HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUPPTL INFO - PP 07-10, CUP 07-18, & VAR 07-02 . ( (-
CITY OF Pnl �l DESERI
73-5�O FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-25�8
T�.: �60 346—o6�t
Fnx: 760 34i-7o98
� info�palm-deserc.org
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
NOTICE OF ACTION
Date: February 8, 2008
Davis Street Land Company
622 Davis Street, Suite 200
Evanston, Illinois 60201
Re: PP 07-10, CUP 07-18 & VAR 07-02
73-545 and 73-425 EI Paseo
The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and
taken the following action at its regular meeting of February 5, 2008:
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF CASE NOS. PP 07-10, CUP 07-18 AND VAR 07-02 BY
ADOPTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2467 AS
AMENDED, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. MOTION CARRIED 3-2
(COMMISSIONERS LIMONT AND SCHMIDT VOTED NO).
Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk, City of Palm
Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. (This case has been
scheduled for the bruary 28, 2008 City Council meeting.)
Lauri Aylaian, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
/tm
cc: Coachella Valley Water District
Public Works Department
Building & Safety Department
Fire Marshal
C>rumo a unam rut�
( �.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2467
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN. INCLUDING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE, TO ALLOW A 27,000
SQUARE FOOT ADDITION (SITE PLAN ONLI� TO THE EXISTING
SAKS 5T" AVENUE AT THE EXISTING GARDENS ON EL PASEO AND
DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING EL PASEO VILLAGE (LOCATED
BETWEEN SAN PABLO AND LUPINE LANE) AND CONSTRUCTION
OF A 72,474 SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY RETAIL, OFFICE, AND
RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT WITH PARKING STRUCTURE AND
ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS IT
RELATES TO THE PROJECT THERETO. SUBJECT PROPERTIES
ARE LOCATED AT 73-545 EL PASEO (GARDENS ON EL PASEO,
APN: 627-261-006) AND 73-425 EL PASEO (EL PASEO VILLAGE,
APN: 627-252-004, 005)
CASE NOS. PP 07-10, CUP 07-18. VAR 07-02
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, Califomia, did
on the 5th day of February, 2008, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
request by Davis Street Land Company, for approval of the above noted; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of
Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act",
Resolution No. 06-78, the Director of Community Development has determined that the
project has required an Environmental Assessment resulting in a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, and the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration in substantially the form as shown in Exhibit `A'; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning
Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify the
recommendation to the City Council of said request:
Precise Plan/Conditional Use Permit:
1. The proposed location of the project is in accordance with the objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance and the purpose of the district in which the site is located.
The proposed project is located in a C-1, General Commercial zone, with a
Scenic Preservation overlay and is covered by the Palm Desert Commercial
Core Area Specific Plan which encourages the retail/restaurant and second
story o�ce enhancement of the El Paseo Corridor. The proposed retail,
restaurant and office project is in accordance with the district in which it is
located and the superior architecture and design meets the intent of the
Scenic Preservation overlay district.
( c
' PLANNING COMMISSfI�N RESOLUTION NO. 2467
height of the EI Paseo Village is lower than the height of the existing Gardens
on EI Paseo.
2. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not
apply generally to other properties in the same zone.
The intended use of the property is consistent with the Commercial Core Area
Specific Plan. The site size and geometry preclude the project from meeting
the requirements of the daylight triangle requirements. The superior
architectural building design and massing of the buildings will serve as
mitigation of building height.
3. That strict or literal interpretations and enforcement of the specified regulation
would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other
properties in the same vicinity and zone.
DavliQht trianQle: The strict and literal enforcement of C-1 Code Section
25.28.060 would deny the applicant privileges enjoyed by fhe owners of other
properties in the EI Paseo district. While the subject property is not technically
unusual as compared with other properties along EI Paseo, conformance to
the 2:1 ratio street frontage setback ratio is not applicable to any property
fronting EI Paseo and would be inconsistent with economic and architectura!
intent for this district.
Where other properties have been granted variances, successful and attractive
two story businesses along EI Paseo have been constructed. If would appear
that not granting the variance would deny the applicant privileges enjoyed by
ofher property owners along EI Paseo. These exceptional circumstances make
it unfeasible to deny the variance.
Buildinp Heipht: The strict and literal enforcement of C-1 Code Section
25.28.060 would deny the applicant privileges enjoyed by the owners of other
properties in the EI Paseo district.
Where other properties have been granted a variance in the past architecture
and massing of the buildings have been the mitigating factor.
4. That the granting of the variance or adjustment will not be detrimental to
public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
The proposed project variances relate to building height and daylight triangle
requirements. The proposed variances are consistent with developments in
the area which have shown no adverse effecfs on public health, safety or
welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the
vicinity. The variances will help preserve the overall aesthetics and retail
environment of the EI Paseo area.
3
• �_ C.
' PLANNING COMMISSIt�N RESOI.UTION NO. 2467
EXHIBIT "A"
Pursuant to TiUe 14, Division 6, Article 6 (commencing with section 15070� of the
Califomia Code of Regulations.
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CASE NOS: PP 07-10, CUP 07-18� VAR 07-02
APPLICANTIPROJECT SPONSOR: City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260
PROJECT DESCRIPTIOI�ULOCATION:
Approval of a Prec;ise Plan ot Des�gn induding a Conditional Use Permit and Variance to
allow a 27,000 square foat additbn (site plan oniy)to the exis�ng Saks 5�' Avenue at the
existing Garciens on EI Paseo and demolition of the existing EI Paseo �Ilage (located
between San Pabb and Lupine Lane) and constructi�on of a 72,474 square foot two-story
retail, office, and restaurant development with paricing structure and an adoption of a
Mitigated Nega�ve Declara�on as it relates to the project thereto. SubJed properties are
located at 73-545 EI Paseo (Gardens on EI Paseo, APN: 627-261-006) and 73-425 EI
Paseo (EI Pasea Vilfage, APN: 627-252-004, 005)
The Director of the Department of Community Development, City of Palm Desert,
Califomia� has found that the described projed wilt not have a signiflcant effect on the
environment. A copy of the Ini�al Study has been attached to document the reasons in
support of this finding. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid
potentially significarrt effects, may also be found attached.
S� �� �-"YJ
LAURI AYIA{AN DATE
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
5
' PLANNING COMMISSIb�� RESOWTION NO. 2467 (�
9. The project is subject to the Art in Public Places program per Palm Desert
Municipal Code Chapter 4.10.
10. The owner shall be responsible for installation and maintenance of landscaping
on the east side of the property, surrounding the cul-de-sac as indicated on the
approved landscape plan.
11. All conditions of approval shall be recorded before any building permits are
issued. Evidence of recordation shall be submitted to the Department of
Community DevelopmenUPlanning.
12. Prior to issuance of permits for the Saks expansion the applicant shall, work with
the City Attorney to review and amend as necessary the current public parking
documents for the existing Gardens on EI Paseo parking deck to reflect the loss
of parking spaces due to the Saks Fifth Avenue expansion.
Deaartment of Public Works:
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. All landscape maintenance shall be performed by the property owner who shall
maintain the landscaping per the City approved landscape document package
for the life of the project, consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance
(Ord. 801).
2. A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils
engineer, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Department of Public
Works prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
BONDS AND FEES
3. Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17
and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permit.
4. The project shall be subject to Transpo�tation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF).
Payment of said fees shall be at the time of building permit issuance.
5. A standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits.
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
6. Storm drain design and construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study
prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the
Department of Public Works prior to start of construction taking into account the
possible overflow of San Pablo and Lupine into the parking area incorporating
preventative measures.
7
� �.
� PLANNING COMMISSI�N RESOLUTION NO. 2467 (
Riverside Countv Fire Department:
1. With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced
project, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures
be provided in accordance with City Municipal Codes, NFPA, UFC and UBC, or
any recognized fire protection standards.
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all buildings per UFC article 87.
2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1 hour duration at 20 psi residual pressure must be
available before any combustible material is placed on the job site.
3. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of providing a gpm fire flow
of 3000 gpm for commercial buildings.
4. The required fire flow shall be available from a wet barrel Super Hydrant(s) 4"x2-
1/2"x2-1/2", located not less than 25' nor more than 150' feet from any portion of
a commercial building measured via vehicular travelway.
5. Water plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and include verification that
the water system will produce the required fire flow.
6. Install a complete NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. This applies to all buildings with
a 3000 square foot total cumulative floor area. The Fire Marshal shall approve
the locations of all post indicator valves and fire department connections. All
valves and connections shall not be less than 25' from the building and within 50'
of an approved hydrant. Exempted are one and two family dwellings. (13 R and
attic protector)
7. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and water-
flow switches shall be monitored and alarmed per UBC Chapter 9.
8. Install a fire alarm system as required by the UBC Chapter 3.
9. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA 10, but not less than one 2A10BC
extinguisher per 3000 square feet and not over 75' walking distance. A "K" type
fire extinguisher is required in all commercial kitchens.
10. All buildings shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within
150' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall not be
less than 24' of unobstructed width and 13'6" of vertical clearance. Where
parallel parking is required on both sides of the street the roadway must be 36'
wide and 32' wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150'
shall be provided with a minimum 45' radius turn-around 55' in industrial
developments.
11. All buildings shall have illuminated addresses of a size approved by the city.
9
CI1V Of Pfll �l DESERI
i �j-510 FRF:D WARING DRIVE
I �ALM �ESF.RI�,CALIFORNIA 92260-257b
�[�et:76o ;46-06��
r�x:760 ;qi-7oq8
i n(o @ p a I m-de s c r t.o r g
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PUBLIC NOTICE
CASE NO. PP 07-10,CUP 07-18,VAR 07-02
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert
City Council to consider a request by Davis Street Land Company for approval of a
Precise Plan of Design, Conditional Use Permit and Variance to allow:
A. The construction of a 27,000 square foot expansion of the existing Saks 5�'
Avenue at the Gardens on EI Paseo, located at 73-545 EI Paseo (APN: 627-261-
006)and;
B. Demolition of the existing EI Paseo Village (located between San Pablo and
Lupine Lane) which will be replaced with a 72,474 square foot two-story retail,
office and restaurant development and a one-story above ground parking deck
with 157 ground level spaces and 145 upper deck spaces. Subject property is
located at 73-425 EI Paseo(APN.627-252-004,005).
C. Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration as it relates to the project thereto. An
Initial Study of environmental impacts has been completed for the project. The
Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration are available for review. The
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was completed in accordance the
City's Guidelines implementing the Califomia Environmental Quality Act.
� � ����r ��
��SSANDNOOR
� I � Cm I I I I I I I I I�1
STATE MVYY 111
s �
� ����
e
«_ �///��� �
6 �
�
SMAD U IT M O �
SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, February 28, 2008, at 4:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm
Desert, Califomia, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and
ha haar�l Writtan r.nmmant� r.nnrarninn all itamc rnvara�i hv thic niihli� haarinn nntira
� �:
CITY OF PALM DESERT
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Department of Community Development/Planning
Attention: Ryan Stendell
FROM: Phil Joy, Associate Transportation Planner
SUBJECT: PP 7-14 EI Paseo GardensNillage Conditions of Approval
DATE: January 30, 2008
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. All landscape maintenance shall be performed by the property owner who shall
maintain the landscaping per the City approved landscape document package for
the life of the project, consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance ( Ord.
801� .
2. A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils
engineer, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Department of Public
Works prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
BONDS AND FEES
3. Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17
and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permit.
4. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees
( TUMF� which shall be due at the time of building permit issuance.
5. A standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits.
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
6. Storm drain design and construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study
prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the
Department of Public Works prior to start of construction taking into account the
possibfe overflow of San Pablo and Lupine into the parking area incorporating
preventative measures
7. Complete grading and improvement plans and specifications on electronic files
shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior
to issuance of any permits for areas of new construction.
/ �,
8. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and
the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works.
9. Pad elevations are subject to review and modification in accordance with Chapter
26 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code.
10. Landscape installation shall be drought tolerant in nature and in accordance with
the City_s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance ( 24.04) .
11. Landscape, grading, and utility plans shall be submitted for review concurrently.
12. Full public improvements, as required by Section 26 of the Palm Desert Municipal
Code, shall be installed in accordance with applicable City standards
Rights-of-way necessary for the installation of the above referenced
improvements shall be dedicated to the city prior to the issuance of any
permits associated with this project.
CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS
13. All public and private improvements shall be inspected by Public Works. No
occupancy permit shall be granted until public improvements have been
completed.
14. Applicant shall comply with provisions of Palm Desert Municipal Code Section
24.12, Fugitive Dust Control as well as Section 24.20, Storm water Management
and Discharge Control.
15. Prior to the start of construction, the applicant shall submit satisfactory evidence
to the Director of Public Works of intended compliance with the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) General Construction Permit for storm
water discharges associated with construction. Developer must contact Riverside
County Flood Control District for informational materials.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
16. Drainage Study shall take into account the possible overflow of San Pablo and
Lupine into the lower level parking area incorporating preventative measures.
�`���
Phil Joy
� /. �.
��lJ .�4.� ♦ _Ll�!
.,
�M ATEq ESTABLISMED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY O�� T �T
��sTR�C� COACHELLA VALLEY WATER �����RIt��D����� "��NT
POST OFFICE BOX 1058•COACHELLA,CALIFORNIA 92236•TELEPHONE(760)398-2651 •FAX(760)398-3711
DIRECTORS: OFFICEFS:
PETER NELSON,PRESIDENT STEVEN B.ROBBINS,
PATRICIA A.LARSON,VICE PRESIDENT GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER
TELLIS CODEKAS MARK BEUHLER,
USSELL KITAHARA October 15� ZOO7 JULIA FERNA DEZ,SECRETARY
OAN PARKS,ASSL TO GENERAL MANAGER
REDWINE AND SHERRILL,ATfORNEYS
File: 0163.1
0421.1
0721.1
Ryan Stendell
Department of Community Development
City of Pa1m Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Dear Mr. Stendell:
Subj ect: PP 07-10
This area is designated Zone B on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps, which are in effect at
this time by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Since the stormwater issues of this development are local drainage, the District does not need
to review drainage design further.
This project lies within the Study Area Boundary of the Coachella Valley Water
Management Plan (September 2002).
The District will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with
the current regulations of this District. These regulations provide for the payment of certain
fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change.
The District requires restaurants to install a grease interceptor, including a sample box,
sanitary tee and running trap with cleanout, prior to any discharge to its sanitation facilities.
The size of the grease interceptor will be determined and approved by the District.
Installation of the interceptor will be inspected by the District.
Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the District for
review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management.
The project lies within the area of benefit of the Coachella Valley Groundwater
Replenishment Program. Groundwater production within the area of benefit is subject to a
replenishment assessment in accordance with the State Water Code.
TRUE CONSERVATION
USE WATER WISELY
� Ryan Stendell
City of Palm Desert 2 October 15, 2007
All water wells owned or operated by an entity producing more than 25 acre-feet of water
during any year must be equipped with a water-measuring device. A District Water
Production Metering Agreement is required to ensure District staff regularly read and
maintain this water-measuring device.
If you have any questions please call Scott Schedell, Stormwater Engineer, extension 2266.
Yo v ly,
Mark L. Johnson
Director of Engineering
cc: Majeed Farshad
Riverside County Department of Transportation, Palm Desert
Monte Bowers
Berryman and Henigar, San Diego
Jeff Johnson
Riverside County Department of Public Health, Palm Desert
El Paseo Land Co.
622 Davis Street, Suite 200
Evanston, IL 60201
SS:ch�englsw\OTocd
050620-3
COACHELLA YALLEY WATER DISTRICT
f p �.
�
Palm Desert Fire Department
� Fire Prevention Bureau
In cooperatlon with Ibverside County Fire Department
73710 Fred Waring Dr. Suite 102 Pakn Desert Ca 92260 760-346-1870 Fax 76a77�195
Palm Desert Fire Marshal�s o��e RE :�'E IVE D
73710 Fred Waring Drive#102 OC I '1 "11001
Palm Desert CA 92260 �p��i;�;�J�II•:.uP�iENTD�P:4B�rHENT
(760)34f�-1870 C1TY4FPALMDESERT
TO: IZct� ST'�v��1� DATE: �C5`t'11c3�
REF: �� �-7—l�
If cirded, conditions apply to project
� With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above
re�ferenoed prvjecX, the fire department recommends the following fire
protection measures be provided in acoord�with City Municipal
Code. NFPA, CFC, and CBC or any reoognized Fre Protection
Standards:
T6e Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for t6e
remodel or construction of all buildings per UFC�ticle 87.
� A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1-har duration at 20 psi residual
pressure must be available befiore �y combustible material is plaoed
on the job site.
Pr�ovide or show there eYists a ivater system capable of providing a gpm f lmv of.•
3. 1500 gpm f�nr single family dw�ellings
4. 2500 gpm for multifamily dMr�etlings
(`�_3000 s�pm for commeraal buildings
" � � • l �
The required flre flow shall be avaflable from a wet barrel Super
Hydr'�nt(s)4"z 2 '/:" z 2 '/z",located not less than 25' nor more t6�n:
6. 200' from any portion af a single family dw�elling mea4ured via
vehicular traveM►ay
7. 165' from any portion of a multifamily dwelling measured via
vehicular traveM�ay
� 150' from any portion of a commen:i�al building measured via
vehic:ular traveMrey
� Water Plans must be approved by the Fire Marshal and indude
verification tl�at the water system wiU pr�oduoe the required fir�flaw._
10. Pleage be advised the pnoposed pr�oject may not be feasible sinve the
e�osting water mains wiN not meet the required fire flaw.
� Install a complete NFPA 13 fire sprinlder system. This applies to all
buildings with a 3000 square foot total cumulative floor area. The Fire
Marsh�shall approved the locations af all po�t indicator valves and
fire department oonnections. AN vafves and c�orx�ections shall not be
less than 25' from the building and within 50' of aa approved
hydrarrt. Exempted are one and iwo family dwellings.
Q All valves corrtrdling the water supply for automatic sprinkler
syatems �nd Water-flow switc6es s6a11 bc monitored and alxrmed per
CBC Chapter 9.
(1� InstaU a fire alarm system as required by the UBC Chapter 3.
� Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA 10, but not less than one
2A10BC extinguisher per 3000 square feet and not over 75' walking
distance. A "K" type fire eztinguis6er is required in all commercial
kitChens.
15 Install a Hood/Duct automatic fire extinguishing system per NFPA 96
in all public and private cooking operations exoept single-family
, . - � {
residential usage.
16. Install a dust c:ollec�ing system per CFC Chapter 76 if c�nducting an
operation that produces airtiorne partides.
� All building shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending
to within 150' of all portions of the ezterior walla of t6e first story.
The roadway shall not be less than 24' of unobstructed width and
13' 6" of vertical clearance. Wher'e paraMel parking is required on
both sides of the street the roadway must be 36' wide and 32' wide
with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in exoess af 150' shall be
provided with a minimum 45' radiu�turn-around 5S' in industrial
developments.
� Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of
gates, barriers or other means provisions shaN be made to install a
"Knoz Box"key over-ride syatem to allow for emergency vehicle
ac:oess. Minimum gate width shall be 16"wit6 a minimum vertical
clearanoe of 13'6".
19. A dead end single aocess over 500' will requi,�e a seoondary aooess,
sprinklers or other mitigative meagur�es approved by the Fire
Marshal_ Under no circumstance shall a dead end over 1300' be
accePted.
� A second access is required. This can be acoornplished by iwo main
acoess poirrts from a main roadway or an emergency gate from an
adjoining development.
21. This projed may require lic�nsing by a state or courrty agency, to
facc:ilitate plan review the applicant shall prepare and submit to the
Fre Marshal a letter of inte�t detailing the proposed usage and
� � • � � (/
O(X'iU�KrY lY�.
22. All buildings shall have illuminated addnesses of a size approved by
the city.
� All fire sprinlder systems. foced fire suppression systems and alarm
plans must be submitted separately to the Fne Marshal for approval
prior to oonstruction.
� Conditions subject to change with adoption af new codes. orbinanoes,
laws, or when building pemiits are nat obtained within iwelve
months.
All questior�s regarding the meaning of these c�onditions should be referred to
the Fire Marsh�'a Ofl'ioe at (760) 346-1870 in Palm Desert.
Location: 73710 Fred Wari Drive#4�, Palm Desert CA 92260
DZ.
Other:
-� ,Q1b � �. � �P� i. ���t..>>v-,� 4��'.�
�t,l�.l�l,. ''t� ��vt s�: —
� �r 5�b o��cr��L�;r,.. W�� ��. —��rv�m�-�
�`�� �tz� ��lz«.e
�►�^�L�!�c_.c CfUFi� 1 �Tc.�C'c-r 4 4�a�-�� � t�Z 5����C�� .
,� 1�5"'�
Sinc:erely,
Jorge Rodriguez
Fire M�shal
� �
INTEROFFICE MEMORADUM RE�'�IV�D
. , +i s 2007
City of Palm Desert
-OMMG:�IT`�UEVELUPNEWT UEPi�?T1tENT
CITY OF PALM DESERT
TO: RYAN STENDELL, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
FROM: FRANKIE RIDDLE, DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL PROGRAMS
SUBJECT: PP 07-10
DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 2007
The submitted precise plan has been reviewed to determine the need for a bus
shelter/stop at the project location and inclusion of required trash/recycling enclosure(s)
for each project.
Bus Shelter: After reviewing the plans it has been determined that this project will not
be conditioned with a requirement for a bus shelter and turnout.
Trash Enclosures: The plan does not appear to reflect trash enclosures. The planned
trash/recycling enclosure(s) must be consistent with Palm Desert Municipal Code
Chapter 8.12. Burrtec Waste and Recycling Services must review and sign-off on the
plans in relations to the placement and number of trash/recycling enclosures. Review of
the plans by Burrtec will ensure that vehicle circulation for its trucks is adequate to
service the complex and to ensure that a sufficient number of enclosures are provided
to meet the needs of the complex. The Applicant may contact Jennifer with Burrtec at
(760) 340-6445 regarding this issue.
FRANKI RIDDLE
DIRECTO F SPECIAL PROGRAMS
cc: Mark Greenwood, Director of Public Works
Dan Kaiser, Acting Director of Building and Safety
r �.
����� CITY OF PALM DESERT
� �
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Ryan Stendeli, Associate Pianner
From: Diane Hollinger, Landscape Speciali
Date: October 16, 2007
Subject: PP07-10
The Gardens on EI Paseo
Ryan, I have reviewed the preliminary landscape plans as submitted by the EI Paseo
Land Company/Davis Street Land Company. The preliminary landscape is shown on
11" x 17" sheet in color. Unfortunately, I am unable to discern what plant material goes
where due to the small scale of the drawing. The plant palette appears to be
acceptable, but will be dependent upon proposed planter sizes. I would suggest
expanding the tree palette as the Tipuana tipu is deciduous and the Parking Lot Shade
Tree Ordinance requires a variety of Evergreen, Semi-deciduous and Deciduous tree
species.
The applicant needs to show wet and dry utility locations, existing and new. The plans
must also reflect proposed ADA path of travel.
Let me know if you have any questions or comments. I can be reached at ext. 444.
G1PubWaks\Landscape Serwces Drnsion\MemosN0-16-07 RyanStendell-TheGardensonElPaseo dh.aoc
� � � � r
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Ezpansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
CITY OF PALM DESERT
CEQA Environmental Checklist & Environmental Assessment
1 Project title: Gardens Expansion/New El Paseo Village Project
2 CEQA Lead agency name and address: City of Palm Desert
75-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260
3 Contact persons and phone number: City of Palm Desert:
Lauri Aylaian; Community Development Director
Ryan Sten�ell; Associate Planner
(760) 346-0611
4 Project location: El Paseo Drive
Palm Desert, California
Riverside County,California
5 Project sponsor's name and address: Steven Divito and Michael Radis
Davis Street Land Company
73-545 El Paseo, Suite 2500
Palm Desert, Ca 92260
6. General Plan Designation: (C-C) Community Commercial 7. Zoning: (C-1)
8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved,including but not limited to later phases of the
project,and any secondary,support,or off-site features necessary for its implementation.)
Proposed Action: The proposed project is located in the City of Palm Desert, south of Highway
111, on the south side of El Paseo Drive, between Lupine Lane and Larkspur Lane. The project
constitutes a limited expansion of an existing retail center (Gardens on El Paseo) and the total
reconstruction of the adjacent commercial center located immediately west of the Gardens,
known as El Paseo Village, and herein referred to as the New El Paseo Village. The Palm Desert
Zoning Ordinance and Map designate this portion of El Paseo Drive as a pedestrian specialty
retail/personal service district, which is intended to encourage pedestrian-oriented uses by
providing a mix of service businesses.� The proposed project appears to meet this standard by
offering high quality commercial retail, office, and restaurant space that includes pedestrian
friendly features in its design.
The "Project" includes a two-story expansion of the existing Saks Fifth Avenue building by
27,000 square feet (13,500 sf each floor) at the existing Gardens property. The second component
of this application includes the demolition of the existing 35,812 sf cluster of commercial
buildings collectively known as "El Paseo Village," which is located on the south side of El
Paseo Drive between San Pablo Drive and Lupine Lane. The existing El Paseo Village will be
replaced by the New El Paseo Village development, which will consist of 3 two-story service
buildings that will contain approximately 70,000 square feet of leasable space at buildout. In
addition, the parking lot south of the New El Paseo Village will be enhanced to a one-story
parking deck above ground level parking.
� "Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance,"adopted February 2S`�, 1999.
-1-
. � , �� �
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Saks Fifth Avenue
The project proposes a two-story 27,000 square foot (s� expansion of the existing 50,247 sf Saks
Fifth Avenue building located within the Gardens development on El Paseo Drive. Currently, the
Gardens encompasses 196,639 square feet of gross leasable space. At project completion the
Gardens gross leasable space will be 223,639 squaze feet. This will be accomplished through the
southerly extension of the south fa�ade of the Saks Fifth Avenue building into the existing
parking structure on the south side of the building. Currently the parking structure provides 919
vehicle parking spaces and 58 golf cart spaces, which will be reduced to 899 vehicle spaces once
the expansion is complete since expansion of the Saks Fifth Avenue building will result in the
loss of 20 parking spaces. Connecting drive lanes will remain on both the lower and upper
parking decks.
New El Paseo Villa�e
The New El Paseo Village component of the project consists of two phases, which will ultimately
result in the demolition of the existing buildings and the construction of three freestanding two-
story commercial buildings that will mimic the architectural design of the adjacent Gardens on El
Paseo complex located to the immediate east, across San Pablo Avenue. A one-story parking deck
above surface level parking will be constructed as part of this redevelopment and will provide
302 pazking spaces. The proposed New El Paseo Village site is currently developed with a
collection of one and two-story buildings, walkways, rear parking, which is accessed by steps,
and service areas and facilities. The existing development is older, unattractive, and inefficient.
Construction of phase one is expected to begin in November of 2008, and will involve the
demolition of existing structures and the construction of 2 two-story buildings. Phase one
demolition will remove the majority of the existing structures, leaving the 3,678 square foot
eastern most structure, which is currently occupied by Roc's Firehouse Grille and Hubbard
Enterprises. This lease expires in September of 2011, at which time phase two will commence
with demolition of the remaining El Paseo Village building and construction of the third and final
New El Paseo Village building. Completion of phase one is expected to occur in the summer of
2009, with businesses operational by October of 2009. Phase two demolition and construction is
planned to begin in September of 2011 and will take approximately 6 months to complete. This
final phase will include the demolition of the remaining structure and the construction of a two-
story restaurant and retail building. If control of the existing retail space occupying the phase II
area can be achieved prior to November 2008, phase I and phase II development will occur
simultaneously.
At buildout the New El Paseo Village will consist of 15,734 sf of office space, 36,893 sf of retail,
17,366 sf of indoor restaurant space and 2,841 sf of patio dinning (associated with the indoor
restaurant space), and a one-story parking decking above surface level parking with 157 ground
level parking spaces and 145 parking spaces on the parking deck (302 total). The three
freestanding two-story buildings will contain retail on the ground level, office space in upper
level of the center building, and restaurants on the upper levels of the two end buildings.
-2-
, � . �� � �
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
9. Surrounding land uses and setting:
North: El Paseo Drive and commercial retail and shopping centers.
South: Shadow Mountain Drive and residential neighborhoods.
West: Commercial Retail and shopping centers.
East: Commercial Retail and shopping centers.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is or may be required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
CVWD, Fire Marshal, Palm Desert Architectural Commission, and Public Works Department.
Summary of CEQA Findings:
The proposed project, Gardens Expansion/New El Paseo Village Project, is expected to have a less than
significant impact on environmental factors with the implementation of mitigation measures. The
environmental factors that have the potential to be impacted by this project without any mitigation
measures are aesthetic resources, geology and soils, noise, and traffic and parking.
Purpose of this Initial Study
This Initial Study has been prepared consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, to determine if
the project, as proposed, may have a significant effect upon the environment. Based upon the findings
contained within this report, the Initial Study will be used in support of the preparation of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
-3-
' ' � �
TN/City of Palm DeseR
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one
im act that is a "Potentially Significant Im act"as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
Hazards & Haz. Mat.s Hydrology/Water Qual. Land Use/Planning
Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing
Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic
Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I fmd that the proposed project COULD NOT have a signi�cant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATNE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
�{ there will not be a signi�cant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1)has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENV IRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially signi�cant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions
or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature (Lauri Aylaian, Community Development Director, Date
City of Palm Desert)
-4-
. � r i
TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that aze adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project
falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based
on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants,based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant
with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is
substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially
Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact"
to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures,
and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiring, program EIR or EIS, or other CEQA
or NEPA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or EIS or negative
declaration or FONSI. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify
the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific
conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources
for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared
or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where
the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead
agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's
environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
-5-
. / �
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Project/CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less T6an Less Than No
Significant Significant w/ Signiticant Impact
Impact Mitigstion Impact
I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a X
scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited to, X
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing X
visual character or quality of the site and
its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial X
light or glare, which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Sources: Palm Desert General Plan, Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance, and Visual Simulations.
Findings of Fact: The proposed project is not expected to have a significant adverse cumulative effect
on visual resources since the proposed project will result in minimal changes from the existing
condition. There are no signi�cant trees, rock outcroppings, historic buildings or other significant
aesthetic resources on the project site and the proposed project will not create a new or intensified
source of light or glare during the day or at night.
Gardens on El Paseo/Saks Expansion
The existing Saks Fifth Avenue building and its adjoining parking lot structure are the predominant
features in this area. The expansion will be a modest addition to the existing structure and will utilize
space that is currently occupied by the existing parking structure, which appears to have been
constructed to facilitate the proposed expansion. While some of the viewsheds surrounding the Saks
Fifth Avenue Building may be modestly altered, the project will not impact any scenic resources nor
will it have a signi�cant effect on the views along Shadow Mountain Drive from which the building will
appear to be a single story (see Appendix A for Saks Visual Simulations).
In order to determine how viewshed will be impacted as a result of this project, visual impact analyses
were conducted for the Saks Fifth Avenue building expansion. The analyses initially consisted of the
taking of photographs at four locations surrounding the proposed project, and the super-imposition of
the corresponding portion of the proposed building expansion. Two views were taken from Shadow
Mountain both east and west of the expansion site, and the third was taken from the condominium
project located immediately west of the proposed expansion. A fourth viewshed was prepared to further
assess potential impacts from Shadow Mountain Drive near Larkspur Lane. (Please see the attached
viewshed analyses located in appendix A of this document.)
-6-
. ( �
. TTI/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
New El Paseo Vi11aQe
The New El Paseo Village portion of the Project will include the demolition of the existing structures
and the construction of a two-story mixed-commercial complex providing retail, restaurant, office space,
and an adjoining one-story parking deck above surface level parking with 302 parking spaces. The
existing structures (El Paseo Village) on this site occur along the south side of El Paseo Drive and
present a somewhat incoherent mix of storefronts, elevations and sidewalk connections. The proposed
New El Paseo Village provides a varied but unified series of elevations that incorporate design elements
and color used at the existing Gardens on El Paseo retail center. The project also continues the
streetscape treatment along the parkway and includes a series of planters along the building as well as
incorporates designated areas for the display of artwork.
The existing structures aze two-stories and effectively cut off views for the pedestrian and driving public
along El Paseo Drive, and from adjoining residential development located to the immediate south. The
proposed project will not change this characteristic of the existing site.
Development will result in the construction of a one-story parking deck above the existing surface level
parking lot. Construction of the parking deck will require modifications to the existing surface level
parking lot including lowering the level of the parking lot through excavation. The lowering of the
parking lot will also address the grade differences across the site from north to south. Parking deck
design incorporates parapets and screening that will limit light and glare from vehicles maneuvering
within the parking deck structure. In addition, substantial landscaping is planned for the parking lot and
one-story deck, particularly along the south fa�ade. Landscaping design will provide an aesthetically
pleasing barrier between the parking deck and nearby residences.
In order to demonstrate the parking deck design and potential impacts to views from nearby residences,
visual simulations were conducted for the New El Paseo Village parking deck. Although development of
the one-story pazking deck above surface parking will somewhat alter current views, implementation of
mitigation measures and incorporation of design features will reduce the level of impact to less than
significant. Visual simulations for the New El Paseo Village parking deck can be seen in Appendix B of
this document.
As currently designed, the south wall of the parking deck is 12.5 feet higher than the tennis courts within
the residential complex immediately south of the proposed project. Every effort was made to reduce at
grade level of the surface level lot and associated parking deck. Current design connects the north end of
parking deck with the second level of the proposed New El Paseo Village buildings.
Based upon the existing conditions and the assessment of the project's potential effects on aesthetic
resources, the proposed project only slightly alters the existing conditions, and will provide needed
improvements to an underutilized and obsolete commercial center in this important retail district.
Development of the one-story parking deck above surface level parking will provide additional parking
for the El Paseo Shopping District. Implementation of the following mitigation measures will ensure that
any potential impacts to visual resources are reduced to less than significant levels.
-7-
. � �� _ �"
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Project/CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Mitigation Measures
Service Areas
1. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the New El Paseo Village component, the City shall
review and approve the final locations of service areas, electrical transformers and other service
areas serving both project components.
Landscapin�
1. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a final landscape plan shall be prepared that assures that
the design conforms to the City's landscape ordinance and guidelines, including the use of native
and other drought-tolerant landscape materials to the greatest extent practicable.
2. The landscaping barrier immediately south of the New El Paseo Village parking deck shall
incorporate the use of climbing or trainable vines on the south fa�ade of the parking deck wall, and
layering of smaller shrubs and bushes in the foreground to further enhance the depth of the
landscaping barrier.
Li tin
1. Parking deck and pedestrian area lighting shall utilize the lowest levels of illumination practicable,
while adequately addressing safety and defensible space. Landscape lighting shall be shielded to
direct and limit areas of illumination to the subject property. Lighting plans shall be provided with
landscape plans.
2. Exterior building and other security lighting shall be integral to the building architecture and/or
landscape plan, shall avoid excessive lighting levels and direct illumination downward to protect
adjoining properties and night skies.
New El Paseo Villa�e Parkin�Deck
1. The parking deck shall be lowered to the greatest extent practicable in order to limit the impact
to viewsheds from nearby by residences.
2. To further reduce impacts to viewsheds from nearby residences, the slope of the parking deck
shall be limited to the greatest extent practicable.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
A. The City Public Works and Community Development Departments shall provide final review of
final architectural designs, grading plans and landscape plans, as well as required lighting plans.
Said plans shall be approved prior to issuance of grading permits.
-s-
� �
, TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Ezpansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Signiticant Sign�cant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigallon Impact
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES:
Would the ro'ect:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique X
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agri- X
cultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing X
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
Sources: Site plan, Palm Desert General Plan, and California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program.
Findings of Fact: Agricultural activities are not known or suspected of having taken place within the
site. The subject property is located in an urban environment surrounded by commercial and residential
land uses, and does not present any potential impacts to agricultural resources in the area. The project
will have no impact on agricultural resources since it does not include the conversion of farmland,
conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or result in the loss of Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The proposed project is not currently in agriculture
production, nor are there Williamson Act contracts on the subject property. Development of the
proposed Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project will not impact agricultural resources, and
therefore no mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
None required.
-9-
(' �
, TN/City of Palm DeseR
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implement- X
ation of the applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or X
projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable X
net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is non-attain-
ment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard(including
re-leasing emissions, which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to X
substantial pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X
substantial number of people?
Sources: Project development plans, Palm Desert General Plan and Environmental Impact Report,
South Coast Air Quality Management District EIR Handbook, 2003 Coachella Valley State
Implementation Plan for PMio, Draft Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan, and Traffic Impact &
Parking Demand Analysis Report.
Findings of Fact: The two primary pollutants of concern in the Coachella Valley are particulate matter
(PM�o) and ozone (03). The Coachella Valley has a history of exceeding regulatory ozone standards,
although the number of days and months the Federal one-hour standard has dropped steadily over the
past decade. The Coachella Valley is classified as a "severe-17" ozone non-attainment area under the
Federal Clean Air Act.Z
Ozone (03) is formed when byproducts of combustion react in the presence of ultraviolet sunlight. This
process occurs in the atmosphere where oxides of nitrogen combine with reactive organic gases, such as
hydrocarbons, in the presence of sunlight. Ozone is a pungent, colorless, toxic gas, and a common
component of photochemical smog. Although also produced within the Coachella Valley, most ozone
pollutants are transported by coastal air mass from the Los Angeles and Riverside/San Bernardino air
basins, thereby contributing to occasionally high ozone concentrations in the valley.
2 "2(x)7 Air Quality Management Plan,"prepared by South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2007.
-10-
. � �
, TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), in conjunction with Coachella Valley
Association of Governments (CVAG), Riverside County and local jurisdictions, prepared the "2003
Coachella Valley PMIo State Implementation Pian," which includes PM�o control program
enhancements and requests an extension of the region's PM�o attainment date. The Coachella Valley is
in a severe non-attainment area for PMIo and is subject to the 2003 SIP and local dust control regulations
and guidelines. A State Implementation Plan that addresses how Southern California will meet federal
standards for finer particulate matter(PM2.5) must be adopted and sent to the EPA by April of 2008.
Particulate Matter (PM�o and PM2.5� consists of fine suspended particles of ten microns or smaller in
diameter, which are byproducts of road dust, sand, diesel soot, wind storms and the abrasion of tires and
brakes. PM�o or smaller is one of the most prevalent forms of pollution in the Coachella Valley and is
associated with land disturbance and strong desert winds. Fine particulate matter poses a significant
threat to public health. The elderly, children, and adults with pre-existing respiratory or cardiovascular
disease are most susceptible to the effects of PM�o. More than half the smallest suspended particles can
be inhaled and deposited in the lungs, resulting in permanent lung damage.3 Elevated PMIo levels are
also associated with an increase in respiratory infections and occunences of asthma attacks.
In the neaz-term, potential impacts to air quality from the proposed development may result from site
grading and associated construction activities. In addition to 03, PMIo and PM2,5, there are other
pollutants of concern for which air quality standards have been developed. An assessment of potential
pollutant emissions associated with the proposed Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project was
conducted, and the impacts of construction, as well as operational impacts associated traffic and
stationary sources from electricity and natural gas consumption were determined to be less than
significant. Findings from this assessment are shown in the tables below. Table-1 lists State and Federal
air quality standards.
Table 1
State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards
State Standazds Federal Standards
Pollutant Averaging Time Concentration Averaging Time Concentration
Ozone(03) 1 hour 0.09 ppm 1 hour 0.12 ppm
8 hour 0.07 ppm 8 hour 0.08 ppm
Carbon Monoxide 1 hour 20.0 ppm 1 hour 35.0 ppm
8 hours 9.0 ppm 8 hours 9.0 ppm
Nitrogen Dioxide 1 hour 0.25 ppm AAM 0.05 ppm
Sulfur Dioxide 1 hour 0.25 ppm AAM 0.03 ppm
24 hours 0.04 ppm 24 hours 0.14 ppm
Suspended Particulate
Matter(PMio) 24 hours 50 mg/m3 24 hours 150mg/m3
AGM 30 mg/m3 AAM SOmg/m3
Notes: ppm=parts per million; mg/m = micrograms per cubic meter of air
AAM = Annual Arithmetic Mean ; AGM =Annual Geometric Mean
Source: California Air Resources Board, 2005
3 "2007 Air Quality Manageme�t Plan,"prepared by South Coast Air Quality Management District,2007.
-Il-
�r l
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Grading and Construction Related Emissions
The proposed project will result in the disturbance of approximately 3.42 acres, which includes the Saks
Fifth Avenue expansion and 2.82 acres for the New El Paseo Village site. A disturbance area of this size
has the potential to generate approximately 90.288 pounds of dust per day (see Table 2 below). In order
to limit impacts from dust that may be generated during construction of the project, impacted areas,
which are not expected to exceed 3.42 acres, will be watered continuously. This and other mitigation
measures are discussed in further detail below.
Table 2
Calculations of Fugitive Dust Potential
Unmitigated Condition
Total Area to be Total Potential
ExcavatedlDisturbed Factor Dust Generation
3.42 ±acres 26.4-1bs./day/acre 90.2881bs./day
Source:Table A9-9,"CEQA Air Quality Handbook,"prepared by South Coast Air Quality Management District,April 1993.
Table 3 summarizes emissions from grading equipment and workers vehicle trips. Grading operations
may begin in the fall of 2008; therefore emission factors for diesel powered grading equipment are based
on California Air Resource Board's 2008 scenario numbers.
Table 3
Grading Emissions Summary
(Pounds per Day)
CO ROG NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2
*Equipment Emissions 37.48 10.42 94.55 0.09 4.26 3.79 8,724.20
Workers' Vehicle Emissions 1.62 0.20 1.24 0.00 0.05 0.04 190.95
Total Grading Emissions 39.11 10.62 95.79 0.09 4.31 3.83 8,915.15
SCAQNID Thresholds of
Significance 550.00 75.00 100.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 N/A
Source: EMFAC 2007 (Version 2.3) Emissions Factors for On-Road Passenger Vehicles & Delivery Trucks.
Passenger Vehicles are < 8500 Ibs, and Delivery Trucks are > 8500 lbs. Total trips for worker are 125% of grading
equipment pieces. Grading activities are expected to begin in 2008. Passenger vehicle trips and delivery truck trips are
each 50°l0 of total daily trips. *SCAB Fleet Average Emission Factors(Diesel): Scenario Year 2008.For all equipment
the composite factor was used. For Equipment Emissions PM2.5 is 89%of PM 10, based on South Coast Air Quality
Management District's "Final- Methodology to Calculate Particulate Matter (PM)10 and PM2.5 Significance
Thresholds,October 2006."PM10 accounts for all particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter.
Table 4 summarizes emissions from construction equipment and worker vehicle trips to and from the
construction site. In addition, off gassing from the laying of asphalt and the architectural coating are
included.
-12-
� (.
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Table 4
Construction Emissions Summary
(Pounds per Day)
CO ROG NOu SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2
Equipment Emissions 21.15 12.83 64.99 0.06 3.37 3.00 5,747.71
Workers Vehicle
Emissions 1.30 0.16 0.99 0.00 0.04 0.03 152.76
Asphalt Paving
Emissions - 1.31 - - - - -
Architectural Coatings - 55.5 - - - - -
Total Construction
Emissions 22.45 69.81 65.98 0.06 3.41 3.03 5,900.46
SCAQI�ID Thresholds 550.00 75.00 100.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 N/A
of Si�ificance
Source: Equipment Emissions:EMFAC 2007 (Version 2.3)SCAB Fleet Average Emission Factors(Diesel)
for 2008. Assumes 8 hours of operation per day. *PM2.5 is 89% of PM 10, based on South Coast Air
Quality Management District's "Final- Methodology to Calculate Particulate Matter (PM) 10 and PM 2.5
Significance Thresholds, October 2006." PM10 accounts for all particulate matter less than 10 microns in
diameter. Workers Vehicle Emissions: EMFAC 2007 (Version 2.3) Emissions Factors for On-Road
Passenger Vehicles&Delivery Trucks.Passenger Vehicles are<8500 lbs,and Delivery Trucks are>8500
lbs. Total trips for worker are 125% of grading equipment pieces. Grading activities are expected to begin
in 2008. Passenger vehicle trips and Delivery truck trips are each 50% of total daily trips. Asphalt Paving:
URBEMIS2002 Users'Guide Version 7.4 May 2003. Architectural Coating: Estimated maximum area that
could be coated in one day during construction activities.
As indicated by the above tables, unmitigated grading and construction activities are expected to be well
below the SCAQMD daily emission threshold for all pollutants. It should be noted that these impacts are
short-term and will occur over a limited period of time and then will end. Site preparation, grading, and
construction activities will result in less than significant emissions and will consist of demolition and
removal of existing commercial buildings on the New El Paseo Village site, and the removal of the
portion of the Gardens parking structure that will make way for the Saks Fifth Avenue building
expansion. Subsequent activities will include grading, delivery of concrete and other building materials,
and building construction. With proper grading and site development controls, the construction phase of
the project is not expected to expose residents to dangerous levels of pollutants. Therefore, the Gardens
Expansion/New El Paseo Village Project is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts to local
or regional air quality.
-13-
. �, r.
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.L8.07
Onerational Buildout Emissions
Operation of the Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village project, including stationary and moving
source emissions is expected to be well below the SCAQMD threshold for all pollutants of concern. The
summary table for operational emissions at project buildout can be seen below in Table 5. Appendix C
contains detailed tables for all data given within the summazy table.
Emissions from stationary sources, electricity (power plants) and natural gas, aze projected to result in
less than significant impacts to air quality resources. The annual electricity consumption for the project
is estimated at nearly 1.9 million kilowatt-hours (Table AQ-10; Appendix C). This amount of energy
generated by a power plant will result in the emission of the specified pollutants in Table 5. Natural gas
consumption for the Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project is estimated at 3.6 million cubic
feet per year (see Table AQ-12; Appendix C). Table 5 shows the amount of emissions of various
pollutants that may result from the consumption of 3.6 million cubic feet of natural gas per year. (Table
AQ-13; Appendix C shows the detailed emissions from natural gas consumption.)
At buildout the Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project is expected to generate an average of
2,536 additional vehicle trips per day with an average trip length of 7 miles. Estimated moving exhaust
emissions associated with this number of trips is detailed in Table AQ-14 of Appendix C, and shows that
none of the daily thresholds are expected to be exceeded. Emission levels for all pollutants are well
below the SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Therefore, moving exhaust emissions that may be
generated as a result of the Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project are expected to be less
than significant.
Table 5
Summary of Operational Emissions
(Pounds per Day)
Moving
Stationary Source Total SCAQIVID
Source Emissions Emissions Anticipated Threshold
Power Nat. Gas Emissions Criteria*
Plants Consumption (LbsJday) (lbs./day) (1bsJday)
Carbon Monoxide 1.04 0.20 171.94 173.17 550.0
Reactive Organic
Gases 0.05 0.05 17.62 17.72 55.0
Nitrogen Oxides 5.97 1.18 17.84 24.99 55.0
Sulfur Oxides 0.62 0.00 0.19 0.81 150.0
Particulates 0.21 0.00 2.48 2.69 150.0
Carbon Dioxide N/A N/A 19,483.78 N/A N/A
*Threshold criteria offered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District for assistance in determining the
significance of air quality impacts. Source: "CEQA Air Quality Handbook," prepared by South Coast Air Quality
Management District, April 1993,Revised January 2006.
-14-
' � i
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA[nitial Study/9.18.07
Climate Change
The regulatory environment for dealing with climate change is just beginning to take shape. Currently,
there are very few established and agreed upon standards for quantifying greenhouse gas emissions and
thresholds for determining level of significance. However, AB 32 establishes a comprehensive program
of regulatory and economically viable mechanisms to achieve quantifiable and cost effective reduction
of greenhouse gases, and designates the Air Resources Board as the responsible agency for developing
appropriate regulations that include monitoring and tracking greenhouse gas emissions.4 Therefore, it is
expected that within a relatively short period regulations and thresholds will be developed that allow for
accurate and feasible ways to quantify project specific emissions, which can then be properly assessed in
CEQA documents.
The primary goal of AB 32 is to require a reduction in global warming emissions to 1990 levels by the
year 2020. In order to accomplish this goal, the bill establishes a statewide emissions cap that will be
phased in beginning in 2012. The Berkeley Energy and Resources (BEAR) model analyzed eight
policies and determined that implementing them would achieve almost half of the emissions standazds
for 2020 emissions goal.s There are a number of additional policies that have not been thoroughly
analyzed, but are expected to provide viable options for further reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Air quality has become an increasing concern because of human health issues, and because air pollutants
are thought to be contributing to global warming and climate change. Air pollution is a chemical,
physical or biological process that modifies the characteristics of the atmosphere. The primary
contributor to air pollution is burning fossil fuels through the use of automobiles, power and heat
generators, and industrial processes. The byproduct from the combustion of fossil fuels can contain a
number air polluting substances. These emissions are responsible for the poor air quality that is evident
in industrial centers worldwide, and may be responsible for global warming trends.
Some air polluting agents aze also greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4),
nitrous oxide (N20), and fluorinated gases (hydrolflourocardons, perflourocarbons, and sulfur
hexafluoride), which are released into the atmosphere through natural processes and human activities.
These gases are termed greenhouse gases due to their shared characteristic of trapping heat, and may be
responsible for the global average increase in surface temperatures of 1.0-1.7 °F that were observed
during the 20th century. The quantity of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased drastically
over a relatively short period. For example, by 2005 the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere had
increased by 36%, methane by 148°Io, and nitrous oxide by 18°Io since pre-industrial times.6
Carbon dioxide is the primary greenhouse gas that is stimulating concern due to current and projected
levels and the highly correlated temperature regression curve that has been observed and is predicted to
rise as carbon dioxide levels rise. Currently, carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere are around
370 parts per million (ppm). Comparatively, prior to the Industrial Revolution, about 250 years ago, COZ
levels were 278 ppm, and over the past 650,000 years carbon dioxide levels have fluctuated between 180
and 300 ppm.�
a "AB 32: Global Warming Solutions Act"prepared by Fabian Nunez and Fran Pavlev,adopted September 27,2006.
5 "Managing Greenhouse Gas Emission in California,"prepared by the California Climate Change Center at UC Berkeley,
January 2006.
6 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Climate Change.Retrieved on October 11`"2007 from
<http://epa.go v/cl imatechange/index.html>
� "Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,"prepared by
B. Metz,O.R. Davidson,P.R Bosch,et al. 2007.
-IS-
, (, t, 'TN/City of Palm DeseR
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
There is much debate over what the effects of climate change will be, but there is a general consensus
that emissions need to be reduced in order to limit air pollution and minimize the amount of cazbon
dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide that is released. Carbon dioxide levels are currently around 370 ppm
but are projected to increase to at least 540 ppm and maybe as much as 970 ppm by the yeaz 2100.8
Currently, there are limited incentives for reducing emission and few laws that require reductions,
however some regulations have been adopted.
Reducing emissions is necessary in order to limit the extent of global warming that will occur as a result
of increased levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, but it is also important to reduce
emissions in order to maintain a certain degree of air quality in which humans are not exposed to
harmful agents.
Mitigation Measures for reducing�pacts to Climate ChanQe
The project shall comply with local, state, and federal regulations regarding applicable air
quality/pollution and climate change. Greenhouse gas inventories may be required to quantify the
amount of greenhouse gases emitted for a specific land use designation over a specific period of time.
Recommendations for reducing global warming and air pollution are discussed below:
1. Promotion and facilitation of alternative energy and conservation programs such as district energy,
landfill gas co-generation, water conservation, heat recovery systems, street lighting, and employee
energy efficiency programs;
2. Implementation of smog control measures that discourage such activities as the use of single
occupancy vehicles and high energy- consumption vehicles and appliances, and that promotes
walking, cycling and the use of public transit, transportation demand management and use of
alternative fuels and alternative fuel vehicles (hybrids, biodiesel, ethanol, etc);
3. Control of non-source emissions such as wood combustion and road dust;
4. Promotion of Green Buildings and alignment of associated regulatory and design considerations.
This will include development of an internal policy to achieve LEED status for municipal
buildings, then extension and promotion of this standard to the community, in concert with other
levels of government;
5. Creation of a Better Buildings Partnership to promote and provide financial incentives for
industrial, commercial and institutional bodies to reduce their building energy use;
6. Implementation of sustainable land use planning and community greening by encouraging mixed
use development, community energy planning, maintenance of forest cover and use of best
management practices for natural areas, green spaces and agricultural lands;
7. On-going review of municipal regulations and their role in creating a sustainable community,
including advocacy for the incorporation of sustainability principles into the National Building
Codes.
8 "Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,"prepared by
B. Metz,O.R. Davidson,P.R Bosch,et al. 2007.
-16-
. � � �
, TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Project/CEQA lnitial Study/9.18.07
Cumulative Impacts
The proposed project will have very limited cumulative impacts, which will result in minimal
contribution to local and regional air quatity as a result of construction. Although the project is expected
to increase patronage slightly, it will not be growth inducing and will not lead to a permanent increase in
population to the area. Increased patronage has the potential to impact air quality, but based on the Air
Quality analysis including the above tables, impacts are not expected to have a significant adverse effect
on local or regional air quality. The project will not be a significant contributor to greenhouse gas
emissions and impacts associated with climate change are expected to be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
As noted above, the City of Palm Desert and the Coachella Valley are a severe non-attainment area for
PM�o (particulates of 10 microns or less). The 2003 PMIo Plan adopted much stricter measures than
were previously imposed for the control of dust to be implemented during the site grading and
development phase. These measures will be integrated into construction management for the proposed
project. These include the control measures cited below under mitigation and monitoring.
A variety of mitigation measures are available to and will be required by the City and/or other regulatory
agencies as a part of the grading permit, which must include a detailed dust control plan conforming to
the City's dust control ordinance. In addition, the following Best Control Measures (BCMs) are
described below and shall be applied as deemed appropriate by the City Building Department.
Control Measures
BCM-1 Further Control of Emissions from Construction Activities: Watering, chemical stabilization,
wind fencing, revegetation, and track-out control.
BCM-2 Disturbed Vacant Lands: Chemical stabilization, wind fencing, access restriction, and
revegetation.
BCM-3 Unpaved Roads and Unpaved Parking Lots: Paving, chemical stabilization, access restriction,
and revegetation.
BCM-4 Paved Road Dust: Minimal track-out, stabilization of unpaved road shoulders, and clean streets
maintenance.
The proposed project has the potential to generate dust during construction. Under high winds and
uncontrolled conditions, grading could result in the generation of up to 90.29 pounds per day for a
limited period. The bulk of the grading will occur during the first few weeks of project development.
The grading contractor will be required to submit a PMio Management Plan prior to initiation of
grading. The grading plan shall provide for the most efficient management of cut and fill activities; an
estimated 8,400 cubic yards of cut is anticipated. In addition, the potential impacts associated with PMio
can be mitigated by the following measures:
1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions.
2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasibie via temporary power poles to avoid on-
site power generation.
3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing opportunities.
-t7-
. � � (
. TTI/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
4. Imported fill and exported excess cut shall be adequately watered prior to transport, covered during
transport, and watered prior to unloading.
5. Any portion of the project to be graded shall be pre-watered to a depth of three feet prior to the
onset of grading activities.
6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on-going basis after
the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that aze actively being graded
shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be
watered at the end of each workday.
7. Any azea which will remain unpaved or otherwise stabilized for a period of more than 30 days
shall be stabilized using either chemical stabilizers or a desert wildflower mix hydroseed on the
affected portion of the site.
8. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion.
9. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean-up of construction-related dirt on
approach routes to and from the site.
10. All grading activities shall be suspended during �rst and second stage ozone episodes or when
winds exceed 25 miles per hour.
11. The project proponent shall notify the City and SCAQMD of the start and end of grading activities
in conformance and within the time frames established in the 2003 PM�o Management Plan.
12. Grading and development permits shall be reviewed and conditioned to require the provision of all
reasonably available methods and technologies to assure the minimal emissions of pollutants from
the development. The City Community Development and Building Departments shall review
grading plan applications to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures set forth in this
document and as otherwise conditioned by the City.
13. As part of the City's Grading Permit process, the applicant shall concurrently submit a dust control
plan consistent with the City's Air Quality Management Plan. Mitigation measures to be
implemented through this plan include but are not limited to the use of water trucks and temporazy
irrigation systems, post-grading soil stabilization, phased roadway paving, as well as other
measures which will effectively limit fugitive dust emissions resulting from construction or other
site disturbance.
14. The City and developer shall encourage effective design and implementation of transportation
management programs for commercial employees, which may include coordinated carpooling, off-
peak shift times, employee flex time and other components.
15. Prior to commencement of grubbing, grading or any other site disturbing construction activities at
the site, the developer shall notify the City and SCAQMD at least 24-hours prior to initiating earth-
movement activities.
16. Earth-moving operations at the site shall require pre-grading watering and the on-going application
of water via inigation system and/or water truck to assure appropriate soil moisture and preclude
significant dust generation
-LS-
. � � �
. � TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
A. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the City Public Works Department shall require, review
and approve a detailed dust management plan consistent with the project grading plan. The dust
control plan or equivalent documentation shall also address issues of construction vehicle staging
and maintenance. Implementation of these mitigation measures will ensure that impacts associated
with PMio are mitigated to a less than significant level.
-I 9-
. � (
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant w/ Sign�cant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES --
Would the ro'ect:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either X
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any X
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on �{
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including,but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling,hydrological interruption,
or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the �{
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or X
ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
� Conflict with the provisions of an �{
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
-20-
. i �
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Sources: Palm Desert General Plan and Environmental Impact Report, Riverside County General Plan
and Environmental Impact Report, and Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan.
Findings of Fact: The subject property is located in an urban environment surrounded by commercial
and residential land uses, and does not support habitat for sensitive species. There have not been any
sensitive or special status species identified onsite and none are expected to inhabit the subject property
or adjacent properties. No trees or other assemblages of vegetation with signi�cant habitat value
currently exist onsite. The project boundary and vicinity does not contain any riparian or wetlands
habitat, and it does not serve as a migratory corridor or nursery site.
The proposed project will result in temporary and permanent disturbance to land that has already been
significantly impacted and does not serve as viable habitat for species. Therefore, development of the
project will not impact sensitive species of plants, or animals, or natural communities and no mitigation
measures will be required.
Mitigation Measures
None required
Mitigation Monitoring and Report
None required
-21-
. ' �� �
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA[nitial Study/9.I8.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant w/ Sign�cant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES --
Would the ro'ect:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X
the significance of a historical resource
as defined in '15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in X
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to '15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including X
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
Sources: Palm Desert General Plan and Environmental Impact Report, Riverside County General Plan
and Environmental Impact Report.
Findings of Fact: Cultural resources are generally defined as those resources of traditional, cultural,
religious, or historic importance to Indian tribes, other socio-cultural groups, or to the American people
in general. They include, but are not limited to, archeological, historical, and traditional cultural historic
districts, sites, buildings, structures, landscapes, or objects.
The proposed project will not impact any known paleontological resource or culturally significant
geological features. No cultural resources have been identified within or adjacent to the project azea, and
there is no evidence to indicate that cultural resources exist onsite. The Gardens Expansion/ New El
Paseo Village Project will result in temporazy and permanent disturbance to land that has already been
significantly impacted. Devetopment is not expected to disturb any known cultural resources; therefore
no mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
None required.
-22-
. �. (
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Signiticant Significant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS—
Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to poten- X
tial substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, X
as delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of
a known fault?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, X
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X
the loss of topsoil?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as X
defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code, creating substantial risks
to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately �{
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
Sources: Palm Desert General Plan and Environmental Impact Report.
-23-
. j \
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Project/CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Findings of Fact
The project site is located approximately 7 miles from the seismically active San Andreas Fault. The site
is not located within an Alquist Priolo Fault Hazard Study Zone and no active faulting is expected to
occur on site or in the project vicinity. The site, as with the rest of the City, has the potential to be
subject to significant ground movement and shaking in the event of a major earthquake on the San
Andreas Fault Zone. Structures, fill, and manufactured slopes associated with this project will be
required to meet the City's and the State's standards for construction, which include Uniform Building
Code requirements for the site's seismic zone. Compliance with the Uniform Building Code will ensure
that potential impacts from ground shaking are reduced to less than significant levels.
The geotechnical aspects of the subject property are such that they are expected o provide for a stable
building foundation and with the use of current building code standards any potential geotechnical
hazards will be reduced to less than significant levels. The potential for liquefaction is considered to be
low, given the distance from active faults, existing soils conditions and the depth to groundwater, which
is in excess of 300 feet. Although the site is located within an area that is considered to have a high
susceptibility to seismically induced settlement, compliance with the Uni�ed Building Code will
minimize impacts in the event of that ground shaking were to occur. The potential for slope failure is
. considered minimal with appropriate design engineering and construction of the proposed retaining wall
along the south boundary of the New El Paseo Village site.
Soils Erosion:
Although the site is located in an area that is considered to have a sever wind erosion hazard, the subject
property and vicinity have been urbanized and no natural blowsand areas remain. Therefore the Gardens
Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project will not impact any existing blowsand areas. During grading
and construction the site may be subjected to temporary wind erosion. Since strong winds are common
within the subject area, appropriate measures will be taken to ensure that during construction potential
soil erosion from wind will be kept to a minimum. The air quality discussion includes analysis that
quantifies the potential level of impact and outlines mitigation measures that will reduce impacts
associated with soil erosion from wind to less than significant levels.
-24-
. ( (..
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures specific to the Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project are discussed
below. Further elaboration of ineasures may be required concurrent with detailed project engineering.
1. Clearing and Grubbing: All surfaces to receive fill shall be cleared of roots, vegetation, debris, and
other unsuitable materials. Soils that are disturbed due to removal of surface vegetation and debris
shall be replaced as controlled compact fill under the direction of the project soils engineer.
2. Preparation of Fill Areas: All fill areas shall be properly processed and recompacted. Fill areas
shall be scarified and watered as prescribed.
3. Placement of Compacted Fill: Fill consisting of on-site or approved imported soils shall be spread
in thin lifts and compacted at near optimum moisture content to a minimum of 90% relative
compaction.
4. Finish cut slopes shall not be inclined steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). All cut slopes shall
be inspected during grading to provide additional recommendations for safe construction.
5. Prior to the initiation of grading or construction, a final grading plan and associated engineering
report addressing dust control, retaining wall engineering details and other design analysis, shall be
submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
A. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit a final grading and drainage
plan, which shall include information on any planned on-site catchments and or storage facilities,
demolition and dust control plan, details on cut and fill, location of staging areas, haul routes and
other details.
Responsible Agency: Public Works, Building and Safety, and Planning Departments.
B. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit engineering drawings detailing
the design and construction of the retaining wall proposed along the project's south boundary.
Responsible Agency: Public Works, Building and Safety, and Planning Departments.
-25-
' � (
• TNlCity of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Project/CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Thaa No
Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigatioa Impact
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
1�IATERIALS --Would the ro'ect:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or X
the environment through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the pub-lic or }�
the environment through reason-ably
foreseeable upset and accident con-ditions
involving the release of hazazd-ous materials
into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle X
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances,or waste within one-quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a X
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land X
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the area?
fl For a project within the vicinity of a private X
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically }{
interfere with an adopted emergency response
or evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant �{
risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent
to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
-26-
. � �.
, TN/City of Palm Desert
Gazdens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Sources: Palm Desert General Plan and Environmental Impact Report.
Findings of Fact
During the demolition phase of this project, there will be a substantial potential for the generation of
dust associated with routine but temporary transport of construction materials from the site. The
demolition process will be regulated through permit conditions to be imposed by the City. No significant
hazardous or toxic materials are expected to be generated by this demolition phase.
Based on a review of the properties within the site vicinity and the data made available during this
assessment, there is expected to be a very low likelihood that contaminants from offsite properties have
migrated to the subject site and impacted the underlying soil and/or groundwater. Based on the findings
of this assessment, soil and/or groundwater investigations to assess the possible presence of hazardous
materials at the subject site are not considered warranted. No additional hazardous materials studies are
recommended for the site.
The project will not make a cumulatively significant contribution to the generation or release of
hazardous or toxic materials. Neither will it have cumulative effects on emergency response capabilities,
or contribute to an increased wildland fire hazard.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures aze required.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
No specific monitoring or reporting required.
-27-
. ` � �
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gazdens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentislly Less Than Less Than No
Signiticant Significant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER
UALITY -- Would the ro'ect:
a) Violate any water quality standards or X
waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater �{
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or
a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a
level which would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which
ermits have been ranted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage X
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner resulting in
substantial erosion/siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage X
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner that would result in flooding on-
or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which �{
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
fl Place housing within a 100-year flood X
hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard X
area structures, which would impede or
redirect flood flows?
-28-
, ( (
TTf/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Sources: Gardens on El Paseo Hydrology Report, City Public Works Department, and Palm Desert
General Plan and Environmental Impact Report.
Findings of Fact: The proposed project will result in an expansion and redevelopment of lands within
and adjacent to the existing Gardens on El Paseo retail center, but will not result in the generation of
contaminated urban runoff or otherwise compromise local or regional water quality. NPDES permit
requirements will be imposed by the City, as appropriate. The project is not expected to generate a
significant need for additional water resources. The project will result in an intensification of land use
but most of this is associated with low water-demand uses such as office and commercial retail. The
substantially more efficient landscape palette is expected to be comprised of native desert and other
drought-tolerant materials and should also limit water demand. The proposed project will meet the
requirements of the City's water-conserving landscaping ordinance. The project will not interfere with
groundwater recharge, and the project will not violate any water quality standazds or waste discharge
requirements. The project's long-term demand for water resources is expected to be less than significant,
and the implementation of water conservation standards will reduce potential impacts to less than
significant levels.
Floodin� and Hydrolog,v9
The proposed Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project is not expected to have a significant
effect on the local stormwater management system or significantly increase site runoff. Stormwater
runoff onsite will be collected in drop inlets and conveyed to the street drain on El Paseo Drive via an
underground storm drain system, which has been sized to manage the 10-year storm event at "open
flow" conditions. The total peak runoff for the proposed project is expected to generate 1.41 cfs and 2.48
cfs more than the existing conditions for a 10-year and 100-year storm event respectively. The project
will not make a cumulatively significant contribution to stormwater runoff or have a significant adverse
effect on local or regional flood control capabilities. The project will not have a significant adverse
effect on local or regional ground water. The hydrology report can be viewed in Appendix E of this
document.
Mitigation Measures
1. The �nal development plans shall provide details on stormwater management. The applicant shall
also submit a final landscape plan and plant palette for the project, which shall comply with the
City Landscape Ordinance, incorporating native and other drought-tolerant plant materials to the
greatest extent practicable. No invasive plants, as identified by the City and/or the Coachella
Valley Mountains Conservancy, shall be permitted.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
A. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, detailed stormwater management and landscaping plans
and palettes shall be reviewed and approved by the City.
Responsible Agencies: Public Works Department, and Community Development Department.
9 "Hydrology Report for the Gardens on EI Paseo,"prepazed by EKN Engineering,Inc.,September 15,2007.
-29-
. � ( �
, TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING -
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established X
community?
b)Conflict with any applicable land use X
plan, policy, or regulation of an agency
with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal
program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
Sources: Palm Desert General Plan, and Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance.
Findings of Fact: The proposed project is well suited for the location and is consistent with the land use
as delineated in the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed project will not physically
divide an established community. The proposed project does not conflict with any applicable land use
plan, policy, or regulation including the General Plan, any Specific Plan or the City of Palm Desert
Zoning Ordinance. The Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village will have no adverse impacts to land
use and planning.
The proposed project will facilitate the interconnectivity of existing commercial development in the
vicinity by following similar design and instituting a shared parking arrangement between the two
properties. The proposed project will enhance rather than adversely impact surrounding land uses. The
project is not located within a Conservation Area and is not affected by the implementation of the
Coachella Valley Multiple Species habitat Conservation Plan. The proposed project will not make a
significant cumulative contribution to land use incompatibilities, and no mitigation measures are
required.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures required.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
I�10 mitigation monitoring or reporting required.
-30-
. � , �
. � TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Sign�cant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigstion Impact
X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would
the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a X
known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of
the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a X
locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
Sources: Palm Desert General Plan and Environmental Impact Report, and Riverside County General
Plan and Environmental Impact Report.
Findings of Fact: Aggregate resources in the Coachella Valley were evaluated by the California
Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (DMG), now known as the California
Geological Survey, (CGS) in a 1988 report entitled, "Aggre�ate Land Classification: Aggregate
Materials in the Palm Springs Production-Consumption Region." ° The proposed project site is located
within an urban area where extensive development has occurred and is not considered a viable source
for mineral resources.
The proposed project will not impact an identified mineral resource area. The project is located adjacent
to existing and approved land uses that would be incompatible with mineral extraction operations. The
proposed project will have a less than significant cumulative effect on mineral resources; therefore no
mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
None required.
io "Mineral Land Classification: Aggregate Materials in the Palm Springs Production-Consumption Region,"prepared by
the California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, 1988.
-31-
. � � �
, TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant w/ Sign�cant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
XI.NOISE Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation X
of noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards
of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation X
of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in X
ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic X
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport X
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
� For a project within the vicinity of a X
private airstrip, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
Sources: Project Description and site survey, Palm Desert Noise Control Ordinance, and "Traffic
Impact & Parking Demand Analysis Report, The Gardens on EI Paseo, Palm Desert, California,"
prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, on June 29, 2007.
-32-
� � �
, TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion ProjecU CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Findings of Fact: The proposed Saks Fifth Avenue expansion site is cunently a portion of a larger deck
connecting second-level parking to the east and west. The existing El Paseo Village property currently
includes the same mix of uses as aze planned for the proposed expansion project. The post-construction
expansion of the Saks Fifth Avenue building is expected to have no impact on the existing noise
environment. The New El Paseo Village component will be a new and enlarged version of the current
land use, and will include two restaurants that provide outdoor terrace dining oriented towards El Paseo
Drive. Restaurants are proposed to be sited at the corners of Lupine Lane and El Paseo, and San Pablo
and El Paseo. Service areas remain on the south side of the buildings and the north side of the parking
deck, which is accessed from drives located on San Pablo and Lupine Lane.
Construction Noise
The construction of the project will generate temporary but occasionally intrusive noise levels from
building demolition and parking structure disassembly, site grading and excavation, material deliveries,
and other construction equipment and activities. An existing multi-family neighborhood is located
across Shadow Mountain Drive and south of the Saks expansion site. Condominium units and associated
outdoor recreation areas are located to the immediate south of the New El Paseo Village site. Homes aze
considered sensitive receptors to noise, and the construction at the site could have a negative, if limited
and temporary, impact on nearby residences. Construction activities are regulated by City ordinance and
limited to the least sensitive times of the day.
Onerational Noise
Operational noise associated with the day-to-day business activities at the Saks Fifth Avenue expansion
and the New El Paseo Village sites are expected to be very limited, with the most pronounced source of
noise expected to be traffic noise at levels comparable to existing conditions. Development plans
indicate that no additional roof area will need to be dedicated to HVAC equipment for the proposed
Saks Fifth Avenue expansion. The New El Paseo Village will use roof-mounted HVAC equipment,
which will be acoustically and visually screened by a parapet and architectural screens. Music is
expected to be piped onto the aforementioned restaurant terraces and buildout conditions aze represented
by the applicant as being comparable to similarly situated restaurants at the existing Gardens
development; these potential impacts are expected to be mitigated by design and are considered to be
less than significant. No other sources of operational stationary noise are expected to result from the
project.
Noise Re�ulation and Im�act Summaty
The City has established community-wide noise standards that emphasize the value of an acceptable
noise environment and are intended to regulate excessive noise from existing uses and associated
activities. They are also meant to serve as a guide for identifying other pertinent noise regulations so as
to direct the location of potential noise generators and sensitive land uses. The regulations for noise
measurement and monitoring, as well as special provisions and exemptions, are set forth in the City's
Noise Control Ordinance as part of the Palm Desert Municipal Code.t� By conforming to the City Noise
Ordinance the project is expected to have a less than significant near-term, operational and long-term
cumulative effect on the noise environment of the area. The following measures are recommended to
assure that noise impacts are kept at less than significant levels.
►I "Noise Element the City of Palm Desert Draft General Plan,"prepared by City of Palm Desert and Terra Nova Planning
&Research, Inc., 2003.
-33-
. � � �
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Smdy/9.18.07
Mitigation Measures
In order to assure the limitation of potential noise impacts from the proposed development, the following
mitigation measures shall be implemented:
1. All internal combustion equipment operating on the project shall be �tted with properly operating
mufflers and air intake silencers.
2. All stationary construction equipment (e.g. generators and compressors) shall be located as far
away from existing homes and other sensitive receptors as possible.
3. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the City Noise Ordinance.
4. With the issuance of grading and building permits, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be
located as far as practicable from homes and other noise sensitive receptors during construction
activities.
5. To the greatest extent practicable, HVAC equipment shall be acoustically and architecturally
screened to buffer associated mechanical noise from nearby residences.
6. Outdoor music levels shall conform to the City Noise Ordinance.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
A. The City shall review the project grading and development plans and assure that stationary noise
sources, as well as equipment maintenance and staging areas sources are located sufficiently away
from existing residences. City inspectors, as well as the grading and general contractors, shall
regularly monitor construction operations and associated noise generation near residences.
Operational noise issues will be mitigated on a case-by-case basis, if and when they arise.
Responsible Agencies: Palm Desert Building and Safety Department, Palm Desert Planning
Department, and the City Engineer.
-34-
. r (
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Signiticant Significant w/ Signiticant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
—Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth X
in an area, either directly(for example,
by proposing new homes and businesses)
or indirectly(for example,through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of X
existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of X
people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Sources: Project description, and Palm Desert General Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report.
Findings of Fact: The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element and
associated designations for the property. The proposed project will not have a direct effect on the loss or
construction of housing or on changes in population in the City or area. The project will result in a
modest increase in retails sales and other commercial space in the El Paseo shopping district, and will
not significantly induce growth or displace an existing community. Limited additional job opportunities
may be provided beyond those under existing conditions.
The project will not have any direct or indirect significant effect on housing or population, nor on
growth-inducement or the displacement of an existing community. Therefore, no mitigation measures
are required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
None required.
-35-
. � �� �
. TTI/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Sigaifcant w/ Significant Impaet
Impact Mitigation Impact
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for
new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other perform-
ance objectives for any of the public
services:
Fire protection? X
Poiice protection? X
Schools? X
Parks? X
Other public facilities? X
Sources: Palm Desert General Plan and Environmental Impact Report.
Findings of Fact: The proposed project will result in a modest increase in retail and other commercial
space. Existing fire and police protective services are expected to be sufficient to meet the needs of the
propose development. School impact fees for the net increase in commercial space will be paid to the
Desert Sand Unified School District prior to the issuance of building permits. The project is not
expected to generate any additional demand for parks or recreational facilities. Buildout of the Gardens
Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on public
services or facilities.
Cumulative Impacts
The proposed project will result in a modest increase in retail and other commercial space, and is not
expected to generate any cumulatively significant impacts to public services or facilities, and no
mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
None required.
-36-
' ( �
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Sign�cant w/ Signiflcant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
XIV. RECREATION--
a) Would the project increase the use of X
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b)Does the project include recreational X
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities,
which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
Sources: Project description, and Palm Desert General Plan and Draft Environmental Impact RepoR.
Findings of Fact: Development of the proposed project will have no direct, indirect or cumulatively
significant adverse impacts on area parks, recreational facilities or trails. The project will not directly
increase household formation in the City, so no additionai demand for park facilities is expected as a
result of the proposed project. There is no reason that project development will cause added use of park
facilities, therefore no mitigation measures aze required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
None required.
-37-
. �' �
TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Project/CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Signiticant Significant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
-- Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is X
substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street
system (i.e., result in a substantial
increase in either the number of vehicle
trips, the volume to capacity ratio on
roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or X
cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads
or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic X
patterns, including either an increase in
traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazazds due to a X
design feature(e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency X
access?
fl Result in inadequate parking capacity? X
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, X
or programs supporting alternative
transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)?
Sources: Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance, Palm Desert General Plan and EIR, and "Traffic Impact &
Parking Demand Analysis Report, The Gardens on El Paseo, Palm Desert, California," prepared by
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, on October 16, 2007.
-38-
. � �� �
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion ProjecU CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Findings of Fact: The proposed Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project will not result in
elevated traffic flows, but it will create an additional parking demand. The subject project is not
expected to generate additional traffic beyond the estimated 1°Io per year overall increase in traffic that is
anticipated within the City of Palm Desert. With the consideration of efficiencies gained from shared
parking, continued availability of on-street parking, optimized parking facilities with the option for valet
services, and the pedestrian oriented nature of the El Paseo district, existing and proposed parking
facilities are expected to be more than sufficient to meet additional parking demands.
Traffic
A traffic impact analysis was prepared for this project in order to consider the potential impacts
associated with additional retail, office, and restaurant space within the existing Gardens on El Paseo
area.12 Trip generation estimates, shown in Table 5-2 of the Traffic and Parking Study, include the total
trips generated for all aspects of the Gardens Expansion/New El Paseo Village Project and estimate that
a maximum addition of 2,536 average daily trips will result from the project's development.
The traffic study found that most area intersections, both signalized and unsignalized, currently (2007)
operate at Level of Service (LOS)13 C or above; however, 2 of the 14 intersections studied operated at a
LOS D or E depending on the time and day. LOS D is generally considered the minimum satisfactory
level in urban environments. Therefore, 13 of the 14 intersections analyzed currently operate at
acceptable levels of service. The intersection of San Pablo Avenue and Highway 111 currently operates
at LOS E during Saturday midday peak traffic flows.
According to the traffic study, development of the project will not impact traffic flows in the area. Table
6-1 from the Traffic Study shows that there is no difference in level of service between the projected
conditions without the project and what is projected with the proposed development. The majority of the
traffic impacts to project area intersections are the result of current and future growth in background
traffic, which will occur separate from and independent of the traffic that may be generated as a result of
the proposed project. Therefore, potential traffic related impacts as a result of this project are considered
to be less than significant.
No consideration has been made for public or mass transit, which has the potential of providing
substantial reductions in the number of trips generated by the proposed commercial shopping center.
Trip generation may also be overstated in consideration of the pedestrian-oriented nature of the Gardens
on El Paseo Shopping District as a whole, which encourages park-and-walk shopping and thereby
reduces the trips generated per unit of commercial space. The synergistic mix of land uses proposed may
also serve to reduce the number of trips generated by the Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village
Project.
i2 "Traffic Impact&Parking Demand Analysis Report,The Gardens on El Paseo,Palm Desert,California,"prepared by
Linscott,Law&Greenspan,Engineers,on October 16,2007.
�3 The"Level of Service"(LOS) is a qualitative measurement, which describes operational conditions within a traffic
stream and considers speed,travel time,driving comfort,safety and traffic interruptions. LOS is described as a range of
alphabetical connotations,"A"through"F,"which are used to characterize roadway operating conditions.LOS A
represents the best,free flow conditions,and LOS F indicates the worst conditions,delays,and system failure.
-39-
/ �
. TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Parkin�
The existing parking supply at the Gardens on El Paseo and El Paseo Village consists of 1,123 spaces,
including 919 vehicle spaces and 58 golf cart spaces in The Gardens' parking structure, and 146 spaces
in the existing El Paseo Village parking lot. The Traf�c and Parking study included a parking survey to
determine the peak total demand for The Gardens' parking structure, and concluded that there is an
existing parking surplus of 191 spaces in this facility.
Upon buildout, the proposed Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project will result in a total
parking supply of 1,259 spaces consisting of 899 vehicle spaces and 58 golf cart spaces in The Gardens'
parking structure, and 302 parking spaces in the proposed New El Paseo Village parking deck.
Therefore, 1,201 vehicle parking spaces and 58 golf cart spaces will be provided at buildout.
In order to determine parking availability for the proposed project, a parking analysis was conducted.
Due to the mix of uses proposed and the associated varying peak parking periods that these uses
generate, the Shazed Parking methodology from Urban Land Institute (ULI) was used to analyze parking
supply at buildout. The details of this analysis can be found in the Traffic and Parking Report in
Appendix D of this document.
The Shared Parking analysis determined that peak demand across all uses at the Gardens and New El
Paseo Village development would require a total of 1,110 parking spaces. At buildout, the project will
provide a total of 1,201 parking spaces, which yields a 91 vehicle parking space surplus at peak demand.
The Shared Parking methodology is a conservative estimate and when considered in conjunction with
the pedestrian friendly district, the availability of on-street parking, and the free shuttle service, it is
reasonable to expect that the 1,201 parking spaces will be more than sufficient to meet the parking
demand for the existing Gardens on El Paseo retail center and the proposed Gardens Expansion/ New El
Paseo Village Project.
It should be noted that the proposed supply of 1,201 parking spaces does not consider the on-street
parking that is provided along El Paseo Drive, Lupine Lane, San Pablo Avenue, and San Luis Rey. Also
the Shopper Hopper, a free trolley, offers shuttle service to the El Paseo Shopping District and
surrounding shopping centers, and may further reduce the parking demand on-site. Finally, the
pedestrian oriented nature of the EI Paseo district is not accounted for in the shared parking analysis, and
may further reduce the expected pazking demand due to walk-in customers.
Access to parking at the Gardens on El Paseo project will remain as currently provided. The two
proposed access drives that will serve the New El Paseo Village parking deck will be located slightly
south of their current locations, which will accommodate the additional stacking that may result from
increased patronage.
-40-
. � �� �
TTI/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Project/CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Mitigation Measures
The implementation of the following mitigation measures will assure that impacts related to traffic and
parking are less than significant.
1. Work within the public right-of-way shall require an approved encroachment permit from the City
Public Works Department.
2. The developer shall pay appropriate Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) in
accordance with the prevailing impacts fee.
3. A reciprocal parking agreement or other covenant shall be established to assure that the reciprocal
parking arrangement between the Gardens and New El Paseo Village properties is maintained for
the life of these developments.
4. Prior to recordation of the Final Plan, the City Building and Safety Department and
Engineering/Public Works Department shall ensure that clear unobstructed sight distances have
been provided at all intersections abutting the project boundaries.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
A. The project proponent shall pay Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) and other
transportation improvement fees required by the City of Palm Desert for the net additional
commercial space resulting from the project's development. .
Responsible Parties: Project Proponent, and City of Palm Desert.
-4 l-
. � � (
• , TN/City of Palm Desert
Gazdens on El Paseo Expansion Project/CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE
SYSTEMS Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment X
requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
b)Require or result in the construction of X
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of X
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies X
available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
e) Result in a determination by the X
wastewater treatment provider that
serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
� Be served by a landfill with sufficient X
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, & local X
solid waste statutes and regulations?
Sources: Palm Desert General Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report.
-42-
. � �.
• , TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Findings of Fact: Domestic water and sanitary sewer services are provided to the site by CVWD, which
has facilities in the project vicinity with adequate existing capacity to fully serve the site. Demolition of
the existing commercial buildings, El Paseo Village, will result in a one-time increase is solid waste
generated at the site. The project will generate a modest and less than significant increase in demand for
utilities and municipal service systems.
The Proposed Action will not have a cumulatively significant impact on public services or facilities
being delivered to the area, therefore no mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
None required.
-43-
.. ; � �..
� , TN/Ciry of Palm Desert
Gardens on EI Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE --
a)Does the project have the potential to X
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
impoRant examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have the potential to X
achieve short-term, to the disadvantage
of long-term environmental goals?
c) Does the project have impacts that are X
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively consider-
able" means that the incremental effects
of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable
future ro'ects)?
d) Does the project have environmental X
effects, which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
Sources: Project Description, and Palm Desert General Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report.
Findings of Fact: The proposed project does not have the potential to signi�cantly degrade the quality
of the environment. The project will not have a significant impact on sensitive wildlife or habitat, or
impact important historic or cultural resources. By intensifying the use of the subject property, the
project enhances the use of limited land and other resources in a more efficient manner. No significant
cumulative impacts have been found to be associated with this project, and no mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
None required.
-�-
. 1 / /
• � 1 TN/City of Palm Desert
Gardens on El Paseo Expansion Projecd CEQA Initial Study/9.18.07
Technical Appendices Prepared for this Environmental Assessment
A. Computer-based visual simulations of Proposed Saks Expansion, prepared by VisionScape
Imagery, Inc., September 2007.
B. Computer-based visual simulations of Proposed New El Paseo Village parking deck, prepared by
VisionScape Imagery, Inc., January 2008.
C. "Air Quality Analysis for the Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project," prepared by
Terra Nova Planning and Research Inc., January 10`�, 2008.
D. "Traffic Impact & Parking Demand Analysis Report, The Gardens on El Paseo, Palm Desert,
California," prepazed by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, on June 29, 2007.
E. "Hydrology Report for the Gardens on El Paseo," prepared by EKN Engineering, Inc.,
September 15, 2007.
Sources:
A. "Traffic Impact & Parking Demand Analysis Report, The Gardens on El Paseo, Palm Desert,
California," prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, on June 29, 2007.
B. Computer-based visual simulations of Proposed Saks Expansion and New El Paseo Village,
prepared by VisionScape Imagery, Inc., September 2007.
C. "Palm Desert Comprehensive General Plan," prepared by General Plan Advisory Committee
Community, Development Department City of Palm Desert and Terra Nova Planning and
Research, Inc., adopted March 15, 2004.
D. "Palm Desert Comprehensive General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report," prepared by
Terra Nova Planning and Research, Inc., September 2003.
E. "Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance," adopted February 25, 1999.
F. "CEQA Air Quality Handbook," prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District,
April 1993.
G. "2003 Coachella Valley PMio State Implementation Plan," prepared by Julia C. Lester, Ph.D.,
and Laki Tisopulos, Ph.D., August 1, 2003.
H. "Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan," prepared by South Coast Air Quality Management
District, et al., adopted May 2007.
I. "Riverside County General Plan" prepared by County of Riverside Transportation and Land
Management Agency, adopted October 2003.
J. "Riverside County General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report," prepared by County of
Riverside Transportation and Land Management Agency, adopted October 2003.
-45-
� (
Appendix A
Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project
Computer-based visual simulations of Proposed Saks Expansion
Prepared by:
VisionScape Imagery, Inc.
nFF�unc ��es�s�edj�ao essor
ar to see t pc�ure.
September 2007
Visual Simulations
Exhibit 1: Site Key
Exhibit 2: Simulation from Location l.
Exhibit 3: Simulation from Location 2.
Exhibit 4: Simulation from Location 3.
Exhibit 5: Simulation from Location 4.
:
-
.
:
s
�� t^ , i ',;q t� .,4� Ax.: ,i� , � ., �u .s ���
y � ,. �
i�� i yi�3� ' 'a f �t,� � � �t .'�'�i
i � , i ,}� ,
� �:��i � :. , y � 1 — , �'
� `}�t.,� r � � ..^;� , 1 ��''' _ ' g `��:'``, ^' : '�;.
: #� },
1��� `�, p�V�. � .�� � � r f•x
,� — ' '`fi,� •� � y� -.,
�,S` e,vj ac y: f �:y r;�y
,� . t ,r` ����� ���� � � ;� � , ,.
j;"'ti �' ! �` "'t .•, �, ,�•3 t �. , ti, � ,�u,
. ,,,
"�k.. ,.�,; � : +'�m.,�
� �r . .S•. `i n ;,hs u.f . . r.,' a1 �r•P+Y ..�
:j� '� t1 � '�r ��4 f ' , , � , �x1. r,��� �P
' . �Y''h x dd.�. ,.r+. t . ��c
::i ' Jf%"� s j 'w+�t�f'}� �f3,,,•
. . ./ . �7� St, � . /: .�b
�� � f., !. y�..�; �.
"�. � ��� �.`�� � �►' �� � � ,/� � �.
� �� l - ���� ��;� �' � .� £3�:
�� -� �;... ,,`��,: , -.� ,,.
� yst ;...�- '� ';�� ;,
� �' d° `�' � .�a
,_4� ��, . K .
� iI I
a�-b�� : ' . � y' .
;�� .� ., � ,,
'� q�j {? � f ;,� �-''x�-
� �.� 1` :�
i k. - �., _, ,i.' : '
C,� �:� ,��
:� �� ';:�
�,
��� ; :
�
,w,� � � � � '� �`� � ;
_ ��+` ;i s �
_ �° � ,;�
_ �;� ";{ .,
— . 4L! �� ;i t ��� .�� 1,
�� �Y�'..:_� �.� "� ;;� , � �_.�.; '���.
1 � t ,�� .. . `' ..,•w� . , y . t�'tt ( . ,^ '� �^:,�
� , � . r� ,�'v;, p � ,z � ��;�v �„��;i.ti
,. i�� �(, �� t � M� ! �' �.. . F� �b�,'F ��:J
_ t��p � 4 < }�j' , ;, 1 fy �; .
� � :. � ^ j , � i a „�o, ,y, �� Y.
_ . { i�.� ..,.�,a ,t �a� **5..,' � `I .' Q p`^I ,pA,��
i ' "� ��� �. ; � � ���j� � ,� 4
�r , ,�, .°��- t� ,�. � � �:��
7 � ��, � y �a A ^� �� : �y
i P 1,I '� ` � ; ,�' � � i P�. ,� ' o� �7��
1�' �' ! �y +y'�'v't�t {. �d1 ` �� ��'/ I �i �•�t� ���'tatij,'
�i � ��� � ^ �` , 4 . 1� ` �.y��',:�
`� j � - t
4 ' ,+ . i_,.�•• .., . 1�`��; �°� a$R`",,,:�
;�.r `:, "" ,:
I if '`�.
' � y ` ,
� . �..:.
� �h . � .
.� . -� ,
� �i .�1., :
� ''.2 I .. 'E ''
, �• . `
� `, 'v,�4
;' ' ` � .�
` ` `*�. �
.
.
.
.
�
.
•
..�,� _ � P ,.�. ,�� � ..,,� y '� ,
�,` � �!� ��y��� � I ► ���4
� �•.;
a ..7 ' _�` �` ..
. �♦. �, •• ..<9P,.� . � .i t �.�. , �1t..' " ^t F,�
_ � „ ,�'f _— r
� ;����t�"` �a�'' � �+ri. ri �� ;
`a �M1.
� I �•V
,r. _ a��''z�^�^`� �`'� ,._. �,.`,, � �� u
'r`.�; ����' �'� ,<�'!_ ,*�
,RY� ,�
:�.�
� �� ��',.' .��'� �.
� ..� -`�,� +t4��,< ��'�'1�- ;yi� ` +•,��y„„ a/`t�i��„ .
y ��$%' t F,•
� ,.' .��. � , . � r .�.� ,...
� .,,,���„�4�.*��.�. ( "� ���'«;`�i.
� .�.
', �� ` , Sy
�` � * � �" / �� rp,��,��..
� :"�,. �r�� Y�� • , ��d: '.r'�'F r�r�-
>:, •a�,.� �; �a.� '� ',,�;�, �.• ;.,� .w�, "�
���`�r.�'��a^,�'�{�. � ,�~�i�.c`�'�-
��. -qA.. �j-g , �y:, '�•�, Y.,
. � � •��'� `3�*� '� -�'' �. _4 ,� `
,� •�'• �.�`1u�' 3 *._`�' 1�
��` ���.�x.q� � '��
Y
� u tll�; f'' ���1��. :
• �a x'� ���� �Y� , .�'.1:.
�� - '� ...4T l �,� '":i
w,
�,� � �Y�:.say t.r�r� t��`�� a � d
i � �, �����`�j i � �r �F��t�� 'I
� �`,��. � ` ,�; .
&. . ��_:•
� `�:' a<J�''r,ji '.� +�+,u�'�H,�r
x�,".�`�- $�' ? ,r'�,�� t
) .n�,
� , . � �
� d`�,,��,�'.. � � �
,r .,h �<
_� � � _ t- * ..
' r�� t :�1 t�, � 2 {.
� � i+.
� _ _ ,f r ��.�c�, �+K.i t�' .H,
�� � � f.� �x� �
� r"
_ �, � �}rs�_ �y r�����.r
� '��� �J ��4.Y�� � �
;'� ' y� . +. . 9
%a �� �+ �,,a;�j.
t
� ��� z ��r�ll
�
� ' '�>�y r:*'
. ��r� fi�x�, v,s�`�,Lq.l�.�f�,
� �� �..�
"�'F,��J. ,;r ' ` ,.�F� J I(I�
�;. , c �I
;: r-�'��: ��
�"'
,f,,� �, �^��.
�r .A;,
� �', � �.
g�,'�:k�ir. - :.y�� ,�R�C'.
i':.�� .�,,; ��. '�
� i�v
�'�� �'� .�a�f�:�i�,' �
r
�1.��^, e, � tA. .r;�..
't�'i:•�•��R��7� , �`�'!J =.
� , .:�d: �� 7/ .:,�.
Yw
i...3� ' ' L'��. . ';1
.''!'� . "'!� .
- �
� � . ; � ;��
� � � " a;�t.
R
. f
y�.... k"' '�
1. ;
.. �e�.. .• I cE.
r , tiource:VisionScapelmagery,inc. t
, � � �
.a ,,� X
� M
0
J � � �.
_ � ?.
�� � m cn
� Z a
O
a �
c:> Y,
�` '' _" a 9'
Y
. 0
�'= � p .
::e.
�4' ;a:
.. �
� �
� � ,
Y �'
�, � .1 ��L� .. . 4 . d � .
M
.� �1 � � �
'�•'a � �tq� �� I.��
U }.� 1
•; t•r�,�
tr; � � ' � �'�!�',''
,_ o�., �„ �,� . ;���.
� � � i � �� j
i:` � y ,,i y, ,
���b� � !i .° }� . �� P•�
� : °
� �, �� �ri,� �. I .,► � _,Y
d' ,
G .sq� ' k- r54 �,. I I � ^"`�,'�' .
w H jy;.:;°r I� � t ��.W +�" .. � .. ..
� 3 t�;.� ` ' +,�, .� _ �� � r. .{ y \�
�}� �` � ���
'J' C/� �+7 �,'F'xy�� '� ..ly .�. M fi �!: ,'.� � � ..
0 3 � �' FP ,�c _ "
.., y I. " � �' � �I ^��� .
'p c >� �S . h�h''y" � _ '�.� i Y ��L' � �,..
d �. o '�' �I "" �. �';��' `,n-.^}. w' � ` �. 1� �'.� �
3 � �� �I �� ;� � �r' � �r, 's
� � x . �� 1� r. ��1 .."S' c � t• � i� �.'r� . .
rt �_ � a; �I .. �� `. . . � �},'''� I� x'T:^?�` .
t
� o � � �� ,:- a �r'� ��: r . � I . r ;��
w , , � ' �.: � ��
� � = �� � � �: : .
�, �� � -��
^ �i;.... �� :�: ,.r� �`i.
+�.i(� " �',
'" � �f�i�, ° '= �'`'�a.
�'�Ef`r�i� �" .. �.
1 � ; 'P'',�-r�,
�,% f�' ' �� �;
4
,,5; � . , �� � g �
�' � �� -� � ��;
:,��, j +�',�;,. �° s ����,�
'�; e ;���
f-. �'�s��"' +,; � 1 r ,
�:'" '-� , � x
� I r �, .
,�,: ��. �� `�`:
�:;, :� �J,� y�:
�Y a�' +saii�.}�"
.��. � � � n'( .
�. „�
�., �:
f
r i
� � . tf'�! ' �
� �.,,.' . . - . 'a�i ..•�����-�,� '
�
m
�
A �
Q
r , Sourcc VisionScnpe Imagery,Inc. N �
` �
�o •--j � fil
_ � O x
� � �,
R, � 7
� � Q
CO �
� D �
O �
.,
ry : ,
:i
�� f. ' ! .. ��r ,ii
'> l � 4 - - �' I
�:. t�a,., ��. � �
1 ',? m, ° ._5i y-;
, .,� � � ;. �'{;
d ` � 1
� �� 1 L
� �+�'�l.+,f� 1' �� .- � �c q� '� ::({..;
C,'� ,�;�� p i ¢ . T �
*�.,s � �.11��' �7 � �� S � ��;hj'1r�lw.';�
�� ������ - � �� �� � , � t��, j
S � + r j��•�p fi , F i i,
S.��s �� ��• T� �'•.`. t ��'.'"�°§,� �, ��
M1 , ,
. ,
�° Zr t - r . € � "�y
w
.v;.
,d�;�i�-� k �:,� +� . , r --; �_ ... �,- f,� r 't>`
.�`�t,f ...±w i'' ;�-. ; >�::
� � •,�, 7 � .;� ' °�
M$i � 4 Y tpt +��,�' yik:,r •,.
s° ;;'~ "'s., 'h ,,'~.c�, ���
�.� �", ''�
t "f � � � �� � i +' .�.�y �'4 �r..
C� �r +�,S' �`�{� � r �� •+ ��t�?�'
m i� '�, � �� r+.4'
_. � � , " '�`{� `•yt���•�,•' �;�`� ' •,� '.�!�'`� (�u{�(� ��,, � `
� � � . � y 5�1� a �1. •m t]a- 4� �
;�• P� u �.
t'� � � �i. ,h�`+ cv�' � ..f�,�, ,'s� `
� '� � R. '��. 4` ep�� . .�.3 �.� {fl/�'�a'!� .
A
,�„� p' a � ' 'I � � .
M d^. C � Ij t.�, - � �, ��� .
3 = „ � . � ''
� � ; �-, *�� �'t !: hµa.
C � �F ' }`� '
�
�C .��.yY. .
A� ��� �'�� '�k.� _ r�' �,�*i
n �: � , ¢ ;t � �
� �' ���c�"kt `. .�^ `� i
3 ��;���l�4�l� ��„���'�''"
�• '��., :.y �,� � ��.�. t �:� ,� ��, �
' s 5. . ,�
', a..� V f:'� . ��'� �•;� ..,•, f �:�`s. `.i�$" �"�:?s �, ,4.�� `!
f �, .c ,� ti �s�� � � ' �, / ' �? �.'�,� 'r� y i{ r
r i ,��r r.� �,,� � a ,r
~` ��', ��L�� , .�qt"�. , r � v. . :�a� �^
��' ,t.. �'a� ��d� �a� i�.�� . � -,� J .
� � �• 7�/
«:'*�. ` ~�'� � �' � � ,�'`R "``�.- '�„'' ^ " �'`
� �' � « ��'��:.' ,��, f� ~ ,*�
.N n f� , � ' � ��
�' � -�.r'��'"""-} '. �.� . '"' 4�Y,� � `a.
� �
. .�,''�� '� . . .,�r.� • �4.� , i '
� .4 ' `f:; �.fr- ,.r.y?
9,• T Hn'�' �i t )��j X/�' T t,�..�
v� �. � �g� •i� . A y ,
. wt . � ; ~�y���?� ��.�t�
�� S k�.� �e�jy �
� .j- Y _ ' `"� � '.
��� `" `, ` g��, a �'�y,� �� . � �������� ������}r ,
• •�,���� 6 � �' r �5•�� •~��I�.K k ��y„�P'.? �' 7-�'p4»
�,��;� ' � ��i � J 4�
�:f* .Y>..- _:�
B
8
;�
�
�
v� �
a
Appendix B
Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project
Computer-based visual simulations of Proposed New El Paseo Viilage
Parking Deck
Prepared by:
VisionScape Imagery, Inc.
TIFF Unc �o�rea eed)��dofnpressar
ar� tl to see tFis pcture.
- January 2008
Visual Simulations
Exhibit 1: Site Key
Exhibit 2: Simulation from Location 1.
Exhibit 3: Simulation from Location 2.
Exhibit 4: Simulation from Location 3.
!� � � � �; �
........._ � ���� �
• � a �„ .
r � �
•
� w� . ' '� � �..� �
� Y . � +y ,.. .,,.a�.,.., .. .s;,,,,.: r ��ti�Y
;�, � . � .. . . j...
.,w�.. . ,,. • �
,� :c :��,�'��-�- �"-- '*t � �� j � ��
A � �
� � " � �
� � � �+ ���. � !��
� � � � fi
r s .., a 1 � 3�:'.- ��:.
_ � • i" y.. �,� � ..'.. ��A, . ��
� ��� :� � �' �.�+ �} ��
. � . � .�.� �.. � . �
f P "'► ._ . x. .i e • �
s `�. 1►. � • ' {�
- : "� �, °� P: �,. : �
1 . � { � t
� « . . ' • ..
— � ♦ • r s . �,� , ` _
� �'�.�� , � +�; �. � , � .�►w"'• w • ►
. • �r
� t � '� � � � � � � , - ; .
s •
i� �-. .t� A' � � � ' �
# • f .
� • *► ! • 1 +� n,
.. �� : ;o+s',,, .�,:��� �r. .
� �, : : � . ;� . ����
� � � �� � � � h �
_ � , - .�; ,�,� .�...w.
� , - ...
. ,,, � � '��� �� tl
- � � a; ,� '
� � , a'� . �
'' ' .r�..°�...avu�t��'�aW
�,"' �, �'^ ,� . _ �,�"'i. °�► �■r�/r .w+,r�,. � •-
�4 ! � r
�� r��-�, .*. I � L• .,yyy�� ay�+•...� � .
� �. ,,�,, cr_
, � -:,+A�.,.� .���L f� 4 � �,...w..iw`+�,'...
B �
.' � '; � .
i � �
'�f� °' .i. .
*� � . i � '�� = �' ,�� � :
� r
� r
. w.ew,�� � } , � � � •.
� , :�: ��'� :
� �., � � �� �
! � -�m
:�.t�ti��.,a;�,:;;;�..,� ., E �,'�"""� �
..
r � �,
�
_ � J ' � m
- 5 x
- ci � o
_ � ° � �
�_ � y N ='
� v � �
z 3 �
_ ! �
— 1' �2
� � ,< r{ �
, ,r;:�r� .
• P' ;�
. ^��' �.fiy� '
F�'' _.._. f��; . ..
� �� �} �' .-� � �...
�i�
Yy j�
. '�7� �e �[k.� ' 'yt�
Fki � � T�
.�I.'�1 .r i� � �f��.;: � i+�"t T�
� } .
k� ; �-�,�
s ,
�° ` -��
-� n
, : ,,
� �a � .
� . ��� ��' .,{.
� i:
� ' �� �
..�„ ,.
� �
i ^ h'�� �f ��� .
�"e"
_�. " ...i s�w...
� a 'i� � � ��r� a
j 1 �„ --� � ■�1 .. ����
' _ � , ; ���{ f .
m — �
" , ,a' �
_ _ _ _��
� �a ?? .��
�- . �
1 f _�_ �� f
�
. _ - --------
r ,r � r
;; r -
�- .�
�. �
_. � ,+ t 4, _ —
��.�. i �... _ —
� � ; � ��^; :l �� �
F� .
�?;,�.� `7 .
� � �_1 ". c _ .,
` "' '�� � „x
� :x�`s. , ,
; ��
� ��� � >`- y� 'w
,us,�;; v r v k:;��
r , ,.nf
. d �- i'��4.� "$
�, , r ;a' , ��
y � y�';��''�`.
,:s� ' ;t
�
o-
�; _, �� a. �'�;
�"'
T
SI �
t� S
.
.
� -�� �t:g.:-:� �r . R't'�.3�y� '4:1
� `-J`:L? ��� ��9 �, ,.r �.a.9� ��1�^�� �:`�
��F '�'�u� ' -���'•`r �' �7�lSd'. �.t3S"3;�.�..
.•t^� .�, .� �ffll �A7'" < y' "'���. ! ' � �,�t�4
. �...,,,..,, . •tt,'�►4y � _ �< �1�,�'�y •�y ��
. - ...r.� '�y�y 4���� _" _. �"""""' > I�
:r � �'�""`,w,`A., � "�'s�,�.i�`� u,� �-_ �"` ��-.' �`�`�.
f �a
`j*` �.. � �}� SI�t�� � ' � � R���r+j
-,, r� f� �� ..�:��/� �
.; . �' ��rr'� 1 �r,` - �i;"; G'/ �f i�%A
,`�. • � 4* � �- ! �\
i , ,� � ` /� ;,, , �.`'.���
� � n.z . . �`e.. �+'1�,��� rr � �� ,, � :/y j , i�
i � : � t���.' �. A . �' . ��;'.�
,<' "R �/.�y`rt,. ��,'r..«�. +4�'` �l �`3f.d
. .I��._ �r �p� ��, . � �..I
�I i�„ •.J�' �J ;•��� .'��,"�1 �� � � �r��.�
,
� . . � ' � y� �' � �_ ����
� � 1
r -.� + � �� a �� . j . t��
j� ��
'.+*�. � ` 7
�e„ ,��C .
:�s� � ; t'
s,�„r� ,;,.
t4' 4 :�'.
C.y: „
-Lx"' • -.,:_' . �-�
� � �i �;>� . <.. •"�-�- �' `=;
�:•. ..�
�• I �.
' `:
_, `,�,.:
. - ' -
� �� � .. `
!�`: -
� [ �,- ~� r � ..: 's���
� `^•� 4.J .'��:..rfi�
f .W' �� 4, �'1 x~�� f �� ���V ` -�
'�+, •' ��_.�r ��'1!'. .
..� ' � ���r
� �., / y 'T• l� ; .s• t � . . �
. 1� � `� •.�f �'��S ys..
.y �; r:J6 '�,��• • , . ',�`
f'��-� ;�.;� r: � . .. ����
�l� � __ s� . F. L;,
t ,. � ��
��. .� -,
�' � �
. ;
_ '•��,.. �4°' t. �1. � � ^ '�� r;•
\ . ... . .... \ ./�� r,,,.�:s
'. � '"�
.
.
:
+ � .ar► �.�w t .:..- � n
<<. � .,,,� � 1,i
f��� . � '. ��`, .y��, '�,y"�. �irj� .� �' a,�-
'� ;`fv�"i�M��°�I� .,�u4�.•.� �,- �
x�' -- ,A.;.Y,�.:'� ;
.�{ 'E �� ' � ` `•
._ N. ,i
`� ' �'. . r�"
�..i�4�l�,ti�..
�1� `�:,:
; � °� � 1 �'�'
; ' , t
i � `••rt ... c � -
, ' � �•, ' .' . . �. t a���
�'. . •:�t �( �.<j.~i7'A•�'. . i`.. �
� • �T' �'�.i s� t •�1
g � � v.� '('�.Aa:�l�>f�. y .
i� f r *�. ,I � _� , a �
„ �:� � - -� : �
�F V.!
. j ?_�1
� 1'
f.� i i,
4:"'{�:� � +•
' �:,:: � ,��„}.,. i
�ti: l � .`' �� � �r� ,
�' .rF�. � . ,:� •= ' ...r?� ':'z..>�:4+a
�,u d:.� �c'..
,t _ �. � � �� � M �- �����- S• �
� �`' tY+b .�'�..�
t�a �1�
.1� �� ♦ A 1 [�
�; '�,'6}..�"'s!^,
f1� � - ���..,s�,�.L:�+.-'
T� _ . •�'�4�.��,k
��, ' ...� .r�. y��
'>- ry.'..,..-�T..MH1�� 'I
, ,�:�.. :h . .�R��.
f� � ,
,'•
t �
� � � :� ,.
� .
, � _ ��.�
� � • � ', �� � ��,l.
!,
Mr �' � ti.
ti •� ..y�Np�.�� �I
i���'.
�. ( � � -�:^�{`�'�
'�: `� ,�, i;,.
' ' . .."�S_� . I� �
�� _ ; S. � .�;. ;
' =:'7. n �.� .*,
�. .�../`:' �,f 'y. '� y� �. ..
1 ♦+K• �'T'' ,�,v '��r, � .
I �� _�� .�`'Yf�►�i,••s ' s
. f^ �
Appendix C
Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project
Air Quality Anal�sis
Prepared by:
QuickTimeTM and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
January 10, 2008
. �. {
, Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-1
State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards
State Standards Federal Standards
Pollutant Averaging Time Concentration Averaging Time Concentration
Ozone 1 hour 0.09 ppm 1 hour 0.12 ppm
8 hour 0.07 ppm 8 hour 0.08 ppm
Carbon Monoxide 1 hour 20.0 ppm 1 hour 35.0 ppm
8 hours 9.0 ppm 8 hours 9.0 ppm
Nitrogen Dioxide 1 hour 0.25 ppm AAM 0.053 ppm
Sulfur Dioxide 1 hour 0.25 ppm AAM 0.03 ppm
24 hours 0.04 ppm 24 hours 0.14 ppm
Suspended 24 hours 50 µg/m3 24 hours 150µg/m3
Particulate
Matter AGM 30µg/m3 AAM SOµg/m3
(PM�o)
Notes:ppm=parts per million;µg/m3=micrograms per cubic meter of air
AAM=Annual Arithmetic Mean;AGM=Annual Geometric Mean
Source:California Air Resources Board,2005
Page 1 of 15
. / �
, Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-2
Projected Grading Equipment Emissions
(Pounds per Day)
#
Equipment Pieces CO ROG NOx SOx PMIo *PMi.� CO2
Off-Highway Trucks 1 6.8 2.2 21.8 0.0 0.8 0.7 2081.0
Scraper 1 11.4 2.8 25.8 0.0 1.1 1.0 2100.0
Tractor/Loader 1 3.3 1.0 6.2 0.0 0.5 0.4 534.5
Grader 1 5.2 1.5 13.0 0.0 0.7 0.6 1061.9
Miscellaneous 3 10.8 2.9 27.8 0.0 1.2 1.1 2946.8
Totals 37.5 10.4 94.5 0.1 4.3 3.8 8,724.20
Source: SCAB F1eet Average Emission Factors (Diesel): Scenario Year 2008. For all equipment the composite
factor was used. *PM2.5 is 89% of PMIo, based on South Coast Air Quality Management District's "Final-
Methodology to Calculate Particulate Matter (PM)�o and PM2,5 Significance Thresholds, October 2006." PMio
accounts for all particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter.
EMFAC 2007 (Version 2.3) SCAB Fleet Average Emission Factors (Diesel) for 2008
Lbs er hour CO ROG NOx SOx PMIo PM2.5 CO2
Off-Highway Trucks 0.85 0.27 2.73 0.00 0.10 260.1
Scraper 1.42 0.35 3.23 0.00 0.14 262.5
Tractors/Loaders 0.41 0.12 0.77 0.00 0.06 66.8
Grader 0.66 0.19 1.62 0.00 0.08 132.7
Miscellaneous 0.45 0.12 1.16 0.00 0.05 122.8
Lbs er da CO ROG NOx SOx PMIo PM2,� CO2
Off-Highway Trucks 6.80 2.18 21.81 0.02 0.79 2,081.0
Scraper 11.38 2.80 25.81 0.02 1.11 2,100.0
Tractors/Loaders 3.25 0.96 6.20 0.01 0.48 534.5
Grader 5.25 1.55 12.95 0.01 0.67 1,061.9
Miscellaneous 3.60 0.97 9.26 0.01 0.40 982.3
Page 2 of 15
. � �
. Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-3
Worker Trips Moving Exhaust Emissions for Grading
(pounds per day in 2008)
Total No. Vehicle Average Mile Total
Trips/Day per Trip Miles
10 X 10 = 100
Pollutant Ibs CO ROG NUx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2
Passenger
Vehicle 0.53 0.05 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 54.98
Delivery Truck 1.10 0.15 1.19 Q.00 0.04 0.04 135.97
Total 1.62 0.20 1.24 0.0018 0.0471 0.0396 190.95
Source: EMFAC 2007 (Version 2.3) Emissions Factors for On-Road Passenger Vehicles & Delivery Trucks.
Passenger Vehicles aze < 8500 lbs, and Delivery Trucks are > 8500 lbs. Total trips for worker are 125% of
grading equipment pieces. Grading activities are expected to begin in 2008. Passenger vehicle trips and Delivery
truck trips are each 50%of total daily trips.
EMFAC2007 Version 2.3
Scenario Year 2008-- Model Years 1965 to 2008
Pollutant CO ROG NOX SOX PM10 PM2.5 CO2
Passenger
Vehicle 0.01055 0.00108 0.00110 0.00001 0.00009 0.00005 1.09953
Delivery Truck 0.02195 0.00299 0.02371 0.00003 0.00086 0.00074 2.71943
Page 3 of 15
: � � (
. Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-4
Grading Emissions Summary
(Pounds per Day)
CO ROG NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2
*Equipment Emissions 37.48 10.42 94.55 0.09 4.26 3.79 8,724.20
Workers' Vehicle Emissions 1.62 0.20 1.24 0.00 0.05 0.04 190.95
Total Grading Emissions 39.11 10.62 95.79 0.09 4.31 3.83 8,915.15
SCAQNID Thresholds of
Significance 550.00 75.00 100.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 N/A
Source: EMFAC 2007 (Version 2.3) Emissions Factors for On-Road Passenger Vehicles & Delivery Trucks.
Passenger Vehicles are < 8500 Ibs, and Delivery Trucks are > 8500 lbs. Total trips for worker are 125°l0 of grading
equipment pieces. Grading activities are expected to begin in 2008.Passenger vehicle trips and delivery truck trips are
each 50%of total daily trips. *SCAB Fleet Average Emission Factors(Dieset): Scenario Year 2008.For all equipment
the composite factor was used. For Equipment Emissions PM2.5 is 89% of PM10, based on South Coast Air Quality
Management District's "Final- Methodology to Calculate Particulate Matter (PM)10 and PM2.5 Significance
Thresholds,October 2006."PM10 accounts for all particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter.
Page 4 of 15
: ( l
. Gazden Expansion/ New El Paso Village
Table AQ-5
Construction Equipment Projected Emission
(Pounds per Day)
Equipment pieces CO ROG NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2
Off-Highway Truck 1 6.80 2.18 21.81 0.02 0.79 0.70 2�081.03
Roller 1 1.06 3.47 6.89 0.01 0.48 0.43 536.42
Tractor/Loader 1 3.25 0.96 6.20 0.01 0.48 0.43 534.45
Grader 1 5.25 1.55 12.95 0.01 0.67 0.60 1,061.95
Paving Equipment 1 1.18 3.69 7.89 0.01 0.55 0.49 551.60
Miscellaneous 1 3.60 0.97 9.26 0.01 0.40 0.36 982.25
Totals 21.15 12.83 64.99 0.06 3.37 3.00 5,747.71
Source: EMFAC 2007 (Version 2.3) SCAB F1eet Average Emission Factors (Diesel) for 2008. Assumes 8 hours of
operation per day. *PM2.5 is 89% of PM 10, based on South Coast Air Quality Management District's "Final-
Methodology to Calculate Particulate Matter (PM)10 and PM 2.5 Significance Thresholds, October 2006." PM 10
accounts for all particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter.
EMFAC 2007 (Version 2.3) SCAB Fleet Average Emission Factors (Diesel) for 2008
Lb per hour CO ROG NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2
Off-Highway Trucks 0.8499 0.2730 2.7256 0.0027 0.0989 260.13
Roller 0.1328 0.4341 0.8607 0.0008 0.0601 67.05
Tractors/Loaders 0.4063 0.1204 0.7746 0.0008 0.0599 66.81
Grader 0.6561 0.1936 1.6191 0.0015 0.0840 132.74
Paving Equipment 0.1479 0.4616 0.9857 0.0008 0.0681 68.95
Miscellaneous 0.4504 0.1215 1.1575 0.0013 0.0503 122.78
Lbs per day CO ROG NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2
Off-Highway Trucks 6.80 2.18 21.81 0.02 0.79 2,081.03
Roller 1.06 3.47 6.89 0.01 0.48 536.42
Tractors/Loaders 3.25 0.96 6.20 0.01 0.48 534.45
Motor Grader 5.25 1.55 12.95 0.01 0.67 1,061.95
Paving Equipment 1.18 3.69 7.89 0.01 0.55 SS 1.b0
Miscellaneous 3.60 0.97 9.26 0.01 0.40 982.25
Page 5 of 15
. � (
. Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-6
Worker Trips Moving Exhaust Emission for Construction
(Pounds per Day)
Total No. Vehicle Average Mile Total Miles
Trips/Day per Trip per Day
8 X 10 = 80
Pollutant lbs CO ROG NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2
Passenger
Vehicle 0.42 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.98
Delivery Truck 0.88 0.12 0.95 0.00 0.03 0.03 108.78
Total 1.30 0.16 0.99 0.00 0.04 0.03 152.76
Source:EMFAC 2007(Version 2.3)Emissions Factors for On-Road Passenger Vehicles&Delivery Trucks.Passenger
Vehicles are<8500 lbs,and Delivery Trucks are>85001bs.Total trips for worker are l25%of grading equipment pieces.
Grading activities are expected to begin in 2008.Passenger vehicle trips and Delivery truck trips are each 50%of total
daily trips.
EMFAC2007 Version2.3
Scenario Year 2008 -- Model Years 1965 to 2008
Pollutant CO ROG NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2
Passenger
Vehicle 0.010548 0.001079 0.001103 0.000011 0.000085 0.000053 1.099532
Delivery Truck 0.021949 0.002993 0.023713 0.000026 0.000856 0.000739 2.719434
Page 6 of 15
� �
� Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-7
Asphalt Off Gassing
(Pounds per Day)
Asphalt Acreage VOC Factor Total Potential VOC
per day (Lbs./acre) (Lbs. per day)
0.5 2.62 1.31
Source: URBEMIS2002 Users'Guide Version 7.4
May 2003.
Page 7 of 15
/
� , I Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-8
Architectural Coating Off Gassing
(Pounds per day)
Maximum
Daily
Building VOC Factor Total Potential VOC
Coverage
(sqft)* (lbsJ1,000 sqft) Generation (lbs.)
3,000 18.5 55.5
Source:Table A9-13,"CEQA Air Quality Handbook," prepared by South
Coast Air Quality Management District,April 1993.
Page 8 of 15
. � �l
. Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-9
Construction Emissions Summary
(Pounds per Day)
CO ROG NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2
Equipment Emissions 21.15 12.83 64.99 0.06 3.37 3.00 5,747.71
Workers Vehicle Emissions 1.30 0.16 0.99 0.00 0.04 0.03 152.76
Asphalt Paving Emissions - 1.31 - - - - -
Architectural Coatings - 55.5 - - - - -
Total Construction Emissions 22.45 69.81 65.98 0.06 3.41 3.03 5,900.46
SCAQNID Thresholds of 550.00 75.00 100.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 N/A
Significance
Source: Equipment Emissions: EMFAC 2007 (Version 2.3) SCAB F7eet Average Emission Factors (Diesel) for
2008. Assumes 8 hours of operation per day. *PM2.5 is 89% of PM10, based on South Coast Air Quality
Management District's "Final- Methodology to Calculate Particulate Matter (PM)10 and PM 2.5 Significance
Thresholds, October 2006." PM10 accounts for all particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter. Workers
Vehicle Emissions: EMFAC 2007 (Version 2.3) Emissions Factors for On-Road Passenger Vehicles & Delivery
Trucks. Passenger Vehicles are< 8500 Ibs, and Delivery Trucks are> 8500 lbs.Total trips for worker are 125%of
grading equipment pieces. Grading activities are expected to begin in 2008. Passenger vehicle trips and Delivery
truck trips are each 50% of total daily trips. Asphalt Paving: URBEMIS2002 Users' Guide Version 7.4 May 2003.
Architectural Coating: Estimated maximum area that could be coated in one day during construction activities.
Page 9 of 15
- l
. Garden Expansion/ New El Paso Village
Table AQ-10
Estimated Electrical Usage Rates
(Kilowatt Hours per Year)
Usage Land Use
Land Use Type Rate Unit Type (Square Kilowatt hours
Feet) per year
Retail 13.55 kilowatt- 63,881.00 865,587.55
Commercial hour/sq.ft./year
Office 12.95 kilowatt- 15,734.00 203,755.30
hour/sq.ft./year
Restaurant 47.45 kilowatt- 17,366.00 824,016.70
hour/sq.ft./year
Total 96,981.00 1,893,359.55
Source: Table A9-11-A,Electricity Usage Rate, "CEQA Air Quality Handbook," prepared by the South
Coast Air Quality Management District, April 1993. Retail commercial includes 27,OOOsf for the Saks
Fifth Ave.expansion and 36,881 sf for the New El Paseo Village.
Page 10 of 15
: ( (
. Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-11
Power Plant Emission Projections
at Project Buildout
(Lbs. per 1,000 kwh)
Annual Electric
Energy Total Annual
Usage (kwh/sqft/year) Total No. Square Feet Electric Usage (kwh)
96,981 1,893,359.55
Pollutants CO ROG NOx SOx PM
kwh 1,893 1,893 1,893 1,893 1,893
Factor 0.2 0.01 1.15 0.12 0.04
Lbs./Year 378.7 18.9 2177.4 227.2 75.7
Lbs./Day 1.04 0.05 5.97 0.62 0.21
Based on per unit usage and emissions factors provided in Tables A9-1 I-A and A9-11-B, "CEQA Air Quality
Handbook," prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, April 1993. Assumes continued
availability and use of natural gas in power plants and an average contribution from hydroelectric sources.
Represents total pounds emitted per year by all land use types at buildout (see Table AQ-10 for land use
breakout).
Page 11 of 15
� � �
•. Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-12
Natural Gas Consumption Factors
(Cubic Feet per Year)
Natural Gas
Land Use Consumption
Land Use Type Natural Gas Usage Factor (SF) (cf/yr)
RetaiUShopping Center 2.9 cubic feet/sq. ft./month 63,881.00 2,223,058.80
Office 2 cubic feeVsq. ft./month 15,734.00 377,616.00
*Restaurant 4.8 cubic feetlsq. ft./month 17,366.00 1,000,281.60
Total 96,981.00 3,600,956.40
Source: Based on emissions factors provided in Tables A9-12, "CEQA Air Quality Handbook," prepared by the
South Coast Air Quality Management District, April 1993. *Assumes Restaurant usage is comparable to
hotellmotel usage.
Page 12 of 15
� � (
. Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-13
Natural Gas Consumption Emission
(Lbs. per 106 cubic feet)
Estimated Total Annual Natural Gas Use: 3,600,956.40
CO ROG NOx SOx PM
Project(cf/year/mil.) 3.60 3.60 3.60 3.60 3.60
Factor(lbs/mil.sqft) 20 5.3 120 0.0 0.2
LbsJyear 72.02 19.08 432.00 0.00 0.72
LbsJday 0.20 0.05 1.18 0.00 0.00
Source:Based on cf/square foot usage and emissions factors for"Nonresidential Office" as provided in
Tables A9-12-A and A9-12-B, "CEQA Air Quality Handbook,"prepared by South Coast Air Quality
Management District,April 1993.
Page 13 of 15
. � �
� . Garden Expansion/New El Paso Village
Table AQ-14
Moving Exhaust Emission at Buildout
(Pounds per Day)
Total No. Vehicle Ave. Trip Total
Trips/Day* Length (miles) miles/day
2,536 x 7 = 17,752
Pollutant CO ROG NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2
Pounds per day 171.94 17.62 17.84 0.19 1.53 0.96 19,483.78
SCAQNID
Thresholds of 550.00 75.00 100.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 N/A
Significance
Based on California Air Resources Boazd Highest EMFAC 2007 (version 2.3) Emissions Factors for On-Road
Passenger Vehicles: Scenario Year 2009. All the emission factors account for the emissions from start, running
and idling exhaust. In addition, the ROG emission factors take into account diurnal,hot, soak,running,and resting
emissions, and PM 10 emission factor takes into account the tire and brake wear. *Total No.Vehicle Trips per day
taken from "Traffic Impact & Parking Demand Analysis Report, The Gazdens on El Paseo, Palm Desert,
California,"prepared by Linscott,Law&Greenspan,Engineers,on June 29,2007.
Page 14 of 15
. . �.
� . Garden Expansion/ New El Paso Village
Table AQ-15
Operational Emissions at Buildout
(Pounds per Day)
Moving
Stationary Source Total SCAQMD
Source Emissions Emissions Anticipated Threshold
Power Na�Gas Emissions Criteria*
Plants Consumption (1bsJday) (lbs./day) (IbsJday)
Carbon Monoxide 1.04 0.20 171.94 173.17 550.0
Reactive Organic
Gases 0.05 0.05 17.62 17.72 55.0
Nitrogen Oxides 5.97 1.18 17.84 24.99 55.0
Sulfur Oxides 0.62 0.00 0.19 0.81 150.0
Particulates 0.21 0.00 2.48 2.69 150.0
Carbon Dioxide N/A N/A 19,483.78 N/A N/A
*Threshold criteria offered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District for assistance in determining the
significance of air quality impacts.Source: "CEQA Air Quality Handbook," prepared by South Coast Air Quality
Management District,April 1993,Revised January 2006.
Page 15 of 15
�.
Appendix D
Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project
Traffic Impact & Parking Demand Anal, siy s Report
Prepared by:
Linscott, Law &Greenspan, Engineers
TIFF(Unc�essed)decompessor
aro needed to see tfwe pitture.
October 16, 2007
{' ( ii
TRAFFIC IMPACT 8�PARKING DEMAND
ANALYSIS REPORT
THE GARDENS ON EL PASEO
Palm Desert,Califomia
October 16,2007
P►spa►ed for.
Davis Street Land Company
622 Davis Street, Suite 200
Evanston, Illinois 60203
LLG Ref. 2-07-2888
e��
� � ' �
�
_ * p�► L 3° °a��n
#
�q���i0�`"
OF�UF
P►�pared By.• unscott,lew&
Trissa(de Jesus)Allen, P.E. c��,�e�••�
Senior Transportation Engineer 1580 Corporete Drive
Suite 122
Costn Mese,CA 92626
714.641.1587 T
714.641.0139 F
wwwllpengineers.com
�� l� (
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SETTING.......................................................................2
3.0 STUDY SCOPE.......................................................................................................................4
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS....................................................................................................6
4.1 EXISTING$TREET NETWORK.................................................................................................fi
4.2 EXISTING TYtAFFIC VOLUMES ................................................................................................6
43 EXISTING PEAIC HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE...........................................................................E
4.4 EXISTING'1�2AFFIC CONDITIONS .......................................................................................... 12
5.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS...................................................................................................... 16
5.1 PROJEC'I'�tAFFIC VOLUIV�S................................................................................................ 16
5.1.1 Project Trip Generation Rates.................................................................................... 16
5.1.2 Project Trip Generation Estimates............................................................................. 16
5.1.3 Project Traffic Distribution and Assignment.............................................................. 19
S.Z CUM[JLA'I'IVE BASE PROJEC'TIONS........................................................................................ 19
5.2.1 Year 2009: Background Traffic Growth..................................................................... 19
5.2.2 Year 2008: Cumulative Project Forecasts.................................................................. 19
$.3 YEAR 2009 CUMI.TLATIVE BASE TRAFFIC VOLUMES............................................................2$
S.4- YEAR 2009 CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT T�LAFFIC FORECASTS...........................................ZS
6.0 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS........................................................................................32
6.1 SIGMFICANT T�2AFFIC IMPAC'I'CRI'TERIA.............................................................................32
6.2 YEAR 2009 CUMULATIVE BASE T�tAFFIC CONDITIONS........................................................32
6.3 YEAR ZOO9 CIIMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS..........................................35
7.0 PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS.....................................................................................36
7.1� PARKING SUPPLY.................................................................................................................36
7.2 PARKIIVG SURVEYS AT THE GARDENS ON EL PASEO............................................................36
7.2.1 Existing Parking Demand in The Gardens'Parking Structure.................................. 36
7.2.2 Existing Parking Demand versus Supply in The Gardens'Parldng Structure........... 38
7.3 CITY CODE PARKING REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................38
�.4 SHARED pARKING t�1VALYSIS...............................................................................................39
7.4.1 Shared Parking Rationale and Basis.......................................................................... 39
7.4.2 Shared Parking Ratios and Profiles........................................................................... 40
7.4.3 Shared Parking Analysis Results................................................................................ 40
Lwscorr,Law&Gr�etaSPaN,ergtnee►s LLG Ref.2-07-2888
� The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
x;_sou�ao�:sxeve�N�n=ssa-��-i o-u,-o�ao�
. � ("
APPENDICES
APPENDD(
A. Intersection Peak Period Traf�ic Counts
B. Intersection Peak Hour Level of Service Worksheets
C. Shared Pazking Analysis Worksheets
LIST OF FIGURES
SECTION•FIGURE# PAGE
Figure2-1: Vicinity Map.................................................................................................................3
Figure3-1: Study Area....................................................................................................................5
Figure 4-1: Existing Roadway and Intersection Physical Characteristics.......................................7
Figure 4-2: Existing(200'�Weekday Midday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .................................. 8
Figure 4-3: Existing(200'n Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes.........................................9
Figure 4-4: Existing(2007) Saturday Midday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes................................. 10
Figure 5-1: Saks Fifth Avenue Expansion Project Traffic Distribution Pattern............................20
Figure 5-2: El Paseo Village Expansion Project Tr�c Distribution Pattem...............................21
Figure 5-3: Project-Generaxed Weekday Midday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes............................22
Figure 5-4: Project-Generated Weekday PM Peak Hour Traf�ic Volumes...................................23
Figure 5-5: Project-Generated Saturday Midday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes.............................24
Figure 5-6: Yeaz 2009 Cumulative Base Weekday Midday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes............26
Figure 5-7: Year 2009 Cumulative Base Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes...................27
Figure 5-8: Yeaz 2009 Cumulative Base Saturday Midday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes.............28
Figure 5-9: Yeaz 2009 Cumulative+Project Weekday Midday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes.....29
Figure 5-10: Year 2009 Cumulative+Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes............30
Figure 5-11: Yeaz 2009 Cumularive+Project Saturday Midday Peak Hour Tr�c Volumes......31
LWsco77,Uw&GREE�Svrw,englneers LLQ Ref.2-07-2888
�� The Garderis on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
��:'28(W'207:;1%B�Repon�_688-rp-10•16-07 dc+c
/ �
LIST OF TABLES
SECTION-TABLE# PAGE
Table 4-1: Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections................................................... l l
Table 4-2: Level of Service Criteria For Unsignalized Intersections.............................................. 13
Table 4-3: Existing(2007) Intersection Peak Hour Levels Of Service........................................... 14
Table 5-1: Project Trip Generation Rates........................................................................................ 17
Table 5-2: Project Trip Generation Estimates................................................................................. 18
Table 6-1: Year 2009 Intersection Peak Hour Levels of Service....................................................33
Table 7-1: Parking Utilization Survey Results................................................................................37
Table 7-2: Weekday Shazed Parking Demand Analysis .................................................................41
Table 7-3: Weekend Shared Pazking Demand Analysis .................................................................42
LINSCOTT,LAW 6 GREENSPAN,engineers LLG Ref.2-07-2888
III The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
x:�.zxnu�zor_sns�nrNon:,rsa-riy-i n-i aazeo�
i �
TRAFFIC IMPACT 8�PARKING DENIAND
ANALYSIS REPORT
THE GARDENS ON EL PASEO
Palm Desert,Callfom(a
October 16,2007
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report documents the findings of the traffic impact and pazking demand analysis report
conducted by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) to determine and evaluate the traffic
impacts and pazking needs associated with The Gazdens on El Paseo project. The report presents an
inventory of existing characteristics and traffic volumes on roadways adjoining the project site,
forecasts vehicular traf�ic anticipated to be generated by the project, evaluates potential impacts of
these project-generated trips on the surrounding street system, and deternunes whether mitigation
measures aze necessary to alleviate project-specific unpacts. In addition, the study estimates the
shared parking demand of the project, and compazes the demand against the existing and proposed
pazking supply to determine any parking surplus or deficiency.
L:NSCOTr,LAW&GREENSPAN,englneers 1 LLG Ref.2-07-2888
The Gardens on EI Peseo,Palm Desert
.. ^...?SOu'-207'8fi6-�Rtpon-�fiSB-rp�-10-I G.0?.Coc
/ (
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SETTING
The project is located in the City of Palm Desert's El Paseo Shopping District, also known as the
"Rodeo Drive of the Desert". This mile-long stretch of El Paseo serves a mix of retail, restaurant,
and office uses, and runs pazallel to SR-111, one block to the south of the Highway. El Paseo has a
landscaped median, and provides on-street parking on both sides of the street. On-street parking also
exists along the north-south streets that intersect El Paseo. The two sites that comprise the project
are located on the south side of El Paseo, in the center of the shopping district.
The project has the following two components: (1)addition of 27,000 square feet(SF)to the existing
Saks Fifth Avenue store in The Gazdens on El Paseo shopping center, and(2)development of 36,893
SF of retail, 20,207 SF of restaurant, and 15,734 SF of general office uses (including the demolition
of 35,812 SF of existing commercial uses) in El Paseo Village, which adjoins The Gardens on El
Paseo on the west. The project is expected to be completed in the Yeaz 2009.
Figure 2-1 shows the location of the project site in relation to the surrounding street system. As
shown, The Gazdens on El Paseo site is bound by El Paseo on the north, Shadow Mountain Drive on
the south, San Pablo Avenue on the west, and Larkspur Lane on the east. Driveways for The
Gardens aze located on San Pablo Avenue and Lazkspur Lane. A two-level, 919-space pazking
structtue (plus 58 golf cart spaces) exists south of the shopping center, with pedestrian access for
The Gazdens provided on both levels of the parking structure. The El Paseo Village site adjoins The
Gardens on the west, and is bound by El Paseo on the north, Lupine Lane on the west, and San Pablo
Avenue on the east. Driveways for this site aze located on Lupine Avenue and San Pablo Avenue,
provid'utg vehiculaz access for a 146-space pazking lot located on the southern portion of the site.
UNSC07r,Lnw 8 GkEENSPnw,englneers LLG Ref.2-07-2888
2 The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
N.,�ROu�207'9RS�Rryon-�SSR-.p�-i o-I6-07.da:
( (
�a tooz-�a-oo e��or•u dc� �r�-rr�\ �toa\ooa��+
n�l r�+►...� .,.... �� � -� �.. ae �
t n �� � 'I � �/+ �r� � �
��'� �,fl 3S[iRK I '� �
� �in,,,w�n ,�` �� '`` � OI�
�rtau � � o
. � � =C� N �
� � ��'�_ W �
� S pqMaitP�' — vt�r �j V a
� �� �'• i--� p
�� � �� � Y �
�j ��
� �, ,�r �o���M � � • � � Rw r ��'`�ti�1� � �
�M `
� � ar+,�n j � � w 1� "�� M--� a
v s N! �' � � ��,�ss � �' �
�� � � ���� �� �'� r� t,4*�T S �''�L. Z
� -.. � � - ■ " o
� ��� ,�� ; �
,�, Z
� ,�y oas� ��.� � r W
�� ws er'' '''�';� �,v� t l a''r�~~�--• t � �
�
-�i oaMn ' �� <
�n vsaw� 0.M��. �'' r, �
_ -�� W
� sf�i� -� � �� �
�s ��� � ''- � g�
qr � � '
��'N' aY� � �% �. _ : ��
`- �.1
� Ay �d � � � IqfS �
; � �
� ;..•
� `� _ ) � ?`````�`���� � �-
g '� - �ara � � `:€:.: � �, o
i 1� r
; �vw� 'm o���u+s � � ��i �'�`'�. '� � m �
I � :::` M ; 'a
�
w ` i�'� � c�
s�i� p � � i: � � � � �
AM � S �+�� ' F r. � t � y �
d {n � �
a
a �s � � -� --- �� _—� � M
. � Ir
� � :����='��
�� �` � o s�"J� ~ N1 3 Ul� � ~ � �#.,� � r:�:�
� � ON1111M �._ g� ���� �v � �
� �� �iNM ' � ' ,�y, �'�i !y �� �
IMS � 3"�"� � �
� � i
.. 3i $ � �Ol£� V�{� �'/
= g �Q y1J � b�� �YY �
� � � � d�—�� -� �
�o � � � ~ ��A y��, p7
` 4 pnt y � ..,,�..
I:.�: VYj�I � ���.��� '��l
g� � �-,...� _� �
i.-.. YlS11 YdS31i
��.. ���� �� �
'�`_'� � �"` — --I
= � I —�i M
r �+.{
� ��v f �� g YMa �.� �i � '� I �� a
)� � �n � � � �'" �,� �` \'� �
N3AMii1Md � �
f � ��� � ��� �� � � �, t .� s ,� � o
I ,p � + ���� �� f�_a � ����;�G�� y � Z
;�_/.'_ ,Y us � Y
j, An - n]iJ17� �1` � R 4
4._... �131K39 �� � g m ViS�'':---
k..' � yfj+ � ^ oA � - !s�
(:!��_.. --�— \ � f ��r��`�� 9 � I
Fyyy. - � ` /�� 1� � u f�:�' Y � � 1
' `•• `�`�L17V9"'��`�`��'�/��� � �
�.'+' � I
� •.`� � ...��t. J . �
3
% (
3.0 STUDY SCOPE
The work scope for this study, including the base assumptions, technical methodologies, and
geographic coverage, satisfies standard City and CMP impact study guidelines/requirements, and
was developed in conjunction with City of Palm Desert Traffic Engineering and Planning staff. The
following traffic scenarios are addressed in the study:
• Eaisting (200'n Conditions - The analysis of existing �ffic conditions is intended to
provide a base analysis for the remainder of the study. The existing conditions analysis
includes an assessment of the key roadways in the azea, current traffic volumes, and
circulation.
■ Year 2009 Cumulative Base Condidons—This phase of analysis projects future traffic
growth and operating conditions in the Yeaz 2009 (anticipated completion year for the
project) which could be expected to result from regional growth and related/cumulative
projects without the addition of project traffic.
■ Year 2009 Cumulative plus Project Conditions - This is an analysis of firture traffic
conditions in the Yeaz 2009 with the addition of project-generated traffic. Any potential
traffic impacts will be deterniined,and mitigation measures developed.
Five signalized intersections and nine stop-controlled intersections were selected for detailed peak
hour level of service analysis under each of the scenarios identified above. The analysis is focused
on assessing potential impacts during the weekday midday peak hour (between 11:00 AM and 1:00
PIVn, weekday afternoon commute peak hour (between 4:00 and 6:00 PM), and Saturday midday
peak hour(between 12:00 noon and 2:00 Plvn.
Figure 3-1 illustrates the study azea and the 14 key intersections analyzed, which include the
following(signalized intersection, except where noted):
1. San Pablo Avenue at SR-111
2. Plaza Way at El Paseo (unsignalized)
3. SR-74 at El Paseo
4. Ocotillo Drive at El Paseo (unsignalized)
5. Sage Lane at El Paseo (unsignalized)
6. Lupine Lane at El Paseo (unsignalized)
7. San Pablo Avenue at El Paseo
8. Larkspur Lane at El Paseo
9. San Luis Rey Avenue at El Paseo
� 10. Tumbleweed Lane at Shadow Mountain Drive(unsignalized)
11. Lupine Lane at Shadow Mountain Drive(unsignalized)
T2. San Pablo Avenue at Shadow Mountain Drive(unsignalized)
13. Larkspur Lane at Shadow Mountain Drive(unsignalized)
14. Shadow Mountain Drive at Ironwood Street(unsignalized)
L�NSCOTT,Uw 8 GREeNSPAN,engirleers LLG Kef.2-07-2888
4 The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm I7eseR
n��aa��so�.sssR�No�+_ssa-���-�aia-n�aoo
r �.
�w coos-�a-so .r•ac:u dc, �r«��a�co�oo��
t-�1 �"
I W
�
� o
�
w � a
� � o
� w
� �
�--� a
w J
W
Qf
Z
O
NZ
W
�
GO �
� W
�
� ^ �
� ::! � �
� ^ W
� � �
11� �D � Y � �
� U
� �a
1
N
ef CS:E�� •�■
M �
. ^
� N .
�
�
O
�
�
•--
5
( � - -
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The assessment of eacisting conditions includes an inventory of the street system, traffic volumes
using these facilities, and tr�c operating conditions at analyzed locations.
4.1 Existing Street Network
A comprehensive inventory of the street system within the study azea was undertaken to develop a
detailed description of existing traffic conditions.
Figure 4-1 illustrates the existing physical characteristics of the streets, including lane
configurations and traffic control at intersections, number of travel lanes, posted speed limits, and
median types along roadways.
4.2 Existing Traffic Volumes
Weekday midday and PM peak period, and Saturday midday peak period traffic counts were collected
at the 14 key intersections in Mazch 2007. Appendix A contains the intersection peak period tr�affic
counts. Figures 4-2 through 4-d illustrate the existing weekday midday, weekday PM, and Saturday
midday peak hour tr�c volumes,respectively.
4.3 Existing Peak Hour Levels of Service
Level of Service (LOS) qualitatively measures the operating conditions within a traf�c system and
how drivers and passengers perceive these conditions. Level of service ranges from LOS A to
overloaded conditions at LOS F. Per the City's General Plan, LOS C is the goal in Palm Desert.
Exceeding that goal would only be acceptable where maximum feasible intersection improvements
have been implemented.
Based upon City guidelines, the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCNI} signalized methodology
was used to determine the level of service for the five signalized key intersections. Based on the
HCM method of analysis, level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of average
control delay per vehicle,which is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption,and
lost travel time. The level of service criteria for signalized intersections are shown in Table 4-1.
The following default values and assumptions were applied in the level of service analyses,based on
the County of Riverside input pazameters (Traff c Impact Analysis Preparation Guide, August 2005)
and other traffic studies completed in the area.
� Base Saturation Flow Rate: 1900 pc/hr/ln(per RCTD)
■ Heavy Vehicle Factor: 0%(per LLG)
■ Cycle Length: 100 seconds(per LLG)
• Lost Time: 16 seconds for four-phase signals; 12 seconds for three-phase signals; 8
seconds for two-phase signals(per RCTD and HCIvn
■ Amber Time: 4 seconds/phase(per LLG}
• Minimum Green: through movements are given the minimum pedestrian crossing time
and turning movements are given 7 seconds (per RCTD)
LwsCorr,UW E�GREENSPAN,engineers 6 LLG Ref.2-07-2888
The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
\"?8(Mi:?07'_SS6�ReponLBS&rp.l0.ic..01 da;
�
�a tooz-zt-90 orar�� ac� s�o��-rwa�\s�wV�ot�oo��
.-� z� E--
� �� �
w �� �
� U d
P 3.S NP
� F'�' O
a n. �
� �� � �
a / +� � �i��f ~ A a
/ I G�-� �� J
� ' � � tt' d� o
� �
�� '� ��— �/ �� �
�� � �� o
� p x Q
� � �,P� � W
�� � .� 3 � �
�° � ' g �
a' w
SAN �� b� .-.
.;i�'' ��� �� .
,� ��� � tt�' : ., ;;� �h•t ���8j�
� .� � � � .{� �i Z a��
—� � r ��
1 —► �� � /aa5. �M� w��z�� �
� � �� / ��c�e � ►-
�\ /�� / .�, � T i�� ` O ZS�j c�
m
/ Y ;
i � / i � I � ��za �
/ \ � �� ��
/ � 3 y p�. I 1 N 1 1 I �
/ " � , ' � ; ? �� I �a�a�`�'�..�'°,�..'-...,�
1 �N � g �
� � �.� \ �y �� � �
�
�
�
� —��� � °' st
� �
/i� ~�� i� �1 \\ �
1 '�ll � � �.� �� \
� n�.�� ,�'� i '�' i
�� � <� � �t � � �. �- �
� �
<,
� 3 \�` i�� o
�� Z
N �
4Q
2
"�
�
�
7
% /
l
�q LOOt—tb-90 i►�lC�G1 dQ1 �PZ—►JYYP��V�9YW.[0�00�\a�
� � H
� � � t�
�
� � a �
� � �w a
P �U
� � � p '� w
��� y;� � � � �
) + � � \ � a
i � st f � w � E w
/ t9 � �� i 1� � � Z
� �1 , ��/ � ,�� \ � O
� � � � x Z
JI
� �� � � o
/���� � �� �� 1 � ��� � � a
J 1 �r � � ��� ��` J�� a W
�� ��?�� r���, -� ... ^� '� -'� A �
� � ��� � � -- i i �3� � i
� � J 1 -- s� i /��: -- o Q
siw � � / I � � � �
_ 2nJ �`�� { � > > � �
�
����� � � �� �'�� ''1 �' � � ��• / �
J � � r-� � _ s J � � �_ � a�
, �
.. z� � � �
1 � �,� � � i
ts-�
sf t -- r^.� "�r3 m°�R `-9Z / tr
\��� ,�� �J1 �� / x �
�^ �9 ���� S� -J �:i:�
�
��g�r� � ` � � ��'( �'^ Llt
� � �,,--oz * J 1 � �9
c � �
1\ ri ����� � 81 ��
�\ �� �\
/
i — / � �
� �
�N�,� �� � / *n N _`�
w �
�� �rs;Z � —' � � �� �� ��\\
1��� �, ���#i� 5« -�1� 1 �� *I�� � �
\\ �/ � � � �,fOt , ��� N
� �� o
�
�
r-
8
f� �
��I LOOL-1L�0 OI-0Y�LI dQl dP'C-f1YYQ��i�00Y��
M '�r(/] F-
`.✓ � �
i �� o
� Wa
W �' �
_ � �V a
P
� � � �
��� `�� � � �
) � � � \` � Ea
i g� � C� W
/ � 08 � � i
i �ro� , � , �i �„ 1�� �� o
� i \ x �
�� �� l � � I �
� �i�X � ��\ � � � � ^� // � �
J 1 l� 51 ��� �\ ,� a W
� � � r�_ __ i a �
52--�
� : �� � --
\�'� �i� �sm `. 65 ^ / � .- e��
J � �" 98 � ;�rom � 0
� r � � 1 � � � � �
� � 193-J .�.. �
�^ �� 131� ^* ..�n�• ;�� � �
� o,`�S3 � � »� �� €:�J � �i \`',T /� �
J � �,-� _.. ```'` � � �/ — �
o� �
��pZ9 _....��� / ��M � 13'1 �// Y �
\\ �, /J � � / N
� 1� i�/ �� J �
/ a 8l -- �� �'s:'s�
� '��^n� �';l '< � '� ��� �S
J � lr-s \ � 1 Jl ��s
� Fg J�� � � sg ..
\�� 1 ��� \� f 1 �,��
� �� �
/ � '
� � /
� �
��'', �S9 \ /� g°� ,��, �
� ^ --195 \ ��j� `Sl \
J � lr-� �� JI
�� � � '� \
��� '�'��/� 9°� J �' } 1 �t J �le � �
€` �� gZ � � \9[ , ��� y
� �� p
z
�
�
�
9
. �.
d�q LOOZ-lL-90 1►-0Y'.Lt dQl �PY-f�dP�YYYZLOt1p0YL\a�
� �� �
� � �
'd'' a o
W �y �
p � U a'
� O
�� �
��� �� o �
Q
� )is � � \� �r v W
l _
�� \s� � 1 1 � � z� z
� 1 ���� / �� � E � o
� i � \ rn x Z
J �
� � J 1 � � o
//n�°a7 � 57\\ � � g 1 --i� �� W� �
J 1 �r 97 �� �` ,� a' W
� ���� r�_ _� i� � �
\ � —_
\�` ,� ��� � � �" // � ��1�� A
' --- 77 / �g�°' '� � �
snN J + r � � �
� �
� ts�J �'�� ,/ � � � � �
� � �to-- g m � r
�/w�� � � 117-1 ^��i :�� �� i � ��� / �+
J � l ri+ � _, j ����� 2 + } i�/ � � �
1� S6 -- } � �� �� 14—����/ W �'
�9 1 ��� ��N � x �
� �� J � �� � �
"'s
� �\ ��/ •� J
����� �st � c , �� � � �::�
c� t� --��,
� � l r-s � N 1 J � l ��s
`\ 96 J��� / � B; .0 l /
� 1 / � ab
� � \
/
i �� � � �
���� ��� � �* �� 1��
J 1 l��zz � �� J + �� � --�si \
��i�� J��f� � � J �� � �+✓ �� I
\`� '// .7fi "', N� \�d � ���i �
�
\ �� �
�
� '
�
1�
(
TnB�e 41
LEYEL OF SERVICE CRITERU FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONSI
Level of Service Control Delay Per Ve6icle �vel of Service Description
(LOS) (seconds/vehicfe)
- This level of service occurs when progression is
extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during
A < 10.0 the green phase.Most vehicles do not stop at all.
Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low
delay.
This level generally occurs with good progression,
B > 10.0 and<20.0 short cycle lengths,or both.More vehicles stop than
with LOS A,causing higher levels of average delay.
Average traffic delays.These higher delays may
result from fair progression,longer cycle lengths,or
C >20.0 and<35.0 both.Individual cycle failures may begin to appeat
— at this level.The number of vehicles stopping is
significant at this level,though many still pass
through the intersection without stopping.
Lang traffic delays At level D,the influence of
congestion becomes more noriceable.Longer delays
may result from some combinatioa of unfavorable
D >35.0 and<55.0 progression,long cycle lengths,or high v/c ratios.
Many vehicles stop,and the proportion of vehicles
not stopping declines.Individual cycle failures are
noriceable.
Very long traffic delays This level is considered by
many agencies(i.e.SANBAG)to be the limit of
E >55.0 and<80.0 acceptable delay.These high delay values generally
— indicate poor progression,long cycle lengths,and
high v/c ratios.Individual cycle failures are frequent
occurrences.
Severe congesrion This level,considered to be
unacceptable to most drivers,often occurs with over
saturation,that is,when amval flow rates exceed
F >_80.0 �e capacity of the intersection.It may also occur at
high v/c ratios below 1.0 with many individual
cycle failwes.Poor progression and long cycle
lengths may also be major contributing factors to
such delay levels.
1 Source:Htgirway Capactry Mamro!2000,Chspter 16(Si�►aliud Intersections�
UNSCOTT,Lnw&GREENSPAN,enginee►s LLG Ref.2-07-2888
�� The Gardens on EI Pasm,Palm DeseR
�:':?BMP20T_�iS6�Repom.^_RS&rp-I O-I G.07 Ooc
� (
• Minimum Pedestrian Crossing Time: based on the signal timing plans if available, or
calculated by using the minimum pedestrian crossing time equation(per HCIvn
■ Analysis Time Period: 0.25 hour(per HCIv�
■ Peak Hour Factor: 0.95 (per LLG)
The 2000 HCM unsignalized methodology for stop-controlled intersections was utilized for the
analysis of the nine unsignalized key intersections. This methodology estimates the control delay
(expressed in seconds per vehicle) for each of the traffic movements on each approach of the
intersection, and determines the level of service for each movement based on the control delay for
the subject movement. The con�rol delay and level of service reported for the intersection
corresponds to the most constrained movement. The level of service criteria for unsignalized
intersections aze shown in Table 4-2.
Based upon the level of service methodologies described, the existing peak hour traffic volumes
presented in Figures 4-2 through 4-4 were used in conjunction with existing lane configurations
illustrated in Figure 4-1 to determine the current traffiic operating conditions at the 14 key
intersections. Appendix B contains the detailed level of service worksheets.
4.4 Existing Traffic Conditions
Table�3 summarizes the existing (2007) peak hour levels of service at the 14 study intersections.
As shown, 12 of the 14 key intersections currently meet the City's LOS C goal during the weekday
midday, weekday PM, and Saturday midday peak hours, and the following intersections currently
operate at a LOS D or LOS E during the peak hour noted:
1. San Pablo Avenue at SR-111 (weekday midday,PM,and Saturday midday peak hours)
3. SR-74 at El Paseo(PM peak hour)
�
Lwscorr,LAw&Grt�Nsanra,englneers LLG Ref.2-07-2888
�2 The Gardens an EI Paseo,Palm Desert
,:�aou•zor_�ss�Rep��,�es�-.��.iaie-o�eo,
(/ �
TAB�E 42
LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNAUZEO INTERSECTIONS2
Level of Servlce Highway Capacity Manuel
(LOS) Delay Value(sec/veh) �vel of Service Description
A 5 10.0 Little or no delay
B > 10.0 and 5 15.0 Short traffic delays
C > 15.0 and 5 25.Q Average traffic delays
D >25.0 and 5 35.0 Long traffic delays
E >35.0 and 5 50.0 Very long traffic delays
F >50.0 Severe congestion
2 Source:Highway Capacity Afa�rua!2000,Chapter 17(Unsignalized Intersections).
- - — — '�
�NSCOTT,LAW&GREENSPAN,englneers �3 LLG Ref.2-07-2888
The Gerdens on El Paseo,Pelm Desert
�"_ROu;'_07'_:tRB�ReE;osi�.NBR-ry+�-10.16.07.doc
Il �..
Ta��e 43
EXISTING(2007� INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE3
Time Control Delay
Key Intersections Period Type (sec/veh) LOS
1. San Pablo Ave at Midday 80 Traffic 50.5 D
SR-111 PM Signal 47.1 D
Sat.Midday SS.1 E
2. Plaza Way at Midday All-Way 12.4 B
El Paseo PM Stop Conirol 11.5 B
Sat.Midday 11.S B
3. SR-74 at Midday 8f7S Traffic 34.1 C
El Paseo PM Signal 42.9 D
Sat.Midday 32.8 C
4. Ocotillo Drive at Midday All-Way 22.7 C
EI Paseo PM Stop Control 16.3 C
Sat.Midday 16.S C
5. Sage Lane at Midday All-Way 15.3 C
EI Paseo PM Stop Control 12.3 B
Sat. Midday 12.2 B
6. Lupine Lane at Midday All-Way 13.4 B
EI Paseo PM Stop Control 11.4 B
Sat.Midday 11.8 B
7. San Pablo Ave at Midday SQ1 Traffic 192 B
El Paseo PM Signal 19.0 B
Sat.Midday 18.5 B
8. Larkspur Lane at Midday SQJ Traffic 23.4 C
El Paseo PM Signal 22.2 C
Sat.Midday 24.2 C
9. San Luis Rey Ave at Midday SQ3 Traffic 22.7 C
El Paseo PM Signal 23.0 C
Sat.Midday 22.S C
10. Tumbleweed Lane at Midday All-Way 7.7 A
Shadow Mountain Dr PM Stop Control 7.6 A
Sat. Midday 7.S A
11. Lupine Lane at Midday One-Way 9.9 A
Shadow Mountain Ilr PM Stop Co»rrol 9.7 A
Sat.Midday 9.3 A
3 Appendlx B contains HCM[.OS shats for key study intersections.
LINSCOTT,LAW 8 GREENSPAN,engineels �4 LLG Ref.2A7-2888
The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
\:7R(NP.?0775F8-�Re�+n`�BSN-�p.i4ic,.0?.da
/
T�►a�e 43(CoNrn�uEn)
EXISTING(2007�PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE4
Time Coatrol Delay
Key Intersections Period Type (sec/ve6) LOS
12. San Pablo Ave at Midday One-Way 10.4 B
Shadow Mountain Dr PM Stop Control 10.3 B
Sat. Midday 9.6 A
13. Larkspur Lane at Midday One-Way 10.3 B
Shadow Mountain Dr PM Stop Control 10.2 B
Sat.Midday 10.1 B
14. Shadaw Mountain Dr Midday All-Way 7.3 A
Ironwood St PM Stop Control 7.3 A
Sat.Midday 7.3 A
Notcs:
■ LOS-Level of Service,please refu to Tablea 4-1 and�-2 for the LOS definitions.
• Bold Dday/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on City of Palm Desert LOS standards.
4 Appendlz B contains HCM shats for key study intasections.
LwsCoiT,LAW E�GREENSPAN,engineers �5 LLG Ref.2-07-2888
The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
::�_sou+.or_ase k���,n casx.�i,�-i o-u,-m ao.
(
5.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS
In order to evaluate the potential traffic impacts of the proposed development, the amount of traffic
that could be generated by the project (i.e., project traffic generation), and future traffic volumes on
the surrounding street system (i.e., Cumulative Base forecasts), need to be estimated. The
Cumulative Base scenario (representing future conditions without the proposed project) could then
be compared with the Cumulative Plus Project scenario (representing future conditions with the
project).
5.1 ProJect Traffic Volumes
A multi-step process was utilized to develop project traffic forecasts. The first step is project traffic
generation, which estimates the total arriving and departing traffic at the project site on a peak hour
and daily basis. The second step of the forecasting process is project traffic distribution, which
involves the development of a geographic trip distribution pattern that identifies the
origins/destinations of project traffic. The third step is project traff'ic assignment, by which project-
generated trips are allocated on the street system.
5.1.1 Project Trlp Generatlon Rates
Traffic generation is expressed in vehicle trip ends, defined as one-way vehiculaz movements, either
entering or exiti.ng the generating land use. Generation factors and equations used in the traffic
forecasting procedure are found in the Seventh Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute
of Transportation Engineers (ITE) [Washington, D.C., 2003]. Table S-1 sutnmarizes the trip
generation rates for the project. To reflect the unique tripmaking characteristics in Palm Desert, the
PM peak hour trip rates were also applied to the weekday midday peak hour.
5.1.2 ProJecf Trip Generatlon Estlmates
Because of the retail components of the project, "pass-by" reductions were applied to the gross
project-generated trips. This is typically done to account for instances when the total number of trips
generated by a retail development is different from the amount of new traffic added to the external
street system serving the project. Retail-oriented sites attract a portion of their trips from traffic
passing by the site, on the way from an origin to an ultimate destination. These retail trips do not
add new traffic to the surrounding street system. The methodology used in estimating pass-by trips
for the project is contained in ITE's Trip Generation Handbook [Washington, D.C., June 2004]. It
should be noted that pass-by reductions are not applied to traffic movements entering and exiting the
project site via project driveways.
Table S-2 presents the resulting gross trip generation estimates for the project, and the net traffic
generation after the pass-by reductions were applied. As indicated in Table S-2, it is estimated that
on a typical weekday, the project would generate approximately 2,536 daily trips, 141 midday peak
hour trips, and 141 PM peak hour trips. On a Saturday, the project would generate approximately
2,413 daily trips and 197 midday peak hour trips.
UNSCOTi,Uw&GREENSPAN,engineers 16 LLG Ref.2-07-2888
Thc Gardens on El Paceo,Palm Desert
x,•.zeou��anxss�Repon u6SR-rpt-10-1 f..07.da
/ (
� v
ev o
� o ° °� �, o � c ,� �
F � a c� Q,C e
N ,�
aO
�.�.. ,��', ,��', � o � � � �
� � v v � � cn �a �
O e o 0 0 0 �
� � � h h � h � �
1. � � �
� � � M � M ,� � � "L
� �
E-� y � o`�. M � q
N � �
.S
:� � \' \ \ ' • `�"
\ \ � �
Q O � � � � $ .g �
v W
� �
� � O O O g7 '�
p„�y Y1 Y1 V1 N V1 � 0'
N
.--� �'`� � � � �
'� O�0 � � 'd� O � � a0
� F.1 `� N l� ^ ,,,,i �
O �
x , � ;
� a o � o e � a � '"
w a � � ° M � �' � � b .9
� a � o 0 0 � o � z H �
� �R � � � � � � p II II
Q � aFyC
`�i� oe � � c� J
�s�7 W � +:� � l� ef � � u
Jm � � (� " N [� •--� � s I�
Q �
� e $
a � � \ o o e � � � �
~ � a '� h ��/1 M OMO M � � �
W 3 � ° "' s' .. .�
b � � �
� � � e � o 0 0 �6� '3 OMO � � N � �
a � a � � b .-�.. � [ � Vl M M �O N1
"'� •� �O + + + -1- +
.-. .-, .� r-. .-. �
W � q
cV v'� � [ °p �l �l � � �l �
J .�. M v. o � a
E"'� � 0�0 ..~r � � � h �O �D M Vl �
�O �O �O �O �O
� C C C G C
�0 ' e o \ \' \ II ^ II ^ II �
G � E• � � v � F- � �
p 'o v 'o^ $ '� o a a a � a '�
��� �.,
� � aaa .aa �
� � e o o �
� $ � � � $ �� � � �
� � Q � ��
�
� �� .s x � � �
� � � a .. � x � .� .�
w w Y � � w A w ` � � '' .� ;; �
,. v� ^ v� v� pq v� v v� g �8 �, � a�. � .� �
�
w $ � g � g � g o o � � .g A � a q � S �
� U ...� cY. .. a`3 -. � p " � C7 ewi � � �� �� o oe
� � � L'' a�i oG w O � g � � � � � 4 � 3
c,, a � a �'+ �'. '7 a E� a .a. 7 00 `3 `� i3 ?� � v� 3
� °' ,yn, �� n, � y q c,, � y �` �9,' •G 3 3 3 v� �n Fv
� � �b � �� a � � �� x � � � zl � � a �
(
� �
00
Vl � e+'f O� 00
� p � ^ � � � N � � n N � N N n � � � R
M F � ' � � , N,C �
rrl i �
� ta�L
� 7 o v� �o � v eo M � °� �
� p" O t� �Q v� , en oo � � M °O M '� a M vo�i � p� �
�
� b � �
V°� '�'�' � �O .-.. v o� t� ... N v� oo .. � ^�
9 n n �O N M O� .-N+ M N � �i � ~ � � � � �
j
� � -r
A v ry, °�° M o1/� 'r � i. � i � � ~ � v°�i � v J
y1 �' ^^ fV O� � M � ""� p� i M
� ,.. .... .-. .-. � � .-• � •r N �
i �
,� [� O�O �O 00 � Q �'-� M � M '� �O � � .-� M rl Te�
O O � � M � v ~ N N � 'i � ' ~ � � �•�y 'C�
� F -- �
e �
� �
� � �
N 'st N �p � � �O
� O y� tn '�V �j N V�1 v�l � � N vi n1 T � N �
� �
a �^ � ~ � � � O � � .�.. � ^-� � N
F � �/'1 � � � .� ..r � � �i � O�O M � � � .
� � �
W � � F � a o�Oo �; °e� � � N N 'q' ^; � � � �q a � � �
N � 3 � � � s
� �
� � � � �
� � 0. � ,'� �n v <`; N v`�i h �' � N '�' ��`, `4 � �; �v � � � �
� " b �, �
a ��"' i.Qr � � � �^ N d' �O ef � � � r1 i O�O M � r � �
V
W
aev �' ►� '^ �n n oo �' °�° r, '� n n �n n o� ,�j e� �
r ',�„ � � � � � � �p � � O �O �vp� � 0 N � 'Op �n
IL � � � �,,,� �.j � � T �y � „y N e0 'C
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � •� �
� 0p op E� o F" a o M F �p v�"i � v y � E"" '� �
'V�1 O O � •17 « oo t� � O� oo ��n} � •� $ ,�'
N O � � Z � N � � � � � 7 � � z � �
N N '� C � ,� p
� � •� � �J a� �° �y � � o
C � w � � �.. '�! 'C � c�
a F' �' p� � O °p T Ma" � .:
.� � w � �, � ���///JJJ .� .� � W (W'�
1 y � � � � y d Q �
a'l W .O � � � '� y �' � (� � f1. � +aZ � .71y
Q \ � y .y � � y � lr � 7
� C � �
� 3 .� a °d �' f� '� ,� � C�
_ W .�� ° e •� �
ai 00 � " � � � o: � �
c adi W � � � � � C o p�„ W F � a �
8 ��., � '� > �' °G � y � � •3 �� �
U � � y p .� � � � F' � � � 3
� y � �" � a �
� � � � a � a � � � ' �
�� � W � � � � �
�+ O
a "
/ (
5.1.3 Project Trafflc Dlstrlbution and Asslgnment
The geographic distribution of tr�c generated by developments such as the project is dependent
upon the following factors:
■ The project's markedservice azea
■ Location of site access points in relation to the surrounding street system
■ Location of parking azeas,and ingress/egress availability at the parking azeas
■ The site's proximity to major traffic carriers and regional access routes
■ Physical characteristics of the circulation system such as lane channelization and
presence of traffic signals that affect travel pattems
■ Presence of traffic congestion in the surrounding vicinity
Based upon these considerations and previous traffic studies completed in the study azea, a traffic
distribution pattern was developed for The Gazdens on El Paseo and El Paseo Village components of
the project, as presented on Figures S-1 and S-2.
The traffic expected to be generated by the project was assigned to the local street network using the
project trip generation estimates presented in Table S-2, and the distribution patterns illustrated on
Figures S-1 and S-2. Figures 5-3 through S-S illustrate the resulting project-generated traffic
volumes during the weekday midday,weekday PM,and Saturday midday peak hours,respectively.
5.2 Cumulative Base Projections
The Cumulative Base or "background" traffic projections account for existing traffic volumes, and
include two growth elements over existing traffic volumes: (1) increase in the existing traffic
volumes due to overall regional growth; and, (2)tr�c generated by specific developments expected
to be constructed by Year 2009 in the vicinity of the project study area. The following sections
describe these two growth elements in existing traffic volumes.
5.2.1 Year 2009:Background Tra�c Growth
Background traffic in the study area has been estimated to increase at a historical rate of
approximately 1% per year. Future increases in background traffic due to regional development are
expected to continue at the same rate.
For the Year 2009, the existing (2007) tr�c volumes were increased by 2% to reflect area-wide
regional growth in traffic. The 1% annual growth rate was determined based on discussions with
City staff.
5.2.2 Year 2008: Cumulative Project Forecasts
The traffic expected to be generated by future projects that are either under construcrion or proposed
within the study area accounts for the second traffic growth element of the Yeaz 2009 Cumulative
Base scenario. According to City staff, there are no related projects expected to be developed by
Year 2009 within the study azea.
LINSCO7T,LAW&GREENS7lW,er►gk►eers 19 LLG Ref.2-07-2888
The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
v•�sa�;?orxssutzNonessa-rM-iair,.n�e�
( (
�a rmt-u-90 cs�rr-0� dm �-owaa�•►�co�ooat��
� O f� �
�
� � � o
w � a �
P � za
_ o0
/ /� \� � � � a
� 1 � \I w � p� w
/ — �"
/ � t � i�� �� A o
/ 1� \\ N / / � � \) V W
�� �n �15X � YOl 4 � �
1 � � � � �\ • nn / � C�
�d �� � �� � W
� 1���r�_ __ t , �, �
� � _� U
�� / :�:• �� � � \ �
� K t-sx / / 'b
�
� '� �ox /� � � � a
��o t,� � , ;.� .� � � q� i� ��� a
/ � •—,5x � 1 i . '
107i � � / �` / �a`] �
� � 4 / ao
I
� xs�� 4 r� � o � � z� W
�� ��� � � ^,� $ �
� , � z�
� 1
4 r N N
�/ � ��' � ���1
� d ♦��`:_
r:.
1 � �10X
� p � x0lti
\\� �// \\\
/
� 1\ � � �'
��v�u�i �\ // n �/Le _\�
-'i -- i � i' �
1 zs�-9 � °w„ 4 1 4 � �
�� � / K
� �� �= � � / �
\� i� o
z
�
�
�
20
l (
�a cooz—za�o er�emo� dQt bwz—s+aooz\�v�aacrn�ooa��
� z � �
� � t�
� �
,^ � W
a\�/ �
w �j a �
� �jza
_ o0
� W
/ /N \�� � � � a
� � � , fs, � �
/ t � �
w
/ �\ / / �e� �� `O A �d
: �
/ 1� \ / � � I � W
U
�/ � � 1 �s a a
\ N � �� � �� /� W �
1 / � �/ W
f I'�_ __ /� �., �
� � / � �� / —�� U
�� '� K t5z N / / '� � �
� '� zax /� 1 I � a
,�� '�� � , :'� �„ � R� � ��
� L,� , �� . �� �
�' •-2sx � _ ^1 i �— �
� .::'Y.Ot 4 /
1 YS�t--� � � Ys� � } o Z �
\ � / N �/ Y = �
\` J� � � ��
� e N n M
� \ // �
/x •� � � ?€'_
� � �2� � � �
��oz � l `"�'
1\ � � \ � xo��
\ N /� \
� � \
/ .
i �� � � .�'
��b� � i� � i'� '� ^
�i � _, j , i �
�
� xo�-�
\\ � �� � � �\ 4 � �
� i � � /� y
� i O
2
�
�
r--
21
( (
a•w coos-s�-o� zr•er•o� dm �vr-sraaaa\s�w\aaQua¢�oaoz\w
� �r U] F--
� Ww
� � W
►n a o
� � �
W a
a
P � p � O
i �� �=y
E N
Q
oa�oo
�
�
� /) � l '0 � f� zE" W
J
I � J W
/ � � �� / \ � �
�
� � �
\� � � J � \� � xz
� 1\ J � W '►1C�j �
�o�.� `- o � N � £ ��� � oWQ
Jl � r � � x c�
� � a
�
i� � �i a W
1 �
� °_'�� l'�_ — :�:...�.f �� � �
�� �// oov � 3 �`�`�`� � / / � p��� A
— 0 / / �o � � A
S„N � � � ,z ::: � � � ��� � � i �
� -� °J � � ��� � � � �� i
:� � �
/ N �� � �y �n 0
� o�� �� � � � :::::�J + ,i � 0^ /� k'
Jl � �t �— �
�
_ — �
1 91 ��f� � � 2��1 i� } �
� � � � o�c �o / Y �
� / �J � `� � 1
� �
� J �
� ~\ i� 0 ,. �} �
o r�r� �p � �� �p
�� � � o
/ J � L � \ °- ^� `� N�l � + l/'U
1� o � ���// � � ° � ad
\\ �/ \\
1 �
/
� / � v- u
� � � �
� `-0 \ � � _�
� ao�c !"O / o i. /c'o � \
� � � � � ,� J � �J
^� —o \
�� p J��� I P Q J � � � o+� � �
�°� f�� o � \\ , ���� �
� �� o
z
�
�
�
(
�•w �-Q�-o� zaa►�� dm �-s+oa��n��oo��
� �� �
� . �� o
� wa
w �' �
a
P _ � A�„V" o
� Lil
E
y
/� ;� `o �� L'� � a
—o
/� � � � � � � �E w
� �� i 1� ��
/ �\ 1 � / � �� � IO �
� � / J � ` Ux i
o�t �" 4 \ 1 £ J,� � � �
/ ..... 0 � N � �
J � �� 5 �� �\ ��� aa. W
1 ��4 r,_ _ _ + �� � �
�\ � / ` �� � --'�
� / oor' `- 3 / / � � �
� 0 � �o�o '� 0
� J + r 12 / �
�
� � � � 1 � \ � I
::: �.:.
�o�� ��� o--� �� ' :�::::1 �' � � � // �
J � �,i� � _, �+ ����`' � i�/ \\— / �
�
� 91 ���� / o,�o � ��� i � �
\��� ��� �J I �� /� �
� � E'�
� �� �� $ � �I I�J
�o�� � � o � ^� ��o Lo
J � �rs � � � ' ��-�o
'� o ��'�,, � � �� a�
.\ �� �\
, �
�
� —� / � � .
/
�
� �
� ao►�o � � / ��
—0 �'� �o�
Jl �ro � �� � + �
J �� � 1 -0 \
1� o ��f��� o J�� � o� �} I
�� �� ° � �� 1 ��/ �
� �� o
Z
x
�
�
(
a�M LOOL-41�t YCIYAt dQl Mi'4-CIYYYL��V�WYZLOL�OOYL��
� � � �
� � � o
� � �
w � � �
� Va
��o �\ � �
� � ) o ` \ � p� a
� � � G� z W
� \ O �� 1 , � 1� r 1 �
� \ , dN / / �oi � � O �
\ / / \ I x �i
� JI
/ o � 5� 1 8 , � � o
� oav�o � � � � q � ao � � �
�
J � Lr" � n i� �\� ��/ � a w
�\ ���^ r�` _� . . � /� � �
� 0-� / � � 'o� A
� I
\ / J �� � O // / a,o �' p \ A
15 a �
'� °-� r . �I/ � > >`r �� /
� o
�o^o `-$ � Q-� �N ':,:� �`o � \ � / �
J � �,=cl � �� . JI � �_ � r�
1 o 4r ��� �i� "
� ZO ���b.r// o`c�o �-o / x �
�� �� �J � �� � N
� _ �� o � �
� oo ��� ° y �� l E:=:1
/ O�� � � N� O�� �{/
J � � ri� � J � � 'y�
�\ o �����, \ � o; ad�
. � .
� — �
�
� - i � �
.
1 �
�/�O � \ // �� �
o�
� �J� � �� J � /��� � ��
1� £o ����� o -��� � o� � } I
�� �� ° � �� 1 N�/ �
� �� a
z
�
�
�
/ �
5.3 Year 2009 Cumulative Base Traffic Volumes
Figures S-6 through S-8 illustrate the Year 2009 Cumulative Base weekday midday, weekday PM,
and Saturday midday peak hour traffic volumes,respectively.
5.4 Year 2009 Cumulative plus Project Traffic Forecasts
The estimates of project-generated �c volumes were added to the Year 2009 Cumulative Base
forecasts to develop traffic projections for the Year 2009 Cumulative plus Project scenario.
The resulting Year 2009 Cumulative plus Project traffic volumes at each of the analyzed locations are
shown in Figures S-9 through 5-11 during the weekday midday, weekday PM, and Saturday midday
peak hours,respectively.
LINSCOTT,LAW 8 GREENSPAN,engine9rs 25 LLG Ref.2-07-2888
The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
.. �.�:?R(Ht?07'BSS��Repon�XSR-rpi-1 p-I 6.07 dnc
. �,
�w �ooz-�a-ao e�rr•u a� �ra-sw��sw�ca�000��
CO w� �
I �� o
� a
W �� �
� �V a
—� � o
/��* �f�� � � �
,� , is� '�� � w " W
� -� a�a
� ���1 ���� �� �� � �o �
� i J + \ x �
�
����� `' �� � � � � �$ � � a
) I l� � � �� � �� a, "
� � w
� 8 J1^ � r�_ —� :`'�`_.- /� _,_ � �
�� �
��188-1 '// ��� � � � � � � `,� A
J � 95 / ��m� '� � �
s�W 74 � � � � � � �
� ' 2 �� .... '� � �� / �
����� � � �30-, N�� ::��'" �� � �6 � � d
J � �r-sr � j � i �— ' � �
_- �
w
� U
� �� ~��� / �t^oI+1 `(.T �\���/ � � �
��08 � � / /J + �� / Y �
� �
� �� i�/ �y �i�
q� ZL -- �;J
� w�d`� � � Z6 �n
'f^^
Jllr� � � J � � 9�
1 1z z9 -'
\ � ������ � 81 ���
� � �
� — �
/
� —� / � �a-
�R�� �ot\ �� �� � -�� ^
� f9QQ \ � �°'�c LlF�
J � r� ��
JI
1 ti� } � � 1 J + l � �
��� .�?�M,� �� � �� � �
., _, ,� � � ,�o� � �r, �
�\ J� o
z
�
�
�
26
� � .
coo�-�a-ao ar�s►�u ac, �rc-aw�z�e•w�.o�ooa���
i� W� �
i �� o
� a
W �� �
� �V a
—� o
���, �� � �
) �p \ � a
i 1
�J �S � w V W
/ �f�FB .� �� � i �� �� O
� \� � �A C;Y � N� \ O O
i —� \— / / J + \� �x w
//mN� � �� N � � ��
/ �
U') f
J � �� � � ��� �� ��� a W
� ����. r�_ __ � a �
� � __
����-� �� g�� � � `;�}:� � � i �- 8�� �
� -- �o� � /�,.�� -- o �
� � � r �o2 / I � �L� � � � �
� �� 2 � �[� � 1 � 5 �,� � Ww
/s�w ��£ \ j22-1 ��ad' ?;� �. i �� / �.+ �t
/J � �r9� � _J : J � � �� � �
�
� •• 2 / �
1 �� J 1� �f � ��M 14� } / � a
\��� ��� �J � `8 // x �
� i� S� J � i s'
� ` ,,��/� s� � ��, �::�
//��� �J� \ � M�� ^^O �
JI ��
\ �N J � ` �
1 ;9 , �� � z�=
\�� .� M� � �� � 1 �1�
� �� �
/
� � � � �
�p ` M�
Ne�M �( � �/ �N � \
��F
J I J�� � �� J � ���l `iF\�
1 �z �.} ( � w,r s� J '� I
�Z89 — �n^ J�, 1 1 �
�� -1 �,�/ O l l 8l r. ,� �
� �/ Lt -1 \s[ , `f���
N
� �� O
Z
�
�
�
2�
�.
� ccoz-�a-oo er�►:u ac, dw�a--swoa���z�.o¢�pa►z��
GO ��' �
I �,� o
� a
�� �
� �"V a
P O
%�� Ltti C� �
\ a
� � ` --� �""� U
�� � 9 _, '� ► f� � W
\oti '�
/ � 1 ,��/ �� N� � �� U
� ' � I � xz
/ W
\ ` � ^� � � C
���� � �� � � e �d
\ / �
Jl �r �� � �� � �''
1 � � '� �
� � �. r�_ __ � �
»s�, � ^/ � � � �'� A
�� �/ ��� `- 71 � � �—�13 � 1
) 1 — e° � j�g°' ' � �
s"'" '� se � ) � \ � �
,- '� ;;� _ r ������{ � '`;y `�' � �
� ���3 �-lt \ i7.2� �� � �€'€�:� � � �—� � q
Ji ��r � s ::: � � �� �_ � � a
� :.:.:..� �2J � � � -'��,-
�\ igL � a�°��/� `��c"3. L� 15-1 n�� Y � �
\� J� /J � � / �
i ;:;
� 1� i� � , 1�� � �
�/�R� �9� � 6; � �*� ^I � '�s
J 1 l�-s \ N �
1� s � ����� � sF, � l�
� � � ^�
� � \
/
� � \ �
��3d �L6 \ // �� �� `�
/J + � � '� J � �J�` ��\
1�� -�1'���� s -��� � �i � � � �
�� �� ta � �� 1 ��/ �
� i� o
Z
�
�
�
28
� � r
�w coo�-s�-o► er:a►�� ac, �v�s-� �aa�co�paoz��
� U� �
� �
� �a �
a�
w �
� �U a
�
O
x�� �� � a �
_
a
) � ` ss F--�
� � �s S � w � W
i �s � 1 � '� �a
� ��� , �� � �i �^ � �o �
_ �— � J � \I �x w
���� �� � si � ; � � v� �d
/ J I �r � � � � ��� ��` �i� oa' W
� 32 �� r�— — � �� �
� ,eg--, '���/ ,��3 �� � —'� A
� / ��� � 5B / / •— 3 � I
` ' J � "'" 95 � ���% � ,0 e
s� � � � � � ��-� � � � �I
i 2� � ( � { � �`$
�/a'd c o `L� \ �830-� ���C� � :€€::€� � i � �� �/ k' �
J I �r�t � _� j- :.:.: J � �� �_ i � �
I lgs 'J�} ( � a'�� � 322� c�� �/ � d �
� � ��� �� ta i � �
�� �� �J I ��i � �
�
� J � �
�N� ��i��/ � + } "--^ �e� �
� ��� �9 \ zs � �� J � l�[
J � `r-o� 1 �
�
1 69 �
\ yy �����J � 81 j�c�
� � �
� � �
/
� —� � � ^
��� `zo�\ ,� �� ; '�
/ J � �� � �� J � ���l --�Fi\\
�c
��6; _'1��� oi� J qg� 1 � � � ' �
�\ J/ � � � �\ , ��� N
� �/ z
�
�
�
( �
a•w too¢—st—o� zo�rr•ot d� �rot��v\�to�ooaa\�
O �� g
� �
� aa �
� a� �
W �V a
�
�i�e, �� � Ga• �
\ a
/ � )O� �/ �L � � � W
� �
// ��1 ��N/ � �5� �� � �
`- ' � � � � xb
� �� I � o
� � �- s� � 1 ic �� � v �
� �t� � � \ � � � � �� � � �
J 1 l� � �� �� ,� cp" W
1\ �1� r,` _` . :.. �► ��� -- �� �
�,�'-, ,�� s�� �- �, � i i �-- e�� a�
` �� / /��� � � x
s�w
JI � »4 / I � ��—� � I
� � � �� .... '� � � 5 � / W
� �
�s�� '�-t� \ �22-� ��� : :;�`:� `"� � � �� � k'
� �s�t � i ::: � + � i �
as+� �s _� ��� i��1 i� � �
`��p� �1t'��^nr�� r*i�i`e� �9Z '� ^�// Y �
�� �� �J { l� � �
� J �
���� �i��/ � + �� � �
� ^��
/J � lrB1 � -, �N " J � ��—�o
�\ ;9 J��� � \ �t� /
\� � M /� \ 1 � �
� � \
/
� 1� � � ^
/ �
��� �� � / �� � �
�
/J I l�� � �� J � �� � � �� \\
�
1�t69 —�}� � � � �� 1 61 � � �
g�l c.,�/ O l l 8! —� ^�
\\ J/ LZ � ^"� \6L , �8w,�� t�i�
� �� O
z
�
�
�
/ (
MW cooa-o►-o� srozo� em d+v<<-sr����a�coz\oo��
� UW �
� �'� w
o,� o
� a� �
Q
W �� a
� a o
��� Lzy�� � p" a
� )FS � � � ~ E:. W
� � , _ w �� �
�� ��`� ,��' �' �� �� �o
� ' J I � �x z
� � � I � �'
�/��� � 9�\ �N � �Z � d'� /� rn� caa
J� 1 '� � ... J ^ �/// \\ '/ �� �
� 85 � r _ : � _ _\ �
� »s-, �� � ^� —� '� M� i ,� ra
�� �� ��� `- �e � � �- z� � �
J I _ 80 � /�s°' -- � A
� r �03 �: :�: / � �' 1�-� \ � i �
� —� ��� � r •: �:::'�•.�.`�• � t ) 42J,r� / '�+
��o`o,�`� �0£ � 122� ���/ :�::;:`'��� /� � ��� // � A
J �� r�b \ .� � / �•.�� 18J 1 � �/ \ � �
� SOl � } .0 � tg� �oo / >- � d'
�\� ' �Cri� ��N `-�£ / Y a (/�
� ,� �JI �� � p
i J � �
� ���/�� � � �� �, �:::1
��M�� �9Z \ 6� � d a� ^�Of `�
J � ` r-ll � c� Iyh,1N J � l�g
9Z J � '�
1� �t ������ � s; �f�
� � �
� � �
/
� � \ � � � �
�M� �-L6 \ /� �� ,%, ��
��
� � I ��i � ,� J 1 /��` —�oa \\
�
� i°s� 1 � � w�. � � zt � '� I
� 4ll � �r'�"�/ ti6 -J N� � s -.� �} �
\\ �/ LZ -7 �\ 1 ��/ v�
� �/ Z
�
.--
r--
i
6.0 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
This section presents a comparison of conditions with and without the project at each analyzed
intersection to determine the incremental effect of the proposed project on Yeaz 2049 traffic
conditions. Detailed calculations of the levels of service aze included in Appendix B.
6.1 Significant Traffic Impact Criteria
In order to provide a quantita.tive basis for determining the significant tr�c impact at a specific
location, it was necessary to establish the criteria to be used in the analysis of intersections for this
study.
Based upon the City's traffic study guidelines, a project is considered to have a significant impact at
an intersection if the following criteria are met:
For Si�nalized Intersections: .
■ the Delay value under "with project" conditions is greater than 55.0 seconds per vehicle
(LOS E or F), and
• there is an Average Delay increase attributable to the project
For Unsignalized Intersections:
■ the Average Delay under"with project" conditions is greater than 35 seconds per vehicle
(LOS E or F), and
■ there is an Average Delay increase attributable to the project
The potential significant impact at the key intersection should be mitigated to offset the Average
Delay increment attributable to the project, and to bring back the level of service to pre-project or
Cumulative Base conditions.
6.2 Year 2009 Cumulative Base Tra�c Conditions
The projected Year 2009 Cumulative Base peak hour trai�ic volumes were analyzed to determine the
level of service for each of the analyzed intersections.
As presented in Table 6-1, 11 of ihe 14 key intersections would meet the City's LOS C goal during
the weekday midday,weekday PM, and Saturday midday peak hours, and the following intersections
would operate at a LOS D or LOS E during the peak hour noted:
1. San Pablo Avenue at SR-111 (weekday midday,PM, and Saturday midday peak hours)
3. SR-74 at El Paseo(weekday midday and PM peak hours)
4. Ocotillo Drive at El Paseo (weekday midday peak hour)
�
LiNSCOTT,LAw&GREENSPaN,engineers LLG Ref.2-07-2888
32 The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palrn Desert
�';:s�xr�c�'�iRSUtepon,'SSB-rpi•IO-i(�.P7 doc
� �
TAaLE 6-1
YEAR 2009 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICES
�l� Year 2009 �3�
Yesr 2009 Significsnt
Cumulative Base Cumulative Plus Impact
Project
Key Intersectiona Tlme Perlod ��,eh� LOS ��eh� LOS Yes/No
1. San Pablo Ave at Midday 58.5 E 58.3 E No
SR-1116 PM 53.5 D 53.4 D No
Sat Midday 65.6 E 65.4 E No
2. Plaza R'ay at Mtdday 12.9 B 13.0 B No
El Paseo PM 11.8 B 12.0 B No
Sat.Midday 11.8 B 12.0 B No
3. SR-74 at Midday 35.1 D 35.3 D No
El Paseo PM 46.2 D 46.6 D No
Sa�Midday 33.6 C 34.0 C No
4. Ocotillo Drive at Midday 25.6 D 27.3 D No
El Paseo PM 17.5 C 18.2 C No
Sat.Midday 17.7 C 18.7 C No
5. Sage Lane at Midday 16.4 C 17.0 C No
El Paseo PM 12.8 B 13.1 B No
Sat.Midday 12.7 B 13.2 B No
6. Lupine Lane at Midday 14.0 B 14.6 B No
EI Pareo PM 11.8 B 12.1 B No
Sat. Midday 12.2 B 12.7 B No
7. San Pablo Ave at Midday 19.4 B 19.7 B No
El Paseo PM 19.1 B 19.6 B No
� Sat.Midday 18.7 B 19.1 B No
8. Larkspur Lane at Midday 23.5 C 23.5 C No
El Paseo PM 223 C 22.3 C No
Sat.Midday 24.8 C 24.5 C No
9. San Luis Rey Ave at Midday 22.9 C 22.9 C No
El Paseob PM 23.1 C 23.1 C No
Sat.Midday 22.7 C 22.6 C No
s Appendtx B contains HCM LOS sheets for key study intersections.
6 Under the HC]vt unsignalized methodology,it is possible to have better LOS under conditions with the projed(in comperison to base conditions
without the projed),because the delay rcported for the entire intersection is a weiahted averaee of the different traffic movemettts on each approach
based upon volumes. Therefore,the project-generated traffic may have ban added to those movcmcnts with very good LOS,so that this benefit is
further exemplified in Ihe weighted average reported for the entin intersection.
�
Lxrsc:orr,Lnw�Gt�EHsvnw,enyfieers LLG Re£2-07-2888
33 The Gardens on EI Peseo,Palm Desert
::-',_Pnu:3o72%SSUteponCRCB•qv 10.1 G.01 aM
( (
TABLE 6-1 (CONTINUED)
YEAR 2009 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICET
�l� Year 2009 �3�
Year 2009 Sigalficant
Cumulative Base Cumulative Plus Impact
Project
Key Intersections Time Period �sD�/�,b� LOS ��eh� LOS Yes/No
10. Tumbleweed Larre at Midday 7.7 A 7.8 A No
Shadow Mountatn Dr PM 7.7 A 7.7 A No
Sat. Midday 7.S A 7.6 A No
11. Lupine Lane at Midday 10.0 A /0.1 A No
Shadow Mountain Dr PM 9.8 A 9.9 A No
Sat. Midday 9.3 A 9.S A No
12. San Pablo Ave at Midday IO.S B 10.8 B No
Shadow Mountain Dr PM 10.4 B 10.7 B No
Sat. �dday 9.7 A 10.0 A No
13. Larkspw Lane at Midday 10.S B 10.7 B No
Shadow Mountain Dr PM 10.3 B IO.S B No
Sat.Midday 10.2 B 10.S B No
14. Shadow Mountain Dr Midday 7.4 A 7.4 A No
Iromvood St PM 7.4 A 7.4 A No
Sat. Midday 7.4 A 7.4 A No
Notcs:
■ LOS=Level of Service,pleue refer to Tables 3-1 and 3-2 for the LOS definiuons.
_ • Bold Dday/L06 valua indica0e adverse servicc levels baud on City of Palm Desert LAS stendards.
'Appendiz B contains HCM IAS she�ts for key study intersections.
�
LiNscon,Lnw 8 GREENs�nN,englneers � The Gardens on Ei Pas o�Pelm Desert
n,zsa�•�c�_sas�R�o��nsA-�in-in-��-m.ao�
( (
6.3 Year 2009 Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions
The Yeaz 2009 Cumulative plus Project peak hour traffic volumes were analyzed to determine the
level of service for each of the analyzed intersections.
Based upon the application of the significance criteria described previously, Table 6-1 indicates that
the project is not expected to cause significant traffic impacts at any of the 14 key study intersections.
Therefore,project-related mitigation measures aze not necessary.
�
LINSCOTT,UW 8 GREENSPAN,engineels LLG Rof.2-07-2888
35 The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
:.�:�xa,�zcr�aRs�.�o��csse-rr�-�o-u,-mea:
( (
7.0 PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS
This parking study evaluates existing parking condidons at'The Gazdens on El Paseo (in terms of the
number of vehicles actually pazked in the pazking shucture), calculates the number of Code-required
parking spaces for the Saks Expansion and El Paseo Village components of the project, describes the
basis and application of the Shared Parking concept, and compares parking demand to supply to
determine any pazking surpluses or deficiencies under future conditions with the project. Pazking
surveys were not performed at El Paseo Village due to the tenant vacation underway.
7.1 ParWng Supply
Based upon a comprehensive inventory of on-site/off-street spaces, it was determined that the
existing pazking supply for the project totals 919 vehicle spaces (plus 58 golf cart spaces) in The
Gazdens' pazking structure, and 146 vehicle spaces in the El Paseo Village lot. The 919 vehicle
spaces in the structure aze comprised of 455 spaces on the lower level and 464 spaces on the upper
level. The 58 golf cart spaces in the structure consist of 48 spaces on the lower level and 10 spaces
on the upper level.
It should be noted that although prior development approvals for The Gardens consider the 58 golf cart
spaces in the structure as part of existing supply for The Gazdens, those golf cart spaces have been
excluded from the demand-versus-supply comparisons in this study as a conservative measure.
On-street parking is provided along El Paseo, Lupine Lane, San Pablo Avenue, and San Luis Rey
Avenue,and these on-street spaces have not been added to the suppIy inventory.
Under future conditions with the completion of the project, 20 vehicle spaces would be removed
from the structure, and 44 spaces would be added to the El Paseo Village pazking lot, resulting in a
future total off-street supply of 1,081 spaces (comprised of 899 vehicle spaces in the structure, and
182 spaces in the Village lot).
7.2 Parking Surveys at The Gardens on EI Paseo
In arder to determine the existing pazking characteristics at The Gazdens' parking structure ai various
times throughout a typical day, a survey of actual parking utilization was conducted on the following
days:
■ Thursday,Mazch 29, 2007
■ Saturday,March 31,2007
The vehicles parked in the structure were counted every hour, beginning at 10:00 AM and ending at
10:00 PM. Table 7-1 presents the results of the pazking surveys performed at The Gardens' structure.
7.2.1 Exisffng Parking Demand In The Gardens'Parking Structure
Table 7-1 indicates the existing parking supply of 919 spaces,the number of spaces occupied by time of
day, the percent occupancy during each observation, and a comparison of the peak demand against
supply indicating an existing pazking stuplus or deficiency.
LINSCOTT�LAW&GREENSP/W,englneers LLG Ref.2-07-2888`
36 The Gazdens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
�''QR(h>•._'07:566•Re�n-J�188-��x-I P-16-02 dcn:
/, (.
Tae�e T-1
PARIqNG UTILIZATION SURVEY RESULTS
Thursday,MArch 29,2007 Saturday,Msrch 31,2007
On-Site Parking Suppty On-Site Parking Supply
Supply= 919 Minus Supply— 919 Minus
Spaces Percent Demand Spaces Pe�cent Demand
Time Occupied Occuponcy (spaces) Occnpied Occuponcy (spaces)
10:00 AM 262 29% 657 157 17% 762
I 1:00 AM 377 4/% 542 321 35% 598
12:00 PM 592 64% 327 461 SO% 458
1:00 PM 601 65% 318 665 72% 254
2:00 PM 679 74°6 240 728 79!6 191
3:00 PM 549 60% 370 635 69% 284
4:00 PM 427 46% 492 586 64% 333
5:00 PM 440 48% 479 650 71% 269
6:00 PM 536 S8% 383 716 78% 203
7:00 PM 517 56% 402 657 71% 262
8:00 PM 416 4S% 503 525 S7% 394
9:00 PM 326 35% 593 365 40% 554
10:00 PM 187 20% 732 275 30% 644
LurSCorr,Lnw 8 GREENSvnN,enylnee►s 37 The Gardcns on E Paseo�Palm Desert
V�'?8(N)'I07:87iS1Rt�x+n:`68N-pn-10-16-07 dot
. � (
As indicated in Table 7-1, the peak parking demand observed on Thursday, March 29, 2007, was
679 spaces, which occurred at 2:00 PM. This 679-space demand cortesponds to 74% of the 919-
space total parking supply being occupied.
Table 7-1 indicates that the peak parking demand observed on Saturday, March 31, 2007, was 728
spaces, wluch also occurred at 2:00 PM. This 728-space demand indicates that 79% of the 919-
space total existing supply in the structure was occupied The demand of 728 spaces on Saturday is
considered the peak demand, since it is greater than the 679-space demand under Thursday
conditions. Therefore, Saturday conditions provide the basis for the parking demand analysis.
Parking facilities with occupancy levels of 85% or more are typically considered "full"; therefore,
The Gardens' pazking structure was not fully occupied during the Thursday and Saturday survey
time periods.
It should be noted that because The Gazdens' pazking structure is centrally located in the El Paseo
Shopping District, and is unrestricted and open to the general public ("Public Parking" signs are
posted along El Paseo that direct parkers to the structure), the structure currently serves the pazking
needs of The Gardens' visitors and employees,plus additional demand generated by the surrounding
retail, restaurant, and office uses. Therefare, the results of the pazking utilization surveys (per Table
7-1)account for both The Gardens' and general public pazking demand.
7.2.2 Exlsting Parking Demand versus Supply in The Gardens'Parking Structure
As indicated in Table 7-1, comparing the peak total demand of 728 spaces against the total supply of
919 spaces yields an existing pazking surplus of 191 spaces in The Gardens' structure. Therefore,
there �is adequate supply to serve the existing demand for The Gardens on El Paseo and additional
public pazldng demand generated by the surrounding commercial uses.
In general, there are two methods that can be used to estimate a projecYs peak pazking demands.
These methods include:
■ Application of City Code pazking ratios(which typically treat each use as a"stand alone"
use at maximum demand); and
� ■ Application of shazed parking usage patterns by time-of-day (which recognizes that the
parking demand for each land use component varies by time of day, day of week, and/or
month of yeaz).
7.3 City Code Parking Requirements
The City Code/City-approved ratios used in this study include the following:
- ■ General retail: 4 spaces per 1,000 SF
■ Office: 4 spaces per 1,000 SF
■ Restaurants: 10 spaces minimum, plus 10 spaces for each 1,OOQ SF for restaurants up to
3,000 SF, and 15 spaces for each 1,000 SF in excess of 3,000 SF
■ City-Approved parking ratio for The Gazdens: 4 spaces per 1,000 SF
UNSCO7T,LAW&GREENSPAN,eng'ureeia 38 LLG Ref.2-07-2888
The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
� \-:'_A(kv,?C7'RRS�Repnn-,`8S8��e-I11-I6-01 AM
( (
The application of City Code parking ratios to the project yields a total Code-based requirement of 587
spaces,comprised of the following:
■ 108 spaces for the 27,000-SF Saks Expansion in The Gazdens on El Paseo
■ 148 spaces for the 36,893 SF of retail in El Paseo Village
■ 63 spaces for the 15,734 SF of office in El Paseo Village
■ 268 spaces for the 20,207 SF of restaurant use in El Paseo Village
7.4 Shared Parking Analysis
In order to estimate the pazking needs of the project, and assure that sufficient parking is available
for its proposed development program, the Shared Parlang methodology was utilized. This goes
beyond simply calculating the City Code requirement, and looks at the operational demand picture
within the actual physical setting. The objective of this Shared Parking analysis is to estimate the
peak parking requirements for the various uses based upon their combined pazking demand patterns.
7.4.1 Shared Parking Ratlonale and Basls
Parking experience indicates that combining different land uses, whase parking demands peak at
different times(of the day, week, and year), generally result in a parking demand that is significantly
lower than "stand-alone" or "free-standing" facilities. In other words, a mixed-use development
results in an overall parking need that is less than the sum of the individual peak parking requirements
for each land use(pazking ratios/factors specific to each land use,or city pazking code rates aze typically
applied to these"stand-alone"developments).
Given the mixed-use nature of the proposed project, with varying peak parking periods (early
afternoon for retail, late morning for general office, and evening for restaurants), it is appropriate to
utilize the Shared Parking concept in forecasting the overall parking demand for the project.
The analytical procedures in a Shared Parking analysis aze well documented in the Urban Land
Institute's (LJLI's) Shared Parking (Second Edition) publication. The publication defines Shazed
Pazking as"parking space that can be used to serve two or more individual land uses without conflict
or encroachment." Therefore, Shared Pazking calculations recognize that when different uses share a
common parking footprint, the total number of spaces needed to support the collective whole is
determined by adding the different pazking profiles (by time of day or day of week) of each use
comprising the mixed-use development. This is done rather than applying individual peak ratios to each
land use component.
There is an important common element between the traditional "code" and the Shared Parking
calculation methodologies. The peak parking ratios, or "highpoint" for each land use's pazldng profile,
typically equals the"code"parking ratio for that use.
_ �
LwSCOTf,LAW b GREENSPur,englneers LLG Ref.2-07-2888
39 The Gardens on EI Paseo,Pelrn Desert
n�.,no,�,_onses�ezNo��casR-.p-in.i��zaoo
i �
7.42 Shared Parking Ratios and Proflles
The hourly parking demand profiles (expressed in percent of peak demand) utilized in this analysis
and applied to the project are based on profiles developed by the Urban Land Institute (UL� and
published in Shared Parking, 2"d EdiNon.
The ULI publication presents hourly pazking demand profiles for seven general land uses: office,
retail, restaurant, cinema, residential (Central Business District: CBD and non-CBD), hotel
(consisting of separate factors for guest rooms, restaurandlounge, conference room, and convention
area). These factors present a profile of pazking demand over time and have been used directly, by
land use type, in the analysis of this project.
The ULI retail use profiles aze applied directly to the El Paseo Village retail component. In doing
so, there is an intermediate step in expressing ULI profiles as a percentage of the week-long peak,
thus arriving at a weekday profile and weekend profile each expressed as a percentage of the
baseline pazking ratio (L1LI actually starts with separate ratios for weekday and weekend day, and
develops profiles for each accordingly; it is more convenient to translate both profiles to a percent of
expected maximum demand, which, for retail, turns out to be on a Saturday). The resulting profiles
represent the most likely hourly parking demand profile, and aze applied to the City's retail parking
ratio of 4 spaces per 1,000 SF. Peak demand for retail uses occurs between 1:00 PM and 2:00 PM
on weekdays, and between 2:00 PM and 4:00 PM on weekends.
The ULI office profiles are also d'uectly applied to the El Paseo Village office component. For
office uses,peak demand occurs between 10:00 AM and 12:00 PM on weekdays and weekends, and
between 2:00 PM and 4:00 PM on weekdays. The profiles are applied to the City's office parking
ratio of 4 spaces per 1,(}00 SF.
The restaurant use profile applied in the study is based on fine/casual dining. Like the retail and
office profiles, the restaurant profiles aze derived from the ULI baseline. A pazking ratio of 10
spaces per 1,000 SF was applied, based on parking studies LLG previously completed for cities
adjoining Palm Desert. According to the Shared Parking publication, the peak demand for
fine/casual dining uses occurs between 7:00 PM and 10:00 PM on weekdays, and between 8:00 PM
and 9:00 PM on weekends.
For the Saks Expansion at The Gardens on El Paseo, the hourly parking profile was derived from the
pazking survey results and applied in the Shared Parking analysis. The resulting empirical profile
was then applied to the City-approved parking ratio of 4.0 spaces per 1,000 SF for The Gardens.
The pazking survey results, which correspond to the existing hourly parking demand at The Gardens'
pazking structure, were incorporated directly into the Shared Parking analysis.
7,4.3 Shared Parking Anal ysis Results
Tables 7-2 and 7-3 present the weekday and weekend parking demand summaries for the project
based on the application of the Shared Parking methodology. These tables present the pazking
accumulation characteristics and parking demand for the proposed project and existing shopping
UNSCOTr,LAW&GREENSPAN,englnee+s LLG Ref.2-07-2888
4� The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
,r':•�acxe�o�:ans�tteNo�,_nse-���-iai<,-o�a«
� (
Tns�E 7-2
WEEKDAY SHARED PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS
E1 Paseo Village E1Paseo Gardeas
Land Use Retail FinelCasual Oftice Saks
Dining Expansion
Size 36.9 KSF 20Z KSF 15.7 KSF 27.0 KSF EP Garden Shared Supply
Ratio[1] 4.0/KSF 10.0/KSF 4.0/KSF 4.0/KSF par�Og parking Minus
Survey
Spsces 148 Spc. 202 Spc. 63 Spc. 108 Spc. Results Demand Demand
1,081 Supply
No.of No.of No.of No.of No.of No.of Surpins or
Time o!Day Spaces Spaces Spaces Spaces Spaces Spaces (Deficiency)
6:00 AM 4 0 2 3 20 29 1,052
7:00 AM 10 6 17 7 50 90 991
8:00 AM 27 14 45 20 140 246 83 5
9:00 AM 58 21 58 42 200 379 702
10:00 AM 92 49 63 67 262 533 548
11:00 AM 117 87 60 85 377 726 355
12:00 PM 128 141 53 94 592 1,008 73
1:00 PM 133 141 54 97 601 1,026 55
2:00 PM 128 126 63 94 679 1,090 (9)
3:00 PM 122 83 60 89 549 903 178
4:00 PM 122 98 53 89 427 789 292
5:00 PM 127 144 30 93 440 834 247
6:00 PM 127 175 15 93 536 946 135
7:00 PM 127 182 6 93 517 925 156
8:00 PM 109 182 4 80 416 791 290
9:00 PM 74 182 2 53 326 637 444
10:00 PM 42 175 1 31 187 436 645
11:00 PM 15 140 0 11 65 231 850
12:00 AM 0 49 0 0 0 49 1,032
Notes:
Source: i1LI-Urban Land Institute"Shazed Parking,"Second Edition,2005.
[1] Parking rates for all land uses based on tILI procedure normalized to express percentage in terms of absolute
peak demand ratios.
LaNscATr,la�w b GaEEt�a�,engbreers LLG Ref.2-07-2888`
- 41 The Gerdens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
N�-_'SOtP.207-868�RepnnC86A-r�n-I�-I G-P7.da:
<
( (
Tn�t.�7-3
WEEKEND SHARED PARKINO DEMAND ANALYSIS
E1Paseo ViUage EI Paseo Gardeas
Land Use Retail FineJCssual Office Saks
Dining Expansion
Size 36.9 KSF 20.2 KSF 15.7 KSF 27.0 KSF EP Garden Shared Supply
Ratio[1] 4,0/KSF 10.0/KSF 4.0/KSF 4.0/KSF Parking parking Minus
Survey
Spacea 148 Spc. 202 Spc. 63 Spc. 108 Spc. Results Demand Demand
],081 Snpply
No.of No.of No.of No.of No.of No.of Surplus or
Time of Day Spaces Spaces Spaces Spacea Spaces Spaces (Deflciency)
6:00 AM 4 0 0 3 20 27 1,054
7:00 AM 11 6 1 7 50 75 1,006
8:00 AM 24 9 3 18 80 134 947
9:00 AM 58 18 5 43 100 224 857
10:00 AM 85 23 5 62 157 332 749
11:00 AM 106 49 7 77 321 560 521
12:00 PM 124 109 5 91 461 790 291
1:00 PM 136 118 5 99 665 1,023 58
2:00 PM 148 100 3 108 728 1,087 (6)
3:00 PM 148 100 2 108 635 993 88
4:00 PM 142 100 1 104 586 933 148
5:00 PM 135 133 1 98 650 1,017 64
6:00 PM 120 185 1 88 716 1,110 (29)
7:00 PM 113 193 0 83 657 1,046 35
8:00 PM 100 202 0 73 525 900 181
9:00 PM 79 185 0 57 365 686 395
10:00 PM SS 185 0 40 275 555 526
11:00 PM 23 181 0 16 110 330 751
12:00 AM 0 101 0 0 0 101 980
Notes:
Source: ULI-Urban Land Institute"Shared Pazking,"Second Edition,2005.
[1] Parking rates for all land uses based on ULI procedure normalized to express percentage in terms of absolute
peak demand ratios.
UNSCOTT,LAW&GREENSPnN,engineers LLG Ref.2-07-2888
42 The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
\.:2 R(k1:2C72RSSGiepon�ASB-rp-10-I F-07.Aoc
(
center(The Gardens) between 6:00 AM and 12:00 midnight, the expected overall,joint-use parking
demand on an hourly basis, and the hourly pazking surplus/deficiency compared to a future, total
pazking supply of I,081 spaces.
Appendix C contains the shazed pazking analysis calculation worksheets for the weekday and
weekend day parking scenarios.
As shown in Table 7-2, under weekday conditions, the project would generate a peak pazking
demand of 1,090 spaces, which is expected to occur at 2;00 PM. This 1,090-space weekday demand
corresponds to a parking deficiency of 9 spaces when compazed against the total pazking supply of
1,081 spaces.
Table 7-3 indicates that under weekend day conditions, the peak pazking demand for the project is
1,110 spaces, which is expected to occur at 6:00 PM. This 1,110-space weekend day demand
corresponds to a parking deficiency of 29 spaces when compazed against the total parking supply of
1,081 spaces. The parking shortfail of 29 spaces on a weekend day is considered the peak
deficiency,since it is greater than the 9-space deficiency under weekday conditions.
The 29-space shortfall will be reduced to 13 spaces through the addition of 16 vehicle spaces. The
additional 16 spaces will be obtained by restriping the existing 58 golf cart spaces in The Gardens
parking structure to convert them into 16 vehicle pazking spaces. The resulting 13-space deficiency
is considered nominal based upon the following considerations:
■ Due to the close proximity of the two sites (The Gardens and El Paseo Village), the
application of the Shared Parking concept to the project combines the future parking lot
� at El Paseo Village and The Gardens pazking structure into one parking pool,to be shazed
by both project components. Pedestrian connectivity between the two components is to
be expected, given the tripmaking and parking characteristics of visitors and employees
of the El Paseo District. The City-run, public "Courtesy Cart" shuttle program (with
ridership at its current peak since its inception in 2004) will help support the shared use
of parking facilities for the project.
■ The shared parking demand analysis for the project is considered to result in conservative
_ estimates of parking needs, and surplus or deficiency, because it does not take into
account any reductions in the project's parking demand due to "walk-in"traffic from the
other uses on EI Paseo and the availability of on-street parking in the area. Based on
traffic and pazking studies previously completed by LLG in similar azeas (i.e., Beverly
Hills"Triangle"), as many as 20%of hips could be attxibuted to"walk-in"traffic.
■ On-street parking is provided along El Paseo, Lupine Lane, San Pablo Avenue, and San
Luis Rey Avenue, and these on-street spaces have not been added to the supply inventory
for the project.
■ The demand estimated for the project is conservative because it includes demand from other
uses on El Paseo. It was difficult to isolate the project's pazking demand from the surveys
because The Gardens' parking structure is centrally located in the El Paseo Shopping
UNSCorf,Lnw 8�G�ENSPlw,eng'uieers 43 LLG Ref.2-07-2888
The Gardeas on El Paseo,Palm Descrt
N.'3g(kl'?07:SSS�Repom:N88-r�+t•I U-I[,-07.doc
f (
District, and is unrestricted and open to the general public ("Public Parking" signs aze
posted along El Paseo that direct pazkers to the structure). The structure currently serves
the parking needs of The Gardens' visitors and employees, plus additional demaud
generated by the surrounding retail, restaurant, and office uses, and parlting for the City-
run "Courtesy Cart" shnttle program. Therefore, the results of the pazking utilizaiion
surveys (which were included in the shared pazking analysis) account for both The
Gardens' and general public parking demand.
■ The industry-based standard of 85% parking occupancy (corresponding to a 15% parking
contingency)is projected to be met at 12:00 PM, 1:00 PM,2:00 PM, 6:00 PM,and 7:00 PM
on a weekday, and between 1:00 PM and 7:00 PM on a weekend day, but these may not
necessarily translate to achzal, operational pazking deficiencies based on d�e considerations
discussed above. Furthermore, the parking ratios (per City Code and design ratios)used as
basis for the shared pazking analysis, and which were applied to the proposed uses for the
project,already typically include a 15%parking contingency.
u�COn,U+w�GREeNsanx,er+9�� � LLG Ref.2-07-2888
The Gardens on EI Paseo,Palm Desert
\:'?BlkC20R388Utepon-�6SR-qN-10-I<,-(q.dp:
I `
Appendix E
Gardens Expansion/ New El Paseo Village Project
Hvdrolo�,v Report for the Gardens on El Paseo
Prepared by:
EKN Engineering, Inc.
September 15, 2007
, i �
HYDR�L4GY REPORT
FOR
THE GARDENS ON EL PASE�
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
SAN PABLO AVENUE AND EL PASEO
PALM DESERT, CALIF�JRNIA
Prepared By:
EKN ENGINEERING, INC.
1920 Main Street, Suite 850
Irvine, CA 92614
September 15, 2007
This Hydrology and Hydraulics Report was prepared under my supervision:
By: Date:
r ;
TABLE OF CONTENTS
introduction..................................................................................................Page 1
Methodology................................................................................................Page 1
Summary.....................................................................................................Page 1 �
Attachment 1 10-Yr Hydrology Calculations................................................Page 2
Attachment 2 100-Yr Hydrology Calcula#ions..............................................Page 8
Attachment 3 Catch Basin Capacity Calculation........................................Page 14
Attachment 4 Hydrology Map ....................................................................Page 15
( (
INTRODUCTION
This Hydrology Study was prepared for the devefopment of the Gardens on EI Paseo
Project in Paim Desert, California. The site is approximately 2.8 acres and is situated at
the southwest comer of San Pablo Avenue and EI Paseo Drive. The existing site consists
of an office complex and drains generally to the aforementioned intersection. The
proposed project will demolish the site and build a similar retail use.
METHODOLOGY
The Riverside County Flood Control Department Hydrology Manual was used utilizing the
Rational Method to determine the peak runoff from the site for a 10 and 100-year storm
events. Flows from the site wifl be collected in drop inlets and conveyed via an
underground storm drain system to a bubbler on EI Paseo Drive. The storm drain system
has been hydrauticalfy sized to convey the 10-year storm event at"open-flow" conditions.
Standard charts were used to size the on-site drop inlets.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
The totaf peak runoff from the existing site is 6.27 cfs and 10.63 cfs for a 10-year and 100-
year storm event respectively. The total peak runoff from the propased site is 7.68 cfs and
13.11 cfs for a 10-year and �00-year storm event respectively.
1
/ �
ATTACHMENT 1
ft+rr*,t*******+e�++********w++r,t,t,r***�r***,t+t,►+a�,t**+.�******f.,t*,t,t*,r***+r**,t+,t***a
RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM BASED ON
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
(RCFC�WCD) 1978 HYDROLOGY MAtJUAL
(c) Copyright 19B2-2007 Advanced Engineering Software (aes)
(Rational Tabling Version 7.OD)
Release Date: 06/01/2007 License ID 1558
********,r********,r**+,r*,r+* DESCRIPTION OF STUDY **********a***�,***,r*******
* 'Fhe Gardens on E1 Paseo *
* Palm Desert, CA *
* 10-Yr Storm ''
*******�.*�.**+*.****.t+******,r+�*******,r*�********x****#+**�*f************r
FILE NAME: 0706810E.DAT
TIN1E/DATE OF STUDY: 22:18 09/14/2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 10.00
SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 6.00
SPECIk'IED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 1.00
2-YEAR, 1-HOUR PRECIPITATION(INCH) = 0.50Q
100-YEAR, 1-HOUR PRECIPITATION(INCH) = 1.600
COMPUTED RAZNFALL INTENSITY DATA:
STORM EVENT = 10.00 1-HOUR INTENSITY{INCH/HOUR) = 0. 962
SLOPE OF INTENSITX DURATION CURVE *� 0.5800
RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES (JSED FOR RATIONAL METHOD
NOTE: COMPUTE CONFLUENCE VALUES ACCORDING TO RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL
AND IGNORE OTHER CONFLUENCE COMBINATIONS FOR DOWNSTREAM ANALYSES
Exa.stinq Condition
,t*,ti.+,r*,r,t+,t,�**ir*i.**,t,t***f.�*t�*W,rir***,r*,t*y.,t,t***+,t***#**,t�*,t+F**,t,t****r,t*,t*,t,twr*
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««<
--:�=�=a c=-�=�==s=c==-=-=asn�-o===m sao x-�as----
ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNiFORM �� s
DEVELOPMENT IS APARTMENi
TC = K*[ (LENGTH**3) /(ELEVATION CHANGE) ]**.2
INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 560.00
UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 297.00
DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 239.18
ELEVATION DIFFERENCE{FEET) = 7.82
TC = 0.323*( ( 560.G0**3)/( 7.82) ]**.2 = 9.530
10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.797
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8099
SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A"
SUBRREA RUNOF'F(CFS) = 2.60
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.15 TOTAI� RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.60
*'k#'k**�Y*i�#******'k#*Yr�F#*�t4*1ri****�F***#Yr**it*1rx*Y�**i+*�i*�k*i**�F Y�Ya.`rai#�Y aMi+�R«�A I�
2
(
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««<
=�==ass-�o�=�a m-ssx==a-=�--�oc=asc=as==�c�vm a:-ca�s=::x as-c xz-c as mz��a==�==a
TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2
CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE:
TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.} = 9.53
RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2.80
TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.7.5
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 2,60
***Yr**�l�kie:Fi#i*****�kir�F*****�k***ir�Mitir**ir*�R�t�k*�r**�ri�*irA******�r+�#*it�kt*k�**t*�k#�r#*
�LOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 21
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««<
===c-�x=a x==:ss-a zsa=:�a c=c==-=v--o=v::�==mas---a a�===c��===-=s=-��a�==s==c=
ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM
DEVELOPMENT IS COI�R�iERCIAL
TC = K*[ (LENGTH**3) /(ELEVATION CHANGE) ]**.2
TNITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 500.00
UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 248.00
DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 245.00
ELEVATIOIJ DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 3.00
TC � 0.303*[ ( 500.00**3) / ( 3.00) ]**.2 = 10,128
J.0 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.700
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8539
SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A"
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.76
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.63 TQTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.'76
,tx***f*�**�.**,t***,t**+r*+*t,�***,r***,t*r�***x,r**,r+t+**t*vrtr,t**t+****�,r�,t*+*,r�*,t*
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CObE = 1
---------------------------------------..__-----------------------------------
»»>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««<
»»>AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES««<
-_.-s a=�====g-=�a�a===_�a===zx===m-�aa�===v==so aa==x�=vv 3-=====---==�ao=.=aa-=
TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2
CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREA.^'I 2 ARE:
TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 10.13
F2AINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2.70
TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.63
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 3.76
** CONFLL'ENCE DATA **
STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA
NUMBER (C�S) (MIN.) (INCH/HpUR) (ACRE)
1 2.60 9.53 2.797 1.15
2 3.76 10.13 2.'700 1.63
*�#*+***v���**+*w**r+r,t*,rr.*+,t*a*,t*WARNING*�r*v.*r,t***�**+*�tx��*+*,�,�x,r+t**+*+.**
IN :HIS COMPUTER PROGRAM, THE CONFLUENCE VALUE USED IS BASED
ON THE RCFC&WCD FORMULA OF PLATE D-1 AS DEFAliLT VALUE. THIS FORMtJLA
WILL NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN THE MAXIMUM VALUE OF PEAK FLOW.
**,r*,r*�*�******+*,�*********+�r***,w**+*,r*a***r�+,r.*+,r***r*r*W,r***«*w**,+**�***
RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO
CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS.
** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** �
STREAM RUNOrF Tc INTENSITY
:VUMBER (CFS} (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR}
1 6.14 9.53 2.�97
� 6.27 10.".3 2.7C0 ,
I
3 �
i
i
f �
COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS:
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS} = 6.27 TC(MIN.) = I0.13
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.8
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 101.00 = 560.00 FEET.
Proposed Condition
*.************�**«*,.****�*�**«******.*�*«********�**************************
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANRLYSIS««<
==x x:o�=---vxr=s��a�=c=-��a=x:a=-c--�ss--a:s-c---zs��-:am=-x==a:a--�--::s-=a
ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM
DEVELOPMENT IS APARTMENT
TC = K*[ (LENGTH**3)/ (ELEVATION CHANGE} ]**.2
INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 225.00
UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 298.00
DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 240.50
ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 7.50
TC � 0.323'�[ ( 225.00**3)/( 7.50) ]**.2 � 5.560
10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY{INCH/HOUR) � 3.823
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8239
SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A"
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.15
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.00 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS} = 3.15
*.***#**w+*r*********,.****+r*****+**+•+*#******��***«*,r*.***v�*,r****,r*,r+****+*
FLQW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 120.00 IS CODE = 31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««<
»»>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NOIJ-PRESSURE FLO4J)««<
__==-=�a s:----v�ax==-�:===xa--z=e:a�-=v-�x=s--=�x=e�_�ass====vsas--====a=--:s
ELEVATION DATA; UPSTREAM{FEET) = 236.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) � 235.70
FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 133.00 MANNING'S N � 0.010
DFPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.7 INCHES
PIPE-FLOW VELOCITX(E'EET/SEC.) = 5.16
ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1
PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 3.15
PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.g = 0.93 Tc(MIN.} = 5.99
LONGEST ELOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 120.00 = 358.00 FEET.
***,t*,t*+**r***,t*+,r*+r+*,r+*t+**++r�,t******,t****,t,t*+,t***,t*,r+**,t�.***+*�.,r,tt*r*�
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 20.00 TO NODE 120.00 IS CODE = 81
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««<
s c--=xa-=x=a===�e=�-=:====�a z�c=�=�a=-�s=x=====�_=_:e==-xs:`-=�==a-===x=-x�x
10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.661
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8215
SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A"
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.07 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.22
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.1 TOTAL RUNCFF{CFS) = 6.37
TC(MZN. ) = 5.99
***w�*********�*+**+*#,�**��*************..�****�****�**,r,�*+��*++****,�*.,�r***,r*
FLOW P�tOCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NODE 131.00 iS CODE = 31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4
I �
»»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««G
»»>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON--PRESSURE FLOW}<G«<
aa==c x---c�=-a�==a=xe��as=sx==o-�z:x:as--x�--s ss=e=c--�.am=:a�====_---^---zaa
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 235.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 235.35
FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 66.00 MANNING'S N = 0.010
DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.5 INCHES
PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.97
ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1
PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.37
PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.18 TC(MIN.) = 6.17
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 131.00 = 424.00 FEET.
***,t,t*�***r+,r***,t***+****+**.�,r**,t*,r*.*,t***w�,v,t�*****,r***+*,r�,t*,r,t,r,r***r.*r***
FLOW PROCESS FROM :VODE 131.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««<
��s=====___�___�:�____�����:=________����===�=a==�=g=____a��==�ss====a=�===_
TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2
CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE:
TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 6.27
RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.60
TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 2.07
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 6.37
*+,��*+*«.***+r***+*****�**�*,r***+,r�.*+**,r*,r,r*.,r*********,�***��,�***+*++********
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3O.CO TO NODE 130.00 IS CODE = 21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««<
=�=�=z=�=--x==�c==--=�=c==s�===_xx=======�s===�=s==-��as=c x==�=sa===�-=a�s==
ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM
DEVELOPMENT IS APARTMENT
TC = K*[ (LENGTH**3) /(ELEVATION CHANGE) ]**.2
INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 175.00
UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 247.OQ
DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 239.80
ELEVATION DIFFERENCE (FEET) = 7.20
TC = 0.323*[ ( 175.00**3) /( 7.20} ] **,2 = 4.821
COMPUTED TIME OF CONCENTRATION INCREASED TO 5 MIN.
10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.066
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8261
SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A"
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) � 0.57
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.17 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.57
*<*+*+t*,r,r,r+***+,r*****,►**,r***+***+**x*�.*+.*�.**�.*+ra****�*a**�,r*,r***�*,�**a,r,r**,r
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 130.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 31
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««<
»»>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOWj««<
====aa=====a�-----___���___=�-----a��c=----��==�a�===-
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 235.80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 235.35
FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 75.00 MANNING'S N = 0.010
DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 3.6 INC"rIES
PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.40
ESTIMA�FD PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1
PIPE-FLOW{CFS) = C.57
PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0,37 Tc(MIN.} = 5.37
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 30.00 TO NODE 131.00 = 250.00 r^EET.
,t*,r*r,t,e*,r,�frr**>,t*r*,t*�,t++t**,r*,rw++*f,t+***+r+-,tr*,�*,t+**,t*r***�*,tirir*,r;�f**,t*,r*,t,t*
FZ,OW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>DESIGtQATE INDEPENDEI�T STREAM FOR CONFLUE:ICF.««:
S
/, �
»»>AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES««<
-----------==�==x==---x--aasxx�xeex-=:ms----=-c=-=�c-�c��c=s====ac=a:a-e:s x=
TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2
CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR IND�PENDENT STREAM 2 ARE:
TIME OF CONCEI3TRATION(MIN.) = 5.37
RAINfALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.90
TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.17
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 0.57
** CONFLUENCE DATA **
STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA .
i7UMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE)
J. 6.37 6.17 3.597 2.07
2 0.57 5.37 3.902 0.17
*,r**:****,r**+,t,r*****,t*,rx***v�a,r**,rWARNING*w******�***�*,t*****+,t,t*********,t,r
IN THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM, THE CONFLUENCE VALUE USED IS $ASED
ON THE RCFC&WCD FORMULA OF PLATE A-1 AS DEFAULT VALUE. THIS FORMULA
WILL NOT NECESSARILX RESULT IN THE MAXIMUM VALUE OF PEAK FLOW.
**,r+k*#*a***,r**********�****+**�**+.*++****;s*****+*w**+,r**+**�+*******,r***
RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRA,TION RATIO
CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS.
*� PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE **
STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY
NUMBER (CFSy (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR)
1 6.10 5.37 3.9�2
2 6.89 6.i7 3.597
COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS:
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 6.89 Tc(MIN. ) = 6.17
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 131.00 � 424.00 FEET.
+*****�r**,t��*a+***,t*****+**�*+*�*,t******.+*�**,r***,t**r*�****,t**+.�**+c***vr,t�**
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 190.00 IS CODE = 31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< •
»»>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE {NON-PRESSURE £LOW)««<
�`�__m2�iix_�_�s���R���__x���3a�__a___����sa=�m=x����x�zxL3����__��a�����3�3
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 235.35 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) � 234.40
FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 205.00 MANNING'S N = 0.010
DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.5 INCHES
PIPE-FLOW VELOCITX(FEET/SEC.) = 5.76
ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUM6ER OF FIPES = 1
PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.89
PIPE TRAVEL TIM�(MIN.) = 0.59 Tc(MIN. ) = 6.77
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE .190.00 = 629.00 FEET.
**��*+r**,r*+,��***,r*****+***+****�*+***�***+*****,r,r******W.****#**,.+�**,r******
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 190.00 TO NODE I40.00 IS CODE = 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««<
e=�s e-v:=xss=--x�m�x=vz���==_--�==-==v=s�==-=-=s=====z a=e-_-_===-�3==e=o=s�es-
TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2
CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE:
TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MZN.) = 6.77
RAINI'ALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.41
TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 2.29
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONF�UENCE = 6.89
�k*ir�lr�t+#iri*#i.�wtr�k�,t###�F*i.�kx�k**�F#***#w***#*�F*�r*x*+**�ktri.n+*�R�ki�*t*,trw#,`,k+a�a�r+.�..�i.,4+
6
( (
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 40.00 TO NODE 190.00 IS CODE = 21
------------------------------------------------------------------ ---
»»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA AN}1LYSIS««<
_--=s---3�::�a3a sma==�c a=c-�:af zax=--==--esssa a��a:a-=vxamas:asas:a���==____--
ASSUMED I23ITIAI, SUBAREA UNIFORM
DEVELOPMENT TS APARTMENT
TC = K*[ (LEIJGTH**3)/IELEVATION CHANGE} ] +*.2
INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 480.00
UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) � 293.00
DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 239.30
ELEVATION DIEFERENCE(FEET} = 3. 70
TC = 0.323*[ ( 480.00**3) !( 3.70) ]**.2 = 10.090
10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) � 2.706
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8079
SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A"
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.18
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) � 0.54 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.18
**+�**��***+�*****«**t*:*******�***********+*****+*+*,r**,r*++.**�************�.
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 140.00 TO NODE 140.00 IS CaDE = 1
---------------------------------------------�----------------__------------
»»>DESIGNA'FE INDEPENDENT STRE,AM FOR CONFLiJENCE««<
»»>AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES««<
a.sa s�a:as x�z=-=-----�-a====a�:a====c--=-as-.-=x xs===c-sc a---x=eass::=--=r-a-�=a
TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2
CONFLUENCE VALUES USr,D FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE:
TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 10.09
RAINFALL INTENS2TY(INCH/HR} � 2.71
TOTAI, STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.54
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = i.18
** CONFLUENCE DATA **
STREAM RUNOFF Tc I23TENSITY AREA
NUMBER {CFS) {MIN.) (ZNCH/HOUR) (ACRE)
1 6.99 6.77 3.411 2.24
2 1.18 10.09 2.706 0.54
********+,t**,t�*+e**,w*+�*,�**#**,�aw*WARNING**+�**+.*r*,t++*�+:*,r***,r,r*****+*w**
IN THTS COMPUTER PROGRAM, THE CONFLUENCE VALUE USED IS BASED
ON THE RCFC&WCD FORMULA OF PLATE D-1 AS DEFAULT VALUE. THIS FORMULA
WILL NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN THE MAXIMUM VALUE OF PEAK FLOW.
***«*****,r,t*****�**rw*+***,r*****�r�x***,r*+.+***+,r**r,r**�.******,t,t,t*****,rrr*r�
RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO
CONFI,UENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS.
*� PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE **
STREAM RUNdFF Tc INTENSITY
NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (ZNCE/HOUR)
1 7.68 6.77 3.411
2 6.65 10.09 2.706
COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS:
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 7.68 TC(MIN.) = 6.7?
TQ�AL AREA(ACRES) = 2.8
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE i90.00 = 629.00 FEET.
.�_���������_������_3�9Y_�_OSi�-������_s���-__����`-_.�25..�_�
END OF STL'DY SUMMARY:
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) - 2.8 TC(MIN.) = 6.7'J
PEAK FLOVP RATE(CFS) � 7.68
�=�=s�====____====�s�===-_�___=====o�saa==�-=_=_=�-��s______________________
=__=��==>>�aa==z�=-==_�_=__��_���__==_____�______�_______________=__________
END OF RATIONAL METHOD AtvALYSIS
7
(
ATTACHMENT 2
*******���************,**�#*.**************�*****�************�****�***�***#
RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM BASED ON
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL 6 WATER CO23SERVATION DISTRICT
(RCFC&WCD) 1978 HYDROLOGY MANUAL
(c) Copyright 1982-2007 Advanced Engineering Software (aes)
(Rational Tabling Version 7.OD)
Release Date: 06/O1/2007 License ID 1558
*********+�***�**+********* DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ''*****�*"`*****************
* The Gardens on El Paseo "
* Palm Desert, CA *
* 100-Yr Storm *
r*+t#***,t*+****,t�**w**+*,t**++.**rk�+�***a**,t****+*,t*,t**,t,t*,t***,t,rt**r�*�r,t*,t*a�
FILE NAME: 07068100.DAT
TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 22:94 09/14/2�07
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
USER SPECIFIED STORM EVEI3T(YEAR) = 100.00
SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 6.00
SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 1.00
2-YEAR, 1-HOUR PRECIPITATION(INCH) = 0.500
100-YEAR, 1-HOUR PRECIPITATIONiINCH) = 1.600
COMPUTED RAINFALL INTENSITX DATA:
STORM EVENT = 100.00 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.600
SLOPE OF IN�'ENSITY DURATION CURVE = 0.5800
RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD
NOTE: COMPUTE CONFLUENCE VALUES ACCORDING TO RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL
AND IGNORE OiHER CONFLUENCE COMBINATIONS FOR DOWNSTREAM ANALYSES
Existing Condition
x*,�,.****,�***#**********,�**�*�***********�*�..�.,.*.«**+**�,,�**�**********.*****
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1Q1.00 IS CODE = 2J.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««<
a=----_------�__�______�______��__==_���________
���____=______��____________ ____ ______
ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM
DEVELOPMENT IS APARTMENT
TC � K*f (LENGTH**3) /(ELEVATION CHANGE) j **.2
INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 560.00
UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET} = 297.00
DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 239.18
r.LEVATION bIFFERENCE(FEET) = 7.82
TC = 0.323*[ ( 560.00**3)/( 7.82) ]**.2 = 9.530
100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY{INCH/HOUR) = 4.651
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = ,8319
SOZL CLASSIFICATION IS "A"
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.95
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) � 1.15 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.95
,eiricwt+*�**ir*,t,t*,ti,t*�a**,r*ir,t,t*ir�x*,r+,t*trir*ir*,t***ir,txir**+*,r,r,r,t*irtt*,t*t*,r*+***+,t*ir
8
(
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««<
a---xs==c=_=----�a=���xz a-a3s---csxx-=--v xa�zxs�as:��--=:�=c=v xr===as�as=��
TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2
CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE:
TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 9.53
RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.65
TOTFIL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.15
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 4.95
***,r*�*+*********+***�+r*�.*,e*-r,r**x**+******#*************,e****,r***#*+�***,r***
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 2�2.00 IS CaDE = 21
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««<
=---a::+��--ax-�_-�-=aa��a�-m c��as-exx:a�a-��cv:�a===a csx=o�ss xa�-=-=��==e�=-�
ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM
DEVELOPMENT IS COMMERCIAL
TC = K*[ (LENGTH**3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE} ] **.2
INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(k'EET) = 500.00
UPSTREAM ELEVATION(F�ET) = 248.00
DOWI3STREAM ELEVATiON(FEET) = 245.00
ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 3.00
TC � 0.363*[ ( 500.00**3) /( 3.00} ]**.2 = 10.128
100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.990
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPI�NT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8652
SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A"
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.33
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1. 63 TOTAL ItUNOFF(CFS) = 6.33
w+**,tr***,t*+*,t***,t**,t,t***,t,ta�+a*,t*t,ttr*,t+***t*,r+*,t*«*+r******a**+*,r,t,r+*,t++vr*,t*
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE lO1.Q0 IS CODE = 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««<
»»>AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES««<
���_�--.������_��������_�.-.=���Z��___��SZ___�������.�������=23�_--�33Z��--_s3Y� �
TCTAL NUMBER OE' STREAMS = 2
CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE:
TIME OF CONCENTRATION{MIN.) = 10.13
RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 9.49
TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.63
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS} AT COtQFLUENCE = 6.33
** CONFLUENCE DATA **
STREAM! RUNOFF TC INTENSITY AREA
NiTMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE)
1 4.45 9.53 4.651 2.15
2 6.33 10.13 4.490 1.63
*****,e*+*,�***�,r**,�,t***,t*,r******�*WARNING*****,r**�*,t,t**+***,t�+***•k�,r*****+�
IN THIS CCMPLJTER PROGRAM, THE CONFLUENCE VALUE USED IS BASED
ON THE RCFC�WCD FORMULA OF PLATE D-1 AS DEFAULT VALUE. THIS FORMULA
WILL NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN THE MAXIMUM VALUE OE QEAK FLOW.
**,r**,r*,t*******�r*�+***,r,+****,r**;.****+*****,r+,.*******�rw*******�t*+**.*******
RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO
CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS.
'* PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE **
STREAM RUNOFF TC INTENSITY
NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (iNCH/HOUR)
1 10.41 9.53 9.651
2 10.63 '_0_?.3 4.99C
9
� (
COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS:
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS} = 10.63 TC{MIN.) = 10.13
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2•6
LONGEST FLOWPATH FRONS NODE 1.00 TO NODE 101.00 = 560.00 FEET.
Proposed Condition
*******.*,*.*.*************«******,.*****,�****��*******,�*.****,�************«*
PLOW PROCESS FROM 230DE 10.00 TO NODE 110.Q0 IS CODE s 21
---------------------------------------------------------------..------------
»»>RATIONAL METHOD II3ITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««<
ai�-e=x��a�-=z�--�--------se xzx sa=c===aams=-o---x�oa�=-=s:a:aa��==-xa=z x-�==e
ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM
DEVELOPMENT IS APARTMENT
TC = K�[ (LENGTA**3) /(ELEVATION CHANGE) ]**.2
INITIAL SCJBAREA ELOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 225.00
UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 298.00
DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 240.50
ELEVATIOIJ DIFFERENCE(FEET) m 7.50
TC = 0.323*( ( 225.00**3)/( 7.50) ]**.2 = 5.560
100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOU12) = 6.358
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8945
SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A"
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.37
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.00 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.37
****,,,�*,r,r*,r,,*�***v�***,r*****�*,r**�.**+*******,r*****,r******+**+****+.*+**i*,«,r***
FLOW PROC�SS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 120.00 IS CODE = 31
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««<
»»>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)««<
:-----==xa:ae--xz==asxs--=-----�-�--zs:s��sa===- --.-...-_-.zaws=ssco=x------=o=ca
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET} = 236.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) s 235.70
FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 133.00 MANNING'S N = 0.010
DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.4 INCHES
PIPE-FL�W VELOCITX(FEET/SEC.) = 5.93
ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1
PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.37
PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.37 TC(MIN.) = 5.93
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 120.00 = 356.00 FEET.
ik**#***M*****�'******+*�k*#�'�"k*�k�r*****+****#*�k***fr*W***.t****�r**#***irlr*********
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 20.00 TO NODE Z20.00 IS CODE = 81
-------------------------------------�..__-----------------------------------
»»>ADDITION OE SUBAREA TO MAINL.LNE PEAK FLOW««<
___________________________�s�========6==�==____
100 YEAR RAINFALL TNTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.122
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT R[iNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6931
SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "A"
SUBAREA AREA{ACRES) = 1.07 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.52
TOTAL AREA(ACRES} = 2.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.89
TC(kNiN.) = 5.93
*,,***+******«******+,��**�********,r**�****v�***+�*.********�***,r**********,r***
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NOOE 131.00 IS CODE = 31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««<
»»>USING COMPGTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)««<
_-�__________________�z-�=�=_���----���__ ��a��==--
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM.(FE�'T} = 235.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET} = 235.35
10
r (
FLOW LENGTH(FEET) � 66.00 MANNING'S N = 0.010
DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.3 INCHES
PIPE-FLOVJ VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.80
ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETEFt(IIVCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1
PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.89
PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.16 Tc(MIN.) = 6.10
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 131.00 = 429.00 FEET.
Yr*ir*t*ic#*�ti�*�k�lelr*********iic�ttt��k#tY#*#i*�Y�k!*#ir1�A*#*ir******#*�'*�1'**�kir�k#ir'k+'k'k****k
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««<
aays:sva�assscc=�c==-x=�--c=-----c---=c---s====c-=-=o==-=-_-_===�=x=saasax=a
TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2
CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPEI3DENT STREAM 1 ARE:
TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 6.10
RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.03
TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 2.07
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 10.89
t********twf,r****t*�.*,tr�*,r**+r****,t+**�*,r*****,tt*,t*,r*,t**,r****,r,t****+.,�w*,r,r*#,r
FLOW PROCESS FRQM NODE 30.OQ TO NODE 130.�0 IS CODE = 21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««<
=c=------------=--v==x_.====-mxas�aa:=sa�a========z=s=xaz==--=___===:=xa�=v==a
ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM
DEVELOPMENT IS APARTMENT
TC � K*( (LENGTH**3)I(ELEVATION CHANGE) ]**.2
IA]ITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(k'EET) = 175.00
UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 297.0�
DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 239.80
ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 7.20
TC = 0.323*[( 175.00*�'3) /{ 7.20) ]**.2 = 4.821
COMPUTED TIME OF CONCENTRATION INCREASED TO 5 MIN.
100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) � 6.762
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF CQEFFICI�NT = .8468
SOIL CLASSIFTCATION :S "A"
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.97
TOTAL AREA(ACRES} = O.i7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.97
,t**,t+#+*�.,r*�r*,t***+***.+t**,t*t,t,r,t*,t*+r*+�+r+c�tr,t****+*,tr,t,r*<*,t,t,t*,t**�+**,tr*,t**i,�
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 130.00 TO NODE 131.00 TS CODE = 31
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««<
»»>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)««<
__________�_���_��_____�_�__�___=__���____=====a�===----------------
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(F�ET} = 235.80 DpWNSTREAM(FEET) = 235.35
rLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 75.00 MANNTNG'S N = 0.010
DEPiH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 5.0 INCHES
PIPF-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.91
ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1
PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 0.97
PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.32 Tc(MIN.) = 5.32
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NOD� 30.00 TO IVODE 131.00 = 250.00 FEET.
�**�*+******„�+**�**�*****#**�*w*�,**��*******+*�*.*****�***�+**�+#x*****+***
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE I31.00 IS CODE = 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««<
»»>AND COMPUTE VARTOUS CONFL'JENCED STREAM VALUES««<
TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 ^
CONFLUENCE VAi�UES USED FOR I1�CEPEN7ENT_ STREAM 2 ARE:
il
(
1 �
;
,
j
�
TSME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.1 = 5.32
RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.52
TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.17
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE _ �•9�
** CONFLUENCE DATA **
STREAM RUN�FF Tc INTENSITY AREA
NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE)
1 10.89 6.10 6.027 2.07
2 0.97 5.32 6.523 0.17
++.*���.*+*++*►+r****+*�****+******WARNI23G************w*****t*+,r**x*+s#****,r
IN THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM, THE CONFLUENCE VALUE USED IS BASED
ON THE RCFC&WCD FORMLILA OF PLATE D-1 AS DEFAULT VALUE. THIS F�RMULA
WILL NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN THE MAXIMUM VALUE OF PEAK FLOW.
+.*****�,+*v�*********,r+****t*t*+r*****i.****ett�.********,r*.*�«******�.********
RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO
CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS.
** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE **
STREAM RUNOFF TC INTENSITY
NUMBER (CFSJ (MIN.} (TNCH/HOUFt)
1 10.9B 5.32 6.523
2 11.79 6.10 6.027
COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOAPS:
PEAK FLOW RATE{CFS) a J.1.79 Tc(MIN.) = 6.10
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2•2
LONGEST FLOWPRTH FROM NODE 10.0� TO NODE 131.00 � 424.d0 FEET.
�+*.**:**+**+*+*****,r,t****+�•**tW***,r****,r***r.r.***,r++r**,r**,t,r**,r.*,�**+++***�
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 190.00 IS CODE = 31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««<
»»>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE fNON-PRESSURE FLOW)««<
=c-=a====axae-xcs=----v3a z--s�a=--=-��-x=v-x=cc====-=s�=�=c--��------v'-�s�s
EL�VATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEETy = 235.35 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 234.40
FLOW LEI3GTH(FEET) a 205.00 MANNZNG'S N = 0.010
DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 19.'7 INCHES
PIPE-FLdW VELOCITY{FEET/SEC.) = 6.53
ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1
PIPE-FLOW(CFS) � 11.79
P2PE TRAVEL TIME(MZN.} = 0.52 Tc(MIN.) = 6.62
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 140.00 = 629.00 FEET.
,t****�******+r***+*******,r,r,r********,r+r+**,r,�*,r,r*****�+*+*r*W�***�*,r�,t*r�**,r,t*,t
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 190.OQ TO NODE 140.00 IS CODE = 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««<
��______es�=oz a=���-omaac��-=v�=z==-==�x���=-__vv=aac_.___-____====z=s=x==a==
TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2
CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEQENDENT STREAM 1 ARE:
TIME OF COI3CENTRATION(MIN.) = 6.62
RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.75
T0�'AL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 2.24
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 11.79
****�.*..***.*********,.*�**�*�**�*w*..*«*�****�*****+�►****+*+**�**�******+***
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 40.00 TO NODE 140.00 IS CODE = 21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««G
12
/ �.
� 1
ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIF012M
DEVEI,OPMENT IS APARTMENT
TC = K*[ (LENGTH**3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE) ]**.2
INITIAI, SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 480.00
UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 293.00
DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 239.30
ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) � 3.70
TC a a.323*[ { 980.00**3)/( 3.70) ]**.2 = 10.090
I00 YEAR RAINFALL INTEI3SITY(INCH/HOUR) = 9.500
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8305
SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS rr�n
SUBAREA I2UNOFF(CFS) = 2.02
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.54 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.02
***,t*,t*w*,ttir*++t*,t,t,t,t*+,t**#,t,r�****,t*,tt+***t,t++,r***,t*t,t*�*+�t*,t,tt***,r*,r,t*,t***
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 190.00 TO NODE 190.00 IS CODE = 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««<
»»>AND COMPUTE VARIOL7S CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES««<
�sa�=-----c=s�za�m�s==s:z-=-=c-�ae�a�a=sms--ns�x==-=avaa--s:c -.---.- x=�--
TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS � 2
CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE:
TIME OF CONCENTRATION�MIN.) = 10.09
RA.INFALL INTENSITX(INCH/HR) = 9.50
TOTAL STREAM AREA{ACRES) = 0.54
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 2.02
** CONFLUENCE DATA **
STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA
NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE)
1 11.79 6.62 5.796 2.24
2 2.02 10.09 4.500 0.54
�*******,t*�*,rt***,r**,t,t*�****,�,r***WARNING+****,r*,t,r+.*******,r*�+t*�*,r**,r*�***,r
IN THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM, THE CONFLUENCE VRLUE USED IS BASED
ON THE RCFC&WCD FORMULA OF FLATE D-1 AS DEFAULT VALUE. THIS FORMULR
WILL NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN THE MAXIMUM VALUE OF PEAK FLOW,
*f+**+**�.+r,r****�w+*****�**,�*****,�*�****************�*********+*********:r***
RAINFALL INTENSITX AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO
CONELUEIJCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS.
** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE **
STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY
NUMBER (CFS} (MIN.) (INCH/HbUR)
1 13.11 6.62 5.746
2 11.25 10.09 4.500
COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESiIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS:
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 13.11 Tc(MIN.) = 6.62
TOTAL AREA(ACRES} = 2.8
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 190.00 = 629.00 FEET.
�-__====�as===��:_____�_�_____====:z�====�=�=��a=====__�___________�===�a3��
END OF STUDY SUMMARY:
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.8 TC(FIIN. y = 6.62
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 13.12
_�ax====as==�=��-_�a=-==sec-��=te==-=t�==a===-===:a--x===-=_===-=c===�=�c=x=-
�-_�====�ca====aa-^�s=c=====--c�=-o=��=-�s===-�=s=- -=�==s�=s=v �cx�sz==a�vc
END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALXSZS
13
. � (
ATTACHMENT 3
CATCH BASIN CAPACiTY
DROP INLET(DI} CAPACITY
(Use Figu�e 5-18)
Use 24"x24" Grate
DI-1 {Node 110}
Q=3.15 cfs, P=6'
d=0.31
DI-2 (Node 120)
Q=3.22 cfs, P=8'
d=0.27'
DI-3 (Node 130)
Q=0.57 cfs, P=4`
d=0.25'
14
� . � . �
� �o
, ~ I�~
� �
.
y e .,
�
h
� � ^
•
0
3
2
�
�
s i
W
1�
�
- � �.L
�
_ �.�
�
� 03 Cullt
o., � T
� f'� � w
a3 �' � � 1
r-- � ---�
02 �.o ••as� ora��a �c,�
�� zw+ � (wtiH a�i 1 '
�•ttw+t) twitHart a�u1
O.i
t t 3 4 S t t �0 20 30 �0 �0 �0
a�saut�� 4 �tT�is�
GRJITE 1NLET CAP�CITY a1 SUWP CONDRIONS
(Table assumes no clogging. I
5-52 Figure 5-18
l
ATTACHMENT 4
HYDROLOGY MAPS
i'
, � � ' ` ��'
}�►
, �
, ��p�i
,
_._ _ __ ._--- --- ------ -- -�- - - - - _
• __ r.- _ „ ' • - - ` ' p R �; �
� � `L� - — ��' �_-:. - - ' � � - " � �i�l;�
_ _...- Y� !O_ w� ' ' ' � __".� _#�:' . . '1� .I-�_ �...� L�J � ._ .
. _'� � � �� .� ��.
.' re � �
:�._ .,. �—��=�—_... �._.__ �_ ..-�`` � -` �--. - .f`_i.. _ .�. -1,l: t� � �
+� ''* i- �'�` �� .;
_ i (�r-�s.�tF1l +�;.?E,- �4 i.,,� :� �
l;l ., ,� ��� �� � � � _ � _ ( �,
--� ��. . i ■ �; �I I � .
`�-, :. ',' t , • _ � _'� I ,
I y , , -- -: 1 � _ - - '' :
�' -�� �
F� �--- -' _ 1 � `_. "� � ', � 1i
I ' /' � r � =,' ' ' '�
.�_. � ,V � �;� -- : 1 � �I i i li.
- '"_ ■ � � i � .
, � r
I _ � � ` � . I ' �
i - . i , � � �
� _ �� I �
t ?� i - A I �a
_; � • � _ _ ._ .� - _ i I
� � �
f_: � - i� I
i' �—- .
_— : -1 i _ ;_ �I -�1�� ' `,, �� Q
: ;�tl ;�_ � _ _.__ � �
*�� , '�. � �. . . I � i I �I i � IL �
J -. � ,: �: � �
i�' �s !�--�-_ i�--. ' *I b� II� • o
� _.
I-L— .�� --, !��?�'' II' � � ;� E
� � �,� �n � � _ ' t' '� o
*�...' I ■ I ' � , O �
�,.; I � f
, � � , � ; 0 0
� �- � , �
� i , j -- r ' I � o
... --•� i. ■ — ` . � ,
�_ � � � __ _ � f } r1
` ! ; �—. - � i . � ;.� �� : i � = w
:: i � �
,;`. . ��� �
:� � i ■ r- I� ''��,, Z o
__.� •� ' (`V �M � � � � '� ' �"" c
, � Q � i � ■ i- i � � 1 �/} a�
� i � ��� �.� i X �
:� `
-- ��, ti� I � �� � :� �� W �
x
.�,�, :;: ■ � � ���n v
` � =:�! \ '� ■ I �o 'J � �,: I i �
° - ` -- � 7�!'1■�■ Q�H" ka i,
� F.
I� '� �'- '� .. 7 I �I' � ��. I� I ! �� �~�
;�. ; �: _. � �� n
-r�` a, u I I y�+n
I� .��,� ... '�;,� . � �I� �... I 'y.�,�'
I ' � ,�� ;_ - , , �� .
�'- - - - -�� ` - �I� ! �'�
, * �-�t�rr ��f` ��I���i�i��r�is�W�t��,��i�:'�.:. ' � �
, �' ;I
_ :i _ _ �i % � - '�` ' �: ..> �, , �
' � � ,• —j-:;" .� i �if
' -• r _ _._.._. ly � ,.
' � - •--- .. - -- ' .. „ _�.... _
� ��•� �
;� �a�.. °1�� , , .
.1�.. . . . _'_ ..r __ {{ ' _ . . .
C ` �' � ' '�4 , . ..�.., . .. � ' .L� ! .I� �1 h�le
. .._.._ E� _ .. :•�� � .'�j'
� C -' - ---- � ,
U���
��� . �
M O ' I� i•,
Ilo I �� � �
� ^�u �
�N� � E
o I
�'-/ a
d
�
v
' . �
� i i;I
f��'�
�
�
, ;�i;J
. ; A �;����
---..-- -- - / ---——�--- -----..__3M/'13NId�l � `----- �----- -"� !����
._ _..- -- L • � �1.
_. . - --- --- --- �---- -- - ---- � 11.
_-- - -- _ ----- - - —
� �\ � \ \ -' --
___-- ---
_ _C .�... I_.J----- ::. --- , ---- C�]-; LJ- —i--r----. p
----. _ � — - ■r �• -�
� I � �
� � ,
� \ ;
;� �� ' ` ' I
�� - -- �� i � �,
� �' � +i� ' • ,
o , - �.'
= � -- - -- �� ; i �'
�r ' --- i `'
��._ • , �
� r^i E �' �.._- - -- - I
� �
I t� I
��� � � _ � �a ��� � I � ,
� � � � i
c� f- r-� iiii� — � p �� �
�� _ - , ii �i -- ' a � �
- . iiEin — � , ` f- � � Q
� ' �iiiii� , Q � o; �
N — �� q � Q L
� a — ¢� I � � N
y ��
�� -
U�� � �-. �
f� a0 � — i V �
M OO ' I - '" "T s O �
�g(�O �. 1_ T� _ — ; I J �
■
a �� r . � 0 0
� � � v
�
� __--f�h ' — ' , }�- a°. .
Mn ''' , ,. _ _ � �$ � # I � i =
U,� C I` — _ �. C � LLJ o
�a?•� - 0 = � � '�,� (A
� �
ao� _ � _ � � . y: Oa c
� �
�ci�c� � --:� • • /,� a�
no it�� � i � . __ � _. _�.__ . _ � � , � �..
d ° ,;f � �p � � C�
� — ' -_ --. -�,��.-.._ �_ . -- '. ,` 1�r � (� �
� — � _ _ : � II IIS11 �
r' �� - ' - - 1 ■��■■ � I. � �..�,.
� _4 # •�� � � I aS ^
� — •� � � ■ �� � �I I ;'�e!
i�-- � � �
. . ; 4 � +
` I � ' ' � '. ,
._. �r � _... .. { 1
� � � � �
_ - __�r -.__�.�.f.- ' .- �■■.�■�r . ' , 1
-.- - � -- . ,. -.� � .�-, , , � ' ;�. 1
_. . _ _� .__ �
__
.__ ._.
� � � � � k�l,�
_ -- - , �-- �-- ---- - --—- --
�. _
_ _. .. __
� �nNanv oiavd rivs,� �
• .. �
�
Q � � c�ic --_ _ _. ;�
titi �
� � rn
� p o o� ,I , o
Ile Ilgll I N
C�J F-" � a
\� m
�
e
N
•
�
M •
�
�,,,,.�\'1\\\\`��is�i�\►\\��i����\\�\�I����S!\\\D►�C����►`���5����\\`\\\ai��►\\\\\►�l���\�\\�\@�l�A�\►\\��\���►�\►\���i�����\\`
'����:�:�������'i.`����������s�■�•���. ��\\\��\\��������\\ � �`
:e;��a�a;.�� � ��� '��1�■ �_�• ��\ � ` ` � ��.
!�s�g� `�\\ �� _ � �\ � ����_ �
E:� � ���►����►�'. f\\� .:Evri!�!ll��:t�.�..�r.lO./d/G:� `�\� �
':3.� 1� , . .. S 5) 4 5 ,�L`�� ` � ` � � �\ �
�:�� N�►1��• .`�'��.,�a,s��a��te."��i�`��, '�H ,�\� ������\\��\�� ���
Ra'v �� �i, � `�..p'�A� pe!l:s�5, �` �\\
�� ,`"�y4�"R i�O��:`�i5' �` � � \ ,
�t�.� \�� +L�♦ e� �,.< \
s�t2 �� ��>f.�r'��p i�z' � ,.�0// � �
� �.' `4�u�Ip��t;. �'�.I.I�d�. \ \ \ `� ►�
��+�� �� s �.>,s.s>,�'�"'"� ��� � \ \�� `� ►�" �
��;� ��� . . .. � ��� �� \� \� \`� �� �
�:�� �, ,`;w. .��.v .� �`� � � �, ��:
�� � � . _ • �1��. �\� ���. ► �,
4a�a '��>+.:� �''-''�►���9�� �� �
�:.� � • .. � r ` � n
1�ia°•,��'seosse'sei '.�\ \� 6�i u�i :i:i ...e���<6�: ��;_�� �� � � \\ a
�tc; . .,Y; ---- .�;: aD�,t�� � ``� `\\ ��� \� �� � � � r�
.c.�1 a.$ :'"•.��es�'�.a:o s9e:e:ie'sze �c�i::.... siia is's. _`\ n:ie �►��, �`. ;� � � �\� �\;
;Hei:��e �,.. � e��: s:.��:s '�.:' —�� �� \
;��.;: :��: ..�.
esbiee�'::� �.:e:i3is .... _ . ». �►�� i , � �` i �� ; ■.�\:
:a: •"�::s,: s::: � � � � \ ►
,:.�: " . � ,�� _ �� ��. \�. � � �
� ' \� ��.....�� � ■
:+;: �� �=.;i � �: :` �t � �\� �� ■
';� r:; :if:� � � \ � � � � �\\ �
�3, w.. 1; :� — �i�- �� � ■
.:r. .. .;;::_�— � �I�� � I �\� �� �\� ��i �\`
:�°`�:_: , \.
; ���$ �, �+����,� ��-� � ���� � � \� �
,_�� � �����:��:�.:,_, ► � ;� � �� j��, �
. ; �. ���. ���. �� .
�a�a� � � a�l,`�;l iii:\ ��1� " �� �
H. �� tl ` ��D
��3a �ti ��«�11�, � . f,l �`;1�a�Q� ". .�` �� � �
��� �z k� �� =- ,�@� � �\�.���� ��������\�„� � �
.. � — —�����.�.���.� �
• :w:3 e �� � : �►•�I"��������� . �������`� \� i
'ica u'r. �te '�' �` `i:�u� —
3s r s� as�� ��e �' �sn.,;a`� i::� '' � a
�i: �w � �o\.
�s a�i� � s°�:ms� �a�•�a .�s; ��i
:�
�..,�. , ��2J!1`fity�!C�'L�5.4�� . :� .�� � \
Qi S���,. •�$SS�Se3L�i..O .. � ■
� � �'s rr3 ! 1���,` t 1� I � �
_ �R. , . �1&�'�,.� �w4•' .� - _ ►�� �
� p` �
� ''A�`���■. �, S�L.r '"� �s;'.. '"� � I� • \�
�4� `� , �: "B'��4� � � • \� \
� �{,a�Pa �a� _ �::�.�9.;.{:b b� ► ,: � a
� �i.3 �. -':.;.... S'?t �"�•�'r.4,i� �� ■
�':` � =a�z:'�m�;=uc��°s"g�::. �� `� �
�' ! ` �\ �
1 ��°a �� �r'' :° `�F, �_�'.� � '` ��►
� �p ::.� � '` �
!�ti`= Cs6S 9t�.�➢ �i ''�f: �':�� � ,
..a. � � �a... f�„' � �,��1�_� � �� 1,►������� i
�u�; 4n,'s ��;�/; ��=�:�5� �.`' �I►—: ��\,���;��\; �;;�, �` �
�`,:�.:.�- ������� �� ������►�\� � �
.. .i�► r .� . �. I�t.i\► , , �\;
. "si3��'\ , ���?i �: i:;: i; =i�� � �'
.. � i ti��� �
�ai� �\� ��'z3i:,�.�';_. , •��� � � � � a�
i��" '�`�►�` "�; :.s. • �`� i\� ��� , \� �\� � �
'i�` \�`��:.�`���°�'•.� �i � �\ � \ � `' � � \� o
.�e,� .; � � � � f►` v
� elii �, � m� ���33ii j�: �—�� � � � 1 , �
9e3?• � e;�c;�?3i� ;�� �� `\\ �\\► ��\\ \► ��
�2�� � \p:a i+:i� 1*; \ `� �\i
i::�: � \ '.'_ � i.:�: � I � � •
1...�.;......,a .,\ ��' \ �� ,1� � �\ �
:4ie ::'�: , .. + �\` -- � � � �
1 y<: � ,��� ... �� �� � � � � � � �_" �
� w's':' • as z _;�:•:.s:e:.�_-r. a-.D� .. :. ,�. \\il�; `` `\� \\ �\ �\`� �`\a
�;�: s : o b•,; .. ► ►��`e;•4 ,1 �� � � � , �� �
::::s��, �.?; ��:. ;;�: . �;�Y , . a, ` �
„�. —�-.. .
e.i;�i��: :aato: a'e,•�;�:: �:.;�e.c . :�� cc , � � � \` `i ���
�? .r.... ��� ��i's�,.:.::s.e�� :s".. �� O�: \ � ��\► �\`� �\\► � ►� �
;�i'�pG:•.:�:Sf, \� ::Ci �i.•. .. ,• ,. �� `� ` \`
��; � e`� ��I' \� �� � � `� �
� ... i �\�
'si:i �� �-._u��� \\ � �
�Sa. � s�,�,��... ;e;,a �s���e:a:�:e:''ue�gs��\` q �\\, \�\� `\\ `\\; �\;
1°.°§ ' zMa; •� !�,"L.`�� � '` � � � ►
�� � � �� �� � �
j�� � '.x� •��r;?i�sl��;,. �1���'. �. �\�► ,\\. �`� ��� a
' �� ��`���-o..�� ���\\� � ■
�=C=a� ,,�� ��s�•�,�4�7R �\ � � \ �` �
;e, \ �eat� a`m._ i
,.�� ,�.ad'�5w`�ae� � �
il3: ��1`�� '\�������`�0;� ,�� \\� ``\\ ,\\� , ,\�
�°• ��,�� �_ �.� 5�,��s.. � ..�,��`�_��\�����.����� � � �
1�t:i ' �.v=�:s�a=_.� `� � �►.�»���n►i»�.-._ � � \� �
�:G:S� ��• \`' � '1 \`�s ��` oVT� ��
�� � ���� � �� �.� ��ji��
�������� �� �i�.►���s,�������. ---- ��� • �i
''�sc :s,ee r�uea►�����e���e�� �h���� ��������������
-.3: �::a�������.�._.:�������.\���i\.
""����a�Il�!IiA�\�►1e1eK si��a:����.��a��������a r�����a�or��iw��a►.�r����aa►.��¢s���va►•����a���������a���/�,•
� �. ; ' E � ,,�� • ,
� i������������
� � � I��I�������■
.u�u ������������ 1� ■����■
i!� ■����■
■����■
_ �
f �
�^�
T
r �
D �
Z �
�
��. 7'....' �
� r.
o r�i��r'� �
3� m�
D� :�� -,
Z� ;.� o
-��+- o
�
�
2
m ,r11
� � W aa�
D' � �
_ ;:. _ . _ _ _ ___ _ _ ___ _
,_ \
_.
� � ; � �, �,� , �� � � , ,: , ;
. �\ ;
� _ ,
. __ .
�
� �. , , , �, ; �
,
ITl \ �' \ \ �'� ,I �\ ,\ �, � � � �
Z � , �! � ��. .� �,
� � \\�� � _ �:`� ���, _ _........ ..... _ _ .._.. __... _ o,
N _ .... .. �, .... ..
�'X
.:... _. � .... . ,� ,.._.
N � i, �" ,
W \ ;�� �_• � ��J �A � � �'� ���
\T
� �\
0 \ ,
1 \�- �`•}�'' \ \\k �\ \ ' \ f
� , � �� � �. � � � � � �
� � �� , . � � �� �I X� � \ � � �r � �_
� .
m �., �, �. , �; . ', `, �
--_ '� _ - -- -
.
fn ,, � \ �` � �- . *- _ -\� k ___ _ __ _
� �.. m , � --- — }-- -- - — -
. �, .
, _ �� �, _ . ;�� � ��. , ; �,��_ �\ � �
�• , .
.
x , . , ���� � �.. ,. � � . �� �,� � � � _
� . _ �
..0 ,� � , ��.. s� � �� � � �'�
•� � , `� � _ \\ � ,�\ '� �� y ' �_
�Q� D �� � � .,��� � ; � � `� � v_, � N
�' � �.� � �� �� �:. :� � � 0 ��
:rt+ � � � ��� ��_ ��,. � �`��� .�, .� , z
-Z — � �� . ` \�� � \� �� '�� � z
^ m � ��. . ` _ . :_\ � _ � \` � _ _ _ m _ _ Ov
.v. \
� ..
Z � ._� �� � �
� �
� V��, A�. �� � \
v � � � � `� �\ � , �
� � �\�\. ,\\\ \ � ` +I 'i \ � \ \\ `\ 4
.
� � �:
. �. `�
, , ��� �� � � : �� \��
�•• � _ �::, �� . � ,_�F.�.: �,. �, __ ` . : . __... .... _.._.. _ O
. � _ �:
�� �, � . �
3 � . \ , �! ; � � � � , \
, , �
z , �� � 4 � ��.. � �_ �,_
. ,
� ,
�, � , �
� �_� � A� ,� ' �. '�� � ��� �s
.
�� � � � ' � �� � '� ,,�
,.
...\� \� � � � \ � `� �'�A
tA __ .:.�., � _.. _ ._ _.. � , _ �
m
� � �N
�-t �
" ,. ' ; 2e'�a' � ze'.a� � 2e�� ,r� �
n ' ;
�' � � � � � � � � � � N �
�E���� o
������ � :
��� � : -
����� � a
l��i� �
,:l���
����� =O
�
�
D� �
Z '��"" ��� (�
0�.,.�,.r-'.�.; �
o r�i1�r'`� �
3�' ` �
D� ,r.( �
N
��� o
V
'-1
I
m ��
� �.�
n � _ _,_ ' _. : . _ ._ _ _ ___ _ �
�
�
� • � � � �� � � �.
C7 N �y ��'��V � �� ��. �� � �
� , ,; , A���. �� �
, �, ,, ��� � �� , � �� -�� , ,.� �
� � '�� A . �� \ \� �� �'�. �` � A �
, � . � �� �\ �\ �.� � ��
D \ � �._.._ � ,;,.... � �.�. � � _. _._. _ _.__ O
�A � _. \ . � \ , �' _`� � ���� • •
� � � ��
O m � � � �` ` � � `� h � .
., � , .�
� z \�� � � \
.;
�. �.. � �� :
� �
� �
Z � � � � ` \ `` � � ; � �, � �, ` � �
.�
D %� �� � �� . �• � �r '�� � \ � �``, A ,,�� ` ��
.,
.,
.
� i � \ , � ', A � �t'
.
Z � � � � � �.�� � � � � `��•� � -��. .
(A _ _ , __ _ --� ,� _ --. - _ _� '� ---_ _ : _____ �_ ___ --- -- - _ - ------
� '�, '., �
1"� � � . � .. \ �
' +C"f Q �: �� � . , �:� � � ; � ' m
� �\
� � x �
��,+► I 1 A \' V�� � � V A � �
.� � Z I I `� � � i, �, � � �. �� ��,� � � � �
��
.�� � � � � �\ w� N�
A r � � v � ��� �� � 1 �',� �� y � fA D i J.
.1'i'7 � � �. �� - �_
N � 1 1 � � �v ��, � y - `
;Z O , � � �. � / Z Z
. ' � �\ \
�
....� m _.: `�, ,>,,\.� _ � __ __ � ,,,. �� �`. \ \`�' \\��,._ _ ._ _ c' _ o
a7 � \. A�- _ �, i � �� _ m
� , . . � O
.. � ��� � � ; � `�, ��� ��. ,`� '�\ �� �' `
� �� ���� �� `�A i \ �V � �'\ �,; �
,.0 ��\ �; \ � \ � . \ \ ` \ '�, �
Z �� � � , �.:, �� .�,
� 'C \ �� � � ��� ` . �� �� A \ �''V �
�-- � __ �\ , ,_ ,� � :. � � _._` �, ' _ __ _ ____ O
� `': � , , ... __ :
, _
�. .. m
��� , � � � \' \� V �� _..
3 � vv �, �� � ���� �, � v�, � �� ��� �. � �i
v , ,
,
��. ��.� l�\ � �: � �., , �� �
�� �
I 1 y�. ���; ��` �� ���� \��� � �� �� �� ��
m � �, , , � ��.�. �. �
.. ,
tn __ _ ___ . _ _ , _
.
mW.._ _. ._. __..._ . _ _ �+
[�9 � '
� ( � ;N
-�
� 2aa Y ze�a � zsa ' tr$ �
`J
�' � � � � � � � � � � N 0
•��_ �
������ e
�_�
����w� -
� J
.
��� : -
E�� �� 4 �
����6 �t
�t����
�M1r��� ZO
f �
�
D� �
,� �
o;�. �1� -�v
o��� 3
3� , �
D�p r{� �
N
Z� i� O
��'�1` O
v
,,� , t
; _.._......,
t
_ , ;
�
_... _.` _ _..____O
\�� � �
�
� � , � �
�;j � � :
� ��
..
, ,
� �: ... �
_ � ; �r ;
, . ;
m ��
G� - �, , '
n4 _ _, � � _.. �
� ,
__ . .. _____ ______
> ; �, �
v i i N � , �o
z � ; � � ��
D � ;.
�
UI � _.� � ; O
_ _._. _... _..._ o� , � �
N �` �
O � N � � �.�j
Z � � ,T{.I I �
m � � i � � ,.
i � �
� � � y ___._
_... ._. ........ ....... ....__ .._._..... n �
,�� � \�.� � ;
�,
,� -O X ? y � � Z �� �. ;
� N
'o� D D O „ � I �_ § r \
� , �
;rr, N z O � � � � �
.� " , �
, m � � i O � �� � �
.,,,, �
z � �: I � �
O z � I � � �
,. � � � � � �. ��, y
N . � +
� y � � � �
m p I ; __. ,_ o __ O
D � _ , � � � � �
— _ _ __ __ _ . _ _ . __ __
r Z O i i �
3 � i � � � i
v � i __ _ _ ____ +
m i
tn _ _ _ _ ___ _ �
,T�• i
=N �
� i � � �
� _ __�__� i _ _ O
n T � i �
y Ti i �
i i
- ___ _ __ _ _ ___ �
� � �
__ _ __ __ _ __�
�
�•�}_ �
����� e
������ � :
�� � � -
.
E�p��� � �
���� �
��
�����
�
r� �
Z'�C" I''�� !�
(1�� � N
o�/�±� 3
��� �
D� r�'I N
���t►� o
V
,.
__ _ __._O ; . ,
�
v
� Q �
..... .. ........._ ..._.... ..__. _. .......... ha � ! .
. . .. --� --'�- -.... �- - ......_ m
\
� � ��
4 " \ .
., . _. .... �
I �, \
� , � `'�
�N � \\�\
"'i N � ; , ;
- _ __0
m _ _ __ � ,
G� � j __ _ __ ___ _ �
� _ T
be : •'•\ ..'� -�;
� § `� � O
: -__ � �
o __ _ _ � __ _ � �
m ��
,. �
.
Z W �� ,� , ; ,; � \ --_ - --------- ---- --�
��; .
U� i" '
. , ,
: : _ _.
� ; � . __ � �
0 , �,; � ; ,�.� a
, ,
� � � � ; >
Z ' '.
, , �
D c,a ' , , ; ►v .. , , � ___ _ O
T. • y � •
m � ,, � �,�. , � . .
,
;
; ;
. �
. r X v � � � ---- �
�: .
� � � , � ,.. � � � � � N_
�
`0 � -� -� � _
.� D m - ; ,,\
:a� y z ; m . ` m � �
r , ,. � _ __
,� � � m , , , , ,�, m ; r �
. � �
. m o D ; � ,% : < ` �t, `�,
.�. y
z � ,� � -- ____
, . � - -
\ <
� m ; � _ �:i�. . ��, � � a
m z / � O '�� A\�. � p
� ,
"� , , z . Z - _--- - -__ --
< - ._ �,,�� �,
y D � - � � - ----- ---� O
, _ - - �-
_ _ _ _ _ -
r �' � : , , -�. �
3 °z _ ; -.___� �
> , § �
� � ' �
; �
o ' % ' �
, , � f � _ _ _
>
� ' �� � � 1 - --- �
__ _ ...._O
� �� �� �
.
�
m �H �
� j- ' ' `' §
--I � ;'! � �� _ _._...__ _.__ �
, _. . ! �
' , , ,
n _ � �
� ,._ _ _� � �
D �� �
,
__ � �, _ _ 0 - ----- �
-- -- - �
;
� �
V , . ; ' �
� � er
i li �I �
' � � � i! � � �
�a { E 1
•t�= �
������ o
�_�
������ .
� "
y, � �
EBg��� R �
����� �
��;���
��:���