HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinal_Palm_Desert_Rail_Feasibility_StudyPALM DESERT RAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study wouldn’t be possible without the hard work and support of the following teams and people:
City of Palm Desert
Karina Quintanilla - Mayor
Jan Harnik – Mayor Pro Tem
Eric Ceja – Director of Economic Development/Public Affairs
Vanessa Mager – Business and Community Outreach Coordinator
Project Team
Kimley-Horn
Perkins Eastman
Kosmont
Community Stakeholders
Riverside County Regional Rail Commission
California State University San Berandino
The Berger Partnership and Acrisure Arena
Local Homeowner Associations
The City of Palm Desert
Local Transit Service Operators
i
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
Table of Contents
1. Introduction, Background and Purpose ..................................1
1.1. Introduction ................................................................................1
1.2. Background and Project Purpose .................................................2
1.3. Purpose of Report .......................................................................2
2. Literature Review ...................................................................3
2.1. Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Coachella Valley –
San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project (Tier 1 EIR and Project
Factsheet) ..................................................................................................3
2.2. City of Palm Desert Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) (May 2021) .....3
2.3. Palm Desert General Plan ............................................................4
2.4. California State University, San Bernardino – Palm Desert Campus Master Plan
4
2.5. Current Planning Efforts .............................................................4
2.6. Future Planning Efforts ................................................................5
3. Existing Condition Analysis ....................................................6
3.1. Current Rail Service and Existing Rail Plan .............................................6
3.2. Location Context .........................................................................8
3.3. Existing Land Uses ......................................................................9
3.4. Zoning ......................................................................................11
3.5. Roadway Volumes ....................................................................12
3.6. Existing Transit Facilities and Ridership ......................................13
3.7. Ridership Estimates ..................................................................16
Table of Contents
4. Community Meetings and Stakeholder Engagement Summary
17
4.1. Consulted Interest Holders ........................................................19
5. Prioritization of Project Implementation ...............................20
5.1. Site Preparation ........................................................................20
5.2. Site Circulation and Parking ......................................................20
5.3. Station Facilities .......................................................................20
5.4. Rail Platforms and Vertical Circulation .......................................21
5.5. Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Improvements ....................21
6. Station Site Selection and Feasibility Analysis ....................22
6.1. Station Site Design Considerations ............................................22
6.2. Station Location Preliminary Selection and Screening .................23
6.3. The Palm Desert Transit Hub Vision ............................................33
6.4. CEQA Preliminary Environmental Study .....................................41
6.5. Cost Estimate ...........................................................................44
7. Potential Funding Sources ....................................................46
7.1. Grant Funding Sources .............................................................46
7.2. Value Capture and Other
Financing Mechanisms ..............................................................47
7.3. Funding Partners ......................................................................48
8. Conclusion and Next Steps ...................................................50
Appendix A: Station Ridership Density Methodology and Results ....A1
Appendix B: Value Capture Financing Analysis Summary .........A2
Letters of Support .....................................................................L1
ii
Figure 1: Proposed Service within the California Rail Plan .............6
Figure 2: RCTC Rail Study Map .....................................................7
Figure 3: Local Context Map .........................................................8
Figure 4: Existing Land Uses in Project Area .................................9
Figure 5: Unbuilt Land Ownership along Project Corridor .............10
Figure 6: Zoning in Project Area ..................................................11
Figure 7: Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Volumes in Project Area .....12
Figure 8: Existing SunLine Transit Routes and Stops in Palm Desert .....14
Figure 9: Transit Boardings in FY 22 ............................................15
Figure 10: Identified Station Sites ...............................................24
Figure 11: Station Platform and Track Design Assumptions .........28
Figure 12: Anticipated profile for Gerald Ford Drive .....................30
Figure 13: Cook Street Site Evaluation Map ................................31
Figure 14: Palm Desert Transit Hub Visioning Sketch ...................33
Figure 15: Palm Desert Transit Facility Conceptual Site Plan ........34
Figure 17: Palm Desert Transit Facility Rendering ........................35
Figure 16: Palm Desert Transit Facility Conceptual Site Plan #2 ...35
Figure 18: Palm Desert Transit Facility Rendering #2 ...................35
Figure 19: Example of Envisioned Programs for the
Palm Desert Rail Station .............................................38
List of Tables
Table 1: SunLine Ridership Figures (Fiscal Year 2022) .................13
Table 2: Station Ridership Estimates (2028) ................................16
Table 3: Key Themes from the Public Meetings ...........................18
Table 4: Station Site Assessment, July 2023 Open House ............25
Table 5: Palm Desert CEQA Site Evaluation ..................................42
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
List of Figures
1
1. INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
1.1. INTRODUCTION
Nestled in the vibrant heart of California’s Coachella Valley, Palm Desert shines as a regional hub among eight municipalities. Here, opportunities
converge, beckoning residents, students, and tourists to experience Palm Desert firsthand.
Situated just 120 miles east of Los Angeles and a mere 15 miles from Palm Springs, this dynamic city serves as the educational center
for communities from San Bernadino to Imperial Counties. With two esteemed university campuses and a thriving community college
within close proximity to the proposed rail station site, Palm Desert proudly nurtures a culture of learning, particularly among those from
underserved communities.
But Palm Desert offers more than just academic prowess. Its vibrant tapestry of recreational, shopping, and entertainment amenities, set against
the backdrop of a uniquely beautiful desert landscape, provides an unparalleled quality of life for residents and visitors. The City has the largest
workforce in the Coachella Valley and is home to many cultural activities and world-class events. This premier resort destination thrives as a safe and
sustainable community, drawing inquisitive minds and innovative employers alike.
With a stable population of approximately 53,000 year-round residents, an additional 32,000 seasonal dwellers add to the vibrancy of our
community each year. Yet, it’s the influx of visitors that truly sets the Coachella Valley apart from our neighboring communities. Welcoming a
staggering 14.1 million tourists annually, the Valley is a tourist hotspot, and Palm Desert is in the middle of the action. Among these visitors, 50% are
from the Los Angeles area, many for only a day trip or weekend getaway, a perfect audience for regular rail service between our two regions.
Palm Desert prides itself on a robust transportation network, boasting dedicated bike lanes, golf cart infrastructure, and SunLine Transit bus services,
all complemented by well-maintained roads. Yet, despite these amenities, access to the city remains largely reliant on Interstate 10 and Palm
Springs International Airport, which welcomed 3.2 million passengers in 2023, alongside limited Amtrak passenger rail service. While neighboring
Palm Springs is a stop on Amtrak routes to Los Angeles, New Orleans, and Chicago, trains are only scheduled for overnight stops. The absence of
regular commuter passenger rail service underscores a crucial gap in connectivity. Introducing such a service would not only enhance transportation
capacity but also offer a sustainable, accessible option for local commuters, regional students, and visitors alike, facilitating seamless journeys to the
heart of the Coachella Valley, Palm Desert.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
2
1.2. BACKGROUND AND PROJECT PURPOSE
Residents of Palm Desert, and the Coachella Valley as a whole, have long
expressed a desire for inter-city rail service. This would provide residents
and tourists the option to travel to destinations such as the Inland Empire
or Greater Los Angeles area without using I-10. The Coachella Valley
Association of Governments (CVAG), Riverside County Transportation
Commission (RCTC), and the California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA)
have also expressed their support for daily intercity passenger rail service in
the Coachella Valley in various existing plans.
As the population and tourism to Palm Desert and the Coachella Valley
increases, a rail station would create multiple benefits for the region. These
include decreasing the overall vehicle miles traveled (VMT) of the region,
lowering carbon emissions, increasing the mobility of non-drivers or those
without vehicles, and serving as an alternative transportation method to
events, such as concerts and sporting events at the Acrisure Arena and the
Coachella Arts & Music Festival. This study analyzes the existing and future
market for a passenger rail station in Palm Desert, the candidate locations
for a station, and the existing and future connectivity to the site. This study
aligns with the previous RCTC Coachella Valley/San Gorgonio Rail Study
adopted in 2022. This report describes the available land in Palm Desert that
could house the station and the process used to identify one locally preferred
station location for new rail service near Cook Street and Gerald Ford Drive.
SunLine currently provides limited weekday commuter service through the
San Gorgonio pass to San Bernardino that draws tens of thousands of riders
per year. The proposed rail service will broaden and enhance that connection
to draw more types of users, trip purposes with faster, more reliable, and
farther reaching service.
This study expands on the Coachella Valley/San Gorgonio Rail Study by
identifying the ideal sites for the rail station and includes a conceptual,
or “blue-sky,” envisioning of connections between the proposed station
and the existing transportation network in Palm Desert. This includes a
Multimodal Transport Hub to support all travel modes throughout Palm
Desert and the Coachella Valley, with potential connections to bus transit,
bicycle travel, pedestrian travel, shuttle buses, ride hailing services,
and a pedestrian bridge across I-10. With input from local officials and
residents of Palm Desert, the City of Palm Desert Rail Station Feasibility
Study represents the collective vision for rail service in the City.
1.3. PURPOSE OF REPORT
This report is the culmination of all the previous efforts conducted for the
Palm Desert Rail Station Feasibility Study compiled in one document. It
includes the following components:
◢Review of Existing Conditions
◢Relevant Literature Review
◢Summary of Community Engagement Efforts
◢Development of the Site Selection Criteria and
Subsequent Evaluation
◢Initial Cost Estimates
◢Implementation Plan
◢Potential Funding Mechanisms.
This report will also recommend next steps that the City and its partners
should take in beginning design and construction of a new station and
securing passenger service.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
3
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study incorporates regional and local planning efforts that relate to the potential station location near Cook
Street and Gerald Ford Drive. These efforts range from long-range regional planning to local specific plans. The following literature review sections
summarize some of the planning documents that were evaluated for any improvements to the Monterey Avenue and Cook Street corridors, as well as
any areas that complement or conflict with the rail service. They include a variety of land use and transportation planning projects that can contribute
to a comprehensive understanding of Palm Desert’s existing and future transportation conditions to the Monterey Avenue and Cook Street Corridors.
There is already a significant number of transit oriented, development-supportive land uses in the potential station area that could directly serve and
be served by station operations including 4,056 hotel rooms, 5,766 units of multifamily housing, and over 6 million square feet of built retail space.
The plans that were reviewed support the continued creation of transit-oriented development opportunities in the station area.
2.1. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION (RCTC) COACHELLA VALLEY –
SAN GORGONIO PASS RAIL CORRIDOR SERVICE
PROJECT (TIER 1 EIR AND PROJECT FACTSHEET)
The San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project serves the many
communities of the Coachella Valley with daily intercity passenger rail
service between Indio in the Coachella Valley through San Gorgonio Pass
to Los Angeles Union Station and assists with coordination of all public
transportation services within Riverside County. The San Gorgonio Pass
Rail Corridor Service Project addresses the first phase of initial service
development planning and alternative analysis to identify potential routes
in the Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Corridor. The regional intercity
passenger rail service will provide customers in these communities with
an alternate mode of travel that will link them to the Coachella Valley and
the Pass Area. This plan provides an overarching vision and strategic
guidance for buildable alternatives for daily intercity rail service for the
Coachella Valley. The goal is to ensure an easement of congestion on local
roads and freeways, and provide new economic opportunity, mobility, and
quality of life.
2.2. CITY OF PALM DESERT LOCAL ROAD SAFETY
PLAN (LRSP) (MAY 2021)
The City of Palm Desert Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) outlines a series of
systemic infrastructure improvements and policy enhancements to improve
roadway safety and reduce vehicle collisions in the City of Palm Desert. The
plan analyzes all reported crashes that occurred in Palm Desert from 2015
to 2019 and identifies intersections and roadway segments with a high risk
for collisions. The plan then proposes improvements for the near-, middle-,
and long-term, as well as opportunities to apply for funding programs such
as the Highway Safety Improvement Plan (HSIP).
4
2.3. PALM DESERT GENERAL PLAN
The Palm Desert General Plan is a document designed to guide the
growth and development of Palm Desert. The document provides
goals and policies which will assist the City in achieving its economic
and community development objectives. The General Plan describes
the City’s goals and strategies related to transportation in the mobility
element. The plan envisions an interconnected multimodal transportation
system consisting of automobiles, public transit, golf carts, bicycling, and
walking. The element focuses on providing a balanced transportation
system that serves all modes of travel safely and efficiently.
2.4. CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SAN BERNARDINO –
PALM DESERT CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
The California State University San Bernardino Palm Desert Campus
(CSUSB PDC) Master Plan represents a vision of the opportunities
in which the intellectual and creative pursuits of the University and
the surrounding community could support and advance the CSUSB
education mission. The goal is to ensure that there is transportation and
pedestrian/bicycle connectivity to access the campus and its facilities.
2.5. CURRENT PLANNING EFFORTS
A review of several additional planning documents was completed to
make sure previous efforts were built upon. The following is a list of the
documents that were reviewed:
◢California State Rail Plan
◢Better Connected Indio: Indio Multi-Modal Feasibility Study
◢SunLine Transit Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) FY23-25
◢SunLine Transit Agency Zero-Emission Bus Rollout Plan
◢Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG)
Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
◢RCTC Next Generation Rail Study
◢Riverside County Long Range Transportation Plan (2016)
◢Cotino Project Site (Disney Master – Planned Community
in Rancho Mirage)
◢CV Link Coachella Valley Active Transportation Route
◢CV Link Neighborhood Electric Vehicle Transportation Plan
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
5
2.6. FUTURE PLANNING EFFORTS
The literature review conducted for this study included 18 development
plans ranging from new residential developments to hotels and
commercial projects. These are described in more detail in the
literature review memorandum. The potential impact and benefits of
these developments continue to support the preferred station location
as they will provide additional housing and services in the station
service area, while not overburdening the transportation infrastructure
needed for station access and community mobility.
An economic analysis of proposed station operations and activity
suggest that 14,000 square feet of additional convenience and quick
service food and beverage, 100 additional hotel rooms near the
station site, and 100 more units of workforce housing will be needed
to take full advantage of the station’s potential and would generate
approximately $500,000 per year in 2023 dollars which could in
turn provide much of the needed support for station operations
and maintenance.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
6
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
3. EXISTING CONDITION ANALYSIS
Figure 1: Proposed Service within the California Rail Plan
3.1. CURRENT RAIL SERVICE AND EXISTING RAIL PLAN
The Coachella Valley is currently served by Amtrak rail service at the
Palm Springs Station. This station is served by the Texas Eagle and
Sunset Limited services, which run as a combined train on this portion of
the route, three times per week in each direction. In FY 2022, the Texas
Eagle Service served 253,491 riders and the Sunset Limited served
73,904 riders along the entire route. The Palm Springs Amtrak Station
and the roads that access it carried 2,294 riders in FY 2022 on these
Amtrak services. However, the Palm Springs Amtrak station faces issues
with inclement weather, such as heavy winds and blowing sand, which
can affect operations. Indian Canyon Road is also vulnerable to closures
and service disruptions due to sand intrusion and flooding during both
rain and wind events. These issues have led to lengthy station closures
in 2021 and 2023 and make the Palm Springs station a less reliable
location for passenger rail service to continue Amtrak service. A station
with Amtrak service in Palm Desert would better serve the region, as
it is less likely to face inclement weather, is central to Coachella Valley
population centers, and has better access to wider valley communities.
Additional passenger rail service between the Coachella Valley and Los
Angeles is part of the California Rail Plan. The Plan proposed operations
between the Coachella Valley and Los Angeles by 2040 with hourly
service to San Bernardino and Riverside.
7
RCTC has studied rail operations in more detail through their rail study and Tier 1 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and has identified a route that
parallels I-10 through Coachella Valley to Colton, Interstate 215 (I-215) and State Route 91 (SR-91) to Fullerton, and Interstate 5 (I-5) to Los Angeles
Union Station. The plan proposes to use the existing rail stations in Palm Springs, Riverside, Fullerton, and Los Angeles. It also suggests potential
new stations in the Coachella, Indio, Palm Desert (Mid-Valley), Beaumont, Pass Area, and Loma Linda areas. Figure 2 shows the proposed service
and potential stations as outlined in the RCTC rail study.
Figure 2: RCTC Rail Study Map
All funds have been secured toward a Tier 2 EIR, which will study specific stations and detailed engineering concepts along the rail corridor. The
proposed service will be two daily roundtrips between Los Angeles and Coachella with an approximate trip time of 3 hours and 15 minutes. There
may be additional tracks installed at selected locations to enhance train travel speeds, minimize delays, and maintain safety. The RCTC plan calls for
service within 10 years, dependent upon funding.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
8
3.2. LOCATION CONTEXT
The City of Palm Desert is located approximately 120 miles east of
Los Angeles and approximately 150 miles west of Yuma, Arizona. The
existing rail line is situated parallel to the I-10 freeway and is located along
the northern boundary of the City of Palm Desert.
The potential stations analyzed in this study included six sites with
sufficient open space to house the station along the rail line in the City
of Palm Desert. Ultimately, the Cook Street/Gerald Ford Drive location
located near CSUSB PDC and Acrisure Arena was selected as the most
suitable locally preferred location. Acrisure Arena had just under 1 million
visitors in 2023. CSUSB PDC currently has about 2,200 students enrolled;
however, the campus master plan projects an enrollment of 8,000 by
2035. Residential growth will also be seen within a 2.5-mile radius, with
an additional 6,221 units under construction. The City of Palm Desert is
also in process of building two parks in the area, one 20-acre community
park and one regional park, all within one mile of the Cook Street/Gerald
Ford Drive station location.
This increase in enrollment, along with increased events at the arena,
would provide additional potential ridership for a rail station in Palm Desert.
Figure 3 shows the local context of the project.
Figure 3: Local Context Map
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
9
3.3. EXISTING LAND USES
Data from the Southern California Association
of Governments’ (SCAG) 2021 Land Use Model
was used to explore the existing land uses
in the project area. There are several vacant
parcels along the existing rail line near both
the Monterey Avenue/Dinah Shore Drive and
Cook Street/Gerald Ford Drive sites; however,
the Cook Street/Gerald Ford Drive site has
more vacant land that fronts an access road,
whereas the vacant land at Monterey Avenue/
Dinah Shore Drive is further from an access
road. Figure 4 on the following page shows the
existing land uses in the project area.
Figure 4: Existing Land Uses in Project Area
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
10
The existing Amtrak station at Palm Springs
occupies approximately four acres of land.
As shown by Figure 5, assuming the Palm
Desert station will need to be at least as large
as the Palm Springs station, there are no sites
east of the Eldorado Drive area that could
accommodate a sufficiently large station.
Figure 5: Unbuilt Land Ownership along Project Corridor
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
11
Figure 6: Zoning in Project Area
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
3.4. ZONING
Zoning data was obtained from the City of Palm Desert’s Interactive Zoning Map to explore the current zoning scheme in the project area. The
parcels near the Monterey Avenue/Dinah Shore Drive site are zoned primarily for commercial use with some service industry. The parcels near the
Cook Street/Gerald Ford Drive site are zoned for commercial, service industry and residential use. Figure 6 below shows the current zoning for
the project areas.
12
3.5. ROADWAY VOLUMES
Annual average daily traffic (AADT) volumes
for 2022 were obtained for the project area
from the Replica platform (gathered from
anonymized cell phone data) and verified
with AADT figures gathered in March 2022
for other projects in Palm Desert. Monterey
Avenue has the highest AADT figures in the
project area, with particularly high volumes
south of the I-10 freeway, near the Monterey
Avenue/Dinah Shore Drive site. Cook Street
also has high volumes, particularly south of
the I-10 freeway. The Monterey Avenue/Dinah
Shore Drive intersection is one of the busiest
intersections in the project area, while the
Cook Street/Gerald Ford Drive intersection
has significantly less volume. Figure 7 shows
the AADT volumes in the project area. This
data will inform the traffic analysis that will be
performed later in the feasibility study.
Figure 7: Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Volumes in Project Area
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
13
3.6. EXISTING TRANSIT FACILITIES AND RIDERSHIP
SunLine Transit is the agency that provides transit service for the Coachella
Valley. Data from SunLine was obtained to examine the current state of
transit service in the City. Palm Desert is currently served by SunLine
Transit routes 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 10. Routes 1-7 are local routes, while
Route 10 is the Commuter Link line that connects Indio, Palm Desert and
other Coachella Valley communities with San Bernardino and the Metrolink
rail system. Route 10 provides service similar to that of the proposed
rail service and demonstrates that there is existing demand for transit
connections to the Inland Empire and connecting rail services to Los Angeles
and Orange County.
There is connectivity with Route 4 at the Monterey Avenue/Dinah Shore
Drive site. This connects Palm Springs International Airport with the Shops at
Palm Desert—with stops serving Downtown Palm Springs, Desert Highland
Gateway Estates, Desert Park Estates, Thousand Palms, Monterey Marketplace
Shopping Center, and Rancho Mirage, and College of the Desert.
Table 1: SunLine Ridership Figures (Fiscal Year 2022)
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
14
There is connectivity with Routes 5 and 10
near the Cook Street/Gerald Ford Drive site.
Route 5 runs from Desert Hot Springs to Desert
Crossing Shopping Center in Palm Desert with
stops serving CSUSB PDC and University of
California Riverside-Palm Desert (UC-Riverside
PD). Figure 8 shows the current transit service
and stops in Palm Desert. The proposed rail
station would provide an opportunity to form
a new transit hub that SunLine can use to
coordinate local services and provide a nexus
for campus, station, resident, and commercial
transportation uses with high potential for new
transit-oriented development.
The ridership figures from Fiscal Year 2022
for the routes in Palm Desert are shown
in Table 1. Route 1 has the highest yearly
ridership, followed by Route 4, and Route 6.
Figure 8: Existing SunLine Transit Routes and Stops in Palm Desert
Route
1 4 5 6 7 10
Passengers
898,073 188,347 12,676 78,443 64,168 19,948
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
15
Boardings in FY 2022 at each bus stop in
Palm Desert are shown in Figure 9. The
stops near CSUSB PDC had a total of 5,203
boardings. The stop with the highest ridership
was at Town Center Way and Hahn Road, with
a total of 81,892 boardings. This stop includes
service on the Amtrak Thruway bus to Fullerton
Station, which has the potential for inclusion in
the proposed rail station. Providing a seamless
connection between Amtrak Thruway Service
and the proposed rail service would improve
the ease of transfer for thousands of riders per
year. The terminus stop of the Route 7 service
at Washington Street and Harris Lane had
14,934 boardings. There is also the potential to
extend this service to the proposed rail station.
Figure 9: Transit Boardings in FY 22
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
*Additional ridership analysis located in the appendix. 16
Table 2: Station Ridership Estimates (2028)
Station Number of All Trips
(Origin and Destination)
Percent of Trips Captured by
Rail Service Daily Ridership Estimates
Coachella 13,371 0.50% 67
Indio 51,014 0.50% 255
Loma Linda 164 0.50% 1
Riverside 2,257 0.50% 11
Fullerton 46 0.50% 1
Los Angeles 1,416 0.50% 7
Total Daily Ridership Estimate (2028)350
3.7. RIDERSHIP ESTIMATES
Based on figures from the origin-destination analysis of the Existing Conditions Report, projections for future daily ridership figures in 2028 were
created for the Palm Desert rail station, as well as additional stations that may be constructed as part of new rail service from Los Angeles to the
Coachella Valley. These estimates assume that the rail service would capture 0.5% of the trips between Palm Desert and the other station areas.
Table 2 below shows the ridership from each rail station and the percentage of all trips that the service is projected to capture. This is intended to be
a conservative estimate that does not take into account some of the additional draws such as events at Acrisure Arena, more connectivity between
CSUSB campuses, and increases in capture due to future service enhancements. This shows that regional transit use over the San Gorgonio
pass could increase by ten times the current ridership on SunLine Commuter Link, largely attributable to the ability to by-pass congestion and the
increased reach of a single seat ride.*
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
17
4. COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY
The City and project team held two public meetings to gather
input on a preferred station location for the RCTC Mid Valley Station.
Topics discussed included information about the future Transit Hub’s
design principles, context, fit, adjacencies, and site constraints. Meetings
also collected information about who a new passenger rail station could
benefit—from residents to visitors.
Materials related to each public open house was also posted on the City’s
website “engagepalmdesert.com.” A sample of Online comments are
shown below, as well as key themes from the public meetings in Table 3:
◢“I think this project would be great for residents and visitors
alike. It will help attract younger folks to the desert and
minimize traffic.”
◢“Ideal for both tourism and commuting; I am among the
remote workers who moved to the valley from LA in 2020.
I regularly travel back, and I would love to have rail as an
option for the commute.”
◢“We need this and have needed it for at least 30 years. Our
Valley needs to join the 21st Century. Less air pollution and
A win for all.”
◢“A must for future growth and combatting climate change.”
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
18
Table 3: Key Themes from the Public Meetings
Topics Key Themes
July 2023
In Person Open House
• Overall project timeframe, the planned route, and role of RCTC in selecting
a station in the Mid-Valley Region
• City of Palm Desert station location options (six options shown)
• Station selection design principles (see Chapter 5)
• Prototypical characteristics of a desired station facility or “Transit Hub”
including examples of non-motorized facilities, parking access and
passenger amenity
• Considerations of local service connections and supporting transportation
modes, such as micro mobility, cycle routes, shuttles etc.
• Review of conceptual station location nearby existing and
proposed development
• Recommendation at the Open House One to move forward three
Cook Street sites
• Support for the Cook Street Corridor locations, interest in leveraging a
partnership with the CSUSB planned campus expansion
• Interest and support for station locations that are accessible to
the Acrisure Arena
• Support for complementary non-motorized access improvements and
connecting into a future CV Link
• Support for station locations with good regional access, and proximity
to existing City commercial areas
• Support for the “Transit Hub” concept and provision of adequate
passenger amenities – shaded waiting areas
• Interest and support for the provision of parking supply; questions on
how much parking and type of parking
• Strong support for the rail line generally
November 2023
In person Open House
• Site selection results: two of the Cook Street sites (C1 and C2)
accommodate a future RCTC station
• Conceptual site plans for the Cook Street sites highlighting potential facility
programs and elements including station facility, parking structures and
transit-oriented development
• A Vision for the Valley: key best practices and design ideas to make the
passenger rail station a new gateway to the valley
• Community programming opportunities
• Next Steps
• Interest and support for rail station in the Cook Street vicinity both
in online comments, at the City’s Engage Page, and from Open
House participants. Many comments included a desire to see the line
completed quickly; “desperately needed” to mitigate traffic
• Interest and support for rail station for remote work and commuters to
LA and to support those who cannot or do not wish to drive.
• Concern about stormwater at Cook Street Site due to the impacts of
recent flooding
• An individual voiced concern about crime; discussion of activated site
design to mitigate
• Interest in improving Coachella Valley connectedness, seeking future
rail coordination with local transit service, and first/last mile options
• Interest and support for a staffed passenger facility and
access to parking
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
19
4.1. CONSULTED INTEREST HOLDERS
During this project, the project team and City of Palm Desert met with the following:
1. Riverside County Regional Rail Commission: Several meetings were held to understand RCTC project goals, high level design constraints for
platform access, operations, and site assumptions in support of conceptual site plans.
2. California State University San Bernadino. Discussion of proposed rail station locations and discussion of opportunities to coordinate planning
with the future campus expansion. The University issued a letter of support for the Cook Street sites.
3. The Berger Partnership and Acrisure Arena: Discussion of proposed rail station locations. Exploration and discussion of partnership
opportunities associated with the Transit Hub vision, initial exploration of existing and projected demand for event-related parking, and desired
access improvements. There was support for a Palm Desert passenger rail facility at the Cook Street locations.
4. Local Homeowner Associations: Discussion of site boundaries, ownership, and potential impacts at Cook Street, and all potential station
site locations. General support for locations that is not adjacent to residential development. Portola and Monterey Avenue site locations
were not preferred.
5. The City of Palm Desert conducted meetings with other select property owners who might be impacted by changes at all potential host
locations, including the site C1 property owner.
6. Local Transit Service Operators – SunLine and Greyhound: Discussion about preferred site programs, design constraints, and operations
requirements. Discussion of several scenarios for bus facility lay out, access, and lay over space.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
20
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
5. PRIORITIZATION OF PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
The Palm Desert Transit Hub’s development should be strategically prioritized, aligning with the initiation schedules of services from the collective
cities, regions, and RCTC. The foundational premise is that the site will serve as a multimodal hub catering to local and regional needs, even before
the commencement of rail services. It will initially support basic functionalities for buses, shuttles, and parking, with provisions for expansion in anticipation of
rail services. Should the City decide to commence site enhancements ahead of rail operations, the following prioritization framework is proposed:
5.1. SITE PREPARATION
The initial step involves executing preliminary site work and establishing
the City’s stormwater management system. Early construction efforts will
focus on rough grading, soil stabilization, and the installation of essential
site utilities, including sewer, stormwater management systems, water,
power, and communication infrastructure such as fiber optics.
5.2. SITE CIRCULATION AND PARKING
Development of site access and internal circulation routes to support
the transit services initially provided. This encompasses constructing
roundabouts at station entry points on Gerald Ford Drive, facilitating ingress
to parking spaces, and arranging drop-off/pick-up lanes. The infrastructure
would also extend to bikeways and facilities; multi-use paths; associated
utilities encompassing site and path lighting, solar installations, charging
stations; and sidewalks.
The development of parking facilities can be scaled to align with passenger
volume and potential shared use by Acrisure Arena and/or CSUSB. A surface
parking lot can be provisioned initially with structured parking planned to
coincide with rail service. The full buildout of anticipated structured parking
needs would be required to be built at once if a single garage is proposed.
The construction of bus access points and passenger zones may
proceed simultaneously or be deferred based on the anticipated services.
Initially, regional and local bus services could share the designated
passenger pick-up/drop-off areas. With the increase in bus service
coinciding with the start of rail operations, dedicated bus loops and stops
could be established.
5.3. STATION FACILITIES
The station facilities and supporting amenities could be introduced prior
to or simultaneously with the introduction of rail service. The facilities
would include the Station Building, incorporating air-conditioned waiting
areas, ticketing and information services, restrooms, concessions, and
back of house. The facilities would be developed to accommodate RCTC,
SunLine, and the City of Palm Desert. Together with the station building,
the bike station, and vehicle rental service kiosks would be built along
with exterior waiting areas, shade structures, and landscaping.
21
5.4. RAIL PLATFORMS AND VERTICAL CIRCULATION
Predicated on the development of the RCTC rail services, this phase
would see the construction of rail platforms, shelters, passenger
amenities, pedestrian overcrossing, elevators, and stairs, supported
by necessary services, including signage and wayfinding, and
utilities such as lighting, power, and water.
5.5. TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (TOD)
IMPROVEMENTS
TOD Improvements could be prioritized based on the timing of the
collective cities, regions, and RCTC services are scheduled to begin.
The base assumption is rough utility stub outs and services to the
TOD sites would be constructed during the site preparation phase
and each site would be developed by their respective developers.
This structured approach allows the Palm Desert Transit Hub to
evolve in phases, integrating with future transportation services
while catering to immediate and future mobility demands.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
22
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
6. STATION SITE SELECTION AND FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
6.1. STATION SITE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Palm Desert occupies a strategic position in the heart of the Coachella
Valley, located at the midpoint of the RCTC’s “Mid Valley” station
geography. It is equidistant, about 15 miles, from both the existing Palm
Springs Station and the future Indio/Coachella terminus station. The City
envisions a new RCTC station location and facility design that leverages
this centrality, facilitating valley accessibility for residents and visitors
alike, and creating a new, convenient gateway for its many destinations.
The site locations describe connections with vital regional transportation
routes; are adjacent to land uses such as employment, education, healthcare,
culture, and leisure; and are accessible to a wide range of amenities. All sites
benefit from excellent access notably the Cook Street multimodal corridor
connecting I-10 with State Route 111 (SR-111)—the main north-south
transit route and retail corridor serving the Coachella Valley.
The site considerations aim to:
◢Establish the best site that will serve all residents and accommodate
other transportation modes, including SunLine Transit Agency
◢Identify and test a preliminary design on the selected site, suitable
for intercity passenger rail service
◢Demonstrate how an accessible station would function
Design goals for the future station location are:
Community Serving. The station location should provide equitable
access for all communities in the Coachella Valley, local and regional
visitors, and vulnerable populations.
Accessible. A future station location should have excellent site access
for vehicles, buses, and pedestrians. It should be proximate to major
streets, Coachella Valley assets, and key destinations.
Intuitive Arrival. The future station should be highly visible with a
functional site configuration.
Connected. A future station should enable future connections
to local transit service providers and support a range of
transportation alternatives.
Supports Economic Development. The selected station location
should facilitate partnerships with other Valley stakeholders and be
attractive to uses that can complement a future station.
Future Flexibility. The site location should provide adequate space for
an appropriately scaled facility and the ability to expand in the future.
23
6.2. STATION LOCATION PRELIMINARY SELECTION
AND SCREENING
The project team identified site areas suitable for a future RCTC
Mid-Valley Station. All preliminary station locations exhibit the
following attributes:
◢Location adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Right-of-Way
(ROW) that will support 1000’ long platforms
◢Available undeveloped parcels along the ROW boundary edge of
sufficient size to enable adequate site circulation, parking, and
facilities (+/- 4 acres)
◢Adjacency to existing or planned commercial, retail, and transit
supportive land uses (e.g., services, educational, hospitality, medical,
leisure, recreational facilities, etic.)
◢Excellent access to regional street networks and access to nearby
local transit service
The team focused on the locations with direct access to north-south
multimodal corridors connecting I-10 with SR-111, supporting regional
connectivity. Multimodal corridors assessed:
◢Monterey Avenue, a north-south corridor with direct I-10 access with
auto-oriented commercial, retail, and shopping near the station area
◢Portola Avenue, a street with a planned I-10 freeway connection
adjacent to hospitality and residential areas and a new city park
◢Cook Street corridor, an area with existing entertainment, retail and
residential uses, and a planned expansion of the CSUSB Palm Desert,
and UCR PD campus. Cook Street is also designated for a future micro-
mobility network and planned “complete street” roadway improvements
The pre-screened identified sites are shown in Figure 10. This
screening was presented in a City of Palm Desert Public Open House
in July 2023. The screening focused on topics related to improved
connectivity for riders, mobility and access, site challenges, and future
development opportunities. The site assessment process from the July
2023 open house shown in Table 4 resulted in the three Cook Street
sites ranking the highest.
Qualitative assessment and key questions included:
Rider Experience: Does the station option enable direct and safe
connections to I-10 and the local/regional street network? Does it
connect to bikeways, cart paths, and pedestrian infrastructure? Does the
site present an opportunity for reducing reliance on personal vehicles? Is
its location visible and prominent?
Mobility and Access: Does the option improve on traffic and other
modes’ circulation and management needs (access to parking, station,
or entertainment activities)?
Challenges: Is the project consistent with the City’s vision and
land use goals? Do adjacent land uses support a station location?
Is there construction, geometric, or technical feasibility challenges?
Do specific spatial or other constraints preclude a station? Is there
infrastructure to support it?
Future Investment: Is the location favorable for development? What
partnership opportunities are available? Does the station location fit into
the City’s or stakeholder’s identified goals and priorities?
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
24
Figure 10: Identified Station Sites
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
25
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
Table 4: Station Site Assessment, July 2023 Open House
Station Site
Locations Rider Experience Mobility and Access Challenges Future Investment Advance?
Monterey
Ave M1
Limited visibility
into proposed site,
adjacent development
is less walkable.
Monterey Ave is a higher traffic
volume, auto-oriented corridor
connecting to the I-10. The
intersection of Monterey Ave and
Dinah Shore Dr has the third
highest number of collisions
in the City. Micro-mobility
connections are challenging
along Monterey due to the higher
traffic volumes and speeds.
Site is space constrained for
passenger drop off and arrival
via car. Less connected for
local bus service.
Redevelopment of adjacent
parcels to transit-oriented
uses requires collaboration of
adjacent private landowners.
No
Portola
Avenue
P1
Site has good connections
to south and central Palm
Desert. Adjacent to planned
developments to the
south and east.
Portola connects a series of
residential neighborhoods. It
has separated bike facilities and
lower traffic volumes.
Site is adjacent to a future
Portola freeway over crossing
and exit for site access.
Portola is a lower intensity
roadway which could
allow for micro-mobility
network connections.
Adjacent to residential
development; transit uses
may be incongruous.
Potential for new Portola
Avenue I-10 crossing.
Low TOD opportunity.
Located within lower scale
residential neighborhood.
No
P2
Limited quick access to
the site due to reliance on
smaller secondary roads.
Station site is located within
a planned city park.
Requires use of land planned
for city park/open space.
Site is adjacent to residential
uses which could be sensitive
to station noise.
Limited opportunity for
denser housing. Potential
opportunity to coordinate with
future public park to create a
“park station”.
No
26
Station Site Locations Rider Experience Mobility and Access Challenges Future Investment Advance?
Cook
Street
C1
Adjacent to retail, good
visibility from Cook
Street and I-10
Cook Street is identified
in the General Plan as a
“multimodal corridor.”
Cook Street is transitioning
to become an important
connector across the city,
connecting the University area,
the resorts along Cook Street,
and downtown Palm Desert via
Fred Waring and Highway 111.
Challenged vehicle circulation
and entry approach. Location
is further from core of CSUSB
campus and Arisure Arena.
Cook Street bridge structure
over tracks poses constraints
onto rail alignment and
platform positioning.
Redevelopment of adjacent
parcels to transit oriented uses
requires collaboration of adjacent
private landowners.
Yes
C2
Well connected to
proposed CSUSB Palm
Desert Campus expansion.
Visibility from freeway.
Location is further from
Acrisure Arena. More
constrained site development
between two already
developed sites.
High TOD opportunity. Supports
General Plan goal to facilitate
the development of a university-
oriented neighborhood
and “town center”
Yes
C3
Well connected to proposed
CSUSB Palm Desert
Campus expansion.
Visibility from freeway.
Potential for future bridge
crossing to the north side
of I-10 with a connection to
Acrisure Arena.
Access to Acrisure Arena is
contingent on a future bridge
crossing over the 1-10.
High TOD opportunity. Supports
General Plan goal to facilitate
the development of a university-
oriented neighborhood
and “town center.”
Closest location to Acrisure Arena
with potential for coordination
of on/off site shared parking
and future connection crossing
I-10 to the arena.
Yes
Due to various challenges, the city decided to not move forward with sites M1, P1, and P2. Though they are vacant, M1 is adjacent to the highest
collision intersection in the city, making micro mobility and transit options limited and challenging. Meanwhile, P1 and P2 sit along Portola Ave., a
lower volume residential street and a future planned park area, making a popular station area incongruous with surrounding uses.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
27
Transit Facility Design Assumptions
To assess suitability of the station sites moving forward (C1, C2, and C3),
the project team established high-level assumptions including platform
criteria, transit facility requirements, parking, bus accommodations,
and transit-oriented development objectives. Critical siting parameters
for the rail platform and station structures were developed in
coordination with RCTC.
The assumptions led to preliminary concept plans for sites C2 and C3.
Preliminary concept plans were shared in a second Public Open House
in November 2023. Building from comments on C2 and C3 and further
study of the assumptions below, a preferred conceptual site plan was
developed and is shown in Section 5.3.
Siting Constraints
Future rail platforms and stations must meet RCTC technical
requirements and its forthcoming station design criteria. All facilities
sited within the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) right-of-way (ROW) are
subject to UPRR approval. RCTC is coordinating directly with UPRR to
clarify these constraints. Final platform and track configurations remain
unresolved at this time and will evolve during subsequent phases of this
project led by RCTC.
Design assumptions, listed below in Figure 11, build from the RCTC
San Gorgonio Passenger Rail Corridor Service Program Tier 1 EIS/EIR,
and incorporate accessibility, fire and life safety standards, and Amtrak
passenger facility design standards1.
◢Trackway: The RCTC San Gorgonio Pass Project will provide three
mainline tracks vs the two currently located in the UPRR ROW. UPRR’s
ROW is 150 feet wide, and with the addition of the new mainline,
additional ROW will be required at the station platform locations to
accommodate two platforms and the required access roads etc. For
purposes of the facility concept development and station siting, the
team assumed the north mainline track will relocate to accommodate
the 3rd mainline track while the south mainline track will be modified
to accommodate a new center passenger platform.
◢Operations: Operating passenger rail services within a UPRR
freight corridor presents constraints due to the different operational,
safety, and infrastructure requirements of freight service. To preserve
operational flexibility for both freight and passenger operator’s
platforms allow for RCTC trains operating on any of the main line
tracks in either direction to arrive at the platform. Both a center and
side platform configuration have been considered.
◢Crossings: UPPR does not allow at grade crossings of the mainline
track. All passenger access to the center platform will require a
grade-separated crossing to access the platform including elevators,
and bridge connection. A side platform can be accessed at-grade,
passengers may board and alight into the station building directly.
While either an undercrossing or overcrossing is acceptable,
an overcrossing is the assumed alternative for this study.
◢Clearances and Protections: UPRR requires a clearance envelope
of 23’-4” above top of rail, 5‘-6” from center line of track to the edge
of platform and 12’-4” inches from the centerline of track to any
permanent structure.
1AMTRAK Station and Development Guidelines, January 2022, v.4
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
28
Platform Assumptions:
◢(1) 36-foot-wide center platform serving passengers in both directions
located between the two northerly mainline tracks
◢(1) 20’ wide side platform served outside of the third mainline track
◢A pedestrian bridge spans the two most southerly tracks providing
platform access and egress to the center platform
◢Platform length: 1,000-foot platforms accommodate up to 10 cars
◢Providing shade and mitigating wind are important for passenger
comfort and have been included as a design assumption for the
platform. A 36-foot-wide center platform allows up to 16 feet of shelter
width. Maximizing the canopy width will address low sun angles
Additional site constraints:
◢The City of Palm Desert owns and manages an open storm drainage
channel that extends along the boundary between the UPRR ROW and
the Cook Street station sites. The open storm drainage channel may
preclude an underpass or below grade platform connections due to flood
mitigation and conflicts with the channel construction and management
◢Stormwater management will include an on-site stormwater
retention area on the C3 site
◢High voltage power transmission lines run along the south edge
of the ROW within city-owned property at the north end of the
C- sites. Further study will be required to assess the cost and
feasibility to underground the power lines to accommodate the
pedestrian overcrossing to the platform. Design assumptions assume
undergrounding to avoid interference
◢All sites are susceptible to high winds and blowing sand.
Mitigating sand accumulation is a consideration for building and
passenger amenity siting
◢Heat and sun require mitigation with large outdoor shade canopies at
all outdoor passenger waiting areas and pedestrian walkways.
Figure 11: Station Platform and Track Design Assumptions
PREFERRED SCHEME
SCHEME B
ACCESS ROAD
VARIES PER SITE SELECTI0N
30'
30'
100'1000'
46' - 8"
20'
100+00 106+00 118+00 124+00
36'
20'
20'
100'
108'
20'
20'ML 1ML 2
ML 3
ACCESS ROAD
CO
O
K
S
T
UPRR ROW
INTERSTATE 10
LEGEND
Existing Rail
New Rail
Station
Platform
Access Bridge
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
29
Vertical Circulation and Connectivity Assumptions
A pedestrian overcrossing to the center platform vs an undercrossing
for the reasons cited above form the basis of the conceptual design.
To meet accessibility requirements to the platform, both ramps and
elevators were considered. The UPRR height clearances above top of
rail to the underside of the pedestrian overcrossing is 23’-4” with a total
vertical distance of ~ 30’ from the station level. The preferred solution
is installing elevators over ramps for the above grade crossing. This
preference is based on several factors, including space constraints, the
impact on the platform’s usability, and the overall efficiency of passenger
movement. Long ramps, extending over 400 feet on either side of the
bridge, were considered impractical for several reasons:
◢Space Constraints: The platform space is limited, and long ramps
would significantly encroach upon areas intended for passengers
and amenities—such as seating areas, information boards, and
other facilities
◢Passenger Experience: The use of long ramps would adversely
affect the travel time for passengers, making it more time-
consuming and physically taxing to access the train platform. This
could be especially challenging for those with mobility issues or
those carrying luggage, potentially making the station less accessible
to a portion of the public
Given these considerations, elevators are seen as the preferred solution
to provide an accessible route to the center platform. Elevators would
occupy less space, have minimal impact on the platform’s functional
areas, and offer a quicker, more efficient way for all passengers,
including those with disabilities, to access the platform. This aligns
with the goal of making public transportation systems accessible to
everyone, following principles of universal design and compliance with
the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
It is proposed that the pedestrian bridge provide direct connections to
both the parking structure and the station building to minimize walking
distances and reduce the potential need to go up and down multiple
times between destinations. This shared use of elevators can also
enhance convenience for commuter passengers by providing a seamless
transition between parking, the station, and train services.
Ancillary Uses and Structures
The site selection processes considered both the potential and ease for
on-site transit-oriented development at the Cook Street sites to enhance
site functionality and convenience. Various scenarios were evaluated for
buildings, public space, parking, access routes, and use mix. The City of
Palm Desert Zoning and Land Use policies will determine the type, scale,
and volume of permitted development.
Local Transit Service
This study assumes a maximum coach/bus length of 45-feet and no
future articulated buses (this would require larger turning radii and
maneuvering space). Straight curbs are preferred over sawtooth bus
geometries. No fueling or charging infrastructure needs are anticipated
in the current program. A dedicated bus loop and dedicated curb space
should be included to avoid conflicts with vehicular traffic.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
30
Local Road Access
Gerald Ford Drive is the primary access point to the station site via Cook Street, which in turn provides access to other Palm Desert neighborhoods
and I-10, or Frank Sinatra Drive. Traffic analysis has shown that there is sufficient roadway capacity on Cook Street and the I-10 interchange to
support new development and station activity. Gerald Ford Drive will need to be expanded to allow 2 travel lanes in both directions with appropriate
turn lanes and intersection control at major campus entrances, the station entrance, and for the proposed new fire station. The station design
concept and cost estimates assume construction of a roundabout at the station entrance. Figure 12 shows the anticipated profile for Gerald Ford
Drive that will support a multimodal friendly neighborhood access route.
5 Sustainability
PPoo tteenn tt ii aa ll cc oo nnddii tt ii oo nnss::
•‘Right-sized’ street
•Environment for walking and biking
•Wide sidewalks and two-way cycle track
•Supportive of transit-oriented development
Figure 12: Anticipated profile for Gerald Ford Drive
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
31
Other Physical Design Constraints
The City of Palm Desert owns and manages
an open storm drainage channel that abuts the
UPRR ROW to the south. It is assumed that the
open storm drainage channel may preclude an
underpass or below grade platform connections
due to flood mitigation and conflicts with the
channel construction and management. The
City of Palm Desert is also exploring approaches
to mitigate stormwater—especially in the
Cook Street corridor. Options for stormwater
management may include a new stormwater
retention area on the C3 site. The design of this
area is outside the scope of this study. High-
powered transmission lines line the south edge
of the ROW within city-owned property. Further
study will be required to assess the cost and
feasibility to underground elevated power lines.
This feasibility study assumes power lines are
underground to avoid interference with a bridge
overcrossing to the platforms.
Selecting the Preferred Site Location
The project team applied the design
assumptions to the three Cook Street Sites to
understand the potential for each site to host
the station facility. Findings are summarized
below and shown in Figure 13.
Figure 13: Cook Street Site Evaluation Map
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
32
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
Cook Street evaluation findings:
Both C2 and C3 have the technical ability to host the rail platform and
ancillary station structure.
C1: While the site is of sufficient size and strategically located near
Cook Street, it faces significant challenges. Access to the site from Gerald
Ford Drive and the CSUSB campus is indirect, which complicates access
to the site for vehicles and buses and creates circulation challenges. The
site is constrained from the Cook Street overcrossing bridge abutments
and columns that restrict where a rail turnout can begin for the start of the
platform. The site visibility from both Cook Street and the I-10 freeway is
also negatively impacted due to the overcrossing ramp structures.
C2: While smallest in size, C2 provides adequate area for a transit facility
and offers good connections to the CSUSB campus planned expansion,
and good site visibility. A drawback is a planned development on the
site at of the time of this report’s publication which may eliminate it as a
viable option.
C3: This is the largest site and offers more area than C1/C2. C3 meets all
design assumptions and offers flexibility for a variety of complementary
programs/development. The C3 site is directly accessible from the CSUSB
campus expansion and may offer a “Gateway” opportunity to welcome
visitors to the campus. The site has high TOD opportunity and potential
to coordinate for on or-off-site parking for Arena. There is potential for
future bridge crossing to north side of I-10 and connection to Acrisure
Arena. There is also potential to coordinate for on or-off-site parking for
Arena. This location supports the City of Palm Desert’s General Plan goal
to facilitate the development of a university-oriented neighborhood. A
stormwater mitigation study is currently underway.
C3 is the preferred location. This site offers not only flexibility for a future
station platform but has the potential to support broader city goals and
leverages the potential expansion of the CSUSB campus and access
to Acrisure Arena. The City is in discussions with the property owner to
purchase the parcel.
33
Palm Desert’s vision for a future RCTC station is
to create a “transit hub” serving the Coachella
Valley and provide options for all Coachella
Valley residents and visitors integrated travel
options to connect where they work, learn, live,
shop, and play. The vision for the Transit-Hub is
to create a safe, vibrant, and accessible station
area providing users access to community-
oriented services and affordable housing,
together with compatible off-peak secondary
uses to create resource-efficient, high-quality,
and environmentally healthy developments
that maximize the social and economic vitality
of the region.
The conceptual Transit Hub design will serve
RCTC rail passengers and future Amtrak
passengers as well. The design accommodates
local bus and shuttle transfers, facilitates park
and ride uses, transfers between micro-mobility
options, and connects to the City’s bike network
extending to CV Link. The site can also be
developed incrementally, and in coordination
with its adjacent landowners – UCR and CSUSB.
Key elements to be considered for a successful
station area include (see Figure 14):
Figure 14: Palm Desert Transit Hub Visioning Sketch
6.3. THE PALM DESERT TRANSIT HUB VISION
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
34
Transit Facility Program
Building from the vision above and meeting the design assumptions listed
in section 5.2., a conceptual site plan and station renderings (Figures 14,
15, 16, and 17) illustrates the transit facility’s core components and includes
opportunities for a future final build out scenario. Core components shown
on the site plan are:
1. Center and Side Rail Platforms
2. Dedicated Local and Regional Bus Pick Up and Drop Off
3. Passenger Amenity Spaces and Shade Covered Outdoor Waiting Area
and Pedestrian Circulation
4. Station Services/TOD Development Opportunities
5. Structured Parking
6. On-Site Stormwater Retention Basin
7. Multimodal Connections to CSUSB Campus
Cycling, rideshare, transit, shuttles, private buses, event mobility,
micro-mobility, car share, and pedestrian access are accommodated in
the transit hub concept.
Figure 15: Palm Desert Transit Facility Conceptual Site Plan
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
35
Figure 17: Palm Desert Transit Facility Rendering
Figure 16: Palm Desert Transit Facility Conceptual Site Plan #2
Figure 18: Palm Desert Transit Facility Rendering #2
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
36
Identifying Opportunities
ᇷ Create a destination through placemaking:
Passengers will alight from the train and platform into an activated
station building and welcoming “station square”. The concept illustrated
above focuses on the arrival experience that accentuates relaxed easy
access into “the heart of the Coachella Valley”. The station will be
designed to host quality, hospitality-conscious visitors and residents. The
building will encompass ticketing functions, wayfinding, and passenger
amenity space (e.g., concierge/visitor center, bathrooms, waiting areas,
etc). Plantings serve a useful passenger comfort function by providing
shading and visual interest. Future designs should consider strategically
incorporating plantings to provide shade for walking and waiting areas
as well as reduce heat island effects of paved areas. Water elements and
passive evaporative cooling should also be incorporated. Native plants
will be selected to support local biomes and flora/fauna. Preliminary
concepts for the station facility are described as follows:
◢Generous conditioned space for waiting, ticketing, and support spaces
◢Integrated retail and passenger amenities (e.g. concierge (security),
bathrooms, coffee kiosk, etc.)
◢Ancillary administrative spaces are included as components of the
station building
◢A shaded porte cochere, drop off area, and landscaped plaza area
support passenger comfort for those leaving and arriving at the station
◢Comfortable outdoor waiting space incorporated into the station site
◢Flexible curb space will facilitate the transfer to multiple
transportation modes
◢At least 200 feet to facilitate transportation network companies (TNC)
and shuttle drop offs as well as passenger vehicle drop offs
ᇷ Explore Opportunities for Transit Oriented and Joint Development:
Land uses on the site should support/compliment transit and visitor-
serving usage. This might include walkable convenience retail, food
and beverage, and other activities that contribute to create an active
environment. Land uses may also be oriented to pre- or post-event
visitors and can make the area a destination for evening event goers at
the nearby arena. A hotel, and on-site hospitality functions, may have
some potential to encourage rail service passengers to stay overnight
and be able to visit the valley car-free. The project team explored the
opportunity for leasable square footage to be incorporated into the
station building or into the ground-floor of the parking garage.
The anticipated growth of the CSUSB campus is certain to be augmented
by the arrival of rail service, and offer greater and more convenient
access for students throughout the region. Additionally, the “town
square” with complementary uses identified above broadens the campus
offering for both students and faculty.
ᇷ Planning for Regional Bus Service:
SunLine does not operate on Gerald Ford Drive; however, growth may
enable future direct services or interchanges at the proposed transit
facility. SunLine’s Number 10 Bus Line is a commuter service with a
stop at CSUSB and along I-10. In the future, SunLine service could
complement both the new passenger rail commuters and the expanded
campus, including reoriented routes.
There is an opportunity to include a bus layover at the station facility, as
well as a future driver breakroom. In the case of mechanical breakdowns
or bus exchanges, a parking zone for disabled buses should be
considered if space allows.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
37
Based on meetings with SunLine, the draft concept plan assumes a 45-
foot coach/bus maximum length and no future articulated buses (which
would require larger turning radii and maneuvering space). Straight
curbs are slightly preferred over sawtooth bus geometries. Future
fleets may include hydrogen or electric operation, but no fueling or
charging infrastructure needs are anticipated. A dedicated bus loop and
dedicated curb space is shown to avoid conflicts and delays with private
vehicular traffic.
POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS:
◢Further discussions with SunLine will ensure the new station site
fits into the future SunLine network and creates those first/last mile
connections with the surrounding Coachella Valley.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
38
ᇷ Beyond Traditional Transit Operations:
The Palm Desert Station facility could offer opportunities for partnerships
with regional institutions, event operators, and destinations. For example,
the transit facility can serve as a connection point for rail passengers to
resorts, local casinos, event spaces such as Acrisure, annual festivals,
sports events, local and regional tour operators, and others.
The site design can support passengers arriving on foot, by car, transit,
micro-mobility, or other means. Programs envisioned for the future station
are listed below, and shown in Figure 19.
◢Bus exchange to local transit providers (SunLine)
◢Flexible curb space for rideshare such as TNCs,
Drop Off/Pick Ups, Taxis
◢Shuttles and private buses (ex: events)
◢Micro-mobility and rental/share programs (ex: E-bike,
golf cart parking or rental)
◢On-demand car rental parking and pick up/drop off
◢Passenger amenity spaces such as protected waiting areas
◢Complementary site uses such as convenience, retail, or eateries.
◢Parking for long-term and short-term users
Facilitating these connections would require planning for appropriate
curb space for peak passenger loads meeting arriving trains. Exploring
partnerships to mode-shift visitors to rail travel can help facilitate a
reduction in VMT for visitors and residents of the Coachella Valley. Private
operators may own and maintain their own vehicle fleets or sub-contract
at specific times for special events.
Figure 19: Example of Envisioned Programs for the Palm Desert Rail Station
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
39
POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS:
◢Continue to coordinate with SunLine on future service network expansion
to serve a future transit facility
◢Explore options to connect existing commuter services with on-site
parking and other mobility connections
◢Plan future micro-mobility networks (golf cart paths, bike lanes, etc)
into the buildout of the transit facility
◢Explore opportunities for partnerships with shared parking, shuttles,
and intermodal transfer to leverage public and private investment with
institutions, neighbors, key valley destinations, and stakeholders
ᇷ Park-and-Ride Facilities
Parking can be phased to expand as service increases. Commuter and
short-term parking will become more desirable as rail service increases in
frequency. Lower frequency train schedules are less attractive for commuter
riders, but would be appropriate for CSUSB students, day trips, weekend
trips, leisure trips, or longer periods of time.
At full rail service in the future, a structured parking garage is assumed
on the site to allow for shaded and protected parking and to free up
adjacent land for transit supportive/complementary uses and facilitate the
establishment of a new “town center.” A parking garage serving riders is
also assumed in the final configuration. POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS:
◢Further study is required to confirm phased parking quantities, types,
and arrangement in coordination with RCTC passenger ridership
estimates and potential site users
◢Identify opportunities for shared off-site parking for Acrisure Arena, or
with CSUSB. These alternative parking uses can leverage investments
and improve the return on investment (ROI) for built parking infrastructure
ᇷ Opportunities for Connections and Improvements to the
Street Network:
A new Class-I bikeway assumed along the rail alignment will complement
the Coachella Valley’s network of E-vehicle (ex: Golf Cart) and multimodal
pathways (Ex: Coachella Valley Link).
POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS:
◢Coordinate multimodal connections to the south to adjacent
developments and the CSUSB campus core
◢Consider opportunities to tie into valley networks more broadly (i.e.
such as along the Cook Street corridor).
ᇷ Public Improvements:
Gerald Ford Drive is the key access road that will provide access to the
station site. Today Gerald Ford Drive has two lanes heading westbound
and one lane heading eastbound. With the changes proposed for the
CSUSB campus expansion, and a potential transit hub, this street
could be redesigned to included landscape buffers, wide sidewalks,
and incorporate traffic calming features to facilitate walking, biking,
and micro-mobility network safety to support a walkable “town center.”
Gerald Ford Drive’s character (e.g., width, pathways, mobility networks,
pedestrian safety) can be considered to strengthen walkability and
connectivity between the transit hub location and adjacent development
and complementary uses.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
40
POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS:
◢Lane quantities and level of service (LOS) analysis should be
confirmed especially as planning for the CSUSB campus and adjacent
development gets confirmed to support future traffic volumes
◢Additional pedestrian amenities or dedicated infrastructure for
bikes and micro-mobility networks can be included in any future
roadway redesign
◢Consider roundabout or traffic circle options for new intersections along
Gerald Ford Drive. Similar circles have been incorporated on roadways
elsewhere within the City of Palm Desert (e.g., Dinah Shore Drive and
Pacific Avenue) and provided requisite traffic calming and moderated
speeds to facilitate safe vehicular travel of all modes
◢Use public realm improvements to include placemaking opportunities
(e.g., traffic circles, prominent urban corners, and view corridors) that
can be incorporated into future design thinking to establish “a sense of
place” for the new station area and “town center”.
◢If traffic circles are incorporated into a future Gerald Ford Drive design,
coordinate with planned vehicular circulation needs (e.g., Buses,
shuttles, emergency vehicle, etc. turning radii) and available site area
for station site development areas.
ᇷ Future Gateway Bridge:
A future connection opportunity includes a bridge connection across
I-10 to Acrisure Arena. This connection is envisioned as a pedestrian/
micro-mobility network connector that could facilitate pedestrian access all
the way up to small scale shuttle vehicles.
This connection dramatically shortens the distance on the local road
network between the station and the arena from about 2.5 miles via
Cook Street to approximately 0.5 miles.
The connection also supports reducing auto traffic associated with large
events and could facilitate the utilization of on-site station parking during
off-peak times for use by arena event goers. Solving for a connection to
the arena may also provide additional revenue streams to the city through
parking fees or additional tax receipts from local businesses.
POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS:
◢Continue to explore with Caltrans and RCTC an opportunity for a future
connection to Acrisure Arena.
◢Continued outreach with Acrisure Arena for future
transportation integration
◢Lastly, future provisioning of an I-10 bridge crossing should be
considered with future planning and opportunities for grant funding
ᇷ Partnerships:
Ongoing coordination with CSUSB / UCR campus planning can
ensure the long-term campus vision is coordinated with any proposed
transit hub planning.
POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS:
◢Continue discussions with local property owners and
institutions (ex: CSUSB) to synergize site planning, uses, and
development opportunities.
◢New streets transportation linkages from the transit facility and through
the campus should be coordinated with future campus planning.
◢Coordinate with the planned fire station and street design along
Gerald Ford Dr.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
41
6.4. CEQA PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
The next steps in the RCTC San Gorgonio Pass Project will be a Tier 2 EIR/
EIS review. During this phase, a detailed assessment description of the
selected project site will be developed—including location, background,
objectives, and technical details. This phase also often includes necessary
permits and approvals.
During environmental review, the project will focus on potential impacts
and unique issues not covered (or were only covered generally) in the now
complete Tier 1 analysis. During Tier 2, the project will identify and assess
the “footprint” of potential station sites. As necessary, mitigation measures
will address the new or more severe impacts identified.
Topics within the EIR are comprised of areas such as:
◢Air Quality and Climate Change: Analysis of emissions resulting from
construction and operation, including greenhouse gas emissions and
their contribution to climate change, as well as conformity with state
and federal air quality standards, appear to be within state guidelines
with a net benefit from supporting multimodal alternatives to driving
private vehicles
◢Water Resources: Analysis of the project’s impact on local water
supply, quality, and hydrology, including stormwater management and
potential flood risks indicates the site can support potential storm water
management best management practices (BMP). A further study is being
conducted by the City of Palm Desert assessing this
◢Biological Resources: Evaluation of impacts on local wildlife, habitats,
and ecosystems, especially considering the Coachella Valley’s diverse
desert ecology. This includes potential effects on endangered species
and sensitive habitats. Initial assessment showed no adverse impacts
◢Cultural and Historical Resources: Consideration of impacts on
archaeological sites, historic buildings, and cultural landscapes, ensuring
compliance with relevant preservation laws, revealed no adverse impacts
◢Socioeconomic Impacts and Environmental Justice: Analysis of
how the project affects local economies, property values, and particularly,
the distribution of environmental benefits and burdens across different
socioeconomic groups; ensuring equitable outcomes showed a
positive impact
◢Transportation and Traffic: Evaluation of the project’s impact on
local and regional transportation networks, including traffic congestion,
changes in traffic patterns, and integration with existing transportation
modes showed no significant adverse impacts
◢Noise and Vibration: Assessment of noise and vibration impacts on
nearby communities from construction activities and the operation of
trains, including potential mitigation measures were not assessed
◢Land Use and Planning: An initial assessment of how the C3 project
site project aligns with existing land use plans and zoning ordinances
showed no adverse impacts with community benefits, including
promoting sustainable land uses
◢Visual and Aesthetic Resources: Assessment of the project’s visual
impact on the surrounding landscape and urban environment, including
views and community character, indicate a positive impact
◢Public Health and Safety: Examination of how the project affects
local communities’ health and safety, including emergency services
accessibility, showed no adverse impacts.
A preliminary screening of both site locations, C2 and C3, showed
significant environmental impacts beyond the typical are not projected.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
42
An area that will require further resolution in the next phase of work is assessment of cultural resources. The sites are located beyond the scope
of the most recent maps conducted for the City of Palm Desert General Plan2. Consultation and coordination with local tribal entities will also be
conducted during Tier 2 studies.
Site Prominence C1 C2 C3
Visual
Resources/ Aesthetics
Visibility from Street Poor Excellent Excellent
From I-10 EB – Obscured EB – Good EB – good
WB - good WB - good WB - good
From Cook obscured by ramp poor poor
From Gerald Ford obscured by development good good
Direct Connection to
Primary Travel Corridors C1 C2 C3
Traffic
and Transportation
Vehicular and Transit Access Fair Excellent Good
Distance from Arterial Cook Street .38 mi Cook Street .28 mi Cook Street .55 mi
Gerald Ford .18 mi Gerald Ford 0 mi Gerald Ford 0 mi
Transit Connections Cook Street .38 mi Cook Street .28 mi Cook Street .55 mi
Number of turns in /
out of property
Cook St: 5 Cook St: 2 Cook St: 2
Gerald Ford 3 Gerald Ford 1 Gerald Ford 1
Connection to CSUSB
Palm Desert Campus Indirect Direct Direct
Vehicular Connection
- Acrisure Arena Cook Street 1. 70 mi Cook Street 1.96 mi Cook Street 2.24 mi
Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Good Good Good
Table 5: Palm Desert CEQA Site Evaluation
2 https://www.palmdesert.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/34535/638373010609730000 p. 90
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
43
Site Prominence C1 C2 C3
Traffic and
Transportation
(continued)
Bicycle & Golf Cart Network Direct to Cook,
indirect to Gerald Ford
Indirect to Cook,
direct to Gerald Ford
Direct to Cook,
indirect to Gerald Ford
CV Link from Cook,from Cook,N/A
CSUSB Palm Desert
Campus Connection Not aligned Alignment
with primary axis
Alignment
with primary axis
Acrisure Arena Cook Street 1.70mi Cook Street 1.96 mi Cook Street 2.24 mi
Ped Bridge .90 mi Ped Bridge .61 mi Ped Bridge .29 mi
Site Suitability C1 C2 C3
Socioeconomic
Impact
Transit Oriented Development
(TOD) Potential Good Good Good
Buildable Area 7.1 acres 4.6 acres 8.2 acres
Mixed Use Viability Good Fair Fair
Shopping,hospitality, recreation,
services, employment and
arts and culture.
Good Fair Fair
Parcel Acquisition / Joint
Dev Opportunity Fair Poor Good
Parcel Availability Existing
Development Plans
Existing
Development Plans N/A
Parcel Cost $$$$$$$$
Highest and Best Use No Yes Yes
Joint Development Opportunity Yes N/A N/A
Potential Infrastructure Costs High Fair Fair
Trackwork, geometry constraints High Low Low
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
44
Site Prominence C1 C2 C3
Socioeconomic
Impact
(Continued)
Bridge Abutments / RR ROW High Low Low
Utilities N/A N/A N/A
Controlled intersections 2 1 1
Land Use Compatibility C1 C2 C3
Land Use and Planning
Site Adjacencies Good Good Good
Town Center Neighborhoods Good Fair Fair
Employment District Good Good Good
Public Facility / Institutional District Good Good Good
CSUSB Interface Fair Good Good
Environmental Consequences C1 C2 C3
Environmental Impacts
Good Good Good
Air Quality (Sand Mitigation)Good Fair Fair
Storm Water Management Good Good Good
Noise Good Good Fair
Biological resources Good Good Good
6.5. COST ESTIMATE
Construction of a rail station suitable for the estimated level of traffic and the resort gateway architecture that is needed to provide the visitor experience
expected of the Coachella Valley is a significant investment for a local community. The City of Palm Desert plans to partner with state and federal agencies
as well as other local agencies and private-sector partners to share the cost of station development, operations, and maintenance so local taxpayers aren’t
bearing the full burden of this important part of the regional transportation infrastructure. Section 7 describes some of the funding opportunities that the City
is exploring to share station costs.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
45
The cost estimates presented here are Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM)
or planning level costs with an accuracy range of -25% to +80%. This
estimate uses ballpark costing based on professional opinion using
limited available conceptual information and the costs to construct
similar stations elsewhere in California. Actual construction costs may
vary significantly from this estimate depending upon the timing of
construction, volatility of material costs, design elements that are chosen
as part of the architectural process, etc.
The ultimate station concept can be built in phases which will allow
the cost to be spread over a longer period of time with some station
elements being needed as soon as train service starts, while others
will be needed later as station ridership and multimodal connections
increase. For example, the parking structure is one of the most expensive
parts of the station construction and likely won’t be needed until rail
ridership reaches a certain threshold or other shared uses create enough
demand that a surface lot can no longer provide the needed capacity.
The new Multimodal Transit HUB on a 10-acre site include:
◢Site access and circulation, utilities, and station buildings
◢Two train platforms including a pedestrian overcrossing spanning
UPRR ROW with stairs and elevators
◢Sitework including passenger plazas, dedicated bus loop,
lighting, and landscape
◢Project also includes TOD site opportunities
Total construction costs for the ultimate station design are expected to
be around $190 million in 2023 dollars. This includes $13.5 million to
build the internal roads and landscaping, $63 million for the ultimate
parking structure (assumed 3-levels), $32 million for the platform,
access bridge, and passenger plaza, and $13 million for station buildings
and signage. An additional $40 million will be needed for design,
engineering, and contracting services, and $30 million for contingency
costs to account for unexpected challenges or delays.
The cost estimate uses the following assumptions:
1. Cost estimate based on year of construction of 2026
2. Construction management and construction administration costs
are not included
3. Agency review fees and permit fees are not included.
4. Railroad and track work costs by others
5. Phased construction, multiple contractor, or mobilization costs
are not included.
In addition to station development, Gerald Ford Drive is currently
incomplete and will need to be widened to accommodate 2 lanes in each
direction with appropriate turning and intersection control. Similarly, the
City will seek partnerships with public and private entities to assist with
construction costs. The roadway improvements are expected to cost
approximately $41M, including a roundabout at the station entrance.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
46
7. POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES
This section identifies funding programs available for agencies in California from Federal, State, and regional sources and how they can be
implemented for transportation infrastructure. Competitive funding resources are available to assist in the development and implementation
of rail infrastructure in the City of Palm Desert. The following is a high-level introduction into some of the main funding programs and grants the City
of Palm Desert can apply.
7.1. GRANT FUNDING SOURCES
Infrastructure and Jobs Act
The Infrastructure and Jobs Act is a federal investment for transportation
and infrastructure. The investment allocates funds for intermodal
transportation system to enhance the nation’s rail network. This
investment is to rebuild the nation’s water, road, transit, and broadband
systems, grow our economy, and create good-paying jobs. Funding
opportunities for infrastructure include:
◢Roads, bridges,
and major projects
◢Passenger and freight rail
◢Highway and
pedestrian safety
◢Public transit
◢Broadband
◢Ports and waterways
◢Airports
◢Water infrastructure
◢Power and grid
reliability and resiliency
◢Resiliency, including funding for
coastal resiliency, ecosystem
restoration, and weatherization
◢Clean school buses and ferries
◢Electric vehicle charging
◢Addressing legacy pollution
by cleaning up Brownfield and
Superfund sites and reclaiming
abandoned mines
◢Western water infrastructure
The Infrastructure and Jobs Act offers opportunities for local
governments and communities to secure competitive federal grants and
improve infrastructure. Additional information regarding this program
at the federal level can be found online at: https://www.phmsa.dot.
gov/legislative-mandates/bipartisan-infrastructure-law-bil-
infrastructure-investment-and-jobs-act-iija
California’s Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP)
Grants from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to fund transformative
capital improvements that will modernize California’s intercity,
commuter, and urban rail; bus; and ferry transit systems to significantly
reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, vehicle miles traveled,
and congestion.
Federal Railroad Administration’s Corridor Identification
and Development Program
A comprehensive intercity passenger rail planning and development
program that will help guide intercity passenger rail development
throughout the country and create a pipeline of intercity passenger rail
projects ready for implementation.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
47
Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements
This program funds a wide range of projects that improve the safety,
efficiency, and reliability of intercity passenger and freight rail to enhance
multimodal connections. This program invests in railroad infrastructure
projects that improve safety, support economic growth, develop
jobs, increase capacity and supply chain resilience, apply innovative
technology, climate change, and equity.
Mega Grant for Grade Separations
This program supports large, complex projects that are difficult to fund
by other means and likely to generate national or regional economic,
mobility, or safety benefits.
7.2. VALUE CAPTURE AND OTHER
FINANCING MECHANISMS
Transportation infrastructure has historically proven to be a catalyst for
economic development in the immediate environs of station areas, as
well as further throughout the local communities. This circumstance
presents the City with an opportunity to utilize available “value capture”
funding and financing tools to capture the value of that future economic
development and create funding for those infrastructure costs, including
initial capital expenditures and maintenance costs, as well as potential
funding for related community benefits and amenities.
A funding and financing strategy that includes financing districts,
monetization of public agency owned assets (e.g., new parking facilities
in the station area), grants, and other complementary sources may
be well-suited to capture value from new development to fund the
targeted infrastructure, as well as related transit-oriented first-/last-
mile infrastructure improvements, and even affordable housing in
the station area.
Consulting team member Kosmont Companies has prepared a Value
Capture Feasibility Analysis that estimates approximately $22 million
to $94 million in present-value funding capacity from a financing
district such as an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD), not
including potential complementary funding available from monetization
of public assets and grants. The financing district would represent the
sustainable, ongoing revenue stream that could directly support initial
infrastructure capital expenditures, as well as maintenance of the
infrastructure.
Part of the overall financing strategy would then be to leverage the
capacity of financing districts to increase scoring and priority for
other complementary funding, such as state transportation, transit-
oriented development, housing, climate resilience grants, and federal
transportation and economic development grants, on an opportunistic
basis. While the financing district would make the City more competitive
for such grants, the grants would also in turn improve the financial
viability of the financing district, solving initial cash flow needs while the
funding capacity of the financing district builds up.
Analysis considered a range of financing district boundary scenarios
(i.e., smaller boundaries focused on the immediate environs of the
station area versus larger boundaries encapsulating opportunity sites
farther from the station), district durations (i.e., 30 years, 45 years), and
very importantly, taxing entity partnership scenarios. While a City-only
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
48
financing district strategy can achieve favorable “return on investment”
for the City (e.g., evaluated to be $0.5 to $3.1 million in annual net fiscal
revenues), a broader partnership including the County of Riverside, for
example, would further improve financial feasibility and funding capacity.
Subject to confirmation of other components of rail station feasibility
and eventual station site selection, implementation of such a financing
strategy would require a series of public meetings and hearings for
approval, pursuant to state law.
7.3. FUNDING PARTNERS
Due to the significant local and regional benefits of transportation
infrastructure, as well as the significant cost associated with such
improvements, the funding plan for these projects typically involves
myriad partners from the public, private, and non-profit sectors. Based
on the consulting team’s similar experience in other communities across
the state, county, and internationally, the coalition of funding partners
could include, but not be limited to, the following types of organizations:
Local Public Agencies
◢Local city (City of Palm Desert)
◢Local county (County of Riverside)
◢Local transportation authority(ies) (e.g., Riverside County
Transportation Commission, SunLine Transit Agency)
◢Local association of governments (e.g., Coachella Valley
Association of Governments)
Local Private Sector and Non-Profit Partners
◢Local landowners and real estate developers
◢Local businesses and visitor destinations (e.g., Acrisure Arena,
local hotels, etc.)
◢Affordable housing developers and related partners (e.g., Lift to Rise)
◢Potential private sector infrastructure developers
◢Local educational institutions (e.g., California State University San
Bernardino, University of California Riverside, College of the Desert,
California Indian Nations College)
◢Local medical institutions (e.g., Kaiser Permanente)
◢Philanthropic individuals and organizations
Potential State Grant / Loan Sources
◢State of California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD)
◢California Department of Transportation (CalTrans)
◢Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR)
◢Strategic Growth Council (SGC)
◢California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (IBank)
Potential Federal Grant Sources
◢U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)
◢U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA)
◢U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
49
The form of funding partnership typically varies highly by
partner and circumstance, but could include frameworks
such as participation in local financing districts (EIFDs,
Community Facilities Districts, Tourism Business
Improvement Districts), one-time monetary contributions,
ongoing allocations of recurring revenues (e.g., sales taxes,
transient occupancy taxes, fees), contributions of land, low-
cost and/or conduit financing, loan guarantees, support in
applications and related pursuit of third-party funding (e.g.,
grant writing, letters of support), and other means.
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
50
Palm Desert Rail Feasibility Study
8. CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS
The existing conditions and public opinion support the addition of a rail station in Palm Desert. As this study progresses into future planning,
design, and implementation phases, stakeholder engagement will remain a critical component of the process. Key stakeholders include the City of
Palm Desert, CSU San Bernardino, Acrisure Arena, Local Homeowners Associations, SunLine Transit, Greyhound, Amtrak, Metrolink, Union Pacific,
and residents of Palm Desert. Additional key stakeholders may be consulted as this project progresses. Further feasibility analysis will be conducted
to finalize a location and layout of the station. This may be supported through accompanying projects to improve roads, transit service, and parking
at or near the station. In addition, incentives to attract transit-oriented development should be considered to create a greater number of destinations
in proximity to the rail station.
All funding avenues for the station, and by extension for transit operators, should be considered and scrutinized. This includes, but is not limited to,
the local and regional tax base, grants, and value capture. Preliminary engineering and final design plans will also need to be prepared and obtain
environmental clearance. Negotiations will also need to be conducted with Union Pacific for construction within the right-of-way, and an operating
agreement will need to be developed with rail service providers such as Metrolink and Amtrak.
A rail station in Palm Desert will create significant benefits to the City and Coachella Valley region by reducing overall VMT and air pollution,
providing an alternative long-distance travel option for non-drivers, and creating opportunities for transit-oriented development and walkable
communities. The station will also benefit visitors to Palm Desert and the region through a potential direct connection to the Acrisure Arena, and by
providing better access to Palm Desert’s universities, local events, and festivals. While this study represents the collective vision for rail service in the
City of Palm Desert, further study and design will refine the proposed improvements in this document. Subsequent phases will ensure the successful
implementation of a rail station with regular passenger service to Palm Desert.
APPENDIX A: STATION RIDERSHIP DENSITY
METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS
Palm Desert Rail Station Feasibility Study – Final Report | Appendix A
Page A‐1
Appendix A: Station Ridership Density Methodology and Results
Introduction:
An analysis was conducted to determine the ridership potential along the existing Union Pacific Railroad
(UPRR) corridor in the central Coachella Valley. This analysis determined which sections of the rail
corridor could potentially serve the most residents, workers and visitors based on nearby land uses.
Methodology:
The methodology evaluated the number of residents, jobs, and special uses or activities with a half‐mile
and three‐mile radius of proposed station locations along the corridor. Data was sourced from the US
Census, Longitudinal Employer‐Household Dynamics data, and existing land uses and was examined at
the census block level. In order to determine the service potential of each of these census blocks, the
following data were obtained for inclusion in the analysis.
Population of Census Blocks (from 2020 US Decennial Census)
Location of Employment and Number Employed (from 2021 Longitudinal Employer‐Household
Dynamics (LEHD) data)
Additional “Special Activities” such as Large Gathering Sites (includes Casinos, Theatres/Concert
Venues, and Universities/Trade Schools)
The information regarding any “special activities” that occur in each block was added based on capacity
information obtained from local universities, casinos, and concert venues. A heatmap of the total
residents, jobs, and special activities was then generated using the Inverse Distance Weighting (IDW)
method in GIS (See Figure 1).
The analysis was conducted at half mile intervals along the rail line resulting in 15 total sites. The GIS
system counted the number of residents, jobs, and special activity seats that were within 3 miles of each
site. It then counted the same information within a half mile of each site. Residents, jobs, and special
uses within ½ a mile of the site were weighted at double those that are further out to reflect the
increase in potential attraction to the station site.
The points representing the station locations were then ranked from 1‐15, with 1 being the segment
with the highest number of weighted residents, jobs, and visitors, and 15 being the one with the least,
with color coding assigned to each (see Figure 1).
Results:
The potential station sites ranged from 38,222 weighted residents, jobs, and visitors up to 77,086
weighted residents, jobs, and visitors. The locally preferred site location selected as part of the Palm
Desert Rail Station Feasibility Study is located at the number 1‐ranked site.
Palm Desert Rail Station Feasibility Study – Final Report | Appendix A
Page A‐2
Figure 1: Ridership Potential from Pedestrians and Transit Users Along Rail Corridor in Palm Desert, California
APPENDIX B: VALUE CAPTURE FINANCING
ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Prepared by:
Kosmont Companies
Preliminary Rail Station
Value Capture Financing Analysis Summary
December 2023
Introduction and Background
2
•As part of its evaluation of the feasibility of a rail station within the City of Palm Desert, the City should
consider the applicability of various “value capture” funding and financing tools to facilitate the relevant
infrastructure installation and operations and maintenance costs
•A financing strategy that includes Tax Increment Financing (“TIF”) financing, new potential parking assets,
and other complementary sources may be well-suited to capture value from new development to fund the
targeted infrastructure
•This analysis estimates ~$22M to $94M in TIF funding capacity alone, while still generating a positive
General Fund fiscal impact of ~$528K to $3.1M annually
•While a City-only financing district strategy can achieve favorable “return on investment” for the City, a
broader partnership including the County of Riverside would further improve financial feasibility
•Subject to confirmation of other components of rail station feasibility and eventual station site selection,
implementation of such a financing strategy would require a series of public meetings and hearings for
approval
Presentation Outline
Communicating in a Digital World
3
1.Overview of Funding and Financing Tools
2.Funding and Financing Analysis for Palm Desert
3.Potential Next Steps and Timing
4
Overview of Primary Development Finance Tools
Infrastructure
Funding &
Financing
Tools
Tax
Increment
Financing
(TIF)
Community
Facilities
Districts
(CFD)
General Fund
Financings (I-
Bank, GO
Bonds, Lease
Revenue
Bonds)
Grants
Impact
Fees, State
Budget
Surplus,
Other
5
$0M
$100M
$200M
$300M
$400M
$500M
$600M
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Baseline Property Value
Property taxes continue to flow to City / County / Schools / Other Taxing Entities as normal
New Property Value from
New Development / Rehabilitation
Available to TIF District
Years from District Formation
Assessed
Property Value
(A/V) within
TIF District
Boundaries
New Total
Value After
TIF District
Benefits all
Taxing Entities
Period of New
Development
Note: Illustrative. Conservative 2% growth of existing assessed value (A/V) shown; does not include mark-to-market increases associated with property sales.
What is Tax Increment Financing (TIF) – Not a New Tax
TIF Alternatives in California Today
Communicating in a Digital World
6
Affordable
Housing
Authorities
(AHA)
Community
Revitalization &
Inv. Authority
(CRIA)
Enhanced
Infrastructure
Financing
District
(EIFD)
Neighborhood
Infill Finance &
Transit
Improvements
Act
(NIFTI)
NIFTI-2
Coterminous requirement and other
requirements have made NIFTI &
NIFTI-2 infeasible in other communities
Restriction to fund ONLY
affordable housing (and
not infrastructure) has
been deemed to
restrictive to be feasible
in other communities
Infrastructure
& Revitalization
Financing
District
(IRFD)
Most flexible,
most widely
used
More emphasis on
affordable housing
(25% set-aside)
Climate
Resilience
District
(CRD)
NEW, limited focus on
certain infrastructure
Flexible, voter-approval still
required
EIFD Fundamentals
Communicating in a Digital World
7
45 years from first bond issuanceLong Term
Districts
Public Financing Authority (PFA) implements Infrastructure Financing Plan (IFP)Governance
Mandatory public hearings for formation with protest opportunity; no public voteApprovals
Any property with useful life of 15+ years & of communitywide significance; purchase,
construction, expansion, improvement, seismic retrofit, rehabilitation, and maintenance
Eligible
Projects
Eligible Projects
Partial List
8
Roadway / Parking / Transit
Brownfield Remediation
Storm / Flood / Public Facilities Parks / Open Space / Recreation
Libraries & Childcare Facilities Affordable Housing
Broadband Small Business / Wildfire Prevention / Other
Value Capture TIF Districts in Progress Statewide
(Partial List)
Relevant Examples:
•County of Riverside Unincorporated EIFDs
(Highway 74, Temecula Valley Wine County, East
Coachella Valley)
•City of La Verne + County of Los Angles TOD EIFD
•City of Placentia + County of Orange TOD EIFD
Why are Public Agencies Authorizing
Value Capture Districts?
Communicating in a Digital World
10
1.Return on Investment: Private sector investment induced by district commitment accelerates
growth of net fiscal revenues, job creation, housing production, essential infrastructure
improvements
2.Ability to attract additional funds / other public money (“OPM”) – tax increment from other
entities (county, special districts), federal / state grants / loans (e.g., for transit oriented
development, water, housing, parks, remediation)
Other Value Capture Tools
Communicating in a Digital World
11
1.Monetization of public agency owned land, such as new parking created
2.Parking revenue financing
3.Community Facilities District (CFD) financing
4.General Fund public financings (e.g., lease revenue financing)
Comparison of Various Public Financing Tools
Communicating in a Digital World
12
District Type Description Revenue
Source
Approval
Structure
Use of
Funds
TIF (e.g., EIFD, CRIA,
IFD, IRFD)
Incremental property tax
revenues from new
development used to fund
local infrastructure.
Max term is 45 years from
approval to issue debt.
Incremental (new
development) property tax
revenues (incl. VLF) –does not
increase taxes
District formation –No vote,
but majority protest
opportunity by landowners
and registered voters
Bond issuance –None
•Infrastructure of regional or
communitywide significance
•Maintenance
•Affordable housing
Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District (CFD)
and/or Assessment
District
Additional assessment or
“special tax” used to fund
infrastructure / services that
benefit property.
Max term is 40 years from
date of debt issuance.
New property assessment or
tax –appears as separate line
item on tax bill
District formation –2/3 vote of
landowners or registered
voters in district*
Bond issuance –vote of elected
body (City)
•Infrastructure capital
expenditures of benefit to
landowners
•Maintenance
•Public services (e.g., safety,
programs)
General Obligation Voter-approved debt that is
repaid with “override” to 1%
tax levy; City-wide
Direct property tax levied on
all properties at same millage
rate
2/3 vote of registered voters in
entire City
•In accordance with bond
plebiscite
Lease Revenue / COPs General Fund-supported
borrowing, generally utilizing
City-owned assets to be
leased and leased back
General Fund (or other legally
available revenues as
determined by City)
Vote of elected body (City)•In accordance with bond
authorization
Potential funding strategy can utilize MULTIPLE mechanisms
* For CFD formation, a vote of registered voters within the district boundary is required if 12 or more registered voters live therein (otherwise a vote of landowners prorated by acreage).
13Note: Does not include projects completed or already under construction.
Source: City of Palm Desert Current Economic Development Projects, Updated Sept 2023
Potential Station Area TOD Only
100 units residential
100-room hotel
14,000 SF commercial Value Capture
Boundary
Scenario #1
Value Capture Boundary Scenario #1
Station Area TOD Only
14Note: Does not include projects completed or already under construction.
Source: City of Palm Desert Current Economic Development Projects, Updated Sept 2023
#Potential Development Projects Approved or Under Review
3 Staybridge Hotel –96 rooms
6 Spanish Walk Apartments –150 units, affordable apartments
8 Palm Villas Apartments -241 units,affordable apartments
18 University Village Pad 3 -Restaurant
21 Millenium Specific Plan –166 single-family lots, commercial, business park +
29 University Neighborhood Specific Plan -remaining components
30 University Park –1100 housing units, public parks, private open space
31 University Park Townhomes –110 Townhomes
32 University Park Multifamily –336 apartment units
Value Capture
Boundary
Scenario #2
+ CSUSB Palm Desert
Campus Master Plan
Value Capture Boundary Scenario #2
Immediately Adjacent Opportunity Sites
•Availability of new parking may additionally
support new development in adjacent properties
15
Value Capture Boundary Scenario #3
Broader Value Capture Area
Note: Does not include projects completed or already under construction.
Source: City of Palm Desert Current Economic Development Projects, Updated Sept 2023
#Potential Development Projects Approved or Under Review
1 DSRT Surf –Lagoon and surf center, 92 hotel rooms, 83 villas +
3 Staybridge Hotel –96 rooms
4 CarMax Auto Superstore Expansion–Carwash tunnel
6 Spanish Walk Apartments –150 units, affordable apartments
7 The Crossings at Palm Desert –176 units,affordable apartments
8 Palm Villas Apartments -241 units,affordable apartments
10 Frank Sinatra Drive/ Portola Ave. Apartments -394 multi-family units
11 West Coast Self-Storage –self-storage facility
15 Santa Barbara Condominiums –32 units, pool, recreation
18 University Village Pad 3 -Restaurant
20 MCP Specific Plan –384 multi-family units, planned commercial
21 Millenium Specific Plan –166 single-family lots, commercial, business park +
25 Alpha Holdings Building –multi-tenant, light industrial
26 Landmark Specific Plan –1500 residential, commercial retail, storage facility
27 Refuge Specific Plan –969 mixed residential units
29 University Neighborhood Specific Plan -remaining components
30 University Park –1100 housing units, public parks, private open space
31 University Park Townhomes –110 Townhomes
32 University Park Multifamily –336 apartment units
Value Capture
Boundary
Scenario #3
+ CSUSB Palm Desert
Campus Master Plan
16
Future Development Assumptions – Scenario #1
Absorption Assumed over 5-20 Years
Note: AV at buildout values in current 2023 dollars. Affordable housing excluded from calculations (typically property tax-exempt)
Sources: City of Palm Desert Current Economic Development Projects, updated Sept 2023, CoStar (Accessed January 2023)
Area # SF or Units Estimated
AV Factor
Estimated
Total AV at Buildout
Residential –For-sale 0 units $500K per unit $0
Residential –Rental 100 units $250K per unit $25 million
Hotel 100 rooms $250K per room $25 million
Commercial / Retail / Office 14,000 SF $300 per SF $4 million
Industrial / Flex 0 SF $195 per SF $0
Total New Development Assumed within Value Capture Study Area $54 million
17
Future Development Assumptions – Scenario #2
Absorption Assumed over 5-20 Years
Note: AV at buildout values in current 2023 dollars. Affordable housing excluded from calculations (typically property tax-exempt)
Sources: City of Palm Desert Current Economic Development Projects, updated Sept 2023, CoStar (Accessed January 2023)
Area # SF or Units Estimated
AV Factor
Estimated
Total AV at Buildout
Residential –For-sale 1,497 units $500K per unit $748 million
Residential –Rental 934 units $250K per unit $233 million
Hotel 196 rooms $250K per room $49 million
Commercial / Retail / Office 23,000 SF $300 per SF $7 million
Industrial / Flex 0 SF $195 per SF $0
Total New Development Assumed within Value Capture Study Area $1.04 billion
18
Future Development Assumptions – Scenario #3
Absorption Assumed over 5-20 Years
Note: AV at buildout values in current 2023 dollars. Affordable housing excluded from calculations (typically property tax-exempt)
Sources: City of Palm Desert Current Economic Development Projects, updated Sept 2023, CoStar (Accessed January 2023)
Area # SF or Units Estimated
AV Factor
Estimated
Total AV at Buildout
Residential –For-sale 2,362 units $500K per unit $1.18 billion
Residential –Rental 3,431 units $250K per unit $858 million
Hotel 288 rooms $250K per room $72 million
Commercial / Retail / Office 220,900 SF $300 per SF $66 million
Industrial / Flex 312,410 SF $195 per SF $61 million
Total New Development Assumed within Value Capture Study Area $2.24 billion
19
Summary of Potential City General Fund
Fiscal Revenue Impacts
Note: Assumes installation of necessary public infrastructure. $2023
•Additional benefits related to housing production, jobs, wages
Value Capture
Boundary
Scenario #1
(TOD Site)
Value Capture
Boundary
Scenario #2
(Immediately
Adjacent
Opportunity Sites)
Value Capture
Boundary
Scenario #3
(Broader Value
Capture Area)
Property Tax $38,000 $694,200 $1,502,100
Property Tax In-Lieu of MVLF $15,200 $291,000 $627,500
Sales and Use Tax -Direct / On-Site $28,200 $46,400 $445,300
Sales and Use Tax -Indirect / Off-Site $9,100 $122,800 $236,000
Transient Occupancy Tax $463,700 $908,900 $1,335,500
Estimated Total ANNUAL Revenues $554,200 $2,063,300 $4,146,400
20
a)First-mile / last-mile connectivity improvements (bike, pedestrian, bus
connectivity)
b)Parking, circulation improvements
c)Water, sewer, and other utility capacity enhancements
d)Affordable housing
e)Parks & open space
Potential Projects for Special District Funding
in Palm Desert
21
•Primary potential contributors of property tax increment are the
City of Palm Desert and County of Riverside
•City is a no/low property tax city and averages ~7% of every $1
collected in property taxes within the Value Capture Study Area
City additionally receives equivalent of ~3% of property tax in
lieu of Motor Vehicle License Fees (MVLF), also available to
TIF districts
•County share varies by area and averages ~13%
County additionally receives equivalent of ~9% of property
tax in lieu of MVLF, also available to TIF, but not incorporated
into this analysis to be conservative
•Other entities (e.g., County Fire, CV Water, Desert Hospital, County
Library) receive small shares, carry restrictions on available
revenues
•School-related entities cannot participate
As counties tend to rely more heavily on property tax revenue sources generated by new development within incorporated jurisdictions, it is Kosmont’s experience that it is not reasonable to
assume allocation of property tax in lieu of MVLF by the County. As cities benefit from additional non-property tax revenue sources (e.g., sales tax, transient occupancy tax) from new
development, it is Kosmont’s experience that it is reasonable for cities to consider contributing property tax in lieu of MVLF.
Sample Property Tax Distributions
within Value Capture Study Area
Property Tax Revenues Available to TIF Districts
Tax Rate Area (TRA) >>>18-165 18-227 18-082*61-165
Sample Projects >>>Spanish Walk Crossings Desert Surf Arena
PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL 30.63%30.63%30.18%
DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL 36.88%
EDUCATIONAL REVENUE AUG FUND (ERAF)16.94%16.59%15.81%18.39%
COUNTY GENERAL FUND 12.92%12.26%11.32%16.11%
DESERT COMMUNITY COLLEGE 8.74%8.74%7.66%8.61%
COUNTY STRUCTURE FIRE PROTECTION 6.82%6.82%5.98%6.72%
CITY OF PALM DESERT 6.40%7.33%5.61%0.00%
RIVCO OFFICE OF EDUCATION 4.76%4.76%4.17%4.69%
CVWD STORM WATER UNIT 4.02%4.02%3.53%3.96%
CV WATER DISTRICT STATE WTR PROJ 3.18%3.18%2.79%3.13%
DESERT HOSPITAL 2.32%2.32%2.03%2.29%
COUNTY FREE LIBRARY 1.67%1.67%1.46%1.64%
CV MOSQUITO & VECTOR CONTROL 1.14%1.14%1.00%1.12%
COACHELLA VALLEY REC AND PARK 1.21%
RIVCO REGIONAL PARK & OPEN SP 0.32%0.40%0.28%0.40%
COACHELLA VALLEY PUBLIC CEMETARY 0.23%
COACHELLA VALLEY RESOURCE CONSER 0.04%0.04%0.04%0.04%
PALM SPRINGS PUBLIC CEMETERY 0.11%0.11%0.11%
SUPERVISORIAL ROAD DISTRICT 4 1.15%
CVWD IMP DIST 1 DS 1.46%
TOTAL 1% PROPERTY TAX GEN LEVY 100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%
22
EIFD Revenue
Allocation Scenario
Year 5
Accumulated
Revenue +
Bonding
Capacity*
Year 10
Accumulated
Revenue +
Bonding
Capacity*
50-Year
Present-Value
@ 3%
Discount Rate
50-Year
Nominal
Total
A) City 50%N/A $136,000 $1,161,000 $2,891,000
B) City 50% + County Dollar
Match (~37% of County share)N/A $272,000 $2,323,000 $5,782,000
City allocation includes allocation from both AB8 + MVLF in-lieu. County allocation does not include MVLF in-lieu.
* Bonding capacity assumes Year 5 is first bond issuance for EIFD. “Year 5 means fifth year of revenue following district formation. Net proceeds shown. Bondable revenue
assumes $25,000 admin charge, 150% debt service coverage. 6.5% interest rate; 30-year term. Proceeds net of 2% underwriter's discount, estimated reserve fund
(maximum annual debt service), costs of issuance estimated at $350,000.Source: Kosmont Financial Services (KFS), registered municipal advisor.
Revenue and Bonding Capacity Scenarios
Scenario #1
23
EIFD Revenue
Allocation Scenario
Year 5
Accumulated
Revenue +
Bonding
Capacity*
Year 10
Accumulated
Revenue +
Bonding
Capacity*
50-Year
Present-Value
@ 3%
Discount Rate
50-Year
Nominal
Total
A) City 50%$1,155,000 $4,344,000 $22,603,000 $58,380,000
B) City 50% + County Dollar
Match (~37% of County share)$2,955,000 $9,333,000 $45,207,000 $116,760,000
City allocation includes allocation from both AB8 + MVLF in-lieu. County allocation does not include MVLF in-lieu.
* Bonding capacity assumes Year 5 is first bond issuance for EIFD. “Year 5 means fifth year of revenue following district formation. Net proceeds shown. Bondable revenue
assumes $25,000 admin charge, 150% debt service coverage. 6.5% interest rate; 30-year term. Proceeds net of 2% underwriter's discount, estimated reserve fund
(maximum annual debt service), costs of issuance estimated at $350,000.Source: Kosmont Financial Services (KFS), registered municipal advisor.
Revenue and Bonding Capacity Scenarios
Scenario #2
24
EIFD Revenue
Allocation Scenario
Year 5
Accumulated
Revenue +
Bonding
Capacity*
Year 10
Accumulated
Revenue +
Bonding
Capacity*
50-Year
Present-Value
@ 3%
Discount Rate
50-Year
Nominal
Total
A) City 50%$3,134,000 $9,645,000 $46,791,000 $120,643,000
B) City 50% + County Dollar
Match (~37% of County share)$6,913,000 $19,934,000 $93,583,000 $241,285,000
City allocation includes allocation from both AB8 + MVLF in-lieu. County allocation does not include MVLF in-lieu.
* Bonding capacity assumes Year 5 is first bond issuance for EIFD. “Year 5 means fifth year of revenue following district formation. Net proceeds shown. Bondable revenue
assumes $25,000 admin charge, 150% debt service coverage. 6.5% interest rate; 30-year term. Proceeds net of 2% underwriter's discount, estimated reserve fund
(maximum annual debt service), costs of issuance estimated at $350,000.Source: Kosmont Financial Services (KFS), registered municipal advisor.
Revenue and Bonding Capacity Scenarios
Scenario #3
25
Potential Cash Flow / Debt Issuance Approaches
•Kosmont Financial Services is in active discussions with public finance underwriters regarding
EIFD debt issuances in other jurisdictions
•Underwriters have proposed several approaches for the leverage of EIFD tax increment for
accelerated debt issuance (e.g., 2-3 years from EIFD formation), for example:
a)EIFD increment only, based on completed (or nearly completed) improvements (no immediate capacity)
b)EIFD increment only, based on completed improvements PLUS near-term growth
c)Overlapping EIFD and CFD (CFD Backstop) – landowners / developers must be willing to pay CFD
special taxes in the short term (e.g., 5-10 years) until EIFD increment reaches a level to cover debt service
d)EIFD increment with City or County general fund backstop
•There are advantages and disadvantages with each approach (e.g., upfront proceeds available,
public agency risk, cost of capital)
•Additional alternatives are available if private sector partners (e.g., landowners / developers are
willing to advance infrastructure funding in exchange for reimbursement from EIFD proceeds)
26
EIFDs work better with a Multi-Agency Partnership
& Attract Other Funding
Other Public Sources
Cap-and-Trade / HCD grant & loan
programs (AHSC, IIG, TCC,CERF)
Prop 68 parks & open space grants
Prop 1 water/sewer funds
Caltrans ATP / HSIP grants
Federal EDA / DOT / EPA funding
Federal ARPA, Invest Act, IIJ Act
Other Private Sources
Development Agreement / impact fees
Benefit assessments (e.g., contribution from CFD)
Statewide Community Infrastructure Program (SCIP)
pooled financing
Private investment
•Ideal strategy includes City and County partnership
•EIFDs which involve a City / County joint effort are more likely to win state grant funding sources
•EIFDs explicitly increase scoring for CA state housing grants (e.g., IIG, AHSC, TCC)
27
Summary of Potential Fiscal Revenue Impacts
Net of Potential 50% Increment Contribution to TIF District
Note: Assumes installation of necessary public infrastructure. $2023
•Additional benefits related to housing production, jobs, wages
Value Capture
Boundary
Scenario #1
Value Capture
Boundary
Scenario #2
Value Capture
Boundary
Scenario #3
City of Palm Desert General Fund
Property Tax $38,000 $694,200 $1,502,100
Property Tax Allocation to TIF District ($19,000)($347,100)($751,000)
Property Tax In-Lieu of MVLF $15,200 $291,000 $627,500
Property Tax In-Lieu of MVLF Allocation to TIF District ($7,600)($145,500)($313,750)
Sales and Use Tax -Direct / On-Site $28,200 $46,400 $445,300
Sales and Use Tax -Indirect / Off-Site $9,100 $122,800 $236,000
Transient Occupancy Tax $463,700 $908,900 $1,335,500
Estimated Total Revenues $527,600 $1,570,700 $3,081,650
28
Illustrative Financing District Formation Schedule
Tax increment allocation begins fiscal year following district formation
Debt issuance, if desired, would occur after a stabilized level of tax increment has been established (may be 3-5 years)
Target Date Task
Q1 2024
a) Conduct outreach / discussion among City staff and Council, County staff and Board of Supervisors, other relevant
stakeholders
b)Final determination of TIF district boundaries, targeted projects, governing Public Financing Authority (PFA) Board
composition
Q1 2024 c)Participating taxing agencies adopt Resolution(s) of Intention (ROI) to form EIFD and formally establish PFA Board
Q1 2024 d) PFA directs the drafting of the Infrastructure Financing Plan (IFP)
Q2 2024 e)Distribute draft IFP to property owners, affected taxing entities, City Council, County Board of Supervisors,
planning commission, with corresponding project-related CEQA documentation
Q2 2024 f) PFA holds an initial public meeting to present the draft IFP to the public and property owners
Q2/Q3 2024 g)PFA holds first “official” public hearing to hear written and oral comments but take no action (noticing must occur
at least 30 days after “f”)
Q3 2024 h)City Council / legislative bodies of other affected taxing entity contributing increment adopt resolution(s)
approving IFP
Q3 2024 i) PFA holds second public hearing to hear additional comments and take action to modify or reject IFP or CRIA Plan
(at least 30 days after “g”)
Q3/Q4 2024 j) PFA holds third public hearing to consider oral and written protests and take action to terminate proceedings or
adopt IFP and form the EIFD by resolution (at least 30 days after “i”)
29
Next Steps
•Address questions, receive and incorporate feedback from City
•If there is City support for mechanisms such as TIF, approach County to discuss potential
partnership
•Subject to confirmation of other components of rail station feasibility and eventual station site
selection, implementation of such a financing strategy would require a series of public meetings
and hearings for approval
30
THANK YOU
Questions?
Kosmont Companies
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd. #382 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
Ph: (424) 297-1070 | Fax: (424) 286-4632
www.kosmont.com
Disclaimer
31
The analyses, projections, assumptions, rates of return, and any examples presented herein are for illustrative
purposes and are not a guarantee of actual and/or future results. Project pro forma and tax analyses are
projections only. Actual results may differ from those expressed in this analysis.
Discussions or descriptions of potential financial tools that may be available to the City are included for
informational purposes only and are not intended to be to be “advice” within the context of this Analysis.
Municipal Advisory activities are conducted through Kosmont Companies’ affiliate, Kosmont Financial
Services, which is Registered as a Municipal Advisor with the SEC and MSRB.
32
TIF Today versus Former Redevelopment Agencies
Sample of Differences
Former RDAs TIF in 2023 (e.g., EIFD)
Eligible Use of Funds •Infrastructure and affordable
housing
•Mixed-income housing
•Land clearing and parcel assembly
•Tax and other private business /
developer subsidies
•Public infrastructure (e.g., roads, flood
control, open space, utilities)
•Public facilities
•Affordable housing
Eminent Domain /
Condemnation
•Allowed •Not allowed
Eligible Areas •Must qualify as “blighted”•No “blight” finding required
Governance •City Council or County Board
•School entity participation
•Public Financing Authority including
Public Members (no school entities)
Formation •Vote of governing body •3 public hearings, majority protest
opportunity from landowners and
registered voters within EIFD
TIF as a Component of the Economic Development and
Public Financing Toolkit
Communicating in a Digital World
33
•There are advantages / disadvantages to TIF Districts compared to other mechanisms, such as general obligation (GO)
bonds, lease revenue bonds / COPs, Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) financing, assessment districts, and
other tools
•Advantages of TIF include no encumbrance of existing City/county resources, can attract tax increment contributions
from other taxing entities, increased priority for grant funding, ability to demonstrate commitment to multiple
infrastructure (and/or affordable housing) projects to catalyze private sector development, capacity to fund maintenance,
no additional taxes to property owners / residents / businesses, and ease of voter approval
•Disadvantages of TIF include lack of comparable financings thus far, statutory vs. constitutional authority to issue debt,
and subordination to redevelopment successor agency obligations
•Complementary Tool: TIF should not be considered a replacement for other useful financing mechanisms, but
rather a complementary tool; other jurisdictions have been successful in utilizing TIF as well as other tools for
different projects within the same community
LETTERS OF SUPPORT