The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRes No. 2908 Circulation Element AddendumPLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2908 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN EIR, APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT UPDATING THE MOBILITY (CIRCULATION) ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN, AND APPROVE UPDATED TRANSPORTATION STUDY GUIDELINES CASE NOS. GPA25-0002 WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65800 et seq. provides for the amendment of any and all adopted City of Palm Desert (“City”) zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations; and WHEREAS, the City Council of Palm Desert adopted its General Plan on November 10, 2016 via CC Resolution 2016-87; and WHEREAS, the City Council of Palm Desert adopted General Plan Amendment GPA19-0001 on September 16, 2019 via CC Resolution 2019-76a to amend the Mobility Element to reclassify “Painters Path”; and WHEREAS, the City Council of Palm Desert adopted the County of Riverside Transportation Study Guidelines for measuring transportation projects under CEQA on August 25, 2022 via CC Resolution 2022-74; and WHEREAS, the City Council of Palm Desert on July 11, 2024 initiated a contract to prepare a comprehensive amendment to Chapter 4 – Mobility (Circulation) Element of the Palm Desert General Plan and updated Transportation Study Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment 25-0002 is the second General Plan Amendment processed for 2025; and WHEREAS, the proposed General Plan Amendment would replace in its entirety the Chapter 4 - Mobility Element of the General Plan previously approved via CC Resolution 2016-87; and WHEREAS, the proposed Amendment is internally consistent with the other elements of the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Study Guidelines provide specifications related to methodologies, tools, and other key assumptions that should be considered for both Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) assessment and Level of Service (LOS) assessment for purposes of evaluating projects in the City of Palm Desert; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the CEQA, the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (State CEQA Guidelines), and the City of Palm Desert CEQA Implementation Requirements, the City of Palm Desert Development Services Department prepared an Addendum to the City’s 2016 certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2908 2 #2015081020) adopted via City Council Resolution No. 2016-86 that determined there is no substantial evidence that the project would result in significant environmental impacts not previously studied in the EIR and accordingly, the project would not result in any conditions listed identified in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15162; and WHEREAS, the proposed Transportation Study Guidelines are consistent with the prepared Mobility Element update and Addendum to the General Plan EIRs; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 18th day of November 2025, hold a duly noticed public hearing for approval of the above- noted Project request; and WHEREAS, at the said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons, which are outlined in the staff report, exist to justify approval of said request: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: SECTION 1. Recitals. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as substantive findings of this Resolution. SECTION 2. General Plan Amendment. As required by Palm Desert Municipal Code “PDMC” Section 25.78.070, the following findings to approve a General Plan Amendment: Pursuant to Section 25.78.070(E), the proposed amendment is in the public interest. There is a substantial public benefit to be derived from the amendment, and the General Plan, as amended, will remain internally consistent. Furthermore, the proposed amendment furthers the goals and objectives of the General Plan. The proposed General Plan Amendment updates the City’s Mobility (Circulation) Element to ensure consistency with current state laws and regulations, correct internal inconsistencies, and plan for future development within the City of Palm Desert. This update provides substantial public benefit by enhancing safety, mobility, and overall quality of life for residents, while establishing the policies, programs, and goals that guide the City’s transportation planning efforts. SECTION 3. CEQA Determination. The Planning Commission does recommend that the City Council finds that the CEQA Addendum to the City’s certified General Plan Environmental Impact Report is complete and adequate for consideration, as presented in Exhibit “A” attached hereto. SECTION 4. Project Recommendations. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council approve the amendment to the Mobility (Circulation) Element, as presented in Exhibit “B” attached hereto; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2908 3 SECTION 5. Project Recommendations. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council approve the Transportation Study Guidelines, as presented in Exhibit “C” attached hereto; and SECTION 6. Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at the City’s office at 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260. Rosie Lua, the Secretary to the Palm Desert Planning Commission, is the custodian of the record of proceedings. SECTION 7. Execution of Resolution. The Chairperson of the Planning Commission signs this Resolution, and the Secretary to the Commission shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption thereof. SECTION 8. Recitals. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as substantive findings of this Resolution. ADOPTED ON November 18, 2025. LINSDAY HOLT CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ROSIE LUA SECRETARY I, Rosie Lua, Secretary of the City of Palm Desert Planning Commission, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2908 is a full, true, and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert on November 18, 2025, by the following vote: AYES: GREEWOOD, HOLT, MEYERHOFF, NICKERSON NOES: NONE ABSENT: COLLUM ABSTAIN: NONE RECUSED: NONE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2908 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Desert, California, on January ___, 2026. ROSIE LUA SECRETARY November 2025 | A ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN EIR SCH No. 2015081020 FOR THE Circulation Element Update City of Palm Desert Prepared for: City of Palm Desert Contact: Carlos Flores Deputy Director of Development Services Palm Desert City Hall 73510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert CA 92260 760.346.0611 x478 cflores@palmdesert.gov Prepared by: PlaceWorks Contact: Mark Teague, AICP 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100 Santa Ana, CA 92707 info@placeworks.com www.placeworks.com A D D E N D U M T O T H E C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T G E N E R A L P L A N E I R C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T Table of Contents November 2025 Page i Section Page 1. ADDENDUM TO THE ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN EIR FOR UPDATE TO THE MOBILITY ELEMENT ........................................................................................................................................ 2 1.1 Background And Overview ............................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Proposed Project ................................................................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Certified EIR ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 1.4 Purpose of an EIR Addendum ......................................................................................................................... 4 2. CEQA ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................ 7 2.1 Environmental Analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Findings ................................................................................................................................................................. 7 A D D E N D U M T O T H E C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T G E N E R A L P L A N E I R C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T Table of Contents November 2025 Page 2 1. Addendum to the Adopted General Plan EIR for Update to the Mobility Element 1.1 BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW This document is an Addendum to the previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse [SCH] No. 2015081020) for the Palm Desert General Plan, which was certified on November 10, 2016 (referred to as the “existing General Plan”). The purpose of this Addendum is to evaluate whether the proposed update to the Mobility Element (“Proposed Project”) would modify the existing General Plan in such a way as to result in new environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects or would otherwise trigger a need for subsequent environmental review. This document serves as the environmental documentation for the City’s Mobility Element Update. This addendum to the Certified EIR demonstrates that the analysis in that EIR adequately addresses the potential physical impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed project and that the proposed project would not trigger any of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that call for further environmental review. 1.2 PROPOSED PROJECT The City of Palm Desert has prepared an update to its existing Mobility Element within the City’s General Plan, which was last updated in 2016. The update focused on enhancing the City’s multi- modal transportation system to improve connectivity, roadway safety, and travel option availability. The updated Mobility Element included goals, policies, and actions to guide changes to the City’s transportation network over the next 15 years. Since the last General Plan Update, several state policies and regulations have been put in place addressing vehicle miles of travel (VMT), roadway safety, goods movement/truck routes, and roadway right-of-way (ROW) preservation for new developments, among others. The City also intends to clarify transportation goals and address inconsistencies between the existing Mobility Element and other specific and area plans adopted by the City. Key Project elements include: x Updating the City’s roadway cross sections and classifications to align with existing conditions, improve consistency with specific/area plans, and support ROW preservation for new A D D E N D U M T O T H E C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T G E N E R A L P L A N E I R C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T 3. CEQA Analysis November 2025 Page 3 developments. This process adds complete street measures enabling all forms of transportation, not just automobiles. x Reclassifying Country Club Drive from a vehicle-oriented arterial with six planned lanes (three in each direction) to a balanced arterial with four travel lanes (two in each direction) and improved bicycle facilities. x Enhancing the City’s bicycle and pedestrian network and ensuring consistency with recently completed and planned improvements. x Refining the City’s truck route network to improve freight connectivity and remove exposure of trucks to sensitive receptors and areas of high pedestrian activity consistent with AB 98 requirements. x Incorporating recommendations from the City’s Vision Zero Action Plan, Active Transportation Plan, and City Center Area Plan. x Clarifying policies and actions within the General Plan to align with state regulations and improve consistency. x Adopting updated Transportation Study Guidelines: CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service (LOS) Safety and Multimodal Operations Assessment. 1.3 CERTIFIED EIR The General Plan EIR discusses mitigation measures to be implemented by the City to reduce potential adverse environmental impacts to a level that is considered less than significant. Such mitigation measures are noted in the EIR, and in the associated mitigation and monitoring program (MMRP) are discussed and presented in the following sections: Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Public Services and Utilities and Transportation. However, even with the application of feasible mitigation measures, some environmental impacts could not be reduced to less-than-significant levels. The significant and unavoidable impacts are identified below. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact 4.4-1 Generate greenhouse gas emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment and inhibit the goals of Assembly Bill 32. Adoption and implementation of the proposed General Plan would result in new development and redevelopment of property throughout the planning area, which would result in GHG emissions from construction activities that would contribute to the cumulative effect of climate change. Transportation A D D E N D U M T O T H E C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T G E N E R A L P L A N E I R C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T 3. CEQA Analysis Page 4 PlaceWorks Impact 4.15-2 Conflict with Caltrans Performance Standards. Adoption and implementation of the General Plan update would not result in unacceptable performance at the single Caltrans intersection in Palm Desert, but would contribute to unacceptable performance along six freeway segments. Impact 4.15-10 Cumulative Conflict with Caltrans Performance Standards. Adoption and implementation of the General Plan update would not result in unacceptable performance at the single Caltrans intersection in Palm Desert, but would contribute to unacceptable performance along six freeway segments. 1.4 PURPOSE OF AN EIR ADDENDUM According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a), an addendum shall be prepared if some changes or additions to a previously adopted EIR are necessary, but none of the conditions enumerated in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a)(1)– (3) calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations): Section 15162 When an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; A D D E N D U M T O T H E C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T G E N E R A L P L A N E I R C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T 3. CEQA Analysis November 2025 Page 5 (c) Mitigation Programs or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation Program or alternative; or (d) Mitigation Programs or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation Program or alternative. Rationale for Preparing an EIR Addendum As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 (Addendum to an EIR): (a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. (b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. (c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration. (d) The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project. (e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency’s findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. The proposed project would update the Mobility Element Update with minor modifications to the existing and proposed street network. As part of the implementation of the Mobility Element the City will adopt Transportation Study Guidelines: CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service (LOS) Safety and Multimodal Operations Assessment. The Traffic Study Guidelines (TSG) establish procedures for determining when a VMT analysis is required, and what level of change in VMT warrants further study. The intent of the TSG is to help streamline those projects that fall within the screening criteria shown in Section 4.2 of the TSG. The screening criteria allow for some land use and transportation projects to move forward without VMT analysis as they are known to have little to no increase in VMT. In general land uses such as parks, schools and daycare centers are expected to serve the local population to encourage walking or at least shorter vehicle trips than regional commercial or industrial centers. Similarly, transportation projects that add safety, pedestrian amenities, and allow for A D D E N D U M T O T H E C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T G E N E R A L P L A N E I R C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T 3. CEQA Analysis Page 6 PlaceWorks new transit options are expected to reduce VMT and as such are also relieved of the need for further study. Rather than a specific number for VMT reduction the TSG includes Table 1: City of Palm Desert “Project Generated” VMT Thresholds of Significance. As shown in Table 1, VMT analysis is comparative to Riverside County as a whole so the level of significance will change over time. Table 1: City of Palm Desert “Project Generated” VMT Thresholds of Significance Project Type Metric MT Threshold Residential Home Based VMT per Resident Below General Plan Buildout county-average MT per resident Non-Residential MT per Service Population OR Home Based Work (Commute) VMT per Employee1 Below General Plan Buildout county-average MT per service population Mixed Use Developments1 MT per Service Population Below General Plan Buildout county-average MT per service population Transportation Project Total VMT Consistent with the SCAG RTP/SCS and/or City General Plan. If not consistent with the SCAG RTP/SCS and or City General Plan, no net change in city-wide MT compared to the General Plan Buildout condition Source: City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines (TSG) 1 “Mixed use” is defined as a project on a single site with two or more distinct land uses. The TSG requires mitigation for those projects that do not screen, or demonstrate impact below the thresholds in Table 1. Mitigation options, discussed in Section 4.4 Mitigation of the TSG include: 1. Modify the project description to reduce VMT generated by the project. This could include higher residential density, additional mixture of land uses, or a reduction in added lane miles. 2. Implement transportation demand management (TDM) measures to reduce VMT generated by the project. 3. Participate in a VMT fee program and/or VMT mitigation exchange (if they exist) to reduce The mitigation measures would need to be fully described and included in the TSG analysis before consideration of the development project. A D D E N D U M T O T H E C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T G E N E R A L P L A N E I R C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T 3. CEQA Analysis November 2025 Page 7 A copy of this addendum, and all supporting documentation, may be reviewed or obtained at the City of Palm Desert, Palm Desert City Hall, 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert CA 92260, Monday through Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. 2. CEQA Analysis 2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The air quality mitigation measures in the Certified EIR would help reduce impacts with the proposed changes, including setbacks and buffer zones between sensitive receptors. However as noted above, the air quality impacts are significant and unavoidable. While the Mobility Element would expand transportation options including transit, cycling, and walking, the reductions in vehicle trips would likely not be sufficient to reduce air quality impacts to less than significant. The revised roadway configurations with right of way standards and additional improvements for connectivity, walking, cycling, and transit will provide more mobility options for the public. The new roadway configurations are a refinement of those found in the existing Mobility Element and have more engineering detail that will aid in communicating expectations with developers and property owners when designing projects. The refined roadway sections are not substantially different from the existing standards. Development of future roadways consistent with the new Mobility Element will either require their own environmental analysis or be part of adjacent projects and included in the project-specific environmental analysis. The adoption of the TSG will ensure that VMT is evaluated for new projects. First for screening to allow streamlining if the project fits within the appropriate thresholds, and if not to guide the study of project VMT. Thresholds included in the TSG will determine the level of project-specific analysis that is required (i.e. negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report). The proposed project is a refinement of the existing Mobility Element and nothing in the proposed Mobility Element or TSG would increase impacts beyond those evaluated in the General Plan EIR. 2.2 FINDINGS For the reasons explained in this addendum, the project would not cause any new significant environmental impacts or substantially increase the severity of significant environmental impacts disclosed in the Certified EIR. Thus, the proposed project does not trigger any of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, requiring the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and the appropriate A D D E N D U M T O T H E C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T G E N E R A L P L A N E I R C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T 3. CEQA Analysis Page 8 PlaceWorks environmental document as authorized by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(b) is an addendum. The following identifies the standards set forth in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines as they relate to the proposed project. 1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which would require major revisions of the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. The proposed Mobility Element is a refinement of the existing Mobility Element with minor modifications to reflect changes in state law (AB 98, SB 932) and to improve connectivity for all types of travel. As such, there are no new significant environmental impacts that have been identified beyond those already assessed in the General Plan EIR. While future projects developed consistent with the Mobility Element may result in physical impacts from construction, the analysis and mitigation measures from the General Plan EIR will still apply. In addition, future projects will also be required to conduct their own environmental analysis that will ensure compliance with existing city and regional regulations. For example, as disclosed on page 4.4-20 of the Draft EIR, “Implementation of programs and policies, derived largely from the General Plan, will further reduce potential GHG related impacts as it is impossible, due to limitations in the modeling software, to quantify the effectiveness of every General Plan policy provision. Individual development projects will be required to undergo project-specific environmental review, and mitigation measures will be identified at that time to reduce any significant impacts.” All projects must meet the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 2022 Air Quality management plan (AQMP) Despite application of existing policy and mitigation measures, the development of the General Plan will contribute to cumulative greenhouse gas emissions and regionally. The proposed Mobility Element provides the ability to reduce the amount of traffic and therefore reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions, however there is no certainty that the reductions will be realized, and if realized, measurable within the City. In the context of this finding, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of the greenhouse gas impacts disclosed in the General Plan EIR. The City also evaluated impacts to roadway Level of Service (LOS) to ensure that the changes would not negatively impact circulation patterns. The analysis indicates that segment LOS under the proposed project remains consistent with segment LOS under the existing General Plan and does not create new, or exacerbate previously identified, deficiencies in the roadway network. With the passage of SB 743, LOS impacts are no longer considered significant under CEQA. LOS is included here as it was part of the General Plan EIR. All other impacts and mitigation measures outlined in the General Plan EIR will remain applicable. 2. No new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified shows: A D D E N D U M T O T H E C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T G E N E R A L P L A N E I R C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T 3. CEQA Analysis November 2025 Page 9 a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR. The General Plan EIR did not evaluate VMT specifically since it was not required at the time, so the project team modeled VMT using the Riverside County travel demand model (RIVCOM 4.0.1. The land use Socioeconomic Data (SED) assumptions for each model year are summarized in Table 1 of the November 6, 2025 Fehr and Peers VMT and LOS results memo. RIVCOM uses a 2018 base year and 2045 future year. Existing Conditions (2025) and Horizon (2040) years were estimated by interpolating between the base and future year models. Housing unit and employment inputs were updated for the City and adjacent Coachella Valley region based on information provided by the City and CVAG (Measure A housing units). This ensured that all housing units, including seasonal/vacation homes, were accounted for in the model. Demographics were also updated to reflect the typical populations of seasonal homes (older households and households without employment). Pending and approved development projects were also reviewed for consistency within the model. Projects not already accounted for by the growth in the General Plan were added to the model. The proposed land use changes as part of the University Neighborhood Specific Plan (UNSP) update effort currently underway were incorporated into the land use inputs for modeling, dated November 4, 2025. VMT Modeling In evaluating VMT, Fehr & Peers used four different methods which are described below. VMT was evaluated on a per service population basis to understand the efficiency of the transportation system. Service population is the sum of residents and employees. 1. Origin-Destination (OD). The OD Method is used to calculate VMT generated by a City for transportation impact analysis. This method evaluates 100 percent of the trip length with one or both trips ending within a jurisdiction (also known as the Full Accounting Method). This method aggregates passenger vehicles and trucks into one VMT forecast. 2. Production-Attraction (PA). The PA Method isolates VMT by trip purpose. This method does not account for trips that extend beyond the model boundary and does not include truck VMT. This methodology may be appropriate for projects with a single use and with relatively low levels of visitor/external trips. The PA Method includes two VMT forecasts: Home-Based (HB) Production VMT per resident and Home-Based-Work (HBW) Attraction VMT per employee. 3. Boundary Method. The Boundary Method multiplies the volume on each roadway segment by the segment length within a specified geographic boundary. This method includes trips on A D D E N D U M T O T H E C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T G E N E R A L P L A N E I R C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T 3. CEQA Analysis Page 10 PlaceWorks the roadway within that boundary, without discriminating where the trip began or ended. The boundary method is used to understand the VMT effect throughout the City, which is inclusive of trips within the boundary that may take longer routes due to congestion along corridors. The boundary utilized in the assessment is the City of Palm Desert boundary. Table 2 provides a summary of the results of the VMT calculations using the above methodologies. As shown in Table 2, the change in VMT reported in all four methods are minor and in three of the four methods the proposed Mobility Element reduces VMT when compared to the existing Mobility Element. Table 2: Change Summary for OD, PA, and Boundary VMT per Service Population Metric 2025 Current Mobility Element (2040) Proposed Mobility Element (2040) Change in VMT Origin-Destination (OD) VMT per Service Population 33.8 32.4 32.0 -0.4 Production-Attraction (PA) Home Based VMT per Resident 13.9 12.5 11.7 -0.8 Production-Attraction (PA) Home Based Work (Commute) VMT per Employee 29.4 28.6 29.1 0.5 Boundary Method 8.7 8.5 8.2 -0.3 Source: Fehr & Peers, 2025 Level of Service The City also evaluated impacts to roadway Level of Service (LOS) to ensure that the changes would not negatively impact circulation patterns. The analysis indicates that segment LOS under the proposed project remains consistent with segment LOS under the existing General Plan and does not create new, or exacerbate previously identified, deficiencies in the roadway network. A D D E N D U M T O T H E C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T G E N E R A L P L A N E I R C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T 3. CEQA Analysis November 2025 Page 11 As shown above, while VMT was not evaluated in the General Plan EIR, the new calculations demonstrate that the proposed Mobility Element would result in a slight reduction from the calculations associated with the existing element. As such, the proposed project would not result in new or more significant impacts than were discussed in the General Plan EIR. b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR. The General Plan EIR identifies significant and unavoidable impacts to greenhouse gas and traffic. While the proposed project may result in physical impacts from future transportation improvements, the analysis and mitigation measures from the General Plan EIR will still apply. No significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified EIR. c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. The mitigation measures outlined in the General Plan EIR would remain applicable ensuring that future projects address previously identified environmental impacts. d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. There are no mitigation measures or alternatives significantly different from those analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The proposed project is expected to have similar significant impacts to those outlined in the General Plan EIR, and all associated policies and mitigation measures identified to address physical environmental effects will apply to future development, maintaining their mitigating effect. As noted earlier, the project primarily proposes refinements to align with the latest legal requirements and updates policies and best practices for mobility, without altering the underlying land uses or increasing environmental impacts compared to the existing General Plan. Since no new significant impacts are anticipated from the adoption of the Mobility Element, no additional mitigation measures or alternatives are required for the proposed project. References City of Palm Desert Mobility Element Update Final VMT and LOS Results, (Fehr&Peers, 2025) November 6, 2025. General Plan Mobility Element Prepared By: Submitted on: October 2025 Fehr & Peers P Overview The Palm Desert Mobility Element establishes a framework for creating a safe, efficient, and sustainable transportation system that serves residents, businesses, and visitors. As the city continues to grow, mobility plays a central role in preserving a high quality of life, supporting economic activity, and providing connection to opportunity. This element addresses how people and goods move through the community—whether by car, transit, walking, bicycling, or freight—and seeks to balance convenience, accessibility, and sustainability. By planning for a multimodal system, the City aims to provide travel options while supporting sustainability goals and accommodating future growth. Goals and policies in this element emphasize creating livable streets that accommodate all users, reducing traffic-related fatalities and injuries, and expanding multimodal options for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders. At the same time, policies encourage efficient goods movement, actively managed parking, and support for sustainable transportation practices such as reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT), planning for emergencies, and investing in resilient infrastructure. The City is also committed to an interconnected regional transportation system that links the Coachella Valley and prioritizes new connections. Statutory Requirements ASSEMBLY BILL 1358 (CALIFORNIA COMPLETE STREETS ACT) Assembly Bill 1358 (AB 1358), also known as the California Complete Streets Act, was signed into law in 2008. Since 2011, AB 1358 requires that all cities and counties revising the circulation element of their general plan to include complete streets policies. The Act states that cities must adopt a “multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways”. The adoption of complete street policies seeks to create a multi-user friendly network for motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, public transportation users, children, seniors, and the disabled. SENATE BILL 375 (SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES AND CLIMATE PROTECTION ACT) Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) was approved in 2008 in response to Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) as California’s comprehensive approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. SB 375 requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to set regional greenhouse gas reduction targets by requiring cities and counties to develop and implement reduction targets. Cities are encouraged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks by greater integration of transportation, land use, housing, and environmental planning aimed at reducing travel times. Mobility Vision Statement: Palm Desert envisions a safe, regionally connected, and multimodal transportation system that enhances daily life for residents, encourages economic development, and supports the movement of visitors. The City will foster innovative transportation solutions in safety, sustainability, and mobility choices that support community needs and regional networks. P SENATE BILL 743 Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) was adopted in 2013 and changes the metric for which transportation impact analyses are measured for new development and transportation projects. Previously under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), transportation impact analyses were measured based on auto delay, level of service (LOS), and other vehicle-based measures of capacity or traffic congestion. Project are now assessed for their transportation impacts with vehicle miles traveled (VMT). This change in measurement was made to promote multi-modal transportation networks, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and encourage mixed-use and infill development. While CEQA no longer requires LOS analysis, the City will continue to analyze it to assist in street and intersection design. SENATE BILL 932 (THE PLAN FOR THE FUTURE BILL) Senate Bill 932 (SB 932) was signed into law in September 2022 and requires that counties and cities identify high-injury streets and intersections in its General Plan. This bill was passed to improve the safety of all road users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, and other active transportation users. The identification of these high-injury intersections and streets should be followed by safety improvements that must be implemented starting within two years after the adoption of the new circulation element. The City adopted the Palm Desert Vision Zero Strategy in Summer 2025 to support implementation of new policies, programs, and capital improvement projects that increase safety for all road users. A particular focus was placed on supporting Safe Routes to Schools and Safe Routes for Older Adults. The Mobility Element incorporates these policies and notes potential safety countermeasures to consider for the high injury network. SENATE BILL 330 (THE HOUSING CRISIS ACT) Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) was adopted in 2019 and prohibits local jurisdictions from enacting any new laws that would result in the reduction or delay of the legal limit of new housing within their jurisdiction. This bill was passed to reduce administrative delays in housing development and to increase the housing supply throughout the state. To streamline the housing approval process without impacting the City’s circulation network, the Mobility Element includes maximum cross section widths for each roadway classification to ensure adequate right-of-way is reserved for future roadway improvements. ASSEMBLY BILL 98 (PLANNING AND ZONING: LOGISTIC USE – TRUCK ROUTES) Assembly Bill 98 (AB 98) was adopted in 2024 and calls for a statewide standardization in the approval of new or expanded logistic and industrial use. Specifically, it requires cities and counties to update their circulation elements to include designated truck routes that avoid residential areas and other sensitive receptors. The law also requires clear signage for truck routes, parking specifications for trucks, and public facing maps of designated truck routes. ASSEMBLY BILL 3177 (MITIGATION FEE ACT: LAND DEDICATIONS, MITIGATING VEHICULAR TRAFFIC IMPACTS) This law was adopted in 2024 and updates requirements for traffic mitigation fees and land dedication for housing developments. Specifically, cities must set lower traffic impact fees for select P housing developments within transit priority areas. The law also prohibits requiring housing developments to dedicate land for road widening if the purpose is to mitigate traffic impacts, meet level of service (LOS) standards, or achieve a desired roadway width. Exceptions to this policy exist for housing developments outside of transit priority areas and for traffic safety improvements. Context Palm Desert’s transportation system supports the city’s role as a hub for residential, commercial, and tourist activity in the Coachella Valley. The City is well connected by major regional highways, including I-10, Highway 111, and State Route 74, and serves as both a destination and a job center. With a higher ratio of jobs to resident workers, Palm Desert attracts significant commuting from throughout the Valley and beyond. Travel is dominated by the private automobile, though shorter commute times and relatively high levels of local employment highlight opportunities to expand sustainable and convenient alternatives. The City has made progress in advancing multimodal mobility. Investments in sidewalks, shade, and lighting have improved pedestrian comfort, while local bikeways and the regional CV Link pathway have expanded opportunities for cycling, golf cart travel, and low-speed electric vehicles. Public transportation is provided by SunLine Transit, which operates fixed-route, paratransit, and microtransit services within the city. Initiatives including CV Rail are exploring future regional transit connections. Safety, resiliency, and goods movement are key issues shaping mobility in Palm Desert: x Recent data highlights concentrations of crashes along major roadways including Highway 111, Monterey Avenue, Cook Street, and Washington Street. The City is advancing a Vision Zero strategy to reduce injuries and fatalities, particularly for pedestrians and bicyclists. x The City is also focused on strengthening infrastructure for extreme weather events and better prepare the community for emergencies. x Freight activity along the I-10 corridor and new state legislation warrant updates to the truck route network to safely and efficiently support goods movement in and through the City. P Circulation Network The City’s circulation network includes the roadway network and associated roadway classifications, the bicycle and golf cart network, and the truck route network. Figure 4.1 shows the proposed roadway network for the City. Figure 4.11 and Figure 4.12 show the proposed bicycle and golf cart network, respectively. Figure 4.13 illustrates the truck route network through Palm Desert. Roadway Classifications Roadway classifications are used to describe the ultimate buildout of specific roadways within the City and include general design standards for complete street improvements. Cross sections, modal priorities, and descriptions for each classification are provided in Figures 4.2 through 4.10. Enhanced Arterial (Highway 111) Highway 111 functions as an enhanced arterial, serving as the major east-west connection to places in Palm Desert. This classification balances the movement of all modes of traffic: vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, and transit. Business access is provided via adjacent frontage roads that include on- street parking. Safety of all road users is prioritized with enhanced pedestrian crossings, narrower lanes, and coordinated traffic signals. Enhanced landscaping, shade trees, public art, and sidewalk activation opportunities help create a sense of place. The general cross-section consists of a six-lane divided roadway, including a wide median with trees and landscaping. This facility may provide dedicated left turn lanes as well as a right turn lane where warranted. An Enhanced Arterial is designed to accommodate approximately 48,600 vehicles at Level of Service (LOS) D. Enhanced arterials include improved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure such as widened sidewalks, Class IV separated bike lanes, or Class II bike lanes along the frontage road. The City will continue to explore complete street improvements for this roadway. Vehicle Oriented Arterials Vehicular oriented arterials prioritize the movement of automobiles. Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are provided wherever possible but are not emphasized. Driveway spacing is limited and controlled to reduce conflicts with through traffic. The general cross-section consists of a six-lane divided roadway, including a median with trees and landscaping. This facility may consist of dedicated left turn lanes as well as a right turn lane where warranted. A Vehicular Oriented Arterial is designed to accommodate approximately 48,600 vehicles at Level of Service (LOS) D. Bicycle and pedestrian facilities include shared sidewalks and buffered Class II bike lanes. Balanced Arterials Balanced arterials support all transportation modes, with a focus on creating dedicated spaces for vehicles, bicyclists/golf carts, and pedestrians. Improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities are typically provided including meandering sidewalks and buffered Class II bike lanes. P The general cross-section consists of a four-lane divided roadway, including either a median or a two-way left turn lane. This facility may consist of dedicated left turn lanes as well as right turn lanes where warranted. A Balanced Arterial is designed to accommodate approximately 33,500 vehicles at Level of Service (LOS) D. Enhanced Secondary Roadways Enhanced secondary roadways provide high levels of bicycle and pedestrian amenities, similar to enhanced arterials. Vehicular circulation is accommodated but not emphasized. Pedestrian facilities include sidewalks with shade trees. Bicycle facilities include Class IV separated bike lanes, which can operate as one-way or two-way. Typically, only one vehicle lane is provided in each direction. This facility typically includes a raised median with dedicated left turn lanes (and right turn lanes if warranted). An Enhanced Secondary Roadway is designed to accommodate approximately 16,800 vehicles at Level of Service (LOS) D. Secondary Roadways Secondary roadways provide a balance between vehicular circulation, property access, and non- automotive modes. They typically provide a striped two-way left turn median and Class II or Class II buffered bike lanes along with sidewalks and shade trees. Secondary roadways can be further divided into two classifications: x Secondary (2 Lane) – one travel lane in each direction, with additional space reserved for enhanced bicycle facilities and/or on-street parking x Secondary (4 Lane) – two travel lanes in each direction without on-street parking The number of vehicle lanes provided varies based on traffic volumes and adjacent land use context. These roadways are designed to accommodate between 16,800 and 28,200 vehicles at Level of Service (LOS) D. Downtown Collector Streets Downtown collector streets prioritize multimodal travel between downtown Palm Desert and adjacent neighborhoods. The general cross section of a downtown collector street consists of a two-lane undivided roadway. Bicycle movement is accommodated through Class III shared bike route, while sidewalks with pedestrian scale lighting support walking to and from downtown. These streets typically provide parallel on-street parking. A collector street is designed to accommodate approximately 16,800 vehicles at Level of Service (LOS) D. Collector Streets Collector streets link neighborhoods to other roadways in the City’s transportation network. Lower traffic volumes allow for the shared use of space between vehicles and bicyclists. On-street parallel parking and sidewalks are also typically provided. Along select collector streets, a marked Class III bike route may be provided. A collector street is designed to accommodate approximately 16,800 vehicles at Level of Service (LOS) D. P El Paseo El Paseo is a key commercial roadway for the city. This roadway prioritizes property access and includes a very high level of pedestrian amenities. The cross section of El Paseo consists of four vehicle travel lanes (two in each direction), parallel parking, and a wide median with trees and landscaping. The roadway also includes Class III shared bicycle facilities. Specific Plan Roadways These roadways are contained within a specific plan. The ultimate buildout and cross section design is provided in the respective specific plan. ÷Èì K á ² á ģ Á ì ģ Ý ² ÷ DªÈá²ģ &ÁÁá ģ Ý²÷ ²È°^°ÎÝÝ²÷ W Î Ý è Î Á ģ ÷ È ì ÷ D Î È è Ý þ ÷ È ì -²ª ° ø þ ĒĒĒ ÎìÈèÝþ ÁìÝ²÷ -Î÷Áþ>Èáè Á ģ Î Ý Î ģ Ý ² ÷ -²ª°øþģ ĒĒĒ -²ª°ø þ ĒĒĒ 'ÝÁģ &ÎÝģ Ý²÷ sÝÈÝģZÎ D²Á á ģ÷ È ì &ÝÈ¾ģ ^²ÈèÝģ Ý²÷ Ç á ģ ^ è Ý è W Î Ý è Î Á ģ ÷ È ì 'ÝÁ&ÎÝÝ²÷ ÎìÈèÝþģ Áìģ Ý²÷ t á ° ² È ª è Î È ģ ^ è Ý è ^Áþ ģÝ²÷ s² È è ª ģ Ý ² ÷ W² È á ģdÎ ģW Á Ç á ģ-² ª ° ø þ t²Áèģ Ý²÷ dÎ ø È ģ È è Ý ģ t þ ĕēÈģ ÷Èì &Ýģ tÝ²Èªģ Ý²÷ WÁ Ç ģZÎ þ Á ģÝ² ÷ Î Î ¾ ģ ^ è Ý è ÷È Ú ģ È þ Î È ģ Z Î Î - Î Ú Ý ² ÷ dÇ Ý ² á¾ZÎø Ý²÷ &Ýģ tÝ²Èªģ Ý²÷ ĕēÈģ ÷Èì ÎìÈè Ý þ ģÁìģ Ç á ^è Ý è sÝÈ Ý ģZÎ t á ° ² È ª è Î È ģ ^ è Ý è WÁÇ áÝè ZÎøþ Ááá²Ċè²ÎÈá &/'hZģ ĕĥĒ đ Ē ē D²Áá È°Èģ ÝèÝ²Á s°²ìÁÝ ģ KÝ²Èèģ ÝèÝ²Á ÁÈģ ÝèÝ²Á È°Èģ ^ÎÈÝþģ ZÎøþ ^ÎÈÝþģ ^èÝè ģ ĺē ģ >ÈáĻ ^ÎÈÝþģ ^èÝè ģ ĺĕ ģ >ÈáĻ ÎøÈèÎøÈ ģ ÎÁÁèÎÝ ÎÁÁèÎÝ ģ ^èÝè Á ģ WáÎ ^Ú²Ċģ WÁÈ ģ ZÎøþá >ÎÁ ģ ^èÝèá WÎÝèÎÁģ /ÈèÝ°Èªģ ĺWÝÎÚÎáĻ ²èþģ ÎìÈÝþ City of Palm Desert Mobility Element Figure 4.2 212’Max ROW Parallel frontage roads Access Management Three in each direction (11’-12’) Travel Lanes Raised (20’)Median Class IV bike lanes (6’ + 4’ buffer) or Class II bike lanes on frontage road (5’) Bicycle Facilities Use Frontage RoadGolf Cart Facilities Sidewalk (10’+) with business frontage Pedestrian Facilities Allowed (on frontage road)Parking Enhanced Arterial (Highway 111) PedestrianBike/ Golf Cart FreightTransitAuto PrioritizedPrioritizedRestricted1N/AAllowed Class IV Bikeway Variation Frontage Road Bikeway Variation City of Palm Desert Mobility Element Figure 4.3 PedestrianBike/ Golf Cart FreightTransitAuto AllowedAllowedPrioritizedAllowedPrioritized 160’Max ROW Encourage driveway consolidation and manage turns Access Management Three in each direction (11’)Travel Lanes Raised (w/ turn lanes) (14’ typical) Median Class II Buffered Bike Lanes (6’ + 3’ buffer) and/or Shared Sidewalk (10’) Bicycle Facilities Meandering Sidewalk (20’ total width) Golf Cart Facilities Meandering Sidewalk (20’ total width) Pedestrian Facilities Not AllowedParking Vehicle Oriented Arterial City of Palm Desert Mobility Element Figure 4.4 140’Max ROW Encourage driveway consolidation and manage turns Access Management Two in each direction (11’)Travel Lanes Raised (w/ turn lanes) (14’ typical) Median Buffered Class II Bike Lanes (6’ + 4’ buffer)Bicycle Facilities Use Bike LanesGolf Cart Facilities Meandering Sidewalk (20’ total width) Pedestrian Facilities Not AllowedParking Balanced Arterial PedestrianBike/ Golf Cart FreightTransitAuto AllowedPrioritizedRestricted1AllowedPrioritized 1Truck traffic is permitted on designated truck routes or for local deliveries. EÎèħģd°ģ©ÎÁÁÎø²ÈªģÝÎøþģáªÇÈèáģÇþģ²ÈÁìģÈģ²è²ÎÈÁģèÝ÷ÁģÁÈģ ²Èģ°ģ²Ýè²ÎÈĦģø²è°ģģÇý²ÇìÇģZKtģÎ©ģĒėēŋħ v WÎÝèÎÁģ÷Èìģĺ/ĵĒđģèÎģ&ÝÈ¾ģ^²ÈèÝģÝ²÷Ļ v &ÝÈ¾ģ^²ÈèÝģÝ²÷ģĺÎÎ¾ģ^èÝèģèÎģWÎÝèÎÁģ÷ÈìĻ City of Palm Desert Mobility Element Figure 4.5 112’Max ROW Encourage driveway consolidation and manage turns Access Management One in each direction (11’)Travel Lanes Raised (w/ turn lanes) (14’ typical) Median Class IV Bike Lanes (8’ + 4-6’ buffer)Bicycle Facilities Use Bike LanesGolf Cart Facilities Sidewalk (10’) with buffer zone or Meandering Sidewalk (20’ total width) Pedestrian Facilities Not AllowedParking Enhanced Secondary Roadway PedestrianBike/ Golf Cart FreightTransitAuto AllowedAllowedAllowedPrioritizedPrioritized One-Way Bikeway Variation Two-Way Bikeway Variation City of Palm Desert Mobility Element Figure 4.6 108’Max ROW Direct driveway access allowed Access Management One in each direction (11’)Travel Lanes Two-Way Left Turn Lane or Raised (14’ typical)2 Median Buffered Class II Bike Lanes (6’ + 3’ buffer)Bicycle Facilities Use Bike LanesGolf Cart Facilities Sidewalk (10’)Pedestrian Facilities AllowedParking Secondary Roadway (2 Lane) 1Truck traffic is permitted on designated truck routes or for local deliveries. PedestrianBike/ Golf Cart FreightTransitAuto AllowedPrioritizedRestricted1N/APrioritized City of Palm Desert Mobility Element Figure 4.7 108’Max ROW Direct driveway access allowed Access Management Two in each direction (11’)Travel Lanes Two-Way Left Turn Lane or Striped2Median Class II Bike Lanes (6’)Bicycle Facilities Use Bike LanesGolf Cart Facilities Sidewalk (6’) or Meandering Sidewalk (20’ total width) Pedestrian Facilities Not AllowedParking Secondary Roadway (4 Lane) 1Truck traffic is permitted on designated truck routes or for local deliveries. PedestrianBike/ Golf Cart FreightTransitAuto AllowedAllowedRestricted1N/APrioritized City of Palm Desert Mobility Element Figure 4.8 62’Max ROW Direct driveway access allowed Access Management One in each direction (11’ -12’)Travel Lanes N/AMedian Class II Bike Lanes (5’) or Shared Roadway Bicycle Facilities Use Bike Lanes or Shared Roadway Golf Cart Facilities Sidewalk (5’-8’)Pedestrian Facilities AllowedParking Downtown Collector 1Truck traffic is permitted on designated truck routes or for local deliveries. PedestrianBike/ Golf Cart FreightTransitAuto PrioritizedPrioritizedRestricted1N/AAllowed City of Palm Desert Mobility Element Figure 4.9 62’Max ROW Direct driveway access allowed Access Management One in each direction (12’)Travel Lanes N/AMedian Shared RoadwayBicycle Facilities Use Shared Roadway Golf Cart Facilities Sidewalk (5’-8’)Pedestrian Facilities AllowedParking Collector 1Truck traffic is permitted on designated truck routes or for local deliveries. PedestrianBike/ Golf Cart FreightTransitAuto AllowedAllowedRestricted1N/AAllowed City of Palm Desert Mobility Element Figure 4.10 100’-108’Max ROW Street-facing businesses Access Management Two in each direction (12’)Travel Lanes Raised (16’ typical)Median Shared RoadwayBicycle Facilities Use Shared Roadway Golf Cart Facilities Sidewalk (6’-14’)Pedestrian Facilities Allowed (Parallel)Parking El Paseo 1Truck traffic is permitted on designated truck routes or for local deliveries. PedestrianBike/ Golf Cart FreightTransitAuto PrioritizedPrioritizedRestricted1N/AAllowed P Bicycle and Golf Cart Circulation Figure 4.11 documents the bicycle network within Palm Desert and Figure 4.12 notes roadways and facilities that can be used by golf carts and neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs). These routes are for use by bicycles and slow speed vehicles. Key facility types shown on these maps are described below. Classification Description CV Link CV Link Connector Facility through signage, crossing treatments, or separate facilities that Class I Class II as joint use facilities used by golf carts and bicycles. These facilities can Class III Class IV as joint use facilities used by golf carts and bicycles. These facilities include physical vertical separation on the roadway, such as with bollards, Truck Routes and Goods Movement Figure 4.13 shows the designated truck routes within Palm Desert. Truck routes are intended to facilitate the through movement of trucks within the City while avoiding sensitive receptors and critical land uses (e.g. schools, parks, residential areas). Truck routes prioritize connections to commercial and industrial areas and regional highways. Consistent with AB 98, the City will make truck route information available online and enforce commercial vehicle restrictions on non-truck route designated roadways through posted weight restrictions. K á ² á ģ Á ì ģ Ý ² ÷ DªÈá²ģ &ÁÁá ģ Ý²÷ ²È°^°ÎÝÝ²÷ W Î Ý è Î Á ģ ÷ È ì D Î È è Ý þ ÷ È ì -²ª ° ø þ ĒĒĒ ÎìÈèÝþ ÁìÝ²÷ -Î÷Áþ >Èáè Á ģ Î Ý Î ģ Ý ² ÷ -²ª°øþģ ĒĒĒ -²ª°ø þ ĒĒĒ 'ÝÁģ &ÎÝģ Ý²÷ sÝÈÝģ ZÎ D²Á á ģ÷ È ì &ÝÈ¾ģ ^²ÈèÝģ Ý²÷ W Î Ý è Î Á ģ ÷ È ì 'ÝÁ&ÎÝÝ²÷ ÎìÈèÝþģ Áìģ Ý²÷ ^Á s² È è ª ģ Ý ² ÷ W²È á ģdÎ ģW Á Ç á ģ-² ª ° ø þ t²Áèģ Ý²÷ dÎ ø È ģ È è Ý ģ t þ ĕēÈģ ÷Èì &Ýģ tÝ²Èªģ Ý²÷ WÁ Ç ģZÎþ Á ģÝ²÷ Î Î ¾ ģ ^è Ý è Ú ģ È þ Î È ģ Z Î Î - Î Ú Ý ² ÷ dÇ Ý ² á ¾ ZÎø Ý²÷ &Ýģ tÝ²Èªģ Ý²÷ sÝÈ Ý ģZÎt á ° ² È ª è Î È ģ ^ è Ý è WÁÇ ģ áÝè ģ ²þÁģ EèøÎÝ¾ &/'hZģ ĕĥĒĒ đ Ē ē D²Áá Ááá ģ /ģ ^ÚÝÝģ Wè° Ááá ģ //ģ ^èÝ²Úģ >È Ááá ģ ///ģ WÝÇ²èèģ ÎÈ ģ >ÎÁ ģ ZÎ Ááá ģ /s ģ ^ÚÝèģ ²¾ģ >È WÝÎÚÎáģ ²¾ģ ÎÝÝ²ÎÝ ģ ĵ ģ &²ÈÁ ģ á²ªÈ ģ d s ģ >²È¾ s ģ ÎÈÈèÎÝá WÎÝèÎÁģ /ÈèÝ°Èªģ ĺWÝÎÚÎáĻ WìÁ²ģ ^°ÎÎÁá ÎÁÁªģ ÇÚìáá ²èþģ ÎìÈÝþ K á ² á ģ Á ì ģ Ý ² ÷ DªÈá²ģ &ÁÁá ģ Ý²÷ ²È°^°ÎÝÝ²÷ D Î È è Ý þ ÷ È ì -²ª ° ø þ ĒĒĒ ÎìÈèÝþ ÁìÝ²÷ -Î÷Áþ >Èáè Á ģ Î Ý Î ģ Ý ² ÷ -²ª°øþģ ĒĒĒ -²ª°ø þ ĒĒĒ 'ÝÁģ &ÎÝģ Ý²÷ sÝÈÝģ D²Á á ģ÷ È ì &ÝÈ¾ģ ^²ÈèÝģ Ý²÷ W Î Ý è Î Á ģ ÷ È ì 'ÝÁ&ÎÝÝ²÷ ÎìÈèÝþģ Áìģ Ý²÷ s² È è ª ģ Ý ² ÷ W²È á ģdÎ ģW Á Ç á ģ-² ª ° ø þ t²Áèģ Ý²÷ dÎ ø È ģ È è Ý ģ t þ ĕēÈģ ÷Èì &Ýģ tÝ²Èªģ Ý²÷ WÁ Ç ģZÎþ Á ģ Î Î ¾ ģ ^è Ý è Ú ģ È þ Î È ģ Z Î Î - Î Ú Ý ² ÷ dÇ Ý ² á ¾ ZÎø Ý²÷ sÝÈ Ý ģZÎt á ° ² È ª è Î È ģ ^ è Ý è WÁÇ ģ áÝè ģ 'ÎÁ©ģ Ýè ģ EèøÎÝ¾ &/'hZģ ĕĥĒē đ Ē ē D²Áá Ááá ģ /ģ ^ÚÝèģ Wè° Ááá ģ //ģ ^èÝ²Úģ >È Ááá ģ ///ģ >ÎÁ ģ ZÎ ^°Ýģ ^²øÁ¾ s ģ >²È¾ s ģ ÎÈÈèÎÝá WÎÝèÎÁģ /ÈèÝ°Èªģ ĺWÝÎÚÎáĻ WìÁ²ģ ^°ÎÎÁá ÎÁÁªģ ÇÚìáá ²èþģ ÎìÈÝþ ÷Èì K á ² á ģ Á ì ģ Ý ² ÷ DªÈá²ģ &ÁÁá ģ Ý²÷ ²È°^°ÎÝÝ²÷ W Î Ý è Î Á ģ ÷ È ì ÷ D Î È è Ý þ ÷ È ì -²ª ° ø þ ĒĒĒ ÎìÈèÝþ ÁìÝ²÷ -Î÷Áþ>Èáè Á ģ Î Ý Î ģ Ý ² ÷ -²ª°øþģ ĒĒĒ -²ª°ø þ ĒĒĒ 'ÝÁģ &ÎÝģ Ý²÷ sÝÈÝģZÎ D²Á á ģ÷ È ì &ÝÈ¾ģ ^²ÈèÝģ Ý²÷ Ç á ģ ^ è Ý è WÎ Ý è Î Á ģ ÷ È ì 'ÝÁ&ÎÝÝ²÷ ÎìÈèÝþģ Áìģ Ý²÷ t á ° ² È ª è Î È ģ ^ è Ý è ^Áþ ģÝ²÷ s² È è ª ģ Ý ² ÷ W² È á ģdÎ ģW Á Ç á ģ-² ª ° ø þ t²Áèģ Ý²÷ dÎ ø È ģ È è Ý ģ t þ ĕēÈģ ÷Èì &Ýģ tÝ²Èªģ Ý²÷ W Á Ç ģZÎ þ Á ģÝ² ÷ Î Î ¾ ģ ^ è Ý è ÷È Ú ģ È þ Î È ģ Z Î Î - Î Ú Ý ² ÷ dÇ Ý ² á ¾ ZÎø Ý²÷ &Ýģ tÝ²Èªģ Ý²÷ ĕēÈģ ÷Èì ÎìÈè Ý þ ģÁì ģ Ç á ^è Ý è sÝÈ Ý ģZÎ t á ° ² È ª è Î È ģ ^ è Ý è WÁÇ ģ áÝè ģ dÝì¾ģ ZÎìèģ EèøÎÝ¾ &/'hZģ ĕĥĒĔ đ Ē ē D²Áá ý²áè²Èª WÝÎÚÎá ÎÈÈè²Èªģ dÝì¾ģ ZÎìèá WÎÝèÎÁģ /ÈèÝ°Èªģ ĺWÝÎÚÎáĻ WìÁ²ģ ^°ÎÎÁá ÎÁÁªģ ÇÚìáá ²èþģ ÎìÈÝþ dÝì¾ ÝÎìèá Ý ²ÈèÈ èÎ ©²Á²èè è°ÝÎìª° èÝ©Ċĥ ÎÈá²áèÈè ø²è° è ° Á²©ÎÝÈ² s°²Á ÎĦ èÝì¾á Çþ ìè²Á²ą Èþ ÝÎøþ èÎ ÎÇÚÁè Á²÷Ý²áĲÚ²¾ĵìÚáĥ P Regional Transportation Improvements Portola Avenue Freeway Interchange The Mobility Element includes the proposed I-10 freeway interchange at Portola Avenue in North Palm Desert. The City is committed to improving access and relieving congestion along the I-10 corridor and will work with regional, state, and federal partners to facilitate this major project. The interchange provides several benefits for Palm Desert including: x Congestion relief at the adjacent Monterey Avenue and Cook Street interchanges x Reduced vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the interchange provides a more direct path of travel for motorists x Supporting development and growth in North Palm Desert x Consistency with state goals and regional transportation plans CV Rail The Coachella Valley Rail (CV Rail) project, also known as the Coachella Valley–San Gorgonio Pass Corridor, is a proposed intercity passenger rail service that will connect downtown Los Angeles with the Coachella Valley, providing an alternative to Interstate 10 for regional travel. The route would span approximately 144 miles, with a potential stop in Palm Desert. The project is being led by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) in partnership with Caltrans, Amtrak, and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). The City supports this project as it aligns closely with Palm Desert’s mobility goals to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT), expand sustainable transportation options, and strengthen regional coordination. Additionally, the project provides opportunities for walkable, mixed-use transit- oriented development (TOD) around the potential station area. Palm Desert will continue collaborating with RCTC and partner agencies to ensure that future rail service is seamlessly integrated into the city’s transportation system. Source: Riverside County Transportation Commission P Transportation Performance Metrics Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) The Mobility Element promotes efficiency and sustainability in the transportation system. Several policies address VMT efficiency and encourage strategies including transportation demand management (TDM), low-VMT development patterns, and multimodal travel options. The City’s transportation study guidelines also lay out approaches to evaluating VMT for development projects, balancing development with sustainability. W Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) measures the total number of miles driven by all vehicles attributed to a specific project or within a specific area. It’s often evaluated on a per person basis to understand the efficiency of the transportation system. VMT is an important tool that helps inform Palm Desert about land use and transportation network relationships that influence travel demand, emissions, and travel choices. The State of California now requires cities to evaluate transportation impacts using VMT under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), shifting focus from how quickly cars move to how efficiently people can access destinations. Level of Service (LOS) To support local planning decisions and manage congestion, Palm Desert will continue to analyze traffic conditions at intersections and along roadways using Level of Service (LOS). LOS is a measure of how efficiently streets and intersections move vehicle traffic, assigning a letter grade from A (free- flowing conditions) to F (congested conditions) based on average vehicle delay. While no longer required for CEQA, LOS analysis is still included in the City’s transportation study guidelines for local development projects. The City strives to maintain LOS D or better conditions during peak hours across most of the City. In the City Center, a lower LOS E threshold is allowed due to right-of-way constraints and a desire to support multimodal travel. P Safety Palm Desert is committed to improving roadway safety and aims to eliminate traffic-related deaths and serious injuries. Building on the City’s Vision Zero Action Plan, the Mobility Element advances comprehensive goals, policies, and actions that address roadway safety holistically. High Injury Network The High Injury Network (HIN) is a subset of the City’s street system with a higher concentration of fatal and serious injury crashes, whether by driving, walking, bicycling, or riding a motorcycle. The HIN network is shown on Figure 4.14. 83 percent of all serious and fatal crashes occurred on the HIN (8 percent of Palm Desert roadways). Priority Safety Improvements The Mobility Element includes policies that prioritize safety improvements along the HIN, with the goal of implementing safety improvements along all HIN roadways by 2050. These include the improvements presented in the City’s Vision Zero Action Plan. Safety Countermeasures Palm Desert promotes the use of proven safety countermeasures to improve road safety for all users. Key safety countermeasures include: x Separated and buffered bicycle facilities x Curb extensions and ADA curb ramp improvements x High visibility crosswalks x Sidewalk gap closures x Leading pedestrian interval (LPI) x Pedestrian scale lighting x Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) x Advance yield and stop markings x Traffic calming medians x Roundabouts x Narrowed travel lanes Safe System Approach š Vision Zero The Safe System Approach is a transportation safety philosophy that adapts road design to anticipate human error and reduce the chances of serious injuries or fatalities. It incorporates the following principles: x Humans Make Mistakes: The transportation system should accommodate variations in behaviors and decisions. x Humans Are Vulnerable: The transportation system should protect human vulnerabilities, particularly users without the protection of a vehicle. x Responsibility is Shared: Governments, industry, non-profits, and the public must work together to address safety. x Safety is Proactive: Solutions should be applied systemically and in advance of crash history when possible. x Redundancy is Crucial: Reducing risks requires a layered approach to safety. Solutions focus on a complete approach to safety through improved driver behavior, road design, vehicles, speed management, and post- crash care. Vision Zero builds on the Safe System Approach with a clear goal of zero traffic deaths or serious injuries on roadways. ÷Èìģ ĕę K á ² á ģ Á ì ģ Ý ² ÷ DªÈá²ģ &ÁÁá ģ Ý²÷ ²È°ģ ^°ÎÝģ Ý²÷ W Î Ý è Î Á ģ ÷ È ì D Î È è Ý þ ÷È ì -²ª°øþĒĒĒ ÁÁģ ^²ÈÁÎ Îì È èÝþ Á ì Ý ²÷ -Î÷Áþ>È áè Á ģ Î Ý Î ģ Ý ² ÷ -²ª°øþģ ĒĒĒ ÷Èìģ Ėē -²ª°øþĒĒĒ 'ÝÁģ &ÎÝģ Ý²÷ sÝÈÝģZÎ ² á È °ÎøÝÝ²÷ D²Á á ÷ È ì &ÝÈ¾ģ ^²ÈèÝģ Ý²÷ ÷Èìģ Ėđ Ç á ģ ^ è Ý è W Î Ý è Î Á ģ ÷ È ì 'ÝÁ&ÎÝÝ²÷ ÎìÈèÝþģ Áìģ Ý²÷ t á ° ² È ª è Î È ģ ^ è Ý è ^Áþ Ý ² ÷ s² È è ª ģ Ý ² ÷ W² È á ģdÎ W Á Ç á ģ-² ª ° ø þ t²Áèģ Ý²÷ dÎ ø È ģ È è Ý ģ t þ ĕēEģ ÷Èì &Ýģ tÝ²Èªģ Ý²÷ WÁ Ç Z Î þ Á Ý ² ÷ ģ s Á Á ģ Ý ² ÷ Î Î ¾ ģ ^ è Ý è ÷Èìģ ĕđ Ú ģ È þ Î È ģ Z Î Î - ÎÚ Ý ² ÷ dÇÝ²á¾ZÎøÝ²÷ &Ýģ tÝ²Èªģ Ý²÷ ĕēEģ ÷Èì ÎìÈèÝ þ ģÁìģÝ²÷ ì È ģ W Á Ç á ģ Z Î Ç á ^èÝè sÝÈÝZÎt á ° ² È ª è Î È ^ èÝ è WÁÇ ģ áÝè ģ -²ª°ģ /È¼ìÝþ ģ EèøÎÝ¾ &/'hZģ ĕĥĒĕ đ Ē ē D²Áá -/E ģ EèøÎÝ¾ ÎÁÁªģ ÇÚìáá WìÁ²ģ ^°ÎÎÁá WÎÝèÎÁģ /ÈèÝ°Èªģ ĺWÝÎÚÎáĻ ²èþģ ÎìÈÝþ D Î È è Ý þ ģ ÷ È ì DªÈá²ģ &ÁÁá ģ Ý²÷ W Î Ý è Î Á ÷ È ì -²ª°øþģ ĒĒĒ &Ýģ tÝ²Èªģ Ý²÷ Î Î ¾ ģ ^ è Ý è Ú ģ È þ Î È ģ Z Î Á ģ WáÎ ^ÎìÝħģ s²á²ÎÈ ģ ÝÎģ è²ÎÈ ģ WÁÈĥ P Goals and Policies Goal 1: Livable Streets. A balanced transportation system that accommodates all modes of travel safely and efficiently. Policy Number Policy 1.1 Complete Streets. Consider all modes of travel in planning, design, and construction of all transportation projects to create safe, livable, and inviting environments for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and public transit users of all 1.2 Transportation System Impacts. Evaluate transportation and development projects in a manner that addresses the impacts of all travel modes through the best available practices and City standards. Verify consistency with the goals and 1.3 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Evaluate transportation impacts under CEQA using VMT consistent with State guidance and the City’s adopted thresholds of significance. Promote transportation demand management (TDM) strategies, low- 1.4 Facility Service Levels. Determine appropriate service levels for all modes of transportation and develop guidelines to evaluate impacts to these modes for all related public and private projects. Provide flexibility for lower vehicle level of service in the City Center, high pedestrian activity zones, and other areas where 1.5 Roadway Design Standards. Implement transportation design standards that guide the planning, design, and construction of infrastructure projects. Prioritize improvements for non-auto modes of travel and innovative street and intersection 1.6 Emergency Vehicle Access. Evaluate the impacts of transportation network changes on emergency vehicle access and response times. 1.7 such as signal coordination, signal retiming, and other applicable techniques to P Goal 2: Safe Transportation System. A transportation system that maximizes the safety of all modes of travel, with a focus on reducing traffic-related injuries and fatalities. Policy Number Policy 2.1 of Vision Zero, evaluating roadway safety holistically to account for human behavior, vulnerable road users, and infrastructure design. 2.2 roadways with higher crash rates and in areas with higher numbers of vulnerable road users, including near schools and older-adult concentration areas, building off the citywide Vision Zero Action Plan recommendations. Begin implementation within two years and regularly monitor progress, with the goal of implementing safety countermeasures on all safety corridors within 25 years. 2.3 2.4 limits to align with roadway land use context and design features. Leverage 2.5 calming measures for motorized travel on local streets where non-motorized travel is prioritized. 2.6 provide education on road-sharing etiquette for cyclists, pedestrians, and 2.7 major crash locations including those affecting vehicles, bicyclists, and P Goal 3: Pedestrian Facilities. Integrated pedestrian pathways that connect residents, businesses, and educational and community uses. Policy Number Policy 3.1 Pedestrian Network. Provide a safe and convenient circulation system for pedestrians that include sidewalks, crosswalks, places to sit and gather, appropriate street lighting, buffers from moving vehicles, shading, and amenities 3.2 Prioritized Improvements. Prioritize pedestrian improvements in the City Center/El Paseo area, areas of the city with community and/or education facilities, supportive land use patterns, expressed community interest in better pedestrian infrastructure, and non-automotive connections such as multi-use trails and transit 3.3 Roadway Sidewalks. Where feasible, provide adequate sidewalks along all public roadways. 3.4 Access to Development. Require that all new development projects or redevelopment projects provide connections from the site to the external 3.5 Safe Pedestrian Routes to School. Consider school pedestrian access as a priority over vehicular movements when any such conflicts occur. 3.6 Safe Pedestrian Routes for Older Adults. Consider pedestrian access and safety as a priority over vehicular movements when any such conflicts occur in older adult Goal 4: Bicycle Networks. Well-connected bicycle network that facilitates bicycling for commuting, school, shopping, and recreational trips. Policy Number Policy 4.1 4.2 bicycle facilities that close gaps in the bicycle network and connect to regional bicycle routes, community facilities, supportive land use patterns, pedestrian 4.3 bicycle parking. Promote installation of full-service end-of-trip bicycle facilities, P Goal 5: Transit Facilities. An integrated transportation system that supports opportunities to use public and private transit systems. Policy Number Policy 5.1 levels of density, mix of residential and employment uses, and connections to 5.2 routing, and frequencies in conjunction with Sunline Transit to ensure that bus 5.3 5.4 5.5 Goal 6: Goods Movement. A transportation system that facilitates the movement of freight to commercial areas, industrial areas, and along major roadways while minimizing traffic-related conflicts and environmental impacts. Policy Number Policy 6.1 efficiency, and minimize conflicts with sensitive areas like residential zones, schools, and non-motorized travel paths. Ensure truck routes are clearly marked 6.2 friendly practices in freight transportation to improve air quality and reduce the environmental impact of heavy-duty vehicles. 6.3 and rest areas near major freight corridors and industrial zones. Equip truck parking areas with electric power hookups to allow trucks to power auxiliary systems without idling. 6.4 zones near local businesses to provide safe and efficient spaces for drop-offs and pick-ups without blocking traffic, bike lanes, or pedestrian pathways. P Goal 7: Parking. An actively managed system of public and private parking facilities that supports future developments. Policy Number Policy 7.1 appropriate techniques to manage parking demand and ensure efficient use of all 7.2 appropriate strategies to maximize the use and cost effectiveness of public 7.3 to parking which might include leasing of private parking lots for short-term or long-term use, using public parking for temporary private functions, or the 7.4 demand strategies such as shared parking, unbundling parking, and other related 7.5 be designed with pick-up and drop-off zones to accommodate the trend towards P Goal 8: Sustainable Transportation. A resilient and functional transportation network that can be built, operated, and maintained within the City’s resource limitations. Policy Number Policy 8.1 construction costs related to new and/or upgraded infrastructure needed to 8.2 share contributions for impacts to all modes of transportation associated with 8.3 operations and maintenance costs for transportation facilities prior to the 8.4 Consider funding strategies that require private development to contribute to the ongoing operations and maintenance of transportation infrastructure within the 8.5 and Federal grant programs to apply to projects and programs in the City, when 8.6 Palm Desert have access to safe evacuation routes in the event of an emergency. Identify and publicize evacuation routes for residents and visitors, ensuring that they are clearly marked and accessible. Consider populations without vehicle 8.7 transportation infrastructure that is resilient to extreme heat, flooding, and other hazards to ensure long-term functionality. Consider strategies such as cool pavement, shade structures/trees, upgraded culverts, and new road construction P Goal 9: Transportation Innovation. A transportation system that leverages emerging technologies to improve mobility for residents, employees, and visitors. Policy Number Policy 9.1 technologies such as autonomous and connected vehicles for use by City Staff. Evaluate and implement potential required changes to infrastructure as 9.2 transportation approaches such as transportation network companies, mobility 9.3 9.4 and procedures to determine their utility in the analysis of existing and future 9.5 and Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEV) by supporting the use of EVs and Goal 10: Regional Coordination. The City transportation system operates as an integral element of the larger regional system. Policy Number Policy 10.1 traffic. Consider but don’t prioritize the movement of through vehicles through 10.2 on the planning, design, and construction of regional roadways to provide an 10.3 agencies on the planning, design, and construction of regional non- motorized 10.4 planning, design, and construction of regional transportation facilities, including the construction of an Amtrak Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Line station in Palm 10.5 non-motorized improvements to focus the City’s outreach with agencies such as Transportation Study Guidelines CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Level of Service (LOS) Safety and Multimodal Operations Assessment Prepared for: Submitted on: City of Palm Desert October 2025 P Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background Information ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Guidelines Organization ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2. City of Palm Desert Thresholds ............................................................................................... 2 2.1 CEQA VMT Thresholds ...................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Level of Service Threshold .............................................................................................................................. 3 2.3 Safety and Multimodal Thresholds ................................................................................................................ 3 3. Analysis Scoping Process ......................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Need for a Transportation Study ..................................................................................................................... 5 3.2 Scoping Agreement ........................................................................................................................................... 5 4. VMT Analysis – CEQA Assessment ........................................................................................ 6 4.1 Analysis Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 6 4.2 VMT Screening Criteria .................................................................................................................................... 7 4.3 VMT Analysis for Non-Screened Projects ................................................................................................... 9 4.4 Mitigation ............................................................................................................................................................. 11 5. Level of Service (LOS) Analysis – Non-CEQA Assessment ................................................ 13 5.1 Types of Studies ................................................................................................................................................. 13 5.2 Scope of LOS Study .......................................................................................................................................... 13 5.3 Data Collection ..................................................................................................................................................14 5.4 Project Characteristics .................................................................................................................................... 15 5.5 Traffic Analysis Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 16 5.6 Site Access Analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 18 5.7 Project Fair Share ............................................................................................................................................ 20 6. Safety and Multimodal Operations Assessment .................................................................... 21 6.1 Safety Assessment ............................................................................................................................................. 21 6.2 Multimodal Operations Assessment ...........................................................................................................22 P Attachments Attachment A: Transportation Study Scoping Form Attachments B-D: Low VMT Zones List of Figures Figure 1: City Center Area LOS E Threshold Zone ................................................................................................... 4 List of Tables Table 1: City of Palm Desert “Project Generated” VMT Thresholds of Significance ...................................... 2 Table 2: Intersection LOS Criteria ............................................................................................................................... 17 Table 3: Maximum Daily Motor Vehicle Volumes .................................................................................................. 18 Table 4: Roadway Segment Level of Service Thresholds .................................................................................... 18 Table 5: Multimodal Operations Assessment Checklist ..................................................................................... 22 City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 1 1. Introduction 1.1 Background Information Consistent with SB 743, CEQA transportation impacts must be identified using vehicle-miles- traveled (VMT) as the preferred metric. CEQA implementation guidelines published by the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) (and formerly known as the Office of Planning and Research or OPR) state that local agencies are encouraged to formally adopt significance thresholds that are used to determine the significance of environmental impacts. These guidelines list the City’s significance thresholds, which are in line with recommendations from the state and intend to improve the efficiency of the transportation system. The City also maintains a level of service (LOS) goal and safety/multimodal access goals, which are intended to understand changes in traffic conditions because of development projects and maintain acceptable traffic conditions. The purpose of these guidelines is to provide specifications related to methodologies, tools, and other key assumptions that should be considered for both VMT assessment and LOS assessment when evaluating projects in the City of Palm Desert. The City’s Department of Public Works reserves the right to modify these guidelines based on project-specific characteristics. Practitioners completing VMT assessments should have sufficient expertise in SB 743 requirements and travel demand forecasting models to ensure accurate and updated assessments. 1.2 Guidelines Organization The remainder of this guidelines document is organized as follows: Section 2: City of Palm Desert Thresholds outlines the adopted thresholds used by the City to determine CEQA transportation impacts and non-CEQA LOS deficiencies. Section 3: Analysis Scoping Process summarizes the process for communicating with the City to determine the appropriate analysis scope and procedures. This section also documents when a transportation study is required. Section 4: VMT Analysis – CEQA Assessment details the preferred methodology for analyzing VMT generated by a project. This includes screening criteria, methodology for non-screened projects, and potential mitigation. Section 5: LOS Analysis – Non-CEQA Assessment describes the preferred methodology for analyzing LOS deficiencies at intersections and along roadway segments. This section includes procedures for analysis and improvements to address LOS deficiencies. Section 6: Safety and Multimodal Analysis – Non-CEQA Assessment describes the preferred methodology for evaluating potential safety deficiencies and addresses multi-modal accessibility to a Project. City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 2 2. City of Palm Desert Thresholds 2.1 CEQA VMT Thresholds A project would result in a significant “project-generated” VMT impact if it exceeds the thresholds listed in Table 1. Table 1: City of Palm Desert “Project Generated” VMT Thresholds of Significance Residential Non-Residential Population OR Home Based Work (Commute) VMT per 1 Below General Plan Buildout county-average VMT per service population 1 Transportation Project Total VMT General Plan. If not consistent with the SCAG RTP/SCS and or City General Plan, no net change in city-wide VMT compared to the General Plan Buildout 1Note that service population is the sum of residents and employees. For non-residential projects where a high share of overall trips are generated by visitors, it may be appropriate to include visitors, customers, and/or overnight guests as part of the service population to show VMT per capita. Alternatively, the analyst can focus only on home-based-work (commute) VMT generated per employee. The appropriate VMT metric(s) should be determined during the project scoping phase in consultation with City staff. Projects must also evaluate their overall effect on city-wide VMT (known as “project-effect VMT”) using the “boundary” method. The project’s impact on VMT would also be considered significant if the link-level boundary VMT per service population within the City of Palm Desert2 increases under the “plus project” condition compared to the “no project” condition. 1 “Mixed use” is defined as a project on a single site with two or more distinct land uses. 2 Note that for most projects, the City limit boundary should be sufficient. However, for larger projects or projects located near the City limit, a larger boundary should be applied to ensure that the true project effect is not truncated. Typically, this would be double the average trip length to/from the site if the City limit is not appropriate. City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 3 2.2 Level of Service Standard Intersections CITY CENTER AREA Within the City Center area (see Figure 1), a project would result in an intersection LOS deficiency if the added project traffic results in an intersection operating worse than LOS E (LOS F) during any peak hour in the peak season (November-April) AND the project increases total intersection volume by two percent or more. The purpose of this more congested threshold is to promote a walkable downtown and reduce the need for widening roadways in the City Center. Improvement recommendations should be context sensitive and prioritize improvements to existing infrastructure when possible (e.g. traffic signal timing updates). OTHER AREAS Outside of the City Center area, a project would result in an intersection level of service (LOS) deficiency if the added project traffic results in an intersection operating worse than LOS D (e.g. LOS E or F) during any peak hour in the peak season (November-April) AND the project increases total intersection volume by two percent or more. The City will review any identified LOS deficient locations to determine if improvements should be considered at these locations. The City may determine that improvements are not recommended due to right-of-way constraints or other contextual factors. Roadway Segments A project would result in a roadway segment LOS deficiency if the added project traffic results in a roadway segment operating worse than LOS D (LOS E or F). If a roadway segment under “no project” conditions operates at LOS E or worse, an LOS deficiency would occur if the added project traffic increases the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio along that roadway segment by 0.02 or more. Roadway segments should be analyzed using average daily traffic in the peak season (November-April). Note that in cases where both intersection and roadway segment analysis are conducted, the results of the intersection analysis supersede the roadway segment analysis. In other words, if a roadway segment is operating at LOS E and the intersections along that roadway segment are operating at LOS D or better, there would not be a LOS deficiency. 2.3 Safety and Multimodal Thresholds A project would result in a safety deficiency if it adds at least 50 peak hour vehicle trips to an intersection or roadway segment that already has a higher-than-average crash rate. Locations with higher-than-average crash rates are those with a positive Critical Crash Rate (CCR) differential as defined in the City’s Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP). Projects should meet all requirements listed in the multimodal operations assessment checklist (see Table 5). 0DJQHVLD6SULQJ(5 &RDFKHOOD9DOOH\1:5 6DQWD5RVDDQG6DQ-DFLQWR0WQV10 6DQWD5RVD:LOGOLIH$UHD &RDFKHOOD9DOOH\(5 8&'HHS&DQ\RQ1DWXUDO5HVHUYH ǀĞŶƵĞϰϴ KĂ Ɛ ŝ Ɛ ů Ƶ ď ƌ ŝ ǀ Ğ WŽ ƌ ƚ Ž ů Ă ǀ Ğ Ŷ Ƶ Ğ DĂŐŶĞƐŝĂ&ĂůůƐƌŝǀĞ ŝŶĂŚ^ŚŽƌĞƌŝǀĞ WŽ ƌ ƚ Ž ů Ă ǀ Ğ Ŷ Ƶ Ğ DŽŶƚĞƌĞǇ ǀĞŶƵĞ ,ŝŐŚǁĂǇϭϭϭ ŽƵŶƚƌǇ ůƵď ƌŝǀĞ ,ŽǀůĞǇ>ĂŶĞ ĂƐƚ ů Ž ƌ Ă Ě Ž ƌ ŝ ǀ Ğ ,ŝŐŚǁĂǇϭϭϭ ǀĞŶƵĞϱϮ 'ĞƌĂůĚ&ŽƌĚƌŝǀĞ sĂƌŶĞƌZŽ Ă Ě ŝƐĞŶŚŽǁĞƌƌŝǀĞ DŝůĞ Ɛ ǀ Ğ Ŷ Ƶ Ğ &ƌĂŶŬ^ŝŶĂƚƌĂƌŝǀĞ ǀĞŶƵĞϱϬ Ě Ă ŵ Ɛ ^ ƚ ƌ Ğ Ğ ƚ 'ĞƌĂůĚ&ŽƌĚƌŝǀĞ ŽƵŶƚƌǇůƵďƌŝǀĞ ^ĞĞůĞǇ ƌ ŝ ǀ Ğ sŝ Ŷ ƚ Ă Ő Ğ ƌ ŝ ǀ Ğ WŝŶ Ğ Ɛ d Ž W Ă ů ŵ Ɛ , ŝ Ő Ś ǁ Ă Ǉ tŝůĚĐĂƚƌŝǀĞ dŽ ǁ Ŷ Ğ Ŷ ƚ Ğ ƌ t Ă Ǉ ϰϮEĚǀĞŶƵĞ WĂů ŵ Z Ž Ǉ Ă ů Ğ ƌ ŝ ǀ Ğ ,ŝŐŚǁĂǇϭϭϭ &ƌĞĚtĂƌŝŶŐƌŝǀĞ tĂ Ɛ Ś ŝ Ŷ Ő ƚ Ž Ŷ ^ ƚ ƌ Ğ Ğ ƚ ǀ Ğ Ŷ ŝ Ě Ă Ğ ƌ ŵ Ƶ Ě Ă Ɛ Ă s Ă ů ů ƌ ŝ ǀ Ğ Ž Ž Ŭ ^ ƚ ƌ Ğ Ğ ƚ ǀĞŶƵĞϰϬ Ğ Ğ Ɖ Ă Ŷ Ǉ Ž Ŷ Z Ž Ă Ě tĂ ƌ Ŷ Ğ ƌ d ƌ Ă ŝ ů Žď ,ŽƉĞ ƌŝǀĞ dĂŵĂƌŝƐŬZŽǁƌŝǀĞ ϰϮEĚǀĞŶƵĞ ŽƵŶƚƌǇ ů Ƶ ď ƌ ŝ ǀ Ğ Ƶ Ŷ Ğ W Ă ů ŵ Ɛ Z Ž Ă Ě ĚĂŵƐ ^ƚƌĞĞƚ sĂƌŶĞƌZŽĂĚ tĂƐŚŝŶŐƚŽŶ ^ƚƌĞĞƚ x x ²èþ ģ ÈèÝ ģ Ý &/'hZģ Ē đ Ē ē D²Áá ²èþģ ÈèÝ ģ Ý ²èþģ ÎìÈÝþ City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 5 3. Analysis Scoping Process 3.1 Need for a Transportation Study Any proposed project that is subject to discretionary approval by the City Council is subject to CEQA and should follow the requirements for VMT Screening or VMT Analysis as outlined in Section 4. The requirement for an LOS, safety, and multimodal assessment will be based upon, but not limited to, the following criteria: 1. If a new development project generates 100 or more peak hour trips, a full study is required for the proposed project. 2. If a new development project generates between 50 and 100 peak hour trips, a focused traffic impact memo is required to address specific issues at the discretion of the City Engineer. 3. If a new development project generates less than the total peak hour trips associated with the previous existing or approved land use, a focused traffic impact memo is required to address specific issues at the discretion of the City Engineer. 4. The City Engineer may require a project to complete a transportation study at their discretion. 3.2 Scoping Agreement A scoping agreement between the City, project applicant, and consultant/representative completing the analysis shall be made to ensure the analysis is comprehensive and aligns with City guidelines. The project applicant and their consultant shall complete the scoping agreement form (see Attachment A) to outline the project and analysis procedures. The scoping agreement form should include: x Project study area, including intersections and roadway links being analyzed for LOS x Project trip generation, distribution, and assignment x Proposed travel demand model used for forecasting. The preferred travel demand forecasting model is the Riverside Country Travel Demand Model (RIVCOM) but, if that model is upgraded in the future, the most accurate forecasting tool for estimating VMT in Palm Desert should be utilized x Use of other approved projects for background traffic, traffic growth assumptions, or integration with RIVCOM x Identification of unique transportation issues that may be specific to a project’s design or location (e.g. queueing, sight distance, pedestrian/bike access) x Documentation of proposed VMT assessment, including if the project is eligible to be screened from VMT assessment. For projects requiring a full VMT assessment, the scoping memorandum should document the planned procedure for estimated project generated and project effect VMT The applicant shall submit a scoping agreement form to the City for review and obtain approval before preparing the transportation assessment. City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 6 4. VMT Analysis – CEQA Assessment In accordance with SB 743, a VMT analysis should be conducted for land use and transportation projects deemed necessary by the City Engineer. 4.1 Analysis Methodology Projects should be analyzed in a three-step process, which is outlined in the flow chart below: Step 1: Screening Assessment Does the Project meet at least one VMT screening criteria? No further VMT analysis required. Provide justification for screening. Step 2: RIVCOM VMT Analysis Does the project exceed the city level of significance? Step 3: Mitigation Does mitigation reduce the VMT rate below the threshold? Significant Impact; no mitigation is necessary Impact Less than Significant with mitigation Potential significant impact; EIR required with Statement of Overriding Considerations City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 7 4.2 VMT Screening Criteria The City has established a set of screening criteria to determine whether a project’s VMT would be expected to cause a less than significant CEQA transportation impact without having to conduct a detailed VMT analysis. Land Use Projects Land use projects can be screened from further VMT assessment if they meet one or more of the following criteria: 1. Projects Located in a Low VMT Area - Projects in areas with VMT per service population below the County average VMT per service population would be presumed to be less than significant. These areas are shown in Attachments B through D. 2. Projects Located in Transit Priority Areas – Projects located within a ½ mile of a high-quality transit stop/route would be screened from VMT assessment. “High-quality transit stop/route” is defined as a rail station or a bus stop with at minimum 20-minute frequencies during peak commute hours. Currently, the area along Town Center Way is classified as a transit priority area. Transit services adjacent to a project site should be reviewed using the most up-to- date transit schedules. Projects must also meet the following design standards to be presumed to less than significant: a. The Project land use is consistent with the predominant land use type in the area b. Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) greater than or equal to 0.75 c. Does not provide additional parking supply beyond City minimum requirements d. Is consistent with the Sustainable Communities Strategy e. Does not replace affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units 3. Local Serving Land Use Projects –Local serving land uses provide more opportunities for residents and employees to shop, dine, and obtain services closer to home or work. These types of projects tend to shorten trips that are already occurring rather than generating new trips. This lowers the average trip length and VMT. The following local serving uses may be presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT unless the City determines otherwise: a. Libraries, civic centers, community centers, and other civic buildings b. Police/fire stations c. Local parks d. K-12 public schools i. Charter schools, private schools and magnet schools are not considered local-serving schools e. Daycare centers f. Medical/dental office buildings (excluding hospitals) g. Auto repair/tire shops, gas/vehicle service stations h. Gyms/health clubs or fitness studios i. Grocery stores and other local retail 3 3 Consistent with the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation SB 743 Technical Advisory https://lci.ca.gov/docs/20190122-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf . A screening memorandum should be submitted providing justification for how the commercial use is “local serving.” City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 8 j. Local serving assembly uses (places of worship, community organizations) k. Local serving hotels l. Assisted living facilities, senior housing Mixed use projects with non-locally serving components would not be screened from further analysis. The ultimate determination of “local serving” will be made on a case-by-case basis by City staff. 4. Affordable Housing Projects – Affordable housing within existing communities generally improves the jobs-housing match, which lowers commutes and VMT. Furthermore, low- income households typically generate less VMT on a per-household basis. Based on guidance from LCI, 100% affordable residential development is presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact. For projects that are less than 100% affordable, each affordable unit shall be deemed to have no VMT generation. The remaining units shall be analyzed as traditional residential units. Project applicants or their consultants/representatives wishing to screen their project from VMT assessment shall submit a VMT screening memorandum that explains how the proposed project satisfies one or more of the screening criteria. The City will review projects and determine if they can be screened from further VMT analysis. If a proposed project is found to not need a full VMT analysis to satisfy CEQA, an LOS Traffic Study may still be required. Transportation Projects Transportation projects that increase roadway capacity can alter trip patterns, trip length, and trip generation, increasing VMT (a phenomenon known as “induced demand”). Consistent with LCI guidelines, transportation projects that do not increase roadway capacity can be presumed to not have a significant transportation impact and can be screened from VMT assessment. Note that roadway widening projects that are consistent with the RTP/SCS or General Plan shall be considered less than significant subject to consideration of other substantial evidence. If a project is not included in the RTP/SCS or General Plan, the City shall review proposed transportation project descriptions to determine if they satisfy one or more of the project types listed below: x Roadway rehabilitation and maintenance x Safety improvement projects and installation of roadside safety devices (median barriers, guardrails, etc.) x Transportation System Management field elements (cameras, message signs, traffic signal improvements) x Roadway shoulder enhancements, so long as they are not used as automobile travel lanes x Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than one mile in length designed to improve roadway safety x Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of intersection turning lanes, two-way left turn lanes, or emergency breakdown lanes. These lanes shall not be utilized as through lanes x Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets (so long as the project also substantially improves conditions for pedestrians and cyclists) x Conversion of general-purpose lanes to managed lanes or transit-only lanes x Addition of transit-only lanes City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 9 x Reduction in the number of through lanes x Grade separation of a roadway facility from rail, pedestrians, or bicyclists x Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices (including traffic signals and traffic signal priority) x Retiming of traffic signals x Installation of roundabouts or traffic circles x Installation of traffic calming devices x Implementation of new transit service x Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation with no net increase in the number of travel lanes x Removal/relocation of off-street or on-street parking spaces x Adoption/modification of on-street parking or loading restrictions (such as parking meters, time limits, accessible spaces, permit parking, etc.) x Addition of new or enhanced bike and pedestrian facilities on existing streets or within existing public rights-of-way x Addition of Class I bike paths, multi-use paths, or other off-road facilities that serve non- motorized travel x Installation of publicly available EV charging infrastructure Projects that do not conform to any of the project types listed above will be required to complete a full VMT assessment. 4.3 VMT Analysis for Non-Screened Projects Land Use Projects Projects not screened through the steps above or not exempt under CEQA will be required to complete a VMT analysis. This can be completed by forecasting VMT through the RIVCOM model to determine if they have a significant VMT impact. For projects with similar land use to adjacent parcels, the use of the VMT maps by TAZ (Attachments B through D) may be used to estimate a Project’s VMT in lieu of a model run. The analysis methodology shall be confirmed during the Project scoping phase and shall include ‘project generated VMT’ and ‘project effect on VMT’ estimates for the project TAZ (or TAZs). 1. Project generated VMT is the sum of daily VMT of all vehicle trips, for all vehicle types and trip purposes, for all project land uses, divided by the service population (i.e., sum of residents plus employees, and in some cases, visitors/overnight guests) in the analysis area generating the VMT. Total project generated VMT is calculated by summing the “VMT from” and “VMT to” the project site (or a larger area when the project is a plan, such as a Specific Plan or General Plan). These calculations are usually performed using outputs from a travel forecasting model. For residential projects, VMT should be isolated to account for home- based VMT only. For non-residential projects, VMT may be isolated to account for home- based-work (commute) VMT only. 2. Project’s effect on VMT is the total boundary VMT that occurs within a selected geographic boundary (e.g., City, County, or region) by any type of vehicle, for any trip purpose, and includes local trips as well as trips that pass through the area without stopping (such as regional freeway trips). The total boundary VMT captures the project’s combined effect on City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 10 new VMT, shifting of existing VMT to/from other neighborhoods, and/or shifts in existing VMT to alternate travel routes or modes. The following scenarios shall be evaluated in the VMT assessment: x Baseline Conditions – Data is available in the RIVCOM model. x Baseline Plus Project – The project land use must be incorporated into the RIVCOM model either by isolating it in its existing TAZ or by creating a new TAZ specifically for the project x A full base year model run must be performed, and changes in VMT should be evaluated both at the project TAZ level and across the entire model network x Cumulative No Project – Data is available in the RIVCOM model. x Cumulative Plus Project – The project land use must be incorporated into the RIVCOM model either by isolating it in its existing TAZ or by creating a new TAZ specifically for the project x If the project is substantial, the analysis should include a reallocation of equivalent land uses from other TAZs to avoid inflating regional growth assumptions x If reallocation is not performed, the methodology must clearly state this limitation and acknowledge that the VMT effects may be overestimated due to the additive approach The model output should also include total VMT, which includes all vehicle trips and trip purposes and must include reasonableness checks, such as validation of trip production and attraction balancing, to ensure that the project’s effect on VMT is accurately captured. It is incumbent upon the consultant to ensure that the VMT results are appropriate in terms of magnitude and direction of change. In some cases, it may be appropriate to extract the “project generated” VMT using the production- attraction (P/A) trip matrix instead of the origin-destination trip matrix (e.g. pulling VMT from the model at a step when trips can be tracked by trip purpose). This may be appropriate when a project is entirely composed of retail or office uses and there is a need to isolate the home-based-work (HBW) VMT for the purposes of isolating commute VMT. For most projects in the City, and especially for “mixed use” (i.e. composed of both residential and retail/office uses) projects, “project generated” VMT should be extracted using the origin-destination method to provide consistency of reported VMT with the VMT used in the air quality, GHG, and energy sections of the environmental document. The City should evaluate the appropriate methodology based on the project land use types and context. Transportation Projects For transportation projects that increase roadway capacity and are not screened, a finding of a significant impact would be determined if the project results in a net increase in City-wide VMT using the “boundary” method compared to the General Plan Buildout conditions. Regional-scale transportation projects should also evaluate County-wide VMT changes. VMT estimates for transportation projects on applicable facilities could utilize the National Center for Sustainable Transportation (NCST) California Induced Travel Calculator that estimates the percent change in VMT for every percent change in miles to the roadway system (known as “elasticity”). Consistent with LCI findings, an elasticity of 1.0 should be used on these facilities.4 If the project is not on one of these facilities, the RIVCOM model should be utilized as it is the best available tool to 4 An elasticity of 1.0 means that for every percent change in lane miles, there is an expected one percent increase in VMT. City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 11 evaluate facilities that are not consistent with these classifications. If NCST is applied, appropriate reductions to discount truck VMT should be incorporated and documented in the assessment. If the proposed project is a new roadway, VMT should be estimated using the RIVCOM model to understand trip redistribution. Near term elasticities should be estimated by holding the HBW and HB-School trip matrices constant. Cumulative analysis should include full model runs. RIVCOM parameters, including number of iterations and convergence criteria should be modified by the consultant to minimize model “noise.” Consultant shall be responsible in validating that the induced travel results are reasonable in both magnitude and direction of change. Note that for transportation improvements within Caltrans right-of-way, it is required that the analysis of those improvements be consistent with Caltrans SB-743 analysis guidelines. The roadway analysis should compare the VMT associated with the no project condition (e.g. General Plan Buildout) to the VMT associated once the project is completed. The increase in VMT would be considered a significant impact and would be subject to mitigation. 4.4 Mitigation Projects that exceed the VMT threshold(s) are required to mitigate their VMT impact to the extent feasible. To mitigate VMT impacts, the following choices are available: 1. Modify the project description to reduce VMT generated by the project. This could include higher residential density, additional mixture of land uses, or a reduction in added lane miles 2. Implement transportation demand management (TDM) measures to reduce VMT generated by the project. 3. Participate in a VMT fee program and/or VMT mitigation exchange (if they exist) to reduce VMT from the project TDM measures promote the use of non-automobile modes to/from the project site. Potential TDM measures and quantification formulas are documented in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (CAPCOA Handbook). Projects may apply any of the VMT reduction measures outlined in the CAPCOA Handbook or identify project-specific VMT reduction measures. Regional mitigation programs including the VMT mitigation toolbox currently 5 under development by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) may also be used. The City will assess the ability to use regional programs on a project-by-project basis once the mitigation toolbox is adopted by CVAG. The availability, applicability, and effectiveness of VMT mitigation measures will vary based on project type, location, and post-construction operations. When VMT mitigation measures are selected for a project, the analyst should consider these and other aspects and adjust the expected VMT reduction to align with project-specific conditions. The City may determine on a case-by-case basis that certain VMT reduction measures may not be feasible for a specific project and/or that ongoing monitoring may be required. 5 As of June 2025 City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 12 Projects that do not mitigate their VMT to below the City threshold would result in a significant and unavoidable transportation impact which would require a full environmental impact report with a statement of overriding considerations. City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 13 5. Level of Service (LOS) Analysis – Non- CEQA Assessment While no longer considered a CEQA impact, the City of Palm Desert requires that land use and transportation projects conduct a LOS traffic assessment to understand if a project will deteriorate traffic conditions on the City’s roadways and identify potential improvements that would improve traffic operations. Preparation of the LOS report is the responsibility of the project applicant and must be prepared by a qualified professional. Prior to beginning the LOS analysis, the applicant shall submit a scoping agreement (see Section 3) which documents the trip generation, trip distribution, and study methodology, including identifying study intersections and roadway segments. The City may request a meeting with the applicant and/or preparer of the LOS report to discuss the methodology prior to initiating work on the analysis. 5.1 Types of Studies Projects generating greater than 100 net new peak hour trips are required to complete a full LOS assessment. Projects generating 50-100 net new peak hour trips or having fewer peak hour trips than the previous existing or approved land use may complete a focused transportation study in lieu of a full LOS assessment. The focused transportation study should include the following: x Project Description – this includes the project location, project size, existing and proposed land use, site plan, and proposed opening year x Project Trip Generation and Distribution – this should include a table with daily and peak hour trip generation estimates and figure(s) detailing trip distribution. x Project Frontage Operations Assessment –LOS intersection analysis of project access intersections for the following scenarios only: o Existing Conditions o Opening Year No Project o Opening Year Plus Project x Site Access Analysis – refer to Section 5.6 5.2 Scope of LOS Study Study Area Boundaries The minimum area to be studied shall include any intersection of two or more “collector” or higher classification streets, at which the proposed project will add 50 or more peak hour trips, not exceeding a five-mile radius from the project site. The Public Works Department may require deviation from these requirements based on the location and their discretion. Roadway segments classified as arterials adjacent to the project frontage shall also be evaluated. The list of study intersections and roadway segments shall be confirmed with the City Engineer during the scoping agreement process. City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 14 Analysis Scenarios The following study scenarios shall be included for roadway and intersection capacity analysis: 1. Existing Conditions- Existing traffic will be counted to determine current conditions. Traffic count data shall be new or less than two years old. 2. Opening Year No Project. Existing traffic volumes should be adjusted using growth rates proposed by the developer’s consultant and accepted by the City. For intersections outside of the City, the growth rate shall be approved by the affected jurisdiction. Typically, the growth rate can be derived from the regional travel demand model using linear growth assumptions. Background traffic should also include a manual assignment of all approved development projects that are within a two-mile radius of the project. 3. Opening Year Plus Project. Opening Year No Project volumes from Scenario 2 plus project trip assignment for the opening year. In some cases, the project trip assignment will vary between opening year and future year. 4. Horizon Year No Project Conditions- This represents traffic conditions at an identified horizon year (typically coinciding with the forecast horizon year of the RIVCOM travel demand forecasting model). 5. Horizon Year plus Project Conditions- Project traffic added to Scenario 4 identified above (Horizon Year No Project). Depending on project conditions and phasing, the City may require additional analysis scenarios be studied. Study Periods The transportation study shall include at least the following commute periods: 1. Morning (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) 2. Afternoon (3:00 PM to 6:00 PM) Midday and school-release peak hours, other peak hours, off-peak hours, weekend, or special event periods may also be required based on the project location and type of use or as directed by the Public Works Department. 5.3 Data Collection Data for existing traffic conditions shall be collected for the project using the following guidelines: x Peak period turning movement counts at all study intersections and/or driveways, including bicycle and pedestrian counts at intersections x 24-hour daily traffic for all study roadway segments including vehicle classification counts in areas with a high percentage of truck use x Traffic counts shall not be used if more than two years old x Traffic data shall be collected between November through April to account for traffic during the peak season x Traffic counts shall be collected on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, or Thursdays, unless other study periods are also warranted (e.g. weekend) x Traffic data shall not be collected on weeks that include a holiday and non-school session time period unless approved by the Public Works Department City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 15 x For congested conditions, back of queue estimates by approach (and turning movement) should be conducted every fifteen minutes Count data shall be included in the study appendices. 5.4 Project Characteristics Trip Generation Trip generation shall be estimated using the latest edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual unless otherwise directed by the City. In accordance with the City’s General Plan, all truck trips from industrial, warehouse and some retail commercial site shall be converted into Passenger Car Equivalents (PCE) for the capacity analysis. The proposed trip generation shall be listed in the scoping agreement for review and approval by the Public Works Department. Trip Distribution The project trip distribution should represent travel patterns representative of the project during the study peak scenarios. The project team should justify the proposed trip distribution with project data, typical commute patterns, and in some cases origin-destination data or a select-zone analysis using the latest travel demand forecasting model 6 or big data source may be appropriate. The proposed trip distribution shall be listed in the scoping agreement for review and approval by the Public Works Department. The trip distribution may be further refined, after consultation with the Public Works Department, based on consideration of the following factors: x Type of proposed development x Location and intensity of development x Conditions on the roadway network in the vicinity x Similar land use in the vicinity x Truck route system x As directed by the Public Works Department Trip Assignment Generally, project trips are expected to be manually assigned to the study area using the approved trip generation and trip distribution. For larger projects, the travel demand forecasting model may be used to account for redistribution. This type of assignment should be specified in the scoping agreement and approved by the Public Works Department. 6 At the time these guidelines were published, the most appropriate travel demand forecasting model for use in City of Palm Desert and Riverside County is the Riverside County Model (RIVCOM). However, the appropriate travel demand model should be verified in the scoping agreement. City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 16 5.5 Traffic Analysis Methodology Traffic Forecasting The latest version of the Riverside County Travel Demand Model (RIVCOM) consistent with the most recent Southern California Association of Governments Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCAG RTP/SCS) is recommended for traffic forecasting efforts in City of Palm Desert. The model version should be identified in the scoping agreement. The model should be reviewed to confirm that all pending and approved development projects that could affect the project study area are accounted for in the model. The list of appropriate development projects shall be obtained from the City planning department, and coordinating with neighboring jurisdictions may also be required. Opening Year base traffic volumes shall be derived from interpolating straight line growth rate between the existing and Future Year traffic volumes from the travel demand forecasting model 7. The growth rate should be identified in the transportation study. Future Year traffic volumes shall be derived from the updated model by applying growth from the base to future models to the traffic counts, also known as the Difference method. Other forecasting methods may be appropriate, but should be documented. Intersection Analysis Intersection analysis shall be conducted utilizing the current edition of the Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology. Closely spaced intersections are to be analyzed using analysis tools capable of accounting for turn lane storage, queue length, blockage, etc. such the Synchro software package. Any other software should be confirmed through the scoping agreement. Traffic signal timing data shall be provided by the City (or appropriate jurisdiction if traffic signal is not operated by the City) and incorporated into the existing and opening-year analyses. Traffic signal splits should be optimized for future year analyses or if substantial changes are made at a study intersection in the opening year. Peak hour factor should be collected in the field and utilized in the existing and opening-year analyses. In cases where traffic is added from a significant number of cumulative projects, the consultant shall use their engineering judgement in the application of peak hour factors to maintain consistency with the existing conditions analyses. A peak hour factor of 0.95 shall be applied to buildout traffic conditions, except in locations where using the observed peak hour factor may be more appropriate (e.g. adjacent to a school). The following input parameters shall be put in place for signalized intersection analysis: x Base Saturation Flow Rate- 1900 pc/hr/ln. x Heavy Vehicle Factor- Determine the percentage of heavy vehicles in existing traffic stream based on count data or consultation with the Public Works Department. Truck intensive 7 For small projects (generate fewer than 100 gross peak hour trips) and focused TIAs, a two percent annual growth rate can be used as approved by the Public Works Department. City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 17 development projects must convert project trips to passenger car equivalents (PCE=2 for medium duty vehicles, PCE=3 for heavy duty vehicles). x Grade- Include as appropriate. x Protected Left Turn Phasing- Add for future year scenarios when left turn volume > 240 vph. x Minimum Green Time- Seven seconds each movement in areas of light pedestrian activity. In areas of heavy pedestrian activity, the minimum green shall be calculated based on the methodology in the HCM. x Cycle Length- 60 seconds to 120 seconds. The City utilizes the following intersection LOS thresholds: x LOS D or better shall be maintained for all roadway intersections x LOS E will be permitted for intersections in the Downtown Area (see Figure 1). See Table 2 for descriptions of LOS grades and thresholds. Table 2: Intersection LOS Criteria Level of Service Description Signalized Delay (Seconds) Unsignalized Delay (Seconds) A < 10.0 < 10.0 B > 10.0 to 20.0 >10.0 to 15.0 C progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual > 20.0 to 35.0 >15.0 to 25.0 D unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle > 35.0 to 55.0 >25.0 to 35.0 E progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. > 55.0 to 80.0 >35.0 to 50.0 F occurring due to over saturation, poor progression, or > 80.0 >50.0 Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 7th Edition, 2022. Roadway Segment Analysis Roadway segment analysis is to be performed by analyzing vehicle-to-capacity (V/C) ratios which compare the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) projected for a segment with the maximum capacity the road can provide. The available roadway capacity depends on the functional classification and number of vehicle lanes provided and is consistent with current HCM methodology (see Table 3 below). City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 18 Table 3: Maximum Daily Motor Vehicle Volumes 1 Enhanced Arterial 6 48,900 Vehicle Oriented Arterial Enhanced Secondary Roadway Secondary Street Downtown Collector 2 17,900 1 Note: 1. Reduced capacity on El Paseo due to high pedestrian activity and on-street parking turnover. Volume represents the capacity from when LOS D transitions to LOS E. Source: City of Palm Desert, 2025. The City utilizes an LOS D threshold for roadway segments. See Table 4 for roadway segment LOS thresholds. Table 4: Roadway Segment Level of Service Thresholds A ≤0.6 B 0.61-0.7 C 0.71-0.8 D 0.81-0.9 E 0.91-1.0 F >1.0 Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 7th Edition, 2022. 5.6 Site Access Analysis Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis A traffic signal warrant analysis should be performed at all unsignalized study intersections forecasted to operate at LOS E or worse for any study scenario as part of the traffic impact analysis. Warrant analysis should utilize the most appropriate of the eight warrants listed in Section 4 of the latest edition of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 19 The need for traffic signals should also include an analysis for Warrant 6 (Coordinated Signal Systems). This warrant should be applied to locations where adjacent traffic signals do not provide the necessary degree of platooning and where the addition of a new traffic signal will assist in providing progressive signal operation. Normally, this should be considered only at locations that are between 1,300 and 2,600 feet from existing or future traffic signal installations. At locations that are less than 1,300 feet from adjacent traffic signals, new traffic signals will not generally be permitted. Where applicable, the need for traffic signals should also include an analysis for Warrant 8 (Roadway Network). The signal warrant may be met by an intersection that has a total existing or immediately projected entering volume of at least 1,000 vehicles per hour during the peak hour of a typical weekday or has a total existing or immediately projected entering volume of at least 1,000 vehicles per hour for each of any 5 hours of a non-normal business day (Saturday or Sunday). If a signal warrant is satisfied, the assessment should not default to recommending a traffic signal at the location; rather, the analyst should identify the best traffic control solution at this location accounting for other factors (such as safety, traffic progression, parcel accessibility, roadway speeds, etc.). Site Access and Parking Analysis During the scoping agreement process, the City will identify potential site access considerations that should be analyzed as part of the transportation study. The following analyses may be required (not exhaustive): 1. Intersection Sight Distance- All on-site intersections, project access driveways or streets to public roadways should provide adequate sight distance. 2. Driveway Length and Gated Entrance- Primary project driveways should have a throat of sufficient length to allow vehicles to enter the project area without causing subsequent vehicles to back up into the public street system. 3. Limit Driveway Impacts- Driveway and local street access on arterial streets should be limited to minimize the impacts on arterial streets. Driveways should be located to maintain a reasonable distance from an adjacent intersection and/or driveway. Whenever possible, driveways should be consolidated with adjacent properties (e.g. implement access management to reduce conflict points and improve safety). When proposed driveways are located across from an existing driveway, the centerlines of the driveways should be aligned with each other 4. Corner Clearance- A driveway should be a sufficient distance from a signalized intersection so that right-turn egress movements do not interfere with the right-turn queue at the intersection. In addition, every effort should be made to provide right-turn egress movements with sufficient distance to enter the left-turn pocket at the adjacent intersection. 5. Right Turn Lanes at Driveways- If the project right turn peak hour volume is 50 or more vehicles, a right-turn deceleration lane should be reviewed for appropriateness on all driveways accessing major arterial and secondary streets. The length of the right turn lane should be sufficient to allow a vehicle traveling at the posted speed to decelerate before entering the driveway as outlined in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual. 6. On-Site Circulation- Strategies should be identified to manage speeds on long drive aisles, improve connectivity, and circulation on-site. City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 20 7. Bicycle and Pedestrian Access- Ensuring pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-auto users can safely access the site and managing conflicts between vehicles and other road users 8. Parking- Adequate parking supply should be provided on-site according to City standards. Shared parking between land uses and other parking considerations (e.g. on- street parking) may be evaluated as needed. 5.7 Project Fair Share In cases where a project contributes to an existing or anticipated LOS deficiency, the City may require the project to pay a fair share contribution toward the cost of needed improvements. Fair share for intersection improvements shall be calculated as the ratio of the increase in peak hour turning movement volumes from the project divided by the total forecasted growth in peak hour turning movements. ܨܽ݅ݎ݄ܵܽݎ݁Ψ ൌܲݎ݋݆݁ܿݐܲ݁ܽ݇ܪ݋ݑݎܶݎ݅݌ݏ ܨݑݐݑݎ݁ܶ݋ݐ݈ܽܲ݁ܽ݇ܪ݋ݑݎܶݎ݅݌ݏ െ ܧݔ݅ݏݐ݅݊݃ܲ݁ܽ݇ܪ݋ݑݎܶݎ݅݌ݏൈ ͳͲͲ Fair share for street segments shall be calculated as the ratio of the increase in average daily trips from the project divided by the growth in average daily traffic. Fair share cost of mitigation shall be calculated using the Project Fair Share percentage (P) multiplied by the total cost of mitigation. Site access improvements should be City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 21 6. Safety and Multimodal Operations Assessment 6.1 Safety Assessment The purpose of this assessment is to document potential deficiencies to roadway safety generated by a Project’s added traffic. This assessment is required for projects that generate 100 or more net new peak hour trips as an additional component to the full LOS assessment. Existing Conditions Review 5-year historical crash data shall be collected for all study intersections and roadway segments, including information on injuries and fatalities. This data should also include crash rates, evaluated on a per million vehicle miles traveled basis. Collision data should be collected using the California Crash Reporting System (CCRS) database maintained by the California Highway Patrol. Intersection and roadway safety data reported in the City’s latest Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) should also be documented, including the local critical crash rate (CCR) differential.8 Project Assessment The safety assessment should analyze and document the following: x Expected changes in multimodal volumes at study intersections and roadway segments that would be caused by the project x Proposed physical modifications to the roadway system including new driveway points, intersection modifications, etc. x Potential for geometric design hazards or other safety concerns including inadequate sight distance, driveway spacing, and on-street queueing x Quantify number of new vehicle conflict points introduced, including unprotected or unsignalized vehicle conflict points x Discussion on conformance to current design standards outlined in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM) and City Standard Plans. Mitigation Projects that add at least 50 net new peak hour vehicle trips to a roadway segment or intersection that was identified in the LRSP with a positive CCR differential shall document potential safety countermeasures. The City may require the project to pay a fair share contribution toward the cost of needed improvements, based on the same formula provided in Section 5.7. 8 The Critical Crash Rate (CCR) compares the observed crash rate to the expected crash rate at a particular location based on facility type and volume using a locally calculated average crash rate for the specific type of intersection or roadway segment being analyzed. A positive CCR differential indicates that the observed crash rate is higher than the expected crash rate. City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 22 6.2 Multimodal Operations Assessment All projects subject to a full transportation study or a focused transportation study should complete the checklist in Table 5 to demonstrate sufficient multimodal accessibility: Table 5: Multimodal Operations Assessment Checklist Parking standards and expected demand. Justify how the development will make use of Table comparing parking supply with minimum requirements and demand On-Site Circulation turning radii, emergency access, and other site characteristics with respect to operations and safety for all modes of transportation. The City may require other analyses based on specific uses (e.g. drive- thru queueing). School transportation studies will require an on-site circulation plan based on their Annotated site plan with information on access and circulation. Figures with truck turning templates may be requested. Driveways or adjacent to the following facilities: x High-injury networks x High-pedestrian activity zones (>50 pedestrians/hour) x Existing or planned Class IV cycle tracks x Major transit stops Driveways are not prohibited on these streets; however, they should be avoided when possible and prioritize safety and movement of people walking, bicycling, and riding transit when avoidance is infeasible. Driveways should be located on minor streets or consolidated when possible. Driveway width shall be minimized to reduce the exposure of people crossing the driveway. Indicate whether the project meets the City’s driveway standards as Brief discussion on project driveway locations and confirmation that driveways meet City driveway standards. Pedestrian Facilities access points shall be identified and conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians along these routes should be minimized. Identify any existing or planned pedestrian Map with pedestrian access points and routes. City of Palm Desert Transportation Study Guidelines 23 Study Element Evaluation Criteria Documentation Bicycle Facilities projects as specified in the City’s General Plan. Indicate whether there are any existing or planned bicycle facilities through or adjacent to the project site and whether the project accommodates access to these facilities. Bicycle access routes and bicycle site access points shall be identified and conflicts between vehicles and bicyclists along these routes should be minimized. Where possible bicycle access routes should be on streets with adequate bicycle Map with bicycle access points and routes. Transit facilities that may be affected by the project. For projects within one-half mile of a transit stop (as the crow flies), indicate the pathway to transit and whether it meets Americans with Disability Act standards. Bus turnouts – Coordinate potential bus stop locations on arterial streets adjacent to the proposed project site with SunLine Transit Agency. Provide bus turnouts for Map with transit access routes and adjacent stop(s), if applicable Trucks (or Other Large Vehicles) number of truck trips that will be generated and design facilities necessary to Truck trip generation table Passenger Loading and Pick-up/Drop- off concentration of pick-up/drop-off activity, the project site circulation and pick- up/drop-off areas must be reviewed to ensure sufficient passenger/freight loading space and circulation routes are provided. Modifications to the site circulation and/or pick-up/drop-off may be recommended. This analysis should include a discussion of transportation network companies (TNC) Map with passenger pick- up/drop-off routes and loading/unloading areas. A vehicle queueing and storage assessment may be required. Other Issues on a case-by-case basis (e.g., construction deficiencies, queuing between closely spaced intersections, emergency access, To be determined by City staff. P Attachment A: Transportation Study Scoping Form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`abZX\[ZcX\d\[WXYZ_eZ\^dfX`X\aZ^[`gh^_Z\^VUZ^[`a\XhXZX\i^`Xhe[\ Y[iiX`Z_b\[i[ZcX\afX`Y^X_jkad^_\XlU^\Xhjm`fX`X\aneZcXi^`^iUia\XaZ[VX_ZUh^Xh_cann^`YnUhXa`o^`ZX\_XYZ^[`[bp [\i[\Xqr[nnXYZ[\s[\c^fcX\Yna__^b^YaZ^[`_Z\XXZ_eaZtc^YcZcXd\[d[_Xhd\[WXYZt^nnahhuv[\i[\XdXawc[U\Z\^d_e`[Z XxYXXh^`fauyi^nX\ah^U_b\[iZcXd\[WXYZ_^ZXjQcXzUVn^Y{[\w_|Xda\ZiX`Ziao\XlU^\XhX]^aZ^[`b\[iZcX_X\XlU^\XiX`Z_ Va_Xh[`ZcXn[YaZ^[`j} ~ ~ ~ €~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ‚~ ~ ƒ"M02@N„)+@…+NM(*†(30/4:OPQRSTUVWXYZZ[\X]^_^[`abZX\[ZcX\d\[WXYZ_eZ\^dfX`X\aZ^[`gh^_Z\^VUZ^[`a\X hXZX\i^`Xhe[\Y[iiX`Z_b\[i[ZcX\afX`Y^X_jkad^_\XlU^\Xhjm`fX`X\aneZcXi^`^iUia\XaZ[VX_ZUh^Xh_cann^`YnUhXa`o ^`ZX\_XYZ^[`[bp[\i[\Xqr[nnXYZ[\s[\c^fcX\Yna__^b^YaZ^[`_Z\XXZ_eaZtc^YcZcXd\[d[_Xhd\[WXYZt^nnahhuv[\i[\XdXawc[U\ Z\^d_e`[ZXxYXXh^`fauyi^nX\ah^U_b\[iZcXd\[WXYZ_^ZXjQcXzUVn^Y{[\w_|Xda\ZiX`Ziao\XlU^\XhX]^aZ^[`b\[iZcX_X \XlU^\XiX`Z_Va_Xh[`ZcXn[YaZ^[`j} ~ ~ ~ €~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ‚~ ~ ‡"ˆ0,($‰2$%/@%-0%)3+Š‹†&+-0/4 ;CG;EŒ ŽŽŽFŽŽŽ5 ŒCB '"M%0( Š+3:;= "ƒ‘%/0%3*>)3@%0%)3/4’Q\abb^YY[U`ZhaZaiU_ZVXnX__Zca`poXa\_[nhjz\[]^hXZ\abb^YY[U`ZhaZX_^bU_^`f[ZcX\Zca` pyoXa\y[nhY[U`Z_j“`nX__[ZcX\t^_Xadd\[]XhVoZcXr^ZoR`f^`XX\eY[U`Z__cannVXdX\b[\iXhhU\^`f”y•ajija`h–y—djije i^hhaotcX``Xa\Vo_Yc[[n_˜jTXa_[`andXawbaYZ[\iaoVX\XlU^\XhZ[VXaddn^XhZ[Y[U`Z_ZawX`hU\^`fZcX[bb_Xa_[`^`ZcX r[aYcXnna™annXoj} š:=B ! "#$%&'()('(**+&*,-.&/001&**&0(2,3&$,+045(2/00(,(-2,-,3&*,/20/10/2/64*(*0&*'1(.&0 (2,3&7+(0&6(2&89 :; <=>?@ABCDEFDGHCCIJKDLMNKDHDFKDEHDOHDGHCCIJKIPQHRIKSHTTFHGKDUVFWHGGHQDFMX<UGKIYIRHGKDHDFYFQDZHDHQF[IKDIQP LQKIPQHRI\FMUDEFGKTFJICIJIDFYKDUVFHMMGFKKFMLQMFGF[IKDIQPJUQMIDIUQK]^_EULGHTTGUHJEDGHCCIJ`URLYFIQCUGYHDIUQYLKD VFKLVYIDDFMIQHMMIDIUQDUDEFTFHaEULGRNDLGQIQPYU`FYFQDJULQDKCUGDEHDIQDFGKFJDIUQbcTFJICIJIDFYKDUVFHMMGFKKFMHGF WHGGHQDHQHRNKIK]KIDFHJJFKK]UQ_KIDFJIGJLRHDIUQ]THGaIQP]JUQKIKDFQJNWIDETRHQKKLTTUGDIQPVIJNJRFK]TFMFKDGIHQK]HQMDGHQKID] HQMUDEFGKbdDDHJETGUTUKFMHQHRNKIKKJFQHGIUK<NFHGKTRLKTGUTUKFMCUGFJHKDIQPHTTGUHJEZHQMHDDHJEHTGUTUKFMTEHKIQP HTTGUHJEICDEFTGUeFJDIKTEHKFMbZ f&'-gg&20&0.4h i%%1-j&0$'-%(2kik1&&g&2,h : lmn o o on pn o o q r o p p s mn s ?EFtIDNUCuHRYvFKFGDGFKFG`FKDEFGIPEDDULKF]KEHGF]HQMGFTGUMLJFDEFIQCUGYHDIUQIQJRLMIQP]VLDQUDRIYIDFMDU]DGHCCIJ JULQDK]F[EIVIDK]HQMKLG`FNKTGU`IMFMIQHRRKLVYIDDFMDGHCCIJKDLMIFKHQMwx?HKKFKKYFQDKbtEHQPFKDUDEFKJUTFUCWUGa] KIDFUJJLTHQJNUGLKF]KyLHGFCUUDHPF]HQMSUGTFGYIDDFMHJDI`IDIFKYHNGFyLIGFHGFKLVYIDDHRUGHYFQMYFQDDUDEFKJUTIQP HPGFFYFQDb z{|}~z}€ ‚ƒ„…†‡ˆ„†‰Š‚……€‹Œ Š€Ž‡… €‘‘ ‘‚€… Š†’…‰ ’†‰Š‚…… ‡“‚… ” ‘‚ … … ’†‰Š‚……€‹ … ‚’ Š•– ‘€…Š Ž… – — ‹ ‘Š Ž…„ —‚ƒ ’’…€ “‚‹‹Ž …‘ ƒ ’’… „ƒ ‘‚Ž˜™˜ Š Ž…‘‚ … ƒ ‚‘… … • P Attachments B-D: Low VMT Zones ĒĔĥę ĒĒĥē ĒēĥĚ ĒĖĥĒ ĒĕĥĚ ĒĕĥĘĒĕĥė ĒĕĥĘ ĒėĥĘ ĒĖĥė ĒēĥĕęĥĖ ĒēĥĔ Ēėĥĕ ĒĖĥę ĒĖĥĘ Ēėĥē ĒęĥĖ đ ĒēĥĒ Ēē ĒĒ ĒđĥĘĒĒĥĒ ęĥĔ Ęĥę ęĥė ĚĥĔ ęĥę ęĥę ĒđĥĔ Ēđĥė ĒĒĥĒ ĚĥĔ ĒĒĥĚ ĒĔĥĔ ĒĖĥĔ ĒĔĥĖ Ēēĥē ĒĒĥĚ ĒĒĥĘ ĒĔ ĒĒĥĚ ĒĕĥĔ Ēē ĒđĥĘ ĒĒĥę Ēđĥę ĒĒĥĕ ĒĒ ĒđĥĖ ĒĒĥę ĒđĥĒ ĒđĥĔ Ēđĥē ęĥė ĒđĥĚ Ěĥē ĚĥĚ ęĥĘ ĒĒĥĕ ĚĥĔ ĒĒĥĒ ĚĥĚ Ēđĥę Ěĥę ĒĒĥę ĒĒĥĔ ĒĘĥĕ ĒĘĥē ĒėĥęĒĕĥĘ ĒĘĥĕĒĘĥĒ ĒĔĥĕ ĒĔĥĕ ĒĖĥĒ Ēėĥę Ēĕĥĕ ĒĖĥę ĒĖĥę Ēėĥē ĒĒĥĕ ĒĔĥĖ ĒĔĥĘ ĒĖĥĘ ĒđĥĔ ĒĒĥĚ ĒđĥĚ ĒđĥĔ ęĥĒ Ęĥē ĒėĥĔ ĒēĥĖ ĒđĥĒ Ēđ Ēē ĒĘĥē ĒĒ ĒĖĥĒ ĒēĥĔ dd-DEdģ ēđĕđģ-ģĺWÝÎìè²ÎÈĻģsDdģÚÝģZá²Èèģþģd đ Ē ē D²Áá Ēēĥĕ EĲ ĒđĥĘĒĒĥĒ ęĥĔ Ęĥę ęĥė ĚĥĔ ęĥę ęĥę Ēđĥĕ ĒđĥĔ Ēđĥė ĒĒĥĒ ĚĥĔ ęĥĘ ĒđĥĒ ĒđĥĔ Ēđĥē ęĥė ĒđĥĚ Ěĥē ĖĥĖ ėĥē ĚĥĔ ĚĥĚ ĘĥĘ ęĥĘ ĚĥĔ ĚĥĚ Ēđĥę ĒđĥĚ ęĥĒ ĚĥĒ Ęĥē ĒđĥĒ Ēđ ĚĥĒ ĒĒ dá ģ ÁÁģ EĲģ Î ģ ÈÎè ģ °÷ģ Zá²ÈèáĦ ģ è°Ý©ÎÝģ ÈÎ ģ -ģ sDdĲZá²Èèĥ EĲ EĲ EĲ EĲ EĲ EĲ EĲ EĲ EĲ EĲ Ēĕĥę Ēđ Ēđ EĲ EĲ -ģsDdĲZáģþģd ÁÎøģÎìÈèþģ÷ÝªģĺŴĒęĥēĻ Î÷ģÎìÈèþģ÷ÝªģĺųĒęĥēĻ ²èþģÎìÈÝþ ĔĖĥĒ Ĕēĥē Ĕėĥę ĔđĥĘ ēĘ ĔėĥĔĔĕĥė Ĕĕ ĔĔĥė ĔĒĥĖ ĔĔĥĘ ĔĔĥĖ ĔđĥĘ ĔĖĥė ĔđĥęĔęĥę ēĖĥĒ ĔĒĥĖ ĔēĥĖ ĔēĥĒ ĔĒĥĔ ĔēĥĘĔĔĥĒ ēĖĥē ēĕĥĚ ēėĥē ēĘĥĒ ēĕĥĘ ĔĒĥĔ Ĕēĥĕ Ĕđĥĕ Ĕēĥė ēĘĥĖ Ĕĕĥĕ ĕĒĥĔ ĔėĥĒ ēęĥĔ ēĘĥĚ ĔđĥĚ ĔēĥĚ ĔĚĥĖ ĔĖĥĘ ĔĘĥĒ ĔĘ ĔĘĥĚ ēĘĥĚ ēęĥē ĔĖĥĚ ĔĘĥĒ ēĚĥĔ ēėĥĖ Ĕđ ĔēĥĖ ēĕĥĚ ēėĥĖĔĕĥĕ Ĕđ ēĚĥĚ ēėĥę ĔĖĥė ēĖĥĕ ēĖ ĔėĥĘ ēĖĥĘ ēęĥĖ ēĘ ĕĒ ēĚĥē Ĕęĥę ĔęĥėĕĔĥĕ ĔęĥĘ ēęĥĕ ĕĖĥĕ Ĕēĥę ĔĚĥĚ ĔĒĥĘ ĔĘĥė ĔĕĥĖ ĔĒĥę ĔĕĥĘ ĕĕ ēėĥĕ ĔēĥĖ ĔĚĥĖ Ĕėĥė ēėĥė ĔĖĥĘ ēėĥĔ Ĕē ĔĔĥĕ ēĖĥĕ ēėĥė Ĕĕĥę ēĚ ĔĔĥĔ ēėĥĒ ĔėĥĒ ēėĥĖ ĔĒ ĔĕĥĚ dd-DEdģ ēđĕđģ-tģĺèèÝè²ÎÈĻģsDdģÚÝģÇÚÁÎþģþģd đ Ē ē D²Áá -t ģ sDdĲÇÚ ģ þ ģ d ÁÎøģ ÎìÈèþģ ÷Ýªģ ĺŴēęĥĔĻ Î÷ģ ÎìÈèþģ ÷Ýªģ ĺųēęĥĔĻ ²èþģ ÎìÈÝþ ēėĥĖ ēĖĥė ēĖĥĒ ĔĒĥĖ ĔēĥĘĔĔĥĒ ēĖĥē ēĕĥĚ ēėĥē ēĘĥĒ ēĕĥĘ ēĕĥė ĔĒĥĔ Ĕēĥĕ Ĕđĥĕ Ĕēĥė ēĘĥĖ ēĕĥĕ Ĕđ ĔēĥĖ ēĕĥĚ ēėĥĖ Ĕĕĥĕ Ĕđ ēĖĥĕ ēĖĥĔ ēĕĥė ēĚĥĚ ēĕĥę ēėĥę ēĕĥė ĔēĥęēĖēĕĥę ēęĥĘ ĔĕĥĒ Ĕē ēĖĥĕ ēĘĥĕ ēėĥė ēĚ ĔĔĥĔ ēĚĥēēėĥĖ ēĕĥė Ĕēĥęēĕĥę ēęĥĘ ĔĕĥĒ ēĖĥĘ ĕēĥĔ ēę ēĚĥĚ ēėĥĖ EĲ EĲ ēēĥĒ ēĘĥĚ ēēĥĚ ĔęĥĒ ĕĖĥĘ ēĘĥĔēĘĥĔ ēėĥĖ Ėē ĖĖĥĒ ĖĒĥĚēĕĥĘ ĒĚ ēęĥė Ĕēĥē ēĔĥĖ ėęĥĘ ĔĔĥĖ ĖęĥĒ ēēĥĘ ēĒĥĖ ēĒĥĖ ēĒĥē ēđĥĒĒĚĥĚ ĖĖĥĖ ĖĖĥę ĕĕĥĖ ĔĘĥĚ Ėėĥė ēđĥĖ ēĕĥė ēđ ĔđĥĘ ēĘĥē ēē ĔđĥĘ ĕė ĖĔ ĕĔĥę Ĕđĥė ēēĥĔ ēēĥĔ ēēĥĕ ēĒ ĒęĥĔ ĖĕĥĚ ĕĘĥė ēē ĒĘĥĘ ĔĔĥĕ ĖĒĥĚ ēėĥē ēđĥĔ Ėĕĥę ĔĔĥĒ ĒĚĥē ēĕĥĔ ēĔĥĔ ĔĒ ĒĚĥĘ ĕėĥē ĕĔĥĕ ĒęĥėĒĔĚĥĖ ĒĘĥĚ ēę ĒĚĥē ĕĘĥę ĔĖ ĒęĥĘ Ĕęĥę ēĚĥē ĖĔĥĚ ēĚĥė ēĚĥĔēĕĥę ēĚĥė ĕĚĥĘ ēėĥĖ ĔĖĥĔ ēĕĥē ĕėĥĔ ēĘĥĖ Ĕđĥē ĕĖĥĕ ĕĔĥĕ ēĖĥĔ ĕęĥĚ ēėĥĚ ēĒĥę ēĘĥę ĖĘ ēĖ ĕĕ ēĒ ĒĘĥė ĕĚĥē ĕĖĥĒ ēėĥĒ ēēĥĚ ēĖĥę ĒĚĥĘ ĔĔĥĔ ĕĘĥę ĔĘĥē ĕęĥē Ėĕĥė ēĖĥē dd-DEdģ ēđĕđģKģsDdģÚÝģ^Ý÷²ģWÎÚìÁè²ÎÈģþģd đ Ē ē D²Áá Kģ sDdĲ^W ģ þģ d ÁÎøģ ÎìÈèþģ ÷Ýªģ ĺŴĔĔĥĒĻ Î÷ģ ÎìÈèþģ ÷Ýªģ ĺųĔĔĥĒĻ ²èþģ ÎìÈÝþ ĖĒĥĚ ėđĥĕ ĖęĥĒ ēēĥĘ ēđĥĒĒĚĥĚ ĖĖĥĖ ĖĖĥę ĕĕĥĖ ĔĘĥĚ Ėėĥė Ėėĥĕ ēĕĥĖ ēđĥĖ ēĕĥė ēđ ĔđĥĘ ĕĚĥė ēėĥē ēđĥĔ Ėĕĥę ĔĔĥĒ ĒĚĥē ēĕĥĔ ĕĖĥĚ ĕĘĥĒ ĕĖĥĖ ēĔĥĔ ĕėĥĕ ĔĒ ĕĔĥĕ ĒęĥėĔĚĕĥęĒĔĚĥĖ ēę ĒĚĥē ēĒ ĕĚĥē ĔĚĥĘ ĕĖĥĒ ēĖĥę ĒĚĥĘ ēėĥĔ ĕęĥē ĕęĥę