HomeMy WebLinkAboutActns 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
Authorize to Bid
Project Advertisement to Bid
City Council Considers Construction Award
Construction
Project Close-out/Acceptance
Date
December 10, 2009
January 3, 2010 — February 2, 2010
February 25, 2010
April — November 2010
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
Measure A $409,800
Drainage Fees $204,900
Traffic Signal Fees $68,300
Total $683,000
Construction Total
$3,909,550 $4,319,350
$3,555,700 $3,760,600
$351, 750 $420,050
$7,817,000 $8,500,000
Prepared By: ,
� � ' ' /
Aaron Kulp, P.E., Associate neer
�
Jus�,i�r(IV�cCarthy, ACN�.Ft��d�velopment
Departr�n�l;�ad:
Mark G eqiwood, P.E. �
Dire or f P blic Works
Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance
��
M. Wohlmuth, City Manager
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,
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
.
{
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
RIGHT-OF-WAY
APN 620-400-003
IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, COUNTY OF RNERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING
THAT PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT MAP NO. 28450 FILED IN BOOK 264, PAGES 4
THROUGH 15, INCLUSNE, OF MAPS, IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE OF SAID
COUNTY OF RNERSIDE, LYING NORTHWESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE
6 EAST, S.B.M., BE1NG ALSO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF FRANK SINATRA DRNE
AND PORTOLA AVENUE AND THE BEGINNING OF A 2000.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL L1NE TO WHICH SAID BEGINNING BEARS NORTH
89°53'S6" EAST (RECORD RADIAL BEARING OF NORTH 89°54'12" EAST PER SAID TRACT
MAP);
THENCE SOUTHERLY AND SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID
PORTOLA AVENUE AND SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 1017.59 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 29°09'06";
THENCE CONTiNUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE SOUTH 29°03'02" WEST A DISTANCE OF
178.36 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE SOUTH 60°56'S8" EAST A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET
TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 3, BEING ALSO THE SOUTHEASTERLY
RIGHT-OF-VIZAY LINE OF PORTOLA AVENUE , AS SHOWN ON.SAID TRACT MAP, AND THE
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE SOUTH 60°56'S8" EAST A DISTANCE OF 17.94 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 27°46'41" WEST A DISTANCE OF 625.46 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A
1727.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 135.14 FEET THROUGH A
CEIvTTRAL ANGLE OF 04°29'O1" TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 3;
Page 1 of 2
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
RIGHT-0E-WAY
APN 620-400-003
THENCE NORTH 71°37'S5" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 2532
FEET TO THE SAID SOUTHEASTERLY RIGHT-0E-WAY LINE OF PORTOLA AVENUE AND
THE POINT OF TERMiNATION.
CONTAINING 19,187 SQUARE FEET OR 0.440 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
ALL AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A
PART HEREOF.
��-:_��
t}1NF3 �4q� ,,,
��� �P���',� p� }���,
t(i !�i'r '+�,�, t� • `•'��
q` .� \ ,
t � �� �-r. r,, � �
a
p �� � No. LS8012 0:"'�i
� E7(p. i�i3i/fo �,�x
MICHAEL JAMES K APTON DATE �'',�, e�. �
P.L.S.8012 EXPIRES 12/31/10 ��FOF�A���O`�'�
__._..r-
REV: 9/28/2009
Page 2 of 2
� EXHI�IT „ �„
LINE TABLE
LINE LENGTH BEARING
I L 1 178.36' S29°03'02"W
I L2 50.00' S60°56'S8"E
L3 17.94' S60°56'S8"E
L4 25.32' N71 °37'S5"W
CURVE TABLE
CURVE LENGTH RADIUS
C 1 135.14' � 1727.00'
LEGEND
P.O.C. INDICATES POINT OF
COMMENCEMENT
DELTA
4 °29'O 1 „
T.P.O.B. INDICATES TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING
� INDICATES RIGHT-OF-WAY
DEDICATED HEREON
(19,187 SQ. FT. / 0.440 ACJ
��Q �AND S(i
��'� �P�� J ��9�G��c
� G �` O
* � N o. 8012 z �
Exp. 12/31 /10
���� 0����
�F CA��F
�� � red��
� ,� �.�'' <<
z�°��*���,
`�' i ` �,�,�� �'
sl� `''J ��,
�,Q)(C ��a ���,
c� ��'
<� �a� /
�� � �imley-Hom
� and Associates, In�,
ENpNEERING, VUWNING B ENNRONMEN7AL CONSULTAN75
401 B Street, SUI7E 600 SAN DIEGO, CA 92107
TEL: (619) 2,i-9411 �%: (619) 234-9433
T
PREPAR Y:
Ga _nv�v_
MIC AEL J. K PT 8012 �DAfE
/
/
�
FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
N89°53'S6"E (R� � � �
SW COR. SECTION 33,�
T4S, R6E, S.B.M.
A,�,�y, r,20��:00��1�
��F�. N 1/2, �J�11/�f
J��� �r� 1 JJ� rr`jf)�
�,B,��iL
N66°42'20"W (RJ
L J7 'f
v p
�p�� �p�h ��
b 0 ,`� �\
�' `' C J �,b
� ,`�� Q�.
�
1
�—
P.O.C.
'q��
��Q��
SCALE: 1" = 200'
� �
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: 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:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF
ON before me,
Notary Public, personally appeared
'GYI
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
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
:1
12
13
14
15
l6
17
18
19
20
21
�.�
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, COUNTY OF RNERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING
THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 4 OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR PARCEL MAP
WANER, P.M.W. NO. 99-11, RECORDED JANUARY 4, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2000-002896,
OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, LYING SOUTHERLY AND
WESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED L1NE:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE
6 EAST, S.B.M., BEING ALSO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF FRANK SINATRA DRNE
AND PORTOLA AVENUE;
THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 33 AND THE CENTERLINE OF
FRANK SINATRA DRIVE NORTH 89°49'S5" EAST (RECORD NORTH 89°49'S9" EAST PER SAID
P.M.VV. 99-11) A DISTANCE OF 301.48 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 00°10'OS" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 55.00
FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY L1NE OF FRANK SINATRA DRNE AS
DESCRIBED 1N INSTRUMENT NO. 275658, RECORDED DECEMBER 6, 1985, O.R., AND THE
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTH 00°10'OS" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 89°49'S5" WEST, A DISTANGE OF 214.59 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 31 °38'22" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 21.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 04° 19' 14" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 78.42 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A
2075.00 FOOT RADNS CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY;
THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 159.90 FEET THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 04°24'S5" TO A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 88.00 FEET EASTERLY OF
THE CENTERLINE OF PORTOLA AVENUE;
Page 1 of 2
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
RIGHT-OF-WAY
APN 694-200-005
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
THENCE NORTH 00°OS'41" WEST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, A DISTANCE OF 1230.12
FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 89°54'19" WEST 38.00 FEET TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE (50.00
FEET HALF WIDTH) OF PORTOLA AVENUE AND THE POINT OF TERMINATION.
CONTAINING 60,064 SQUARE FEET OR 1379 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
ALL AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A
PART HEREOF.
,,,�-s�.._-. :
6s' �'�'%} ��� �
�r.���� � PM E S ,�; �����C.�
0 � V Z o+ �i
9 '� � No, LS90i2 �
MICHAEL JAMES K APTON DATE �# Exp.12i3���° �
P.L.S.8012 EXPIRES 12/31/10 �°'°.p�, �.�'
REV: 9/28/2009 ��`�C ��\�Q
Page 2 of 2
' EXI�II3IT „�"
LINE TABLE
' i r, i ��L6
LINE LENGTH BEARING ���,� ���, �j Q
; L 1 55.00' N00° 10'OS"W �
' � ,� `��'l%' � ( /�' � U
j L2 20.00' N00°10'OS"W I ��,���r�j�1i?�� � j� � O
L 3 2 1 4. 5 9 S 8 9° 4 9' S 5" W � l��' � w U
L4 21.00' I N31 °38'22"W I i �/�,� p>
I LS 78.42' I N04°19'14"E � % Z�
I L6 38.00' I S89°54' 19"W I I � � �
� � �
CURVE TABLE -- 50'� � Q o 0
-�-ISo' ^ F- U z �
� CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA ,��� �� , N ; Z . Q a
� U w .o
�I C 1 159. 90' 2075. 00' 4°24'S5" I �����o' � , o p�. � � cN o
LEGEND
P.O.C. INDICATES POINT OF
COMMENCEMENT
T.P.O.B. INDICATES TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING
j�� INDICATES RIGHT-OF-WAY
DEDICATED HEREON
(60,064 SQ. FT. / 1.379 ACJ
��� �AND S(i
v�'� �P�� J ����G��c
� C� �` O
*� O
� No. 8012 z �
Exp. 12/31 /10 *
�P��F O���Q'
�F C A1� �F
I/I � � IGmley-Hom
\l � and Associates, In�.
ENGINEERING, PLANNING & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSUL7ANTS
401 B Street, UITE 600 SA IEGO, 92701
TEI.: (619) 4-9411 AX: ) 4-9433
PREPA D Y:
0
MI HAEL J. KNA N PL5 DA E
�-� r� � - I /f "> C.J
l j'N � ^ �
��t�'?' r�'1 � �
\��� %j o�z� ��
� I ;/ o�<,,� o�
W� �%/� �UQO �Q
� / �Oo� �a
.%; �I � ZC��°p z�
�c�%'�`,�'��' � � � a: <t �o o � �
�� c��r`�l � � Q W � � z �
, �s'�`r �'�� '� � � 3 U � � "' o �
��^
��� E-' // o � w N o N O
O) / o � � 0 0 w
�O N Z �
. (1, � /� Z � � J
%/� � Q
��88' w z > � �
�' � � N �
r.r?l �a, ��� I � � � � O O
r /,I �, � Z
� �
� w �o
' fj %/I O �- F- p,
,��s.4'� ;a��;1 � �/' z � � � ^
��� I� � �
/�' . Q� Z�m
� %f �O �Zw
� � —
/ " w w
� 1 o�a
r������� ' � � � o 0 0
� r� fjc�j' � I o � U F= Q 0
o � �
�'�r �r? 1 I o � U �
,-��t'' � Z LS T.P.O.B. � a. p U
��`,�' I � L4 L2� � � �
I � L3
i'
SW COR. SECTION 33, �� ����� � -- j
_T4S, R6E, S.B.M.- ��� N89�49'55� 301.48'�� L 1(TIE) }� �
� FRANK SINATRA DRIVE ��
�� � � f
P.O.C. —�� I
/�
� ����!��1 �
SCALE: 1" = 200'
��
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 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:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF
BY
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
.
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.
EXHIBIT "A"
All as shown on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and by this reference made a part
hereof.
�
� � � �,,� ��-w=-t
R. Page Garner, L.S.
City Surveyor
City of Palm Desert
0�/� 9 /a 9
Date
/�t���'sU�
��
,�y� �,��� �qq� o
��
�J I <� �`� �'
�� Fxp.3 31 I� .�
�� � S No.6155 eQ.
, j-9,r�, OF CA�-\4��
Page 1 of 1
II IV.Y I ,
"EXH I B IT B"
� SCALE: 1 "=200'
11��
r:� ���;i �
�
��� �?f �� �
�J ��C� ' �
� �� r���,
,�'� �� � �
�'
� ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY
,\TO BE GRANTED TO THE L6
� CITY OF PALM DESERT
h
�
A�R�.� � �
<q q�F \
��F
� .
�Ec�ND�
P.O.0 NVDICATES POM(T OF
TP.OB NVDICATE3 TRUE POINT
OF �IN�G
�NVDICATE3 DRAINAGE
EASEWENT AFiEA
(188,545.3 30FT/4.328 AC)
�b
f�
�
�� ^ o�
i'` ^1�' °�
� ii o�
�� G
�
I Jr �
�
LINE TABLE
LINE LENGTH BEARING
I L1 173.04' S71'37'39"E
� L2 594.27' N84'22'17"E
L3 93.28' N49'35'57"E
L4 309.65' N47'12'02"W
L5 166.02' S66'49'56"W
L6 91.50' N8730'47"W
L7 220.48' N64'19'30"W
L8 211.21' S27'46'S7"W
L9 25.32' S71'37'39"E
s�
���� f
' � J � il
�
L1 TP.OB
0
i�r �
'� � � r r � �I�
� ��
.O.0 L9 � �
�_
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 DE5ERT, a municipal corporation,
hereby grants to public use, to the CfTY OF PALM DESERT, a municipai corporation, a permanent easement and
right-of-way for public street and public utility purposes, over, under, along and across all khat reat property situated
in the City of Palm Desert, County of Riverside, State of California described as follows:
�EGAL DESCRIPTION AND PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF AS EXHIBITS "A"
AND "B" RESPECTIVELY
C17Y OF PALM DESERT
Dated:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF
ON before me,
Notary Public, personally appeared
City of Palm Desert, a municipal corporation,
BY
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 helsheithey executed the same in hisiher/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.
WlTNESS my hand and o�cial 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
�
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING
THE MOST WESTERLY 11.00 FEET OF LOT 4 OF TRACT MAP NO. 28450 FILED IN BOOK 264,
PAGES 4 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE OF
SAID COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE.
CONTAINING 2,009 SQUARE FEET OIZ 0.046 ACRE, MORE OR LESS.
ALL AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A
PART HEREOF.
MICHAEL JATvI�S KNAZ'TON
P.L.S.8012 EXPIRE512/31/10
REV: 10/20/2009
O �
DATE
�
%!`r����� ` ``{
� `f3,.,:::W
�F.� �
��J ��~
-1 � IYQ. L�y��.) i / ' .
.yti. Ex�, l�'i 31I1p F� f
ci��qr� � f,��"_'.;' .;
\\��C A�-�_�W� �
Page 1 of 1
R
E� H I B I'T " B''
. ��� , � �
�
� \ a � �
=a � c�j ' � Czj � /� A.P.N.
<� � � � U' LZ�° � o ;� � � 620-400-004
, \� � IZ� �l� ;�° � � � LOT 4
� �� <{'\��� �� �� / � ,; �� TRACT28450
��I ��� �'` ���' �7j i �L � L2 M.B. 264/4-15
� 1 tt� ���> Q ,
�� �Ll
� / o�'� �0.08' � �7 "��"
/(� r' 1�1- ,�\J� 1'lr'{A�i 1 ��J�i��
�� r�J�'fJJ�JJ� i�iL�, 2��f/�f�l�
' � LJ7 � DETAIL 'A'
�o�
l�rir�� r ��'!rJJ SCALE: 1"=20'
� ��iL�, ���fl�f�J�
I
r 1 S�� o3>SS F
h
/�e
a
�� ��V � v C�i
,� / �'10,
W � S72 12' 15"E (RJ
,� � Sp- �-----
� �
� J V� SEE DETAIL 'A' q, P. N. 62(
� O / �; m LO�
, �' t � ' � TRACT
� 'o r1,�,1�1. M.B.26
�' /o J � J-�-'f �J �-� J-1-1
� "' I J7 "���
/�l J' rl /I r
� rrir�� r �J-fJJ
� 1�11,�, '��J%��r� 1J
' -- �C
'� D� R�' WILLOW CT.
� � - .
� �
I �
LEGEND LINE TABLE
� INDICATES RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE LENGTH BEARING
DEDICATED HEREON I L 1 10.95' N83°40' 18"W
(2,009 SQ. FT. / O.Od6 ACJ I L2 11.03' � N83°40' 18"W
�� ❑ IGn�ey-Hom
� ���'� �URVE TABLE
ENGINEERMl6, P ING h ENNROMUENTAL CONSULTANIS
401 B Street, ITE 600 S DIE C 92101
�� (619) 2-9411 �FA ( 234-9433 CURVE LENGTH RADIUS
�
PREPAR BY: I
C 1 44.57' 363.00'
� C2 � 139.24' I 1950.00'
MI AEL . KNAPTO PL 012 D 7
�OO Q`t�C�l
SCALE: 1" = 100'
�� �AND SL
�� � � • k �L
v�, �P�' �Ly� �,c
� v � �
* � N o. 8012 Z *
Exp. 12/31 /10
J,9TF � o¢��Q-
�F CA��
DELTA �
7°02'05" �
4°OS'28" �
J
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
To: Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121
Sacramento, CA 95814
From: City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
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 in 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 submdted 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 additional 3.0 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 38001inear 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.
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
() 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.
IO�l3/o�
Date of Draft Report
12�-/ �o /D �
Date of Final Report
� ��
Aaron Kulp, P.E.
Associate Engineer
Attachments:
A. Initial Study Checklist �
B. Comments and Response to Comments (if any)
Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue Intersection Improvements
Afitigated .'�'egani e Declaranon 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
3. Contact Person and Phone
Number:
4. Project Location:
5. Project Sponsor's Name and
Address:
Department of Public Works
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578
Aaron Kulp, Associate Engineer , P.E
760-346-0611
Located at the intersection of Frank Sinatra Road and Portola
Avenue in Palm Desert, CA.
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 ilIumination.
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 aIong 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 Pian, 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).
11. 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
Biological Resources
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Mineral Resources
Public Services
Utilities/Service Systems
Agriculture Resources
Cultural Resources
Hydrology/Water Quality
Noise
Recreation
Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
Air Quality
Geology/Soils
Land Use/Planning
Population/Housing
Transportation/Traffic
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
IMP�4CT 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.
�
Signature
� �-O �i � l�. �-P
Printed Name
i (� � I `,( /C�i
Date
��-r� v� ���
For
����C"
�
�_
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?
Findin�s:
Potentially Potentially Less Than
Significant Significant Significant
Impact Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑
�
�
No
Impact
�
�
❑
I
❑
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.
,�
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:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of ❑
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
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:
�
�
Potentially
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
�
Less Than
Significant
Impact
u
No
Impact
//
❑ ❑ �
❑ ❑ �
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.
Mitisation 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.
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
ithe Project:
i
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 an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds far ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptars to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
people?
Findings:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
Less Than No
Significant Impact
Impact
❑ �
❑ �
� ❑
� ❑
❑ �
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 groposed project does not increase the number of vehicles using the
roadway.
c)
J�
The Air Quality Impact Assessment concluded that the proposed project will not directly
contribute to any increase of criteria pollutants.
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
e)
receptor being a residential development at the northwest corner of the intersection. This project
will not expose any sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
The proposed Project will not create any objectionable odors.
Miti�ation Measures:
The proposed project will not have a direct impact on air quality, therefore no mitigation is required.
' 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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
��
❑�
C
�
❑�
��
C
Less Than
Significant
Impact
�1
�/
❑
��
n
�
/�
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?
�
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
No
Impact
►1
❑ �
❑ �
Findings: 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.
� 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:
Potentially Potentially Less Than
Significant Significant Significant
Impact Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
�
�
�
No
Impact
�
❑
❑
❑
' 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,
i 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 identi�ed within a ane-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) Dae 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
Miti�ation Measures:
No mitigation measures are proposed because no impacts to cultural resources are anticipated.
j - - _ --
i Geology and Soils. Would the Project
Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
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 ar 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) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
4) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
i c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the Project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defned 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?
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
�
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
�1
�
❑
❑
❑
❑
�
❑
� �
I
�
� �
�
�
�
❑ �
❑ �
Findin�s: 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 explare 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
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than No
Significant Impact
Impact
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, or 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 signiiicant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas ar where residences
are intermixed with wildlands?
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
//
//
❑ �
❑ �
�
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
►1
�
�
�
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.
Miti�ation 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 def cit 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?
❑�
�
�
❑ � ❑
❑ � ❑
n
/1
�
��
�/
�
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 signiiicant 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:
I 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.
Miti�ation Measures:
The analysis did not identify any significant impacts associated with the Project; accordingly, no mitigation is required.
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?
Findin�s:
Potentially Potentially Less Than
Significant Significant Significant
Impact Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
❑ ❑ ❑
No
Impact
/1
❑ ❑ � ❑
❑ ❑ � ❑
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.
Miti�ation 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:
�
�
�
�
/1
�/
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.
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:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
0
Potentially
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
0
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
Less Than
Significant
Impact
n
No
Impact
_�
❑ �
❑ �
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.
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
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.
�
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
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?
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ �
❑ �
Findin�s:
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
Significant
Impact
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 far designated roads or 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)?
Findin�s:
Potentially
Signiiicant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
❑�
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
� ❑
Less Than
Significant
Impact
u
No
Impact
�
❑ �
❑ �
❑ �
❑ �
❑ �
� �
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 traffc
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 well.
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.
Mitigation Measures:
No impacts are proposed, therefore no mitigation is required.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
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 signiiicant 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?
Findin�s:
Potentially
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
�
n
�
❑ �
No
Impact
�
�
❑
❑ ❑ �
❑ o �
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ �
� ❑
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?
n
u
❑■
❑�
�
❑■
/1
/1
�I
❑�
�
Findings:
U
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.
� L aF TN
,F
ti ��. . . •';:
_ � O
f ' n
�� iFo N
ARNOLD SCHWARZSNEGGER
Gov�RrroR
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE of PLANNING AND RESEARCH
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE AND PLANNING UNIT
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:
o��`CEOF PLrWp�C�
� ����=`�i�a
o� 74' '9
� ymy
Ow � �S
• �lAtEOF CAL1F�Aa�P•
CYrrTxin BRYnrrr
DIREcroR
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,
�������
-�'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
email
Address 73-510 Fred Waring Dr
City Palm Desert
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
Proximity to:
Highways
Airports
Railways
Waterinrays
Schoo/s
Land Use
I-10
UPRR
Desert Sand Unified
Residential, Commercial, and Open Space
Fax
State CA Zip 92260
Secfion 4
Base SBB&M
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 deiined 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.
w
�
�i�
o p
•y r+,
�
�+ ` ��
.�
� �
7'
� J
G
.N
�� � �
�
1��y .�+ �
�, � � o
� �oa
v �� o
C�G,P.1 W
�
iZ.
� O
H
H O
�
�
0
Q
�
�
H
�
�
.�
.�
� 7Y
y� �
�
� O
� �
o �
.� �
o �
.�oo
P� �
N
N
�
�
a
0
\ �'
�V
A�
.�
� �
� o
v U
� �
� �
\ � 0
�.n
p��
�
a�
N
N
Q
�
�
O
y
v
�
��� �
.. ., �
� O •v 7 �
� v �,
� o � �� � � v � �
v '' Q �i� '' � ,,e„'��,, � o
r� N�' � '� `� . � N • �, w
O;� tti � .d '3 E'" �, r'� �o
�'�y` � y �` �d � -o O '' a^
� � � � � �C `c� O �o^
� p �� ��, �pp P O �" r,
R ,.
a> ��'ca y p � � � � i � � �'a
Y� S�' 3� o @ f, v y
� � w „ Ud yd d W y� v e
G� �i o Q TJ y 9�'7 y-�G '
p�A�� � � � � � °:
� �, o ' 3 '' ,'
o •� �'' U � 3 � �'d�
� a� � 3y� �� � � o U �
w A Y` N� �'d '�p' 7 r" %
O N O� J�" w O� e? � nt1
� � � � � V � .�
Li� % O � � v �` `4 Q
.0 � � o �
i �' ?p ' � � � w �-�/
� ,,, O
�N
J
Q" CS
1 � Q'
�, �/y'� � p
� �/" H �
� w Y
� � � �
a � `y' p
, U '� o �
C� �a 9
s�+ O '� �
�' `� �" ��, �P
o �
� � �
Y
��
.�
�
�
�
W N
Ex-,\
�
\�
�d
O O
�
C
a
�
v
C
a
� N �
o v �
u �
� � �
` O �
�
U K v�i
u � v "�O
ry w�- fY6 C
� � 3 �
. . � . �
,'o'''o ' , � r
r+i ri � �p'
� � � � N
� ^ �
' W Vf 4f /.R N4 M fR Vf di �
M
; N
�
LL
� W IR Vf 64 W IR Vf W W W
N
�
LL
f/f W di Vf di W fR Vf W�
O
�
LL
fIR W V! W fA W W di Wi M
i � i o i � � � �
O 0 N N
� ri N �
pp N
O ^ �
r
�
LL
W W W W W W W M fA
� i o � � � � � i M
� O � N
� � N O
op 'D r
0
Y
;LL
w w vf w w w trt vf d+
� � ..
� N N �
C N N ppp LQ
7 N N � r
LL
N N
. � _
N
C y �
O
a' �� O
�
.� y C O �
a C 'a+ C i{% C
�o u � � +, �
v N ,��, ��c a�i � L
0 o d c•� E p c r
d d 1L U W Q U O
�o � � � � ' ' ' ' ' �o u�. ,
� � ��� M
O�
�y M M �
� �
W /A M di W Vi V! W M
�o � � � � � 10 t0
N O O
M � �
= M 1")
N� �
�
LL
Vf fR U� Vi 4'T V? V! /A W
m ' ' ' ' ' M M
N = M Hf
�
LL
IA fR u'T Vi fA di w � �
� � � � � � M M �
n h A
N N' N
O�
}
LL
Vf W fA W iR di W W W
� � � � r i � N _
tD
O N
N
O� W
O � �
�
LL
W V� 4'T �di fR W w W H
� i � � i � � O —
N
P �
O Q
OD �
0
�
LL
w w w w w w w d+ d►
Cp O y �N..
LL v F- V O
U
Q �
y O N
o �
.a
�
a
0
d
a
m
d
a�+ v
N c
'�'' in � O
� o V m
o � V � «
U � � � � o
c d i y� u a
�a � N „ �a
L
W V �C y C �;
i oe Q� u O
9
W
� R
L L
U „ U
a °J a
� � �
� C C
� � C
� �
L £
� Q 0.
.�.�. .o. .�. .�
,•� ,c o
`� O� O � t0
y ^ r+i n � N
� � � �
Uf Hf Vi 1A 1A df di �
� � � i i � �
� N
M ".j �
N�
�
LL
fA fA U'T fR W IA w
M � � � 1 � �
N M M
�
LL
ui w w rR w vi �
^ � i � � i �
_ � r
� � �
O
LL
IA W fA 69 W fR w
� 0 � O i � �
N
� O �
� N o g �
p� �n �n O
O � ^� �fj
�
LL
� w vf M w w u� �
� O , � , � O�D
O� ~ � M
O N � � � N
Cp � N � Y�1
o - - ,.i
�
LL
w vi w w w vi y+
o ro
COo !'�1 V' 7' 0
LL V' N M N F
N
'�O
C N
� .o
H LL C
a+
�
9 � W u' ii�
�LL � c d
u�. a a L o
o �
a+ G
L > ; G y y
OI N y i C GJ
C �d �p O �y t
:� E 0.' VI � �
PEN AIR PETENTRQ
AM UNDERGRWNI
A-2 ACRES
A-0. 75 (UNOERC
ALT 5
UNDERGROUND BASIN
A=B ACRES
JME=19.9 AF 100-YR
$6,51).000
II Scale: 00'
OPISY LPNE LM
NMPL GLOW iRIBVTARY XERE
7.. 0G OWRALL ..
GRarvx SN PIRA ORIK
I 1
. IW YR RETENTIONBASES OF DESIGN -
PER F�NERSIOE COUNTY
FLOOD OW CONTROL INCK
STANOAFOS Y CFAINAGE MASTER PLAN
2 COSTS SXONN ARE FOR RETENTION
e
BASIN'
pOpNLL�,Yy h OOES NOT INCLUDE
ST1[.M 11//1. \SIiEM W1�TS,
AF 100-YR
if OPEN
BESERI AP RE1ENigN BASIN
ANO UN.RGRGO D BASIN
Mt COVR E`, A=2 ACRES (OPEN) t:=
Retention Basin Alternatives
❑_ ❑ Kimley-Horn Opinion of Construction Cost
and Assoclates, Inc. Frank Sinatra/Portola Vicinity Map
6000'L 83aw3030
dVYV AllNfDlA S1N3W3SV3/MO& a3SOdONd
21a VJIVNIS MNVdJ GNd '.gAV V10180d
G�b�lOo CIS] «� '�.��'; •ia3sodofld � a
yr
t?8v1N3W39V3 30MMIa /
a " Moa a3sodoad
r MON ONIlSIX3
i .
A /
M08 ONUSIX3
�� Y � � i � •Jp� 'l.
Mozl o3sbdoad �
m
III -
I
•oul-selaloossypua ❑�❑
woH•Relwi
W
+
x
I.l,
;Il
;�j'.
�4
I
'
-
A
6000- ' 1 839W3030
db'W AlIN1O1/1 S1N3W3AO8dWI 43SOdObd
'NQ V6I HNIS YNV&=l GNV '3AV d7O180d
Lr��SU�IJVPr
�l Y
e
0
r
4
E
r
r
v
�