26529.00060\42337578.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
Permanent Residential
Property
$388 per Residential
Unit
Short-Term Rental
Property
$291 per Residential
Unit
Hotel Property $277 per Hotel
Room
Retail Property $0.67 per Building
Square Foot
Other Non-Residential
Property
$0.34 per Building
Square Foot
Effective July 1, 2026 and each subsequent Fiscal Year following, the Maximum Special Tax rates shall be increased from the Maximum Special Tax rate in effect for the prior Fiscal Year by the Annual Escalation Factor.
2. Undeveloped Property
Each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2024-25, each Assessor’s Parcel classified as Undeveloped Property shall be exempt from the levy of the Special Tax.
3. Exempt Property
No Special Tax shall be levied on Exempt Property as defined in Section F.
For each Fiscal Year, if the use or ownership of an Assessor’s Parcel or Exempt Property changes so that such Assessor’s Parcel is no longer classified as one of the uses set forth in Section F, therefore making such Assessor’s Parcel no longer eligible to be classified as Exempt Property, such Assessor’s Parcel shall be deemed to be Taxable Property and shall be taxed pursuant to the provisions of Section C.
D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
Commencing in Fiscal Year 2024-25 and for each subsequent Fiscal Year, the CFD Administrator shall levy the Special Tax on all Taxable Property of CFD 2024-1 until the total amount of Special Tax levied equals the Special Tax Requirement. The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property within CFD 2024-1 up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement.
Notwithstanding any provision of this Section D to the contrary, under no circumstances will the Special Tax levied against any Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property that is classified as Residential Property be increased by more than ten percent (10%) per Fiscal Year as a consequence of delinquency or default in the payment of the Special Tax by the owner of any other Assessor’s Parcel.
E. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
26529.00060\42337578.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
The Special Tax shall be levied in perpetuity for the purpose of financing ongoing authorized services and therefore may not be prepaid.
F. EXEMPTIONS
The City Council shall classify as Exempt Property: (i) Public Property, (ii) Property Owner Association Property, (iii) Assessor’s Parcels with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the easement, including but not limited to property designated for open space, trails, pathways, parks or park and recreation related facilities, and (iv) property reasonably designated by the City or CFD Administrator as Exempt Property due to deed restrictions, conservation easement, or similar factors.
G. APPEALS
Any property owner claiming that the amounts or application of the Special Tax is not correct may file a written notice of appeal with the CFD Administrator not later than twelve months after having paid the first installment of the Special Tax. The CFD Administrator shall promptly review the appeal, and if necessary, meet with the property owner, consider written and oral evidence regarding the amount of the Special Tax, and rule on the appeal. If the decision of the CFD Administrator requires that the Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel be modified or changed in favor of the property owner, a cash refund shall not be made but an adjustment shall be made to the Special Tax on that Assessor’s Parcel in the subsequent Fiscal Year(s) to compensate for the overpayment of the Special Tax.
H. MANNER OF COLLECTION
The Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes, provided, however, that the Special Tax may be billed and collected at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet the financial obligations of CFD 2024-1.
I. DURATION OF TAX
The Special Tax shall be levied in perpetuity to fund the Special Tax Requirement unless such tax is no longer required as determined by the City Council.
J. INTERPRETATION
The City may interpret, clarify, and revise this Rate and Method to correct any inconsistency, vagueness, or ambiguity, by resolution and/or ordinance, that does not create a material adverse effect on the levy and collection of the Special Tax.
26529.00060\42337582.1
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS,
CALIFORNIA CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION AND SUBMITTING TO THE VOTERS OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2024-1 (PUBLIC
SAFETY), CITY OF INDIAN WELLS PROPOSITIONS REGARDING THE
ANNUAL LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTRICT TO PAY THE COSTS OF CERTAIN PUBLIC
SERVICES, AND ESTABLISHING AN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
THEREFOR
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 53325.1 of the California Government Code, the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Indian Wells (the “City”) has adopted the resolution of formation of Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety) , City of Indian Wells , County of Riverside, State of California (“CFD No. 2024-1”), establishing the Community Facilities District and the boundaries thereof (the “Resolution of Formation”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 53326 of the California Government Code, it is necessary that the City Council also submit to the voters of CFD No. 2024-1 the proposition relating to the annual levy of special taxes on taxable property within CFD No. 2024-1 to pay the costs for certain public services; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 53325.7 of the California Government Code, the City Council may also submit to the voters of CFD No. 2024-1 a proposition with respect to establishing an appropriations limit for CFD No. 2024-1; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk (the “City Clerk”) has advised the City Council that they have received a statement from the Registrar of Voters of the County of Riverside that there are no persons registered to vote in the territory of CFD No. 2024-1.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council finds that: (i) the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference ; (ii) 12 persons have not been registered to vote within the territory of CFD No. 2024-1 for each of the 90 days preceding the close of the public hearing held on June 20 , 202 4; (iii) pursuant to Section 53326 of the California Government Code, as a result of the findings set forth in clause (ii) above, the vote in the s pecial election called by this R esolution shall be by the landown ers of CFD No. 2024-1 whose property would be subject to the special taxes if they were levied at the time of the election, and each landowner shall have one vote for each acre, or portion thereof, which he or she owns within CFD No. 2024-1 which would be subject to the proposed special taxes if they were levied at the time of the election; (iv) the owner of all of the property in CFD No. 2024-1 has by written consent (a) waived the time limits set forth in Section 53326 of the California Government Code fo r holdi ng the election called by this R esolution and the election on the propositions of CFD No. 2024-1, which pursuant to Section 4 hereof is consolidated with the election called hereby, (b) consented to the holding of the special elections on June 20, 2024, (c) waived notice and mailed notice of the time and date of the special elections, and (d) waived an impartial analysis of the ballot propositions pursuant to Section 9313 or 13119 of the ATTACHMENT #2
26529.00060\42337582.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
2 California Elections Code and arguments and rebuttals pursuant to Sections 9314 to 9317, inclusive, mailing of a statement pursuant to Section 9401 of that Code and receipt of a ballot pamphlet as required by Section 3023 of that Code; and (v) the City Clerk has consented to the holding of the special elections on June 20, 2024.
SECTION 2. Call of Election . The City Council hereby calls and schedules special elections for June 20, 2024, within and for CFD No. 2024-1 on (i) the proposition with respect to the annual levy of special taxes on taxable property within CFD No. 2024-1 for the payment of the ongoing maintenance of certain public services to be provided by CFD No. 2024-1 and (ii) the proposition with respect to establishing an appropriations limit for CFD No. 2024-1.
SECTION 3. Propositions. The propositions to be submitted to the voters of CFD No. 2024-1 at such special election shall be as follows:
First Proposition: Shall Proposition A authorizing the levy of a special tax annually on taxable property within CFD No. 2024-1 of the City of Indian Wells, County of Riverside, State of California, to pay certain Services as defined and for the purposes specified in the Resolution of Formation adopted by the City Council of the City of Indian Wells on June 20, 2024 (the “Resolution of Formation”), to accumulate and fund police protection services, fire protection and suppression services, ambulance and paramedic services, maintenance of streets and roadways, maintenance and operation of street lights, parks, parkways and open space, and maintenance of public facilities, including any incidental expenses authorized by the Act, and any other expense required in order to carry out the authorized purposes of CFD No. 2024-1, and to levy and collect the special tax, so long as the special tax is needed to pay for the Services and for such other purposes, at the special tax rates and pursuant to the method of apportioning the special tax set forth in Exhibit B to the Resolution of Formation adopted by the City Council of the City of Indian Wells on June 20, 2024, be approved?
Second Proposition: Shall Proposition B authorizing an annual appropriations limit, as defined by subdivision (h) of Section 8 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution, in the amount of $4,000,000 be approved?
SECTION 4. Consolidation of Elections. The special election called hereby on the propositions to be submitted to the voters of CFD No. 2024-1, as set forth in Section 3 hereof, shall be consolidated with the special election on the proposition of CFD No. 2024-1 proposition with respect to the annual levy of special taxes on taxable property within CFD No. 2024-1 for the payment of the ongoing maintenance of certain public s ervices to be provided by CFD No. 2024-1. The ballot for said consolidated elections shall be in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A.
SECTION 5. Conduct of Election. Except as otherwise provided in Section 6 hereof, the consolidated special elections shall be conducted by the City Clerk in accordance with the provisions of the California Elections Code governing mail ballot elections of cities, and in particular the provisions of Division 4 (commencing with Section 4000), of that Code, insofar as they may be applicable.
26529.00060\42337582.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
3 SECTION 6. Election Procedures. The procedures to be followed in conducting the consolidated special elections on (i) the proposition with respect to the levy of special taxes on taxable property within CFD No. 2024-1 to pay the for the ongoing maintenance of certain public services and (ii) the proposition with respect to establishing an appropriations limit for CFD No. 2024-1 in the amount of $ 4,000,000 (the “Consolidated Special Elections”) shall be as follows:
(a) Pursuant to Section 53326 of the California Government Code, ballots for the Consolidated Special Elections shall be distributed to the qualified electors by the City Clerk by mail or personal service.
(b) Pursuant to applicable sections of the California Elections Code governing the conduct of mail ballot elections of cities, and in particular Division 4 (commencing with Section 4000) of that Code with respect to elections conducted by mail, the City Clerk shall mail or deliver to each qualified elector an official ballot in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, and shall also mail or deliver to all such qualified electors a ballot pamphlet and instructions to voter, including a sample ballot identical in form to the official ballot but identified as a sample ballot, a return identification envelope with prepaid postage thereon addressed to the City Clerk for the return of voted official ballots and a copy of the Resolution of Formation adopted by the City Council of the City of Indian Wells on June 20, 2024. (c) The official ballot to be mailed or delivered by the City Clerk to each landowner - voter shall have printed or typed thereon the name of the landowner -voter and the number of votes to be voted by the landowner -voter and shall have appended to it a certification to be signed by the person voting the official ballot which shall certify that the person signing the certification is the person who voted the official ballot, and if the landowner -voter is other than a natural person, that he or she is an officer of or other person affiliated with the landowner - voter entitled to vote such official ballot, that he or she has been authorized to vote such official ballot on behalf of the landowner -voter, that in voting such official ballot it was his or her intent, as well as the intent of the landowner -voter, to vote all votes to which the landowner - voter is entitled based on its land ownership on the propositions set forth in the official ballot as marked thereon in the voting square opposite each such proposition, and further certifying as to the acreage of the landowner-voter’s land ownership within CFD No. 2024-1. (d) The return identification envelope to be mailed or delivered by the City Clerk to each landowner-voter shall have printed or typed thereon the following: (i) the name of the landowner, (ii) the address of the landowner, (iii) a declaration under penalty of perjury stating that the voter is the landowner or the authorized representative of the landowner entitled to vote the enclosed ballot and is the person whose name appears on the identification envelope, (iv) the printed name and signature of the voter, (v) the address of the voter, (vi) the date of signing and place of execution of the declaration, and (vii) a notice that the envelope contains an official ballot and is to be opened only by the City Clerk. (e) The instruction to voter form to be mailed or delivered by the City Clerk to the landowner-voters shall inform them that the official ballots shall be returned to the City Clerk properly voted as provided thereon and with the certification appended thereto properly completed and signed in the sealed return identification envelope with the certification thereon
26529.00060\42337582.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
4 completed and signed and all other information to be inserted thereon properly inserted by 12:00 p.m. on the date of the Consolidated Special Elections; provided that if all qualified electors have voted, the elections shall be closed with the concurrence of the City Clerk. (f) Upon receipt of the return identification envelopes which are returned prior to the voting deadline on the date of the elections, the City Clerk shall canvass the votes cast in the Consolidated Special Elections and shall file a statement with the City Council as to the results of such canvass and the election on each proposition set forth in the official ballot.
SECTION 7. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable.
SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Indian Wells, California, at a regular meeting held on this 20th day of June 2024.
GREG SANDERS
MAYOR
CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 2024-__
I, Angelica Avila, City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Indian Wells, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the whole number of the members of the City Council is five (5); that the above and foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Indian Wells on the 20 day of June 2024, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________________ ____________________________________
ANGELICA AVILA TODD LEISHMAN FOR
CITY CLERK BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
CITY ATTORNEY
26529.00060\42337582.1
A-1
EXHIBIT "A"
OFFICIAL BALLOT
CONSOLIDATED SPECIAL ELECTIONS FOR
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2024-1 (PUBLIC SAFETY)
CITY OF INDIAN WELLS
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
June 20, 2024
To vote, mark a cross (+) in the voting square after the word “YES” or after the word “NO”. All marks otherwise made are forbidden.
If you wrongly mark, tear, or deface this ballot, return it to the City Clerk and obtain another.
PROPOSITION A: Shall Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety) of the City of Indian Wells , subject to accountability measures required pursuant to Government Code Section 50075.1 levy a special tax annually on taxable property within Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety), City of Indian Wells, County of Riverside, State of California, to pay certain Services as defined and for the purposes specified in the Resolution of Formation adopted by the City Council of the City of Indian Wells on June 20, 2024 (the “Resolution of Formation”), to accumulate and fund police protection services, fire protection and suppression services, ambulance and paramedic services, maintenance of streets and roadways, maintenance and operation of street lights, parks, parkways and open space, and maintenance of public facilities, including any incidental expenses authorized by the Act, and any other expense required in order to carry out the authorized purposes of CFD No. 2024 -1, and to levy and collect the special tax, so long as the special tax is needed to pay for the Services and for such other purposes, at the special tax rates and pursuant to the method of apportioning the special tax set forth in Exhibit B to the Resolution of Formation adopted by the City Council of the City of Indian Wells on June 20, 2024, be approved?
YES
NO
PROPOSITION B: Shall Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety), City of Indian Wells, County of Riverside, State of California establish an annual appropriations limit, as defined by subdivision (h) of Section 8 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution, in the amount of $4,000,000 be approved?
YES
NO
26529.00060\42337582.1
A-2
PROPOSITIONS A IS SUBJECT TO THE ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 50075 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
26529.00060\42337584.1
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS,
CALIFORNIA DECLARING THE RESULTS OF THE CONSOLIDATED
SPECIAL ELECTIONS WITHIN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2024-1 (PUBLIC SAFETY)
WHEREAS, the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Indian Wells (the “City”) has previously undertaken proceedings to establish and did establish a community facilities district pursuant to the terms and provisions of the “Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982”, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the “Act”) with the adoption of a resolution of formation on June 20, 2024 (the “Resolution of Formation”). This community facilities district shall hereinafter be referred to as Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety), the City of Indian Wells, County of Riverside, State of California (“CFD No. 2024-1”); and
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2024 , the City Council also adopted a resolution calling a special election for June 20, 2024, for submitting to the qualified electors of CFD No. 2024-1 the proposition with respect to the annual levy of special taxes on taxable property within CFD No. 2024-1 to pay for certain public services and providing for the consolidation of that election with the election on the proposition of CFD No. 2024-1 with respect to establishing an appropriations limit for CFD No. 2024-1 (the “Election Resolution”); and WHEREAS, the City Council has received a statement from the City Clerk (the “City Clerk”), who pursuant to the Election Resolution was authorized to conduct the consolidated special elections for CFD No. 2024-1 and act as the election official therefor, with respect to the canvass of the ballots returned and the results of the consolidated special elections, certifying that more than two-thirds of the votes cast upon the propositions submitted to the voters in the consolidated special elections in CFD No. 2024-1 were cast in favor of all such propositions.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2 . Findings. The City Council finds that: (i) there were no persons registered to vote within the boundaries of CFD No. 2024-1 at the time of the close of the protest hearing on June 20, 2024, and pursuant to Section 53326 of the California Government Code (“Section 53326”) the vote in the consolidated special elections for CFD No. 2024-1 was, therefore, to be by the landowners owning land within CFD No. 2024-1, with each landowner having one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land that h e or she owned within CFD No. 2024-1 which would have been subject to the special tax if levied at the time of the consolidated special elections; (ii) pursuant to Section 53326 and the Election Resolution, the City Clerk distributed the ballot for the consolidated special elections to the owner (s) of all of the taxable property included within the boundaries of CFD No. 2024-1 (the “Property Owner”) by mail or personal delivery; (iii) the Property Owner waived the time limits for holding the consolidated special elections and the election dates specified in Section 53326, and consented to the calling and holding of the consolidated special elections on June 20, 2024 ; (iv) the ATTACHMENT #3
26529.00060\42337584.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
-2-
consolidated special elections have been properly conducted in accordance with all statutory requirements and the provisions of the Election Resolution; (v) pursuant to Section 53326, the Property Owner, which owns approximately 27.88 acres in CFD No. 2024-1, was entitled to a total of 28 votes; (vi) the ballot was returned by the Property Owner to the City Clerk prior to the hour on the date of the election specified by the City Council for the return of voted ballots; (vii) the ballot returned to the City Clerk by the Property Owner voted all votes to which it was entitled in favor of all propositions set forth therein; (viii) more than two-thirds of the votes cast in the consolidated special elections in CFD No. 2024-1, on each such proposition were cast in favor thereof, and pursuant to Sections 53328, 53329 and 53355 of the California Government Code, all such propositions carried; (ix) the City Council, as the legislative body of CFD No. 2024-1, is therefore authorized to take the necessary action to have CFD No. 2024-1 annually levy special taxes on taxable property within CFD No. 2024-1, in an amount sufficient to pay for certain public services to be provided , and (x) an appropriations limit for CFD No. 2024-1 has been established in the amount of $4,000,000.
SECTION 3. Declaration of Results. All votes voted in the consolidated special elections on the propositions with respect to (i) the annual levy of special taxes on taxable property within CFD No. 2024-1 to pay for certain public services to be provided as described in the Resolution of Formation; and (ii) establishing an appropriations limit for CFD No. 2024-1 in the amount of $4,000,000 were voted in favor thereof, and all such propositions carried.
SECTION 4. Effect of Elections. The effect of the results of the consolidated special elections, as specified in Section 3 hereof, is that the City Council, as the legislative body of CFD No. 2024-1, is authorized (i) to annually levy special taxes on taxable property within CFD No. 2024-1 in an amount sufficient to pay for certain public services to be provided as described in the Resolution of Formation at the special tax rates and pursuant to the methodology for determining and apportioning such special taxes which are set forth in Exhibit B to the Resolution of Formation adopted by the City Council of the City of Indian Wells on June 20, 2024; and (ii) an appropriations limit has been established for CFD No. 2024-1 in the amount of $4,000,000.
SECTION 5. Notice of Special Tax Lien . The City Clerk shall record a notice of special tax lien pursuant to Section 53328.3 of the California Government Code and Section 3114.5 of the California Streets and Highways Code.
SECTION 6. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable.
SECTION 7. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.
[Continues on Next Page]
26529.00060\42337584.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
-3-
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Indian Wells, California, at a regular meeting held on this 20th day of June 2024.
GREG SANDERS
MAYOR
CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 2024-__
I, Angelica Avila, City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Indian Wells, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the whole number of the members of the City Council is five (5); that the above and foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Indian Wells on the 20 day of June 2024, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________________ ____________________________________
ANGELICA AVILA TODD LEISHMAN FOR
CITY CLERK BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
CITY ATTORNEY
26529.00060\42352290.1
ORDINANCE NO. _____
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS,
CALIFORNIA, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2024-1 (PUBLIC SAFETY ), AUTHORIZING
THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES IN SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Indian Wells, California (the “City”), has initiated proceedings, held a public hearing, conducted an election and received a favorable vote from the qualified electors authorizing the levy of special taxes in the community facilities district, all as authorized pursuant to the terms and pro visions of the “Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982”, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1. Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the “Act”). This community facilities district shall hereinafter be referred to as Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety), City of Indian Wells, County of Riverside, State of California (“CFD No. 2024-1”).
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS, CALIFORNIA, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2024- 1, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. This City Council does, by the passage of this Ordinance, authorize the levy of special taxes on taxable properties located in CFD No. 2024-1 pursuant to the Rate and Method of Apportionment for CFD No. 2024-1 as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Rate and Method”).
SECTION 2. This City Council, acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 2024-1, is hereby further authorized, by resolution, to annually determine the special tax to be levied within CFD No. 2024-1 for the then current tax year or future tax years; provided, however, the special tax to be levied shall not exceed the maximum special tax authorized to be levied pursuant to the Rate and Method.
SECTION 3. The special taxes herein authorized to be levied, to the extent possible, shall be collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes are collected and shall be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency as applicable for ad valorem taxes; provided, however, CFD No. 2024-1 may utilize a direct billing procedure for any special taxes that cannot be collected on the County of Riverside tax roll or may, by resolution, elect to collect the special taxes at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet its financial obligations.
SECTION 4. The special taxes authorized to be levied shall be secured by the lien imposed pursuant to Section 3114.5 and 3115.5 of the California Streets and Highways Code, which lien shall be a continuing lien and shall secure each levy of the special taxes. The lie n of the Special Tax (as defined in the Rate and Method) shall continu e in force and effect until the City no longer provides the services and the lien canceled in accordance with law or until the Special Tax ceases to be levied by the City Council.
ATTACHMENT #4
26529.00060\42352290.1
City of Indian Wells
Ordinance No.
2 SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. Within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City.
Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Indian Wells, California, on June 20, 2024.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this __ day of ____, 2024.
GREG SANDERS
MAYOR
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF INDIAN WELLS)
CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE NO. ___
I, Angelica Avila, City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Indian Wells, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that Ordinance No. __, having been regularly introduced at a regular meeting of June 20, 202 4 was again introduced, the reading in full thereafter unanimously waived, and duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on _____, 2024 and said Ordinance was passed and adopted by the following stated vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________________ ____________________________________
ANGELICA AVILA TODD LEISHMAN FOR
CITY CLERK BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
CITY ATTORNEY
26529.00060\42352290.1
City of Indian Wells
Ordinance No.
3 EXHIBIT “A”
RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT FOR
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2024-1 (Public Safety)
OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ........................ 1 II. GENERAL DESCRIPTION & BOUNDARIES OF CFD NO. 2024-1 ........................... 2 III. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES ................................ ................................ .......... 3 IV. COST ESTIMATES................................ ................................ ...................... 4 V. RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX ................................ . 5
EXHIBIT A (BOUNDARY MAP) ................................ ................................ ......... A-1 EXHIBIT B (RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT, CFD NO. 2024-1) ................ B-1
1 I. Introduction
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Indian Wells (hereinafter referred to as the “ City Council”), in the State of California, did, pursuant to the terms and provisions of Chapter 2.5 of Part 1, of Division 2, of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, as amended (the “Act”), adopt a Resolution of Intention for the proposed formation of City of Indian Wells Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety) (“CFD No. 2024-1” or the “District”).
WHEREAS, this Community Facilities District Report (“Report”) is being provided to the City Council and generally contains the following:
1. A brief description of CFD No. 2024-1;
2. A brief description of the Services (defined below) to be provided by the City of Indian Wells (“City”) in conjunction with the formation of CFD No. 2024-1;
3. A brief description of the boundaries of CFD No. 2024-1; and
4. An estimate of the cost of the Services, including all costs associated with formation of CFD No. 2024-1, determination of the amount of any special taxes, collection of any special taxes, or costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of the City and the District with respect to CFD No. 2024-1, and any other incidental expenses to be paid.
For particulars, reference is made to the Resoluti on of Intention, Resolution No. 2024-16, as previously approved. All capitalized terms not defined herein are defined in the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax section (Exhibit C) of this report.
NOW THEREFORE Willdan Financial Services, the appointed responsible firm directed to prepare the Report, pursuant to the provisions of the Act, does hereby submit the following.
2 II. General Description & Boundaries of CFD No. 2024-1 The boundaries of the territory proposed for inclusion in the proposed community facilities district are described and shown on the map entitled “PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2024-1 (PUBLIC SAFETY), CITY OF INDIAN WELLS, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,” which is on file in the office of the Clerk of the City Council of the City of Indian Wells and was recorded with the County Recorder of the County of Riverside on May 30th, 2024 in Book 93 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts at Pages 22-23 and as Instrument Number 2024-0156228. A copy of the map is attached hereto as Exhibit A and hereby incorporated by reference.
3 III. Description of Services
It is proposed that CFD No. 2024-1 shall finance:
1. police protection services,
2. fire protection and suppression services,
3. ambulance and paramedic services,
4. maintenance of streets and roadways,
5. maintenance and operation of streetlights,
6. parks,
7. parkways and open space, and
8. maintenance of public facilities.
CFD No. 2024-1 shall also finance costs associated with the determination of the amount of and the levy and collection of special taxes which are levied to provide such services and costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of the community facilities district.
4 IV. Cost Estimates
About $65,758.66 will be spent on authorized services with an annual escalation factor of 3% or CPI, whichever is greater.
All costs associated with formation of CFD No. 2024-1, determination of the amount of any special taxes, collection of any special taxes, or costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of the City and the District with respect to CFD No. 2024-1, and any other incidental expenses to be paid will be paid by CFD No. 2024-1 from special tax collections and/or other sources.
5 V. Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax
The Rate and Method of Apportionment (RMA) provide s sufficient information to allow a property owner within CFD No. 2024-1 to estimate the Maximum Special Tax for his or her property. It also includes method of prepayment in full or prepayment in part and the procedure for prepayments.
For particulars on the rate and method of apportionment, r eference is made to Exhibit B of this report.
A-1
EXHIBIT A
Boundary Map
A-2
A-3
B-1
EXHIBIT B
Rate and Method of Apportionment
CFD No. 2024-1 (Public Safety)
B-2
RATE AND METHOD OF
APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
For the City of Indian Wells Community Facilities District No. 202 4-1 (Public Safety), County of Riverside, State of California
The Special Tax as hereinafter defined shall be levied on all Assessor’s Parcels within the City of Indian Wells Community Facilities District No. 202 4-1 (Public Safety), (“CFD 202 4-1”), other than Assessor’s Parcels classified as Exempt Property as defined herein and collected each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2024-25, in an amount determined by the CFD Administrator through the application of the procedures described below. All the real property within CFD 2024-1, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent, and in the manner herein provided.
A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings:
“Act” means the Mello-Roos Communities Facilities Act of 1982 as amended, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California. “Administrative Expenses” means the following actual or reasonably estimated expenses related to the administration of CFD 2024-1: the costs of determining the amount of the levy of the Special Tax, the collection of Special Taxes, including the expenses of collecting delinquencies and pursuing foreclosures, the payment of a proportional share of salaries and benefits of any City employee and City overhead whose duties are directly related to the administration of CFD 2024- 1, fees and expenses for counsel, audits, costs associated with responding to public inquiries regarding CFD 2024-1, and any and all other costs incurred in connection with the administration of CFD 2024-1.
“Annual Escalation Factor” means the annual percentage increase of the All Urban Consumers Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) or three percent (3%), whichever is greater. The annual CPI used shall be for the area of Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the twelve (12) months ending the preceding December 31, or such other replacement index as may be determined by the City.
“Assessor’s Parcel” means a lot or parcel shown in an Assessor’s Parcel Map with an assigned assessor’s parcel number.
“Assessor’s Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels by assessor’s parcel number.
“Base Year” means Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024. “Building Permit” means a permit issued for new construction of a residential dwelling or non - residential structure. For purposes of this definition, “Building Permit” shall not include permits for construction or installation of retaining walls, grading, utility improveme nts, or other such improvements not intended for human habitation or commercial activities.
B-3
“Building Square Footage” or “Building Square Foot” means for Residential Property, all the square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, patio, enclosed patio, or similar area; and for Non-Residential Property, all the square footage within the perimeter of the non-residential structure, measured from outside wall to outside wall, not including space devoted to stairwells, basement storage, required corridors, public restrooms, elevato r shafts, light courts, vehicle parking areas incidental thereto, mechanical equipment incidental to the operation of such building, and covered pedestrian circulation areas, including atriums, lobbies, plazas, patios, decks, arcades and similar areas, except such public circulation areas or portions thereof that are used solely for business purposes.
The determination of Building Square Footage shall be based on the Building Permit(s) issued for such structure and/or by reference to appropriate records kept by the City. “CFD Administrator” means an official of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining the Special Tax Requirement and providing for the levy and collection of the Special Tax for CFD 2024-1.
“CFD 2024-1” means City of Indian Wells Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety) established by the City Council under the Act.
“City” means the City of Indian Wells.
“City Council” means the Council of the City of Indian Wells, acting as the legislative body of CFD 2024-1.
“County” means the County of Riverside.
“Developed Property” means an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property for which a Building Permit was issued on or before June 1 preceding the Fiscal Year for which the Special Tax is being levied. “Exempt Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels within CFD 2024-1 that are exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to the Act or Section F herein.
“Fiscal Year” means the period commencing on July 1 of any year and ending the following June
30. “Hotel Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property within CFD 2024-1 for which a Building Permit has been issued for purposes of constructing one or more non -residential buildings intended to provide accommodations, meals and other services for travelers and tourists.
“Land Use Type” means any of the land use types listed in Table 1 below. “Maximum Special Tax” means the maximum Special Tax determined in accordance with Section C, which may be levied in any Fiscal Year on an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property. “Multi-Family Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property for which a Building Permit has been issued for the purpose of constructing a building or buildings comprised of attached Residential Units available for rental by the general public, not for sale to an end user, and under common management.
B-4
“Municipal Services” means those authorized services that may be funded by CFD 2024-1 pursuant to the Act, as amended including but not limited to fire protection and suppression services; ambulance and paramedic services; police protection services; maintenance of streets and roadways; maintenance and operation of street lights; maintenan ce of parks, parkways and open space; and maintenance of public facilities.
“Non-Residential Property” means any Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property, which is not classified as any, Residential Property, Public Property and Property Owner Association Property.
“Permanent Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property not classified as Short-Term Rental Property.
“Property Owner Association Property” means for each Fiscal Year any property within the boundaries of CFD 2024-1 that was owned by, or irrevocably dedicated as indicated in an instrument recorded with the County Recorder to a property owner association, including any master or sub-association, as of June 1.
“Proportionately” means in a manner such that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy to the Maximum Special Tax is equal for all Assessor’s Parcels within each Land Use Class. “Public Property” means any property that is owned by, dedicated or irrevocably dedicated to a city, the federal government, the State of California, the County, or any other public agency (each, a “Public Entity”); provided, however, that any such property is leased by such a Public Entity to a private entity and is thereby subject to taxation pursuant to Section 53340.1 of the Act, such leasehold estate shall be classified and taxed according to the use thereof. “Residential Property” means Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property within CFD 2024-1 for which a Building Permit has been issued for purposes of constructing one or more Residential Unit(s).
“Residential Unit” means any residence in which a person or persons may live, which is not considered to be used for non-residential purposes.
“Short-Term Rental Property” means Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property intended for rental to the general public on a short-term basis.
“Special Tax” means the special tax authorized to be levied within CFD 2024-1 pursuant to the Act, to fund the Special Tax Requirement.
“Special Tax Requirement” means the amount, as determined by the CFD Administrator, for any Fiscal Year to: (i) pay the costs of providing the Municipal Services during such Fiscal Year, (ii) pay Administrative Expenses associated with the Special Tax, (iii) establish or replenish any operational reserve fund established for Municipal Services, (iv) pay incidental expenses related to the Municipal Services as authorized pursuant to the Act, (v) fund an amount equal to a reasonable estimate of delinquencies expected to occur in the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax will be levied (“Estimated Special Tax Delinquency Amount”) and (vi) fund the shortfall, if any, in the Special Tax revenues collected in the preceding Fiscal Year necessary to fund the Specia l Tax Requirement for such Fiscal Year where such shortfall resulted from delinquencies in the
B-5
payment of the Special Tax in such Fiscal Year that exceeded the Estimated Special Tax Delinquency Amount included in the Special Tax Requirement for such Fiscal Year. “Taxable Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels that are not exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to the Act or Section F.
“Undeveloped Property” means an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property which is not classified as Developed Property.
B. CLASSIFICATION OF ASSESSOR’S PARCELS
Each Fiscal Year, beginning with Fiscal Year 202 4-25, using the definitions above, each Assessor’s Parcel within CFD 2024-1 shall be classified by the CFD Administrator as Taxable Property or Exempt Property. In addition, each such Fiscal Year, each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property shall be further classified by the CFD Administrator as Developed Property or Undeveloped P roperty. Commencing with Fiscal Year 2024-25 and for each subsequent Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property shall be assigned a Land Use Type and subject to the levy of the Special Tax pursuant to Section C below.
C. SPECIAL TAX RATES
1. Developed Property
Each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 202 4-25, each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be subject to the Special Tax.
The Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property for Fiscal Year 2024-25 is shown below in Table 1.
TABLE 1
Land Use Type Maximum
Special Tax
Permanent Residential
Property
$388 per Residential
Unit
Short-Term Rental Property $291 per Residential
Unit
Hotel Property $277 per Hotel Room
Retail Property $0.67 per Building
Square Foot
Other Non-Residential
Property
$0.34 per Building
Square Foot
B-6
Effective July 1, 2026 and each subsequent Fiscal Year following, the Maximum Special Tax rates shall be increased from the Maximum Special Tax rate in effect for the prior Fiscal Year by the Annual Escalation Factor.
2. Undeveloped Property
Each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2024-25, each Assessor’s Parcel classified as Undeveloped Property shall be exempt from the levy of the Special Tax.
3. Exempt Property
No Special Tax shall be levied on Exempt Property as defined in Section F.
For each Fiscal Year, if the use or ownership of an Assessor’s Parcel or Exempt Property changes so that such Assessor’s Parcel is no longer classified as one of the uses set forth in Section F, therefore making such Assessor’s Parcel no longer eligible to be classified as Exempt Property, such Assessor’s Parcel shall be deemed to be Taxable Property and shall be taxed pursuant to the provisions of Section C.
D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
Commencing in Fiscal Year 2024-25 and for each subsequent Fiscal Year, the CFD Administrator shall levy the Special Tax on all Taxable Property of CFD 2024-1 until the total amount of Special Tax levied equals the Special Tax Requirement. The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property within CFD 2024-1 up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement.
Notwithstanding any provision of this Section D to the contrary, under no circumstances will the Special Tax levied against any Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property that is classified as Residential Property be increased by more than ten percent (10%) p er Fiscal Year as a consequence of delinquency or default in the payment of the Special Tax by the owner of any other Assessor’s Parcel.
E. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax shall be levied in perpetuity for the purpose of financing ongoing authorized services and therefore may not be prepaid.
F. EXEMPTIONS
The City Council shall classify as Exempt Property: (i) Public Property, (ii) Property Owner Association Property, (iii) Assessor’s Parcels with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the e asement, including but not limited to property designated for open space, trails, pathways, parks or park and recreation related facilities, and (iv) property reasonably designated by the City or CFD Administrator as Exempt Property due to deed restriction s, conservation easement, or similar factors.
G. APPEALS
Any property owner claiming that the amounts or application of the Special Tax is not correct may file a written notice of appeal with the CFD Administrator not later than twelve months after having paid the first installment of the Special Tax. The CFD Ad ministrator shall promptly review the appeal, and if necessary, meet with the property owner, consider written and oral evidence regarding the amount of the Special Tax, and rule on the appeal. If the decision of the CFD Administrator requires that the Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel be modified or changed in favor of the property owner, a cash refund shall
B-7
not be made but an adjustment shall be made to the Special Tax on that Assessor’s Parcel in the subsequent Fiscal Year(s) to compensate for the overpayment of the Special Tax.
H. MANNER OF COLLECTION
The Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes, provided, however, that the Special Tax may be billed and collected at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet the financial obligations of CFD 2024-1.
I. DURATION OF TAX
The Special Tax shall be levied in perpetuity to fund the Special Tax Requirement unless such tax is no longer required as determined by the City Council.
J. INTERPRETATION
The City may interpret, clarify, and revise this Rate and Method to correct any inconsistency, vagueness, or ambiguity, by resolution and/or ordinance, that does not create a material adverse effect on the levy and collection of the Special Tax.
INDIAN WELLS CITY COUNCIL
June 20, 2024
To: City Council
From: Finance Department
Prepared by: Kevin McCarthy, City Finance Director
Subject: Proceedings to Establish Future Annexation to Proposed Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Council ADOPTS Resolution of the City Council of the City of Indian Wells, California, Acting as the Legislative Body of Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety), the City of Indian Wells, County of Riverside, State of California, Authorizing the Annexation of Territory in the Future to Such Community Facilities District; and
FINDS the project to be exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15060.
DISCUSSION:
Prior to this agenda item, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing and special landowner election to complete the formation of the City of Indian Wells Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety) (“CFD No. 2024-1”) to address the need to provide funding for the continued demand for additional municipal services associated with new development and population growth.
The proposed CFD No. 2024-1 is to assist in funding public safety cost increases related to future development throughout the community. Concurrent with establishing Community Facilities District No. 2024-1, the City wishes to develop a mechanism to annex additional property to CFD No. 2024-1 as those projects begin development.
On May 16, 2024, this City Council approved Resolution No. 2024-17 (the “Resolution of Intention”), which declared the intention to annex territory in the future to CFD No. 2024- 1, approved the boundaries of the proposed future annexation area to CFD No. 2024-1, described the Services proposed to be financed, and the proposed rate and method of apportionment of special taxes. Additionally, the Resolution of Intention set forth this public hearing to be held on June 20, 2024.
Additional property is anticipated to be annexed into CFD No. 2024-1 at a future date.
Adopting the attached resolution authorizes the future annexation area. If approved, the
City can efficiently annex additional properties to CFD No. 2024-1 as needed. Future property anticipated to annex into CFD No. 2024-1 includes but is not limited to Leo Cook, the owner and developer of APN 633- 240-042, and BBC Esmeralda, owner of APN 633- 150-044 (the “Future Annexation Property” ). Additionally, APNs 633- 310-014, 633-310- 030, 633-310-032, 633- 310-034, 633-410-036, 633-410-041, 633- 410-046, 633-410- 050, 633-410-052, 633-150-071, and 633-150-077 are owned by the City of Indian Wells and are proposed to annex into CFD No. 2024-1 at a later date.
As a public agency, the City is not subject to the proposed special tax and intends to transfer ownership of the property to be included in CFD No. 2024-1 to third parties. The property will be subject to a special tax once ownership is transferred to third parties and the annexation into CFD No. 2024-1 is completed.
Approval of the resolution described above is a step in the process to authorize the proposed future annexation to CFD No. 2024-1 for all Future Annexation Property.
Establishing the ability to annex Future Annexation Property, including additional property as may be required, this evening will reduce the administrative burden on the City, City Council, and property owners wishing to develop in the City. The administrative burden is reduced because the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982," being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act") which usually requires two meetings of the City Council (e.g., a resolution of intention meeting and then a second meeting to hold the public hearing) may be reduced to one meeting pursuant to Section 53339 of the Act. The City can eliminate the need to hold the public hearing upon adopting the future annexation procedures. Instead, with the unanimous consent of the owner or owners of any parcel proposed for annexation, the City can adopt a single resolution approving each annexation.
The
final steps for establishing the future annexation area to CFD No. 2024-1 will occur at the City Council meeting. The Mayor and the City Council will conduct a public hearing and, following the public hearing, may adopt a resolution to form the future annexation area of CFD No. 2024-1.
OPTIONS:
The City Council could choose not to approve the attached resolution and not complete the authorization of the future annexation area of CFD No. 2024-1. The City Council could also provide alternative direction to staff.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact on the City’s general fund as the costs of the future annexation proceedings are paid from proceeds of deposits collected from the Owner to form CFD No. 2024-1. The future costs of annexing property to CFD No. 2024-1 and the ongoing
administration costs will be paid from property owner deposits and the levy and collection of the annual special taxes collected from future annexation property.
A special tax proposed to pay for the services to be provided to the territory proposed for annexation in the future shall be equal to any special tax levied to pay for the same services in the original formation property, creating CFD No. 2024-1. However, if the actual cost of providing the services to property within the proposed future annexation area is higher or lower than the cost of providing such services within the existing CFD No. 2024-1, a higher or lower special tax may be levied within such territory to the extent the actual cost of providing the services in the annexation territory is higher or lower than the costs of providing those services to the original formation property.
The special tax rates to be imposed in each annexation area are subject to unanimous approval and election of the owner or owners of such property. In any such circumstance, the r
ate and m ethod of apportionment may be revised to reflect the higher or lower special tax, as applicable. However, the maximum special tax rate in the existing community facilities district may not be increased as a result of any annexation. The existing special tax rates are proposed as follows:
Permanent Residential Property: $388 per residential unit Short-Term Rental Property: $291 per residential unit Hotel Property: $277 per hotel room
Retail Property: $0.67 per building square foot
Other Non-Residential Property: $0.34 per building square foot
An annual escalation factor will increase the maximum special tax rates for each fiscal year. Long-term revenue projections will depend on the number, scale, and progress of new developments annexed into CFD No. 2024-1.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA):
This action has been reviewed per the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State and local CEQA Guidelines, and the City's environmental regulations. The City, acting as the Lead Agency, determined that the resolution is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment as there is no possibility that the action would result in a significant environmental impact, and because it does not constitute a “project” as defined in Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution- Authorizing the Annexation of Territory
26529.00060\42337573.1
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-____
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS,
CALIFORNIA, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2024-1 (PUBLIC SAFETY) , THE CITY OF
INDIAN WELLS , COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
AUTHORIZING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY IN THE FUTURE TO
SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Indian Wells (the "City") has declared its intention, conducted proceedings and held a public hearing relating to the authorization to annex territory in the future to Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety) of the City of Indian Wells (“CFD No. 2024-1”) pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982," being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act"), and specifically Article 3.5 thereof; and
WHEREAS, notice of such public hearing was given in the form and manner as required by the Act; and
WHEREAS, all communications relating to the authorization to annex territory in the future were presented at such public hearing, and it has been determined that a majority protest as defined by Government Code Section 53339.6 has not been received against the authorization to annex territory in the future to CFD No. 2024-1; and WHEREAS, it has now been determined to be within the public interest and convenience to establish a procedure to allow and provide for future annexations to CFD No. 2024 -1 and further to specify the amount of special taxes that would be authorized to be levied on any parcels that may be annexed to CFD No. 2024 -1 in the future, as well as setting forth the terms and conditions for certification for any annexation in the future; and WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed in the future shall be known and designated as F uture Annexation Area Community Facilities District No. 2024-01 (the "Future Annexation Area"), and a map designated as "Future Annexation Area to Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety), City of Indian Wells, County of Riverside, State of California" showing the territory proposed to be annexed in the future has been approved and a copy thereof shall be kept on file with the transcript of these proceedings.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. Determination. It is hereby determined by this City Council as follows:
A. All prior proceedings pertaining to authorization for the annexation of the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2024 -1 in the future were valid and taken in conformity with the requirements of the law, and specifically the provisions of the ATTACHMENT #1
26529.00060\42337573.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
2 Act, and this finding and determination is made pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 53325.1.
B. The written protests against the authorization for the annexation of the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2024 -1 in the future received do not represent a majority protest as defined by Government Code Section 53339.6 and, therefore, the authorization for the annexation of the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2024-1 in the future has not been precluded by majority protest pursuant to Government Code Section 53339.6.
C. The public convenience and necessity require a procedure to authorize and provide for territory to be annexed in the future to CFD No. 2024-1 in order to finance the costs and expenses necessary to provide the public services described below made necessary by the development or redevelopment of such territory.
D. The authorization for the annexation of territory within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2024 -1 in the future as proposed conforms with the City of Indian Wells’ statement of goals and policies regarding the establishment of community facilities districts.
E. The provision for the annexation of territory within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2024-1 in the future and the authorization to levy special taxes of territory within the Future Annexation Area upon the annexation thereof to CFD No. 2024- 1 to finance the public services described below constitutes the creation of a government funding mechanism which does not involve the commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. Therefore, the provision for the annexation of territory within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2024-1 in the future and the authorization to levy special taxes within such territory upon the annexation thereof to CFD No. 2024-1 does not constitute a “project” which is subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 and following).
SECTION 3. Annexation Authority . The City Council does hereby authorize the annexation of territory within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2024 -1 in the future pursuant to the provisions and authorization of Article 3.5 of the Act.
SECTION 4. Description of the Future Annexation Area . A description of the Future Annexation Area is as follows:
All that property and territory proposed to be annexed in the future to the CFD, as said property is shown on the map designated as “Future Annexation Area to Community Facilities District No. 2024- 01 (Public Safety), City of Indian Wells, County of Rivers ide, State of California” (the “Future Annexation Area Map”), a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and shall remain open for public inspection. The Future Annexation Area Map has been filed in the Office of the Riverside County Recorder, in Book 93, Pages
26529.00060\42337573.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
3 24-28 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts and as Document No. 2024-0156229.
Future annexation proceedings may only be completed with the unanimous consent of the owner or owners of any parcel proposed for annexation.
SECTION 5. Authorized Services. The types of services to be financed from the levy of the special tax in CFD No. 2024-1, including the Future Annexation Area, are those described in Exhibit A attached hereto which is incorporated herein by this reference ("Authorized Services").
The Authorized Services to be financed by the levy of special taxes to be levied on specific territory within the Future Annexation Area to be annexed to CFD No. 2024-1 may include some or all of such Authorized Services or may include alternatives to the Authorized Services.
The Authorized Services shall to the maximum extent practicable, taking into account budgetary and operational demands of the City, be provided in common within CFD No. 2024-1 and the territory within the Future Annexation Area.
The City Council finds that the Authorized Services described in this Section 5 hereof are necessary to meet increa sed demands placed upon the City as a result of new development occurring within the boundaries of CFD No. 2024-1 and the Future Annexation Area.
SECTION 6. Special Tax. It is the intention of th e City Council that, except where funds are otherwise available, a special tax sufficient to finance the Authorized Services (the “Special Tax”) to be provided in the territory of the Future Annexation Area upon the annexation of such territory to CFD No. 2024-1 and related incidental expenses authorized by the Act, secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the territory within the Future Annexation Area that annexes to CFD No. 2024 -1, will be levied annually within the boundaries of such territory upon the annexation thereof to CFD No. 2024 -1. For further particulars as to the rates and method of apportionment of the proposed Special Tax, reference is made to the attached and incorporated Exhibit B (the “Rates and Method”), which sets forth in sufficient detail the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax to allow each landowner or resident within the territory in the Future Annexation Area to clearly estimate the maximum amount of the Special Tax that such person will have to pay for the Authorized Services upon the annexation of such territory to CFD No. 2024-1. The Special Tax may not be prepaid.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the actual cost of providing Authorized Services to any territory within the proposed Future Annexation Area is higher or lower than the cost of providing such services within the existing CFD No. 2024 -1, a higher or lower special tax may be levied within such territory , to the extent the actual cost of providing the services in the annexation territory is higher or lower than the costs of providing those services in the existing district, subject to the unanimous approval and election of the owner or owners of such territory. In any such circumstance, the Rate and Method may be revised to reflect the higher or lower special tax, as applicable. The maximum special tax rate in the existing community facilities district may not be increased as a result of any annexation proceeding.
The proposed Special Tax, to the extent possible, shall be collected in the same manner as ad valorem property taxes or in such other manner as this City Council or its designee shall
26529.00060\42337573.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
4 determine, including direct billing of the affected property owners. Such Special Tax shall be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency as applicable for ad valorem taxes. Any Special Tax that may not be collected on the County tax roll shall be collected through a direct billing procedure by the City.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 53340 and except as provided in Government Code Section 53317.3, properties of entities of the state, federal, and local governments shall be exempt from the levy of the Special Tax.
SECTION 7. Special Tax Accountability Measures. Pursuant to and in compliance with the provisions of Government Code Section 50075.1, this City Council hereby establishes the following accountability measures pertaining to the levy by CFD No. 2024-1 of the special taxes described in Section 6 above.
A. The Special Tax shall be levied for the specific purposes set forth in Section 6 above.
B. The proceeds of the levy of the Special Tax shall be applied only to the specific applicable purposes set forth in Section 6 above.
C. CFD No. 2024-1 shall establish a separate account into which the proceeds of the Special Tax shall be deposited.
D. The Director of Finance /Treasurer of the City of Indian Wells , or his or her designee, acting for and on behalf of CFD No. 2024-1, shall annually file a report with the City Council as required pursuant to Government Code Section 50075.3 SECTION 8. Annexation Effective Date . Annexation of territory in the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2024 -1 in the future shall be effective only upon the unanimous approval of the owner or owners of each parcel or parcels to the annexation of such parcel or parcels to the election by such owner or owners to subject such parcel or parcel to the levy of the special tax at any time that any parcel is proposed for annexation. Upon receipt of the written consent and election by such owner or owners, no further public hearings will be required to effectuate the annexation of such parcel or parcels to CFD No. 2024-1.
SECTION 9. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Indian Wells, California, at a regular meeting held on this 20th day of June 2024.
GREG SANDERS
MAYOR
26529.00060\42337573.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
5 CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 2024-__
I, Angelica Avila, City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Indian Wells, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the whole number of the members of the City Council is five (5); that the above and foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Indian Wells on the 20 day of June 2024, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________________ ____________________________________
ANGELICA AVILA TODD LEISHMAN FOR
CITY CLERK BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
CITY ATTORNEY
26529.00060\42337573.1
A-1
EXHIBIT “A”
DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED SERVICES
The City of Indian Wells (the “City”) is establishing Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety) (the “CFD”) to finance, in whole or in part, the following services (“services” shall have the meaning given to that term in the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”)) which include administration expenses and collection for reserves. All services to be funded by the CFD are to be in addition to those provided before the CFD was created, and may not supplant services already available when the CFD was created.
Authorized Services:
The types of City services to be financed by the CFD (“Services”) shall include, but are not limited to, police protection services, fire protection and suppression services, ambulance and paramedic services, maintenance of streets and roadways, maintenance and operation of street lights, parks, parkways and open space, and maintenance of public facilities, including any incidental expenses authorized by the Act, and any other miscellaneous or incidental services identified by the City necessary to provide the described Services herein.
Administrative Expenses:
In addition, the following costs will also be funded by the special taxes levied within the CFD.
1. Administrative Expenses including costs incurred to determine, levy and collect the special taxes, including compensation of City employees for administrative work performed in relation to the CFD and a proportionate amount of the City’s general administra tive overhead related thereto, the fees of consultants and legal counsel, the costs of collecting installments of the special taxes upon the general tax rolls, preparation of required reports, and any other costs incurred for the administration of the CFD by the City;
2. Any amounts needed for operating reserves and capital replacement reserves; and Any amounts needed to cure actual or estimated delinquencies in special taxes for the current or previous fiscal years.
26529.00060\42337573.1
B-1
EXHIBIT B
CITY OF INDIAN WELLS
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2024-1
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Taxes
RATE AND METHOD OF
APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
For the City of Indian Wells Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety), County of Riverside, State of California
The Special Tax as hereinafter defined shall be levied on all Assessor’s Parcels within the City of Indian Wells Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety), (“CFD 2024-1”), other than Assessor’s Parcels classified as Exempt Property as defined herein and collected each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2024-25, in an amount determined by the CFD Administrator through the application of the procedures described below. All the real property within CFD 2024-1, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent, and in the manner herein provided.
A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings:
“Act” means the Mello-Roos Communities Facilities Act of 1982 as amended, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California. “Administrative Expenses” means the following actual or reasonably estimated expenses related to the administration of CFD 2024-1: the costs of determining the amount of the levy of the Special Tax, the collection of Special Taxes, including the expenses of collecting delinquencies and pursuing foreclosures, the payment of a proportional share of salaries and benefits of any City employee and City overhead whose duties are directly related to the administration of CFD 2024- 1, fees and expenses for counsel, audits, costs associated with responding to public inquiries regarding CFD 2024-1, and any and all other costs incurred in connection with the administration of CFD 2024-1.
“Annual Escalation Factor” means the annual percentage increase of the All Urban Consumers Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) or three percent (3%), whichever is greater. The annual CPI used shall be for the area of Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the twelve (12) months ending the preceding December 31, or such other replacement index as may be determined by the City.
“Assessor’s Parcel” means a lot or parcel shown in an Assessor’s Parcel Map with an assigned assessor’s parcel number.
“Assessor’s Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels
26529.00060\42337573.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
B-2
by assessor’s parcel number.
“Base Year” means Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2024 and ending June 30, 2025. “Building Permit” means a permit issued for new construction of a residential dwelling or non - residential structure. For purposes of this definition, “Building Permit” shall not include permits for construction or installation of retaining walls, grading, utility improveme nts, or other such improvements not intended for human habitation or commercial activities. “Building Square Footage” or “Building Square Foot” means for Residential Property, all the square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, patio, enclosed patio, or similar area; and for Non-Residential Property, all the square footage within the perimeter of the non-residential structure, measured from outside wall to outside wall, not including space devoted to stairwells, basement storage, required corridors, public restrooms, elevato r shafts, light courts, vehicle parking areas incidental thereto, mechanical equipment incidental to the operation of such building, and covered pedestrian circulation areas, including atriums, lobbies, plazas, patios, decks, arcades and similar areas, except such public circulation areas or portions thereof that are used solely for business purposes.
The determination of Building Square Footage shall be based on the Building Permit(s) issued for such structure and/or by reference to appropriate records kept by the City. “CFD Administrator” means an official of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining the Special Tax Requirement and providing for the levy and collection of the Special Tax for CFD 2024-1.
“CFD 2024-1” means City of Indian Wells Community Facilities District No. 2024-1 (Public Safety) established by the City Council under the Act.
“City” means the City of Indian Wells.
“City Council” means the Council of the City of Indian Wells, acting as the legislative body of CFD 2024-1.
“County” means the County of Riverside.
“Developed Property” means an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property for which a Building Permit was issued on or before June 1 preceding the Fiscal Year for which the Special Tax is being levied. “Exempt Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels within CFD 2024-1 that are exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to the Act or Section F herein.
“Fiscal Year” means the period commencing on July 1 of any year and ending the following June
30. “Hotel Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property within CFD 2024-1 for which a Building Permit has been issued for purposes of constructing one or more non -residential buildings intended to provide accommodations, meals and other services for travelers and tourists.
26529.00060\42337573.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
B-3
“Land Use Type” means any of the land use types listed in Table 1 below. “Maximum Special Tax” means the maximum Special Tax determined in accordance with Section C, which may be levied in any Fiscal Year on an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property. “Multi-Family Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property for which a Building Permit has been issued for the purpose of constructing a building or buildings comprised of attached Residential Units available for rental by the general public, not for sale to an end user, and under common management.
“Municipal Services” means those authorized services that may be funded by CFD 2024-1 pursuant to the Act, as amended including but not limited to fire protection and suppression services; ambulance and paramedic services; police protection services; maintenance of streets and roadways; maintenance and operation of street lights; maintenan ce of parks, parkways and open space; and maintenance of public facilities.
“Non-Residential Property” means any Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property, which is not classified as any, Residential Property, Public Property and Property Owner Association Property.
“Permanent Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property not classified as Short-Term Rental Property.
“Property Owner Association Property” means for each Fiscal Year any property within the boundaries of CFD 2024-1 that was owned by, or irrevocably dedicated as indicated in an instrument recorded with the County Recorder to a property owner association, including any master or sub-association, as of June 1.
“Proportionately” means in a manner such that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy to the Maximum Special Tax is equal for all Assessor’s Parcels within each Land Use Class. “Public Property” means any property that is owned by, dedicated or irrevocably dedicated to a city, the federal government, the State of California, the County, or any other public agency (each, a “Public Entity”); provided, however, that any such property is leased by such a Public Entity to a private entity and is thereby subject to taxation pursuant to Section 53340.1 of the Act, such leasehold estate shall be classified and taxed according to the use thereof. “Residential Property” means Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property within CFD 2024-1 for which a Building Permit has been issued for purposes of constructing one or more Residential Unit(s).
“Residential Unit” means any residence in which a person or persons may live, which is not considered to be used for non-residential purposes.
“Short-Term Rental Property” means Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property intended for rental to the general public on a short-term basis.
“Special Tax” means the special tax authorized to be levied within CFD 2024-1 pursuant to the
26529.00060\42337573.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
B-4
Act, to fund the Special Tax Requirement.
“Special Tax Requirement” means the amount, as determined by the CFD Administrator, for any Fiscal Year to: (i) pay the costs of providing the Municipal Services during such Fiscal Year, (ii) pay Administrative Expenses associated with the Special Tax, (iii) establish or replenish any operational reserve fund established for Municipal Services, (iv) pay incidental expenses related to the Municipal Services as authorized pursuant to the Act, (v) fund an amount equal to a reasonable estimate of delinquencies expected to occur in the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax will be levied (“Estimated Special Tax Delinquency Amount”) and (vi) fund the shortfall, if any, in the Special Tax revenues collected in the preceding Fiscal Year necessary to fund the Specia l Tax Requirement for such Fiscal Year where such shortfall resulted from delinquencies in the payment of the Special Tax in such Fiscal Year that exceeded the Estimated Special Tax Delinquency Amount included in the Special Tax Requirement for such Fiscal Year. “Taxable Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels that are not exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to the Act or Section F.
“Undeveloped Property” means an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property which is not classified as Developed Property.
B. CLASSIFICATION OF ASSESSOR’S PARCELS
Each Fiscal Year, beginning with Fiscal Year 2024-25, using the definitions above, each Assessor’s Parcel within CFD 2024-1 shall be classified by the CFD Administrator as Taxable Property or Exempt Property. In addition, each such Fiscal Year, each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property shall be further classified by the CFD Administrator as Developed Property or Undeveloped P roperty. Commencing with Fiscal Year 2024-25 and for each subsequent Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property shall be assigned a Land Use T ype and subject to the levy of the Special Tax pursuant to Section C below.
C. SPECIAL TAX RATES
1. Developed Property
Each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2024-25, each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be subject to the Special Tax.
The Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property for Fiscal Year 2024-25 is shown below in Table 1.
TABLE 1
Land Use Type Maximum
Special Tax
Permanent Residential
Property
$388 per Residential
Unit
26529.00060\42337573.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
B-5
Short-Term Rental
Property
$291 per Residential
Unit
Hotel Property $277 per Hotel
Room
Retail Property $0.67 per Building
Square Foot
Other Non-Residential
Property
$0.34 per Building
Square Foot
Effective July 1, 2026 and each subsequent Fiscal Year following, the Maximum Special Tax rates shall be increased from the Maximum Special Tax rate in effect for the prior Fiscal Year by the Annual Escalation Factor.
2. Undeveloped Property
Each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2024-25, each Assessor’s Parcel classified as Undeveloped Property shall be exempt from the levy of the Special Tax.
3. Exempt Property
No Special Tax shall be levied on Exempt Property as defined in Section F.
For each Fiscal Year, if the use or ownership of an Assessor’s Parcel or Exempt Property changes so that such Assessor’s Parcel is no longer classified as one of the uses set forth in Section F, therefore making such Assessor’s Parcel no longer eligible to be classified as Exempt Property, such Assessor’s Parcel shall be deemed to be Taxable Property and shall be taxed pursuant to the provisions of Section C.
D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
Commencing in Fiscal Year 2024-25 and for each subsequent Fiscal Year, the CFD Administrator shall levy the Special Tax on all Taxable Property of CFD 2024-1 until the total amount of Special Tax levied equals the Special Tax Requirement. The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property within CFD 2024-1 up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement.
Notwithstanding any provision of this Section D to the contrary, under no circumstances will the Special Tax levied against any Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property that is classified as Residential Property be increased by more than ten percent (10%) p er Fiscal Year as a consequence of delinquency or default in the payment of the Special Tax by the owner of any other Assessor’s Parcel.
E. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax shall be levied in perpetuity for the purpose of financing ongoing authorized services and therefore may not be prepaid.
26529.00060\42337573.1
City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-___
B-6
F. EXEMPTIONS
The City Council shall classify as Exempt Property: (i) Public Property, (ii) Property Owner Association Property, (iii) Assessor’s Parcels with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the e asement, including but not limited to property designated for open space, trails, pathways, parks or park and recreation related facilities, and (iv) property reasonably designated by the City or CFD Administrator as Exempt Property due to deed restriction s, conservation easement, or similar factors.
G. APPEALS
Any property owner claiming that the amounts or application of the Special Tax is not correct may file a written notice of appeal with the CFD Administrator not later than twelve months after having paid the first installment of the Special Tax. The CFD Ad ministrator shall promptly review the appeal, and if necessary, meet with the property owner, consider written and oral evidence regarding the amount of the Special Tax, and rule on the appeal. If the decision of the CFD Administrator requires that the Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel be modified or changed in favor of the property owner, a cash refund shall not be made but an adjustment shall be made to the Special Tax on that Assessor’s Parcel in the subsequent Fiscal Year(s) to compensate for the overpayment of the Special Tax.
H. MANNER OF COLLECTION
The Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes, provided, however, that the Special Tax may be billed and collected at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet the financial obligations of CFD 2024-1.
I. DURATION OF TAX
The Special Tax shall be levied in perpetuity to fund the Special Tax Requirement unless such tax is no longer required as determined by the City Council.
J. INTERPRETATION
The City may interpret, clarify, and revise this Rate and Method to correct any inconsistency, vagueness, or ambiguity, by resolution and/or ordinance, that does not create a material adverse effect on the levy and collection of the Special Tax.
INDIAN WELLS CITY COUNCIL
June 20, 2024
To: City Council
From: City Manager Department
Prepared by: Angelica Avila, City Clerk
Subject: Annual Appointments to the Various Commission, Committees, and Boards Vacancies
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
Council APPROVES the Council Ad Hoc Committee recommendations for a two-year term beginning on July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2026; and
APPOINTS Robert Fry to serve on the Golf Resort Advisory Committee; and
APPOINTS Dan Miller and Tyler Shigenaga to serve on the Grants In Aid Committee; and
RE-APPPOINTS for a second term ending on June 30, 2026 ; Dawn Swajian and Tricia Cole to serve on the Community Activities Committee, Gordon Johnson and Toper Taylor on the Golf Resort Advisory Committee, Susan Paresky Grants in Aid Committee and Linda Blank to serve on the Joslyn Senior Center Board; and
FINDS the action exempt from CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3).
BACKGROUND:
Annually the City Council appoints residents (“Members”) to serve on various Commissions, Committees and Boards (“Committee”). Serving on a Committee provides an opportunity for residents to volunteer and serve their community. The selection process includes an application and interview by a City Councilmember(s), who make recommendations to the full City Council.
Selected Members serve for a two-year term unless they fill an unexpired vacancy on any one Committee. Members may serve two consecutive terms, up to a maximum of four years, on any one Committee. Members are required to complete an application after the completion of their first term to seek reappointment or to apply for a different
Committee. The Council Ad Hoc Committee has recommended 6 resident members who re-applied for reappointment be appointed for another two-year term.
The City received 33 applications from interested residents to fill vacancies, with terms beginning on July 1, 2024, and ending on June 30, 2026. Candidate applications remain valid and are kept for 6 months should any unexpected vacancies occur.
Applications received are available for public review at City Hall, City Clerk Department during regular business hours, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday (excluding holidays).
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA):
The action is not a project within the meaning of Section 15378 of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change in the environment, directly or indirectly; and that the action is nonetheless exempt from the requirements of CEQA in that the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. (14 CCR 15061(b)(3).)
INDIAN WELLS CITY COUNCIL
June 20, 2024
To: City Council
From: City Manager Department
Prepared by: Christopher Freeland , City Manager
Subject: Agreements with Abode Communities and Summit
Development for Affordable Housing Development in Indian Wells
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
Council AUTHORIZES and DIRECTS the City Attorney to prepare and the City Manager to execute exclusive-negotiati on agreements with Adobe Communities and Summit Developers (Genton Developers) regarding potential development of an affordable housing project in the City of Indian Wells; and
FINDS the action is not a project within the meaning of Section 15378 of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines because it has no potential to result in physical change in the environment, directly or indirectly; and that the action is nonetheless exempt from the requirements of CEQA in that the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. (14 CCR 15061(b)(3).)
BACKGROUND:
Government Code section 65302(c) mandates that cities adequately plan, through a Council-adopted Housing Element, for their existing and projected housing needs, including its share of the regional housing need allocation ( “RHNA”). The City of Indian Wells has been assigned an allocation of 382 new housing units as its share of the RHNA in Southern California for the 6th Housing Element cycle (2021–2029). This includes 117 very-low-income units, 81 low-income units, 91 moderate-income units, and 93 above- moderate-income units. The City’s current Housing Element has been adopted by the City Council and is awaiting final certification by the State Department of Housing and Community Development.
The City’s adopted Housing Element includes a program to rezon e the vacant 34-acre
parcel at the northeast corner of Miles Avenue and Warner Trail. This site is identified as an inventory site in the City’s Housing Element to accommodate additional affordable
housing units on 8 to 10 acres of the site to help satisfy the City’s RHNA requirements.
The City is in the process of acquiring this parcel for affordable housing, park, recreation, open space, and associated parking.
DISCUSSION:
Summit Developers (a.k.a. Genton Development) has submitted a preliminary application for the development of a wellness resort hotel consisting of a wellness sanctuary , hotel rooms, condominiums , detached bungalows, and luxury villas on the vacant 15-acre property located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Miles Avenue. This project will generate hundreds of new employment positions within the City and Summit Developers desires to develop a workforce-housing project as an incentive to attract and retain staff for its new resort and wellness center.
In 2020, the City entered into an exclusive-negotiati on agreement (“ENA”)1 with Abode Communities for the development of affordable housing on another property elsewhere in the community. Development of that property project has been delayed due to infrastructure needs in the Whitewater Channel. Abode Communities was previously selected by the City after a competitive Request for Proposals process. Abode Communities has been in business for over 50 years, producing more than 45 affordable housing developments with approximately 3,000 units.
The City wishes to enter into ENAs with Summit Developers and Abode Communities to facilitate discussions on the potential development of workforce housing on the vacant parcel at the northeast corner of Miles Avenue and Warner Trail. This will afford both potential developers the opportunity to conduct the necessary studies of the property and develop initial designs of workforce housing, park, recreation, open space, and associated parking. This in turn will provide the City with competitive options for ultimately selecting the final developer or developers to develop the site. It is important to note that this site has been identified as having Native American artifacts and will require additional site investigations and consultation with the affected tribe to determine the extent of developable area. As such, staff is recommending an initial 180-day ENA with each, with the option to administratively extend for another 180 days as necessary.
Residents and other stakeholders will have ample opportunity to provide comments on any development at future community meetings. It is also important to note that entering into an ENA does not commit the City to do a development with Summit Developers or with Abode Communities.
1 An ENA is legal document utilized by the City to provide parties the opportunity to discuss a potential project with specific developers who have expressed a willingness to work together on a potential development. It is not a development approval. Nor is it a promise to approve any project in the future.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA):
This action has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in CEQA, the state and local CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City.
The City, acting as Lead Agency, has determined the action is not a project within the meaning of Section 15378 of the State of CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to result in physical change in the environment, directly or indirectly; and that the action is nonetheless exempt from the requirements of CEQA in that the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. (14 CCR 15061(b)(3).) Any future development of the site will be subject to the appropriate CEQA analysis and mitigation .
INDIAN WELLS CITY COUNCIL
June 20, 2024
To: City Council
From: Finance Department
Prepared by: Kevin McCarthy, City Finance Director
Subject: Proposed Ballot Measure for Special Fire Tax Increase RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
Council DISCUSSES the Polling Results of the Special Fire Tax Ballot Measure; and DIRECTS Staff to prepare the Ordinance approving the Revision and Resolution for Council consideration at the July 2024 Council Meeting; and FINDS the action to be exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3).
DISCUSSION:
During the City Council Meeting on March 7, 2024, the Council deliberated on a proposal to introduce a Ballot Measure to increase the Special Fire Tax. Indian Wells residents have been subject to a special tax of $120 per household annually since its approval in 1980. This amount has remained unchanged for over four decades.
Justification for Annual Escalator
The introduction of an annual escalator to the Special Fire Tax is intended to preserve service levels by ensuring consistent emergency medical and fire protection services. This mechanism adjusts for inflation, maintaining the real value of revenue over time and covering the rising costs associated with these services. It provides a predictable revenue stream, aiding long-term financial planning and ensuring sufficient funding for essential services.
This approach also distributes the funding burden more equitably, preventing sudden tax spikes and minimizing taxpayer impact. The extra revenue can also enhance fire safety infrastructure, firefighter training, and equipment acquisition, ultimately improving public safety and emergency preparedness.
Proposed Changes
The proposed measure seeks to implement an annual escalator mechanism to the existing tax. This mechanism would increase the tax by $6.00 to $10.00 per household per year.
Over the next decade, this increase is expected to raise the annual tax revenue from $600,000 to $900,000, generating approximately $1.2 million in additional revenue over the same period.
Ballot Poll Testing
Before proceeding with the ballot, the Council instructed staff to conduct a resident ballot poll and present the findings at the Council meeting scheduled for June 20, 2024. At the time of this report, the poll data is still being compiled. Once completed, the Polling Report will be made available to the public and the City Council prior to the Council Meeting in a timeframe consistent with State law.
Next Steps
Upon receiving direction from the Council, if the Polling Report indicates a favorable environment for proceeding with the Ballot Measure, staff will prepare the necessary ballot documents and schedule a Public Hearing for the City’s July 2024 Council Meeting to present the Ballot Measure for the Council’s consideration.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA):
This action has been reviewed per the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State and local CEQA Guidelines, and the City's environmental regulations. The City, acting as the Lead Agency, determined that the ordinance is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment as there is no possibility that the action would result in a significant environmental impact, and because it does not constitute a “project” as defined in Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guide lines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Special Fire Tax Polling Results (submitted under separate cover).
12100 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 350 | Los Angeles, CA 90025 1999 Harrison St., Suite 2020 | Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: (310) 828-1183 | Fax: (310) 453-6562 Phone: (510) 451-9521 | Fax: (510) 451-0384 TO City of Indian Wells
FROM John Fairbank and Adam Sonenshein
FM3 Research
RE: Update on Survey of Indian Wells Voters on Updating the Existing Special Fire Tax DATE June 18, 2024
Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3) is conducting a survey of likely voters in the City of Indian Wells to understand the viability of a ballot measure to update the existing Indian Wells Special Fire Tax so it is adjusted annually according to the cost of providing services (with and without a 5% cap on annual increases).
Through yesterday, June 17th, we surveyed 165 Indian Wells residents, including 85 who have completed the survey online and 80 who have participated over the phone. To the degree possible, the respondents have similar demographic attributes as the overall pool of likely voters in the city.
FM3 is continuing to pursue additional survey responses through Wednesday in advance of a report to the City Council on Thursday, June 20th. Depending on the number of survey interviews completed by the time of that meeting, FM3 may continue pursuing responses through June 23rd. The Final Report will be provided to the City Council by June 28th.
ATTACHMENT #1
INDIAN WELLS CITY COUNCIL
June 20, 2024
To: City Council
From: Public Works Department
Prepared by: Dina Purvis, Public Works Manager
Subject: Possible Partnership with Indian Wells Preservation Foundation for Development of a Museum/Library at the
Carl Bray Site
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
Council DISCUSSES and PROVIDES direction on the possibility of partnering with the Indian Wells Preservation Foundation for the development of a museum/library at the Carl Bray site; and
FINDS action is not a “project” under CEQA and, alternatively, is exempt from CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3).
DISCUSSION:
At the March 7, 2024, Council Meeting, Councilmember Donna Griffith requested Council consideration to place an item on a future agenda to discuss the feasibility of a partnership between the Indian Wells Preservation Foundation (IWPF) and the City of Indian Wells for the development of a museum/library on the City owned land adjacent to the Carl Bray monument. At the April 4, 2024, Council Meeting, City Council approved 20 hours of staff time to explore the necessary steps for use of the property (e.g., lease), City development standards, conceptual design for ingress and egress from the site, as well as rough cost estimates for the ingress and egress (e.g., design, CEQA, construction) The City owns 9,000 + sq ft of vacant land that was part of the former Carl Bray homesite.
This land is adjacent to the existing Carl Bray monument along Highway 111. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) owns approximately 21,800 square feet, and the Indian Wells Country Club owns approximately 18,000 square feet (Attachment #1). It is staff’s understanding that IWPF has reached out to IWCC and CVWD to utilize a portion of their land for this potential project. CVWD has given conceptual approval to use their land for temporary overflow or special event parking. IWCC is willing to provide IWPF the vacant land for the project, but not any golf course area (See area highlighted in Attachment #1).
For a project to be feasible, the IWCC land is necessary for parking, ingress and egress to site, and to provide for the building and surrounding grounds. The total disturbed area for this project could be 22,000 sq ft. This square footage would be the basis for any required CEQA review.
Community Development and Public Works Departments met to discuss the feasibility of construction of a structure on the site. Assuming the land is available from other potential partners, current zoning codes could allow for up to a 3,000 sq ft building on the site.
This staff report outlines the key design, environmental, and construction needs for the proposed project. The aim is to provide a comprehensive overview of the requirements to ensure a successful project, as well as an idea of the possible cost. A rough estimate is as follows:
1. Feasibility Study:
The initial step in this project is to hire a planning/engineering firm to conduct a feasibility study. This study would analyze and identify any issues related to the project prior to design, construction, environmental, etc. The study would examine title reports, location of utilities, environmental documents and design requirements, project compliance to zoning, and much more. This would identify any site-specific issues, barriers, and constraints prior to initiating the project.
2. Land Use:
Prior to moving forward with design, approval by all parties to utilize the land is necessary. In addition to utilizing IWCC and CVWD property, the IWPF would need Council approval to utilize the former Carl Bray site (e.g., a lease agreement).
3. Design Process:
o Architectural Design: Engage a reputable architectural firm to develop a concept that aligns with the project goals, site constraints, and community preferences.
o Landscape Design: Incorporate native plants, mitigate stormwater runoff, and create inviting outdoor spaces for visitors in compliance with the City’s new landscape ordinance.
o Site Ingress/Egress: Multiple factors make the site difficult to safely access from Highway 111, such as high speeds on Highway 111 and the lack of sight distance for driver decision making. Based on existing conditions, a deceleration and an acceleration lane along Highway 111 would need to be constructed. Attachment #2 highlights a deceleration lane of approximately 500 feet and an acceleration lane of 540 feet. These distances would need to be analyzed by a traffic engineer (traffic study) to confirm distances and impact to curb, sidewalk, utilities, and landscaping along Highway 111.
4. Environmental Review-California Environmental Compliance Act (CEQA): Under CEQA, a thorough evaluation of the project based on environmental impact assessments, accessibility, and zoning regulations to minimize ecological disruption. CEQA review would be required. The site currently has an EIR (Environmental Impact Report) that limits use to signage and foot traffic. Analysis to include potential sustainability mitigation measures.
5. Project Construction
o Grading of Site: The site has significant elevations changes. The site would need to be designed to overcome the differences in elevation to promote safe accessibility (ADA Accessibility), minimize view impacts to residents at Indian Wells Country Club, and to maximize developable land.
o Construction of Building and onsite improvements: Staff is unable to provide any conclusive cost estimates on the building without knowing the size of the building, materials to be used on the inside and outside, location of utilities, parking lot size, permits (e.g., City, CVWD, environmental compliance), or other site improvements that IWPF may wish to incorporate into the design. The building is likely to have offices, exhibit area(s), restrooms, storage, kitchen space, reception area, and interior & exterior event space.
o Offsite Improvements: This includes costs related to the construction to provide acceleration and deceleration lane, realignment of utilities, reconstruction of Highway 111 curb, gutter, sidewalks and landscaping.
The below amounts are estimates given ever-increasing rates for services and construction. Staff reached various vendors to provide preliminary cost estimates based on similar sized project. To obtain more accurate costs, a feasibility study between the City and IWPF can be conducted to identify known and unknown costs.
Feasibility Study $50,000
Design Process
Architectural Design $150,000
Landscape Design $25,000
Traffic Study $25,000
Environmental Consultant (CEQA) $200,000
Project Construction (e.g. grading, parking
lot, building, utilities, etc.)
TBD
Staff recommends a traffic study be conducted prior to any project approval identify any traffic impacts caused by the project and provide recommendations for ingress and egress to the site.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Fiscal impact in unknown at this time.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA):
The action is not a “project” under CEQA and, alternatively, is exempt from CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). Any further discretionary action would be considered a project under CEQA and will require CEQA review.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Carl Bray Site
2. Ingress and Egress Site Plan
INDIAN WELLS CITY COUNCIL
June 20, 2024
To: City Council
From: Public Works Department
Prepared by: Ken Seumalo, P.E., Public Works Director
Subject: Comprehensive Traffic Safety Action Plan
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
Council APPROVES the Comprehensive Traffic Safety Action Plan and the accompanying Resolution; and
FINDS the project to be exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061 (b)(c).
BACKGROUND:
Over the past few years, Public Works staff have been tasked to identify traffic safety issues in the community, in response to community and Council requests to examine speed, traffic collisions, and various other traffic safety issues. The completion of a traffic study would assist staff in identifying areas of concern and address specific community traffic related concerns. Staff sought funding from various state and federal grant authorities.
In January 2023, the City was awarded a “Safe Streets for All” grant in the amount of $200,000 from the Federal Highway Administration (“FHWA”). After conducting a request for proposal process, Kimley-Horn & Associates was selected to conduct the Safety Action Plan (SAP
). The project began in October 2023 with internal meetings between Kimley- Horn and Staff to share any collection of data, relevant city documents, and discuss areas of potential safety issues. The project also included a series of community engagement meetings to gather feedback from the community and public safety officials. Meetings were held on:
January 20, 2024 – Stakeholder’s Meeting 1
February 7, 2024 – Public Workshop 1
March 20, 2024 – Safety Summit
March 26, 2024 – Stakeholder’s Meeting 2
April 17, 2024 – Public Workshop 2
The Stakeholder’s Meetings included law enforcement, fire de partment, education, ADA Advocate, Resident Pedestrian Advocate, Resident Bicycle Advocate, Chambers of Commerce, SunLine Transit, CVAG, Caltrans District 8, City of Palm Desert and City of La Quinta. The two Public Workshops and the Safety Summit included residents, interested public members, and other stakeholders.
In addition to the in-person meetings, the City hosted an extensive online engagement from February 15, 2024, to March 15, 2024. Through an interactive map, members of the public were allowed to identify categories of interest (walk, bike, ADA, vehicle and other) on a map and leave comments and concerns they perceived about specific locations. Approximately 47 stakeholder comments were left on the map with concerns including traffic speeds throughout the City, proximity of vehicles to pedestrians along Eldorado Drive and Fairway Drive, Westbound Highway 111 vehicles using the right turn pocket at Cook Street as a passing lane, etc.
An online survey was also conducted during the same time peri od, including an email blast to residents. The City received approximately 500 stakeholder responses, with the
most common concerns including the need for additional bicycle lanes at various locations, additional pedestrian walkways, speed/congestion issues, and facilities improvements (e.g., like use of traffic circles, speed humps, etc.). The feedback provided by the public from both the interactive map and the survey is available in Appendix of the SAP
(Attachment #1).
Additionally, on February 7, 2024 , Kimely Horn staff, City staff, and interested stakeholders conducted a field visit to observe 10 different intersections to observe their operation and have a better understanding of any issues at each location. The site visits provided an opportunity for all stakeholders to see the traffic operations firsthand and observe the potential issues that reduce safety in the area.
At the conclusion of these community and stakeholder meetings, Kimely Horn developed the City of Indian Wells’ Safety Action Plan which includes a variety of options, called a “toolbox” to address any issues.
The completion of a comprehensive traffic study can also be utilized by staff to seek transportation improvement grants. Those cities that have adopted a traffic safety plan score more competitively on grant applications. Certain grants require a SAP to be completed to even be considered.
DISCUSSION:
The City of Indian Wells ’ Safety Action Plan (SAP) meets a Council Goal to identify and improve the safety of the City’s transportation network. The SAP examines and compiles data on the various types of accidents in the community, identify locations in the City where accidents are more prevalent, locations where traffic improvements may improve
traffic safety, and address other modes of transportation concerns, common in the community (e.g., pedestrian, bicycle, and golf carts). The plan analyzes crash data throughout the City to identify high-risk accident locations and analyses potential causes of the accidents. This analysis utilized crash history from January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2022, to thoroughly review the City’s transportation network to:
1. Identify factors in the transportation network that inhibit safety for all roadway users;
2. Improve safety at specific high-crash locations, and reduce serious injury and fatal collisions; and,
3. Develop safety measures using the four E’s of safety: Engineer ing, Enforcement, Education, and Emergency Response to encourage safer driver behavior and lower severity outcomes.
With this plan, the City continues its safety efforts to enhance the City’s transportation network, reduce traffic fatalities and serious injury-related crashes, and the goals set forth in the City’s General Plan (IIC1, IIC2, IIC3):
Provide a safe and efficient street system that links all parts of the area for the movement of people and goods.
Provide Indian Wells’ residents with a choice of travel modes. Provide a street system that contributes to residents’ quality of life and minimizes impacts on the environment.
In addition, this plan further meets these General Plan Goals thru the following objectives:
1. Identify areas with a high risk of crashes.
2. Illustrate the value of a comprehensive safety program and the systemic process.
3. Plan future safety improvements for near-, mid-, and long-term.
4. Define safety projects for federal, state, and regional funding considerations.
The SAP identified seven (7) project locations as priority projects based on an evaluation of crash data, community and stakeholder input, and equity considerations, that were chosen to be representative of the corridor and intersection configurations throughout the city:
1. Intersection: Fred Waring Drive & Eldorado Drive
2. Mini Corridor: Highway 111: Village Center Drive to Province Way
3. Intersection: Fairway Drive & Rancho Palmera Drive
4. Intersection: Fairway Drive & Eldorado Drive
5. Intersection: Highway 111 & Indian Wells Lane
6. Corridor: Highway 111: Miles Avenue to Mountain Cove
7. Intersection: Washington Street & Miles Avenue
The SAP provides a variety of strategies and potential improvements (countermeasures) to address issues in the community. It is important to note that these countermeasures are only suggestions to open a dialogue within the community on how to best address methods to improve traffic safety in Indian Wells. Projects will be examined by staff and potential solutions will be part of the City’s Capital Improvement Program budget approval process, after extensive community discussion on the wants and desires of the community.
It is important for the City Council to adopt this traffic study as a valid official document of the City, similar to the City’s General Plan, Housing Element , or Pavement Condition Index (PCI) study.
OPTIONS:
The City Council has the following options available to them.
1. Adopt the Comprehensive Traffic Safety Action Plan and corresponding Resolution (Attachment #3).
2. Not approve the Comprehensive Traffic Safety Action. This action may reduce the city’s competitiveness for additional transportation related grants.
3. City Council can provide alternative direction.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA):
This project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State and local CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. The City acting as Lead Agency, has determined the [identify project or entitlement type here] qualifies as being Categorically Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3).
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Indian Wells Traffic Safety Action Plan
2. Complete Streets Safety Assessment – Berkeley SafeTREC Study
3. Resolution
Study Methodology/Tools
Analyze Data
• Review Accident Trends
• Develop crash factors (Aggressive Driving, Impaired Driving, Etc.) • Gather public input
Develop Goals/Strategies to improve transportation safety Case Study
Intersection: Cook/Hwy 111
Council Acceptance
• Increases scoring on grant applications
• Prioritizes traffic safety throughout the City
• Supports staff using alternative methods for
examining accident data to develop mitigation
• Staff Recommends Council Receive and File the
Traffic Safety Action Plan report
QUESTIONS?
2 1:30pm, the Council will be asked to adopt the “Traffic Safety Study Action Plan”. It is extremely important that the residents of Indian Wells understand what is being proposed by City Staff and the effect it could possibly have on the residents living on or adjacent to:
Cook Street
Rancho Palmeras
Eldorado
Fairway
I have included as part of this IW Views a well-thought-out letter written by Councilman Bruce Whitman outlining why the city should not move forward with this project in its entirety.
I believe our focus should be on Highway 111 and Fairway (speeding) and not on the other streets.
The reason for my position on this issue is clear:
There simply is no safety data to justify turning our street into a “Concrete Jungle.”
The City’s residents, by ballot measure rejected a plan to put the CV Link through Indian Wells. This proposal only encourages more Bicycles and ignores the resident’s previous position on this issue, which could potentially increase liability for the city. The “six year study” shows no pedestrian incident on our neighborhood streets and only one bike incident on
Fairway.
3 This is just another potential government boondoggle wasting $
4.7 Million of taxpayer money unnecessarily to potentially correct a problem that doesn’t exist on our neighborhood streets. Read the Report and then ask yourself the question; is it necessary?
We agree that noise and speeding on Highway 111 and Fairway are a problem, but to destroy our beautiful green pathways which will add additional liability by building sidewalks and bike paths is not the answer.
At the time the City of Indian Wells was founded, the founding fathers specifically planned that the city would not have sidewalks. Let’s keep with the vision of our founding fathers and keep our city as beautiful as it is with lots of green spaces and no sidewalks.
This is the worst time of the for the City Staff to be bringing an issue of this importance to the Council. Please come to the Council Meeting and express your opinion.
PLEASE SEE COUNCILMAN WHITMAN’S LETTER BELOW
From: Bruce Whitman
To Indian Wells Residents
“COMPLETE STREETS”
4 At next Thursday’s Council meeting Council will be asked to vote to adopt the Traffic Safety Study “Action Plan.” There is nothing wrong with the data collected in the study itself; the actual data above on page 25 (figures 22 and 23) of the study show that Indian Wells’ neighborhood streets Fairway, Cook, Rancho Palmeras and Eldorado are completely safe without “improvements” which involve pouring tons of concrete over green spaces to create sidewalks and new bike lanes.
Unfortunately, I expect Appendix B, a “survey” based on asking about “fear” without presenting the actual data above in forming the questions, will be presented as the rationale for going forward with a “complete streets” program on our most beloved neighborhood streets.
But without disclosing the actual 6 years of safety data to the surveyed, this survey is not worth much.
This current “action plan” envisioned by the City includes converting much of the green spaces on these demonstrably safe streets into concrete sidewalks and bike paths. I invite you to go up to Fairway and look at the south side green space from the curb to the wall. Imagine 20 feet of that greenspace to the south taken and replaced with a concrete sidewalk and a wide 2-way concrete bike path curb to wall. Is this what we, the residents of Indian Wells, want in our neighborhood? Do we want to encourage even more cars and bikes to come into the neighborhood streets to bypass 111 traffic? Wouldn’t that present a greater safety problem?
Remember, the premise of “complete streets” is pedestrian and bike safety. I am a strong believer in data based decision-making. Facts 5 are facts, and the facts are clear: there is not a pedestrian and bike safety problem on South Indian Wells neighborhood streets.
So, I urge you to give this recently completed 5 year Traffic Safety Study your full attention. Turn to pages 25 and 45 of the study. These maps show that in the 6 years of the study, in all of South Indian Wells, we had ZERO pedestrian incidents on our neighborhood streets, and 1 bike accident on Fairway which resulted in a “suspected minor injury.”
So why focus on the neighborhood streets? Dozens of residents safely walk, golf cart and bike in our neighborhood streets every day, successfully sharing the road without incident. The roads are lined with desert landscaping, trees and beautiful green space. At present the City has budgeted $4.7 million for an action plan on neighborhood streets that the traffic safety data does not support.
I am an advocate of public safety of our residents. We do have a speeding problem. I have supported a reduced speed limit on Fairway and Eldorado, and increasing our police patrols and traffic enforcement. I am not opposed to a data driven plan that slows cars from speeding in our neighborhoods.
The traffic study action plan will be discussed at the June 20 Council meeting. The Council vote adopting the “action plan” is an important step in going forward with this project. Please come and let our city leaders know where you stand. In the end, it’s your choice.
[All opinions expressed above are my personal opinions and are not,
1 Angelica Avila
From: luanne arias
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2024 2:27 PM
To: Greg Sanders; Bruce Whitman; Ty Peabody; Dana Reed; Donna Griffith; [email protected]; Angelica Avila; [email protected] Subject: Council item #1-5 Comprehensive Traffic Safety Resolution 6/20/24 CAUTION: This email originated outside our organization. Be cautious with any links or attachments. ________________________________
Dear Council Members,
Please approve this TraƯic Safety resolution that you are voting on Thursday, June 20.
I live at in Dorado Villas, and often walk on Fairway, Cook and El Dorado for exercise and to frequent businesses at the shopping center on #111. These roads have become more dangerous to use as a walker. The number of Increased new residents from the Province are also adding to the traƯic problem.
If you have never walked north on Cook from Fairway, I urge you to do so. Its hard to believe nothing has been done yet to provide safety for our residents. I’ve attended community input meetings and done surveys…and am still waiting on improvements by the city.
Luanne Arias
Dorado Villas, IW
1 Angelica Avila
From: Susan Schmidt
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2024 12:18 PM
To: Greg Sanders; Bruce Whitman; Ty Peabody; Dana Reed; Donna Griffith; [email protected]; Angelica Avila; [email protected] Subject: Comprehensive Traffic Safety Action Plan Input CAUTION: This email originated outside our organization. Be cautious with any links or attachments. ________________________________
Dear Mayor, City Council members, City Clerks and City managers of Indian Wells,
I am a resident of Indian Wells that has been running and walking along the streets of Cook, Fairway, Eldorado and Highway 111 for over fifteen years. I feel the safest along Highway 111 due to the sidewalks and distance from speeding cars. I’m certain it is not an “if” someone gets hit along these streets, it is a “when” . As a runner and walker I can go against traƯic, this allows me to see the oncoming cars, many of which are speeding. I do bike, however I will not ride my bike in Indian Wells, it is simply too dangerous. I now take my dog to El Paseo to walk, I don’t feel comfortable along Cook Street with her. The stretch from Hwy 111 along Cook to Fairway has too many speeding cars, without sidewalks or calming bumps it is too dangerous.
One of many close calls I will share happened a couple of months ago. I was running against traƯic west on Fairway not far from the cross street of Rancho Palmeras Drive, the sun was in the eyes of the drivers. A speeding truck was going full bore toward The Eldorado entrance completely in the bike lane. Had I been a biker heading the same direction, that speeding truck with the sun in their eyes would have run right over me. I had to jump up onto the grass. He never saw me. This sort of thing is not that unusual. I’m usually out early in the morning to beat the traƯic, unfortunately the lull in traƯic seems to lead drivers to think they can go faster. So no time of day is safe.
I appreciate all that you are doing to gather information, input and eƯorts to make all of the things many of us move to the desert for, safe and more enjoyable ! I have been running for over 30 years, I realize it can be dangerous to do so on many roads. In that, I feel the streets that are of concern are worthy of that concern and something needs to change before someone is killed.
Thank you again for your time and all that you do.
Susan Schmidt
Indian Wells
1 Angelica Avila
From: Kathleen Dirickson
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2024 6:39 AM
To: Greg Sanders; Bruce Whitman; Ty Peabody; Dana Reed; Donna Griffith; [email protected]; Angelica Avila; Ken Seumalo
Subject: Today' Meeting
Importance: High
CAUTION: This email originated outside our organization. Be cautious with any links or attachments. ________________________________
Dear Council Members,
My husband and I are older (our kids would say old) but we like to walk from our home in Dorado Villas up Fairway and north on Cook to CVS and now Sprouts. Currently we walk in the gutter on uneven pavement with cars speeding by. We could walk in the grass but it is slanted and has many impediments. This is a particularly diƯicult walk if we are luck enough to have grandchildren with us as the baby stroller then is in harm’s way. You’ll see that our request for safer streets is not wasteful spending.
Come walk with me and I will show you what I mean.
Thank you for taking our opinions into consideration in continuing to make our community safer.
Kathleen and Phil Dirickson
Indian Wells
1 Angelica Avila
From: Bob Reeder
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2024 10:04 AM
To: Bruce Whitman; Greg Sanders; Ty Peabody; Donna Griffith; Dana Reed; [email protected]; Angelica Avila
Subject: Safe Streets
CAUTION: This email originated outside our organization. Be cautious with any links or attachments. ________________________________
City Council and StaƯ
I am in favor of moving forward with the traƯic safety project. With all due respect I don’t believe adding sidewalks and calming traƯic puts a burden on the aesthetics of Indian Wells. On the contrary, I believe it adds value to the livability and safety of our terrific city. Please vote to move to the next step.
Warm regards,
Robert Reeder
Sent from my iPhone
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
[page intentionally left blank]
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
CITY OF INDIAN WELLS
COMPLETE STREETS SAFETY ASSESSMENT
FINAL REPORT
S
EPTEMBER 2021
ASSESSMENT TEAM
Afsaneh Yavari, T.E.
University of California Berkeley
SafeTREC / School of Public Health
2614 Dwight Way
Berkeley, CA 94720
(510) 642-2333
[email protected]
John Ciccarelli
Bicycle Solutions
511 Anderson St
San Francisco, CA 94110
(415) 912-6999
[email protected]
www.bicyclesolutions.com
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
c. The Regents of the University of California. This report was produced in cooperation with the City of Indian Wells.
Funding for this program was provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Opinions, findings, and conclusions are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the University of California and/or the agencies supporting or contributing to this report. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The agency that is subject of this report is hereby granted a non- exclusive right to copy and distribute this report for its own or its stakeholders’ non- commercial use. All other uses of this report require written permission from the Technology Transfer Program.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 5
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 7
1.1. Objective of The Assessment .............................................................................. 7
1.2. Assessment Approach ......................................................................................... 7
1.3. Disclosures ........................................................................................................... 7
2. BACKGROUND AND COLLISION HISTORY ................................................................... 8
2.1. Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety Overview........................................................... 8
2.2. Pedestrian and Bicyclist Collision Data .............................................................. 9
2.3. Street Story ..........................................................................................................13
3. BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS RESULTS AND SUGGESTIONS ....................................15
3.1. Benchmarking Analysis of Policies, Programs, and Practices .........................15
3.1.1. General Plan: Provision for Pedestrian and Bicycle Nodes ...............................35
4. COMPLETE STREETS AUDIT RESULTS AND SUGGESTIONS ....................................39
4.1. Overview ...............................................................................................................39
4.2. Focal areas ...........................................................................................................39
4.3. General Citywide suggestions ............................................................................40
4.4. Focal Areas ..........................................................................................................47
4.4.1. Area #1: CV-Link Regional Path .......................................................................47
4.4.2. Area #2: Fairway Drive between Cook Street and Eldorado Drive ....................57
4.4.3. Area #3: Eldorado Drive south of Highway 111 ................................................65
4.4.4. Area #4: Cook Street between Fairway Drive and Fred Waring Drive ...............67
4.4.5. Area #5: Indian Wells Lane south of Highway 111 ............................................69
4.4.6. Area #6: Club Drive between Highway 111 and Sandpiper Drive .....................72 APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY OF PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT MEASURES ........................76 APPENDIX B: GLOSSARY OF BICYCLING IMPROVEMENT MEASURES ............................83 APPENDIX C: RESOURCE LIST AND REFERENCES ...........................................................92 APPENDIX D: STREET CONNECTIVITY .................................................................................95
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4-1: Map of focal areas ..................................................................................................40 Figure 4-2: Segmented floating corner island treatment ............................................................42 Figure 4-3: Paint-and-delineator curb extensions ......................................................................44 Figure 4-4: Crosswalk marking patterns (FHWA) ......................................................................45 Figure 4-5: Leading Pedestrian Interval phases ........................................................................46 Figure 4-6: Median island on residential street (Canary at Inverness, Sunnyvale CA) ...............47 Figure 4-7: CV-Link homepage image (www.coachellavalleylink.com) ......................................47 Figure 4-8: CV-Link alignment alternatives through Indian Wells ..............................................48 Figure 4-9: Fred Waring Drive at and near Whitewater River channel .......................................50 Figure 4-10: Eldorado Drive east side north of river bridge – mature palm trees .......................51 Figure 4-11: Eldorado between Fred Warning and river - existing .............................................51 Figure 4-12: Concept for Fred Waring Drive / Eldorado Drive / Via Toscana intersection ..........52 Figure 4-13: Eldorado Drive / Desert Horizons Drive intersection ..............................................53 Figure 4-14: 5 meter (~15’) delineated path (SF-Oakland Bay Bridge East Span) .....................54 Figure 4-15: Driveway apron on north side of Highway 111, for landscape access ...................54 Figure 4-16: Indented or “verge” parking ...................................................................................55 Figure 4-17: Public access spur locations for developments near Miles Avenue .......................55 Figure 4-18: Highway 111 facing east across spur channel toward La Quinta ...........................55 Figure 4-19: Fairway Drive context ............................................................................................ 57 Figure 4-20: Fairway at Williams, showing minimum south-side area width ..............................58 Figure 4-21: Fairway Drive cross section concept .....................................................................59 Figure 4-22: Fairway Drive full concept (paths and traffic calming) ............................................60 Figure 4-23: Gated access points at Cielito and Eldorado (south leg) .......................................61 Figure 4-24: Fairway / Rancho Palmeras intersection ...............................................................62 Figure 4-25: Fairway / Eldorado intersection .............................................................................63 Figure 4-26: Eldorado Drive layout south of Highway 111 .........................................................65 Figure 4-27: Cook Street existing conditions .............................................................................67 Figure 4-28: Cook Street concept (facing north from Fairway) ..................................................68 Figure 4-29: Indian Wells Lane between Pala Palms Drive and Highway 111 - existing ............69 Figure 4-30: Indian Wells Lane north cul-de-sac – gate to Miramonte property .........................70 Figure 4-31: Concept for path between Indian Wells Drive culs-de-sac and Highway 111 ........70 Figure 4-32: Club Drive between Sandpiper Drive and Highway 111 - existing .........................72
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3 Figure 4-33: Indian Wells Country Club guard station on Club Drive at Sandpiper Drive ...........73 Figure 4-34: Club Drive landscaping along east (retail) side. West (hotel) side is similar ..........73 Figure 4-35: Pedestrian “desire lines” along and across Club Drive near Highway 111 .............73 Figure 4-36: Connecting hotel lobby area with the shopping center and its restaurant ..............74
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Indian Wells Summary Statistics ............................................................................... 8 Table 2-2: Indian WellsTraffic Collisions and Rankings .............................................................. 8 Table 3-1: Summary of Programs, Policies, and Practices Benchmarking Analysis for the City of Indian Wells ..........................................................................................................................16 Table 4-1: General Suggestions for Physical Enhancements ....................................................41 Table 4-2: Suggested Crosswalk Treatments ............................................................................45 Table 4-3: Indian Wells CV-Link Focal Area – Segments ..........................................................49 Table 4-4: Suggestions for Fairway Drive Between Cook and Eldorado ....................................64 Table 4-5: Suggestions for Eldorado Drive Between Highway 111 and Fairway Drive ..............66 Table 4-6: Suggestions for Cook Street North of Fairway Drive ................................................68 Table 4-7: Suggestions for Indian Wells Lane Connection to Highway 111 ...............................71 Table 4-8: Suggestions for Club Drive Hotel/Commerical Area Near Highway 111 ...................75 Pedestrian Improvement Measures ...........................................................................................76 Bicycling Improvement Measures .............................................................................................83 Resource List and References ..................................................................................................92 Resources for Experimentation and Interim Approvals ..............................................................93
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 4 [page intentionally left blank]
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Indian Wells requested that SafeTREC at the University of California, Berkeley conduct a Complete Streets Safety Assessment (CSSA) study for various locations within the City. A team of two safety experts conducted the CSSA. One of the experts visited the City of Indian Wells and conducted a walking audit on May 17, 2021. The objectives of the CSSA are to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety and to enhance walkability and accessibility for all pedestrians and bicyclists in Indian Wells.
Based on the OTS 2018 statistics, Indian Wells ranked 44 out of 75 California cities in Group F, in total fatal and injury collisions (with a ranking of “1” being the worst and “75” the best). It ranked 71 for pedestrian collisions, and 65 for bicyclist collisions. This ranking is based on a number of weighted factors including population, daily vehicle miles traveled, collision records, collision trends, and others. For more information on OTS rankings, please refer to https://www.ots.ca.gov/media-and-research/crash-rankings-results/ This report is organized into the following chapters:
• Chapter 1 is an introduction to the Complete Streets Safety Assessment for City of Indian Wells.
• Chapter 2 presents background information on bicyclist and pedestrian safety in the City and collision history.
• Chapter 3 presents benchmarking analysis results and suggestions for potential improvement from the benchmarking analysis.
• Chapter 4 presents field walking audit results and suggestions for potential improvements from the audit.
Benchmarking Analysis of Policies, Programs, and Practices To assess pedestrian safety conditions in Indian Wells , the expert team conducted a benchmarking analysis to understand how the City’s existing conditions compared with current best practices. Through a pedestrian and bicycle safety assessment survey conducted with City staff, the expert team identified the City’s pedestrian and bicycle policies, programs, and practices and categorized them into three groups:
• Key strengths (areas where the City is exceeding national best practices) • Enhancement areas (areas where the City is meeting national best practices) • Opportunity areas (areas where the City appears not to meet national best practices) While suggestions are provided for each category, cities have differing physical, demographic, and institutional characteristics that may make certain goals or policies more appropriate in some jurisdictions than others. Ultimately, City staff may determine where resources and efforts are best placed for meeting local development and infrastructure goals for pedestrians and bicyclists.
A discussion of the City’s pedestrian and bicycle safety policies, programs, and practices, and suggestions for potential improvement or further enhancement to the City’s existing programs and policies are presented in Chapter 3.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 6 Walking Audit Focal Areas
Per City’s request, the following six (6) focal areas (intersections, street segments or corridors) were studied in this assessment:
1 CV-Link path
2 Fairway Drive
3 Eldorado Drive
4 Cook Street
5 Indian Wells Lane
6 Club Drive
Many of the strategies suggested in this report are appropriate for grant applications, including Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) or Active Transportation Program (ATP) funding. The strategies may also be incorporated into a bicycle or pedestrian master plan, documents that could set forth bicycle, pedestrian and streetscape policies for the City, identify, and prioritize capital improvement projects.
The suggestions presented in this report are based on limited field observations and time spent in Indian Wells by the CSSA evaluator. These suggestions, which are based on general knowledge of best practices in pedestrian and bicycle design and safety, are intended to guide City staff in making decisions for future safety improvement projects in the City, and they may not incorporate all factors which may be relevant to safety issues in the City.
As this report is conceptual in nature, conditions may exist in the focal areas that were not observed and may not be compatible with suggestions in this report. Before finalizing and implementing any physical changes, City staff may choose to conduct more detailed studies or further analysis to refine or discard the suggestions in this report, if they are found to be contextually inappropriate or appear not to improve bicycling safety or accessibility due to conditions including, but not limited to, high vehicular traffic volume or speeds, physical limitations on space or sight distance, or other potential safety concerns.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 7 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. OBJECTIVE OF THE ASSESSMENT
The City of Indian Wells (the City) requested that the Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC) at University of California, Berkeley conduct a Complete Streets Safety Assessment (CSSA) for the City. The objective of the CSSA is to improve safety and accessibility for all people walking and biking in the City of Indian Wells . This assessment emphasizes safety and mobility issues associated with pedestrians and bicyclists.
1.2. ASSESSMENT APPROACH
The SafeTREC Safety experts conducted a pre -visit telephone interview with City staff on May 04, 2021. One of the SafeTREC experts met with City staff and conducted a walking audit at various locations in Indian Wells on May 17, 2021. Positive practices, as well as pedestrian and bicycle safety and accessibility issues were identified at the field audit.
1.3. DISCLOSURES
The benchmarking analysis aims to provide the City with information on current best practices and how the city compares. Cities have differing physical, demographic, and institutional characteristics that may make certain goals or policies more appropriate in some jurisdictions than others. Ultimately, City staff will determine where resources and efforts are best utilized to meet local development and infrastructure goals for people walking and biking.
The suggestions presented in this report are based on limited field observations and limited time spent in the City of Indian Wells by the CSSA evaluator. These suggestions, which are based on general knowledge of best practices in pedestrian and bicycle design and safety, are intended to guide City staff in making decisions for future safety improvement projects in the city, and they may not incorporate all factors, which may be relevant to the pedestrian and bicycle safety issues in the city.
As this report is conceptual in nature, conditions may exist in the focal areas that were not observed and may not be compatible with suggestions in this report. Before finalizing and implementing any physical changes, City staff may conduct more detailed studies or further analysis to refine or discard the suggestions in this report if they are found to be contextually inappropriate or appear not to improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety or accessibility due to conditions including, but not limited to, high vehicular traffic volume or speeds, physical limitations on space or sight distance, or other potential safety concerns.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 9 2.2. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLIST COLLISION DATA
The collision data for Indian Wells from January 2015 to the end of 2019 was taken from the SafeTREC Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) database. During this five-year period, 157 collisions occurred in Indian Wells, one of which was fatal. There were 5 collisions involving pedestrians and 6 involving bicyclists.
Pedestrian Collisions
Within the 5 -year period analyzed from TIM S data, 5 collisions involved pedestrians, none of which was fatal, but two were with severe injury. Of the 5 collisions, 3 involved pedestrian crossing in crosswalk at an intersection, one crossing not in crosswalk. One was not in road. The following charts depict this data:
Chart 2.1: Number of Pedestrian Collisions by Collision Severity, Indian Wells
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 10 Chart 2.2: Number of Pedestrian Collisions per Day of Week per Time, Indian Wells
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 11 Chart 2.3: Number of Pedestrian Collisions by Pedestrian Action, Indian Wells
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 12 Bicycle Collisions:
Based on the TIMS data, within the 5 -year (2015-2019) period, there were 6 collisions involving bicyclists, one of which was fatal and 2 were with severe injury. The following charts depict this data.
Chart 2.4: Number of Bicycle Collisions by Collision Severity, Indian Wells
Chart 2.5: Number of Bicycle Collisions per Day of Week per Time, Indian Wells
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 13 Chart 2.6: Number of Bicycle Collisions by Primary Collision Factor (PCF) Violation, Indian Wells
The type of information provided above was obtained from SafeTREC’s TIMS ( https://tims. berkeley.edu/) can help the enforcement d epartm ent in decision making regarding their enforcement efforts.
2.3. STRE
ET STORY
The Street Story program (https://streetstory.berkeley.edu/) is a relatively new tool developed by UC Berkeley’s Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC) with OTS support. Street Story is a community engagement tool that allows residents, community groups and agencies to collect information about transportation collisions, near-misses, general hazards and safe locations to travel. To promote access to the tool, SafeTREC conducts technical
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 14 assistance sessions with communities and organizations on using Street Story. Street Story is free to use and publicly accessible.
Street Story features a survey where people can record travel experiences. Once a record has been entered, the information is publicly accessible on the website with maps and tables that can be downloaded.
It is suggested that City staff use this free tool to collect information from their residents for local needs assessments, transportation safety planning efforts, safety programs and project proposals.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 15 3. BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS RESULTS AND
SUGGESTIONS
3.1. BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS OF POLICIES, PROGRAMS, AND PRACTICES To assess pedestrian and bicycle safety conditions in the City/County, the CSSA team first conducted a benchmarking analysis to understand how the City’s/County’s existing conditions compared with current nationwide best practices. Responses were analyzed using a benchmarking matrix, as shown in Table 3-1, which lists the benchmarking topics that fall under the following categories:
• Implementation of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Improvements • Policies and Programs
• Funding
• Data Collection
• Pedestrian and Bicycle Network Implementation
• Pedestrian and Bicycle Support Programs
The CSSA team also reviewed the local agency’s website and relevant documents. Through a pedestrian and bicycle safety assessment interview conducted with local agency’s staff, the CSSA team identified the local agency’s pedestrian and bicycle policies, programs, and practices and categorized these into three groups:
• Key strengths (areas where the City/County is exceeding nationwide best practices) • Enhancement areas (areas where the City/County is meeting best practices) • Opportunity areas (areas where the City/County appears not to meet best practices) While suggestions are provided for each category, cities have differing physical, demographic, and institutional characteristics that may make certain goals or policies more appropriate in some jurisdictions than others. Ultimately, local agency staff may determine where resources and efforts are best placed for meeting local development and infrastructure goals for pedestrians.
Each topic receives one of those three ratings and is highlighted in green in the table below. This analysis shares information on current best practices and how the City/County compares. With differing physical, demographic, and institutional characteristics, certain goals or policies may be more appropriate in some jurisdictions than others. Ultimately, Local Agency staff may determine where resources and efforts are best placed for meeting local development and infrastructure goals for pedestrians.
The items in Table 3-1 are further elaborated in the following sections, which provide a description for each benchmarking topic, the local agency’s current practices, and ideas for improvement or further enhancement. The Local Agency staff may select strategies for implementation based on local priorities.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 21 Suggestions for Potential Improvement
• Consider prioritizing sub-areas within the City/County that exhibit greatest pedestrian activity. • Expand the ADA Transition Plan to include the public right -of-way, particularly the downtown area, other priority development areas, bus stops, and schools. • Consider having a part -time, trained ADA coordinator to review projects for accessibility and implement the ADA Transition Plan.
• Provide ADA standards and best practice training for engineering staff at all levels.
Pedestrian/Bicycle Coordinator
A pedestrian/bicycle coordinator provides guidance for pedestrian/bicycle planning efforts and oversees implementation of plans. In a sampling of pedestrian -oriented California cities, a common denominator among cities (with a population over 100,000) is a full -time pedestrian/ bicycle coordinator.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Include dedicated time for the pedestrian and bicycle staff person to write grants for both capital projects and ongoing funding for walking and biking related programs and optics as well as to liaison with local non-profit, advocacy groups, and schools.
Formal Advisory Committee
Advisory committees serve as important sounding boards for new policies, programs, and practices. Responding to public concerns through public feedback mechanisms represents a more proactive and inclusive approach to bicycle and pedestrian safety compared to a conventional approach of reacting to collisions.
Public Involvement and Feedback Process
Having multiple touch points with the community creates transparency and open lines of communication between the Local Agency staff, residents, and businesses. Different kinds of formats and venues for public involvement and feedback allows for broader participation from the community. Consideration of local demographics (e.g., languages spoken) and the easiest formats for people to participate (e.g., online, in person but in the course of their daily activities, or at Local Agency-organized meetings) are important for meaningful and productive community dialogue.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Add “safety” or bicycle and pedestrian specific issues as the “work type” when people place a pin in 311 for easy coding and understanding of issues.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 22 • Provide quarterly or annual updates to the community on the “state of walking and biking”, including recently completed projects, anticipated timeline for upcoming projects, and what the Local Agency plans to fund.
• Provide notices and interpretation in the most commonly spoken languages.
Traffic Calming Program
Traffic calming programs and policies set forth a consensus threshold on neighborhood requests and approvals, as well as standard treatments and criteria.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Increase the amount of dedicated funding available for traffic calming each year. • Expand the Local Agency’s traffic calming toolbox to include other tools, such as raised crosswalks, raised intersections, chicanes, and traffic diverters. They Local Agency could secure additional dedicated funding streams as part of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan buildout to accommodate these sometimes costlier (but highly effective) improvements.
• Expand the Local Agency’s practices to include proactive traffic calming measures instead of only responding to community requests. The Local Agency could consider allocating a portion of funding to proactive traffic calming, such as on bicycle boulevard streets or safe routes to schools, and then allocate the remaining funding to react to specific community requests.
• Refer to the following resources for traffic calming best practices:
o www.trafficcalming.org
o Traffic Calming Guidelines from the City of Danville
(https://www.danville.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/139/NTMP-Guidel ines-Booklet- PDF)
o Neighborhood Traffic Management Program from the City of Anaheim (https://www.anaheim.net/2841/NTMP3)
o ITE Technical Resources – Traffic Calming Measures:
(https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/traffic-calming/traffic-calming-measures/) Speed Limits and Speed Surveys
Local municipalities have the authority to set the posted speed limit based on current speed data.
The speed limit is rounded to the nearest five mile per hour (MPH) increment based on the 85 th percentile speed of free -flowing traffic. School zone speed limits in California are a de facto 25 miles per hour or less, where specified. Speed is also critical for complete streets safety.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 23 Pedestrian fatality rates increase exponentially with vehicle speed. Thus, controlling vehicle speeds is one of the most important strategies for enhancing pedestrian and bicyclist safety.
Figure 3-1. Relationship between Vehicle Speed, Victim Age, and Fatalities Suggestions for Potential Improvement
• Install traffic calming measures, signal coordination, and similar tools to maintain slower speeds appropriate for an urban community, particularly on streets that will be reviewed in the next speed survey.
• After complete streets improvement and other safety improvements are installed, conduct off-cycle speed surveys to review the speed limit and see if it needs to be reduced based on the improvements.
• Consider pedestrian volumes and known complete streets safety issues when setting speed limits and employ traffic calming strategies in locations where speed surveys suggest traffic speeds are too high for pedestrian and bicyclist safety. • Ensure complete streets design standards have appropriate target design speeds for urban areas and do not contribute to a routine need for traffic calming. • Consider the use of 15 MPH school zones.
Safe Routes to Schools
Safe Routes to School (SRTS) programs encourage children to safely walk or bicycle to school.
The Marin County Bicycle Coalition was an early champion of the concept, which has spread nationally (refer to best practices at www.saferoutestoschools.org). SRTS programs are important
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 24 both for increasing physical activity (and reducing childhood obesity) and for reducing morning traffic associated with school drop-off (as much as 30% of morning peak hour traffic).
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Form an ongoing steering committee for the program (or each school) comprised of Local Agency staff, school district staff, PTA leaders, and other stakeholders that meets regularly to monitor efforts and identify new opportunities. • Consider a safe route to school plan for all schools to conduct walk audits, identify recommended safety improvements, and secure funding for those improvements.
Crosswalk Installation, Removal, and Enhancement Policies A formal policy for crosswalk installation, removal, and enhancement provides transparency in decision-making and adopts best practices in pedestrian safety and accommodation. It includes consideration of all kinds of crosswalks, including uncontrolled and controlled locations.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Develop a City - or Countywide crosswalk policy for the installation, removal, and enhancement of crosswalks at controlled and uncontrolled location. Ensure that it is consistent with best practices and recent research. This includes removing crosswalks only as a last resort and providing midblock crossings where they serve pedestrian desire lines.
• Consider developing a treatment selection “tool” to assist staff with the identification of applicable treatments in a given context.
• When crosswalk enhancements are identified, add them to a prioritized list that will be upgraded over time as funding is available.
Crosswalk policy resources include:
• Federal Highway Administration Study Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations:
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc 4/guide to improve uncontrol led crossings.pdf
• National Cooperative Highway Research Program Application of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments for Streets and Highways:
http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/175419.aspx
Shared Mobility Services
Shared mobility services are transportation services — typically offered by private companies — that offer ride- hail services (e.g. , Lyft or Uber) for both solo and pooled trips, bike share, and scooter share. Policies for shared mobility services can allow agencies to encourage, prohibit, or direct how they want shared mobility to work in their agency. They can allow for curb space management, clear organization of sidewalk space, and encourage (or discourage) private vendors to come to the City/County. Curb space management is a practice that requires curb
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 25 access to be planned, designed, operated, and maintained to enable curb utilization with safe, convenient, and multimodal access for all transportation users.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Adopt a curb management plan to designate how the Local Agency will prioritize and proactive plan for curb uses (e.g., parking, passenger loading, commercial loading, ADA loading and parking, bicycle parking, bus-only lanes) and to make sure that the curb has the highest and best use of space.
• Consider micromobility policies (e.g. , permitting, enforcement) in place to prioritize pedestrian and bicyclist safety and keep the sidewalk organized and usable for people of all abilities.
Funding
A dedicated, annual funding stream for bicycle and pedestrian projects ensures that these types of projects will be implemented regularly. Bicycle and pedestrian projects can also be integrated in the other work that the local agency does, including repaving and other routine maintenance of the roadway network.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Partner with other agencies and continue applying for grant funding for both infrastructure and non-infrastructure projects.
• Integrate bicycle and pedestrian projects into the site plan review process for new development.
• Secure additional funding for repaving projects to allow for “quick build” projects and other bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements to be integrated into those projects. • Establish a dedicated funding source for pedestrian and bicycle projects.
Collection of Pedestrian and Bicyclist Volumes
Pedestrian and bicyclist volume data is important for understand where people walk and bike.
This establishes baseline data prior to project implementation and can help prioritize projects, develop collision rates, and determine appropriate bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.
Suggestions for Potential Improvement
• Routinely collect pedestrian and bicycle volumes by requiring them to be counted in conjunction with manual intersection turning movement counts. https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/4 AOC Tech Transfer Seminar Banner 06032013 .pdf
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 26 • Geocode pedestrian volume data with GIS software along with other data such as pedestrian control devices and collisions to analyze data for trends or hotspots related to pedestrian safety.
Inventory of Bikeways, Parking, Informal Pathways, and Key Bicycle Opportunity Areas • Migrate the inventory of bikeways, bike parking, and future bike improvements into a GIS format for quick mapping and sharing.
• Identify a staff person responsible for maintaining the GIS data set.
Inventory of Sidewalks, Informal Pathways, and Key Pedestrian Opportunity Areas A GIS-based sidewalk inventory enables project identification and prioritization, as well as project coordination with new development, roadway resurfacing, and so on. This data set can be available on the Local Agency’s website for knowledge sharing with the public as well as agencies.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Create a City - or Countywide inventory of existing and missing sidewalks, informal pathways and key pedestrian opportunity areas in GIS.
• Consider establishing a program to work with property owners to repair damaged sidewalks outside their property. This can be a condition for the sale of the property.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Traffic Control Audit (Signs, Markings, and Signals) Cities have a wide variety of traffic control devices that regulate how bicyclist and pedestrians should use the street and interact safely with drivers. However, some cities do not have inventories how, when, and where this is installed. Creating a database of this information allows the Local Agency’s staff to know where infrastructure may be out of date or in needed of updates.
For example, countdown signals are important pedestrian safety countermeasure. The 2012 California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) requires the installation of countdown pedestrian signals for all new signals. Likewise, the CA MUTCD also requires installation of bike detection at all actuated signals. Bike detection is a basic building block of the bike network to make sure that bikes can trigger the traffic signal. Inventorying bike detection and countdown signals allows the Local Agency’s staff to approach safety from a systems perspective and develop projects to close gaps in biking and walking infrastructure over time.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Develop a City- or Countywide crosswalk inventory in GIS and maintain it over time. This would allow for a systemic safety approach to enhancing crosswalks, and allow the Local Agency to prioritize all crosswalk enhancement projects City - or Countywide for implementation over time and as money is available.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 27 • Ensure that locations with pedestrian desire lines have safe crosswalks. An updated crosswalk policy can help determine the appropriate crossing treatment at uncontrolled locations without marked crosswalks.
• Include maintenance records within the GIS database inventory of signs, markings and signals.
• Develop a proactive monitoring program for ensuring the quality and proper functioning of traffic control devices.
Collision History and Collision Reporting Practices
Safety is typi cally approach through both proactive and reactive measures. Identifying and responding to collision patterns on a regular basis is an important reactive approach to bicycle and pedestrian safety, which may be combined with other proactive measures. This is the traditional way most cities have approached safety. However, many are now looking to proactive safety to address safety issues on a system wide basis. This is often paired with a policy goal of getting to zero fatality or severe injury collisions (commonly referred to as “Vision Zero”).
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Adopt a data driven systemic safety approach, which would include a systems approach to identifying, prioritizing, and ultimately implementing safety countermeasure and/or a formal commitment to Vision Zero.
• Work with elected officials and department heads to adopt a Vision Zero policy formally stating the Local Agency’s commitment to reducing the number of traffic-related fatalities and severe injuries to zero.
• Additionally, with sufficient pedestrian volume data, the Local Agency could prioritize collision locations based on collision rates (i.e., collisions/daily pedestrian volume), a practice that results in a more complete safety needs assessment. Treatments could then be identified for each location and programmatic funding allocated in the Local Agency’s Capital Improvements Program (CIP).
o The City of Sacramento’s Pedestrian Master Plan includes a section on how to prioritize locations based on collision rates:
http://www.cityofsacramento.org/transportation/engineering/publications.html Complete Streets Policy
Complete Streets Policies are formal statements showing a local agency’s comm itment to planning and designing for all modes of travel and travelers of all ages and abilities.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 28 Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• The following jurisdictions have established practices for complete streets, including implementation of these policies through multimodal level of service thresholds, and may serve as models:
o Boston, Massachusetts, Boston’s Complete Streets:
http://bostoncompletestreets.org/about/
o Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Philly Free Streets:
http://www.phillyfreestreets.com/
o Baltimore, Maryland, Complete Streets Ordinance:
https://transportation.baltimorecity.gov/completestreets o South Bend, Indiana, Complete Streets Policy:
https://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/app/legacy/documents/cs/policy/cs-in- south-bend-resolution.pdf
o Town of Ashland, Massachusetts, Complete Streets Policy:
https://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/app/legacy/documents/cs/policy/cs-ma- ashland-policy.pdf
Active Transportation Plan
This type of plan includes a large menu of policy, program, and practice suggestions, as well as site-specific (and prototypical) engineering treatment suggestions. Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan(s) documents a jurisdiction’s vision for improving walkability, bikeability, and bicycle and pedestrian safety; establish policies, programs, and practices; and outline the prioritization and budgeting process for project implementation.
Suggestion for Potent
ial Improvement:
• Implement the low-hanging projects in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and seek grant funding for major projects
• Pursue additional funding opportunities for programs identified by the Plan. • Provide regular updates to the Plan, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities and design guidelines that address the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages and abilities • Develop high injury networks for walking and biking to identify routes with the highest incidences of fatal and severe injuries for pedestrians and bicyclists. This will create a systematic safety analysis that can help in prioritizing limited resources. • Consider identifying existing and missing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure for safety improvement.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 29 Existing Bike Network
Innovative features such as separated bikeways, bicycle boulevards, and buffered bike lanes can decrease the level of traffic stress experienced by bicyclists, make biking more comfortable, and — in so doing — appeal to a wide range of bicyclists. Level of traffic stress refers to the level of comfort or discomfort a bicyclist might experience. Research conducted by the Mineta Institute in San Jose establishes levels of traffic stress on a scale for 1 to 4 with LTS 1 at the level that most children can tolerate and LTS 4 at the level characterized by “strong and fearless” cyclists (see:
http://transweb.sjsu.edu/project/1005.html). A bicycle network that is attractive to the majo rit y of
the population would have low stress and high connectivity.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement:
• Continue to identify funding sources and implement the proposed projects identified in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
• Develop design standards for bike boulevards, trails, paths, and landscaping for bicycle network.
• Create a GIS data for existing bike network to identify gaps and opportunities for improvements.
Existing Pedestrian Facilities
Suggestion for Potential Improvement:
• Continue to identify funding sources and implement the proposed projects identified in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
• Create a GIS database for existing pedestrian infrastructure to identify gaps, inventory assets, and create opportunities for systemic safety analysis of all crosswalks.
Bike Network Implementation Practices
Considering the safety and comfort of people biking leads to better bikeway projects that can encourage new biking trips and enhance safety for people biking today and in the future.
Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) was originally developed by researchers at the Mineta Transportation Institute. LTS assesses the comfort and connectivity of bicycle networks.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement:
• Prioritize bicycle projects to align with roadway resurfacing and projects that are near school sites.
• Secure enough funding for repaving and other complete streets projects to allow for installation of protected bike facilities and intersection improvements.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 30 • Prioritize Use LTS to strategically implement bikeways and traffic calming treatments that would improve LTS of existing bikeways.
Design Guidelines and Standards
Design guidelines and development standards create a clear set of documents that guide how all transportation improvements should be installed City- or Countywide. As a result, they can create a consistent, high-quality biking and walking experience.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Consider adopting national bicycle and pedestrian safety best practices for roadway and facility design guidelines and standards:
o NACTO Urban Street Design Guide:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/2012-nacto-ur ban-street-design- guide.pdf
o CROW Design Manual for Bicycle Traffic
o FHWA Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide
https://nacto.org/wp-content/ uploads/2016/05/2-4 FHWA -Separated-Bike-Lane- Guide-ch-5 2014.pdf
o MassDOT Separated Bike Lane Planning & Design Guide
https://www.mass.gov/lists/separated-bike-lane-planning-design-guide o ITE Recommended Practice for Accommodating Pedestrians and Bicyclists at Interchanges
o AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities https://nacto.org/wp-content/
uploads/2015/04/AASHTO Bicycle- Facilities-
Guide 2012- toc.pdf
AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities https://transops.s3.amazonaws.com/uploaded files/Update%20of%20the%20AASHTO%20Gui de%20for%20the%20Planning%2C%20Design%2C%20and%20Operation%20of%20Pedestria n%20Facilities.pdf
Roadway Surfaces
The quality of a roadway surface along bikeways is an important consideration when choosing to bike. Rough surface in a bike lane creates an uncomfortable bicycling experience and may also pose safety hazards.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 31 Suggestion for Potential Improvement:
• Prioritize maintenance of roadways where bicycle facilities are present, particularly for closing gaps in the bikeway network or where improved pavement quality is needed on popular bicycle routes.
• Prioritize debris removal on roadways where bicycle facilities are present. • Assess the needs for new and enhanced crosswalks and curb ramps with each repaving project. Include consideration of lane reductions and quick build projects such as paint and plastic median refuges and bulb outs; high -visibility crosswalks; and advanced yield markings.
Attention to Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing Barriers
Crossing barriers — such as railroads, freeways, and major arterials — may discourage or even prohibit bicycle access and are often associated with vehicle- bicycle collisions. Large intersections and interchanges and uncontrolled crossings can often deter bicyclists due to high speeds, high number of conflict points with vehicles, and high level of exposure. Identifying and removing barriers and preventing new barriers is essential for improving bicyclist safety and access. Crossing barriers also discourage or even prohibit pedestrian access and can create safety challenges for pedestrians. These can be similar to the biking barriers or present additional challenges.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement:
• Use green routinely to highlight conflict zones at large intersection and interchanges.
See Oakland’s bicycle lane striping guidance for more information:
http://www2.oaklandnet.com/government/o/PWA/o/EC/s/BicycleandPedestrianProgram/ OAK024653
• To slow speeds at critical intersections, use smaller corner radii using small design vehicles appropriate for urban areas and updated standard plans to reflect this. • Review design of slip/trap-right lanes at intersections and implement improvements. • Implement best practice guidance on bicycle accommodation through interchanges and expressways, as appropriate, using the ITE’s Recommended Practice: Guidelines to Accommodate Bicyclist and Pedestrians at Interchanges plus consideration of protected bike lane design.
• Identify and create an inventory of pedestrian barriers with targeted recommendations for phased improvements.
• Consider pedestrian barriers and needs in doing bicycle barriers assessment.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 32 Traffic Signal and Stop Sign Warrants
Providing all -way stop or signal control at an intersection may improve pedestrian safety by reducing speeds and controlling pedestrian -vehicle conflicts. Installing bicycling signals and limiting stop signs on bicycle routes may enhance bicycle mobility and safety. The CA MUTCD defines warrants for installing signals and stop signs.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Develop specific signal and stop sign warrants that are pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly.
Sidewalk Furniture or Other Sidewalk Zone Policies
Street furniture encourages walking by accommodating pedestrians with benches to rest along the route or wait for transit; trash receptacles to maintain a clean environment; street trees for shade, and so on. Uniform street furniture requirements also enhance the design of the pedestrian realm and may improve economic vitality.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
Adopt a Street Furniture Ordinance to include locations and furniture amenities other than those associated with transit stops, as appropriate.
Street Tree Requirements
Street trees enhance the pedestrian environment by providing shade and a buffer from vehicles, which increase pedestrian safety. Street trees may also enhance property values, especially in residential neighborhoods. However, street trees, when improperly selected, planted, or maintained, may cause damage to adjacent public utilities.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Update the Street Tree Ordinance to provide guidance on permissible tree types and permitting requirements, also specifying a requirement for new trees plantings associated with development projects.
Bicycling Supportive Amenities and Wayfinding
In addition to designating roadway or paths in a bicycle network, supportive amenities (including parking, water fountains, and maintenance stations) can encourage bicycling. Wayfinding can both encourage bicycling and enhance safety by navigating cyclists to facilities that have been enhanced for bicyclist use or to local retail opportunities for economic growth.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement:
• Create and deploy a bicycle wayfinding strategy City- or Countywide as recommended in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, as well as a Biking Guide. • Develop a Biking Guide that includes a bike map and bicycle locker and rack locations.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 33 Bicycle Parking Requirements
Safe and convenient bicycle parking is essential for encouraging bicycle travel (especially in-lieu of vehicle travel). Bicycle parking can also facilitate last -mile connections between two modes, such as bicycle parking at a transit station. To be effective, bicycle parking needs to be visible and secure and have enough capacity to accommodate bicycle demand, both long- term and short-term. Long -term and short -term parking can be implemented through a bicycle parking ordinance as in the City of Oakland (see details at http://www2.oaklandnet.com/Government/ o/PWA/o/EC/s/BicycleandPedestrianProgram/OAK024596).
Suggestion for Potential Improvement:
• Implement short-term and long- term, secured bicycle parking at all new development, consistent with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and the APBP Bicycle Parking Guidelines, 2nd edition.
• Site bicycle racks to be convenient for bicyclists, out of the way of pedestrians, and with good visibility for security, consistent with the APBP Bicycle Parking Guidelines, 2nd edition.
• Consider implementation of “branded” racks for the City/County (with a unique design or City/County’s symbol).
Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Education Program
Engineering treatments are often not enough on their own to realize full safety benefits associated with the treatment. Safety education programs complement engineering treatments and increase compliance. Education campaigns target people of all ages, especially school-age children where safe walking and biking habits may be instilled as lifelong lessons.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Conduct a formal education campaign targeting people driving, walking, and biking about street safety. This includes: advertisements on buses and bus shelters, an in- school curriculum, community school courses, public service announcements, and many other strategies. Consider a focus on speed and safe driving. o The Street Smarts program in San Jose, CA, provides a model pedestrian safety Enforcement
Enforcement of pedestrian and bicycle right -of-way laws and speed limits is an important complement to engineering treatments and education programs.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 35 • Routinely conduct bicycle safety audits of key corridors throughout the City/County, including those with recent improvements, those with heavy bicycle demand, and those with high collision rates.
• Collaborate with schools on projects beyond the school district boundaries.
3.1.1. General Plan: Provision for Pedestrian and Bicycle Nodes Planning principles contained in a local agency’s General Plan can provide an important policy context for developing pedestrian-oriented, walkable areas. Transit-oriented development, higher densities, and mixed uses are important planning tools for pedestrian-oriented areas. The General Plan identifies pedestrian priority areas, which are zones in which high volumes of pedestrian traffic are encouraged and accommodated along the sidewalk.
Suggestion for Potential Enhancement
• Create an overlay district for pedestrian priority areas with special pedestrian- oriented guidelines, such as relaxing auto Level of Service standards and prioritizing pedestrian improvements. Prioritize sidewalk improvement and completion projects in these nodes. • Utilize vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for future transportation impact analysis.
Bike Ordinances (Sidewalk Riding)
Suggestion for Potential Improvement:
• Consider an optional helmet ordinance for adults.
• Consider allowing for context -specific flexibility in sidewalk riding policies and enforcement.
Transportation Deman d Management (TDM) Programs
TDM programs encourage multimodal travel by incentivizing non- automobile options. As new development occurs, TDM programs can be expanded, formalized, and strengthened.
Suggestions for Potential Improvement
As part of a comprehensive TDM program:
• Hire or identify a part-time TDM Coordinator.
• Create a TDM program and accompanying website with separate pages for employees, residents, and visitors.
• Establish a Transportation Management Association (TMA) for key commercial and business areas to coordinate parking, transit, and other TDM strategies and policies.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 36 General Plan: Densities and Mixed-Use Zones
Planning principles contained in a local agency’s General Plan can provide an important policy context for developing bicycle-oriented and walkable areas. Transit-oriented development, higher densities, and mixed uses are important planning tools for pedestrian-oriented areas.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Utilize vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for future transportation impact analysis. • Consider allowing moderate to high densities in the downtown and mixed- use zones as well progressive parking policies, such as shared parking and demand-based pricing. • Consider multi -modal trade -offs in the transportation impact analysis for new development, so that the safety and needs of people walking and biking is weighed heavily and vehicular delay is not the primary performance measure. • Ensure that wide sidewalks, high quality, protected bike lanes, and intersection safety improvements are included with all new development projects, particularly where densities are higher
• Strongly weigh walking and biking performance measures as well as safety metrics in determining appropriate intersection improvements and street design.
Specific Plans, Overlay Zones, and Other Area Plans
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Emphasize bicyclist and pedestrian-oriented design, walkability, and/or placemaking in all new specific plans, overlay zones, and other area plans.
Historic Sites
Historic walking routes or bike trails, such as the famous Freedom Trail in Boston, encourage active transportation and enhance economic vitality.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement
• Continue to implement the goals, policies and programs that support walking trips included in the Historic Preservation and Community Design Element of the General Plan to showcase natural or local sites of interest, and link key features of the Local Agency. Maps of the tour route and historic documentation materials could be made available online or as a mobile app in addition to wayfinding signs, maps, and plaques could also be provided throughout the Local Agency. Consider other areas of the City/County for walking tours and historic signs.
• Consider upgrading History Walk signs with larger text to improve legibility and wayfinding.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 38 These conflicts require consensus building between the Local Agency and the respective departments. Consensus building could include pilot testing of alternative treatments, such as a model traffic circle in an open field.
No information was provided about coordination with emergency response.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement:
• Include the Fire Department early in the process as a stakeholder in the Williams Street and Bancroft Street separated bikeway projects to ensure access needs are accommodated.
• Balance the trade-off between traffic calming safety treatments such as roundabouts or partial street closures and longer emergency response times. • Encourage emergency and transit responders to participate in test runs of roadway designs that are aimed to reduce speed and improve bicycling access.
Coordination with Health Agencies
Involving non- traditional partners such as public health agencies, pediatricians, etc., in the planning or design of pedestrian and bicycle facilities may create opportunities to be more proactive with pedestrian and bicycle safety, identify pedestrian and bicycle safety challenges and education venues, and secure funding. Additionally, under -reporting of pedestrian- vehicle and bicycle-vehicle collisions could be a problem that may be partially mitigated by involving the medical community in pedestrian and bicycle safety planning. 2 Coordination with Transit Agencies
Providing safe and comfortable biking and walking routes to transit stops and stations, and the ability to take bicycles on-board transit vehicles increases the likelihood of multi-modal trips.
Suggestion for Potential Improvement:
• Prioritize implementation of safe routes to transit projects around the BART stations as well as to bus stops on AC Transit major corridors.
• Work with transit agencies, Caltrans, and other relevant partners to improve access and safety to stations and bus stops.
2 Sciortino, S., Vassar, M., Radetsky, M. and M. Knudson, “San Francisco Pedestrian Injury Surveillance: Mapping, Underreporting, and Injury Severity in Police and Hospital Records,” Accident Analysis and Prevention , Volume 37, Issue 6, November 2005, Pages 1102-1113
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 40 Figure 4-1 maps these focal areas.
Figure 4-1: Map of focal areas
Section 4.3 presents key issues and suggestions identified during the audit that can be applied citywide. Subsequent sections address the six focal areas, with figures that illustrate the suggestions.
4.3. GENERAL CITYWIDE SUGGESTIONS
The following general suggestions for physical enhancements may be appropriate Citywide or in the focal areas. These are discussed in detail below.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 42 Corner curb extensions
At intersections with conventional corners and no curb extensions, pedestrians preparing to cross a street typically make their crossing decisions before stepping off the curb, i.e., while on the sidewalk. Due to substantial corner radii at most intersections, this places them over 10 feet outside of the first travel lane they will enter. Corner curb extensions (bulb- outs) enable pedestrians to safely make their decision near the outside travel lane, where they are more visible to approaching motorists and also have a considerably shorter distance to cross. Raised curb extensions also enable crosswalk warning sign assemblies to be installed closer to the travel lanes where they are more visible to motorists. One resource for curb extensions is NACTO’s Urban Street Design Guide section: https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design- guide/street-design-elements/curb-extensions/
Curb extensions attached to the street’s existing curb can be expensive to construct because they must preserve drainage along the street and provide accessible slopes and curb ramps. However, the same safety benefits can be obtained with less expense and without modifying drainage if the extension area is segmented into “floating” islands between which pedestrians including wheelchair users travel at existing street grade.
“Temporary Traffic Calming Curbs” (Calgary, AB)
Figure 4-2: Segmented floating corner island treatment
Interim curb extensions
Many cities are now deploying treatments consisting only of painted lines, colored paint or epoxy fill, and tubular delineators to rapidly and inexpensively create corner-bulb installations in advance of funding availability for hardscape versions (Figure 4-3). These go by various names such as “Painted Safety Zones” (San Francisco) , “Painted Curb Extensions” (Pasadena), “Painted Bulbouts” (Denver) and “Interim curb bulbs” (Seattle).
San Francisco MTA writes:
Painted safety zones are painted road areas that wrap around sidewalk corners to make pedestrian crossing intersections more visible to people driving. Painted safety zones are often flanked by delineators (white posts) and encourage people who drive to slow down, especially when making turns.
https://www.sfmta.com/getting-around/walk/pedestrian-toolkit
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 43 Seattle DOT (SDOT) writes:
Interim curb bulbs may be appropriate in locations where there is a safety need and a permanent solution is not feasible in the short term, and/or where there is a planned capital improvement within 5 years. At intersections with curb and gutter, an interim curb bulb can only be done [where] there are existing curb ramps. In some cases, curb bulbs may also be integrated with bioretention to manage storm water runoff from the right-of-way.
https://streetsillustrated.seattle.gov/urban-design/adaptive-design/intersection- treatments/
Crosswalk marking patterns – high vi
sibility and contrast edge
The standard crosswalk-marking scheme at controlled approaches has 2 transverse lines and no fill pattern. Many cities use the standard pattern at controlled approaches and a high -visibility pattern at uncontrolled approaches. The following description from San Francisco MTA’s crosswalk design guidelines describes the safety advantages of high-visibility markings:
Because of the low approach angle at which drivers view pavement markings, the use of longitudinal stripes in addition to or in place of the standard transverse markings can significantly increase the visibility of a crosswalk to oncoming traffic.
While research has not shown a direct link between increased crosswalk visibility and increased pedestrian safety, high- visibility crosswalks have been shown to increase motorist yielding and channelization of pedestrians, leading the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to conclude that high- visibility pedestrian crosswalks have a positive effect on pedestrian and driver behavior.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 44 Los Angeles (Cesar Chavez & St Louis)
Pasadena Street Design Guide
Los Angeles – Pico & Curson
San Francisco (16th St & Kansas St)
Seattle (Burke-Gilman Trail & 40th Ave NE & NE 52nd Pl) Figure 4-3: Paint-and-delineator curb extensions
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 46 Leading Pedestrian Interval
Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI ) traffic signal phasing displays the pedestrian signal’s WALK indication for 3 -7 seconds before the green indication for same- direction traffic. LPI gives pedestrians a head start to occupy the crosswalk before turning vehicles. A 2000 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) found that LPI reduces conflicts between turning vehicles and pedestrians.
Field Evaluation of a Leading Pedestrian Interval Signal P hase at Three Urban Intersections. Van Houten, Retting, Farmer, Van Houten. Transportation Research Record (TRR) 2000.
It is suggested that the city consider implementing LPI at signals with high pedestrian activity, prohibiting right-turn-on-red as needed per recent research findings.
Figure 4-5: Leading Pedestrian Interval phases
Center islands on side streets
Adding pill-shaped center islands just behind the crosswalks side streets at some intersections can improve safety in several ways:
• Calm right turns from the major street
• Calm left turns onto the major street
• Calm through movements on the side street
• Provide a modest refuge for pedestrians crossing the side street, especially slow ones • Enable the limit lines to be moved forward for better sightlines • Provide a sheltered place for bicycle users approaching on the side street to prepare to cross or enter the major street
Figure 4-6 shows such an island on a 40- foot residential street in Sunnyvale CA (Canary Drive, at Inverness Way). The island is 6 feet wide and 20 feet long.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 47 Figure 4-6: Median island on residential street (Canary at Inverness, Sunnyvale CA)
4.4. FOCAL AREAS
The following subsections address the six focal areas listed in Section 4.2.
The evaluator explored each focal area with City staff on the field visit day. Staff observations and notes appear in each subsection. Because of the Covid- 19 pandemic, observations may not reflect typical (non-pandemic) operation.
4.4.1. Area #1: CV-Link Regional Path
Overview
Coachella Valley Link (“CV-Link”) is a multi-use paved path that when completed will connect the cities along the Whitewater River corridor. The path is open to pedestrians, users of conventional and electric-assisted bicycles, and low-speed three- and four-wheel electric vehicles such as golf carts. Indian Wells is Segment #6.
Figure 4-7: CV-Link homepage image (www.coachellavalleylink.com)
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 48 Figure 4-8: CV-Link alignment alternatives through Indian Wells Each city determines CV- Link’s alignment within its boundary. Figure 4-8 shows the three alignment alternatives through Indian Wells: #1: Left (north) Bank, #2 Right (south) bank, and #3 On-Street. On-Street (#3), the City’s current adopted alignment, will depart from the river corridor at the western city limit with Palm Desert and return to the river’s south bank at the eastern city limit with La Quinta. Alternatives #1 and #2 along the river channel are deferred.
Table 4-3 divides Indian Wells’ CV-Link on-street alignment focal area into segments. Discussion follows the table.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 50 Indian Wells’ adopted CV-Link alignment departs from the river at this location and crosses the channel on the north side of the road, where there is a 6’ sidewalk with a metal pole -and-cable fence, and a separate 6’ or wider concrete sidepath that departs from roadway grade and follows the river channel’s cross -grade, merging back into the sidewalk approximately 600’ west of the Eldorado signal (Figure 4-9). Pedestrians typically use the sidewalk; bicyclists typically use the sidepath even though its surface planes have substantial cross-slope for drainage.
a) Westbound just west of river channel
b) Sidepath and sidewalk at south end of river channel, facing east Figure 4-9: Fred Waring Drive at and near Whitewater River channel Other than guide signage to direct users between the river and the Eldorado signal, no significant improvements appear to be needed to implement CV-Link on this segment.
Segment 2 – Eldorado Drive/ Via Toscana intersection and Eldorado river bridge At the Eldorado Drive / Via Toscana signal 600’ east of the river, the on-street CV-Link alignment will use the north crosswalk (across Via Toscana) and the east crosswalk (across Fred Waring) to reach the southwest corner of the intersection, then continue along the east side of Eldorado to share the existing golf cart path’s river crossing on the roadway bridge.
As shown in Figure 4-10, there is currently insufficient width to construct a sidepath on the east side of Eldorado between the intersection’s southeast corner and the golf cart path without removing three mature palm trees.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 51 Figure 4-10: Eldorado Drive east side north of river bridge – mature palm trees
Figure 4-11: Eldorado between Fred Warning and river - existing However, the two southbound lanes that depart the intersection receive only single-lane movements — Fred Waring’s single eastbound right turn lane and single westbound left turn lane, and Via Toscana’s single southbound through lane. Removing Eldorado’s inner receiving lane and shifting all northbound approach lanes westward would free up one lane width along the east side. Figure 4-12 shows a concept, with CV -Link and its crosswalks highlighted in orange (not suggested as a treatment) and Eldorado’s bike lanes in green. White and yellow extension lines through the intersection show certain realigned vehicle and bicycle travel paths.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 52 Figure 4-12: Concept for Fred Waring Drive / Eldorado Drive / Via Toscana intersection South of the intersection, CV -Link will share the existing barrier-separated golf cart path across the river channel on the east side of Eldorado Drive. Path junctions will be added in the golf cart path’s barrier wall at the north and south ends of shared segment on the bridge, presumably with signage informing CV-Link users that entry to the Indian Wells Country Club area to the east is prohibited.
Segment 3 – Eldorado between river and Highway 111; Desert Horizons Drive intersection The CV-Link alignment will continue along the east side of Eldorado Drive to the northeast corner of the Highway 111 intersection, using the existing wide landscape area. Desert Horizons Drive intersects from the west approximately 1,500’ south of Fred Waring Drive, with a gated attended entrance that has two inbound and two outbound lanes . It serves a large development whose residents will need access to the path. Eldorado does not stop at this intersection.
As shown in Figure 4-13, there is a northbound left turn lane and unused buffer lane on the south leg, opposite a wide landscaped median on the north leg. The concept shows a north- leg crosswalk with high -visibility markings, warning sign assemblies using W11-15 Trail Crossing signs and optional pedestrian- activated Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), yield lines with R1-5 Yield Here signs, and a median refuge island. (The dashed yellow line is not suggested for installation — it shows how the outbound vehicle left turn path from Desert Horizons Drive will clear the median refuge island.)
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 53 a) Existing
b) Concept
Figure 4-13: Eldorado Drive / Desert Horizons Drive intersection Segment 4 – Eldorado Drive / Highway 111 intersection
CV-Link’s on-street alignment will continue south along the east side of Eldorado to Highway 111, past Indian Wells Fire Department Station 55 and City Hall. Beginning at the fire station’s north driveway, the wide CV-Link path would replace the existing sidewalk. It would turn east at the intersection’s northeast corner and follow the north side of Highway 111 to the City of La Quinta before reconnecting with the south bank of the river channel.
The si gnal’s east crosswalk and a proposed path along the east side of Eldorado Drive will connect residents south of Highway 111 to CV-Link. To reduce conflicts between pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Highway 111, it is suggested to widen the east crosswalk and delineate it as adjacent parallel bicycle and pedestrian crossings, with the bicycle area aligned inboard (west) of
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 54 the pedestrian area. The bicycle crossing area would not be delineated as a bike lane because it would not be aligned with bike lane north or south of Highway 111.
Segment 5 – Highway 111 between Eldorado Drive and eastern spur channel The CV-Link alignment will follow the north side of Highway 111 between Eldorado Drive and the La Quinta city limit. For most of this di stance a meandering sidewalk exists, and the only major improvement needed would be to widen the surface for shared use with bicycle traffic. It is suggested to consider installing a 15’ shared surface delineated as a 10’ two-way bicycle area (5’ + 5’) wit h directional arrows and dashed yellow centerline (passing permitted), adjacent to a 5 pedestrian priority area at the same grade as the bicycle area ( i.e., not raised), preferably distinguished by pavement color. Figure 4-14 shows such a path on the San Francisco — Oakland Bay Bridge. In practice, groups of pedestrians flex onto the bicycle area when no bicyclists are present, and solo bicyclists give them space when passing.
Figure 4-14: 5 meter (~15’) delineated path (SF-Oakland Bay Bridge East Span) City staff said that landscape crews park along the north side of Highway 111 on this stretch to maintain plantings and irrigation. At various locations the existing curb descends to street grade or has a driveway-like apron ( Figure 4-15). Other examples of “verge” or “indented” parking appear in Figure 4-16.
Figure 4-15: Driveway apron on north side of Highway 111, for landscape access
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 55 Figure 4-16: Indented or “verge” parking
Proposed developments on the north side of Highway 111 near Miles Avenue would install CV- Link segments along their frontage. Because Indian Wells’ future CV-Link network may include a path along the south side of the river, such developments should also be conditioned to construct or provide access easements for public-access shared-use paths between the Highway 111 CV- Link and the south side of the river as suggested in Figure 4-17.
Figure 4-17: Public access spur locations for developments near Miles Avenue Segment 6 – Highway 111 between eastern spur channel and La Quinta city limit Indian Wells’ eastern city limit with La Quinta follows the east side of a spur channel that runs northward under Highway 111 to the river.
Figure 4-18: Highway 111 facing east across spur channel toward La Quinta
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 56 The County proposes to construct a shared use path bridge across the channel on the north side of Highway 111. The City of La Quinta proposes to construct a CV -Link staging area (trailhead with parking) on the east side of the spur’s junction with the river, in the “Point Happy” area that occupies the northwest quadrant of the Highway 111/ Washington Avenue intersection located about 1,500 east of the channel.
No suggestions are offered for this segment.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 57 4.4.2. Area #2: Fairway Drive between Cook Street and Eldorado Drive Existing conditions and fi eld observations
Overview
Within Indian Wells, Fairway Drive runs east -west 2,500’ (approximately 1/2 mile) south of Highway 111. It extends 5,200’ (approximately one mile) between Cook Street / Vintage Drive and the north leg of Eldorado Drive, then continues east approximately 2,800’ (1/2 mile) to Indian Wells Lane, which also runs north toward Highway 111.
Developments to the south are golf course subdivisions , with gated entrances at Vintage Drive (south leg at Cook Street), opposite Cielito Drive, and Eldorado Drive (south leg).
Figure 4-19: Fairway Drive context
On the 5,200’ segment between Cook / Vintage and Eldorado (north leg), Fairway is 40’ wide, with an 8’ north-side parking lane, two 5’ bike lanes and two 11’ traffic lanes. There is no sidewalk along north-side fronting houses, but there is a wide landscape area on the south side the width of which varies considerably . The eastbound right turn pockets serving the gated entrances opposite Cielito Way and at the south leg of Eldorado Drive indent into this landscape area.
The segment’s endpoint intersections at Cook / Vintage and Eldorado are all-way stops, as is the midpoint intersection at Rancho Palmeras Drive, approximately 1/2 mile from the endpoints . All other intersections on this segment are one-way stops.
Observations
Because there is no sidewalk on the north side — only a parking lane, r esidents of north-side fronting houses and developments served by streets that intersect from the north routinely cross the street and walk along the south side lawn and landscape corridor for recreation, despite there being no sidewalk or path. One such south-side pedestrian is visible at the right side of Figure 4-23(a) [Cielito Drive gated access].
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 58 The usable width available for installing a shared use path on the south side varies considerably depending on the varying setback to the tall wall that encloses the golf course developments and the presence of mature trees and hedges along the wall.
Figure 4-20 shows these conditions at Williams Drive, where the south wall setback is at a minimum and tall hedges are present. Here the distance between the south curb and face of hedge is approximately 12’.
a) Aerial (north at top)
b) Street view, facing west
Figure 4-20: Fairway at Williams, showing minimum south-side area width Analysis
Alternate cross section concept, to create south-side path During the field visit an alternative cross section for Fairway Drive was discussed that would widen the south-side landscape corridor by 10’, enabling the installation of a wide shared use path. This would be achieved by reconstructing the south curb and gutter 10’ further north, narrowing the street from 40’ to 30’ and eliminating the two 5’ bike lanes.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 59 To keep the street easy for pedestrians to cross and comfortable for on- street bicyclists to be passed by vehicles, traffic calming measures would be installed to lower the vehicle speed distribution. The existing double yellow (no passing) centerline would either be replaced with a dashed (passing permitted) centerline or eliminated. R117 (CA) “PASS [BIKES] 3 FT MIN” signs would encourage comfortable passing of on-street bicyclists.
Figure 4-21 illustrates this cross-section transformation. In the concept image, the widened south- side area is used for a “mode-separated” path that aligns both bicycle directions closer to the street and the pedestrian area further away. This will maximize pedestrian comfort and also align the faster path traffic (bicyclists) further from sight obstructions where the path crosses the gated access points at Cielito Drive and the south leg of Eldorado.
a) Existing
b) Concept
Figure 4-21: Fairway Drive cross section concept
Traffic calming
To make crossing the street to/from the south-side path comfortable for all users, and to maximize comfort for faster bicyclists who choose to use the street, it will be important to deter motorist speeding. Currently on this segment, Fairway stops only at its midpoint intersection with Rancho Palmeras Drive , with 1/2- mile straightaways to the east and west . To deter speeding, traffic calming measures with closer spacing are suggested. Installing three measures on each 1/2-mile subsegment would create 1/8- mile spacing — approximately 650’. T he 1/4- mile points approximately coincide with the T intersections at Azure Hills Lane and Williams Road. For these intersections it is suggested to consider either a small (“neighborhood”) traffic circle combined with small “deflector” islands in the north parking lane and along the south curb, or a raised crosswalk or raised-intersection treatment.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 60 Additional calming measures are suggested at the 1/8 -mile points, midway between the Azure Hills Lane and Williams intersections. The westernmost and easternmost 1/8-mile points roughly coincide with the T intersections at Dorado Villas Drive (where Fairway has a westbound right turn pocket) and Vista Dorado Drive. At those locations “intersection” treatments could be considered as suggested above.
The two remaining 1/8-mile points (midway between Azure Hills Lane and Paradise Valley Road, and midway between Rancho Palmeras Drive and Williams Road) do not coincide with intersections. At those locations it is suggested to consider speed cushions — segmented speed humps with wheel gaps placed to enable fire trucks to pass through without raising a wheel. On- street bicyclists also use these gaps.
Combined concept
Figure 4-22 illustrates the full concept for Fairway Drive, including the east -west path along the south-side of Fairway and also north-south paths along Cook and Eldorado (north leg) connecting to Highway 111 and beyond — including CV-Link along Highway 111.
Figure 4-22: Fairway Drive full concept (paths and traffic calming) Blue rectangles represent traffic calming treatments at 1/8-mile (approximately 650’) spacing.
The south-side path will cross the gated driveways at Cielito and Eldorado (south leg). The Cielito gate is a minor access point signed “Service Traffic Only — Members Please Use Main Gate .” The Eldorado gate is a major access with separate entrance lanes for members and visitors.
Design of the path crossings at these locations is beyond the scope of this report. However, it is suggested to incorporate crossing warning signs and high-visibility pavement markings. Because the wall will restrict sightlines between outbound drivers and path traffic just ahead, the signs to warn outbound traffic may need to be inboard (south) of the wall.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 61 a) Cielito access point, signed “Service Traffic Only.” Note pedestrian approaching from right.
b) Eldorado south leg (main access). Note separate entry lanes for members and visitors.
Figure 4-23: Gated access points at Cielito and Eldorado (south leg) Rancho Palmeras Drive intersection
Rancho Palmeras Drive intersects Fairway Drive from the north at the midpoint of the one -mile focal area segment. It is 56’ wide with parking on both sides, no sidewalks, and no bike lanes.
This substantial width creates opportunities to make crossing the street and traveling along it more comfortable for pedestrians and bicyclists.
• C orner curb extensions. At the intersection there are parking lanes on both Fairway and Rancho Palmeras. This enables installation of full-corner curb extensions to the 8’ depth of the parking lanes, shortening the crossing distance across Fairway by 8’ and across Rancho Palmeras by 16’.
• Sidewalks. Dependi ng on the type of bikeway selected, either 5’ (minimum desirable) or 6’ (preferred) attached sidewalks could be installed on Rancho Palmeras Drive. • Bikeways. Gi ven the street’s existing 56’ width, after reconstructing curb and gutter to add sidewalks, and retaining both 8’ parking lanes, sufficient width would remain to accommodate bicyclists. With 5’ sidewalks, 5’ bike lanes and 10’ travel lanes would fit.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 62 With 6’ sidewalks, only 4’ bike lanes (inadvisable along parking lanes) and 10’ travel lanes would fit. Alternatively, 14’ shared lanes would fit.
Because Rancho Palmeras car ries relatively low volume, it is suggested to install 14’ shared lanes with Shared Lane Markings (“sharrows”) centered 4’ from the parking lane line. 14’ is generally recognized as the minimum lane width sufficient for motor vehicles to pass bicyclists within the lane. However, it is suggested to install a dashed (passing permitted) centerline and R117 (CA) “PASS [BIKES] 3 FT MIN” signs to encourage more comfortable passing across centerline whenever there are adequate oncoming gaps.
a) Existing (R.P. 56’ w/o sidewalks, Fairway 40’)
b) Concept (R.P. 44’ w/sidewalks, Fairway 30’)
Figure 4-24: Fairway / Rancho Palmeras intersection
Eldorado Drive (north leg) intersection
At the east end of the one- mile focal area segment, Eldorado Drive intersects Fairway from the north. To the east, Fairway narrows, drops the bike lanes, and continues east 2,800’ (approximately 1/2 mile) to Indian Wells Lane, which runs north toward Highway 111.
At this intersection Eldorado is aligned north-south and Fairway is aligned roughly west-southwest / east-northeast. The northwest corner is a large vacant area that appears to be two house lots.
The acute-angle northeast corner is set back, presumably to facilitate westbound- to-northbound right turns, but this may also enable southbound stop-sign violators turning left into Fairway’s east leg to cut the corner at high speed.
The major traffic movement is between Eldorado and the west leg of Fairway. In addition, the City envisions a shared use path along the east side of Eldorado, which would effectively continue the Fairway Drive path described in this section up to Highway 111 to connect with CV-Link. As such, there would be a path crossing across Fairway’s east (minor) leg.
Connecting the west and north legs with a curve and “squaring up” the east (minor) leg would eliminate high- speed turning movements into and out of the east leg by stop- sign violators, reducing risk for crosswalk users.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 63 a) Existing
b) Concept
Figure 4-25: Fairway / Eldorado intersection
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 65 4.4.3. Area #3: Eldorado Drive south of Highway 111
Existing conditions and field observations
Overview
Eldorado Drive extends approximately 1/2 mile south of Highway 111 to Fairway Drive. For most of this distance it is 86’ wide with no sidewalks, two travel lanes and an unbuffered bike lane in each direction, and an 18’ raised landscaped median with left turn pockets featuring wide “stinger” peninsulas. The width of each half-section, excluding the median, is 34’.
At its southern end, shown in Figure 4-26, Eldorado narrows on its west side to 54’ at Altamira Drive and continues 450’ to Fairway Drive with no sidewalks, a 28.5’ wide southbound lane (including 8’ for west-side parking), a 18’ northbound lane, a 7.5’ northbound bike lane (6.0’ asphalt, 1.5’ concrete gutter), and a double yellow (no passing) centerline. On the 250’ transition from 5 -lane to 2- lane, the outside southbound lane becomes a trap right turn lane serving Altamira. Red lines indicate prohibited parking; the curbs are not actually painted red.
Figure 4-26: Eldorado Drive layout south of Highway 111 Analysis
On Eldorado’s 1,300’ southern half between Fairway and Osage Trail, the northbound direction is fed by only one lane from Fairway , and Altamira presumably contributes little volume, so only one traffic lane is needed — the outside lane’s width could be repurposed. The traffic lanes appear to be 13’ wide, which current practice considers extra- wide even for a moderate -speed arterial, so also narrowing the remaining traffic lane to 11’ would free up 15’ of width — ample for a shared use path with a landscape buffer. If the width of the existing northbound bike lane was also incorporated, with the thought that bicycle traffic would use the path, the total available width for the path corridor would be 15’ + 7.5’ = 22.5’ — ample for a mode-separated path layout similar to the Fairway Drive concept, with a 10’ two-way bicycle area and an 8’ pedestrian area.
On the two- lane segment between Fairway and Altamira, the 7.5’ northbound bike lane width could be combined with 7’ obtained by narrowing the 18’ northbound travel lane to 11’, for 14.5’ of raw material, and a few feet of existing landscape depth is present behind the east curb at all locations on this segment (width varies based on backyard wall alignment). Allowing for a 2’ wide traffic barrier and 1’ shy-away distance along backyard walls of east-side houses, at least 13’ of clear path travel width should be available for a shared use path even on this narrower segment.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 67 4.4.4. Area #4: Cook Street between Fairway Drive and Fred Waring Drive Existing conditions and field observations
Overview
Cook Street extends approximately 1/2 mile south of Highway 111 to an all -way STOP intersection with Fairway Drive. South of Fairway it becomes Vintage Drive (gated entry) and continues approximately 1/4 mile further south into the Vintage Club golf course development Cook extends north of Highway 111 for 1/2 mile along the west side of the Desert Horizons superblock, to the city limit at Fred Waring Drive. On the east side a meandering sidewalk runs within a 45’ deep landscape area occupied only by lawn and palm trees. Cook continues north through Palm Desert, crossing the Whitewater River and ending at its Interstate 10 interchange.
On the segment south of Highway 111 the speed limit is 35 mph. The only street intersecting from the east is opposite Cove Gate Road, serving the new Province at Indian Wells subdivision. On the southernmost 1/4 mile north of Fairway Drive, four culs -de-sac of the Algonquin Circle subdivision (accessed from Fairway) back up to Cook’s east -side right of way: Chippewa Drive, Concho Drive, Kiowa Drive and Huron Drive.
a) Intersections between Highway 111 and Fairway Drive
b) Northbound (east) side just north of Fairway Drive
Figure 4-27: Cook Street existing conditions
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 69 4.4.5. Area #5: Indian Wells Lane south of Highway 111 Existing conditions and field observations
Overview
As shown in Figure 4-29, Indian Wells Lane’s southern segment ends at a cul -de-sac approximately 670’ south of Highway 111. The street’s axis aligns with a low wall enclosing the east parking lot of the Miramonte Indian Wells Resort and S pa complex. A double row of palm trees runs parallel to the wall, along the west edge of an open parcel with two tennis courts served by a parking lot that shares the Highway 111 junction with the Miramonte complex.
a) Overview north of Pala Palms Drive
b) Driveway intersection detail at Highway 111
Figure 4-29: Indian Wells Lane between Pala Palms Drive and Highway 111 - existing The cul-de-sac has a pedestrian gate that connects to the Miramonte driveway, however there is no sidewalk along the parking lot it serves, so pedestrians traveling to/from Highway 111 conflict with private-vehicle movements for over 500’ (a 2-minute walk for an able-bodied adult).
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 70 Figure 4-30: Indian Wells Lane north cul-de-sac – gate to Miramonte property Analysis
It would be beneficial for residents of Indian Wells Lane and connecting streets to be able to walk and bike to/from Highway 111 and CV-Link without having to travel within the Miramonte complex or conflict with traffic associated with it. The space between the palm trees along the east side of Miramonte lot’s low wall appears to be an ideal alignment for a path (Figure 4-31). The distance between the cul-de-sac wall and the tennis court driveway is approximately 500’.
a) Double row of palm trees along low wall enclosing Miramonte east parking lot (center right, upper)
b) Concept for path and driveway crosswalks
Figure 4-31: Concept for path between Indian Wells Drive culs-de-sac and Highway 111
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 72 4.4.6. Area #6: Club Drive between Highway 111 and Sandpiper Drive Existing conditions and field observations
As shown in Figure 4-32, Club Drive north of Sandpiper Drive runs between the Indian Wells Resort Hotel complex and a shopping plaza with a restaurant, bookstore and other businesses.
The distance between Sandpiper Drive’s north curb and Highway 111’s south crosswalk is approximately 750’ (a 3-minute walk for an able-bodied adult). Club Drive’s width on this segment is 50’ curb-to-curb and 68’ between the low walls that enclose the hotel and shop ping center.
There are bike lanes except through the guard booth area, but no sidewalks. The 9’ deep planting strips are landscaped with 6’ of mostly-unobstructed lawn in front of 3’ hedges with periodic wall projections into the hedge areas.
A guard station controls entry to the residential area to the south . It has two inbound lanes (one controlled and one for members) and two outbound lanes.
Indian Wells Resort H otel on the west side has three driveways respectively 65’, 140’ and 460’ south of Highway 111’s south crosswalk. Small monument signs designate the northernmost as “ENTRANCE” and the next as “EXIT.” A one-way southbound drive aisle runs between the middle and south driveways, serving single-loaded diagonal parking along the eastern facade.
The shopping center on the east side also has three driveways — one offset slightly south of the hotel’s northern exit driveway, one roughly midway along the hotel’s eastern frontage ( i.e., no vehicular cross movement) and one opposite the hotel’s south driveway. Vicky’s of Santa Fe Restaurant occupies an outbuilding at the north end of the parking lot and has a U-shaped drop- off / valet servic e driveway. Parking operations in the shopping center lot change after non - restaurant retail closes and restaurant dinner valet operation begins. The shopping center only has sidewalks and walkways along the buildings east of the central outbuilding (Always Best Care Senior Services); there are none at the restaurant or in the main section of the lot.
Figure 4-32: Club Drive between Sandpiper Drive and Highway 111 - existing
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 73 Figure 4-33: Indian Wells Country Club guard station on Club Drive at Sandpiper Drive
Figure 4-34: Club Drive landscaping along east (retail) side. West (hotel) side is similar Analysis
Figure 4-35 shows pedestrian “desire lines” (idealized travel paths, constrained by obstacles) along and across Club Drive. Prefix C denotes Commercial (shopping center); CR = restaurant, CN / CC / CS = (N)orth, (C)entral and (S)outh paths in the east-west direction across the parking lot. Prefix H = Hotel. CC has no counterpart on the hotel side because the hotel has no receiving sidewalk along its east parking lot. XN and XS are locations for crosswalks across Club Drive.
Sidewalk alignments E and W connect the residential area and the Highway 111 intersection’s southeast and southwest corners.
Figure 4-35: Pedestrian “desire lines” along and across Club Drive near Highway 111
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 74 Line “E,” representing an east-side sidewalk along Club Drive, is the most important pedestrian element for connecting the residential area south of the guard station with the shopping center and Highway 111. Because it is on the same side as the shopping center, shopping and dining trips along it not involve crossing Club Drive north of Sandpiper. Also, vehicle conflicts on the east (northbound, exit ) side of the guard station are likely to be less intense than on the west (southbound, entry) side. Implementing walkways CS and CR would connect residents between the east sidewalk (E) and all shopping center buildings; central walkway CC is not needed for this purpose. To implement (E), it is suggested to install a 6’ wide attached sidewalk on the east side of Club Drive, replacing the lawn area, with a bypass around the back of the USPS mailbox that is located near where “E” meets “CC.”
It does not seem as important to implement “W” as a sidewalk because hotel guests can circulate north-south within the hotel and reach Highway 111’s south sidewalk by crossing the entrance driveway north of the lobby. Also, few residents of homes south of the guard booth probably walk to/from the hotel, except perhaps to patronize its restaurants — and those trips could be served by Club Drive’s east sidewalk plus crosswalk XN.
Items HN (Hotel north access) and XN (Club Drive north crosswalk) are most important for connecting hotel guests and staff with the shopping center and its restaurant. HN crosses the hotel’s east -side parking drive aisle — a simple single -direction decision for pedestrians .
Crosswalk XN across Club Drive would need to be aligned on the south side of the shopping center’s north driveway, the major movements of which are inbound (southbound) left turns from Highway 111 and outbound (northbound) right turns re turning to Highway 111. It would be beneficial to provide a median refuge, which could be as simple as a pair of half-round islands.
After crossing Club Drive at XN, restaurant patrons would benefit from a marked crosswalk across the shopping center’s north driveway, a sidewalk along the east side of Club Drive (E) and a spur walkway connecting to the restaurant, implementing desire line CR. Figure 4-36 shows conceptual alignments for HN, XN (with a median refuge), E, CR (restaurant walkway) and CN (directly walkway across the parking lot to the shopping center’s main building).
Figure 4-36: Connecting hotel lobby area with the shopping center and its restaurant
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 76 APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY OF PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT
MEASURES
Pedestrian Improvement Measures
Measure Description Benefits Application
Traffic Control Countermeasures
Traffic Signal or
All-Way Stop
Conventional traffic control
devices with warrants for use
based on the Manual on Uniform
Control Devices (MUTCD).
Reduces pedestrian-
vehicle conflicts and
slows traffic speeds.
Must meet warrants
based on traffic and
pedestrian volumes;
however, exceptions
are possible based on
demonstrated
pedestrian safety
concerns (collision
history).
HAWK Beacon
Signal
HAWKs (High Intensity Activated
Crosswalks) are pedestrian-
actuated signals that are a
combination of a beacon flasher
and a traffic control signal. When
actuated, HAWK displays a
yellow (warning) indication
followed by a solid red light.
During pedestrian clearance, the
driver sees a flashing red “wig-
wag” pattern until the clearance
interval has ended and the signal
goes dark.
Reduces pedestrian-
vehicle conflicts and
slows traffic speeds.
Useful in areas where it
is difficult for
pedestrians to find gaps
in automobile traffic to
cross safely, but where
normal signal warrants
are not satisfied.
Appropriate for multi-
lane roadways.
Overhead
Flashing
Beacons
Flashing amber lights are
installed on overhead signs, in
advance of the crosswalk or at
the entrance to the crosswalk.
The blinking lights
during pedestrian
crossing times
increase the number
of drivers yielding for
pedestrians and
reduce pedestrian-
vehicle conflicts. This
measure can also
improve conditions on
multi-lane roadways.
Best used in places
where motorists cannot
see a traditional sign
due to topography or
other barriers.
Stutter Flash
The Overhead Flashing Beacon
is enhanced by replacing the
traditional slow flashing
incandescent lamps with rapid
flashing LED lamps. The
beacons may be push-button
activated or activated with
pedestrian detection.
Initial studies suggest
the stutter flash is
very effective as
measured by
increased driver
yielding behavior.
Solar panels reduce
energy costs
associated with the
device.
Appropriate for multi-
lane roadways.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 77 Pedestrian Improvement Measures
Measure Description Benefits Application
In-Roadway
Warning Lights
Both sides of a crosswalk are
lined with pavement markers,
often containing an amber LED
strobe light. The lights may be
push-button activated or
activated with pedestrian
detection.
This measure
provides a dynamic
visual cue and is
increasingly effective
in bad weather.
Best in locations with
low bicycle ridership, as
the raised markers
present a hazard to
bicyclists. May not be
appropriate in areas
with heavy winter
weather due to high
maintenance costs. May
not be appropriate for
locations with bright
sunlight. The lights may
cause confusion when
pedestrians fail to
activate them and/or
when they falsely
activate.
High-Visibility
Signs and
Markings
High-visibility markings include a
family of crosswalk striping styles
including the “ladder” and the
“triple four.” One style, the zebra-
style crosswalk pavement
markings, were once popular in
Europe, but have been phased
out because the signal-controlled
puffin is more effective (see
notes). High-visibility fluorescent
yellow green signs are made of
the approved fluorescent yellow-
green color and posted at
crossings to increase the visibility
of a pedestrian crossing ahead.
FHWA recently ended
its approval process
for the experimental
use of fluorescent
yellow crosswalk
markings and found
that they had no
discernible benefit
over white markings.
Beneficial in areas with
high pedestrian activity,
as near schools, and in
areas where travel
speeds are high and/or
motorist visibility is low.
In-Street
Pedestrian
Crossing Signs
This measure involves posting
regulatory pedestrian signage on
lane edge lines and road
centerlines. The In-Street
Pedestrian Crossing sign may be
used to remind road users of
laws regarding right of way at an
unsignalized pedestrian crossing.
The legend STATE LAW may be
shown at the top of the sign if
applicable. The legends STOP
FOR or YIELD TO may be used
in conjunction with the
appropriate symbol.
This measure is
highly visible to
motorists and has a
positive impact on
pedestrian safety at
crosswalks.
Mid-block crosswalks,
unsignalized
intersections, low-speed
areas, and two-lane
roadways are ideal for
this pedestrian
treatment. The STOP
FOR legend shall only
be used in states where
the state law specifically
requires that a driver
must stop for a
pedestrian in a
crosswalk.
Pedestrian
Crossing Flags
Square flags of various colors,
which are mounted on a stick
and stored in sign-mounted
holders on both side of the street
at crossing locations; they are
carried by pedestrians while
crossing a roadway.
This measure makes
pedestrians more
visible to motorists.
Appropriate for mid-
block and uncontrolled
crosswalks with low
visibility or poor sight
distance.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 78 Pedestrian Improvement Measures
Measure Description Benefits Application
Advanced Yield
Lines
Standard white stop or yield limit
lines are placed in advance of
marked, uncontrolled crosswalks.
This measure
increases the
pedestrian’s visibility
to motorists, reduces
the number of
vehicles encroaching
on the crosswalk, and
improves general
pedestrian conditions
on multi-lane
roadways. It is also
an affordable option.
Useful in areas where
pedestrian visibility is
low and in areas with
aggressive drivers, as
advance limit lines will
help prevent drivers
from encroaching on the
crosswalk. Addresses
the multiple-threat
collision on multi-lane
roads.
Geometric Treatments
Pedestrian
Overpass/
Underpass
This measure consists of a
pedestrian-only overpass or
underpass over a roadway. It
provides complete separation of
pedestrians from motor vehicle
traffic, normally where no other
pedestrian facility is available,
and connects off-road trails and
paths across major barriers.
Pedestrian
overpasses and
underpasses allow for
the uninterrupted flow
of pedestrian
movement separate
from the vehicle
traffic.
Grade separation via
this measure is most
feasible and appropriate
in extreme cases where
pedestrians must cross
roadways such as
freeways and high-
speed, high-volume
arterials. This measure
should be considered a
last resort, as it is
expensive and visually
intrusive.
Road Diet (aka
Lane Reduction)
The number of lanes of travel is
reduced by widening sidewalks,
adding bicycle and parking lanes,
and converting parallel parking to
angled or perpendicular parking.
This is a good traffic
calming and
pedestrian safety tool,
particularly in areas
that would benefit
from curb extensions
but have
infrastructure in the
way. This measure
also improves
pedestrian conditions
on multi-lane
roadways.
Roadways with surplus
roadway capacity
(typically multi-lane
roadways with less than
15,000 to 17,000 ADT)
and high bicycle
volumes, and roadways
that would benefit from
traffic calming
measures.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 79 Pedestrian Improvement Measures
Measure Description Benefits Application
Median Refuge
Island
Raised islands are placed in the
center of a roadway, separating
opposing lanes of traffic with
cutouts for accessibility along the
pedestrian path.
This measure allows
pedestrians to focus
on each direction of
traffic separately, and
the refuge provides
pedestrians with a
better view of
oncoming traffic as
well as allowing
drivers to see
pedestrians more
easily. It can also split
up a multi-lane road
and act as a
supplement to
additional pedestrian
tools.
Recommended for
multi-lane roads wide
enough to
accommodate an ADA-
accessible median.
Staggered
Median Refuge
Island
This measure is similar to
traditional median refuge islands;
the only difference is that the
crosswalks in the roadway are
staggered such that a pedestrian
crosses half the street and then
must walk towards traffic to
reach the second half of the
crosswalk. This measure must
be designed for accessibility by
including rails and truncated
domes to direct sight-impaired
pedestrians along the path of
travel.
Benefits of this tool
include an increase in
the concentration of
pedestrians at a
crossing and the
provision of better
traffic views for
pedestrians.
Additionally, motorists
are better able to see
pedestrians as they
walk through the
staggered refuge.
Best used on multi-lane
roads with obstructed
pedestrian visibility or
with off-set
intersections.
Curb Extension
Also known as a pedestrian bulb-
out, this traffic-calming measure
is meant to slow traffic and
increase driver awareness. It
consists of an extension of the
curb into the street, making the
pedestrian space (sidewalk)
wider.
Curb extensions
narrow the distance
that a pedestrian has
to cross and
increases the
sidewalk space on
the corners. They
also improve
emergency vehicle
access and make it
difficult for drivers to
turn illegally.
Due to the high cost of
installation, this tool
would only be suitable
on streets with high
pedestrian activity, on-
street parking, and
infrequent (or no) curb-
edge transit service. It is
often used in
combination with
crosswalks or other
markings.
Reduced Curb
Radii
The radius of a curb can be
reduced to require motorists to
make a tighter turn.
Shorter radii narrow
the distance that
pedestrians have to
cross; they also
reduce traffic speeds
and increase driver
awareness (like curb
extensions) but are
less difficult and
expensive to
implement.
This measure would be
beneficial on streets
with high pedestrian
activity, on-street
parking, and no curb-
edge transit service. It is
more suitable for wider
roadways and roadways
with low volumes of
heavy truck traffic.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 80 Pedestrian Improvement Measures
Measure Description Benefits Application
Curb Ramps
Curb ramps are sloped ramps
that are constructed at the edge
of a curb (normally at
intersections) as a transition
between the sidewalk and a
crosswalk.
Curb ramps provide
easy access between
the sidewalk and
roadway for people
using wheelchairs,
strollers, walkers,
crutches, handcarts,
bicycles, and also for
pedestrians with
mobility impairments
who have trouble
stepping up and down
high curbs.
Curb ramps must be
installed at all
intersections and mid-
block locations where
pedestrian crossings
exist, as mandated by
federal legislation (1973
Rehabilitation Act and
1990 Americans with
Disabilities Act). Where
feasible, separate curb
ramps for each
crosswalk at an
intersection should be
provided rather than
having a single ramp at
a corner for both
crosswalks.
Raised
Crosswalk
A crosswalk whose surface is
elevated above the travel lanes.
Attracts drivers'
attention; encourages
lower travel speeds
by providing visual
and tactile feedback
when approaching
the crosswalk.
Appropriate for multi-
lane roadways,
roadways with lower
speed limits that are not
emergency routes, and
roadways with high
levels of pedestrian
activity, such as near
schools, shopping
malls, etc.
Improved Right-
Turn Slip-Lane
Design
Right-turn slip lanes (aka
channelized right-turn lanes) are
separated from the rest of the
travel lanes by a pork chop-
shaped striped area. This
measure separates right-turning
traffic and streamlines right-
turning movements. Improved
right-turn slip lanes would
provide pedestrian crossing
islands within the intersection
and be designed to optimize the
right-turning motorist’s view of
the pedestrian and of vehicles to
his or her left.
This measure
reduces the
pedestrian's crossing
distance and turning
vehicle speeds.
Appropriate for
intersections with high
volumes of right-turning
vehicles.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 81 Pedestrian Improvement Measures
Measure Description Benefits Application
Chicanes
A chicane is a sequence of tight
serpentine curves (usually an S-
shape curve) in a roadway, used
on city streets to slow cars.
This is a traffic-
calming measure that
can improve the
pedestrian
environment and
pedestrian safety.
Chicanes can be
created on streets with
higher volumes, given
that the number of
through lanes is
maintained; they can
also be created on
higher-volume
residential streets to
slow traffic. Chicanes
may be constructed by
alternating parallel or
angled parking in
combination with curb
extensions.
Pedestrian Access and Amenities
Marked
Crosswalk
Marked crosswalks should be
installed to provide designated
pedestrian crossings at major
pedestrian generators, crossings
with significant pedestrian
volumes (at least 15 per hour),
crossings with high vehicle-
pedestrian collisions, and other
areas based on engineering
judgment.
Marked crosswalks
provide a designated
crossing, which may
improve walkability
and reduce
jaywalking.
Marked crosswalks
alone should not be
installed on multi-lane
roads with more than
about 10,000
vehicles/day. Enhanced
crosswalk treatments
(as presented in this
table) should
supplement the marked
crosswalk.
Textured Pavers
Textured pavers come in a
variety of materials (for example,
concrete, brick, and stone) and
can be constructed to create a
textured pedestrian surface such
as a crosswalk or sidewalk.
Crosswalks are constructed with
the pavers or can be made of
stamped concrete or asphalt.
Highly visible to
motorists, this
measure provides a
visual and tactile cue
to motorists and
delineates a separate
space for
pedestrians, as it
provides a different
texture to the street
for pedestrians and
motorists. It also
aesthetically
enhances the
streetscape.
Appropriate for areas
with high volumes of
pedestrian traffic and
roadways with low
visibility and/or narrow
travel ways, as in the
downtown area of towns
and small cities.
Anti-Skid
Surfacing
Surface treatment is applied to
streets to improve skid
resistance during wet weather.
This is a supplementary tool that
can be used to reduce skidding
in wet conditions.
Improves driver and
pedestrian safety.
Appropriate for multi-
lane roadways and
roadways with higher
posted speed limit
and/or high vehicle
volumes or collision
rates.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 82 Pedestrian Improvement Measures
Measure Description Benefits Application
Accessibility
Upgrades
Treatments such as audible
pedestrian signals, accessible
push buttons, and truncated
domes should be installed at
crossings to accommodate
disabled pedestrians.
Improves accessibility
of pedestrian facilities
for all users.
Accessibility upgrades
should be provided for
all pedestrian facilities
following a citywide
ADA Transition Plan.
Pedestrian
Countdown
Signal
Displays a “countdown” of the
number of seconds remaining for
the pedestrian crossing interval.
In some jurisdictions the
countdown includes the walk
phase. In other jurisdictions, the
countdown is only displayed
during the flashing don’t walk
phase.
Increases pedestrian
awareness and
allows them the
flexibility to know
when to speed up if
the pedestrian phase
is about to expire.
The forthcoming 2009
MUTCD is expected to
require all pedestrian
signals to incorporated
countdown signals
within ten years. The
signals should be
prioritized for areas with
pedestrian activity,
roadways with high
volumes of vehicular
traffic, multi-lane
roadways, and areas
with elderly or disabled
persons (who may walk
slower than others
may).
Transit
High-Visibility
Bus Stop
Locations
This measure should include
siting bus stops on the far side of
intersections, with paved
connections to sidewalks where
landscape buffers exist.
Provides safe,
convenient, and
inviting access for
transit users; can
improve roadway
efficiency and driver
sight distance.
Appropriate for all bus
stops subject to sight
distance and right-of-
way constraints.
Transit Bulb
Transit bulbs or bus bulbs, also
known as nubs, curb extensions,
or bus bulges are a section of
sidewalk that extends from the
curb of a parking lane to the
edge of the through lane.
Creates additional
space at a bus stop
for shelters, benches,
and other passenger
amenities.
Appropriate at sites with
high patron volumes,
crowded city sidewalks,
and curbside parking.
Enhanced Bus
Stop Amenities
Adequate bus stop signing,
lighting, a bus shelter with
seating, trash receptacles, and
bicycle parking are desirable
features at bus stops.
Increase pedestrian
visibility at bus stops
and encourage transit
ridership.
Appropriate at sites with
high patron volumes.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 83 APPENDIX B: GLOSSARY OF BICYCLING IMPROVEMENT
MEASURES
Bicycling Improvement Measures
Measure Description Benefits Application
LINKS /ROADWAY SEGMENTS
A. Road Design and Operations to Slow Traffic
Traffic Calming
There are a variety of measures
too numerous to list here. See
ITE Institute of Transportation
Engineers, "Traffic Calming:
State of the Practice".
Reduces motor
vehicle speeds, which
improves safety for all
modes and increases
bicyclist’s comfort.
Urban and suburban
settings; suggested for
urban major streets with
prevailing speeds of 35
mph and higher and for
suburban major streets
with prevailing speeds
45 mph or higher; and
for all local streets with
speeds of 30+ mph.
Bicycle Boulevard
A minor street on which traffic
control devices are designed
and placed to encourage cycling;
these include unwarranted stop
signs along bike route are
removed; crossing assistance at
major arterials is provided (see
examples in Nodes-Section E
below).
Allows cyclists to
maintain their travel
speeds, significantly
reducing their travel
time; provides cyclists
with a low volume,
low speed street
where motorists are
aware that it is a
bicycle-priority street.
On minor streets with
less than 3000 vehicles
per day especially
useful when Bike Blvd
is parallel to and within
¼ mile of a major
arterial with many
desirable destinations.
Signal
Coordination at
15 -25 mph
The signal timing along a
corridor is set so that traffic
which receives a green light at
the first intersection will
subsequently receive a green
light at all downstream
intersections if they travel at the
design speed; aka a “green
wave.”
Encourages motorists
to travel at slower
speeds, provides a
more comfortable
experience for
cyclists and increases
overall traffic safety;
also allows cyclists to
hit the green lights,
so that they can
maintain their travel
speeds, significantly
reducing their travel
time.
Urban settings, typically
downtown and other
areas with relatively
short blocks and with
traffic signals at every
intersection.
Woonerf/Shared
Space
A shared space concept where
the entire public right of way is
available for all modes, often
with no sidewalks, and with no
lane striping, and little if any
signage.
Access for motor
vehicles is
maintained, unlike a
pedestrian zone, but
motor vehicle speeds
are constrained to 5
mph by design and
the presence of other
modes. Safety for all
modes is improved.
Low volume residential
streets where families
can gather and children
are encouraged to play;
also commercial areas
with high pedestrian
volumes, bicyclists and
transit.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 84 B. Road Design to Provide Bicycle Infrastructure
Bike Lanes
A painted lane for the exclusive
use of bicyclists; it is one-way
and is 5 feet minimum in width.
They can be retrofitted onto an
existing street by either a)
narrowing existing wide travel
lanes; b) removing a parking
lane; c) removing a travel lane,
or d) widening the roadway. A
common method to retrofit bike
lanes is described below.
Provides cyclists with
their own travel lane
so that they can
safely pass and be
passed by motor
vehicles.
Roadways with over
4000 vehicles per day
(if less than 4000
vehicles per day see
Bicycle Boulevards
above).
Road Diet (aka
Lane Reduction)
One to two travel lanes are
replaced with a bike lane in each
direction, and in most cases by
also adding left-turn lanes at
intersections or a center two-way
left-turn lane; variations include
widening sidewalks, and
replacing parallel parking with
angled or perpendicular parking.
Improves traffic
safety for all modes
by: a) eliminating the
double-threat to
pedestrians posed by
the two or more travel
lanes in each
direction; b) providing
bike lanes for cyclists;
c) providing a left-turn
pocket for motorists,
reducing rear-end
collisions and
improving visibility to
oncoming traffic.
Classic application is a
four-lane undivided
roadway with less than
15,000 to 17,000 ADT
though conversions of
four-lane streets may
work up to 23,000 ADT.
Also applies to three-
lane roadways and to 5
or 6-lane undivided
roadways
Buffer adjacent to
bike lanes
A three to five-foot buffer area is
provided on one or both sides of
the bike lane.
Right-side buffer
(between bike lane
and on-street
parking): Removes
cyclists from the door
zone; Left-side
(between bike lane
and adjacent travel
lane): provides
greater separation
from passing motor
vehicle traffic.
This measure is
particularly beneficial in
the following conditions:
Right-side: on streets
with parallel on-street
parking particularly in
cities with a collision
history of dooring;
Left-side: on streets
with traffic with
prevailing speeds of 40
mph and higher.
Cycle Tracks
A bikeway within the roadway
right of way that is separated
from both traffic lanes and the
sidewalks by either a parking
lane, street furniture, curbs or
other physical means.
Reduces sidewalk
riding, provides
greater separation
between motorists
and cyclists.
Urban settings with
parallel sidewalks and
heavy traffic.
C Other Traffic Control Devices
Except Bicycles
placard
A Regulatory sign placard for
use with other regulatory signs.
Increases or
maintains the access
and circulation
capabilities of
bicyclists.
Used at locations where
the restriction in
question does not apply
to bicyclists, such as No
Left Turn or Do Not
Enter.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 85 Sharrows
A pavement legend that
indicates the location within the
travel lane where bicyclists are
expected to occupy.
The sharrow
encourages cyclists
to ride outside of the
door zone and
studies have shown
that sharrows reduce
the incidence of
cyclists riding on the
sidewalk and wrong-
way riding.
Two or more lane city
streets where the right-
most lane is too narrow
for a motor vehicle to
safely pass a cyclist
within the travel lane.
Bike Lanes May
Use Full Lane
sign (MUTCD R4-
11)
Regulatory Sign
Informs motorists and
cyclists that cyclists
may be travelling in
the center of a narrow
lane.
Two or more lane city
streets where the right-
most lane is too narrow
for a motor vehicle to
safely pass a cyclist
within the travel lane.
Share the Road
sign (MUTCD W-
11/ W16-1p)
Warning sign and placard
Informs motorists to
expect cyclists on the
roadway.
Two-lane roads
particularly in rural
areas where shoulders
are less than four-feet.
Bike Directional
Signs
(MUTCD D1
series or similar)
Informational signs indicating
place names and arrows, with
distances as a recommended
option (D1-2C)
Informs bicyclists of
the most common
destination served by
the bike route in
question.
Particularly useful to
direct cyclists to a
facility such as a bike
bridge or to use a street
to access a major
destination that might
not otherwise be readily
apparent.
D. New infrastructure to improve bicycle connectivity
Bike Path
A paved pathway for the
exclusive use of non-motorized
traffic within its own right of way;
Provides additional
connectivity and route
options that otherwise
would not be
available to bicyclists.
Wherever a continuous
right of way exists,
typically found along
active or abandoned
railroad ROW,
shorelines, creeks, and
river levees.
Pathway
connections
Short pathway segments for
non-motorized traffic, for
example, that join the ends of
two culs-de-sac or provide other
connectivity not provided by road
network.
Provides short-cuts
for bicyclists that
reduce their travel
distance and travel
time.
Varies by community;
suggested at the end of
every newly constructed
cul-de-sac.
Bicycle Overpass/
Underpass
A bicycle overpass or underpass
is a bridge or tunnel built for the
exclusive use of non-motorized
traffic and is typically built where
at-grade crossings cannot be
provided such as to cross
freeways, rivers, creeks and
railroad tracks. They can also be
built to cross major arterials
where, for example, a bike path
must cross a major roadway.
A bike bridge / tunnel
complement a local
roadway system that
is discontinuous due
to man-made or
natural barriers. They
reduce the distance
traveled by cyclists,
and provide a safer
conflict-free crossing,
particularly if it is an
alternative to a
freeway interchange.
Grade separation via
this measure is most
feasible and appropriate
when it would provide
direct access to major
bicyclist destinations
such as a school or
college, employment
site, major transit
station or would reduce
the travel distance by
one mile or more.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 86 NODES / INTERSECTIONS
Measure Description Benefits Application
E. Intersection Design for Motor Vehicles
Reduced Curb
Radii
The radius of a curb is reduced
to require motorists to make the
turn at slower speeds and to
make a tighter turn.
Shorter curb radii
reduce the speed of
turning traffic thereby
enabling a more
comfortable weave
between through
cyclists and right-
turning motorists.
This measure is
suitable for downtown
settings, at all cross
streets with minor
streets, all residential
streets and all
roadways that are not
designated truck routes.
Remove/Control
Free Right-Turn
Lanes
Where a separate right-turn lane
continues as its own lane after
the turn, it may be redesigned to
eliminate the free turn. A short-
term solution is to control the
turning movement with a stop
sign or signal control and to
redesign the island as discussed
below.
Improves bicyclist
safety since this
design forces through
cyclists on the cross
street to end up in
between two lanes of
through motor vehicle
traffic.
All locations where
there are free right-turn
lanes except those
leading onto freeway
on-ramps.
Remove/Redesign
Right-Turn Slip-
Lane Design
Right-turn slip lanes (aka
channelized right-turn lanes) are
separated from the rest of the
travel lanes by a pork chop-
shaped raised island that is
typically designed to facilitate
fast right turns, and right-turning
vehicles are often not subject to
the traffic signal or stop sign.
Improves bicyclist
safety by slowing
right-turning motorists
and facilitates the
weave between
through bicyclists and
right-turning
motorists.
All locations with a
channelized right-turn.
Remove Optional
Right-Turn Lane
in Combination
with a Right-Turn
Only Lane
At locations where there is an
optional right-turn lane in
combination with a right-turn
only lane, convert the optional
right-turn lane to a through-only
lane.
Improves bicyclist
safety since cyclists
have no way of
knowing how to
correctly position
themselves in the
optional (through
/right turn) lane.
All locations where
there is an optional
right-turn lane in
combination with a
right-turn only lane per
HDM 403.6(1) (except
on freeways).
Redesign Ramp
Termini
Redesign high speed free flow
freeway ramps to intersection
local streets as standard
intersections with signal control.
Improves bicyclist
and pedestrian safety
on intersections of
local streets with
freeway ramps.
All freeway
interchanges with high
speed ramps
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 87 F. Intersection Design Treatments - Bicycle-Specific Bicycle Signal
Detection and
Pavement
Marking
Provide signal detectors that
also detect bicyclists in the
rightmost through lane and in
left-turn lanes with left-turn
phasing. Provide pavement
marking to indicate to cyclists
where to position themselves in
order to activate the detector.
Enables cyclists to be
detected when motor
vehicles are not
present to trigger the
needed signal phase.
Improves bicyclists’
safety.
Per CA MUTCD 4D.105
and CVC 21450.5, all
new and modified traffic
detection installations
must detect bicyclists;
All other traffic-actuated
signals may be
retrofitted to detect
bicyclists as soon as
feasible.
Bicycle Signal
Timing
Provides signal timing to account
for the speed of cyclists to cross
an intersection.
Improves bicyclists’
safety by reducing
the probability of a
bicyclist being in an
intersection when the
phase terminates and
being hit by traffic
that receives the next
green phase.
Signal timing that
accounts for cyclists is
particularly important for
cyclists on a minor
street approach to a
major arterial which
crosses a greater
distance due to the
width of the arterial,
hence requiring a
longer time interval.
Bicycle Signal
Heads
A traffic signal indication in the
shape of a bicycle, with full red,
yellow green capability.
Improves bicyclist
safety by providing a
bicycle -only phase,
where appropriate,
given the geometry
and phasing of the
particular
intersection.
Where intersection
geometry is such that a
bicycle-only phase is
provided and/or bicycle
signal heads would
improve safety at the
intersection. See also
CA MUTCD for
warrants for bicycle
signal heads.
Widen Bike Lane
at Intersection
Approach
Within the last 200 feet of an
intersection, widen the bike lane
and narrow the travel; for
example from 5 foot bike lane
and 12 feet travel lane would
become a 7 foot bike lane and
10 foot travel lane.
Improves cyclist
safety by
encouraging right-
turning motorists to
enter the bike lane to
turn right, (as
required by the CVC),
which reduces the
chance of a right-turn
hook collision in
which a through
cyclist remains to the
right of a right-turning
motorist.
On roads with bike
lanes approaching an
intersection without a
right-turn only lane and
there is noncompliance
with right-turning
vehicles merging into
the bike lane as
required by the CVC
and UVC.
Bike Lane inside
Right-Turn Only
Lane
(“Combined
Bicycle/Right-Turn
Lane”)
Provide a bike lane line inside
and on the left side of a right-
turn only lane.
Encourages cyclists
to ride on the left side
of the right-turn only
lane thus reducing
the chance of a right
hook collision, where
a cyclist remains to
the right of a right-
turning motorist.
On roads with bike
lanes approaching an
intersection with a right-
turn only lane and there
is not enough roadway
width to provide a bike
lane to the left of the
right-turn lane.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 88 Bike Boxes
Area between an Advance Stop
Line and a marked crosswalk
designated as the queue space
for cyclists to wait for a green
light ahead of queued motor
vehicle traffic; sometimes
painted green.
Primary benefits are
to reduce conflicts
between bicyclists
and right-turning
traffic at the onset of
the green signal
phase, and to reduce
vehicle and bicyclist
encroachment in a
crosswalk during a
red signal phase.
Locations where there
are at least three
cyclists at the beginning
of the green phase and
moderate to high
pedestrian volumes.
Marked Crosswalk
with Distinct
Marked Area for
Bicyclists
separate from
Pedestrians
A marked crosswalk that has two
distinct areas, one for
pedestrians and one for
bicyclists.
Reduces conflicts
between bicyclists
and pedestrians by
indicating the part of
the crosswalk
intended for the two
different modes.
At a typical intersection,
cyclists would not be
riding within the
crosswalk, so this
measure is intended for
those few locations
where the intersection
design is such that
bicyclists are tracked
into a crosswalk such
as at a midblock bike
path crossing or
possibly a cycle track.
Pedestrian
Countdown Signal
Displays a “countdown” of the
number of seconds remaining for
the pedestrian crossing interval.
In some jurisdictions the
countdown includes the walk
phase. In other jurisdictions, the
countdown is only displayed
during the flashing don’t walk
phase.
While designed for
pedestrians, this
measure also assists
bicyclists in knowing
the time remaining to
cross the intersection.
The 2012 MUTCD
requires all pedestrian
signals to incorporated
countdown signals
within ten years
Measure Description Benefits Application
G. Geometric Countermeasures to Assist crossing a Major Street Median Refuge
Island
A raised island placed in the
center of a roadway, separating
opposing lanes of traffic, with
ramps for cyclists and ADA
accessibility
This measure allows
bicyclists to cross one
direction of traffic at a
time; it allows drivers
to see bicyclists
crossing from the
center more easily.
Suggested for multilane
roads at uncontrolled
crossings where an 8-
foot (min.) wide by 15-
foot (min.) long median
can be provided.
Staggered
Refuge
Pedestrian Island
This measure is similar to
traditional median refuge islands;
the only difference is that the
crosswalk is staggered such that
a pedestrian crosses one
direction of traffic street and then
must turn to their right facing
oncoming to reach the second
part of the crosswalk. This
measure must be designed for
accessibility by including rails
and truncated domes to direct
sight-impaired pedestrians along
the path of travel.
Benefits of this
measure include
forcing the bicyclists
and pedestrians to
face the oncoming
motorists, increasing
their awareness of
the impending
conflict. Additionally,
can improve
motorists’ visibility to
those persons in the
crosswalk.
Best used on multilane
roads with obstructed
pedestrian visibility or
with off-set intersections
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 89 Raised
Crosswalk/Speed
Table
A crosswalk whose surface is
elevated above the travel lanes
at the same level as the
approaching sidewalk. For
bicyclists, a typical location
would be at a bike path crossing,
where the bike path elevation
would remain constant while
roadway cross traffic would
experience a speed-hump type
effect.
Attracts drivers'
attention to the fact
there will be non-
motorized users
crossing the roadway,
and slows traffic by
providing a speed-
hump effect for
motorists
approaching the
crosswalk.
Appropriate for multi-
lane roadways,
roadways with lower
speed limits that are not
emergency routes, and
roadways with high
levels of pedestrian
activity, such as near
schools, shopping
malls, etc.
Measure Description Benefits Application
H. Traffic Control Countermeasures to Assist Crossing a Major Street
Traffic Signal or
All-Way Stop
Sign
Conventional traffic control
devices with warrants for use
based on the Manual on Uniform
Control Devices (MUTCD)
Provides the gap
needed in traffic flow
so that cyclists can
cross the street,
reducing bicycle-
vehicle conflicts and
risk-taking by cyclists
to
Must meet warrants
based on traffic/
pedestrian / bicycle
volumes, collision
history, and/ or other
factors.
Modern
Roundabout
A traffic circle combined with
splitter island on all approaches
and entering traffic must YIELD
to traffic within the roundabout;
typically designed for traffic
speed within the roundabout of
between 15 and 23 mph.
Slows traffic on cross
street so that cyclists
can more easily
cross.
Roundabouts are a
better alternative than
an All-Way Stop signs
when the side street
volume is approximately
30 % of the total
intersection traffic
volume and total peak
hour volume is less than
2300 vehicles per day.
Hawk Beacon
Signal
HAWK (High Intensity Activated
Crosswalks) are pedestrian-
bicyclist actuated signals that are
a combination of a beacon
flasher and a traffic control
signal. When actuated, HAWK
displays a yellow (warning)
indication followed by a solid red
light. During the cross street
phase, the driver sees a flashing
red “wig-wag” pattern until the
clearance interval has ended and
the signal goes dark.
Provides the need
gaps in traffic so
bicyclists can safely
cross the street, can
be timed separately
for bicycles and
pedestrians. Reduces
pedestrian-vehicle
conflicts and slows
traffic speeds
Useful in areas where it
is difficult for bicyclists
/pedestrians to find
gaps in automobile
traffic to cross safely,
but where normal signal
warrants are not
satisfied. Appropriate
for multilane roadways.
Rectangular
Rapid Flashing
Beacon
(RRFB/Stutter
Flash)
A warning sign that also contains
rapid flashing LED lamps. The
beacon may be push-button
activated or activated with
pedestrian detection.
Initial studies suggest
the stutter flash is
very effective as
measured by
increased driver
yielding behavior.
Solar panels reduce
energy costs
associated with the
device.
Locations not controlled
by any measures listed
above. Appropriate for
multi-lane roadways.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 90 In-Roadway
Warning Lights
Both sides of a crosswalk are
lined with pavement markers,
often containing an amber LED
strobe light. The lights may be
push-button activated or
activated with pedestrian
detection.
This measure
provides a dynamic
visual cue of the
uncontrolled
crosswalk and is
especially effective at
night and in bad
weather.
Locations not controlled
by any measures listed
above. Best in locations
with low bicycle
ridership on the cross
street, as the raised
markers may present
difficulty to bicyclists.
May not be appropriate
in areas with heavy
winter weather due to
high maintenance costs.
May not be appropriate
for locations with bright
sunlight.
Bicycle Crossing
Sign (MUTCD
W11-1) or Trail
Crossing sign
(MUTCD W11-
15/W11-15p)
Warning Sign and placard.
Alerts motorists to a
location where
bicyclists or bicyclists
and pedestrians will
be crossing the
roadway at an
uncontrolled location.
Typical application is at
bike path crossing of a
roadway. (At a typical
pedestrian crosswalk at
an intersection, use the
Pedestrian warning sign
W11-2)
In-Street
Pedestrian
Crossing Signs
(MUTCD R1-6)
This measure involves posting
this regulatory sign on road
centerlines that read, “YIELD for
Pedestrians in crosswalk”.
(Depending on state law, the
word STOP may replace the
word YIELD).
This measure
improves the visibility
of the crossing to
motorists and has a
positive impact on
pedestrian safety at
crosswalks.
Mid-block crosswalks,
unsignalized
intersections, low-speed
areas, and two-lane
roadways.
Advanced Yield
Lines
Standard white stop or yield limit
lines are placed 20-50 feet in
advance of marked, uncontrolled
crosswalks.
This measure
increases the
pedestrian’s visibility
to motorists, reduces
the number of
vehicles encroaching
on the crosswalk, and
improves general
pedestrian conditions
on multi-lane
roadways. It is also
an affordable option.
Useful in areas where
pedestrian visibility is
low and in areas with
aggressive drivers, as
advance limit lines will
help prevent drivers
from encroaching on the
crosswalk. Addresses
the multiple-threat
collision on multi-lane
roads.
Transit
Bike Racks on
Buses
A rack on the front of the bus
that typically holds two or three
bicycles.
Increases the trip
length distance that a
person can make.
Appropriate for all
buses; most urban
transit agencies have
already implemented
this measure.
Bikes allowed
inside buses when
bike rack is full
A policy adopted by a transit
agency that allows passengers
to bring bicycles inside the bus
when the bike rack is full and
there is room inside.
Prevents cyclists from
needless being left
behind to wait for the
next bus if the bike
rack is full yet there is
room inside the bus.
Appropriate for all
buses; most urban
transit agencies have
already implemented
this measure.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 91 Folding bikes
allowed inside
buses
A policy adopted by a transit
agency that treats a folding
bicycle as luggage, thereby
allowing it inside the bus at all
times.
Removes cyclists’
uncertainty as to
whether they will be
able to fit their bike
either on the bike
rack or inside the
bus; thus they can
reliably plan on being
able to catch their
intended bus.
Appropriate for all
buses; most urban
transit agencies have
already implemented
this measure.
City of Indian Wells
Complete Streets Safety Assessment
September 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 92 APPENDIX C: RESOURCE LIST AND REFERENCES
Resource List and References
Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (“PBIC”)
http://www.bicyclinginfo.org
Along with walkinginfo.org, a resource site maintained by UNC Highway Safety Research Center (UNC-HSRC)
Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash Analysis Tool
(“PBCAT”)
http://www.walkinginfo.org/facts/pbcat/index.cfm
Crash typing software product intended to assist planners and engineers with improving walking and bicycling safety through the development and analysis of a database containing details of crashes between motor vehicles and pedestrians or bicyclists FHWA On-Demand Bicycle Safety Training Courses
http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/training/ondemand-
training.cfm
FHWA University Course on Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation National Highway Institute Bicycle Facility Design Course Safe Routes to School National Course
APBP National Complete Streets Workshops
FHWA University Course on Bicycle and Pedestrian
Transportation, Report No. FHWA-HRT-05-085
http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/pubs/05085
A detailed 24-lesson course in planning and design for non- motorized transportation.
FHWA Official Rulings website
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/orsearch.asp
List of FHWA communications regarding experiments, and
interpretation of documents (Requests To Experiment / RTEs, response letters, progress reports, final reports, changes). FHWA Interim Approvals webpage
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/res-interim_approvals.htm
List of all Interim Approvals granted by FHWA. Interim Approvals enable states and local agencies to request approval to use a new device without experimentation before the device is incorporated into a future edition of the MUTCD.
FHWA “Bicycle Facilities and the Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices” webpage
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedest
rian/guidance/design_guidance/mutcd_bike.cfm
Status in the 2009 US MUTCD of various bicycle-related signs, markings, signals, and other treatments (e.g., can be implemented, Interim Approval, currently experimental).
FHWA DRAFT Accessibility Guidance for Bicycle
and Pedestrian Facilities, Recreational Trails, and
Transportation Enhancement Activities (2008)
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_tr
ails/
guidance/accessibility_guidance/
guidance_accessibility.cfm
Summary of current accessibility standards, pending standards, guidelines under development, program accessibility, accessibility design criteria for sidewalks, street crossings and shared use paths and trails
FHWA Bollards, Gates and other Barriers (webpage)
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_tr
ails/guidance/accessibility_guidance/bollards_acces
s.cfm
Current guidance on the hazards of bollards, gates, fences and other barriers to restrict unauthorized use of paths. Alternatives to bollards and gates.
California Traffic Control Devices Committee
(CTCDC)
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/signtech/newtech/
Committee agendas, minutes, annual reports, experiment status and reports, experimentation guidelines and requests,
implementation of FHWA-issued Interim Approvals.
Caltrans Complete Streets webpage
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/complete_st
reets.html
Complete Intersections guide and other resources