17 DEE DE DELT
ELM ECU=
nIi1Tr❑❑L❑❑❑❑d
r❑❑I Ed
❑ ❑❑ D-
❑r❑❑❑md ❑r
I❑C❑TT❑ECILI❑
El ELITE
m
r
F C❑❑= ❑r❑IL
❑ I❑FEED ❑r❑[
❑I I ❑❑d ❑d r ILl
rE Er DE ❑E❑I I
❑ IUD I r❑ I❑ Ll
r❑❑❑© ❑❑d r❑ I r❑ ❑❑❑❑
❑ ntil-❑❑ ❑ I I ED d ❑
❑ FL ICr ❑ ❑❑d ❑❑L-❑
d
❑❑FLLL

ELIDEDEDEDD
ErEED
rr❑❑❑dam❑ ED ❑r= I ❑r1I IJ IIII� III D
LIEd LLI❑LI❑ EW❑ ❑❑r❑ I
IDLEILDELID El MI
❑ ❑❑ rmd ❑]❑ ❑❑d TII❑a- ❑❑d
❑❑❑ Ell ❑❑d EE I M ❑❑❑
LED mK
❑ ❑m❑❑ ❑❑d'❑❑N❑n= IIR❑
L1111111111)1111111L110
❑❑ ❑❑ ❑
❑ rE ❑❑❑❑
IC❑❑ d ❑WI
❑❑❑EW❑D-Ld
❑I ❑❑
❑I ❑ ❑
❑❑ ❑uLI❑ ❑LLUW
❑ m❑❑E❑❑❑❑EE❑❑❑
I CLUE
I❑❑
A-8
A-9
A-10
924
r❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑

D ❑
❑ ❑❑R ❑❑ ❑ M ©❑❑❑
LLD ❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑
❑]' ❑ ❑ ❑❑ I I ❑ I❑ HiHi d I
HI❑r❑ D -❑D❑= I ❑C4° ❑❑d ❑
❑❑d ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑E❑ ❑-d ❑ u ❑Ll
�❑ a"E❑
I I
❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑❑ L M ❑ D Hid
r❑❑❑� ❑ ❑ ❑m❑❑d
❑❑❑ ❑ ❑
❑D❑❑
❑❑P°c❑d ❑mr❑ MD ❑ ❑❑❑ HI DEED r r❑❑Hi❑l° ❑❑❑❑ r❑❑
ri ❑❑❑mil ❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ Him-❑ D®❑rnrn❑
❑ d1 I r rLE❑ I ❑IT❑❑❑❑❑d ❑ r ❑ Qd
II
im mim r ❑Ei
❑d ❑-d ❑ ❑m�❑
❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑
d ❑r❑ ED= ❑E❑❑ ma ❑ TED
❑❑ r❑d ❑ IMO ❑❑
CITE CdnI❑a-r❑d❑I ❑
❑ Ell EU I❑❑ ❑
❑❑�
❑❑❑r❑=❑ ❑
❑IUD❑ o -❑❑❑❑r
=DEE ❑ ❑
II
I I
I I
II
❑ ❑ ❑❑A ❑❑ rDDarEd LEI
❑d DAD- IlLI❑ ❑ M ❑❑
❑L❑ ❑ ❑❑ r ❑❑ AM=
❑ ❑❑d ❑❑❑ ❑❑
ELL
C ❑❑ ❑❑a-
II
❑mr❑ Hi
❑ I ❑d ❑
❑ ❑mr
❑ ®❑
❑❑ ❑ ❑ E E
❑❑I I I ❑❑T'
❑�❑D❑❑ r❑
Him
❑❑❑
r❑�❑rnDEEld M❑D❑
ELI I
1 I
❑❑❑❑d❑=❑
Mitigation Measure BIO-[B]: Artificial Nighttime Lighting ❑m❑ ❑❑
aid LidD
Throughout construction and the lifetime operations of the Project, the City and Project proponent shall eliminate all nonessential lighting throughout the Project area and avoid or limit the use of artificial light at night during the hours of dawn and dusk when many wildlife species are most active. The City and Project proponent shall ensure that all lighting for the Project is fully shielded, cast downward and directed away from surrounding open -space and agricultural areas, reduced in intensity to the greatest extent possible, and does not result in lighting trespass including glare into surrounding areas or upward into the night sky (see the International Dark -Sky Association standards at http://darksky.org/) .

The City and Project proponent shall ensure use of LED lighting with a correlated color temperature of 3,000 Kelvins or less, proper disposal of hazardous waste, and recycling of lighting that contains toxic compounds with a qualified recycler. 5) Landscaping
❑ ❑❑❑ m ❑❑m❑ M ❑ D AI I LEE =ELU ❑ nod ❑❑d HiL ❑❑❑❑❑❑lid ❑ I D❑ d ❑ ME❑ ❑ ❑❑[d [EMI ELL❑ ❑a-❑ EDI= ❑ Did ❑❑Ud ❑u u ❑-❑ ❑-❑ ❑d ❑❑ Trail IEEE DIED F Hi❑ M❑D❑❑D❑❑ r❑ I ❑ ❑ ❑❑d❑ L❑❑=❑ M❑D [ID r ❑ r❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑d❑ ❑❑r❑❑D-d[LEI EMI DUE I❑D ❑ ❑ Hi DEM ❑❑m]❑ ❑ ❑M ❑ ❑ ❑ D rll l❑❑Hi ❑ rmm ❑❑I ❑I 0 I ❑ ❑I u I❑ ❑ ❑ m M MEM ❑❑_r_M❑Ful riluTur
❑❑❑❑
m ❑ FF LL rifin W❑mW-cal HE Err
7111117
m ❑❑m =ER LIE LmmW mmhut❑❑ ❑�❑a-❑❑❑
EA IMF MralIrOlIE [TIME
0° L❑❑❑EIrEEE ❑❑d ❑ER= a MLLE
❑❑ ❑❑❑M ❑❑❑❑M[r ❑❑❑❑ ❑rte❑ r
It❑❑L®
r❑❑d
r
❑ D- ❑❑❑l❑❑❑
❑❑ m❑ ❑ J❑ ❑ - - I rr❑❑❑n TmTE❑❑ ❑
❑❑❑Cll fTT- ® cal Emu Bufo americanus ICU rLLUHM WILL
❑f ThTTIT ❑R❑ ❑ [Er ❑ r lE i d E i�r❑❑❑ ❑�
A-10
A-11
925

D ❑
❑F .DER❑❑ ❑Mr=
❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑
❑ CEDE R ❑m❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑d ET L ❑❑d ELLIELEDLEDEDLEIDD ❑r❑❑❑❑❑ II I II fi 1 ❑a-❑LIEEl❑❑ ❑ ❑❑❑ ❑Er1 I =El U EEL
❑❑❑❑d❑ rF IEEL
❑❑❑❑d DET❑❑Dd 7-I❑ 1 ❑
❑Td r❑❑II
❑ Imo❑ I❑M❑
d ❑ ❑ ❑❑ I❑ D ❑E DUE r❑ DE ❑ ❑❑d ❑ E r❑ErD
❑r❑LI LIL❑d I ❑❑ d❑ IIE ❑E❑ ILE ❑Dr ❑]-❑❑D❑❑ r❑
❑❑ ❑ ❑ 1 r❑TD pE HE ❑IA LI FF _ II _ ❑ ❑ DDT
I❑ ❑ ❑❑dry ate❑ E I❑❑FI ❑EM
❑❑ ❑❑UIEIEL ❑ E 1 ❑❑ E ❑I ❑❑❑m❑ -11 ECM" ❑❑
MCrE Ems❑ ❑EM ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑=❑I ❑El C❑ ❑r❑E
❑7 E II _ IDEL ❑❑❑ ❑[Hfll Em I II TITD L ❑
❑ ❑ EIF D- D -DD L DD ❑❑ ❑❑EI LI D'❑
El
11 r
IM❑EI r❑ EMIT

DD D AIM LEI
❑ ❑EE F I II ❑❑IT EE ❑
❑❑❑ 1 ❑❑
I❑
r
FI
r
❑� ❑ WI❑❑❑
�WLLW❑ ❑❑d ❑❑D-❑❑ ❑Lr
DDT ❑EDEI E ❑❑d rE
d ❑ [ELITI❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑[E❑❑❑D'
❑ I❑❑d ❑ ❑ iThrTi miD d dr❑❑❑❑ FLI HUE❑T 117 1
❑ ❑D -d ❑❑mID]-❑ E I E ❑❑ dr❑❑❑❑F lErELIDEDd ❑ ID ❑❑d
❑ ❑ WI ❑ 1 II 1 ❑r❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑L❑r❑ElUI ❑ ❑m ❑D' E DIET
rUl❑
D-
rum

F J U D I
EEDEtD Ear
I I
❑El

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
❑ E ❑ ❑ r❑❑❑[❑❑ [EMETIC ❑ I ❑ d ❑ [MEd ❑❑ rF❑❑❑ ❑❑Ell I ❑❑ ErDDErte ❑❑d HUE❑❑❑❑❑ d ❑ 1 r❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ El r❑D-❑mod EWLI ❑ d ❑ IDE ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑md EI❑ ❑ E D❑❑D- F ❑❑ED ❑❑El I ❑ In ❑❑ ❑❑❑7Cd ❑W ❑ ❑] 11 I 1 11 1 1 ❑❑❑R❑ D" ❑ ❑ ❑d ❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑ Ed ❑ I I F CI LEI"d ELEELEIED I
I ❑ ❑ ❑❑1711❑d❑ED Fr dD-ru❑ ❑r❑U _
D❑LE❑❑ I _ ❑DD❑F F ❑❑❑ ❑❑❑D❑ Id
❑❑ E ❑EED❑ F II ❑ EE V Elm _ 1 IF Qd
1 1
I I F
r❑❑D-❑❑❑❑
r
r1
IE❑ ❑ ❑ rEC ❑ ❑ter❑ED I I r
❑ ❑IrD ❑ ®d ❑❑❑❑❑d 1
EMCEED ❑WD1❑DD=DE 11 ❑CD❑ MEE
❑❑ ❑❑ELD-❑ ❑I I ❑ r❑❑❑rEld LIE ❑ ❑ DD ❑ F ❑ ❑❑ ELLA LEED E ❑ L❑ I II
I II
❑ ❑ Qd 11 I IEL❑❑ID ❑Enro ❑ DD ❑ Cm im ❑d
❑L ❑

ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FILING FEES
❑❑❑ JIr❑❑1❑r❑❑❑ D-❑❑❑md ❑D ❑Lfd ❑❑m ❑❑ OM ❑❑ ❑❑
❑❑❑❑m❑❑❑ ❑❑EA ❑m❑ ❑❑❑ pill _ ❑ EI❑❑ El ❑❑ CIDE'
❑ DPI HUED ❑❑D'❑ ❑I ❑ ❑D IMP L ❑❑d ❑ ❑❑❑I ❑❑d
D❑ i r❑❑❑ ❑❑UID'❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ D ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑UI❑ ❑❑
r❑❑❑r d El Erd D- [Er MID ❑❑d ❑r ❑ ❑r❑UThThE D
❑I❑ E R❑❑ 111LIEDDD ❑❑❑I❑❑
❑❑❑❑❑=

CONCLUSION
❑ D ❑❑ ❑❑❑r❑ UI❑ = ❑❑❑Er= El
[d ❑❑ F ❑ ❑❑d ❑ 1 F E 1 ❑ ❑r❑lTTlmE ❑❑
= M ❑ D d ❑❑❑ D❑EDEd ❑D❑❑DUI [d ❑❑
❑ DIM ❑ I I WI ME❑ D -DI Lr
❑dd ❑❑ I ❑I ❑ ❑ ❑❑ r❑❑ ❑Ed ❑❑❑
r❑mIEd M❑D❑
❑❑❑r❑❑❑
II
r
I
❑❑d WI ❑ Qd =MEd
❑❑❑❑ D-❑ ❑❑ I ❑L ❑❑D❑
E ❑❑I d ❑T❑❑ E❑
❑❑❑ ❑❑El❑d ❑
❑❑ mD-❑
U
r
IIF
ED
❑ ❑❑=❑
m0❑
❑❑❑❑ ❑❑EUI
❑mrnTd ❑❑❑d MED
Cr EDDIE=
I❑❑❑❑❑❑❑EW❑M❑DUI❑
❑ElEl❑W LLLr❑ Er
❑r E [M❑M r❑❑ ❑r❑❑u❑❑❑
❑ D ❑❑ rE ❑ ❑ ❑❑d ❑ UI❑D-❑
❑❑d❑ Em ]
I I
�❑
❑D❑❑
II
❑1
r
r
Mid ❑❑ WI❑❑
METED I u
❑❑d
r❑❑❑dd❑d El❑
A-11
A-12
A-13
A-14
926

D L
❑I MR DE ❑Mtom
Lu ❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑
❑ D ❑❑ ❑D -m❑❑❑ r❑ =MLLE uir I ❑r _
r
=C❑❑ ED ❑mid ❑❑d ❑ ulrm Lu ❑❑
IDd H❑ ❑ mid ❑❑ d ©❑ r,
EDIDEITTITTITTMDEE10 ❑❑m ❑ Cid ❑ T❑�r❑ m❑
u1 EM r❑❑D-d urn ❑ICIEC7LEDID-❑ lEr ❑❑d
❑ ❑❑❑1❑❑❑ r❑❑D-d CITE C>fiEn CCTICUD- D- ❑]-mED
ml ❑ ❑❑❑r E ❑ rum ❑❑U ❑
ECM r❑
,—DocuSigned by:
iwt Fr ,t ibcY14.,
'-84F92FFEEFD24C8
KCm Dr❑❑❑D-❑
E ❑ r❑❑❑ DEED
CID
r❑D-❑❑ M ❑❑❑❑D -
Attachment 1: MMR❑ CID ❑D❑❑
❑m
❑ ❑❑WJD- ❑rumuD-m MUD- E ❑
❑ D ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑CED-CIDr❑ ❑D❑ ❑ C<d II I _ ❑
I _ Ir❑❑❑md M
❑ M ❑❑m-❑❑
r
❑❑❑ DEED
E❑
LEA -
❑❑CID- ❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑ II ❑❑ ❑❑f
❑ ❑ rum ❑❑u ❑I II ❑ I❑CID-❑
II
M D-❑ ❑ E01 ❑ ❑❑I 1 I❑❑ IEEE ❑Ed ❑ C[d
❑ D' ❑ D' LULL ❑❑ I ❑ I U muu
LD-❑❑DTP
ED -
rI
I LED
❑❑m❑ CID ❑❑
TILLED
EM
❑D -
II
C❑
r
I I
❑❑❑
❑❑d❑❑d
JP I❑❑
R❑❑❑❑❑❑ EOM
❑❑d❑�
❑❑❑ D'❑❑❑❑❑ CID I ❑❑
❑ I ❑❑❑EDUCE ❑❑d R❑
❑ ❑D-❑❑ ❑❑LIE LILLIE
Er
D -Cm❑❑❑❑
DD EMU D 771-EnDME
❑ ❑D- I CID❑❑
A -14
927

❑ M ©❑❑❑
ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP) Mitigation Measures
Timing and
Methods
Responsible
Parties
Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Nesting Birds
To the greatest extent feasible, the Project
will avoid construction activities during the
peak nesting season (February 1 through
September 15). Regardless of the time of
year, nesting bird surveys shall be
performed by a qualified avian biologist no
more than (3) days prior to vegetation
removal or ground -disturbing activities.

Preconstruction surveys shall focus on both
direct and indirect evidence of nesting,
including nest locations and nesting
behavior. The qualified avian biologist shall
make every effort to avoid potential nest
predation as a result of survey and
monitoring efforts. If active nests are found
during the preconstruction nesting bird
surveys, a qualified biologist shall establish
an appropriate nest buffer to be marked on
the ground. Nest buffers are species specific
and shall be at least 300 feet for passerines
and 500 feet for raptors. A smaller or larger
buffer may be determined by the qualified
biologist familiar with the nesting phenology
of the nesting species and based on nest
and buffer monitoring results. Construction
activities may not occur inside
the established buffers, which shall remain
on- site until a qualified biologist determines
the young have fledged or the nest is no
longer active. Active nests and adequacy of
the established buffer distance shall be
monitored daily by the qualified biologist
until the qualified biologist has determined
the young have fledged or the Project has
been completed. The qualified biologist shall
have the authority to stop work if nesting
pairs exhibit signs of disturbance.
928
Timing: ❑❑
❑a-❑[IE❑❑❑
d❑ EtEIT ❑EI
LIED I ❑
r❑❑ ❑ m
❑ EEEd ❑
d EITT❑E❑
Methods: ❑❑❑
MI ❑ I❑
M ❑❑EJE
Implementation❑
Eli ❑❑d ❑r❑L I
lirEEEEEEE
Monitoring and
Reporting❑❑lan

❑ M ©❑❑❑
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Burrowing Owl
Focused and Pre -Construction Surveys
Timing:

Focused
surveys: ❑r❑E
Implementation❑
❑ILI❑❑d ❑r❑�
p-❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
Suitable burrowing owl habitat has been
❑ iM❑❑ I I❑
confirmed on the site; therefore, focused
Monitoring and
r❑❑ ❑ Mr
burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted
Er=d❑
Reporting ,E ❑i
by a qualified biologist in accordance with
d=LIE L❑
the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl
❑I Pre -
Mitigation (2012 or most recent version)
construction
prior to vegetation removal or ground-
surveys: ❑❑
disturbing activities. If burrowing owls are
❑❑ ❑❑
detected during the focused surveys, the
d ❑-❑7-
qualified biologist and Project proponent
JIr❑❑❑❑r❑ ❑❑i!
shall begin coordination with CDFW and
r❑LJr❑d
USFWS immediately, and shall prepare a
❑ I I ❑ ❑❑d
Burrowing Owl Avoidance and Monitoring
❑ I I IEI ❑❑ ❑❑d-❑
Plan that shall be submitted to CDFW for
❑r❑i- Er mid
review and approval prior to commencing
dELET❑❑❑
Project activities. The Burrowing Owl Plan
❑❑d ❑❑❑❑ tea-❑
shall describe proposed avoidance and
❑ ❑❑❑ I
monitoring actions, including measures
I❑I ill] I ❑ ❑❑
necessary to avoid take of burrowing owl
❑ ErE ❑❑ ❑❑
individuals, nests, and eggs. The Burrowing
d❑I
Owl Plan shall include the number and
location of occupied burrow sites (occupied
Methods: E
site means at least one burrowing owl or its

MTEE I I
sign has been observed within the last three
years; may be indicated by owl sign
including feathers, pellets, prey remains,
eggshell fragments, or excrement at or near
a burrow entrance or perch site), acres of
burrowing owl habitat that will be impacted,
details of site monitoring, and details on
proposed buffers and other avoidance
measures. If impacts to occupied burrowing
owl habitat or burrow(s) or burrowing owl
individuals, nests, or eggs cannot be
avoided, appropriate CESA authorization
(i.e., Incidental Take Permit under Fish and
M❑❑ r❑
Game Code section 2081) should be
obtained from CDFW prior to
commencement of Project activities.

Preconstruction burrowing owl surveys
shall be conducted no less than 14 days
prior to the start of Project -related activities
and within 24 hours prior to ground ��r,

❑ M ©❑❑❑
disturbance, in accordance with the Staff
Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012 or
most recent version). Preconstruction
surveys should be repeated when there is a
pause in construction of more than 30 days.

Preconstruction surveys shall be performed
by a qualified biologist following the
recommendations and guidelines provided
in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl
Mitigation. If the preconstruction surveys
confirm occupied burrowing owl habitat,
Project activities shall be immediately
halted. The qualified biologist shall
coordinate with CDFW and prepare a
Burrowing Owl Avoidance and Monitoring
Plan that shall be submitted to CDFW and
USFWS for review and approval prior to
commencing Project activities.

Mitigation Measure BIO-[A]: Salvage of
Timing: ❑r❑r
Implementation El
Sand -Dependent Covered Species
MI =LE I ❑
❑ 011 ❑❑d ❑r❑EI
r❑❑ ❑ m
❑r❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑-❑❑❑d❑
Prior to vegetation removal or ground-
disturbing activities, the City will collaborate
d❑❑T❑❑
Monitoring and
with the Coachella Valley Conservation
Reporting❑❑11
❑ I I
Methods: ❑❑❑
Commission to plan and implement a
salvage of sand -dependent Covered Species
within the Project site.

M I❑ I I❑
M ❑❑m-❑
Mitigation Measure BIO-[B]: Artificial
Timing:

Implementation
Nighttime Lighting
❑d'❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑=I EDd ❑r❑�I
❑r❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
❑I r❑I I ❑
Throughout construction and the lifetime
❑❑d 0 ❑
operations of the Project, the City and
❑❑a"❑I ❑❑ ❑❑
Monitoring and
Project proponent shall eliminate all
nonessential lighting throughout the Project
area and avoid or limit the use of artificial
= ❑r❑L
Reporting❑❑I H
Methods: ❑❑❑
light at night during the hours of dawn and
M I ❑I I❑
dusk when many wildlife species are most
active. The City and Project proponent shall
ensure that all lighting for the Project is fully
shielded, cast downward and directed away
M❑❑m-❑
930

❑ M ©❑❑❑
from surrounding open -space and
agricultural areas, reduced in intensity to the
greatest extent possible, and does not result
in lighting trespass including glare into
surrounding areas or upward into the night
sky (see the International Dark -Sky
Association standards at
http://darksky.org/) . The City and Project
proponent shall ensure use of LED lighting
with a correlated color temperature of 3,000
Kelvins or less, proper disposal of
hazardous waste, and recycling of lighting
that contains toxic compounds with a
qualified recycler.
931

CITY OF RANC O MIRAGE
ATTACHMENT 5

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
69-825 Highway 111 • Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
[email protected] • (760) 328-2266

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION To: ® Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation
1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Riverside County Clerk
P.O. Box 751
Riverside, CA 92501
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code.

State Clearinghouse (SCH) Number: 2025051428
Project Title/Case No.: 9 -Lot Subdivision (Tentative Tract Map No. 38636) — Environmental Assessment Case No.

EA23-0003, Variance Case No. VAR24-0002, and Tentative Tract Map Case No. TTM23-0001 Project Applicant: Farhad Zomorodi
Project Location: 72094 Ginger Rogers Road (APN: 685-080-002) Project Description: The project proposes to subdivide 5.04 gross acres into nine (9) single-family residential lots with lots ranging in size from 16,122 sq. ft. to 16,841 sq. ft. A private street is proposed, in addition to two retention basins and perimeter landscaping within the project common areas. The project requests approval of a variance request to the Very Low Density Residential (R -L-2) minimum required lot size from 18,000 sq. ft. to 16,000 sq. ft. in order to be compatible with the established lot sizes of the immediate area. The project involves the demolition of an existing single- family residence built in 1958. No single-family residence architectural plans are proposed as part of this project.

This is to advise that the lead agency, City of Rancho Mirage, has approved the above described project on (date) and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project.

1. The project ❑ will ❑x will not have a significant effect on the environment.

2. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. ❑x A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.

3. Mitigation measures ❑x were ❑ were not made a condition of the approval of the project.

4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan ❑x was ❑ was not adopted for this project.

5. A Statement of Overriding Considerations ❑ was ❑x was not adopted for this project.

6. Findings ❑x were ❑ were not made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.

The City Council adopted the following Finding: The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This is to certify that the Mitigated Negative Declaration with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to the General Public at: City of Rancho Mirage, 69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270.

Mitigated Negative Declaration — Rancho Mirage City Council Date:

Joy Tsai, Senior Planner
I hereby certify that the City of Rancho Mirage has made the above findings of fact and that based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and hearing record the project will not have a significant effect on the environment.

Date:

Joy Tsai, Senior Planner
932

ATTACHMENT 6

CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE
Chair Chanter
Vice Chair Bryant
Commissioner Agostini
Commissioner Beale
Commissioner Grey

REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
Thursday, October 9, 2025, 2:00 PM

DRAFT MINUTES

1. GENERAL

1.A. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Chanter called the meeting to order at 2:00 P.M.

1.B. FLAG SALUTE
Commissioner Agostini led the flag salute.

1.C. ROLL CALL - Agostini, Beale, Grey, Bryant, Chanter

Present: Agostini, Beale, Bryant, Chanter.

Absent: Grey.

MOVED/SECONDED BY AGOSTINI/BEALE TO EXCUSE COMMISSIONER GREY'S ABSENCE. MOTION CARRIED 4/0.

2. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Commissioner Agostini thanked the City and staff for honoring G. Dana Hobart, former Rancho Mirage City Council Member, and highlighted his contributions to the City and community.

Vice Chair Bryant reflected on the passing of G. Dana Hobart, calling it a somber time for Rancho Mirage. He praised Mr. Hobart's intelligence, leadership, and integrity, recalling his own appointment to the Planning Commission by Mr.

Hobart in 2018 and the four guiding principles Mr. Hobart shared with him. Vice Chair Bryant highlighted Mr. Hobart's long tenure in public service and dedication to the City.

Chair Chanter agreed with Vice Chair Bryant's remarks, calling them fine words about a valuable man to the community.

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

3.A. September 25, 2025, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes —RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the September 25, 2025, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented.

The following individual provided public comments: Brad Anderson. 933

MOVED/SECONDED BY BEALE/AGOSTINI TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 25, 2025, REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED 4/0.

4. PUBLIC HEARINGS

4.A. Environmental Assessment Case No. EA23-0003, Variance Case No. VAR24-0002, and Tentative Tract Map Case No. TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) — Applicant: Farhad Zomorodi. Consideration of a 9 -Lot Residential Subdivision on 5.04 Gross Acres. The Project Requests Approval of a Variance to the Very Low Density Residential (R -L-2) Minimum Required Lot Size From 18,000 Sq. Ft. to 16,000 Sq. Ft. Located at 72094 Ginger Rogers Road (APN: 685-080-002)
Joy Tsai, Senior Planner, presented the staff report.

The following individual provided public comments: Brad Anderson.

A discussion ensued.

MOVED/SECONDED BY BEALE/AGOSTINI TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL TAKE THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS: 1) APPROVE THE FILING OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (SCH# 2025051428) BASED ON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CASE NO. EA23-0003; AND, 2) APPROVE VARIANCE CASE NO. VAR24-0002; AND, 3) APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636), SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, AND BASED ON THE CONTENT AND FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT. MOTION CARRIED 4/0.

4.B. Environmental Assessment Case No. EA24-0009, Minor Variance Case No. VAR24-0005, and Tentative Tract Map Case No. TTM24-0003 (TTM 38971) —Applicant: Phillip Fomotor. Consideration of a 16 -Lot Residential Subdivision on 19.81 Gross Acres. The Project Requests Approval of a Minor Variance to the Residential Estate (R -E) Minimum Required Lot Size of 1 Acre to .98 Acre for Two Lots. North of the Intersection of Mirage Cove Drive and Peterson Road (APN's: 689-090-003, 689-130-004, -005, -013, -014, -017, -018, & 689-140-022) Vice Chair Bryant recused himself, due to the proximity of his residence to the subject project.

The meeting was recessed at 2:24 P.M. and Vice Chair Bryant left the Council Chamber. The meeting was reconvened at 2:30 P.M., with CommissionerAgostini, Commissioner Beale, and Chair Chanter present.

Ben Torres, Planning Manager, presented the staff report. He recommended inclusion of the following three (3) additional conditions of approval:
• As determined to be feasible by the City Engineer curb and gutter shall be installed along the project frontage on Nielson Road and Peterson Road with the curb face at a width to be determined during plan check. • Existing tamarisk trees on the project site shall be removed within 6 months from a final determination on the proposed project by the City Council.
• The ultimate roadway width as determined by the City Engineer shall be installed by the applicant on Peterson Road fronting the following addresses: 38841, 38785, & 38775 Peterson Road.

The following individuals provided public testimony: Kay Williams, Toni Ringlein, Janeen Bahr, and Vicki Petersen.

Phillip Fomotor, applicant, spoke regarding the project and answered questions posed by the Planning Commission.

A discussion ensued.

Stephan Longoria, City Engineer, answered questions posed by the Planning Commission.

MOVED/SECONDED BY BEALE/AGOSTINI TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL TAKE THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS: 1) APPROVE THE FILING OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (SCH# 2025070800) BASED ON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CASE NO. EA24-0009; 2) APPROVE MINOR VARIANCE CASE NO. VAR24- 0005; 3) APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. TTM24-0003 (TTM 38971), SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WITH THE ADDED CONDITIONS, ANDDla ON THE CONTENT AND FINDINGS IN THE STAFF

REPORT; 4) DIRECT STAFF TO LOOK INTO EQUESTRIAN TRAIL INCLUSION; AND 5) ADD THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
• AS DETERMINED TO BE FEASIBLE BY THE CITY ENGINEER CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE INSTALLED

ALONG THE PROJECT FRONTAGE ON NIELSON ROAD AND PETERSON ROAD WITH THE CURB FACE AT A WIDTH TO BE DETERMINED DURING PLAN CHECK.
• EXISTING TAMARISK TREES ON THE PROJECT SITE SHALL BE REMOVED WITHIN 6 MONTHS FROM A FINAL DETERMINATION ON THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY THE CITY COUNCIL. • THE ULTIMATE ROADWAY WIDTH AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY ENGINEER SHALL BE INSTALLED BY THE APPLICANT ON PETERSON ROAD FRONTING THE FOLLOWING ADDRESSES: 38841, 38785, & 38775 PETERSON ROAD.

MOTION CARRIED 3/0 (VICE CHAIR BRYANT RECUSED).

The meeting was recessed at 3:01 P.M. and Vice Chair Bryant returned to the Council Chamber. The meeting was reconvened at 3:03 P.M. with all four Planning Commissioners present.

5. NON -AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENTS
The following individual provided non -agenda public comments: Vicki Petersen.

6. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Chanter adjourned the meeting at 3:04 P.M.

Date Approved by Planning Commission:
935

ATTACHMENT 7
3/20/2025 6:43:50 PM
s
N
CD
a3
U
H
X
w

IN THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38636
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 16 IN THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 6 EAST, S.B.M.

S.D. ENGINEERING AND ASSOCIATES
585-080- 02
(VACJ\NT LAND)
CO
N
H
CD
z
7F1::ms _
O

43.80'
z
cn Q
m
CC
zQ
O
z0_
wo
F-
w
CC

7.00'

50.00'
MI��-
1)
,/,
CO
z
U
z
LLl
Z
w
H
Cr
J
CD
m
~ z
CD = H
U
H Z
LO
LU
O
LU >
CD
CL
0_ CID
H-
UJ
I -I
X
Li
r
,.,
331.67 TVJ 131.91'
,/,

LANDSCAPING

PROPOSED
PROPOSED 6' HIGH MASONRY WALL
PE=325.5
9 16,786 S.F.

0.39 ACRES

0.50%

97.34'
25' BSL
PE=325.5
16,617 S.F.

0.38 ACRES
PROPOSED 6') HIGH

MASONRY LL
131.91'
EXIST. 6' HIGH MASONRY W
PE= (326.1.

4. ,/,
CD
r
,/,
,/,
126.50'
,/,
16,191 S.F.

0.37 ACRES
126.50'
W
N 0°11'34"E 509.23'

0.59 ACRE
126.50'
25' BSL
PE=326.0
2 16,191 S.F.

0.37 ACRES
126.50'
PE= (326.7)
J

NO PARKING ON RED CURB PAINTED
ALONG FRONTAGE OF LOTS 1-6.
665.13'
LOT D
h
N
N 0°11'00"E 665.311'
(S]iNGL r _ r\j\j
LANE
L._
--- LANDSCAPING
130.00'
PE=326.5
16,186 S .F .

0.37 ACRES

62.61'
25' 3SL
\r R r r
J r s_
J

38. PE=326.5
3 16,184 S .F .

0.37 ACRES
130.00'
442
J ri\]-r]_AL
PE= (327.4)
CD
O
MARCH, 2025
I I
N 0°11'34"E 1330.26'
dill MID ilMiNI III, MID Ill, till,
187.00'
PROPOSED 6' HIGH MASONRY WALL
PE=

PROPOSED WATERLINE

PROPOSED SEWER
,J
L
25�
0 6
16,122 S.F.

0.37 ACRES

58. 36,
co
(J.)
> /
SL
PE=327.0
16,299 S.F.

0.37 ACRES
189.89'
EXIST. 6' HIGH SONRY WALL
/�
PE= (328.0)
Fr- /
NOTE:

EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE ON LOT C TO BE DEMOLISHED.

I
oN
0 O
PE=328.0
m 16,541 S

0.39 ACRES
cu
110'
(334.67) TN
EIXIST .

PE= (328.7)
0 0
III
I,I
H
ND
EXIST.

III
N 89°41'27
(333.33) TN
6' HIGH MASON
I
�I
J
P (328.2)
l, 1
H
cr) CD
w it i
L-0
7 (_,) PE= (328.2)

VICTORY

SOUTH G WEST
R/W
RAMON
ROAD
wq
w
CC

DINAH SHORE
GINGER
w
0 GERALD FORD
30'
12'
CTORY
ROGERSRD.

VIA MARTA
DR.
z
w
w
0 DRIVE
CO
0 07

VICINITY MAP
C/L
/
18'
NTS

NORTH & EAST
R/W
30' / 7'
-LETTERED LOT
/ /
12'
/n
2%/1
19 2%
VARIES
ti
�P+
tii1

MEANDERING SIDEWALK PER
CITY STD. NO. 500

EXISTING PROPOSED

IMPROVEMENTS //IMPROVEMENTS/

TYPICAL SECTION

GINGER ROGERS ROAD

LANDY LANE
R/W
R/W
NOTE: BACK OF CURB = R/W
C/L

18.50 ' 18.50 '

WEDGE TYPE CURB PER
CITY STD. NO. 222

TYPICAL SECTION

LOT A (PRIVATE STREET)

OWNER/SUBDIVIDER
72094 GINGER ROGERS LLC
ATTN: MR. FARHAD ZOMORODI
9165 ALCOTT STREET #203
LOS ANGELES, CA 90035
PH: (310) 428-2875

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
- GOVERNMENT LOT 16 IN THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF
SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 6 EAST,
M.

ZONING
EXISTING AND PROPOSED:

VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R -L-2)
(SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)

ACREAGE
GROSS AREA = 5.04 ACRES
NET AREA = 4.37 ACRES
PROJECT DESC.

LETTERED LOTS : 5

O LOT A - PRIVATE STREET

O LOTS B, C - RETENTION BASIN

O LOTS D, E - LANDSCAPED PARKWAY
NUMBERED LOTS : 9

GRAPHIC SCALE
1"=30'
30 0
30 60
90 ENGINEER
S.D. ENGINEERING AND ASSOCIATES
242 E. AIRPORT DRIVE, STE. 212
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
ATTN: MR. SURESH DODDIAH
PH: (909) 215-3451
ASSESSORS PARCEL NO:
685-080-002

SCHOOL DISTRICT

PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

LETTER LOT AREAS
LOT A (PRIVATE STREET) = 25,866 S.F. (0.59 AC)
LOT B (RETENTION BASIN) = 5,683 S.F. (0.13 AC.)
LOT C (RETENTION BASIN) = 5,640 S.F. (0.13 AC.)
LOT D (LANDSCAPED AREA) = 5,133 S.F. (0.12 AC.)
LOT E (LANDSCAPED AREA) = 730 S.F. (0.02 AC.)

UTILITY PURVEYORS
ELECTRIC: IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT
GAS: THE GAS COMPANY/SEMPRA ENERGY CO.

TELEPHONE: FRONTIER
WATER: COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
CABLE: SPECTRUM
SEWER: COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
(760) 335-3640
(760) 327-3343
(760) 778-3601
(760) 398-2651
(866) 874-2389
(760) 398-2651
PLANNING CASE NO. EA23-0003, TTM23-0001, VAR 24-0002
S. D . ENGINEERING AND ASSOCIATES

LAND PLANNING AND CIVIL ENGINEERING
242 E. AIRPORT DRIVE, STE. 212 - SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408 PHONE (909) 215-3451 EMAIL: suresh©sdengineering.net
SURESH DODDIAH R.C.E. 36361 DATE
NO. 36361
EXP, 6-30-26
DIAL 1' ' TWO WORKING

BEFORE DAYS BEFORE

YOU DIG YOU DIG
TOLL FREE 1-800-227-2600

A PUBLIC SERVICE BY

UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
REV.

REVISION DESCRIPTION
DATE
ENGR. CITY
DATE

SHOULD CONSTRUCTION OF THE REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS NOT

COMMENCE WITHIN TWO YEARS OF THE DATE OF APPROVAL

SHOWN HEREON AND CARRIED FORTH IN A DILIGENT MANNER,

THE CITY ENGINEER MAY REQUIRE REVISIONS TO THE PLANS

TO BRING THEM INTO CONFORMANCE WITH CONDITIONS AND
STANDARDS IN EFFECT.
3E\CH
A ▪ K:

CITY BM #PD 18-5
BEING A 1-1/2" COPPERWELD IN ASPHALT, FLUSH, AT THE

CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF BOB HOPE DRIVE AND
DINAH SHORE DRIVE.

ELEV. = 347.672

CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA
DRAWN BY:

EB/RI
DESIGNED BY:

EB
CHECKED BY:

SD
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38636
72094 GINGER R0GERS ROAD
SCALD

AS SHOWN
DATE:
3/20/2025
DRAWING NO.
936

TRACT38636

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN
72094 Ginger Rogers Drive
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
APN: 685-080-002
Lot A Street
Lot B Area
Lot C Area
Lot D Area
Lot E Area
Offsite Area
Total Landscape Area:

MATCHLINE A -A SEE SHEET 2
me Nu
PROPOSED 6' HIGH MASONRY WALL

PLANTING AND WALL DESIGN ALONG LANDY LANE

TO MATCH ADJACENT TRACT
8 16,191 S.F.

0.37 ACRES
N89°48'26"W
128.00'
MEANDERING PATH 6 FT WIDE x 4 IN. THICK
FINISH: BRUSH COLOR: YOSEMITE BROWN OR
SIMILAR COLOR APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER.

PER PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DETAIL 500
& SECTION 30 DESIGN GUIDELINES
PE=325.5
9 16,786 S.F.

0.39 ACRES
PROPOSED 6` HIGH

BASIN SLOPES SHOWN FOR STEEL VIEW FENCING

ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES
SEE CIVIL PLANS.

PROPOSED 6' HIGH

MASONRY WALL
N89°43'18"E

RETENTION BASIN/

OPEN AREA
STEEL
Y GATE
(PRIVATE STREET)
TUBUL

DOUBLE ENT
\OO

GINGER ROGER
2 16,191 S.F.

0.37 ACRES
N89°48'26'W
128.01'
PE=325.5
1 16,617 S.F.

0.38 ACRES
PROPOSED 6' HIGH

STEEL VIEW FENCING

BASIN SLOPES SHOWN FOR

ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES
SEE CIVIL PLANS.
114.03'

RETENTION BASIN/

OPEN AREA
PROPOSED 6' HIGH

MASONRY WALL
MEANDERING PATH 6 FT WIDE X 4 IN THICK
FINISH: BRUSH COLOR: YOSEMITE BROWN OR
SIMILAR COLOR APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER.

PER PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DETAIL 500
& SECTION 30 DESIGN GUIDELINES
VJ/

I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY'S WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE

ORDINANCE AND SUBMIT A COMPLETE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE EXISTING 6' HIGH

MASONRY WALL

TO REMAIN

CONCEPTUAL PLAN
Scale: 1" =30'

EXISTING

CURB & GUTTER
69 13
41 131
21 79
31 40
49 21
4,329
Sq. Ft.
7,612
Sq. Ft.

Sq. Ft.

NORTH
90 120
Applicant:
72094 GINGER ROGERS LLC
P.C. BOX 10544
BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90213
Contact: MR. FARHAD ZOMORADI
Phone: (310) 428-2875
DATE 3/27/2025
Planting Legend
SYMBOL QTY.

DINAH SHORE

GINGER R

GERALD FORD

BOTANICAL NAME
15 10Ft.
t. Phoenix dactylifera
Brown Trunk
6 36" Box Acacia smallii
6 24" Box Olea europaea'Swan Hill'
15 24" Box Vitex agnus-eastus
Achillea millefolium'Paprika'
1 Gal.
5 Gal.
5Gal.
1 Gal.
5 Gal.
1 Gal.
5 Gal.
5 Gal.
1 Gal.
5 Gal.
36" o.c.

Agave americana
Agave desmettiana
Baileya multiradiata
Caesalpinia gilliesii
Chrysactinia mexicana
Hesperaloe parviflora
Leucophyllum frutescens 'Green Cloud'
Santolina chamaecyparissus'Nana'
Senna artesmisiodes

VIA JOSEFINA

VICINITY MAP
Scale: NTS

COMMON NAME
Date Palm
Sweet Acacia
Fruitless Olive
Chaste Tree
Paprika Common Yarrow
Century Plant
Dwarf Century Plant
Desert Marigold
Desert Bird of Paradise
Damianita Daisy
Red Yucca
Green Texas Ranger
Dwarf Lavender Cotton
Feathery Cassia
DRIVE
NORTH

WUCOLS VI
WATER
USAGE
Mod
Low
Low
Low
Low
V. LOW
Low

INTENDED MATURE SIZE
(HxW)
801H, 012'
201H,015'
20'H,018'
20'H, 015'
21H,03'
5'H, 0 5-7'
18" H, 0 18"
6'H,06'
2'H,02'
4'H, 0 4'
4"H,06'
1'H, 01'
5'H,05'
1-2 Granite Boulder - Boulders with in 3' of public curb shall be placed such that the height does not exceed 15".

Rosmarinus officinalis'Huntington Carpet' 18" oc.
3" Thick Layer of Decomposed Granite
3"Thick Layer of Gravel
Native Soil a Basin Bottoms
Decorative Pavers
JOB: 23-09 LKD CKE
April 7, 2023
Carpet Rosemary Low
Color: Desert Spice
Available from
Caldg.com
See Detail - Sheet 2

AND ASSOCIATES
Landscape Architecture
3687 Valencia Ave. SHEET 1 OF 2
San Bernardino, CA 92404
Office phone: (909) 888-5568
[email protected]
www.richardpopeandassociates.com
Richard Pope, Landscape Architect CA# 2664
2' H, 02'

F
W
z
J
LOT D
L
rr
m
N G°11'34"E
■
II
-#

I QM IN
..

PE=327.5
6 16,122 S.F.

0.37 ACRES
MEANDERING PATH 6 FT WIDE x 4 IN. THICK

BROOM FINISH
COLOR: YOSEMITE BROWN OR
SIMILAR COLOR APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER.

PER PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DETAIL 500
& SECTION 30 DESIGN GUIDELINES
N89°48'26"W
PROPOSED 6' HIGH MASONRY WALL

PLANTING AND WALL DESIGN

TO MATCH ADJACENT TRACT
PE=326.5
16,186 S.F.

0.37 ACRES
N89°48'26"W
128.00'
8 16,191 S.F.

0.37 ACRES
PE=326.0
Q
Ln
L
■ • - .. - .. .. . I.
■ .

EXISTING 6' HIGH MASONRY WALL

TO REMAIN
N 89°41'27"E 329.94"
232.94'
R ■
. U.

PE=328.0
5 16,841 S.F.

0.39 ACRES
no
5S 3

PROPOSED WATERLINE
I-
0 1

PROPOSED SEWER
■ . s . .

MATCHLINE A -A SEE SHEET 1
..
/co_
r
PE=327.0
4 16,299 S.F.

0.37 ACRES
"BOOM
Mrt9ZL8t°68N
PE=326.5
3 16,184 S.F.

6.37 ACRES
166'LZ I
M„9Zt8t7°68N
2 16,191 S.F.

0.37 ACRES
PE=326.0
..

CONCEPTUAL PLAN
C
..

CO
00 ..
fin
..

Scale: 1" =30'
0 15
30 NORTH
60 90 120
■
nn
Lri
LU
C)
C)
0 z
EXISTING 6' HIGH

MASONRY WALL

TO REMAIN
d0' LONG, 2' DEEP OFFSET
EVERY 6D WITH FINISH TO

MATCH ADJACENT TRACT
ALONG LANOY LANE.

NOT TO SCALE
1"6 1100K & EYE HING
2 PER GATE TYPICAL

CIRCLE NIT
;6 LAYING PATTERNS

HERRINGBONE
PATTERN 1
PATTERN 4
Check with your bazar Mora'' Represeelalira fax ;nodal arailabdity and colour option, COBBLE

PAVER & CIRCLE
NIL iJLAi T'i OF INLAVLL, rAVCR

PATTERNS INSPIRED BY OLD
EUROPEAN STR£ETSCAPES

FEATURES & BENEFITS
• Perfect for simple or intricate
circles and fan patterns
• Mix and match colours and sizes
• Pillow -top profile with gently
curved edges
• Available in circle kit package
• Manufactured to CSA A231.2
specification
• Concrete strength: 8000 PSI
155 MPAI
• Absorption: Shall not exceed 5%
& SNARES & SIZES
SQUARE I6Q MM
115 a 115 x 6ttmm
41/22 a 41 x2%
RECTANGLE I60MM
S
115x172x64rrrm
4' a 61x2%
CIRCLE KIT 160MM
•
1 - T Circle
2 - 5' Circles

IS BELGARD

COMMERCIAL
For more info, visit BetgardCommerciaLcom
Oldcaslle APG - Canada West
Eritish Colombia Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba
0 al
05 252a 0Lde5stle'AP0.. A CRH Cempany,All Rights Reserved.

REL26-200 Rev 1011 3e2073
2'xS'x16'

TAN CONCRETE

BLOCK CAP
'L2J 6' HIGH BLOCK WALL
�' WI 40' LONG,
2' DEEP OFFSET EVERY 60'.

SMOOTH FINISH, IN COLORS TO
MATCH THE ADJACENT TRACT.
1'X1" STRUCTURAL
STEEL TUBING @ 6' O.C.
} SO. STEEL TUBING
16'
1"X I` STRUCTURAL STEEL

TUBING TOP & BOTTOM RAIL
C) 6' HIGH TUBULAR STEEL GATE

WALL & FENCE LEGEND

FINISH GRADE

FINISH GRADE

CONCRETE

FOOTING
4' X1' STRUCTURAL

STEEL TUBING

X STRUCTURAL STEEL
TUBING 4. O.C. , STRUCTURAL
2"X2'
12° x 12" SQUARE SPLIT
'-' FACE CMU PILASTER
COLOR: TO MATCH

ARCHITECTURE
NOTE:
- ALL FABRICATION SHALL BE TUBULAR

SQUARE STEEL WELDED AT CONNECTIONS,
GRIND MD PRIME.
- POWDER COAT - BLACK

FINISH GRADE
6' HIGH TUBULAR STEEL
CMU PILASTER 12" SQUARE WITH

PRE -CAST CAP COLOR TO MATCH BLOCK
WALL COLOR.

TUBULAR
STEEL
FENCE
FINISH
GRADE
5 6' HIGH X 3' WIDE

TUBULAR STEEL GATE
® A
EXISTING 6' HIGH BLOCK WALL
PROPOSED 6' HIGH BLOCK WALL W/ 40' LONG, 2' DEEP OFFSET EVERY 60'.

SMOOTH FINISH, IN COLORS TO MATCH THE ADJACENT TRACT.

PROPOSED 6' HIGH TUBULAR STEEL FENCE W/ 12" X 12" PILASTERS QTY 2 PROPOSED 6' HIGH X 8' WIDE TUBULAR STEEL GATE
3' WIDE TUBULAR STEEL PEDESTRIAN GATE

R I C H A R D
POPt

AND ASSOCIATES
Landscape Architecture
3687 Valencia Ave.

San Bernardino, CA 92404
Office phone: (909) 888-5568
[email protected]
www.richardpopeandassociates.com
Richard Pope, Landscape Architect CA# 2664
SHEET 2 OF 2
0 ATTACHMENT 8
Public Comments Received
Tentative Tract Map No. 38636 — 9 -Lot Subdivision
Environmental Assessment Case No. EA23-0003,
Variance Case No. VAR24-0002, and Tentative Tract
Map Case No. TTM23-0001
939

From: Diane Currie
To: CityCkerk ranchomirageca.gov
Cc: Jov Tsai
Subject: 72094 Ginger Rogers Rd Environmental assessment EA23-0003 Date: Monday, October 6, 2025 9:59:35 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside The City of Rancho Mirage. DO NOT CLICK links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello
We live at 9 Siena Vista Ct in Rancho Mirage and will be severely impacted by these new houses being proposed. I have heard that the "standard" set back from property lines is 25 feet. As our house is only 15 feet from our property line that puts a house awfully close to us.

The best solution (for our privacy and perhaps saving some of our mountain views) would be to put the two retention basins on the other side of our fence at the back of the proposed 9 houses. Right now it's at the very front of the complex on Ginger Rogers. Do either of you know who we should discuss this issue with? Appreciate any feedback
Regards,
Diane Currie and Carol Snell
940

From: Diane Currie
To: Planning Division
Subject: Fwd: 72094 Ginger Rogers Rd Environmental assessment EA23-0003 Date: Monday, October 6, 2025 12:39:19 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside The City of Rancho Mirage. DO NOT CLICK (inks or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

We live at 9 Siena Vista Ct in Rancho Mirage and will be severely impacted by this new development being proposed. The current proposal as best we can discern is that the property line at the back of the development will be very close to our property line. We understand that the "standard" set back from property lines is 25 feet. Our house is only 15 feet from our property line therefore, that puts a proposed house awfully close to our property line.

We would like to request two items: that the original proposal of seven homes be considered, which could potentially not have a home so close our property line, as opposed to the nine currently being planned. Second, could the retention basins be at the back of the property instead of the front, providing a much needed buffer. The current proposal shows these basins at the very front of the complex on Ginger Rogers.

We respectfully appreciate serious consideration to these two proposals.

Diane Currie
510-908-45o
941

City Council Staff Report
Environmental Assessment Case No. EA24-0009, Minor Variance Case No. VAR24-0005, and Tentative Tract Map Case No. TTM24-0003 (TTM 38971) — Applicant: Phillip Fomotor. Consideration of a 16 -Lot Residential Subdivision on 19.81 Gross Acres. The Project Requests Approval of a Minor Variance to the Residential Estate (R -E) Minimum Required Lot Size of 1 Acre to .98 Acre for Two Lots. Located North of the Intersection of Mirage Cove Drive and Peterson Road (APN's: 689-090-003, 689-130-004, -005, -013, -014, -017, -018, & 689-140-022)
DATE
ITEM #
November 6, 2025
PUBLIC HEARINGS - 6B.

Presented To
Presented By
Mayor and City Council
Ben Torres, Planning Manager

RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Approve the filing of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH# 2025070800) based on Environmental Assessment Case No. EA24-0009;

2. Approve Minor Variance Case No. VAR24-0005; and

3. Approve Tentative Tract Map Case No. TTM24-0003 (TTM 38971), subject to the Conditions of Approval, and based on the content and Findings in the staff report.

DISCUSSION
Background and Request
The applicant, Phillip Fomotor, is requesting approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 38971 to create a sixteen -lot single-family residential subdivision. The subject property is zoned Residential Estate (R -E) and consists of a

19.81 -acre project site currently consisting of 8 lots located north of the intersection of Mirage Cove Drive and Peterson Road. The proposed project requests approval of a Minor Variance to the Residential Estate (R -E) minimum required lot size from 1 acre to .98 acre for two of the proposed lots (lots 8 & 9) in order to be compatible with the established lot sizes of the immediate area and due to existing site constraints.

Project Summary
The proposed project will subdivide eight existing parcels totaling 19.81 gross acres into sixteen single-family residential lots. The residential subdivision will not be gated, similar to other residential developments in the vicinity.

The project site has frontages along various public streets which include Mirage Cove Drive, Nielson Road, Peterson Road, and Kelley Lane (private street). The applicant has confirmed that access to the proposed parcels will be from Peterson Road. The subdivision of the project site will be proposed in two phases, Phase 1 includes the subdivision of three (3) southern parcels into eight (8) lots, identified as Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, and 16. Once Phase 1 is subdivided architectural plans will be proposed for development of these parcels. Phase 2 will happen at a future date which includes the subdivision of five (5) northern parcels into eight (8) lots, identified as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, and 12. Once phase 2 is subdivided architectural plans will also be proposed for these lots. 942

The project also proposes a Minor Variance to reduce (two percent reduction) the 1 -acre minimum lot size for two out of the sixteen proposed lots that have a size of .98 acres. All other lots will have sizes that range from 1 acre to

1.55 acres. The overall project density is .90 dwelling units per net acre, which complies with the maximum density of 1 dwelling unit per net acre under the R -E zoning district.

Detailed site planning, building footprints, floor plan, exterior design, landscaping, and grading will be submitted for review during the development review application process for the future development of the proposed parcels. The development of the proposed parcels will be subject to the development standards of the underlying zoning district in effect at the time of application submittal.

Planning Commission
On October 9, 2025, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed project. Staff presented the highlights of the proposed project, and four public comments were received during the public hearing. As summarized in the meeting minutes attached to this report, the Commissioners asked questions which the staff addressed. After due consideration of the staff report and public testimony, the Planning Commission made the following motion, which included additional conditions of approval as recommended by staff.

The Planning Commission also directed staff to review the inclusion of the equestrian trail. Staff reanalyzed the equestrian trail issue raised and based on our review of a Circulation Plan from 1981 (Resolution No. 81-60), equestrian trails were not planned for the area south of lot 7 implementation of the plan has been inconsistent along the designated portions. However, Condition of Approval No. 26 requires right of way dedication south of lot 7 at a width of 46' for future connectivity.

MOVED/SECONDED BY BEALE/AGOSTINI TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL TAKE THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS: 1) APPROVE THE FILING OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (SCH# 2025070800) BASED ON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CASE NO. EA24-0009; 2) APPROVE MINOR VARIANCE CASE NO. VAR24-0005; 3) APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. TTM24-0003 (TTM 38971), SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WITH THE ADDED CONDITIONS, AND BASED ON THE CONTENT AND FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT; 4) DIRECT STAFF TO LOOK INTO EQUESTRIAN TRAIL INCLUSION; AND 5) ADD THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
• AS DETERMINED TO BE FEASIBLE BY THE CITY ENGINEER CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE

INSTALLED ALONG THE PROJECT FRONTAGE ON NIELSON ROAD AND PETERSON ROAD WITH THE CURB FACE AT A WIDTH TO BE DETERMINED DURING PLAN CHECK. • EXISTING TAMARISK TREES ON THE PROJECT SITE SHALL BE REMOVED WITHIN 6 MONTHS FROM A FINAL DETERMINATION ON THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY THE CITY COUNCIL. • THE ULTIMATE ROADWAY WIDTH AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY ENGINEER SHALL BE INSTALLED BY THE APPLICANT ON PETERSON ROAD FRONTING THE FOLLOWING ADDRESSES: 38841, 38785, & 38775 PETERSON ROAD.

MOTION CARRIED 3/0 (VICE CHAIR BRYANT RECUSED).

Environmental Determination
An Environmental Assessment form was submitted for the 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) in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15070. Mitigation measures were recommended for Biological Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was published in The Desert Sun newspaper on July 20, 2025, and distributed to interested parties. The thirty -day public review period for the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration commenced on July 21, 2025, and ended on August 19, 2025. During the review period, the City received one formal letter from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) commenting on the Draft IS/MND requesting additional mitigation measures to be incorporated. While the City is not required to respond to comments on an IS/MND, 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 prior to project approval a Lead Agency must consider all comments received before making a final determination on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Responses to comments received were prepared and have been incorporated into the draft revised IS/MND and included as Attachment 4. Those who provided comments were individually notified with the public hearing notice on September 24, 2025.

Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) Tribal Consultation
943

State law requires public agencies in California to formally consult with Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with a project's geographic area, during the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process. Eleven potentially interested tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) were contacted pursuant to AB 52 for information regarding their knowledge of cultural resources that were within or near the project area. Tribes had thirty days from the date of receipt of the notice to request consultation. Four tribes (Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, Pechanga Band of Indians, and Quechan Tribe of the For Yuma) provided a response to the AB 52 Consultation Request Letter sent by the City of Rancho Mirage by certified mail on February 11, 2025. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and the Pechanga Band of Indians were the only tribe to request a formal consultation in their letters dated March 7, 2025 and March 25, 2025. Consultation was concluded with all participating tribes on May 14, 2025. No additional requests for formal consultation were received, and the AB 52 noticing period was concluded.

Noticing Requirement
RMMC 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 requiring a public hearing. If the number of property owners to whom the notice would be mailed is less than 25, then the mailing radius is required to be increased to 1,000 feet as measured from the exterior boundaries of the subject parcel.

On October 22, 2025, 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 RMMC Chapter 17.74. Notification of the public hearing was published in The Desert Sun newspaper on October 26, 2025.

All written public comments related to the City Council's review of the proposed project received prior to the publication of this agenda packet, including any comments received for consideration of the Planning Commission, have been attached as Attachment 8; any oral testimony or comments made, including those by Developer, it's representatives, or public, if any, can be found on the video recording of the meeting on the city's website and were reviewed by the City Council prior to City Council's consideration of the item. All items were made publicly available at the same time as they were made available to a majority of the council in accordance with the Brown Act.

Attachments
Attachment 1 -
Attachment 2 -
Attachment 3 -
Attachment 4 -
Attachment 5 -
Attachment 6 -
Attachment 7 -
Attachment 8 -
10/09/2025 PC Staff Report & Conditions of Approval
Aerial Photo
Public Hearing Notice
Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
Draft Notice of Determination
10/09/2025 Draft PC Minutes
Exhibits
Public Comments
944

ATTACHMENT 1
Planning Commission Staff Report
Environmental Assessment Case No. EA24-0009, Minor Variance Case No. VAR24-0005, and Tentative Tract Map Case No. TTM24-0003 (TTM 38971) — Applicant: Phillip Fomotor. Consideration of a 16 -Lot Residential Subdivision on 19.81 Gross Acres. The Project Requests Approval of a Minor Variance to the Residential Estate (R -E) Minimum Required Lot Size of 1 Acre to .98 Acre for Two Lots. North of the Intersection of Mirage Cove Drive and Peterson Road (APN's: 689-090-003, 689-130-004, -005, -013, -014, -017, -018, & 689- 140-022)
DATE
ITEM #
October 9, 2025
PUBLIC HEARINGS - 4B.

Presented To
Presented By
Planning Commission
Ben Torres, Planning Manager

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Recommend to the City Council:

1. Approval of the filing of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH# 2025070800) based on Environmental Assessment Case No. EA24-0009; and,

2. Approval of Minor Variance Case No. VAR24-0005; and,

3. Approval of Tentative Tract Map Case No. TTM24-0003 (TTM 38971), subject to the Conditions of Approval, and based on the content and Findings in the staff report.

DISCUSSION
Facts

1. Applicant: Phillip Fomotor

2. Request:

Consideration to subdivide eight (8) parcels totaling 19.81 acres into sixteen (16) residential lots. Phase 1 includes the subdivision of three (3) southern parcels into eight (8) lots, identified as Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, and 16. Phase 2 includes the subdivision of five (5) northern parcels into eight (8) lots, identified as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, and

12. The project site is currently vacant and has a zoning designation of Residential Estate (R -E). A Minor Variance is proposed to consider a .98 -acre size for two parcels; all other parcels will range in size from 1 acre to 1.55 acres. No single-family residence architectural plans are proposed as part of this project.
945

3. Location:

North of the intersection of Mirage Cove Drive and Peterson Road.

Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 689-090-003, 689-130-004, -005, -013, -014, -017, -018, & 689-140-022

4. Project Size: 19.81 gross acres

5. Existing Land Use and General
Vacant land; Residential Estate (R -E)
Plan/Zoning:

6. Date Application Deemed Complete: September 24, 2025 Background and Request
The applicant, Phillip Fomotor, is requesting approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 38971 to create a sixteen -lot single-family residential subdivision. The subject property is zoned Residential Estate (R -E) and consists of a

19.81 -acre project site currently consisting of 8 lots located north of the intersection of Mirage Cove Drive and Peterson Road. The proposed project requests approval of a Minor Variance to the Residential Estate (R -E) minimum required lot size from 1 acre to .98 acre for two of the proposed lots (lots 8 & 9) in order to be compatible with the established lot sizes of the immediate area and due to existing site constraints. The site constraints include having three street frontages for these two proposed lots with right-of-way dedications on each frontage and being surrounded on all sides with roads or property not part of the project site. No single-family residence architectural plans or landscaping plans are proposed as part of this project. Per Condition of Approval No. 2 development of the property shall require the appropriate entitlement process as determined by the Planning Division at which time architectural plans and landscaping plans for the individual lots will be reviewed.

The following entitlements are requested: Environmental Assessment (EA24-0009), Minor Variance (VAR24-0005), and a Tentative Tract Map (TTM24-0003).

Site and Surrounding General Plan, Zoning and Land Uses The 19.81 -acre project site contains scattered vegetation and is currently vacant. Due to the configuration of the proposed subdivision it has frontages along various streets which include Nielson Road, Peterson Road, Mirage Cove Drive, and Kelley Lane. Part of the project site also borders the Whitewater Storm Channel. The site also shows signs of past disturbance.

The General Plan and zoning of the project site is R -E (Residential Estate with a maximum of one dwelling unit per net acre). The following table describes the surrounding land uses located adjacent to the subject property:

General Plan and Zoning Designation
Land Use
Project Site
Residential Estate (R -E)
Vacant land
North
Residential Estate (R -E), Mobile Home Park (MHP),
Floodways and Drainage Channels (OS -W)
Single-family residences, Mobile
Home Park, Whitewater Storm
Channel
East
Residential Estate (R -E) & Floodways and Drainage
Channels (OS -W)
Single-family residences &
Whitewater Storm Channel
South
Residential Estate (R -E) & Medium Density
Residential (R -M)
Single-family residences & Vacant
Land
West
Residential Estate (R -E) & Mobile Home Park (MHP),
Single-family residences & Mobile
Home Park
Project Description
946

The proposed project will subdivide eight existing parcels totaling 19.81 gross acres into sixteen single-family residential lots. The residential subdivision will not be gated, similar to other residential developments in the vicinity.

Access to the proposed parcels will be provided by various public streets which include Mirage Cove Drive, Nielson Road, and Peterson Road. One private street, Kelley Lane will also provide access. The subdivision of the project site will be proposed in two phases, Phase 1 includes the subdivision of three (3) southern parcels into eight (8) lots, identified as Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, and 16. Once Phase 1 is subdivided architectural plans will be proposed for development of these parcels. Phase 2 will happen at a future date which includes the subdivision of five (5) northern parcels into eight (8) lots, identified as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, and 12. Once phase 2 is subdivided architectural plans will also be proposed for these lots. No single family home architectural plans are part of this current request.

The project also proposes a Minor Variance to reduce (two percent reduction) the 1 -acre minimum lot size for two out of the sixteen proposed lots that have a size of .98 acres. All other lots will have sizes that range from 1 acre to

1.55 acres. The overall project density is .90 dwelling units per net acre, which complies with the maximum density of 1 dwelling unit per net acre under the R -E zoning district.

The proposed land use and gross lot size of each parcel is provided in the table below:

Lot Size
Land Use
Overall Project Site
862,924 sq. ft. (19.81 ac)
16 lot subdivision
Proposed Lot 1
43,763 sq. ft. (1.00 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 2
46,675 sq. ft. (1.07 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 3
43,705 sq. ft. (1.00 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 4
43,701 sq. ft. (1.00 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 5
55,148 sq. ft. (1.26 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 6
43,631 sq. ft. (1.00 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 7
43,623 sq. ft. (1.00 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 8
42,480 sq. ft. (0.98 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 9
42,476 sq. ft. (0.98 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 10
49,644 sq. ft. (1.14 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 11
59,377 sq. ft. (1.36 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 12
67,608 sq. ft. (1.55 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 13
48,336 sq. ft. (1.11 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 14
48,325 sq. ft. (1.11 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 15
48,310 sq. ft. (1.11 ac)
Single-family residence
Proposed Lot 16
47,755 sq. ft. (1.10 ac)
Single-family residence
Detailed site planning, building footprints, floor plan, exterior design, landscaping, and grading will be submitted for review during the development review application process for the future development of the proposed parcels. The development of the proposed parcels will be subject to the development standards of the underlying zoning district in effect at the time of application submittal.

Analysis
Review Authority
The proposed project requires separate, but interrelated approvals: a Minor Variance to the Residential (R -E) minimum required lot size from 1 acre square feet to .98 acres for only two out of the sixteen proposed lots in order to be compatible with the established lot sizes of the immediate area; and a Tentative Tract Map to allow a sixteen - lot single-family residential subdivision with lots ranging in size from .98 acres square feet to 1.55 acres. The analysis that follows provides the basis for staff's recommendation to approve the Minor Variance and Tentative Tract Map applications.

Minor Variances allow for adjustments to the City's development standards for a particular property due to special circumstances. The Tentative Tract Map application is reviewed for the location, design, configuration, and potential impacts of the proposed use. Therefore, the findings to approve a Minor Variance to allow the reduction of the minimum lot size requirement from 1 acre to .98 acres would be made prior to consideration of the proposed residential subdivision.

The following analysis provides the foundation for the findings in the staff report. Together, the analysis and findings support staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the project and all its components, subject to the Conditions of Approval ingtt �f nt 2.

Minor Variances (Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Chapter 17.50) Minor Variances are exemptions which can grant up to ten (10) percent of the standard being modified for development standards like minimum parcel size and provide relief from the City's development standards triggered by unusual or special circumstances on the property such as location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other condition where the application of the City's development standards denies property owners privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zoning districts or creates an unnecessary, non -self-created hardship or unreasonable regulation which makes it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards.

Minor Variances may be granted when the strict application of the City's development standards denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zoning districts or creates an unnecessary and non -self-created hardship or unreasonable regulation which makes it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards.

In compliance with State law, specific "findings" must be made before a decision -making body may approve a Minor Variance. After evaluating the information submitted by the applicant and analyzing relevant facts, staff concludes that approval of the Minor Variance is appropriate based on the following findings:

1. Special Circumstances: The two lots out of sixteen that propose .98 -acre lot sizes are subject to additional right-of-way dedications and parkway requirements along Mirage Cove Drive, Nielson Road, and Peterson Road. These constraints reduce the buildable area of the project site and limit the applicant's ability to design a subdivision that complies with the current minimum lot size standard. The reduced lot sizes are compatible with adjacent residential development, which has similar site conditions. In addition, due to the subdivisions scattered parcel location the location of lots 8 & 9 is surrounded by existing streets or existing development on all sides so the lot sizes cannot be readjusted to meet the 1 acre minimum. As such, a Minor Variance is necessary to account for these site constraints and to allow for a compatible subdivision design.

2. Preservation of Property Rights: Granting the Minor Variance allows the property to be developed similarly to other nearby properties given the constraints on the two subject lots (8 & 9) with three public streets surrounding these lots in addition to property not part of the project site to the north. Many neighboring lots are smaller than the current 1 -acre minimum lot size. The Minor Variance would ensure that the property owner can subdivide the property with similar lot sizes to what is already existing in the neighbored due to the constraints on this portion of the project site.

3. No Detrimental Effects: The Minor Variance will not harm public health, safety, or welfare. The subdivision has been designed to comply with applicable safety standards, including emergency access, fire protection, and drainage. The project does not increase density beyond what is permitted, nor does it introduce any use or physical condition that would negatively affect adjacent properties.

4. Consistency with Surrounding Properties: The variance does not grant a special privilege. The proposed lot sizes align with the established neighborhood pattern, which includes lots of varying sizes due to the earlier subdivision of properties. The Minor Variance maintains compatibility with surrounding homes and does not introduce any uses outside of those permitted in the R -E zoning district.

5. General Plan and Neighborhood Compatibility: The proposed subdivision aligns with the City's General Plan, supporting low -density large lot residential uses in the area.

While the proposed lot sizes range from approximately .98 acre to 1.55 acres, only two lots are .98 acres in size slightly below the 1 acre minimum due to right of way dedications and are .02 acre smaller than what is typically required in the R -E district. The reduction is minimal and does not result in a development intensity that exceeds what is envisioned in the General Plan. The request for a Minor Variance is reasonable given the project's conformance with density standards and the overall compatibility of the subdivision design with the surrounding built environment.

As designed and conditioned, the proposed project preserves the intent of low -density development, enhances the existing neighborhood fabric, and contributes to the City's goals for quality residential growth.

Tentative Map (Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Section 16.12.065) A tentative map is a map approving the division of land for the purpose of sale, lease, or financing, and is governed by the Subdivision Map Act. A tentative map prescribes how the land is to be subdivided. The City's Subdivision Ordinance (Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Title 16 Subdivisions) establishes the minimum standards for the design of the lots, and the public improvemen9, iaQserve them.

Once a tentative map is approved, the refined final map is approved by the City Council if deemed by the City Engineer to be in substantial conformance with the tentative map. The final map is then recorded with the Riverside County Recorder's Office, after which the newly created parcels may be individually sold and developed pursuant to the underlying General Plan and zoning regulations.

Subdivision Design
The proposed subdivision complies with the City's Development Code standards, except for the minimum lot size standard for the Residential Estate (R -E) zoning district, for which the applicant is requesting a Variance.

Residential lot sizes range from .98 acres to 1.55 acres, resulting in an overall project density of .90 dwelling units per net acre. The following table compares the proposed subdivision with the City's Development Code standards for the R -E zoning district:

Development
Feature
Development Standards
Proposed
Meets Requirements
Parcel Width
Minimum 100 ft.

Parcel widths range from 109.5
ft. to 179.23 ft.

Yes
Parcel Depth
Minimum 100 ft.

Parcel depths range from
284.06 ft. to 671.57 ft.

Yes
Lot Size
Minimum 1 acre
.98 acres to 1.55 acres
Yes, with approval of
Minor Variance
Maximum Density
1 dwelling units per net
acre maximum
.g0 units per acre
Yes
As set forth in the above analysis, and with Minor Variance approval, the subdivision is in conformance with the Rancho Mirage General Plan, Rancho Mirage Municipal Code, and all applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.

Access and Circulation
The proposed subdivision will not be gated. Access to the proposed parcels will be provided by various public streets which include Mirage Cove Drive, Nielson Road, and Peterson Road. One private street, Kelley Lane will also provide access. The proposed public and private roadway dimensions meet both City and Fire Department standards, as conditioned. Overall, the subdivision's design complies with the surrounding neighborhood Grading and Drainage
The entirety of the project area has been disturbed in the past and currently remains vacant with scattered vegetation. The 19.81 -acre project site is relatively flat with pad elevations ranging from 258.5 feet to 262.7 feet above sea level. These elevations were determined based on the site's topography and have been reviewed by the City Engineer. The existing terrain drains from the south, and the overall drainage pattern will generally remain consistent post -development, flowing from north to south.

To manage stormwater on -site, retention basins are proposed at the southern end of each parcel: The project's grading and drainage design ensures that all stormwater and nuisance water will be contained on -site. The basins will be sized to accommodate runoff from a worst -case 100 -year storm event affecting the project's half -street frontage.

The Preliminary Hydrology Study for the proposed subdivision is on file with the Planning Division. As conditioned, the applicant is responsible for submitting the final hydrology report and grading plans to the Engineering Division for review and approval.

Additional Correspondence
As part of the subdivision review, staff sent notices to the Public Works Department, Riverside County Fire Marshal's Office, and all public utility companies and service agencies regarding the proposed subdivision. All utility providers, including gas, water, sewer, and cable/telecommunication services, are expected to serve the proposed parcels. Any comments received have been incorporated into this report and the Conditions of Approval. 949

Environmental Determination
An Environmental Assessment form was submitted for the 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) in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15070. Mitigation measures were recommended for Biological Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was published in The Desert Sun newspaper on July 20, 2025, and distributed to interested parties. The thirty -day public review period for the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration commenced on July 21, 2025, and ended on August 19, 2025. During the review period, the City received one formal letter from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) commenting on the Draft IS/MND requesting additional mitigation measures to be incorporated. While the City is not required to respond to comments on an IS/MND, 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 prior to project approval a Lead Agency must consider all comments received before making a final determination on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Responses to comments received were prepared and have been incorporated into the draft revised IS/MND and included as Attachment 4. Those who provided comments were individually notified with the public hearing notice on September 24, 2025.

Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) Tribal Consultation
State law requires public agencies in California to formally consult with Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with a project's geographic area, during the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process. Eleven potentially interested tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) were contacted pursuant to AB 52 for information regarding their knowledge of cultural resources that were within or near the project area. Tribes had thirty days from the date of receipt of the notice to request consultation. Four tribes (Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, Pechanga Band of Indians, and Quechan Tribe of the For Yuma) provided a response to the AB 52 Consultation Request Letter sent by the City of Rancho Mirage by certified mail on February 11, 2025. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and the Pechanga Band of Indians were the only tribe to request a formal consultation in their letters dated March 7, 2025 and March 25, 2025. Consultation was concluded with all participating tribes on May 14, 2025. No additional requests for formal consultation were received, and the AB 52 noticing period was concluded.

Noticing Requirement
RMMC 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 requiring a public hearing. If the number of property owners to whom the notice would be mailed is less than 25, then the mailing radius is required to be increased to 1,000 feet as measured from the exterior boundaries of the subject parcel.

On September 24, 2025, 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 RMMC Chapter 17.74. Notification of the public hearing was published in The Desert Sun newspaper on September 28, 2025. Any information addressed to the Planning Commission, but received after completion of this final report, will be distributed at the public hearing. No comments have been received as of the publication date of this report.

FINDINGS
Pursuant to RMMC Section 17.50.060 Findings and decision, the review authority may approve a Minor Variance in whole or in part, with conditions, only if all of the following findings are made:

1. There are special circumstances applicable to the property, including location, shape, size, surroundings, or topography so that the strict application of this title denies the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning district classification. Special circumstances apply to the subject property due to its scattered parcel location with parcels fronting various public and private streets and the fact that this subdivision is only considered continuous since property lines meet at the center of existing streets. The Minor Variance is only proposed for lots 8 & 9 which are surrounded by three public streets and property that is not part of the project site, which results in constraints given that lot sizes cannot be readjusted to meet the 1 acre minimum and that right-of-way dedications are required for all three streets further reducing the lot sizes. Both lots 8 & 9 propose lot sizes of .98 acres, which is a small deviation from the 1 -acre minimum lot size required in the R -E zone. In addition, many residential lots in the vicinity,ji5t t sizes that are less than 1 acre. Without a Minor

Variance, strict application of the current minimum lot size standard would prevent the property from being subdivided for the two subject lots in a manner that is consistent with the established neighborhood pattern and typical lot sizes. Therefore, the Minor Variance is warranted to account for these site constraints and to allow a compatible subdivision design in accordance with General Plan Program LU 3.1B.

2. Granting the minor variance:

A. Is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zoning district and unavailable to the property for which the minor variance is sought. The proposed Minor Variance is necessary to preserve and enjoy a substantial property right that is already possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zoning district but is unavailable to the subject property for the proposed lots 8 & 9 under current development standards due to right-of-way dedications on three street frontages.

Without this Minor Variance, the subject property would be unable to develop two lots that are consistent with the established neighborhood pattern, limiting the property owner's ability to use their property comparably to others nearby. The Minor Variance ensures equitable treatment by allowing development compatible with surrounding properties and existing neighborhood character in accordance with General Plan Program LU 3.1B.

B Would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located. The proposed Minor Variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements. The subdivision has been designed and conditioned to comply with applicable safety standards, including emergency access, fire protection, and drainage. The project does not increase density beyond what is permitted, nor does it introduce any use or physical condition that would negatively affect adjacent properties. In addition, the project will be subject to review and approval by the Building and Safety Division, Engineering Division, and Riverside County Fire Department to ensure compliance with all health and safety codes.

These safeguards, combined with the project's compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood, ensure that the Minor Variance will not result in adverse impacts on the community.

C. Does not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other property in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located. The proposed Minor Variance to reduce by two percent the minimum lot size from 1 acre to .98 acres for two (2) out of the sixteen (16) proposed lots does not constitute a special privilege, as it aligns with the existing development pattern in the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed subdivision includes lots ranging in size from .98 acres to 1.55 acres. The proposed lot sizes are consistent with the established lot sizes in the area and do not grant any advantage beyond what has historically been permitted for similarly situated properties. The Variance serves to maintain neighborhood compatibility, rather than granting a special privilege.

D Does not allow a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject parcel. The proposed Minor Variance does not authorize any use or activity that is not otherwise permitted by the zoning regulations for the project site. The current General Plan and zoning designation for the project site is Residential Estate (R -E), which allows for large lot single-family residential uses. The proposed project involves the subdivision of land for single-family homes at a density of .90 dwelling units per net acre, which is within the allowable density of 1 unit per net acre under both the General Plan and zoning designations.

E. Would not be inconsistent with the general plan. The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan in that the current General Plan and zoning designation for the project site allows for the subdivision of property. The current General Plan and zoning designation for the project site is Residential Estate (R -E). The R -E zoning district identifies appropriate areas for large lot single-family uses. The General Plan density limit allows up to one dwelling unit per net acre, and the proposed project density is .90 dwelling units per net acre. The project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation in terms of land use, and the design and appearance of the project is compatible with the surrounding community as follows:
o Land Use and Neighborhood Compatibility: The subdivision will create sixteen single-family residential lots, contributing to the City's housing stock. The proposed lot sizes remaineeous and consistent with the scale of neighboring

developments. The layout mirrors adjacent large residential lots. While the proposed subdivision utilizes a slightly reduced lot size minimum for two of the lots, it retains appropriate setbacks and open space, minimizes grading impacts, and preserves natural drainage patterns. The proposed design aligns with the established development pattern, supporting neighborhood continuity and cohesion in accordance with General Plan Program LU 3.1 B.

While the proposed lot sizes range from approximately .98 acres to 1.55 acres, slightly below the 1 acre minimum required in the R -E zoning district, the reduction for two of the .98 acre lots is minimal (two percent reduction) and does not result in a development intensity that exceeds what is envisioned in the General Plan. The request for a Minor Variance is reasonable given the project's conformance with density standards and the overall compatibility of the subdivision design with the surrounding built environment.

As designed and conditioned, the proposed project preserves the intent of low -density development, enhances the existing neighborhood fabric, and contributes to the City's goals for quality residential growth.

3. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Environmental Assessment form was submitted for the project, and the determination was made that the project required an initial study. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH Number 2025070800) was prepared based on Environmental Case No. EA24-0009 and pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. The document contains mitigation measures pertaining to Biological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Environmental impacts will be less than significant with implementation of the project's mitigation measures.

Pursuant to RMMC Section 16.12.065 Action on tentative tract maps, the review authority may approve a tentative tract map may be approved only if the following findings are made:

1. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the City's General Plan as specified in Section 65451 of the California Government Subdivision Map Act. The current General Plan and zoning designation for the project site is Residential Estate (R -E). The R -E zoning district identifies areas appropriate for large lot single-family uses. The allowable maximum density is one dwelling unit per net acre. The overall project density is .90 dwelling units per net acre, which complies with the maximum density under the R -E zoning district. As conditioned, the proposed tentative map is consistent with the City's General Plan and Subdivision Map Act.

2. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance requirements, as conditioned. As set forth in the above analysis, the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the City's General Plan, zoning, and all applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, as conditioned. The development of the proposed parcels will be subject to the development standards of the underlying zoning district in effect at the time of application submittal.

3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development, as conditioned. The proposed parcels comply with the majority of the City's Development Code standards for the underlying zoning designation, Residential Estate (R -E). The project site is physically suitable for the type of low -density residential development with proposed lots that are primarily 1 acre minimum in size with the exception of two out of the sixteen lots that have lot sizes of .98 acres. The overall project density is .90 dwelling units per net acre, which complies with the maximum density under the R -E zoning district.

4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development, as conditioned. The proposed subdivision has an overall density of .90 dwelling units per net acre, which does not exceed the maximum permitted density of one dwelling unit per net acre under the R -E zoning district. In addition, the applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.

No residential development is being proposed in conjunction with the proposed subdivision.

Detailed site planning, building footprints, floor plan, exterior design, landscaping, and grading will be submitted for review during the development review application process for the future development of the proposed parcels. The development of the proposed parcels will be subject to the development standards of the underlying zoning district in effect at the time of application submittal.

5. The design of the subdivision and proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fi 6 dlife or their habitat. The project has been reviewed

for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on the implementation of the project's Biological Resource Mitigation Measures, there would be no potential significant negative impacts upon environmental quality and natural resources. The project site is surrounded by existing developments to the in all directions. The project site has been partially disturbed in the past, and any site development will have to comply with the mitigation measures and requirements of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The proposed project has less than a significant impact with the incorporation of mitigation measures provided in the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration.

6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems, as conditioned. As part of the subdivision review, staff sent notices to the Public Works Department, Riverside County Fire Marshal's Office, and all public utility companies and service agencies regarding the proposed subdivision. As conditioned, agencies are expected to provide service to the proposed parcels, including providers of electricity, gas, water, sewer, and cable telecommunication services. Noise and fugitive dust associated with grading and construction of this project shall be mitigated through compliance with the proposed project's Mitigated Negative Declaration and the City's Municipal Code provisions regarding dust control and construction hours.

Lastly, permits are required to be obtained to construct the new site improvements. No public health impacts are expected, as conditioned.

7. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision, as conditioned. As part of the subdivision review, staff sent notices to the Public Works Department, Riverside County Fire Marshal's Office, and all public utility companies and service agencies regarding the proposed subdivision. Any comments received have been incorporated into the staff report and the Conditions of Approval. The Tentative Map has been conditioned to record any necessary easements and abandon existing easements that are deemed unnecessary by the City Engineer. The incremental impact of the project on service system capacities is mitigated by the dedications and public improvements required within the Conditions of Approval requiring all necessary dedications and public improvements to be in accordance with the City's adopted General Plan.

8. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Environmental Assessment form was submitted for the project, and the determination was made that the project required an initial study. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH Number 2025070800) was prepared based on Environmental Case No. EA23-0003 and pursuant to the and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070. The document contains mitigation measures pertaining to Biological Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources. Environmental impacts will be less than significant with implementation of the project's mitigation measures.

Attachments
Attachment 1 - Aerial Photo.pdf
Attachment 2 - Conditions of Approval.pdf
Attachment 3 - Public Hearing Notice.pdf
Attachment 4 - Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration.pdf Attachment 5 - Draft Notice of Determination.pdf
Attachment 6 - Exhibits.pdf
953

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Environmental Assessment Case No. EA24-0009, Minor Variance Case No. VAR24-0005, and Tentative Tract Map Case No. TTM24-0003 (Tentative Tract Map No. 38971) ("Project") Special conditions (or portions thereof) are designated in bold.

I. GENERAL

1. All improvements shall conform to the provisions of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code (RMMC), Title 16, (Subdivisions), unless specifically modified by any of the following conditions.

2. Development of the Subject Property shall require the appropriate entitlement process as determined by the Planning Division.

3. The Project approval shall be effective for two (2) years from the date of City Council approval. A Final Map must be approved by the City within this specified time period, or the Project approval shall become null and void unless the expiration date for the tentative map is extended as provided by RMMC Section 16.12.090.

4. The applicant shall execute a written acknowledgment to the Planning Division stating acceptance of and compliance with all of the Conditions of Approval for this Tentative Tract Map and all associated cases, and that the plans submitted are in compliance with the Conditions of Approval. No modifications shall be made to said plans without written approval from the appropriate decision -making body.

5. The Conditions of Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90 -day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun.

6. The development of the subject property shall conform substantially with the approved exhibits contained in Case Nos. EA24-0009, VAR24-0005, and TTM24-0003 and all associated cases on file in the Planning Division. This includes all dimensional and size specifications, landscaping, hardscape, design treatments (including color and materials), and the locations of perimeter walls and plant materials as shown in the landscape exhibits.

7. Prior to issuance of any permits, the applicant shall acknowledge that the approved project and any or all proposed modifications to the approved project shall be completed in accordance with applicable City Ordinances, Guidelines, and other requirements in effect at the time of building permit issuance.

8. All green waste shall be disposed of at a permitted composting facility. The applicant shall undertake or cause to be undertaken such action or actions as are necessary to permit and/or otherwise accommodate the implementation of recycling services. Such action or actions may include, but are not limited to: designating and providing adequate area at Pge1of,12

EA23-0003, VAR24-0002, & TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) - Conditions of Approval convenient locations with appropriate access for the placement of dumpsters and/or bin sets; constructing permanent enclosures that meet all requirements of the Code of the City of Rancho Mirage and each dumpster and/or bin set; providing for the security of each dumpster to discourage scavenging, and; providing adequate indoor area at convenient locations for the collection and short-term storage of recyclables. The applicant shall submit a "Recycling Program" that has been reviewed by an agent of the City, which, at a minimum, explains, states or otherwise defines: (1) recyclables generated by type; (2) estimate by pounds for each recyclable generated; (3) number of dumpsters and/or plastic bin sets (one set equals three "baskets") needed to accommodate estimated recyclables; (4) location of each dumpster (may be identified on a map attached as an exhibit); (5) method of collection such as curbside at each residential unit or at rear of property by dumpster, etc.; and (6) pick-up schedule for recyclables. The applicant shall provide other such information as may be necessitated by the development proposal.

9. The applicant shall comply with RMMC Chapter 9.60 which requires disclosure in the sale of residential property. The purpose of this chapter is to protect purchasers of new homes or lots for custom homes against unacceptable development on adjacent property by requiring the sellers of such homes and lots to disclose land use regulations applicable to contiguous properties and to disclose the nature of any development project approvals for such property that may exist.

10. Grading permits shall not be issued prior to vertical development entitlements unless approved by the Public Works or Development Services Directors.

11.The location of this project is considered an "infill site" with very close proximity to existing residences. Should the City receive complaints about construction noise from residents in close proximity to the project, the City may limit construction activities to the hours between 7am and 5pm.

12. The mitigation measures contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (State Clearinghouse Number 2025070800) based on Environmental Case No. EA24-0009 are hereby incorporated as Conditions of Approval. The property owner shall be responsible for implementing the mitigation measures contained within the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration, as necessary.

13. Within 5 days of project approval the applicant shall submit to the City of Rancho Mirage a check in the total amount of $3,018.75 made payable to the City of Rancho Mirage for the CEQA filing fees for the IS/MND (State Clearinghouse Number 2025070800).

14. If any portion of the subdivision is proposed to be converted into a gated community in the future Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&RS) shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. In addition, any future gate plans if proposed shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division.

15. As determined to be feasible by the City Engineer curb and gutter shall be installed along the project frontage on Nielson Road and Peterson Road with the curb face at a width to be determined during plan check.

Pge2o 2

EA23-0003, VAR24-0002, & TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) - Conditions of Approval

16. Existing tamarisk trees on the project site shall be removed within 6 months from a final determination on the proposed project by the City Council.

17. The ultimate roadway width as determined by the City Engineer shall be installed by the applicant on Peterson Road fronting the following addresses: 38841, 38785, & 38775 Peterson Road.

II. PLANNING
Prior to City Council approval of the Final Map, the following Conditions shall be satisfied:

18. Landscape Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Division for each of the lots when architectural plans are proposed. The Planning Division reserves the right to request additional landscaping upon final inspection of each lot created by this subdivision if it is determined that areas are devoid of plant or ground cover material.

A. The approved landscape plan may be modified only with City approval in a manner pursuant to Section 17.42.120 (Modification of a Development Plan Permit). Minor modifications to the approved plan may be considered by the Development Services Director.

B. The project shall be completed in accordance with the Ordinances, requirements, guidelines, and other criteria in effect at the time of construction.

C. Landscaping, Wall, and Grading Plans shall demonstrate that all electrical transformers, utility pads, cable TV and phone boxes, and similar utility fixtures will be screened, pursuant to RMMC Chapter 17.20 and/or installed underground if required.

D. Landscaping. The plans shall be submitted as a Landscape Documentation Package in accordance with Ordinance No. 990, and as amended by Ordinance 1101. Such Plan(s) shall be consistent with the Preliminary Landscape Plan, and the applicant shall provide evidence that the landscape plan has been reviewed and approved by the Riverside County Office of the Agricultural Commissioner and the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) prior to requesting a final inspection.

The final landscaping and irrigation plans shall incorporate the use of Evapotranspiration (ET) irrigation "smart" controllers which shall include automatic water scheduling, rain, and temperature sensors. Prior to a final inspection, the landscape contractor shall verify in writing with Planning staff that controllers have been installed, are correctly programmed, and operate with these features. More information on smart controllers can be found at www.irrigation.com . The project landscape architect shall submit written verification that the landscaping and irrigation has been installed in accordance with the approved plans. i. Vegetation with spikes that may be harmful to pedestrians shall be a minimum of three (3) feet away from walkways.

Pgeo6 2

EA23-0003, VAR24-0002, & TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) - Conditions of Approval E. Walls. Where perimeter walls are shown on the development plan they shall be designed with aesthetic relief and be of high -quality architectural design to complement adjacent developments. In accordance with the Community Design Elements, the landscaped parkway and perimeter wall along all property lines shall be aesthetically enriched and subject to approval of Planning staff, with architectural review as deemed necessary. All top of wall elevations and adjacent finish grade elevations for the project perimeter and entry walls shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division and City Engineer. The applicant shall contact the adjacent property owners if grading outside the subdivision boundaries is required for construction of the perimeter walls. This shall be accomplished prior to issuance of any permit.

19. Future neighborhood signage shall be subject to approval and issuance of a separate sign permit or sign program.

III. PUBLIC WORKS
Prior to City Council Approval of the Final Map, the following Conditions shall be satisfied:

20. FORMATION AND/OR ANNEXATION TO CFD
Pursuant to Ordinance No. 485 the applicant shall provide evidence that formation of, or annexation to a Communities Facilities District (CFD) No. 1 — Police and Fire services — to pay the City annually for public service costs associated with this project has been initiated. This requires the submittal of an application fee, the preparation of a boundary map, and 6-8 weeks' processing time. The applicant is advised to begin the application process as soon as possible, because the CFD annexation must occur prior to issuance of Grading Permits, or prior to Final Map approval if there is one.

21. STUDIES AND CALCULATIONS REQUIRED
The applicant shall submit a soils report, geological and hydrology studies, and hydraulic calculations, as required by the City Engineer, prior to approval of the Grading Plan.

22. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN
The applicant shall be required to submit a grading and drainage plan prepared by a licensed civil engineer to the City Engineer for plan check and approval. The grading and drainage plan shall be consistent with any and all conditions of approval associated with any applicable subdivision map and any Development Permit entitlements issued for the subject project by the City or any other responsible public agency. The grading and drainage plan shall conform to all city policies, standards, and regulations applicable to the project. In addition, if the project involves grading and drainage issues related to Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) facilities, written evidence of the District's approval shall be included with the submittal required by the City of Rancho Mirage.

23. STORMWATER RETENTION
The grading of the project shall be designed such that all storm water to the level of a 100 year frequency storm; worst case of the 1, 3, 6, or 24 hour duration, shall be retained on site, including the street frontage area. Or per Municipal Code Section 15.64.140.B, if

EA23-0003, VAR24-0002, & TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) - Conditions of Approval the project is less than 1 acre or if it is south of the Whitewater Flood Channel, the grading of the project may be designed for the drainage to be conveyed to an "acceptable disposal site as determined by the City Engineer". Since this project is south of the Whitewater Channel, it could qualify for the drainage to an "acceptable disposal site", which could be the existing storm drain box culvert per AD 77-02 if it can be shown that it can take the additional stormwater flows. It would also need to be shown that water could be safely conveyed to this box culvert. The proposed retention basins on the individual lots, all approximately 1 acre or larger, is acceptable also. Surface streets are not considered "an acceptable disposal site" for common "nuisance water" from sprinklers and cleaning. Therefore, at a minimum, all projects shall make provisions to absorb such "nuisance water" to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A Hydrology/Hydraulic Report, in accordance with the Riverside County Hydrology Manual, shall be submitted from a Registered Civil Engineer, showing how this stormwater is handled.

24. WQMP
Whether they are in areas that must retain 100% stormwater or not, all discretionary projects that meet any of the following criteria must submit "Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plans (WQMP)" in accordance with Appendix H of the Whitewater River Region Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) (available at:
htt3://content.rcflood.org/NPDES/WhitewaterWS.asDx)
A.) "single family hillside residences that create 10,000 square feet or more of impervious area where natural slope is 25% or greater;
B.) single-family hillside residences that create 10,000 square feet of impervious area where the natural slope is 10% or greater where erosive soil conditions are known; C.) Commercial and industrial developments of 100,000 square foot or more; D.) Automotive repair shops [includes Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes 5013, 7532, 7333,7534, 7537, 7538, and 7539];
E.) Retail gasoline outlets disturbing greater than 5,000 square feet; F.) Restaurants disturbing greater than 5,000 square feet; G.) Home subdivisions with 10 or more housing units;
H.) Parking lots of 5,000 square feet or more or with 25 or more parking spaces and potentially exposed to Urban Runoff; or
I.) Discharge into the MS4 (aka Municipal Storm Drain System) and disturb an area of one acre or more, or disturb less than one acre, but are part of a larger common plan of development or sale (referred to as Other Development Projects).

If any of the above criteria exist, or at the discretion of the City, a Final WQMP shall be required prior to permit issuance, with Recording of a Covenant, or other approved mechanism, establishing the WQMP as a Public Record that shall apply upon occupancy, and continuing forward, to all future operators/residents of the project. Any approved design modifications that take place during construction shall be documented and incorporated into the Recorded WQMP Covenant prior to occupancy.

Per category G above, this project will need to do a Final WQMP.

Pge�og2

EA23-0003, VAR24-0002, & TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) - Conditions of Approval

25. STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS If public infrastructure is to be included in this project, the applicant shall execute and submit the City of Rancho Mirage's Standard Agreement for Construction of Public Improvements for review and approval by the City Engineer and City Attorney.

26. STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Street improvements shall be required as specified below. Paved access in accordance with the City Master Plan of Streets and City Standards shall be provided to the subdivision. Plans for the construction of the required street improvements shall be designed by a California Registered Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to Final Map approval. All street construction shall be in conformance with these plans and the City's General Plan and Standard Details. Plans shall be approved prior to or concurrent with Final Development Plan approval and construction shall occur prior to occupancy. The developer shall furnish proof that any Sewer and Water Improvement Plans have been reviewed and approved by CVWD. The developer shall furnish proof that the Fire Marshal has approved the Water Plans and Street layout for the project.

A.) Public Streets - Nielson Road and Peterson Road
i. Right-of-way along Nielson Road and Peterson Road at a width of 23 feet from centerline shall be dedicated to the City of Rancho Mirage. Right-of-way south of Lot 7 shall be dedicated to the City of Rancho Mirage with a width of 46'. ii. Asphalt paving shall be installed along the project per City Standards. iii.Until such time as an alternative public storm drain system or street surface drainage system can be completed, this project must accept the responsibility for absorbing the water from the 100 year storm street drainage along the project frontage and the tributary area upstream.
iv. Landscape and irrigation plans for all public street parkways and median islands shall conform to City standards and be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Division. Boulders shall not exceed 15" in height within 3 feet of a public street curb. Canopy trees shall be placed a minimum of 10 feet from public street curb and a minimum of 5 feet from sidewalks. Palm trees shall be placed a minimum of 5 feet from public street curb or sidewalk with a minimum trunk height of 10 feet. Right of way lines shall be shown on the final landscape plan.

Public Streets - Mirage Cove Drive
v. Right-of-way along Mirage Cove Drive at a width of 30 feet from centerline shall be dedicated to the City of Rancho Mirage.
vi. Curb and Gutter shall be installed along the project frontage with the curb face at a width to be determined by the City Engineer. Asphalt paving shall be installed along the project per City Standards.

Pgefiob 12

EA23-0003, VAR24-0002, & TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) - Conditions of Approval vii. Until such time as an alternative public storm drain system or street surface drainage system can be completed, this project must accept the responsibility for absorbing the water from the 100 year storm street drainage along the project frontage and the tributary area upstream.
viii. Landscape and irrigation plans for all public street parkways and median islands shall conform to City standards and be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Division. Boulders shall not exceed 15" in height within 3 feet of a public street curb. Canopy trees shall be placed a minimum of 10 feet from public street curb and a minimum of 5 feet from sidewalks. Palm trees shall be placed a minimum of 5 feet from public street curb or sidewalk with a minimum trunk height of 10 feet. Right of way lines shall be shown on the final landscape plan.

B.) Private Streets Kelley Lane
i. Private street paving shall consist of a minimum of 3" A.C. paving over 4" of compacted Class II aggregate base material. On private streets, decorative concrete or other surfacing materials shall be reviewed by Public Works for conformance to Public Works standards.
ii. On private streets, non-standard curb and gutter may be acceptable if the City's standard drainage criteria is satisfied, and the specific non-standard curb and gutter is approved by the Department of Public Works. To be consistent with Kelley Lane to the south of Mirage Cove there is no curb and gutter required, in lieu of drainage in a swale located 3 feet from the edge of the paving. iii. The private street design and construction shall be completed in accordance with the City of Rancho Mirage standards and codes unless superseded by more stringent requirements from the State or Federal ADA guidelines. Such design shall include demonstration of adequate fire and delivery truck turning movements.
iv. In accordance with Municipal Code 17.26.070(d), all required off-street parking areas shall be designed so that surface water shall not drain over any sidewalks or adjoining parcels.
v. Private streets within the project shall be constructed with a minimum two-way travel way of 28 feet. An additional 23 feet of dedication as a private street shall be done along Kelley Lane to augment the existing easements along the east side of Kelley Lane. The additional paving should be built to match what is existing along Kelley Lane in that area already, expanding the width to 28 feet as needed. A "hammerhead" type of Fire Department turnaround area shall be provided on the north end of Kelley Lane, which may overlap a private driveway. As a private street, a gate can be added if the existing residents on Kelley Lane agree to it. The design should be reviewed for approval by the Planning and Engineering Departments. Any median islands PgeZof 12

EA23-0003, VAR24-0002, & TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) - Conditions of Approval shall have a minimum of 24 feet clearance on either side of them. Private street paving shall consist of a minimum of 3" A.C. paving over 4" of compacted Class II aggregate base material.

27. DEDICATION OF PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS
A ten (10) foot public utility easement adjacent to the curb and gutter and edge of pavement shall be provided by the property owner for all public and private streets, and for public streets where the public right-of-way is less than the required 10 feet. All necessary utilities: sewer, water, electric, phone, fiber optic communications, natural gas, and television cable shall be provided to the lots and along the property frontage, unless otherwise approved.

28. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES REQUIRED
All existing or proposed Southern California Edison, General Telephone, CATV, or other overhead service facilities, shall be installed underground in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.16 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code. The underground installation of all existing or proposed overhead distribution utility lines shall be completed and/or appropriate guarantee arrangements shall be entered into for any structure constructed pursuant to this approval as required by the City Engineer. Such guarantee arrangement shall be approved by the City administrative staff and the City Attorney and shall include the posting of improvement security adequate to secure the periphery of the subject property; and as identified above and as required in Section 12.16 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code.

29. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM
A sanitary sewer system shall be required and shall be installed in accordance with the provisions established and set forth by the regulations of the Coachella Valley Water District, the Riverside County Department of Public Health, and/or the regional Water Quality Control Board. All necessary easements shall be provided.

30. DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM
A domestic water system shall be required and shall be installed in accordance with the provisions established and set forth by the regulations of the Coachella Valley Water District, the Riverside County Department of Public Health, and/or the regional Water Quality Control Board. All necessary easements shall be provided.

31. LOCAL AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (LAQMP;
The applicant shall prepare a Local Air Quality Management Plan (LAQMP) pursuant to Ordinance No. 855, Municipal Code Chapter 7.01. Said LAQMP shall detail the project's potential impact upon the air quality of the area and any necessary mitigation measures and shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of the Grading Permit. For ease of preparing a LAQMP, the applicant may contact the Public Works Department regarding use of the LAQMP worksheet. Projects over 10 acres shall also submit the 8.5"x11" format Dust Control Plan required by the South Coast Air Quality Management District for review by the City. At the time of payment of the permit fees the developer shall submit a "dust control deposit" to be determined from the acreage and the current fee schedule.

Pge6of,12

EA23-0003, VAR24-0002, & TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) - Conditions of Approval

32. SWPPP/NOI
Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the Property Owner shall submit the completed NOI (Notice Of Intent) form and site plan with the appropriate fee, to the State Water Quality Control Board for the General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit. The WDID number issued shall be placed on the cover sheet of the Grading Plans as Proof of Submittal. The SWPPP promised by the NOI is required to be kept on the project site and may be requested for viewing by City or Water Quality Control Board personnel.

33. CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
The construction of all required public and private improvements, including but not limited to landscaping, sewer, water, curb and gutters, paving, drainage facilities, and other required improvements shall be completed prior to occupancy of any structure and/or the subdivider shall enter into an agreement, acceptable to the City, ensuring the construction of such improvements within eighteen (18) months of City Council approval of the Final Map.

34. WRITTEN VERIFICATION
Prior to release of bonds or financial guarantees, the applicant or his successor shall provide written verification that the improvements have been installed in accordance with the approved plans.

35. AS -BUILT PLANS
A complete set of "As -Built" Grading, Sewer, Water, Landscaping, Street, Storm Drain, and all other required improvement plans shall be submitted by the engineer of record for review and approval, prior to any occupancy or release of Subdivision Bonds.

36. SUBDIVISION MAP
A subdivision map shall be processed and recorded prior to any release of permits.

37. SECURITY
In accordance with the request of the Rancho Mirage Police Chief, the site shall be fenced and gated for security purposes. Screening material shall be placed on the fence to help block blowsand and to block views through the fence. If necessary, the applicant shall provide a state licensed private security officer during the time construction workers are not onsite.

38. PAD CERTIFICATION
Prior to release of Building Permits, a Pad Certification submitted from a Licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer, attesting to the elevation matching the rough grade pad elevation shall be submitted to validate the rough grading completion. 39 COMPACTION REPORT
Prior to the release of Building Permits, the lot(s) for the building(s) shall have a compaction report submitted by a Geotechnical Engineer attesting to the buildable pad being compacted at least 90% of maximum relative density. If any over -excavation, or slopes steeper than 2:1, are needed for the building pad, a Geotechnical Engineer shall submit a document attesting to the acceptability of this non-standard earthwork in accordance with the recommendations of the preliminary soil report.

Pge6o2 2

EA23-0003, VAR24-0002, & TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) - Conditions of Approval

40. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT REAPPORTIONMENT
If the property to be subdivided is located within the boundaries of an Assessment District, assessments shall be reapportioned over the property to account for the newly created lots.

41. PARK FEES
Applicant shall pay all applicable parkland fees for the acquisition and/or development of community parks and recreational facilities in those amounts in effect at the time the grading permit is issued.

42. IMPROVEMENTS COMPLETED PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY
Prior to occupancy, the construction of all required public improvements, including but not limited to sewer, water, curb and gutters, paving to join, stormwater drainage facilities, and other required utility improvements shall be completed.

43. CVWD LETTER
Prior to occupancy, if applicable, a letter from Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) shall be submitted stating that all the district fees have been paid and all requirements have been met for development.

IV. CITY ATTORNEY
Prior to City Council approval of the Final Map, the following Conditions shall be satisfied:

44. INDEMNITY AGREEMENT
The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul this permit approval. The City shall notify the permittee of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City shall cooperate in the defense. If the City fails to notify the permittee of any claim, action or proceeding of which the City has written notice, the permittee shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City.

45. REIMBURSEMENTS
The permittee shall reimburse the City for any court and attorney's fees which the City may be required to pay as a result of any claim or action brought against the City because of this grant. Although the permittee is the real party in interest in an action, the City may, at its sole discretion, participate in the defense of the action, but such participation shall not relieve the permittee of any obligation under this Condition.

46. IMPROVEMENT SURETY
Pursuant to Chapter 15.64.280 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code, all public improvements proposed with the Development Plan submittal, or required by the adopted approval Conditions, shall be guaranteed by cash bonds, letters of credit, or other legal instruments acceptable to the City Attorney and City Council.

47. RELEASE OF PLANS
Written authorization must be obtained from any certified, licensed, or registered P 1.Qq,#,12

EA23-0003, VAR24-0002, & TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) - Conditions of Approval professional who signed the original building plans authorizing the plans to be made available by the City to all subsequent owners upon request (if on file with the City at the time of the request) for use by any subsequent owners solely for the construction, maintenance, operation, and use of the subject building(s) at the Project Site. 48 NOTICE TO CITY UPON DEFAULT, FORECLOSURE OR BANKRUPTCY In the event that the applicant receives a notice of default from any lender in connection with funds loaned to the applicant for the proposed development, or that any security instrument given by the applicant to any lender is foreclosed upon whether through a trustee's sale or otherwise, or that the applicant files a petition for bankruptcy, the applicant shall immediately notify the City of such notice of default, foreclosure sale, and/or filing of the bankruptcy petition, as the case may be. 49 MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS
The current and future property owner(s) shall be responsible for maintaining in compliance with all City standards for the same, the on -site and off -site landscaping and integrated architectural features required by this entitlement; all perimeter landscaping shall be maintained in a first-class condition. Landscape maintenance shall consist of regular watering mowing, pruning, fertilizing, clearing of debris and weeds, and the removal and replacement of irrigation systems, in compliance with all relevant and applicable provisions of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code. Integrated architectural features must be kept in a manner which maintains the desirability of the immediate area and neighboring areas and respects the harmonious relationship with existing and adjoining developments. Due regard for preservation of each feature and its intended irrigation with surrounding landscaping, buildings, structures, screening, and signs is required. All features must be maintained in a manner commonly accepted by professionals who are experts in the care and preservation of each particular type of feature. A covenant to assure continued maintenance of on -site and off -site required landscaping and integrated architectural features by the current and future property owners or other liable entity, consistent with the terms and provisions of this condition of approval, shall be prepared in a format approved by the City Attorney and recorded in the Office of the Riverside County Recorder against all parcels created with this subdivision and any subsequent amendments thereto.

V. FIRE MARSHAL

50. The proposed project may have a cumulative adverse impact on the Fire Department's ability to provide an acceptable level of service. These impacts include an increased number of emergency and public service calls due to the increased presence of structures, traffic, and population. The project proponents/developers will be expected to provide for a proportional mitigation to these impacts via capital improvements and/or impact fees.
51 Fire Department emergency vehicle apparatus access road locations and design shall be in accordance with the California Fire Code, City of Rancho Mirage Municipal Code, and Riverside County Fire Department Standards. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. 156412

EA23-0003, VAR24-0002, & TTM23-0001 (TTM 38636) - Conditions of Approval

52. Fire Department water system(s) for fire protection shall be in accordance with the California Fire Code, City of Rancho Mirage Municipal and Riverside County Fire Department Standards. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to building permit issuance.

53. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the required water system, including all fire hydrant(s), shall be installed, and accepted by the appropriate water agency and the County Fire Department prior to any combustible building material placed on an individual lot. Contact the Fire Department to inspect the required fire flow, street signs, all weather surfaces, and all access and/or secondary access. Approved water plans must be at the job site.

P156 12

ATTACHMENT 2
Tentative Tract Map No. 38971 -16 Lot Subdivision
966

ATTACHMENT 3
CITY Or RANCHO MIPPGE
Planning Division
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
Planning©RanchoMirageCA.gov
(760) 328-2266

PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Thursday, November 6, 2025 - 1:00 p.m.

Environmental Assessment Case No. EA24-0009, Minor Variance Case No.

VAR24-0005, and Tentative Tract Map Case No. TTM24-0003 (TTM 38971) ("Project")
Applicant: Phillip Fomotor
Request: Consideration to subdivide eight (8) parcels totaling 19.81 acres into sixteen (16) residential lots. Phase 1 includes the subdivision of three (3) southern parcels into eight (8) lots, identified as Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, and 16.

Phase 2 includes the subdivision of five (5) northern parcels into eight (8) lots, identified as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, and 12. The project site is currently vacant and has a zoning designation of Residential Estate (R -E).

A Minor Variance is proposed to consider a .98 -acre size for two parcels; all other parcels will range in size from 1 acre to 1.55 acres. No single-family residence architectural plans are proposed as part of this project. The Planning Commission recommended approval on October 9, 2025.

Location: North of the intersection of Mirage Cove Drive and Peterson Road.

Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 689-090-003, 689-130-004, -005, -013, -014, -017, -018, & 689-140-022
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the City of Rancho Mirage City Council regarding consideration of the above referenced applications pursuant to Rancho Mirage Municipal Code Titles 16 and 17. An Environmental Assessment form was submitted for the 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 newspaper on July 20, 2025, and distributed to interested parties. The 30 -day public review period for the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was from July 21, 2025, to August 19, 2025.

The Public Hearing will be held on Thursday, November 6, 2025, 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 967

EA24-0009, VAR24-0005, & TTM24-0003 (TTM38971) November 6, 2025 public inspection at City Hall, Monday through Friday, between 8 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., and will be posted on the City's website with the publication of the City Council Agenda, to be posted at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

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.

Vicinity Map — Not to Scale
•

FRANK SINATRA DR
rYti�T
,Cti9 STO
\S t
MIRAGE COVE DR.

TERSON RD.

NORTH

VICINITY MAP
1 1
SITE,
1 C
z
COUNTRY CLUB DR.
968

ATTACHMENT 4
16 Lot Subdivision
Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 38971
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Lead Agency:

City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, California 92270
Prepared by:

BLODGETT BAYLOSIS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
2211 S. HACIENDA BOULEVARD, SUITE 107
HACIENDA HEIGHTS, CALIFORNIA 91745
June 2025
City of Rancho Mirage 1
969

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY
Tentative Tract Map 38971
Project Title:

City Project No:

Lead Agency Name and
Address:

Applicant:

Contact Person:

Phone Number:

Project Location:

Accessor Parcel
Number(s):

Project Area:

General Plan & Zoning
Designation:

Tentative Tract Map 38971 - 16 Lot Subdivision
Environmental Assessment Case No.

EA24-0009 Tentative Tract Map Case No.

TTM24-0003 for Tentative Tract Map 38971
Minor Variance Case No. VAR24-0005
City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, California 92270
Phone: (760) 328-2266
Horti Caesaris, LLC
9401 Wilshire Blvd, 9th Foor
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Pilar Flotterud, Senior Planner
(760) 328-2266
North of the intersection of Mirage Cove Drive and
Peterson Road in the City of Rancho
Mirage, California
689-090-003, 689-130-004, 689-130-005,
689-130-013, 689-130-014, 689-130-017,
689-130-018, 689-140-022

19.81 Acres
The General Plan/Zoning designation for the
project area is Residential Estate (R -E).

City of Rancho Mirage 2
970

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
CHAPTER 1: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 7
PROJECT OVERVIEW 7
PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING 7
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 8
ACCESS AND PARKING 8
ENERGY UTILITIES 8

WATER UTILITIES
8 WASTEWATER UTILITIES 8
SOLID WASTE 8
Table 1 Project Summary (Lot Characteristics) 9
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES 9
DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS & OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED 10 Exhibit 1 Regional Map 11
Exhibit 2 Citywide Map 12
Exhibit 3 Local Map 13
Exhibit 4 Aerial Photograph 14
Exhibit 5a Site Plan 15
Exhibit 5b Site Plan 16
Exhibit 6 Zoning Designations 17
CHAPTER 2: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION 18
DETERMINATION: 20
1 - AESTHETICS 21

1.1 Setting 21

1.2 Discussion of Impacts: 22

1.3 Mitigation Measures: 23
2 - AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES 24

2.1 Setting 24

2.2 Discussion of Impacts: 25

2.3 Mitigation Measures: 25
3 - AIR QUALITY 26

3.1 Setting 26

3.2 Discussion of Impacts: 27
Table 2 Estimated Daily Construction Emissions (Ibs./day) 29 Table 3 Estimated Operational Emissions in Ibs./day 29
Table 4 Local Significance Thresholds Exceedance SRA 30 for 5 Acres of Disturbance 30 (site is 19.81 acres) 30

3.3 Mitigation Measures: 31
4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 32

4.1 Setting 32

4.2 Discussion of Impacts: 33

4.3 Mitigation Measures: 36
5 - CULTURAL RESOURCES 37

5.1 Setting 37

5.2 Discussion of Impacts: 38

5.3 Mitigation Measures: 41
6 - ENERGY 42

6.1 Setting 42

6.2 Discussion of Impacts: 42
Table 5 Proposed Project's Energy Consumption 43

6.3 Mitigation Measures: 44
7 - GEOLOGY AND SOILS 45

7.1 Setting 45

7.2 Discussion of Impacts: 46

7.3 Mitigation Measures: 48
City of Rancho Mirage 3
971

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
8- GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 49

8.1 Setting 49

8.2 Discussion of Impacts: 51
Table 6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons per year [MT/yr]) 51

8.3 Mitigation Measures: 53
9 - HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 54
55 9.2 Discussion of Impacts: 55

9.3 Mitigation Measures: 56
10 - HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 57

10.1 Setting 58

10.2 Discussion of Impacts: 58

10.3 Mitigation Measures: 60
11 - LAND USE AND PLANNING 61

11.1 Setting 61

11.2 Discussion of Impacts: 62

11.3 Mitigation Measures: 62
12 - MINERAL RESOURCES 63

12.1 Setting 63

12.2 Discussion of Impacts: 63

12.3 Mitigation Measures: 64
13 - NOISE 65

13.1 Setting 65

13.2 Discussion of Impacts: 65
Table 7 Construction Noise Levels at the Nearest Sensitive Receptors 66 Table 8 Common Effects of Construction Vibration 67
Table 9 Vibration Source Levels for Typical Construction Equipment 68

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
16 - RECREATION 74

16.1 Setting 74

16.2 Discussion of Impacts: 74

16.3 Mitigation Measures: 75
17 - TRANSPORTATION 76

17.1 Setting 76

17.2 Discussion of Impacts: 76
Table 10 Project Trip Generation 77

17.3 Mitigation Measures: 78
18 - TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES 79

18.1 Setting 79

18.2 Discussion of Impacts: 80

18.3 Mitigation Measures: 82
19 - UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS 83

19.1 Setting 83

19.2 Discussion of Impacts: 84
Table 11 Water Consumption (gals/day) 84
Table 12 Wastewater (Effluent) Generation (gals/day) 85 Table 13 Solid Waste Generation (Ibs./day) 85

9.1 Setting
City of Rancho Mirage 4
972

19.3 Mitigation Measures: 86
20 - WILDFIRE 87

20.1 Setting 87

20.2 Discussion of Impacts: 88
89 21 - MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 90
90 Table 13 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 93 CHAPTER 3: REFERENCES 97
CHAPTER 4: APPENDICES (UNDER A SEPARATE COVER) 97
CHAPTER 5: REPORT PREPARERS 97

21.1 Discussion of Impacts:
16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

20.3 Mitigation Measures:

City of Rancho Mirage 5
973

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

City of Rancho Mirage 6
974

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
CHAPTER 1: PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT OVERVIEW
The City of Rancho Mirage is reviewing an application that would involve the subdivision of 16 lots within 8 parcels totaling 19.81 acres. Currently, the three southern parcels would subdivided into 8 Tots - Lot 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, and 16. This would be phase 1 of the project. Phase 2 of the project involves the remaining 5 northern parcels which would be subdivided into 8 lots - Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, and 12. The subject parcels are all vacant and undeveloped. The proposed development would connect to a new 8 -inch water main and an 8 -inch sewer main in Peterson Road. The terrain in the project area is generally level, with ground elevations ranging approximately from 255 feet to 260 feet above mean sea level. The surface soil is composed of light olive gray fine sand. The project is located within what is considered to be the California Creosote Bush Scrub plant community though the ground surface in the project area has been cleared of native vegetation in the past and existing vegetation include introduced and ruderal species such as landscaping plants and low-lying grasses. The Zoning designation that is applicable to the aforementioned parcels is Residential Estate (R -E). No General Plan Amendment or Zone Change would be required for the proposed residential development.

PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING
The proposed project site is located in the west -central portion of the City of Rancho Mirage. The City of Rancho Mirage is located in the eastern portion of Riverside County within the Coachella Valley area. Rancho Mirage is generally bounded on the north by Thousand Palms and Cathedral City, on the east by Palm Desert, on the south by Palm Desert and unincorporated Riverside County, and on the west by Cathedral City. Regional access to the City of Rancho Mirage is provided by the Interstate 10 (I-10) Freeway which extends across the northernmost portion of the City. The I-10 Freeway is located approximately 4.84 miles north of the project area. The location of Rancho Mirage, in a regional context, is shown in Exhibit 1. A citywide map is provided in Exhibit 2.

The proposed project would include 16 residential Tots (referred to as Lots 1 through 16) and 4 lots for future streets (referred to Lots A through D). The project will undergo two phases. Phase 1 of the project would be the subdivision of Lots 6-9, and Tots 13-16. Phase 2 of the project would be the subdivision of lots 1-7 and lots 10-12. The proposed project area is generally bounded on the north by the Whitewater Stormwater Channel, on the west by Golden State Street, a private street with no access to the subject site, on the south by Mirage Cove Drive, and on the east by the Whitewater Stormwater Channel and Kelley Lane. The proposed subdivision is bisected by Peterson Road in a north -to -south orientation. The project site is currently comprised of 8 vacant, undeveloped parcels that would be subdivided into 16 parcels. The Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) that comprise the proposed project area include 689-090-003; 689-130-004; 689-130- 005; 689-130-013; 689-130-014; 689-130-017; 689-130-018; and 689-140-022. The project site is located within the Cathedral City, Calif., United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7 1/2 Minute Quadrangle (Section 2, Township T5S Range R5E, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian). The proposed project's latitude and longitude is 33.76919 N and -116.43917 W. A local vicinity map is provided in Exhibit 3.

City of Rancho Mirage 7
975

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The proposed project would involve the subdivision 16 lots within the 19.81 -acre site. The terrain in the project area is generally level, with elevations ranging approximately from 255 feet to 260 feet above mean sea level. The 16 individual lot sizes would range in land area from 42,476 square feet to 67,608 square feet. The lots would be arranged along Peterson Road around the proposed cul-de-sac roadway. The project will undergo two phases. Currently, the three southern parcels would subdivided into 8 lots - Lot 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, and 16. This would be phase 1 of the project. Phase 2 of the project involves the remaining 5 northern parcels which would be subdivided into 8 lots - Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, and 12.

ACCESS AND PARKING
Access to the future residential subdivision would be provided along Peterson Road. The individual units would be arranged along Peterson Road. Lots A and B would be future Peterson Road extensions through the project.

ENERGY UTILITIES
The Southern California Edison (SCE) would provide electricity to the project site. Natural gas service is provided by the Southern California Gas Company.

WATER UTILITIES
There is no existing water infrastructure located on -site. The proposed development would connect to a new 8 -inch water main and an 8 -inch sewer main in Peterson Road. Groundwater is the primary source of domestic water supply in the Coachella Valley. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) is the largest provider of potable water in the Coachella Valley and currently provides potable water in the vicinity of the project area.

WASTEWATER UTILITIES
There is no existing wastewater infrastructure located on -site. CVWD operates 6 water reclamation plants and maintains more than 1,000 miles of sewer pipelines and more than 30 lift stations that transport wastewater to the nearest treatment facility and nearly 6.3 billion gallons of wastewater is treated yearly. In addition, wastewater generated by the project will be conveyed to CVWD Wastewater Reclamation Plant Number 10 in Palm Desert (WRP-10). According to the 2015 CVWD Urban Water Management Plan, WRP-10 has a capacity to treat 18 million gallons per day (MGD).

SOLID WASTE
Solid waste disposal and recycling services for the City of Rancho Mirage are provided by Burrtec.

Solid waste and recycling collected from the proposed project will be transported to the Edom HiII Transfer Station. Waste from this transfer station is then sent to a permitted landfill or recycling facility outside of the Coachella Valley. These include the Badlands Disposal Site, the El Sobrante Sanitary Landfill, and the Lamb Canyon Disposal Site.

City of Rancho Mirage 8
976

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
The proposed site plan is illustrated in Exhibit 5. The project is summarized in Table 1.

Table 1 Project Summary (Lot Characteristics)
Lot
Description
Lot Area
Lot 1
Single -Family Residential Unit
43,763 sq. ft.

Lot 2
Single -Family Residential Unit
43,675 sq. ft.

Lot 3
Single -Family Residential Unit
43,705 sq. ft.

Lot 4
Single -Family Residential Unit
43,701 sq. ft.

Lot 5
Single -Family Residential Unit
55,148 sq. ft.

Lot 6
Single -Family Residential Unit
43,631 sq. ft.

Lot 7
Single -Family Residential Unit
43,623 sq. ft.

Lot 8
Single -Family Residential Unit
42,480 sq. ft.

Lot 9
Single -Family Residential Unit
42,476 sq. ft.

Lot 10
Single -Family Residential Unit
49,644 sq. ft.

Lot 11
Single -Family Residential Unit
59,377 sq. ft.

Lot 12
Single -Family Residential Unit
67,608 sq. ft.

Lot 13
Single -Family Residential Unit
48,336 sq. ft.

Lot 14
Single -Family Residential Unit
48,325 sq. ft.

Lot 15
Single -Family Residential Unit
48,310 sq. ft.

Lot 16
Single -Family Residential Unit
47,755 sq. ft.

Lot A
Public Street
58,083 sq. ft.

Lot B
Public Street
30,357 sq. ft.

Lot C
Public Street
2,517 sq. ft.

Lot D
Private Street
14,608 sq. ft.

Source: Fomotor Engineering. Tract Map 38971. November 21, 2024.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
The terrain in the project area is generally level, with elevations ranging approximately from 255 feet to 260 feet above mean sea level. The surface soil is composed of light olive gray fine sand.

The project location is within what would be the California Creosote Bush Scrub plant community; however, the ground surface in the project area has been cleared of native vegetation in the past and existing vegetation include introduced and ruderal species such as landscaping plants and low-lying grasses. The entirety of the project area has been disturbed in the past, with all native vegetation being removed. A paved road, fencing along the Whitewater drainage, and utility poles, are located adjacent to the project area, but all of these items are modern in origin. The site and the surrounding area are shown in an aerial photograph provided in Exhibit 4.

The project site is currently comprised of 8 vacant, undeveloped parcels that would be subdivided into 16 parcels. The Zoning designation for the project area is Residential Estate (R -E). Land uses and development located in the vicinity of the proposed project site are outlined below:
• North of the project site: The Whitewater Flood Control Channel generally extends along the project area's north side. This area is designated as Open Space — Floodways and Drainage Channels (OS -W).

City of Rancho Mirage 9
977

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
• East of the project site: Single family homes are located to the east of the project site.

These homes are designated as Residential Estate (R -E). Further east, the Whitewater Flood Control Channel generally extends along the project area's east side. These parcels are designated as Open Space — Floodways and Drainage Channels (OS -W). • South of the project site: Mirage Cove Drive extends along the project area's south side.

Vista Cove at Rancho Mirage, a resort, and a vacant lot are located further south of the aforementioned roadway. These parcels are designated as Residential Estate (R -E). • West of the project site: Nielson Road extend along the project area's west side. Further west of the road are single family homes and a mobile home park. These parcels are designated as Mobile Home Park (MHP) and Residential Estate (R -E).

An aerial photograph of the project site and the surrounding area is provided in Exhibit 4. The land use and zoning map is provided in Exhibit 5.

DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS & OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL

IS REQUIRED
A Discretionary Action is an action taken by a government agency (for this project, the government agency is the City of Rancho Mirage) that calls for an exercise of judgment in deciding whether to approve a project. The project site is currently comprised of 8 vacant, undeveloped parcels that would be subdivided into 16 parcels. The Zoning designation that is applicable to the aforementioned parcels is Residential Estate (R -E). No General Plan Amendment or Zone Change would be required for the proposed residential development. The following discretionary approvals are required:
• Approval of a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 38971);
• Approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND); and, • The adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).

All potentially interested tribes identified by the NAHC were also contacted pursuant to AB -52 for information regarding their knowledge of cultural resources that were within or near the project area. There are currently no other public agencies whose approval is required at this time.

A Minor Variance (VAR24-0005) is also proposed to reduce the net lot area of lots 8 & 9 from a 1 acre minimum to .98 acres.

City of Rancho Mirage 10
978

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
A
Morongo Valley
Desert Hot Spring;
f10
Palm Springs
JCathedral City
Rancho Mirage
Thousand Palms
Palm Desert
Bermuda Dunes
Ivo
Indio
Coachella
La Quinta
Map Features
— Major Hi 1iways
I —I Rancho Mirage
Riverside County
0 2.5 5 mi
Exhibit 1 Regional Map
SOURCE: BLODGETT BAYLOSIS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
City of Rancho Mirage 11
979

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Palm Springs
C'alh civai (in
Thousand Palms
Rancho 1\1111-ii2e
Palm Desert
Map Features
Project Site
— Major Highways
F-1 Rancho Mirage
0 0.75 1.5
Exhibit 2 Citywide Map
SOURCE: BLODGETT BAYLOSIS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
City of Rancho Mirage 12
980

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
a
CO
I I
hS,
47 fieei
—De 1 -Mar
—Tanforafl
-Saratoga
Cfl
0 0
0-
I
Frank -Sinatra -Drip r.

M irage ove-Dri ye
QJ
0 o(In; P
a)
— { f 6drla-Laue-=
Desert-C=_o AvenueT _
Map Features
Project Site
0 250 500 ft
Exhibit 3 Local Map
SOURCE: BLODGETT BAYLOSIS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
City of Rancho Mirage 13
981

Exhibit 4 Aerial Photograph
16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
SOURCE: BLODGETT BAYLOSIS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
Map Features
Project Site
0 150 300 ft
City of Rancho Mirage
982
14 NE5dN Rump„ e:a --i �
LOT 9
42476 SOFT.
5,90 AC.

PAD 256.5
LOT 16
47755 5OFT,

1.10 AC.

PAD 259 ..4
Exhibit 5a Site Plan
City of Rancho Mirage
LOT 8
42480 SOFT.
0,98 AC.

PAC 259.3
LOT 15
48310 SOFT.

1.11 AC.

PAD 259.5
16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
LOT 7
43623 SOFT.
, 1,00 AC.
?AD 2612
LOT 14
4@325

1.i1 C.

PAO 250.7
LOT 13 •
48336 SOFT.. •
PAD 280.1
SOURCE: Fomotor Engineering. Tract Map No. 68971. November 21, 2024.

LOT 6
43631 SOFT.

1.00 AC.

PAD 261.5
P
15 LOT F
55148 S

1.25 A
PAC 26
µ*PI FG PHASE 2
LOT 12
67608 SOFT.

1.55 AC.

PAD 261.6
983

LOT 1
43631 00FT.

1.00 AC.

PAD 261.5

MAPPING PHASE

1.25 AC,
PAD 251.5
LOT t2
67605 SOFT.

1.55 AC.

PAD 261.6
LOT 11
54377 SOFT
LOT 10
99544 SOFT.

1.14 AC.

PAO 261 5
LOT 3
43705 SOFT.

1.20 AC.

PAD 262.7
16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

1.07 AC.
600 252.7
,l01 LOON ROAD
Exhibit 5b Site Plan
0,DEN STATE STREET
LOT 1
43763 SOFT,
1 00 AC
PAD 262.7
SOURCE: Fomotor Engineering. Tract Map 38971. November 21, 2024.

City of Rancho Mirage 16
984

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Saratoga
Del -Mar
Tanforan—
IVIHP
zr R -E
o
Carla-L-ane
Exhibit 6 Zoning Designations
SOURCE: CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE
R -E
Desert4Cove3Avenue
Map Features
CI Project Site
Zoning
® C -G
MHP
OSIPP
©S/W
R -E
R -H
R -L-3
R -M
ROW
500 ft
City of Rancho Mirage
985
17 16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
CHAPTER 2: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, at least one impact that would require mitigation as indicated by the checklist on the pages.
❑ Aesthetics
❑ Biological Resources
❑ Geology / Soils
❑ Hydrology / Water
Quality
❑ Noise
❑ Recreation
❑ Utilities / Service
Systems
❑
Agriculture &
Forestry Resources
Cultural Resources
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Land Use / Planning
Population / Housing
Transportation
❑ Wildfire
❑ Air Quality
involving
following
Energy
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
❑ Mineral Resources
❑ Public Services
Tribal Cultural Resources
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
City of Rancho Mirage 18
986

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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.

City of Rancho Mirage 19
987

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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. 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:
❑ 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 further is required.
7/3/2025
Pilar Flotterud, Senior Planner Date
City of Rancho Mirage
City of Rancho Mirage 20
988

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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
Im act
p
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
p
No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
❑
❑
❑
1 b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
❑
❑
❑
1 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?
❑
❑
❑
1 d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare, which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
❑
❑
❑
lir
SOURCES:

1. Fomotor Engineering. Tract Map 38971. November 21, 2024.

2. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

3. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage Municipal Code. As amended 2023.

1.1 SETTING
The evaluation of aesthetics and aesthetic impacts is generally subjective, and it typically requires the identification of key visual features in the area and their importance. The characterization of aesthetic impacts involves establishing the existing visual characteristics including visual resources and scenic vistas that are unique to the area. Visual resources are determined by identifying existing Iandforms (e.g., topography and grading), views (e.g., scenic resources such as natural features or urban characteristics), and existing light and glare characteristics (e.g., nighttime illumination). Changes to the existing aesthetic environment associated with the proposed project's implementation are identified and qualitatively evaluated based on the proposed modifications to the existing setting and the viewers' sensitivity. The project -related impacts are then compared to the context of the existing setting, using the threshold criteria discussed above.

City of Rancho Mirage
989
21 16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
The natural setting of the Rancho Mirage area is critical to its overall visual character and provides scenic vistas for the community. The Santa Rosa Mountains and the foothills (including the Indio Hills), provide a natural, scenic backdrop to the Rancho Mirage community. The Santa Rosa Mountains are part of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument. The base of the aforementioned mountains is located just over 7 miles to the southwest of the project site.

The San Bernardino Mountains are located to the north and east of the City (approximately 16 miles).

1.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) No Impact.

The City of Rancho Mirage is reviewing an application that would involve the subdivision of 16 lots within 8 parcels totaling 19.81 acres. Currently, the three southern parcels would subdivided into 8 lots - Lot 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, and 16. This would be phase 1 of the project. Phase 2 of the project involves the remaining 5 northern parcels which would be subdivided into 8 lots - Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, and 12. The subject parcels are all vacant and undeveloped. The proposed development would connect to a new 8 -inch water main and an 8 -inch sewer main in Peterson Road. The terrain in the project area is generally level, with ground elevations ranging approximately from 255 feet to 260 feet above mean sea level. The surface soil is composed of light olive gray fine sand. The project is located within what is considered to be the California Creosote Bush Scrub plant community though the ground surface in the project area has been cleared of native vegetation in the past and existing vegetation include introduced and ruderal species such as landscaping plants and low-lying grasses. The Zoning designation that is applicable to the aforementioned parcels is Residential Estate (R -E). No General Plan Amendment or Zone Change would be required for the proposed residential development.

The natural setting of the Rancho Mirage area is critical to its overall visual character and provides scenic vistas for the community. The Santa Rosa Mountains provide a natural, scenic backdrop to the Rancho Mirage community. The Santa Rosa Mountains are part of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument. The base of the aforementioned mountains is located just over 10 miles to the west of the project site. The foothills of the Santas Rosa Mountains along with the Indio Hills extend into the southern portion of the City. The San Bernardino Mountains are located to the north and east of the City (approximately 16 miles). The proposed development would not obstruct any significant views of the aforementioned mountains of the existing or future homes located to the east of the development site. Once developed, views of the aforementioned mountains would continue to be visible from the public right-of-way. As a result, no impacts would occur.
b) No Impact.

According to the California Department of Transportation, none of the improved or unimproved roads located adjacent to the project site are designated as scenic highways. Highway 111, located approximately 1,500 feet to the west of the site, is considered to be an Eligible State Scenic Highway, though this roadway is not officially designated as such. According to the Rancho Mirage General Plan, Bob Hope Drive (located approximately 1.75 to the east of the site), is a City -designated Scenic road. In addition to the foregoing, the project property is currently absent of any historic buildings, structures or other former permanent improvements that would have any aesthetic value. The site's development would also facilitate the site's ongoing City of Rancho Mirage 22
990

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
maintenance and rehabilitation. Lastly, the project site does not contain any buildings listed in the State or National registrar. As a result, no impacts would occur. c) No Impact.

There are no protected views in the vicinity of the project site (refer to Subsection A). In addition, the City does not have any zoning regulations or other regulations governing scenic quality other that the development standards for which the new residential units would conform to. As a result, no impacts would occur.
d) Less Than Significant Impact.

The nearest light sensitive receptors are the existing residential units located to the west and east of the project site. In addition, the properties located to the north, west, and east are zoned for residential development. The project's lighting would be required to comply with Chapter

17.18.050 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code. The proposed project's lighting must be designed so as to prevent emissions of glare or light beyond the property line. All exterior lighting at the project site would be conditioned to be Dark -Sky compliant, in order to reduce the amount of light emitted at the project site at night. This would keep the night skies in the City of Rancho Mirage visible to residents and visitors. Riverside County Ordinance Number 655 regulates light pollution in the County. Ordinance No. 655 restricts the use of certain light fixtures emitting into the night sky undesirable light rays which have a detrimental effect on astronomical observation and research. The project would be required to comply to these County's standards. Since the proposed project would be required to adhere to both the City's and County's Tight and glare requirements, the impacts would be less than significant.

1.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 23
991

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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?
❑
❑
❑
Nr
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?
❑
❑
❑
r
SOURCES:

1. California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, Farmland Mapping, and Monitoring Program. California Important Farmland Finder.

2. California Department of Conservation. State of California Williamson Act Contract Land.

2.1 SETTING
The California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) was established in 1982 to track changes in agricultural land use and to help preserve areas of Important Farmland. It divides the state's land into eight categories of land use designation based on soil quality and existing agriculture uses to produce maps and statistical data. These maps and data are used to help preserve productive farmland and to analyze impacts on farmland.

Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Local Importance are all Important Farmland and are collectively referred to as Important Farmland in this analysis. The highest rated Important Farmland is Prime Farmland. The California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the Williamson Act, allows a city or county government to preserve agricultural land or open space through contracts with landowners. Contracts last 10 years and are automatically renewed unless a notice of nonrenewal is issued.

According to the California Department of Conservation, the project site and the adjacent properties do not contain any areas of Farmland of Statewide Importance, and no agricultural City of Rancho Mirage 24
992

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
uses are located onsite or adjacent to the property. The project site and the surrounding parcels are indicated as Urban and Built -Up Land. The Whitewater Storm Channel is designated as Other Land.

2.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) No Impact:

According to the California Department of Conservation, the project site and the adjacent properties do not contain any areas of Farmland of Statewide Importance, and no agricultural uses are located onsite or adjacent to the property. According to the California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program the proposed project is located in a portion of Rancho Mirage designated as Urban and Built -Up Land. The project site is not located in an area where the existing zoning promote agricultural uses or is otherwise classified as farmland. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed project would not involve the conversion of any prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance to urban uses. As a result, no impacts would occur. b) No Impact:

There are no agricultural uses located within the site that would be affected by the project's implementation. According to the California Department of Conservation Division of Land Resource Protection, the project site is not subject to a Williamson Act Contract. As a result, no impacts on existing Williamson Act Contracts would result from the proposed project's implementation.
c) No Impact:

There are no forest lands or timber lands located within or adjacent to the site. Furthermore, the site's existing zoning designation does not contemplate forest land or timber land uses. As a result, no impacts will occur.
d) No Impact:

No forest lands are located within the project site. The proposed use would be restricted to the site and would not affect any land under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land management (BLM).

As a result, no loss or conversion of forest lands to urban uses would result from the proposed project's implementation.
e) No Impact:

The project would not involve the disruption or damage of the existing environment that would result in a loss of farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use because the project site does not contain any significant vegetation. As a result, no farmland conversion impacts would occur.

2.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage
25 993

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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?
❑
❑
1 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?
❑
❑
L
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
❑
❑
❑
SOURCES:

1. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. California Emissions Estimator Model. Version 2022. (Appendix A)

2. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

3. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage Municipal Code. As amended 2023.

4. South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan. Adopted December 2, 2022.

5. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Air Quality Analysis Handbook. 1993.

6. Southern California Association of Governments. The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments. Adopted September 3, 2020.

7. State of California, Department of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State — January 1, 2021-2023. Sacramento, California, May 2023.

3.1 SETTING
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project may be deemed to have a significant adverse impact on air quality if it results in any of the following:
• The proposed project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
• The proposed project would 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.
• The proposed project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

The proposed project would result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people. Air quality impacts may occur during the construction or operation phase of a project, and may come from stationary (e.g., industrial processes, generators), mobile (e.g., automobiles, trucks), or area (e.g., water heaters) sources. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the main regulatory authority in the region (Salton Sea Basin) with regard to air quality issues. In April 1993, the SCAQMD adopted a CEQA Air Quality Handbook that provides guidance for the CEQA analysis of potential air quality impacts City of Rancho Mirage 26
994

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
of new projects. The SCAQMD has established quantitative thresholds for short-term (construction) emissions and long-term (operational) emissions for the following criteria pollutants:
• Ozone (O3) is a nearly colorless gas that irritates the lungs, and damages vegetation.

Ozone is formed a by photochemical reaction (when nitrogen dioxide is broken down by sunlight).
• Carbon Monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless toxic gas that interferes with the transfer of oxygen to the brain and is produced by the incomplete combustion of carbon -containing fuels emitted as vehicle exhaust.
• Nitrogen Oxide (NO,) is a yellowish -brown gas, which at high levels can cause breathing difficulties. NOx is formed when nitric oxide (a pollutant from burning processes) combines with oxygen.
• Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is a colorless, pungent gas formed primarily by the combustion of sulfur -containing fossil fuels. Health effects include acute respiratory symptoms. • PIV/10 and PM2.5 refers to particulate matter less than ten microns and two and one-half microns in diameter, respectively. Particulates of this size cause a greater health risk than larger -sized particles since fine particles can more easily cause irritation. • Reactive Organic Gasses (ROG) refers to organic chemicals that, with the interaction of sunlight photochemical reactions may lead to the creation of "smog." Projects in the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) generating construction -related emissions that exceed any of the following emissions thresholds are considered to be significant under CEQA:
• 75 pounds per day of reactive organic compounds;
• 100 pounds per day of nitrogen dioxide;
• 550 pounds per day of carbon monoxide;
• 150 pounds per day of PM,o;
• 55 pounds per day of PM2.5; or,
• 150 pounds per day of sulfur oxides.

A project would have a significant effect on air quality if any of the following operational emissions thresholds for criteria pollutants are exceeded:
• 55 pounds per day reactive organic compounds;
• 55 pounds per day of nitrogen dioxide;
• 550 pounds per day of carbon monoxide;
• 150 pounds per day of PM10;
• 55 pounds per day of PM25; or,
• 150 pounds per day of sulfur oxides.

3.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) No Impact:

Measures to improve regional air quality are outlined in the SCAQMD's Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The most recent AQMP was adopted in 2022 and was jointly prepared with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the Southern California Association of Governments City of Rancho Mirage 27
995

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
(SCAG). The AQMP will help the SCAQMD maintain focus on the air quality impacts of major projects associated with goods movement, land use, energy efficiency, and other key areas of growth. Key elements of the 2022 AQMP include enhancements to existing programs to meet the 24 -hour PM2.5 Federal health standard and a proposed plan of action to reduce ground -level Ozone. The primary criteria for pollutants that remain non -attainment in the local area include PM2.5 and Ozone. Specific criteria to determine a project's conformity with the AQMP is defined in Section 12.3 of the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook.

The proposed Project is consistent with the assumptions underlying the AQMP and the 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan and will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Projects that are consistent with the projections of employment and/or population forecasts identified in the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) prepared by SCAG are considered consistent with the SCAQMD growth projections, since the RTP/SCS forms the basis of the land use and transportation control portions of the SCAQMD. According to the Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report Adopted on September 3, 2020 by SCAG, the City of Rancho Mirage's population is projected to increase from the year 2016 figure of 18,200 to 25,200 in the year 2045, an increase of 7,000. The proposed 16 -unit project would potentially result in 31 new residents assuming an average household size of 1.95 persons per household derived from the 2023 United States Census Bureau for the City of Rancho Mirage. Therefore, the proposed project is not in conflict with the growth projections established for the City by SCAG. The project's construction emissions would be below the thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD (the project's daily construction emissions are summarized in Table 2). In addition, the proposed project's long-term (operational) airborne emissions would be below levels that the SCAQMD considers to be a significant impact (refer to Table 3). As a result, no impacts would occur.
b) Less Than Significant Impact:

According to the SCAQMD, any project is significant if it triggers or exceeds the SCAQMD daily emissions threshold identified previously and noted at the bottom of Tables 2 and 3. The proposed project's construction and operation would not lead to a violation of the above -mentioned criteria.

The analysis of daily construction and operational emissions was prepared utilizing the California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEModV.2022.1.1.25). For air quality modeling purposes, a twelve-month period of construction for all construction phases was assumed.

City of Rancho Mirage 28
996

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Table 2 Estimated Daily Construction Emissions (Ibs./day) Construction Phase
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10
PM2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions

9.89 31.7

31.8 0.06

9.26 5.25
Daily Thresholds
75 100
550
150
150
55 Significant Impact?
No
No
No
No
No
No
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. California Emissions Estimator Model. Version 2022.1.1.25 (Used in Appendix A)
Long-term emissions refer to those air quality impacts that would occur once the proposed project has been constructed and is operational. These impacts would continue over the operational life of the project. The two main sources of operational emissions include mobile emissions and area emissions related to off -site electrical generation. The analysis of long-term operational impacts summarized in Table 3 also used the CaIEEModV.2022.1.1.25 computer model. The analysis summarized in Table 3 indicates that the operational (long-term) emissions would be below the SCAQMD daily emissions thresholds.

Table 3 Estimated Operational Emissions in Ibs./day
Emission Source
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10
PM2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions

1.43 0.87

7.76 0.02

1.37 0.36
Daily Thresholds
55 55
550
150
150
55 Significant Impact?
No
No
No
No
No
No
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. California Emissions Estimator Model. Version 2022.1.1.25 (Used in Appendix A)
The analysis presented in Tables 2 and 3 reflects projected emissions that are typically higher during the summer months and represent a worse -case scenario. As indicated in Tables 2 and 3, the impacts are considered to be less than significant. In addition, the SCAQMD Rule Book contains numerous regulations governing various activities undertaken within the district. Among these regulations is Rule 403.2 — Fugitive Dust Control for the South Coast Planning Area, which was adopted in 1996 for the purpose of controlling fugitive dust. Adherence to Rule 403.2 regulations is required for all projects undertaken within the district. Future construction truck drivers must also adhere to Title 13 - §2485 of the California Code of Regulations, which limits the idling of diesel -powered vehicles to less than five minutes. Adherence to the aforementioned standard condition would minimize odor impacts from diesel trucks. Adherence to Rule 403 Regulations and Title 13 - §2485 of the California Code of Regulations would further reduce the potential impacts. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact:

According to the SCAQMD, residences, schools, daycare centers, playgrounds, and medical facilities are considered sensitive receptor land uses. As indicated in the previous section (refer to Tables 2 and 3, the proposed residential development would not result in an exceedance of SCAQMD thresholds. As indicated in Table 4, the project is not anticipated to exceed construction local significant thresholds (LSTs) for particulates. For purposes of analysis, it was assumed that no more than 5 -acres would be disturbed on any given construction day. Further analysis of the CaIEEMod worksheets indicated that the primary source of construction PM emissions is fugitive dust. Adherence to additional mandatory Rule 403 regulations would reduce fugitive dust City of Rancho Mirage 29
997

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
emissions by approximately 50% to levels that are less than significant. Rule 403 requires that temporary dust covers be used on any piles of excavated or imported earth to reduce wind-blown dust. In addition, all clearing, earthmoving, or excavation activities must be discontinued during periods of high winds (i.e., greater than 15 mph), so as to prevent excessive amounts of fugitive dust.

Table 4 Local Significance Thresholds Exceedance SRA 30 for 5 Acres of Disturbance site is 19.81 acres
Emissions
Maximum
Emissions
(Ibs./day)
Type
Allowable Emissions Threshold (Ibs./day) and a
Specified Distance from Receptor (in meters)
25 50 100 200 500
NOx

0.87 Operation
304
340
425
547
875
NOx

31.7 Construction
304
340
425
547
875
CO

7.76 Operation
2,292
3,237
5,331
10,178
31,115
CO

31.8 Construction
1,480
3,237
5,331
10,178
31,115
PM10

1.37 Operation
4 11
16 27
60 PM10

9.26 Construction
14 44
67 112
248
PM2.5

0.36 Operation
2 3
5 9
31 PM2.5

5.25 Construction
8 11
19 37
128
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. California Emissions Estimator Model. Version 2022.1.1.25 (Used in Appendix A)
The Coachella Valley is currently designated as a serious nonattainment area for PM10 (particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less). The U.S. EPA -approved Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan is in place with an attainment strategy for meeting the PM10 standard. Some of the existing measures include the requirement of detailed dust control plans from builders that specify the use of more aggressive and frequent watering, soil stabilization, wind screens, and phased development to minimize fugitive dust. Appropriate air quality measures to prevent fugitive dust are required by the City's Fugitive Dust Control ordinance and plan implementation requirements, which are consistent with SCAQMD Rules 403 and 403.1 that apply to the Coachella Valley strategy for reducing fugitive dust emissions. Under the City's dust control regulations, a Local Air Quality Management Plan (LAQMP) must be prepared and approved prior to any earth -moving operations. Consistent with SCAQMD Rules 403 and 403.1, implementation of the Fugitive Dust Control Plan is required to occur under the supervision of an individual with training on Dust Control in the Coachella Valley. The plan would include methods to prevent sediment track -out onto public roads, prevent visible dust emissions from exceeding a 20 -percent opacity, and prevent visible dust emissions from extending more than 100 feet (vertically or horizontally from the origin of a source) or crossing any property line.

The project's contractors must comply with other SCAQMD regulations governing equipment idling and emissions controls as well as mandatory SCAQMD regulations governing fugitive dust (Rule 403) and odors (Rule 1401). In addition, future truck drivers visiting the site during the project's construction must adhere to Title 13 - §2485 of the California Code of Regulations, which limits the idling of diesel -powered vehicles to less than five minutes. These regulations would reduce particulate emissions by as much as 50%. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant.

City of Rancho Mirage 30
998

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
d) No Impact:

The SCAQMD has identified those land uses that are typically associated with odor complaints.

These uses include activities involving livestock, rendering facilities, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting activities, refineries, landfills, and businesses involved in fiberglass molding. The proposed residential project would not result in the generation of any odors. In addition, construction truck drivers must adhere to Title 13 - §2485 of the California Code of Regulations, which limits the idling of diesel -powered vehicles to less than five minutes.

Furthermore, the project's contractors must adhere to SCAQMD rules and regulations that govern fugitive dust during site preparation which would significantly reduce the generation of fugitive dust. As a result, no odor -related impacts would occur.

3.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 31
999

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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, El
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?
I
I
�/
�\
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?
❑
ti
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?
❑
N
SOURCES:

1. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

2. Coachella Valley Association of Governments. Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan.

3. City of Rancho Mirage Municipal Code. As amended. August 2016

4. RCA Associates, Inc. General Biological Resources Assessment APN 689-090-003, 689-130-004, -005, -014, -017 & 689- 140-022. March 3, 2024.

4.1 SETTING
Sensitive biological resources include a variety of plant and animal species that are specialized and endemic to a particular habitat type. Due to loss of habitat, some of these species have been designated by either, or both, the federal and state government resource agencies as threatened or endangered. Species listed as threatened include those whose numbers have dropped to such low levels and/or whose populations are so isolated that the continuation of the species could be City of Rancho Mirage
1000
32 16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
jeopardized. Endangered species are those with such limited numbers or subject to such extreme circumstances that they are considered in imminent danger of extinction. Other government agencies and resource organizations also identify sensitive species, those that are naturally rare and that have been locally depleted and put at risk by human activities. While not in imminent danger of jeopardy or extinction, sensitive species are considered vulnerable and can become candidates for future listing as threatened or endangered.

The vegetation community present on site supports a disturbed desert scrub habitat encompassing mainly native plants and some non-native grasses. The site contains a few species of plants which include kelch grass (Schismus barbatus), creosote bush (Larrea tridentata), four winged saltbush (Atriplex canescens), Asian mustard (Brassica tournefortii), Nettle leaved goosefoot (Chenopodiastrum murale) and Brittlebush (Encelia farinose).

4.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation:

Birds observed during the onsite surveys included common ravens (Corvus corax), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), Northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) and rock pigeon (Columba livia). No mammals were seen during the February 2024 survey. Although the Antelope Ground squirrel (Ammospermophilus leucurus) were not present during the field investigation we can assume they are in the area due to current conditions and population distributions. Other wildlife species that may occur on site include desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audubonii) and California ground squirrels (Otospermophilus beecheyi), and Merriam's kangaroo rats (Dipodomys merriami) may also occur on the site given their wide -spread distribution in the region. No reptiles were observed during the field investigation, however there were a number of reptile tracks along the property and we can assume that they are present in the area. Species that are expected to occur on site include the western whiptail lizard (Cnemidophorus tigris) and common side -blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana). No sensitive habitats (e.g., wetlands, vernal pools, critical habitats for sensitive species, etc.) were observed on the site during the field investigations.

The following are the listed and special status species that have the ability to occur on the project site. It is not a comprehensive list of all the species in the quad. This information has been taken from the California Natural Diversity Database and is using the most current version.

Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard: The site is located within the documented Coachella Valley fringed -toed lizard range, a state and federal threatened species, according to California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) (2024). The property supports minimal suitable habitat for the lizard based on the location of the site in a developed area of Rancho Mirage. No Coachella Valley fringed -toed lizard was observed anywhere within the property boundaries during the February 12, 2024 surveys. The species is not expected to move onto the site in the near future based on the absence of any recent observations in the immediate area, and the presence of busy roadways and developments in the immediate area which may act as barriers to migration.

City of Rancho Mirage 33
1001

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Burrowing Owl: The site is located within documented burrowing owl habitat according to CNDDB (2024). No owls were seen on the property during the survey, and minimal suitable habitat was observed. Burrowing owls are not expected to occur on the site due to lack of suitable vegetation and burrows.

Le Conte's thrasher: Le Conte's thrashers have not been recently observed in the area according to CNDDB (2024). Thrashers are not expected to occur on the site due to lack of critical vegetation used by the species, such as catclaw acacia. Thrashers may be very infrequent in the area given the low population levels in the region as well as the lack of any recent sightings according to the CNDDB.

There were no instances of any federally or state endangered plant species during the field survey conducted on February 12, 2024. The site has been disturbed in the past and development has occurred around most of the neighboring properties. Although the site does contain minimal habitat for the Chapparal sand verbena (Abronia villosa var. aurita) and the Slender cottonhead (Nemacaulis denudata var. gracilis) which include sandy areas and desert scrub, the species were not observed during the February 2024 field survey.

Future development activities include the grading and removal of all vegetation from the 19.8 - acre parcel; however, cumulative impacts to the general biological resources (plants and animals) in the surrounding area are expected to be negligible. This assumption is based on the habitat containing scarce vegetation of non-native species. As discussed above, the site does not support any burrowing owls due to the lack of suitable habitat and potential burrows. Joshua trees (a state candidate species) were not observed in the field investigations during February 2024 survey.

The following mitigation measures should be considered:
• Biological Resources Mitigation No. 1 Pre -construction surveys for burrowing owls and nesting birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Section 3503 of the California Fish and Wildlife Code shall be conducted prior to the commencement of Project -related ground disturbance.
a. Appropriate survey methods and timeframes shall be established, to ensure that chances of detecting the target species are maximized. In the event that listed species, such as desert tortoise, are encountered, authorization from the USFWS and CDFW must be obtained. If nesting birds are detected, avoidance measures shall be implemented to ensure that nests are not disturbed until after young have fledged. b. Pre -construction surveys shall encompass all areas within the potential footprint of disturbance for the project, as well as a reasonable buffer around these areas. • Biological Resources Mitigation No. 2 A focused plant survey should be considered for all special status plant species that have the potential to occur on the site to be performed during the blooming season (April -June) to determine the potential environmental effects of the proposed projects on special status plants and sensitive natural communities following recommended protocols by the Department of Fish and Wildlife.

City of Rancho Mirage 34
1002

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
The above mitigation measures would reduce the impacts to levels that are less than significant. b) No Impact:

No drainage channels were observed within the site boundaries. As a result, no impacts are anticipated.
c) No Impact:

No sensitive habitats (e.g., wetlands, vernal pools, critical habitats for sensitive species, etc.) were observed on the site during the field investigations. No riparian vegetation (e.g., cottonwoods, willows, etc.) exist on the site. No potential channels were observed on the property and it is the opinion of RCA Associates that no further surveys will be necessary. As a result, no impacts are anticipated.
d) No Impact:

The site's utility as a habitat and a migration corridor is constrained by the presence of an adjacent roadway and the development that is present in the neighboring areas. As a result, no impacts are anticipated.
e) No Impact:

Future development activities include the grading and removal of all vegetation from the 19.8 - acre parcel; however, cumulative impacts to the general biological resources (plants and animals) in the surrounding area are expected to be negligible. This assumption is based on the habitat containing scarce vegetation of non-native species. As discussed above, the site does not support any desert tortoises or burrowing owls due to the lack of suitable habitat and potential burrows.

Joshua trees (a state candidate species) were not observed in the field investigations during February 2024 survey. As a result, no impacts are anticipated. f) Less than Significant Impact:

The Project occurs within the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) plan area and is subject to provisions and policies of the CVMSHCP.

The proposed project's implementation would not be in conflict with the provisions of any other adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plans.

Although the site is located within the CVMSHCP boundary, the site is not located within a biological sensitive or any conservation areas. As a result, impacts are less than significant.

City of Rancho Mirage 35
1003

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

4.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

The analysis of biological impacts determined that the following mitigation measures would be required to reduce the project's impacts to levels that would be less than significant.

Biological Resources Mitigation Measure No. 1. Pre -construction surveys for burrowing owls and nesting birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Section 3503 of the California Fish and Wildlife Code shall be conducted prior to the commencement of Project -related ground disturbance.
a. Appropriate survey methods and timeframes shall be established, to ensure that chances of detecting the target species are maximized. In the event that listed species, such as desert tortoise, are encountered, authorization from the USFWS and CDFW must be obtained. If nesting birds are detected, avoidance measures shall be implemented to ensure that nests are not disturbed until after young have fledged. b. Pre -construction surveys shall encompass all areas within the potential footprint of disturbance for the project, as well as a reasonable buffer around these areas. . Biological Resources Mitigation Measure No. 2. A focused plant survey should be considered for all special status plant species that have the potential to occur on the site to be performed during the blooming season (April -June) to determine the potential environmental effects of the proposed projects on special status plants and sensitive natural communities following recommended protocols by the Department of Fish and Wildlife.

City of Rancho Mirage 36
1004

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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:

1. Southern California Association of Governments. The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments. Adopted September 3, 2020.

2. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

3. U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. National Register of Historic Places. htto://nrhp.focus.nps.gov. 2023.

4. CRM TECH. 16 Lot Subdivision Project on Peterson Road. March 25, 2024.

5.1 SETTING
Historic structures and sites are defined by local, State, and Federal criteria. A site or structure may be historically significant if it is locally protected through a General Plan or historic preservation ordinance. In addition, a site or structure may be historically significant according to State or Federal criteria even if the locality does not recognize such significance. To be considered eligible for the National Register, a property's significance may be determined if the property is associated with events, activities, or developments that were important in the past, with the lives of people who were important in the past, or represents significant architectural, landscape, or engineering elements. Specific criteria include the following:
• Districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are associated with the lives of significant persons in or past;
• Districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or, • Districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory.

Ordinarily, properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years are not considered eligible for the National Register. However, such properties would qualify if they are integral parts of districts that do meet the criteria or if they fall within the following categories:
• A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or historical importance;
City of Rancho Mirage 37
1005

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
• Districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; • A building or structure removed from its original location that is significant for architectural value, or which is the surviving structure is associated with a historic person or event; • A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building associated with his or her productive life; • A cemetery that derives its primary importance from graves of persons of transcendent importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or from association with historic events;
• A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same association has survived; • A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance; or, • A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance.

5.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) No Impact:

According to Eastern Information Center (EIC) records, the project area had been surveyed for cultural resources once prior to this study (RI -08506 in Figure 5; Sander 2010). No cultural resources have been recorded on or adjacent to the property, however. Within the one -mile scope of the records search, EIC records identified a total of 30 previous studies completed on various tracts of land and linear features between 1979 and 2016 (Figure 5). As a result of these and other similar studies in the vicinity, one historic -period site and one prehistoric -period site were previously recorded within the scope of the records search but outside the current project area.

The historic -period site (33-005513) was recorded as the Peterson Ranch, a single wood frame house ca. 1930s (Wagner 1982). The prehistoric -period site (33-000628/CA-RIV-628T) consists of a trail segment and several stone cairns (Banks 1979; Parr and Arkush 1988; Bissell 2000).

These previously recorded cultural resources were found more than a quarter mile from the project location. Since the project's implementation would not impact any Federal, State, or locally designated historic resources, no impacts would occur.
b) Less Than Significant Impact:

On January 9, 2024, CRM TECH archaeologist Nina Gallardo completed the historical/ archaeological resources records search for this study at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System. Located on the campus of the University of California, Riverside, the EIC is the official cultural resource records repository for the County of Riverside. The purpose of the records search was to compile a complete inventory of previously identified cultural resources and existing cultural resources reports within a one -mile radius of the project location. Previously identified cultural resources include properties designated as California Historical Landmarks, Points of Historical Interest, or Riverside County Historic Landmarks, as well as those listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, or the California Historical Resources Inventory.

City of Rancho Mirage 38
1006

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Historical background research for this study was conducted by CRM TECH Archaeologist Frank Raslich. In addition to published literature in local and regional history, sources consulted during the research included U.S. General Land Office (GLO) land survey plat maps dated 1856, United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps dated 1904-1988, and aerial/satellite photographs taken in 1959-2023. The historical maps are available at the websites of the U.S.

Bureau of Land Management and the USGS, and the aerial/satellite photographs are available at the website of Nationwide Environmental Title Research (NETR) Online and through the Google Earth software.

Historical sources consulted for this study indicate that the entire project area was unsettled and undeveloped until the mid -20th century (Figures 6-9 of Appendix C — Cultural Study). Between the 1850s and the 1930s, no humanmade features of any kind were noted within or adjacent to the project area despite its location near the Southern Pacific Railroad (built in the 1870s), U.S.

Highway 60/70/99 (built prior to the 1920s), and two other major transportation arteries located approximately two miles to the north (Figures 6- 8 of Appendix C — Cultural Study). By the 1940s, Rio del Sol Road, the forerunner of present-day Bob Hope Drive, had been completed near the project vicinity along with several date gardens and ranches and a structure was present in the southern part of the project area (Figure 9 of Appendix C — Cultural Study). By 1957, roads and housing appeared around and within the project area. To the south of the project location, Gerald Ford Drive was first laid out between 1979 and 1984 and subsequently became a paved road by 1996, which ushered in a period of rapid urban growth in the surrounding area. The residential neighborhoods to the north and the south of the project location and the commercial properties to the west were all developed since then. The project area was not involved in any of these nearby developments. The structures in the southern part of the project area appears to have been removed after 2005 but before 2009. The rest of the study area, however, has remained undeveloped and largely unused to the present time.

The field survey of the project area produced completely negative results for any potential "historical resources," and no buildings, structures, objects, sites, features, or artifacts more than 50 years of age were encountered within the project boundaries. The entirety of the project area has been disturbed in the past, with all native vegetation being removed. Previous modern development and demolition have impacted the ground surface. Modern debris is comprised of milled lumber fragments, PVC pipe, chain fencing, broken glass bottle fragments, a few steel cans, and paper and building material refuse. No evidence of the structures previously located in the southern portion of the project area were observed. There are residential developments, a paved road, fencing along the Whitewater drainage, and utility poles, adjacent to the project area, but all of these items are modern in origin and, therefore, none of them are of any historical/archaeological interest.

On December 21, 2023, CRM TECH submitted a written request to the State of California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a records search in the commission's Sacred Lands File. In the meantime, CRM TECH also contacted the nearby Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) for additional information on potential Native American cultural resources in the project vicinity and to arrange for tribal participation in the upcoming archaeological field survey.

On January 19, 2024, CRM TECH archaeologists Michael D. Richards and Malika Mobley carried out the field survey of the project area with the assistance of ACBCI Cultural Resources Analyst Claritsa Duarte from the Tribal Historic Preservation Office. The survey was conducted at an intensive level by walking a series of parallel north -south transects at 15 -meter (approximately City of Rancho Mirage 39
1007

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
50- foot) intervals. In this way, the entire project area was systematically and carefully examined for any evidence of human activities dating to the prehistoric or historic period (i.e., 50 years or older). Ground visibility was fair (-50 percent) in areas where there were low-lying grasses but excellent (-90 percent) where there was little to no vegetation.

In response to CRM TECH's inquiry, the NAHC reported in a letter dated January 18, 2024, that the Sacred Lands File identified no Native American cultural resources in the project vicinity but recommended contacting local Native American groups for further information. For that purpose, the NAHC provided a list of potential contacts in the region. The NAHC's reply is attached to this report in Appendix 2 of Appendix C — Cultural Study for reference by the City of Rancho Mirage in future government -to government consultations, if necessary. As mentioned above, the ACBCI, which is the nearest tribe to the project location, participated in the archaeological field survey for this study on January 19, 2024. In a letter dated December 26, 2023, Xitlaly Madrigal, Cultural Resources Analyst with the ACBCI Tribal Historic Preservation Office, identified the project location as a part of the tribe's Traditional Use Area. Therefore, the ACBCI requested copies of all cultural resources documentation generated for this project for review by the Tribal Historic Preservation Office as well as the presence of an ACBCI Cultural Resource Monitor (see App. 2 of Appendix C — Cultural Study). The applicant would be required to follow the Tribal Cultural Mitigation Measures No. 1, 2, and 3. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact:

There are no dedicated cemeteries located within or in the vicinity of the project site. The proposed project would be restricted to the project site and therefore would not affect any dedicated cemeteries in the vicinity. Notwithstanding, the following mitigation is mandated by the California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 15064.5(b)(4):
"A lead agency shall identify potentially feasible measures to mitigate significant adverse changes in the significance of an historical resource. The lead agency shall ensure that any adopted measures to mitigate or avoid significant adverse changes are fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures." Additionally, Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code states:
"In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined, in accordance with Chapter 10 (commencing with (b) Section 27460) of Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code, that the remains are not subject to the provisions of Section 27491 of the Government Code or any other related provisions of law concerning investigation of the circumstances, manner and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative. The coroner shall make his or her determination within two working days from the time the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, notifies the coroner of the discovery or recognition of the human remains. If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission."
City of Rancho Mirage 40
1008

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Adherence to the standard condition would ensure potential impacts remain at levels that are less than significant.

5.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None Required. The applicant would be required to follow Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure No. 1, 2, and 3.

City of Rancho Mirage 41
1009

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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:

1. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

2. SCAQMD. SCAQMD Air Quality Handbook. 1993.

3. California Air Resources Board and the Southern California Air Quality Management District. California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEModV.2022.1.1.25) (Appendix A).

6.1 SETTING
Southern California Edison (SCE) would provide electricity to the project site. Natural gas service is provided by the Southern California Gas Company. Currently, the existing site is vacant and does not use electricity or natural gas. Electricity and natural gas are the primary sources of energy in the City of Rancho Mirage. Electricity is provided primarily by Southern California Edison (SCE) and Imperial Irrigation District (IID) provides services for everything north of Gerald Ford Drive and east of Bob Hope Drive in the City of Rancho Mirage.

The Rancho Mirage City Council started the Rancho Mirage Energy Authority (RMEA) for the purpose of helping to reduce the community's IID electricity bills. Pursuant to CCA law, RMEA is an all -new, 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 costs. The RMEA's power is delivered through SCE poles and wires. SCE is still the utility and would continue to bill and collect from customers but using RMEA's Tower electricity rates would allow businesses and residents to save 5 percent. SCE facilities include 12 kV transmission lines for local distribution. High voltage lines for more distant transmission range up to 115 kV and 230 kV. Substations step down voltage for local distribution and use. Three substations serve the City of Rancho Mirage: one on Highway 111 east of Thunderbird Cove, one on Clancy Lane at Monterey Avenue, and one on Plumley Road south of 35th Avenue.

6.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less than Significant Impact:

During construction, the proposed project would consume energy related to the use of fuels used to power construction vehicles and other equipment that would be used during site clearing, grading, and construction. Fuel use associated with construction vehicle trips generated by the proposed project was also estimated; trips include construction worker trips, haul truck trips for City of Rancho Mirage 42
1010

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
material transport, and vendor trips for construction material deliveries. Energy consumed during construction would be temporary in nature and would not present a significant demand on energy resources. The proposed project would be constructed pursuant to the 2022 energy standards of Title 24. Construction equipment greater than 150 horsepower (hp), is also required to comply with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 3 emissions standards and shall ensure that all construction equipment is tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. For engines from 175 to less than 750 hp, the Tier 4 Final regulations took effect on January 1, 2014. For engines from 49 to less than 75 hp, it took effect on January 1, 2013. Finally, for engines from 75 to less than 175 hp, the Tier 4 regulations took effect on January 1, 2015. In addition, the project would be required to comply with the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485, which minimizes the idling time of construction equipment either by shutting it off when not in use or by reducing the time of idling to no more than five minutes. These emissions standards require highly efficient combustion systems that maximize fuel efficiency and reduce unnecessary fuel consumption.

Therefore, no significant impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.

The increased demand is expected to be sufficiently served by the existing Southern California Edison (SCE) facilities. As shown in Table 5, the proposed project is anticipated to consume 409.41 kWh daily. The proposed project is located within the service area of the Southern California Gas Company. The project site currently has no demand for natural gas. Therefore, the development of the proposed project would create a permanent increase in the demand for natural gas. As shown in Table 5, the proposed project is anticipated to consume 1,559.0 kBTU of natural gas on a daily basis.

Energy Type
Electrical Consumption
Natural Gas Consumption
Table 5 Proposed Project's Energy Consumption
Consumption Rate
9,339.25 kWh/unit/year
35,564.3 kBTU/unit/year
Annual Energy Consumption
149,428 kWh/year
569,029 kBTU/year
Daily Energy Consumption
409.4 kWh/Day
1,559.0 kBTU/Day
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. California Emissions Estimator Model. Version 2022.1.1.25 (Used in Appendix A) According to the CaIEEMod air quality emissions model, the 16 units would consume 158,767 kWh of electricity on an annual basis. According to the same model, the 16 units would consume 569,029 kBTUs on an annual basis. The proposed project's energy consumption would be related to energy that would be used for lighting and other household activities. Lighting would be required to follow the City's Outdoor Lighting Policy, which includes the use of energy efficient lighting. For these reasons, the project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy. The project applicant would be required to work with the local electrical utility company to identify existing and future strategies that would be effective in reducing energy consumption. As a result, the impact would be less than significant.

City of Rancho Mirage 43
1011

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
b) Less than significant impact:

The State Building Standards Commission adopted updates to the California Green Building Standards Code (Code) which became effective on January 1, 2023. The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards (Title 24) became effective to aid efforts to reduce GHG emissions associated with energy consumption. Title 24 now requires that new buildings reduce water consumption, employ building commissioning to increase building system efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant -emitting finish materials. The proposed project as well as any future development within the remainder of the project site would be required to conform to all pertinent energy conservation requirements. The proposed project would be required to comply with all pertinent Title 24 requirements along with other Low Impact Development (LID) requirements.

The project would provide for, and promote, energy efficiencies required under other applicable Federal and State of California standards and regulations, and in doing so, would meet or exceed all California Building Standards Code Title 24 standards. Moreover, energy consumed by the project's operation is calculated to be comparable to, or less than, energy consumed by other single family homes of similar scale and intensity that are constructed and operating in California.

On this basis, the project would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy. Further, the project would not cause or result in the need for additional energy producing facilities or energy delivery systems. As a result, the potential impacts would be less than significant.

6.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 44
1012

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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?
❑
❑
L
❑
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:

1. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

2. UC Davis. SoilWeb. Website accessed June 11, 2024.

3. United States Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Website accessed June 11, 2024.

4. Sladden Engineering. Geotechnical Update. June 7, 2024. Geotechnical Investigation Report. October 19, 2010.

7.1 SETTING
The City of Rancho Mirage is located in a seismically active region. Earthquakes from several active and potentially active faults in the Southern California region could affect the proposed City of Rancho Mirage
1013
45 16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
project site. In 1972, the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zoning Act was passed in response to the damage sustained in the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act's main purpose is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. The closest active fault to the project site is at the San Andreas Fault, approximately 3.6 miles northeast. Therefore, due to the distance of the fault zone, it can be concluded that the potential fault -rupture risk is low. Surface ruptures are visible instances of horizontal or vertical displacement, or a combination of the two. The amount of ground shaking depends on the intensity of the earthquake, the duration of shaking, soil conditions, type of building, and distance from epicenter or fault.

The potential impacts from fault rupture and ground shaking are considered no greater for the project site than for the surrounding areas given the distance between the site and the fault trace.

However, the deep groundwater in Rancho Mirage does not allow the saturation of the sediments; therefore, the potential for liquefaction to occur at the project site is less than significant.

Windblown sand and other recently deposited sediments are typically loose and, therefore, potentially subject to seismically induced settlement.

7.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less Than Significant Impact:

The City of Rancho Mirage is located in a seismically active region. Earthquakes from several active and potentially active faults in the Southern California region could affect the proposed project site. In 1972, the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zoning Act was passed in response to the damage sustained in the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act's main purpose is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. closest active fault to the project site is at the San Andreas Fault, approximately 3.5 miles northeast. Therefore, due to the distance of the fault zone, it can be concluded that the potential fault -rupture risk is low. Surface ruptures are visible instances of horizontal or vertical displacement, or a combination of the two. The amount of ground shaking depends on the intensity of the earthquake, the duration of shaking, soil conditions, type of building, and distance from epicenter or fault. The potential impacts from fault rupture and ground shaking are considered no greater for the project site than for the surrounding areas given the distance between the site and the fault trace. However, the deep groundwater in Rancho Mirage does not allow the saturation of the sediments; therefore, the potential for liquefaction to occur at the project site is less than significant. Windblown sand and other recently deposited sediments are typically loose and, therefore, potentially subject to seismically induced settlement.

According to the City's General Plan, the project area has a moderate susceptibility to seismically induced settlement. Strong seismic shaking, the 2017 General Plan states, can cause densification or compaction of soils resulting in local or regional settlement of the ground surface, which can cause damage to foundations and structures. To ensure the safety of the project against seismically induced hazards, the project site shall adhere to the standard design requirements stated in the most recent California Building Code (CBC), and the City's building standards. Overall, impacts from seismically induced ground failure such as liquefaction and settlement are anticipated to be less than significant at the project site. As a result, the potential impacts regarding liquefaction and landslides are less than significant.

City of Rancho Mirage 46
1014

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
b) Less Than Significant Impact:

The University of California, Davis SoilWeb database was consulted to determine the nature of the soils that underlie the project site. According to the University of California, Davis SoilWeb database, the property is underlain by Coachella fine sand composed of Coachella, Myoma, Gilman, and Indio soils associations with 0 to 2 percent slopes. The proposed project's contractors would be required to adhere to specific requirements that govern wind and water erosion during site preparation and construction activities. Following development, the project site would be paved and landscaped, which would minimize soil erosion. The project's construction would not result in soil erosion with adherence to those development requirements that restrict storm water runoff (and the resulting erosion) and require soil stabilization. In addition, stormwater discharges from construction activities that disturb one or more acres, or smaller sites disturbing less than one acre that are part of a common plan of development or sale, are regulated under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permitting program.

Prior to initiating construction, contractors must obtain coverage under an NPDES permit, which is administered by the State. In order to obtain an NPDES permit, the project Applicant must prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Riverside County has identified sample construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) that may be included in the mandatory SWPPP. The use of these construction BMPs identified in the mandatory SWPPP would prevent soil erosion and the discharge of sediment into the local storm drains during the project's construction phase. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact:

The proposed project's construction would not result in soil erosion since the project's contractors must implement the construction BMPs identified in the mandatory SWPPP. The BMPs would minimize soil erosion and the discharge of sediment off -site. Additionally, the project site is not located within an area that could be subject to landslides or liquefaction. The soils that underlie the project site possess a low potential for shrinking and swelling. Soils that exhibit certain shrink swell characteristics become sticky when wet and expand according to the moisture content present at the time. Since the soils have a low shrink -swell potential, lateral spreading resulting from an influx of groundwater is slim. Moreover, the project will not result in the direct extraction of groundwater. As a result, the potential impacts would be less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact:

The University of California, Davis SoilWeb database was consulted to determine the nature of the soils that underlie the project site. According to the University of California, Davis SoilWeb database, the property is underlain by Coachella fine sand composed of Coachella, Myoma, Gilman, and Indio soils associations with 0 to 2 percent slopes. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, these soils are acceptable for residential development. The applicant is required to adhere to all requirements detailed by the USDA. As a result, the potential impacts would be less than significant.
e) Less Than Significant Impact:

The proposed project would be required to connect to and utilize the sanitary sewer system. No City of Rancho Mirage 47
1015

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
septic tanks systems would be used. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant. f) Less Than Significant Impact:

According to Figure 4.9.3, Paleontological Sensitivity, in the Riverside County General Plan, the property is recognized for having low potential for Paleontological Sensitivity. Areas recognized for having a "low" potential have a reduced likelihood of containing significant non-renewable paleontological resources, including vertebrate or significant invertebrate fossils. Moreover, the site is not recognized as a unique paleontological or a unique geologic feature. Additionally, the project property lies in an urbanized context within the City, surrounded by residential uses. No known paleontological sites are found within the project site. The potential for uncovering any significant resources during construction activities is unlikely, since the site has already been cleared, graded, and disturbed from previous grading activities. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated.

7.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 48
1016

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
8 - GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
GREENHOUSE EMISSIONS — Would the
project:

Potentially
Significant
Im act
p
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
p
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:

1. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. California Emissions Estimator Model. Version 2022. (Appendix A)

2. South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan. Adopted December 2, 2022.

3. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Air Quality Analysis Handbook. 1993.

4. Southern California Association of Governments. The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments. Adopted September 3, 2020.

5. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

6. Rancho Mirage, City of. 2012 Sustainability Plan: Leadership in Energy Efficiency. 2013.

8.1 SETTING
Examples of greenhouse gasses (GHG) that are produced both by natural and industrial processes include carbon dioxide (0O2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). The accumulation of GHG in the atmosphere regulates the earth's temperature. Without these natural GHG, the Earth's surface would be about 61°F cooler. However, emissions from fossil fuel combustion have elevated the concentrations of GHG in the atmosphere to above natural levels.

These man-made GHG will have the effect of warming atmospheric temperatures with the attendant impacts of changes in the global climate, increased sea levels, and changes to the worldwide biome. The major GHG that influences global warming are described below. • Water Vapor. Water vapor is the most abundant GHG present in the atmosphere. While water vapor is not considered a pollutant, while it remains in the atmosphere it maintains a climate necessary for life. Changes in the atmospheric concentration of water vapor are directly related to the warming of the atmosphere rather than a direct result of industrialization. As the temperature of the atmosphere rises, more water is evaporated from ground storage (rivers, oceans, reservoirs, soil). Because the air is warmer, the relative humidity can be higher (in essence, the air is able to "hold" more water when it is warmer), leading to more water vapor in the atmosphere. As a GHG, the higher concentration of water vapor is then able to absorb more thermal indirect energy radiated from the Earth, thus further warming the atmosphere. When water vapor increases in the atmosphere, more of it would eventually also condense into clouds, which are more able to reflect incoming solar radiation. This would allow less energy to reach the Earth's surface thereby affecting surface temperatures.
• Carbon Dioxide (CO2). The natural production and absorption of CO2 is achieved through the terrestrial biosphere and the ocean. Manmade sources of CO2 include the burning coal, oil, natural gas, and wood. Since the industrial revolution began in the mid -1700's, these activities have increased the atmospheric concentrations of 0O2. Prior to the industrial revolution, concentrations were fairly stable at 280 parts per million (ppm). The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, 2014) Emissions City of Rancho Mirage 49
1017

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
of CO2 from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes contributed about 78% of the total GHG emissions increase from 1970 to 2010, with a similar percentage contribution for the increase during the period 2000 to 2010.
• Methane (CH4). CH4 is an extremely effective absorber of radiation, although its atmospheric concentration is less than that of 0O2. Methane's lifetime in the atmosphere is brief (10 to 12 years), compared to some other GHGs (such as 0O2, N2O, and Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). CH4 has both natural and anthropogenic sources. It is released as part of the biological processes in low oxygen environments, such as in swamplands or in rice production (at the roots of the plants). Over the last 50 years, human activities such as growing rice, raising cattle, using natural gas, and mining coal have added to the atmospheric concentration of methane. Other human -related sources of methane production include fossil -fuel combustion and biomass burning. • Nitrous Oxide (N2O). Concentrations of N2O also began to increase at the beginning of the industrial revolution. In 1998, the global concentration of this GHG was documented at 314 parts per billion (ppb). N2O is produced by microbial processes in soil and water, including those reactions which occur in fertilizer containing nitrogen. In addition to agricultural sources, some industrial processes (fossil fuel -fired power plants, nylon production, nitric acid production, and vehicle emissions) also contribute to its atmospheric load. It is also commonly used as an aerosol spray propellant. • Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC). CFCs are gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in methane or ethane (C2H6) with chlorine and/or fluorine atoms. CFCs are nontoxic, nonflammable, insoluble, and chemically unreactive in the troposphere (the level of air at the Earth's surface). CFCs have no natural source but were first synthesized in 1928. It was used for refrigerants, aerosol propellants, and cleaning solvents. Due to the discovery that they are able to destroy stratospheric ozone, a global effort to halt their production was undertaken and in 1989 the European Community agreed to ban CFCs by 2000 and subsequent treaties banned CFCs worldwide by 2010. This effort was extremely successful, and the levels of the major CFCs are now remaining level or declining. However, their long atmospheric lifetimes mean that some of the CFCs would remain in the atmosphere for over 100 years.
• Hydrofluorocarbons (HFC). HFCs are synthetic man-made chemicals that are used as a substitute for CFCs. Out of all the GHGs, they are one of three groups with the highest global warming potential. The HFCs with the largest measured atmospheric abundances are (in order), HFC-23 (CHF3), HFC-134a (CF3CH2F), and HFC-152a (CH3CHF2). Prior to 1990, the only significant emissions were HFC-23. HFC-134a use is increasing due to its use as a refrigerant. Concentrations of HFC-23 and HFC-134a in the atmosphere are now about 10 parts per trillion (ppt) each. Concentrations of HFC-152a are about 1 ppt. HFCs are manmade and used for applications such as automobile air conditioners and refrigerants.
• Perfluorocarbons (PFC). PFCs have stable molecular structures and do not break down through the chemical processes in the lower atmosphere. High-energy ultraviolet rays about 60 kilometers above Earth's surface are able to destroy the compounds. Because of this, PFCs have very long lifetimes, between 10,000 and 50,000 years. Two common PFCs are tetrafluoromethane (CF4) and hexafluoroethane (C2F6). Concentrations of CF4 in the atmosphere are over 70 ppt. The two main sources of PFCs are primary aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing.

City of Rancho Mirage 50
1018

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
• SulfurHexafluoride (SF6). SF6 is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, nontoxic, nonflammable gas. SF6 has the highest global warming potential of any gas evaluated; 23,900 times that of CO2. Concentrations in the 1990s where about 4 ppt. Sulfur hexafluoride is used for insulation in electric power transmission and distribution equipment, in the magnesium industry, in semiconductor manufacturing, and as a tracer gas for leak detection.

The SCAQMD mass emissions threshold is 3,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (MTCO2E/yr). Carbon dioxide equivalent, or CO2E, is a term that is used for describing different greenhouses gases in a common and collective unit.

8.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less Than Significant Impact:

The State of California requires CEQA documents to do an evaluation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions or gases that trap heat in the atmosphere. GHG are emitted by both natural processes and human activities. Examples of GHG that are produced both by natural and industrial processes include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). Carbon dioxide equivalent, or CO2E, is a term that is used for describing different greenhouses gases in a common and collective unit. The SCAQMD established the 3,000 MTCO2 per year threshold for residential land uses. As indicated in Table 6, the operational CO2E is 333 MTCO2E per year, which is well below the threshold.

Table 6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons per year [MT/yr]) Source
GHG Emissions (Metric Tons/year)
CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2E
Long -Term — Mobile Emissions
252

0.01 0.01
256
Long -Term — Area Emissions

0.20 --
--

0.20 Long -Term — Energy Emissions

66.3 --
--

66.5 Long -Term — Total Emissions
324

0.17 0.01
333
Short -Term — Construction Emissions
281

0.01 --
283
Total Construction Emissions
Amortized Over 30 Years

9.43 Total Emissions
342.43
Significance Threshold
3,000 MTCO2E/year
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. California Emissions Estimator Model. Version 2022.1.1.25 (Used in Appendix A)
As indicated in Table 6, the majority of the GHG emissions (252 out of 342 MTCO2E) would originate from mobile sources. As a result, the potential impacts are considered to be less than significant.

City of Rancho Mirage 51
1019

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
b) Less Than Significant Impact:

The City of Rancho Mirage's 2012 Sustainability Plan: Leadership in Energy Efficiency (Plan) serves as a framework for the development and implementation of policies and programs that would reduce the City's GHG emissions. The Plan is within a broader sustainability planning context supported by Southern California Edison (SCE) and its rate payers in a program called "Green for Life." The Plan addresses climate change at the local level by taking action to reduce GHG emissions within the City's operations and within the City with the target of reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 as set by AB 32. In an effort to stay ahead of impending regulations, this Sustainability Plan defines the City of Rancho Mirage's goal of complying, at a minimum, with statewide mandates to reduce GHG emissions. At the same time, through considered action, Rancho Mirage anticipates the following outcomes:
• Increase energy efficiency in local government operations and in community activities; • Create new jobs in the community associated with smart energy management; • Save money now being spent for energy and explore the establishment of a revolving fund whereby energy savings will be available for municipal and community programs to enhance energy efficiency and continue to reduce GHG emissions; • Maintain or enhance the comfortable desert lifestyle of residents and visitors alike; and • Bring the CVAG jurisdictions together for effective regional sustainability and climate action planning.

Rancho Mirage completed the 2010 Greenhouse Gas Inventory creating a path to sustainability.

The inventory provided a detailed and clear analysis of the City's "carbon footprint," showing the sources and sectors of emissions, highlighting opportunities for emissions reductions that make sense for Rancho Mirage. Highlights of the 2010 GHG Inventory for Rancho Mirage are included below. (The full Inventory can be found in Section III of the Rancho Mirage Sustainability Plan):
• In 2010, Rancho Mirage emitted 277,698 metric tons of C02e. To meet AB 32 targets, by 2020 the City needed to reduce its annual emissions by 54,272 metric tons. • In 2010, the largest percentage of emissions - over 43% - came from the electricity used to power the City's homes, businesses, resorts, fountains, and streetlights. • In 2010, the largest percentage of emissions -over 43%- came from the electricity used to power the City's homes, businesses, resorts, fountains, and streetlights. 8.2 Discussion of Impacts: a) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would allow for the development of seventeen single-family residential units.

The Rancho Mirage General Plan's Safety Element in its section on Climate Change includes Goals, Policies and Programs with a preamble identifying the City's efforts to coordinate with state, regional, and County agencies to establish and maintain an up to date database on climate change conditions in the region, legislation affecting the City's regulatory responsibilities, and changing technical assessments that refine or re -characterize the climate change impacts City of Rancho Mirage 52
1020

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
affecting the region. The City would also monitor the effectiveness of its adaptation strategies.

The City's development review process is designed to assure that development proposals are thoroughly evaluated regarding climate change and that comprehensive mitigation measures are developed and implemented. The City is also taking a proactive role to assure the public is safe by informing them about severity of climate change impacts and what resources are available to them to mitigate these impacts. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

The project would also comply with applicable Green Building Standards and City of Rancho Mirage's policies regarding sustainability (as dictated by the City's General Plan, Sustainability Plan, and Energy Action Plan). The previous section evaluated the proposed project's GHG emissions. The analysis determined that the GHG emissions would be below the regionally accepted thresholds. The calculated emissions would not exceed the GHG and criteria air pollutant thresholds and therefore would not interfere with the City's efforts to monitor and do its part to address climate change. The proposed project would not involve or require any variance from an adopted plan, policy, or regulation governing GHG emissions. As a result, no potential conflict with an applicable greenhouse gas policy plan, policy, or regulation would occur and the potential impacts are considered to be less than significant.

8.3 Mitigation Measures:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 53
1021

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
9 - HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Im act
p
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Im act
p
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?
y
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?
l J
x.
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?
i
SOURCES:

1. CaIEPA. DTSC's Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List - Site Cleanup (Cortese List).

2. CalFire. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map.

3. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

City of Rancho Mirage
1022
54 16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

9.1 SETTING
Hazardous materials refer generally to hazardous substances that exhibit corrosive, poisonous, flammable, and/or reactive properties and have the potential to harm human health and/or the environment. Hazardous materials are used in a wide variety of products (household cleaners, industrial solvents, paint, pesticides, etc.) and in the manufacturing of products (e.g., electronics, newspapers, plastic products). Hazardous materials can include petroleum, natural gas, synthetic gas, acutely toxic chemicals, and other toxic chemicals that are used in agriculture, commercial, and industrial uses; businesses; hospitals; and households. Accidental releases of hazardous materials can occur from a variety of causes, including highway incidents, warehouse fires, train derailments, shipping accidents, and industrial incidents.

9.2 Discussion of Impacts:
a) Less Than Significant Impact:

The project's construction would require the use of diesel fuel to power the construction equipment. The diesel fuel would be properly sealed in tanks and would be transported to the site by truck. Other hazardous materials that would be used on -site during the project's construction phases include, but are not limited to, gasoline, solvents, architectural coatings, and equipment lubricants. These products are strictly controlled and regulated and in the event of any spill, cleanup activities would be required to adhere to all pertinent protocols. As a result, less than significant impacts would occur.
b) Less Than Significant Impact:

The project's construction would require the use of diesel fuel to power the construction equipment. The diesel fuel would be properly sealed in tanks and would be transported to the site by truck. Other hazardous materials that would be used on -site during the project's construction phase include, but are not limited to, gasoline, solvents, architectural coatings, and equipment lubricants. These products are strictly controlled and regulated and in the event of any spill, cleanup activities would be required to adhere to all pertinent protocols. As indicated in Subsection D, the project site is not listed in either the CaIEPA's Cortese List or the Envirostor database. As a result, the likelihood of encountering contamination or other environmental concerns during the project's construction phase is remote. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant.
c) No Impact:

There are no schools located within one -quarter of a mile from the project site. The nearest school is Palm Valley School, located approximately 1.4 miles north of the project site. The next nearest schools to the project site include Rancho Mirage Elementary school, and Cathedral City Elementary School. The proposed residential project would not create a hazard to any local school. As a result, no impacts are anticipated.

City of Rancho Mirage 55
1023

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
d) No Impact:

Government Code Section 65962.5 refers to the Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List, commonly known as the Cortese List. The Cortese List is a planning document used by the State and other local agencies to comply with CEQA requirements that require the provision of information regarding the location of hazardous materials release sites. A search was conducted through the California Department of Toxic Substances Control Envirostor website to identify whether the project site is listed in the database as a Cortese site. The project site is not identified as a Cortese site. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
e) No Impact:

The project site is not located within an airport land use plan and the site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. The nearest airports to the project site include the Palm Springs International Airport, which is located approximately 4.7 miles northwest of the project site and the Bermuda Dunes Airport is located approximately 9 miles east of the project.

The project would not introduce a structure that would interfere with the approach and take off of aircraft utilizing any regional airports. As a result, no impacts related to this issue would occur. f) No Impact:

At no time would any adjacent street be completely closed to traffic during the proposed project's construction. In addition, all construction staging must occur on -site. As a result, no impacts are associated with the proposed project's implementation.
g) No Impact:

The project site is not located within a "moderate fire hazard severity zone." As a result, no impacts would result.

9.3 Mitigation Measures:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 56
1024

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
1 O - 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?
❑
❑
f�/
V�
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?
❑
❑
�/
X
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?
❑
❑
1r
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
❑
❑
.d. Pl
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?
❑
❑
❑
f ,
SOURCES:

1. FEMA. Glossary. Flood Zones. Website accessed June 11, 2024.

2. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

3. Fomotor Engineering. Preliminary Hydrology Study for Tentative Parcel Map 38971. July 9, 2024.

City of Rancho Mirage
1025
57 16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

10.1 SETTING
The Clean Water Act (CWA) is the principal Federal law that addresses water quality. The act's primary objectives are to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters." The implementation plan for these objectives includes the regulation of pollutant discharges to surface water, financial assistance for public wastewater treatment systems, technology development, and non -point source pollution prevention programs. The Clean Water Act also establishes that states adopt water quality standards to protect public health or welfare and to enhance the quality of water. The use and value of State waters for public water supplies, propagation of fish and wildlife, recreation, agriculture, industrial purposes, and navigation must also be considered by the states.

The National Pollutant Elimination Discharge System (NPDES) applies to Statewide construction activities including clearing, grading, or excavation that results in the disturbance of at least one acre of total land area, or activity which is part of a larger common plan of development of one acre or greater. In most cases, the NPDES permit program is administered by authorized states.

In California, these programs are administered by the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) that issue NPDES permits and enforce regulations in their respective regions. A requirement of the State General Construction Activity NPDES permit is the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP must identify and implement best management practices (BMPs) to reduce impacts to surface water from contaminated stormwater discharges during the construction of the proposed action. Required elements of an SWPPP include the following: site description addressing the elements and characteristics specific to the site; descriptions of BMPs for erosion and sediment controls; BMPs for waste handling and disposal; implementation of approved local plans; proposed post -construction control requirements; and non-stormwater management.

The City of Rancho Mirage is located within the Whitewater River Watershed, which is an arid desert region in Riverside County encompassing an area of approximately 1,645 square miles.

The Whitewater River Region accounts for approximately 367 square miles (22%) of the Whitewater River Watershed. The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCF & WCD), Coachella Valley Water District, (CVWD), and other incorporated cities within the Coachella Valley including Rancho Mirage, have a joint permittee responsibility for this region, also known as the MS4 Permit area. Development in this area would be required to obtain a NPDES permit.

10.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less Than Significant Impact:

During construction, compliance with waste discharge requirements would be met through the permit registration and coverage process under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, Order No. 2009-0009- DWQ, as amended by 2010- 0014-DWQ and 2012-006-DWQ. This permit is otherwise known as the Construction General Permit (CGP), applicable to any construction activity that results in a land disturbance of equal to or greater than one acre. In addition, stormwater discharges from construction activities that disturb one or more acres, or smaller sites disturbing less than one acre that are part of a common plan of development or sale, are regulated under the National City of Rancho Mirage 58
1026

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permitting program. As a result, the construction impacts would be less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact:

Water used to control fugitive dust would be transported to the site via truck. No direct ground water extraction would occur. Furthermore, the construction and post -construction BMPs would address contaminants of concern from excess runoff, thereby preventing the contamination of local groundwater. These BMP controls may include, but not be limited to, the following:
• Stabilization practices for all areas disturbed by construction and grading. • Structural practices for all drainage/discharge locations. • Stormwater management controls, including measures used to control pollutants occurring in stormwater discharges after construction activities are complete. • Velocity dissipation devices to provide nonerosive flow conditions from the discharge point along the length of any outfall channel.
• Other controls, including waste disposal practices that prevent discharge of solid materials.

In addition, there would be no direct groundwater withdrawals associated with the proposed project's implementation. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact:

The proposed project's location would be restricted to the proposed project site and would not alter the course of any stream or river that would lead to on- or off -site siltation or erosion. As a result, the potential impacts would be less than significant. d) No Impact:

According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance maps obtained for the City of Rancho Mirage, the proposed project site is located in a flood hazard zone, labeled as "Zone X" with the description of "0.2% annual chase flood hazard, areas of 1`)/0 annual chance flood with average depth less than one foot or with drainage areas of less than one square mile." Thus, properties located in "Zone X" are areas of minimal flood hazard. The proposed project site is not located in an area that is subject to inundation by seiche or tsunami.

In addition, the project site is located inland approximately 70 miles from the Pacific Ocean and the project site would not be exposed to the effects of a tsunami. As a result, no impacts are anticipated.
e) No Impact:

The project's construction would not interfere with any groundwater management or recharge plan since there are no active groundwater management recharge activities on -site or in the vicinity.

City of Rancho Mirage 59
1027

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
According to Appendix D - Hydrology Study and WQMP, Each proposed lot within the project site was separately analyzed for proposed condition basin capacity using Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Shortcut Method for the 1, 3, 6, and 24 -hour duration 100 -year storm event to determine the worst - case contributing runoff volume. This computed runoff volume was used to size a proposed retention basin for each lot as per City of Rancho Mirage Standard Detail 310 for Retention Basins. The runoff from each proposed onsite area would be directed via swale system to the proposed retention basin. Adjacent half street frontage was added to the runoff area of each lot.

The materials included with this study are presented to satisfy the criteria set forth in the Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (RCFC & WCD) Hydrology Manual. The onsite/offsite post -developed condition design runoff volume was determined using the worst of the 1, 3, 6, and 24 -hour duration storm for the 100 -year event. Peak discharges of the 100 -year storm event will be determined with the Rational Formula. Synthetic Unit Hydrograph (SUH) calculations were performed in accordance with RCFC & WCD criteria. The Hydrologic Soil Group area was determined with the Natural Resources Conservation Service's National Cooperative Soil Survey (See Reference Material). Point precipitation frequency data was obtained with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Precipitation Frequency Data Server from Atlas 14 (See Reference Material.). The NOAA point precipitation data of the 100 -year event will be plotted on a log -log plot to obtain the slope of intensity duration curve which will be used in the Rational Method analysis. Any necessary storm drains will be modeled with the computer modeling software, Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extensions for AutoCAD CiviI3D 2024, by Autodesk, Inc. Any necessary storm drain inlets will be sized as per AutoCAD Hydraflow Express Extension, Version 12.

Basin infiltration was not used to size the retention basins. A percolation test will be performed in the future. The 1 -hour storm was determined to be the worst case of the 1, 3, 6, and 24 -hour duration 100 -year storm events for the Synthetic Unit Hydrograph analysis. In general, each lot will have an independent retention basin sized to contain the 100 -year 1 -hour runoff from each respective lot as well as the adjacent half -street frontage. Each basin will be four to five feet deep with 3 to 1 side slopes and receive runoff from swale flow (See SUH Shortcut Calculations and Preliminary Hydrology Plan in the Reference Materials). The impermeable area used for calculations was based on a 1 -acre residential lot from Plate D-5.6 of the RCFC&WCD Hydrology Manual and the adjacent half -street frontage was added. The Runoff Index was selected from Plate D-5.5 (1 of 2) of the RCFC&WCD Hydrology Manual.

As a result, no impacts are anticipated.

10.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 60
1028

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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?
❑
❑
❑
r
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:

1. Google Maps. Website Accessed June 11, 2024, and Rancho Mirage Zoning Map, Website Accessed, June 11, 2024.

2. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

11.1 SETTING
The legal framework under which California cities and counties exercise local planning and land use functions is set forth in California Planning and Zoning Law, Government Code Sections 65000-66499.58. Under State planning law, each city and county must adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan. State law provides cities and counties wide latitude in how a jurisdiction may create a general plan. There are certain requirements that must be met including the inclusion of seven mandatory elements described in the Government Code, including a section on land use.

The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the regional planning organization for six counties: Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. The region encompasses a population exceeding 19 million in an area of more than 38,000 square miles. As the designated Council of Governments (COG), the Federal government mandates SCAG to research and develop plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality. These mandates led SCAG to prepare comprehensive regional plans to address these concerns. SCAG is responsible for the maintenance of a continuous, comprehensive, and coordinated planning process resulting in a regional transportation plan. SCAG is also responsible for the development of demographic projections and the integrated land use, housing, employment, transportation programs, measures, and strategies for the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP).

The City of Rancho Mirage General Plan Update, adopted November 16, 2017, includes a chapter dedicated for the land use element: Chapter 2 Land Use. This chapter focuses on a comprehensive plan of the general allocation and distribution of land uses throughout Rancho Mirage as well as setting standards and targets for population density and building intensity. The land use includes residential, commercial, open space, recreation, public buildings, and other categories of public and private land uses. The City of Rancho Mirage utilizes a single map system: the City's General Plan land use designations and the City's zoning designations are the same. The zoning designation for the project site is Residential Estate (R -E) City of Rancho Mirage 61
1029

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

11.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) No Impact:

Land uses and development located in the vicinity of the proposed project site are outlined below:
• North of the project site: The Whitewater Flood Control Channel generally extends along the project area's north side. This area is designated as Open Space — Floodways and Drainage Channels (OS -W).
• East of the project site: Single family homes are located to the east of the project site.

These homes are designated as Residential Estate (R -E). Further east, the Whitewater Flood Control Channel generally extends along the project area's east side. These parcels are designated as Open Space — Floodways and Drainage Channels (OS -W). • South of the project site: Mirage Cove Drive extends along the project area's south side.

Vista Cove at Rancho Mirage, a resort, and a vacant lot are located further south of the aforementioned roadway. These parcels are designated as Residential Estate (R -E). • West of the project site: Nielson Road extends along the project area's west side. Further west of the road are single family homes and a mobile home park. These parcels are designated as Mobile Home Park (MHP) and Residential Estate (R -E).

The granting of the requested entitlements and subsequent construction of the proposed project would not result in any expansion of the use beyond the current boundaries. As a result, the project will not lead to any division of an existing established neighborhood. As a result, no impacts would occur.
b) Less than Significant Impact:

According to the Rancho Mirage Land Use and Zoning Map, the Residential Estate (R -E) designation provides for single family residential developments on lots one acre or larger in size.

The R -E zoning district is intended to provide an intermediate density between more typical residential densities and open space lands. Each individual lot would have a minimum parcel size of 1 acre. Additionally, not only would each individual lot would have a maximum density of 1 du/net acre, at least a 1,000 sq. ft. private outdoor living space, but also the setbacks and other requirements as indicated in the City of Rancho Mirage Code of Ordinance Section 17.08.020 Table 2-3 Residential Zones General Development Standards Requirements by Individual Zoning District. The proposed development would be consistent with this land use designation. As a result, less than significant impact would occur.

11.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 62
1030

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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?
❑
❑
❑
/X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
❑
❑
❑
SOURCES:

1. California, State of. Department of Conservation. California Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources Well Finder.

2. California Department of Conservation. Mineral Land Classification Map for Riverside County. Website accessed June 11, 2024.

3. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

12.1 SETTING
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) has developed mineral land classification maps and reports to assist in the protection and development of mineral resources.

According to the SMARA, the following four mineral land use classifications are identified:
• Mineral Resource Zone 1 (MRZ-1): This land use classification refers to areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. • Mineral Resource Zone 2 (MRZ-2): This land use classification refers to areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood for their presence exists. • Mineral Resource Zone 3 (MRZ-3): This land use classification refers to areas where the significance of mineral deposits cannot be evaluated from the available data. Hilly or mountainous areas underlain by sedimentary, metamorphic, or igneous rock types and lowland areas underlain by alluvial wash or fan material are often included in this category.

Additional information about the quality of material in these areas could either upgrade the classification to MRZ-2 or downgrade it to MRZ-1.
• Mineral Resource Zone 4 (MRZ-4): This land use classification refers to areas where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other mineral resource zone.

12.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a). No Impact:

A review of California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources well finder indicates that there are no wells located in the vicinity of the project site. The project site is not located in a Significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Area (SMARA) nor is it located in an area with active mineral extraction activities. A review of California Division of OH, Gas, and Geothermal City of Rancho Mirage 63
1031

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Resources well finder indicates that there are no wells located within or in the vicinity of the project site. The project site is not located within a designated Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) which means there are no significant mineral resources present on -site. As indicated previously, there are no active mineral extraction activities occurring on -site or in the adjacent properties. As a result, no impacts to mineral resources would occur.
b) No Impact:

As previously mentioned, no mineral, oil, or energy extraction and/or generation activities are located within the project site. Moreover, the proposed project would not interfere with any resource extraction activity. Therefore, no impacts would result from the implementation of the proposed project.

12.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 64
1032

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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?
❑
❑
a
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
❑
❑
x
SOURCES:

1. Toll -Free Airline. Riverside, California.

2. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

13.1 SETTING
Noise levels may be described using several methods designed to evaluate the "loudness" of a particular noise. The most commonly used unit for measuring the level of sound is the decibel (dB). Zero on the decibel scale represents the lowest limit of sound that can be heard by humans.

The eardrum may rupture at 140 dB. In general, an increase of between 3.0 dB and 5.0 dB in the ambient noise level is considered to represent the threshold for human sensitivity. Noise level increases of 3.0 dB or less are not generally perceptible to persons with average hearing abilities.

The most commonly used unit for measuring the level of sound is the decibel (dB). Zero on the decibel scale represents the lowest limit of sound that can be heard by humans.

13.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less Than Significant Impact:

The City regulates noise -generating activities through the Municipal Code and requires that daytime noise levels be 60 dBA CNEL or less at the property line for residential land uses and 45 dBA CNEL or less for all interior areas. Existing land uses in the vicinity of the project site include vacant undeveloped land and residential development. Construction activities would result in localized and temporary increases in ambient noise levels and may impact sensitive receptors.

Construction noise sources are regulated within Sections 8.45.050 and 15.04.030(A) 117.1 of the Rancho Mirage Municipal Code which prohibit construction activities other than the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., with no construction occurring on Sundays or federal holidays. The project's construction will occur during the hours permitted by the City of Rancho Mirage. These restrictions, muffling of construction equipment, and other measures will reduce, to some extent, City of Rancho Mirage 65
1033

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
construction noise impacts on surrounding land uses. Impacts will be temporary and will end once construction is complete.

Construction noise will vary depending on the construction process, type of equipment involved, location of the construction site with respect to sensitive receptors, the scheduled proposed to carry out each task (e.g., hours and days of the week) and the duration of the construction work.

The project's construction noise levels were estimated using the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model Version 1.1. The distance used between the construction activity and the nearest sensitive receptors varied depending on the individual pieces of equipment but a distance of 100 feet was used. The model assumes a 10.0 dBA reduction due to attenuation from the existing walls located along the street frontages of the nearby residential development. The results of the construction noise modeling are presented in Table 7 below. The middle column ("Baseline) indicates the anticipated noise levels adjacent to the construction equipment. The last column indicates the anticipated daytime noise levels 100 feet from the equipment.

Table 7 Construction Noise Levels at the Nearest Sensitive Receptors Construction Equipment
Baseline Max (in Lmax)
Projected Noise Levels
(in Lmax)
Backhoe

77.6 dBA

61.5 dBA
Compactor (ground)

83.2 dBA

67.2 dBA
Concrete Mixer

78.8 dBA

62.8 dBA
Dump Truck

76.5 dBA

60.4 dBA
Excavator

80.7 dBA

64.7 dBA
Grader

85.0 dBA

69.0 dBA
Roller

80.0 dBA

64.0 dBA
Paver

77.2 dBA

61.2 dBA
Tractor

84.0 dBA

68.0 dBA
Flat Bed Truck

74.3 dBA

58.2 dBA
Source: Roadway Construction Noise Model
As shown in Table 7, the majority of the equipment would result in noise levels under 65 dBA at a distance of 100 feet from the equipment generating the noise. All of the adjacent residences are located more than 100 feet from where the equipment would be operating. The proposed project will not expose sensitive receptors to excessive noise levels. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact:

Construction activities would produce varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods employed. While ground vibrations from typical construction activities very rarely reach levels high enough to cause damage to structures, special consideration must be made when sensitive or historic land uses are near the construction site. The construction activities that typically generate the highest levels of vibration are blasting and impact pile driving and the use of a vibratory roller. However, the project would not require blasting, pile driving, or vibratory rollers. The largest piece of vibration -generating equipment that could be used for project City of Rancho Mirage 66
1034

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
construction is a large bulldozer. Large bulldozers generate a vibration level of 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet. Existing or potential noise sensitive residential development is located on all sides of the project site. Ground vibrations associated with construction activities using modern construction methods and equipment rarely reach the levels that result in damage to nearby buildings though vibration related to construction activities may be discernible in areas located near the construction site. A possible exception is in older buildings where special care must be taken to avoid damage.

Table 8 summarizes the levels of vibration and the usual effect on people and buildings. The U.S.

Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) has guidelines for vibration levels from construction related to their activities and recommends that the maximum peak -particle -velocity (PPV) levels remain below 0.05 inches per second at the nearest structures. PPV refers to the movement within the ground of molecular particles and not surface movement. Vibration levels above 0.5 inches per second have the potential to cause architectural damage to normal dwellings. The U.S.

DOT also states that vibration levels above 0.015 inches per second (in/sec) are sometimes perceptible to people, and the level at which vibration becomes an irritation to people is 0.64 inches per second. The effects of vibration on buildings are summarized in Table 8.

Table 8 Common Effects of Construction Vibration
Peak Particle
Velocity (in/sec)
Effects on Humans
Effects on Buildings

3.0 Vibration is unpleasant
Potential for architectural damage and possible
minor structural damage
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
Various types of construction equipment have been measured under a wide variety of construction activities with an average of source levels reported in terms of velocity levels as shown in Table

8. Although the table gives one level for each piece of equipment, it should be noted that there is a considerable variation in reported ground vibration levels from construction activities. The data in Table 9 does provide a reasonable estimate for a wide range of soil conditions. Based on Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, a vibration level of 102 VdB (vibration decibels, or 0.5 inches per second [in/sec]) is considered safe and would not result in any construction vibration damage.

City of Rancho Mirage 67
1035

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Table 9 Vibration Source Levels for Typical Construction Equipment Construction Equipment
PPV @25 ft.
(inches/sec.)
Vibration
(VdB) @ 25 ft.

Pile Driver (impact)
Upper range

1.58 112
Typical

0.644
104
Pile Drive (Sonic)
Upper range

0.734
105
Typical

0.170
93 Clam Shovel Drop

0.202
94 Large Bulldozer

0.089
87 Caisson Drilling

0.089
87 Loaded Trucks

0.076
86 Small Bulldozer

0.035
79 Source: Federal Highway Administration FHWA Noise and Vibration During Construction The project will be required to adhere to all pertinent City noise control regulations. The limited duration of construction activities and the City's construction -related noise control requirements will reduce the potential impacts. A vibration level of 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet would be 0.53 in/sec PPV at 40 feet and 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet (refer to Table 9). These vibration levels would be less than the FTA thresholds. Additionally, construction equipment would move throughout the entire site and would only be located near the project boundaries for short periods of time. Thus, vibration levels at the receptors located near the project boundaries would be less than these maximum levels for a majority of the construction period. Although vibration levels may be perceptible for short periods of time, maximum vibration levels would not exceed FTA thresholds. Therefore, project construction would not generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels, and impacts would be less than significant. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant.
c) No Impact:

The project site is not located within an airport land use plan and is located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. The nearest airports to the project site include the Palm Springs International Airport, which is located approximately 4.7 miles northwest of the project site and the Bermuda Dunes Airport is located approximately 9 miles east of the project. As a result, the proposed project will not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels related to airport uses. As a result, no impacts would occur.

13.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 68
1036

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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:

1. Southern California Association of Governments. The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments. Adopted September 3, 2020.

2. State of California, Department of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State — January 1, 2021-2023. Sacramento, California, May 2023.

3. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

4. United States Census Bureau. Rancho Mirage City, California. 2024.

14.1 SETTING
According to the Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report Adopted on September 3, 2020 by SCAG, the City of Rancho Mirage's population is projected to increase from the year 2016 figure of 18,200 to 25,200 in the year 2045, an increase of 7,000. The 2024 population estimate of the City of Rancho Mirage is 18,001, according to the United States Census Bureau.

The average persons per household is 1.97. An estimated 49.9% of the population in Rancho Mirage is 65 years or older.

14.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less Than Significant Impact:

Growth -inducing impacts are generally associated with the provision of urban services to an undeveloped or rural area. Growth -inducing impacts include the following:
• New development in an area presently undeveloped and economic factors which may influence development. The site is currently undeveloped. All land use surrounding the property are designated for residential development.
• Extension of roadways and other transportation facilities. Future roadway and infrastructure connections will serve the proposed project site only. • Extension of infrastructure and other improvements. The installation of any new utility lines will not lead to subsequent offsite development since these utility connections will serve the site only.
• Major off -site public projects (treatment plants, etc.). The project's increase in demand for City of Rancho Mirage 69
1037

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
utility services can be accommodated without the construction or expansion of landfills, water treatment plants, or wastewater treatment plants. • The removal of housing requiring replacement housing elsewhere. The site contains a single older dilapidated housing unit. As a result, no replacement housing will be required. • Additional population growth leading to increased demand for goods and services. The proposed 16 -unit project would potentially result in 31 new residents assuming an average household size of 1.95 persons per household derived from the 2023 United States Census Bureau for the City of Rancho Mirage.
• Short-term growth -inducing impacts related to the project's construction. The project will result in temporary employment during the construction phase.

The newly established roads and existing utility lines will serve the project site only and will not extend into undeveloped areas. According to the Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report Adopted on September 3, 2020 by SCAG, the City of Rancho Mirage's population is projected to increase from the year 2016 figure of 18,200 to 25,200 in the year 2045, an increase of 7,000. The 2024 population estimate of the City of Rancho Mirage is 18,001, according to the United States Census Bureau. The proposed project will not result in any unplanned growth.

Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact:

The project site's General Plan and Zoning designation is Residential Estate (R -E). The proposed 16 -unit project would potentially result in 31 new residents assuming an average household size of 1.95 persons per household derived from the 2023 United States Census Bureau for the City of Rancho Mirage. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.

14.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 70
1038

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
15 - PUBLIC SERVICES
PUBLIC SERVICES — Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Im act
p
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Im act
p
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:

1. Toll -Free Airline. Riverside, California.

2. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

3. Statement from Riverside County Sheriff's Department's Lieutenant Chrisopher Ternes.

15.1 SETTING
The Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), under contract with the City of Rancho Mirage, provides a full range of 24 -hour fire protection and emergency medical services to the City. RCFD maintains two fire stations within the City of Rancho Mirage, Fire Station 50 and Fire Station 69.

Law enforcement services in the City of Rancho Mirage are provided under a contractual agreement with Riverside County Sheriff's Department (RCSD). The main County sheriff's station is located Palm Desert at 73-705 Gerald Ford Drive. According to Riverside County Sheriff's Department's Lieutenant Christopher Ternes, the RCSD consists of 10 dedicated police personnel, 19 patrol deputies, and 4 non -dedicated deputies.

The project site is within the boundary of the Palm Springs Unified School District (PSUSD). The district provides education from grades transitional kindergarten to grade 12 within surrounding cities such as Cathedral City, Desert Hot Springs, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, and Rancho Mirage, as well as the unincorporated parts of the County of Riverside.

City of Rancho Mirage provides public parks, open space, and multi -city recreational facilities with various amenities. Other public facilities in the City of Rancho Mirage include the City Hall, public library, and observatory.

City of Rancho Mirage 71
1039

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

15.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
i) Less Than Significant Impact:

The Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), under contract with the City of Rancho Mirage, provides a full range of 24 -hour fire protection and emergency medical services to the City. The City's Fire Department serves approximately 25 square miles with an estimated service population of 18,001 (Riverside County Fire Department for Rancho Mirage). RCFD maintains two fire stations within the City of Rancho Mirage, Fire Station 50, and Fire Station 69. Fire Station 50 is located at 70-801 Highway 111. From the City of Rancho Mirage General Plan Update Public Services + Facilities Element, Fire Station 50 covers the southern portion of the City Fire Station 69 is located at 71-751 Gerald Ford Drive. The Riverside County Fire Department operates under a Regional Fire Protection Program, which allows all of its fire stations to provide support as needed regardless of jurisdictional boundaries.

The RCFD currently reviews all new development plans. The proposed project would be required to conform to all fire protection and prevention requirements, including, but not limited to, building setbacks, emergency access, and fire flow (or the flow rate of water that is available for extinguishing fires). The proposed project would only place an incremental demand on fire services since the installation of fire hydrants and sprinkler systems inside the buildings.

Furthermore, the project will be reviewed by County Fire officials to ensure adequate fire service and safety as a result of project implementation. Development of the proposed project would result in a minimal increase in demand for fire services. Service calls could place an additional demand on fire personnel, fire apparatus and equipment. The project will be constructed with strict adherence to all pertinent building and fire codes. In addition, the proposed project would be required to implement all pertinent Fire Code Standards. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant.
ii) Less Than Significant Impact:

Law enforcement services in the City of Rancho Mirage are provided under a contractual agreement with Riverside County Sheriff's Department (RCSD). The Sheriff's department provides 24 -hour police law enforcement services and operates a small police substation at the Rancho Mirage Public Library. The main County sheriff's station is located Palm Desert at 73-705 Gerald Ford Drive. This station is approximately 4.4 miles from the project site. The City's police department patrols 7 days a week, 365 days a year and 24 -hours a day. According to Riverside County Sheriff's Department's Lieutenant Christopher Ternes, the RCSD consists of 10 dedicated police personnel, 19 patrol deputies, and 4 non -dedicated deputies. the City provided a ratio of 1 officer per 786 residents, which is well above the commonly used and accepted ratio of one officer per 1,000 residents. Emergency response times vary and are dependent on the location of patrol cars. The average response time for priority 1 calls in the City of Rancho Mirage was 5 to 6 minutes.

The project site is located in an existing urban area and is currently serviced by the Sheriff's Department. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially increase the need for new or expanded police facilities and response times are not expected to be impacted. Additionally, City of Rancho Mirage 72
1040

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
all new construction in the City will be required to pay Development Impact Fees to assist in offsetting impacts to police services. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant. iii) Less Than Significant Impact:

The project site is within the boundary of the Palm Springs Unified School District (PSUSD). The construction of the proposed 16 single family units would not create a significant increase in school enrollments. The project would be required to pay School Impact Fees to the PSUSD.

According to the Palm Springs Unified School District, current impact fees at the time of writing is $5.17 per square foot for residential development and $0.84 for commercial/industrial development. The payment of these fees is considered to be mitigation of potential impacts. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant.
iv) Less Than Significant Impact:

City of Rancho Mirage provides public parks, open space, and multi -city recreational facilities with various amenities. The proposed project would be required to comply with the City's parkland in lieu fee (Quimby) and other development impact fees requirements. The future residents generated by project implementation may lead to an incremental increase in physical deterioration of City public recreational facilities. The occupancy of the 16 -units would not substantially increase the use of existing parks so as to accelerate their physical deterioration since the site is relatively small and it would provide private open space amenities. Additionally, the project will be required to comply with the City's development impact fee requirements. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant.
v) Less Than Significant Impact:

The proposed project would not generate substantial population growth that would increase the demand for other governmental service. The review of the project indicates that this development will not create any unique public facilities which require extensive maintenance. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant.

15.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 73
1041

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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?
SOURCES:

1. Fomotor Engineering. Tract Map 38971. November 21, 2024.

2. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

16.1 SETTING
The City of Rancho Mirage contains several mini parks and local parks. Mini Parks are usually less than one acre and are intended to complement adjacent uses. These types of parks may be children's play lots, passive seating areas, city entry features, or special purpose open space areas. Local parks are intended for the active and passive recreation needs of nearby residents in the park's vicinity. These types of parks may include picnic areas, playground equipment, hard court areas, multi -purpose playfields, limited parking, and special landscaping and public art. The nearest park is the Michael S. Wolfson Park located approximately 700 feet north of the project site.

16.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less Than Significant Impact:

The project would be required to comply with the City's parkland in lieu fee (Quimby) and other development impact fees requirements. The occupancy of the 16 units would not substantially increase the use of existing parks to accelerate their physical deterioration since the site is relatively small and it would provide private open space amenities. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact:

As previously indicated, the implementation of the proposed project would not physically impact any existing parks and recreational facilities in the City. No such facilities are located adjacent to the project site. The project would be required to comply with the City's parkland in lieu fee (Quimby) and other development impact fees requirements. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant.

City of Rancho Mirage 74
1042

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

16.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 75
1043

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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)?
I I
❑
III
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
❑
❑
I
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
❑
❑
❑
SOURCES:

1. Fomotor Engineering. Tract Map 38971. November 21, 2024.

2. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

17.1 SETTING
The City of Rancho Mirage has two regional routes through Rancho Mirage: State Highway 111 and U.S. Interstate 10 (I-10). These highway routes provide regional and interstate connections for Rancho Mirage and Coachella Valley. There are 5 categories in the Rancho Mirage roadway hierarchy: Major Arterial, Minor Arterial, Major Collector, Minor Collector, and Local streets. The City of Rancho Mirage is required to operate these roads and all corridors at a level of service (LOS) of D or higher. Streets located within and along the boundaries of the project site include Nielson Road, Peterson Road, Kelley Lane, and Mirage Cove Drive are all classified as Local streets.

17.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less Than Significant Impact:

The trip generation for the proposed project is based on the trip generation rates for Land Use 210 - "Single -Family Detached Housing" included in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation, 11th Edition.

City of Rancho Mirage 76
1044

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Table 10 Project Trip Generation
Land Use
Units
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Daily
Single Family
ITE Code 210

0.19 0.56

0.74 0.62

0.37 0.99

9.44 Project
16 units
3 9
12 10
6 16
151
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation, 11th Edition As shown in Table 10, the proposed project is forecast to generate 12 total trips in the AM peak hour, 16 total trips in the PM peak hour, and 151 daily trips. The proposed project would not create a level of service deficiency at any area intersection due to the limited trip generation. As a result, the impacts will be less than significant.
b) Less than Significant Impact:

The City's Transportation Analysis Policy identifies three types of screening criteria under which projects are not required to submit a detailed VMT analysis and a presumption of a less than significant transportation impact can be made based on the facts of the project. Project Type Screening Certain types of projects are exempt from the need to prepare a detailed VMT and may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact as they are local serving by nature, thus shortening travel distances by introducing shopping/services within the community, or they are small enough to not warrant assessment. As specified in the City's Transportation Analysis Policy, the following types of projects may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact:
• Local serving retail projects less than 50,000 square feet; • Day care centers;
• Local parks;
• Local -serving public facilities;
• Ministerial projects;
• Small infill projects;
• Restricted affordable, transit supportive residential projects in planned growth areas with high -quality Transit;
• Transportation projects that do not increase VMT; and • Projects that generate less than 110 daily vehicle trips. This provision generally correlates to typical development as listed as follows: 11 single-family residential dwelling units; 16 multi -family condominium or townhouse residential dwelling units; or 10,000 square feet of office.

The proposed project's trip daily generation is 151 trips. However, the proposed 16 -unit residential development is considered to be a small infill project. According to the VMT legislation (SB 743) an "Infill site" means a lot located within an urban area that has been previously developed, or on a vacant site where at least 75 percent of the perimeter of the site adjoins, or is separated only by an improved public right-of-way from, parcels that are developed with City of Rancho Mirage 77
1045

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
qualified urban uses. The nearest major intersections to the project site are listed below. The proposed project is anticipated to generate 160 daily trips with 13 morning (AM) peak hour trips and 17 evening (PM) peak hour trips. As a result, the impacts would be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact:

The individual units would be located on the Peterson Road and Kelley Lane. The proposed project will not expose future drivers to dangerous intersections or sharp curves and the proposed project will not introduce incompatible equipment or vehicles to the adjacent roads. As a result, the potential impacts would be less than significant.
d) No Impact:

The proposed project would not affect emergency access to any adjacent parcels. At no time during construction will adjacent streets be completely closed to traffic. All construction staging must occur on -site. As a result, no impacts are associated with the proposed project's implementation.

17.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 78
1046

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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
❑
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in
its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code § 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.
❑
SOURCES:

1. CRM TECH. 16 Lot Subdivision Project on Peterson Road. March 25, 2024.

2. Fomotor Engineering. Tract Map 38971. November 21, 2024.

3. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

18.1 SETTING
The California State Government passed AB 4239, creating the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC is responsible for identifying and categorizing Native American cultural resources as well as preventing damages to designated sacred sites and associated artifacts and remains. Legislation passed in 1982 authorized the NAHC to identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) when Native American remains are found outside of any place other than a designated cemetery. An MLD has the authority to make recommendations in regard to the treatment and disposition of the discovered remains.

The Native American Historic Resource Protection Act or Assembly Bill (AB 52), defines guidelines for reducing conflicts between Native Americans and development projects and activities. Projects are subject to AB 52 if a notice of preparation for an EIR is filed or a notice of intent to adopt a Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration is filed on or after July 1, 2016. "Tribal Cultural Resources" (TCR) are protected under CEQA and are defined as a site, feature, place, cultural landscape (must include the size and scope of landscape), sacred place, and object with a cultural value to a California Native American tribe that is either included or eligible for inclusion in the California Register or included in a local register of historical resources. At the lead agency's discretion, a resource can be treated as a TCR if a Native American Tribe provides substantial evidence. Additionally, AB 52 allows tribes to engage in consultation with lead agencies and sets guidelines for such consultation.

City of Rancho Mirage 79
1047

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

18.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation:

A Tribal Resource is defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 and includes the following:
• Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following: included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1.
• 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 I of Section 5024.1.

In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision I of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
• A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision (a) is a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape.
• A historical resource described in Section 21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 21083.2, or a "non -unique archaeological resource" as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 21083.2 may also be a tribal cultural resource if it conforms to the criteria of subdivision (a).

All potentially interested tribes identified by the NAHC were also contacted pursuant to AB -52 for information regarding their knowledge of cultural resources that were within or near the project area. Tribal consultation was completed on May 15, 2025. The tribal consultation letters are attached as Appendix G — Tribal Consultation Letters. All potentially interested tribes identified by the NAHC were also contacted pursuant to AB -52 for information regarding their knowledge of cultural resources that were within or near the project area. These groups include the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians, Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, Cahuilla Band of Indians, Campo Band of Diegueno Mission Indians, Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians, La Posta Band of Duegueno Mission Indians, Los Coyotes Band of Mission Indians, Manzanita Band of Kumeyaay Nation, Mesa Grand Band of Diegueno Mission Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Pechanga Band of Indians, Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma, Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation, Ramona Band of Cahuilla, Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, and Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians.

Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians responded they are "unaware of specific cultural resources that may be affected by the proposed project."
The Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma responded they "[did] not wish to comment on this project." The City has not received any additional correspondence from the Pechanga Band of Indians since April 21, 2025. In accordance with AB 52, and based on the reasonable and good -faith efforts detailed in the City's letter in Appendix G — Tribal Consultation Letters, the City concluded City of Rancho Mirage 80
1048

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
that mutual agreement could not be reached. Therefore, the AB 52 Tribal Consultation period with the Pechanga Band of Indians would be considered closed.

The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) has met with city staff for a consultation meeting to address concerns regarding the project's impact on Tribal Cultural resources. As a result of the meeting, the ACBCI requested the addition of the following mitigations d to ensure the protection of tribal cultural resources within an April 29, 2025 letter . The applicant would be required to follow the mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to tribal cultural resources:

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation No. 1 The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians must be notified a minimum of 30 days prior to any earth -moving activities including grading, grubbing, trenching, or excavations at the site. All earth -moving activities including grading, grubbing, trenching, or excavations at the site shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist and/or approved Agua Caliente Native American Cultural Resource Monitor(s).

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation No. 2 A qualified archaeologist and 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. Should cultural materials be discovered, they shall be recorded and evaluated in the field. The monitors shall be prepared to recover artifacts 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. If artifacts are discovered, these shall be cataloged and analyzed. The archaeologist and monitor, in discussion with the Tribal Historic Preservation Office, shall determine and implement the best course of action for the treatment and disposition of the artifacts.

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation No. 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 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. b) Less Than Significant Impact:

The project site is located within or on the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians territory. A search of the National Register of Historic Places and the list of California Historical Resources was conducted, and it was determined that no Native historic resources was listed within the City of Rancho Mirage. Since the project's implementation would not impact any Federal, State, or locally designated historic resources. As a result, no impacts would occur.

City of Rancho Mirage 81
1049

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

18.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

The analysis of tribal cultural resources impacts determined that the following mitigation measures would be required to reduce the project's impacts to levels that would be less than significant.

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation No. 1 The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians must be notified a minimum of 30 days prior to any earth -moving activities including grading, grubbing, trenching, or excavations at the site. All earth -moving activities including grading, grubbing, trenching, or excavations at the site shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist and/or approved Agua Caliente Native American Cultural Resource Monitor(s).

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation No. 2 A qualified archaeologist and 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. Should cultural materials be discovered, they shall be recorded and evaluated in the field. The monitors shall be prepared to recover artifacts 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. If artifacts are discovered, these shall be cataloged and analyzed. The archaeologist and monitor, in discussion with the Tribal Historic Preservation Office, shall determine and implement the best course of action for the treatment and disposition of the artifacts.

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation No. 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 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.

City of Rancho Mirage 82
1050

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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:

1. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Jurisdiction Review Reports. 2023.

2. Coachella Valley Water District. 2022-23 Annual Review. 2023.

3. Fomotor Engineering. Tract Map 38971. November 21, 2024.

4. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

19.1 SETTING
Groundwater is the primary source of domestic water supply in the Coachella Valley. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) is the largest provider of potable water in the valley and currently provides potable water in the project vicinity. CVWD operates more than 100 wells and serves a population of 290,000 in its service area including the City of Rancho Mirage. There are no existing water infrastructure located on -site.

The CVWD manages wastewater transportation and treatment within the City of Rancho Mirage.The CVWD operates 6 water reclamation plants and maintains more than 1,000 miles of sewer pipelines and more than 30 lift stations that transport wastewater to the nearest treatment facility and nearly 6.3 billion gallons of wastewater is treated yearly.

City of Rancho Mirage
1051
83 16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Solid waste disposal and recycling services for the City of Rancho Mirage is provided by Burrtec.

Solid waste and recycling collected from the proposed project will be hauled to the Edom Hill Transfer Station. Waste from this transfer station is then sent to a permitted landfill or recycling facility outside of the Coachella Valley. These include Badlands Disposal Site, El Sobrante Sanitary Landfill and Lamb Canyon Disposal Site.

19.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less Than Significant Impact:

There are no existing water or wastewater treatment plants, electric power plants, telecommunications facilities, natural gas facilities, or stormwater drainage infrastructure located on -site. Therefore, the project's implementation will not require the relocation of any of the aforementioned facilities. The existing unit located on the property is dilapidated and would be replaced. As a result, the potential impacts would be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact:

Groundwater is the primary source of domestic water supply in the Coachella Valley. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) is the largest provider of potable water in the valley and currently provides potable water in the project vicinity. CVWD operates more than 100 wells and serves a population of 290,000 in its service areas. CVWD's 2012 adopted Water Management Plan and 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) have been developed to assist the agency in reliably meeting current and future water demands in a cost-effective manner. The 2015 UWMP serves as a planning tool that documents actions in support of long-term water resources planning and ensures adequate water supplies are available to meet the existing and future urban water demands. There are no existing water infrastructure located on -site. The proposed development would connect to a new 8 -inch water main and an 8 -inch sewer main in Peterson Road. As indicated in Table 11, the proposed project is projected to consume approximately 9,066 gallons of water on a daily basis.

Table 11 Water Consumption (gals/day)
Use
Single-family Home
Total
Unit
16 units
16 units
Factor
566.6 gals./unit/day`
Generation
9,066 gals./day
9,066 gals./day
Source: Coachella Valley Water Dstrict. 2022-23 Annual Review. 2023. *Based on 301 gals./capita/day
The existing water supply facilities and infrastructure will be able to accommodate this additional demand. In addition, the proposed project will be equipped with water efficient fixtures and drought tolerant landscaping will be planted throughout the project site. As a result, the impacts are considered to be less than significant. As a result, the impacts will be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact:

The CVWD operates 6 water reclamation plants and maintains more than 1,000 miles of sewer pipelines and more than 30 lift stations that transport wastewater to the nearest treatment facility City of Rancho Mirage 84
1052

16 units
16 units
16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
and nearly 6.3 billion gallons of wastewater is treated yearly. CVWD's peak flow factor of 200 gallons per day per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU), was used to determine the proposed wastewater generation for the project. The site was found to provide approximately 55 EDU and estimates a total wastewater demand of approximately 11,000 gallons per day (gpd), or 0.011 MGD. In addition, wastewater generated by the Project will be conveyed to CVWD Wastewater Reclamation Plant Number 10 in Palm Desert (WRP-10). Per the 2015 CVWD Urban Water Management Plan, WRP-10 has a capacity to treat 18 million gallons per day (MGD). This plant treats an annual average flow of 10.8 MGD (12,000 AFY) from the activated sludge plant. There are no existing water infrastructure located on -site. The proposed development would connect to a new 8 -inch water main and an 8 -inch sewer main in Peterson Road. According to Table 12, the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 2,096 gallons of sewage per day.

Table 12 Wastewater (Effluent) Generation (gals/day)
Use
Unit
Factor
Generation
Single Family Residential
16 units
Total
16 units
131 gals./unit/day*
2,096 gals./day
2,096 gals./day
Source: Coachella Valley Water District. 2022-23 Annual Review. 2023. *Based on 69.6 gals./capita/day
The proposed project's sewage generation will likely be lower since the new plumbing fixtures that will be installed will consist of water conserving fixtures as is required by the current City Code requirements. As a result, the impacts are expected to be less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact:

Solid waste disposal and recycling services for the City of Rancho Mirage is provided by Burrtec.

Solid waste and recycling collected from the proposed project will be hauled to the Edom HiII Transfer Station. Waste from this transfer station is then sent to a permitted landfill or recycling facility outside of the Coachella Valley. These include Badlands Disposal Site, EI Sobrante Sanitary Landfill and Lamb Canyon Disposal Site. Cal -Recycle data indicates the Bandlands Disposal site has 15,748,799 cubic yards of remaining capacity, the EI Sobrante Landfill has a remaining capacity of 143,977,170 tons of solid waste, and Lamb Canyon Disposal has a remaining solid waste capacity of 19,242,950 cubic yards.

The proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 259 pounds per day of solid waste (refer to Table 13). The projected quantify of solid waste is limited and can be accommodate by the existing capacity. As a result, the potential impacts are considered to be less than significant.

Table 13 Solid Waste Generation (Ibs./day)
Use
Unit
Factor
Generation
Single Family Residential
259 Ibs./day

16.2 Ibs./unit/day`
Total
259 Ibs./day
Source: California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Jurisdiction Review Reports. 2023.
*Based on 8.60 Ibs./capita/day
City of Rancho Mirage 85
1053

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
e) No Impact:

The proposed project, like all other development in Rancho Mirage and Riverside County, would be required to adhere to City and County ordinances with respect to waste reduction and recycling. As a result, no impacts related to State and local statutes governing solid waste are anticipated.

19.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 86
1054

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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?
❑
❑
X
d) Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post -fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
❑
❑
❑ lir
SOURCES:

1. Fomotor Engineering. Tract Map 38971. November 21, 2024.

2. Rancho Mirage, City of. City of Rancho Mirage 2017 General Plan Update. Adopted November 16, 2017.

3. Rancho Mirage, City of. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. https://ranchomiracieca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Rancho- Mirace-2017-LHMP-Final-Adopted.pdf

20.1 SETTING
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project may be deemed to have a significant adverse impact on wildfire risk and hazards if it results in any of the following:
• The proposed project would, if located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
• The proposed project would, if located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, 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. • The proposed project would, if located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project require the installation City of Rancho Mirage 87
1055

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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.
• The proposed project would, if located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project 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.

According to the City's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, The risk of fire in Rancho Mirage is considered moderate to very high due to a combination of hot dry summers, steep mountain terrain and sparse scrub vegetation. Although the majority of land within the City includes urbanized land such as golf courses, manicured lawns and street parkways, the northernmost area of the City (generally north of Ramon Road) is moderately susceptible to fire.

20.2 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) No Impact:

Surface streets would be improved so as to serve the project site and adjacent area.

Furthermore, the proposed project would not involve the closure or alteration of any existing evacuation routes that would be important in the event of a wildfire. At no time during construction will adjacent streets be completely closed to traffic. All construction staging must occur on -site.

As a result, no impacts would occur.
b) No Impact:

The project site is located in the midst of an undeveloped area. The proposed project may be exposed to particulate emissions generated by wildland fires in the mountains located to the west of the site. However, the potential impacts would not be exclusive to the project site since criteria pollutant emissions from wildland fires may affect the entire City as well as the surrounding cities and unincorporated county areas. As a result, no impacts would occur. c) No Impact:

The project site is not located in an area that is classified as a moderate fire risk severity within a State Responsibility Area (SRA), and therefore will not require the installation of specialized infrastructure such as fire roads, fuel breaks, or emergency water sources. As a result, no impacts would occur.
d) No Impact:

There is no risk from wildfire within the project site or the surrounding area given the project site's distance from any area that may be subject to a wildfire event. In addition, the site is not located within a moderate fire risk and state responsibility area. Therefore, the project would not expose future residents to flooding or landslides facilitated by runoff flowing down barren and charred slopes. As a result, no impacts would occur.

City of Rancho Mirage 88
1056

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025

20.3 MITIGATION MEASURES:

None required.

City of Rancho Mirage 89
1057

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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?
❑
❑
❑
j\

21.1 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
a) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation:

The proposed project would not have the potential to substantially 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, substantially 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.

As indicated in Chapter 2.1 through 2.20, the proposed project will not result in any significant unmitigable environmental impacts.

Biological Resources Mitigation Measure No. 1. Pre -construction surveys for burrowing owls and nesting birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Section 3503 of the California Fish and Wildlife Code shall be conducted prior to the commencement of Project - related ground disturbance.
a. Appropriate survey methods and timeframes shall be established, to ensure that chances of detecting the target species are maximized. In the event that listed species, such as desert tortoise, are encountered, authorization from the USFWS and CDFW must be obtained. If City of Rancho Mirage 90
1058

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
nesting birds are detected, avoidance measures shall be implemented to ensure that nests are not disturbed until after young have fledged.
b. Pre -construction surveys shall encompass all areas within the potential footprint of disturbance for the project, as well as a reasonable buffer around these areas.

Biological Resources Mitigation Measure No. 2. A focused plant survey should be considered for all special status plant species that have the potential to occur on the site to be performed during the blooming season (April -June) to determine the potential environmental effects of the proposed projects on special status plants and sensitive natural communities following recommended protocols by the Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure No. 1. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians must be notified a minimum of 30 days prior to any earth -moving activities including grading, grubbing, trenching, or excavations at the site. All earth -moving activities including grading, grubbing, trenching, or excavations at the site shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist and/or approved Agua Caliente Native American Cultural Resource Monitor(s).

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure No. 2. A qualified archaeologist and 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. Should cultural materials be discovered, they shall be recorded and evaluated in the field. The monitors shall be prepared to recover artifacts 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. If artifacts are discovered, these shall be cataloged and analyzed.

The archaeologist and monitor, in discussion with the Tribal Historic Preservation Office, shall determine and implement the best course of action for the treatment and disposition of the artifacts.

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure No. 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 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. b) No Impact:

The proposed project would not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. The environmental impacts will not lead to a cumulatively significant impact on any of the issues analyzed herein.

City of Rancho Mirage 91
1059

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
c) No Impact:

The proposed project would not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.

City of Rancho Mirage 92
1060

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
Table 13 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Respons
A A ency le
Timing
Verification
(Date and
Initials)

AESTHETICS
No Mitigation was required.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
No Mitigation was required.

AIR QUALITY
No Mitigation was required.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Biological Resources Mitigation Measure No. 1. Pre -construction surveys for burrowing owls and nesting birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Section 3503 of the California Fish and Wildlife Code shall be conducted prior to the commencement of Project -related ground disturbance.
a. Appropriate survey methods and timeframes shall be established, to ensure that chances of detecting the target species are maximized.

In the event that listed species, such as desert tortoise, are encountered, authorization from the USFWS and CDFW must be obtained. If nesting birds are detected, avoidance measures shall be implemented to ensure that nests are not disturbed until after young have fledged.
b. Pre -construction surveys shall encompass all areas within the potential footprint of disturbance for the project, as well as a reasonable buffer around these areas..

Project Developer
Qualified Biologist
City of Rancho
Mirage
Prior to
commencement of
Construction
Biological Resources Mitigation Measure No. 2. A focused plant survey should be considered for all special status plant species that have the potential to occur on the site to be performed during the blooming season (April -June) to determine the potential environmental effects of the proposed projects on special status plants and sensitive natural communities following recommended protocols by the Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Project Developer
Qualified Biologist
City of Rancho
Mirage
Prior to
commencement of
Construction

CULTURAL RESOURCES
No Mitigation was required.

GEOLOGY AND SOILS
No Mitigation was required.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
No Mitigation was required.

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
No Mitigation was required.

HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
City of Rancho Mirage
1061
93 16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
No Mitigation was required.

LAND USE AND PLANNING
No Mitigation was required.

MINERAL RESOURCES
No Mitigation was required.

NOISE
No Mitigation was required.

POPULATION AND HOUSING
No Mitigation was required.

PUBLIC SERVICES
No Mitigation was required.

RECREATION
No Mitigation was required.

TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC
No Mitigation was required.

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure No. 1. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians must be notified a minimum of 30 days prior to any earth -moving activities including grading, grubbing, trenching, or excavations at the site. All earth -moving activities including grading, grubbing, trenching, or excavations at the site shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist and/or approved Agua Caliente Native American Cultural Resource Monitor(s).

Project Developer
Cultural Monitor
City of Rancho
Mirage
Prior to
commencement of
Construction
Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure No. 2. A qualified archaeologist and 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. Should cultural materials be discovered, they shall be recorded and evaluated in the field. The monitors shall be prepared to recover artifacts 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. If artifacts are discovered, these shall be cataloged and analyzed. The archaeologist and monitor, in discussion with the Tribal Historic Preservation Office, shall determine and implement the best course of action for the treatment and disposition of the artifacts.

Project Developer
Cultural Monitor
City of Rancho
Mirage
During the Project's
construction phase
Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure No. 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 Coroner to be of Native American descent, the Coroner shall contact the Native Project Developer
Cultural Monitor
City of Rancho
Mirage
During the Project's
construction phase
City of Rancho Mirage
1062
94 16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
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.

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
No Mitigation was required.

Wildfire
No Mitigation was required.

City of Rancho Mirage 95
1063

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

City of Rancho Mirage 96
1064

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
CHAPTER 3: REFERENCES
The references that were consulted have been identified using footnotes.

CHAPTER 4: APPENDICES (UNDER A SEPARATE COVER)
Appendix A — Air Quality Report
Appendix B — Biological Study
Appendix C — Cultural Study
Appendix D — Hydrology Study and WQMP
Appendix E — Soils Update and Geotechnical Study
Appendix F — Roadway Construction Noise Model
Appendix G — Tribal Consultation Letters
CHAPTER 5: REPORT PREPARERS
Lead Agency
City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, California 92270
Subconsultants
Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning
2211 S. Hacienda Boulevard, Suite 107
Hacienda Heights, California 91745
(626) 336-0033
Marc Blodgett, Project Principal
Raymond Wen, Project Manager
Brian Wong, Project Planner & GIS Technician
City of Rancho Mirage 97
1065

16 Lot Subdivision • TTM 38971
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2025
THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

City of Rancho Mirage 98
1066

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

APPENDIX A
RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User -Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated

3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
1067
1 /80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated

3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.8. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated

3.10. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated

3.11. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated

3.12. Paving (2026) - Mitigated

3.13. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated

3.14. Architectural Coating (2026) - Mitigated

3.15. Architectural Coating (2027) - Unmitigated

3.16. Architectural Coating (2027) - Mitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.1.2. Mitigated

4.2. Energy
1068
2/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.3.2. Mitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.4.2. Mitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.5.2. Mitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.6.2. Mitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
1069
3/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

4.7.2. Mitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.8.2. Mitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.9.2. Mitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

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

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated

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

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off -Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
1070
4/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

5.2.2. Mitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.3.2. Mitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.9.2. Mitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
1 071
5/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5A0.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.11.2. Mitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.12.2. Mitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.13.2. Mitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.14.2. Mitigated

5.15. Operational Off -Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated
1 072
6/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

5.15.2. Mitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2.2. Mitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
1073
7/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

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
1074
8/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field
Value
Project Name
RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971)
Construction Start Date
7/1/2025
Operational Year
2026
Lead Agency
—
Land Use Scale
Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults
County
Windspeed (m/s)

3.30 Precipitation (days)

10.0 Location

33.7677427749099, -116.43910090881545
County
Riverside -Salton Sea
City
Rancho Mirage
Air District
South Coast AQMD
Air Basin
Salton Sea
TAZ
5621
EDFZ
11 Electric Utility
Southern California Edison
Gas Utility
Southern California Gas
App Version
2022.1.1.26

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
Single Family
Housing

16.0 Dwelling Unit

19.8 31,200
1 075
9/80
187,406

52.0 RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

1.3. User -Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector
Measure Title
Construction
Construction
C-9
Use Dust Suppressants
C -10-A
Water Exposed Surfaces

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.

TOG
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM 10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Unmit.

4.04 3.40

31.7 31.8

0.06 1.37

19.9 21.3

1.26 10.2

11.4 -
6,896
6,896

0.28 0.06

1.03 6,923
Mit.

4.04 3.40

31.7 31.8

0.06 1.37

7.89 9.26

1.26 3.99

5.25 -
6,896
6,896

0.28 0.06

1.03 6,923
Reduced
-
-
-
-
-
-
60%
56%
-
61%
54%
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
Unmit.

9.91 9.89

10.5 13.4

0.02 0.43

0.20 0.52

0.40 0.05

0.42 -
2,525
2,525

0.10 0.03

0.02 2,536
Mit.

9.91 9.89

10.5 13.4

0.02 0.43

0.20 0.52

0.40 0.05

0.42 -
2,525
2,525

0.10 0.03

0.02 2,536
%
Reduced
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Average
Daily
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Unmit.

1.12 0.97

6.72 9.09

0.02 0.27

1.35 1.62

0.25 0.59

0.84 -
1,699
1,699

0.07 0.02

0.13 1,707
Mit.

1.12 0.97

6.72 9.09

0.02 0.27

0.56 0.83

0.25 0.24

0.49 -
1,699
1,699

0.07 0.02

0.13 1,707
%
Reduced
—
—
—
—
—
—
59%
49%
1076O%
42%
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
10/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024 Annual —
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Unmit.

0.20 0.18

1.23 1.66
< 0.005

0.05 0.25

0.30 0.05

0.11 0.15
-
281
281

0.01 < 0.005

0.02 283
Mit.

0.20 0.18

1.23 1.66
< 0.005 0.05

0.10 0.15

0.05 0.04

0.09 -
281
281

0.01 < 0.005

0.02 283
%
Reduced
-
-
-
-
-
-
59%
49%
-
60%
42%
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

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

4.04 3.40

31.7 31.8

0.06 1.37

19.9 21.3

1.26 10.2

11.4 -
6,896
6,896

0.28 0.06

1.03 6,923
2026

1.31 1.10

9.94 13.5

0.02 0.38

0.09 0.47

0.35 0.02

0.37 -
2,534
2,534

0.10 0.03

0.41 2,546
Daily -
Winter
(Max)
2025

1.37 1.15

10.5 13.4

0.02 0.43

0.09 0.52

0.40 0.02

0.42 -
2,525
2,525

0.10 0.03

0.01 2,536
2026

9.91 9.89

9.94 13.3

0.02 0.38

0.20 0.52

0.35 0.05

0.37 -
2,522
2,522

0.10 0.03

0.02 2,533
2027

9.91 9.88

0.84 1.18
< 0.005

0.02 0.02

0.03 0.02
< 0.005

0.02 -
147
147

0.01 < 0.005
< 0.005
148
Average
Daily
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
2025

0.85 0.72

6.54 7.00

0.01 0.27

1.35 1.62

0.25 0.59

0.84 -
1,395
1,395

0.06 0.01

0.10 1,401
2026

1.12 0.97

6.72 9.09

0.02 0.26

0.07 0.33

0.24 0.02

0.25 -
1,699
1,699

0.07 0.02

0.13 1,707
2027

0.33 0.33

0.03 0.04
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
-

4.94 4.94
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005

4.96 Annual
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
2025

0.16 0.13

1.19 1.28
< 0.005

0.05 0.25

0.30 0.05

0.11 0.15
-
231
231

0.01 < 0.005

0.02 232
2026

0.20 0.18

1.23 1.66
< 0.005

0.05 0.01

0.06 0.04
< 0.005

0.05 -
281
281

0.01 < 0.005

0.02 283
2027

0.06 0.06

0.01 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
-

0.82 0.82
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.82 1077
11 /80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year
Daily -
Summer
(Max)
TOG
ROG
2025 4.04 3.40
NOx
CO

31.7 31.8
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T

0.06 1.37 7.89 9.26 1.26 3.99 5.25
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
6,896 6,896 0.28 0.06 1.03 6,923
2026 1.31 1.10 9.94 13.5 0.02 0.38 0.09 0.47 0.35 0.02 0.37 2,534 2,534 0.10 0.03 0.41 2,546 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
2025 1.37 1.15 10.5 13.4 0.02 0.43 0.09 0.52 0.40 0.02 0.42 2,525 2,525 0.10 0.03 0.01 2,536 2026 9.91 9.89 9.94 13.3 0.02 0.38 0.20 0.52 0.35 0.05 0.37 2,522 2,522 0.10 0.03 0.02 2,533 2027 9.91 9.88 0.84 1.18 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 0.02 147 147 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 148 Average
Daily
2025
2026
2027
Annual
2025 0.16
2026 0.20
2027 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 -

0.85 0.72 6.54 7.00 0.01 0.27 0.56 0.83 0.25 0.24 0.49

1.12 0.97 6.72 9.09 0.02 0.26 0.07 0.33 0.24 0.02 0.25 -

0.33 0.33 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 1,395 1,395 0.06 0.01 0.10 1,401
1,699 1,699 0.07 0.02 0.13 1,707

4.94 4.94 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.96
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

0.13 1.19

1.28 < 0.005

0.05 0.10

0.15 0.05

0.04 0.09
-
231
231

0.01 < 0.005

0.02 232

0.18 1.23

1.66 < 0.005

0.05 0.01

0.06 0.04
< 0.005

0.05 -
281
281

0.01 < 0.005

0.02 283

0.82 0.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.82

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.

Daily,
Summer
(Max)
TOG
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
078
12/80
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024 Unmit.

1.50 1.43

0.82 7.76

0.02 0.02

1.35 1.37

0.02 0.34

0.36 9.19
2,099
2,109

1.01 0.08

5.37 2,162
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Unmit.

1.29 1.23

0.87 4.60

0.02 0.02

1.35 1.37

0.02 0.34

0.36 9.19
1,910
1,919

1.01 0.08

0.36 1,969
Average
Daily
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Unmit.

1.35 1.29

0.82 5.62

0.02 0.02

1.31 1.33

0.02 0.33

0.35 9.19
1,950
1,959

1.01 0.08

2.40 2,010
Annual
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Unmit.

0.25 0.23

0.15 1.03
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.24 0.24
< 0.005

0.06 0.06

1.52 323
324

0.17 0.01

0.40 333

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
TOG
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Mobile

0.67 0.62

0.66 6.80

0.02 0.01

1.35 1.36

0.01 0.34

0.35 -
1,672
1,672

0.06 0.07

5.14 1,700
Area

0.81 0.80

0.01 0.91
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
-

2.43 2.43
< 0.005
< 0.005
—

2.44 Energy

0.02 0.01

0.14 0.06
< 0.005

0.01 -

0.01 0.01
-

0.01 -
400
400

0.03 < 0.005
-
401
Water
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

1.25 24.7

25.9 0.13
< 0.005
-

30.1 Waste
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

7.94 0.00

7.94 0.79

0.00 —

27.8 Refrig.
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.22 0.22
Total

1.50 1.43

0.82 7.76

0.02 0.02

1.35 1.37

0.02 0.34

0.36 9.19
2,099
2,109

1.01 0.08

5.37 2,162
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Mobile

0.56 0.50

0.72 4.54

0.01 0.01

1.35 1.36

0.01 0.34

0.35 -
1,485
1,485

0.06 0.07

0.13 1,509
Area

0.72 0.72
-
-
-
-
-
-
w
-
"-7n
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
13/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024 Energy

0.02 0.01

0.14 0.06
< 0.005

0.01 -

0.01 0.01
-

0.01 -
400
400

0.03 < 0.005
-
401
Water
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

1.25 24.7

25.9 0.13
< 0.005
-

30.1 Waste
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

7.94 0.00

7.94 0.79

0.00 —

27.8 Refrig.
—
—
—
—
— —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.22 0.22
Total

1.29 1.23

0.87 4.60

0.02 0.02

1.35 1.37

0.02 0.34

0.36 9.19
1,910
1,919

1.01 0.08

0.36 1,969
Average
Daily
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Mobile

0.57 0.52

0.68 5.11

0.01 0.01

1.31 1.32

0.01 0.33

0.34 -
1,524
1,524

0.06 0.07

2.17 1,549
Area

0.76 0.76
< 0.005

0.45 < 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
-

1.20 1.20
< 0.005
< 0.005
-

1.20 Energy

0.02 0.01

0.14 0.06
< 0.005

0.01 -

0.01 0.01
-

0.01 -
400
400

0.03 < 0.005
-
401
Water
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

1.25 24.7

25.9 0.13
< 0.005
-

30.1 Waste
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

7.94 0.00

7.94 0.79

0.00 —

27.8 Refrig.
—
—
—
—
— —
—
—
—
—
—
— —
—
—
—

0.22 0.22
Total

1.35 1.29

0.82 5.62

0.02 0.02

1.31 1.33

0.02 0.33

0.35 9.19
1,950
1,959

1.01 0.08

2.40 2,010
Annual
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Mobile

0.10 0.09

0.12 0.93
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.24 0.24
< 0.005

0.06 0.06
-
252
252

0.01 0.01

0.36 256
Area

0.14 0.14
< 0.005

0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005
-
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
- 0.20

0.20 < 0.005
< 0.005
-

0.20 Energy
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.03 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
-

66.3 66.3
< 0.005
< 0.005
—

66.5 Water
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.21 4.08

4.29 0.02
< 0.005
—

4.98 Waste
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

1.32 0.00

1.32 0.13

0.00 -

4.60 Refrig.
—
—
—
—
— —
—
—
—

0.04 0.04
Total

0.25 0.23

0.15 1.03
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.24 0.24
< 0.005

0.06 0.06

1.52 323
324

0.17 0.01

0.40 333

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector
TOG
Daily, —
Summer
(Max)
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM 10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
1080
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
14/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024 Mobile

0.67 0.62

0.66 6.80

0.02 0.01

1.35 1.36

0.01 0.34

0.35 -
1,672
1,672

0.06 0.07

5.14 1,700
Area

0.81 0.80

0.01 0.91
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
-

2.43 2.43
< 0.005
< 0.005
-

2.44 Energy

0.02 0.01

0.14 0.06
< 0.005

0.01 -

0.01 0.01
-

0.01 -
400
400

0.03 < 0.005
-
401
Water
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

1.25 24.7

25.9 0.13
< 0.005
-

30.1 Waste
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

7.94 0.00

7.94 0.79

0.00 -

27.8 Refrig.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

0.22 0.22
Total

1.50 1.43

0.82 7.76

0.02 0.02

1.35 1.37

0.02 0.34

0.36 9.19
2,099
2,109

1.01 0.08

5.37 2,162
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Mobile

0.56 0.50

0.72 4.54

0.01 0.01

1.35 1.36

0.01 0.34

0.35 -
1,485
1,485

0.06 0.07

0.13 1,509
Area

0.72 0.72
-
Energy

0.02 0.01

0.14 0.06
< 0.005

0.01 -

0.01 0.01
-

0.01 -
400
400

0.03 < 0.005
-
401
Water
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

1.25 24.7

25.9 0.13
< 0.005
-

30.1 Waste
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

7.94 0.00

7.94 0.79

0.00 -

27.8 Refrig.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

0.22 0.22
Total

1.29 1.23

0.87 4.60

0.02 0.02

1.35 1.37

0.02 0.34

0.36 9.19
1,910
1,919

1.01 0.08

0.36 1,969
Average
Daily
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Mobile

0.57 0.52

0.68 5.11

0.01 0.01

1.31 1.32

0.01 0.33

0.34 -
1,524
1,524

0.06 0.07

2.17 1,549
Area

0.76 0.76
< 0.005

0.45 < 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
-

1.20 1.20
< 0.005
< 0.005
-

1.20 Energy

0.02 0.01

0.14 0.06
< 0.005

0.01 -

0.01 0.01
-

0.01 -
400
400

0.03 < 0.005
-
401
Water
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

1.25 24.7

25.9 0.13
< 0.005
-

30.1 Waste
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-

7.94 0.00

7.94 0.79

0.00 -

27.8 Refrig.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

0.22 0.22
Total

1.35 1.29

0.82 5.62

0.02 0.02

1.31 1.33

0.02 0.33

0.35 9.19
1,950
1,959

1.01 0.08

2.40 2,010
Annual
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Mobile

0.10 0.09

0.12 0.93
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.24 0.24
< 0.005

0.06 0.06
-
252
252

0.01 0.01

0.36 256
Area

0.14 0.14
< 0.005

0.08 < 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
-

0.20 0.20
< 0.005
< 0.005
-

0.20 1081
15/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024 Energy
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.03 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
< 0.005
-
< 0.005
-

66.3 66.3
< 0.005
< 0.005
—

66.5 Water
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.21 4.08

4.29 0.02
< 0.005
—

4.98 Waste
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

1.32 0.00

1.32 0.13

0.00 -

4.60 Refrig.
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.04 0.04
Total

0.25 0.23

0.15 1.03
< 0.005
< 0.005

0.24 0.24
< 0.005

0.06 0.06

1.52 323
324

0.17 0.01

0.40 333

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
Onsite
TOG
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
Demoliti
on
Onsite
truck
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

2.86 0.00

0.16 ROG

2.40 0.00

0.13 NOx

22.2 0.00

1.22 CO

19.9 0.00

1.09 SO2

0.03 0.00
< 0.005
PM10E

0.92 0.00

0.05 PM10D

0.00 0.00
PM10T

0.92 0.00

0.00 0.05
PM2.5E

0.84 0.00

0.05 PM2.5D

0.00 0.00
PM2.5T

0.84 0.00

0.00 0.05
BCO2
NBCO2
3,425

0.00 188
CO2T
3,425

0.00 188
CH4

0.14 0.00

0.01 N2O

0.03 0.00
< 0.005
R

0.00 CO2e
3,437

0.00 188
1082
16/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024 Demoliti — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
on
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual
Off-Roa 0.03 0.02 0.22 0.20 < 0.005 0.01
d
Equipm
ent

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.01 0.01 0.01 31.1 31.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 31.2
Demoliti 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
on
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Offsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Worker 0.09 0.08 0.08 1.43 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 223 223 0.01 0.01 0.77 226 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 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 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 11.1 11.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 11.2 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 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 0.00 0.00 Annual
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 1.84 1.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.86 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 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 0.00 0.00 1083
17/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024

3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
TOG
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Onsite
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

2.86 2.40

22.2 19.9

0.03 0.92
-

0.92 0.84
-

0.84 -
3,425
3,425

0.14 0.03
—
3,437
Demoliti
on
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 0.00
-

0.00 0.00
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 -

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Average
Daily
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.16 0.13

1.22 1.09
< 0.005

0.05 -

0.05 0.05
-

0.05 -
188
188

0.01 < 0.005
—
188
Demoliti
on
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 0.00

0.00 —
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 -
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 -

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Annual
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.03 0.02

0.22 0.20
< 0.005

0.01 -

0.01 0.01
-

0.01 -

31.1 31.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
—

31.2 Demoliti
on
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.00 0.00
1084
-

0.00 0.00
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
18/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024 Onsite
truck
Offsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily

0.00 0.09

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.08

0.00 0.00
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005
Vendor 0.00 0.00
Hauling
Annual

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.08 1.43

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
< 0.005 0.06

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00
Vendor 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

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

0.00 0.00

0.20 0.20

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.01 0.01

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
< 0.005 < 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.05 0.00

0.05 0.00

0.00 0.00
< 0.005 < 0.005 -

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 223

0.00 0.00

11.1 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00
223 0.01

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

11.1 < 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.01

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.77 0.00

0.00 0.00
226

0.00 0.00

0.02 11.2

0.00 0.00

0.00 < 0.005
< 0.005
- 1.84

1.84 < 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005

1.86 0.00

0.00 0.00
- 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
- 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
TOG
Onsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
1085
19/80

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024 Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

3.94 3.31

31.6 30.2

0.05 1.37
-

1.37 1.26
-

1.26 -
5,295
5,295

0.21 0.04
—
5,314
Dust
From
Material
Movemer
—
t
—
—
—
—
—

19.7 19.7
—

10.1 10.1
—
—
—
—
—
—
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 -

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Average
Daily
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.11 0.09

0.87 0.83
< 0.005

0.04 -

0.04 0.03
-

0.03 -
145
145

0.01 < 0.005
—
146
Dust
From
Material
Movemer
t
—
—
—
—

0.54 0.54
-

0.28 0.28
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 -

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Annual
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.02 0.02

0.16 0.15
< 0.005

0.01 -

0.01 0.01
-

0.01 -

24.0 24.0
< 0.005
< 0.005
—

24.1 Dust
From
Material
Movement
—
—
—
—
—
—

0.10 0.10
-

0.05 0.05
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
-

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Offsite
—
— —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1086
20/

RNCH 005 - 16 Lot Subdivision (TTM 38971) Detailed Report, 7/12/2024 Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Worker

0.10 0.09

0.09 1.67

0.00 0.00

0.23 0.23

0.00 0.05

0.05 -
260
260

0.01 0.01

0.90 264
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

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

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