Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRes 99-5 CUP 98-4 at 72801 Hwy 111 CITY OF PALM DESERT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT I. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council II. REQUEST: Appeal to Public Works Department condition #6 of P.C. Resolution 1 905 approving a conditional use permit to construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart, located at 72-801 Highway 111 . III. APPLICANT: Chevron Products Company P.O. Box 2833 La Habra, CA 90632-2833 IV. CASE NO: CUP 98-4 CITY COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED V. DATE: January 14, 1999 'CR IV4p,�, OTHER - i� DAT VI. CONTENTS: o.��u,eaz ,n 11 , A. Staff Recommendation ,SENT: �'1 Q .x�. - - B. Background �1.,rD C. Project Description 4 •:i h ' ty Clerk's Office D. Analysis E. Conclusions F. Draft Resolution No. 99-5 G. Planning Commission Resolution No. 1905 H. Planning Commission Staff Reports dated 1 2-1 , 1 1 -1 7, 11 -6, 10-22, 10-6 and 9-15-98), / Minutes dated same Public Works Memorandum dated December 1 , 1998 J. KHR Associates traffic analysis dated October 29, and November 24, 1998 K. Site Plan & Elevations A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council deny the appeal and affirm Planning Commission Resolution 1905, approving Conditional Use Permit 98-4 with Public Works condition # 6 as drafted. STAFF REPORT JANUARY 14, 1999 CUP 98-4 B. BACKGROUND: The proposed project consists of removing Chevron's existing service bay operation and replacing it with a 2,900 square foot convenience store. While the existing fuel station operation will remain the same, the existing canopy would be remodeled to match the proposed convenience store building. The project received unanimous approval by the Planning Commission on December 1, 1998. On December 15, 1998, Chevron filed an appeal to the Planning Commission's decision, specifically Public Works condition #6 (see appeal attached). Condition #6 was modified and approved as follows: The project shall construct street widening improvements (minimum five feet) along Plaza Way property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound lanes (left, through and right) and a six foot wide concrete sidewalk. Public works staff estimates that the construction cost for these improvements will be approximately $48,000. Any cost in excess of 15% of the total improvement costs shall be the responsibility of the City. Chevron's appeal to condition #6 is based on there assumption that their required contribution amount of 15 percent of the total cost for roadway improvements to Plaza Way could be an indefinite one. They request the condition be modified to reflect a fixed amount of $7,000 via a cash bond. The $7,000 figure reflects 15 percent of the Public Works Department estimated cost of $48,000 to a add total of three northbound lanes (left, through and right) to Plaza Way. Based on the Public Works Department analysis (see attached), they anticipate a 15 percent traffic increase due to Chevron's proposed project. In addition to the 15 percent increase in traffic, their analysis found that the Level of Service (LOS) for the northbound Plaza Way leg could be expected to degrade from an existing LOS of "C" to a future LOS of "D" if the required improvements are not completed. Public Works condition #6 originally required Chevron to incur all costs (i.e. $48,000) for roadway improvements on Plaza Way consisting of three northbound lanes (left, through and right). Planning Commission modified the condition to read as presented above, limiting Chevron's responsibility to 15 percent of the total improvement cost. 2 STAFF REPORT JANUARY 14, 1999 CUP 98-4 Although they conceded to the worse case scenario presented by the City's Public Works Department (i.e. 15% increase in traffic), Chevron's traffic consultant, KHR Associates, produced correspondence contradicting the Public Works Department's position (see attached). In correspondence dated November 25, 1998, KHR indicates there is little or no basis for concluding that converting a service bay operation to a food mart would constitute an increase in traffic or a reduction in level of service at the Plaza Way/Highway 111 intersection. They in fact argued that removal of the service bays and replacement with a 2,900 square foot convenience store would reduce the number of vehicle trips to the site. C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Plaza Way. The site is zoned regional planned commercial (P.C.3) and is currently operated as a fuel station by Chevron. The existing property currently provides automobile service and repair along with fuel. The site totals 0.67 acres and is surrounded by regional commercial uses. Specifically, the site is adjacent to Palms to Pines East on the south and east, Palms to Pines shopping center to the west and the Town Center Mall to the north. 1 . ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: North: P.C. 3 / Regional Commercial South: P.C. 3 / Regional Commercial East: P.C. 3 / Regional Commercial West: P.C. 3 / Regional Commercial The precise plan includes the demolition of the existing automobile service building, which also includes restroom and small cashier areas. The new site plan shows the location of the proposed 2,900 square foot retail food mart. The plan includes the addition of new off-street parking spaces adjacent to the building along the west and south. The location of the existing canopy, underground storage tanks and fuel dispenser islands will remain the same. The new building will remain single story, with a maximum height of 21 feet. The building is set back 32 feet from the Highway 1 1 1 , as required by the ordinance. Along the eastern property line there exists a 15 foot setback. 3 STAFF REPORT JANUARY 14, 1999 CUP 98-4 The following table illustrates the project's proposed development standards and ordinance requirements: Ordinance Requirements: STANDARDS PROJECT ORDINANCE Building Height 21 ' 35' Front Setback 32' 32' Rear Setback 37' N/A Side Yard Setback 15 '(East) 136' (West) N/A Parking 12 4/1000 (12) Circulation: The location of the project's two existing ingress/egress points off of Plaza Way will not be modified. Principal access to the site exist via the southernmost driveway on Plaza Way. The northern driveway will remain in use primarily as an egress point back onto Plaza Way. The site will continue to have access to the adjacent Palms to Pines East shopping center through an existing access easement, running east and west. Parking: The proposed 2,900 square foot retail food mart requires 12 off-street parking spaces (4/1 ,000). The site provides a total of 12 off-street parking spaces located along the building's west and south elevations. The 12 parking spaces meet the parking ordinance requirement of 4 spaces per 1 ,000 square feet. Architecture/Landscaping: The building architecture and landscaping was reviewed by the Architecture Review Commission (A.R.C.) on three occasions. Minutes of those meetings are attached. At the August 11 , 1 998 meeting, the A.R.C. approved the building's architecture and landscaping, voting 5-0. The architecture elevations were reviewed and approved based on major improvements to the building's architecture and the fuel dispenser canopy. The existing canopy structure will receive a new metal roof to match the proposed metal roofing for the food mart building. Issue: 4 STAFF REPORT JANUARY 14, 1999 CUP 98-4 New landscaping will be added throughout the site, including along the Highway 111 frontage and the eastern property line. The applicant is requesting a minor exception to the landscape setback area. The ordinance requires that the entire area along a street between the property line and the setback line be landscaped to a minimum depth of 30 feet. The applicant requires a reduction to 20 feet along the northwestern portion of the property line. The reduction is required to accommodate fuel truck turn-around space. Desert landscaping will be utilized throughout the site, using a variety of native plants as approved by the A.R.C. on August 11 , 1998. D. ANALYSIS The proposed project meets all of the City zoning ordinance requirements, with the exception of the 30 foot landscape buffer requirement. Its use is compatible with the existing land uses in the general vicinity. The project's architecture and landscaping were approved by the A.R.C., at the August 1 1 , 1998 meeting. A. FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF DENIAL OF APPEAL: 1 . The required 15 percent cost contribution by the applicant to improve the northbound leg of Plaza Way is required to insure an acceptable level of service "C" as indicated in the Department of Public Works' analysis and is proportionate to the project's magnitude of impact as identified in the traffic analysis. B. FINDINGS REQUIRED FOR APPROVAL A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: 1 . That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of zoning ordinance and the purpose of the district in which it is located. • The proposed retail food mart and automobile fuel station is an allowed use in the P.C. 3 district with Planning Commission approval of a conditional use permit. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public, health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 5 STAFF REPORT JANUARY 14, 1999 CUP 98-4 • The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding uses and existing zoning. The use will not be detrimental to the general public, health, safety and welfare or materially injurious to the properties in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance, except for approved variances or adjustments. • The project is consistent will all applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance. 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goals, objectives and the policies of the city's general plan. • The proposed use is compatible in existing P.C. 3 district, and meets all of the city goals, objectives and policies of the general plan. B. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Community Development has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment and has been classified a class 3 categorical exemption for purposes of CEQA. E. CONCLUSIONS: Staff recommends that City Council approve the conditional use permit as approved by the Planning Commission on December 1 , 1998. This would include condition #6, requiring Chevron to contribute 15% towards future roadway improvement to Plaza Way. Required improvements to Plaza Way will mitigate any level of serv'ce deterioration, due to Chevron proposed project. Prepared by Martin Alvarez Reviewed and Approve by Philip Drell 6 SERVICE STATION SERVICES '99 SIN 15 Rini 11 1J 3 CITY CLERKS OFFICE January 13 , 1999 City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Dr. Palm Desert, CA. 92260-2578 Dear Sir or Madam: Please find enclosed ( 6 ) six letters requesting withdrawal to appeal . Please distribute them to the applicable offices. Thank you for your time and cooperation. Sincerely, Service Station Services 3 HUTTON CENTRE DRIVE SUITE 711 SANTA ANA, CA 92707 714/546-1227 FAX 714/546-0812 SERVICE STATIO \ SERVICES WSJ gill: 15 n!'i 14. January 13, 1999 `� CITY CLERK'S 017ri6E MR. ROBERT A. SPIEGEL, MAJOR MR. BUFORD A. CRITES, CITY COUNCIL MEMBER MS. JEAN M. BENSON, CITY COUNCIL MEMBER MR. JIM FERGUSON, CITY COUNCIL MEMBER MR. RICHARD S. KELLY, CITY COUNCIL MEMBER 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CA 92260-2578 SUBJECT: REQUEST TO WITHDRAW APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL Chevron Products Company 72-801 Highway 111/Plaza Way, Palm Desert Project Number: CUP # 98-4/Conditional Use Permit Honorable Madams/Sirs: On behalf of Chevron Products Company, we request to withdraw our application to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission decision to City Council regarding the above referenced location. The reason for the appeal to City Council is specifically related to Public Works Department condition # 6. Chevron feels that 15% of the total improvement cost would be a fair share contribution towards the improvement of the intersection. Should the City Council desire a presentation, we request a continuance until the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting January 28, 1998. We apologize for any inconvenience we may have caused the City of Palm Desert Development Services Department. Feel free to contact me at (714) 546- 1227 extension 237 should you have any questions or concerns regarding our above request. Sincerely, (4V-11% April D. Smith ADS/dv CC: MR. AL NORRIS, CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY MR. MARIO BAUTISTA, CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY MR. MARTIN ALVAREZ, CITY PLANNER S!;Tr 711 SANTA ANA, CA 92707 714/546-1227 FAX 714/546-0812 RESOLUTION NO. 99-5 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL TO PUBLIC WORKS CONDITION #6 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 1905 AND AFFIRMING PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 2,900 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL FOOD MART, LOCATED AT 72-801 HIGHWAY 1 1 1 . CASE NO. CUP 98-4 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 14th day of January, 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an appeal by CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY INC. for the above mentioned; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. "97-18," in that the director of community development has determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption for purposes of CEQA and no further documentation is necessary; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify their decision affirming Planning Commission Resolution 1905: A. APPEAL: 1 . The applicant's required 15 percent cost contribution for improvements to the northbound leg of Plaza Way are required to insure an acceptable level of service "C" as indicated in the Department of Public Works' analysis and is proportionate to the magnitude of impact as identified in the traffic analysis. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: 1 . That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of zoning ordinance and the purpose of the district in which it is located. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public, health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. RESOLUTION NO. 99-5 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goal s, objectives and the policies of the city s general plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Coucil of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Council in this case. 2. That approval of Conditional Use Permit 98-4 is hereby granted for reasons subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 14th day of January, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT S. SPEIGAL, Mayor ATTEST: SHEILA R. GUILLIGAN, City Clerk Palm Desert City Council RESOLUTION NO. 99-5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. CUP 98-4 Department of Community Development: 1 . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null, void and of no effect whatsoever. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Applicant shall participate in a commercial recycling program as determined by the City Environmental Conservation Manager and applicable Waste Disposal Company. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas. Said placement shall be approved by applicable trash company and Department of Community Development. 6. All future occupants of the buildings shall comply with parking requirements in Section 25.58 of the zoning ordinance. 7. A detailed parking lot and building lighting plan shall be submitted to staff for approval, subject to applicable lighting standards, plan to be prepared by a qualified lighting engineer. RESOLUTION NO. 99-5 8. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the department of public works prior to architectural review commission submittal. 9. Project is subject to Art in Public Places program per Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 4.10. 10. Final landscape plans shall comply with the parking lot tree planting master plan. 11 . Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping for the life of the project, which agreement shall be notarized and which agreement shall be recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run with the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape plan shall include a long-term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate watering times, fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific materials to be planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801 ) and the approved landscape plan. 12. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of building permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, Fringe-Toed Lizard, TUMF, School Mitigation and Housing Mitigation fees. 13. The project s setbacks shall conform the P.C. (3) in Section 25.30 of the City s Zoning Ordinance, with exception to Section 25.30.230 (E). 14. The project shall not include outside telephones. Department of Public Works: 1 . Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of a grading permit. 2. All private driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee paid prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 3. Landscaping maintenance on all public street property frontages shall be the responsibility of the property owner. 4. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans by the Director of Public Works and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works. RESOLUTION NO. 99-5 5. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. 6. The Project shall construct street widening improvements (minimum five feet) along Plaza Way property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes (left, through and right) and a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk. Public Works staff estimates that the construction cost for these improvements will be approximately $48,000. Any costs in excess of 15% of the total improvement costs shall be the responsibility of the City. 7. Building pad elevations for the proposed project are subject to review and modification in accordance with Section 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 8. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF). Payment of said fees shall be at time of building permit issuance. Riverside County Fire Department: 1 . With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plan check, Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Codes, appropriate NFPA Standards, CFC, CBC, and/or recognized fire protection standards. The fire department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per California Fire Code Sec. 10.401 . 2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure must be available before any combustible materials are placed on the job site. 3. Provide, or show there exists, a water system capable of providing a potential gallon per minute flow of 3000 gpm for commercial. The actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given water main shall be 1500 GPM for two hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. 4. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6"x4"x2-1 /2"x2- 1 /2'), located not less than 150 commercial from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. Hydrants installed below 3000 feet elevation shall be of the "wet barrel" type. 5. Prior to the application for a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and two copies of the water system plan to the County Fire Department for RESOLUTION NO. 99-5 review. No building permit shall be issued until the water system plan has been approved by the County Fire Chief. Upon approval, the original will be returned. One copy will be sent to the responsible inspecting authority. 6. Comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, adopted January 1 , 1990, for all occupancies. 7. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanesand shall g q be clearly marked by painting and or signs approved by the Fire Marshal. 8. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet # 10, but not less than 2A1OBC in rating. Fire extinguishers must not be over 75 feet walking distance. In addition to the above, a 40BC extinguisher is required for commercial kitchens. 9. All buildings shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall be not less than 24' of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is allowed, the roadway shall be 36 wide with parking on both sides, 32 wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 1 50 shall be provided with a minimum 45 radius turn-around (55 in industrial developments). Fountains or garden islands placed in the middle of these turn- arounds shall not exceed a 5 radius or 10 diameter. City standards may be more restrictive. 10. Contact the Fire Department for final inspection prior to occupancy. 11 . This project may require licensing and/or review by State agencies. Applicant should prepare a letter of intent detailing the proposed usage to facilitate case review. Contact should be made with the Office of the State Fire Marshal (818- 960-6441 ) for an opinion and a classification of occupancy type. This information and a copy of the letter of intent should be submitted to the fire Department so that proper requirements may be specified during the review process. Typically this applies to educational, day care, institutional, health care, etc. 12. Commercial buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city. 13. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be submitted separately for approval prior to construction. Subcontractors should contact the fire marshal's office for submittal requirements. 14. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve months. DEC-02-66 13: 36 FROM:CITY OF PALM DESERT ID- 760 340 0574 PAGE 2/2 .-•••mow•••• I' 3/91 Y it _ = CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFOR • - rn ."Laf. APPLICATION TO APPEAL ,cook N 3 rj; DECISION OF THE Planning Commission 2, (Name of Committee/Commission)' rn Case No. CUP 98-4 Meeting Date: December 1 , 1998 Name of Appellant Chevron Products Company Address 1300 S. Beach Blvd., La Habra, CA 90632-2833 Phone: (562) 694-7578 Description of Application: Request approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construciton of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart. Reason for Appeal: "Please see attached" Signature of AppellantL ia Date/2// -/96 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY o0 Date Appeal Filed: 19.' + Fee Received: `pn Treasurer's Receipt#: -1-1 I--1 Received by: Public Hearing Set For: ►4 - Action taken by the City Council: - Date: Sheila R Gilligan,City Clerk CD C> CC 0 r„ SERVICE STATION `J' m SERVICES cp -n N CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY 72801 HIGHWAY 111 @ PLAZA WAY m i--' PALM DESERT, CA #9-3047 LETTER OF APPEAL On behalf of Chevron Products Company, we appeal to Condition No. 6 from Resolution No. 1905 of the Conditional Use Permit 98-4, adopted by the Planning Commission December 1, 1998. The City of Palm Desert Department of Public Works is requiring Chevron Products Company to complete extensive street improvements on Plaza Way. Condition No. 6 requires the widening of Plaza Way by five feet along the property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes along with a six foot wide concrete sidewalk. Chevron Products Company does not feel we should assume responsibility for 15% of the total improvement costs and should not be accountable for the modifications to the northbound travel lane and construction of the sidewalk. Chevron Products Company is proposing that the condition be modified in lieu of the street widening costs and off-site improvements. The dollar amount calculated by the City of Palm Desert is indefinite, for this reason we are requesting the issuance of a cash bond for the improvements. We are proposing to post a cash bond in the amount of$7,000.00 that will replace the 15% of the total improvement costs. On November 24, 1998 KHR Associates reported the Results of Intersection Level of Service Analysis for Highway 111 @ Plaza Way. KHR Associates suggests an alternative to mitigate any traffic created by the Chevron station. They propose the installation of a split-phase signal that will help ameliorate the traffic on Plaza Way. KHR Associates says "Consideration should be given to a split-phase operation for Plaza Way traffic. This congestion may be attributable to the lack of separate left turn phasing for north-south (Plaza Way) traffic. This will add some delay to Highway 111 traffic, but significantly improve overall traffic conditions at the subject intersection." The estimated cost for a split-phase signal is approximately $7,000.00. We feel a $7,000.00 cash bond is appropriate and fair recompense for any traffic resulting from the improvement at our facility. The conversion to a convenience market will not have any effects on traffic congestion. KHR Associates states that case studies have shown that the conversion of the service bays at the Chevron service station to a convenience store will not result in any increase in traffic. They predict that under the worst case scenario, the proposed Chevron station will add a 1.25% increase in existing vehicle volume to the intersection. KHR Associates say "With such a minute increase, the Level of Service (LOS) does not change, and any deterioration in LOS is imperceptible. Therefore, improvements to Plaza Way or the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way do not appear warranted based solely on the proposed Chevron project and its related traffic impacts." Condition No. 6, if exacted by the City of Palm Desert, would require additional expense for permits and off-site improvements through Cal. Trans., consulting engineers and applicable agencies from the City of Palm Desert. The expenditures for permit acquisition of the convenience market along with the City's requested supplementary expenditures for the off-site improvements will require unexpected costs Chevron that will render this project economically infeasible. The proposed construction of the convenience market will commence subsequent to the construction of the adjacent shopping center. The shopping center is proposing a new access driveway to the shopping center via Highway 111. This additional driveway via Highway 111 will abate the existing traffic conditions at the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way by offering an auxiliary passage way to the shopping center. Chevron Products Company would like to agree upon a suitable solution with the City of Palm Desert. We are willing to post a bond in the amount of$7,000 to be used towards a split-phase signal light or a fair share contribution toward the off- site improvements in order to accommodate the projected traffic. The City of Palm Desert shall be responsible for off-site improvement plans and permits from both local and State jurisdictions. cfl CC - rn n C m i-'' C) m Vi �7 < o rn T. o --rs N n m 2 • ." i�7#' • . , - .., .v•.*5..4 :S 141N11 Cf brld4i i+OP.O.•-i'bi0J'".MO►..:?+s.*•.r•h wTi,+',.•..T.,.4.. •. -.... 1 �,..e .., —. _ . -.. ._ w /: 8715 ,r`e`'' SERVICE STATION SERVICES, INC. ' -' - 3 HUTTON CENTER DR., STE. 711 714546-1227 '. SANTA ANA, CA 92707 - 11 y Q 18-351 • DATE '21 l �/L L 1220 18 PAY lit ^ , _ TO THE It.'/1� - • - s ORDER OF I $ �00 • .c: t/ -•. DOLLARS B %..,,• �-Y E. Martin Office 0016 - .- ,`w a,YYiJ • 701 Plot Sheet . C - - I - - Bank FOR C $oer- 'Am �� Aa . iv."0087i ii' 'I: i2200 Si6I: 0i68s'107i490 . , DEC-02-SS 13: 36 FROM:CITY OF PALM DESERT ID: 760 340 0574 PAGE 1/2 • �A ��., City of Palm Desert •' °?. Air =' 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California 92260-2578 Telephone (760)346-0611 Fax(760)340-0574 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM DELIVER TO: APRIL SMITH AGENCY/FIRM: DEPARTMENT: DATE: 12/02/98 FAX NUMBER: (714) 546-0812 PHONE: VERIFY: 2 Pages INCLUDING this cover sheet_ If this transmission is incomplete, immediately call person designated below: FROM: Rochelle K1a;sen, Deputy City Clerk • DEPARTMENT: DEPT. OF COML4UNITY JFFAIRS/CITY CLERK PHONE: (760)346-0611 Ext. 304 COMMENTS: Following is a City of Palm Desert "Application To Appeal" form. Appeals of Planning Commission decisions are accepted in the Office of the City Clerk, providing they are received within 15 days of the date of the Planning Commission' s decision. These appeals must also be filed with a $50. 00 fee. Please let me know if there is any further information my office or the Department of Community Development can provide_ — d -ix - fl a l-i► i 211d Sda-v3' /61)\ it F ©OV oU pti�� Desert .!-aa 1 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 -a7 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. CUP 98-4 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider a request by CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the demolition of an existing service building and the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart located at 72-801 Highway 111. Property is also particularly described as A.P.N. 640-170-003. )\...) L_ 1---1.: le a•.4.,,( �' a Vona r 1,4 �� <ALMDESLRT �'" �' OWN CENTER PQ ii��in � . .T ' w SOf pow l_ ��� 0000 0000. \ ...............„ ,...0.00.0.0. • P.C.—(3) r-1 P. .— 3) S.P. S.P. EL PASEO NORTH �P C• 1 _ • P.R.76 • • W ` . • Q. , ^• ..,.. • LIW• / c : i4v rq..*.r1 i1: 7r--"isr.-it r.- - r----7.- r"..,•-• 0 • -,-- o 1 ; SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, January 14, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions 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 planning commission (or city council) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Sun SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, CITY CLERK December 21, 1998 Palm Desert City Council PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1905 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 2,900 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL FOOD MART, LOCATED AT 72-801 HIGHWAY 111 . CASE NO. CUP 98-4 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 1st day of December, 1998, hold a duly noticed public hearing which was continued from September 1 5, October 6, November 3 and November 17, 1998, to consider the request by CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY INC. of the above mentioned; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. "97-18," in that the director of community development has determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption for purposes of CEQA and no further documentation is necessary; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify the granting of said conditional use permit: 1 . That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of zoning ordinance and the purpose of the district in which it is located. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public, health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance, except for approved variances or adjustments. 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goal's, objectives and the policies of the city's general plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1905 • 2. That approval of Conditional Use Permit 98-4 is hereby granted for reasons subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 1st day of December, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: BEATY, FINERTY, JONATHAN, CAMPBELL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: FERNANDEZ 4 \-7// )), �SONIA M. CAMPBELL, Chairfoerson ATTEST: • PHILIP DRELL>Secretary Palm Desert Pinning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1905 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. CUP 98-4 Department of Community Development: 1 . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null, void and of no effect whatsoever. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Applicant shall participate in a commercial recycling program as determined by the City Environmental Conservation Manager and applicable Waste Disposal Company. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas. Said placement shall be approved by applicable trash company and Department of Community Development. 6. All future occupants of the buildings shall comply with parking requirements in Section 25.58 of the zoning ordinance. 7. A detailed parking lot and building lighting plan shall be submitted to staff for approval, subject to applicable lighting standards, plan to be prepared by a qualified lighting engineer. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1905 8. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the department of public works prior to architectural review commission submittal. 9. Project is subject to Art in Public Places program per Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 4.10. 10. Final landscape plans shall comply with the parking lot tree planting master plan. 11 . Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping for the life of the project, which agreement shall be notarized and which agreement shall be recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run with the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape plan shall include a long-term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate watering times, fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific materials to be planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801 ) and the approved landscape plan. 12. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of building permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, Fringe-Toed Lizard, TUMF, School Mitigation and Housing Mitigation fees. 13. The project's setbacks shall conform the P.C. (3) in Section 25.30 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, with exception to Section 25.30.230 (E). 14. The project shall not include outside telephones. Department of Public Works: 1 . Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of a grading permit. 2. All private driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee paid prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 3. Landscaping maintenance on ail public street property frontages shall be the responsibility of the property owner. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1905 4. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans by the Director of Public Works and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works. 5. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. 6. The Project shall construct street widening improvements (minimum five feet) along Plaza Way property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes (left, through and right) and a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk. Public Works staff estimates that the construction cost for these improvements will be approximately $48,000. Any costs in excess of 1 5% of the total improvement costs shall be the responsibility of the City. 7. Building pad elevations for the proposed project are subject to review and modification in accordance with Section 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 8. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF). Payment of said fees shall be at time of building permit issuance. Riverside County Fire Department: 1 . With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plan check, Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Codes, appropriate NFPA Standards, CFC, CBC, and/or recognized fire protection standards. The fire department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per California Fire Code Sec. 10.401 . 2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure must be available before any combustible materials are placed on the job site. 3. Provide, or show there exists, a water system capable of providing a potential gallon per minute flow of 3000 gpm for commercial. The actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given water main shall be 1500 GPM for two hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. 4. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6"x4"x2-1/2"x2- 1 /2"), located not less than 150' commercial from any portion of the building(s) as 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1905 measured along approved vehicular travelways. Hydrants installed below 3000 feet elevation shall be of the "wet barrel" type. 5. Prior to the application for a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and two copies of the water system plan to the County Fire Department for review. No building permit shall be issued until the water system plan has been approved by the County Fire Chief. Upon approval, the original will be returned. One copy will be sent to the responsible inspecting authority. 6. Comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, adopted January 1 , 1990, for all occupancies. 7. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes and shall be clearly marked by painting and or signs approved by the Fire Marshal. 8. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet # 10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Fire extinguishers must not be over 75 feet walking distance. In addition to the above, a 40BC extinguisher is required for commercial kitchens. 9. All buildings shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall be not less than 24' of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is allowed, the roadway shall be 36' wide with parking on both sides, 32' wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150' shall be provided with a minimum 45' radius turn-around (55' in industrial developments). Fountains or garden islands placed in the middle of these turn-arounds shall not exceed a 5' radius or 10' diameter. City standards may be more restrictive. 10. Contact the Fire Department for final inspection prior to occupancy. 1 1 . This project may require licensing and/or review by State agencies. Applicant should prepare a letter of intent detailing the proposed usage to facilitate case review. Contact should be made with the Office of the State Fire Marshal (81 8-960-6441 ) for an opinion and a classification of occupancy type. This information and a copy of the letter of intent should be submitted to the fire Department so that proper requirements may be specified during the review process. Typically this applies to educational, day care, institutional, health care, etc. 1 2. Commercial buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1905 13. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be submitted separately for approval prior to construction. Subcontractors should contact the fire marshal's office for submittal requirements. 14. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve months. 7 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: December 1 , 1998, continued from 9-15, 10-6, 11-3, and 1 1-17- 98 CASE NO: CUP 98-4 REQUEST: Approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart, located at 72-801 Highway 1 1 1 . APPLICANT: Chevron Products Company P.O. Box 2833 La Habra, CA 90632-2833 DISCUSSION: Commission will recall this matter was continued from the September 15, October 6, November 3, and November 17, 1998 meetings to allow the applicant to work with staff to address the hours of operation and Public Works' conditions of approval Nos. 6 and 7. Hours of Operation: Staff has addressed the hours of operation in the October 6, and November 3, 1998 staff reports and recommends Commission allow the service station and convenience store to remain open 24 hours per day, with the sale of alcohol hours to be determined by the Alcohol and Beverage Control agency. Public Works Conditions 6 and 7: Commission will recall at the November 17, 1998 Commission meeting, the Public Works Department submitted two memoranda dated November 12, 1998 and November 5, 1998, addressing the site specific study conducted by Chevron's consultant on a comparable site. As summarized in the Public Works memoranda, the study anticipated an increase in traffic with the construction of a new convenience store. The Public Works Department thus justifies the use of Condition #6 to mitigate congestion on Plaza Way caused by the proposed project. Language to the condition has been added as follows: STAFF REPORT DECEMBER 1, 1998 CUP 98-4 6. The Project shall construct street widening improvements (minimum five feet) along Plaza Way property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes (left, through and right) and a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk. Public Works staff estimates that the construction cost for these improvements will be approximately $48,000. Any costs in excess of this amount shall be the responsibility of the City. The remaining issue raised by the applicant was regarding Public Works condition of approval No. 7. Condition No. 7 requires a maximum width of 38' for both driveways along Plaza Way, as illustrated on the site plan. After further review the Public Works has deleted this condition. The Public Works Department received correspondence (November 24, 1998) from KHR Associates, the day packets were distributed. The correspondence addresses results of an intersection level of service analysis for Highway 111 and Plaza Way. City staff did not have sufficient time to respond to the correspondence and thus will prepare a response and oral report for the December 1 , 1 998 meeting. II. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. , subject to the attached conditions. III. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Resolution B. Staff report/minutes dated September 1 5, October 6, November 3, and November 17, 1998. C. Public Works memorandum dated November 24, 1998 D. KHR Asso iates, Intersection Level of Service Analysis Prepared by: ct-if artin Alvarez Reviewed and Approved by: Philip Drell PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 2,900 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL FOOD MART, LOCATED AT 72-801 HIGHWAY 111 . CASE NO. CUP 98-4 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 1st day of December, 1998, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY INC. of the above mentioned; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. "97-18," in that•the director of community development has determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption for purposes of CEQA and no further documentation is necessary; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify the granting of said conditional use permit: 1 . That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of zoning ordinance and the purpose of the district in which it is located. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public, health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance, except for approved variances or adjustments. 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goal's, objectives and the policies of the city's general plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2. That approval of Conditional Use Permit 98-4 is hereby granted for reasons subject to the attached conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 1st day of December, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SONIA M. CAMPBELL, Chairperson ATTEST: PHILIP DRELL, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. C.U.P 98-4 Department of Community Development: 1 . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null, void and of no effect whatsoever. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Applicant shall participate in a commercial recycling program as determined by the City Environmental Conservation Manager and applicable Waste Disposal Company. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas. Said placement shall be approved by applicable trash company and Department of Community Development. 6. All future occupants of the buildings shall comply with parking requirements in Section 25.58 of the zoning ordinance. 7. A detailed parking lot and building lighting plan shall be submitted to staff for approval, subject to applicable lighting standards, plan to be prepared by a qualified lighting engineer. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 8. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the department of public works prior to architectural review commission submittal. 9. Project is subject to Art in Public Places program per Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 4.10. 10. Final landscape plans shall comply with the parking lot tree planting master plan. 11 . Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping for the life of the project, which agreement shall be notarized and which agreement shall be recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run with the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape plan shall include a long-term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate watering times, fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific materials to be planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801 ) and the approved landscape plan. 12. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of building permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, Fringe-Toed Lizard, TUMF, School Mitigation and Housing Mitigation fees. 13. The project's setbacks shall conform the P.C. (3) in Section 25.30 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, with exception to Section 25.30.230 (E). Department of Public Works: 1 . Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of a grading permit. 2. All private driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee paid prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 3. Landscaping maintenance on all public street property frontages shall be the responsibility of the property owner. 4. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans by the Director of Public Works and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. 6. The Project shall construct street widening improvements (minimum five feet) along Plaza Way property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes (left, through and right) and a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk. Public Works staff estimates that the construction cost for these improvements will be approximatley $48,000. Any costs in excess of this amount shall be the responsibility of the City. 8. Building pad elevations for the proposed project are subject to review and modification in accordance with Section 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 9. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF). Payment of said fees shall be at time of building permit issuance. Riverside County Fire Department: 1 . With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plan check, Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Codes, appropriate NFPA Standards, CFC, CBC, and/or recognized fire protection standards. The fire department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per California Fire Code Sec. 10.401 . 2. A fire flow of 1 500 gpm for a 1 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure must be available before any combustible materials are placed on the job site. 3. Provide, or show there exists, a water system capable of providing a potential gallon per minute flow of 3000 gpm for commercial. The actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given water main shall be 1500 GPM for two hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. 4. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6"x4"x2-1/2"x2- 1/2"), located not less than 150' commercial from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. Hydrants installed below 3000 feet elevation shall be of the "wet barrel" type. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5. Prior to the application for a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and two copies of the water system plan to the County Fire Department for review. No building permit shall be issued until the water system plan has been approved by the County Fire Chief. Upon approval, the original will be returned. One copy will be sent to the responsible inspecting authority. 6. Comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, adopted January 1 , 1990, for all occupancies. 7. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes and shall be clearly marked by painting and or signs approved by the Fire Marshal. 8. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet # 10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Fire extinguishers must not be over 75 feet walking distance. In addition to the above, a 40BC extinguisher is required for commercial kitchens. 9. All buildings shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall be not less than 24' of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is allowed, the roadway shall be 36' wide with parking on both sides, 32' wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 1 50' shall be provided with a minimum 45' radius turn-around (55' in industrial developments). Fountains or garden islands placed in the middle of these turn-arounds shall not exceed a 5' radius or 10' diameter. City standards may be more restrictive. 10. Contact the Fire Department for final inspection prior to occupancy. 11 . This project may require licensing and/or review by State agencies. Applicant should prepare a letter of intent detailing the proposed usage to facilitate case review. Contact should be made with the Office of the State Fire Marshal (818- 960-6441 ) for an opinion and a classification of occupancy type. This information and a copy of the letter of intent should be submitted to the fire Department so that proper requirements may be specified during the review process. Typically this applies to educational, day care, institutional, health care, etc. 12. Commercial buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city. 13. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be submitted separately for approval prior to construction. Subcontractors should contact the fire marshal's office for submittal requirements. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve months. 7 • CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Martin Alvarez, Assistant Planner FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Engineering Manager SUBJECT: CUP 98-4 — CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY DATE: November 24, 1998 Based on our further review and analysis, Public Works Condition Number 7, relating to driveway width, should be deleted. In addition, the following language should be added to Public Works Condition No. 6. * Public Works staff estimates that the construction cost for these improvements will be approximately $48,000. Any costs in excess of this amount shall be the responsibility of the City. /JOSEPH S. GAUGUSH, P.E. JSG/ms cc: Richard J. Folkers Phil Drell Mark Greenwood 11/4U/1770 iu.ui 347-/3b-b444 KHK A55UUTAIt5 YAUL 61 ► KHR ASSOCIATES Consulting Engineers -Architects - Plannere November 24, 1998 Mr. Joseph Gaugush, Engineering Manager City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 SUBJECT: RESULTS OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS FOR HIGHWAY 111/PLAZA WAY, IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CAUFORNIA—CASE NO.C.U.P.98-4(SENT VIA FAX) Dear Mr. Gaugush: The information contained herein has been prepared at the request of Chevron • Products Company to document existing and projected levels of service at the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way, in the City of Palm Desert, California. INTERSECTION DESCRIPTION The intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way is signalized for 5 phases of traffic movement Highway 111 features 3 through lanes in each (westbound and eastbound) direction. The westbound approach leg also features a separate left turn lane. The eastbound approach leg features dual left turn lanes. Plaza Way features 1 through lane and I left turn lane on the northbound approach leg, and 1 right turn lane, 1 left turn lane, and a shared through/left turn lane on the southbound approach leg. TRAFFIC COUNTS On Friday, November 20, 1998, peak hour traffic turn movement counts were taken at the subject intersection between 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. The peak hour occurred between 5:00 and 6:00 P.M. This period of time represents the worst case situation with respect to traffic conditions along Highway 111 and at the subject intersection. A summary of the traffic counts is attached herewith. Weather conditions at the time of the counts were sunny, very little wind, and clear. There were no unusual traffic conditions, accidents, or ongoing special events in the vicinity of intersection. EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE The level of service (LOS) of a roadway segment or an intersection is a qualitatively defined measure of prevailing traffic, design, and operational conditions_ The LOS, denoted alphabetically from "A"to "F," best to worst, is an evaluation of the degree of congestion, roadway design constraints, delay, accident potential, and driver discomfort experienced during a given period of time-typically during the peak hour or 2355 Maln Street-Suite 120 (949) 756-6440 Irvine, California 92814 FAX(949) 766-6444 11/L3/1770 117;!71 747-f 3b-b444 KHK A55UU1 I L5 HAUL 112 Mr.Joseph Geugush 11 R4/98 Page 2 of 4 on a daily basis. While LOS "A" is the most desirable operational state for a roadway segment or intersection, LOS"C" is considered a benchmark for planning purposes. In more urbanized areas, LOS "D" is an accepted condition for peak hours of vehicular travel on major streets and highways. The LOS may be quantitatively calculated by a number of methods, including the Highway Capacity Method (HCM) and the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method. Regardless of the method, a LOS calculation generally compares traffic volumes with the physical and operational capacity of a roadway section or intersection to carry traffic demands placed upon it. Table I lists typical LOS definitions for intersections. TABLE I Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Volume-to-Capacity Ratios Level of V!C Service Ratio Definitions A <0.60 Uncongested operation; all vehicles clear in a single signal cycle. <0.70 Light congestion;occasional backup on critical approaches. C <0.80 Some congestion on approaches, but intersection functional. D <0.90 Traffic required to wait through more than one cycle during short peaks.However,no long-lasting queues result. E <1.00 Severe congestion with some long-tasting queues on critical approaches. Blockage of intersection may occur if traffic signal does not provide for protected left turn movements. p >1.00 Total breakdown with"stop-and-go"operation.Back-up may occur at nearby intersections. SOURCE:Highway Capacity Manual,1991 Based on the traffic count data, and applying the ICU standard traffic engineering procedures for determining the level of service (LOS) at signalized intersections, the existing P.M. peak hour LOS for the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way is calculated to be"C" (see attached LOS calculation sheet). This LOS is acceptable for urban traffic conditions at signalized intersections. 11/LD/J 1tJ.tJ1 747-tob-b444 KHK 4.155ULIl. Its r Put bJ Mr.Joseph Gaugush 11R4198 Page3of4 TRIP GENERATION Aspreviouslydocumented in KHR Associates' October 29, 1998 letter to you, the P and each F has 12 vehicle fuelingpositions (VFP),existing Chevron servi ce station generates 12.91 trip ends during the P.M. peak hour (or a total of 155 vehicles entering and exiting). Also, as documented in the October 29, 1998 letter, the existing USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive has 10 vehicle fueling positions (VFP), and generates 19.60 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. peak hour (or a total of 196 vehicles entering and exiting). PROJECTED LEVEL OF SERVICE In order to determine the `worst case scenario" traffic impacts associated with the proposed Chevron service station project,the following assumptions were made: 1) The conversion of the service bays at the Chevron service station to a convenience store will result in increased traffic generation. (In reality, case studies have shown that such a"conversion of use" may not result in any increase in traffic.) 2) The amount of increase per vehicle fueling position will be comparable to the characteristics exhibited at the existing USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive (i.e., 19.60 trip ends per VFP). (In reality, a discount gas station generates more traffic per VFP than major oil company service stations of similar size.) 3) The existing Chevron service Station generates 12.91 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. peak hour(or 155 trip ends total). 4) The proposed project could generate 235 trip ends total (i.e., 12 VFPs times 19.60 trip ends per VFP). 5) The net increase in traffic during the P.M. peak hour will be 80 trip ends (i.e., 235 projected minus 155 existing). 6) All of the projected increase in traffic will enter and exit the Chevron site via the Highway 111/Plaza Way intersection, with 50% of the new traffic generated (i.e., 40 trip ends) entering and 50% of the new traffic generated (i.e., 40 trip ends) exiting, during the P.M. peak hour. (In reality, a significant number of trips will enter and/or exit through the shopping center or to the south via Plaza Way). Under the above worst case scenario, the ICU for the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way does increase with the additional traffic during the P.M. peak hour. However, the LOS is projected to remain at"C"(see attached LOS calculation sheet). 11/L"J/1770 lU.Ul 747-/0b-b444 KHK ASSUG1Altb HAUL 04 Mr.Joseph Gaugush 11 R4188 Page 4 of 4 SIGNIFIcANCE OF TRAFFIC INCREASES On November 20, 1998, a total of 3,212 vehicles entered and exited the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way during the P.M. peak hour. Under the worst case scenario,the proposed Chevron service station will add 80 trip ends(or 40 vehicles)to the intersection (or a 1.25% increase over the existing volume). With such a minute increase, the LOS does not change, and any deterioration in LOS is imperceptible. Therefore, improvements to Plaza Way or the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way do not appear warranted based solely on the proposed Chevron project and its related traffic impacts. In fact, based on current and projected traffic volumes, a comfortable reserve of capacity must be exhausted before the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way experiences a significant deterioration in the LOS. MITIGATING TRAFFIC CONGESTION Despite an acceptable LOS, traffic congestion can occur at the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way (when traffic is backed-up and unable to get through the intersection in one cycle of the traffic signal operation). This congestion may be attributable to the lack of separate left turn phasing for north-south (Plaza Way) traffic. Separate left turning phasing is not possible due to the existence of a shared left- through lane for the southbound approach leg. Therefore, consideration should be given to a split-phase operation for Plaza Way traffic. This will add some delay to Highway 111 traffic, but significantly improve overall traffic conditions at the subject intersection. The improvements can be made at relatively minor cost. IN CLOSING I hope that you find the above information useful, along with findings presented in the October 14, 1998 letter to you. If possible, please provide your comments to Mr. Al Norris at Chevron Products Company, and to Ms. April Smith, at Service Station Services, soon as possible, as the subject project is scheduled to be heard at an upcoming City Planning Commission hearing. If there are any questions regarding this analysis, please contact me directly, at your convenience. Sincerely yours, QRpFESSio O 4/ tes ��. N K A k S ames H. mura, P.E. i �� President N o. Expiration: 09/30/99 cc Al Norris,Chevron Products Company \J> IRA F F 1� •� / April Smith.Service Station Services � �� '/ Marsh Tanner TF 0 11/LJ/1JJU 1u.ut J47-(J0-044+ Kr1K 1.-155LAr14 t5 r Alit t1 • PROJECT: CHEVRON-PALM DESERT COUNT PERIOD: 4:00PM TO 6:00PM LOCATION: HIGHWAY 111/PLAZA WAY FIELD COUNT BY: S. KAWAMURA COUNT DATE: 11120/98 T. NORTON INPUT BY: S.KAWAMURA HIGHWAY 111 -EASTBOUND HIGHWAY 111 -WESTBOUND RIGHT THRU LEFT RIGHT THRU LEFT TOTAL 4:00PM-:15PM 22 210 34 26 173 41 506 4:15PM-4:30PM 15 167 26 18 _ 147 39 412 - 4:30PM4:45PM 18 191 16 31 206 40 502 4:45PM-5:00PM 12 228 38 25 w 233 48 582 5:00PM-5:15PM 21 237 35 19 212 45 569 5:15PM-5:30PM 22 289 26 25 225 57 644 5:30PM-5:45PM 28 284 29 28 257 38 664 5:46PM-6:00PM 25 310 42 29 301 66 773 TOTALS 163 1916 246 201 1754 372 4652 PLAZA WAY-NORTHBOUND PLAZA WAY-SOUTHBOUND RIGHT THRU LEFT RIGHT THRU LEFT TOTAL 4:00PM-4:15PM 31 21 21 20 18 34 145 4:15PM-4:30PM 28 13 19 21 16 22 119 4:30PM-4:45PM 29 5 15 24 12 22 107 4:45PM-5:OOPM 56 14 20 19 23 34 166 5:00PM-5:15PM 32 10 11 29 20 36 138 5:15PM-5:30PM 48 9 15 36 20 22 150 5:30PM-6:45PM 35 13 16 21 7 25 117 5:45PM-6:OOPM 52 14 18 27 21 25 157 TOTALS 311 99 135 197 137 220 1099 • PEAK HOUR HIGHWAY 111 -EASTBOUND HIGHWAY 111 -WESTBOUND RIGHT THRU LEFT RIGHT THRU LEFT TOTAL 5:00PM-5:15PM 21 237 35 19 212 45 569 _ 5:15PM-5:30PM 22 289 28 25 225 57 644 5:30PM-5:45PM 28 284 29 28 257 38 664 5:45PM-6:00PM 25 310 42 29 301 68 773 TOTALS 96 1120 , 132 101 995 206 2650 PLAZA WAY-NORTHBOUND PLAZA WAY-SOUTHBOUND RIGHT THRU LEFT RIGHT THRU LEFT TOTAL 5:00PM-5:15PM 32 10 11 29 20 36 138 5:15PM-6:30PM 48 9 15 38 20 22 150 6:30PM-5:45PM 35 13 16 21 7 25 117 5:45PM-6:00PM 52 14 18 27 21 25 157 TOTALS 167 46 60 113 68 108 562 11/2n/i i nEi:b1 'j4j-/nb-b444 KHK A55UUlAltb F'Abt bb KHR ASSOCIATES INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS Count Date: 11/20/98 KHR Code: Highway 111-Plaza.xls Location: City of Palm Desert, CA Input By: T. Norton North-South Street: Plaza Way- 1 Phase County: Riverside East-West Street: Highway 111 -4 Phase Peak Hour: 5:00 to 8:00 P.M. Comments: FridayP.M. Peak Hour,Optional Left/Thru Lane Treated as 1/2 Lane for Each Movement; . city of Opposing Left Turn Lanes for 1 Phase Reduced to 1/2 of Capacity for Protected Left Turns or Spit Phase Peak Hour Volume Volume/Capacity Ratio Direction Number Capacity Existing Existing of Lane of (Veh/Hr) Existing Plus Existing Plus Travel Movement Lanes On Green Project Project Left Turn 1 800 60 76 0.075 0.095 Northbound Through 1 1800 46 54 0.133 " 0.148 ' Right Tum - - 167 183 - - Left Turn** 1.5 1200 108 108 0.090 * 0.090 • Southbound Through" 0.5 800 68 78 0.085 0.095 Right Tum 1 1800 113 113 0.071 0.071 Left Turn 2 3200 132 132 0.041 0.041 Eastbound Through 3 4800 1120 1120 0.253 • 0.257 Right Tum ,. - 96 112 - - Left Tum 1 1800 208 222 0.129 ' 0.139 • Westbound Through 3 4800 995 995 0228 0228 Right Turn - - 101 101 - - ICU Plus Lost Time Factor of.10 0.706 Existing Level of Service C ICU Plus Lost Time Factor of.10 • 0.734 Existing Plus Project Level of Service C • Denotes Critical Movement " Denotes Shared Lane CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Martin Alvarez, Assistant Planner FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Engineering Manager SUBJECT: CUP 98-4 — CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY DATE: December 1, 1998 Attached for distribution to the Planning Commission is our response to the November 24, 1998, Level of Service analysis prepared by KHR Associates for the above-referenced project. As indicated in our response, we recommend that Condition No. 6 be implemented (as modified) for this project. The author of the response, Mr. Mark Greenwood, will be present at tonight's Planning Commission to discuss the issues as may be necessary. JOSEPH S. GAUGUSH, P.E. JSG/ms cc: Richard J. Folkers Phil Drell Mark Greenwood CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: JOSEPH S. GAUGUSH, ENGINEERING MANAGER FROM: MARK GREENWOOD, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER SUBJECT: LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS FOR CHEVRON SERVICE STATION (CUP 98-4) DATE: November 30, 1998 The November 24, 1998 Level of Service Analysis by KHR Associates has been reviewed, per your request. The following comments are the result of that review and additional analysis of the situation. In the TRAFFIC COUNTS section of the report, it is stated that 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. represents worst case conditions. Other recent traffic studies in this area, and our own observations, have found that the 11:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M. weekday and weekend periods can both experience higher traffic volumes than the weekday P.M. peak therefore, the analysis should not be considered to represent the worst case. It is noted that Mr. Kawamura personally performed a portion of the data collection, yet again failed to contact city staff regarding requirements, methods and procedures for completing traffic studies in the City of Palm Desert. Few would dispute that the City is allowed to determine study methodologies, etc., within the confines of acceptable engineering practice. As you know, our policy has been to establish the framework for traffic studies in consultation with applicants and their engineers however, in this case the engineer has prepared a series of evaluations while declining our offer to meet and confer on the issues. The Public Works Department requires all traffic studies involvingsignalized intersections to P 9 utilize the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology to analyze capacity and level-of- service. The Intersection Capacity Utilization method, which was used by KHR Associates for this study, is not appropriate for the detailed analysis required in this case. Since the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way is within the jurisdiction of Caltrans, it is recommended that this study be referred for their review. Our analysis, using HCM methodology, found that by using KHR Associates trip distribution and existing traffic volumes, the northbound leg of the intersection of Plaza Way and Highway 111 will suffer a degradation in level of service from LOS "C" to LOS "D" due exclusively to project traffic. The argument that this project will increase intersection traffic by only 1.25% does not address our concern, which is increased traffic on the northbound approach only. Again using KHR Associates data, a 15% increase in northbound traffic can be expected, which should be considered as a significant impact to level of service. The HCM analysis summaries, with notations, are attached. The report indicates that LOS "D" is an accepted level of service on major streets and highways. The City of Palm Desert General Plan states that our goal is to maintain LOS "C". The report suggests that split-phase operation be implemented at the Highway 111 and Plaza Way signal, while acknowledging that delay will be increased on Highway 111. The report then goes on to say that overall operation would be improved, while providing no basis for this finding. Each of the split-phase signals on Highway 111 (Desert Crossing, Town Center Way and Portola Avenue) operate poorly within the existing coordinated system. In fact we are working to remove all split-phasing on Highway 111, through the CVAG Valley-wide Signal Synchronization Project. There is little reason to expect adequate operation with an additional split-phased signal on Highway 111. Recommendations to impact delay and congestion on Highway 111 must be forwarded to Caltrans for their review, prior to our consideration of such a proposal. To provide a brief overview of our knowledge of the potential traffic impacts from this project: 1. Initial evaluation of the proposed project by the Public Works Department indicated that the project would increase traffic on Plaza Way at Highway 111, resulting in the potential to degrade level of service on Plaza Way. 2. KHR Associates compared the existing use with a use similar to the proposed project (USA Gasoline) and found that the gas station with convenience store generated 50% more traffic per fueling position than the gas station with service bays. Based on data provided by the engineer, the project can be expected to increase traffic from the site by 50%. This study was performed at the suggestion of the applicant and at a site chosen by the applicant. 3. Evaluation of increased traffic due to the project, using trip distributions by KHR Associates and the HCM methodology, indicate significant impact to northbound traffic on Plaza Way. Northbound traffic volumes on Plaza Way can be expected to increase by 15%, resulting in a degradation in level of service from LOS "C" to LOS "D". This evaluation is based on data provided by the applicant. 4. No practical alternatives to mitigate the impacts of the project have been presented. After review of all of the information to date, a legitimate concern remains regarding potential impacts caused by the project. It is recommended that Public Works Condition No. 6 be implemented (as modified) with approval of the project. MARK GREENWOOD, P.E. cc: File HIGH WAY 111 & PLAZA WAY November 30. 1998 Timings Summary Cycle Length: 120 Natural Cycle: 120 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated F 4, EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT SBT Left Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Phase Number 5 2 1 6 8 4 Phase Lagging? Lead Lag Lead Lag Can Lead or Lag? Maximum Split (s) 15 52 32 69 36 36 Maximum Split (%) 13% 43% 27% 58% 30% 30% Minimum Split (s) 8 10 8 10 10 10 Yellow Time (s) 5 5 5 5 5 5 Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Splits and Phases: HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY 4- 1 -3 2 ,j, 4 32 52 36 15 69 36 5 c- 6 T 8 Volume Worksheet 4- T- 14, I T r3 13 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Volume (vph) 132 1120 96 206 995 101 60 46 167 108 68 113 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 147 1244 107 229 1106 112 67 51 186 120 76 126 Lane Util. Factor 1.03 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 Lane Group Flow (vph) 151 1486 0 229 1340 0 67 237 0 102 114 126 Synchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 1 � S X 111/4161 HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY November 30. 1998 Lane and Saturated Flow Worksheet T 1.11 te 4, EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lanes 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Shared Lane? No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes No Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Bus Stops (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Parking (#/hr) Frt Protected 0.988 0.986 0.882 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.987 Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 5521 1770 5510 1770 1635 3539 1839 1583 Frt Perm. 0.988 0.986 0.878 0.850 Flt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.623 0.333 0.791 Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 5521 1770 5510 1160 1635 1241 1473 1583 Area Type: Other Capacity and Level of Service Analysis Summary - -' IElI T y 11I Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Perm or Prot? Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Adj Flow (vph) 151 1486 229 1340 67 237 102 114 126 Prot. Satd Flow 3539 5521 1770 5510 Perm. Satd Flow 1160 1635 1241 1473 1583 Green Ratio 0.10 0.41 0.24 0.55 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 354 2254 428 3030 319 450 341 405 435 V/C Ratio 0.43 0.66 0.54 0.44 0.21 0.53 0.30 0.28 0.29 Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, d1 38.6 21.8 30.1 12.2 25.4 28.0 26.1 26.0 26.0 Platoon Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Incr. Delay, d2 0.5 0.5 1.0 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.1 Webster's Delay 33.3 19.1 26.6 10.4 21.7 24.7 22.3 22.2 22.2 LOS D C D B C C C C C Cycle Length: 120 Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.54 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.59 1111Pia Intersection Webster Delay: 17.8 �'s... Intersection LOS: C 4N.'" Synchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 2 leN/C 1 S1Itsi(, 600 HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY November 30. 1998 Queue Lengths, and Potential Blocking Problems —1' —, c F- T Ls 4. Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Volume 151 1486 229 1340 67 237 102 114 126 Queue Length 50% (ft) 35 206 107 154 28 110 22 49 55 Queue Length 95% (ft) 105 445 288 293 97 295 69 148 160 Link Length (ft) 105 105 907 907 532 532 143 143 143 of Link Used 100% 424% 32% 32% 18% 55% 48% 103% 112% Blocks Upstream? Yes Storage Length (ft) % of Storage Used Fills Storage? % of Turning Storage Blocks Turning Storage? • Synchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 3 11�c Sc 1 �Co6otIP (noki, Delay, Stop, and Fuel Summary November 30. 1998 Intersection: HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY Approach EB WB NB SB Total Volume (vph) 1348 1302 273 289 3212 Travel Distance (veh-mi/hr) 47.2 243.4 31.6 12.2 666.6 Webster Signal Delay (veh-hr/hr) 10.1 6.2 2.4 2.3 21.0 Stops (vph) 967 786 209 209 2171 Fuel Used (gal) 28 19 4 3 54 Synchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 4 E.. .tc HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY November 30. 1998 Timings Summary Cycle Length: 120 Natural Cycle: 120 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated EJ E - L 4, EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT SBT Left Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Phase Number 5 2 1 6 8 4 Phase Lagging? Lead Lag Lead Lag Can Lead or Lag? Maximum Split (s) 15 52 32 69 36 36 Maximum Split (%) 13% 43% 27% 58% 30% 30% Minimum Split (s) 8 10 8 10 10 10 Yellow Time (s) 5 5 5 5 5 5 Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Splits and Phases: HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY 4- -4 2 4 32 52 36 15 69 36 5 F- 6 T 8 Volume Worksheet LJ LJ T yI y EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Volume (vph) 132 1120 112 222 995 101 76 54 183 108 76 113 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 147 1244 124 247 1106 112 84 60 203 120 84 126 Lane Util. Factor 1.03 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 Lane Group Flow(vph) 151 1504 0 247 1340 0 84 263 0 98 126 126 Svnchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 1 HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY November 30. 1998 Lane and Saturated Flow Worksheet _t -} -a, . ,r 14-i U T 0 y 1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lanes 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Shared Lane? No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes No Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Bus Stops (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Parking ( #/hr) Frt Protected 0.986 0.986 0.884 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.987 Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 5510 1770 5510 1770 1639 3539 1839 1583 Frt Perm. 0.986 0.986 0.880 0.850 Flt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.596 0.282 0.701 Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 5510 1770 5510 1110 1639 1051 1306 1583 Area Type: Other Capacity and Level of Service Analysis Summary -t -4 U T U U fi Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Perm or Prot? Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Adj Flow (vph) 151 1504 247 1340 84 263 98 126 126 Prot. Satd Flow 3539 5510 1770 5510 Perm. Satd Flow 1110 1639 1051 1306 1583 Green Ratio 0.10 0.41 0.24 0.55 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 354 2250 428 3030 305 451 289 359 435 V/C Ratio 0.43 0.67 0.58 0.44 0.28 0.58 0.34 0.35 0.29 Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay. d1 38.6 21.9 30.5 12.2 25.9 28.5 26.4 26.5 26.0 Platoon Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Incr. Delay, d2 0.5 0.5 1.4 0.1 0.1 1.4 0.3 0.3 0.1 Webster's Delay 33.3 19.2 27.3 10.4 22.2 25.7 22.7 22.8 22.2 LOS DCDBCDCCC Cycle Length: 120 Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.57 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.62 F" Intersection Webster Delay: 18.1 411110 Intersection LOS: C tr Svnchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 2 HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY November 30. 1998 Queue Lengths, and Potential Blocking Problems Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Volume 151 1504 247 1340 84 263 98 126 126 Queue Length 50% (ft) 38 226 124 163 38 131 22 59 57 Queue Length 95% (ft) 105 458 314 299 118 329 68 166 160 Link Length (ft) 105 105 907 907 532 532 143 143 143 % of Link Used 100% 436% 35% 33% 22% 62% 48% 116% 112% Blocks Upstream? Yes Storage Length (ft) % of Storage Used Fills Storage? % of Turning Storage Blocks Turning Storage? • Synchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 3 Delay, Stop, and Fuel Summary November 30. 1998 Intersection: HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY Approach EB WB NB SB Total Volume (vph) 1364 1318 313 297 3292 Travel Distance (veh-mi/hr) 47.8 246.4 36.3 12.5 679.1 Webster Signal Delay (veh-hr/hr) 10.3 6.4 2.8 2.4 21.9 Stops (vph) 1032 785 248 221 2286 Fuel Used (gal) 29 19 4 3 55 Synchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 4 ‘4..sasetr 11/L5/177ti 10:t71 747-/Db-b444 KHK UulA l tb h'- L Ul ►.�� KHR ASSOCIATES Consulting Engineere -Architects - Plannere November 24, 1998 Mr. Joseph Gaugush, Engineering Manager City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 SUBJECT: RESULTS OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS FOR HIGHWAY 111/PLAZA WAY, IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA—CASE NO.C.U.P.98-4(SENT VIA FAX) Dear Mr. Gaugush: The information contained herein has been prepared at the request of Chevron Products Company to document existing and projected levels of service at the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way, in the City of Palm Desert, California. INTERSECTION DESCRIPTION The intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way is signalized for 5 phases of traffic movement. Highway 111 features 3 through lanes in each (westbound and eastbound) direction. The westbound approach leg also features a separate left turn lane. The eastbound approach leg features dual left turn lanes. Plaza Way features 1 through lane and 1 left turn lane on the northbound approach leg, and 1 right turn lane, 1 left turn lane, and a shared through/left turn lane on the southbound approach leg. TRAFFIC COUNTS On Friday, November 20, 1998, peak hour traffic turn movement counts were taken at the subject intersection between 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. The peak hour occurred between 5:00 and 6:00 P.M. This period of time represents the worst case situation with respect to traffic conditions along Highway 111 and at the subject intersection. A summary of the traffic counts is attached herewith. Weather conditions at the time of the counts were sunny, very little wind, and clear. There were no unusual traffic conditions, accidents, or ongoing special events in the vicinity of intersection. EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE The level of service (LOS) of a roadway segment or an intersection is a qualitatively defined measure of prevailing traffic, design, and operational conditions. The LOS, denoted alphabetically from "A"to "F," best to worst, is an evaluation of the degree of congestion, roadway design constraints, delay, accident potential, and driver discomfort experienced during a given period of time-typically during the peak hour or 2355 Maln Street-Suite 120 (949)756-8440 Irvine, California 92814 FAX(949)766-6444 11/L3/1770 10.U1 747-(3b-b444 KHK A55UU1A I t5 F'A(at b1 Mr.Joseph Gaugush 11 R4198 Page 2 of 4 on a daily basis. While LOS "A" is the most desirable operational state for a roadway segment or intersection, LOS "C" is considered a benchmark for planning purposes. In more urbanized areas, LOS "D" is an accepted condition for peak hours of vehicular travel on major streets and highways. The LOS may be quantitatively calculated by a number of methods, including the Highway Capacity Method (HCM) and the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method. Regardless of the method, a LOS calculation generally compares traffic volumes with the physical and operational capacity of a roadway section or intersection to carry traffic demands placed upon it. Table I lists typical LOS definitions for intersections. TABLE I Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Volume-to-Capacity Ratios Level of V!C Service Ratio Definitions A <0.60 Uncongested operation; all vehicles clear in a single signal cycle. B <0.70 Light congestion; occasional backup on critical approaches. C <0.80 Some congestion on approaches,but intersection functional. D <0.90 Traffic required to wait through more than one cycle during short peaks.However,no long-lasting queues result. E <1.00 Severe congestion with some long-lasting queues on critical approaches. Blockage of intersection may occur if traffic signal does not provide for protected left turn movements. p >1.00 Total breakdown with "stop-and-go"operation. Back-up may occur at nearby intersections. SOURCE:Highway Capacity Manual,1991 Based on the traffic count data, and applying the ICU standard traffic engineering procedures for determining the level of service (LOS) at signalized intersections, the existing P.M. peak hour LOS for the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way is calculated to be "C" (see attached LOS calculation sheet). This LOS is acceptable for urban traffic conditions at signalized intersections. 11/L"J/1771 1t7:t91 747-/70-0444 KP'1K Ab U1,1H l t5 r(4ut 111J Mr.Joseph Gaugush 11R4188 Page 3of4 TRIP GENERATION As previously documented in KHR Associates' October 29, 1998 letter to you, the existing Chevron service station has 12 vehicle fueling positions (VFP), and each generates 12,91 trip ends during the P.M. peak hour (or a total of 155 vehicles entering and exiting). Also, as documented in the October 29, 1998 letter, the existing USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive has 10 vehicle fueling positions (VFP), and generates 19.60 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. peaK hour (or a total of 196 vehicles entering and exiting). PROJECTED LEVEL OF SERVICE In order to determine the 'Worst case scenario" traffic impacts associated with the proposed Chevron service station project,the following assumptions were made: 1) The conversion of the service bays at the Chevron service station to a convenience store will result in increased traffic generation. (In reality, case studies have shown that such a"conversion of use" may not result in any increase in traffic.) 2) The amount of increase per vehicle fueling position will be comparable to the characteristics exhibited at the existing USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive (i.e., 19.60 trip ends per VFP). (In reality, a discount gas station generates more traffic per VFP than major oil company service stations of similar size.) 3) The existing Chevron service station generates 12.91 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. peak hour(or 155 trip ends total). 4) The proposed project could generate 235 trip ends total (i.e., 12 VFPs times 19.60 trip ends per VFP). 5) The net increase in traffic during the P.M. peak hour will be 80 trip ends (i.e., 235 projected minus 155 existing). 6) All of the projected increase in traffic will enter and exit the Chevron site via the Highway 111/Plaza Way intersection, with 50% of the new traffic generated (i.e., 40 trip ends) entering and 50% of the new traffic generated (i.e., 40 trip ends) exiting, during the P.M. peak hour. (In reality, a significant number of trips will enter and/or exit through the shopping center or to the south via Plaza Way). Under the above worst case scenario, the ICU for the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way does increase with the additional traffic during the P.M. peak hour. However, the LOS is projected to remain at"C"(see attached LOS calculation sheet). aa! c ! „., aa� a� - J !JU—OYYY nrw HJJUILIMICJ P'(-1l]G 174 • Mr.Joseph Gaugush 1124198 Page 4 of 4 SIGNIFICANCE OF TRAFFIC INCREASES On November 20, 1998, a total of 3,212 vehicles entered and exited the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way during the P.M. peak hour. Under the worst case scenario, the proposed Chevron service station will add 80 trip ends(or 40 vehicles)to the intersection (or a 1.25% increase over the existing volume). With such a minute increase, the LOS does not change, and any deterioration in LOS is imperceptible. Therefore, improvements to Plaza Way or the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way do not appear warranted based solely on the proposed Chevron project and its related traffic impacts. In fact, based on current and projected traffic volumes, a comfortable reserve of capacity must be exhausted before the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way experiences a significant deterioration in the LOS. MITIGATING TRAFFIC CONGESTION Despite an acceptable LOS, traffic congestion can occur at the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way (when traffic is backed-up and unable to get through the intersection in one cycle of the traffic signal operation). This congestion may be attributable to the lack of separate left turn phasing for north-south (Plaza Way) traffic. Separate left turning phasing is not possible due to the existence of a shared left- through lane for the southbound approach leg. Therefore, consideration should be given to a split-phase operation for Plaza Way traffic. This will add some delay to Highway 111 traffic, but significantly improve overall traffic conditions at the subject intersection. The improvements can be made at relatively minor cost. IN CLOSING I hope that you find the above information useful, along with findings presented in the October 14, 1998 letter to you. If possible, please provide your comments to Mr. Al Norris at Chevron Products Company, and to Ms. April Smith, at Service Station Services, soon as possible, as the subject project is scheduled to be heard at an upcoming City Planning Commission hearing. If there are any questions regarding this analysis, please contact me directly, at your convenience. Sincerely yours, 00FESS/0 Nq tee �� A� l ames H. mura, P.E. President N o. Expiration: 09/30/99 cc Al Norris.Chevron Products Company \‘-r2' lRA F F 1� �� April Smith.Service Station Services '4i — -/ Marsh Tanner F C A L�F 0�e%J nruc HJJUl,11-1IGJ rHur 03 PROJECT: CHEVRON -PALM DESERT COUNT PERIOD: 4:0OPM TO 6:00PM LOCATION: HIGHWAY 111/PLAZA WAY FIELD COUNT BY: S. KAWAMURA COUNT DATE: 11/20/98 T.NORTON INPUT BY: S.KAWAMURA stcOrmairPoisiDeswel-TemIkGovail HIGHWAY 111 -EASTBOUND HIGHWAY 111 -WESTBOUND RIGHT THRU LEFT RIGHT THRU LEFT TOTAL 4:00PM-1:15PM 22 210 34 26 173 41 506 4:15PM-4:30PM 15 167 26 18 _ 147 39 412 4:30PM-4:46PM 18 191 16 31 206 40 502 4:45PM-5:00PM 12 228 38 25 w 233 48 582 5:00PM-5:15PM 21 237 35 19 212 45 569 5:15PM-5:30PM 22 289 26 25 225 57 644 5:30PM-5:45PM 28 284 28 28 257 38 664 6:45PM-6:00PM 25 310 42 29 301 66 773 TOTALS 163 1916 ' 246 ' 201 ' 1754 372 4652 PLAZA WAY-NORTHBOUND PLAZA WAY-SOUTHBOUND RIGHT THRU LEFT RIGHT THRU _ LEFT TOTAL 4:00PM-4:15PM 31 21 21 20 _ 18 34 145 4:15PM-4:30PM 28 13 19 21 16 22 119 4:30PM-4:45PM 29 5 15 24 12 22 107 4:45PM-5:00PM 56 14 20 19 23 34 166 5:00PM- :15PM 32 10 11 29 20 36 138 5:15PM-6:30PM 48 9 15 36 20 22 150 6:30PM-6:45PM 35 13 16 21 7 25 117 5:45PM-6:00PM 52 14 18 27 21 25 157 TOTALS 311 99 135 197 137 220 1099 PEAK HOUR HIGHWAY 111 -EASTBOUND -HIGHWAY 111 -WESTBOUND RIGHT - THRU LEFT RIGHT THRU LEFT TOTAL 5:00PM-5:15PM 21 237 35 19 212 45 569 5:15PM-5:30PM 22 289 28 25 225 57 644 5:30PM-6:46PM 28 284 29 28 257 38 664 6:45PM-6:00PM 25 310 42 29 301 66 773 TOTALS 96 1120 132 101 995 206 2650 PLAZA WAY-NORTHBOUND_PLAZA WAY-SOUTHBOUND RIGHT THRU LEFT RIGHT THRU LEFT TOTAL 5:00PM.5:15PM 32 10 11 29 20 36 138 5:15PM-6:30PM 48 9 15 38 20 22 150 6:30PM-6:46PM 35 13 16 21 7 25 117 5:45PM-8:00PM 52 14 18 27 21 25 157 TOTALS 167 46 60 113 68 108 562 11/L3/177b 10:t71 747-/7b-b444 K11K A55Ul;lA I t5 1'(4.1t 'lb i �r KHR ASSOCIATES INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS Count Date: 11/20/98 KHR Code: Highway 111-Plaza.xls Location: City of Palm Desert, CA Input By: T. Norton North-South Street: Plaza War-1 Phase County: Riverside East-West Street: Highway 111 -4 Phase Peak Hour: 5:00 to 8:00 P.M. Comments: Friday P.M. Peak Hour,Optional Left/Thru Lane Treated as 1/2 Lane for Each Movement; Capacity of Opposing Left Turn Lanes for 1 Phase Reduced to 1/2 of Capacity for Protected Left Turns or Split Phase Peak Hour Volume Volume/Capacity Ratio Direction Number Capacity Existing Existing of Lane of (Veh/Hr) Existing Plus Existing Plus Travel Movement Lanes On Green Project Project • Left Turn 1 800 60 76 0.075 0.095 Northbound Through 1 1800 46 54 0.133 * 0.148 ' Right Tum - - 167 183 - - Left Turn" 1,5 1200 108 108 0.090 ' 0.090 * Southbound Through" 0.5 800 68 78 0.085 0.095 Right Tum 1 1800 113 113 0.071 0.071 Left Tum 2 3200 132 132 0.041 0.041 Eastbound Through 3 4800 1120 1120 0.253 * 0.257 Right Tum - - 96 112 - - Left Turn 1 1600 206 222 0.129 * 0.139 ' Westbound Through 3 4800 995 995 0.228 0228 Right Turn - - 101 101 - - ICU Plus Lost Time Factor of.10 0.705 Existing Level of Service C ICU Plus Lost Time Factor of.10 0.734 Existing Plus Project Level of Service C * Denotes Critical Movement " Denotes Shared Lane CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: November 17, continued from 9-15, 10-6 and 11-3, 1998 CASE NO: CUP 98-4 REQUEST: Approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart, located at 72-801 Highway 1 1 1 . APPLICANT: Chevron Products Company P.O. Box 2833 La Habra, CA 90632-2833 I. DISCUSSION: Commission will recall this matter was continued from the September 15, October 6, and November 3, 1998 meetings to allow the applicant to work with staff to address the hours of operation and Public Works' conditions of approval Nos. 6 and 7. Hours of Operation: Staff has addressed the hours of operation in the October 6, and November 3, 1998 staff reports and recommends Commission allow the service station and convenience store to remain open 24 hours per day, with the sale of alcohol hours to be determined by the Alcohol and Beverage Control agency. Public Works Conditions 6 and 7: The remaining issues raised by the applicant were concerning Public Works conditions of approval Nos. 6 and 7. Condition No. 6 requires street improvements to Plaza Way, due to projected increase in traffic generated by the proposed service station with convenience store. Condition No. 7 requires a maximum width of 38' for both driveways along Plaza Way, as illustrated on the site plan. As discussed in the November 3, 1998 staff report a site specific study was conducted on both the existing site and a comparable site with service station and convenience store (USA Gasoline, Highway and Fred Waring). Attached, please find memorandums from the Public Works Department, dated November 5 and 12, 1998 summarizing the results of the study. Based on the attached Public Works STAFF REPORT NOVEMBER 17, 1998 CUP 98-4 analysis of the October 29, 1998 trip generation report, condition # 6 remains the same. 6. The Project shall construct street widening improvements (minimum five feet) along Plaza Way property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes (left, through and right) and a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk. II. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. , subject to the attached conditions. III. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Resolution B. Staff report dated September 15, and October 6, 1998 and November 3, 1998. C. Public Works memorandum dated November 12, 1 998 D. KHR Ass iates, October 29, 1998 "Site Specific Trip Generation Study" Prepared by: artin Alvarez Reviewed and Approve Philip Drell CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Martin Alvarez, Assistant Planner FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush. Engineering Manager SUBJECT: CUP 98-4; CHEVRON PRODUCT COMPANY DATE: November 12, 1998 As a result of on-going discussions regarding traffic impacts associated with the above-noted project, KHR Associates (traffic engineers for the project applicant) initiated a "site-specific" trip generation by analysis for the existing subject site and a comparable proposed site. The resulting study is attached as well as a response to the study from the City's transportation engineer. As stated in the attached memorandum, an increase in traffic, and the associated impact, will occur as a result of the proposed project. Therefore, we continue to request that the project be required to implement the improvements specified in Department of Public Works Condition No. 6. SEPH S. GAUGUSH, P.E. JSG/ms Attachment (as noted) cc: Richard J. Folkers Phil Drell Mark Greenwood CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: JOSEPH S. GAUGUSH, ENGINEERING MANAGER FROM: MARK GREENWOOD, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER SUBJECT: TRIP GENERATION FOR CHEVRON SERVICE STATION (CUP 98-4) DATE: November 5, 1998 The October 29, 1998 Trip Generation Report by KHR Associates has been reviewed, per your request. The study of the existing Chevron and USA gas stations indicates that peak hour traffic from the Chevron site will increase by approximately 50%, with the modification of the Chevron operation. The northbound approach on PJaza WaX_at Highway 111 currently experiences a higher than desirable congestion level, largely due to the location of the existing Chevron driveways. A - '50% increase- in traffic on the driveways -and the resulting traffic increase on Plaza Way should be expected to create unacceptable delay and congestion, unless appropriate mitigation measures are implemented. Widening on Plaza Way (within existing right-of-way) to provide 1 left turn, 1 through and 1 right turn lane continues to be reasonable and appropriate mitigation for traffic impacts which are likely to result from the project. MARK GREENWOOD, P.E. cc: File • I�^ram lbw- haw_ KHR ASSOCIATES Consulting Engineers -Architects - Planners October 29, 1998 R EC F Mr. Joseph Gaugush, Engineering Manager din;: 1998 City of Palm Desert ut�'a►3Tr'vStNT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive CITY OF PALM DESERT Palm Desert, California 92260 SUBJECT: RESULTS OF TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS FOR CHEVRON&USA GAS SERVICE STATIONS IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA -CASE NO.C.U.P.98-4(SENT VIA FAX) Dear Mr. Gaugush: The information contained herein is a follow-up to my October 14, 1998 letter to you regarding trip generation and traffic impacts associated with the proposed Chevron service station project on the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Plaza Way, in the City of Palm Desert, California. In order resolve the question of trip generation rates, traffic counts were taken at two existing service stations in the City of Palm Desert- one representing the uses at the existing Chevron station, and the other representing `- ='-uses similar to that proposed for the Chevron service station. - esday, October 27,1998, trafl-ic counts were taken simultaneously at the existing Chevron service station, on the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Plaza Way, and at the USA Gasoline station on the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive. The periods of traffic counts included 7:00 to 9:00 A.M.; 11:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M.; and 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. These periods of time are traditionally associated with the highest weekday demand for service station customers, and coincide with peak periods of vehicular demand on roadways (i.e., commute hours and lunch time). STUDY SITES The existing Chevron service station at Highway 111 and Plaza Way features a 2,491 square foot building with 3 service bays and a small snack shop, and 12 fueling dispensers on three fueling islands. The service bays are open for business. The dispensers are paired so as to offer all grades of fuel at each vehicle fueling position (see discussion below regarding vehicle fueling positions). Access is provided via two driveways on Plaza Way and through the adjoining shopping center parking lot. The wdsting USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive features a 2,430 square foot convenience store, and 5 multi-product fueling dispensers on two fueling islands. Each dispenser offers all grades of fuel on either side at each vehicle fueling position. Access is provided via a driveway on Highway 111 and a driveway on Fred Waring Drive. USA is known for its low gas prices. Thus, this station is extremely busy, with most of its sales transacted in cash, and more transactions, but less gas purchased per transaction. 2355 Main Street-Suite 120 (949)756-6440 Irvine, California 92614 FAX(949)756-6444 Mr.Joseph Gaugush 14129/98 Page 2 of 5 TRAFFIC COUNTS The results of the October 27,1998 traffic counts are provided on the attached data summary sheets. Weather conditions at the time of the counts were sunny, very little wind, and clear. There were no unusual traffic conditions or ongoing special events in the vicinity of either station. Both stations were fully open for business, however, the "full service" fueling island at the Chevron station was found to be closed before 9:00 A.M., and after 5:00 P.M. Chevron During the two-hour A.M. count period, 89 vehicles entered and 70 vehicles exited the existing Chevron station, for a two-hour total of 159, an hourly average of 79.5 vehicles, and a peak hour total of 93 vehicles entering and exiting. During the A.M. count, more vehicles entered than exited because a number of vehicles were brought in for service and left in the morning. During the two-hour noon count period, 132 vehicles entered and 135 vehicles exited the station, for a two-hour total of 267, an hourly average of 133.5 vehicles entering and exiting, and a peak hour total of 152 vehicles entering and exiting. During the two-hour P.M. count period, 121 vehicles entered and 140 vehicles exited the station, for a two-hour total of 261, an hourly average of 130.5 vehicles entering and exiting, and a peak hour total of 155 vehicles entering and exiting. During the P.M. count, more vehicles exited than entered because vehicles that were brought in for service in the morning were picked up in the afternoon. USA Gasoline During the two-hour A.M_ count period, 141 vehicles entered and 139 vehicles exited the existing USA Gasoline, for a two-hour total of 280, an hourly average of 140 vehicles entering and exiting, and a peak hour total of 150 vehicles entering and exiting. During the two-hour noon count period, 176 vehicles entered and 177 vehicles exited the station, for a two-hour total of 353, an hourly average of 176.5 vehicles entering and exiting, and a peak hour total of 184 vehicles entering and exiting. During the two-hour P.M. count period, 183 vehicles entered and 178 vehicles exited the station, for a two-hour total of 361, an hourly average of 180.5 vehicles entering and exiting, and a peak hour total of 196 vehicles entering and exiting. It should be noted that a number of vehicles entered the USA Gasoline station site on Highway 111 and immediately exited the Fred Waring Drive driveway. These motorists Mr.Joseph Gaugush 1a2a198 Page3of5 were trying to avoid the long delay at the Highway 111/Fred Waring Drive t,affic signal by cutting through the USA Gasoline station site. These vehicles were excluded from the count since they were not generated by the use itself. OBSERVATIONS REGARDING NUMBER OF VFP Since there was some question regarding the number of vehicle fueling positions (VFP) at the existing Chevron service station, field observations were also noted on the position and number of vehicles at each fueling island. Per the October 14, 1998 letter, it is contended that there are 12 dispensers and 12 VFPs at the existing Chevron station. The City contends that there are 24 VFPs. By definition, a VFP is the physical space a vehicle occupies while fueling at a service station. While the configuration and number of dispensers vary from service station to service station, the number of vehicles that can physically be situated to fuel at a given time is indicative of the true number of VFPs. For the subject Chevron station, there are three fueling islands —two self-service and one full-service. Each fueling island contains two pairs of product dispensers — one pair at each end of the island. Each pair of product dispensers offers the basic grades of fuel from either side of the island. .._ During the tiafic count perkds,at no time did more than two vehicles simultaneously obtain fuel on each side of the fueling island. In only one instance there was a vehicle waiting while two vehicles were fueling on one side of an island. It can therefore be concluded that, for all practical reasons, and reasoning by definition, there are 12 vehicle fueling positions at the existing Chevron service station. For the purposes of the following trip generation calculations, it was assumed that there are 12 VFPs at the Chevron station. However, during those hours when the full service Island was closed, it was assumed that there are 8 VFPs. The USA Gasoline station, with 5 multi-product dispensers, is assumed to have 10 VFPs, based on the standard VFP definition,and as confirmed by field observations. TRIP GENERATION RATES Based on the above traffic counts, trip generation rates (i.e., trip ends per VFP) were calculated for each peak hour of the AM, noon, and PM count periods. Chevron During the AM. peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing Chevron station was calculated to be 11.63 trip ends per VFP per A.M. peak hour on an average weekday (assuming only 8 VFPs available due to the closure of the full service island before 9:00 A.M.). Mr.Joseph Gaugush 10/29/98 Page 4 of 5 During the noon peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing Chevron station was calculated to be 12.68 trip ends per VFP per noon peak hour on an average weekday. During the P.M. peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing Chevron station was calculated to be 12.91 trip ends per VFP per P.M. peak hour on an average weekday(assuming 12 VFPs). USA Gasoline During the A.M. peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing USA Gasoline station was calculated to be 15.00 trip ends per VFP per AM. peak hour on an average weekday. During the noon peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing USA Gasoline station was calculated to be 18.40 trip ends per VFP per noon peak hour on an average weekday. During the P.M. peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing USA Gasoline station was calculated to be 19.60 trip ends per VFP per P.M. peak hour on an average weekday. -- COMPARISON OF TRIP GENERATION RATES Trip generations rates found in the 6th edition of the Tn'p Generation report, indicate that the number of morning (A.M.) peak hour trips per VFP is 12.27 for a service station with service bays, and 10.06 fora service station with a convenience store. The number of evening (P.M.) peak hours trips per VFP is 14.56 for a service station with service bays, and 13.38 for a service station with convenience store. A comparison of calculated for the subject study sites and those in the Trip Generation report, suggest some significant differences. The overall results of the field studies presented herein are mixed. However, they generally suggest that peak hour trip generation rates for service stations with conveniences stores may be higher in Palm Desert, and perhaps the entire Coachella Valley, than national averages presented in the Trip Generation report. Furthermore, the location, accessibility, and product pricing of a service station appear to be directly related to tip making propensities — as evidenced by USA Gasoline's superior location, direct access to Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive, and lower gas prices,when compared to the Chevron station. As expected, a comparison of the ITE trip generation rate for a service station with service bays and the existing Chevron station show great similarities, with the study results slightly lower than the ITE rates (i.e., 11.63 trip ends per VFP during the A.M. per the study, and 12.27 trip ends per VFP according to the ITE report and 12.91 trip Mr.Joseph Gaugush 10/29/98 Page 5 of 5 ends per VFP during the P.M. per the study, versus 14.56 trip ends per VFP according to the ITE report). For service stations with a convenience store, the results are very different A comparison of the ITE trip generation rate for a service station with convenience store and the existing USA Gasoline station shows great differences, with the study results higher than the ITE rates (i.e., 15.50 trip ends per VFP during the A.M. per the study, versus 10.06 trip ends per VFP according to the ITE report; and 19.60 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. per the study, versus 13.38 trip ends per VFP according to the ITE report). While the higher rates at one study site are not necessarily indicative of all service stations with convenience stores, the results suggest that further investigation is warranted—particularly in the Coachella Valley. IN CLOSING I hope that you find the above information useful, along with findings presented in the October 14, 1998 letter to you. If possible, please provide your comments to Mr. Alvarez and to Ms. April Smith, at Service Station Services, soon as possible, as the subject project is scheduled to be heard at the City Planning Commission hearing of November 4, 1998. If there are any questions regarding this study, please contact me directly, at your convenience. Sincerely yours, KHR A6ao s o ROFESS/p� ��`� �SH. KAIygy ley -4 9 � James H. Kawamura, P.E. ' • President . Exp ra : 09/30 9 st IRAFf1C sQ- 97 f, of CAi-�c CC Al Norris,Chevron Products Company April Smith,Service Station Services Martin Alvarez,City of Palm Desert KHR ASSOCIATES DRIVEWAY TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY Project: Chevron Service Station Count Period_ 11:00 AM to 1:00 PM Location: Highway 111 &Plaza Way Palm Desert,California Count By: S.Kawamura Driveways On: Plaza Way Checked By: J.Kawamura Count Date; 10/26/1998 Day: Tuesday Data Input By:C.Robles IQIR died.ca,Mon D.,atMlaon ga s Chevron Driveways Plaza WaxDriveway 1 Plaza Wa ry DrIveway 2 Shopping Period Inbound Outbound klbound Outbound Center Total Time Period Laft Right Laft Right Lett Right Left j Rlcht In Out In Out 11:00 to 11:15 AM 1 0 0 8 5 3 2 4 2 1 11 13 11:15 to 11:30 AM 2 2 0 4 6 2 2 8 2 2 14 18 11:30 to 11:45 AM 1 2 0 3 4 2 3 5 4 3 13 14 11:45to12:00PM 2 0 1 7 8 5 1 6 4 2 17 ,j 17 12:00t012:15PM* 1 2 0 4 7 4 3 7 6 3 19 17 12:15 to 12:30 PM* 2 1 1 3 4 5 2 6 3 2 15 14 12:30 to 12:45 PM' - 3 2 2 7 9 3 2 , 9 5 3 22 23 12:45 to 1:00 PM" 1 1 1 8 11 3 3 5 5 4 21 21 2-Hr.Directional Totals 1 13 10 5 42 52 27 18 50 30 20 132 135 Peak Hour Totals 7 , 6 4 22 31 15 10 27 18 _- 12 77 75 •Noon Peak Hour-12:00 to 1:00 PM KHR ASSOCIATES DRIVEWAY TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY Project: USA Gas Service Station Count Period: 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM Location: Highway 111 &Fred Waring Drive 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM _ Palm Desert.California Count By: T.Schippers Driveways On: _Highway 111 diFred Waring Drive Checked By: J.Kawamura I Count Date: 10/26/1998 Day: Tuesday Data Input By: C.Robles 164R Ref.USA-Palm oeeenxts USA Driveways Highway 111 Fred Waling Drive Period Inbound - Outbound Inbound �_ Outbound Total _ Time Period Left Right Left Right Left ! Right Left Right In Out v. 7:00 to 7:15 AM* 12 , • 9 2 10 5 9 24 23 7:15 to 7:30 AM* 4 8 2 5 1 J 3 11 12 _ 7:30 to 7:45 AM' _ 12 11 _ 3 12 3 11 27 25 7:46 to 8:00 AM* 6 8 1 6 2 5 13 15 8:00 to 8:15 AM 5 8 3 7 1 7 15 16 8:15to8:30AM 3 6 3 7 0 4 13 10 8:30 to 8:45 AM 10 9 6 5 1 14 21 24 _8:45to9:00AM 8 6 3 6 2 6 17 14 2-Hr.Directional Totals 0 60 0 65 23 58 15 59 141 139 Peak Hour Totals i 0 34 0 38 8 , 33 11 _ 28 , 75 75 "AM Peak Hour-7:00 to 8:00 AM usA tfrivewa1rs Highway 111 Fred Waring 9rivo Period Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound Total Time Period ~Left Right ` Left Right Left Right Left Right in Out 1I -1 4:00 to 4:15 PM 7 4 5 6 1 9 18 14 4:151o4:30PM 9 8 7 2 4 11 18 23 4:30 to 4:45 PM 10 7 , 8 6 4 12 24 23 4:45 to 5:00 PM 8 9 8 6 5 9 22 23 v _ .. , 5:00 to 5:15 PM' , 10 9 10 _ 8 2 14 28 25 5:15 to 5:30 PM' 9 4 7 7 6 12 23 22 5:30 to 5:45 PM* 11 5 8 8 4 14 27 24 5:45 to 6:00 PM' 9 ` r 8 5 9 3 13 23 24 — --f Y - 2-Hr.Directional Totals 0 73 0 55 58 52 29 94 183 178 Peak Hour Totals 0 39 0 27 30 32 15 53 101 95 e PM Peak Hour-5:00 to 6:00 PM KHR ASSOCIATES DRIVEWAY TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY Project: Chevron Service Station Count Period: 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM Location: Highway 111 &Plaza Way 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM Palm Desert,California Count By: S.Kawamura Driveways On: Plaza Way Chocked By: J.Kawamura Count Data: 10/26/1998 Day: Tuesday Data Input By:C. Robles MR Ref-Charon-Palm oesan-AU PMX s Chevron 6rlvewa ye Plaza Way Driveway 1 8" PlazaWay Driveway 2 ' Shopping �� «I Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound Center Total Time Period Loft Right Left Right Left Right Lett Right In Out in Out 7:00 to 7:15 AM 2 0 _ 2 _ 1 . 1 0 0 0 2 2 5 5 1 7:15 to 7:30 AM 2 0 2 3 0 1 0 1 1 7 4 • ! 7:30m7:45A.M 1 2 0 4 9 1 2 1 4 3 17 10 7:45 to 8:00 AM* 1 0 3 6 5 3 2 2 4 1 13 14 8:00 to 8:15 AM* 2 1 0 0 4 4 1 4 1 2 12 7 8:15 to 8:30 AM* 1 0 1 • 4 5 2 2 3 1 1 9 11 8:30 to 8:45 AM ; 2 0 0 5 8 1 1 4 4 1 13 11 8:45 to 9:00 AM 2 0 1 2 9 0 0 5 2 0 13 8 2-Hr.Directional Totals i 13 4 7 24 42 11 9 19 19 11 89 70 Peak Hour Totals I 5 3 4 14 23 10 7 , 10 10 7 51 42 •AM Peak Hour-7:30 to 8:30 AM Chevron Orr,/eways Plaza Way Driveway 1 Plaza Way Driveway 2 Shopping Poriod Inbound Outbound inbound Outbound Center Total Time Period Loft night Left : Right Left —Right Left Rigid In Out In Out 4:00to4:15PM , 2 , 1 0 7 +5 0 0 ' 5 _1 2 9 14 4:15 to 4:30 PM 4 0 0 3 3 1 1 6 1 3 9 13 4:30 to 4:45 PM _ 3 1 2 6 8 2 2 2 2 2 16 14 4:45 to 5:00 PM* 2 2 1 4 10 1 3 8 2 5 17 21 5:00 to 5:15 PM` 4 2 3 5 9 5 2 8 6 7 28 25 5:15 to 5:30 PM* 1 1 0 5 7 2 4 7 3 3 14 19 5:30 to 5:45 PM* 2 1 2 6 5 2 2 6 3 4 13 20 5:45 to 6:00 PM 3 0 1 4 8 2 0 3 4 6 17 _ 14 Z_Hr Directional Totals 21 8 9 40 55 15 14 46 22 32 121 140 Peak Hour Totals 9 6 6 20 31 10 11 29 14 19 70 85 *PM peak Hour-4:45 to 5:45 PM KHR ASSOCIATES DRIVEWAY TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY Pro)ect USA Gas Service Station _ Count Period: 11:00 AM to 1:00 PM Location: Highway 111 &Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California Count By: T.SchipDsrs Driveways On: Highway 111 8c Fred Waring Drive Checked By: J.Kawamura Count Oats: 10/26/19913 Day: Tuesday Data Input By: C.Robles IQiR Red USA-Pori Deaurans -USA Driveways^ H191way 1Ti - Fred Waring Drive Period Inbound Outbound inbound _ Outbound Total Time Period r Lett Right Left Right Left Right � Right+ ��' 11:00to11:15AM ' 8 5 6 7 7 10 . 21 22 11:15 to 11:30 AM 5 2 7 8 4 11 20 17 11:30 to 11:45AM 5 9 _ 1 10 5 7 _ 16 21 11:45 to 12:00 PM 9 . 8 7 I 9 3 12 25 23 12:00 to 12:15 PM' 11 _ _ 8 6 9 8 11 26 25 1215 to 12:30 PM" ,_ 9 . . 7 3 8 7 9 20 _ 23 12:30 to 1245 PM* I 9 6 7 1 7 5 10 23 21 12:45 to 1:00 PM' ( 12 9 9 L..± 4 12 25 25 2-Hr.Directional Totals 0 68 0 52 46 62 43 82 176 177 Peak Hour Totals 0 41 0 28 25 28 24 42 94 94 *Noon Peak Hour-12:00 to 1:00 PM e CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: November 3, continued from September 15, and October 6, 1998 CASE NO: CUP 98-4 REQUEST: Approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart, located at 72-801 Highway 1 1 1 . APPLICANT: Chevron Products Company P.O. Box 2833 La Habra, CA 90632-2833 I. BACKGROUND: Commission will recall this matter was continued from the September 15, and October 6, 1998 meetings to allow the applicant to work with staff to address the hours of operation and Public Works' conditions of approval numbers 6 and 7. II. DISCUSSION: Hours of Operation: Staff addressed the hours of operation in the October 6, 1998 staff report and recommends Commission allow the service station and convenience store to remain open 24 hours per day, with the sale of alcohol hours to be determined by the Alcohol and Beverage Control agency. Several factors exist that are unique to this property, which allow staff to recommend approval of a 24 hour operation. Those factors include: 1 . The location of the property and its surrounding uses. The property in question is located in the City's commercial core and is surrounded by commercially zoned properties. The project has frontage on both Highway 111 and Plaza Way and backs up to the Palms to Pines East shopping center. 2. The nearest residentially zoned property is more than 500 feet to the south. No concerns regarding the hours of operation have been brought to staff's attention by adjacent property owners or residents. STAFF REPORT NOVEMBER 3, 1998 CUP 98-4 Public Works Conditions 6 and 7: The remaining issues raised by the applicant were regarding Public Works conditions of approval Nos. 6 and 7. Attached Commission will find both a letter from Chevron's traffic engineer dated October 14, 1998, in response to traffic generation and street improvement requirements on Plaza Way and the Public Works Department memorandum dated October 19, in response to Chevron's letter. Condition No. 6 relates to the widening of Plaza Way public right-of-way only by five feet, to provide a total of three northbound lanes (left, through and right). Public Works condition number 6 has been modified to read as follows: 6. The Project shall construct street widening improvements (minimum five feet) along Plaza Way property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes (left, through and right) and a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk. In regards to the discussion on the amount of traffic generated by the proposed service station/convenience store, both the Public Works department and Chevron's engineers have contrasting opinions. The City's Public Works Department believes that the street improvements on Plaza Way are justified based on their projected traffic impacts to Plaza Way and thus condition of approval # 6 is justified. The applicant is conducting a site specific analysis of a similar service station. It may be possible that the analysis may not be ready for Tuesday's meeting and thus a continuance may be necessary to resolve the issue. The second issue raised by the applicant was the width of the northerly driveway along Plaza Way. The Public Works Department's condition No. 7 limited the northerly driveway on Plaza Way to a maximum of 30 feet. Due to the applicant's concerns associated with fuel delivery vehicles exiting the site, condition No. 7 has been amended to read as follows: 7. Proposed northerly driveway width shall be a maximum of 38 feet. Ill. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Planning Commission continue the matter until the site specific traffic analysis is completed or until the traffic issue is resolved. STAFF REPORT NOVEMBER 3, 1998 CUP 98-4 IV. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Resolution B. Staff report dated September 15, and October 6, 1998 C. KHR Assoc., "Service Station Trip Generation & Traffic Impacts" October 14, 1998. D. Public Works memorandum dated October 19, 1998 Prepared by: artin Alvarez Reviewed and Approved by: 4! Philip Drell PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 2,900 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL FOOD MART, LOCATED AT 72-801 HIGHWAY 111 . CASE NO. CUP 98-4 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 3rd day of November, 1998, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY INC. of the above mentioned; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. "97-18," in that the director of community development has determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption for purposes of CEQA and no further documentation is necessary; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify the granting of said conditional use permit: 1 . That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of zoning ordinance and the purpose of the district in which it is located. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public, health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance, except for approved variances or adjustments. 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goal's, objectives and the policies of the city's general plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2. That approval of Conditional Use Permit 98-4 is hereby granted for reasons subject to the attached conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 3rd day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SONIA M. CAMPBELL, Chairperson ATTEST: PHILIP DRELL, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. C.U.P 98-4 Department of Community Development: 1 . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null, void and of no effect whatsoever. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Applicant shall participate in a commercial recycling program as determined by the City Environmental Conservation Manager and applicable Waste Disposal Company. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas. Said placement shall be approved by applicable trash company and Department of Community Development. 6. All future occupants of the buildings shall comply with parking requirements in Section 25.58 of the zoning ordinance. 7. A detailed parking lot and building lighting plan shall be submitted to staff for approval, subject to applicable lighting standards, plan to be prepared by a qualified lighting engineer. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 8. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the department of public works prior to architectural review commission submittal. 9. Project is subject to Art in Public Places program per Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 4.10. 10. Final landscape plans shall comply with the parking lot tree planting master plan. 11 . Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping for the life of the project, which agreement shall be notarized and which agreement shall be recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run with the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape plan shall include a long-term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate watering times, fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific materials to be planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801 ) and the approved landscape plan. 12. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of building permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, Fringe-Toed Lizard, TUMF, School Mitigation and Housing Mitigation fees. 13. The project's setbacks shall conform the P.C. (3) in Section 25.30 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, with exception to Section 25.30.230 (E). Department of Public Works: 1 . Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of a grading permit. 2. All private driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee paid prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 3. Landscaping maintenance on all public street property frontages shall be the responsibility of the property owner. 4. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans by the Director of Public Works and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. 6. The Project shall construct street widening improvements (minimum five feet) along Plaza Way property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes (left, through and right) and a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk. 7. Proposed northerly driveway width shall be a maximum of thirty-eight feet. 8. Building pad elevations for the proposed project are subject to review and modification in accordance with Section 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 9. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF). Payment of said fees shall be at time of building permit issuance. Riverside County Fire Department: 1 . With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plan check, Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Codes, appropriate NFPA Standards, CFC, CBC, and/or recognized fire protection standards. The fire department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per California Fire Code Sec. 10.401 . 2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure must be available before any combustible materials are placed on the job site. 3. Provide, or show there exists, a water system capable of providing a potential gallon per minute flow of 3000 gpm for commercial. The actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given water main shall be 1500 GPM for two hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. 4. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6"x4"x2-1/2"x2- 1/2"), located not less than 150' commercial from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. Hydrants installed below 3000 feet elevation shall be of the "wet barrel" type. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5. Prior to the application for a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and two copies of the water system plan to the County Fire Department for review. No building permit shall be issued until the water system plan has been approved by the County Fire Chief. Upon approval, the original will be returned. One copy will be sent to the responsible inspecting authority. 6. Comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, adopted January 1 , 1990, for all occupancies. 7. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes and shall be clearly marked by painting and or signs approved by the Fire Marshal. 8. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet # 10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Fire extinguishers must not be over 75 feet walking distance. In addition to the above, a 40BC extinguisher is required for commercial kitchens. 9. All buildings shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall be not less than 24' of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is allowed, the roadway shall be 36' wide with parking on both sides, 32' wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150' shall be provided with a minimum 45' radius turn-around (55' in industrial developments). Fountains or garden islands placed in the middle of these turn-arounds shall not exceed a 5' radius or 10' diameter. City standards may be more restrictive. 10. Contact the Fire Department for final inspection prior to occupancy. 11 . This project may require licensing and/or review by State agencies. Applicant should prepare a letter of intent detailing the proposed usage to facilitate case review. Contact should be made with the Office of the State Fire Marshal (818- 960-6441 ) for an opinion and a classification of occupancy type. This information and a copy of the letter of intent should be submitted to the fire Department so that proper requirements may be specified during the review process. Typically this applies to educational, day care, institutional, health care, etc. 12. Commercial buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city. 13. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be submitted separately for approval prior to construction. Subcontractors should contact the fire marshal's office for submittal requirements. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve months. 7 10/16/1998 16:21 714-756-6444 KHR ASSLL1AILb rHllt el of Post It Fax i._. 7671 D" (OW. 'NOW" limb. KHR ASSOCIATES Co O 9 cRCPA\l►, c°. liNiActs ASSoca4 e.s Consulting gnglneers -Architecto - Planners Phone r Phone Fax#(7 0WW! ? cfi Fanf October 14, 1998 c7"t\_ v i Mr. Joseph Gaugush, Engineering Manager City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 SUBJECT:SERVICE STATION TRIP GENERATION&TRAFFIC IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH CHEVRON SERVICE STATION NO.9-3047(PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA)—CASE NO.C.U.P.98-4(SENT VIA FAX) Dear Mr. Gaugush: At the request of Mr. Al Norris, with Chevron Products Company, I have reviewed the materials forwarded to my office regarding the proposed Chevron service station project on the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Plaza Way, in the City of Palm Desert, California. My comments are directed primarily in response to an interoffice memorandum,dated September 28, 1998, signed by you and addressed to Mr. Martin Alvarez, Assistant Planner, regarding the subject project I am prefacing my comments regarding the City's correspondence with some background information on service station trip generation, For your information, I am the author of both the 1992 Mobil National Traffic Study (a comprehensive traffic survey of 30 service stations nationwide), and an article in the March 1993 edition of the ITE Journal, entitled, 'Service Station Trip Generation." Subsequently, the definitions and data generated as part of the Mobil National Traffic Study have been incorporated into the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE) Trip Generation report In fact, I served on the Technical Committee overseeing the technical contents of the latest edition (i.e., 6th Edition)of the Trip Generation report. KEY DEFINITIONS Among the definitions that have become keys to understanding and interpreting service station trip generation are the specific types of uses and the term vehicle fueling position (or VFP). Service Station Use The major categories of service station use include: gasoline (or fuel) only; service station with service bays; service station with mart (or convenience store); service station with car wash; service station with mart and quick serve restaurant (or QSR); and service station with mart and fast food drive-thru. There are, of course, various combinations and subsets of these major categories. It should also be noted that there is another category of land use that is often confused with the service station use — namely, 'convenience stores." While the term convenience store is often used 2355 Main Street-Suite 120 (849) 756-8440 Irvine,Califomla 92614 FAX(949)756-6444 10/16/1998 16:21 714-756-6444 KHR ASSOC iAIL5 rAUt el Mr.Joseph Gaugush 10/14/96 Page 2 of 6 interchangeably when referring to stand-alone developments (such as 7-Elevens) or in conjunction with a service station development(such as Chervon's Food Mart), the trip generation characteristics of each are remarkably different The confusion over the definition of convenience stores is exacerbated by the fact that, in some areas of the country, there are convenience stores with gasoline pumps_ Since the differences in trip generation characteristics are significant, the ITE Trip Generation report does make the distinction between a "service station with a convenience store' and a "convenience store with gasoline pumps" by establishing separate categories of land use and trip generation. The primary business activity of a service station with a convenience store is the sale of automotive fuel, Convenience store sales are ancillary business to fuel sales, with approximately 15% of the total customers purchasing only a convenience store item (i.e., 85% of the customers are purchasing only fuel or fuel with a convenience store item). Furthermore, the amount of traffic generated by a service station with a convenience store is only remotely related to the size of the store. Rather, the number of dispensers is the best indicator of traffic generating potential of a service station with a convenience store. In contrast, the primary business activity of a convenience store or convenience store with gasoline pumps is the sale of store merchandise (e.g., drinks, food, newspapers, magazines, sundries, etc.). If a convenience store sells fuel, it is usually as a secondary business, and the volume of fuel sales is a fraction of the amounts sold by a typical service station. The amount of baffle generated by a convenience store is often closely related to the size of the store. Vehicle Fueling Position The term "vehicle fueling position' (VFP) is one I originated to describe the physical space a vehicle occupies while getting gasoline or diesel fuel at a service station — in effect a 'parking space used for fueling a vehicle.'A VFP most correctly describes the number of vehicles that can physically be served at a given time at a particular service station. The correlation between VFPs and modem fuel pumps (or dispensers) is that there are typically two VFPs per multi-product dispenser (MPD). However, this is not the case when product dispensers are placed immediately adjacent to one another or when a lane adjacent to the dispensers is physically and permanently blocked. In such cases, the physical ability of a vehicle to obtain fuel defines a VFP. Thus, the total number of VFPs that a service station may be said to have is equivalent to the total number of vehicles that can simultaneously get fuel at any given time. The number of • MPDs at a particular service station is related to the projected volume of fuel that will be sold. The volume of fuel that is projected to be sold at a particular service station is an indicator of the amount of traffic anticipated to be generated by the station. 10/16/1998 16:21 714-756-6444 KHR ASSOCIATES rHuc nJ Mr.Joseph Gaugush 10/14/98 Page 3 of 5 Typical Trip Generation Analysis A determination can be made on the amount of traffic generated to and from a service station by counting the number of times a motor vehicle moves onto or off the premises (each such movement being a 'trip" or, more appropriately, a `trip end"). For service stations, the resulting number is often expressed as the number of"daily trips" or "peak hour trips" per "vehicle fueling position." "Daily trips" refers to the number of trips counted in a 24-hour period, while "peak hour trips" refers to the number of trips counted during the hour of highest morning traffic (typically, between the hours of 6:00 A.M. to 9:00 A.M.)or the hour of highest evening traffic (typically, between the hours of 4:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M.). The results of past studies, as reflected In the Tnp Generation report, indicate that the number of daily trips per VFP is 168.56'for a service station with service bays, and 162.78 for a service station with a convenience store. The number of morning (AM.) peak hour trips per VFP is 12.27 for a service station with service bays, and 10.08 for a service station with a convenience store_ The number of evening (P.M.) peak hours trips per VFP is' '4.56 for a service station with service bays, and 13.38 for a service station with convenience store. The findings of the other studies referred to in this letter are consistent with these results. Uniformly, irrespective of the location of a particular station, the number of trips per vehicle fueling position generated by a service station with service bays is shown to be greater than the number of trips per vehicle fueling position generated by a service station with convenience stone_ Based on the results of these studies and on my professional experience and observations, I am of the opinion that if a service station with service bays were converted to a service station with convenience store, and the number of vehicle fueling positions for the site remained unchanged, the new facility would not generate anygreater numb er of tipsthan the old Most M t like( the new fa generate fewer trips. facility. Y, facility would The °conversion° of a service station with service bays to a service station with a convenience store or a service station with a convenience store and a car wash may result in increased gasoline sales and/or increased revenue per customer while generating fewer trips to the facility for the following reasons: 1) First, after a conversion, the site no longer generates the trips previously generated by the service bays (i.e., lubrication and/or repair services). Unless the customer remains at the station while his or her car is being serviced, a visit to a service station with service bays can generate up to 6 trips by the customer. For example, each of the following constitutes one trip; a) the customer drives his or her car to the station; b) the customer's friend also drives to the station to pick up the customer; c) the customer and the friend Mr.Joseph cguah 10/14/98 Page 4 of 5 leave the station in the friend's car; d) the customer and the friend return to the station in the friend's car, e) the friend drops off the customer and leaves the station; and f) the customer picks up his or her car and leaves the station. In addition, service station employees who travel off premises to purchase automobile parts generate additional trips, as do stations that offer towing services or are supplied by parts deliveries. Service stations with service bays also employ many more people (up to 3 per service bay) than service stations with convenience store and/or car wash. 2) A second reason is the 'consolidation" of trips. "Consolidation" simply means that a customer may purchase fuel, buy a convenience store item, and use the car wash (if available) during the same visit to the site. Experience shows that at a service station with convenience store, approximately 85% of the convenience store's customer base is already on the premises to purchase fuel —resulting in additional sales, but no additional traffic. INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS Referring to the September 28, 1998 memorandum, for the purposes of estimating trip generation, the City assumed an incorrect land use category for the proposed use. Per the 6th Edition of ITE Trip Generation report, the existing use is a 'gasoline/service station" (with service bays) and the proposed use is a "gasoline/service station with convenience market.' In the same memorandum, the City also assumed an incorrect number of vehicle fueling positions. Based on the site plan, there'are-12 ssVFPs -- rat ;24, as the memorandum states. The confusion may have resulted from the fact that there are 12 dispensers on the site, and typically there are 2 VFPs per dispenser(one on each side of the dispenser). However, in the particular case of the subject service station, there are two dispensers side by side and room for only 2 VFPs per pair of dispensers. Since the number of dispensers is not being altered, the correct number of VFPs is 12 for both the existing and proposed conditions of the subject service station site. By using the correct land use category, and the correct number of vehicle fueling positions, the eedsting use (i.e., service station with service bays) generates 2: 22.72 trip ends per average weekday day, v iltitlie proposed use (i.e., service station with a convenience store) Wittvgenerate 1,953.36Ttrip ends per average weekday day — resulting in armet decrease of 69.36 trip ends per average weekday. During the A.M. peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing use is 147.24, while the proposed use will generate 120.72 trip ends day—resulting in a net decrease of 28.52 trip ends for the A.M. peak hour. During the P.M. peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing use is 174.72, while the proposed use will generate 160.56 trip ends day— resulting in a net decrease of 14.16 trip ends for the P.M. peak hour. Mr.Joseph Gaugustt 10/14118 Page 5 015 In recognition of the fact that most people get gas on their way to or from some other ' trip is often used when referring to traffic generated by a the term p n9 activity, "pass-by" service station development. Pass-by trips are generated from traffic already on the adjacent streets and do not in themselves add significantly to traffic congestion or delay. For service stations a pass-by trip reduction factor of 85% or more is acceptable —meaning only 35%or less of trip ends generated by a service station is"new traffic." IMPACT ON THE ASSESSEMNT OF FEES In light of the above findings, we request a reconsideration of the Conditions of Approval, the City's Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees, and/or the traffic signaliization fees for the subject project. IN CLOSING I hope that you will consider the above findings, and provide your comments to Mr. Alvarez and to Ms. April Smith, at Service Station Services, soon as possible, as the subject project is scheduled to be heard at the City Planning Commission hearing of October 20, 1998. If there are any questions regarding the above findings, please contact me directly, at your convenience. Sincerely yours, KHR Associates (7-c,RoFESS/oi, /�� �5tl. KA�• q ` %\ James H. Kawamura, P.E. _9'- , Ap4a 1 1 10 President Expiration: 09/30/99 \ 1 AFF\ sQ 97' 4F cA1_ �) cc Al Norris,Chevron Products Company April Smith.Service Station Services Martin Alvarez,City of Palm Desert RECEPVEr CITY OF PALM DESERT OCT 201998 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM GOWJNITY CEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF PALM DESERT TO: Martin Alvarez, Assistant Planner FROM: Richard J. Folkers, ACM/Director of Public Works SUBJECT: CUP 98-4 - CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY DATE: October 19, 1998 The Public Works Department has reviewed the October 14, 1998 report by KHR Associates regarding the Chevron service station at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Plaza Way (CUP 98-4). We must preface our comments by noting that Mark Greenwood, Transportation Engineer, called Ms. April Smith of Service Station Services on October 7, 1998 to request some discussion with the project traffic engineer prior to preparing any traffic studies or reports. Although Ms. Smith agreed that this could help to resolve the concerns, the engineer never contacted the Public Works Department prior to submitting the report. This leaves us with excellent documentation of opposing viewpoints, but little movement towards resolution of the concerns. We are disappointed that our efforts to facilitate timely completion of the project, while resolving sincere concerns for traffic conditions in the area, have gone unanswered. The report fails to relieve the concern that the project will result in substantially more traffic than the current use. Although average trip rates are cited in the report and in this response, we must be careful not to overlook the potential of this site to exceed average trip generation rates. This site is on State Highway 111, in the heart of the business district while adjoining large residential areas. There are also few gas station/convenience stores in the area. These conditions provide this site the opportunity to far exceed average trip rates, potentially resulting in far more traffic than we might otherwise expect. While we have no interest in penalizing successful projects, we must also be cautious to prevent them from creating negative impacts to the street system. While we agree that the loss of the service bays (without a replacement use) would result in a reduction in traffic from the site, the location of the bays and configuration of the shopping center resulted in those trips being distributed to several driveways and areas which are removed from the intersection of Plaza Way and Highway 111. However, a great majority of the convenience store trips are expected to use the project driveways on Plaza Way, resulting in additional traffic and congestion on Plaza Way at Highway 111. As mentioned in the report, the ITE Trip Generation Manual provides data for a variety of gas station configurations. ITE Land Use 845 "Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market" and Land Use 853 "Convenience Market with Gasoline Pumps" are very similar uses, with very different trip generation characteristics. Use 845 has an average rate of 162.78 trips per fueling position, while Use 853 has an average rate of 542.60 trips per fueling position. This represents over a 300% range of trip generation rates based on interpretation of which use this is. However, the question is not "Which use is this?", rather it is "How much traffic will result and what will the impacts be?" If we use the lower trip generation rate in our analysis as the project traffic engineer suggests, and the project generates traffic at the higher rate, we could be left with severe traffic congestion on Plaza Way at Highway 111, impacting this site and all other businesses in the area. Our evaluation of the ITE trip generation rates indicates that Use 845 applies to relatively small convenience stores with limited product lines, while Use 853 applies to larger convenience stores with a larger variety of product lines. With approximately 2,900 square feet, this project fits well into our interpretation of Use 853, resulting in the 542.6 trips per fueling position rate, as stated in our September 28, 1998 memorandum. The report finds fault with our estimate of 24 vehicle fueling positions for the existing and proposed uses, and states that there are 12 vehicle fueling positions for both uses. We have again reviewed the site plan and maintain that it is possible to fuel up to 24 vehicles at one time on the proposed layout. The maximum number of vehicles fueling at any given time could be between 12 and 24. Since our evaluation is based on the same number of fueling positions for the existing and proposed uses, there is little at issue here. The potential of this project to generate 300% more traffic than the site currently produces, and the resulting impact to Plaza Way, continues to necessitate widening of Plaza Way as previously identified in Public Works Condition No. 6. If we are unable to resolve the traffic concerns at this location, it may be necessary to submit the proposed project to Caltrans for their review, since there could be a potential impact to the State Highway. RI HARD /FOLKERS, P.E. cc: Joseph S. Gaugush, Engineering Manager Mark Greenwood, Transportation Engineer File 10/16/1998 16:21 714-756-6444 KHR ASSOCIATES PAGE 01 Post•It•Fax Notes 7B71 Date 146 �1/=6".S PPP- To Ta N`At�ihl a�114W2.Fmni �►1h T43("34KLi() �►_�� KHR ASSOCIATES CoJ4e'iC-Ay,CQAls, a c°- rcc s Consulting Engineers -Architects - Planners Phone r phone Fax rs .77\ /'4 'x Tc6,6 Fax October 14, 1998 Mr. Joseph Gaugush, Engineering Manager City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 SUBJECT_ SERVICE STATION TRIP GENERATION Sr TRAFFIC IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WiTH CHEVRON SERVICE STATION NO.9-3047(PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA)—CASE NO.C.U.P.98-4(SENT VIA FAX) Dear Mr. Gaugush: At the request of Mr. AI Norris, with Chevron Products Company, I have reviewed the materials forwarded to my office regarding the proposed Chevron service station project on the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Plaza Way, in the City of Palm Desert, California. My comments are directed primarily in response to an interoffice memorandum, dated ember Sept 28, 1998, signed by you and addressed to Mr. Martin Alvarez Assistant Planner, regarding the subjectproject. 9 p 1ect. I am prefacing my comments regarding the City's correspondence with some background information on service station trip generation, For your information, I am the author of both the 1992 Mobil National Traffic Study (a comprehensive traffic survey of 30 service stations nationwide), and an article in the March 1993 edition of the ITE Journal, entitled, "Service Station Trip Generation." Subsequently, the definitions and data generated as part of the Mobil National Traffic Study have been incorporated into the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation report. In fact, I served on the Technical Committee overseeing the technical contents of the latest edition (i.e., 6th Edition)of the Trip Generation report. KEY DEFINITIONS Among the definitions that have become keys to understanding and interpreting service station trip generation are the specific types of uses and the term vehicle fueling position (or VFP). Service Station Use The major categories of service station use include: gasoline (or fuel) only; service station with service bays; service station with mart (or convenience store); service station with car wash; service station with mart and quick serve restaurant (or QSR); and service station with mart and fast food drive-thru. There are, of course, various combinations and subsets of these major categories. It should also be noted that there is another category of land use that is often confused with the service station use — namely, "convenience stores." While the term convenience store is often used 2355 Maln Street-Suite 120 (949) 756-6440 Irvine, Calliomla 92614 FAX(949) 756-6444 . 10/16/1998 16:21 714-756-6444 KHR ASSOCIATES PAGE 02 Mr.Joseph Gaugush 10/14/96 Page 2 of 6 interchangeably when referring to stand-alone developments (such as 7-Elevens) or in conjunction with a service station development(such as Chervon's Food Mart), the trip generation characteristics of each are remarkably different, The confusion over the definition of convenience stores is exacerbated by the fact that in some areas of the country, there are convenience stores with gasoline pumps_ Since the differences in trip generation characteristics are significant, the 1TE Trip Generation report does make the distinction between a "service station with a convenience store- and a "convenience store with gasoline pumps" by establishing separate categories of land use and trip generation. The primary business activity of a service station with a convenience store is the sale of automotive fuel. Convenience store sales are ancillary business to fuel sales, with approximately 15% of the total customers purchasing only a convenience store item (i.e., 85% of the customers are purchasing only fuel or fuel with a convenience store item). Furthermore, the amount of traffic generated by a service station with a convenience store is only remotely related to the size of the store. Rather, the number of dispensers is the best indicator of traffic generating potential of a service station with a convenience store. In contrast, the primary business activity of a convenience store or convenience store with gasoline pumps is the sale of store merchandise (e.g., drinks, food, newspapers, magazines, sundries, etc.). tf a convenience store sells fuel, it is usually as a secondary business, and the volume of fuel sales is a fraction of the amounts sold by a typical service station, The amount of traffic generated by a convenience store is often closely related to the size of the store. Vehicle Fueling Position The term `vehicle fueling position" (VFP) is one I originated to describe the physical space a vehicle occupies while getting gasoline or diesel fuel at a service station — in effect a "parking space used for fueling a vehicle."A VFP most correctly describes the number of vehicles that can physically be served at a given time at a particular service station. The correlation between VFPs and modem fuel pumps (or dispensers) is that there are typically two VFPs per multi-product dispenser (MPD). However, this is not the case when product dispensers are placed immediately adjacent to one another or when a lane adjacent to the dispensers is physically and permanently blocked. In such cases, the physical ability of a vehicle to obtain fuel defines a VFP. Thus, the total number of VFPs that a service station may be said to have is equivalent to the total number of vehicles that can simultaneously get fuel at any given time. The number of MPDs at a particular service station is related to the projected volume of fuel that will be sold. The volume of fuel that is projected to be sold at a particular service station is an indicator of the amount of traffic anticipated to be generated by the station. - 10/16/1998 16:21 714-756-F1444 KHR ASSOCIATES PAGE 03 Mr.Joseph Gaugush 10/14/98 Page 3 of 5 Typical Trip Generation Analysis A determination can be made on the amount of traffic generated to and from a service station by counting the number of times a motor vehicle moves onto or off the premises (each such movement being a"trip" or, more appropriately, a 'trip end"). For service stations, the resulting number is often expressed as the number of"daily trips" or 'peak hour trips" per "vehicle fueling position." "Daily trips" refers to the number of trips counted in a 24-hour period, while "peak hour trips" refers to the number of trips counted during the hour of highest morning traffic (typically, between the hours of 6:00 A.M. to 9:00 AM.)or the hour of highest evening traffic(typically, between the hours of 4:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M.). The results of past studies, as reflected In the Trip Generation report, indicate that the number of daily trips per VFP is 168.56 for a service station with service bays, and 162.78 for a service station with a convenience store. The number of morning (A.M.) peak hour trips per VFP is 1227 for a service station with service bays, and 10.06 for a service station with a convenience store_ The number of evening (P.M.) peak hours trips per VFP is 14.56 for a service station with service bays, and 13.38 for a service station with convenience store. The findings of the other studies referred to in this letter are consistent with these results. Uniformly, irrespective of the location of a particular station, the number of trips per vehicle fueling position generated by a service station with service bays is shown to be greater than the number of trips per vehicle fueling position generated by a service station with convenience store_ Based on the results of these studies and on my professional experience and observations, I am of the opinion that if a service station with service bays were converted to a service station with convenience store, and the number of vehicle fueling positions for the site remained unchanged, the new facility would not generate any greater number of trips than the old facility. Most likely, the new facility would generate fewer trips. The "conversion" of a service station with service bays to a service station with a convenience store or a service station with a convenience store and a car wash may result in increased gasoline sales and/or increased revenue per customer while generating fewer trips to the facility for the following reasons: 1) First, after a conversion, the site no longer generates the trips previously generated by the service bays (i.e., lubrication and/or repair services). Unless the customer remains at the station while his or her car is being serviced, a visit to a service station with service bays can generate up to 6 trips by the customer. For example, each of the following constitutes one trip; a) the customer drives his or her car to the station; b) the customer's friend also drives to the station to pick up the customer; c) the customer and the friend .1 I Ir 111-11 LJ I 'T..- 1-0 vJ • Mr.Joseph Gaugush 1 a14J98 Page 4 of 5 leave the station in the friend's car; d) the customer and the friend return to the station in the friend's car, e) the friend drops off the customer and leaves the station; and f) the customer picks up his or her car and leaves the station. In addition, service station employees who travel off premises to purchase automobile parts generate additional trips, as do stations that offer towing services or are supplied by parts deliveries. Service stations with service bays also employ many more people (up to 3 per service bay) than service stations with convenience store and/or car wash. 2) A second reason is the "consolidation" of trips. "Consolidation" simply means that a customer may purchase fuel, buy a convenience store item, and use the car wash (if available) during the same visit to the site. Experience shows that at a service station with convenience store, approximately 85% of the convenience store's customer base is already on the premises to purchase fuel —resulting in additional sales, but no additional traffic. INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS Referring to the September 28, 1998 memorandum, for the purposes of estimating trip generation, the City assumed an incorrect land use category for the proposed use. Per the 6th Edition of ITE Trip Generation report, the existing use is a "gasoline/service station" (with service bays) and the proposed use is a "gasoline/service station with convenience market" In the same memorandum, the City also assumed an incorrect number of vehicle fueling positions. Based on the site plan, there are 12 VFPs — not 24, as the memorandum states. The confusion may have resulted from the fact that there are 12 dispensers on the site, and typically there are 2 VFPs per dispenser(one on each side of the dispenser). However, in the particular case of the subject service station, there are two dispensers side by side and room for only 2 VFPs per pair of dispensers. Since the number of dispensers is not being altered,the correct number of VFPs is 12 for both the existing and proposed conditions of the subject service station site. By using the correct land use category, and the correct number of vehicle fueling positions, the existing use (i.e., service station with service bays) generates 2,022.72 trip ends per average weekday day, while the proposed use (i.e., service station with a convenience store) will generate 1,953.36 trip ends per average weekday day — resulting in a net decrease of 69.36 trip ends per average weekday. During the A.M. peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing use is 147.24, while the proposed use will generate 120.72 trip ends day—resulting in a net decrease of 28.52 trip ends for the A.M. peak hour. During the P.M. peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing use is 174.72, while the proposed use will generate 160.56 trip ends day— resulting in a net decrease of 14.16 trip ends for the P.M. peak hour. 1UJ lU/1JJU, SU.LU .+� ..+v vim.. . .•. a.-..�..+ •--- --. ----- Mr.Joseph Gaugush 10/14198 Page 5ot5 In recognition of the fact that most people get gas on their way to or from some other activity, the term "pass-by' trip is often used when referring to traffic generated by a service station development. Pass-by trips are generated from traffic already on the adjacent streets and do not in themselves add significantly to traffic congestion or delay. For service stations a pass-by trip reduction factor of 85% or more is acceptable —meaning only 35%or less of trip ends generated by a service station is "new traffic." IMPACT ON THE ASSESSEMNT OF FEES In light of the above findings, we request a reconsideration of the Conditions of Approval, the City's Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees, and/or the traffic signalization fees for the subject project. IN CLOSING I hope that you will consider the above findings, and provide your comments to Mr. Alvarez and to Ms. April Smith, at Service Station Services, soon as possible, as the subject project is scheduled to be heard at the City Planning Commission hearing of October 20, 1998. If there are any questions regarding the above findings, please contact me directly, at your convenience. Sincerely yours, KHR Associates e�OFESS/pN ck- �S KAlr4 <<� ti .. f-lifrit411P-7(40/el‘drAhrilrie#0 James H. Kawamura, P.E. '' President Expirntion. 09/30/99 47, J>s IRA Ff‘c' �Q ca AI Norris,Chevron Products Company --�� April Smith,Service Station Services Martin Alvarez,City of Path Desert CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: Continued from September 1 5, 1998 CASE NO: CUP 98-4 REQUEST: Approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart, located at 72-801 Highway 1 1 1 . APPLICANT: Chevron Products Company P.O. Box 2833 La Habra, CA 90632-2833 BACKGROUND: Commission will recall this matter was continued from the September 15, 1998 meeting to allow the applicant to work with staff addressing the hours of operation and Public Works' conditions of approval numbers 6 and 7. II. DISCUSSION: Hours of Operation: The applicant's intent is to remain open 24 hours per day. Although the most recent convenience store approval known as Cam's Corner, is required to close at 12:00 midnight, this property's location and development characteristics are substantially different. For instance, the subject property is located in the City's commercial core and is surrounded by commercially zoned properties. The project has frontage on both Highway 111 and Plaza Way and backs up to the Palms to Pines East shopping center. The nearest residentially zoned property is more than 500 feet away to the south. No concerns regarding the hours of operation have been brought to staff's attention by adjacent property owners or residents. Residents should have the opportunity to utilize such services at all hours, where they do not negatively impact the neighborhood. Staff recommends Commission allow the convenience store and gasoline service to remain open 24 hours per day, with the sale of alcohol hours to be determined by the Alcohol and Beverage Control agency. STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 6, 1996 CUP 98-4 Attached Commission will find a memorandum written by the Public Works Department in response to concerns raised by the applicant at the September 15, meeting. Those remaining issues raised by the applicant were regarding conditions of approval Nos. 6 and 7. Condition No. 6 relates to the widening of Plaza Way by six feet, to provide a total of three northbound lanes (left, through and right). In the memorandum dated September 22, the Public Works Department justifies the addition of a right-turn lane at Plaza Way, or a total of three northbound lanes based on the projected increase in weekday trips produced by the existing gasoline service and the proposed 2,900 square foot convenience store. Condition No. 6 remains the same. The second issue the applicant raised was the width of the northerly driveway along Plaza Way. The Public Works Department's condition No. 7 limited the northerly driveway on Plaza Way to a maximum of 30 feet. Due to the applicant's concerns associated with fuel delivery vehicles exiting the site, condition No. 7 has been amended to read as follows: 7. Proposed northerly driveway width shall be a maximum of 38 feet. III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Planning Commission adopt the amended resolution, incorporating the amendment to Public Works condition No. 7. IV. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Resolution B. Staff report dated September 15, 1998 C. Public Works memorandum dated September 22, 1998 D. Plans Prepared by: artin Alvarez Reviewed and Approved by Philip Drell PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 2,900 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL FOOD MART, LOCATED AT 72-801 HIGHWAY 111 . CASE NO. CUP 98-4 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 6th day of October, 1998, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY INC. of the above mentioned; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. "97-18," in that the director of community development has determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption for purposes of CEQA and no further documentation is necessary; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify the granting of said conditional use permit: 1 . That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of zoning ordinance and the purpose of the district in which it is located. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public, health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance, except for approved variances or adjustments. 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goal's, objectives and the policies of the city's general plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2. That approval of Conditional Use Permit 98-4 is hereby granted for reasons subject to the attached conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 6th day of October, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SONIA M. CAMPBELL, Chairperson ATTEST: PHILIP DRELL, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. C.U.P 98-4 Department of Community Development: 1 . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null, void and of no effect whatsoever. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Applicant shall participate in a commercial recycling program as determined by the City Environmental Conservation Manager and applicable Waste Disposal Company. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas. Said placement shall be approved by applicable trash company and Department of Community Development. 6. All future occupants of the buildings shall comply with parking requirements in Section 25.58 of the zoning ordinance. 7. A detailed parking lot and building lighting plan shall be submitted to staff for approval, subject to applicable lighting standards, plan to be prepared by a qualified lighting engineer. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 8. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the department of public works prior to architectural review commission submittal. 9. Project is subject to Art in Public Places program per Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 4.10. 10. Final landscape plans shall comply with the parking lot tree planting master plan. 11 . Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping for the life of the project, which agreement shall be notarized and which agreement shall be recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run with the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape plan shall include a long-term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate watering times, fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific materials to be planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801 ) and the approved landscape plan. 12. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of building permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, Fringe-Toed Lizard, TUMF, School Mitigation and Housing Mitigation fees. 13. The project's setbacks shall conform the P.C. (3) in Section 25.30 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, with exception to Section 25.30.230 (E). Department of Public Works: 1 . Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of a grading permit. 2. All private driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee paid prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 3. Landscaping maintenance on all public street property frontages shall be the responsibility of the property owner. 4. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans by the Director of Public Works and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. 6. Project shall provide for the widening of Plaza Way (minimum six feet) along the property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes ( left, through and right) and a six foot wide concrete sidewalk. . 7. Proposed northerly driveway width shall be a maximum of thirty-eight feet. 8. Building pad elevations for the proposed project are subject to review and modification in accordance with Section 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 9. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF). Payment of said fees shall be at time of building permit issuance. Riverside County Fire Department: 1 . With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plan check, Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Codes, appropriate NFPA Standards, CFC, CBC, and/or recognized fire protection standards. The fire department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per California Fire Code Sec. 10.401 . 2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure must be available before any combustible materials are placed on the job site. 3. Provide, or show there exists, a water system capable of providing a potential gallon per minute flow of 3000 gpm for commercial. The actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given water main shall be 1500 GPM for two hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. 4. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6"x4"x2-1 /2"x2- 1/2"), located not less than 150' commercial from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. Hydrants installed below 3000 feet elevation shall be of the "wet barrel" type. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5. Prior to the application for a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and two copies of the water system plan to the County Fire Department for review. No building permit shall be issued until the water system plan has been approved by the County Fire Chief. Upon approval, the original will be returned. One copy will be sent to the responsible inspecting authority. 6. Comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, adopted January 1 , 1990, for all occupancies. 7. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes and shall be clearly marked by painting and or signs approved by the Fire Marshal. 8. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet # 10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Fire extinguishers must not be over 75 feet walking distance. In addition to the above, a 40BC extinguisher is required for commercial kitchens. 9. All buildings shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 1 50' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall be not less than 24' of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is allowed, the roadway shall be 36' wide with parking on both sides, 32' wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 1 50' shall be provided with a minimum 45' radius turn-around (55' in industrial developments). Fountains or garden islands placed in the middle of these turn-arounds shall not exceed a 5' radius or 10' diameter. City standards may be more restrictive. 10. Contact the Fire Department for final inspection prior to occupancy. 11 . This project may require licensing and/or review by State agencies. Applicant should prepare a letter of intent detailing the proposed usage to facilitate case review. Contact should be made with the Office of the State Fire Marshal (818- 960-6441 ) for an opinion and a classification of occupancy type. This information and a copy of the letter of intent should be submitted to the fire Department so that proper requirements may be specified during the review process. Typically this applies to educational, day care, institutional, health care, etc. 12. Commercial buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city. 13. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be submitted separately for approval prior to construction. Subcontractors should contact the fire marshal's office for submittal requirements. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve months. 7 CITY OF PALM DESERT 2 9 1998 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM Jv iaJtt1111tt:k LOPk: Mai,' CITY Of.PALM ULSERT TO: Martin Alvarez, Assistant Planner FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Engineering Manager SUBJECT: CUP 98-4 — CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY DATE: September 28, 1998 In response to concerns raised at the September 15, 1998, Planning Commission regarding the above-referenced project, the following is provided: * Department of Public Works Condition No. 6 — Widening of Plaza Way The existing facility currently operates as a gasoline service station including automobile service and repair as well as fuel dispensing units. As proposed, the project will remove the automobile service component while retaining the current level of fueling service and adding 2,900 square feet of "retail food mart" (i.e., convenience market). The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, Sixth Edition, identifies weekday trip generation rates as follows: Gasoline/Service Station (844) - 168.56 Trips/Fueling Position Convenience Market w/Gasoline Pumps (853) - 542.6 Trips/Fueling Position Using the existing/proposed number of fueling positions (24) results in the following trip generations. Existing Use: (24 x 168.56) = 4,048 Weekday Trips Proposed Use: (24 x 542.6) = 13,022 Weekday Trips Based on the projected increase in weekday trips (more than triple the current level) and the associated impact to area traffic circulation, the requirement for widening on Plaza Way to provide for a total of three northbound lanes, in our opinion, is justified. The proposed widening will be accommodated within existing public right-of-way with no additional property dedication required. Page 2 September 28, 1998 SUBJECT: CUP 98-4 — CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY * Department of Public Works Condition No. 7 — Driveway Width Due to concerns associated with fuel delivery vehicles being able to transit and exit the site, this condition should be amended to read: Proposed northerly driveway width shall be a maximum of thirty-eight feet. This width (38') is based upon the project site plan. A proposed on-site planter wall along the northerly border of the project was used to establish this revised driveway width and, therefore, would not impede delivery truck movement. Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions or require additional information. J SEPH SAUGUSH, P.E. JSG/ms cc: Richard J. Folkers Mark Greenwood • dti c"�3y7., A li i" ., set) 17 1998 _ • ,AO ' `qs r' tL: f1 ' ijr i!r,4i4! Teou�o KU Xc S[C Midi 'ViZ ' i -•its fe-1 J^ ,. ,, �a� :':G E DO te:j`1 Y , i NUri r _ FOR al 1 a,i.`-:+'� 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESER ,C OR • ;b -CIPr�,n�, R r' TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 "" - C... .. J REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND SEP t) C '• V • 6 ._) t CONO[T 1 „xii�p • �. _ ;_. • 4,:. Tilt; r CASE NO(S) : p 7 8 I. °0Q rnt / PROJECT: R eLi,,ode C ,q7 /'g. ./1//5 13 eiJ,'S ( ? Si APPLICANT: �✓l/IercC-9N 1 Nb,s7,7,,7 �vau,o/�,gcv,, ,-sncv ,(L' 3o 1 -oyl...s� ,•51-u e Sci i' -e .20o A/46G ry A r c,, , G9, 9.265"/ Enclosed please find materials describing a project for which the following is being requested, {9Pprv✓pL 4t= 19 iei�ciso �-, ) -. of c i) �� trial LJ I.JC vv CI PS i5 J / is�k/w6 V1 c - '- -Ecz-,. �c /r✓6 a - ,c7--#( y�Jp ) Ri fr i9►•d 6LAI Lcf/r' b Get /��w io #'iC 1 S i S7 — r9p/v s G o - /70 -Co 5", 006 -f 0 0 e The attached data was prepared by the applicant and is being forwarded to you for comments and recommended conditions of approval . The city is interested in the probable impacts on the environment ( including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, noise, objects of historical or aesthetic significance) and recommended conditions of approval based on your expertise and area of concern. Your comments and recommended conditions of approval must be received by this -office prior to 4:30 p.m. Sepf 4;, )9929 in order to be discussed by the land division committee. The land division committee (comprised of director of community development, city building official , city engineer, fire marshal , and a representative of CVWD) will discuss the comments and recommended -conditions of approval and will forward them to the planning commission through the staff report. Any information received by this office after the receipt deadline will not be discussed by the land division committee. Sincerely, ' /D X714,44WAft/ , e722- -i- Ct/VD ,j 3431— R ?hit Pi-PCL ak)- DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING --1&, _q /tm Attachments PLEASE RETURN MAP WITH COMMENTS i . A11:17~ ' 'Ci $ftilr Of Pzii.. 1 iri 1 ZQD'®=G;;.I20-a, �4411. At jl;., 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 f\I a c©mr� PR1ove/i REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IL . ci, IO .Gt6 CASE NO(S) : /:7f7 ,8 _ /‘ -- PROJECT: R e 4,r,,od'( % f ' - /' o �i✓ S G r' s'— APPLICANT: „,52✓iev,1-c.4N Tivihsi,-77Py7 GVaa/o/p/9cr,..,��-s'c f- 4/C `So I For&S7 /91ue su''Fe moo Aiq c cA ry A eacL, , '9. 9.2657 Enclosed please find materials describing a project for which the following Is being requested: ,g'opro‘),9L ot= 19 frd:Nci:so /v- of d 5,)h& K VILe - t i.Li l),D6 v-P c(ps; y pa'rk/w6 ..CEO DL a?-e./ ,Gzr., c /;'✓6 a vet o-�.,/ r)Pw P ; +' /9I'd bUt Cc)/w 6 c(f P/''- ill /0 I/)Ps 4 "57— — y9pill s 6 'o - /70 -DOS", 606 4 b o8 The attached data was prepared by the applicant and is being forwarded to you for comments and recommended conditions of approval . The city is interested -in the probable impacts on the environment ( including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, noise, objects of historical or aesthetic significance) and recommended conditions of approval based on your expertise and area of concern. Your comments and recommended conditions of approval must be received by this office prior to 4:30 p.m. Sept .5', ) 996 , in order to be discussed by the land division committee. The land division committee (comprised of director of community development, city building official , city engineer, fire marshal , and a representative of CVWD ) will discuss the comments and recommended conditions of approval and will forward them to the planning commission through the staff report. Any information received by this office after the receipt deadline will not be discussed by the land division committee. Sincerely, ,.....,--e ' ?hat />''t°CZ-- DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING /tm Attachments PLEASE RETURN MAP WITH COMMENTS CITY OF PsALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Martin Alvarez, Assistant Planner FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Engineering Manager SUBJECT: CUP 98-4 — CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY DATE: October 1, 1998 In response to recent correspondence from Service Station Services and Hogie & Hogie, attorneys for Chevron Products Company, the following is provided: The primary issue involves Public Works Condition Number 6 which requires the widening of Plaza Way by six feet and constructing a six-foot-wide sidewalk along the Plaza Way project frontage. Based upon the correspondence received, there appears to be some confusion as to what the condition requires. * Property Dedication - The conditions of approval do not require property dedication. The issues raised regarding unconstitutional taking are mute in that the proposed widening will take place within existing street right-of-way. In addition, there will be no modification to the on-site circulation as a result of the required Plaza Way improvements. The basis for this requirement was presented in a previous interoffice memorandum dated September 28, 1998. In order to assure that no property impacts result, Public Works Condition Number 6 should be modified as follows: The project shall construct street widening improvements (minimum five feet) along the Plaza Way property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes (left, through and right) and a six- foot-wide concrete sidewalk. Page 2 October 1, 1998 SUBJECT: CUP 98-4 — CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY As discussed in the previously referenced September 28, 1998, memorandum, the revised driveway width of 38 appears to meet the criteria identified in the Service Station Sery ices correspondence. Based on the turning radius indicated on the project site plan, site access will not be impacted. Attached is a sketch indicting the proposed improvements and the impact on the subject site. ; 1 JOSEPH S. GAUGUSH, P.E. JSG/ms Attachment cc: Richard J. Folkers Mark Greenwood Phil Drell David J. Erwin - -,Sr.�iicHT '1-WALK UQif - - _. . • 1SST. BUTTOG TATE 1-5T: NAME 51GN. 01.-.0..plIMP Ulli:. WHEII.CF�A1R ., PULL TRAFFIC S / BOX . p. I /, , • 1-WALK mi. , e — _ — — /.//! (E)T.• P.B . (E) PLANTER / II fr O I ,1/4____ 7, — i - (E) C-45 MONUMENT SIGN W/ I LPC & "AUTO SERVICE' APC NEVI PLANTER >mil : ' It\i,... _ F_._ i r — = _ r NEV SLUMPSTONE I;II:: =—. PLANTER WALL — — _ i. _ r._ Q � a ( LII; . ,( WC PAVING r 23'-0' (BLDG. SETBACK / v N ' Ily O ��� II NC I (OCORETE (EWWORD) 16' 'MARKCHEVRON 111 .GUARD POSTS 1: I Ow.) -\\ / , OF 2) r I '4 PROPd5ED v a\ rr 5I DEwgl.k VI__ CONCRETE ISLAND 1 c") 1MITH 2-DISPENSERSlon 4 1 1 (TYP. OF 8) t al NSTALL NEW 24' SQ. CI ( •E PERIMETER i I I CANOPY COLUMN P .S. .. a "RA! ) ter----(E)CANOPY i li I ( COLUMN (TYP. OF EXIST ( E T.S.P.: I ./" (E) LEVEL II GvR8 ,I r SPANNERS I I (TYP.-a) ALP P03ED I I ,r� ( DRNE r--.1 , (()CONCRETE DRNEC vR I SLAB Oi ❑I ' ^ W SET S X88'I:IJ a i Irti Ic - ►: eJ 1 CANOPY 171 a A HI:: N0 Z L, I ir i �' _ _ I G W , I II a ..V__ —PRoPbsW wro`„r� v r -ram ,• I 11 r \ 1. -7 \-PROPesco St oetW�Lk A/C PAVING Hik CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Martin Alvarez, Assistant Planner FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Engineering Manager SUBJECT: CUP 98-4 — CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY DATE: September 28, 1998 In response to concerns raised at the September 15, 1998, Planning Commission regarding the above-referenced project, the following is provided: * Department of Public Works Condition No. 6 — Widening of Plaza Way The existing facility currently operates as a gasoline service station including automobile service and repair as well as fuel dispensing units. As proposed, the project will remove the automobile service component while retaining the current level of fueling service and adding 2,900 square feet of "retail food mart" (i.e., convenience market). The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, Sixth Edition, identifies weekday trip generation rates as follows: Gasoline/Service Station (844) - 168.56 Trips/Fueling Position Convenience Market w/Gasoline Pumps (853) - 542.6 Trips/Fueling Position Using the existing/proposed number of fueling positions (24) results in the following trip generations. Existing Use: (24 x 168.56) = 4,048 Weekday Trips Proposed Use: (24 x 542.6) = 13,022 Weekday Trips Based on the projected increase in weekday trips (more than triple the current level) and the associated impact to area traffic circulation, the requirement for widening on Plaza Way to provide for a total of three northbound lanes, in our opinion, is justified. The proposed widening will be accommodated within existing public right-of-way with no additional property dedication required. Page 2 September 28, 1998 SUBJECT: CUP 98-4 — CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY * Department of Public Works Condition No. 7 — Driveway Width Due to concerns associated with fuel delivery vehicles being able to transit and exit the site, this condition should be amended to read: Proposed northerly driveway width shall be a maximum of thirty-eight feet. This width (38') is based upon the project site plan. A proposed on-site planter wall along the northerly border of the project was used to establish this revised driveway width and, therefore, would not impede delivery truck movement. Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions or require additional information. b :/ - / , 1-7 JbSEPH Sv AUGUSH, P.E. JSG/ms cc: Richard J. Folkers Mark Greenwood HOGIE HOGIE STEPHEN W. HOGIE LAW Y E R S 3 HUTTON CENTRE DRIVE WILLIAM A. HOGIE SUITE 711 ECEIVED' ANA, CALIFORNIA 92707 v TELEPHONE (714) 54G-3537 SEP 2 81998 FACSIMILE (714) 546-0812 SEPTEMBER 24, 1998 -.:BLiL; WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY OF PALM DESERT MS. SONYIA CAMBELL, CHAIRPERSON MR. SABBY JONATHAN, PLANNING COMMISSIONER MR. PAUL BEATY, PLANNING COMMISSIONER MR. GEORGE FERNADEZ, PLANNING COMMISSIONER MS. CINDY FINERTY, PLANNING CONE'vMISSIONER MR. DAVID ERWIN, CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CA 92260-2578 PROJECT NUMBER: CUP 98-4 / CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROJECT NAME: CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY Honorable Madams/Sirs: Chevron Products Company respectfully requests that you review the proposed Planning Commission resolution for our project. We believe that the imposition of Department of Public Works condition 6 is an unconstitutional taking. QUESTION PRESENTED: Did the City fail to satisfy the Constitutional' requirements for a dedication' as enumerated by the Court in Dolan v. Tigard?' ' Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 17 of the Constitution of the State of California. 2 Dedication or an irrevocable offer to dedicate. These terms should be viewed as interchangeable as they differ only in timing. Additionally, both bar the use of the property in question for purpose of determining setback, viability area for signage, etc. 3 114 S. Ct. 2309(1994). 1 DISCUSSION: Prior to the Court's decision in Dolan, land owners of service station properties were often forced "to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole."4 The City has forced Chevron Products Company to choose between redeveloping this property and Chevron Products Company's right under the Fifth Amendment to just compensation for the dedication anon of r p operty for public use. Chevron Products Company does not quarrel with the City's authority to exact some form of dedication as a condition of approval, but challenges the showing made by the City to justify this exaction. The City has not identified any special benefit conferred on Chevron Products Company, and has not identified any special burdens created by Chevron Products Company's project that would justify this particular dedication. - Chevron Products Company does not dispute that a "nexus" may exist between an increase in traffic created by any redevelopment and the imposition of a condition that some form of mitigation be provided. Chevron Products Company does dispute the degree of exaction demanded by the City and whether it possesses the required relationship to the projected impact of Chevron Products Company's proposed development. As no justification have been provided, the City's request for dedication falls well short of the constitutionally sufficient findings required by the Dolan Courts CONCLUSION: The City has failed to make any findings to justify the exaction of an uncompensated dedication. The City should remove Department of Public Works condition 6. Sincerely, Stephen W. ogie, Esq. on behalf o Chevron Products Company Cc: MR. PHIL DRELL, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MR. JOE GAUGUSH, ENGINEERING MANAGER MR. MARIO BAUTISTA, CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY MR. AL NORRIS, CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY ` Armstrong v. United States, 364 U. S. 40, 49(1960). 5 "We think a term such as 'rough proportionality' best encapsulates what we hold to be the requirement of the Fifth Amendment. No precise mathematical calculation is required, but the city must make some sort of individualized determination that the required dedication is related both in nature and - extent to the impact of the proposed development." Dolan at_. (emphasis added). 2 SERVICE STATION RECEIVED VET SEP 2 81998 '''JBLI' vvORKS DEPARTMENT CITY OF PALM DESERT SEPTEMBER 21, 1998 MS. SONYIA CAMBELL, CHAIRPERSON MR. SABBY JONATHAN, PLANNING COMMISSIONER MR. PAUL BEATY, PLANNING COMMISSIONER MR. GEORGE FERNADEZ, PLANNING COMMISSIONER MS. CINDY FINERTY, PLANNING COMMISSIONER CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CA 92260-2578 PROJECT NUMBER: CUP 98-4/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROJECT NAME: CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY Honorable Madams/Sirs: Chevron Products Company respectfully requests that you review the proposed Planning Commission resolution for our project. Department of Public Works has requested a reduction of the northerly drive to thirty foot, and a twelve-foot dedication with improvements on Plaza Way. At the Planning Commission meeting September 15, 1998, concerns were also raised regarding the hours of operation. The existing forty-four foot northerly drive on Plaza Way is critical to the safety of the station's operation and traffic circulation. As indicated on the Site Plan, the fuel delivery truck utilizes this drive to safely exit the service station. Chevron Products Company modified the landscape planters on Highway 111 to allow the proper turning radius for safe fuel deliveries. We contacted the Department of Public Works and they increased the width from their"minimum" to thirty-eight feet, which will still impact site access. We request that the existing drive remain at its current width of forty-four feet. 1 3 -ON CENTRE DRIVE SUITE 71 1 SANTA ANA, CA 92707 71 4/546-i 227 E.v 7 i 4/54::-08 1 2 Condition six requires a six-foot dedication for a right turn lane and six foot of dedication for a sidewalk, all to be constructed at Chevron's expense. A twelve-foot dedication of property will dramatically affect the passing lane to the fueling positions on Plaza Way. Currently the distance from the planter curb to the pump island is 19'-6"which allow cars to safely maneuver to the forward fueling position when the rear position is in use. With a twelve-foot dedication and the six-foot planter, the pass through distance between the island and planter is reduced to seven foot six inches which is not adequate space for a single car to fuel and drive through safely. We request that the Planning Commission not impose this condition as the requirements will dramatically effect the station's safe operation. The Planning Commissioners addressed concerns regarding the hours of operation for the convenience store, beer/wine and gasoline sales. We have conducted research with the Planning Department staff and request that beer and wine sales end at midnight, and that the convenience store and gasoline sales remain open for twenty-four hour operation. Commercial zoning surrounds the site and these hours of operation create no burden on residential areas. The _ AM/PM located at Highway 111 and Portola operates a twenty-four hour operation and that station is next to both residential and commercial zones. Chevron feels that the residents of Palm Desert and travelers deserve the opportunity and convenience of shopping twenty-four hours a day. In summary, the dnve reduction on Plaza Way impacts the safety of fuel delivery trucks. Off- site improvements on Plaza Way affect Chevron's fuel pump operation and on-site circulation at the island on Plaza Way. The hours of operation of beer/wine can cease at 12:00am but the convenience store and gasoline sales should remain open twenty-four hours. Feel free to contact me at (714) 546-1227 extension 237 should you have any questions regarding the above request. Thank you for your consideration and time. Sincerely, U;)i/Z( V9 °()11 April D. Smith ADS/jr Cc: MR. PHIL DRELL, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MR. JOE GAUGUSH, ENGINEERING MANAGER MR. DAVID ERWIN, CITY ATTORNEY MR. MARIO BAUTISTA, CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY MR. AL NORRIS, CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY 2 CITY OF PALM DESERT • DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: September 15, 1998 CASE NO: CUP 98-4 REQUEST: Approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart, located at 72-801 Highway 1 1 1 . APPLICANT: Chevron Products Company P.O. Box 2833 La Habra, CA 90632-2833 BACKGROUND: The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Plaza Way. The site is zoned regional planned commercial (P.C.3) and is currently operated as a fuel station by Chevron. The existing property currently provides automobile service, repair along with fuel. The site totals .67 acres and is surrounded by regional commercial uses. Specifically, the site is adjacent to Palms to Pines East on the south and east, Palms to Pines shopping center to the west and the Town Center Mall to the north. A. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: North: P.C. 3 / Regional Commercial South: P.C. 3 / Regional Commercial East: P.C. 3 / Regional Commercial West: P.C. 3 / Regional Commercial II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The precise plan includes the demolition of the existing automobile service building, which also includes restroom and small cashier areas. The new site plan shows the location of the proposed 2,900 square foot, retail food mart. The plan includes the addition of new off-street parking spaces, adjacent to the building along the west and south. The location of the existing canopy, underground storage tanks and fuel dispenser islands will remain the same. STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 CUP 98-4 The new building will remain single story, with a maximum height of 21 feet. The building is setback 32 feet from the Highway 1 1 1 , as required by the ordinance. Along the eastern property line, there exist a 15 foot setback. The following table illustrates the project's proposed development standards and ordinance requirements: Ordinance Requirements: STANDARDS PROJECT ORDINANCE Building Height 21 ' 35' Front Setback 32' 32' Rear Setback 37' N/A Side Yard Setback 15 '(East) 136' (West) N/A Parking 12 4/1000 (12) Circulation: The location of the project's two existing ingress/egress points off of Plaza Way will not be modified. Principal access to the site exist via the southern most driveway on Plaza Way. The northern driveway will remain in use primarily as an egress point back onto Plaza Way. The site will continue to have access to the adjacent Palms to Pines East shopping center through an existing access easement, running east and west. Parking: The proposed 2,900 square foot retail food mart requires 12 off-street parking spaces (4/1 ,000). The site provide a total of 12 off-street parking spaces, located along the building's west and south elevations. The 12 parking spaces meets the parking ordinance requirement of 4 spaces per 1 ,000 square feet. Architecture/Landscaping: The buildings architecture and landscaping was reviewed by the Architecture Review Commission (A.R.C.) of three occasions. Minutes of those meetings are attached. At the August 11 , 1998 meeting, the A.R.C. approved the buildings architecture and landscaping ,voting 5-0. The architecture elevations were reviewed and approved based on major improvements to the building's architecture and the 2 STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 CUP 98-4 fuel dispenser canopy. The existing canopy structure will receive a new metal roof, to match the proposed metal roofing for the food mart building. Issue: New landscaping will be added throughout the site, including along the Highway 111 frontage and the eastern property line. Desert landscaping will be utilized throughout the site, using a variety of native plants as approved by the A.R.C. on • August 11 , 1998. The applicant is requesting a minor exception to the landscape setback area. Section 25.30.230 (E) requires that the entire area along a street between the property line and the setback line be landscaped to a minimum depth of 30 feet. The applicant is requesting a reduction to 20 feet along the northwestern portion of the property line. This reduction is required to accommodate fuel truck turn-a-round space. The A.R.C. did not see this as an issue and felt that the proposed landscaping would be adequate to meet the intent of the ordinance. III. ANALYSIS The proposed project meets all of the City zoning ordinance requirements, with the exception of the 30 foot landscape buffer requirement. It's use is compatible with the existing land uses in the general vicinity. The project's architecture and landscaping were approved by the A.R.C., at the August 11 , 1998 meeting. A. FINDINGS REQUIRED FOR APPROVAL 1 . That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of zoning ordinance and the purpose of the district in which it is located. • The proposed retail food mart and automobile fuel station is an allowed use in the P.C. 3 district with Planning Commission approval of a conditional use permit. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public, health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3 STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 CUP 98-4 • The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding uses and existing zoning. The use will not be detrimental to the general public, health, safety and welfare or materially injurious to the properties in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance, except for approved variances or adjustments. • The project is consistent will all applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance. 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goal's, objectives and the policies of the city's general plan. • The proposed use is compatible in existing P.C. 3 district, and meets all of the city goal's, objectives and policies of the general plan. B. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Community Development has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment and has been classified a class 3 categorical exemption for purposes of CEQA. IV. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. approving CUP 98-4, subject to conditions. V. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft resolution B. Legal notice C. A.R.C. minutes dated April 28, May 26 & August 11 , 1998 D. Comments from other departments and agencies E. Plans (Site Plan, Elevations & Landscaping Plans) 4 STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 CUP 98-4 Prepared by Martin Alvarez Reviewed and Approved by - Philip Drell 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 2,900 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL FOOD MART, LOCATED AT 72-801 HIGHWAY 111 . CASE NO. CUP 98-4 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 15 day of September, 1998, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY INC. of the above mentioned; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. "97-18," in that the director of community development has determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption for purposes of CEQA and no further documentation is necessary; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify the granting of said conditional use permit: 1 . That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of zoning ordinance and the purpose of the district in which it is located. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public, health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance, except for approved variances or adjustments. 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goal's, objectives and the policies of the city's general plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2. That approval of Conditional Use Permit 98-4 is hereby granted for reasons subject to the attached conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 15th day of September, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SONIA M. CAMPBELL, Chairperson ATTEST: PHILIP DRELL, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. 6. Project shall provide for the widening of Plaza Way (minimum six feet) along the property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes ( left, through and right) and a six foot wide concrete sidewalk. . 7. Proposed northerly driveway width shall be a maximum of thirty feet. 8. Building pad elevations for the proposed project are subject to review and modification in accordance with Section 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 9. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF). Payment of said fees shall be at time of building permit issuance. Riverside County Fire Department: 1 . With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plan check, Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Codes, appropriate NFPA Standards, CFC, CBC, and/or recognized fire protection standards. The fire department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per California Fire Code Sec. 10.401 . 2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure must be available before any combustible materials are placed on the job site. 3. Provide, or show there exists, a water system capable of providing a potential gallon per minute flow of 3000 gpm for commercial. The actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given water main shall be 1500 GPM for two hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. 4. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6"x4"x2-1/2"x2- 1/2"), located not less than 150' commercial from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. Hydrants installed below 3000 feet elevation shall be of the "wet barrel" type. 5. Prior to the application for a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and two copies of the water system plan to the County Fire Department for review. 5 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. No building permit shall be issued until the water system plan has been approved by the County Fire Chief. Upon approval, the original will be returned. One copy will be sent to the responsible inspecting authority. 6. Comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, adopted January 1 , 1990, for all occupancies. 7. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes and shall be clearly marked by painting and or signs approved by the Fire Marshal. 8. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet # 10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Fire extinguishers must not be over 75 feet walking distance. In addition to the above, a 40BC extinguisher is required for commercial kitchens. 9. All buildings shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall be not less than 24' of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is allowed, the roadway shall be 36' wide with parking on both sides, 32' wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150' shall be provided with a minimum 45' radius turn-around (55' in industrial developments). Fountains or garden islands placed in the middle of these turn-arounds shall not exceed a 5' radius or 10' diameter. City standards may be more restrictive. 10. Contact the Fire Department for final inspection prior to occupancy. 11 . This project may require licensing and/or review by State agencies. Applicant should prepare a letter of intent detailing the proposed usage to facilitate case review. Contact should be made with the Office of the State Fire Marshal (818- 960-6441 ) for an opinion and a classification of occupancy type. This information and a copy of the letter of intent should be submitted to the fire Department so that proper requirements may be specified during the review process. Typically this applies to educational, day care, institutional, health care, etc. 12. Commercial buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city. 13. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be submitted separately for approval prior to construction. Subcontractors should contact the fire marshal's office for submittal requirements. 14. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve months. 6 1 •sates •' ,,,1\ ,,' h', Cityof Palm Desert 'S , l . 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TELEPHONE(760)346-0611•FAX(760)340-0574•http://www.palm-desert.org CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. CUP 98-4 - NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the demolition of an existing service building and the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart located at 72-801 Highway 111. Property is also particularly described as A.P.N. 640-170-003 I.P. \.J I Lf,—) .- a �gnu dy PALM [JESERT E }"" //// \\�'� TOWN CENTER iIH / PO ,,,,-commr _Lamp liki i . SITE U r „' • P.G.-(3) P. .- 3) - S.P. rj ' y S.P. a - C r'- EL PASEO NORTH P.R.-6 • ..., _., ...1.:, • \ Of74 / .+ 8f4V j ....._ 0 ts. ''tom s _ n - 4P.. n..rv„ra r.o« SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, September 15, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions 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 planning commission (or city council) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert sun Phil Drell, Secretary August 22, 1998 Palm Desert Planning Commission ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 28, 1998 MINUTES 2. CASE NO.: CUP 98-4 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY, P.O. Box 2833, La Habra, CA 90632-2833 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of new 2,900 square foot food mart building to replace existing service building LOCATION: 72-801 Highway 111 at Plaza Way ZONE: PC-3 Mr. Alvarez reported that the applicant is proposing a new 2,900 square foot food mart in place of the existing service station building, and landscaping will be added, but the canopy will remain the same. A new trash enclosure will also be added. The maximum building height proposed is 21'6". The City's landscape consultant, Eric Johnson, has reviewed the plans and provided written remarks, including that the materials should be more compatible with the desert environment. The applicant will also be adding a planter for 24-inch box shade trees in the parking lot. The proposed project meets zoning ordinance requirements. Al Naras of Chevron stated that he would like to extend another parking finger on the south side of the building and add another tree with a freestanding light fixture at 35 feet. Commissioner Urrutia asked if the drawing represents the Chevron prototype, to which Mr. Naras responded affirmatively, and added that this will be the first such Chevron building in Southern California. Mr. Naras pointed out that 85% of the store customers will be fueling customers. Commissioner Urrutia asked if the additional trees will require the elimination of a parking space, to which Mr. Naras responded that everything would be shifted north. 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 28, 1998 MINUTES Commissioner Urrutia suggested shifting everything to the south rather than to the north, and recommended additional landscaping for the north end, to which Mr. Smith responded by indicating that there is a requirement that the first 30-foot strip next to the street be landscaped. Commissioner Urrutia reported that his firm has been retained to renovate the entire shopping center, and even though the plans have not yet been submitted to the City, he would be happy to share them with the applicant as long as his client has no objections. Commissioner Holden noted that the plans for the store include a large 9 west- facing window, and suggested that something be done to provide protection from the sun. Commissioner O'Donnell asked how much flexibility is available given that this is a prototype, to which Mr. Naras replied that he is willing to add some architectural treatments so that the project blends in, but it is important that the customers to be able to recognize this as a Chevron facility. Commissioner Urrutia commented that an additional vehicular entrance is being planned off of Highway 111 halfway between the Plaza Way intersection and the Highway 74 intersection. Commissioner Holden stressed the need for some architectural treatment of the east elevation since it will be highly visible to westbound traffic. Mr. Buchanan recommended that the rooftop equipment access ladder be moved inside the building. Action: Commissioner O'Donnell moved, seconded by Commissioner Holden, to continue the case. Motion carried 4-0-1, with Commissioner Urrutia abstaining and Commissioner Van Vliet absent. 11 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MAY 26, 1998 MINUTES 3. CASE NO.: Zap? 98-4 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY, P.O. Box 2833, La Habra, CA 90632-2833 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of new 2,900 square foot food mart building to replace existing service building LOCATION: 72-801 Highway 111 at Plaza Way ZONE: PC-3 Mr. Alvarez reported that the Commission reviewed this proposal last month and suggested that the landscaping should be revised to be compatible with a desert environment. The Commission also wanted the architecture to be more compatible with the plans for the remodel of the adjacent Palms to Pines East shopping center. In response to the Commission's suggestions, the applicant has added three more parking spaces on the north side and has also added two shade trees in the parking lot. Regarding the 30-foot landscape buffer along Highway 111, the applicant is requesting that an exception be made so that there is sufficient room for fuel trucks to turn around. The project engineer noted that a diamond shaped tile detail has been added to the elevations, but there are no other architectural changes. Chairman Gregory stated that he and Commissioner Connor are concerned about the landscape plan because there are areas which propose trees that won't do well, i.e., a Washingtonian Robusta planted in too small of an area which will result in damage to the surrounding concrete. On the east side, the plans call for taller plants close to the building and low ground cover between the building and the taller plants, and that won't work well. 6 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MAY 26, 1998 MINUTES Chairman Gregory recalled that Commissioner Urrutia previously suggested laying out the parking in a different way in order to accommodate more landscaping on the south side. He believes it would have been helpful for the applicant to have the City's landscape consultant, Eric Johnson, to look at the plans first. The last time the Commission reviewed this project, it was suggested that the architecture be compatible with the new shopping center • remodel. Commissioner O'Donnell commented that the addition of the diamond- shaped tile detail is not enough to make the building architecturally compatible with the center. The project engineer noted that this building has to follow Chevron's prototype. Commissioner O'Donnell asked how the island canopy ties into the front elevations on the west, to which the project engineer replied that the intent is for the convenience store to be different than the fueling area. Chairman Gregory asked if the shade structure over the pumps are being changed, to which the project engineer responded negatively. Commissioner Van Vliet agreed that the canopy should tie in with the building architecture; so the canopy may need to be upgraded. Commissioner O'Donnell indicated that he has a problem with the lack of change in the rear elevations, with which Commission Connor concurred, and noted that this four-sided building has high visibility from all sides. Mr. Buchanan suggested that someone familiar with the plans contact him because there is no access to the roof, the switch gear needs to be enclosed or brought inside, and the plans need to show handicap accessibility. Chairman Gregory stated that the revised plans simply are not what the Commission is looking for, as the Commission was hoping for more of an . architectural effort to make the building compatible with the shopping center remodel in order to maintain a village character. 7 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MAY 26, 1998 MINUTES The project engineer asked if there is any problem with the tower, to which Chairman Gregory responded negatively and added that it might be a start; however, more of an architectural effort needs to be made. Commissioner Holden indicated that his biggest concern is that the building is terribly flat and box-like, to which the project engineer replied that the columns could be bumped out to provide more undulation. Commissioner Holden stressed the need for more relief and depth to the elevations. Commissioner O'Donnell indicated that he understands the applicant feels the functions of the store and the fueling station are different; however, he sees them as one and thinks both structures should tie together architecturally. Commissioner Holden commented that the top of the canopy should relate to the top of the building; so he would suggest using the same roof pitch or tile on both structures. The solution is not as simple as bumping things out or merely adding a few cosmetic changes, because the Commission is looking for some substantial architectural changes. Commissioner O'Donnell asked if the applicant is aware that there will be a new entry added off of Highway 111, to which the project engineer responded affirmatively. Commissioner O'Donnell noted that the additional entry will provide an even more prominent view of the east building elevation. Action: Commissioner Connor moved, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to continue the case. The motion carried 5-0, with Commissioner Urrutia abstaining. 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 11, 1998 MINUTES 2. CASE NO.: "CUP 98-4 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY, P.O. Box 2833, La Habra, CA 90632-2833 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of revised plans for a new 2,900 square foot food mart building to replace existing service building LOCATION: 72-801 Highway 111 at Plaza Way ZONE: PC-3 Alan Aris presented revised plans and indicated that the transformer has been relocated behind the trash enclosure, and that the applicant feels that the distance between the pump islands and the building is optimal from an operational standpoint and is opposed to increasing that distance. The title company has indicated that an easement would require approval of all the owners and tenants in the center; so the applicant will not be pursuing the easement, especially since the applicant feels comfortable with the distance between the pump islands and the building. The architectural detail will be continued around the building. Chairman Gregory noted that the plan indicates existing Oleander and California Fan Palm on the Highway 111 frontage, and expressed concern that the existing landscaping will block the new landscaping and suggested that the Oleanders be removed and that the plans indicate exactly where the palms will be located. Commissioner Connor felt that it would be awkward to go from a desert scape to petunias and suggested that the desert theme be continued throughout. He suggested replacing Salvia Greggii with Leucophyllum Zygophyllum and replacing Mexican Evening Primrose with Ruellia Britonia. Commissioner Connor concurred with the suggestions from the City's landscape consultant, Eric Johnson, with the exception of the suggestion regarding the palm tree. 7 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 11, 1998 MINUTES Commissioner O'Donnell noted that the canopy has been changed to match the building, but the canopy will be three feet higher than the top of the parapet on the building, to which Mr. Aris replied that the canopy is not close to the building and has to be of a height sufficient to accommodate large trucks underneath. Commissioner Urrutia stated that the electrical service equipment should be built into the building rather than sticking out, and indicated that the front facia should extend out two feet. Action: Commissioner Holden moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to grant preliminary approval with the following conditions: 1) On the Highway 111 frontage, remove the Oleanders, indicate where the palms will be placed and continue with the desert theme; 2) replace Salvia Greggii with Leucophyllum Zygophyllum; 3) replace Mexican Evening Primrose with Ruellia Britonia; and 4) make substitutions suggested by Eric Johnson, with the exception of the palm tree. The motion carried 5-0. 8 CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Department of Community Development/Planning Attention: Martin Alvarez FROM: Richard J. Folkers, Asst. City Manager/Public Works Director SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-04; CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY DATE: September 3, 1998 The following should be considered conditions of approval for the above-referenced project: (1) Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of a grading permit. (2) All private driveways and parking lots shall be inspected by the engineering department and a standard inspection fee paid prior to the issuance of a grading permit. (3) Landscaping maintenance on all public street property frontages shall be the responsibility of the property owner. (4) Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans by the Director of Public Works and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works. (5) In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. (6) Project shall provide for the widening of Plaza Way (minimum six feet) along the property frontage to provide for a total of three northbound travel lanes ( left, through and right) and a six foot wide concrete sidewalk. . (7) Proposed northerly driveway width shall be a maximum of thirty feet. (8) Building pad elevations for the proposed project are subject to review and modification in accordance with Section 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. ((9) The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF). Payment of said fees shall be at time of building permit issuance. RICHARD J. F LKERS, P.E. (jeg\CUP98-04ma.cnd) • RIVERSIDE COUNTY tm.IFORNIA taw-" r FIRE DEPARTMENT r'loon of Font. ,oko PE►110iEC7,44 I JJ IN COOPERATION WITH THE :f , COUNT Y .i I . CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY C liter '!`;;, RIVERSIDE AND FIRE PROTECTION ��,�, DF GLEN J.NEWMAN �, �,. FIRE CHIEF RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE COVE FIRE MARSHAL PERRIS,CALIFORNIA 92370 70-801 HWY 111 TELEPHONE (714)657-3183 • RANCHO MIRAGE,CA 92270 _ (619) 346.1870 TO: REF: If circled, underlined or noted, condition applies to project J. With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plan check, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Code, NFPA, UFC, and UBC and/or recognized Fire Protection Standards: The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per Uniform Fire Code Sec. 10 . 301C. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. 6). Provide, or show there exists a water system capable of providing a potential gallon per minute flow , and 3000 for commercial . The actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given water main shall be 1500 GPM for two hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. 6 The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6" x 4" x 2-1/2" x 2-1/2" ) , located not less than and 150' commercial from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelwa s. Hydrants installed below 3000' elevation shall be of the '&e`t barre type. 5. A combination of on-site and off-site Super fire hydrants (6"x4"x2- 1/2"x2-1/2" ) will be required, located not less than 25 ' or more than 200' single family, 165' multifamily, and 150' commercial from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways . The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. • 6. Provide written certification from the appropriate water company having jurisdiction that hydrant(s) will be installed and will produce the required fire flow, or arrange field inspection by the Fire Department prior to request for final inspection. Prior to the application for a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and two copies of the water system plan to the County Fire Department for review. No building permit shall be issued until the water system plan has been approved by the County Fire Chief . Upon approval , the original will be returned. One copy will be sent to the responsible inspecting authority. Plan shall form to fir hydrant t s, locatio and spacing, and the syste shall m t the fire low requi e ents. P n shall a ' gned by a Regis eyed Civ Enginee d may b si ned by he 1 cal w ter mpany with the fol owin certifi a ion: " c tify hat t de ign o he water sys em is in ccorda ce ith t e re uirem nts pr cr bed by the Riverside ou ty Fire epar ment " "S stem s b en desig d to provide a minimum g 11 n per mi flow 00, 250 , 3000. " 8. The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit process to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separations, or built-in fire protection measures such as a fully fire sprinklered building. 9. Please be advised the proposed project may not be feasible since the existing water mains will not meet the required fire flows. Please check with the water company prior to obtaining an approval from the Planning or Building Department. Comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, adopted January 1 , 1990 , for all occupancies . 11. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13 . The post indicator valve and fire department connection shall be located to the front, not less than 25' from the building and within 50' of an approved hydrant. This applies to all buildings with 3000 square feet or more building area as measured by the building footprint, including overhangs which are sprinklered per NFPA 13 . The building area of additional floors is added in for a cumulative total . Exempted are one and two family dwellings . 12 . Install a fire alarm (water flow) as required by the Uniform Building Code 3803 for sprinkler system. Install tamper alarms on all supply and control valves for sprinkler systems . „gr' . 6 Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes and shall be clearly marked by painting and/or signs approved by the Fire Marshal . 14. Install a fire alarm as required by the Uniform Building Code and/or Uniform Fire Code. Minimum requirement is UL central station monitoring of sprinkler system per NFPA 71 and 72 . Alarm plans are required for all UL central station monitored systems, systems where any interior devices are required or used. (U.F.C. 14-103(a) ) F' Install portable fire extinguishers g per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less 4. than 2A10BC in rating. Fire extinguishers must not be over 75' walking distance. In addition to the above, a 40BC fire extinguisher is required for commercial kitchens. 16. Install a Hood/Duct automatic fire extinguishing system if operating a commercial kitchen including, but not limited to, deep fryers, grills , charbroilers or other appliances which produce grease laden vapors or smoke. NFPA 96 , 17, 17a. 17. Install a dust collecting system as per the Uniform Building Code, Section 910a and Uniform Fire Code Section 76. 102 , if conducting an operation that produces airborne particles. A carpenter or woodworking shop is considered one of several industrial processes requiring dust collection. All buildings shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150 ' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall be not less than 24' of unobstructed width and 13 ' 6” of vertical clearance . Where parallel parking is allowed, the roadway shall be 36' wide with parking on both sides, 32' wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150' shall be provided with a minimum 45' radius turn-around ( 55' in industrial developments) . Fountains or garden islands placed in the middle of these turn-arounds shall not exceed a 5' radius or 10' diameter. City standards may be more restrictive. 19. The minimum width of interior driveways for multi-family or apartment complexes shall be: a. 24 feet wide when serving less than 100 units, no parallel parking, carports or garages allowed on one side only. b. 28 feet wide when serving between 100 and 300 units; carports or garages allowed on both sides, no parallel parking. c. 32 feet wide when serving over 300 units or when parallel parking is allowed on one side . d. 36 feet wide when parallel parking is allowed on both sides . 20. Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates, barriers, guard houses or similar means, provision shall be made to facilitate access by emergency vehicles in a manner approved by the Fire Department. All controlled access devices that are power operated shall have a Knox Box over-ride system capable of opening the gate when activated by a special key located in emergency vehicles. Devices shall be equipped with backup power facilities to operate in the event of power failure. All controlled access devices that are not power operated shall also be approved by the Fire Department. Minimum opening width shall be 16' with a minimum vertical clearance of 13'6" . 21. A dead end single access over 500' in length will require a secondary access, sprinklers or other mitigative measure approved by the Fire Marshal . Under no circumstances shall a single dead end access over 1300 feet be accepted. 22. A second access is required. This can be accomplished by two main access points from main roadway or an emergency gated access into an adjoining development. 44;°. f %!. ." ontact the Fire De artment for a final inspection � Pprior to occupancy. Z4 This project may require licensing and/or review by State agencies. 4111 Applicant should prepare a letter of intent detailing the proposed usage to facilitate case review. Contact should be made with the Office of the State Fire Marshal (818-960-6441 ) for an opinion and a classification of occupancy type. This information and a copy of the letter of intent should be submitted to the Fire Department so that proper requirements may be specified during the review process. Typically this applies to educational , day care, institutional , health care, etc. 25. All new residences/dwellings are required to have illuminated residential addresses meeting both City and Fire Department approval . Shake shingle roofs are no longer permitted in the Cities of Indian Wells , Rancho Mirage or Palm Desert. Commercial buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city. All fire sprinkler systems , fixed fire suppression systems and alarm 'h plans must be submitted separately for approval prior to construction. Subcontractors should contact the Fire Marshal's office for submittal requirements. lrV onditions subject to change with adoption of new codes , ordinances , 411 aws , or when building permits are not obtained within twelve months . All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Fire Department , Coves Fire Marshal , at Phone ( 619 ) 346-1870 or the Fire Marshal 's office at 70-801 Highway 111 (Rancho Mirage Fire Station) , Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 . OTHER: Sincerely, MIKE HARRIS Chief by MIKE MC CONNELL Coves Fire Marshal bbm 00 *ATEq` ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY ECEIVEI %%STRICT M` Y - 41998 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT :OMMUNITY[EVELOP�tE�JT UEPnR7facty i POST OFFICE BOX 1058 •COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 •TELEPHONE(�so)3O ?GA7PALM DESERT DIRECTORS OFFICERS TELLIS CODEKAS, PRESIDENT THOMAS E.LEVY,GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER JOHNHNOND R. RUMMONDS, VICE PRESIDENT April l 1998 BERNARDINE SUTTON.SECRETARY DORW. McFADDEN P 27, OWEN McC00K,ASSISTANT GENERAL MANA GER THE ODOR M. FISH REDWINE AND SHERRILL.ATTORNEYS THEODORE J. FISH File: 0163. 1 Department of Community Development City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Gentlemen: Subject: Conditional Use Permit No. 98-4, Portion of the Southeast Quarter of Section 19, Township 5 South, Range 6 East, San Bernardino Meridian This area is protected from stormwater flows by the Palm Valley Stormwater Channel and may be considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances. This area is designated Zone B on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. The district will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this district. These regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change. The district requires convenience stores to install a grease interceptor, including a sample box, sanitary tee and running trap with cleanout, prior to any discharge to its sanitation facilities. The size of the grease interceptor will be determined by the Riverside County Environmental Health Department and approved by the district. Installation of the interceptor will be inspected by the district. Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the district for review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management. TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY Department of Community Development -2- April 27, 1998 City of Palm Desert If you have any questions please call Dan Farris, principal stormwater engineer, extension 264. Yours very truly, Tom Levy General Manager-Chief Engineer cc: Don Park Riverside County Department of Public Health 46-209 Oasis Street Indio, California 92201 TC:md\eer\de\apr\cup98.4 • COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairperson Campbell stated that per a request by Councilmember Jean Benson she would announce that the Marine Corps has started its Toys for Tots Drive and have placed boxes for donations of unwrapped toys, books and games in the Administration Building, North Wing, Community Services Building and Sheriff's Department. She encouraged that the boxes be filled to not only assist the community, but to show gratitude to the Marine Corps for all they do for the City. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PMW 98-10 - DAVID AND LEISA AUSTIN, Applicants Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to combine Lots 15 and 18 of Palm Desert Unit No. 3, M.B. 21/81-84 into one parcel to allow construction of an office building. B. Case No. PMW 98-19 - WALTER AND DEIDRA NEULS, Applicants Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to combine remnants of Lots L and H of Tract 24530-1 . Action: It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he/she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case No. CUP 98-4 - CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY, Applicant (Continued from September 15, October 6, November 3 and November 17, 1998) 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart at 72-801 Highway 111 . Mr. Alvarez asked if the Commission would like him to touch on the salient points of the project or move on to the remaining issues raised on September 15. Commission requested that he proceed with the remaining issues. Mr. Alvarez explained that the applicant wished to operate 24 hours per day with the proposed convenience store and fuel facility. Staff didn't object to the request. He pointed out that the project is located in the heart of the commercial district, is surrounded by general commercial uses on all sides and the closest residential area is more than 500 feet away. Staff recommended that the applicant be allowed to operate 24 hours per day and with the sale of alcohol time limit to be determined by the Alcohol & Beverage Control agency. He deferred the traffic issue to Mr. Greenwood of Public Works. Mr. Greenwood stated that staff prepared an analysis of the latest traffic evaluation which was provided by the applicant. Since Commission just received it today, he said he would go through it and highlight the major points. Public Works was concerned with the methodology that was used to determine the level of service (LOS) in the analysis Public Works received. Staff used the traffic volume numbers provided by the applicant and performed their own analysis which was included in the Commission's packets. Generally what the analysis found was that by completion of this project LOS on northbound Plaza Way could be expected to degrade from the existing LOS "C" to a future LOS of "D". The project contributed to that change in LOS by increasing volume on that leg by 15%. Staff felt that these numbers did bear out the condition requiring the widening to provide the northbound right turn lane. He asked for any questions. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the 15% increase in traffic applied to the northbound Plaza Way leg only. Mr. Greenwood concurred and explained that the overall intersection, as indicated in the applicant's report, overall volume in the intersection would only increase by 1 .25%. Commissioner Jonathan clarified that that was where the difference was in terms of the percentage. The applicant was looking at it in relation to the overall traffic and Mr. Greenwood was looking at the northbound section of Plaza Way. Mr. Greenwood concurred and explained that when they were studying signalized intersections, especially with an existing signal, it was important to look at the 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 overall operation of the intersection and any detailed locations or specific approaches that they were concerned with. In this case they have always been concerned with the northbound approach only. It had never been staff's concern that the overall volume would increase in any drastic way knowing that there are 5,000 cars per day through that intersection. The project traffic to the overall intersection would be a "drop in the bucket", but to that leg of the intersection it would be significant. Commissioner Jonathan clarified that it was the impact on that leg that would result in a deterioration from "C" level to a "D" level. Mr. Greenwood concurred that it would on that leg. Commissioner Jonathan noted that Mr. Greenwood in his memo indicated that he used an accepted methodology that is different from what the consultant used. The consultant used the Intersection Capacity Utilization Method and Mr. Greenwood used the Highway Capacity Manual Methodology. Mr. Greenwood explained that the Highway Capacity Manual was published by the Transportation Research Board, a federally funded or federally sponsored agency, a nationwide document used by many, many jurisdictions. The ICU methodology was used by relatively few agencies and even those agencies that used it tended not to use it when evaluating existing signals and impacts to those signals. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Mr. Greenwood happened to know what the result would be on the northbound section of Plaza Way using the ICU method and if that would have yielded a 1 5% increase as well. Mr. Greenwood stated that the ICU method was less detailed and it was harder to provide leg by leg impacts. It provided a pretty good picture of the overall impact, but wasn't as accurate leg by leg. Chairperson Campbell asked if the other lane was added if it would begin at the stop sign at the entrance into the present shopping center or at one of the Chevron Station entrances. Mr. Greenwood said the transition to start bending the curb into the widening would begin just shortly north of the stop sign and the full widening would occur somewhere along Chevron's frontage. Chairperson Campbell asked if the stop sign would remain. Mr. Greenwood concurred. Commissioner Jonathan asked if liquor sales would terminate at 2:00 a.m. Mr. Drell said it was his understanding that it was at 2:00 a.m. Chairperson Campbell noted that the public hearing was still open and asked the applicant to address the commission. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 MR. ALAN NORRIS, Property Development Specialist for Chevron Products Company in La Habra, said he would like to briefly go over some of the background of this project before getting into the specific traffic issue. He felt it was important to look at this project in its overall scope. Chevron has operated a service station at this location for a little over ten years and during the entire time Chevron operated as a service bay operation. The station was currently not necessarily maintaining its volume primarily due to its antiquated appearance and also poor image of the existing facility. Chevron was moving into the food mart business nationwide and they have done enormous consumer research in terms of what customers want from a gasoline station and they have come away with three major findings. That one, where people have their car worked on no longer has any bearing on where they buy their gas. Customers also look for gasoline dispensing equipment that have the ability to accept a credit card. Should they so desire they look for the ability to buy convenient food items in a clean, well lit environment. With those three main premises, Chevron designed it newest retail outlet which they are proposing to build at this location. In terms of some of the benefits from the reconstruction, obviously they wanted to improve the appearance of their facility and move into the food mart business. They feel the improved appearance is something that would tie in with what is going on behind them in the new shopping center and also the change in their mode of operation would benefit everyone: Palm Desert residents, the city and the business owners in the adjacent shopping center. Their proposed facility would blend in with the architectural style and color of the improvements slated for the shopping center behind them. They have modified their standard building design dramatically to incorporate the elements that were recommended by the Architectural Review Commission in terms of bump outs on the columns, the tower entry statement, eaves along the back and side elevations, tile accents along the bottom of the building, all to blend in with the community. Also, he felt that significant landscaping was being included with this project. A little over 20% or one-fifth of the whole property would be done in landscaping to provide an aesthetically pleasing environment. Chevron supported and agreed with all of those conditions identified in staff's report except one. That was Public Works Condition No. 6. He said he would like to go into a few things from Chevron's perspective and then he would let Mr. Kawamura have the floor to address the technical 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 issues and then he would like to close. He said that from Chevron's perspective they still feel that Public Works Condition No. 6 was imposed on them without merit. They have reviewed the matter in detail and felt the requirements prescribed in No. 6 were neither proportional nor necessary in connection with their planned redevelopment. A nexus didn't exist between their project and this request. There was little or no basis for concluding that from their converting a service bay operation to a food mart would constitute either an increase in traffic or a reduction in the level of service at the intersection. The City by law had the burden of proof to justify this condition and as of yet had been unable to do so. Chevron's traffic engineer studied the matter in depth and determined the current level of service at this intersection was a "C". The level of service was recognized as more than acceptable for urban traffic conditions at signalized intersections and taking into account a worst case scenario of an increase in peak PM drive hour traffic, the level of service rating for this intersection remained a "C". He also pointed out from the handout on page two that the level of service with the project would still remain a "C" as evidenced by this study. It was only the northbound lane that they disagree on where staff says it goes to a "D". He stated that Chevron was not insensitive to traffic congestion that can occur at this intersection. It is a problem they feel they did not create nor did they feel responsible to remedy. He pointed out that Plaza Way currently serves 28 different retail establishments and therefore the burden of any improvements to Plaza Way were not the responsibility of Chevron. He felt Chevron made a good faith effort in working with this project to work with staff. In particular he cited the Architectura► Review Commission meetings where they acquiesced to all the architectural requirements of the community. It was unfortunate that they had been unable to remedy Condition No. 6 but they were certainly amenable to doing something other than what had been presented. They didn't feel that this entire burden should lie on Chevron. He said he would turn the podium over to Mr. Kawamura and he would address some of the specifics of the engineering studies and traffic studies in this regard. Commissioner Finerty said she had a question for Mr. Norris. In the letter the Commission received from Chevron's attorneys dated November 25, 1998, on page two it said, and they were talking about the traffic and what everything 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 was based upon here, paragraph number one said that "This condition erroneously assumes that the remodeled station would generate more traffic than the existing facility. Chevron is confident this will not be the case. It has been Chevron's experience at prior facilities that convenience store conversions while increasing gasoline sales rarely resulted in greater vehicle traffic to the site." She contrasted that to the minutes from the Planning Commission meeting dated September 15, 1998. The minutes indicated that Mr. Norris said that "Chevron was moving into the convenience store business nationwide and they have done enormous consumer research regarding customer buying habits for petroleum products." He went on to say that this would be one of the first to be built in So. California and she was questioning exactly what that experience was at the prior facilities. Mr. Norris thanked Commissioner Finerty for bringing that up and apologized for not clarifying himself. When he said one of the first to be built, Chevron has done a lot of food mart conversions from service bay operations nationwide. That is what they called their grand entrance architecture and that was what he was referring to when he said one of the first to be built in So. California. It was that specific building design. Commissioner Jonathan asked what Mr. Norris thought ht the total remodel would cost - a ballpark figure. Mr. Norris said approximately $800,000. Commissioner Jonathan said he would round that off to about $1 million. Mr. Norris felt that was a big stretch of a round. Commissioner Jonathan asked with a cost $800,000 why Chevron would invest that kind of money if they didn't anticipate that it would bring in more customers than the repair bays. Mr. Norris said they were removing the repair bays. Commissioner Jonathan concurred and pointed out that they were removing the repair bays and were replacing them with a food mart at a cost of approximately $800,000. He asked why a profit motivated business would 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 choose to do that if they didn't anticipate that more people would patronize their business. Mr. Norris said they were looking to have more people patronize the business, however, they felt that food was more of what the customer wanted as an ancillary business. Someone there today fueling would much rather have the ability to buy a convenient food item versus having a tire changed. Commissioner Jonathan said that now Mr. Norris was saying that they were anticipating more business. He said that on one hand the letter from his attorney stated that Chevron didn't anticipate that more traffic would be generated. On the other hand it appeared logical, and he felt Mr. Norris was in agreement, that the only reason a business would make an investment of $800,000 was because it would bring in more business, which meant more traffic. Mr. Norris said they were certainly looking to increase their fuel volume and he wouldn't deny that at all. What they were saying and what their experience has been, for not only Chevron but as an industry as a whole, that the service bay business by and of its own nature, created more traffic than a food mart does. Meaning that when someone has to have their car serviced, they drop it off in the morning, someone comes to pick them up, during the day people deliver parts, someone brings them back to pick up their car during the day and then they leave the station. That constituted much more traffic than someone coming in who may already be fueling and going in and then buying a convenient food item when they are already an existing fueling customer. The nature of the service bay business in large by itself created more trip traffic than a food mart. Commissioner Jonathan thought that was an interesting theory and asked if that was their actual experience. Mr. Norris said it was not only Chevron's experience, but it was also the industry's experience. Typically a service station has wreckers, people delivering parts, people dropping off cars, people picking up cars and the service bay operation outside of the fuel created a lot of traffic independent of itself. 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 Commissioner Jonathan imagined a food mart would as well. Mr. Norris stated that currently, right now, 85% of Chevron's food mart business came from people already there buying gasoline. The biggest increase they see in fuel sales happened not from a change of mode of operation from the service bay to a convenience store or food mart, but from changing gasoline pumps that don't accept a credit card to changing pumps that do accept a credit card. They realize a bigger increase in gasoline sales from that and this station already has gasoline dispensing equipment that accepts credit cards. The USA gasoline station that was studied, although they agreed with the validity of the research, he felt that USA station was an entirely different operation than Chevron. USA today was priced 10C a gallon less than Chevron have a direct access off Highway 1 1 1 . They felt that was not a true comparison of what would happen to this particular location in converting it to a Chevron food mart. They didn't feel the USA gasoline site was really relevant. Commissioner Finerty asked who chose that site for the site specific study. Mr. Norris said it was mutually agreed upon between Mr. Kawamura and Mr. Joe Gaugush. There was no Chevron food mart in the vicinity to use as a comparison and it was agreed that was a site that was on Highway 111 that was of a similar use that could be used as a benchmark. Commissioner Finerty asked Mr. Greenwood if he was aware that Mr. Gaugush agreed to that site. Mr. Greenwood said Mr. Gaugush did agree to having that site studied, but it was at the applicant's suggestion. Public Works Department had a site in mind that was the existing Chevron convenience store operation at Ramon and Varner. That was the site Public Works would have chosen. The applicant chose the site that was studied. Commissioner Finerty asked what the logic was in studying a site Chevron didn't feel was comparable. Mr. Norris said he would like to have Mr. Kawamura address that since he was not privy to those conversations. 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 Commissioner Jonathan asked if the theory behind the food mart was to bring in some level, perhaps 15% or so of independent customers that would just go there to buy food. Mr. Norris said it was also what current customers told them they want. Commissioner Jonathan noted it would result, which was probably the applicant's hope, in higher gasoline sales and would bring in more people to buy gasoline. The decrease to traffic as a result of not having service bays and the increase to traffic, whether it offset it, exceeded it, or whatever, would be from now having customers who would come to buy food and then whatever impact the food mart has on increasing customer usage of the gasoline pumps. They were really talking about whether the reduction would be more than offset by the increase in customers both for food and gasoline. He was sure they were hoping that it would but they didn't know. They were hoping for as much return on that investment as possible and as much business as possible if they were like most businesses, but they don't know that for a fact. Time would tell. Mr. Norris said they didn't know it for a fact at this location, but their experience has been that where they removed service bays at other locations and converted them to food marts, and this wasn't just Chevron but the industry as a whole, that the trip generation net result was actually less. Mr. Norris concurred that total trip generation to the site including both food and gasoline was actually less. MR. JIM KAWAMURA, addressed Commission and said he is President of KHR Associates, an engineering, planning and architectural consulting firm under commission to Chevron Products Company to review and provide input regarding the proposed service station at Plaza Way and Highway 1 1 1 . He prefaced his comments by indicating that they had no disagreement with City staff regarding methodologies, regarding the concerns, or regarding the intent. What they did question and have differences of opinion on was specifically the end result of all of the analyses. He said it got a little complicated in terms of talking about the Intersection Capacity Utilization Method, Highway Capacity Manual Method, etcetera, and there were a lot of technical terms and jargon that was used by traffic engineers and he found that in a lot of cases traffic seemed to be a very subjective issue and no one ever seemed to 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 agree on whether there was a traffic problem or not. He pointed out in this particular case that irrespective of the methodology, irrespective of what numbers they were assuming as far as existing traffic conditions, future traffic conditions, etcetera, that the bottom line was that when they take the worst case scenario under each of the series of steps they went through to analyze the situation on behalf of their client, Chevron, but as well with the City's input, they could not honestly in good faith conclude that there is a direct relationship between the Chevron proposed project and a measurable traffic problem on Plaza Way or at the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way. The point here was that number one, they didn't disagree that there can be traffic congestion at that intersection and he had been out there on many occasions looking at traffic at all hours of the day: morning, midday, in the evening hours, and if anyone went out there and looked at the traffic conditions, there was a lot of traffic going through that intersection. There was no disagreement there. There was also a significant part of that traffic being generated on that northbound leg, the Plaza Way leg of the intersection. That traffic wasn't solely coming from Chevron. As Mr. Norris indicated there were at least 28 other businesses within the Von's shopping center and the shopping center directly behind them that contributed to that traffic, not to mention the traffic that comes from El Paseo over to Highway 111 that uses Plaza Way as a sort of shortcut. They didn't even count that traffic. So if they looked at the whole sum of the existing traffic total on Plaza Way, Chevron's portion of that existing problem, if they wanted to call it that, was a small fraction of the total volume of traffic going through that intersection. He asked if this project in itself required an improvement on Plaza Way that was 100% totally the responsibility of Chevron regardless of whether there was a measurable traffic impact or traffic increase or not, if the levels of service for the intersection as a whole remain the same, he thought it would be hard pressed on anyone's point of view to suggest that Chevron solely by converting its service bays to a convenience store operation or food mart operation was responsible for 100% of the improvement on Plaza Way. He realized that they couldn't build half a roadway and they were also saying that they realize that this additional lane for the northbound leg of Plaza Way and Highway 111 was something that was a necessity and would be needed because in the shopping center behind them there were a number of vacancies there and as those vacancies and the remodeling 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 occurred in the center, there would be more traffic generated. If they looked back at these numbers and asked how they came up with the conclusion that this improvement was solely the responsibility of Chevron and Chevron should pay for it, it had to do with one figure or one point as Mr. Greenwood indicated and that was that the level of service for the northbound leg, through movement only and not even the left turn northbound, just the through movement goes from a level of service "C" to level of service "D". If they looked at the numbers in the six pages or so of output from the Highway Capacity Manual Methodology of determining intersection levels of service that staff prepared and they looked at each leg and each of the levels of service, they would realize that none of them change from existing to future with the Chevron project with the exception of that one northbound leg. It went from a "C" to a "D". He asked how they got to that point and how they reached the conclusion that it goes from a "C" to a "D". There were several assumptions that would have to be made to reach that conclusion. One of them was that all of the traffic that would be generated, regardless of what the number is, whether it is 100 cars or 1 ,000 cars, all of that traffic had to come from Chevron entering and exiting using Plaza Way through Highway 111 to get that number for the through movement to be high enough so that the level of service changed. The reality was, and he would list the percentages because he thought they were significant, that to get that assumption they would have to assume that all 40 cars that would be generated during the P.M. peak hour were going into the Chevron service station using Plaza Way and exiting the Chevron station using Plaza Way to get onto Highway 111 either going through to the shopping center or turning left or right. By their own count on an earlier study when they were just looking simply at where the traffic was coming from, and he said he would give Commission those numbers because they were remarkably consistent and they weren't trying to manipulate numbers to work in their favor, they had to realize that when they did the traffic counts with the driveways they weren't even talking about levels of service. They noticed that a lot of traffic that enters and exits the Chevron station didn't go out onto Highway 11 1 . They go into the shopping center, go back to El Paseo and elsewhere. They don't even go to Highway 111 . So when they extract the numbers for the shopping center traffic, the people that go to the Chevron station that either come to the station from the shopping center, or when they leave the 12 • MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 station and go into the shopping center directly without even going out onto Plaza Way or they make a movement into or out of the Chevron station using Plaza Way but heading toward El Paseo, not Highway 111 . They were looking at in the morning peak hour--38% of that traffic was not directed at Highway 1 1 1 . The PM peak was 38%. The noon hour was 41 %. If they wanted to say 100% of the traffic and if they wanted to make the argument that they were comparing apples to apples, he asked how an existing circulation pattern which says that anywhere between 38% to 41 % of the traffic didn't even go through the Highway 111 intersection, now in the after analysis saying that now they have the project 100% goes through the intersection. The other assumption they would have to make was that they have a 50% increase in traffic in order to get that number, the 40 cars they are talking about during the PM peak hour to even reach that number. They would have to assume a 50% increase in traffic because of the food mart and secondly, 100% of that 50% increase was going through the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way. That was the only way they could get that level of service to budge from "C" to "D". He said it barely budged by fractions. The 50% came from the analysis of USA gas versus Chevron. He said he wanted to set the record straight because he thought this was very important. The reason they even began this discussion about possibly doing a case study of both the existing Chevron station and one other location, whether it was a USA gas or any other location, was because the City's original traffic report indicated that the existing Chevron station generated 4,048 vehicle trip ends per day and that using the assumption of 24 vehicle fueling positions (dispensers or pumps) that this new station would generate 13,022 trip ends--an increase of 9,000 trip ends and that was the City's contention. That Chevron would be generating 9,000 additional vehicle trip ends. Now they were talking about 40 trip ends during the PM peak hour. The reason they went and studied the USA gas station, and he discussed this personally with Joe Gaugush, he suggested to Joe that because standard methodology is to use the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip General Manual and if they used that manual and used that definition of service stations and convenience stores, etc., and came up with the calculations, they would come to the same conclusion that Mr. Norris indicated. That was if they took the trip generation rate for a service station with service bays and compared it with a service station with a convenience store, there would actually 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 be a decrease in the total trips generated. About seven or eight years ago he did a study commissioned by Mobil Oil Corporation called the Mobil National Traffic Study. His company did it and he was the principal investigator. They went and looked at 30 service stations nationwide in seven different states for Mobil Oil Corporation to determine once and for all the trip generation characteristics, what the parking characteristics of service stations of various types of configuration were. While this was a privately commissioned study, the report and the findings were remarkable and they were subsequently added as part of the ITE Trip Generation Manual and he worked with the ITE technical section in Washington D.C. to help develop these new standards so they were talking to the guy who came up with these standards for how service stations should be evaluated. To address Commissioner Jonathan's question regarding this whole issue, and it has come up time and time again, why would anyone invest $1 million when they weren't going to have any more customers and he felt that was a very simple and honest question. In fact, they were asked that by Mobil because when they originally did their study they used 20 stations and they came back with the result and Mobil said they didn't believe him. Their own client said they didn't believe him and told him to go look at ten more stations. They did and the results came back the same so they started looking at the actual transaction tickets and what was happening and why this phenomenon occurred was two reasons. Number one, service stations with service bays generate more traffic. They were talking traffic versus customers and he said that was the difference between the two numbers. Traffic is, as indicated by Mr. Norris, any time a car needs repaired at that station, they were bringing it in for service, a friend comes to pick them up, they bring them back in the afternoon and that meant four or five trip ends being generated by one customer. Compared to a convenience store or food mart, as Mr. Norris indicated, they have shown that 85% of the transactions that occur from all food mart sales are customers that are already there. The customers instead of spending $10 on gas were now spending $10 for gas plus $2 or $3 for something in the convenience store. That was what justified bottom line investment. They were making more money from the same customers. That was the whole idea behind shopping malls. They have a captive client and make them spend more money. They don't get more customer--they simply make them spend more money while they are there. Regarding the nexus for this whole issue 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 of whether the improvements were justified in this particular case, the bottom line was that in terms of the USA gas, they tried to use that as a case study location working with Joe Gaugush. He proposed originally to look for a station that Mr. Gaugush would feel comfortable with and looked at USA gas because he knew it was very busy, it is on the highway and even though it is not an apples to apples comparison at least it got them in the ballpark and not talking about 13,000 trip ends with a service station and convenience store or 24 vehicle fueling positions because that didn't exist. They picked that site merely as an example so they could at least get into the ballpark and ideally they would have picked a Chevron service station with a food mart and no, Mr. Gaugush never introduced or suggested another location to them and he had two discussions over this and Mr. Gaugush said let's go ahead and go with the USA gas with the full understanding and, unfortunately, it didn't turn out to be the case--that this was not to be used against them. If they told him that eventually the results of their USA gas analysis would be used as an argument against their project he never would have picked USA gas because obviously there was a huge difference between the two operations. For one thing, there was a 10C price difference and so the customers at USA gas in terms of the volume and the composition of that customer profile was significantly different than Chevron. They saw something today coming into town that was one step beyond--Costco and their gas operations. He asked if it would be fair to compare them to Costco. They saw cars lined up six deep over there on all fueling islands. They were probably talking 10,000 cars a day at a station like that. That was not an apples to apples comparison. They didn't count USA gas for the reason of comparing it with Chevron. What they tried to do was indicate that number one, they weren't talking about 13,000 trips per day for any type of station. Number two, they weren't talking about 24 vehicle fueling positions for Chevron, they were talking about 12 and he thought the City had acquiesced to those two points of contention they had. That was the only reason they used the USA gas as a case study site. He wanted to set that record straight because he now saw this document taking the assumption of saying that they would take USA's number and apply it to Chevron and therefore they have a 50% increase in traffic, which was erroneous. Then they would take that assumption one step further and say that of that 50% increase in traffic, 100% would go through Highway 1 1 1 and Plaza Way and that simply was not 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 the case either. He hadn't had a chance, because this information came to him this afternoon, to go back and redo the calculations to see if they took more realistic numbers and plugged them into the Highway Capacity Manual Method and said what the level of service was for that northbound direction because that was the sole nail that this whole hat of 100% of the improvement costs being attributable to Chevron was coming from and to see if that nail holds that hat up if they changed those numbers around to something more realistic. They haven't had the opportunity to do that but he was pretty sure that when they do come up with those calculations they would find that the level of service stayed the same. It was "C" now and would remain "C". There went the nexus. Commissioner Finerty noted that in the memo Commission had from Mr. Greenwood with regard to traffic counts, Mr. Kawamura used the 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. time as the worst case scenario for traffic and the Commission was being advised by staff that recent traffic studies in the area and our own observations have found that 11 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 p.m. weekday periods could experience higher traffic volumes. She was questioning why there wasn't communication between Mr. Kawamura and staff to agree on a peak time. Also, further reading it appeared that Mr. Kawamura independently had gone out with his own methods and procedures and there wasn't a lot of communication with Mr. Gaugush in preparing the evaluations. Mr. Kawamura said that if they had used the 11 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 p.m. count, they would have gladly done that because the result would have been less traffic. They actually took traffic counts at both the USA gas and Chevron and they counted that period of 11 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 p.m. as well as the morning peak and afternoon peak. In their correspondence dated November 24, 1998 when they looked at the counts theysaid "let's use the 4:00p.m. to 6:00p.m. because theyare higher". Based on the counts they conducted at the location, and this was back when they were looking at both USA and Chevron, they would gladly do that but what it would end up showing was instead of the 40 cars they would have a smaller number. They took what they considered the worst case situation and they would be more than happy to say 1 1 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 p.m. That actually gave them less of an impact. 16 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 Commissioner Finerty noted that they were being told that other recent traffic studies showed that 11 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 p.m. experiences higher traffic volumes and Mr. Kawamura was telling her no, that was not true. Mr. Kawamura said they had to look at, regardless of whether it was higher or not, the significance of whether it was higher or not. If they were to assume that 11 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 p.m. is higher, that number was probably insignificant with respect to the type of analysis they were talking about. In order to bump a level of service, they were talking about thousands of cars differential between those two periods of time. He said he would give the Commission numbers because he felt it was relevant and they were trying to do this because they were trying to look at this very objectively looking at the worst case situation. They would have gladly picked the 11 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 p.m. period because the results would have been more favorable to them. He wanted to give them proof of that in one of the numbers he sees as important to recognize where they came up with their 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. period because he felt that 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. was normally thought of as the commuting hours and those were the hours they felt would be more appropriate in terms of looking at these types of figures for analysis purposes. Using Chevron station as an example, they counted morning peak, afternoon peak and midday peak. The trip generation rate based on their correspondence dated October 29 when they were looking at strictly how much traffic USA gas was generating and what the Chevron station was generating. If they had used the morning peak hour as their peak hour at worst case situation, the trip generation rate for the Chevron service station would have been 1 1 .63 trip ends for a vehicle fueling position. If they had used the p.m. peak period, which was the afternoon time they used, the rate would have been 12.91 . If they had picked the midday 11 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 p.m. period, the rate would have been 12.27--lower than the 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. period. They took the worst case situation and looked at 12.27 and 12.91 and said 12.91 was higher. Commissioner Finerty asked if these numbers were based on figures taken on October 29, 1998. Mr. Kawamura said yes, well, that was the date of the report. He said the intent there was not to try to demonstrate what were the peak 17 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 hours as far as traffic on Highway 111 and Plaza Way, they were trying to determine at what time of day they generated the highest number of vehicles from the Chevron station and it happened to be the afternoon peak. The difference between 12.91 and 12.27 was pretty small; it was a fraction of a trip. They picked the higher number. If the Commission wanted them to take the middle number they would gladly do that but the results would have been less of an impact. Commissioner Finerty said she believed it was Mr. Kawamura's recommendation to use a split phased signal. Mr. Kawamura concurred. Commissioner Finerty said that was to solve what Mr. Kawamura thought was Chevron's part of the problem. Mr. Kawamura said no, that was certainly not the intent to say that it was Chevron's part of the problem. What they merely tried to do, and they couldn't look at a problem both ways and have an answer. They couldn't have their cake and eat it too. They either looked at the intersection of Plaza Way and Highway 111 as a whole and said that the most important thing was moving traffic through the intersection, period. They obviously couldn't have green lights for all directions at all times. Someone had to sacrifice. Where do they place the sacrifice? Do they sacrifice the traffic movement on Highway 111 to try to get Plaza Way moving or do they sacrifice the side streets to Plaza Way for the benefit of the Highway 111 traffic? If they wee saying what is important is not the individual movements but the intersections as a whole, then they have to analyze the intersection as a whole and with the ICU Method and Highway Capacity Manual Method they would get the same results under both scenarios for level of service for the intersection as a whole. They say it is "C" now and would be "C" in the future. The City's own staff using the Highway Capacity Manual Method said the intersection as a whole is level of service "C" now and will be "C" in the future. If they weren't concerned with the whole intersection and they were saying that the only thing they care about is Plaza Way, and going one step further, if they only care about northbound through movement on Plaza Way, they don't care even about the left turns because the left turn movement is "C" and would 18 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 remain "C" then they should just talk about northbound left--that their whole purpose in life is to make sure northbound Plaza Way traffic moves at an acceptable level of service. If that was their concern, then a split phase operation would obviously help because it would give them 100% of the green time for that leg for movement to go through. They didn't have a conflicting left turn to worry about. When the light is green they go through. That was contrary to the benefit of the intersection as a whole. The only reason they mentioned the split phase was because it seemed like there was this fixation on the part of the City's staff that the northbound or south leg of that intersection was the critical movement and they have to somehow solve this problem on Plaza Way that is happening in front of Chevron. He said fine, if the Commission wanted to do that and take that approach, they could split phase it and that would solve the problem immediately. Obviously he acknowledged, and he said so in his memo, but that doesn't solve the problems of the intersection and in fact might make it worse to the intersection as a whole because someone had to sacrifice. If they improve Plaza Way, Highway 111 suffers. They couldn't have their cake and eat it too. They either have to address it as an intersection as a whole or individual legs and he thought it was a far stretch to go from where they are today to where the situation would be in the future with Chevron rebuilding its station to conclude that Chevron is now creating a "traffic impact" as a result of the remodel. Commissioner Beaty asked, bottom line, if Chevron felt that in the future it would be a benefit to them and everyone in that shopping center, Von's and all of those businesses, that they have three northbound lanes coming up on Plaza Way. Mr. Kawamura said he didn't think there was any disagreement that a third lane would be beneficial. Commissioner Beaty said he thought that Mr. Kawamura did a good job of making his point and he thought he was probably starting to agree with him that it may not be the total responsibility of Chevron to shoulder the cost. He asked if that was the issue. Mr. Kawamura said he thought it was entirely. 19 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 Commissioner Beaty said that City staff, and obviously they have already heard discussions that the shopping center behind Chevron would be improved and the assumption had to be that it would change and increase more traffic also. He asked if there was any way to require those businesses to contribute to some of this improvement which he felt everyone would agree they need. Mr. Drell replied that in that project they actually saw the development reducing square footage so it was kind of hard when they are reducing square footage to require traffic improvements. Also, this was a traffic improvement that was not adjacent to their property so obviously they didn't require improvements. It was harder to make a nexus when actual square footage was being reduced, which was what happened in the shopping center remodel. Commissioner Beaty thought that if they were improving the shopping center they would increase traffic. Mr. Drell said they were remodeling the exteriors but they were actually reducing the square footage. Mr. Smith noted they were also adding an access. Mr. Drell concurred and explained they were adding an access on Highway 111 and if there was an increase it would probably be a wash with the new access on Highway 111 . The traffic engineer's handbook didn't take into account remodeling of exteriors. It was based on square footage of retail space and when they reduce retail space, all the things being equal, they would not make a hard case that they were increasing traffic. Obviously they could get a better store in there at any time. Mr. Kawamura said that unfortunately that was the case, but if they take into consideration the vacancies they saw in the shopping center and say hypothetically that he wanted to go into that shopping center and rent one of those spaces and open up a bakery or whatever and if was required to go through the same type of detailed traffic analysis as Chevron was going to be required to, Chevron was an existing operation. They are in business and are generating traffic now. That traffic was accounted for in the existing traffic count. Those vacant shops back there were not included in those numbers. If they opened up a business in one of those vacant shops, they were generating new traffic. Right now that space is vacant and if he opened up a business people would come there. One might argue that a lot of his customers would be from those already in the shopping center just like Chevron was saying that a lot of their customers are already there, so the point is that they are talking about a situation that is a little bit different in comparison. If Chevron's station was shut down, if it was a vacant site and it was proposing to build this project, he would be on the City's 20 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 side saying that here is the existing traffic and now they were adding all of this additional traffic because a new business going in. He could see the argument, but in this particular case what they have to concentrate and look at is the difference between what is existing and what is proposed. That differential was the impact and that differential was insignificant. Commissioner Jonathan said that with the shopping center in the rear, his basic point as he said earlier was that it was unlikely that someone would put in any kind of major investment in order to create smaller square footage which would result in less customers. That was not what it was about and they understood that. However, he wanted to leave the issue of nexus and responsibility for the additional traffic and there would be a lot, a little or none. Forgetting that for a moment and assuming that Plaza Way was not a good traffic situation as it exists, Mr. Kawamura mentioned that they couldn't have their cake and eat it too in terms of resolving the problems that are there. But wasn't the proposed improvement to Plaza Way a method of accomplishing that and wouldn't that result in the best improvement to traffic flow not just for northbound and left turn and so forth, but also to the entire intersection? He asked if that was the best solution that Mr. Kawamura was aware of. Mr. Kawamura said yes, it was. Mr. Norris readdressed Commission and said that Chevron was asking for the Commission to approve their project removing Condition No. 6. They feel, again, that the condition was neither reasonable nor proportional in terms of what they were doing. They also felt that the new direct access that the shopping center behind them would have directly off Highway 1 1 1 would lessen the load on Plaza Way. Taking a worst case scenario with some unbelievable traffic counts, the level of service did not change the intersection. They also asked the Commission to recognize the benefits of their proposed project both from a customer service perspective of having something that the residents of Palm Desert want, but also the aesthetic benefit to the community to have that facility in place adjacent to the shopping center versus what was in place today. He said he would be more than happy to answer any further questions. 21 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1 , 1998 Commissioner Finerty said that Mr. Kawamura alluded to the split phase signal and the cost would be $7,000. From what she understood Chevron agreed to pay that cost, but what she thought she just heard him say and what was quoted in their report was that would not exactly solve the problem and could make matters worse on Highway 1 1 1 . He just now said that the improvement on Plaza Way as proposed by staff for the $48,000 would be the best way to solve the problem. Given the fact that there is an existing condition where there is traffic and her belief was that an expanded use and convenience store for Chevron would exacerbate that condition, she asked if there was somewhere between the $7,000 and the $48,000 that they could agree on. Mr. Norris said they feel that there was not going to be this rash of traffic that would occur as a result of them changing this building. They feel that $7,000 was really their best good faith effort to try to acquiesce to staff. They felt that neither a condition exists today nor that a condition would exist in the future, but they were willing to do that. They felt they were being more than fair in doing that. Commissioner Finerty noted that the $7,000 was for the split phased signal which Mr. Kawamura basically said was not the best way to handle the situation and asked if he agreed. Mr. Norris said that again, there were 28 other businesses plus two direct streets that have service via Plaza Way. They didn't feel it was their responsibility and that they didn't create a problem there nor would they create one in the future and it was not their responsibility to remedy it as a developer. Looking at a worst case scenario of a 15% supposed increase in traffic they felt that $7,000 would be 15% or close thereto to the $48,000. If there was another remedy that needed to be taken, they felt this was more than adequate for Chevron's share of their responsibility for Plaza Way. Commissioner Finerty indicated she had a hard time understanding Chevron investing to what Mr. Norris alluded to in the September 15, 1998 minutes of a $900,000 rebuild and not anticipating an increase in traffic and at the same time if they were going to be spending $900,000 why they were quibbling over a few thousand to better the improvement for everyone. 22 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 Mr. Norris said there were a couple of issues. They certainly hoped to get an increase in fuel sales and he wouldn't deny that; however, as he pointed out the change of operation from a service bay given the nature of that business and automobile repair constituted less traffic. Regarding the nature of the investment, if he said $900,000 he mis- spoke because it was closer to $800,000 but they feel whether it is $48.00 or $48,000 it wasn't right to make this their responsibility. He was a little surprised that staff and the City really felt that in the scope of their project that this was an insignificant amount of money to put against their project especially since they acquiesced to all the different architectural changes that were recommended by the Architectural Review Commission. He said he was somewhat at a loss as to the relevance that this $48,000 kept coming up that they should just do this for the betterment of the community. They wanted to be a good neighbor but this wasn't their responsibility. Commissioner Finerty agreed that there was a problem that needed to be taken care of and she wasn't going to say that Chevron was creating it all on their own or with changing their facility, but they also had to go on what staff told them and they have to trust their judgement and basically they were being told that the $48,000 was the best way to deal with this traffic problem. Mr. Norris replied, "and that Chevron should do this". Commissioner Finerty said she didn't know that and that was why she was asking if there was somewhere between the $7,000 that Chevron agreed to for the split phased signal and the $48,000 which was the best case scenario to solve this issue. Mr. Norris said that again the latest correspondence taking a worst case scenario as Mr. Kawamura said, realizing that all of the traffic would be going northbound on Plaza Way that they get the 15%. Again, $7,000 was 15% of $48,000. Mr. Greenwood said he would like to clarify staff's position. Right now today Plaza Way experienced a service level of "C" and that was an acceptable level of service in almost anyone's book. So if they took the no project scenario they don't have a problem. Now if they undertake the project they fully expect based on the project engineer's numbers, all of these numbers, every 23 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 last one of them, was developed by the engineer. Staff merely analyzed them in another methodology. That methodology said that the project's numbers say there will be a 15% increase in traffic and that increase in traffic will degrade the level of service on the northbound leg from "C" to "D". That would degrade that leg below the City's stated level of service goal which is level "C" and therefore there is a nexus on this project to make sure that impact does not occur. Mr. Norris said that still took into account no loss in trip generation for the loss of service bays. They were saying that strictly because they pump more gas that this traffic was going to go up. Mr. Greenwood replied no, they were saying that based on the project engineer's analysis of the similar site which, while the City didn't chose it, those were the best numbers they have and they have analyzed the numbers they have and tried to compare apples to apples as far as the trip generation and saying that 100% of the traffic had to go through the intersection, they used the exact same trip distribution that was used in the ICU analysis and those were comparing apples to apples as best could be done. Mr. Norris asked if he felt an apple to apple comparison was a location that has gasoline priced 10C per gallon less than Chevron. He asked if he felt that was true comparison of trip generation. Mr. Greenwood explained that as he said earlier, staff believed there was a better site to study but they did accept the site that was presented to them. Commissioner Jonathan felt that perhaps the Commission had heard the points and understood the points from all perspectives and suggested they could move on. Chairperson Campbell noted that the public hearing was still open and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to this matter. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Campbell asked for commission comments. Commissioner Jonathan said he actually thought that staff was correct in its analysis and conclusions and he thought that the applicant was correct too. That might be odd but he thought they were talking about two different issues. The issue where staff is correct is in the net impact that this proposed project would have on traffic. His gut feeling and he has looked at the 24 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 numbers and listened to testimony and understood and both arguments were compelling. He listened to one perspective and said okay, I believe that and then he listened to the next guy and if they looked at staff and their report he thought it was compelling and believed that so probably somewhere in between was the truth. His gut feeling said, and that they have to assume that this will be a successful project, and traffic would increase. Whatever the offset was he understood that service bays create a lot of traffic and that would all go away and be replaced to a lesser extent, same extent or higher extent by the success of the food mart and the increased gasoline sales that it generates, but his gut feeling said there would be some increase. On the other hand where he felt the applicant was right was not on the issue of traffic generation but on the issue of nexus. This proposed Chevron project may push the traffic over the top to go from "C" to "D", but it wasn't solely responsible in that they were near "D" to begin with. So he thought that Chevron had responsibility, but he felt the proposed project behind had responsibility and A.G. Edwards had responsibility and McDonald's, the movie theater and so on. He felt that it would be a good project and would improve the community but he didn't buy that entirely either because Chevron had no choice because the area is improving and if Chevron continued to deteriorate in appearance and so forth, it wasn't going to survive. He understood that the community was going to benefit, but he didn't want them to think that they completely bought it that Chevron was doing this magnanimously because it likes the city of Palm Desert and wanted to make this a charitable contribution and he understood the benefits both ways. It would be a good project, is right for the area and he would like to see it come about. He felt that Plaza Way needed to be improved no matter what happened so this was a good opportunity to make that come about. The real question was who would pay the $48,000 or so. He suggested that either the Chevron proposal for Condition 6 be approved, meaning they contribute $7,000 towards the cost of the staff recommendation for improving the area, or that alternately if that wasn't acceptable to Council, that some other cost sharing arrangement be devised. As a Planning Commissioner he thought the project stood on its own merits and the issue of who should pay for that improvement was one that he was comfortable with the Chevron proposal and if Council wasn't then fine, they could address that and come up with something else, but as a planning project, it sat well with him and he would like to see it happen. Mr. Drell noted that unless it was called up by Council or appealed by the applicant or someone else, it wouldn't go to Council. 25 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 Commissioner Jonathan said he would be reared to accept it with the prepared P modification to Condition No. 6 that says any cost in excess of $7,000 shall be the responsibility of the City. He would just amend that final sentence and if Council felt that was inappropriate, then they would have the ability to call it up. Commissioner Beaty said he was in agreement with Commissioner Jonathan with the exception of changing the amendment that drastically and he would prefer to see it stay as it is stated and allow the applicant the opportunity to appeal it to Council and let Council and Chevron work out the financing. From a planning standpoint they needed the third lane and the intersection needed to be improved and they could fight it out how much Chevron should pay and how much the City would pay. Commissioner Jonathan said he would be okay with that but the only reason he was suggesting the modification is because if Council is okay with it there was no need to do a public notice and all that because no one would call it up. If not, they would call it up. Commissioner Beaty said that if it wasn't appealed they would get the intersection at a lower cost to the City. Then it would be Chevron's decision and not the Council's decision. Commissioner Finerty asked if the other commissioners were in concurrence with the hours of operation being 24 hours per day since that was staff's recommendation. Commissioner Beaty said he didn't have a problem with those hours in that location. Chairperson Campbell concurred. Commissioner Jonathan also agreed. Commissioner Finerty asked Mr. Norris if they planned to have a pay phone outside. Mr. Norris said he believed so, but would check the plan to verify that. Chairperson Campbell thought the City wanted to do away with outside phones, like at Walgreen's. Mr. Norris said there wasn't an outside telephone on the plans. Chairperson Campbell suggested adding that as a condition that there be no outside pay phones or loitering. If they had one inside that would be fine. Mr. Norris concurred. 26 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 Chairperson Campbell said that after hearing all of the testimony this evening she would concur with the other commissioners in regard to the money and if Chevron wanted to go ahead and donate that much money toward the $48,000 and leave it up to Council as to if the new shopping center should add something to that too because they would be responsible for generating more traffic as well as the other shopping centers. Mr. Norris asked for clarification that Chairperson Campbell was saying the condition would be amended to reflect the $7,000. Chairperson Campbell said they were just discussing this and Commissioner Beaty noted there wasn't a motion yet. Commissioner Jonathan said he could see it both ways, but he tended to maybe get that $7,000 "offer" for lack of a better term onto the books by incorporating that in Condition No. 6 with the hopes that Council would find that to be equitable and they would go ahead and do it. The way Condition No. 6 reads he thought it would be inappropriate and wouldn't be an equitable sharing of costs and for the applicant to pay $7,000 was approaching equity. He was more comfortable with that than just leaving No. 6 as is. Whether the motion lived or died, he was prepared to put forth a motion for approval with the exception of modifying the last sentence in Condition No. 6 of the Department of Public Works to read "...any costs in excess of $7,000 shall be the responsibility of the City." Commissioner Finerty noted that the staff report dated December 1 talked about any costs in excess of $48,000 would be the responsibility of the City and that Public Works staff was estimating the construction cost to be $48,000. She didn't know how firm of a figure that was and if they were talking about an increase of 15% traffic, then perhaps they would want to say 15% of the cost. Commissioner Jonathan said he wouldn't have a problem with that if she felt that was more appropriate. Commissioner Finerty noted that she just didn't know how good of a number the $48,000 figure was and if it could grow. Mr. Drell thought it was a pretty good number, but if they were going with the $7,000 logic, then it made sense that the project at some point in time would go out to bid and they would know exactly how much it would cost and then it would be 15% of that. If it was less it would be less and if more, it would be more than $7,000. Chairperson Campbell asked if Commissioner Jonathan wanted to make that one of the conditions. Commissioner Jonathan concurred and said he would amend the motion to indicate that any costs in excess of 15% of the 27 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 1, 1998 total improvement costs shall be the responsibility of the City. Commissioner Finerty noted that would also include the addition of the pay phone condition. Commissioner Jonathan said he didn't know if they needed to say anything about the pay phone because it wasn't on the plan and they would have to come to commission to get it. Mr. Drell noted that often phones get added by the phone company and it was probably a good idea to specifically call it out so they understand that is their intent. Commissioner Jonathan said he would be in agreement to adding the condition of no outside/public pay phones. Commissioner Finerty said she would second the motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Fernandez abstained). It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1905 approving CUP 98-4, subject to conditions as amended. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Fernandez abstained). B. Case No. PP/CUP 98-18 - LEWIS BISHOP ARCHITECTS for PALM DESERT COMMUNITY CHURCH, Applicant Request for approval of a precise plan/conditional use permit for a 12,629 square foot church facility on 4.6 acres on the west side of Portola Avenue, 1600 feet north of Frank Sinatra Drive. Mr. Smith noted that the plans were on display and that Commission also received the plans in their packets. He explained that the property is a 4.6 acre site on the west side of Portola. It is the sixth lot north of Frank Sinatra Drive some 1600 feet north of Frank Sinatra. The property is zoned Planned Residential, five units to the acre. The PR zone permitted churches as a conditional use. They have the request for a multi-phased church. The applicant at this point had shown five possible phases, the first phase being a 1 ,952 square foot multipurpose building which would provide for seating up to 138 persons during Sunday church services. Phase 2 was the addition of another quadrant of 1 ,952 square feet for Sunday School classrooms. Phase 3 another Sunday School classroom facility. Phase 4 would be the 28 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 1998 VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR None. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he/she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case No. CUP 98-4 - CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY, Applicant (Continued from September 15, October 6, and November 3, 1998) Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart at 72-801 Highway 111 . Mr. Drell explained that the applicant was requesting another continuance to further discuss the traffic study. Public Works was satisfied with it, but apparently the applicant wasn't. Chairperson Campbell noted that the public hearing was open and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one. Commissioner Jonathan noted that in the September 15 minutes condition number seven indicated a maximum of 30 feet and asked if that was a misprint and should be 38 feet. Mr. Drell said it should be 38 feet and there was some clarification needed. They were showing 44 feet from the outside to outside aprons and he wasn't sure where the 38 feet was measured. He suggested that Mr. Greenwood comment on that issue. Mr. Greenwood clarified that Public Works Condition 7 originally did say 30 feet. After some 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 1998 discussion with the applicant it was revised to 38 feet measured from the southerly edge of the existing driveway so that they would be moving it a few feet farther away from Highway 111 . Mr. Drell asked if that width was measured from where the apron meshed with the street or if it was from the extreme limits where it starts to taper down. Mr. Greenwood noted that different applicants design them in different ways, but the most common way was that the driveable area was 38 feet. That would be the area lowered down to the street. Mr. Drell said that as it is now drawn, he measured the existing at 40 feet so they were really only talking two feet they would have to shift it, which was actually influenced by their own curb design. Commissioner Jonathan thanked staff. Commissioner Beaty thought this came up at their last meeting. He said that this was the fourth continuance of this matter and it was a request for additional communication with the Engineering Department and he asked if Mr. Greenwood was satisfied with a continuance to December 1 . Mr. Greenwood said they were satisfied that they have a good description of what to expect now. He wasn't quite sure what additional study the applicant wants to do. So far this had been a relatively limited operational study and if they wanted to do a full in-depth traffic study two weeks wouldn't be enough time. Commissioner Beaty asked the other commissioners if they thought this should be continued to a date uncertain and let it be readvertised when the applicant was ready. Mr. Drell said he believed that on December 1 they would be prepared and would have a resolution before commission. They weren't required to acknowledge the continuance request and if they know as much as they could, they could make a decision. Commissioner Beaty noted there was a resolution before them this evening. Mr. Drell felt they should be given another chance. Mr. Greenwood indicated that commission had Public Works' opinion on this issue and asked if there was anything more the commission would like them to look at and if they were headed in the right direction. Commissioner Beaty clarified that they were questioning Chevron, not Public Works. Mr. Greenwood said he would like the next meeting to be the last one so if there was anything additional that the commission needed he would like the opportunity to get it. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Chairperson Campbell, to continue Case No. CUP 98-4 to December 1 , 1998 by minute motion. Commissioner Jonathan felt that Commissioner Beaty's point was well taken 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 1998 and requested that staff communicate to the applicant that there appears to be an inclination to move forward with this matter on December 1 , 1 998 and they might be well advised to come here and be prepared with some kind of presentation. Mr. Greenwood said that they would pass that along to the project traffic engineer. Chairperson Campbell called for the vote. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Fernandez abstained). B. Case No. CUP 91-8 Amendment - SOUTHWEST COMMUNITY CHURCH, Applicant (Continued from October 20, 1998) Request for approval of a one-year time extension to a conditional use permit to allow the temporary use of a five-acre parcel west of the existing facility to locate a 6,400 square foot classroom building and a 280-space parking lot at 73-251 Hovley Lane West. Mr. Drell indicated that some correspondence was received from Southwest Community Church reiterating their commitment to comply with the permit and they have replanted eight queen palm trees on the west side of the temporary building. He noted that Mr. Richards was in the audience to report on his perception of the current state of affairs. Chairperson Campbell noted that public hearing was still open and asked if the applicant wished to address the commission. MR. JIM RICHARDS, 40-840 Avenida Estrada, said he wasn't with the church, but they have been in contact with the church administrators and since the last hearing the neighborhood was very pleased with the response from the church. He felt that over time they were getting better communication and the Planning Commission had been a great help in facilitating this and they were hearing their concerns. The church was willing to compromise, the neighbors were willing to compromise and the church had been very proactive since the last meeting and the neighbors found nothing that was an open item right now. He thanked the Commission and church for their efforts. Chairperson Campbell stated that if there were any problems in the future, Mr. Richards could let the Commission know. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 3, 1998 VII. CONSENT CALENDAR None. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he/she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case No. PP/CUP 98-17 - T. MICHAEL HADLEY for ROBERT McLACHLAN, DDS, Applicant Request for approval of a precise plan of design/conditional use permit to construct a 9,312 square foot dental office and Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as it relates thereto on the C-1 (general commercial) zoned property at the southwest corner of Highway 111 and Portola Avenue, APN 627-222-054. Mr. Drell explained that the applicant was requesting a two-week continuance to November 17, 1998. Chairperson Campbell opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one. Chairperson Campbell left the public hearing open and asked for a motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, continuing PP/CUP 98-17 to November 17, 1998 by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. B. Case No. CUP 98-4 - CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY, Applicant (Continued from September 15 and October 6, 1998) Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart at 72-801 Highway 111 . 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 3, 1998 Mr. Drell indicated that the applicant was requesting a continuance to November 17, 1998. Issues involved whether or not the remodeled facility would generate more traffic than the existing facility and the nexus between that and the required street improvements that the Department of Public Works was requiring. There was debate amongst the experts and the applicant went out and did some actual counts comparing the Chevron Station with the USA Station at Fred Waring and Highway 1 1 1 , which is probably the busiest station in the whole city. In any case, the results of that analysis had not yet come back. That was the reason for the continuance. Chairperson Campbell noted that the public hearing was still open and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. There was no one and the public hearing was left open. Chairperson Campbell asked for a motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, continuing CUP 98-4 to November 17, 1998 by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Fernandez abstained). IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Case No. HDPP 98-2 - EDDIE AHMAD BABAI, Applicant (Continued from October 20, 1998) Per Planning Commission direction, request for adoption of a resolution approving a hillside development plan to allow grading of the site and construction of a single family home on five acres within the Hillside Planned Residential zone known as 47-075 Southcliff Road, APN 628-120-002. Chairperson Campbell noted that at the last meeting this case was approved 4-1 and staff was directed to prepare a resolution of approval. Mr. Drell informed commission that alternative colors had been provided which staff believed were more in keeping with the colors of the surrounding mountainside. (The colors were on display.) Chairperson Campbell noted that condition number seven referred to the color sample board. Mr. Drell indicated those colors were subject to approval by the Commission. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 6, 1998 wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public testimony was closed. She asked for commission comments. Commissioner Finerty stated that she agreed with staff's recommendation and moved for adoption of the resolution to deny the golf cart display request. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, approving the findings as presented by staff. Commissioner Beaty said he was in agreement but wondered if it would be permissible for the applicant to park the golf cart in a parking space. Mr. Drell said no but that the dealers had been told that if the golf cart was a licensed commuting vehicle under the golf cart program, then they could park it anywhere they wanted in a public parking space. Otherwise, they would be using the public space as a sales area. Chairperson Campbell called for the vote. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1898, denying CUP 98-15. Motion carried 5-0. C. Continued Case No. CUP 98-4 - CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart at 72-801 Highway 111 . Chairperson Campbell noted that there was a request for a continuance and asked if staff had any comments. Mr. Drell informed Commission that basically the applicant was requesting a continuance because they were taking issue with the traffic study which they feel is why the city is requiring them to do some street improvements. They have requested a two-week continuance. Since he thought it would take them a couple of weeks to do the analysis and then staff would need time to review it, he recommended the continuance be a month, to November 3, 1998. Chairperson Campbell asked if there would be a meeting that day. Mr. Drell noted that we usually have a meeting on election day. Commissioner Beaty asked if the extra two weeks had been proposed to the applicant. Mr. Drell said no, but he assumed that 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 6, 1998 the applicant was one of the people here who left after Chairperson Campbell noted that they were requesting a continuance and he said at that time that staff would be recommending a one month continuance, but he couldn't speak for someone who wasn't there. If the applicants in a hurry, they wouldn't have asked for a continuance. Chairperson Campbell noted that the public hearing was open and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION. There was no one. The public hearing was left open and Chairperson Campbell asked for a motion. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Beaty, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, continuing Case No. CUP 98-4 to November 3, 1998 by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Fernandez abstained). D. Case No. CUP 91-9 Amendment - OLIPHANT & LIZZA, Applicants Request for approval of an amendment to an existing conditional use permit modifying certain valet parking restrictions for the parking lot on the north side of Alessandro east of Portola Avenue and including 24 parking spaces within an adjacent parking lot (the Ace Hardware lot) for an existing 6,000 square foot restaurant at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Portola Avenue at 74-040 Highway 1 1 1 . Mr. Drell noted that if at the conclusion of the staff report the Commission wished to, and the city attorney could explain the justification, since there were issues of potential litigation involved in this case which have a certain bearing on the Commission's decision to a certain degree, he felt it would be inappropriate to discuss those issues in open session. If the Commission so wished, they could go into closed session to discuss those issues. He explained that the request was an amendment of a proposal that was submitted to the Commission in April-May which originally included a 1 ,000 square foot expansion of the Ruth's Chris restaurant and the modification and deletion of a lot of the valet parking requirements as well as the inclusion of the Ace Hardware parking lot to expand the parking available to the valet for the Ruth's Chris restaurant. As a result of some continued unresolved issues concerning potential purchase of some of the adjacent residential lots to 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 square feet and the property is zoned R-1 10,000 which prescribes a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet. It also prescribed a minimum lot width of 90 feet. The requested lot split proposed creation of an 82-foot wide lot. He discussed that with Mr. Billington last week and Mr. Billington concurred that the map could be amended to provide the minimum 90 feet of lot width. Mr. Smith showed the change on the display map. He stated that the findings for approval of the tentative map were outlined on pages two and three of the staff report. A lot split of this type is a Class 15 Categorical Exemption for purposes of CEQA. Staff recommended approval of the tract map subject to the conditions. Chairperson Campbell opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. A gentleman from the audience informed Commission that the engineer was not present and he didn't care to speak. Chairperson Campbell asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Campbell asked for commission comments. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Beaty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0. It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Beaty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1895, approving TPM 28984, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. D. Case No. CUP 98-4 - CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 2,900 square foot retail food mart at 72-801 Highway 111 . Mr. Alvarez explained that the project was located on the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Plaza Way. The property was currently operating as a fuel station which currently has some light automotive repair and a small cashier 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 area. The applicant, Chevron, wanted to demolish the existing building and replace it with a 2,900 square foot food mart. The plan included the addition of parking to accommodate the commercial retail use. The existing canopy, fuel dispensing islands and storage tanks would remain in the existing location. He explained that substantial modifications had been made to the elevations since the original application was submitted. ARC reviewed it and granted preliminary approval of the landscaping. The applicant was requesting an exception to a requirement which asked for a 30-foot buffer from the street line to the setback line. The applicant indicated that they were requesting a reduction down to 20 feet for their fuel trucks to have an adequate turn around area. ARC felt this was a minor exception and that the proposed landscaping would be sufficient to accommodate the intent of the ordinance. Mr. Alvarez noted that the Department of Public Works was requiring a six- foot right-of-way increase on Plaza Way to allow for a left-turn through lane to the mall and a right-turn which would help traffic flow in that location. The two existing ingress and egress points would remain in the same location. Staff recommended approval and indicated the project was a Class 3 Categorical Exemption for CEQA purposes. Chairperson Campbell asked what the hours of operation would be for the food mart. Mr. Alvarez deferred the question to the applicant. Chairperson Campbell opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. AL NORRIS, the Development Specialist for Chevron Products Company in La Habra, said he would like to give a brief history of this location. He explained that Chevron has operated a service station at this site for more than ten years. During that time they operated in an auto service bay format. The station was currently losing volume primarily due to its poor appearance and inefficient layout. Chevron was moving into the convenience store business nationwide and they have done enormous consumer research regarding customer buying habits for petroleum products. They came away with three major findings. One, where people have their car worked on no longer has any bearing on where they buy their gas. Two, today's motorists really demand gasoline dispensing equipment that accept credit cards and also customers would like the ability to buy convenient food items in a clean, well-lit environment. With those three thoughts Chevron designed its 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 newest retail outlet which they are proposing to build at this site. This would be one of the first to be built in Southern California with a capital cost to Chevron of about $900,000. In terms of benefits of reconstruction, they would like to approve the appearance of their facility and move into the convenience store business. They feel the improved appearance and associated increase in business would benefit everyone. Their customers, Palm Desert residents, the city and property owners in the immediate vicinity. Per the colored rendering, he felt their facility would blend in with the architectural style of the adjacent shopping center. They modified their standard architecture dramatically incorporating archways and tile along the base of the building and bumping out the corners of the building and the entry statement to give more definition. Additionally, he felt there was significant landscaping even with the variance pointed out. Approximately 28% of the property would be landscaped, providing an aesthetically pleasing environment. Of the conditions identified, Chevron supported and agreed with virtually all of them except for two, Public Works items six and seven. The requirement of widening Plaza Way and providing a six-foot sidewalk they felt was inappropriate. A nexus or cause and effect relationship did not exist between their project and this request. They were just replacing the building. There was no work being done to the fueling area whatsoever. Their experience, and traffic studies confirmed, that going from a service bay facility to a convenience store resulted in less traffic. It was really because of the nature of the business. Typically 85% of their store business came from the fueling islands, meaning customers who were already there and wanted to purchase some ancillary food items of some type versus an auto service bay which generated several trips in and of itself with people dropping off cars and coming back to pick them up. By the nature of the business typically there was less traffic generated by this. The dedication of sidewalk would render their far gasoline island really inoperable. They were talking about a six-foot sidewalk and a six-foot dedication along Plaza Way. Chevron engineering standards required a minimum of 18 feet between the curb island and the curb and gasoline island to allow for pass through, meaning that if there is a car at a fueling position, that someone could drive around and get to the forward pump and preserve traffic circulation. Regarding the drive approach which is also referenced in item seven, this drive approach is existing and not being disturbed by their project. The fueling area of 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 this station would remain intact and they were in fact intending to keep the station open while they build the new building. This would obviously inhibit their ability to operate the facility to change the size of the approach. Also, it would impact their transport path when the truck exits onto Plaza Way to go back out of the station. Lessening this approach would also impact transport's ability to maneuver that turn. They had no prior knowledge of this condition when they were going through their due diligence or discovery phase of this project. They inquired about dedication and none was revealed to them at that time. This just came up earlier in the week when they received staff's report on this. He said they have reviewed this matter and feel that there is no proportionality between what they are doing and what is being asked of them regarding these conditions and Chevron is asking for the Commission to overturn these conditions, recognizing that they are not applicable to their project and that the rough proportionality does not exist between their request and this condition. He asked for questions. Commissioner Jonathan indicated that the points discussed appeared to be cogent and he understood what Mr. Norris was saying. It seemed reasonable, but unless he was mistaken, they didn't have a representative from the Public Works Department present. If the Commission deemed it appropriate, he asked if Mr. Norris could live with a postponement of this matter to the next meeting when they could be present and he would have an opportunity to resolve the matter directly with staff before it came back to Commission. Mr. Norris said they would really rather not. They were anxious to get under construction as soon as possible and they would like to go ahead and get an approval tonight. He asked if Commissioner Jonathan was saying that wasn't possible. Commissioner Jonathan said that was possible, but he was just concerned because if staff put those conditions in, he was hesitant to take an opposing direction from staff without hearing from them and then making up his mind. Mr. Norris' other option was if the project were to be approved as is, he could appeal the matter to council and he could bring up the matter there. Commissioner Jonathan asked staff when this matter would go to council if there was an approval tonight. Mr. Smith said it would probably be the second meeting on October 22. 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 Mr. Norris asked if they were continued what their time line would be. Mr. Smith replied October 6, 1998. Commissioner Beaty asked if Planning staff had an opportunity to discuss these issues with Public Works. Mr. Alvarez said he did briefly with the City Engineer. He mentioned that the six-foot dedication along Plaza Way would not impact that existing planter. That was the extent of their discussion. He also indicated that it would be workable if they had a problem with the turnaround for the trucks and the size of the approach. Their concern was they wanted to get that approach as far away from Highway 1 1 1 to allow proper circulation. Mr. Norris noted that the plan showed that the transport as it swings around the outer edge of the canopy ended up at the far edge of that approach and shortening that would mean the transport vehicle would not be able to turn onto Plaza Way to get out of the site. Chairperson Campbell felt that area was a mess all the time on Plaza Way. Commissioner Beaty noted that the intent was to add that third lane for turning and he felt that was needed. Chairperson Campbell concurred. Commissioner Fernandez asked City Attorney Hargreaves if he had a conflict of interest since he was with Vons and asked if it would make a difference because of the mini-mart request being so close to Vons. Mr. Hargreaves replied that the determination would depend on the foreseeable impact this development would have on the Vons and if there was a foreseeable impact they would have to run it through an analysis depending upon how large it was and on whether it was a Fortune 500 Company, listed on the New York Stock Exchange, and a whole list of things they would have to use to estimate the likely impact. His recommendation would be if there was any question in Commissioner Fernandez's mind that there could be a perceivable impact, the prudent thing to do at this time would be to abstain and if this matter got continued, he could continue that analysis. Chairperson Campbell noted that the Chevron Station was located on the east side of Plaza Way and Vons was on the west side. Mr. Hargreaves said he couldn't comment on the commercial aspects of it. Commissioner Fernandez stated that he would abstain. 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 Commissioner Jonathan asked if there was an approval that the applicant was comfortable with if the matter would have to go to city council since it was only a conditional use permit. Mr. Smith said no, typically on a conditional use permit the action is final with the Commission unless appealed. Commissioner Jonathan noted that conceivably it could be worked out and they would be back before the Commission on October 6 and be completed with the approval process as opposed to the other alternative that he saw, which was take their chances and vote on it and in the event that they approved it as is and they were to appeal to council, then it wouldn't be before council until October 22. He asked if the applicant would object to a continuance if the Commission were so inclined. Mr. Norris said under that scenario, no. Chairperson Campbell asked what their hours of operation would be for the food mart. Mr. Norris replied 24 hours. Chairperson Campbell noted that no use was open 24 hours a day. Commissioner Beaty felt that the issue had to do with the sale of beer and wine. Chairperson Campbell asked for confirmation that they would be selling alcoholic beverages at this food mart. Mr. Norris confirmed that they intend to. Commissioner Beaty asked if there was a license already in place. Mr. Norris said he wasn't sure. Commissioner Beaty said he thought there was since he had seen it for sale. He indicated that the AM/PM was required to cease sales at midnight and he believed that the new Cam's Corner was allowed to go to 2:00 a.m. and he had been asked about that. Mr. Smith said that with respect to Cam's Corner it has the same hours as Lucky's adjacent to it and it was midnight for beer and wine. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the convenience store stayed open, but the beer and wine weren't sold, or the whole retail operation stopped. Mr. Smith stated that Lucky's closed at midnight and Cam's Corner 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 convenience store closed at midnight. Commissioner Beaty asked if AM/PM was open 24 hours. He thought they were at Portola. Mr. Norris said that when so directed, they have locking coolers for the beer and wine. The facility was still open. They just locked those coolers. Chairperson Campbell commented that a lot of the people going to the AM/PM at the Arco Station weren't just going there to buy gas. They just go to the food mart and that would mean a lot of extra traffic. Mr. Norris said that unfortunately AM/PM had a much better established name in this business and they were hoping to get to that point, but at this point their ratio was 1 5% true walk up or food purchases only; 85% were people who were there to buy gas. Chairperson Campbell indicated that toward the future they were looking for customers to just come in without buying gas. Mr. Norris said they hoped that would happen. With a service station business they had people dropping off cars and people picking them up and people running out during the day to get parts and come back and some delivering and then someone to pick up their car and then that person leaving. That was a lot of trip generation in connection with a service bay that had nothing to do with the fueling. There was a lot of traffic generated just by the service bays that would be gone. When they looked at things like widening the road and these improvements, when they have a traffic engineer and stuff that have been validated by an outside traffic engineer that they could produce in terms of lessening the number of trips, they found it hard (and they weren't doing anything with the fueling) to agree to conditions to widen roads and things like that. Chairperson Campbell asked for confirmation that Mr. Norris was in agreement to have the case continued to the next meeting. Mr. Norris said if it must be, yes. 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 Chairperson Campbell asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one. The public hearing was left open and Chairperson Campbell asked for a motion. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he would like to move for a continuance for two reasons. Number one to enable the applicant to have an opportunity to work directly with staff and resolve the issues brought up by the applicant and along with that to enable staff to have a representative from Public Works at the meeting. The other reason for a continuance was he would like to have the hours of operation defined and hopefully agreed to between staff and the applicant. He would move for a continuance to a time certain, October 6, 1998. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Beaty, to continue Case No. CUP 98-4 to October 6, 1998 by minute motion. Motion carried 3-0-1 (Commissioner Fernandez abstained). E. Case No. CUP 98-11 - NEXTEL COMMUNICATION INC., Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the installation of a 60-foot high wireless communication tower at 75-050 Merle Drive. Mr. Alvarez explained that the property is located in the Service Industrial District at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Merle Drive. The site was occupied by Great American Mini Storage. The applicant, Nextel, wished to install a 60-foot high wireless communication tower at the north end of the property, a 60 feet wide by 140 feet long vacant piece of property. The tower would sit 1 68 feet from Cook Street face of curb. The applicant intends to plant two natural palm trees four feet from the proposed tower at heights of 40 and 50 feet. The applicant was also proposing a unique technique which has not been used in the desert which includes a simulated palm tree trunk and the addition of artificial palm tree fronds at the top of the tower. The antennas were 15 and would be shaped in a triangular form as illustrated in the exhibits. He noted Exhibit A was in front of the Commission which showed a simulated photograph of the site and the palm trees at the proposed location. The project met all the zoning ordinance requirements for height, 16 CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Martin Alvarez, Assistant Planner FROM: Joseph S. Gaugush, Engineering Manager SUBJECT: CUP 98-4 — CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY DATE: December 1, 1998 Attached for distribution to the Planning Commission is our response to the November 24, 1998, Level of Service analysis prepared by KHR Associates for the above-referenced project. As indicated in our response, we recommend that Condition No. 6 be implemented (as modified) for this project. The author of the response, Mr. Mark Greenwood, will be present at tonight's Planning Commission to discuss the issues as may be necessary. JOSEPH S. GAUGUSH, P.E. JSG/ms cc: Richard J. Folkers Phil Drell Mark Greenwood CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: JOSEPH S. GAUGUSH, ENGINEERING MANAGER FROM: MARK GREENWOOD, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER SUBJECT: LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS FOR CHEVRON SERVICE STATION (CUP 98-4) DATE: November 30, 1998 The November 24, 1998 Level of Service Analysis by KHR Associates has been reviewed, per your request. The following comments are the result of that review and additional analysis of the situation. In the TRAFFIC COUNTS section of the report, it is stated that 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. represents worst case conditions. Other recent traffic studies in this area, and our own observations, have found that the 11:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M. weekday and weekend periods can both experience higher traffic volumes than the weekday P.M. peak therefore, the analysis should not be considered to represent the worst case. It is noted that Mr. Kawamura personally performed a portion of the data collection, yet again failed to contact city staff regarding requirements, methods and procedures for completing traffic studies in the City of Palm Desert. Few would dispute that the City is allowed to determine study methodologies, etc., • within the confines of acceptable engineering practice. As you know, our policy has been to establish the framework for traffic studies in consultation with applicants and their engineers however, in this case the engineer has prepared a series of evaluations while declining our offer to meet and confer on the issues. The Public Works Department requires all traffic studies involving signalized intersections to utilize the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology to analyze capacity and level-of- service. The Intersection Capacity Utilization method, which was used by KHR Associates for this study, is not appropriate for the detailed analysis required in this case. Since the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way is within the jurisdiction of Caltrans, it is recommended that this study be referred for their review. Our analysis, using HCM methodology, found that by using KHR Associates trip distribution and existing traffic volumes, the northbound leg of the intersection of Plaza Way and Highway 111 will suffer a degradation in level of service from LOS "C" to LOS "D" due exclusively to project traffic. The argument that this project will increase intersection traffic by only 1.25% does not address our concern, which is increased traffic on the northbound approach only. Again using KHR Associates data, a 15% increase in northbound traffic can be expected, which should be considered as a significant impact to level of service. The HCM analysis summaries, with notations, are attached. The report indicates that LOS "D" is an accepted level of service on major streets and highways. The City of Palm Desert General Plan states that our goal is to maintain LOS "C". The report suggests that split-phase operation be implemented at the Highway 111 and Plaza Way signal, while acknowledging that delay will be increased on Highway 111. The report then goes on to say that overall operation would be improved, while providing no basis for this finding. Each of the split-phase signals on Highway 111 (Desert Crossing, Town Center Way and Portola Avenue) operate poorly within the existing coordinated system. In fact we are working to remove all split-phasing on Highway 111, through the CVAG Valley-wide Signal Synchronization Project. There is little reason to expect adequate operation with an additional split-phased signal on Highway 111. Recommendations to impact delay and congestion on Highway 111 must be forwarded to Caltrans for their review, prior to our consideration of such a proposal. To provide a brief overview of our knowledge of the potential traffic impacts from this project: 1. Initial evaluation of the proposed project by the Public Works Department indicated that the project would increase traffic on Plaza Way at Highway 111, resulting in the potential to degrade level of service on Plaza Way. 2. KHR Associates compared the existing use with a use similar to the proposed project (USA Gasoline) and found that the gas station with convenience store generated 50% more traffic per fueling position than the gas station with service bays. Based on data provided by the engineer, the project can be expected to increase traffic from the site by 50%. This study was performed at the suggestion of the applicant and at a site chosen by the applicant. 3. Evaluation of increased traffic due to the project, using trip distributions by KHR • Associates and the HCM methodology, indicate significant impact to northbound traffic on Plaza Way. Northbound traffic volumes on Plaza Way can be expected to increase by 15%, resulting in a degradation in level of service from LOS "C" to LOS "D". This evaluation is based on data provided by the applicant. 4. No practical alternatives to mitigate the impacts of the project have been presented. After review of all of the information to date, a legitimate concern remains regarding potential impacts caused by the project. It is recommended that Public Works Condition No. 6 be implemented (as modified) with approval of the project. MARK GREENWOOD, P.E. cc: File HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY November 30. 1998 Timings Summary Cycle Length: 120 Natural Cycle: 120 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated -1 ICIULTJIgt EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT SBT Left Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Phase Number 5 2 1 6 8 4 Phase Lagging? Lead Lag Lead Lag Can Lead or Lag? Maximum Split (s) 15 52 32 69 36 36 Maximum Split (%) 13% 43% 27% 58% 30% 30% Minimum Split (s) 8 10 8 10 10 10 Yellow Time (s) 5 5 5 5 5 5 Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Splits and Phases: HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY 1 - 2 4, 4 32 52 36 15 69 36 -�' 5 6 T '8 Volume Worksheet , U LJ (- L J LJ H 0 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Volume (vph) 132 1120 96 206 995 101 60 46 167 108 68 113 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 147 1244 107 229 1106 112 67 51 186 120 76 126 Lane Util. Factor 1.03 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 Lane Group Flow (vph) 151 1486 0 229 1340 0 67 237 0 102 114 126 Svnchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 1 \i(i ST I 14 CotINT101.1 HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY November 30. 1998 Lane and Saturated Flow Worksheet ' -4 41 4-' it- T Li I Lid U EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lanes 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Shared Lane? No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes No Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Bus Stops (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Parking (#/hr) Frt Protected 0.988 0.986 0.882 0.850 FIt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.987 Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 5521 1770 5510 1770 1635 3539 1839 1583 Frt Perrn. 0.988 0.986 0.878 0.850 Flt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.623 0.333 0.791 Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 5521 1770 5510 1160 1635 1241 1473 1583 Area Type: Other Capacity and Level of Service Analysis Summary l'J -� L i Ej IT..� W, y J Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Perm or Prot? Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Adj Flow (vph) 151 1486 229 1340 67 237 102 114 126 Prot. Satd Flow 3539 5521 1770 5510 Perm. Satd Flow 1160 1635 1241 1473 1583 Green Ratio 0.10 0.41 0.24 0.55 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 354 2254 428 3030 319 450 341 405 435 V/C Ratio 0.43 0.66 0.54 0.44 0.21 0.53 0.30 0.28 0.29 Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, d1 38.6 21.8 30.1 12.2 25.4 28.0 26.1 26.0 26.0 Platoon Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Incr. Delay, d2 0.5 0.5 1.0 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.1 Webster's Delay 33.3 19.1 26.6 10.4 21.7 24.7 22.3 22.2 22.2 LOS D C D B C C C C C imer Cycle Length: 120 Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.54 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.59 t " Intersection Webster Delay: 17.8 rle ••� Intersection LOS: C Syncluo 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 2 E � scii4(, ( iQI1-1& HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY November 30. 1998 Queue Lengths, and Potential Blocking Problems Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Volume 151 1486 229 1340 67 237 102 114 126 Queue Length 50% (ft) 35 206 107 154 28 110 22 49 55 Queue Length 95% (ft) 105 445 288 293 97 295 69 148 160 Link Length (ft) 105 105 907 907 532 532 143 143 143 of Link Used 100% 424% 32% 32% 18% 55% 48% 103% 112% Blocks Upstream? Yes Storage Length (ft) % of Storage Used Fills Storage? % of Turning Storage Blocks Turning Storage? • Synchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 3 co4000,00 �CcSri � • Delay, Stop, and Fuel Summary November 30. 1998 Intersection: HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY Approach EB WB NB SB Total Volume (vph) 1348 1302 273 289 3212 Travel Distance (veh-mi/hr) 47.2 243.4 31.6 12.2 666.6 Webster Signal Delay (veh-hr/hr) 10.1 6.2 2.4 2.3 21.0 • Stops (vph) 967 786 209 209 2171 Fuel Used (gal) 28 19 4 3 54 Synchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 4 E,*( n HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY November 30. 1998 Timings Summary Cycle Length: 120 Natural Cycle: 120 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Etj EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT SBT Left Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Phase Number 5 2 1 6 8 4 Phase Lagging? Lead Lag Lead Lag Can Lead or Lag? Maximum Split (s) 15 52 32 69 36 36 Maximum Split (%) 13% 43% 27% 58% 30% 30% Minimum Split (s) 8 10 8 10 10 10 Yellow Time (s) 5 5 5 5 5 5 Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Splits and Phases: HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY 411 -3 2 ,j, 4 32 52 36 15 69 36 -t15 4- 6 T Volume Worksheet I� ������ bid Ei [Li, �� [t Ljj EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Volume (vph) 132 1120 112 222 995 101 76 54 183 108 76 113 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow(vph) 147 1244 124 247 1106 112 84 60 203 120 84 126 Lane Util. Factor 1.03 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 Lane Group Flow(vph) 151 1504 0 247 1340 0 84 263 0 98 126 126 Synchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page I %I \ Vf4Said.r • HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAr November 30. 1998 Lane and Saturated Flow Worksheet '-'' �-1 llJ El U 0 y U It] EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lanes 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Shared Lane? No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes No Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Bus Stops (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Parking (#/hr) Frt Protected 0.986 0.986 0.884 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.987 Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 5510 1770 5510 1770 1639 3539 1839 1583 Frt Perm. 0.986 0.986 0.880 0.850 Flt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.596 0.282 0.701 Said. Flow (perm) 3539 5510 1770 5510 1110 1639 1051 1306 1583 Area Type: Other Capacity and Level of Service Analysis Summary Et -, LJ U [ Lin LltI lk l 4-' Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Perm or Prot? Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Adj Flow(vph) 151 1504 247 1340 84 263 98 126 126 Prot. Satd Flow 3539 5510 1770 5510 Perm. Satd Flow 1110 1639 1051 1306 1583 Green Ratio 0.10 0.41 0.24 0.55 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 354 2250 428 3030 305 451 289 359 435 V/C Ratio 0.43 0.67 0.58 0.44 0.28 0.58 0.34 0.35 0.29 Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay. d1 38.6 21.9 30.5 12.2 25.9 28.5 26.4 26.5 26.0 Platoon Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Incr. Delay, d2 0.5 0.5 1.4 0.1 0.1 1.4 0.3 0.3 0.1 Webster's Delay 33.3 19.2 27.3 10.4 22.2 25.7 22.7 22.8 22.2 LOS D C D B C D C C C Cycle Length: 120 Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.57 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.62 F"m" Intersection Webster Delay: 18.1 411111bmi•imb Intersection LOS: C 11116 . Svnchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 2 • HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY November 30. 1998 Queue Lengths,and Potential Blocking Problems Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Volume 151 1504 247 1340 84 263 98 126 126 Queue Length 50% (ft) 38 226 124 163 38 131 22 59 57 Queue Length 95% (ft) 105 458 314 299 118 329 68 166 160 Link Length (ft) 105 105 907 907 532 532 143 143 143 % of Link Used 100% 436% 35% 33% 22% 62% 48% 116% 112% Blocks Upstream? Yes Storage Length (ft) % of Storage Used Fills Storage? % of Turning Storage Blocks Turning Storage? • • Synchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 3 CA C.o NET Delay, Stop, and Fuel Summary November 30. 1998 Intersection: HIGHWAY 111 & PLAZA WAY Approach EB WB NB SB Total Volume (vph) 1364 1318 313 297 3292 Travel Distance (veh-mi/hr) 47.8 246.4 36.3 12.5 679.1 Webster Signal Delay (veh-hr/hr) 10.3 6.4 2.8 2.4 21.9 Stops (vph) 1032 785 248 221 2286 Fuel Used (gal) 29 19 4 3 55 Synchro 3 Report C:\SYNCHRO3\DATA\PALMDSRT.SY5 Page 4 \1 Vka.oseer 11/L:J/1770 LU.U1 7Y 7-l;JO-OYYY r\r4C HJJUl,11-1 I CJ r HUC U1 ► KHR ASSOCIATES Coneuitinq Engineers -Architects• Planners November 24, 1998 Mr. Joseph Gaugush, Engineering Manager City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 SUBJECT: RESULTS OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS FOR HIGHWAY 111/PLAZA WAY, IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA—CASE NO.C.U.P.98-4(SENT VIA FAX) Dear Mr. Gaugush: The information contained herein has been prepared at the request of Chevron Products Company to document existing and projected levels of service at the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way, in the City of Palm Desert, California. INTERSECTION DESCRIPTION The intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way is signalized for 5 phases of traffic movement Highway 111 features 3 through lanes in each (westbound and eastbound) direction. The westbound approach leg also features a separate left turn lane. The eastbound approach leg features dual left turn lanes. Plaza Way features 1 through lane and 1 left turn lane on the northbound approach leg, and 1 right turn lane, 1 left turn lane, and a shared through/left turn lane on the southbound approach leg. TRAFFIC COUNTS On Friday, November 20, 1998, peak hour traffic turn movement counts were taken at the subject intersection between 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. The peak hour occurred between 5:00 and 6:00 P.M. This period of time represents the worst case situation with respect to traffic conditions along Highway 111 and at the subject intersection. A summary of the traffic counts is attached herewith. Weather conditions at the time of the counts were sunny, very little wind, and clear. There were no unusual traffic conditions, accidents, or ongoing special events in the vicinity of intersection. EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE The level of service (LOS) of a roadway segment or an intersection is a qualitatively defined measure of prevailing traffic, design, and operational conditions. The LOS, denoted alphabetically from "A"to "F," best to worst, is an evaluation of the degree of congestion, roadway design constraints, delay, accident potential, and driver discomfort experienced during a given period of time-typically during the peak hour or 2355 Maln Street-Suite 120 (949)756-6440 Irvine, California 92614 FAX(949)756-6444 aa •-•- J. nl lrt r-tJJUI�iHIGJ rf-1uG uc Mr.Joseph Gaugush 1124198 Page 2 of 4 on a daily basis. While LOS "A" is the most desirable operational state for a roadway segment or intersection, LOS "C" is considered a benchmark for planning purposes. In more urbanized areas, LOS `D" is an accepted condition for peak hours of vehicular travel on major streets and highways. The LOS may be quantitatively calculated by a number of methods, including the Highway Capacity Method (HCM) and the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method. Regardless ofmethod,the a LOS calculation generally compares traffic volumes with the physical and operational capacity of a roadway section or intersection to carry traffic demands placed upon it. Table I lists typical LOS definitions for intersections. TABLE Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Volume-to-Capacity Ratios Level of V/C Service Ratio Definitions A <0.60 Uncongested operation; all vehicles clear in a single signal cycle. 8 <0.70 light congestion; occasional backup on critical approaches. C <0.80 Some congestion on approaches,but intersection functional. D <0.90 Traffic required to wait through more than one cycle during short peaks.However,no long-lasting queues result. E <1.00 Severe congestion with some long-lasting queues on critical approaches. Blockage of intersection may occur if traffic signal does not provide for protected left turn movements. F >1.00 Total breakdown with"stop-and-go"operation. Back-up may occur at nearby intersections. SOURCE:Highway Capacity Manual,1991 Based on the traffic count data, and applying the ICU standard traffic engineering procedures for determining the level of service (LOS) at signalized intersections, the existing P.M. peak hour LOS for the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way is calculated to be "C' (see attached LOS calculation sheet). This LOS is acceptable for urban traffic conditions at signalized intersections. 111 AU.U1 JYJ fJU UYY-v nr1l F1JJl1.a.F1 I .a I-Fi.L UJ Mr.Joseph 0sugush 11f24438 Page 3of4 TRIP GENERATION As previously documented in KHh Associates' �� October 29,positions (VFP), and each 8 letter to you, the existing Chevron service station generates 12.91 trip ends during the P.M. peak hour (or a total of 155 vehicles entering and exiting). Also, as documented in the October 29, 1998 letter, the existing USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive has 10 vehicle fueling positions (VFP), and generates 19.60 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. peaK hour (or a total of 196 vehicles entering and exiting). PROJECTED LEVEL OF SERVICE In order to determine the 'Worst case scenario" traffic impacts associated with the proposed Chevron service station project, the following assumptions were made: 1) The conversion of the service bays at the Chevron service station to a convenience store will mutt in increased traffic generation. (In reality, case studies have shown that such a"conversion of use" may not result in any increase in traffic.) 2) The amount of increase per vehicle fueling position will be comparable to the characteristics exhibited at the existing USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive (i.e., 19.60 trip ends per VFP). (In reality, a discount gas station generates more traffic per VFP than major oil company service stations of similar size.) 3) The existing Chevron service station generates 12.91 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. peak hour(or 155 trip ends total). 4) The proposed project could generate 235 trip ends total (i.e., 12 VFPs times 19.60 trip ends per VFP)_ 5) The net increase in traffic during the P.M. peak hour will be 80 trip ends (i.e., 235 projected minus 155 existing). 6) All of the projected increase in traffic will enter and exit the Chevron site via the Highway 111/Plaza Way intersection, with 50% of the new traffic generated (i.e., 40 trip ends) entering and 50% of the new traffic generated (i.e., 40 trip ends) exiting, during the P.M. peak hour. (In reality, a significant number of trips will enter and/or exit through the shopping center or to the south via Plaza Way). Under the above worst case scenario, the ICU for the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way does increase with the additional traffic during the P.M. peak hour. However,the LOS is projected to remain at"C"(see attached LOS calculation sheet). --• ---- -- -- .� •„• JJlM11M I LJ f1"IUC U' Mr.Joseph Gaugush 1124198 Page 4 of 4 SIGNIFICANCE OF TRAFFIC INCREASES On November 20, 1998, a total of 3,212 vehicles entered and exited the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way during the P.M. peak hour. Under the worst case scenario,the proposed Chevron service station will add 80 trip ends(or 40 vehicles)to (or 125% increase over the existing volume). With such a minute the intersectiona is imperceptible. and anydeterioration in LOS pe�pti increase, the LOS does not change, Therefore, improveme nts to Plaza Way or the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Chevronprojectand le on the based so proposed Way do not appear warranted solely its related traffic impacts. In fact, based on current and projected traffic volumes, a comfortable reserve of capacity must be exhausted before the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way experiences a significant deterioration in the LOS. MITIGATING TRAFFIC CONGESTION Despite an acceptable LOS,traffic congestion can occur at the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way (when traffic is backed-up and unable to get through the intersection in one cycle of the traffic signal operation). This congestion may be attributable to the lack of separate left turn phasing for north-south (Plaza Way) traffic. Separate left turning phasing is not possible due to the existence of a shared left- through lane for the southbound approach leg. Therefore, consideration should be given to a split-phase operation for Plaza Way traffic. This will add some delay to Highway 111 traffic, but significantly improve overall traffic conditions at the subject intersection. The improvements can be made at relatively minor cost IN CLOSING I hope that you find the above information useful, along with findings presented in the October 14, 1998 letter to you. If possible, please provide your comments to Mr. Al Norris at Chevron Products Company, and to Ms. April Smith, at Service Station Services, soon as possible, as the subject project is scheduled to be heard at an upcoming City Planning Commission hearing. If there are any questions regarding this analysis, please contact me directly, at your convenience. Sincerely yours, okoFESS/0 tee K A# ames H. ura, P.E. President N o. Expiration: 09/30/99 cc Al Norris,Chevron Products company Jl IPA F E 1� St nrtl April Sh.Service Station Services F 0 F C A��E 0� / Marsh Tanner \ i CO Q.1 o O � NaNO1 ii ii E il ii n oOtOo�fu�YrU^if O Fn mM F<- c00 ,^- +fir) oa pv� er � � � O r Ou aOr• W O , h eo ? ~ 1— 1- F- !— F 2 p • 4C ,... O 0 pEfe el LL N � Zir oQ 0 '; � 44VNMO NNAN in cpNVn r ¢ 03 3 = M1- g mNV9 � e- M OOre- , NN N = OD G (n , � :I" gFlNgAg � pEm � N do T ne mt. O m � N IC 7 O F. �. F N CV N c7 OI J f > >, Q e� Q 1 N H H F- Qaa I- 3 = t0 Qi y� 00 Q► = o Q pp t0 r I� .- a._ _ m ul OD CO Q = 01 m P rl [jj o9 = m- CONem N N N ONNN � NcDNN !, (�} r- CVNN �. wN �`7NN OWi = a a � W _ 2 MW - o =8 .o c z �p Q� � } O tD aDto ((p� N m O Ne- m- Ne- m- m- m- m go r 0 � r � � tip � yQ iete MMNN sP ' Ne- e- Ne- e- e- a- rf 7 m c a '- " 10 rg wo 0, re F (N r Zv ( W ' a(N - NRN + OfN - i. gg NNN � Z ' W ' ' 4� gg 15 I Q a "�Nt cV t�f 5 _ Qp cA a u t " 3 r. l " 1g oocv , � NNNN c; NN � P NSN'1 !- = � Nc� c"Dvi3 W C7c�7 � M �Nsf CO � O `�' i C7 � M Q r = - e- = p GZ g 0� U x vi = a M 2 2 2M22222 22 � g 22m2 Lii a da a aaddaaa as G. aaa '. O0 > > G.WOOCL Ho 6 �' a � oaomoa 1,. ....., Igt4 ; iii 5 2222m222 �' � � � � aa. aa�, g a ...1C? ? _ _461 4_4_41ininuiii _ 44444i4, H4i hw_iia IOaislii , , 11/LJ/1JJU 1V.UI JYJ IJU UYYY nry[ HJJUl..LH 1 co 1-Hl7C CI KHR ASSOCIATES INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS Count Date: 11/20/98 KHR Code: Highway 111-Plaza.AS Location: City of Palm Desert, CA Input By: T. Norton North-South Street: Plaza War- 1 Phase County: Riverside East-West Street: Highway 111 -4 Phase Peak Hour 5:00 to 8:00 P.M. Comments: Friday P.M. Peak Hour, Optional Left/Thru Lane Treated as 1/2 Lane for Each Movement Capacity of Opposing Left Turn Lanes for 1 Phase Reduced to 1/2 of Capacity for Protected Left Turns or Split Phase Peak Hour VolumeVolume/Capaci Ratio Didion Number Capacity Existing Existing of Lane of (VehMr) Existing Plus Edsting Plus Travel Movement Lanes On Green ' ' . M - • : " Left Turn 1 800 60 76 0.075 0.095 Northbound Through 1 1800 46 54 0.133 0.148 ` Right Tum - - 167 183 - - Left Turn" 1.5 1200 108 108 0.090 0.090 • Southbound Through" 0.5 800 68 76 0.085 0.095 Right Tum 1 1600 113 113 0.071 0.071 i Left Turn 2 3200 132 132 0.041 0.041 Eastbound Through 3 4800 1120 1120 0.253 0.257 Right Tum - 96 112 - - Left Turn 1 1800 206 222 0.129 0.139 • Westbound Through 3 4800 995 995 0228 0228 Right Turn - - 101 101 - - ICU Plus Lost Time Factor of.10 0.705 Existing Level of Service C ICU Plus Lost Time Factor of.10 0.734 Existing Plus Project Level of Service C • Denotes Critical Movement " Denotes Shared Lane Nov-25-98 11 :06A SERVICE STATION SERVICES 714 E" 0812 P_02 Post-fr Fax 5 Note .^e7 'D•k r r l�, ' ' nom ca `��KHR ABSOCIATII� �'Dvp` SSc' Y' 'l consWtlng Engineers-Architect*•Planners 91"`" s ` /_ November 24. 1998 Mr. Joseph Gaugush, Engineering Manager City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 SUBJECT:RESULTS OF INTERSEC iON LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS FOR HIGHWAY 111IPLAZA WAY,IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALFORNIA—CASE NO.C.UP.98 (SENT VIA FAX) Dear Mr. Gaugush: The information contained herein has been prepared at the request of Chevron Products Company to document existing and projected levels of service at the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way, in the City of Palm Desert, California. INTERSECTION DESCRIPTION The intersection of Highway 111 and Plana Way is signalized for 5 phases of traffic movement Highway 111 features 3 through lanes in each(westbound and eastbound) direction. The wound approach leg also features a separate left turn lane. The eastbound approach leg features dual left turn lanes. Plaza Way features 1 through lane and 1 left turn lane on the northbound approach leg, and 1 right turn lane, 1 left turn lane, and a shared through/left turn lane on the southbound approach leg. TRAFF C trQVNTS On Friday, November 20, 1998, peak hour traffic turn movement counts were taken at the subject intersection between 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. The peak hour occurred between 5:00 and 6:00 PM.This period of time represents the worst case situation with respect to traffic conditions along Highway 111 and at the subject intersection_ A summary of the traffic counts is attached herewith. Weather oondttions at the time of the counts were sunny. very little wind, and clear. There were no unusual traffic conditions, accidents, or ongoing special events in the vicinity of intersection. EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE The ktvei of service (LOS) of a roadway segment or an intersection is a qualitatively defined measure of prevailing traffic, design, and operational conditions. The LOS, denoted alphabetically from "A" to "F," best to worst, is an evaluation of the degree of congestion, roadway design constraints, delay, accident potential, and driver discomfort experienced during a given period of time-typically during the peak hour or 2355 Main Street-Suite 120 (949)756-6440 Irvine.California 92614 FAX(94e)73A-6444 No4-25-98 11 :O6A SERVICE STATION SERVICES 714 F"� 0812 P .O3 • Mr.Joseph Grugush 11,ZN88 Pege2d4 on a daily basis. While LOS 'A" Is the most desirable operational state for a roadway segment or intersection, LOS"C" is considered a benchmark for planning purposes. In more urbanized areas, LOS "D" is an accepted condition for peak hours of vehicular travel on major streets and highways. The LOS may be quantitatively calculated by a number of methods, including the Highway Capacity Method (HCM) and the Intersection Capacity utilization (ICU) method. Regardless of the method, a LOS calculation generally compares traffic volumes with the physical and operational capacity of a roadway section or intersection to carry traffic demands placed upon it. Table I lists typical LOS definitions for intersections. TABLE I Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Volume-to-Capacity Ratios Level of WC Sirvici 13IR� pgflr A 41.60 Uncongestsd operation: 11I vsnicies clear in a single signal cycle. _0.70 Light congestion;occasional backup on critical approaches. C <0.110 Some congestion on approaches,but intersection functional 0 <0.90 Traffic required to wait through more than one cycle during spurt peaks.However,no long-lasting queues result, E <1.00 severe congestion with some long-lasting queues on critical approaches.Blockage of intersection may occur If traffic signal does not provide for protected left turn movements. F >t_00 Total breakdown with"atop-and-go"operation.Back-up may occur at nearby Intersections. 80(1010E:Paghway Capacity Manual.liii Based on the traffic count data, and applying the ICU standard traffic engineering procedures for determining the level of service (LOS) at signalized intersections, the existing P.M. peak hour LOS for the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way is calculated to be"CP (see attached LOS calculation sheet). This I OS is acceptable for urban traffic conditions at signalized intersections. Nov-25-98 11 :06A SERVIr'F STATION SERVICES 714 i 0812 P .04 ... ...•...v vv. . •.•.. .-..•awe.. �..i rr'c vJ Mr.Joseph Gaupush 11R4P$ Page 3 of 4 TRIP GENERATION As previously documented in KHR Associates' October 29, 1998 letter to you, the existing Chevron service station has 12 vehicle fueling positions (VFP), and each generates 12.91 trip ends during the P M. peak hour (or a total of 155 vehicles entering and exiting). Also, as documented in the October 29, 1998 letter,the existing USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive has 10 vehicle fueling positions (VFP), and generates 19.60 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. peak hour (or a total of 196 vehicles entering and exiting). PROJECTED LEVEL OF SERVICE In order to determine the 'worst case scenario` traffic impacts associated with the proposed Chevron service station project, the following assumptions were made: 1) The conversion of the service bays at the Chevron service station to a convenience store will result in increased traffic generation. (In reality, case studies have shown that such a'conversion of use'may not result in any increase in traffic.) 2) The amount of increase per vehicle fueling position will be comparable to the characteristics exhibited at the existing USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive (i.e., 19.60 trip ends per VFP). (In reality, a discount gas station generates more traffic per VFP than major oil company service stations of similar size.) 3) The existing Chevron service station generates 12.91 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. peak hour(or 155 trip ends total). 4) The proposed project could generate 235 trip ends total (i.e., 12 VFPs times 19.60 trip ends per VFP). 5) The net increase in traffic during the P M. peak hour will be 80 trip ends (i.e., 235 projected minus 155 existing). 6) All of the projected increase in traffic will enter and exit the Chevron site via the Highway 111/Plaza Way intersection, with 50% of the new traffic generated (i.e., 40 trip ends) entering and 50% of the new traffic generated (i.e., 40 trip ends) exiting, during the P_M_ peak hour. (In realty, a significant number of trips will enter and/or exit through the shopping center or to the south via Plaza Way). Under the above worst case scenario, the ICU for the Intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way does increase with the additional traffic during the P.M. peak hour. However,the LOS is projected to remain at"C"(see attached LOS calculation sheet). Nov-25-98 11 :06A SERVICE STATION SERVICES 714 0812 P_05 rant 114 Mr.Joseph Geugtah 11124/98 Page 4 of 4 SIGNIFICANCE OF TRAFFIC CREASES On November 20, 1998, a total of 3,212 vehicles entered and exited the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way during the P.M. peak hour. Under the worst case scenario, the proposed Chevron service station will add 80 trip ends(or 40 vehicles)to the intersection (or a 1.25% increase over the existing volume). With such a minute increase, the LOS does not change, and any deterioration in LOS Is Imperceptible. Therefore, improvements to Plaza Way or the Intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way do not appear warranted based solely on the proposed Chevron project and its related traffic impacts. In fact, based on current and projected traffic volume*, a comfortable reserve of capacity must be exhausted before the intersection of Highway l9 Y 111 and Plaza Way experiences a significant deterioration in the LOS. MfTIGATING TRAFFIC 02_NGESTIO Despite an acceptable LOS, traffic congestion can occur at the intersection at Highway 111 and Plaza Way (when traffic Is baked-up and unable to get through the intersection in one cycle of the traffic signal operation). This congestion may be attributable to the lade of separate left turn phasing for north-south (Plaza Way)traffic. Separate left turning phasing is not possible due to the existence of a shared left- through lane for the eouthbound approach leg. Therefore, consideration should be given to a splits operation for Plaza Way traffic. This will add some delay to Highway 111 traffic, but significantly improve overall traffic conditions at the Subject intersection. The Improvements can be made at relatively minor cost. IN CLOSING I hope that you find the above information useful, along with findings presented in the October 14, 1998 letter to you If possible, please provide your comments to Mr. Al Norris at Chevron Products Company, and to Ms. April Smith, at Service Station Services, soon as possible, as the subject project is scheduled to be heard at an upcoming City Planning Commission hearing- If there are any questions regarding this analysis, please contact me directly, at your convenience. Sincerely yours. Q40FESSIQ'A • KAif l IC -47amen H. ura, P.E. • President N o r Etpmsoc co/3U/19 cC Al Nan*COMM PMCksuts Company sr rRA f F Apra SmiM,Semite Metal SeMces �r Marsh Tanner OF CA Ci E Z Nov-25-98 11 :06A SERVICE STATION SERVICES 714 ��6 0812 - - - ..... - P.06 PROJECT: CHEVRON-PALM DESERT COUNT PERIOD: 4:00PM TO 8:00PM LOCATION: HIGHWAY 111/PLAZA WAY FIELD COUNTRY: 3.KAWAMURA COUNT DATE: 11/20/98 T.NORTON INPUT BY: S.KAWAMURA swinerra HIGHWAY 111 -EASTgp(/ND HIGHWAY 111 .WESTBOUND *+.r0~4 RIGHT THRU LEFT , RIGHT THRU LEFT TOTAL 4:00PM-4:18PM' 22 210 34 26 173 41 506 413136144:3oPM 15 187 28 18 147 38 412 4:30P614:40PM 18 ' 191 16 31 206 40 502 4:411PY4:11016M 12 228 38 25 233 48 582 8:901,81.$:15PM 21 237 35 16 212 45 569 6:15PM4:30PM_- 22 269 26 25 225 57 644 5:30PM4:41PM 28 254-1 29 w 28 ._..257 - 38 - 864 ' 6:4516M4:00PM 25 310 42 29 301 66 773 TOTALS _ 1i••63 ISi6 246 201 1754 372 4462 PLAZA WAY-NORTHBOUND PLAZA V•AY-SOUTHBOUND -1 RIGHT THRU LeTT RIGHT ^ THRU LEFT TOTAL a:00PM-4:1$PM' 31 ' 21 21 20 18 34 14S 4:15P1114:30PM 23 13 19 21 18 22 119 4b:30PMy1:45PM ' 29 5 15 24 12 22 4- PM.lZ:OOPM 58 14107 S:OOPYi:1SPM 32 10 / 20 1 23 34 1 B8 -111sPM.6aOPoi 48 _ 29 20 38 138 9 1S 36 20 22 150 ^ 5:30PM.4:46PM 35 13 16 21 _ 7 25 117 45:46PM-5:40PM 52 14 _ 18 T 27 21 26 157 TOTALS 311 ea 136 1117 1370 10!! PEAK HOUR HIGHWAY 111 -EASTBOUND HIGHWAY 111 -WA_ RIGHT TIMtU LEFT RK1MTr� ='OOPM4<:15pN! 21 - TMRU LEFT TOTAL 237 35 _ 19 21? 45 589 5:1aPM�:30PM. 22 289 26 25 225 57 844 6:30PMS4:41IPM 28 284 29 28 _ 257 38 —1 884 5:45131114:00PM 26 310 42 29 301 773 TOTALS PO tin in101 395 " 206 2680 PLAZA WAY-NORTHBOUND PLAZA WAY-SOUTH BOUND_, RIGHT THRU LEFT ' RIGHT THRU LEFT TOTAL 5:00P31-6:181281 32 10 11 29 20 38 135 5:15P14.5:301314 48 9 15 38 20 22 150 6:30PM-a:45PM 35. 13 18 21 7 25 i;46PMd:00PM' 52 14 18 27 117 4 21 25 1 S7 TOTALS 167 46 10 113 68 108 _ 562 Nov-25-98 11 :O7A SERVICE STATION SERVICES 714 "5 0812 P. 07 • __ _____... __ __ „ , .. ,-- r.rir, HJJUI.ym i t PAGE ©6 —. KHR ASSOCIATES INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS Count Date 11/20l98 KHR Code: Highway 111-PIara.xls Location: City of Palm Desert, ca Input By: T.Norton North-South Street~ Plaza Way•1 Phase County: Riverside East-West Street Highway 111 -4 Phase Peak Hour: 5:00 to 8:00 P.M. Comments: Friday P.M_Peak Hour; - nat LeftlTlw lane Trotted OS 1/2 Lane for Each Movement: Capecity of Opposing Left Turn Lanes for 1 Phase Reduced to 112 of Capacity for Protected Leg Turns or Split Phase _ Peak Hour Volume Vaktrrhe/C�Ratlo Direction Number Capacity Existing mg of Lane of (Veh/Hr) Existing Pius Existing Pius Travel Movement Lanes On Green Project Project Left Turn 1 800 60 76 0.075 0.005 Northbound Through 1 1600 46 54 ails* 0.14!! • Right Turn - - 167 163 - - r 4--..-. _____.-_._. . - r - • ----___� Left Turn"- 1.5 1200 10t3 10f; 0.090 •• 0.090 • Southbound Through** 0.5 800 08 76 0.005 0.095 Right Turn 1 1600 113 113 0.071 0.071 Left Turn 2 3200 132 132 0.041 0.041 Eastbound Through 3 4e00 1120 1120 0.253 • 0.257 • Bight Turn - - 96 112 - - Left Turn 1 1600 206 222 0.128 ' 0.139 * westbound Through 3 4800 995 995 0228 0.228 Right Tum • - 101 101 - - ICU Plus Lost Time Farxor of.10 0.705 Existing Level of Service C ICU Plus Lost Time Factor of.10 0.734 Existing Plus Project Level of Service C ' Denotes Critical Movement — Denotes Shared Lane 1♦O SOGIA law ►r TES �,.,�►.. �► s Consulting Enyinaersi -Architects - Planners October 29, 1998 1998 Mr. Joseph Gaugush, Engineering Manager City of Palm Desert ucPARTMENT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive CITY OF PALM DESERT Palm Desert, California 92260 SUBJECT: RESULTS OF TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS PALMOR DESERT,CHEVRON &USA NIA GAS SERVICE STATIONS IN THE CITY OF —CASE NO.C.U.P.984(SENT VIA FAX) Dear Mr. Gaugush: The information contained herein is a follow-up to my October 14, 1998 letter to you regarding trip generation and traffic impacts associated with the proposed Chevron service station project on the southeast comer of Highway 111 and Plaza Way, in the City of Palm Desert, California. In order resolve the question of trip generation rates, traffic counts were taken at two existing service stations in the City of Palm Desert— • one representing the uses at the existing Chevron station, and the other representing _._....._-- uses similar to that proposed for the Chevron service station. - — - _ - -Oc ob-r 27,1998. counts were taken simultaneously at the e-asting On Tuesday,Chevron service station, on the southeast comer of Highway 111 and Plaza Way, and - - at the USA Gasoline station on the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive. The periods of traffic counts included 7:00 to 9:00 AM.; 11:00 AM.to the P.M.; and 4:00 to 6:00 P.M.These periods of time are traditionally associated highest weekday demand for service station customers, and coincide with peak periods of vehicular demand on roadways (i.e., commute hours and lunch time). STUDY SITES The existing Chevron service station at Highway 111 and Plaza Way features a 2,491 square foot building with 3 service bays and a small snack shop, and 12 fueling dispensers on three fueling islands. The service bays are open for business. The dispensers are pa red so as to offer all grades of fuel at each vehicle fueling position (see discussion below regarding vehicle fueling positions). Access is provided via two driveways on Plaza Way and through the adjoining shopping center paridng lot. The existing USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive features a 2,430 square foot convenience store, and 5 multi-product fueling dispensers on two fueling islands. Each dispenser offers all grades of fuel on either side at each vehicle fueling position. Access is provided via a driveway on Highway 111 and a driveway on Fred Waring Drive. USA is known for its low gas andprices.ore transactions,this station but is extremely busy, with mos of its`sales t ansacted in cash, less gas purchased per b iAG> )11. (949) 756-fi440 � 2355 Main Street-Suite 120 FAX(949)756-64-4 Irvine.California 92614 Mr.Joseph Gauguah . 1012903 Page 2of5 TRAFFIC CQ 1� \TS The results of the October 27,1998 traffic counts are provided on the attached data summary sheets. Weather conditions at the time of the counts were sunny, events in , verye wind, and clear. There wereno unusual traffic conditions r ongoing specia for business, however, the the vidnity of either station. Both stations were fully open "full service" fueling island at the Chevron station was found to be dosed before 9:00 A.M., and after 5:00 P.M. Chevron During the two-hour A.M. count period, 89 vehicles entered and 70 vehicles eexited existing Chevron station, for a two-hour total of 159, an hourly During the of 9 vehicles, and a peak hour total of 93 vehicles entering and exiting• count, more vehicles entered than exited because a number of vehicles were brought in for service and left in the morning. During the two-hour noon count period, 132 vehicles entered and-1 5 vehicles exited average 133.5 vehicles entering the station, for atwo-ton total of 152 vehiourly des entering and e9. and exiting, and a peak two-hour P.M. count period, 121 vehicles entered apd--140 vehicles exited During the average of,`130.5�vehicles entering the station, for a two-hour total of 261, an hourly 9 and exiting, and a peak hour During the hour total of 155 vehicles entering in P.M.M. count, more vehicles exited than entered because vehicles that were brought for service in the morning were picked up in the afternoon. USA Gasoline During the two-hour A.M. count period, 141 vehicles entered and 139 vehicles ex cited the existing USA Gasoline, for a two-hour total of 280, an hourly averageof 1491 vehicles entering and exiting, and a peak hour total of 150 vehicles entering and exiting. During the two-hour noon count period, 176 vhicl enntered 76 5 hides entering _1 vehicles exited the station, for a two-hour total of 353, an hourly average and exiting, and a peak hour total of 184 vehicles entering and'exiti . During the two-hour P.M. count period, 183 vehicles entered,and 178 vehicles exited the station, for a two-hour total of 361, an hourly average or '1� 8�0 vehicles entering and exiting, and a peak hour total of 196 vehicles entering and Ong• It should be noted that a number of vehicles entered the USA Gasoline station site on Highway 111 and immediately exited the Fred Waring Drive driveway. These motorists Mr.Joseph Gaugush 10J2S319e Page3 ar 5 were frying to avoid the tong delay at the Highway 111/Fred Waring DrNe traffic signal by cutting through the USA Gasoline station site. These vehicles were excluded from the count since they were not generated by the use itself. OBSERVATIONS REGARDING NUMBER OF VFP Since there was some question regarding the number of vehicle fueling positions (VFP) at the existing Chevron service station, field observations were also noted an the position and number of vehicles at each fueling island. Per the October 14, 1998 letter, it is contended that there are 12 dispensers and 12 VFPs at the existing Chevron station.The City contends that there are 24 VFPs. By definition, a VFP is the physical space a vehicle occupies while fueling at a service station. While the configuration and number of dispensers vary from service station to service station,the number of vehicles that can physically be situated to fuel at a given time is indicative of the true number of VFPs. For the subject Chevron station, there are three fueling islands—two self-service and one full rice. Each fueling island contains two pairs of product dispensers — one pair at each end of the island. Each pair of product dispensers offers the basic grades of fuel from either side of the island.. _._. During the traffic count periods,'at no time did more than two vehicles simultaneous -. obtain fuel on each side of the fueling island. In only one instance there was a vehicle waiting while two vehicles were fueling on one side of an island. It can therefore be concluded that, for all practical reasons, and reasoning by definition, there are 12 vehicle fueling positions at the existing Chevron service station. For the purposes of the following trip generation calculations, it was assumed that there are 12 VFPs at the Chevron station. However, during those hours when the full service Island was closed, it was assumed that there are 8 VFPs. The USA Gasoline station, with 5 multi-product dispensers, is assumed to have 10 VFPs, based on the standard VFP definition,and as confirmed by field observations. TRIP GENERATION RATES Based on the above traffic counts, trip generation rates (i.e., trip ends per VFP) were calculated for each peak hour of the AM, noon, and PM count periods. Chevron During the A.M. peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing Chevron station was calculated to be 11.83 trip ends per VFP per A.M. peak hour on an average weekday (assuming only 8 VFPs available due to the closure of the full service island before 9:00 A.M.). Mr.Joy Gaugush 10i29198 page 4 of 5 During the noon peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing Chevron station was calculated to be 12.68 trip ends per VFP per noon peak hour on an average weekday. During the P.M. peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing Chevron station was calculated to be 12.91 trip ends per VFP per P.M. peak hour on an average weekday(assuming 12 VFPs). USA Gasoline During the A.M. peak hour of traffic, the number of trip ends generated by the existing USA Gasoline station was calculated to be 15.00 trip ends per VFP per AM. peak hour on an average weekday. During the noon peak hour of traffic,the number of trip ends generated by the existing USA Gasoline station was calculated to be 18.40 trip ends per VFP per noon peak hour on an average weekday. During the P.M. peak hour of traffic,the number of trip ends generated by the existing USA Gasoline station was calculated to be 19.60 trip ends per VFP per P.M. peek hour on an average weekday. COMPARISON OF TRIP GENERATION RATES Trip generations rates found in the 6th edition of the Trip Generation report indicate that the number of morning (A.M.) peak hour trips per VFP is 12.27 for a service station with service bays, and 10.06 for a service station with a convenience store. The number of evening (P.M.) peak hours trips per VFP is 14.56 for a service station with service bays, and 13.38 for a service station with convenience store. A comparison of calculated for the subject study sites and those in the Trip Generation report, suggest some significant diifferences. The overall results of the field studies presented herein are mixed. However, they generally suggest that peak hour trip generation rates for service stations with conveniences stores may be higher in Palm Desert, and perhaps the entire Coachella Valley, than national averages presented in the Trip Generation report. Furthermore, the location, accessibility, and product pricing of a service station appear to be directly related to trip making propensities — as evidenced by USA Gasoline's superior location, direct access to Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive, and lower gas prices,when compared to the Chevron station. As expected, a comparison of the ITE trip generation rate for a service station with service bays and the existing Chevron station show great similarities, with the study results slightly lower than the iTE rates (i.e., 11.83 trip ends per VFP during the A.M. per the study, and 12.27 trip ends per VFP according to the ITE report; and 12.91 trip Mr.Joseph Gaugush 1 0I29J98 Page 5 of 5 ends per VFP during the P.M. per the study, versus 14.56 trip ends per VFP according to the ITE report). For service stations with a convenience store, the results am very different A comparison of the ITE trip generation rate for a service station with convenience store and the existing USA Gasoline station shows great differences, with the study results higher than the ITE rates (i.e., 15.50 trip ends per VFP during the A.M. per the study, versus 10.06 trip ends per VFP according to the ITE report; and 19.60 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. per the study, versus 13.38 trip ends per VFP according to the ITE report). While the higher rates at one study site are not necessarily indicative of all service stations with convenience stores, the results suggest that further investigation is warranted—particularly in the Coachella Valley. IN CLOSING I hope that you find the above information useful, along with findings presented in the October 14, 1998 letter to you. tf possible, please provide your comments to Mr. Alvarez and to Ms. April Smith, at Service Station Services, soon as possible, as the subject project is scheduled to be heard at the City Planning Commission hearing of November 4, 1998. If there are any questions regarding this study, please contact me directly, at your convenience. Sincerely yours, KHR AGo g o ROFESS/p 1.,\ %���`� t1. K A�9yG I � ` • '� x 1 (: i7? • <240:34m14.014 _ James H. Kawamura, P.E. � President \ . LIP •`a • 09/� 9 Jt IR A F F I`' `"irC cc Al Norris,Chevron Products Company April Smmtth,Service Station Services Min Alvarez,City of Palm Desert • KHR ASSOCIATES DRIVEWAY TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY Project: Chevron Service Station Count Period: 11:00 AM to 1:00 PM Location: Highway 111 &Plaza Wei Palm Desert.California Count By: S.Kawamura Driveways On: Plaza Way Checked By: J.Kawamura Count Date: 10/26/1998 Day: Tuesday Data Input By:C.Robles MR Re O cn owfl4 o XLs Chevron Driveways Plaza WaxDrivewaj►I Ptm Way Driveway 2 r-Shopping Period inbound Outbound Inbound outbound Canter Total Time Period Left Right Lid Right Left Right Left Right In Out In Out 11:OOto11:15AM 1 0 0 6 5 3 2 4 2 1 11 13 11:15 to 11:30 AM 2 2 0 4 6 2 2 8 2 2 14 16 11;30 to 11:45 AM 1 2 0 3 4 2 3 5 4 . 3 13 14 11:45 to 1200 PM 2 0 1 7 i 8 5 1 6 4 2 17 , 17 12:00to12:15PM* 1 2 0 4 7 4 3 7 6 3 19 17 1215 to 12:30 PM* 2 1 1 3 4 5 2 8 3 2 15 14 1Z30 to 12:45 PM* 3 2 2 7 9 3 2 9 5 3 22 23 12:45to1:00PM* 1 1 1 8 11 3 3 5 5 I 4 21 21 2-Hr.Diractlonsl Totals 13 10 5 42 52 27 18 50 30 20 132 135 I I Peak Hour Totals 7 6 4 22 31 15 10 27 18 12 77 75 •Noon Peak Hour-12:00 to 1:00 PM KHR ASSOCIATES DRIVEWAY TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY Project USA Gas Service Station Count Period: 7:D0 AM to 0:00 AM Location: Highway 111 &Fred Waring Drive 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM Palm Desert.Califomia Count By: T.Schippers Driveways On: Highway 111 6 Fred Waring Drive Checked By: J.Kawamura Count Date: 1028/1998 Day: Tuesday Date Input By: C. Robles KHR Ref.USA-Pdm D6 tALs USA nvewaya Highway 111 Fred Waring Drive Period Inbound puttround inbound Outbound Total Time Period Left Right Lett Right Left Right Left Right In Out r A 7:00to7:15AM* 12 • 9 2 10 5 it 24 23 7:15to7:30AM' 4 8 2 5 1 3 11 12 7:30 to 7:45 AM' 12 11 3 12 3 11 27 25 7:46 to 8:00 AM* 6 8 1 6 2 5 13 15 8:00t08:15AM 5 8 3 7 1 7 15 16 8:15to8:30AM 3 8 3 7 0 4 13 10 8:30to8:45AM 10 9 6 5 1 14 21 24 8:45to9:00AM 8 6 3 6 2 6 17 14 a - — -- — s- 2-Hr.Directional Totals 0 80 0 65 23 58 15 59 141 139 Peak Hour Totals 0 34 0 36 8 33 11 28 76 75 *AM Peak Hour-7:00 to 8:00 AM USA Drivewa ' e ay 111 Fred Warin. Drive Period Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound Total Time Period ' Lett Right Left Right Left Right Lett Right In Out 4:00 to 4:15 PM 7 • 4 5 6 1 9 18 14 4:151o4:30PM 9 8 7 2 4 11 18 23 4:30 to 4:45 PM 10 7 8 8 4 12 24 23 4:45 to 5:00 PM 8 9 8 6 5 9 22 23 5:00 to 5:15 PM` 10 9 10 8 2 14 28 25 5:15 to 5.30 PM' 9 4 7 7 6 ill 23 22 5:30 to 5:45 PM* 11 6 8 8 4 27 24 5.45 to 6:00 PM* 9 r 8 5 9 3 23 24 r-Hr.Directional Totals 0 73 I 0 55 68 52 29 94 183 178 Peak Hour Totals 0 39 0 27 30 32 15 53 101 95 'PM Peak Hour-5:00 to 6:00 PM I � � � • � 't1 N 7 3A- I � � = S2 cn cn o A Sa g C w o J; a. a. a. j °? cn c? Q? .4 :1 1-4 o , R 1 O u+ O to o at S 3 f� Cam„ C i O it o v S c c ° g 6 Er 8 3 g a B S = -I Er 5' 6 S Q Et 0 0 i cn A Cal En cm ch C1 A A A.ii 'a C k g tD m m 07 m V V V 'o 6. I s � g w CO tel to 4 3 tp .Na W N a .I. N co A in: i co Cn G1 IV N -I, N.) ..h. .a N /.1 IIOp rn at p -a IN N o - 0 W r♦ O O O _. O Ta ..► co ! S w OJ C . N Co W ..a haO O 5 i. J. V - Co 1. COO O hai M. 0 C o A C7r at cm A cn co -.Ir A NaCn J. O cb A NIC -(�? a, t:n —1 CD o co ca cn i z 3 t N to 0o of .a. cr 1 m w 1 X O Q - (�T p Cn I N N N 01 N -a ,O 1N g. * 1 o J V7 r o o N ,. w -& o p a 3 I0 G -_-, O N . N CoN -t co0g. A i •I. A �� V tO N .a N N �► 0 O P D 1ND VA1 CW C) V Co Co N CO Ut NI O t0 Cn . W A N + O Ofit 07 i �` A C.l Cal C) N N . -a i .a i NA s W C7A 0 ` Flg �o OD .e. .. -a NI 5 1 c e 'CA A to V to N Cat N at SS' V _., O ..r• -+ jJ ..a Cal _. N B. 3 O 5 m O Q 5 ii o pni a to co O N [ ,. CO W W t° -a.N EA V—4 -4 C71 5-I i W , I �1 $ O m N tt A 4 it yyN O co .tea i V A t7 A 01 _ _ 1 KHR ASSOCIATES DRIVEWAY TURN MOVEMENT 1 COUNT SUMMARY Project USA Gas Service Station Count Period: 11:00 AAA to 1:00 PM Location: Highway 111&Ftud Waring Drive Palm Desert,California Count By: T.Schionett3 Driveways Om Highway 111 &Fred Waring Drive Chocked By: J.Kawamura Count Date: 10J2611988 Day: Tuesday Data Input By: C.Robles KHR lac USA-Pen oas us -USA Driveways Hrghway 1if Fred Wann Drive Period krbaund Outbound ..--. k>a,ound I Outbound Total Tune Period tart Right ' Left Right lag Rigid Right, ki out 11:00 to 11:15 AM 8 5 6 7 7 10 21 22 11:15 to 11:30 AM 5 2 7 8 4 11 20 17 11:30 to 11:45 AM 5 9 _ 1 10 5 7 16 21 11:45 to 12:00 PM 9 8 7 9 3 12 25 23 1200 to 1215 PM' 11 6 6 9 8 11 26 25 1215 to 12:30 PM' _ 9 7 3 8 7 9 20 23 12:30 to 12:45 PM' 9 e 7 7 5 10 23 21 12:45 to 1:00 PM' 12 9 9 4 4 12 25 25 2-Hr.Directional Totals 0 08 0 52 1 46 i 82 43 82 176 177 Peak Hour Totals 1 0 41 0 28 25 28 24 42 , 94 94 •Noon Peak Hour-12:00 to 1:00 PM 11/L4/177b lb; Z 'y4y-/bb-b444 KHR ASSOCIATES PAGE 01 Post-it'Fax 1._._ 7871 Date 11/8L1 ha To tv� R Nnl ht Fram t""� KHR ASSOCIATES ca'veg- Co. KNG\ Consulting Engineers -Architects - Planners Pieene.µ.� _, Phone I �1�1L�1v5�,S Fix# November 24, 1998 Mr. Joseph Gaugush, Engineering Manager City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 SUBJECT: RESULTS OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS FOR HIGHWAY 111/PLAZA WAY, IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA—CASE NO. C.U.P.98-4(SENT VIA FAX) Dear Mr. Gaugush: The information contained herein has been prepared at the request of Chevron Products Company to document existing and projected levels of service at the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way, in the City of Palm Desert, California. INTERSECTION DESCRIPTION The intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way is signalized for 5 phases of traffic movement. Highway 111 feature 3 through lanes in each (westbound and eastbound) direction. The westbound approach leg also features a separate left turn lane. The eastbound approach leg features dual left turn lanes. Plaza Way features 1 through lane and 1 left turn lane on the northbound approach leg, and 1 right turn lane, 1 left turn lane, and a shared through/left turn lane on the southbound approach leg. TRAFFIC COUNTS On Friday, November 20, 1998, peak hour traffic turn movement counts were taken at the subject intersection between 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. The peak hour occurred between 5:00 and 6:00 P.M. This period of time represents the worst case situation with respect to traffic conditions along Highway 111 and at the subject intersection. A summary of the traffic counts is attached herewith. Weather conditions at the time of the counts were sunny, very little wind, and clear. There were no unusual traffic conditions, accidents, or ongoing special events in the vicinity of intersection. EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE The level of service (LOS) of a roadway segment or an intersection is a qualitatively defined measure of prevailing traffic, design, and operational conditions. The LOS, denoted alphabetically from "A" to "F," best to worst, is an evaluation of the degree of congestion, roadway design constraints, delay, accident potential, and driver discomfort experienced during a given period of time-typically during the peak hour or 2355 Main Street-Suite 120 (949) 756 $440 Irvine, California 92614 FAX(949) 756-6444 11/LEI/17d lb:J2 949-756-6444 KHR ASSOCIATES PAGE N2 NAr.Joseph Gaugush 1124198 Page 2of4 on a daily basis. While LOS "A" is the most desirable operational state for a roadway segment or intersection, LOS "C" is considered a benchmark for planning purposes. In more urbanized areas, LOS "D" is an accepted condition for peak hours of vehicular travel on major streets and highways. The LOS may be quantitativelycalculated bya number of methods, including the Highway Capacity Method (HCM) the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method. Regardless of the method, a LOS calculation generally compares traffic volumes with the physical and operational capacity of a roadway section or intersection to carry traffic demands placed upon it. Table I lists typical LOS definitions for intersections. TABLE I Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Volume-to-Capacity Ratios Level of V/C Service Ratio Definitions A <0.60 Uncongested operation; all vehicles clear in a single signal cycle. B <0.70 Light congestion;occasional backup on critical approaches. C <0.80 Some congestion on approaches, but Intersection functional. D <0.90 Traffic required to wait through more than one cycle during short peaks. However, no long-lasting queues result. E <1,00 Severe congestion with some long-lasting queues on critical approaches. Blockage of intersection may occur If traffic signal does not provide for protected left turn movements. p >1.00 Total breakdown with"stop-and-go" operation. Back-up may occur at nearby intersections. SOURCE:Highway Capacity Manual,1991 Based on the traffic count data, and applying the ICU standard traffic engineering procedures for determining the level of service (LOS) at signalized intersections, the existing P.M. peak hour LOS for the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way is calculated to be "C" (see attached LOS calculation sheet). This LOS is acceptable for urban traffic conditions at signalized intersections. tYY r\n[ 0.D_>UL.1A I L5 PAGE 63 Mr.Joseph Gaugush 11/24/98 Page 3 of 4 TRIP GENERATION As previously documented in KHR Associates' October 29, 1998 letter to you, the existing Chevron service station has 12 vehicle fueling positions (VFP), and each generates 12.91 trip ends during the P.M. peak hour (or a total of 155 vehicles entering and exiting). Also, as documented in the October 29, 1998 letter, the existing USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive has 10 vehicle fueling positions (VFP), and generates 19.60 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. peak hour (or a total of 196 vehicles entering and exiting). PROJECTED LEVEL OF SERVICE In order to determine the "worst case scenario" traffic impacts associated with the proposed Chevron service station project, the following assumptions were made: 1) The conversion of the service bays at the Chevron service station to a convenience store will result in increased traffic generation. (In reality, case studies have shown that such a "conversion of use" may not result in any increase in traffic.) 2) The amount of increase per vehicle fueling position will be comparable to the characteristics exhibited at the existing USA Gasoline service station at Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive (i.e., 19.60 trip ends per VFP). (In reality, a discount gas station generates more traffic per VFP than major oil company service stations of similar size.) 3) The existing Chevron service station generates 12.91 trip ends per VFP during the P.M. peak hour(or 155 trip ends total). 4) The proposed project could generate 235 trip ends total (i.e., 12 VFPs times 19.60 trip ends per VFP). 5) The net increase in traffic during the P.M. peak hour will be 80 trip ends (i.e., 235 projected minus 155 existing). 6) All of the projected increase in traffic will enter and exit the Chevron site via the Highway 111/Plaza Way intersection, with 50% of the new traffic generated (i.e., 40 trip ends) entering and 50% of the new traffic generated (i.e., 40 trip ends) exiting, during the P.M. peak hour. (In reality, a significant number of trips will enter and/or exit through the shopping center or to the south via Plaza Way). Under the above worst case scenario, the ICU for the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way does increase with the additional traffic during the P.M. peak hour. However, the LOS is projected to remain at"C"(see attached LOS calculation sheet). - - J4.3-IJ0-0444 KHR ASSOCIATES PAGE 04 Mr.Joseph Gaugush 11I24/98 Page 4 or 4 SIGNIFICANCE OF TRAFFIC INCREASES On November 20, 1998, a total of 3,212 vehicles entered and exited the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way during the P.M. peak hour. Under the worst case scenario, the proposed Chevron service station will add 80 trip ends (or 40 vehicles) to the intersection (or a 1.25% increase over the existing volume). With such a minute increase, the LOS does not change, and any deterioration in LOS is imperceptible. Therefore, improvements to Plaza Way or the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way do not appear warranted based solely on the proposed Chevron project and related traffic impacts. In fact, based on current and volumes, itsa comfortable reserve of capacity must be exhausted before the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way experiences a significant deterioration in the LOS. MmGATING TRAFFIC CONGESTION Despite an acceptable LOS, traffic congestion can occur at the intersection of Highway 111 and Plaza Way (when traffic is backed-up and unable to get through the intersection in one cycle of the traffic signal operation). This congestion may be attributable to the lack of separate left turn phasing for north-south (Plaza Way) traffic. Separate left turning phasing is not possible due to the existence of a shared left- though lane for the southbound approach leg. Therefore, consideration should be given to a split-phase operation for Plaza Way traffic. This will add some delay to Highway 111 traffic, but significantly improve overall traffic conditions at the subject intersection. The improvements can be made at relatively minor cost. )IN CLOSING I hope that you find the above information useful, along with findings presented in the October 14, 1998 letter to you. If possible, please provide your comments to Mr. Al Norris at Chevron Products Company, and to Ms. April Smith, at Service Station Services, soon as possible, as the subject project is scheduled to be heard at an upcoming City Planning Commission hearing. If there are any questions regarding this study, please contact me directly, at your convenience. Sincerely yours, K As ea eR0 ESS`04; oc:: "21443t1`414----. .‘e.bef V. ffr. eN\ • J s H. Ka amura, P.E. y ' President a No. TR 1 1 10 Expiration: 09/30/99 Cc: Al Norris,Chevron Products Company \ T April smith, Service Station seMces sl �A F F i� - Marsh Tanner 17, F C „ -� •y4y-156-6444 KHR ASSOCIATES PAGE 65 PROJECT: CHEVRON-PALM DESERT LOCATION: HIGHWAY0000 ��WAY FIELD COUNT BY: S. KAWAMURA INPUT BY: S. KAWAMURA T. NORTON HIGHWAY 111 EASTBOUND xisC1)wvmeverm�er-n tout THRU HIGHWAY 111 -WESTBOUND11.1111 4:00PM4:I5PM 210 ®��� TOTAL 4:16PM.4:30PM 167 28 28 173 $� 4:30PM-4:45PM 18 26 18 502 4:45PM- :45PM 191 16 206 40 S:OOPM,5:1Sphq���� 46 582 $:15PM�:30pM 289 INEEMB 19 �mEsi 569 allailll 644 5:3OPM-5:43PM 28 284 5:45PM-6:00PM 29 28 301 66 773 ® 310 � 29 NMI TOTALS �� -_ 77 111X311 201 IMENIMIDIIIIIII211 PLAZA WAY-NORTHBOUND PLAZA WAY-SOUTHBOUND 4'1PM�:lSPM RIGHT ���� IMO 4:18PM_ciSPM ��® 20 18�a_ TOTAL 4:30PM.4:45PM 2INE9 19 18 =Elm 119 4:4SPM�;OQPM 56 ®�® 107 5:OOPM-5;15PM UM 10 OEM 29 �� 138 38 5:15PM-5:30PM 9 MEIN 36 20 INFERi 20 36 150 5;3OPM..6.4SPM IMEMINIMIll 165:45PM-6:OOPM � 18 ®��MI 150 TOTALS ������ 1099 PEAK HOUR _11.11111111111. HIGHWAY 111 -EASTBO ND HIGHWAY 111 _ THRU N�®WESTBOUND 111.111. 5:00PM-5:15PM ® 6 19 �� '� TOTAL589 5:15P►VI.�_gOpM 5:3OPM-6:45PM 28 284 29 ®� 644 5:45PM-6:00PM 310 !, 29 301 888 664 MIMIIIIIIITOTALSow= 1'____ 101 mud= 206 2 650 111111111.0 PLAZA WAY-NORTHBOUND PLAZA RIGHT THRU � WAY-SOUTHBOUND 5:00PM-5:15PM N 10 =+� 9ua e ' TOTAL 5:15PM.5:3OpM 48 9 ��.-�I 29 20 36 138 S:sOPMS:46PM ��� 36 20 ® 150 5:45PM-6:0OPM ®� ig �©�� TOTALS ����= ICill 60 ®INECIN 108 562 rr1r: a550cIATES ASSOCIATESKHR INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS Count Date: 11/20/08 Location: City of Palm Desert, CA KHR Code: Hi ghway 11 i-Plaza.xls North-South Street: Plaza Wa - 1 Phase verside input By: 7'. Norton East-West Street: Hi hwa 111 - 4 Phase County: Ri Peak Hour: 5:00 to 6:00 P.M __.____.____4 Comments: Fr1da P.M. Peak Hour; 0 to nai Leftahru Lane Treated es 1/2 Lane for Ea Capacit of 0 osin Left Turn LanesR Lanes for 1 Phase � Movement; Left Turns or S lit Phase ced to 1/2 of Ca cit for Protected Direction Peak Hour Volume of Number Capacity Volume/CaiaElt Ratio Travel Lane Nehli�r Existing of ) Existing Plus Existing Plus Movement Lanes On Green 9 Left Turn Project Pro'ect 111 Northbound 800 60 76 Through 0.075 0.095 1600 46 133 Right Turn 54 0.133 * o.1as = 167 183 Left Turn*- 1.5 - - Southbound 1200 108 108 Through'= 0.090 ' 0.090 0.5 800 68 Right Turn 78 0.085 0.095 1 1600 113 Left Turn 1 13 0.071 0.071 1111 Eastbound Through 3200 132 132 0�1 0.041 4800 1120 1120 0.253 * 0.257 Right Tum - Left Turn86 112 - Westbound 1600 206 222 ThroughIIII 0.129 " 0.139 = 4800 995 995 Right Turn 0.228 0.228 101 101 ICU PlusLost - Time Factor of_10 0.706 Existing Level of ServiceC y� r�.f% .j' ICU PlusLost Yf'''�Time Factor of.10 j <,.•'' .i'y•ri i•//r Existing Plus Project , ;,�,; 0.734 Level of Service _• - "` * Denotes Critical Movement ** Denotes Shared Lane . KHR ASSOCIATES_ 16:21 714-756-6444 Dazes �► /16/1998 Post•t•Fax .0 76 l�From �/T`3 NU.I _ KHR AH90CIATEt3 VJ Thom phone r - Architects'- Planners r GonsurtlnA �r.gtn s - FaX r %b'. 3y -`�c6; Fex October 14, 1998 Mr. Joseph Gaugush, Engineering Manager city of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert California 92260 SUBJECT:SERVICE STATION TRIP GENERATIONSERVICE TRAFFIC�9�(PALM ASSOCIATED WITH CHEVRON DESERT,CAUFORNIA)—CASE NO.C.UP.984(SENT VIA FAX) Dear Mr. Gaugush: with Chevron Products Company, I have reviewed the At the request of Mr. Al Norris, regarding the proposed Chevron service station materials forwarded to my office r� 111 and Plaza Way, in the City of Palm project on the southeast corner of Highwayin response to an interofficeDesert, California. My comments are directed primarily memorandum,dated Septe mber 28, 1998, signed by you and addressed to Mr. Martin Alvarez,Assistant Planner, regarding the subject project. the C'rt�s correspondence with some I am prefacing my comments regarding generation. For your information, I am background information on service station trip g a comprehensive traffic the author of both the 1992 Mobil National Traffic Study surveyof 30 service stations nationwide), and an article in the March 1993 edition of "Service Station Trip Generation." SubsegUently, the die Journal,addentitled,generated as part of the Mobil National Traffic Study � been definitions and into theta Institute n of Tin Engineers(ITE) Trip Gem report Incorporated IesTech Committee overseeing the technical contents of the In fact, I served on the Technical latest edition (i.e., 8"'Edition)of the Trip Generation report. KEY DEFINITIONS become keys to understanding and interpreting Among the definitions that have service station trip generation are the specific types of uses and the term vehicle fueling position (or VFP). SerwIc station Use major categories of service station use include: gasoline (or fuel) only; service The �o � (or convenience store); service . station with service bays; service station with mart (or service service station with mart and quick serve restaurant station with car wash; There �� of course. various and service station with mart and fast food d n '+'should also be noted that various there combinations and subsets of these major categories. the service station use — is another category of land use that is often confused withce store is often used namely, "convenience stores.' While the term (94�756- 0 �D 2355 Maln Street-Suite 120 F�q)((949)756-6444 Irvine,CalMornlA 92614 KHR ASSOC 1A" 6/1998 16:21 714-756-6444 Mr.Joseph GaJUust► 10114198 Page 2of6 as 7-Elevens) or In to stand-alone developments (suchMart), the tripn conjunction with when referring ment(such as Gt errvo¶n's Foconfusion over the station development different conjunction a of each are by fact that, some areas of the definition conyis Sincenthe areas of e country, of a are c conveniencestoresice stores with gasoline pumps- lion report does convenience sto E Trip Genera are IT s there • cant, the ' and country, characteristics are slgnrh a convenience stare dtawith generation tween a � station and of I in a make the cesledistinction gasoline pumps" by establishing separate categories 'convenience store use and trip generation. a convenience store is the sale of a service station with fuel to ris the with The primaryoo business Convenience business store sales are ancillary a convenience stole item a automotive ) Go he total rs purchasing .h( approximately 15% of the total customers p or fuel with a convenience store customers are purchasing only fuelstation with a item). Furthermore, amount of traffic generated of bttyie store Rather,the number (i.e., Fu remotely related to the potential r a service station with of convenience is 11E dispensers store b only r of traffic generating �dispef�ers is the best indicator a convenience store. of a convenience store or convenience Coro primary business activity a tore o food. newspapers, e In cone is the sale of store merchandise (�l� fuel, it o usually as a with gasoline pumps If a convenience store amounts by a magazines,business, etc.). of fuel sales is fraction i col the eamonce store sold oftenya secondary typicalservice ►ice st station, and the volume ��station,The amount of traffic.generated closely related to the size of the store. Vehicle A Position to describe the physical (VFP) to The term 'hide occupies fcu piesg position'getting gasoline or diesel fuel at a service��bes the space a vehicle oc spies used fore g 9 VFP most correct y station —in space fueling a vehicle: A at a particular service number of v cm9 stthat can physically be served at a given time of vehiclesmodem fuel pumps (or dispensers) is that iron between VFPs and uel (mps However, this is t theren.The typically la VFPs per multi-product dispenser one another or there are typically two dispensers are placed immediately adjacent blocked. In suchr or when case when product the dispensers is physically and permanently adjacent to the d'ispe fuel defines a VFP. Thus, the total cases, e a Lane h of a vehicle to obtainhave equivalents, the total numberrie , the physical ability be said to number of s that a service station may time. The of VFP can simultaneously get fuel at any given of fuel that will number at particular thatstation is related to the projected volume articular orviee station is be so a lime serviceatis projected to be sold at a particular station. sold.The volume of fuel th�rc anticipated to be generated by an indicator of the amount KHR ASSOCIATES _6/1998 16:21 714-756-6444 Mr.Joseph Gaugush 10114188 Page 3of5 Trip G erab°n Ar�bB� started to and from a service be made on the amount of traffic generated onto or off the stationA determination can a motor vehicle moves For counting the number of times , or, more appropriately, a ` end").trips" prem by nt being a"tr►p ressed � Myer ofi'end" or sfemces (each suds moveme number of the resulting number is often exp refers to the service sthoon r r•vehicle fueling pos Of" "Daily trips" or`peak hour trips" per k hour trips" refers to the number of taps counted in a 24-hour period, while P� between the hours of rips :00 �r> during the hour of highest morning traffic (typically, then the hours of A.M. to 9:00 AM.)or the hour of highest evening be 4:00 P.M.to 7:00 P.M.). indicate that the In the Trip Generation service bays, and The results of past studies, as reflected 168d A.M.) r VFP is h68.56'for a service�r of morning 16mber or aerie Est station with a convenience store• baps, and 10(A. for peak for a service 12.27 fora service station with service hour traps per VFP is The number of evening (P.M.) peak hours a servicestationwith a convenience store. , and >tg,38 for a service trips per VFP isn4.56 for a service station with Service bays station with convenience store in this lets are consistent with those The findings of the other studies referred n of a particular Station,the number of trips of the location service b shown per vehicle. fueling irrespective p by a Service station with generated by a per positron generatedof trips per vehicle fueling position to be g..fea= thaw the narrate service station with convenience store_ rofessior►al experience and Based on the results of these studies and on won with service bays [e I am of the opinion that if a service number vehicle Nations, convenience stores d not gene fueling converted to a service station with the new r faglgy for the site remained unchanged, likely, the fueling positions number of trips than the old facility. Most any greater generate few_er trips. a service station witha of a service station with service bays store and a car wash may The `conversion convenience r while convenience store or a service station with a sed revenue per custflme gasoline sales and/or increased result in increased for the following generating fewer trips to th©facility generates the trips Previously First, after a conversion, the site no longer services). Unless 1) lubrication and/or repair generated by the service bays (i.e.,Cbythe remains at the station while his or herfcae up to 6 s serviced, a the customerservice bays can generate visit to a service station with customer. For example, each of the following constitutes one trip; a) the the customers friend also customer drives his or her car tobe 1thuste s meter;c)�e customer and the friend drives to the station to pick up 'moy Mead'Old NI �p spas d�195'd96 agwaua6 It!M esep�U 'a u! Burunsai — a du% spua dal �equmu �� Spas du} 86'b�a ZL Li. s! asn 6u!ls!xa NI Aq Pa Spun dut '8Z esn pasoda,d a41 6upna '��y !ead 'iffy ayl ioj d NI al!�10 NI `ally �o anoy �� Wd � dal ZL'OZ� alwaua6 ll�►esn pasodw vat n;au e ut 6urc!nsw—Aq p ua8 spas W In a4 'o to Inoy asn ! •Ae ca ay)aB sad spua ut 9E-6'9 to auoaP INb BuunQ •�eP�aan++ a6e�ene dt1�x '£�B L PDr (aims asua!uanuoa ene sad spun z aye spun dM ' a•, asn pasodoid oqi t Aep Anp ooM 'suoa!sod Et yzz uor�al auaB uc aowas "a'1) asn 6u! atn !sn d Zu'ZZO& aua6 qu eo 1JO a pu .io6e3eo asn pm% ice°° a� 6u 6ugan} a�!ya^ 3'° 'agwrn' p� �� B aowas yatgn suoq!puoo pasodoidaou!g •aq►s u iaq oo anspl�6ulaq lou s! siasuadslP 40��sP na szi, Si ed }o �agwnu } sc UO io; wool pue apes Aq ap!s suesuad • sip le •s�asu'uoge ;o �t sd Z O ass° relied NI u! ienaMoH • iasuad aowas pa�q� ��° eo+dl�}pue '� �UO slast,ads+p z ale cuatn sa3els umP+�wOusew ��p °auo)jasuads!p sad s� as JGew isn�uo4 ALL . aqp wail pa}lnsa1 awl d Dugan; Z6 a+e •trzl}ems aM ell U0 ays ma uo awes ul atn se `oZ u— �oou!ue pawnss�e ow l�}►.0 O wn voo ap!ye'" • .lam aoua!uan �q aawas yl!H►) .LOi�Rs osefi a s! asn pasodcud mil pue ( uoR!P) �g els a uogels aa!nj a s! a sin 'p�., UOI WeUao dpi au J ,uoy ui ose8, a s{ asn 6u!is!Xa asn pue! o ue pawns= an ma aa►Nasla a Jo}ljo6a1� wJ to S 6u red •asn sa Io an .wnp w 8881• '8Z>a4 ayl du}6u � vd�nd a W(1SS S '�l NOIId lnq 'sales IeuoWPPe a Builn%u— d ta uo AAA aseq sewaisno %anises u em 13n;asond°;S°s'• 0oue!uaiwoa to/A o new BgewaoaddE 'wow ,ene ySeM Leo ayl a yogi •al!s all of lls!n awes MA 6uunjnd dew ° e leo 1 1 annoys a Val! 'Ian)ase�p oees vl (Z a43 asn p� '�! awns Baua!ue�►uoo a /Snq I ! � uoseej Pu sueaw AldW!s muogep!�osuoo„ •sdui }o uuorlepllosuoa. ayl •4SUM lea so(pue asols aoua!uanuoo s Jed E at dn) a{doed wow Auew Ao{dwa osie suogels ao!Nas uey3 (�e q Dolmas BEd Aq pallddns ate Jo saowe�s suof� ao!Mag id aq polld6 sped allgowMes slueq a'JiNas 4 '^ op se 'sdl.q 1euo!}!pP `vo4!PPe suo! iso saaAoldwa uorlels ao!Nas 6u!nnol nd° � lama yu► pue '.uolleis oine ses!wa�d �° ,d �awolsno eta (3 and o� Jag Jo sly do p a u! uo!lels ill .uo��s mg ranee{ pue 1p y eul ayl (a 'aq $� uaw � olsno a o sdoip Pu va! a u! uo!lels eyl an�e! ayl Sl tuni pue i J aqi pue awolsno a►.{i(p :Jeo s,P 4 NI oa wn�w Pua� ay} P s io v aosa esrv'ro1 gsgeonnO yjeeo`Aft Mr.Joseph Gaisoush 1aM4I98 Page 5d5 peopleost get gas on their way to or from some other Inrecognitiontt of the fact that►p is often used when referring to traffic generated by a activity, Mgenerated fromalreadyon � ce �n development Pass-by trips areto cong sn the seat and do not in themselves add signifrc ar t y adjacent or e . For serviceects trip reduction factor of 65%or more is acceptable delay. stations a pass-by p generated by a service station is°new traffic-" —meaning only 35%or less of trip ends ge I MPACT ON THE ASSESSEMNT OF FEES Ithe above findings, we request a reconsideration of the Conditions of A pprove!, the Crty's Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees, and/or the traffic A signalization fees for the subject project IN CLOSING I hope that you will consider the above findings, and provider. ibl your comments ts to to M Me Alvarez and to Ms. April Smith, at Service Station Services, Commission astsoss hearing t e subject project is scheduled to be heard at the City Planning of October 20, 1998- If there are any questions regarding the above findings, please contact me directly,at your convenience. Sincerely yours, p f ES S KHR Associates �°�5\-k. K A ti # ../ 1"17(Lt-1 • #. \ Kawamura, P.E. ��, 0• . James H. Kawam President ` * Egictbe. 09/30/39 J>- R A F Sr�C ,� 17 ca Al Norris,Ctievron Products Company Agxd 5fl U I.service Stamm Services North Alvarez,City of Palm Desert