Agenda packet, regular meeting — Palm Desert City Council, July 11, 2024 (part 9 of 9)

APPROVEDTY
04/17/2024
1718

DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
Street
Install 3" A.C. Pavement Over 6" Class II
Aggregate Base SF 382,333 $4.00 $1,529,332.00
Install Decorative Pavement, Color and
Type Per Landscape Architect's Plans.

See Detail on Sheet 16 SF 5,585 $15.00 $83,775.00
Construct 6" Curb and Gutter Type I Per
City of Palm Desert Standard Plan No.
102 LF 4,455 $18.00 $80,190.00
Construct 6" Curb Type II Per City of
Palm Desert Standard Plan No. 103 LF 2,490 $15.00 $37,350.00 Construct 6" Wedge Curb. See Detail A
on Sheet 16 LF 9,840 $18.00 $177,120.00
Construct 6" Mountable Curb. See
Detail B on Sheet 16 LF 460 $15.00 $6,900.00
Construct Curb Transition (Wedge Curb
to Curb and Gutter) Per Detail on Sheet
16 EA 49 $125.00 $6,125.00
Construct Cross Gutter Type II Per City
of Palm Desert Standard Plan No. 108
with Modified Slope as Shown in Detail
on Sheet No. 16 SF 6,680 $10.00 $66,800.00
Construct Sidewalk Per City of Palm
Desert Standard Plan No. 104 SF 88,920 $5.00 $444,600.00 Construct Curb Ramp Case A Per
County of Riverside Std. No. 403 EA 22 $2,500.00 $55,000.00 Construct Curb Ramp Case C Per
County of Riverside Std. No. 403 EA 4 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 Construct Curb Ramp Case D Per
County of Riverside Std. No. 403 EA 9 $2,500.00 $22,500.00 Const. Combination Curb Inlet Catch
Basin No. 1 Per County of Riverside Std.

Dwg. No. 300, See Plan For W.
(Modified; 2" Wide Per City Direction) EA 14 $5,000.00 $70,000.00

Page 2 of 5 ends

1719
Construct Gutter Depression for
Combination Grate Opening Catch
Basin Per County of Riverside Std. Dwg.

No. 311 (Modified; 2' Wide Per City
Direction) EA 14 $240.00 $3,360.00
Install Stop Legend, Limit Line, Sign
Post, Stop Sign and Street Name Sign
Per Stop Sign Legend and Sign Post
Detail on Sheet No. 14 EA 13 $800.00 $10,400.00
Sawcut and Join Existing Pavement Per
Overlay Join Detail on Sheet No. 16 LF 220 $3.00 $660.00 Adjust Water Valve To Grade Per CVWD
Standard And Specifications, See
Separate Proposed Water Plans EA 37 $300.00 $11,100.00
Adjust Sewer Manhole To Grade Per
CVWD Standards And Specifications,
See Separate Proposed Sewer Plans EA 52 $600.00 $31,200.00 Install 4" A.C. Pavement Over 6" Class II
Aggregate Base (Fire Access Road) SF 20,610 $4.00 $82,440.00 Storm Drain
Furnish and Install 18" HDPE Storm
Drain. See HDPE Typical Trench Section
Sheet 20 LF 545 $40.00 $21,800.00
Furnish and Install 24" HDPE Storm
Drain. See HDPE Typical Trench Section
Sheet 20 LF 270 $50.00 $13,500.00
Furnish and Install 30" HDPE Storm
Drain. See HDPE Typical Trench Section
Sheet 20 LF 1,165 $60.00 $69,900.00
Furnish and Install 36" HDPE Storm
Drain. See Typical Trench Section Sheet
20 LF 550 $70.00 $38,500.00
Furnish and Install 18" x 11.25° HDPE
Bend EA 1 $400.00 $400.00
Furnish and Install 18" x 45° HDPE Bend EA 1 $400.00 $400.00

Page 3 of 5 ends

1720
Furnish and Install 30" x 45° HDPE Bend EA 1 $600.00 $600.00 Furnish and Install 30" x 18" HDPE WYE EA 1 $600.00 $600.00 Furnish and Install 30" HDPE End Cap EA 1 $600.00 $600.00 Furnish and Install 18" HDPE End Outlet
Structure EA 2 $600.00 $1,200.00
Furnish and Install 36" HDPE Flared
End Outlet Structure EA 1 $650.00 $650.00
Furnish and Install 60" Inside Diameter
Manhole Per CVWD Dwg. Std. S-5 EA 5 $6,000.00 $30,000.00 Furnish and Install 72" Inside Diameter
Manhole Per CVWD Dwg. Std. S-5 EA 2 $8,000.00 $16,000.00 Construct Concrete Collar Per R.C.F.C.D.

Std. Dwg. No. M803 EA 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00
Construct Rip-Rap Energy Dissipater
Pad Per City of San Diego Dwg. No.

SDD-104 and Detail on Sheet No. 17 and
20 EA 3 $2,000.00 $6,000.00
Construct Storm Drain Bubbler Outlet
Per Detail on Sheet No. 20 EA 2 $1,500.00 $3,000.00
Install Inlet Structure Per Detail A on
Sheet 20 EA 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
SUBTOTAL OF STREET AND STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS $2,938,502.00 15% CONTINGENCY $440,775.30
TOTAL $3,379,277.30
Assumptions:

1. 2. The above opinion does not include raw land, legal fees, agency permits, professional engineering fees, construction phasing, bonds, financing/carrying costs, construction staking, soils testing, accounting or construction management.

These quantities are based on the Del Webb Exlore at Palm Desert Street and Storm Drain Improvement Plan completed on 04/03/2024.

Page 4 of 5 ends

1721

3. MSA Consulting Inc. makes no representation concerning the estimated quantities and cost figures other than that all such figures are opinions only and the Engineer shall not be responsible for any fluctuations in cost factors or the actual quantities shown.

Page 5 of 5 ends

1722
1723
1724
1725
1726
1727
1728
April 26, 2024
in the City of Palm Desert
MSA JOB #2636

ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS FOR
North of Frank Sinatra Drive
Tract Map No. 38434-1
Project Location:

Prepared for:

Pulte Home Company, LLC
27401 Los Altos, Suite 400
Mission Viejo CA 92691

DEL WEBB EXPLORE AT PALM DESERT MONUMENTATION

Page 1 of 2 ends

1729

DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
Street
Monumentation LOT 135 $300.00 $40,500.00
SUBTOTAL OF MONUMENTATION $40,500.00
15% CONTINGENCY $6,075.00
TOTAL $46,575.00
Assumptions:

1. 2.

The above opinion does not include raw land, legal fees, agency permits, professional engineering fees, construction phasing, bonds, financing/carrying costs, construction staking, soils testing, accounting or construction management.

These quantities are based on the Del Webb Exlore at Palm Desert Final Tract Map 38434-1 completed on 04/25/2024.

Page 2 of 2 ends

1730
1731
1732
1733
1734
1735
1736
1737
1738
1739
1740

ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS FOR
North of Frank Sinatra Drive
Tract Map No. 38434
Project Location:

Prepared for:

Pulte Home Company, LLC
27401 Los Altos, Suite 400
Mission Viejo CA 92691

DEL WEBB EXPLORE AT PALM DESERT STREET AND STORM DRAIN

IMPROVEMENTS
June 26, 2024
in the City of Palm Desert
MSA JOB #2636

APPROVED
C.F. 07/03/2024
1741

DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
Street
Install 3" A.C. Pavement Over 6" Class II
Aggregate Base SF 231,173 $4.00 $924,692.00
Install Decorative Pavement, Color and
Type Per Landscape Architect's Plans. SF 4,580 $15.00 $68,700.00 Construct 6" Curb and Gutter Type I Per
City of Palm Desert Standard Plan No.
102 LF 1,260 $40.00 $50,400.00
Construct 6" Wedge Curb. LF 12,815 $40.00 $512,600.00
Construct 6" Mountable Curb. LF 314 $35.00 $10,990.00
Construct Curb Transition (Wedge Curb
to Curb and Gutter) EA 17 $150.00 $2,550.00
Construct Cross Gutter Type II Per City
of Palm Desert Standard Plan No. 108
with Modified Slope SF 2,978 $20.00 $59,560.00
Construct Sidewalk Per City of Palm
Desert Standard Plan No. 104 SF 84,410 $6.00 $506,460.00 Construct Curb Ramp Case A Per
County of Riverside Std. No. 403 EA 6 $6,000.00 $36,000.00 Construct Curb Ramp Case C Per
County of Riverside Std. No. 403 EA 18 $6,000.00 $108,000.00 Construct Curb Inlet Catch Basin Per
County of Riverside Std. Dwg. No. 300,
See Plan For W and H EA 12 $10,000.00 $120,000.00
Construct Gutter Depression for Curb
Opening Catch Basin Per County of
Riverside Std. Dwg. No. 311 EA 12 $2,000.00 $24,000.00
Install Stop Legend, Limit Line, Sign
Post, Stop Sign and Street Name Sign EA 6 $800.00 $4,800.00

Page 2 of 3 ends

1742
Adjust Water Valve To Grade Per CVWD
Standards And Specifications, See
Separate Proposed Water Plans EA 51 $800.00 $40,800.00
Adjust Sewer Manhole To Grade Per
CVWD Standards And Specifications,
See Separate Proposed Sewer Plans EA 41 $800.00 $32,800.00 Construct Spillway/Access Ramp EA 4 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 Storm Drain
Furnish and Install 18" HDPE Storm
Drain. LF 1,578 $80.00 $126,240.00
Furnish and Install 30" HDPE Storm
Drain. LF 638 $180.00 $114,840.00
Furnish and Install 18" x 45° HDPE Bend EA 3 $400.00 $1,200.00 Furnish and Install 18" HDPE Flared End
Outlet Structure EA 5 $1,000.00 $5,000.00
Furnish and Install 60" Inside Diameter
Manhole Per CVWD Dwg. Std. S-5 EA 5 $4,500.00 $22,500.00 Install Rock Energy Dissipator per RCFC
& WCD Std. Dwg. No. JS333 EA 5 $500.00 $2,500.00
Install Inlet Structure EA 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00
SUBTOTAL OF STREET AND STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS $2,787,132.00 20% CONTINGENCY $557,426.40
TOTAL $3,344,558.40
Assumptions:

1. 2.

These quantities are based on the Del Webb Exlore at Palm Desert Street and Storm Drain Improvement Plan completed on 05/24/2024.

Page 3 of 3 ends

1743
1744
1745
1746
1747
1748
June 6, 2024
in the City of Palm Desert
MSA JOB #2636

ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS FOR
South of Gerald Ford Drive
Tract Map No. 38434
Project Location:

Prepared for:

Pulte Home Company, LLC
27401 Los Altos, Suite 400
Mission Viejo CA 92691

DEL WEBB EXPLORE AT PALM DESERT MONUMENTATION

Page 1 of 2 ends

OKAY FOR BONDING
C.F.
1749

DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
Street
Monumentation LOT 197 $300.00 $59,100.00
SUBTOTAL OF MONUMENTATION $59,100.00
15% CONTINGENCY $8,865.00
TOTAL $67,965.00
Assumptions:

1. 2.

These quantities are based on the Del Webb Exlore at Palm Desert Final Tract Map 38434 prepared on 06/04/2024.

Page 2 of 2 ends

1750
2023- 0150325
05/ 25/ 2023 01: 19 PM Fee: $ 0. 00

Page 1 of 6 ends

RECORDING REQUESTED BY, AND Recorded in Official Records WHEN RECORDED, MAIL TO: County of Riverside
Peter Aldana
Assessor- County Clerk- Recorder
City Clerk' s Office
73-
Palm
510
of
Desert,
Fred
Palm
Waring
Desert
CA 92260-
Drive
2578
IIIN
Record for the Benefit of 41 I
the City of Palm Desert
Pursuant to Government Code Section 6103 This Space for Recorder's Use Only) APN: Portion of 694- 310- 007 and Portion of 694- 310- 010 Documentary transfer tax is $ 0. 00
Exempt from Documentary Transfer Taxes Pursuant to R & T Code Section 11922

GRANT OF EASEMENT
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, The City of Palm Desert, a municipal corporation, (" Grantor") hereby grants public use, to the CITY OF PALM DESERT, a California municipal corporation (" Grantee"), an easement for Public Street purposes, hereby named Explorer Drive, and an easement for Public Utility purposes over, under and along the real property in the City of Palm Desert, County of Riverside, State of California, as described in Exhibit " A" and depicted on Exhibit " B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

The City of Palm Desert,
a municipal corpor n
L. T H LEMAN
Its: CITY MANAGER
Dated: 5/.9‘T/ 01- 6) 9-3
1751
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

State of California
County of Riverside
On 5 94/ 2023, before me, in• Q. Sand-ez a
Notary Public, personally appeared /,.. T lb/OM/ 1 who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(,$') whose name( ) is/ are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/ sf/ e/ tbfey executed the same in his/ h' r/ tVVieir authorized capacity(ie ), and that by his/ har/their signature( s) on the instrument the person( 4 or the entity upon behalf of which the person() acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.
fry
A
NC11
Notary Public• California
1,, Riverside County
Signature qps* Commission M 2419214
L. + My Comm. Expires Oct 29, 2026
1752

EXHIBIT ' A'

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

PUBLIC STREET AND PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT

BEING A STRIP OF LAND, VARIABLE IN WIDTH, LYING WITHIN A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN CORRECTIVE GRANT DEED, RECORDED APRIL 4, 2023 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023- 0095443, AND A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN QUITCLAIM DEED RECORDED JULY 21, 2014 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2014- 0268859, BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY. ALSO BEING IN THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 6 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHERLY NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL " A" OF THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE ( WAIVER OF PARCEL MAP PMW- 21- 0009), RECORDED APRIL 07, 2022 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2022- 0167200 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT ALSO LYING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF GERALD FORD DRIVE PER DOCUMENT NO. 247410, RECORDED NOVEMBER 01, 1985 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS;

THENCE, LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY AND CONTINUING ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID PARCEL " A", ALSO BEING THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID DOCUMENT NO. 2023- 0095443, SOUTH 47° 23' 23" EAST A DISTANCE OF 34. 01 FEET;

THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE AND SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, SOUTH 00° 03' 36" WEST A DISTANCE OF 942. 64 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL" A", AND THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0095443;

THENCE, LEAVING SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE AND CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID DOCUMENT NO. 2023- 0095443, SOUTH 89° 56' 24" EAST A DISTANCE OF 60. 00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID DOCUMENT NO. 2023- 0095443;

THENCE, LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND CONTINUING ALONG THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID DOCUMENT NO. 2023- 0095443, AND ITS NORTHERLY PROLONGATION ACROSS PARCEL' A' OF SAID QUITCLAIM DEED, NORTH 00° 03' 36" EAST A DISTANCE OF 721. 56 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 06° 03' 39" EAST A DISTANCE OF 76. 52 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 00° 03' 36" EAST A DISTANCE OF 145. 26 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 47° 22' 56" EAST A DISTANCE OF 33. 93 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID DOCUMENT NO. 247410;
THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE SOUTH 89° 55' 15" WEST A DISTANCE OF 118. 00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.

CONTAINING AN AREA OF AREA OF 60, 171. 08 SQUARE FEET/ 1. 381 ACRES MORE OR LESS.

ATTACHED HERETO IS EXHIBIT' B' AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR SRO
LAND
SCR UNDER MY DIRECTION ON: 05/ 19/ 2023 ARNOLD

WHITAKER
N0. 7883
AR OLD HITAKER EXP. 03- 31- 25 of 6\0°`
PLS 78
SHEET 1 OF 1
1753

EXHIBIT ' B'

PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR

PUBLIC STREET AND PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT
55' RIGHT OF WAY PER DOC, NO. 50 do SITE
247410, RECORDED 11/ 01/ 19/ 85, O. R. GERALD FORD Lo
CENTERLINE & N' LY LINE OF T. 4S., R. 6E. o0
N14 COR.

SECTION 32 T, 4S., R. 6E., S. B. M. SHEPHARD
LN
SEC. 32 BASIS OF BEARINGS 5'\ 1, 4D43
N 89° 55' 15' E 2635. 71' _
c_

FRANK SINATRA DR
GERALD FORD DR T. 5S., R. 6E.
cc L8
PUBLIC) NE COR. o w ` o
a
SEC. 32 COUNTRY z
CLUB ° DR
R/ W LINE & / h
o
N' LY BOUNDARY 1 VICINITY MAP
R/ W LINE LEGEND N. T.S.

LINE OF PAR. " A"
f
TP.O.B. PARCEL BOUNDARY/ STREET R/ W
NE' LY COR. CENTERLINE
PAR. " A" I AREAM601 g1008SFR1 381 AC
TP.OR TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING
o 68/ /
L • INDICATES RECORD DATA PER
o
co . o
co O ^ DOC. NO. 2023- 0095443
N o
0 Q oto o
o BASIS OF BEARINGS
3 N o 1 1 J w O THE N' LY LINE OF THE NE 1/ 4 OF SEC. 32, T. 4 S., R. 6 E., S. B. M. o c O o ,— AS SHOWN ON RECORD SURVEY, ON FILE IN BOOK 128, AT a
N^
M 6c]' Q v
N
M PAGE 93 OF RECORD OF SURVEY. TAKEN AS N89° 55' 15" E. 0- • 4- - 4-
1- r-..
ago
0)
co Caw to Sip
LAND
S6
O
w Q
ARNOLD J. F,,
w 71

WHITAKER
EL
J J
O.' 7 83 LINE DATA
r
z
4 L# BEARING DISTANCE
4 R/ W LINE & / P
RIGHT OF WAY F CAL, L1 ( S47° 23' 23" E) ( 34. 01')

ELY BOUNDARY DEDICATED PER
DOC # 2023- 0095443, L2 ( S00' 03' 36" W) ( 942. 64') LINE OF PAR. " A" RECORDED 4/ 04/ 23, O. R.

L3 ( S89' 56' 24" E) ( 60. 00')
SOUTH LINE OF DOC. L4 N00°03' 36" E 721. 56' 4 -se.
3 NO. 2014- 0268859
j
w O
a oo
L5 N06° 03' 39" E 76. 52'
0 o
Z
o (Nio L6 N00' 03' 36" E 145. 26'
M
60 i; o I o L7 N47°22' 56" E 33. 93'
a
o N °` O
L8 S89° 55' 15" W 118. 00'
SE' LY COR.

N
PAR. " A" GRAPHIC SCALE
L3 100 0 100 200
SE' LY COR.

DOC. NO.
2023- 0095443 IN FEET )
1" = 100' SHEET 1 OF 1
1754
t.......... CITY Of PALM DESERT
K- 73 5- I0 FRED WARING DRIVE
7 b `, PAI4b PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260- 2578
l
ti' TEL: 760 346- 0611
93tt:' info@cityofpalmdesert. org
Vitalia Project
Public Street and Public Utility Easement
Portion of APN 694- 310- 007 and
Portion of 694- 310- 010

CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the interest in real property conveyed by the GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC STREET AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES dated May 24, 2023, from the CITY OF PALM DESERT, a municipal corporation, to the CITY OF PALM DESERT, a municipal corporation, is hereby accepted pursuant to its Resolution No. 77- 48, adopted May 12, 1977.
r
W
HONY J. M IA, MMC, CIT CLERK

CITY OF PALM D ' , - A LIFORNIA
May 24, 2023

Page 1 of 2 ends

PRIMED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1755
RESOLUTION NO. 77- 48

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PLAN DESERT, CALIFORNIA,

AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO ACCEPT OFFERS OF

RIGHT- OF- WAY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY UPON THE

RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY

ENGINEER
The City Council of the City of Palm Desert does hereby resolve that the City Clerk is authorized to accept and record on behalf of the City all offers of dedication, easements, and other grants of right- of- way offered to the City for public purposes when such acceptance is recommended by both the City Attorney and the City Engineer.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED on this 12th day of May, 1977, by the following vote:

AYES: Brush, McPherson, Newbrander, Wilson A Mullins
NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RD .ViVivL1 va MAYOR
ATTEST:

EACH DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE I5

ATTACHED IS CERTIFIED TO BE A FULL, TRUE AND

CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL ON FILE AND ON
SHEILA GIL I . C ty ler A" • INMYOFFICE•
City of Palm Desert, Cal forma D 2 4 2o23
NY City perk
City er Noma

Page 2 of 2 ends

1756
1757
1758
1759
1760
1761
1762
1763
1764
1765
1766
1767
1768
1769
1770
1771
1772
1773
1774
1775
1776
1777
1778
EXHIBIT “A”

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
1 OF 2

IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, A PORTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION (FEE), RECORDED APRIL 4, 2023, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2023-0095443, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, LOCATED IN THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 6

EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION; THENCE NORTH 00°03'36" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 226.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 330.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 89°56'24" WEST;

THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 35°05'48", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 202.14 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 54°57'48" WEST TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION;

THENCE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE ALONG SAID EAST LINE SOUTH 00°03'36" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 36.26 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF

SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION,

THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION NORTH 89°56'24" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
SUBJECT TO EXISTING EASEMENTS, COVENANTS, RIGHTS AND RIGHTS-OFWAY OF RECORD.

CONTAINING 5,821 SQUARE FEET OR 0.134 ACRES MORE OR LESS. 1779
1780
1 OF 2
PARCEL “B” Per PMW 23-0006

IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, A PORTION OF PARCEL “B” OF THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. 21-0009, RECORDED APRIL 7, 2022, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2022-0167200 AND PARCEL 3 OF THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. 88-1, RECORDED JUNE 1, 1988, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 146461, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, LOCATED IN THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 6 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL “B”;
THENCE SOUTH 00°03'36" WEST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF PARCEL “B”, A DISTANCE OF 539.76 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89°58'51" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 535.92 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°01'09" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 82.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 89°58'51" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 19.25 FEET TO THE BEGINNING

OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF

30.00 FEET;

THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43°43'23", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 22.89 FEET TO THE

BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 89.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 43°44'32" EAST;

THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 87°26'46", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 135.83 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 43°42'14" EAST;

THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43°43'23", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 22.89 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 89°58'51" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 445.25 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00°01'09" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 491.94 FEET; THENCE NORTH 43°30'23" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 65.77 FEET;
1781
2 OF 2
THENCE NORTH 89°56'24" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 14.63 FEET TO THE EASTERLY

RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AS SHOWN IN GRANT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY RECORDED DECEMBER 13, 2022, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2022-0500103, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE NORTH 00°03'36" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 354.14 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL “A” AS DESCRIBED IN QUITCLAIM DEED, RECORDED JULY 21, 2014, AS DOCUMENT NO. 2014-0268859, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE NORTH 89°55'15" EAST, ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 214.39 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL “B” OF SAID CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. 21-0009;
THENCE SOUTH 00°01'14" EAST, ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL B AND THE EASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL 3 OF SAID CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. 88-1, A DISTANCE OF 3332.57 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 3;
THENCE SOUTH 89°53'06" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 3, A DISTANCE OF 1323.18 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 3;
THENCE NORTH 00°02'47" EAST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 3, A DISTANCE OF 1332.86 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL B;
THENCE NORTH 00°03'36" EAST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL B, A DISTANCE OF 1189.86 FEET, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.

SUBJECT TO EXISTING EASEMENTS, COVENANTS, RIGHTS AND RIGHTS-OFWAY OF RECORD.

CONTAINING 78.797 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
1782
Dinah Shore Dr
A St
Portola Ave Portola Ave
Gerald Ford Dr
College Dr
Varner Rd
Gateway Dr
Toni Dr
Shepherd Ln
Henri Dr
Rem
brandt Pkwy
Cortesia
Way
Raphael Dr
Raphael Dr
Dolce Ave
Dick Kelly Dr
Renoir Pl
Cezanne Dr
Xander Ct
Monterey Ave
Marriott's
Shadow Ridge
Portola
Ave
Drexell Dr
Hollister Dr
Rose Ridge Dr
Emerson Dr
Shadow
Ridge Rd
Shepherd Ln
Desert Greens Dr N
Oak Flats Dr
Frank Sinatra Dr
Santa Rosa
Country Club
10 Jack Ivey
Dr
Gerald Ford Dr
Technology Dr
College Dr
Pacific Ave
Ivey Ranch
Country Club
College
Dr
University Park
Esri Community Maps Contributors, Loma Linda University, UC Riverside, City of Palm Desert, County of Riverside, California State Parks, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, USFWS
Palm Desert Parcels
7/3/2024
0 0.13 0.25 0.5 mi
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 km
1:18,056
VICINITY MAP 1783
1784

CITY OF PALM DESERT
CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
Date: July 11, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
From: Anthony J. Mejia, City Clerk
Subject: City Council Meeting of July 11, 2024
Below you will find questions received from the Mayor or Councilmembers and answers provided by City staff regarding tonight’s City Council meeting:

ITEM 2a: STUDY SESSION: IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT’S ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE

PARTNERSHIP
Q1: Regarding the IID substation, is it correct that we will not be liable for the $5 million in bonds, as we will either be reimbursed by other property owners or indirectly through increased sales tax revenue over several years
A1: The City would front the initial cash outlay to get the substation underway and then require payback agreements prior to the landowners developing their properties. The City may be out $1- $3 million over the next decade or two depending on the speed of development. Without the substation, the property owners are frozen out.

ITEM 13a: APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL, SUCCESSOR AGENCY, AND HOUSING AUTHORITY

MINUTES
After further review, the City Clerk recommends the approval of the June 27, 2024, City Council Meeting minutes with the following revision:
15a. APPEAL OF THE BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS DETERMINATION OF THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL’S APPLICATION OF THE 2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE, SECTION R310.1 (EMERGENCY ESCAPE AND RESCUE)
Dylan Guzel, provided closing remarks on behalf of the City, asserted that there are regulations that businesses are required to follow that homeowners do not in order to protect the public; asserted that this action is not considered a regulatory taking as the City stated the room was never intended to be a bedroom, the City did not sell or advertise the unit, and the City upheld the Code at the time of construction.

Dylan Guzel, Deputy City Attorney, provided closing remarks on behalf of the City; pointed out that a vacation rental is a commercial endeavor which is subject to regulations similar to other businesses; noted these regulations are in place for the public health and safety during emergencies; asserted that the County Assessor’s Office statements regarding the number of bedrooms are based on a visual floorplan inspection without comparison to the California Building Codes and pointed out these representatives are not official building inspectors, architects, engineers, or professionals in that capacity; opined that the City’s actions are not a regulatory taking as the City has consistently applied the building code standard that dens cannot be used as a sleeping room and had no role in the advertising or marketing of the property. 1785
06/27/2024 Question & Answer Memo

Page 2 of 5 ends

Carrie Kropfl, Appellant, provided closing remarks; stated she represents the innocent victims; urged the City prepare a disclosure form for short-term rental operators and renters, and send a cease and desist letter to Monterey Country Club property management.

Carrie Kropfl, Appellant, provided closing remarks; voiced support for allowing potential renters to sign a disclosure form regarding the use of a den as a sleeping room; asserted that other communities have advertised dens attached to an atrium as bedrooms and that Coachella Valley cities need to address false advertising, including the City of Palm Desert issuing a cease and desist letter to the Monterey County Club management; opined that the City’s interpretation will impact not only vacation rental owners but also all properties with a similar floorplan, leading to a reduction of a bedroom and decreased property values.

ITEM 13b: APPROVAL OF WARRANT REGISTERS
Q1: Where is the $13 million coming from to buy the parcels? (Page 43) A1:The sale of the property at Desert Willow (DW) is $4.6 million. That’s the only amount coming from the City. There are a few transactions happening in this one register:

1. The City is buying the property (DW Parking Lot) from the SARDA at Fair Market Value ($4.6M) from our Golf Amenity Fees - Capital Funds (441) with the first wire - #57353787.

2. The 2nd and 3rd wires are a result of staff reaching out to the County due to a stale dated check.

The County of Riverside lost the SARDA check ($4.4M) related to the sale of land from SARDA to Vitalia/Pacific West for affordable housing, so we canceled payment and reissued wire #71465195. The additional $16k, was a separate part of that transaction as well - #71465387.

3. The SARDA then sent the $4.6M proceeds (DW Parking Lot) to the County of Riverside for distribution to the various taxing entities - #72032577.

Ultimately, the City (as a taxing entity) will receive a small apportionment from each of these transactions. Those proceeds are then deposited into the Economic Development Fund upon receipt.

ITEM 13g: ADOPT RESOLUTION OPTING INTO SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH

DISTRIBUTORS OF OPIOIDS, GROCERY CHAIN KROGER, AND FUTURE PROPOSED

OPIOD SETTLEMENTS
Q1: What is the estimated amount that the City is expected to receive from this settlement? A1: Based on the amount awarded to the State of California and our other settlement allocations, an estimate could be around $40,000 disbursed over 11 years. 1786
06/27/2024 Question & Answer Memo

Page 3 of 5 ends

ITEM 13j: AWARD CONTRACT TO PBK ARCHITECTS, INC., FOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN SERVICES OF FIRE STATION 33 AND 71 (CFA00017 & CFA00019) Q1: This item includes the recommendation to demolish and rebuild Station 71. Is this item intended to approve that recommendation? If so, could you provide more information on the following aspects:
a. What is the justification for this recommendation given that a rebuild costs $1,272,905 more than renovation?
b. What is the plan for timing and provision of services during the demolition and rebuild process?
c. How will service disruptions be managed, considering that renovations can be done in stages to minimize disruptions, whereas demolition and rebuild inherently include delays? A1: Staff estimates that the construction will take approximately 12-14 months. The current plan involves setting up temporary housing for both Fire Stations during this period to minimize impacts on response times. We considered moving staff to other Fire Stations and having FS 102 assist with calls from FS 67. However, current trends indicate that assistance from FS 102 to FS 71 will be limited. CalFire Chiefs support the recommendation for temporary housing.

FS 33 has ample space to accommodate a temporary site. However, FS 71 is located on a small parcel, making it impossible to host temporary housing and construction activities simultaneously.

Therefore, staff is exploring nearby city-owned lots for temporary housing, bays, and equipment during construction. The goal is to minimize impacts on response times as much as possible. Staff will continue to adjust this plan as the design progresses.

The renovations will involve the demolition and structural reconfiguration of the building's interior, making it unsafe for Cal Fire staff to work in the building during construction.

ITEM 13k: AWARD ON-CALL CONTRACTS TO MULTIPLE VENDORS FOR PARK AND

FACILITIES REPAIRS AND IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Q1: What has been the budgeted dollar amount for these CIP projects in previous years? This year's budget is $5.3 million.

A1: Although the on-call facilities maintenance and repair agreements can be utilized to complete task orders for capital projects, staff primarily utilize the agreements to accomplish updates on deferred maintenance or minor repair projects as needed. The budget for these agreements includes both capital and operations funding.

Previous fiscal years’ Park and Facilities CIP project budgets are below:
• Fiscal Year 24/25 $5.3 Million
• Fiscal Year 23/24 $4.0 Million, increased to $5.7
• Fiscal Year 22/23 $3.5 Million
• Fiscal Year 21/22 $2.0 Million
1787
06/27/2024 Question & Answer Memo

Page 4 of 5 ends

ITEM 13l: AWARD CONTRACT NO. C47680 TO JACOBSSON ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC., FOR THE EL PASEO CURB RAMP MODIFICATION PROJECT (PROJECT CST00025)
Q1: Can you provide the additional cost of undertaking this project as a standalone effort compared to incorporating it into the overall repaving scheduled for 2025? A1: Staff did not anticipate additional costs would be incurred by the City from splitting the project into two phases. The concrete work that will be constructed in Phase I of the project is typically performed by a subcontractor and the prime contractor marks up the subcontractors bid 10-15% to cover administration expenses related to the subcontract. By bidding the concrete work and the asphalt work separately staff expects the markup will be eliminated.

Q2: This item refers to curb and gutter work intended to be completed "in the summer of 2024." As it is now July 10th, could you please provide an updated timetable for this work? Given the current date, is it still feasible to complete the project within the summer timeframe? A2: The project will begin construction by August 1, 2024, and will be completed by September 15, 2024.The intent is to complete the project before the beginning of the busy season.

ITEM 13n: REJECT ALL PROPOSALS SUBMITTED FOR COURTESY PATROL SERVICES AT THE

HOUSING AUTHORITY PROPERTIES
Q1: Why did Courtesy Patrol Services decline to renew their contract? A1: The current service provider indicated that they are facing difficulties in securing the necessary insurance coverage, which has been an ongoing issue.

ITEM 13o: REJECT ALL BIDS, APPROPRIATE FUNDS, AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO

AWARD A CONTRACT FOR THE CIVIC CENTER PARKING LOT REHABILITATION PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $600,000
Q1: is this project for repaving or resealing/slurry?
A1: The entry/exit drive at Fred Waring is a re-pave, while the rest of the parking lot will be repaired as needed and slurry sealed. There is also a crosswalk near the Desert Recreation building that will be replaced with concrete. Please reference the “Area of Work Aerial” for further clarification.

ITEM 13s: APPROVE CONTRACT WITH FEHR & PEERS FOR THE PREPARATION OF A

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE MOBILITY ELEMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $139,076 AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS
Q1: Can the language of the deliverables in Task 6 be revised to align with the broader scope described in the staff report, ensuring it includes collaboration with SunLine Transit Agency for a variety of public transit solutions, not just the evaluation of existing and proposed bus lines?
A1: This action will be included in Task 6 of the Scope of Work found in Exhibit A of the Professional Services Agreement. The formatting and text of the agreement for Task 6 has been revised to add a new bullet point for "Collaboration with SunLine Transit Agency ("STA") for a variety of public transit solutions". This will be in addition to the deliverable item for evaluation of existing and proposed bus lines. Staff has also revised task 3.1 to require collaboration with STA. 1788
06/27/2024 Question & Answer Memo

Page 5 of 5 ends

ITEM 14d: CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF A PORTION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (EXPLORER DRIVE) IS “EXEMPT SURPLUS LAND” PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54221
Q1: Is this decision consistent with our previous surplus land/right-of-way decision that we voted on in South Palm Desert a few months ago?
A1: There is a small sliver of property that was missed in the original land sale to Refuge that needs to be addressed. Therefore, this portion of the city right-of-way was not in the City’s Central Inventory. The process will be consistent with the Surplus Land Act (SLA) requirements. Once the SLA process is cleared, the same per square foot charge will be applied to this property as was used in the initial sale.

ITEM 14e: ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 38434-1 AND

AGREEMENTS
Q1: Could you provide the zoning rules that applied to the vacant land at the time when the property was developed and homes were sold on the south border of this development? Specifically, what was the maximum allowable height? Additionally, if there have been any changes to these zoning rules, when did they occur?
A1: In October 1995, during the original approval of residential Tract 28258, the vacant land ("Refuge Site") was designated PR-5 (Planned Residential 5 dwelling units/acre). The PR zoning designation allowed buildings up to two-stories with a maximum height of 24', with a minimum setback of 100' from the project perimeter for all two-story, detached, single-family structures.

In June 2012, as a requirement of State Housing Element law, the City approved a change of zone for a 38-acre portion of the Refuge Site from PR-5 to Planned Residential 20 dwelling units per acre (PR-20). The development standards for the PR zoning district did not substantially change until 2017.

In August 2017, as a part of a general plan consistency update, the City approved a change of zone for the entire vacant Refuge Site to PR-20 and amended the PR zoning district to allow threestory buildings with a maximum height to 40'-0", with a minimum setback of 100' from the project perimeter for all two-story, detached, single-family structures. 1789
1 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1

CITY OF PALM DESERT

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

1. Parties and Date. This Agreement is made and entered into this 11th day of July, 2024, by and between the City of Palm Desert, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of California with its principal place of business at 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California 92260-2578 (“City”) and FEHR & PEERS an S Corporation, with its principal place of business at 100 PRINGLE AVENUE, SUITE 600, WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596("Consultant").

The City and Consultant are sometimes individually referred to herein as "Party" and collectively as "Parties."

2. Recitals.

2.1 Project.

The City is a public agency of the State of California and is in need of professional services for the following project:

Amendment of the Palm Desert Mobility (Circulation) Element of the General Plan (hereinafter referred to as “the Project”).

2.2 Consultant.

Consultant desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of certain professional services required by the City on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

Consultant is duly licensed and has the necessary qualifications to provide such services.

3. Terms.

3.1 Scope of Services and Term.

3.1.1 General Scope of Services. Consultant promises and agrees to furnish to the City all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to supply the services for the Project ("Services") as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agreement, the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations.

3.1.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2025, unless earlier terminated as provided herein. The City shall have the unilateral option, at its sole discretion, to renew this Agreement automatically for no more than TWO additional one-year terms. Contractor shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and shall meet any other established schedules and deadlines.

3.2 Responsibilities of Consultant.

3.2.1 Independent Contractor; Control and Payment of Subordinates.

The Services shall be performed by Consultant or under its supervision. Consultant will determine the means, methods, and details of performing the Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement. City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and not as an employee.

Any personnel performing the Services shall not be employees of City and shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City, or any of its officials, officers, directors, employees, or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultants officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and as required by law. Consultant shall be 07/11/2024
Item 13s
Revised Agreement
1790
Contract No. C48060
2 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workers' compensation insurance.

3.2.2 Schedule of Services. Consultant shall perform the Services in accordance with the Schedule of Services set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant represents that it has the professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services as expeditiously as is required by the Schedule of Services and the standard of care applicable to Consultant’s Services. Upon reasonable request of City, Consultant shall provide a more detailed schedule of anticipated performance to meet the Schedule of Services.

3.2.3 Conformance to Applicable Requirements. All work prepared by Consultant shall be in accordance with this Agreement .

3.2.4 Substitution of Key Personnel. Consultant has represented to City that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, Consultant may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence upon written approval of City. In the event that City and Consultant cannot agree as to the substitution of key personnel, City shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause.

The key personnel for performance of this Agreement are as follows: JASON D. PACK.

3.2.5 City's Representative. The City hereby designates Nick Melloni, Principal Planner, or his/her designee, to act as its representative in all matters pertaining to the administration and performance of this Agreement ("City's Representative"). City's Representative shall have the power to act on behalf of the City for review and approval of all products submitted by Consultant but not the authority to enlarge the scope of Services or change the total compensation due to Consultant under this Agreement. The City Manager shall be authorized to act on City's behalf and to execute all necessary documents which enlarge the scope of services or change the Consultant's total compensation subject to the provisions contained in Section 3.3 of this Agreement. Consultant shall not accept direction or orders from any person other than the City Manager, City's Representative or his/her designee.

3.2.6 Consultant's Representative. Consultant hereby designates JASON D. PACK, or his/her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Consultant's Representative"). Consultant's Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Consultant for all purposes under this Agreement. The Consultant's Representative shall supervise and direct the Services, using his/her best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement.

3.2.7 Coordination of Services. Consultant agrees to work closely with City staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to City's staff, consultants, and other staff at all reasonable times.

3.2.8 Standard of Care; Performance of Employees. Consultant shall perform all Services exercising that degree of care, skill, and diligence ordinarily exercised by professionals performing similar services in the same or similar locale and under similar circumstances that of Consultant under this Agreement . Consultant represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. Consultant warrants that all employees and subconsultants shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the 1791
Contract No. C48060
3 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
Services assigned to them. Consultant represents that it, its employees and subconsultants have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services, and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. Consultant shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from the City, any services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the Consultant's failure to comply with the standard of care provided herein. Any employee of the Consultant or its sub-consultants who is determined by the City to be uncooperative, incompetent, a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project, a threat to the safety of persons or property, or any employee who fails or refuses to perform the Services in a manner acceptable to the City, shall be promptly removed from the Project by the Consultant and shall not be re-employed to perform any of the Services or to work on the Project.

3.2.9 Period of Performance. Consultant shall perform and complete all Services under this Agreement within the term set forth in Section 3.1.2 above (“Performance Time”). Consultant shall also perform the Services in accordance with any completion schedule or Project milestones described in Exhibits “A” or “B” attached hereto, or which may be separately agreed upon in writing by the City and Consultant (“Performance Milestones”). Consultant agrees that if the Services are not completed within the aforementioned Performance Time and/or pursuant to any such Performance Milestones developed pursuant to provisions of this Agreement, it is understood, acknowledged and agreed that the City will suffer damage.

Neither City nor Consultant shall be considered in default of this Agreement for delays in performance caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the non-performing Party. For purposes of this Agreement, such circumstances include a Force Majeure Event. A Force Majeure Event shall mean an event that materially affects a Party’s performance and is one or more of the following: (1) Acts of God or other natural disasters; (2) terrorism or other acts of a public enemy; (3) orders of governmental authorities (including, without limitation, unreasonable and unforeseeable delay in the issuance of permits or approvals by governmental authorities that are required for the services); (4) strikes and other organized labor action occurring at the site and the effects thereof on the services, only to the extent such strikes and other organized labor action are beyond the control of Consultant and its subcontractors, and to the extent the effects thereof cannot be avoided by use of replacement workers; (5) pandemics, epidemics or quarantine restrictions; or (6) any other causes beyond the reasonable control of the defaulting or delayed Party. For purposes of this section, “orders of governmental authorities,” includes ordinances, emergency proclamations and orders, rules to protect the public health, welfare and safety, and other actions of a public agency applicable to the services and Agreement.

Should a Force Majeure Event occur, the non-performing Party shall, within a reasonable time of being prevented from performing, give written notice to the other Party describing the circumstances preventing continued performance and the efforts being made to resume performance of this Agreement. Force Majeure Events and/or delays, regardless of the Party responsible for the delay, shall not entitle Consultant to any additional compensation.

Notwithstanding the foregoing in this section, the City may still terminate this Agreement in accordance with the termination provisions of this Agreement.

3.2.10 Laws and Regulations; Employee/Labor Certification. Consultant shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Project or the Services and shall give all notices required by law. Consultant shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with the Services and this Agreement. All violations of such laws and regulations shall be grounds for the City to terminate the Agreement for cause. 1792
Contract No. C48060
4 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1

3.2.10.1 Employment Eligibility; Consultant. Consultant certifies that it fully complies with all requirements and restrictions of state and federal law respecting the employment of undocumented aliens, including, but not limited to, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, as may be amended from time to time and shall require all subconsultants and sub-subconsultants to comply with the same. Consultant certifies that it has not committed a violation of any such law within the five (5) years immediately preceding the date of execution of this Agreement and shall not violate any such law at any time during the term of the Agreement.

3.2.10.2 Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer, and it shall not discriminate against any subconsultant, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, physical disability, ancestry, sex, age, marital status, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, reproductive health decision making, veteran or military status, or any other consideration made unlawful by federal, state, or local laws. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. Consultant shall also comply with all relevant provisions of City's Minority Business Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related programs or guidelines currently in effect or hereinafter enacted.

3.2.10.3 Safety. Consultant shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, the Consultant shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed.

3.2.11 Insurance.

3.2.11.1 Minimum Requirements. Without limiting Consultant’s indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of the Services, Consultant shall obtain, provide, and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form that is satisfactory to City. (A) General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.
(B) Automobile Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, nonowned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident. The City’s Risk Manger may modify this requirement if it is determined that Consultant will not be utilizing a vehicle in the performance of his/her duties under this Agreement. (C) Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions) Insurance.

Consultant shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the 1793
Contract No. C48060
5 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
effective date of this Agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three years after completion of the Services required by this Agreement. (D) Workers’ Compensation Insurance. Consultant shall
maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at least $1,000,000). Consultant shall submit to City, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of the City, its officers, agents, employees, volunteers, and representatives.
(E) Umbrella or Excess Liability Insurance. Consultant may opt to utilize umbrella or excess liability insurance in meeting insurance requirements. In such circumstances, Consultant shall obtain and maintain an umbrella or excess liability insurance policy with limits that will provide bodily injury, personal injury and property damage liability coverage at least as broad as the primary coverages set forth above, including commercial general liability and employer’s liability. Such policy or policies shall include the following terms and conditions:
(1) A drop-down feature requiring the policy to respond if any primary insurance that would otherwise have
applied proves to be uncollectible in whole or in part for any reason;
(2) Pay on behalf of wording as opposed to reimbursement; (3) Concurrency of effective dates with primary policies; and (4) Policies shall “follow form” to the underlying primary policies.
(5) Insureds under primary policies shall also be insureds under the umbrella or excess policies.

If coverage is maintained on a claims-made basis, Consultant shall maintain such coverage for an additional period of three (3) years following termination of the Agreement.

3.2.11.2 Other Provisions or Requirements.
(A) Proof of Insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers’ compensation. Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by City’s Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this Agreement. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.
(B) Duration of Coverage. Consultant shall procure and
maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Services hereunder by Consultant, his/her agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants. (C) Primary/Non-Contributing. Coverage provided by
Consultant shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance procured or maintained by City shall not be required to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied 1794
Contract No. C48060
6 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of City before the City’s own insurance or selfinsurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured. (D) City’s Rights of Enforcement. In the event any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications, or is canceled and not replaced, City has the right, but not the duty, to obtain the insurance it deems necessary, and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant, or City will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, City may terminate this Agreement.
(E) Acceptable Insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders’ Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VII (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City’s Risk Manager.
(F) Waiver of Subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against the City, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees, volunteers, and representatives or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against the City, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees, volunteers and representatives and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.
(G) Enforcement of Contract Provisions (non estoppel).

Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on the City nor does it waive any rights hereunder.
(H) Requirements Not Limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance.

Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City. (I) Notice of Cancellation. Consultant agrees to oblige its insurance agent or broker and insurers to provide City with a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which a ten (10) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage.
(J) Additional Insured Status. General liability, automobile liability, and if applicable, pollution liability and cyber liability, policies shall provide or be endorsed to provide that the City and its officers, officials, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives shall be additional insureds with regard to liability and defense of suits or claims 1795
Contract No. C48060
7 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
arising out of the performance of the Agreement, under such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies.
(K) Prohibition of Undisclosed Coverage Limitations. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing.
(L) Separation of Insureds. A severability of interests provision must apply for all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limits of liability. The policy(ies) shall not contain any cross-liability exclusions. (M) Pass Through Clause. Consultant agrees to ensure that its subconsultants, subcontractors, and any other party involved with the Project who is brought onto or involved in the Project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with subconsultants, subcontractors, and others engaged in the Project will be submitted to City for review.
(N) City’s Right to Revise Specifications. The City and the City’s Risk Manager reserve the right at any time during the term of the Agreement to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in additional cost to the Consultant, the City and Consultant may renegotiate Consultant’s compensation. If the City reduces the insurance requirements, the change shall go into effect immediately and require no advanced written notice. (O) Self-Insured Retentions. Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. City reserves the right to require that self-insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self-insurance will not be considered to comply with these specifications unless approved by City. (P) Timely Notice of Claims. Consultant shall give City prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Consultant’s performance under this Agreement, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies.
(Q) Additional Insurance. Consultant shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the Services.

3.2.12 Water Quality Management and Compliance. Consultant shall keep itself and all subcontractors, staff, and employees fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations that may impact, or be implicated by the performance of the Services including, without limitation, all applicable provisions of the City’s ordinances regulating water quality and storm water; the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. § 1251, et seq.); the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Water Code § 13000 et seq.); and any and all regulations, policies, or permits issued pursuant to any such authority.

Consultant must comply with the lawful requirements of the City, and any other municipality, drainage district, or other local agency with jurisdiction over the location where the Services are 1796
Contract No. C48060
8 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
to be conducted, regulating water quality and storm water discharges. Failure to comply with laws, regulations, and ordinances listed in this Section is a violation of federal and state law. Consultant warrants that all employees and subcontractors shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the work assigned to them without impacting water quality in violation of the laws, regulations, and policies of this Section.

3.3 Fees and Payments.

3.3.1 Compensation. Contractor shall receive compensation, including authorized reimbursements, for all Services rendered under this Agreement at the rates set forth in Exhibit “C” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The total compensation shall not exceed ONE HUNDRED, AND THIRTY-NINE THOUSAND AND SEVENTY-SIX DOLLARS ($139,076) without written approval of the City Council or City Manager, as applicable.

3.3.2 Payment of Compensation. Consultant shall submit to City monthly invoices which provide a detailed description of the Services and hours rendered by Consultant.

City shall, within 30 days of receiving such invoice, review the invoice and pay all non-disputed and approved charges. If the City disputes any of Consultant's fees, the City shall give written notice to Consultant within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth therein. Payment shall not constitute acceptance of any Services completed by Consultant. The making of final payment shall not constitute a waiver of any claims by the City for any reason whatsoever.

3.3.3 Reimbursement for Expenses. Consultant shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing by City or included in Exhibit "C" of this Agreement.

3.3.4 Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, City may request that Consultant perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work which is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which the Parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement.

Consultant shall not perform, nor be compensated for, Extra Work without written authorization from the City.

3.4 Labor Code Requirements.

3.4.1 Prevailing Wages. Consultant is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Section 1720, et seq., and 1770, et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000, et seq., ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on "public works" and "maintenance" projects. If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, Consultant agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. City shall provide Consultant with a copy of the prevailing rates of per diem wages in effect at the commencement of this Agreement. Consultant shall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the Services available to interested parties upon request and shall post copies at the Consultant's principal place of business and at the project site. It is the intent of the parties to effectuate the requirements of sections 1771, 1774, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1813, and 1815 of the Labor Code within this Agreement, and Consultant shall therefore comply with such Labor Code sections to the fullest extent required by law. Consultant shall defend, indemnify, and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives, free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws.
1797
Contract No. C48060
9 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1

3.4.2 Registration/DIR Compliance. If the Services are being performed on a public works project of over $25,000 when the project is for construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work, or a public works project of over $15,000 when the project is for maintenance work, in addition to the foregoing, then pursuant to Labor Code sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, the Consultant and all subconsultants must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). Consultant shall maintain registration for the duration of the Project and require the same of any subconsultants. This Project may also be subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR. It shall be Consultant’s sole responsibility to comply with all applicable registration and labor compliance requirements, including the submission of payroll records directly to the DIR. Any stop orders issued by the DIR against Consultant or any subconsultant that affect Consultant’s performance of Services, including any delay, shall be Consultant’s sole responsibility. Any delay arising out of or resulting from such stop orders shall be considered Consultant caused delay and shall not be compensable by the City. Consultant shall defend, indemnify, and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of stop orders issued by the DIR against Consultant or any subconsultant.

3.4.3 Labor Certification. By its signature hereunder, Consultant certifies that it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Services.

3.5 Accounting Records.

3.5.1 Maintenance and Inspection. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all costs and expenses incurred under this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of City during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement.

3.6 General Provisions.

3.6.1 Termination of Agreement.

3.6.1.1 Grounds for Termination. City may, by written notice to Consultant, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof, at least seven (7) days before the effective date of such termination. Upon termination, Consultant shall be compensated only for those Services which have been performed in accordance with this Agreement to the date of termination, and Consultant shall be entitled to no further compensation.

Consultant may not terminate this Agreement except for cause. The rights and remedies of the City provided in this section shall not be exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law, equity or under this Agreement.

3.6.1.2 Effect of Termination. If this Agreement is terminated as provided herein, City may require Consultant to provide all finished or unfinished Documents and Data and other information of any kind prepared by Consultant in connection with the performance of Services under this Agreement. Consultant shall be required to provide such document and 1798
Contract No. C48060
10 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
other information within fifteen (15) days of the request, provided, however, City pays Consultant for its Services performed in accordance with this Agreement.

3.6.1.3 Early Termination. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, if for any fiscal year of this Agreement the City Council fails to appropriate or allocate funds for future payment under the Agreement after exercising reasonable efforts to do so, the City may upon seven (7) days’ written notice, order work on the Project to cease. Upon termination, Consultant shall be compensated only for those Services which have been performed in accordance with this Agreement y, and Consultant shall be entitled to no further compensation.

3.6.1.4 Additional Services. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided herein, City may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated.

3.6.2 Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose:

Consultant: FEHR & PEERS
3750 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 225
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
ATTN: JASON D. PACK, PRINCIPAL
City: City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578
ATTN: Nick Melloni, Development Services Department
Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service.

3.6.3 Ownership of Materials and Confidentiality.

3.6.3.1 Documents & Data; Licensing of Intellectual Property. This Agreement creates a non-exclusive and perpetual license for City to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sublicense any and all copyrights, designs, and other intellectual property embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant under this Agreement ("Documents & Data"). All Documents & Data shall be and remain the property of City and shall not be used in whole or in substantial part by Consultant on other projects without the City’s express written permission. Within thirty (30) days following the completion, suspension, abandonment or termination of this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to City reproducible copies of all Documents & Data, in a form and amount required by City. City reserves the right to select the method of document reproduction and to establish where the reproduction will be accomplished. The reproduction expense shall be borne by City at the actual cost of duplication. In the event of a dispute regarding the amount of compensation to which the Consultant is entitled under the termination provisions of this Agreement, Consultant shall provide all Documents & Data to City upon payment of the undisputed amount. Consultant 1799
Contract No. C48060
11 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
shall have no right to retain or fail to provide to City any such documents pending resolution of the dispute. In addition, Consultant shall retain copies of all Documents & Data on file for a minimum of fifteen (15) years following completion of the Project and shall make copies available to City upon the payment of actual reasonable duplication costs. Before destroying the Documents & Data following this retention period, Consultant shall make a reasonable effort to notify City and provide City with the opportunity to obtain the documents.

3.6.3.2 Subconsultants. Consultant shall require all subconsultants to agree in writing that City is granted a non-exclusive and perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subconsultant prepares under this Agreement. Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant has the legal right to license any and all Documents & Data. Consultant makes no such representation and warranty in regard to Documents & Data which were prepared by professionals other than Consultant or its subconsultants, or those provided to Consultant by the City.

3.6.3.3 Right to Use. City shall not be limited in any way in its use or reuse of the Documents and Data or any part of them at any time for purposes of this Project or another project, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement or on a project other than this Project without employing the services of Consultant shall be at City’s sole risk. If City uses or reuses the Documents & Data on any project other than this Project, it shall remove the Consultant’s seal from the Documents & Data and indemnify and hold harmless Consultant and its officers, directors, agents, and employees from claims arising out of the negligent use or re-use of the Documents & Data on such other project. Consultant shall be responsible and liable for its Documents & Data, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, only with respect to the condition of the Documents & Data at the time they are provided to the City upon completion, suspension, abandonment, or termination. Consultant shall not be responsible or liable for any revisions to the Documents & Data made by any party other than Consultant, a party for whom the Consultant is legally responsible or liable, or anyone approved by the Consultant.

3.6.3.4 Indemnification – Documents and Data. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, volunteers, agents and representatives free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, for any alleged infringement of any patent, copyright, trade secret, trade name, trademark, or any other proprietary right of any person or entity in consequence of the use on the Project by City of the Documents & Data, including any method, process, product, or concept specified or depicted.

3.6.3.5 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents & Data either created by or provided to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Consultant. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of City, be used by Consultant for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or the Project. Nothing furnished to Consultant which is otherwise known to Consultant or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. Consultant shall not use City's name or insignia, photographs of the Project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services or the Project in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of City. 1800
Contract No. C48060
12 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1

3.6.3.6 Confidential Information. The City shall refrain from releasing Consultant’s proprietary information ("Proprietary Information") unless the City's legal counsel determines that the release of the Proprietary Information is required by the California Public Records Act or other applicable state or federal law, or order of a court of competent jurisdiction, in which case the City shall notify Consultant of its intention to release Proprietary Information. Consultant shall have five (5) working days after receipt of the release notice to give City written notice of Consultant's objection to the City's release of Proprietary Information.

Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, and its officers, directors, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives from and against all liability, loss, cost or expense (including attorney’s fees) arising out of a legal action brought to compel the release of Proprietary Information. City shall not release the Proprietary Information after receipt of an objection notice unless either: (1) Consultant fails to fully indemnify, defend (with City's choice of legal counsel), and hold City harmless from any legal action brought to compel such release; and/or (2) a final and non-appealable order by a court of competent jurisdiction requires that City release such information.

3.6.4 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, appropriate, or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement.

3.6.5 [Reserved]

3.6.6 Indemnification.

3.6.6.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall defend (with counsel of City’s reasonable choosing), indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, volunteers, agents, and representatives free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of, pertaining to, or incident to any negligent acts, errors or omissions, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, subconsultants or agents in connection with the performance of the Consultant’s Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all reasonable expert witness fees, attorney’s fees and other related costs and expenses except such loss or damage caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement and shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Consultant, the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers, or representatives.

3.6.6.2 If Consultant’s obligation to defend, indemnify, and/or hold harmless arises out of Consultant’s performance as a “design professional” (as that term is defined under Civil Code section 2782.8), then, and only to the extent required by Civil Code section 2782.8, which is fully incorporated herein, Consultant’s indemnification obligation shall be limited to claims to the extent they arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant. Consultant’s liability for such claim, including the cost to defend, shall not exceed the Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault.

3.6.7 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings, or agreements.

3.6.8 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County.
1801
Contract No. C48060
13 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1

3.6.9 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement.

3.6.10 City's Right to Employ Other Consultants. City reserves right to employ other consultants in connection with this Project.

3.6.11 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the Parties.

3.6.12 Assignment; Subcontracting. Consultant shall not assign, sublet, or transfer this Agreement or any rights under or interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the City, which may be withheld for any reason. Any attempt to so assign or so transfer without such consent shall be void and without legal effect and shall constitute grounds for termination. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the Services required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of City.

Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement.

3.6.13 Construction; References; Captions. Since the Parties or their agents have participated fully in the preparation of this Agreement, the language of this Agreement shall be construed simply, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any Party. Any term referencing time, days or period for performance shall be deemed calendar days and not workdays. All references to Consultant include all personnel, employees, agents, and subconsultants of Consultant, except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. All references to City include its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers, and representatives except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. The captions of the various articles and paragraphs are for convenience and ease of reference only, and do not define, limit, augment, or describe the scope, content, or intent of this Agreement.

3.6.14 Amendment; Modification. No supplement, modification, or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by both Parties.

3.6.15 Waiver. No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any other default or breach, whether of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver, benefit, privilege, or service voluntarily given or performed by a Party shall give the other Party any contractual rights by custom, estoppel, or otherwise.

3.6.16 No Third-Party Beneficiaries. There are no intended third-party beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties.

3.6.17 Invalidity; Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect.

3.6.18 Prohibited Interests. Consultant maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Consultant warrants that it has not paid, nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer, or employee of City, during the term of his or her service 1802
Contract No. C48060
14 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
with City, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom.

3.6.19 Authority to Enter Agreement. Consultant has all requisite power and authority to conduct its business and to execute, deliver, and perform the Agreement. Each Party warrants that the individuals who have signed this Agreement have the legal power, right, and authority to make this Agreement and bind each respective Party.

3.6.20 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original.

3.6.21 Survival. All rights and obligations hereunder that by their nature are to continue after any expiration or termination of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the indemnification obligations, shall survive any such expiration or termination. [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
1803
Contract No. C48060
15 Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1

SIGNATURE PAGE TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT

AND FEHR & PEERS
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first above written.

CITY OF PALM DESERT
By:

L. Todd Hileman
City Manager
Attest:

By:

Anthony J. Mejia
City Clerk
Approved as to form:

By:

Isra Shah
Best Best & Krieger LLP
City Attorney
FEHR &PEERS, an S Corporation
By:

Sarah Brandenberg
Vice President
By:

Lysa Wollard
Chief Financial Officer / Treasurer
QC: MN
Insurance:
_________
Initial Review
_________
Final Approval
1804
Contract No. C48060
Exhibit “A”
Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
EXHIBIT “A”

SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Consultant shall provide full professional services to assist the City of Palm Desert Development Services Staff with an update of the City’s Circulation Element, also known as the Mobility Element of the General Plan.

Task 1: Project Management
Task 1.1: Kick-Off Meeting
The consultant will work with the City’s Project Manager to schedule a project kickoff meeting.

The consultant will prepare a draft agenda to discuss the project schedule and goals, and to confirm the approach to the transportation technical analyses, including travel demand modeling assumptions, roadway network scenarios, and the analysis scenario years. The team will also discuss available data sources and traffic count locations. Additionally, the consultant will discuss contract management and invoicing to ensure timely submittal pf invoices in accordance with City requirements.

Task 1.2: Regular Project Meetings
Recurring monthly meetings will be scheduled between the consultant and City staff to review analyses, deliverables, discuss findings, raise any issues or concerns, and provide an update on next steps.

Task 1.3: Contract Management
The consultant will submit monthly progress reports and invoices. The progress reports will recap work associated with the monthly invoice.

Task 1 Deliverables:

1.Kick-Off Meeting Agenda, including project schedule, data needs, regular status updates/meetings, and invoicing.

2.Monthly check-in calls/meetings (agendas and meeting minutes will be provided).

3.Monthly invoices and progress reports.

Task 2: Existing Conditions
Task 2.1: Data Collection and Review
The consultant’s initial review will include a review of relevant documents including the current General Plan, recent CEQA documents, regional planning documents (such as the Congestion Management Plan (CMP), Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), Area and Specific Plans, documents prepared by CVAG, local transit/active transportation plans, recent traffic impact studies prepared for new development, and any other planning documents that would provide additional information relative to the Circulation Update effort. The purpose of this review is to identify existing data needs and determine which of the previous data collection and mapping efforts can be employed in this analysis.

Task 2.2: Existing Conditions Assessment
Using the data collected in Task 2.1, a background technical report will be prepared documenting existing conditions in the area. This will include a regulatory context summarizing recent legislative requirements the General Plan should consider, existing roadway network classifications, existing and proposed active transportation facilities, transit service, existing truck and rail facilities, and relevant census information such as commute trip information, mode split information, and relative locations of where Palm Desert residents work and vice versa. Key issues and opportunities will be documented in this report. This report will also summarize the Streetlight traffic count data on study roadway segments and will highlight areas where traffic counts have changed significantly since the 2016 assessment was completed. 1805
Contract No. C48060
Exhibit “A”
Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
The consultant will prepare a draft background technical report and submit it to the City for one round of consolidated comments.

Task 2.3: Safety Assessment
The consultant will analyze publicly available collision information to summarize roadway collision trends that will assist in identifying a High Injury Network (HIN) as required by SB 932. This HIN network will be used to supplement and inform policies in this element update. The consultant will also work with the City to better understand and reference the City’s Vision Zero Strategy study.

These findings will be provided in a series of charts that will be included in the existing conditions background technical report.

Task 2.4: Update Travel Demand Model
The consultant will utilize either the latest version of the RIVCOM travel demand model or the previously developed City model for this effort. Next, any proposed changes in land use and the roadway network will be updated in the model. The model will be used to compare the Adopted General Plan Circulation Element and the proposed Circulation Element Update with any associated land use changes.

It is anticipated that this traffic model will be employed for the following purposes:
•Testing roadway network and classification alternatives •Analyzing the level of service at study roadway segments •Forecasting VMT for the City using a couple of different methods. This can be used to better understand how VMT can/should be incorporated into the City’s policy document and to help inform VMT guidelines for the City.

Task 2 Deliverables:

1.List and map of study segments for Streetlight data collection

2.Draft background technical report, including safety assessment

3.Final background technical report, including safety assessment Task 3: Alternatives Development
Task 3.1: Engagement & Coordination
The consultant will meet with City Staff, and other agencies, to review transportation network issues and needs based on existing and expected network operations. This engagement must include collaboration SunLine Transit Agency for a variety of public transit solutions. Additionally, the consultant will hold one council workshop to review current issues and potential opportunities with various stakeholders.

Task 3.2: Roadway Network Alternatives Development
It is anticipated that up to two (2) proposed alternatives will be developed consisting of roadway network, lane, classification, and/or truck routing changes. The updated travel demand model will be used to determine a single preferred roadway network alternative for a future year model. The consultant will discuss with City Staff the appropriate approach to developing forecasts for this effort.

Task 3 Deliverables:

1. Council issues and opportunities workshop materials and attendance

2. Memorandum documenting input from stakeholders, proposed alternatives, and VMT differences for each alternative
Task 4: SB 743 Transportation Impact Assessment Guidelines The consultant shall prepare updated Transportation Study Guidelines that cover both the CEQA requirements under SB 743, as well as the City’s desire to maintain Level of Service (LOS) requirements. The consultant will review the City’s current Transportation Study Guidelines and state requirements provided by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 1806
Contract No. C48060
Exhibit “A”
Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
The consultant will prepare detailed guidelines that explain how to prepare a VMT assessment for screening out projects, as well as how to prepare a VMT analysis for projects that do not screen out. The consultant will also work with City Staff to identify areas of the City where the LOS expectations may need to change. Changes will be incorporated into the Transportation Study Guidelines. Maps will be prepared to identify development locations that screen out of VMT assessment.

Task 4 Deliverables:

1.Draft Transportation Study Guidelines

2.Final Transportation Study Guidelines
Task 5: Roadway Network Recommendations
Task 5.1: Roadway Network Alternatives Modeling
The consultant will model up to two roadway network changes. As part of this exercise, they will calculate the VMT changes associated with the roadway network alternatives.

Task 5.2: Roadway Classifications and Roadway Network Recommendations The consultant will review the results of the alternative roadway network analyses and develop recommendations for altering functional operations and mobility within each roadway classification. These recommendations may consist of changes to roadway classifications or network changes, such as vacating roadway segments, adding or reducing capacity to existing roadways, and/or safety or operational improvements. These changes will consider potential effects on other transportation modes, such as pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit. The consultant will also review existing truck routes and recommend changes to support industrial development and goods movement. Changes will also include a review of roadway cross-sections to ensure consistency within the General Plan (e.g. consistency with the area plans within the document) and consistency with other planning documents in the City (like the ATP).

Task 5 Deliverables:

1.Draft Technical Memorandum recommending changes to roadway classifications and/or the City roadway network

2.VMT modeling showing change in VMT

3. Present proposed changes (a PowerPoint presentation and present at one (1) meeting)

4.Final Technical Memorandum recommending changes to roadway classifications and/or the City roadway network with input from meeting incorporated per City Staff’s direction Task 6: Circulation Element Update:

Based on recommendations provided in Task 5 and discussions with City Staff, the consultant will develop an initial set of transportation policies related to various items for incorporating into the Circulation Element Update, including but not limited to:
•VMT transportation impacts
•Level of Service (LOS)
•Maximum allowable roadway cross sections
•Consistency with other state laws (e.g. SB 330, SB 35) •Coachella Valley Passenger Rail Service
•Transit System including an evaluation of existing and proposed transit lines •Collaboration with SunLine Transit Agency for a variety of public transit solutions •Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
•Safety and Vision Zero Strategies
•Emergency Evacuation Routes
These policy changes will address changes in state law, specifically AB 1358 (Complete Streets requirement), SB 932 (Safe Systems and Vision Zero Approach requirement), SB 743, and SB 330 (clarifying roadway improvement requirements for new housing developments). 1807
Contract No. C48060
Exhibit “A”
Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
The consultant will develop the initial policies and present these policies to City Staff for review.

The consultant will combine the information developed in the previous tasks into a comprehensive Circulation Element (including text, graphics, and policies). An implementation matrix will also be prepared to align action steps with added and edited policies.

Task 6 Deliverables:
1Draft Circulation Element Update and Implementation Matrix

2.Final Circulation Element Update Implementation Matrix Task 7: CEQA
The focus of the project will be to update the Circulation Element of the General Plan to create better guidance on meeting Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) reductions, improve safety by incorporating Vision Zero, and review of the policies to ensure they meet the needs of the City.

The project consultant shall prepare the necessary documentation to ensure compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Consultant shall prepare necessary steps for compliance with Senate Bill-18 Tribal Consultation. Completion of the SB 18 process is needed prior to acting on the project.

This scope does not include:
•Public distribution of document
•Attendance at public hearings
•Copies
•Filing fees
•Technical studies (i.e. traffic, AQ, GHG, Noise)
Task 7 Deliverables:

1.Administrative Draft and Public Draft Addendum, SB-18 Tribal Consultation Letters, Notice of Determination, Notice of Completion.
1808
Contract No. C48060
Exhibit “B”
Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
EXHIBIT "B"

SCHEDULE OF SERVICES
(SEE FOLLOWING PAGE)
1809
Contract No. C48060
Exhibit “C”
Revised 07-2023
BBK 72500.00001\32374915.1
EXHIBIT "C"

COMPENSATION
In the event that this Agreement is renewed pursuant to Section 3.1.2, the rates set forth above may be increased or reduced each year at the time of renewal, but any increase shall not exceed the Consumer Price Index, All Urban Consumers, Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA. (SEE FOLLOWING PAGE)
1810
From: CouncilMeeting Comments
To: Michelle Nance
Subject: FW: COMMENTS TO PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL - JULY 11, 2024 Date: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 11:24:19 AM
Attachments: We sent you safe versions of your files.msg REFUGE CNCL MTG JUL 11.docx
REFUGE TIMELINE ...docx
From: Jana Bennehoof Koroczynsky
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 6:30 PM
To: CouncilMeeting Comments <[email protected]> Subject: COMMENTS TO PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL - JULY 11, 2024 Mimecast Attachment Protection has deemed this file to be safe, but always exercise caution when opening files.

‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ Please see the attached letter to council and attached timeline of impacts on Kaufman Broad and Shepherd Lane neighborhoods that goes along with the letter.

Thank you,
Jana Koroczynsky
Representing more than 60 households in Kaufman Broad and Shepherd Lane neighborhoods
1811
Jana Koroczynsky city council comments July 11, 2024
(1) Flooding hazard
(2) Devaluation of property
(3) Privacy and safety loss
(4) Statutory non-compliance
(5) Negligence
(6) Loss of views
On Friday last week Richard Cannone informed me that the city code of ordinance § 28.02.040 dealing with methods of reducing flood losses refers to existing designated flood zones only. Okay. Why on earth would it not refer to any construction in this current climate? He also said that both the contract City Engineer and an independent Engineering firm thoroughly reviewed the drainage plans for Refuge and concluded that the drainage design is effective and meets requirements. We insist that there be a certification of the grading, in conformance with the lines and grades shown on the approved grading plans, by a licensed land surveyor before Palm Desert city council approves the final tract map.

We have never experienced flooding in past 28 years, but we have never had a man-made 11-foot-high mountain or a flood channel behind our back wall. We have a water drainage specialist who says we will be flooded with a 3” per hour rainfall.

The city, the developer of Refuge Palm Desert/Explore, and the PulteGroup have violated tort law according to the state of California civil codes 3479¹ and 3480², by creating a public nuisance behind both neighboring Kaufman and Broad and Shepherd Lane community walls.

Elevating the landscape to the south of Pulte’s property by eleven feet was supposedly to solve a drainage problem on their property. But actually it was to save the cost of soil export and one storm lift station. Pulte has created flooding, safety, privacy issues, as well as loss of views and devaluation of property for the neighboring communities, not to mention emotional distress.

City officials, MSA and the developer, either by incompetence, negligence or intention, kept key information pertinent to the raised elevation hidden from the people who could interpret that information. When the danger to the communities was revealed, they showed little interest in addressing concerns. Who will take financial responsibility for future damages?
Instead of taking the opportunity to correct its errors, despite the consequences being potentially far-reaching and severe, until very recently the city has done nothing but obfuscate for the past two years. The integrity of the city in which the citizens of KB and SL chose to live is seriously in question.

City governments exist to create order, fairness, and accountability. Non-compliance leads to the instability of our community. I respectfully ask city council to reconsider their mantra of: “It has all been approved, there is nothing that can be done.”
¹Civil code 3479 is a section of the California Civil Code that defines nuisance as anything that harms health, offends the senses, obstructs the free use of property or public spaces, or involves the illegal sale of controlled substances. It is not related to the Louisiana Civil Code section 3479, which deals with the particular successor of a precarious possessor. The California Civil Code section 3479 has not changed since 2012. ²California Civ. Code 3480 “A public nuisance is one which affects at the same time an entire community or neighborhood, or any considerable number of persons, although the extent of the annoyance or damage inflicted upon individuals may be unequal.” Taken from the city website on July 4, 2024
City code of ordinance § 28.02.040 Methods of reducing flood losses.

In order to accomplish its purposes, this title includes methods and provisions to:

A. Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety, and property due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or flood heights or velocities; B. Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities, which serve such uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction;
D. Control filling, grading, dredging, and other development which, may increase flood damage; and E. Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert floodwaters or which may increase flood hazards in other areas. (Ord. 985 § 1, 2001)
1812
According to the Refuge Specific Plan, these policies (among others) have been violated:

6.4 Applicable Environmental Resources Policy Consistency

1. 2.1 View corridor preservation. Protect and preserve existing, signature views of the hills and mountains from the city.

6.6 Applicable Safety Policy Consistency

1. 3.1 Flood Risk in New Development. Require all new development to minimize flood risk with siting and design measures, such as grading that prevents adverse drainage impacts to adjacent properties, on-site retention of runoff, and minimization of structures located in floodplains.

6.7 Applicable Public Utilities and Services Policy Consistency

2. 1.2 On-site stormwater retention and infiltration. Whenever possible, stormwater shall be infiltrated, evapotranspirated, reused or treated onsite in other ways that improve stormwater quality and reduce flows into the storm drain system.

3. 1.3 Groundwater infiltration. Encourage the use of above-ground and natural stormwater facilities in new development and redevelopment, such as vegetated swales and permeable paving.

4. 7.2 Review of new development. Work with the Riverside County Sherriff’s Department and the Riverside County Fire Department to review and modify development proposals to incorporate defensible space, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED), and other public safety design concepts into new development.

Please see our indented comments in staff report below:

CITY OF PALM DESERT STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: July 11, 2024
PREPARED BY: Rosie Lua, Deputy Director of Development Services REQUEST: ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 38434-1 AND

AGREEMENTS
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt a resolution entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM

DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP OF FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 38434-1.”

2. Authorize the Mayor to execute Agreement for the construction and maintenance of a portion of public right of way

3. Authorize the City Attorney to make necessary, non-monetary changes to the Agreements and City Manager to execute any changes to said Agreements. *
Note: This item may be pulled from the agenda if the final attachments are not provided by Wednesday, July 10, 2024.

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:

On November 17, 2022, the City Council approved the Refuge Specific Plan (SP22-0001), a request by Refuge Palm Desert, LLC (Applicant), 17755 Sky Park Cir, Ste 101, Irvine, CA 92614 to establish five (5) planning areas, up to 969 residential dwelling units and related improvements on a 106.4-acre site located at the southwest corner of Gerald Ford Drive and Rembrandt Parkway. Concurrently, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map 38434 (TTM 38434) by Resolution No. 2022-93, to subdivide a 93.56-acre portion of the proposed site into 1 condominium lot (14.29 acres) and 339 single family residential lots and its associated club house, open space, retention basins, and infrastructure (approximately 78 acres).

August 23, 2022 Letter from MSA
Letter inviting neighboring communities to review project that was submitted for approval to the city.

Refuge project Concerns discussed: dust, traffic, views and drainage (flooding).

Eglert spoke at first meeting primarily about safety, privacy loss with their view right into our homes. 1813
(Many people in neighborhood throw away “junk mail” without even opening it. Many thought the mail in MSA envelope was junk mail. The Refuge plan was reviewed and planned without many in the neighboring communities even knowing about it. Why was mail not sent by the city?) October 2022 Planning commissioners told concerns were: dust, traffic, views. No mention of drainage concerns.

November 17, 2022 City Council approves Refuge Specific Plan based on planning commissioners recommendation. Neighboring communities were not notified and unaware.

On September 5, 2023, the Planning Commission approved by Resolution No. 2841, a request to modify the layout to reduce the previously approved TTM 38434 to 332 single family residential lots and modify pad elevations. On March 5, 2024, the Planning Commission approved by Resolution No. 2859, an additional request by the Applicant to modify pad elevations. On March 5, 2024, the Planning Commission approved by Resolution No. 2859, an additional request by the Applicant to modify pad elevations.

Sept 5, 2023 Letter from city to KB and SL neighborhoods. Public hearing before the Planning Commission at council chambers about Pulte Homes to revise tract map to “modify the layout to accommodate a 332 singlefamily home residential development on a 93.56 acre project site south of Gerald Ford Drive and west of Portola Road within existing Refuge Specific Plan area.”
Many went to website “Refuge” where they saw the following and did not bother attending the meeting:

TTM 38434 identified Lot A as a
private open space lot totaling 1.16
acres. However, a portion of Lot A of
TTM 38434, approximately 0.13 acres
or 5,821 square feet is public right of
way (Explorer Drive) which is owned
by the City of Palm Desert (City); now
considered as excess right of way. The
Refuge Specific Plan included a vehicular circulation plan that designed a curvature of the proposed future extension of Explorer Drive, which created an excess portion of right of way. At a future date the city intends to convey the 0.13-acre excess right of way to the Applicant.

Resolution No. 2022-93 and subsequent approvals did not include conditions of approval for Lot A. Final Tract Map 38434-1 omits the 0.13-acre excess right of way within Lot A for the approval and recordation of the map. Upon approval, the City will enter into an agreement with the Applicant for maintenance and infrastructure obligations of the excess right of way, which will remain in effect until the City conveys the

0.13 acres to the Applicant.

In addition, the City processed and approved an application for a Parcel Map Waiver (PMW23- 0006) for a lot line adjustment creating the boundaries of the condominium lot (14.29 acres) identified in TTM 38434.

The Certificate of Compliance and perfecting deeds have been recorded in the official records of Riverside County.

The Final Tract Map No. 38434-1 (FTM 38434-1) is a phased portion of the map that includes 135 single family residential lots, 10 public street and infrastructure lots, 11 lots of open space including retention basins, and 1 lot to include the club house (approximately 38.23 acres). The phasing of the TTM 38434 was permissive through Condition of Approval No. 21 of Resolution No. 2022-93 with approval of the City Engineer and financial securities for all public improvements associated with the phase.

The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) of the Homeowner’s Association (HOA) documents the maintenance obligations for the proposed site which includes maintaining all lots reserved for open space, landscaping and storm drain purposes, and all landscaping located in the public right of way adjacent to private property and within medians and roundabouts within the community.

The Subdivision Improvement Agreements (SIA) and Grading Agreement and associated bonds subsequently were submitted by the applicant to guarantee the completion of construction. The City 1814
Engineer has determined that FTM 38434-1 meets the application requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the City’s ordinances. The Final Map has been deemed technically correct by the City Engineer and the Conditions of Approval in Resolution have been satisfied for FTM 38434-1.

Violates tort law according to the state of California civil codes 3479 and 3480, by creating a public nuisance behind both neighboring Kaufman and Broad and Shepherd Lane community walls. We insist that the certification of the grading in conformance with the lines and grades shown on the approved grading plans by the licensed land surveyor before Palm Desert city council approves the final tract map.

Legal Review: This report has been reviewed by the City Attorney’s office.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no direct impact to the General Fund with this action. However, once the proposed public streets are completed and accepted, their long-term maintenance will be the responsibility of the City of Palm Desert.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2024-____ 2. Conditions of Approval of Resolution Nos. 2022-93, 2841, and 2859 3. Tentative Tract Map 38434 4. Final Tract Map 38434-1 City of Palm Desert Adopt Resolution Approving Final Tract Map No. 38434-1 Page 3 of 3
1815
Approval Process and Confusion
The approval process for this project has been confusing at best. Letters came from MSA, the city and, eventually, Pulte. Pulte mentioned Del Webb and Explore (see letter dated May 3), names we did not hear before.

The city planning manager insists that the project name is still Refuge, but the city public works inspector insists it is Explore. The “if you see dust” sign on the property on Gerald Ford Drive says Explore.

Plans signed off by Mainero Smith & Associates (MSA), were submitted by Pulte to the city for final approval on March 7, 2024, and approved by the city on April 24, 2024. As mentioned earlier, many of our residents say they have no recollection of receiving the letter about a public meeting on March 5, 2024 regarding elevation changes.

TIMELINE REFUGE PROJECT
August 23, 2022 Letter from MSA
Letter inviting neighboring communities to review project that was submitted for approval to the city.

Refuge project Concerns discussed: dust, traffic, views and drainage (flooding).

Eglert spoke at first meeting primarily about safety, privacy loss with their view right into our homes. (Many people in neighborhood throw away “junk mail” without even opening it. Many thought the mail in MSA envelope was junk mail. The Refuge plan was reviewed and planned without many in the neighboring communities even knowing about it. Why was mail not sent by the city?)
October 2022 Planning commissioners told concerns were dust, traffic, views. No mention of drainage concerns.

November 2022 City Council approves Refuge Specific Plan based on planning commissioners’ recommendation.

Neighboring communities were not notified and unaware.

August 2, 2023 Letter from MSA
Neighboring communities invited to view video conference at 5:30-9:30 about Refuge wanting to “revise the existing Tentative Tract Map 38434 under the approved Refuge Palm Desert Specific Plan. Tentative Tract Map 38434 is comprised of 93.56+/- acres of property, located on the … , as shown on the enclosed map. (There was no enclosed map.) Pulte Group was introduced as a partner to build homes.

The meeting was supposed to begin at 5:30 PM but did not begin until after 6:30 PM. (see email chain below) “Walkway will be publicly accessible,” Marc Kleiman who also said, “You may also find preliminary information related to the project at Refuge.com”
Maria Torres email July 3, 2024 “We also tried to participate in the Aug 2, 2023, meeting regarding small changes which Nicole wouldn’t tell us about prior to meeting, but though they said 6pm we stayed online till 6:30pm and nothing and later we requested video. I’ll send you the email with the link.” See email chain below.

From: Vann, Nicole <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 3, 2023 10:55 AM
To: Eglert Gutierrez <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Refuge PD [2636-MSA1.KJrl]
Good morning Mr. Gutierrez,
Per your request, please find a link to the recorded meeting here: Refuge Palm Desert Community Meeting Link (080223) You may want to forward the recording to the 6:30 mark since that is when the meeting really starts.

Best,
Nicole Vann
Planner / Project Manager
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
34200 Bob Hope Drive | Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
office 760.320.9811
From: Eglert Gutierrez <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2023 6:32 PM
To: Vann, Nicole <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Refuge PD [2636-MSA1.KJrl]
Hello Nicole,
I could not access the meeting on zoom, couldn’t hear anything, yet the screen said it was recording. Please send me access to your recorded meeting.

Thank you,
Eglert Gutierrez
(760) 851-7314
From: Vann, Nicole <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2023 11:28 AM
1816
To: Eglert Gutierrez <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Refuge PD [2636-MSA1.KJrl]
Good morning Mr. Gutierrez,
There are no exhibits in advance of the 8/2 meeting. The purpose of the community meeting is to present the plan to members of the community in a forum where the minor changes can be properly explained and discussed. It would be counterproductive to that goal to send the site plan out prior to the meeting. We hope you understand, and we look forward to discussing it with you then. If for some reason you would like to discuss this, or anything else, in advance of the meeting, please feel free to reach out to Marc Kleiman at 949.400.6652.

Here is the link to the zoom meeting.

Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/98123377836?pwd=TFAvVUdtTTVsaXRvMGhrMTFCTnV4QT09 Meeting ID: 981 2337 7836
Passcode: 152658
When
Wednesday Aug 2, 2023 ⋅ 5:30pm – 9:30pm (Pacific Time - Los Angeles) Kind regards,
Nicole Vann
Planner / Project Manager
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
34200 Bob Hope Drive | Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
office 760.320.9811
From: Eglert Gutierrez <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2023 2:40 PM
To: Vann, Nicole <[email protected]>
Subject: Refuge PD
Hello Nicole,
Please let me know how we can access the August 2 meeting and also how to see exhibits.

Thank you,
Eglert Gutierrez
(760) 851-7314
Sept 5, 2023 Letter from city
Public hearing before the Planning Commission about Pulte Homes to revise tract map to “modify the layout to accommodate a 332 single-family home residential development on a 93.56 acre project site south of Gerald Ford Drive and west of Portola Road within existing Refuge Specific Plan area.” Many in neighborhoods went to website “Refuge” where they saw the following and did not bother attending the meeting:

Taken from City Council agenda for July 11, 2024 meeting:

September 5, 2023, the Planning Commission approved by Resolution No. 2841, a request to modify the layout to reduce the previously approved TTM 38434 to 332 single family residential lots and modify pad elevations. On March 5, 2024, the Planning Commission approved by Resolution No. 2859, an additional request by the Applicant to modify pad elevations.

March 5, 2024 Letter from city (This is the meeting that most in community do not remember receiving a letter.) Public hearing before Planning Commission to consider approved pad elevations for tentative tract map 38434 to accommodate a 332 single-family home residential development on a 93.56 acre project site south of … “ Meeting was to “consider a request by Pulte Home Company to revise the approved pad elevations. 1817
Email from Linda Candler to Carlos Flores regarding the March 5, 2024 meeting:

June 28, 2024
Carlos Flores, Principal Planner
City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260
Dear Mr. Flores:

I am requesting a review and inspection of the Refuge rough grading as it is inconsistent with the approved plans. I also request that you reopen the Planning Commission hearings for the March 5, 2024 Rough Grading Plan and May 21, 2024 Revised Landscape Plan because these plans are inconsistent with each other. My concerns are set out below.

At the meeting on the Landscape Plan on May 21, 2024, I objected to the Revised Landscape Plan proposing to change the landscape buffer from 50’ to 45’ as this would bring the slope closer to our property, impacting our views and creating more dust. As shown on Exhibit EE to the November 17, 2022 Specific Plan (p. 902), there is a 7’ elevation gain behind our Lot.

When asked by the Planning Commission if the 7’ elevation gain was correct, the answer was no. I understand this may have been a misunderstanding, but can you please correct the record.

As it is now graded, the slope starts 22’ from our back wall. This is inconsistent with a Site Line Analysis submitted for Lot 25 (our Lot) which shows the distance from our back wall to the home on Lot 18 is 71.7”. Assuming a 15’ setback and a 14’ slope at a 2:1 grade, the slope should not commence until 57.7’ from our back wall. If the rear yard of Lot 18 is greater than 15’, assuming a 50’ buffer the slope should not start until 36’ from our back wall to conform with Cross-Section EE showing the slope ends at the retaining wall of the Refuge property.

Cross Section EE also shows that the retaining wall is to be built at the same level as the pad elevation of the new lots. (Lots 18 and 19, pad elevations of 298.7 and 298.8). The rough grading appears to change that and raise the top of the slope 1-2’ above the new pad elevations. This is inconsistent with the landscape plan showing the retaining wall is to be level with the pad elevations.

The Rough Grading Plan does not show any cross-section of the grading behind our property.

Section I-I relates to Lot 24, not our Lot, and to the corner of Lots 24 and 99 and specifically states it relates to the South border. Section J relates to the streets to the North of Chinook Circle. What is the precise grading plan for the area behind Lot 25 and why was the slope moved closer to our back wall than what was approved?
-1-
The Public Notice to the March 5, 2024 hearing regarding the Rough Grading Plan stated it only related to a change in pad elevations, not to a change in the slope or the placement of the slope closer to our property line. Also, there is no Cross-Section for the area behind our house so we had no way to object to a change in the slope. We believe it is too high, too close to our lot, and inconsistent with what was approved.

In summary, we want the pad height elevations of the Lots 18 and 19 verified as the grading appears too high; we want the slope to start as shown on the Site Line analysis and Exhibit EE, not the 22’ as currently graded, and we want our pad height verified now to ensure that the elevation gain from our pad to the new Lot 18 is no greater than 7’.

I presented these concerns to City Council on June 27, 2024, along with photographs and copies of Cross-Section EE and the Site Line Analysis. I have attached copies for your reference.

Sincerely,
Linda Candler
74040 Chinook Circle
Palm Desert, CA. 92211
March 7, 2024 MSA Submits Explore rough grading plan for approval.

April 5, 2024
Pulte bought Refuge portions according to Mr. Dewegeli, Pulte Manager of Land Planning & Entitlements, Southern California Division.

April 24, 2024 Department of Development Services approves rough grading plan.

May 13, 2024 Letter from Pulte
“Explore Palm Desert” meeting about architecture, front yard landscape, common areas, clubhouse, amenities.

Kina Kato talked about drainage concerns for KB neighborhood. Ms. Kato asked Mr. Dewegeli for an answer. He was confused and said to email Nicole Vann, MSA.

Eglert spoke at the May 13, 2024 meeting erosion hazard behind our wall and requested grading plans which Dewegeli told Nicole to send him which she didn’t, so we asked her for them on May 21 to which she responded: The City Planning Department should have all available public plans online for your viewing. All other plans are proprietary information.

Many neighboring community residents assume letter is talking about Sun City expansion and has nothing to do with them. No one knows who Pulte is.
1818
May 14, 2024 Grading begins behind KB and SL communities.

May 21, 2024 Letter from city Planning commission
Neighborhood Recognizes there is a problem with grading and the 11-foot-high escarpment may cause flooding hazard to both KB and SL neighborhoods.

Kina Kato made a note that she was unable to log on for the meeting. She selected #669 and recording said, “meeting not started” (at 6:08 PM). She selected #213 and that also failed. She was unable to join this meeting.

The meeting was about approving architecture and landscaping within Refuge.

May 21, 2024
Eglert spoke at the May 13, 2024 meeting erosion hazard behind our wall and requested grading plans which Dewegeli told Nicole to send him which she didn’t.

Eglert and Maria again asked Nicole from MSA for grading plans, to which she responded: The City Planning Department should have all available public plans online for your viewing. All other plans are proprietary information.

May 22, 2024
10AM meeting with Carlos Flores (no show).

Eddie, Eglert and Luis went to meeting that Eddie had scheduled with Flores for 10am May 22 at the Planning counter but Flores never showed up so Melonni answered their questions and Eglert pressured Melloni for grading plans which he received from on May 23.

Eglert and Maria could not find the plans requested online.

May 23, 2024 City Council Mtg.

Maria Torres speaks on Zoom.

Liz Bower and Jana Koroczynsky speak (allowed 3 minutes each) and were removed from council chambers to meet with Carlos Flores outside in the heat. Koroczynsky suggests going into air conditioning. Flores insists that it is Refuge, not Explore. After arguing about all the confusion around this project, someone came in and said to give them two weeks and there would be a neighborhood meeting.

May 27, 2024
Mr. Gutierrez sends Nick Melloni and Julian De La Torre an email outlining drainage concerns:

From: Eglert Gutierrez
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2024 4:29 PM
To: Nick Melloni <[email protected]>; De La Torre, Julian <[email protected]>; Carlos Flores <[email protected]>
Cc: City of Palm Desert <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Refuge Del Webb
Mr. Melloni on your Oct 18, 2022, email re: Refuge, you stated that “The proposed grading and height is done to accommodate drainage for the site and roughly follows exiting topography of the site”.

Mr. De La Torre, you stated at the townhall meeting of Tuesday, June 25, that the parcel drains by gravity from the southwest corner to the northeast corner. You are correct, and therefore, it was not necessary to raise the southern portion of the parcel and have houses towering over our homes in order to accommodate drainage, but soil would then need to be removed in the center and that’s what Pulte was trying to avoid thus creating a giant mound in order to get an unobstructed view by sacrificing OUR views, our property value, our privacy, our safety, and risking property damage.

Mr. Flores you put renderings up on the screen at the townhall meeting of Tuesday, June 25, (attached cross section Pulte) demonstrating a cross section where there would not be a direct line of sight into our homes, but the image fails to line up the sightline along the two block walls and is deceiving.

I have created a second REAL cross section true to scale (section II in Precise Grading Plan) which shows the actual line of sight (the image with red). This shows that anyone that looks over the Refuge’s wall can see straight into most of the private areas of our home, not just our back yards! Underneath my cross section is their image from the approved grading plan of the same cross section (not to scale black and white) that gives the false impression that the difference in heights between the two walls is less than 3 feet. They wrote NTS (not to scale) really tiny underneath but very misleading.

The 3rd image (Section in Precise Grading Plan) is my cross section super-imposed over the grading plan demonstrating that it is to scale and shows the 5-foot pathway is just 9 ft from our wall not the 15 ft demonstrated on (Cross Section sent by Marc Kleiman and N. Melloni).

The photo taken today from my kitchen (06272024 WORKERS PASSING) demonstrates that anyone can simply look into our homes and yards. And the last image shows the grading I propose that would accommodate preserving our privacy, security and views while still addressing water drainage.

The Refuge specific plan is a binding agreement. Pulte claims in it that their purpose was to not export soil, which was great for them, but by this action the city failed us.
1819
And since the refuge parcel could drain by gravity, they only raised it to meet their sand shifting goals and violated the agreement of protecting us from onlookers and created a water drainage channel subject to erosion, disguised as a public pedestrian path from Gerald Ford directly to our back walls. They have raised the pad and homes to a height way beyond what is necessary when they could have built at basically the level of our homes. They have intentionally and maliciously removed our views, which violates agreement to preserve our views. They must also protect ALL structures, meaning our walls and back yards from dangers of excessive rainfall and putting a drainage canal just 2 feet from our block wall is doing the contrary. They also must retain all surface water on their property not up against our block walls.

The city council and staff have to do their jobs and protects us, the citizens and city from those that assume to take advantage with all their deceitful double talk, false advertising which has been used to harm us by reducing the value of our homes, eliminating the views, creating water damage hazard, a security and safety concern with canal & bike path and direct view into our private lives. If they win, we will suffer forever the consequences of this abuse. PDCC cannot allow them to harm us in this manner. They have to be held accountable for not fulfilling their requirements as to the specific plan. They have violated the agreement and cannot continue with their intentions. This is a breach of contract because they have failed to perform their promised obligations and violation of this agreement is also illegal.

According to the Refuge Specific Plan, these policies (among others) have been violated:

6.4 Applicable Environmental Resources Policy Consistency

1. 2.1 View corridor preservation. Protect and preserve existing, signature views of the hills and mountains from the city.

6.6 Applicable Safety Policy Consistency

6.7 Applicable Public Utilities and Services Policy Consistency

3. 1.3 Groundwater infiltration. Encourage the use of above-ground and natural stormwater facilities in new development and redevelopment, such as vegetated swales and permeable paving.

We, the current citizens of the City of Palm Desert, await a solution from city staff and council that will benefit everyone involved.

Thank you
Eglert Gutierrez & Maria Torres
Response from city staff: crickets.

May 28, 2024 Email from Nicole Vann, MSA
Link to information that was screen shot and printed out by on May 28, 2024. Walkway elevations show Woodward crosssections as: AA, BB, CC, and DD.

Shown on “Refuge” website from November 2022 through May 2024

1820
Renderings shown on city website, not sure when they were posted. Neighborhoods were never told to reference city website, just “Refuge” website.
1821
May 30, 2024 6:50 AM
Eric Lomeli sends grading plans for the south end of the Pulte development. He said the Cross-Section I-I was the buffer section representation behind Woodward drive. That happened to be wrong and corrected later but added to confusion. (He is no longer shown on website city staff page.)
June 13, 2024 City Council Mtg.

Jana Koroczynsky speaks and Maria Torres speaks on Zoom (3 min each) June 25, 2024
Town Hall Meeting with KB, SL neighborhoods, Pulte, MSA and the city.

Very contentious. The only thing that was determined was Pulte saying they would pay for damages out of a fund they set up. Residents not sure they can believe them.

The biggest concern was the elevation and the flooding it would create for the neighborhoods during a downpour when there was no flooding problem in the past 28 years in which they existed. Also the safety, privacy and general public nuisance conditions created by the man-made 11-foot-high elevation behind their walls.

June 27, 2024 City Council Mtg.

Jana Koroczynsky (KB) and Linda Candler (SL) spoke. Maria was going to speak but was unable to be there on time.

The Refuge specific plan is a binding agreement. Pulte claims in it that their purpose was to not export soil, which was great for them, but by this action the city failed us.

And since the refuge parcel could drain by gravity, they only raised it to meet their sand shifting goals and violated the agreement of protecting us from onlookers and created a water drainage channel subject to erosion, disguised as a public pedestrian path from Gerald Ford directly to our back walls. They have raised the pad and homes to a height way beyond what is necessary when they could have built at basically the level of our homes. They have intentionally and maliciously removed our views, which violates agreement to preserve our views. They must also protect ALL structures, meaning our walls and back yards from dangers of excessive rainfall and putting a drainage canal just 2 feet from our block wall is doing the contrary. They also must retain all surface water on their property not up against our block walls.

The city council and staff have to do their jobs and protects us, the citizens and city from those that assume to take advantage with all their deceitful double talk, false advertising which has been used to harm us by reducing the value of our homes, eliminating the views, creating water damage hazard, a security and safety concern with canal & bike path and direct view into our private lives. If they win, we will suffer forever the consequences of this abuse. PDCC cannot allow them to harm us in this manner. They have to be held accountable for not fulfilling their requirements as to the 1822
specific plan. They have violated the agreement and cannot continue with their intentions. This is a breach of contract because they have failed to perform their promised obligations and violation of this agreement is also illegal.

According to the Refuge Specific Plan, these policies (among others) have been violated:

6.4 Applicable Environmental Resources Policy Consistency

1. 2.1 View corridor preservation. Protect and preserve existing, signature views of the hills and mountains from the city.

6.6 Applicable Safety Policy Consistency

6.7 Applicable Public Utilities and Services Policy Consistency

3. 1.3 Groundwater infiltration. Encourage the use of above-ground and natural stormwater facilities in new development and redevelopment, such as vegetated swales and permeable paving.

We, the current citizens of the City of Palm Desert, await a solution from city staff and council that will benefit everyone involved.

Thank you
Eglert Gutierrez & Maria Torres
Response from city staff: Crickets.

June 28, 2024 Letter Linda Candler to Carlos Flores:

June 28, 2024
Carlos Flores, Principal Planner
City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260
Dear Mr. Flores:

When asked by the Planning Commission if the 7’ elevation gain was correct, the answer was no. I understand this may have been a misunderstanding but can you please correct the record.

The Rough Grading Plan does not show any cross-section of the grading behind our property.

Section I-I relates to Lot 24, not our Lot, and to the corner of Lots 24 and 99 and specifically states it relates to the South border. Section J relates to the streets to the North of Chinook Circle. What is the precise grading plan for the area behind Lot 25 and why was the slope moved closer to our back wall than what was approved?
-1-
The Public Notice to the March 5, 2024 hearing regarding the Rough Grading Plan stated it only related to a change in pad elevations, not to a change in the slope or the placement of the slope closer to our property line. Also, there is no Cross-Section for the area behind our house 1823
so we had no way to object to a change in the slope. We believe it is too high, too close to our lot, and inconsistent with what was approved.

I presented these concerns to City Council on June 27, 2024, along with photographs and copies of Cross-Section EE and the Site Line Analysis. I have attached copies for your reference.

Sincerely,
Linda Candler
74040 Chinook Circle
Palm Desert, CA. 92211
Response from city staff: Crickets.

June 29, 2024
Marc Kleiman attached Refuge/Explore plans, dated May 10, 2024, showing “view fencing” and “view lots”. We believe this is evidence that Refuge PD and Pulte did not elevate the landscape for drainage, but for expensive “view lots”.

July 1, 2024 email from Todd Hileman that the city assumed the property was sold to Pulte.

July 3, 2024 email from Maria Torres to Jana Koroczynsky “Eglert just measured pad with a laser and level at 10 foot height. The approved plans state that the difference between our pad and the one behind us should be 9.9 (or 9’11”) BUT the mound is about a foot higher than 10 ft laser mark. It appears around 11 feet high. See photo attached. Behind your house it should be 9’ 5” according to their plans so the pad is probably about a foot and a half higher behind your house. This explains why they don’t want a private surveyor checking their work out.”
1824
From: CouncilMeeting Comments
To: Michelle Nance
Subject: FW: Refuge
Date: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 11:23:53 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: Patricia Rogers
Sent: Friday, July 5, 2024 8:45 PM
To: CouncilMeeting Comments <[email protected]> Subject: Refuge
To Whom It May Concern:

Due to the extreme heat, I will be unable to attend in person; but am hopeful something will be done to alleviate the issue of possible flooding caused by the planned change in terrain next to the block wall fence between the open land and the established communities of K&B residential homes as well as those on Shepherd Lane.

We want to avoid the damages suffered by the citizens of Cathedral City and other areas from the recent flooding from Hilary. We trust the leaders of our city will be mindful in making decisions for our future and our homes.

Thanking you in advance for your attention and concern. 1825
From: CouncilMeeting Comments
To: Michelle Nance
Subject: FW: Refuge/Pulte abomination
Date: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 11:23:44 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: Louise Fasana
Sent: Friday, July 5, 2024 5:42 PM
To: CouncilMeeting Comments <[email protected]> Subject: Refuge/Pulte abomination
I am not clear about what it might take to command the attention of the council, but laws, protocols, and common sense are not being adhered to or followed.

Pulte has taken advantage and continues to take advantage of the Kaufman and Broad community and imperils the residents of the Kaufman and Broad community as well as our homes and personal belongings.

Please revisit this shocking abrogation of our rights.

Louise Fasana
Palm Desert
Kaufman and Broad community.
1826

Palm Desert City CouncilJuly 11, 2024

Palm Desert City Council
July 11, 2024