The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutActns Related to Property Imprvmnt - Portola Ave & Frank Sinatra (572-08) CITY OF PALM DESERT/PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT REQUEST: APPROVE ACTIONS RELATED TO PROPERTY TRANSACTION FOR PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS; ADOPT THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF THE NOTICE OF DETERMINATION; AND AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT PORTOLA AVENUE AND FRANK SINATRA DRIVE (PROJECT NO. 572-08) SUBMITTED BY: Mark Greenwood, P.E., Director of Public Works DATE: December 10, 2009 CONTENTS: Grant Deed for Parcel 620-400-003 Grant Deed for Parcel 694-200-005 Grant of Easement for Parcel 620-400-003 Grant of Easement for Parcel 620-400-004 Notice of Determination Mitigated Negative Declaration Project Work Sheet Retentions Basin Alternatives Vicinity Map Proposed ROW/Easements Vicinity Map Proposed Improvements Vicinity Map Recommendation By Minute Motion: 1. Approve Alternative 1 for the location of the retention basin, utilizing the approximately 4.3 acres on the southwest corner of the 20-acre property owned by the Redevelopment Agency (RDA); 2. Authorize the Chairman to Execute the Grant Deeds for Parcels 620-400-003 and 694-200-005, 3. Authorize the City Clerk to accept and file the Grant Deeds for Parcels 620-400-015 and 620-400-016 pursuant to Resolution No. 77-48, 4. Authorize the Mayor/Chairman to Execute the Grant of Easement for Parcels 620-400-003 and 620-400-004, 5. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and authorize the Director of Public Works to execute and file the Notice of Determination (NOD) with the County Clerk and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research for the Intersection Improvements Staff Report Intersection Improvements for Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive (Project 572-08) December 10, 2009 Page 2 of 5 at Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive (Project No. 572-08), and 6. Authorize Advertisement for Bids for the Intersection Improvements at Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive (Project No. 572-08). Funds are available for the construction of this project in the following accounts: Measure A Account No. 213-4548-433-4001; Drainage Fund Accounts No. 232-4548- 433-4001 and 420-4548-433-4001; and Traffic Signal Fee Account No. 234-4548-422- 4001. No General Fund monies are required for construction. Landscape funds are available in the following account: Capital Project Reserve Accounts No. 400-4311-433-400 and 400-4363-433-4001. Executive Summary The intersection of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive is currently a four-way stop. On July 10, 2008, City Council awarded a contract for design of intersection improvements that would allow for the construction of the ultimate improvements at the intersection per the City's General Plan. This will require the acquisition of additional right-of-way from four parcels and easements from two parcels. Also, per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the City is required to adopt the MND at a public meeting and record the NOD with the County Clerk and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research. Staff is also requesting authorization to advertise for bids of the project. Backqround This proposed project consists of widening Portola Avenue and improving traffic flow, drainage, pedestrian access, safety, and aesthetics at the intersection at Portola � Avenue and FranK Sinatra Drive. These improvements will bring�the intersection Level ' of Service from F to C for the 2020 projections and support the City's traffic vision for 2020 as described in the City's General Plan. The project will require right-of-way (ROW) acquisition along the east and west side of Portola Avenue south of Frank Sinatra Drive, the east side of Portola Avenue north of Frank Sinatra Drive, the south side of Frank Sinatra Drive west of Portola Avenue, and the north side of Frank Sinatra Drive east of Portola Avenue. On July 10, 2008, City Council awarded a contract to Kimley-Horn and Associates in the amount of $511,000 to design the improvements and prepare the plans, specifications, and environmental documentation for the project. City Council subsequently approved Amendment No. 1 in the amount of $96,000 on September 9, 2008, and Amendment No. 2 in the amount of $76,000 on September 10, 2009, bringing the total design contract amount to $683,000. The widening of the roadway will require the acquisition of ROW from parcels 620-400- 003, 694-200-005, 620-400-015, and 620-400-016. The City Redevelopment Agency (RDA) owns parcels 620-400-003 and 694-200-005. Parcel 620-400-003 is located on Staff Report Intersection Improvements for Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive (Project 572-08) December 10, 2009 Page 3 of 5 the east side of Portola Avenue south of Frank Sinatra Drive. The ROW required on this parcel consists of 19,178 square feet of frontage for the widening of Portola Avenue. Parcel 694-200-005 is located at the northeast corner of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive. The ROW required on this parcel consists of 60,064 square feet of frontage for the widening of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive. Parcels 620-400-015 and 620-400-016 are owned by RJT Homes — Catavina, LLC. These parcels are located at the southwest corner of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive. The ROW that would be acquired from these two parcels is 45,389 square feet. Staff has negotiated a grant deed for this ROW free of cost in exchange for the roadway improvements. Staff is anticipating the receiving the executed Grant Deeds from RJT Home — Catavina, LLC shortly and per Resolution 77-48 the City Clerk will accept the Grant Deeds on the behalf of the City Council. The project will require an easement on parcel 620-400-004, owned by the City, for the widening of Portola Avenue. The easement will be primarily for the relocation of the sidewalk and parkway outside of the existing ROW. To ensure for future maintenance and access onto the sidewalk and parkway, staff is recommending that the City record an easement for public street and public utility purposes on this parcel. The easement will be 2,009 square feet along the frontage of the parcel. Drainage improvements for the project includes the interception and conveyance of stormwater from east and west of the intersection along Frank Sinatra Drive and from Portola Avenue north of the intersection. The project includes the construction of a storm drain system consisting of catch basins and a pipe network to convey runoff underground to the south. Several alternatives were studied for the termination of the proposed storm drain system. All of the alternatives were designed to store the 100- year storm volume in accordance with Riverside County Flood Control District standards. The approximate costs shown for each alternative are for the construction of the retention basin system orily, and do not include the storm drain pipes or structures. � The alternatives shown on the attached Vicinity Map and are briefly described as follows: Alternative 1 This alternative involves constructing a conventional 3-acre open-air retention basin, approximately 10 feet deep, on the property owned by RDA to the southeast of the intersection. This open-air retention basin would provide storage for the entire 19.9 acre-feet of stormwater runoff. Estimated Cost: $800,000 Alternative 2: This alternative involves providing an 8-acre area for an underground retention system to store the entire 19.9 acre-feet of required stormwater storage volume. The underground system would be located on RDA property on the east side of Portola Avenue. Estimated Cost: $6,510,000 Staff Report Intersection Improvements for Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive (Project 572-08) December 10, 2009 Page 4 of 5 Alternative 3 This alternative incorporates a smaller open-air retention basin on RDA property to the east of Portola Avenue, and a smaller underground retention system underneath the driving range to the southeast of Desert Willow Court. The open-air basin would be approximately 2 acres with a 13.5 acre-feet volume capacity. The remaining 6.5 acre- feet of storage would be contained within a 2.75-acre underground retention system underneath the driving range. Estimated Cost: $2,690,000 Alternative 4 This alternative is similar to Alternative 3 in that it proposes a 2-acre open-air retention basin in the same location on RDA property to the southeast of the intersection. However, the proposed 2.75-acre underground retention system would be located to the west of Portola Avenue located on privately owned property. This would require obtaining additional land from the private property owner. Estimated Cost: $6,060,000 (including ROW acquisition costs) Alternative 5 This alternative is similar to Alternative 2 in that it entails providing an 8-acre area for an underground retention system to store the entire 19.9 acre-feet of required stormwater storage volume. The underground system would be located on the edge of the ROW to the west of Portola Avenue. This would require obtaining additional land from the private property owner. Estimated Cost: $7,721,000 (including ROW acquisition costs) At the City Manager's direction, staff proceeded with the design of Alternative 1 because it is the most economical way to attain the required storage, while providing flexibility for future development opportunities. This will require an easement on parcel 620-400-003, which is owned by the RDA. The easement will be 188,545 square feet � (4.3 acres of the 20-acre site) in the southern most portion of the parcel. However, wheri the development takes place on this parcel, the basin can be reconfigured and designed into the development. The retention basin has been sized to accommodate future development on this lot. The retention basin will not be landscaped at this time; however, landscaping will be incorporated into the ultimate retention basin when the site is fully developed. Kimley-Horn and Associates conducted an Initial Study (IS) for the project pursuant to the CEQA. The IS and Notice of Availability/Notice of Intent to adopt a MND were distributed to various public agencies and organizations on October 14, 2009, to initiate a 30-day review period. The City received no comments during the review period. Staff requests City Council adopt the MND and authorize the Director of Public Works to execute and file the NOD with the County Clerk and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research for the project. The plans for the intersection improvements and storm drain system have been prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates and are ready to bid. The landscape plan still Staff Report Intersection Improvements for Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive (Project 572-08) December 10, 2009 Page 5 of 5 must be reviewed by the Landscape Beautification Committee. Staff is recommending that City Council authorize staff to advertise the project for bids contingent upon final staff approval of the plans and specification and after the landscape plan has been approved by the Landscape Beautification Committee. Pending City Council authorization to solicit bids and all utility relocation schedules, the proposed project schedule is as follows: Milestone Date Authorize to Bid December 10, 2009 Project Advertisement to Bid January 3, 2010 — February 2, 2010 City Council Considers Construction Award February 25, 2010 Construction April — November 2010 Project Close-out/Acceptance December 2010 Fiscal Impact There is no immediate fiscal impact. However, once the project has been bid, staff will recommend the award of construction to the lowest qualified bidder for the construction of the project. The project cost is estimated at $8,500,000, including environmental, design, ROW acquisition, and construction. Summary as shown below: Fund Desiqn Construction Total Measure A $409,800 $3,909,550 $4,319,350 Drainage Fees $204,900 $3,555,700 $3,760,600 Traffic Signal Fees $68,300 $351,750 $420,050 Total $683,000 $7,817,000 $8,500,000 Prepared By: Depart n ad: . G� . . � Aaron Kulp, P.E., Associate neer Mark G e wood, P.E. Dire or f P lic Works Jus ' cCarthy, AC d velopment Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance p CITY COUNCIL A�ON ^ APPROVED DETTIED ' i2ECEIVED OTHER J M. Wohlmuth, City Manager � \ MEETING DA ' (�C�� F�St�JT ) AYES: ' �� , '" i� cv � r ., ��'�� Y RdA ��`_�C� NOES: - AI3SENT: ` � QN �� I O• � AT3STAIN: `YI VERIFIED BY ��y VERlFiED BY � �� `�y � Original on File with City C k's Oftice � Original on file with City Clerk's Office r . ' No Recording Fees Required Per ' Government Code Section 27383 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 NO DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX DUE • APN: 620-400-003 (THIS SPACE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY) GRANT DEED FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION,the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY,a public body,corporate and politic, Hereby grants to the CITY OF PALM DESERT, a municipal corporation,the following described real property In the city of Palm Desert, County of Riverside, State of California: LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF AS EXHIBITS"A" AND"B" RESPECTIVELY Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency, a pubiic body, corporate and politic, P.D. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Dated: BY STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF' � ' � ON before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared Who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s)whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies) and by his/herltheir signature(s)on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature Name(typed or printed), Notary Public in and for said county and state . { EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION RIGHT-OF-WAY APN 620-400-003 1 IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, COUNTY OF RNERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING 2 THAT PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT MAP NO. 28450 FILED IN BOOK 264, PAGES 4 3 THROUGH 15, INCLUSNE, OF MAPS, IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE OF SAID 4 COUNTY OF RNERSIDE, LYING NORTHWESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: 5 6 COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 7 6 EAST, S.B.M., BE1NG ALSO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF FRANK SINATRA DRNE 8 AND PORTOLA AVENUE AND THE BEGINNING OF A 2000.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE 9 CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY,A RADIAL L1NE TO WHICH SAID BEGINNING BEARS NORTH 10 89°53'S6" EAST(RECORD RADIAL BEARING OF NORTH 89°54'12" EAST PER SAID TRACT 11 MAP); 12 13 THENCE SOUTHERLY AND SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID 14 PORTOLA AVENUE AND SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 1017.59 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL 15 ANGLE OF 29°09'06"; 16 17 THENCE CONTiNUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE SOUTH 29°03'02"WEST A DISTANCE OF 18 178.36 FEET; 19 20 THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE SOUTH 60°56'S8"EAST A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET 21 TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 3, BEING ALSO THE SOUTHEASTERLY . 22 RIGHT-OF-VIZAY LINE OF PORTOLA AVENUE ,AS SHOWN ON.SAID TRACT MAP, AND THE 23 TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; 24 25 THENCE SOUTH 60°56'S8"EAST A DISTANCE OF 17.94 FEET; 26 27 THENCE SOUTH 27°46'41"WEST A DISTANCE OF 625.46 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 28 1727.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY; 29 30 THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 135.14 FEET THROUGH A 31 CEIvTTRAL ANGLE OF 04°29'O1"TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 3; 32 Page 1 of 2 , � � EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION RIGHT-0E-WAY APN 620-400-003 33 THENCE NORTH 71°37'S5" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 2532 34 FEET TO THE SAID SOUTHEASTERLY RIGHT-0E-WAY LINE OF PORTOLA AVENUE AND 35 THE POINT OF TERMiNATION. 36 37 CONTAINING 19,187 SQUARE FEET OR 0.440 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. 38 39 ALL AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT"B"ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A 40 PART HEREOF. �-:_�� t}1NF3�4q�;}�•, 41 � �p,M�',� ,��,`�'�, lU �v'" '+�,�,t�'`'�� R' -�\, 42 � � ��'%� C.'�'';; -�� / "d � ::�;'; 43 0 � � No. LS8012 � , � E7(p.i2i31//o ��X 44 MICHAEL JAMES K APTON DATE �',�, \�. 45 P.L.S.8012 EXPIRES 12/31/10 ��OF�A��O`�'� _._._- 46 REV: 9/28/2009 Page 2 of 2 � EXI-�I�IT �� FRANK SINATRA DRIVE - - - - - �— N89°53'S6"E (R� � � � LINE TABLE — — — � SW COR.SECTION 33, I P.O.C. LINE LENGTH BEARING T4s, R6E,S.B.M. L 1 178.36' S29°03'02"W SO'r-- L2 50.00' S60°56'S8"E L3 17.94' S60°56'S8"E o � L4 25.32' N71°37'S5"W o�� ol � CURVE TABLE Q � N� CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA � C 1 135.14' 1727.00' 4°29'O 1" ='�SO' a� h/� LEGEND o, P.O.C. INDICATESPOINTOF A,�,�y, �,�p�.,pp��J� i/ �� COMMENCEMENT ��r;, N�/�, ��/�f " `Jf' ,, J�� r� 1 JJ� rr`jf)� �� 7� T.P.O.B. INDICATES TRUE POINT OF �,B,1�jJ, � BEGINNING o/,�'��' N�� INDICATES RIGHT-OF-WAY �/,� DEDICATED HEREON � rC (19,187 SQ. FT. /0.440 ACJ / � O�I �� O Q i /v r.P.o.e. � �2 L3 i ) O0� . O � � � O � � h� h �Q L A ND S� � ,oc�,�O'`�c��j�`�D� 5 . �p �/ h� � D� c�<"`��P�� 'j'y-�L�`-` �� rc��' / `O�, Q� �'� �,b J � N o. 8012 z � �� ' �'� '�� Q� � ��, c,' � �. � Exp. 12/31/10 � `�'��\ ,��c�' �/ �,'� � � sl� � a � �b � � �Q �.� �` `2�' ° �� F CA��F�� c�j��' /�� r�a� � ❑� �imley-Hom � �� and Associates,In�, ' �� ENpNEERING, VUWNING B ENNRONMEN7AL CONSULTAN75 '� TEL: (61g) Z' SU941600 SAN DI%G(6 9) 234-9433 / � N66°42�20�w�R� SCALE: 1��=200 PREPAR Y: � L4 4a ?i , ��-r �, ��-r � MIC AEL J.K PT 8012 DA E � � . No Recording Fees Required Per � Govemment Code Section 27383 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 NO DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX DUE APN: 694-200-005 (THIS SPACE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY) GRANT DEED FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION,the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY,a public body, corporate and politic, Hereby grants to the CITY OF PALM DESERT, a municipal corporation, the following described real property In the city of Palm Desert, County of Riverside, State of California: LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF AS EXHIBITS"A" AND"B" RESPECTIVELY Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency, a public body, corporate and politic, P.D. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Dated: BY STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF � ' � ON before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared Who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s)whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies)and by his/her/their signature(s)on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature Name (typed or printed), Notary Public in and for said county and state ' , . � EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION RIGHT-OF-WAY APN 694-200-005 1 IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, COUNTY OF RNERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING 2 THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 4 OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR PARCEL MAP 3 WANER, P.M.W. NO. 99-11, RECORDED JANUARY 4, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2000-002896, 4 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE,LYING SOUTHERLY AND 5 WESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED L1NE: 6 7 COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 8 6 EAST, S.B.M., BEING ALSO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF FRANK SINATRA DRNE 9 AND PORTOLA AVENUE; l0 .1 THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 33 AND THE CENTERLINE OF 12 FRANK SINATRA DRIVE NORTH 89°49'S5"EAST(RECORD NORTH 89°49'S9"EAST PER SAID 1� P.M.VV. 99-11)A DISTANCE OF 301.48 FEET; 14 15 THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 00°10'OS"WEST,A DISTANCE OF 55.00 t6 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY L1NE OF FRANK SINATRA DRNE AS 17 DESCRIBED 1N INSTRUMENT NO. 275658, RECORDED DECEMBER 6, 1985, O.R., AND THE 18 TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; 19 20 THENCE NORTH 00°10'OS"WEST, A DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET; 21 2�2 THENCE SOUTH 89°49'S5" WEST,A DISTANGE OF 214.59 FEET; � � 23 24 THENCE NORTH 31°38'22" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 21.00 FEET; 25 26 THENCE NORTH 04°19'14"EAST,A DISTANCE OF 78.42 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 27 2075.00 FOOT RADNS CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY; 28 ' 29 THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 159.90 FEET THROUGH A 30 CENTRAL ANGLE OF 04°24'S5"TO A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 88.00 FEET EASTERLY OF 31 THE CENTERLINE OF PORTOLA AVENUE; 32 Page 1 of 2 � EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION RIGHT—OF—WAY APN 694-200-005 ;� THENCE NORTH 00°OS'41" WEST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE,A DISTANCE OF 1230.12 34 FEET; 35 36 THENCE SOUTH 89°54'19" WEST 38.00 FEET TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT—OF—WAY LINE(50.00 37 FEET HALF WIDTH) OF PORTOLA AVENUE AND THE POINT OF TERMINATION. 38 39 CONTAINING 60,064 SQUARE FEET OR 1379 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. 40 41 ALL AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT"B"ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A 42 PART HEREOF. �,�...�,,,�, 43 ;��C�}!��,: 44 ��PMES��'�°'� �v =Q- �C� 45 p �� U � .... O " '"� � No, LS90i2 � 46 MICHAEL JAMES K APTON DATE �# Exp.12i3��° � 47 P.L.S.8012 EXPIRES 12/31/10 �°'°.p�,� �s..�' 48 REV: 9/28/2009 �UF C p,L�FQ Page 2 of 2 ' EXI�II3IT „ �" LINE TABLE r, i L6 LINE LENGTH BEARING ��,��, ( �j � i L 1 55.00' N00°10'OS"W ,� r��%'� � L2 20.00' N00°10'OS"W �,��r��1i?' � � O L3 214.59' S89°49'S5"W ��' w U L4 21.00' N31°38'22"W � � � � � LS 78.42' N04°19'14"E I ZQ � L6 38.00' S89°54'19"W � � i � CURVE TABLE 5� Q o � z � CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA �� 50' N � z U Q a � U �- w �o C 1 1 5 9.9 0' 2 0 7 5.0 0' 4°2 4'S 5" �,� ��`�o'� I � � o� � O �. o ,��t'�`?' r�� ^ o � � > � o LEGEND ��' o � z � N N P.O.C. INDICATES POINT OF I N � <•, � oo z COMMENCEMENT W i � �j Q O cv Q T.P.O.B. INDICATES TRUE POINT OF � � � � °� � � �;; �I ZC.) � °p z � BEGINNING ;,%+ �.�, �� . n �J �� a: �roo � � ' Z � r�l Q � � � o �� INDICATES RIGHT OF-WAY �� 3 U o o N o � DEDICATED HEREON -C`r�' � p' �,. � � o o � (60,064 SQ. FT. / 1.379 ACJ >>� �I o � w o `V O o � O o0 U � o z c�v Z � fs, � Z � � � 88' w z > � � c,� � `�' ONO r�r?�;�'�� I � `� � O o�o _ �J� ��1 f�f I � O Q Z � '��s'4' 'a�� Z � � � �° �� I Q � Z � w • - � � m � � o � Zw . �� AND S� I � 0 � a �`� �� J. �� f'L r��!� ' � z o 0 �v Q� y �` r � ,� I u-, U � �— 0 � V� � O � ��fJ� � � Q � --' � o � U c�`?� i oo O U O * � No. 8012 z =�`t�'�' `' z L5 T.P.O.B. a; � U Exp. 12/31/10 * �� I L4 L2 "' � � �� i L3 ��F �F CA��F O�� SW COR.SECTION 33, N89°49'55� 301.48' L 1 TIE } "� _T4S,R6E,S.B.M. � _ _ _ _ � � � �n FRANK SINATRA DRIVE �� /I�� IGmley-Hom ' \l� andAssociates,In�. P.o.c. I ENGINEERING, PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL CONSUL7ANTS 401 B Street, UITE 600 SA IEGO, 92701 � TEI.: (619) 4-9411 AX: ) 4-9433 PREPA D Y: I -- ��!��1� � SCALE: 1"=200' MI HAEL J.KNA N PL5 DA E � , � No Recording Fees Required Per � Govemment Code Section 27383 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 (THIS SPACE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY) NO DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX DUE APN: 620-400-003 GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, a public body, corporate and politic, hereby grants to the CITY OF PALM DESERT, a municipal corporation, the following described real property in the City of Palm Desert, County of Riverside, State of California: An easement for drainage and water retention purposes and the maintenance thereof over, under, along and across all that certain property described in a legal description and plat attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibits "A" and "B" respectively. Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency, a public body, corporate and politic, P.D. REDEVELOPEMENT AGENCY Dated: BY STATE OF CALIFORNIA . COUNTY OF . . . ON before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s)whose name�s)is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies)and by his/her/their signature(s)on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature Name(typed or printed), Notary Public in and for said county and state . - EXHIBIT "A" That portion of Lot 3 of Tract No. 28450 in the City of Palm Desert, County of Riverside, State of California, as per map filed in Book 264, Pages 4 through 15 inclusive, of Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said County described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 3; thence along the southerly line of said Lot 3 S71°37'39"E 25.32 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said southerly line the following three courses: S71°37'39"E 173.04 feet to an angle point therein; thence N84°22'17"E 594.27 feet to an angle point therein; thence N49°35'57"E 93.28 feet; thence leaving said southerly line N47°12'02"W 309.65 feet; thence S66°49'S6"W 166.02 feet; thence N87°30'47"W 91.50 feet; thence N64°19'30"W 220.48 feet; thence S27°46'57"W 211.21 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave to the southeast having a radius of 1727.00 feet; thence southwesterly 135.14 feet along said curve through a central angle of 4°29'01" to said southerly line of Lot 3 and to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 188,545.3 square feet, or 4.328 acres, more or less. All as shown on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. ::��Svy � � �i"��Gq�� ,� i � �L. �Q'z'iv'"l 0� /9 G 9 .;,;J�. �`� �' R. Page Garner, L.S. Date �� xp.3 3� �o .* , City Surveyor ` ;�j �S No.6155 \�. City of Palm Desert �''� o�'� ofi cA�-�� Page 1 of 1 "EXH I B IT B" SCALE:1"=200' LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L1 173.04' S71'37'39"E L2 594.27' N84'22'17"E L3 93.28' N49'35'57"E lf�� L4 309.65' N47'12'02"W r'� C��; L5 166.02' S66'49'56"W C\� �(I �� L6 91.50' N8730'47"W \f,�� ' �/ � L7 220.48' N64'19'30"W , � a L8 211.21' S27'46'S7"W �� r�� L9 25.32' S71'37'39"E �� s ?f � I�r � �j� � �� ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY � ,\ TO BE GRANTED TO THE L6 � CITY OF PALM DESERT h � A�R�.� � � <�"��F � �' — il �� r f , � 0 L1 TP.OB � I Jr �: �'/ \ � �� I� P.O.0 INDICATES POM(T OF ^,y`'>'�1 p'� � �/ .O.0 � � i�^�� ,�1 L9 TP.OB NVDICATE3 TRUE POINT �� `�P� OF�IN�G � � NVDICATE3 DRAINAGE EASEWENT AFiEA (188,545.3 30FT/4.328 AC) CITY OF PALM DESERT DRAINAGE EASEMENT CITY OF PALM DESERT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT No Recording Fees Required Per Government Code Section 27383 RECORDING REQUESTED BYAND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 NO DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX DUE APN:620-400-004 (THIS SPACE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY) GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION,the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, CITY OF PALM DESERT,a municipal corporation, hereby grants to public use,to the CiTY OF PALM DESERT,a municipal corporation,a permanent easement and right-of-way for public street and public utility purposes,over, under,along and across all that real property situated in the City of Palm Desert, County of Riverside, State of California described as follows: LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF AS EXHIBITS"A" AND"B"RESPECTIVELY City of Palm Desert,a municipal corporation, CITY OF PALM DESERT Dated: gy STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF � ' ON before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared Who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s)whose name(s)is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies)and by his/her/their signature(s)on the instrument the person(s),or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)acted,executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature Name(typed or printed), Notary Public in and for said county and state . EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION RIGHT-0E-WAY APN 620-400-004 1 IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING 2 THE MOST WESTERLY 11.00 FEET OF LOT 4 OF TRACT MAP NO. 28450 FILED IN BOOK 264, 3 PAGES 4 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE,OF MAPS, IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE OF 4 SAID COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. 5 6 CONTAINING 2,009 SQUARE FEET OR 0.046 ACRE, MORE OR LESS. 7 8 ALL AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT"B"ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A 9 PART HEREOF. 10 , 1 1 ' j W� i �^� ":�_,. 12 Q � �� 3 �.; �`�" r 13 MICHAEL JA S KNA TON DATE ��' �? ;,� ��g;i;; 14 P.L.S.8012 EXPIRES 12/31/10 �' � �.��`�t�� F' ` ; 15 REV: 10/20/2009 ��ql� �� 'C A�-��r �. : Page 1 of 1 R EXHIBIT " B" ,�� ' � � �,;a , < � c��)'1 O� � A.P.N. ��\/�I`_cIZ� ,ljl� ' `� 1 620-400-004 !� c� � / ,.�� C� LOT 4 � ��; , �� O � � TRACT 28450 �j<<� \� `�� . � � M.B. 264/4-15 � 1 tr� �,�> Q L2 � �� /� L 1 p,� 0.08' ^ L�J'7 "��" /� r'1��,�� rrtA�i r Jf-��iil� o `�J��fJJ�JJ� i�iL�, 2r��f/�f�l� �o, �J r � DETAIL 'A' l�rir�� r ��'!rJJ SCALE: 1"=20' � ��iL�� fl�f�J� � ih S��o3jSS� /�b' U �� J � / v ~�I � � s , S72°12'15"E (RJ � �0 �- - - - - � � i V� SEE DETAIL 'A' q,P.N. 620-400-004 � �� LOT 4 � o �o �� TRACT 28450 � /o ��J�'f�JJ-�J1J M.B. 264/4-15 0 � ,`�' L J7 "�� /� 7r;r�1�7 ��f�J J�11,�, ��%�'fJ 1� I DES� � R�WI_W CT_ . . � �OG�`t�C�l i � SCALE: 1"= 100' �� AND Sl� � �� • k� �L LEGEND v`"v�P 9-0 ``�-� LINE TABLE � � o � � INDICATES RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE LENGTH BEARING * No. 8012 * DEDICATED HEREON Exp. 12/31/10 (2,009 SQ. FT. /0.046 ACJ �� 10.95' N83°40'18"W J'� �`r L2 11.03' N83°40'18"W 9�'F �� m �F CA��F � and Assoaates,inc. ENGINEERING, P NING dc ENNRONAIENTAL CONSULTANiS CURVE TABLE 401 B Street, ITE 600 S DIE C 92101 �� (619) 2 -9411 FA ( 234-9433 CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA PREPAR BY: C 1 44.57' 363.00' 7°02'05" C2 139.24' 1950.00' 4°OS'28" MI AEL .KNAPTO PL 012 D 7 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION To: Office of Planning and Research From: City of Palm Desert 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Sacramento, CA 95814 Palm Desert, CA 92260 (Lead Agency and Applicant) Riverside County Clerk-Recorder 2720 Gateway Drive P.O. Box 751 Riverside, CA 92502-0751 Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination iu compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. FRANK SINATRA DRIVE AND PORTOLA AVENUE 1NTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Project Title SCH#: 2009101050 City of Palm Desert/Aaron Kulp (760) 346-0611 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER CONTACT PERSON AREA CODE/TELEPHONE/EXTENSION . (If submitted to Clearinghouse) Project Location: The project site consists of the intersection of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue, City of Palm Desert, Riverside County, California. Latitude: 33°46'21"N, Longitude: 116°22'14" Project Description: This proposed project consists of widening Portola Avenue and improving the intersection at Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive. These improvements will bring the intersection to an acceptable level of service, and support the City's traffic vision for 2020 as described in the City's General Plan. The project will require right-of-way(ROW) acquisition along the east and west side of Portola Avenue south of Frank Sinatra Drive, the east side of Portola Avenue north of Frank Sinatra Drive, the south side of Frank Sinatra Drive west of Portola Avenue, and the north side of Frank Sinatra Drive east of Portola Avenue. The necessary land acquisition includes approximately 2.7 acres of ROW and an additional 3.0 acres for a retention basin. This is to advise that the City of Palm Desert has approved the above described . 0 Lead Agency, ❑Responsible Agency , project on December 10, 2009 and has made the following determinations regarding the Dale above described project: �. The project(❑ will/ � will not)have a significant effect on the environment. 2. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. � A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures(0 were/ ❑ were not)made a condition of approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations(❑ was / O was not)adopted for this project. 5, Findings(❑ were / 0 were not)made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and record of project approval is available to the General Public at: City of Palm Desert City Hall, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California 92260 Date received for filing and posting at OPR: SIGNATURE (PUBLIC AGENCY) DATE TITLE Mitigated Negative Declaration MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION State Clearinghouse No. 2009101050 December 10, 2009 SUBJECT Palm Desert, CA—Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue Intersection Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION This proposed project consists of widening Portola Avenue and improving the intersection at Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive,two major urban arterials in the City of Palm Desert. This project will widen Portola Avenue,and improve the intersection at Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive for traffic flow, pedestrian access, safety, and aesthetics. These improvements will bring the intersection to an acceptable level of service, and support the City's traffic vision for 2020 as described in the City's General Plan. The project will require right-of-way(ROW)acquisition along the east and west side of Portola Avenue south of Frank Sinatra Drive, the east side of Portola Avenue north of Frank Sinatra Drive,the south side of Frank Sinatra Drive west of Portola Avenue, and the north side of Frank Sinatra Drive east of Portola Avenue. The necessary land acquisition includes approximately 2.7 acres of ROW and an additiona13.0 acres for a retention basin southeast of the intersection. Improvements to Portola Avenue will include widening to three northbound through-lanes and three � southbound through lanes. These improvements span approximately 3800 linear feet and include the east side of Portola Avenue north of Frank Sinatra and the west side of Portola Avenue south of Frank Sinatra. Also included will be a Transit-Signal-Priority traffic signal system,ADA compliant ramps within the curb return areas, and intersection illumination. Widening of the north side of Frank Sinatra Drive will include improvements to approximately 1450 linear feet east and west of Portola Avenue. The existing sidewalk will be moved against the curb and several drainage inlets will be added along Frank Sinatra Drive. The proposed additional drainage inlets will connect to an approximately 3.0 acre retention basin to be constructed southeast of the intersection of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue. This retention basin will accommodate existing drainage as well as the drainage associated with the additional impervious area. Other miscellaneous improvements include the addition of eight catch basins along Heatherwood Drive, Drexell Drive, and Hollister Drive, relocating major utility transmission lines along Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue, and planting approximately 100,000 square feet of landscaping in new medians. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The intersection of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue is currently built as an all-way stop control intersection with two thru lanes and a left-turn lane in each direction. Existing drainage is conveyed in gutters and generally flows from north to south. According to the City's General Plan, the surrounding land uses include Residential, Commercial, and Open Space. Currently the northwestern corner of the intersection is comprised of single family residences, the northeast and southwest corners of the intersection are undeveloped, and the southeast corner of the intersection is a resort golf community. The undeveloped areas consist of highly Disturbed Desert Scrub. No sensitive plants, animals, or habitats are found within the proposed project footprint and none are expected due to the developed and highly disturbed condition of the proposed project area. Two archaeological sites(CA-RN-5080 and CA-RIV-12698)have been identified within a one-mile radius of the project area, but none are listed within the project site. No cultural resources were identified within the project area during the field surveys and no isolated cultural resources have been identified within a one-mile radius of the project site. Soil identified during the geotech analysis included poorly graded(well sorted)Aeolian sand. This material was consistent in each of the bores and appeared dry to slightly moist,medium dense,fine to medium grained, and very pale brown to light gray in color. The potential for erosion, liquefaction, or expansive soils are considered low within the project area. According to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map # 06065C1615G, the project area is located in Zone X, areas outside of the 500-year flood plain. The proposed project is not located within the 100-year floodplain. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION The City of Palm Desert conducted an Initial Study(attached),which determined that the proposed project would have less than significant impacts on the environment. The project, as proposed, avoids or mitigates any potentially significant environmental impacts, and the preparation of an environmental impact report will not be required. There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the City, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If there are substantial changes that alter the character or impacts of the proposed project, another environmental impact determination will be necessary. The project includes measures to mitigate potentially significant impacts to aesthetic/visual resources and biological resources to a less-than-significant leveL Prior to approval of the project, the lead agency may conclude, at a public hearing, that certain mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration are infeasible or undesirable. In accordance with CEQA Section 15074.1, the lead agency may delete those mitigation measures and substitute other measures which it determines are equivalent or more effective. The lead agency would adopt written findings that the new measure is equivalent or more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects and that it,in itself,would not cause any potentially significant effect on the environment. 1. Based on the whole record (including the Initial Study and any supporting documentation) and the mitigation measures incorporated into the project, the City of Palm Desert has determined that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. 2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration, with its supporting documentation, reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the lead agency, which is the City of Palm Desert. DOCUMENTATION The attached Initial Study documents the reasons to support the above determination. MITIGATION MEASURES Aesthetics/Visual Resources AV-1 Traffic lights will be designed and installed in accordance with the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 10,Vehicles and Traffic, City Development Standards so as to minimize visual impact and reduce the potential for light and glare. Biological Resources B-1 The City of Palm Desert shall pay the Local Development Mitigation Fee of$30,942 to mitigate for impacts to Disturbed Desert Scrub in accordance with the Coachella Valley . Multiple Species Habitat Conservation P1an. . . PUBLIC REVIEW DISTRIBUTION Draft copies or notice of this Mitigated Negative Declaration were distributed to: • State Clearinghouse • California Native Plant Society • Department of Fish and Game • Regional Water Quality Control Board • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers • Office of Historic Preservation • Department of Parks and Recreation • Department of Water Resources • California Highway Patrol • Caltrans, District 8 • Department of Toxic Substances Control • Native American Heritage Commission PUBLIC REVIEW O Draft document referred for comments (X) No comments were received during the public review period. O Comments were received but did not address the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration findings or the accuracy/completeness of the Initial Study. No response is necessary. The letters are attached. O Comments addressing the findings of the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and/ar accuracy or completeness of the Initial Study were received during the public review period. The letters and responses follow (see Response to Comments, attached). Copies of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Initial Study, documentation materials, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program may be obtained from the City of Palm Desert. Contact:Aaron Kulp, 760-346-0611. �0��3/ o� �� Date of Draft Report Aaron Kulp, P.E. Associate Engineer IT.�D � Date of Final Report Attachments: � A. Initial Study Checklist � � B. Comments and Response to Comments (if any) Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue Intersection Improvements Mitigated:'�'egatii�e Declaration Page 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Palm Desert, CA—Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue Intersection Improvements 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Palm Desert Department of Public Works 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578 3. Contact Person and Phone Aaron Kulp,Associate Engineer,P.E Number: 760-346-0611 4. Project Location: Located at the intersection of Frank Sinatra Road and Portola Avenue in Palm Desert, CA. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Palm Desert Department of Public Works 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578 6. General Plan Designation: Residential, Commercial, and Open 7. Zoning: Open Space, Space Commercial, and Residential 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 far its implementation. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary.) This proposed project consists of widening Portola Avenue and improving the intersection at Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive, two major urban arterials in the City of Palm Desert. This project will widen Portola Avenue, and improve the intersection at Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive for traffic flow, pedestrian access, safety, and aesthetics. These improvements will bring the intersection to an acceptable level of service, and support the City's traffic vision for 2020 as described in the City's General Plan. The project will require right-of-way (ROW) acquisition along the east and west side of Portola Avenue south of Frank Sinatra Drive, the east side of Portola Avenue north of Frank Sinatra Drive, the south side of Frank Sinatra Drive west of Portola Avenue, and the north side of Frank Sinatra Drive east of Portola Avenue. The necessary land acquisition includes approximately 2.7 acres of ROW and an additiona13.0 acres for a retention basin. Improvements to Portola Avenue will include widening to three northbound through-lanes and three southbound through lanes. These improvements span approximately 3800 linear feet and include the east side of Portola Avenue north of Frank Sinatra and the west side of Portola Avenue south of Frank Sinatra. Also included will be a Transit-Signal-Priority traffic signal system, ADA compliant ramps within the curb return areas, and intersection illumination. Widening of the north side of Frank Sinatra Drive will include improvements to approximately 1650 feet of the ROW east and west of Portola Avenue. The existing sidewalk will be moved against the curb and several drainage inlets will be added along Frank Sinatra Drive. The proposed additional drainage inlets will connect to an approximately 3.0 acre retention basin to be constructed southeast of the intersection of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue. This retention basin will accommodate existing drainage as well as the drainage associated with the additional impervious area. Other miscellaneous improvements include the addition of eight catch basins along Heatherwood Drive, Drexell Drive, and Hollister Drive, relocating major utility transmission lines along Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue, and planting approximately 100,000 square feet of landscaping in new medians. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) According to the City's General Plan, the surrounding land uses include, Residential, Commercial, and Open Space. Currently the northwestern corner of the intersection is single family residential, the northeast and southwest corners of the intersection are undeveloped, and the southeast corner of the intersection is resort golf community. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required(e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board will require a Clean Water Act Section 402 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) Permit for construction impacts(SWPPP). ll. Consistency with Previous EIR: Not Applicable ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Hazards &Hazardous Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Materials 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 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X 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" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1)has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPt�CT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a)have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and(b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions ar mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. � - ( (� /I`�( /CYi Signature Date �T�-O� l�.�-Q ��'C�1 v� Ft� ��C� Printed Name For Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Aesthetics. Would the Project a) Have a substantial adverse affect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑ � b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not ❑ ❑ ❑ � limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality ❑ ❑ � ❑ of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which ❑ ❑ � ❑ would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Findings• a, b) The proposed project entails intersection improvements around the existing intersection of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive. These improvements include adding turn lanes within and adjacent to the existing project footprint as well as adding additional drainage inlets that will flow to a retention basin to the south. The only vertical component will be the addition of a traffic signal where there is currently a four way stop at the Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive intersection. The project will not have an adverse impact on a scenic vista and will not damage any scenic resources as there are no scenic resources within the project area. c, d) The proposed project will incorporate a new traffic signal at an intersection where there is currently a four-way stop. This will change the existing visual character of this area and increase light or glare. . However, since there are existing telephone poles and power lines at the intersection as well as flashing lights on top of the existing stop signs, these impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. Miti�ation Measures: Traffic lights will be designed and installed in accordance with the Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 10,Vehicles and Traffic, City development standards so as to minimize visual impact and reduce the potential for light and glare. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Agriculture Resources. Would the Project In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the Project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of ❑ ❑ ❑ � Statewide Importance(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ❑ ❑ ❑ � Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, ❑ ❑ ❑ � due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Findin�s• a) The project area is not zoned for agricultural uses, has not previously been used for agriculture, does not contain any agricultural uses, and is not under a Williamson Act contract. . . b) The project area does not contain agricultural resources or land under Williamson Act contract. c) Refer to sections II a and b. Miti�ation Measures: Since no agricultural land exists in the immediate vicinity of the project and no impacts to agricultural land associated with the Project were identified, no mitigation is required. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Air Quality. Would the Project Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the Project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ ❑ ❑ � quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to ❑ ❑ ❑ � an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any ❑ ❑ � ❑ criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under a�applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard(including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptars to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ � ❑ concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of ❑ ❑ ❑ � people? Findin�s• � � � a) The proposed project calls for intersection improvements at the intersection of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue. Improvements include constructing a traffic signal where there is currently a four-way stop and realigning the road to include turn lanes. All improvements are consistent with the ultimate 2020 build-out and there are no conflicts to the existing air quality plan as discussed in the City of Palm Desert's General Plan. b) An Air Quality Impact Assessment was conducted by Scientific Resources Associated in July 2009 and found that the proposed project will not directly violate any air quality standard or contribute to air quality violations. As this portion of Palm Desert is built-out, traffic volumes on Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive are anticipated to more than quadruple by 2020. The proposed project will help to alleviate this congestion and with increased traffic flow, less degradation to air quality is anticipated. The proposed project does not increase the number of vehicles using the roadway. c) The Air Quality Impact Assessment concluded that the proposed project will not directly contribute to any increase of criteria pollutants. d) The Project is located within a partially developed area of Palm Desert with the nearest sensitive Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated receptor being a residential development at the northwest corner of the intersection. This project will not expose any sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. e) The proposed Project will not create any objectionable odors. Mitigation Measures: The propased project will not have a direct impact on air quality, therefore no mitigation is required. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Biological Resources. Would the Project a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through ❑ ❑ � ❑ habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, ar regulations, ar by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife S ervice? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or ❑ ❑ � ❑ other sensitive natural community identified in local ar regional plans, policies, regulations ar by the California department of Fish and Game or U.S. 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 pools, coastal, etc.)through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ❑ ❑ ❑ � resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting ❑ ❑ ❑ � biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? fl Conflict with any local policies of an adopted Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ � Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Findin�s: A reconnaissance-level biological constraints analysis was performed by Rocks Biological Consulting (RBC) on October 7, 2008. This survey consisted of walking the proposed project site and mapping general boundaries of vegetation communities and land uses on an aerial photograph. General surveys for plant and animal species and an assessment of the potential of the site to contain sensitive habitats and/or species were also conducted. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a-d) A Biological Constraints Analysis was conducted by Rocks Biological Consulting in October 2008 and updated in August 2009. The analysis found that the approximately 13.2 acre proposed project site supports 7.8 acres of Developed area and 5.4 acres of highly Disturbed Desert Scrub. No sensitive plants, animals, or habitats occur within the proposed project footprint and none are expected due to the developed and highly disturbed condition of the proposed project area. e-� As part of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), all participating cities and the County of Riverside are required to implement a Local Development Mitigation Fee(LDMF) on new development within the plan area. The per-acre of impact fee is currently $5730. Based on an impact on 5.4 acres of Disturbed Desert Scrub, the project proponent's approximate total fee to be paid to the City of Palm Desert would be $30,942. Mitigation Measures: As described above, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented to reduce the impacts to Disturbed Desert Scrub to less than significant level: • The City of Palm Desert shall pay the LDMF of$30,942 to mitigate for impacts to Disturbed Desert Scrub in accordance with the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Cultural Resources. Would the Project a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a ❑ ❑ ❑ � historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an ❑ ❑ � � archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ❑ ❑ � � resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside ❑ ❑ � � of formal ceremonies? Findin�s• Preliminary archival research for the Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue interchange improvements was conducted in September 2008. A records search at the Eastern Information Center at the University of California, Riverside was conducted on September 30, 2008 to identify previously documented resources within one mile of the APE. In addition, the California Register of Historical Resources (1976), the California Historical Landmarks (1995), and the California Points of Historical Interest (1993 and updates) were also consulted. Other resources utilized included the National Register of Historic Places, the Historical American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER), the collections of the University of California Los Angeles library system, historic aerial photographs, and the California Historic Topographic Map Collection at California State University, Chico. . Seven previous cultural resources studies have been conducted within a one-mile radius of the project site. Of these, two included portions of the project site. An additional four studies provide overviews of the cultural resources in the general project vicinity. a) The project area has sparse vegetation and has been disturbed through previous road-building and grading. No historical resources are present within the project vicinity. b) Two archaeological sites (CA-RIV-5080 and CA-RIV-12698) have been identified within a one-mile radius of the project site. An archaeological survey was conducted of the project area in October 2008 and in July 2009 and did not identify any cultural resources within the project area. No archaeological sites are located within the project site. No sites are listed on the Archaeological Determination of Eligibility (DOE) list. No isolated cultural resources have been identified within a one-mile radius of the project site or within the project site itself. Therefore, no impacts to cultural resources are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. c & d)Due to the extent of the work proposed it is unlikely that any unique paleontological resources will be disturbed or destroyed. No unique geologic features exist in the project area. If human remains are discovered the Coroner will be notified as required by the Public Resources Code and Health and Safety Code. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are proposed because no impacts to cultural resources are anticipated. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Geology and Soils.Would the Project a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: 1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on ❑ ❑ � ❑ the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. 2) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ � � 3) Seismio-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ❑ � 4) Landslides? ❑ � � � b) Result in substantial soil erosion ar the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑ � c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that ❑ ❑ ❑ � would become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on-ar off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction ar collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of ❑ ❑ ❑ � the Uniform Building Code(1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of ❑ ❑ ❑ � septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Findings: A limited geotechnical investigation was performed at the intersection of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue on July 8, 2008. The purpose of the investigation was to explore the subsurface conditions of the area of the intersection in order to provide recommendations for roadway widening. Based on the results of the investigation, the proposed project is feasible. a) The subject site is not located within the vicinity of any known fault or active fault. The potential for liquefaction, earthquakes, or slope failure/land sliding/rock falls are all negligible. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated b-d) Soil identified during the geotech analysis included poorly graded (well sorted) Aeolian sand. This material was consistent in each of the bores and appeared dry to slightly moist, medium dense, fine to medium grained, and very pale brown to light gray in color. The potential for erosion, liquefaction, or expansive soils are considered low. e) The project does not propose septic tanks or any other form of alternative wastewater disposal systems. Miti�ation Measures: No impacts are anticipated therefore no mitigation measures are proposed. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the Project a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment ❑ ❑ ❑ � through the routine transport, use, ar disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment ❑ ❑ ❑ � through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely ❑ ❑ ❑ � hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous ❑ ❑ ❑ � materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public ar the environment? e) For a Project located within an airport land use plan or,where ❑ ❑ ❑ � such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Proj ect area? fl For a Project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would ❑ ❑ ❑ � the Project result in a safety hazard for people residing or warking in the Project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ❑ ❑ ❑ � adopted emergency response plan or emergency 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 ar where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Findings• a) The proposed project consists of intersection improvements at the intersection of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive. No hazardous materials are to be transported or disposed of as part of the project. An EDR radius search(a third party search of federal, state, and local hazardous material databases) of the area identified two sites within a 1/4 of a mile of the project area that are listed on state hazardous materials databases including CA WDS,RCRA, and HAZNET. These databases indicate these facilities possess permits to discharge waste water, are small quantity hazardous material generators, and/or listed on a hazardous materials inventory. According to the search,the facilities do not have any known violations associated with hazardous materials. A Phase I ESA conforming to ASTM standards was not performed as part of this analysis. b) No upset conditions that could release hazardous chemicals are proposed as part of the project. c) The proposed Project is not located within one-quarter mile of a school. d) According to the California Environmental Protection Agency's website regarding the, the proposed project site does not include, nor is it in close proximity to any sites identified on the Department of Toxic Substances Control Cortese List. e) The project is not located within or near an airport land use designation. � The proposed Project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. g) The proposed project will not interfere with any adopted emergency plan or evacuation plan. The proposed project includes improvements that will help facilitate more efficient traffic flow and therefore emergency vehicles could anticipate less congestion as a result. h) According to the West Riverside County Natural Hazards Disclosure Map, the Project site is not located within a fire hazard zone. Mitigation Measures: � � � No impacts are anticipated therefore no mitigation is proposed. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the Project a) Violate any water quality standards or 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 permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or ❑ ❑ � ❑ area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage 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, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the ❑ ❑ � ❑ capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? � � � Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ � ❑ g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped ❑ ❑ ❑ � on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary ar Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures, which ❑ ❑ ❑ � would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ ❑ � injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Expose people or structures to inundation by seiche, tsunami, ❑ ❑ ❑ � or mudflow? Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Findings• a) As part of the intersection improvements, the proposed Project will include drainage improvements. All proposed conditions will meet water quality standards and waste discharge requirements set forth in the Colorado River Basin Plan. Water will be discharged to an approximately 3 acre retention basin southeast of the intersection. From this retention basin, water will percolate into the ground. b) No groundwater withdrawals are proposed as part of this project, however groundwater recharge will be affected as the impervious area will be increased during intersection improvements. To offset this increase in impervious area, existing and additional stormwater runoff will be directed to the retention basin southeast of the intersection where the stormwater will percolate through the ground and recharge groundwater supplies. c, d) The proposed improvements to the intersection of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive will only provide minor alterations to the existing drainage pattern and no impacts causing erosion or siltation are anticipated. Part of the project includes correcting flooding problems by directing existing flows into the proposed retention basin. e) Run-off created by the addition of impervious area from the project will be treated by the proposed retention basin. This retention basin represents the best available treatment option for stormwater runoff. � The proposed project will not degrade water quality. Appropriate best management practices (BMP) associated with the required federal NPDES permit, and all other existing federal and state regulations regarding water quality will be adhered to, as required through the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). g, h) According to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map # 06065C1615G, the area is located in Zone X, areas outside of the 500 year flood plain. The proposed project is not located within the 100-year tloodplain, nor does it include any housing, therefore there are no potential flooding impacts to housing or structures. i) . The proposed Project is not located downstream of a levy, therefore there is no significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. j) The proposed Project is located over 100 miles east of the Pacific Ocean and is not downstream of any significant body of water. There is no risk of exposure to inundation by seiche or tsunami. The topography around the project area is relatively flat; therefore mudslides are not a risk either. Mitigation Measures: The analysis did not identify any significant impacts associated with the Project; accordingly, no mitigation is required. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Land Use and Planning. Would the Project a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ � b) Conflict with any applicable land use 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 conservation plan or ❑ ❑ � ❑ natural community conservation plan? Findings: a) The Project is located at an existing intersection and will not physically divide a community. b) The proposed Project will not conflict with any policy of an agency with jurisdiction over the project. The Project does not conflict with any goals set forth in the City's General Plan. c) The proposed project is within the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). As part of this MSHCP, all participating cities are required to implement a Local Development Mitigation Fee (LDMF) on new development within the plan area. As such, the proposed project will comply with this LDMF,which is currently $5730/acre. Mitigation Measures: � � � � The proposed project will comply with the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee as described in the biological resources section abovc. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Mineral Resources. Would the Project a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource ❑ ❑ ❑ � that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important ❑ ❑ ❑ � mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Findings• a,b) There are no known mineral resources or mineral resource recovery sites within the general vicinity of the project area. The project would not affect any mineral resources. Mitigation Measures: No impacts are proposed, therefore no mitigation is required. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Noise. Would the Project a) Exposure of persons to or generation 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 of excessive gound ❑ ❑ � � borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in ❑ ❑ � ❑ the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise ❑ ❑ � ❑ levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project? e) For a Project located within an airport land use plan or, ❑ ❑ ❑ � where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels? fl For a Project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would ❑ ❑ ❑ � the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels? . . . Findin�s• a) According to the Noise Element of the City of Palm Desert's General Plan, the one-hour average for outdoor noise levels in residential areas is 55 dBA from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. and 45 dBA from 2 p.m. to 7 a.m. According to the projected noise contours for 2020, areas within 1400 feet of the intersection of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive will be experiencing noise levels above 55 dBA. This increase in noise level is a result of increased traffic and development in the surrounding areas and not a direct result of the proposed project. b) The project will not involve drilling or other subterranean activities that will generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. c,d) The project is located at an existing intersection and an increase in ambient noise levels is projected as the surrounding area is developed. The proposed project will not directly increase any ambient noise levels. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated e) The site is not located within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport. � The site is not located within proximity of a private airport. Mitigation Measures: No impacts are proposed, therefore no mitigation is required. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Population and Housing. Would the Project a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ❑ ❑ ❑ � directly(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly(for example, through extension of road or otherinfrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ ❑ ❑ � necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ � construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Findin�s• a) The project does not include new housing and is intended to mitigate the effects of projected population growth in surrounding areas by improving traffic flow and capacity of the existing road network, The proposed project itself does not generate growth, but rather improves an existing roadway to make travel more efficient for the current and future residents in the surrounding community. b-c) The project will not require the acquisition of any housing or displace any existing housing or inhabitants of the area. Mitigation Measures: No impacts are proposed, therefore no mitigation is required. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Public Service. Would the Project a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ � Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ � Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ � Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ � Findin�s• a) The proposed project will not create a need for any new governmental facilities. It will improve existing roadway infrastructure by adding a signal and dedicated right turn pockets for each direction at the intersection of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue. The project has the potential to decrease emergency vehicle response times as well as improve residents' commutes to and from parks and schools. Mitigation Measures: . . - � No impacts are proposed, therefore no mitigation is required. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Recreation. Would the Project a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks ❑ ❑ ❑ � or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the Project include recreational facilities or require the ❑ ❑ ❑ � construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Findings• a—b) The proposed project would not facilitate the increase use of an existing or planned park. The proposed project improves an existing roadway to make travel more efficient for the current and future residents in the surrounding community. The proposed project does not include any recreational facilities or generate the need for construction of a new facility. There is a sports complex planned in close prouimity to this project; however this project will not have any adverse impact on that future facility. Mitigation Measures: No impacts are proposed, therefore no mitigation is required. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Transportation/Traffic. Would the Project a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is 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 cumulatively, a level of service ❑ ❑ ❑ � standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads ar highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an ❑ ❑ ❑ � increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature(e.g., ❑ ❑ ❑ � sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ � � fl Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ � � g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting � ❑ � � alternative transportation(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Findings• a-b) The proposed project is a pro-active measure taken by the City of Palm Desert to offset any future increases in traffic as outlined in their General Plan. The proposed project will ensure that the LOS is maintained at level C or better for the intersection of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive. It is likely that without the proposed project, an increase in development of the surrounding areas would cause the Level of Service at the intersection to fall below C. c) No airports e�st within the vicinity of the site and air traffic patterns will not be affected by the proposed project. d) The proposed project will improve an exisfing intersection by adding dedicated left turn lanes as well as a new traffic signal. These measures should improve public safety at the intersection by increasing traffic control. There are no incompatible uses in the surrounding area. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated e) The proposed project will improve emergency access and could potentially improve emergency response times as we1L fl This project does not generate the need for parking. In addition, this area of the City does not have an on- street parking component or requirement or any public use parking facilities in the vicinity. No impacts to parking capacity are anticipated. g) The proposed project does not conflict with any policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. Existing pedestrian sidewalks will be maintained, and bike lanes will be added along Portola Avenue South of Frank Sinatra Drive as well as along Frank Sinatra Drive east of Portola Avenue, which is consistent with the City's General Plan. Miti�ation Measures: No impacts are proposed, therefore no mitigation is required. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Utilities and Service Systems. Would the Project a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable ❑ ❑ ❑ � Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water treatment ❑ ❑ ❑ � facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water ❑ ❑ � ❑ drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project ❑ ❑ ❑ � from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ❑ ❑ ❑ � provider, which 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? fl Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to ❑ ❑ ❑ � accommodate the Project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations ❑ ❑ � ❑ related to solid waste? Findings• a) No wastewater will be generated as part of the proposed project. All stormwater run-off will be treated within the proposed retention basin before percolating into the ground. b) No new water treatment facilities are proposed or necessary for the proposed project. c) The proposed Project will increase surface runoff. A storm water system, including a retention basin, has been designed and will be constructed to accommodate Project-induced water runoff. With implementation of the drainage facilities, stormwater will be mitigated to below historic flows. Therefore the Project will have a less than significant impact on the storm drain system. d) The proposed project will not require the use of any additional water resources. Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated e) No wastewater will be generated from this project, therefore no impact to the wastewater treatment provider will occur. f, g) The proposed project will not generate any solid waste, therefore no there will be no impacts on existing landfills. Mitigation Measures: No impacts are proposed, therefore no mitigation is required. Potentially Potentialiy Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Mandatory Findings of Significance. Would the Project a) Does the Project have the potential to degrade the quality of ❑ ❑ � ❑ the environment, substantially reduce the habitat or 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 of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the Project have impacts that are individually limited, ❑ ❑ � ❑ but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a Project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current Project, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the Project have environmental effects, which will ❑ ❑ � ❑ cause substantial adverse affects on human beings, either directly ar indirectly? Findings• a) The proposed project consists of the widening and signalization of an existing intersection. A minor increase in ROW will be required; however impacts to habitat or wildlife species will be less than significant. The development will not impact any threatened or endangered species. b) The proposed project is not increasing the number of vehicles on the road, it will bring the intersection of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue to an acceptable level of service, and support the City's traffic vision for 2020 as described in the City's General Plan. Subsequently, there will be no cumulative affects to traftic, air quality, ar noise. Impacts from the proposed project are not significant by themselves or in combination with past or future projects within the area. The Project will not cause any new direct or cumulatively considerable impacts. c) As described in the Air Quality, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, Public Service, and Utilities and Service Systems sections of this Initial Study, the Project will not cause any substantial direct or indirect adverse affects on human beings; there is no significant impact. References: 1. Riverside County General Plan. 2003. 2. City of Palm Desert General Plan. 2004. 3. Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. 2007. 4. EDR Radius Map Report with GeoCheck. July 2009. 5. Air Quality Impact Assessment. Scientific Resources Associated. July 2009. 6. California Register of Historical Resources. 1976. 7. Califarnia Historical Landmarks. 1995. 8. California Points of Historical Interest. 1993. 9. California EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control Database Cortese List. http://www.calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/SectionA.htm. Accessed July 2009. 10. West Riverside County Natural Hazards Disclosure List. 2000. ll. FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map #06065C1615G. August 28, 2008. 12. South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. April 1993, with November 1993 Update. � �ar TN� o��`CEOFPLANN/ryC �'4�.:'�uei�� A � •,,��\�,I�Q �` �'' STATE OF CALIFORNIA �� 'F' m W O � y � �� ; � T GOVERNOR'S OFFICE of PLANNING AND RESEARCH �"�,l a�P� , �F� N STATE CLEARINGHOUSE AND PLANNING UNIT • AIFOF`""� ARNOLD SCHWARZSNEGGER CYNTFiIA BRYANT GOV�RNOR DIREGTOR November 17,2009 Aaron Kulp City of Palm Desert Department of Public Worlcs 73-510 Fred Waring Dr Palm Desert, CA 92260 Subject: Palm Desert,CA-Frank Sinaha Drive and Portola Avenue Intersection Improvements SCH#: 2009101050 Dear A�uon Kulp: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Mitigated Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for review. The review period closed on November 12,2009,and no state agencies subnutted comments by that date. This letter aclrnowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft enviromnental documents,pursuant to the California Envuonxnental Quality Act. Please call the State Clearnlghouse at(916)445-0613 if you liave any questious regarding the envuonmental review process. If you have a question about the above-named project,please refer to the ten-digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office. Suicerely, �k?��----� � -�'uz. Scott Morgan Acting Director, State Clearinghouse 140010th Street P.O.Box 3044 Sacramento,California 95812-3044 (916)445-0613 FAX(916)323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 2009101050 Project Title Palm Desert, CA- Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue Intersection Improvements Lead Agency Palm Desert, City of Type MND Mitigated Negative Declaration Descripfion This proposed project consists of widening Portola Avenue and improving the intersection at Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive,two major urban arterials in the City of Palm Desert. This project will widen Portola Avenue,and improve the intersection at Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive for traffic flow, pedestrian access, safety, and aesthetics. These improvements will bring the intersection to an acceptable level of service, and support the City's traffic vision for 2020 and described in the City's General Plan. The project will require right-of-way(ROW)acquisition along the east and west side of Portola Avenue south of Frank Sinatra Drive,the east side of Portola Avenue,and the north side of Frank Sinatra Drive east of Portola Avenue. The necessary land acquisition includes—2.7 acres of ROW and an additional 3.0 acres for retention basin. Lead Agency Contact Name Aaron Kulp Agency City of Palm Desert Department of Public Works Phone 760-346-0611 Fax email Address 73-510 Fred Waring Dr City Palm Desert State CA Zip 92260 Project Location _ _ County Riverside City Palm Desert Region Lat/Long 33°46'21"N/ 116°22' 14"W Cross Sfreets Frank Sinatra Dr and Portola Ave Parce!No. Township 5S Range 6E Secfion 4 Base SBB&M Proximity to: Highways I-10 Airports Railways UPRR Waterinrays ' ' • • Schoo/s Desert Sand Unified Land Use Residential, Commercial, and Open Space Project Issues Aesthetic/Visual;Agricultural Land;Air Quality;Archaeologic-Historic; Biological Resources; Drainage/Absorption; Flood Plain/Flooding; Geologic/Seismic; Landuse; Minerals; Noise; Population/Housing Balance; Public Services; Recreation/Parks; Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading; Toxic/Hazardous;Traffic/Circulation;Vegetation;Water Quality Reviewing Resources Agency; Department of Fish and Game, Region 6; Office of Historic Preservation; Agencies Department of Parks and Recreation; Department of Water Resources; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 8; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 7; Department of Toxic Substances Control; Native American Heritage Commission Dafe Received 10/13/2009 Sfarf of Review 10/13/2009 End of Review 11/12/2009 Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue Intersection Improvements Mitigation Monitoring Program Contents This document is the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) for the Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue Intersection Improvements project. The MMP includes a brief discussion of the legal basis for the purpose of the program, discussion, and direction regarding complaints about noncompliance, a key to understanding the monitoring matrix, and the monitoring matrix itself. Legal Basis of and Purpose for the Mitigation Monitoring Program California Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires public agencies to adopt mitigation monitoring or reporting programs whenever certifying an environmental impact report (EIR) or a mitigated negative declaration (MND). This requirement facilitates implementation of all mitigation measures adopted through the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)process. The MMP contained herein is intended to satisfy the requirements of CEQA as they relate to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project. It is intended to be used by City of Palm Desert (City) staff, participating agencies, project contractors, and mitigation monitoring personnel during implementation of the project. Mitigation is defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15370 as a measure that does any of the following: • Avoids impacts altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action • Minimizes impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation • Rectifies impacts by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment • Reduces or eliminates impacts over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the proj ect • Compensates for impacts by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments ' The intent of the MMP is to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of adopted mitigation measures and permit conditions. The MMP will provide for monitoring of construction activities as necessary, on-site identification and resolution of environmental problems, and proper reporting to City staff. Mitigation Monitoring Table The Mitigation Monitoring Table identifies the mitigation measures proposed for the project. These mitigation measures are reproduced from the Initial Study and conditions of approval. The table has the following columns: Mitigation Measure: Lists the mitigation measures identified within the Initial Study for a specific impact, along with the number for each measure as enumerated in the Initial Study. Timing: Identifies at what point in time, review process, or phase the mitigation measure will be completed. Agency/Department Consultation: References the City department or any other public agency with which coordination is required to satisfy the identified mitigation measure. Verification: Spaces to be initialed and dated by the individual designated to verify adherence to a specific mitigation measure. Noncompliance Complaints Any person or agency may file a complaint asserting noncompliance with the mitigation measures associated with the project. The complaint shall be directed to the City in written form, providing specific information on the asserted violation. The City shall conduct an investigation and deternune the validity of the complaint. If noncompliance with a mitigation measure has occurred, the City shall take appropriate action to remedy any violation. The complainant shall receive written confirmation indicating the results of the investigation or the final action corresponding to the particular noncompliance issue. a� � �i b � o - � � � �" w a •�, � � � � � �n 0 0 �� '� ee �-' 'o 'ti o i�+ � � � .U �" s� N O O ,�, H � p N V �" �" � � � o � ° � � �'� -d � a o o Q � � b +, p....-�'", � � � :� Q Q � � ° a � � � q o V s", o y a a O �« � °� o 0 � W � � Y � U U � �j v o '� p. '� 'd y � � O � •� ^d � C� (n cd � � � � � � � U �� Q '� ,S". O � � r�'n .`�Q' V � b�A � � 7,� � ,� '� �� c�C .� t, ctl N � 'b � � .�"" c� � � � ° Q � d � � � � � h ,� y � '� P, � � � � � o � � � w � � � � � � � y b �r�. � �,' YVi U .� '�n Q 0 ¢, p v y t�.+ � � N v� � C� h O °J '� QU � � � '-' �' .� O � y � U 'C ,,, a � cV +-+ � � � ,i: c�d � " s"" � ,� ,� � � U � � " � p� � �"'Y � � � � cnb A � � c,.., �, .. � .. .� � 0 � � ' � (% � � p N c�C _ � N ,� � .� . . 4.� U . U � � Cj O � •O � U -G 4? O +� � a> > .� O ac�i yi'"'"' O cd+ � � �.�. ' S'" � �C U Q+ 7"' U .S"" N cy � � F"� Q G c� C/1 H c� U Q ,G, � '� W w � U � � o v' � � Y � w o V ° � o � � � � � ° O Q ... � � n. 'j�r' � �., v, o � � � � ��j � g \ �l � � Q o w a�'i U t�, o ti �,.., s ti '-� � Q h ��., W �" O �� Q� ay � y, � .. Q � � '� � � ' � � f� � Q � ¢ `.G 'O O � i � [ � i ! i C . � 9 N � !�C ' d L � � U U a � � a °J a o � u � � � � .0 ° � ro C W � � L y C U K v�i � � lll � � a� "a E W £ � � m c H Q C�. ,� � 3 � � � � o � � O i o i � ^ � n � � � � � M � 7 r�+f d O � r+i ri � �p' M pj �p' ^ O� � N t0 'i� � W yj 'y M � ;y nf n � N ':.N ^ � ;f � !.F � � � �. � w vt w w us w w w w vi w w v� w w w rn w va ur w w w w w «a v+ N' ,o � � � � � � � ,o � � � � � ' ' ' o 0 I� v�i u�i � ;M �+ u� Ln ::M ��M � M 1") M M L �:I N ';N -�,�N � � � £ �LL ;LL 'LL Zw u1 w w w w w w w w � w w ui ur w ur vr w w w w w w w u� w � � � � M � � � M M M � � � i � M QJ i fV �N �"� M Hf ,N M M 'O � � _ � _ L. � � � v GJ �LL LL LL 3 u� w w w w w w w w �n w w w w � vi w w w w ua w w w w � C ; � � � - � � � i � M M � � � � � � � Q � t� � A I� 1� — �"N N' N � � �`1 f0 'p 'p �.;p O i� � � iLL �LL ILL Q. Ni W fH Nt fA u4 W /y Vi M u4 W fA W iR vi W W W IA W fA 69 W fR w Hf p � N � � � � r � N � 0 � i � � �D � i � i OG N N N �i C N V1 S � ,O ^ N � ��0 � �� N O p � O � .;O ^ aD �'��O W 'O� t�I ry � 'i r i: ;o C '.1 LL � ,LL �';{�L ' i w w w w w w w w en w w w 'w fn w w w w w w w w w �n w . a+ = i o � � � � � i M � i � � � M t��f Op � S , v�i O�D I� p � � :O� � }01 � N .O 0 M N iC a`�o N p .-O Q �O N � .�o � N Y 'D r s ao � :ao °p ^! �+ _ !c o o — — ,.� i LL 'LL LL LL � M1T di W W Vi Vf fR W w V'T W W W dt VT W K IR W tA W W fR u'1 M� fC i � � � .. .. .. � r r � „� « O ld � : C N N Q O : C � O N y�Nj �C O f'�1 V' M O Q� ,�,,LL M M Y � �.;LL � H V O j LL � N M nl F � — — — U ~ N � � a �i O '� _ � o o c`�° N 'y�j � u � � � _ a C w O d a '++ � u �+ � +�+ c 9 L O d � in � O � in +��+ i' V p N '^ p U � H 1L C � p� Vl 0 � V y O � � O 9 � W �' in V C 'a+ � C 'a+ id N d C LL C W a C 'a+ C i {� C C d � Vl � y�, Q � i O � N t � C d C � W V C 6� +' L 7 > � � L 0 0 � o �� G o y ro y � � V s w aidi d � � � d a u. u w Q U O F oe Q O l7 E � a l7 O p f . 1 �� ( a� `� �� ( � f � � d�°.0� �i' .� . � . � �..( � f iE�l� � � w �- { , . � , `� Scale� i"='400� p � .. .onisr�nrvc oaisr�nne �. u n a � � � h , _ I S �...:., . . FLOW iPB11iPPY XEPE . . � ' � . ��r �� . ' �� . � . �zay.�or avcanu ''"c` � � � �aaNx si�n�an oanrt i � �AC IiYyyy� �- �" 5. p . yn �C �S°r�,yg7"W � l4' �� t .�� [ Y '� ' k �� . � ��F� t I y� { � �jWi ,, . .e ➢ 'S ' '� �. � LE�O 4. �}� nLi � f800000 ri, '' � �� '�-"7��. z sc,si0000 � c ��ALi ] 12690.000 ' L'�' �T� 5 � j � nLi a 12,690,000 UNOERGROUNO 6ASN i `�P�i 5 56510,000 - n=8 nCRES ' �T �'"- i� VOLVME=199 FF 100-YR '� �. . �'TP � �F. {f. � �6.Si0000 '� a �AM-4 .- �• �„ntc.. �'� �� ;• � � - . oo m acrcrviiory enss or ocsicr+ �` -_ ('�I PER FivEq50E COUNIY ROCO CONiROL�' k �P _ - 5*arvDaRDS L �RnwnGE S1fR PLnN p��^ ' 2 C055 SnOWN 4RE FIXt REiENiIpN y -_ 6FSN5 OrvLY h p0E5 rv01 MCWOE $iORM ORAW $YSiEM COSiS - � e 1 r�Y�M __�� a � tl ,� f * 8 21`F �P2 '� n Y ' �xi� � r ,. .3 � r 4y • 1' � s:y $` � '- /ezv / . �3' � t 4' � �. 3 � � ' � ��. f ;�t �'� � / / � ' p , � � ' � ° k�� . nLi 2 VNOERGflOVNO BFSIN N .. 4a�� / � ��,� �n=0 NLRfS vJLUME-t99 � tW-vA � � 1 � 1' � �i�` 56.510,000 t� �' �` � �t Y. p�. I / �� . . . L f i� � � �AU I OGEN FIR RfiEN110N BASIN 1 'i{,,; °o=�a' f1i� . _ � � - n=3 PCRE$ - yr: 3 1 g ' ._.. 1 ��t ..va�� c-iz.s ar iao-m i,:. f ^ , � � � � �Y.saoo aao „�, f ♦�r. a . t Y CFEN AIF REIENiICN BPSN �jjj�L� � � �� _ E � �NO UNDERCFWN� BASIN S j � � � _ �-- ` a �� rM1 � � y�S [ P=$ ACflf$ (OPENJ � ai r ♦ �a� . � OPE FIR REiENL10N BPSIry� �� n-].]5 (urvDEFGROVnO) ` � ` � rvpERCPW D BnSiry � f e � 52690.000 40f5ERt v/LLOW COVB� nG.ES (OPEN) � w '�� .h5 • '4 . c LLrv�fFCFWN�) ! �� i'p�-'� D+� �Cy�S�� 12 a�.cUO . > *�' r�� h �: +t.� �fe� � a=., : �a� � �� f .� �_ � � �{ � LE �YS� a:+R �*� S , � . i� � � . �` �P ��x q T� }� 5L 4 � � +( Pb � t � i � � f'�t� `S �� V � ''� - { � � '��'�U.. ��c� h urvo[ace�on[ nnsw .�J' k� ; �g .v,'ds� �. �' �{F" " :. •:s}{i� �urvoca oa rvc aanc�'. p W } ; F S • ,d '� F Ri� A . : k4 . § 9i�a. . d i'#q�� . . .. � F�� ,' l �� ' � f � � � � ry� • &.�♦ � .F . o � � ) � t¢s. C� � Sd�� '. �, -S� _ !n ♦ e .. � � ' ,� . . ' ' -.e .Yi _ ��'� � ,i � ,' . / r p : �t�. . � � {.Y a x„a*�i..',�/ t.., �v. �:`.� Fi� . J, i � Retenfion Basin Alternatives � ❑� KimleyHorn Opinion of Construction Cosf �❑ and Associates, inc. Frank Sinatra/Portola Vicinity Map sooz '� aaswaoao � db'W illlNl�l/1 S1N3W3Sb9/M02.� 43SOd021d aui se�eioossy pue �`� woH-/slwiH ,I�I/� 2!a b'Nlb'NIS )!Nb'tJ� aNb' '3/l b' b'701210d .o s z = «� �c.r�,.--� - � � � , - � r�� 6� , � .� �', �� . �N3W3S 3 � � . ; " 1 1O3SOdO�d �•-! �+ � 0 ; � . .� '�e :�� .� .. �. ' � � � . � ��, �� , �h � 6 �� #1 �k'i,� �� ' � 'idF � �� # � � -'�':�1` 1 Y :�� / ` , Y , � S '�sy¢,Y7�� / � `�� s .�, s 'W 4 � , g �: � � b'�2iV1N3W3SV33`JVNIb210 � �:, a �r�R--: ai:; / .� • / . �. . ' � t ,Y ,p �.` M02143SOdOad � :k��--M1' "� ' i , I . � a �^ � a ' � 4C.,.s�- �i! � �.i.i` . � / �m. U i.a� � �. M021 �JNIlSIX3 —�� . `�� r e,. ��•� aa �i. .... • �" .�^ . _'' �- '. ��'?�§ C�l1 'x= '. �y� � � a ',1� i " a j��}�. , .. 'aP ��y �.�> � '! , � � a Y � ♦ ' ' i j � n .��,�` ��' � * �.� , \ �. / _ r � ,� . , *�� t� � '�� ; �. . � s � , �%¢ � * . , „ ., y 0 "�.� Y;� ' ,�`�' ��r � ,+ ;' -'�a . �qs;S' �' ' , .. �� MOLI `JNIlSIX3 ��i t � �.�t . � #'�s `�:.�ri y,� . � i I.,'�.*�F - .'_. ` . .214 b211tiNIS>1Nb'N� - . � � : . ,� , , � . � , � . � ' � .��;�!� f � ., ' � ' „ � .` � _ _ _ . -, ,�,.. • i , li ��----l . I � �`�'., t�:t� � �» �. ' � , w . ��- �`i. �6 � �, ` � � i 3 ��{�8.�, � t ♦ ' ' • T ,f � ' I ' . O � .... . l. . i .i � �, " �,..' � .. . � O r . . O . . � , �,� , �..�'' 'r y MON a3Sbd021d � I .� `�� x e ;. , -� , c �j"' '" -p ,'��` ° _ - ' � m '� ' "' �.a. ::.� 1:. � '�� . �, .:s. � .�.. • • -' 1 - ; ' ;, � � 1 ,� � ' ��R ; �; � + + ' • + F. ' � .� .� . ' ♦ � I _ l l � , I _ � .— — `p� , ... I / + I �.�" � � r�� ,�. ., !� ,.� j� '1`y; "i�� a.,. I . • � � ' , I . . :: �z�w''[h' �' �``.. � ' � � •' ', .I � �� 1 I� �� 1�" � � �'�' . I k � � • . d nc . . �, s . .. p- �y a � §$ � � . � . _ � Iµ . . � . .- .. '��r _ • � �I . � 1'�L " .'J M �r.. . ei :1 i�� ' ~ a+.�, i ' ' . ,-.,_'4!_ ..,-, ;;. ' • . r . �i °� .aca,*�y.e�" ,w. 7�,yT} . • ' { _ F*�try 1� �+�'' � � f� x�. . ��,.d "Ib•�l .�� .' sooz 'i a3awa�ao db'W.IlINI�I/1 S1N3W3/IONdWl43SOd021d aui seaei�ossypue �� woN-/�e�wi,x ��il 2i4 b4il b'NI S >1 Nb21� aNb' '3/I F/ H701210d � „ i x � '� Ga�eo� "'�v ' i ��` .r �{p � � ' �� o II �. , „� "' ,, . � '�� '� 1 ' � ' � � �'� , ` s� ��.. 0 � , . ��s „�� _ �—� �' � �� . '�',. r . ��" . . — '• :�� . w � /� �_ ;�, � :�, � � �- . � . �, � � .• / � ,�, , , � � �� . '� � �/ / � .`z' •., �,�' � � � � � v ,r, y _m, ' � � '� �' j� 84;# ' � � • �,. �. � .�, � ' y� T ; �' � / a x+ � � .i ; .� R-t j� � / � .�►,�N*. � ,s "' / , � � , � > � �N .�` u �, r � / ' �/ • � � , � / P=! � 1 • � Y k �� , "� ?�. r�, - . .� � �� 1 r•= � � $ kr ` � . � . ^ 1 y � � r , t" i . � . . � � � ' _* '��+¢ / / / / i �� . •� t � . ,�- i �) . y9� 4', % � .i: �. f y � �t r l �� ' * P � � � w. '� � � � li�� .�L�. � `E � .. r �? "�� I I � ; � �� .:. �* � � . il .. Ij' .�°{ �� '�» ��,.. 4t� t�b"�� x'� �y; �i jil �,�.,,` k {t K� ��.1. I i�' "+� � � a,�{�iy' ''' , p*' r��'31 � �� . ' ",�,,1�r � �tiRi�:.y �a, ,t � r i "4 a;?�" ' � ; i � �f�, . . . .. . �p i .�.: 'i :..� 'Y'., +j1 I , �� '1' ' €l�:�:.i*#s,._.� ., . :.+ t�,� t • S..s � � ` . � .'�t"�'�a's'{ .A , , . . . .� ❑ � —_ _ y�` . ,� y�-.' . , ... . . _� . ' .. '�' _ r � .� ., � '21a b2l1 NIS JffVt�21� -i_ — . �' . ' I ( ' � •` � � .�: � � � � - `' � . �,: : . . : - , . j ' • . ' ' . i I ' � , I , �. .' l � � . � ,.'.('' �I^ 1 �+ � ,j" 4w �- � � ,.\. � ' � � �• �� 1�� i kv � t^� M �'' � I � �.� ; O � � � � b. �� I `i , : ,�� r 'p y A . . , , �y �k � � , E �� ', �,I�- � � �;;i ,� �, . _ ,� � +� � a .,-:� �7 �. ' '. , ' ` - � k� � _ .:� } 1• � � � ' " - '' ', `�} !� � � _ � � , • � y ,� 1 , ` • I * `` �� • � h► � � � ! � i A . ,.l ��"� , • . . . . �'.: '� ,.: . . . . _. .. • r� - • y � �� . � �' , � � . I �; � � I f , . . � +' , '� —. ,I 'ai e_ _ �" � I �-�. ` , • • �� h � � ' � . . � . { � I � #�. � I� `� I �� i ,� ta,�,�"_ � .� � X :� ;.�, '.�' �� . ' . ' ' � 'b� ..�. �� ; � i:'- � ' +. rit. ' { J�+�� '' , ,fsk I I� � ~ • ,�' �A • 4 I �.� q ( � �� , /' �L a S / ' 'l... ` . tl � . ' + � y� � � __ , � ' :,�'_ �., � y� --� -� � , � • � i ��, t . � �„ � , r� � � t � e •��, �,.. k � � . � • :j .� • . , a.s_' — �# � , ° . . . � ..... � � � _ . . , , � � � ..� � �� j-g-. f� ��Te �j 'y�wF� 11,',�.: �� ' � `- . , e + - � . � ; � - _ � :�� . ,.,�, , , � �� - .,