Palm Desert City Council
April 9, 2026

0.45 AC.

LOT "F"
10,277 SF

0.24 AC.

LOT "C"
479 SF

0.01 AC.
62 3,244 SF
PE 273.8
59 3,244 SF
PE 274.8
58 2,232 SF
PE 274.6
57 2,232 SF
PE 274.6
56 3,244 SF
PE 274.8
53 3,244 SF
PE 275.3
52 2,232 SF
PE 275.1
51 2,232 SF
PE 275.1
50 3,244 SF
PE 275.3
47 3,244 SF
PE 276.3
48 2,727 SF
PE 275.8
49 2,727 SF
PE 274.8
46 2,231 SF
PE 276.1
45 2,214 SF
PE 276.1
44 3,345 SF
PE 276.3
43 2,803 SF
PE 275.8
42 2,762 SF
PE 277.9
41 3,215 SF
PE 278.4
40 2,233 SF
PE 278.2
39 2,233 SF
PE 278.2
38 3,496 SF
PE 278.4
35 3,497 SF
PE 279.9
37 2,806 SF
PE 277.9
36 2,806 SF
PE 279.4
34 2,236 SF
PE 279.7
33 2,236 SF
PE 279.7
32 3,385 SF
PE 279.9
29 3,878 SF
PE 280.3
28 2,296 SF
PE 280.1 30
2,852 SF
PE 279.8
31 2,780 SF
PE 279.4
27 2,353 SF
PE 280.1
26 3,571 SF
PE 280.3
25 3,135 SF
PE 279.8
149
2,581 SF
PE 280.7
150
2,430 SF
PE 280.5
151
2,760 SF
PE 280.5
152
2,490 SF
PE 280.6
153
2,288 SF
PE 280.3
154
2,262 SF
PE 280.0
155
2,286 SF
PE 279.7
156
2,534 SF
PE 279.4
123
3,121 SF
PE 278.8
148
2,983 SF
PE 279.9
147
2,244 SF
PE 279.7
146
2,244 SF
PE 279.4
145
2,210 SF
PE 279.2
144
2,244 SF
PE 279.0
143
2,516 SF
PE 278.7
124
2,240 SF
PE 278.7
125
2,240 SF
PE 278.5
126
2,205 SF
PE 278.4
127
2,275 SF
PE 278.2
128
2,707 SF
PE 278.1
129
2,516 SF
PE 278.4
130
2,244 SF
PE 278.7
131
2,210 SF
PE 278.9
132
2,244 SF
PE 279.2
133
2,244 SF
PE 278.3
134
2,210 SF
PE 277.6
135
2,432 SF
PE 277.1 142
2,815 SF
PE 280.1
141
2,234 SF
PE 279.8
140
2,269 SF
PE 279.6
139
2,269 SF
PE 279.3
138
2,234 SF
PE 279.1
137
2,269 SF
PE 278.8
136
2,468 SF
PE 278.7
19 2,673 SF
PE 280.3
20 3,221 SF
PE 280.8
21 2,209 SF
PE 280.6
22 2,209 SF
PE 280.6 23
4,601 SF
PE 280.8
24 3,195 SF
PE 280.3
112
2,497 SF
PE 272.6
111
2,250 SF
PE 272.9
110
2,553 SF
PE 273.1 109
2,448 SF
PE 273.4 108
2,227 SF
PE 273.6 107
2,194 SF
PE 273.9 106
2,228 SF
PE 274.2 105
2,227 SF
PE 274.5
104
2,463 SF
PE 274.8
113
2,749 SF
PE 277.2
121
2,842 SF
PE 278.8 122
2,516 SF
PE 279.1
114
2,244 SF
PE 277.5
115
2,210 SF
PE 277.8
116
2,244 SF
PE 278.0
117
2,244 SF
PE 278.2
118
2,210 SF
PE 278.3
119
2,244 SF
PE 278.5
120
2,244 SF
PE 278.7
60 2,727 SF
PE 274.3
61 2,727 SF
PE 273.3
63 2,232 SF
PE 273.6
64 2,232 SF
PE 273.6
65 3,244 SF
PE 273.8
66 2,727 SF
PE 273.3
68 3,244 SF
PE 272.9
67 2,727 SF
PE 272.4
69 2,232 SF
PE 272.7
70 2,232 SF
PE 272.7
71 3,244 SF
PE 272.9
72 2,727 SF
PE 272.4
74 3,244 SF
PE 271.7
73 2,740 SF
PE 271.2
26'
55 2,727 SF
PE 274.3
54 2,727 SF
PE 274.8
LOT "D" 1,089 SF / 0.03 AC.

LOT "E" 2,301 SF / 0.05 AC.

LOT "J"
1,375 SF

0.03 AC.

LOT "I"
1,687 SF

0.04 AC.

LOT "B"
1,657 SF

0.04 AC.

LOT "A"
29,248 SF

0.67 AC. LOT "A"
LOT
EX. C/L
EX. PROJECT BOUNDARY &
R/W
EX. CURB & GUTTER
PROP. LOT LINE

43.25'

5.625' 32' 5.625'
LOT "K"
18,202 SF

0.42 AC.

EX. PROJECT BOUNDARY &

LOT LINE
EX. C/L
EX. CURB & GUTTER
EX. PROJECT BOUNDARY &
R/W
PROP. LOT LINE
PROP. 32' BUILDING SETBACK
EX. C/L
EX. CURB &
GUTTER
EX. PROJECT BOUNDARY &
R/W
PROP. LOT LINE
PROP. 32' BUILDING SETBACK
24'
39'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
37'
37'
33'
33'
42'
28'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
38'
37'
68'
68'
68'
68'
68'
68'
68'
32' 56'
32'
32'
32'
32'
32'
33'
33'
40'
73'
74'
72'
64'
47'
64'
38' 39' 39' 38'
47'
61'
13'
64'
39' 50'
39'
9'
39'
39'
9'
38'
47'
13'
47'
64'
38' 39' 39' 38'
47'
64'
47'
64'
39' 39' 38'
47'
64'
38'
36' 30'
30'
37'
37'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
33'
40'
40'
33'
33'
13 2,727 SF
PE 279.2
14 3,221 SF
PE 279.7
15 2,209 SF
PE 279.5
16 2,209 SF
PE 279.5 17
3,221 SF
PE 279.7
18 2,727 SF
PE 279.2
7 2,727 SF
PE 278.5
8 3,221 SF
PE 279.0
9 2,209 SF
PE 278.8
10 2,209 SF
PE 278.8 11
3,221 SF
PE 279.0
12 2,727 SF
PE 278.5
1 2,725 SF
PE 277.7
2 3,221 SF
PE 278.2
3 2,209 SF
PE 278.0
4 2,209 SF
PE 278.0 5
3,221 SF
PE 278.2
6 2,727 SF
PE 277.7
89 2,714 SF
PE 273.5
24'
LOT "G"
571 SF

0.01 AC.
13' 13' 13' 13' 13' 13'
39'
9'
39'
9'
39' 39' 39'
9'
39'
9'
LOT "M"
680 SF

0.02 AC.

LOT "Q"
62,214 SF

1.43 AC.

LOT "Q"
"A"
24'
C C
A
A
D
D
E
E
55'
PROP. MEANDERING

SIDEWALK
PROP. MEANDERING

SIDEWALK
PROP. MEANDERING SIDEWALK
275.05
FL
274.63
FL-LP
277.37
FL 279.45
FL-LP
278.02
FL 278.18
FL-HP
275.54
FL
276.90
FL
276.00
FL-LP
278.91
FL
272.96
FL
272.00
FL-LP
272.35
FL
271.45
FL-LP
42'
16' 16'
58'
PROP. 32' TWO-STORY BUILDING SETBACK
276.90
FL
272.75
FL-HP
C
EX. PROJECT BOUNDARY &
C/L
PROP. 32' TWO-STORY BUILDING SETBACK
N 89°52'08" E 337.80'
277.6
FL-HP
51'

25.5'
20' 20'
A.C. PAVEMENT OVER A.B.

PORTION OF STREET "B" & "G"

25.5'
PROP. CURB & GUTTER
(PRIVATE ROAD / PARKING BOTH SIDES)
SCALE: 1" = 10'
R/W
PROP.

SECTION A-A
CL 5.5'
2%

5.5'
R/W
PROP.
2%
PROP. CURB
10' 10'
8'

PARKING
8'

PARKING
P.U.E. P.U.E. 12' 12'

TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE
130' (EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS)
±66' ±18'
±9' ±9'
EX. BARRIER CURB
±12'

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
±46'
(PUBLIC ROAD)
SCALE: 1" = 10'
EX. RAISED MEDIAN

SECTION E-E
±34'
±14' ±14' ±6'
EX. BARRIER CURB
±32' ±6' ±14' ±14'
EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. BIKE
LANE
EX. BIKE EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. TRAVEL LANE
LANE
±34'
20' - 30'
6'

SIDEWALK
EX. CURB & GUTTER
PROP. MEANDERING SIDEWALK
CL
EX. CURB & GUTTER
65' LOT

LANDSCAPE PARKWAY
PROP.

PROJECT BOUNDARY
PROP. R/W &
R/W
EX.

R/W
EX.
124' (EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS)
±16' ±53'
±8' ±8'
EX. BARRIER CURB
±14'

PORTOLA AVENUE
L
±55'
C
(PUBLIC ROAD)
SCALE: 1" = 10'

PROJECT BOUNDARY
EX. R/W &
EX. RAISED MEDIAN

SECTION F-F
±41'
R/W
EX.
±6' ±23' ±12'
EX. BARRIER CURB
±15' ±14' ±6' ±18'
EX. BIKE EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. TRAVEL LANE
LANE
EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. BIKE
LANE
±35'
20' LOT
PROP.

LANDSCAPE PARKWAY
6'

SIDEWALK
EX. CURB & GUTTER
PROP. MEANDERING SIDEWALK
74 3,244 SF
PE 271.7
PE 271.2
75 2,232 SF
PE 271.5
76 2,232 SF
PE 271.5
77 3,244 SF
PE 271.7
LOT "O"
5,919 SF

0.14 AC.

LOT "N"
2,361 SF

0.05 AC.

LOT "P"
15,318 SF

0.35 AC.

PROP. MEANDERING

SIDEWALK
43'

21.5'
16' 16'
A.C. PAVEMENT OVER A.B.

STREET "A", PORTION OF STREET "B" & "G" & STREET "H"

21.5'
PROP. CURB & GUTTER
(PRIVATE ROAD / NO PARKING BOTH SIDES)
SCALE: 1" = 10'
R/W
PROP.

SECTION B-B

5.5'
2% 2%
PROP. CURB & GUTTER
5' 5'
P.U.E.
32'

TRAVEL LANE
CL

TRAVEL LANE
R/W
PROP.

P.U.E.

5.5'
STREETS "C", "E" & "I" THRU "W"
(PRIVATE ROAD / NO PARKING BOTH SIDES)
SCALE: 1" = 10'

SECTION C-C
25'
12' 12'
A.C. PAVEMENT OVER A.B.
5' 24' 5'

TRAVEL LANE
P.U.E. CL
R/W
PROP.

R/W
PROP.

P.U.E.

TRAVEL LANE
PROP. SIDEWALK
PROP. FLUSH CURB
PROP. VALLEY
GUTTER
PROP. SIDEWALK
PROP. FLUSH CURB

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
STREETS "D" & "F"
(PRIVATE ROAD / NO PARKING BOTH SIDES)
SCALE: 1" = 10'

SECTION D-D
25'
12' 12'
A.C. PAVEMENT OVER A.B.
5' 24' 5'

TRAVEL LANE
P.U.E. CL
R/W
PROP.

R/W
PROP.

P.U.E.

TRAVEL LANE
PROP. SIDEWALK
PROP. FLUSH CURB
PROP. VALLEY
GUTTER
PROP. FLUSH CURB
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 39307

DATA TABLE
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 620-400-030 & 620-400-031
EXHIBIT DATE: JANUARY 30, 2026

SOURCE OF TOPOGRAPHY

ADDRESS
INLAND AERIAL SURVEYS, INC.
7117 ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUITE A
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92503
DATE OF TOPOGRAPHY DECEMBER 22, 2021

PUBLIC UTILITY PURVEYORS

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY

FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS

COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT

SPECTRUM

COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT

UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT

EXISTING ZONING

PROPOSED ZONING

EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL, 22 DU/AC. (P.R.-22)
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL, 22 DU/AC. (P.R.-22)

TOWN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD

LAND USE DESCRIPTION
1 EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES
ZONE "X": AREAS DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE THE 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOODPLAIN

AS SHOWN ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS, COMMUNITY PANEL MAP NUMBER: 06065C1595G

FEMA FLOOD ZONE DESIGNATION
EFFECTIVE DATE: AUGUST 28, 2008

APPLICANT /

ADDRESS

CONTACT
18300 REDMOND WAY, SUITE 120
REDMOND, WASHINGTON 98052

KIM MOLINA

EXHIBIT PREPARER

ADDRESS
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
34200 BOB HOPE DRIVE
RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270
CONTACT PAUL DEPALATIS, AICP TELEPHONE (760) 320-9811

REVISIONS
NO. DATE

LIQUEFACTION MODERATE LIQUEFACTION ZONE
NOTES 1.

TOWN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD

THE CITY OF PALM DESERT OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(800) 684-8123
(877) 238-0092
(800) 921-8101
(760) 398-2651
(877) 719-3278
(760) 398-2651
(800) 227-2600

DESCRIPTION

ELECTRIC
GAS

TELEPHONE
WATER
CABLE
SEWER
USA
PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 6 EAST,

LAND OWNER
THIS MAP INCLUDES THE ENTIRE CONTIGUOUS OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND DIVIDER.

2. THERE ARE NO EXISTING DWELLINGS, BUILDINGS, OR OTHER STRUCTURES KNOWN ON THIS PROPERTY.

BLUE FERN WEST, LLC.

ACREAGE
PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS (LOTS 1 THRU 156) 9.19 AC.

EXISTING GROSS AREA 28.59 AC.

TELEPHONE (951) 687-4252
SHEET
SHEETS
1 OF
1 A 4 FT. EASEMENT GRANTED TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, FOR POLE LINES,

CONDUITS OR UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES RECORDED NOVEMBER 2, 1965, REC. NO. 124577 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. (PLOTTED HEREON) (TO REMAIN) 2 AN EASEMENT GRANTED TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, FOR PUBLIC ROAD, HIGHWAY AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECORDED NOVEMBER 4, 1985, REC. NO. 1985-0273074 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. (PLOTTED HEREON) (TO REMAIN)
3 AN EASEMENT GRANTED TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, FOR RIGHT-OF WAY PURPOSES, RECORDED DECEMBER 23, 2009, REC. NO. 2009-0659534 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. (PLOTTED HEREON) (TO REMAIN)
4 AN EASEMENT GRANTED TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, FOR RIGHT-OF WAY PURPOSES, RECORDED DECEMBER 23, 2009, REC. NO. 2009-0659535 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. (PLOTTED HEREON) (TO REMAIN)
SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN.

PROPOSED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION IN FEE 10.36 AC.

SCHOOL DISTRICT DESERT SANDS UNIFIED

VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.

CITY OF
PALM
DESERT

GERALD FORD
DRIVE

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE

COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE
DINAH
SHORE
DR.

CITY OF
RANCHO
MIRAGE
SITE
PROPOSED OPEN SPACE LOTS (LOTS "A" THRU "Q") 4.32 AC.

EAST
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST

CENTERLINE

EASEMENT

EXISTING

FLOWLINE

HIGH POINT
NUMBER

PROPOSED

RIGHT OF WAY

TOP OF PAVEMENT
(E)
(N)
(S)
(W)
C/L
ESMT.

EX.

FL
HP
NO.

PROP.

R/W
TP

ABBREVIATIONS
P.U.E. PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT

AC ACREAGE

C&G CURB AND GUTTER

APN ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER

E/P EDGE OF PAVEMENT

GB GRADE BREAK
G.N.V. GROUND NATIVE VEGETATION

LP LOW POINT

PE PAD ELEVATION

PIG POINT OF INTERSECTION, GUTTER FL

SF SQUARE FEET

R RADIUS
STD. STANDARD

TOE BOTTOM OF SLOPE

TOP TOP OF SLOPE

TC TOP OF CURB
A.C. ASPHALT CONCRETE

P/L PROPERTY LINE
N.T.S. NOT TO SCALE
MIN. MINIMUM
MAX. MAXIMUM

EXISTING OVERHEAD TELEPHONE

EXISTING IRRIGATION

EXISTING GAS

EXISTING EASEMENT

EXISTING ELECTRIC

EXISTING IRRIGATION DRAIN LINE

EXISTING CABLE

EXISTING CONTOURS

EXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONS
LEGEND
X

EXISTING EASEMENT DELTA

EXISTING LOT LINE

EXISTING TELEPHONE

CFD COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT

EXISTING SEWER

EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY

PROPOSED BOUNDARY

PROPOSED AND EXISTING CENTER LINE

PROPOSED CURB

PROPOSED EASEMENT

EXISTING BOUNDARY

EXISTING SEWER FORCE MAIN

EXISTING WATER

PROPOSED LOT LINE

PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
TYP. TYPICAL
N.A.P. NOT A PART

VIEW MATCHLINE - SEE ABOVE LEFT

VIEW MATCHLINE - SEE BELOW RIGHT

BENCH MARK
BENCH MARK:

DESCRIPTION:

LOCATION:

ELEVATION:
105 PORTOLA AND COUNTRY CLUB
2" CITY PALM DESERT BRONZE DISK IN CONCRETE CATCH BASIN

SOUTH END OF CONCRETE CATCH BASIN ON WEST SIDE OF PORTOLA AVENUE SOUTH OF COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE.
241.24' (NAVD88 DATUM)

BASIS OF BEARING
BASED UPON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM (CCS83), ZONE 6, 2004.0 EPOCH, AS PER CITY OF PALM DESERT CONTROL SURVEY MONUMENTS BM 105 AND BM 144.

TAKEN AS: N 01°21'56" E
PROPOSED STREETS (STREETS "A" THRU "W") 4.72 AC.
(FRANK SINATRA DRIVE & PORTOLA AVENUE)
PROPOSED NET AREA 18.23 AC.
550
551
98 STREET "B"

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
STREET "D"
STREET "E"
LOT "L"
97 96
95 88
87 86
85 84
83 94
93 92
91 90
82 81
80 79
78 99
100
101
102
103
LOT "H"
LOT "F"
LOT "C"
62 59
58 57
56 53
52 51
50 47
48 49
46 45
44 43
42 41
40 39
38 35
37 36
34 33
32 29
28 30
31 27
26 25
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
123
143 144 145 146 147 148
128 127 126 125 124
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
140 141 142 139
138
137 136
19 20
21 22
23 24
112 111 110
109
108
107
106
105
104
113 121
122
114 115 116 117 118 119 120
60 61
63 64
66 55
54 LOT "D"
LOT "E"
LOT "J"
LOT "I"
LOT "B"
LOT "A"
LOT "A"
LOT
LOT "K"
13 14
15 16
17 18
7 8
9 10
11 1 12
2 3 4
5 6
89 LOT "G"
LOT "M"
LOT "Q"
LOT "Q"
"A"
C C
A
A
D
D
E
E
C
63 64
65 66
68 67
69 70
71 72
74 73
75 76
77 LOT "O"
LOT "N"
LOT "P"
51'

25.5'
20' 20'
A.C. PAVEMENT OVER A.B.

PORTION OF STREET "B" & "G"

25.5'
PROP. CURB & GUTTER
(PRIVATE ROAD / PARKING BOTH SIDES)
SCALE: 1" = 10'
R/W
PROP.

SECTION A-A
CL 5.5'
2%

5.5'
R/W
PROP.
2%
PROP. CURB
10' 10'
8'

PARKING
8'

PARKING
P.U.E. P.U.E. 12' 12'

TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE
130' (EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS)
±66' ±18'
±9' ±9'
EX. BARRIER CURB
±12'

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
±46'
(PUBLIC ROAD)
SCALE: 1" = 10'

PROJECT BOUNDARY
EX. R/W &
EX. RAISED MEDIAN

SECTION E-E
±34'
R/W
EX.
±14' ±14' ±6'
EX. BARRIER CURB
±32' ±6' ±14' ±14'
EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. BIKE
LANE
EX. BIKE EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. TRAVEL LANE
LANE
±34'
20' LOT
PROP.

LANDSCAPE PARKWAY
6'

SIDEWALK
EX. CURB & GUTTER
PROP. MEANDERING SIDEWALK
CL
EX. CURB & GUTTER
124' (EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS)
±16' ±53'
±8' ±8'
EX. BARRIER CURB
±14'

PORTOLA AVENUE
L
±55'
C
(PUBLIC ROAD)
SCALE: 1" = 10'

PROJECT BOUNDARY
EX. R/W &
EX. RAISED MEDIAN

SECTION F-F
±41'
R/W
EX.
±6' ±23' ±12'
EX. BARRIER CURB
±15' ±14' ±6' ±18'
EX. BIKE EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. TRAVEL LANE
LANE
EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. TRAVEL LANE EX. BIKE
LANE
±35'
20' LOT
PROP.

LANDSCAPE PARKWAY
6'

SIDEWALK
EX. CURB & GUTTER
PROP. MEANDERING SIDEWALK
43'

21.5'
16' 16'
A.C. PAVEMENT OVER A.B.

STREET "A", PORTION OF STREET "B" & "G" & STREET "H"

21.5'
PROP. CURB & GUTTER
(PRIVATE ROAD / NO PARKING BOTH SIDES)
SCALE: 1" = 10'
R/W
PROP.

SECTION B-B

5.5'
2% 2%
PROP. CURB & GUTTER
5' 5'
P.U.E.
32'

TRAVEL LANE
CL

TRAVEL LANE
R/W
PROP.

P.U.E.

5.5'
STREETS "C", "E" & "I" THRU "W"
(PRIVATE ROAD / NO PARKING BOTH SIDES)
SCALE: 1" = 10'

SECTION C-C
25'
12' 12'
A.C. PAVEMENT OVER A.B.
5' 24' 5'

TRAVEL LANE
P.U.E. CL
R/W
PROP.

R/W
PROP.

P.U.E.

TRAVEL LANE
PROP. SIDEWALK
PROP. FLUSH CURB
PROP. VALLEY
GUTTER
PROP. SIDEWALK
PROP. FLUSH CURB
STREETS "D" & "F"
(PRIVATE ROAD / NO PARKING BOTH SIDES)
SCALE: 1" = 10'

SECTION D-D
25'
12' 12'
A.C. PAVEMENT OVER A.B.
5' 24' 5'

TRAVEL LANE
P.U.E. CL
R/W
PROP.

R/W
PROP.

P.U.E.

TRAVEL LANE
PROP. SIDEWALK
PROP. FLUSH CURB
PROP. VALLEY
GUTTER
PROP. FLUSH CURB

PEDESTRIAN ACCESSIBILITY PLAN

DATA TABLE
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 620-400-030 & 620-400-031
EXHIBIT DATE: JANUARY 30, 2026

SOURCE OF TOPOGRAPHY

ADDRESS
INLAND AERIAL SURVEYS, INC.
7117 ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUITE A
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92503
DATE OF TOPOGRAPHY DECEMBER 22, 2021

APPLICANT /

ADDRESS

CONTACT
18300 REDMOND WAY, SUITE 120
REDMOND, WASHINGTON 98052

KIM MOLINA

EXHIBIT PREPARER

ADDRESS
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
34200 BOB HOPE DRIVE
RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270
CONTACT PAUL DEPALATIS, AICP TELEPHONE (760) 320-9811

REVISIONS
NO. DATE

THE CITY OF PALM DESERT OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

DESCRIPTION
PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 6 EAST,

LAND OWNER
BLUE FERN WEST, LLC.

TELEPHONE (951) 687-4252
SHEET
SHEETS
1 OF
1 SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN.

VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.

CITY OF
PALM
DESERT

GERALD FORD
DRIVE

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE

COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE
DINAH
SHORE
DR.

CITY OF
RANCHO
MIRAGE
SITE
EAST
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST

CENTERLINE

EASEMENT

EXISTING

FLOWLINE

HIGH POINT
NUMBER

PROPOSED

RIGHT OF WAY

TOP OF PAVEMENT
(E)
(N)
(S)
(W)
C/L
ESMT.

EX.

FL
HP
NO.

PROP.

R/W
TP

ABBREVIATIONS
P.U.E. PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT

AC ACREAGE

C&G CURB AND GUTTER

APN ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER

E/P EDGE OF PAVEMENT

GB GRADE BREAK
G.N.V. GROUND NATIVE VEGETATION

LP LOW POINT

PE PAD ELEVATION

PIG POINT OF INTERSECTION, GUTTER FL

SF SQUARE FEET

R RADIUS
STD. STANDARD

TOE BOTTOM OF SLOPE

TOP TOP OF SLOPE

TC TOP OF CURB
A.C. ASPHALT CONCRETE

P/L PROPERTY LINE
N.T.S. NOT TO SCALE
MIN. MINIMUM
MAX. MAXIMUM

EXISTING OVERHEAD TELEPHONE

EXISTING IRRIGATION

EXISTING GAS

EXISTING EASEMENT

EXISTING ELECTRIC

EXISTING IRRIGATION DRAIN LINE

EXISTING CABLE

EXISTING CONTOURS

EXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONS
LEGEND

EXISTING EASEMENT DELTA

EXISTING LOT LINE

EXISTING TELEPHONE

CFD COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT

EXISTING SEWER

EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY

PROPOSED BOUNDARY

PROPOSED AND EXISTING CENTER LINE

PROPOSED CURB

PROPOSED EASEMENT

EXISTING BOUNDARY

EXISTING SEWER FORCE MAIN

EXISTING WATER

PROPOSED LOT LINE

PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
TYP. TYPICAL
N.A.P. NOT A PART

VIEW MATCHLINE - SEE ABOVE LEFT

VIEW MATCHLINE - SEE BELOW RIGHT
LEGEND

ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN PATH
FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 39307
552

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
A
B B
98 STREET "B"
STREET "D"
STREET "E"
97 96
95 88
87 86
85 84
83 94
93 92
91 90
82 81
80 79
78 99
100
101
102
103
62 59
58 57
56 53
52 51
50 47
48 49
46 45
44 43
42 41
40 39
38 35
37 36 34
33 32
29 28
30 31
27 25 26 149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
123
143 144 145 146 147 148
128 127 126 125 124 129
130
131
132
133
134
135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142
19 20
21 22
23 24
112 111 110
109
108
107
106
105
104
113 121
122
114 115 116 117 118 119 120
60 61
63 64
65 66
68 67
69 70
71 72
74 73
75 76
77 55
54 13
14 15 16
17 18 7
8 9 10
11 12 1
2 3 4
5 6
89 C
C
D
D
A
PROP. HOUSE
(TWO-STORY)
PROP. PROPERTY
WALL
PROP. MEANDERING

SIDEWALK
WEST
BOUND
EX. LANDSCAPE
EX. MEANDERING MEDIAN

SIDEWALK
SIGHT LINE (TYP.)
PERSON
(TYP.)
EX. SURFACE
PROP. SURFACE
277.81
EAST
BOUND
PROP. C/L
PROP. HOUSE
(TWO-STORY)
EX. HOUSE
(SINGLE STORY)
PE 280.30
(LOT 19)
STREET "B"
(PRIVATE ROAD)
EX. R/W &

PROPERTY BOUNDARY

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
(PUBLIC ROAD)
EX. C/L
280.30
280.80 PE 280.80 280.30
(LOT 20)
(279.09)
(278.92)
280.80
275.05
(275.08) (279.4) (274.57)
(274.45)
(279.12)
EX. PROJECT BOUNDARY &
PROP. PROPERTY WALL
274.83
274.00
272.89
PROP. C/L
STREET "J"
(PRIVATE ROAD)
PROP. HOUSE
(TWO-STORY)
PROP. PROJECT SIDEWALK
(273.97) EX. SURFACE
PROP. SURFACE
(274.29) PERSON
(TYP.)
SIGHT LINE (TYP.)
PE 274.00
(LOT 95)
PROP. HOUSE
(TWO-STORY)

PORTOLA DRIVE
EX. C/L
(PUBLIC ROAD)
EX. LANDSCAPE
MEDIAN
NORTH
BOUND
PROP. PROPERTY
WALL
(278.53)
PROP. MEANDERING

SIDEWALK
EX. MEANDERING

SIDEWALK
PERSON
EX. SURFACE (TYP.)
PE 280.3
(LOT 29)
SIGHT LINE (TYP.)
SIGHT LINE (TYP.)
(273.39)
(273.35)
(272.63)
277.88 278.96 (272.79)
EX. R/W &

PROPERTY BOUNDARY
SOUTH
BOUND
(279.34)
PROP. HOUSE
(TWO-STORY)
STREET "G"
(PRIVATE ROAD)
PE 279.8
(LOT 30)
279.80 279.80
280.30
280.30
PROP. SURFACE
EX. C/L
EX. LANDSCAPE
MEDIAN
(268.12)
NORTH
BOUND
PROP. PROPERTY
WALL
PROP. MEANDERING

SIDEWALK
EX. MEANDERING

SIDEWALK
PERSON
(TYP.)
PROP. C/L
PROP. SURFACE EX. SURFACE
SIGHT LINE (TYP.)

PORTOLA DRIVE
(PUBLIC ROAD)
(268.98)
(269.07)
(268.11)
EX. SURFACE
EX. R/W & PROPERTY BOUNDARY
(270.50)
268.16
273.80
PROP. HOUSE
(TWO-STORY)
273.80
(272.05) 273.30 273.30
272.61
PE 273.80
(LOT 59)
PE 273.30
(LOT 60) PROP. SURFACE
SOUTH
BOUND
(269.20)
EX. PROPERTY WALL
(269.19)

LINE OF SIGHT EXHIBIT

DATA TABLE
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 620-170-009
EXHIBIT DATE: JANUARY 30, 2026

SOURCE OF TOPOGRAPHY

ADDRESS
AEROTECH MAPPING, INC.
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 300
IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92618
DATE OF TOPOGRAPHY OCTOBER 31, 2024

APPLICANT /

ADDRESS

CONTACT
18300 REDMOND WAY, SUITE 120
REDMOND, WASHINGTON 98052

KIM MOLINA

EXHIBIT PREPARER

ADDRESS
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
34200 BOB HOPE DRIVE
RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270
CONTACT PAUL DEPALATIS, AICP TELEPHONE (760) 320-9811

REVISIONS
NO. DATE

THE CITY OF PALM DESERT OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

DESCRIPTION
BEING THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 5 EAST,

LAND OWNER
BLUE FERN WEST, LLC.

TELEPHONE (619) 606-5020
SHEET
SHEETS
1 OF
1 SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN.

FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 39307

SECTION A-A
SCALE: 1" = 15'

SECTION SITE INDEX

SECTION B-B
SCALE: 1" = 15'

SECTION D-D
SCALE: 1" = 15'

SECTION C-C
SCALE: 1" = 15'

DATA TABLE (CONTINUED)

SIGHT LINE LEGEND

PEDESTRIAN VIEW
VEHICLE VIEW 1
NOTES

1. VEHICLE VIEWS ARE ONLY VISIBLE FOR A MATTER OF SECONDS AS MOTION CREATES A CONSTANTLY CHANGING PERIPHERAL SCENE.

2. BUILDING ELEVATIONS ARE CONCEPTUAL AND FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY.

VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.

CITY OF
PALM
DESERT

GERALD FORD
DRIVE

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE

COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE
DINAH
SHORE
DR.

CITY OF
RANCHO
MIRAGE
SITE
553

PORTOLA AVENUE

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE

PORTOLA SPRINGS, PALM DESERT, CA
North LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN
JUNE 26 2025
Sheet
1 of 7
0 40' 80' 240'
Scale 1" = 80'
Plans Prepared by:

Howard Associates, Inc.
1951 Fourth Ave., Ste. 302
San Diego, CA. 92101
(619) 718-9660Contact: Julie Howard
[email protected]
CA RLA 2681, EXP. 3/31/27
Applicant:

Blue Fern Development West, LLC
18300 Redmond Way, Ste. 120
Redmond, WA 98052
Attn:Kim Molina
Ph. (714) 782-4271Kim.Molina @pacificlandpro.com
Submittals Amendments
554

PORTOLA AVENUE

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
Masonry Wall
Tubular Steel Fence
Wall and Fencing Legend
North

WALL AND FENCING PLAN
JUNE 26 2025
Sheet
2 of 7
6' Ht. Tubular Steel Fence
6' Ht. Typ.
0 40' 80' 240'
Scale 1" = 80'
6' Ht. Masonry Wall with Pilasters
6' Ht. Typ.

Plans Prepared by:

Howard Associates, Inc.
1951 Fourth Ave., Ste. 302
San Diego, CA. 92101
(619) 718-9660
Contact: Julie Howard
[email protected]
CA RLA 2681, EXP. 3/31/27
Applicant:

Blue Fern Development West, LLC
18300 Redmond Way, Ste. 120
Redmond, WA 98052
Attn:Kim Molina
Ph. (714) 782-4271
Kim.Molina @pacificlandpro.com
Submittals Amendments

PORTOLA SPRINGS, PALM DESERT, CA
555

PORTOLA AVENUE

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
North
Matchline- See Sheet 4
A
CG
Amenity Areas
Central Green
Recreation/Pool AreaFenced Dog ParkPark with Tot Lot and Open Lawn Open Lawn Play Area
Primary EntranceBasin
B
DEF

LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN
JUNE 26 2025
Sheet
3 of 7
Scale 1" = 30'
0 15' 30' 90'
G
B
A
F
Plans Prepared by:

Howard Associates, Inc.
1951 Fourth Ave., Ste. 302
San Diego, CA. 92101
(619) 718-9660
Contact: Julie Howard
[email protected]
CA RLA 2681, EXP. 3/31/27
Applicant:

Blue Fern Development West, LLC
18300 Redmond Way, Ste. 120
Redmond, WA 98052
Attn:Kim Molina
Ph. (714) 782-4271
Kim.Molina @pacificlandpro.com
Submittals Amendments

PORTOLA SPRINGS, PALM DESERT, CA
Street Light, Typ.

Pedestrian Light, Typ.
556

PORTOLA AVENUE

PORTOLA AVENUE
Matchline- See Sheet 3
A
CG
Amenity Areas
Central Green
Recreation/Pool AreaFenced Dog ParkPark with Tot Lot and Open Lawn Open Lawn Play Area
Primary EntranceBasin
B
DEF
North

LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN
JUNE 26 2025
Sheet
4 of 7
Matchline- See Plan Right
Matchline- See Plan Left
Scale 1" = 30'
0 15' 30' 90'
F
D
C
G
G
E
Plans Prepared by:

Howard Associates, Inc.
1951 Fourth Ave., Ste. 302
San Diego, CA. 92101
(619) 718-9660
Contact: Julie Howard
[email protected]
CA RLA 2681, EXP. 3/31/27
Applicant:

Blue Fern Development West, LLC
18300 Redmond Way, Ste. 120
Redmond, WA 98052
Attn:Kim Molina
Ph. (714) 782-4271Kim.Molina @pacificlandpro.com
Submittals Amendments

PORTOLA SPRINGS, PALM DESERT, CA
Street Light,
Typ.

Pedestrian Light, Typ.

Street Light,
Typ.
557

LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN-AMENITY AREAS
JUNE 26 2025
North
A
CG
Amenity Areas
Central Green
Recreation/Pool AreaFenced Dog ParkPark with Tot Lot and Open Lawn Open Lawn Play Area
Primary EntranceBasin
B
DEF
D
A
B

CENTRAL GREEN

RECREATION/ POOL AREA
Sheet
5 of 7

C FENCED DOG PARK AND OPEN LAWN PLAY AREA
Park with Tot Lot and Open Lawn
Fenced Dog Run
Shade Structure
with Benches
Open Lawn
6' Masonry Wall
Shaded
Benches Play Lawn
5' Wide Concrete Walks,
Natural Grey Color
Shade Structure
with Picnic Tables
Play Lawn
5' Wide ConcreteWalks, Natural
Grey Color
Tot Lot
5' Wide Concrete Walks,
Natural Grey Color
5' Wide ConcreteWalks, Natural Grey Color
Pool Area
Restroom/Equipment
Storage Building
Tot Lot
Shade Structure
with Picnic Tables
5' Wide Concrete
Walks, Natural Grey Color
Plans Prepared by:

Howard Associates, Inc.
1951 Fourth Ave., Ste. 302
San Diego, CA. 92101
(619) 718-9660
Contact: Julie Howard
[email protected]
CA RLA 2681, EXP. 3/31/27
Applicant:

Blue Fern Development West, LLC
18300 Redmond Way, Ste. 120
Redmond, WA 98052
Attn:Kim Molina
Ph. (714) 782-4271Kim.Molina @pacificlandpro.com
Submittals Amendments
5' Wide Concrete
Walks, Natural Grey Color
Scale 1" = 20'
0 10' 20' 60'

PORTOLA SPRINGS, PALM DESERT, CA
558
F
Scored, Colored Concrete Accent Paving
6' HT. Masonry Wall
Accent Trees and Planting
at Project Primary Entry
JUNE 26 2025
Sheet
6 of 7
North

LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN -STREETSCAPE
10' PUE
Primary Entrance
Meandering 6' Wide
Sidewalk, Natural Grey Color
Enhanced Landscape
along Portola Avenue
Street Tree
Where Space Allows
Street Trees Grouped on Either Side
of Meandering Sidewalk
Typical Internal Street
Note: All Street Trees to be Located OutsidePublic Utility Easements and CVWD Easements.

Street Trees in Private Front Yards will be Located
Where Space Allows. Scale 1" = 20'
0 10' 20' 60'

PORTOLA AVENUE
5' Wide Concrete Sidewalk,
Natural Grey Color
Plans Prepared by:

Howard Associates, Inc.
1951 Fourth Ave., Ste. 302
San Diego, CA. 92101
(619) 718-9660
Contact: Julie Howard
[email protected]
CA RLA 2681, EXP. 3/31/27
Applicant:

Blue Fern Development West, LLC
18300 Redmond Way, Ste. 120
Redmond, WA 98052
Attn:Kim Molina
Ph. (714) 782-4271Kim.Molina @pacificlandpro.com
Submittals Amendments

PORTOLA SPRINGS, PALM DESERT, CA
10' PUE
Street Trees Grouped on Either Side
of Meandering Sidewalk
6' Ht. Wall, Typ.
559

PLANT LEGEND PLANT LEGEND (CONTINUED)

PLANTING LEGEND
JUNE 26 2025
Sheet
7 of 7
Plans Prepared by:

Howard Associates, Inc.
1951 Fourth Ave., Ste. 302
San Diego, CA. 92101
(619) 718-9660
Contact: Julie Howard
[email protected]
CA RLA 2681, EXP. 3/31/27
Applicant:

Blue Fern Development West, LLC
18300 Redmond Way, Ste. 120
Redmond, WA 98052
Attn:Kim Molina
Ph. (714) 782-4271
Kim.Molina @pacificlandpro.com
Submittals Amendments

PORTOLA SPRINGS, PALM DESERT, CA
20' Ht. Street Light
15' Ht. Pedestrian Light
Lighting Legend
Qty.
17 14
Note: See Lighting Plans for Details
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567

C I T Y O F P A L M
D E S E R T 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEL: 760-346-0611
[email protected]

CITY OF PALM DESERT

PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CASE NO. PP25-0006 & TTM25-0005 (TTM 39306 and TTM 39307)

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BEFORE THE PLANNING

COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, TO CONSIDER A REQUEST BY BLUE FERN WEST LLC, TO APPROVE A PRECISE PLAN AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 39306, AND TTM 39307 FOR A 156-UNIT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TO

CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A CEQA ADDENDUM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA).

The City of Palm Desert (City), acting as the Lead Agency under CEQA, has previously adopted an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the former Frank Sinatra & Portola Apartment Project on January 26, 2023. The City has determined that the proposed project represents a modification to the previously approved project and that preparation of a CEQA Addendum pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 is appropriate. The Addendum will rely on the environmental analysis and findings of the adopted 2022 IS/MND and will demonstrate that the proposed changes do not result in new significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts.

PROJECT LOCATION: Southwest corner of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue, City of Palm Desert, California Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs): 620-400-030 and 620-400-031 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project proposes a Precise Plan and Tentative Tract Map 39306, TTM 39307 for the Portola Springs Residential project. The proposed project includes development of 156 single-family residential (SFR) units on approximately 18.31 acres, with onsite circulation, utilities, stormwater facilities, and open space areas.

Development will occur through a multi-map process:
 Finance Map (TTM 39306): Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 39726 serves as a Finance Map to facilitate the financing within the approved master development. This map allows the project site to be subdivided into larger financing parcels without altering the approved land use plan or development footprint.
 Subdivision Map (TTM 39307) and Precise Plan 25-0006: Creates the residential lots and establishes development standards and layout.

PUBLIC HEARING: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, will hold a Public Hearing at its meeting on February 3, 2026. The Planning Commission meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California. Pursuant to Assembly Bill 2449, this meeting may be conducted as a hybrid meeting, allowing public access via teleconference or in person. Options for remote participation will be listed on the Posted Agenda for the meeting at: https://www.palmdesert.gov/connect/city-council PUBLIC REVIEW: The plans and related documents are available for public review Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. by contacting the project planner, Sijifredo Fernandez. Please submit written comments to the Planning Division. If any group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence at or prior to the Planning Commission hearing. All comments and any questions should be directed to:

Sijifredo Fernadez, Senior Planner
City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260
(760) 776-6434
[email protected]
PUBLISH: THE DESERT SUN ROSIE LUA, SECRETARY
JANUARY 23, 2026 PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
568
February 2, 2026
Subject: Portola Springs Residential Project Update
Dear Neighbors,
Thank you for your continued interest in the Portola Springs residential project.

The Planning Commission Hearing date has been scheduled for February 17th, 2026. As a reminder, the Portola Springs project is a 156-unit, two-story single-family residential project, which replaces the previously approved 394-unit, three-story apartment rental project.

For your reference, the current site plan is attached, along with a line-of-sight exhibit demonstrating the views of the project from Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive.

If approved, construction could be ready between late 2026 – late 2027.

We appreciate your engagement and look forward to your continued involvement as the project progresses. If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to reach out to (949) 514-8515 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
The Blue Fern Team

PROJECT SUMMARY
Blue Fern is a family-owned company specializing in land development and home building. Blue Fern will be processing a tentative map approval for the Portola Springs residential project, which is the 18-acre triangle-shaped undeveloped property located at the southwestern corner of the Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue intersection. The project is proposing 156 singlefamily detached residential lots with a recreation area that will be private to the community.

Once this process is complete, a qualified home builder will construct the homes on the approved lots.
569

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)

COUNTY OF ORANGE)

DECLARATION OF MAILING
RE:

Portola Springs Residential Project
Update
I, Celeste Marshall, do hereby declare as follows:

1. I am a Project Manager of Express Notice and Mail LLC. I am over 18 years of age and I am a resident of the County of Orange, State of California.

2. On February 3, 2026 I caused to be mailed a copy of “Portola Springs Residential Project Update” by mail to all owners and occupants within the 1000 foot boundaries of the proposed site:
a. See Attached Map b.

See Attached Mailing List
See Attached Notice
See Attached Envelope
c. d.

3. The attached list was prepared using the latest available data per the County Assessor’s Office.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed at County of Orange, California.

By:
___Celeste Marshall ________________ ______
[Please Print Name]
February 3 2026
Portola Springs Residential Project
570
1000' RADIUS

PORTOLA SPRINGS PROJECT
© 2025 LightBox. All rights reserved.
1000 feet
571
1000' RADIUS

PORTOLA SPRINGS PROJECT

LIST OF OWNERS - CONSOLIDATED

APN NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
009-615-362 PALM DESERT RECREATIONAL FACIL 38995 DESERT WILLOW DR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1674 620-170-009 LAND CATAVINA 1130 E MISSOURI AVE STE 890 PHOENIX AZ 85014-2721 620-180-011, 620-323-034, -035, -036 PALM DESERT 73750 COUNTRY CLUB DR PALM DESERT CA 92260-8663 620-322-009 HURST LUMEN 1211 243RD ST HARBOR CITY CA 90710-1801 620-322-010 DECKER TIMOTHY 39119 DESERT GREENS DR E PALM DESERT CA 92260-1410 620-322-011 ELLIOTT ROBERT 39103 DESERT GREENS DR E PALM DESERT CA 92260-1410 620-323-011 MCELROY RALPH 39054 DESERT GREENS DR E PALM DESERT CA 92260-1403 620-323-012 FISCHER NEIL 24087 ROMAN NOSE DR CONIFER CO 80433-6903 620-323-013 ZINN WENDY PO BOX 2154 RUNNING SPRINGS CA 92382-2154 620-323-014 CAMPBELL ANDREW 39090 DESERT GREENS DR E PALM DESERT CA 92260-1403 620-323-015 SOARES JAMES 39102 DESERT GREENS DR E PALM DESERT CA 92260-1403 620-323-016 REMSEN CAROL 1748 BELLE MEADE RD ENCINITAS CA 92024-4209 620-323-017 GETMAN DANIEL 5231 IRON STONE WAY PRESCOTT AZ 86301-8501 620-323-018 RICARD GERALD 24682 VIA DEL RIO LAKE FOREST CA 92630-2012 620-323-019 WULFF RANDY 39071 CUDY CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1402 620-323-020 HASKELL JOHN 39051 CUDY CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1402 620-323-021 WEATHERS STEPHAN 19 WINTERGREEN IRVINE CA 92604-2800 620-323-022 EVANS MAGDALINE 39011 CUDY CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1402 620-323-023 CRON ROY 106 LOUISE DR PLACENTIA CA 92870-2502 620-323-024 SPENCER TRUDY 39050 CUDY CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1402 620-323-025 WINTERS MICHAEL 20742 COLLEGEWOOD DR WALNUT CA 91789-1119 620-323-026 SMALL MILFORD 39090 CUDY CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1402 620-323-027 MOORE BRADLEY 39176 DESERT GREENS DR E PALM DESERT CA 92260-1412 620-323-028 SAMPSON-DIXON TRUST 39186 DESERT GREENS DR E PALM DESERT CA 92260-1412 620-400-005, -009, -019, -029, -033, 620-420-009, -012, 694-200-011, -022 CITY OF PALM DESERT 73510 FRED WARING DR PALM DESERT CA 92260-2524 620-400-010, -011, 694-367-008 CVWD PO BOX 1058 COACHELLA CA 92236-1058 620-400-030, -031 HOMES RJT 1130 E MISSOURI AVE STE 890 PHOENIX AZ 85014-2721 620-421-082 WVC RANCHO MIRAGE INC 9002 SAN MARCO CT ORLANDO FL 32819-8600 620-470-007 RETREAT AT DESERT WILLOW HOMEO 42635 MCLANIE PL # 103 PALM DESERT CA 92211 620-471-001 NEWBY BARBARA A REVOCABLE TRUS 3054 NW DUFFY DR BEND OR 97703-5485 620-471-002 MARTIN KEVIN 838 MASSEY LANDING EDMONTON AB T6R 3S7 CANADA 620-471-003 THE RITCHIE COGHILL FAMILY TRU 2003 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1650 620-471-004 LEE HONG 2004 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1650 620-471-005, -015, -020, -025, -030, -035, -040, -045, -050, -055, -060, -065, - 075, 620-472-005, -010, -015, -020,-030, -035, -040, -045 -050, -055, -060, -065 RETREAT AT DESERT WILLOW HOMEO 73081 FRED WARING DR PALM DESERT CA 92260-2878 620-471-006 STEINLAUF BRADIE 1018 10TH ST SANTA MONICA CA 90403-4105 620-471-007 MARKES PHILLIP 42 CALLE CASTILLO SAN CLEMENTE CA 92673-6868 620-471-008 COLBOURNE MARK 24 GRAYFIELD DR STOUFFVILLE ON L4A 0B1 CANADA 620-471-009 SHABASHOV MARK 2104 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1651 620-471-010 PORTOLA PD 73081 FRED WARING DR PALM DESERT CA 92260-2878 620-471-011 SLAUGHTER WILLIAM 401 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1648 620-471-012 COX DONN 1827 S SATELLITE WAY BOISE ID 83712-8597 620-471-013 SELTECH HOLDINGS INC 505 ANN AVE BURLINGTON ON L7L 5M4 CANADA 620-471-014 BOLDT SCOTT 1305 FOREST LN FARIBAULT MN 55021-9263 620-471-016 VANDERPOOL ALAN 501 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1649 620-471-017 LEE SANG 502 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1649 572
1000' RADIUS

PORTOLA SPRINGS PROJECT

LIST OF OWNERS - CONSOLIDATED
620-471-018 BALANCE RICHARD 503 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1649 620-471-019 PENNER CARI 112 GRANITE PARK BLVD STEINBACH MB R5G 2J5 CANADA 620-471-021 MORRISON BRET 601 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1652 620-471-022 ROBINSON MARCIA 602 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1652 620-471-023 LOSH MICHAEL 9700 SE 61ST PL MERCER ISLAND WA 98040-5108 620-471-024 ORLYCK THEODORE PO BOX 2336 SUN VALLEY ID 83353-2336 620-471-026 MCCULLOCH ROCKY 3202 WILDWOOD DR LONGVIEW WA 98632-5435 620-471-027 WHIDDEN THOMAS 702 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1653 620-471-028 HOLBROOK JERRY 520 E PINEHURST TRL DAKOTA DUNES SD 57049-5403 620-471-029 LUTJENS LARRY 704 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1653 620-471-031 LIMES JOSEPH 2201 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1673 620-471-032 THE CYPRESS RIVER REVOCABLE TR 9903 BASILICA CT CYPRESS CA 90630-3537 620-471-033 WONG TERRANCE 2203 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1673 620-471-034 SASS AARON 14871 SW 164TH AVE TIGARD OR 97224-1869 620-471-036 ROBERTSON BRUCE 801 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1654 620-471-037 BELL BRENDAN 4279 HOBSON RD KELOWNA BC V1W 1Y4 CANADA 620-471-038 JOHANSEN GORDON 803 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1654 620-471-039 SIMPSON GERALD 4259 HOBSON RD KELOWNA BC V1W 1Y4 CANADA 620-471-041 TOTTA LEONARD 22 LILAC IRVINE CA 92618-6909 620-471-042 VOLPOV ROMAN 6928 CHELMSFORD ST RICHMOND BC V7C 4J2 CANADA 620-471-043 LUTHER GLENN 532 LAKE ST S APT G202 KIRKLAND WA 98033-6482 620-471-044 PROSSER NEAL 2246 RANCH VIEW PL THOUSAND OAKS CA 91362-3163 620-471-046 TOPE MICHAEL 901 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1656 620-471-047 HEINZ CURTIS 17675 W 94TH ST LENEXA KS 66219-1941 620-471-048 FIORITO TIMOTHY 3107 NW 94TH ST SEATTLE WA 98117-2946 620-471-049 FALLON DANIEL 9133 112TH AVE NE KIRKLAND WA 98033-5707 620-471-051 HENRY CATHERINE PO BOX 894 WHEAT RIDGE CO 80034-0894 620-471-052 HUFFINES PAMELA 1002 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1657 620-471-053 VAN LANDSCHOOT DAVID 1003 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1657 620-471-054 OWNER 1004 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1657 620-471-056 FOWLER KAREN 452 W OMAHA AVE CLOVIS CA 93619-4800 620-471-057 KIRKHAM BRANDON 9223 SW 43RD AVE PORTLAND OR 97219-5209 620-471-058 PAWLEY JAMISON 801 MOUNTAIN LN GLENDORA CA 91741-3025 620-471-059 GRACEL TIMOTHY 222 CHRISTIE PARK VIEW SW CALGARY AB T3H 2Z4 CANADA 620-471-061 HARRIS JAMES 1101 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1658 620-471-062 ANGSTER GWENDOLYN 1102 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1658 620-471-063 DAVIS JACK 26 MILLSTREAM RD UPPER SADDLE RIVER NJ 07458-2415 620-471-064 THUNBERG STEPHEN 3534 TURNBERRY DR JAMUL CA 91935-1651 620-471-066 LOEWEN GREGORY A & RENEE D REV 301 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1647 620-471-067 VAKOVSKY PATRICIA 4146 HARBOUR ISLAND LN OXNARD CA 93035-1449 620-471-068 BODEN PETER PO BOX 914 MANSON WA 98831-0914 620-471-069 HARRISON ROGER 5340 WALLACE AVE DELTA BC V4M 1A1 CANADA 620-471-070 RETREAT AT DESERT WILLOW HOMEO 1111 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY STE 101 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-6789 620-471-071 GORYL SKIP 201 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1646 620-471-072 LAFORGE KENNETH 9025 COTTONWOOD CANYON PL LENEXA KS 66219-8174 620-471-073 SHENEMAN GARY 15219 FONTANA ST LEAWOOD KS 66224-8711 620-471-074 SHUEY MARY 409 BAYHILL CIR DAKOTA DUNES SD 57049-5092 620-472-001 SEIKALY RAMZI 6500 ELLENVIEW AVE WEST HILLS CA 91307-2716 573
1000' RADIUS

PORTOLA SPRINGS PROJECT

LIST OF OWNERS - CONSOLIDATED
620-472-002 CASTONGUAY LIVING TRUST U/A 1202 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1659 620-472-003 WELDY SUSAN PO BOX 488 ORINDA CA 94563-0488 620-472-004 WATKINS AMELIA 1 CALEB CT GUILFORD CT 06437-2298 620-472-006 NEWBURGER JOHN LIVING TRUST 1301 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1633 620-472-007 FETMAN GARRY 1302 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1633 620-472-008 TREDGET ERIC 740 BUTTERWORTH DR EDMONTON AB T6R 2M7 CANADA 620-472-009 SHORT GOLF 3535 LEBON DR APT 4101 SAN DIEGO CA 92122-6400 620-472-011 OSBORNE DAN 3008 STRATMOOR HILLS AVE HENDERSON NV 89052-6922 620-472-012 DEPASCALE FAMILY TRUST 460 3RD ST ENCINITAS CA 92024-3508 620-472-013 BLANK STEVEN 55 VALLEY VIEW DR HENDERSON TN 38340-2904 620-472-014 ST CLAIR DANIEL 131 PALOS VERDES BLVD UNIT 212 REDONDO BEACH CA 90277-5855 620-472-016 CAMERON JEFFREY 30963 VIA LA CRESTA RANCHO PALOS VERDES CA 90275-5376 620-472-017 DP RETREAT LLC NO DATA ON FILE
620-472-018 MAY WILLIAM PO BOX 37 CANYON CREEK AB T0G 0M0 CANADA 620-472-019 BURY BRYAN 422 MISTWOOD BLUFF RD CAMDENTON MO 65020-4813 620-472-021 NA STEVE 100 NIGHTHAWK IRVINE CA 92604-3682 620-472-022 BERGUM TRUST PO BOX 450 SEDGEWICK AB T0B 0E2 CANADA 620-472-023 BALSAN 6201 PROGRESSIVE AVE STE 400 SAN DIEGO CA 92154-6651 620-472-024 MCCLESKEY KATHY 4307 NAVIGATOR LN ANACORTES WA 98221-4476 620-472-025 RETREAT AT DESERT WILLOW 73081 FRED WARING DR PALM DESERT CA 92260-2878 620-472-026 HAMMANS LIVING TRUST PO BOX 2502 EUGENE OR 97402-0165 620-472-027 TAYLOR ALLAN 4624 E BROADWAY LONG BEACH CA 90803-1702 620-472-028 ISKANDAR TONNY 210 N MONTEREY ST ALHAMBRA CA 91801-2598 620-472-029 ENGEBRETSON RICHARD E REVOCABL 1804 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1639 620-472-031 BILLING ALEXANDER & THERESA RE 1701 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1638 620-472-032 LOSEKE CRAIG 6303 E 119TH ST TULSA OK 74137-8316 620-472-033 PLETKE DANIEL 1703 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1638 620-472-034 EISENHUT TIMOTHY 1704 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1638 620-472-036 TINSLEY WILLIAM 1401 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1634 620-472-037 POMFRET ADAM 331 VIA SAN SEBASTIAN REDONDO BEACH CA 90277-6659 620-472-038 UNRAU ROBERT 281 EAGLE RIDGE DR SW CALGARY AB T2V 2V6 CANADA 620-472-039 STEPHENSON THOMAS 1404 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1634 620-472-041 SANOFSKY JACK 1717 PLUTE ST ROCKLIN CA 95765 620-472-042 YUN JOHNCA 6535 PARK LAKE DR CLARKSTON MI 48346-1545 620-472-043 ZHANG KAREN 1935 MAVERICK LN SANTA ANA CA 92705-2562 620-472-044 ELLSWORTH SCOTT 2704 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1643 620-472-046 ASHLEY BRADLEY 101 ST CLAIRAVEW APT 904 TORONTO ON M4V 0A2 CANADA 620-472-047 BALL DAVID 1502 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1635 620-472-048 1945 CASTLE 1503 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1635 620-472-049 HOEKSTRA DOUGLAS 16912 ELM RD MAPLE GROVE MN 55311-3808 620-472-051 HERRMANN MARLENE 2801 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1644 620-472-052 FORMENTO MELIA 2746 BELLEZZA DR SAN DIEGO CA 92108-6745 620-472-053 WITHAM CHERRI 1932 ALTA PL EL CAJON CA 92021 620-472-054 HAJIAGHA MARJAN 2804 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1644 620-472-056 DUPLAN PATRICIA 1601 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1637 620-472-057 WOOLER PETER 1602 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1637 620-472-058 MAGMA INC 920 S WINCHESTER BLVD SAN JOSE CA 95128-2924 620-472-059 SOTELO RICARDO 1604 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1637 574
1000' RADIUS

PORTOLA SPRINGS PROJECT

LIST OF OWNERS - CONSOLIDATED
620-472-061 PEREZCHICA ANTONIO 101 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1645 620-472-062 RANKOWITZ CYNTHIA 11 ENCAMPMENT PL RIDGEFIELD CT 06877-1123 620-472-063 LAHEY ANN 103 RETREAT CIR PALM DESERT CA 92260-1645 620-472-064 NIPP DOROTHY 11330 PACIFIC ST OMAHA NE 68154-3364 694-364-010 SANJUAN FERDINAND 40448 CORTE PLACITAS PALM DESERT CA 92260-2394 694-364-011 PETIT CLAIR ALFRED 73601 HEATHERWOOD DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2015 694-364-012 SMITH STEPHANIE 73613 HEATHERWOOD DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2015 694-364-013 ANDRADE GERARD 73621 HEATHERWOOD DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2015 694-364-014 ZEMEK DAVID 73631 HEATHERWOOD DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2015 694-365-009 JECK TIMOTHY 11095 KENNEDY AVE CONIFER CO 80433-4611 694-365-010 EPSTEIN PHILIP 37589 HOLLISTER DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2051 694-365-011 HOLLORAN DONNA 73620 HEATHERWOOD DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2017 694-365-012 GRANADOS ENRIQUE 73630 HEATHERWOOD DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2017 694-365-013 HUSSEY CHRISTOPHER 37879 HOLLISTER DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2053 694-365-014 MOR ALEXANDER 37851 HOLLISTER DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2053 694-365-015 KINDER TODD 73621 WILLINGTON RD PALM DESERT CA 92211-2048 694-365-016 CARLOS FIDEL 73613 WILLINGTON RD PALM DESERT CA 92211-2048 694-366-001 YANG CHIN 79300 DESERT WIND CT LA QUINTA CA 92253-4245 694-366-002 DAWSON DEANNA 37785 HOLLISTER DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2052 694-366-006 CHANTRY LUCINDA PO BOX 524 SHERRARD IL 61281-0524 694-367-001 HPRL HOLLISTER LLC 6925 BECKETT ST TUJUNGA CA 91042-2036 694-367-002 LAWRENCE ASHLEY 37772 HOLLISTER DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2002 694-367-003 CHAVARIN HECTOR 27602 ELDENA DR RANCHO PALOS VERDES CA 90275-1023 694-367-004 SMITH PATRICIA 37828 HOLLISTER DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2001 694-367-005 FETES GABRIELLA 37856 HOLLISTER DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2001 694-367-006 STOCKTON DENNIS 75140 SAINT CHARLES PL STE A PALM DESERT CA 92211-9044 694-367-007 NGUYEN QUE 11267 SENDA LUNA LLENA SAN DIEGO CA 92130-2665 694-375-031 CUCCIAS JR ROBERT 37660 HOLLISTER DR PALM DESERT CA 92211-2003 694-381-001 ENGLER JEREMY 74101 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2068 694-381-002 WEALAND RANDY 74107 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2068 694-381-003 RUSTICELLI LOUIS 74113 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2068 694-381-004 WENSEL STACY 74119 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2068 694-381-005 HARMON RANDY 74125 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2068 694-381-006 MAYA HANNA HOLDINGS LTD 127 BANYAN CREST UNIT 5 SASKATOON SK S7V 1G5 CANADA 694-381-007 RODRIGUEZ ARNOLD 74137 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2068 694-381-008 RODRIGUEZ HECTOR 74143 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2068 694-381-009 DESIMONE JENNIFER 74140 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2067 694-381-010 ARVIZU BRITTNEY 74134 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2067 694-381-011 MIERA RANDALL 405 LOMITA ST EL SEGUNDO CA 90245-4054 694-381-012 GRENROCK CARY 74122 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2067 694-381-013 CALIXTO DEBBIE 74116 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2067 694-381-014 OGRODNICK ANTHONY 74110 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2067 694-381-015 RUSNEAC IOAN 74104 COLLEGE VIEW CIR E PALM DESERT CA 92211-2067 694-381-016 LOW BENNETT 3982 EELS RD CASHMERE WA 98815-9744 694-382-001 EMERSON LINDA 74092 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2064 694-382-002 MAGSAM MARK 74086 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2064 694-382-003 TOMS CRAIG 74080 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2064 694-382-004 GLUMAC VLADIMIR 74074 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2064 575
1000' RADIUS

PORTOLA SPRINGS PROJECT

LIST OF OWNERS - CONSOLIDATED
694-382-005 JENNE DAVID 74068 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2064 694-382-006 KASPRICK DEVIN 74062 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2064 694-382-007 WILSON GEORGE 74056 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2064 694-382-008 RUPPERT RICHARD 74050 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2064 694-382-009 GRAHAM TIMOTHY 74053 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2065 694-382-010 REITMAN NARAN 74059 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2065 694-382-011 LANGDON VICKI 3530 KILKEE RD LINCOLN NE 68520-1462 694-382-012 KARIC ALDA 11225 PEACH GROVE ST UNIT 308 N HOLLYWOOD CA 91601-4569 694-382-013 MANOS KELLY 74077 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2065 694-382-014 PHAM BRYAN 74083 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2065 694-382-015 LOTICH PHILLIP 74089 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2065 694-382-016 GENTRY LUKE 74095 COLLEGE VIEW CIR W PALM DESERT CA 92211-2065 694-391-001 TO -015 HAZELDEN BETTY FORD FOUNDATION PO BOX 11 CENTER CITY MN 55012-0011 694-391-016 TERRELL LEAH 74090 ALPINE LN PALM DESERT CA 92211-2082 694-391-017 ABDELNOUR MICHAEL 74084 ALPINE LN PALM DESERT CA 92211-2082 694-391-018 BOEHRINGER DEBRA 74078 ALPINE LN PALM DESERT CA 92211-2082 694-391-019 MACKIE KEITH 3716 MCLAY GREEN EDMONTON B T6R 0B9 CANADA 694-391-020 NOVACK JASON 74066 ALPINE LN PALM DESERT CA 92211-2082 694-391-021 DONNER SUSAN 74060 ALPINE LN PALM DESERT CA 92211-2082 694-391-022 SMITH GREG 74054 ALPINE LN PALM DESERT CA 92211-2082 694-391-023 JUAREZ BILLY 3630 MELICHAR LN NW OLYMPIA WA 98502-2546 694-391-024 74053 ALPINE LANE 10660 HOLMAN AVE LOS ANGELES CA 90024-5907 694-391-025 RODRIGUEZ ANGELICA 74057 ALPINE LN PALM DESERT CA 92211-2082 694-391-026 GREER DEBRA 2545 ALLEN ADALE RD FAIRBANKS AK 99709-2581 694-391-027 BALBINI JULIE 74067 ALPINE LN PALM DESERT CA 92211-2082 694-391-028 YANG DAVIES FU 515 AVENIDA LARGO NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660-4018 694-391-029 WELK STEPHANIE 4701 N PORTWEST CIR WICHITA KS 67204-2356 694-391-030 OSBORN MARY 74087 ALPINE LN PALM DESERT CA 92211-2082 694-391-031 HEINKEL ROBERT 1952 PELICAN PL COSTA MESA CA 92626-4732 694-392-001 BEMIS DAVID 74102 PELE PL PALM DESERT CA 92211-2909 694-392-002 MCMAKEN KIMBERLY 74116 PELE PL # 4 PALM DESERT CA 92211-2909 694-392-003 GALSTJAN ISKOUHI 74130 PELE PL PALM DESERT CA 92211-2909 694-392-004 LIM JAMES 1079 HARVEST CIR PLEASANTON CA 94566-6439 694-392-005 NOVACK JEFFREY 1764 BURBURY WAY SAN MARCOS CA 92078-0927 694-392-006 JAMES LINDA 74172 PELE PL PALM DESERT CA 92211-2909 694-392-007 SMITH BARRETT 74186 PELE PL PALM DESERT CA 92211-2909 694-392-008 SCICLI JR CHARLES 74193 PELE PL PALM DESERT CA 92211-2909 694-392-009 WISEMAN KEVIN 74179 PELE PL PALM DESERT CA 92211-2909 694-392-010 WINKLE RICHARD 74165 PELE PL PALM DESERT CA 92211-2909 694-392-011 PARKER GWENETTE 4530 DON FELIPE DR LOS ANGELES CA 90008-2826 694-392-012 NABER ANTHONY 74137 PELE PL PALM DESERT CA 92211-2909 694-392-013 MOVSISYAN SIRAK 74123 PELE PL PALM DESERT CA 92211-2909 694-392-014 CONLON JOSEPH 78551 POMPEII CT LA QUINTA CA 92253-7922 694-392-015 GATES DEANNE 74100 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2972 694-392-016 ELLIS DEBRA 74106 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2972 694-392-017 MAIN DONALD 606-3400 MCDONALD AVE BRANDON MB R7B 1R8 CANADA 694-392-018 GAERTNER ALFRED 74118 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2972 694-392-019 EPP FRANK 74124 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2972 576
1000' RADIUS

PORTOLA SPRINGS PROJECT

LIST OF OWNERS - CONSOLIDATED
694-392-020 WALLACE JOE 74130 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2972 694-392-021 AGAHI PEYMAN 74136 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2972 694-392-022 DERBIGNY MICHAEL 74142 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2972 694-392-023 BELL ANTHONY 74145 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2973 694-392-024 WHITE ISAAC 74139 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2973 694-392-025 KLEMPNER HAROLD 3015 WIMBLEDON DR REGINA SK S4V 2Y2 CANADA 694-392-026 JACKSON GLENN PO BOX 142 INGLIS MB R0J 0X0 CANADA 694-392-027 HESSLER ROBERT 74121 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2973 694-392-028 FLOOD THEODORE 74115 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2973 694-392-029 HERRERA CLAUDIA 74109 UNIVERSITY POINTE CT PALM DESERT CA 92211-2973 694-392-030 MCQUEEN KRISTIN 4723 INDIANOLA WAY LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE CA 91011-2640 694-392-031, -032 UNIVERSITY POINTE INC 68950 ADELINA RD CATHEDRAL CITY CA 92234-3747 DESERT RESORT MANAGEMENT 42635 MELANIE PL STE 103 PALM DESERT CA 92211 J&W MANAGEMENT 73320 EL PASEO PALM DESERT CA 92260
577

RECREATION
AREA

0.29 AC.

RETENTION
BASIN

0.25 AC.

PROPOSED 45' BUILDING SETBACK LINE

FRANK SINATRA DRIVE

PORTOLA AVENUE
24'
40'
51'
32'
24'
20'
20'

PORTOLA AVENUE
10' PUE
10' PUE
10' PUE
40'

EXISTING ROW

EXISTING ROW

SHALLOW

RETENTION BASIN
24'
32'
40'
50'
32'

RIGHT IN / RIGHT

OUT ACCESS

SHALLOW

RETENTION BASIN
24'
37' 1
2 3 4
6 5
7 8
9 10
12 11
13 14
15 16
18 17
19 20
21 22
24 23
26 25
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 36 34
35 37
38 39
40 42
41 43
44 45
46 48
47 49
50 51
52 53
54 55
56 57
58 60
59 62
61 63
66 64
65 67
68 69
72 70
71 73
74 75
76 77
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
28 27 26 25 24 23
29 30 31 32 33 34
44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36
35 45 46 47
48 49
50 51
52 58 53
57 56
55 54
79 78
77 76
75 67 74
66 65
64 63
62 61
60 59
72 73
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 RIGHT IN / RIGHT OUT ACCESS

MAIN ENTRY
10' PUE
20'
70 45'
45'
45'

EXISTING SCE POWERPOLE

EXISTING POLE ANCHORS
REQUIRED 32' BLDG.

SETBACK LINE
REQUIRED 32' BLDG.

SETBACK LINE
REQUIRED 20' PROJECT PERIMETER

SETBACK FROM PUBLIC STREET
REQUIRED 20' PROJECT PERIMETER

SETBACK FROM PUBLIC STREET
32'
REQUIRED 32' BLDG.

SETBACK LINE

EXISTING ROW
32'
51'
40'
10'
10'
5'
10'
10'
10'
10'
5'
10'
10'
5'
5'
68 32'
43'
10'
71 69
PROPOSED 6'

MEANDERING

SIDEWALK
PROPOSED 6'

MEANDERING

SIDEWALK
PROPOSED 6'

MEANDERING

SIDEWALK
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING

CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN

PORTOLA SPRINGS, CITY OF PALM DESERT, CA
1 of
1 Sheet

DATA TABLE
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS:

EXISTING ZONING: P.R.22 (GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD)
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE:

GROSS DEVELOPABLE AREA ±16.9 ACRES
620-400-030-5 & 620-400-031-6
TOWN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD (7-40 DU/AC.)

SITE SUMMARY
LOT PROGRAM : ALLEY-LOAD SFD ± 79 LOTS (51%)
LOT PROGRAM : CLUSTER SFD ± 77 LOTS (49%)
TOTAL LOTS : ± 156 LOTS
GROSS DENSITY ±9.2 DU/AC. MONTEREY AVE

COUNTRY CLUB DR

FRANK SINATRA DR

PORTOLA AVE

BOB HOPE DR

GERALD FORD DR
±1.4 DU/AC.

JULY 03, 2025
EXCLUDES PROP. FRANK SINATRA DR. AND PORTOLA AVE. ROW DEDICATION 20' PROJECT PERIMETER SETBACK AREA
578
FRANK SINATRA DRIVE A PORTOLA AVENUE B B 98 STREET "B"
STREET "A" STREET "D" STREET "F"
STREET "C" STREET "E" STREET "G"
STREET "J"
STREET "I" STREET "H"
STREET "K"
STREET "L"
STREET "M"
STREET "N"
STREET "O"
STREET "P"
STREET "Q"
STREET "R"
STREET "S" 979695 88 87 86858483 9493 929190 82 81 80 79 78 99 100 101 102 103 STREET "W" 62 59 58 5756 53 52 5150 47 48 49 46 45 44 43 42 4140393835 37 36 34333229 28 30 31 27 25 26 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 123 143 144 145 146 147 148 128 127 126 125 124 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 19 20 21 22 23 24 112 111 110 109 108 107 106 105 104 113 121 122 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 60 61 63 64 65 66 68 67 69 70 71 72 74 73 75 76 77 55 54 STREET "V"
STREET "U"
STREET "T" 13 14 15 16 17 18 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 89 STREET "G" C C D D A ±25' PROP. HOUSE (TWO-STORY) PROP. PROPERTY WALL
±25' PROP. MEANDERING SIDEWALK WEST BOUND EX. LANDSCAPE EX. MEANDERING MEDIAN SIDEWALK SIGHT LINE (TYP.) PERSON (TYP.) EX. SURFACE PROP. SURFACE 277.81 EAST BOUND PROP. C/L PROP. HOUSE (TWO-STORY) EX. HOUSE (SINGLE STORY) PE 280.30 (LOT 19) STREET "B" (PRIVATE ROAD) EX. R/W & PROPERTY BOUNDARY FRANK SINATRA DRIVE (PUBLIC ROAD) EX. C/L 280.30 280.80 PE 280.80 280.30 (LOT 20) (279.09) (278.92) 280.80 275.05 (275.08) (279.4) (274.57) (274.45) (279.12) EX. PROJECT BOUNDARY & PROP. PROPERTY WALL 274.83 274.00 272.89 PROP. C/L STREET "J" (PRIVATE ROAD) PROP. HOUSE (TWO-STORY) ±25' PROP. PROJECT SIDEWALK (273.97) EX. SURFACE PROP. SURFACE (274.29) PERSON (TYP.) SIGHT LINE (TYP.) PE 274.00 (LOT 95) 5' PROP. HOUSE (TWO-STORY) ±25' PORTOLA DRIVE EX. C/L
(PUBLIC ROAD) EX. LANDSCAPE MEDIAN NORTH BOUND PROP. PROPERTY WALL (278.53) PROP. MEANDERING SIDEWALK EX. MEANDERING SIDEWALK PERSON EX. SURFACE (TYP.) PE 280.3 (LOT 29) SIGHT LINE (TYP.) SIGHT LINE (TYP.)
(273.39) (273.35) (272.63) 277.88 278.96 (272.79)
EX. R/W & PROPERTY BOUNDARY SOUTH BOUND (279.34) PROP. HOUSE (TWO-STORY) ±25' STREET "G" (PRIVATE ROAD) PE 279.8 (LOT 30) 279.80 279.80 280.30 280.30 PROP. SURFACE EX. C/L ±25' EX. LANDSCAPE MEDIAN (268.12) NORTH BOUND PROP. PROPERTY WALL PROP. MEANDERING SIDEWALK EX. MEANDERING SIDEWALK PERSON (TYP.) PROP. C/L PROP. SURFACE EX. SURFACE SIGHT LINE (TYP.) PORTOLA DRIVE (PUBLIC ROAD) (268.98) (269.07) (268.11) EX. SURFACE EX. R/W & PROPERTY BOUNDARY (270.50) 268.16 273.80 PROP. HOUSE (TWO-STORY) 273.80 (272.05) 273.30 273.30 272.61 PE 273.80 (LOT 59) PE 273.30 (LOT 60) ±25' PROP. SURFACE SOUTH BOUND (269.20) EX. PROPERTY WALL (269.19) LINE OF SIGHT EXHIBIT DATA TABLE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 620-170-009 EXHIBIT DATE: JANUARY 30, 2026 SOURCE OF TOPOGRAPHY ADDRESS AEROTECH MAPPING, INC. 200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 300 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92618 DATE OF TOPOGRAPHY OCTOBER 31, 2024 APPLICANT / ADDRESS CONTACT 18300 REDMOND WAY, SUITE 120 REDMOND, WASHINGTON 98052 KIM MOLINA EXHIBIT PREPARER ADDRESS MSA CONSULTING, INC. 34200 BOB HOPE DRIVE RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270 CONTACT PAUL DEPALATIS, AICP TELEPHONE (760) 320-9811 REVISIONS NO. DATE THE CITY OF PALM DESERT OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA LEGAL DESCRIPTIONDESCRIPTION BEING THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 5 EAST, LAND OWNER BLUE FERN WEST, LLC. TELEPHONE (619) 606-5020 MSA CONSULTING ,INC. Civil Engine ring LandSurveying Landscape Architecture Planning Environmental Services DryUtilityCo rdination GIS 34200 Bob Hope Drive Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 | 760.320.9811 | MSAConsultinginc.com SHEET SHEETS 1OF1 SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN. FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 39307 SECTION A-A SCALE: 1" = 15' SECTION SITE INDEX SECTION B-B SCALE: 1" = 15' SECTION D-D SCALE: 1" = 15' SECTION C-C SCALE: 1" = 15' DATA TABLE (CONTINUED) SIGHT LINE LEGENDPEDESTRIAN VIEW VEHICLE VIEW 1 NOTES 1. VEHICLE VIEWS ARE ONLY VISIBLE FOR A MATTER OF SECONDS AS MOTION CREATES A CONSTANTLY CHANGING PERIPHERAL SCENE. 2. BUILDING ELEVATIONS ARE CONCEPTUAL AND FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY.

PORTOLA VICINITY MAP N.T.S. CITY OF PALM DESERT
AVENUE GERALD FORD DRIVE FRANK SINATRA DRIVE COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE INTERSTATE 10 AVENUE
COOK STREET DINAH SHORE DR.

MONTEREY CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE SITE
R:\2866\Acad\Planning\Exhibits\2866 Line of Sight Exhibit - TTM 39307.dwg, 1/30/2026 3:43:15 PM, dgallerani, MSA Consulting, Inc. 579
580
581
582
583

CITY OF PALM DESERT

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

INTERNAL STAFF MEMORANDUM
To: City of Palm Desert Planning Commission
From: Sijifredo Fernandez, Senior Planner
CC: Rosie Lua, Director of Development Services
Date: February 17, 2026
Subject: Agenda Item 7a
Related: Planning Commission Meeting February 17, 2026
Commissioner Question related to Agenda Item 7a:

1. I see the southbound deceleration lane provided for in the conditions of approval, but I don't see anything about left-turn access from northbound Portola. Will that recommendation be incorporated?
Staff recommends adding the following language to the Tentative Tract Map Resolution Condition of Approval No. 26 and Precise Plan Condition of Approval No. 46, to be inserted between subsections “e” and “f,” in order to address the left-turn access. The attached memorandum includes the traffic analysis identifying the need for this improvement. The Tentative Tract Map resolution has been revised accordingly to reflect this modification. (See Attachment 1 and Attachment 3a and 3b) ➢ “The Applicant shall construct a median opening at the northerly Portola Avenue driveway to accommodate a northbound left-turn lane into the development, providing a minimum 200-foot storage length. The design shall account for the existing southbound left-turn movement from Portola Avenue onto Retreat Circle North and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.” Staff revision to Condition of Approvals:

2. Precise Plan Resolution Number Formatting: There is a formatting error in Planning Resolution 2913, as Condition #62 is missing. The final resolution 584
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17, 2026

will be revised to correct this error, which will result in a corresponding shift in the numbering sequence.

Applicants comment letter:

3. Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP, legal counsel for the applicant, submitted a letter dated February 17, 2026, requesting that the Commission make an express finding that the Project also qualifies for a CEQA exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183. (See Attachment 2) Staff response: Staff has evaluated the applicant’s request and determined that the Project qualifies for a CEQA exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183.

Accordingly, staff has incorporated this exemption into the recommended findings for both resolutions and will provide a detailed analysis of Section 15183’s applicability during the project presentation, including an explanation of the Project’s consistency with the applicable General Plan and zoning designations and the prior environmental review conducted for the General Plan Update. Please see the draft revisions to the resolutions reflecting these updates.

The Project is consistent with the land use, zoning, and density designations established by the City’s 2016 General Plan Update, which was evaluated in a certified Environmental Impact Report. CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 provides that projects consistent with an adopted General Plan EIR are eligible for CEQA streamlining or exemption where no new significant impacts, or substantial increases in the severity of previously identified impacts, would occur.

The following is a summary for clarification of the record:
• The Applicant submitted a General Plan Consistency Memorandum dated February 17, 2026, which provides additional evidence demonstrating the Project’s consistency with the City’s 2016 General Plan land use, zoning, and density designations.
• The Consistency Memorandum substantiates the City’s findings that the Project does not result in any new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of impacts analyzed in the 2016 General Plan EIR. • The Consistency Memorandum has been reviewed by City staff and is incorporated into the administrative record in support of reliance on CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.
• Staff finds that the Addendum, together with the Consistency Memorandum and supporting technical studies, constitutes substantial evidence supporting CEQA streamlining under Section 15183.

Accordingly, the Project qualifies for CEQA streamlining pursuant to Section 15183, and the City may rely on the existing environmental record to support approval of the Project. (Attachment 3a and 3b)
Attachments:
585
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17, 2026

1) Site Access and VMT Memorandum
2) Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP, CEQA Letter
3) Resolutions
a. Updated Resolution No. 2913
b. Updated Resolution No. 2914
586

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To: Blue Fern, c/o Kim Molina, Pacific Land Consultants From: Sabita Tewani, AICP, PTP, Senior Transportation Planner Tyler Mathews, Transportation Planner
Arthur Chen, Senior Transportation Modeler
Subject: Site Access and Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis for Portola Springs Residential Project, City of Palm Desert
Date: November 10, 2025
cc: Kristen Stoner, Dudek
Dennis Pascua, Dudek
Attachments: Figures 1 – 6
A – Approved Traffic Scoping Agreement and Form and PP25-006 Completeness Review B – Vistro Worksheets
C – SimTraffic Worksheets
The following technical memorandum provides a Site Access and Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis for the proposed Portola Springs Residential Project (project), located at the southwest corner of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive in the City of Palm Desert (City). Based on a project team meeting with the City staff on June 5, 2025, and the approved Scoping Agreement included as Attachment A, and PP25-0006 Completeness Review comments provided on the October 1, 2025, the following memorandum includes an access analysis of the project driveways along Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive and a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) screening analysis per CEQA requirements for transportation analysis of the proposed project.

The City of Palm Desert has adopted the VMT metric and significance criteria for transportation impact analyses for CEQA compliance and requires level of service (LOS) analysis for General Plan consistency requirements. It should be noted the City adopted the Riverside County Transportation Impact Guidelines for Level Service and Vehicle Miles Traveled (December 2020) per Resolution 2022-74 on August 25, 2022, and subsequently released the City of Palm Desert Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment (August 2023). The analysis is consistent with both the City and County requirements for the transportation analysis of a land use project.

1.0 Project Description and Setting
Figure 1 shows the project’s location at the southwest corner of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Boulevard.

Regional access to the project site is primarily from Interstate 10 (I-10) to the north and State Route 111 (SR-111) to the south. The project would construct 156 single-family dwelling units on a 16.9 acre site. The project site is designated as Planned Residential in the City’s land use map and would be consistent with that land use designation. 587

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: SITE ACCESS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS FOR PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,

CITY OF PALM DESERT
18192.02 2
NOVEMBER 2025
The site plan of the proposed project is shown on Figure 2. The proposed project would be accessed via three driveways: Driveway 1 on Frank Sinatra Boulevard, Driveway 2 on Portola Avenue, and Driveway 3 further south on Portola Avenue. The three driveways would operate with the following access restrictions:
• Driveway 1 (D1) would operate as right-in/right-out only driveways (i.e., no left-turns for inbound and outbound access) due to existing raised medians on Frank Sinatra Drive. • Driveway 2 (D2) on Portola Avenue would operate as left-in-right-in/right out • Driveway 3 (D3) on Portola Avenue would operate as right-out only The access driveways would be 32 feet wide and would be designed per City standards for residential driveways as included in the City of Palm Desert Standard Details and Design Guidelines1 .

Roadways
The City of Palm Desert follows the roadway classification system included in the City’s General Plan (adopted November 10, 2016) Mobility chapter. The roadways in the vicinity of the project site are described below:

Portola Avenue is classified as a north-south Balanced Arterial in the City and in the vicinity of the proposed project.

Balanced arterials have four lanes with a median as well as sidewalks for pedestrians and bicycle lanes. Portola Avenue, south of Frank Sinatra Drive, is constructed with three lanes in each direction with a raised median and a Class II bike lane in both directions. The three travel lanes in the southbound direction transition to two-lanes approximately 250 feet south of Frank Sinatra Drive. The roadway is generally constructed with paved and meandering sidewalks with landscaping and trees along the eastern side of Portola Avenue between Frank Sinatra Drive and County Club Drive. The posted speed limit in the project vicinity is 55 miles per hour (MPH). Portola Avenue would provide access to the project via two right-in/right-out only driveways.

Frank Sinatra Drive is classified as a Balanced Arterial in the City and in the vicinity of the proposed project. The roadway is oriented east-west in the City. The current roadway design is four lanes with a median and a Class II bike lane in both directions. The roadway is generally constructed with paved and meandering sidewalks with landscaping and trees along the northern side of Frank Sinatra Drive between Portola Avenue and Monterey Avenue. The posted speed limit in the project vicinity is 55 MPH. Frank Sinatra Drive would provide access to the project via right-in/right-out only driveway, west of Portola Avenue.

Country Club Drive is classified as an east-west Vehicular Oriented Arterial in the City and in the vicinity of the proposed project. Country Club Drive is a four-lane roadway with a raised median, paved sidewalks, and Class II bike lanes. The posted speed limit in the project vicinity is 45 MPH.

Cook Street is a north-south roadway classified as a Vehicular Oriented Arterial in the City and in the vicinity of the proposed project. Cook Street is generally constructed as a six-lane roadway with a raised median and paved sidewalks north of Frank Sinatra Drive and as a four-lane roadway with a raised median, Class II bike lanes and sidewalks south of Frank Sinatra Drive. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the roadway. On-street parking is generally not permitted and the posted speed limit is 55 MPH. 1 https://www.palmdesert.gov/departments/public-works/engineering-/standard-drawings 588

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: SITE ACCESS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS FOR PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,

CITY OF PALM DESERT
18192.02 3
NOVEMBER 2025
Transit Facilities
SunLine Transit Agency provides public transportation throughout Coachella Valley. Bus Routes 5, 10, and 500 operate in the vicinity of the project along Cook Street, as described below:
▪ Route 5 operates between the Palm Desert Towne Center and Desert Hot Springs via Cook Street and Fred Waring Drive between 6:30 a.m. and 7:30 p.m. The route operates at a frequency of 60 minutes on weekdays only.
▪ Route 10 is a commuter link between San Bernardino and Indio and serves north Palm Desert via Cook Street. The route has a frequency of 2.5 to 3 hours throughout the week and there is no weekend or holiday service available.
▪ Route 500 operates as a weekday-only school tripper service between Cook Street at University Park Drive and Town Center. The route operates between 3:50 p.m. and 4:15 p.m. primarily to prevent overcrowding on other routes due to increase in student ridership from the Palm Desert High School.

The nearest bus stop to the project site for Route 5 and is located approximately one mile east of the intersection of Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra Drive. Bus stops for Route 10 and 500 are located approximately 0.2 miles from the project site, north of Cook Street/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection.

Bicycle and Golf Cart Facilities
The Palm Desert General Plan Mobility Element provides a comprehensive and updated overview of the City’s current and future recommendations to enhance multi-modal facilities which include pedestrian, bicycle, and golfcart classifications:

Class I: Class I facilities are off-street facilities, which can be shared between golf carts, bicyclists, and pedestrians.

Class II: Class II facilities are on-street facilities, which can be used by either bicycles only or as joint use facilities used by golf carts and bicycles. These facilities are designated either by striping or through physical separations in the roadway.

Class III: Class III paths are on-street facilities designated through signage that do not provide a separate space.

Class S: Class S facilities are shared sidewalks that provide access for both pedestrians and bicyclists.

Coachella Valley (CV) Link: CV Link is a regional off-street facility for new electric vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. This facility will be overseen by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments.

CV Link Connectors: CV Connectors provide additional connections to the CV Link Facility through signage, crossing treatments, or separate facilities that provide connections from the city to the CV Link Facility.

There are existing Class II bike facilities that are striped for bicycles and golf carts adjacent to the project site along Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive. Class II facilities currently exist on Country Club Road, east of Portola Avenue and on Cook Street, south of Frank Sinatra Boulevard. Figure 3 illustrates the bike and transit facilities in the vicinity of the project site.
589

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: SITE ACCESS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS FOR PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,

CITY OF PALM DESERT
18192.02 4
NOVEMBER 2025
Pedestrian Facilities
As described under Roadway Facilities, the segments of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue in the vicinity oi the project are constructed with paved and meandering sidewalks along one side of the roadway while the opposite side of these streets is unpaved and has intermittent shrubs or landscaping. The Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection is constructed with curb ramps and pedestrian crosswalks on all four legs of the intersection. The traffic signal at the intersection includes pedestrian phasing.

2.0 Project Trip Generation
Trip generation estimates for the project are based on daily and AM and PM peak hour trip generation rates obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 11th Edition (2021), using the Single-family (detached) land use (ITE Code 210) trip rates. Table 1 provides a comparison of the proposed project’s trip generation with the previously approved project.

Table 1. Trip Generation Comparison
Land Use
Daily Trip
Rate/Unit
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Rates and Trip Generation1
Multi-family housing (Low-rise) 6.74 trips/DU 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.32 0.19 0.51 Single-family housing (Detached) 9.43 trips/DU 0.18 0.53 0.70 0.59 0.35 0.94 Land Use Units Daily
Approved Project (multi-family) 402 2,709 40 121 161 129 76 205 Proposed Project (single family) 156 1,471 27 82 109 93 54 147 Net New (Proposed – Approved) -1,238 -13 -39 -52 -36 -22 -58 Notes: DU = Dwelling unit
1 Trip rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition.

The approved project’s trip generation was estimated to be 2,709 daily trips, 161 AM peak hour trips (40 inbound and 121 outbound), and 205 PM peak hour trips (129 inbound and 76 outbound). As shown in Table 1, using the ITE trip rates for the single family detached units, the proposed project would generate approximately 1,471 daily trips, 109 AM peak hour trips (27 inbound and 82 outbound), and 147 PM peak hour trips (93 inbound and 54 outbound). Compared to the approved project trip generation, the proposed project would generate net negative (or fewer trips): (-) 1,238 daily trips, (-) 52 AM peak hour trips (-13 inbound and -39 outbound), and (-) 58 PM peak hour trips (-36 inbound and -22 outbound).

The proposed project would add fewer trips to the intersections and roadway segments in the vicinity of the project site compared to the previously approved project. Hence, the City staff did not require the project to prepare a new traffic analysis, however, to account for the new trips at the access driveways, the site access analysis has been prepared. The site access analysis is based on the proposed project’s trip generation estimates, i.e., 1,471 daily trips, 109 AM peak hour trips (27 inbound and 82 outbound), and 147 PM peak hour trips (93 inbound and 54 outbound).
590

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: SITE ACCESS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS FOR PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,

CITY OF PALM DESERT
18192.02 5
NOVEMBER 2025

3.0 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Project trip distribution percentages were based on project access control and logical travel paths to commute corridors from the project site. Approximately 15% of project trips would travel north along Portola Avenue and 30% of the project trips would travel south along Portola Avenue. Approximately 40% of project trips would travel east along Frank Sinatra Drive and 15% would travel west along Frank Sinatra Drive. Project trips were assigned to the project driveways by applying the project trip generation estimates to the trip distribution percentages described above. Figure 4 illustrates the project trip distribution and assignment.

The project’s trip distribution at project driveways D1, D2, and D3 and roadway segments near the site is shown on Figure 4 Some trips would make eastbound U-turns at the Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection to access the proposed project. A nominal percentage of trips could also make southbound U-turns at the Portola Avenue/Desert Willow Court intersection, south of project driveway D3. However, the percentage and project trips would be low and not affect the site access analysis shown below.

4.0 Site Access Analysis
The proposed project access driveways would operate as follows:
▪ Driveway 1 (D1)/Frank Sinatra Drive – Allows right-in-right-out movements from eastbound on Frank Sinatra Drive.
▪ Driveway 2 (D2)/Portola Avenue – Allows left-in movements from northbound on Portola Avenue and rightin-right-out movements from southbound on Portola Avenue ▪ Driveway 3 (D3)/Portola Avenue – Allows right-out movements only To analyze the operation of driveways, a queuing analysis was conducted at the project driveways. A queuing analysis is needed to identify improvements or need for turning lanes by assessing queue lengths at intersections and/or site access driveways. The Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection was also included in the analysis because of the proximity to the site. The queuing analysis was conducted for AM and PM peak hours under the Existing and Existing plus Project conditions.

An analysis of right turn deceleration lane was also conducted for all the inbound right turns from Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive into the project site. The City’s guidelines require analysis and review of available storage capacity of existing and proposed auxiliary lanes if a project generates 50 vehicles per hour or greater during peak hours. This is because:
▪ High volumes of right-turn traffic can cause backup and delay on the through lanes. ▪ Results in conflicts between crossing pedestrians and right turning vehicles and bicycles. ▪ Result in frequent rear-end and sideswipe collisions involving right-turning vehicles. 591

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: SITE ACCESS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS FOR PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,

CITY OF PALM DESERT
18192.02 6
NOVEMBER 2025

4.1 Site Access Standards
The City of Palm Desert TIA Guidelines (2023) identifies policies applicable to site access and deceleration lanes within the city, as follows:

1. A left-turn deceleration lane with taper and storage length is required for any driveway with a projected peak hour left ingress turning volume estimated to be 25 vehicles per hour (vph) or greater. The taper length shall be included as part of the required deceleration lane.

2. A right-turn deceleration lane is required for any driveway with a projected peak hour right ingress turning volume estimated to be 50 vph or greater. The taper length shall be included as part of the required deceleration lane length. Pocket storage length requirements shall be based on individual project characteristics.

3. A right-turn deceleration lane should be considered for lower turning volumes on high-volume streets.

4. A left-turn deceleration lane should be considered for locations where left-turning vehicles would be required to queue in a high speed (> 40 mph) through lane.

5. Installation recommendations for deceleration lanes and related intersection turning movement distributions shown in the final traffic study report will be subject to approval by the City Engineer.

4.2 Analysis Methodology
A queuing analysis, using SimTraffic 12 software, was conducted to determine the 95th percentile (design) queue of the existing and proposed storage lanes at the project driveways and the Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection.

The project trip assignment was used to assess vehicular queues that would occur along Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive and to determine the requirements for turn lanes and deceleration lanes. As seen in the PM peak hour, a maximum of 53 vehicles would make a southbound right-turn into the site at the Driveway 2 (D2)/Portola Avenue

4.3 Queuing Analysis
This queuing analysis focuses on the weekday daily, AM (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) and the PM (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) peak periods. The peak periods represent the highest volume of traffic for the adjacent street system. Existing weekday AM and PM peak hour turn movement counts for the Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection were obtained from the Catavina Residential Transportation Impact Analysis (Michael Baker 2025) were used as background volumes. The project trip assignment illustrated on Figure 4 were added to background traffic volumes to obtain Existing plus Project traffic volumes for the project driveways and the Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection.

Existing and proposed geometric conditions at the intersection and driveways are illustrated on Figure 5. Table 2 summarizes the 95th percentile queuing analysis under Existing and Existing plus Project conditions. The SimTraffic worksheets are provided in Attachment C.
592

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: SITE ACCESS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS FOR PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,

CITY OF PALM DESERT
18192.02 7
NOVEMBER 2025
Table 2. Project Queuing Summary
Intersection
Movement Storage
Length1
Existing Existing plus Project
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Avg
Queue2
Exceeds
Storage
Length
Avg
Queue2
Exceeds
Storage
Length
Avg
Queue2
Exceeds
Storage
Length
Avg
Queue2
Exceeds
Storage
Length
Portola Avenue/
Frank Sinatra Drive
NBUL 257 317 Yes 291 Yes 338 Yes

305 Yes
SBUL 178 236 Yes 252 Yes 242 Yes 234 Yes
EBUL 120 106 No 166 Yes 130 Yes 171 Yes
EBR 230 77 No 70 No 84 No 69 No
WBUL 143 134 No 118 No 137 No 154 Yes
WBR 100 69 No 59 No 78 No 65 No
Driveway 1/ Frank
Sinatra Drive
NBR3 170 Does not exist 56 No 48 No
Portola
Avenue/Driveway 2
NBL 150 Does not exist 23 No 43 No
EBR3 145 Does not exist 32 No 22 No
Portola
Avenue/Driveway 3
EBR3 145 Does not exist 28 No 23 No
Notes: NBUL = northbound U- and left-turn lane; NBR = northbound right; SBUL = southbound U- and left-turn lane; EBUL = eastbound U- and left-turn lane; EBR = eastbound right; WBUL = westbound U- and left-turn lane; WBR = westbound right. 1 Storage length is exceeded if the calculated distance is less than or equal to the storage length provided. 2 Based on 95th percentile queue length in SimTraffic 12. 3 Storage length is on-site.
593

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: SITE ACCESS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS FOR PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,

CITY OF PALM DESERT
18192.02 8
NOVEMBER 2025
As shown in Table 2, under the Existing conditions, the vehicular queues exceed the storage lane at the Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection at the northbound and southbound left-turn lanes in the AM and PM peak hours; and, the eastbound left-turn lane in the PM peak hour only. Under the Existing plus Project conditions, the project would add trips to the Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection and the queue lengths would increase nominally (less than 25 feet or one car length) at all the turn movements. The queue at the eastbound left-turn lane would exceed storage length in the AM peak hour, however it would be less than one car length. The queue at the westbound left-turn lane would exceed storage length in the PM peak hour, however it would be only one car length. It should be noted that average queues do not exceed the storage length under any peak hour. As such, the project would not contribute to excessive queueing at the Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection to require any improvement. Additionally, the on-site queues at the project driveways would not exceed more than two vehicles and would be accommodated within the driveway s’ throat (storage) lengths provided on the project site. The highest volumes of right-turning vehicles in to the project site were observed In the PM peak hour when 51 vehicles make a southbound right-turn at the Portola Avenue/Driveway 2. Because this would exceed the threshold in the City’s guidelines, it is recommended that the project construct a deceleration lane to accommodate southbound right turning vehicles at the Portola Avenue/Driveway 2. The existing curb, gutter, sidewalk, and bicycle lane along Portola Avenue along with the transition of the southbound lanes from three lanes to two lanes along the project frontage would need to be designed to accommodate the southbound right deceleration lane.

4.4 Site Access Improvements
Project access and frontage improvements along the project site would be constructed according to the City’s standard requirements. Following improvements are proposed for the project access driveways:
• Driveway 1 (D1)/Frank Sinatra Drive: Construct Project access as a right-in/right-out only access by providing northbound right turn lane and an inbound lane • Driveway 2 (D2)/Portola Avenue: The project would install a stop control on the eastbound approach and construct the intersection with the following geometrics:

1. Project would provide a median opening along Portola Avenue at this location to accommodate a 150 feet northbound left turn lane with taper for the D2.

2. Provide a deceleration lane to accommodate a total length of 100 feet of southbound right turn lane with taper at D2 along Portola Avenue.

A detailed design of the northbound left turn lane and the southbound deceleration lane at the Portola Avenue/Driveway 2 would be prepared by the project’s civil engineer and would be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
• Driveway 3 (D3)/Portola Avenue: Construct Project access as a right-out only access by providing an eastbound right turn lane
594

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: SITE ACCESS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS FOR PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,

CITY OF PALM DESERT
18192.02 9
NOVEMBER 2025

5.0 VMT Analysis
In December 2018, CEQA Guidelines were updated to include a threshold for evaluating traffic impacts using the VMT methodology. This methodology was required to be used statewide beginning on July 1, 2020. The CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, “Determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts” state that “generally, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts” and define VMT as “the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project.” It should be noted that “automobile” refers to on-road passenger vehicles, specifically cars and light trucks. OPR has clarified in the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (OPR 2018) (Technical Advisory) and informational presentations that heavy-duty truck VMT is not required to be included in the estimation of a project’s VMT. Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project on transit and non-motorized traveled.

The requirements to prepare a detailed transportation VMT analysis apply to all discretionary land development projects that are not exempt from CEQA, except those that meet at least one of the VMT screening criteria described below. A project that meets at least one of the screening criteria per City’s VMT guidelines below would be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact.

5.1 VMT Screening Criteria
The City uses the VMT screening criteria included in the County of Riverside Transportation Guidelines which include:
▪ Small Projects: applies to projects with low trip generation per existing CEQA exemptions or based on the County Greenhouse Gas Emissions Screening Tables, result in a 3,000 Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (MTCO2e) per year screening level threshold
▪ Projects near High quality transit: applies to projects located within half-mile of an existing major stop which maintains a service interval frequency of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods
▪ Local-serving retail uses: applies to retail uses where no single store on-site should exceed 50,000 square feet and the use is local serving
▪ Affordable Housing: applies to projects with a high percentage of affordable housing ▪ Local essential service: applies to local serving essential services such as day care, or police or fire facility, medical/dental office buildings, government offices or local or community parks ▪ Redevelopment Projects: applies to projects that replace existing VMT-generating land uses and does not result in a net overall increase in VMT
▪ Map-based Screening: The map-based screening eliminates the need for complex analyses by allowing existing VMT data to serve as a basis for screening smaller residential and office developments. This mapbased screening criteria is applicable to this project as it is a residential project located in a low VMT area As shown below, the project would screen out using the map-based screening assessment and not require further VMT analysis.
595

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: SITE ACCESS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS FOR PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,

CITY OF PALM DESERT
18192.02 10
NOVEMBER 2025

5.2 Map-Based Screening Analysis
The map-based screening for the project is performed using the updated Riverside County Travel Demand Model (RIVCOM), with a base year of 2018. A model run was performed and its Daily Residential Home Based VMT per Capita was computed by travel analysis zone (TAZ) and compared to the Riverside County Average VMT per Capita.

The project is located TAZ #1605 of the RIVCOM model. A sample of the surrounding TAZ’s residential VMT values were calculated then compared to the Riverside County average to see if the project is located within a low VMT area and under the County VMT threshold value. Figure 5 shows a map of the project site with RIVCOM TAZs and Table 3 presents the VMT per capita values of the TAZs surrounding the proposed project.

Table 3. VMT per Capita Estimate for Screening
TAZ Residential VMT Population VMT per Capita
1603 7,742 552 14.03
1604 28,607 1,706 16.77
1605 (Project) 20 2 9.86
1608 1,235 115 10.74
1609 16,228 1,206 13.46
1649 1,652 97 17.03
1651 11,967 686 17.44
1655 17,034 1,093 15.58
1656 6,100 382 15.97
Total 90,585 5,839 15.51
Riverside County 42,904,715 2,358,439 18.19
The project is located in TAZ #1605 within the RIVCOM model, which contains a low residential VMT per capita value along with a low population. To get a more accurate VMT per capita value of the project, the surrounding 10 TAZs that have similar residential uses around the project site were selected and their VMT per capita values were calculated. The average of the 10 TAZs’ VMT per capita value is 15.51, which is lower than the Riverside County average of 18.19. The City’s Guidelines are consistent with the Riverside County Guidelines in that if a project’s VMT per capita value is lower than the county average, then the project meets the map-based screening criteria and the project’s impact can be presumed to be less than significant. Therefore, the project would not require further VMT analysis. The impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.

6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
The approved project’s trip generation was estimated to be 2,709 daily trips, 161 AM peak hour trips (40 inbound and 121 outbound), and 205 PM peak hour trips (129 inbound and 76 outbound). As shown in Table 1, using the ITE trip rates for the single family detached units, the proposed project would generate approximately 1,471 daily trips, 109 AM peak hour trips (27 inbound and 82 outbound), and 147 PM peak hour trips (93 inbound and 54 outbound). Compared to the approved project trip generation, the proposed project would generate net negative 596

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: SITE ACCESS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS FOR PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,

CITY OF PALM DESERT
18192.02 11
NOVEMBER 2025
(or fewer trips): (-) 1,238 daily trips, (-) 52 AM peak hour trips (-13 inbound and -39 outbound), and (-) 58 PM peak hour trips (-36 inbound and -22 outbound).

The proposed project would be accessed via three driveways: Driveway 1 (D1) on Frank Sinatra Boulevard, Driveway 2 on Portola Avenue, and Driveway 3 (D3) further south on Portola Avenue. A 150 feet northbound left turn lane will be constructed at Driveway 2 (D2) on Portola Avenue by providing a median opening along Portola. Per the City’s guidelines, a deceleration lane would be required along the project’s eastern site boundary preceding Driveway 2 for southbound right-turn movements. The existing curb, gutter, sidewalk, and bicycle lane along Portola Avenue along with the transition of the southbound lanes from three lanes to two lanes along the project frontage would need to be designed to accommodate a 100 feet southbound right deceleration lane.

Dudek performed a map based VMT screening evaluation of the project and found that it meets the screening criteria because it is located in a low VMT area consistent with the City and Riverside County’s transportation guidelines.

Therefore, the project is presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact under CEQA, and no mitigation measures are required.

7.0 References
City of Palm Desert. 2023. Palm Desert Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, August 2022.

County of Riverside Transportation Department. 2020. Transportation Analysis Guidelines for Level of Service, Vehicle Miles Traveled. August 2022.

ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers). 2021. Trip Generation Manual. 11th ed.

Michael Baker International. 2025. Transportation Impact Analysis – Catavina Residential.

TRB (Transportation Research Board). 2022. Highway Capacity Manual, Seventh Edition: A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis.
597
1 3

FRANK SINATRA DR PORTOLA AVE COUNTRY CLUB DR

COOK ST
D1
D2
D3 2
© 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO Jul 23, 2025 - 4:49pm tmathews P:\300.Environmental\18192_Blue Fern Development USA\03 Task Orders\02_Portola Springs\01 Dudek Work Products\01 Documents\Transportation\Graphics\AutoCAD\PortolaSprings_TRAF.dwg Layout: Fig1-StudyArea Portola Springs Residential Development Project NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 1 SOURCE: Bing Maps 2025
Project Location
Legend
Project Boundary n

PROJECT SITE
DX Right-In/Right-Out
Driveways
598
SOURCE: MSA Consulting, Inc., 2025
Jul 23, 2025 - 4:50pm tmathews P:\300.Environmental\18192_Blue Fern Development USA\03 Task Orders\02_Portola Springs\01 Dudek Work Products\01 Documents\Transportation\Graphics\AutoCAD\PortolaSprings_TRAF.dwg Layout: Fig2-SitePlan Portola Springs Residential Development Project n NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 2
Site Plan
599
&RXQWU\&OXE'U
*HUDOG)RUG'U
)UDQN6LQDWUD'U
9DUQHU5G
  
)HHW ˝
'DWH˛ˆ˘8VHU˛FJDUGQHU3DWK˛ =˛?3URMHFWV?M˙˝?0$3'2&?&(4$?3RUWROD6SULQJVDSU[ 0DS˛)LJXUH%LNHDQG7UDQVLW)DFLOLWLHV/D\RXW˛)LJXUH%LNHDQG7UDQVLW)DFLOLWLHV 3URMHFW%RXQGDU\
6XQ/LQH%XV6WRSV
6XQ/LQH7UDQVLW5RXWHV
5RXWH˘_'HVHUW+RW6SULQJV&686%

3'&
3DOP'HVHUW0DOO
5RXWH&RPPXWHU/LQN_,QGLR&686%

3'&
&686%
5RXWH˘_3DOP'HVHUW0DOO
%LF\FOH *ROI&DUW)DFLOLWLHV
&ODVV6WULSHG/DQH
6KDUHG6LGHZDON
*ROI&DUWV3HUPLWWHG
6285&(˛(VUL%DVHPDS˚3DOP'HVHUW*HQHUDO3ODQ˚6XQ/LQH7UDQVLW$JHQF\˘ 3RUWROD6SULQJV5HVLGHQ
%LNHDQG7UDQ
),*85(
&RDFKHOOD
/D4XLQWD
,QGLDQ
:HOOV
3DOP'HVHUW
,QGLR
5DQFKR
0LUDJH
&DWKHGUDO
&LW\
3DOP
6SULQJV
y{
y{˝˘
y{˙ˇ
y{
y{
y{ˆ
]^›
5 L Y H U V L G H
& R X Q W \
3URMHFW6LWH
 ?
600
1 FRANK SINATRA DR

PORTOLA AVE COUNTRY CLUB DR

COOK ST
D1
D2
D3
Oct 28, 2025 - 8:34am tmathews C:\Users\tmathews\OneDrive - Dudek\Desktop\In Progress\Portola Springs\Graphics\AutoCAD\PortolaSprings_TRAF.dwg Layout: Fig4-PrjDist-Asgn Portola Springs Residential Development Project NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 4 SOURCE: Bing Maps 2025
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment n
Driveway 1 D1 Frank Sinatra Drive
Portola Avenue D2 Driveway 2
(4) 14
(62) 42
(12) 8
(10) 6
(8) 28
(5)
3 (15) 51
(10) 6
28 (8)
(15)
9 Portola Avenue D3 Driveway 3
Portola Avenue 1 Frank Sinatra Drive
(12) 8
(33) 23
(5) 3 (11) 37
(4)
14 (12) 8
Legend
Percentage
Distribution XX%
(X) Weekday AM Peak Hour
X
Traffic Volumes
Weekday PM Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
DX Right-In/Right-Out
Driveways
Site Boundary
15%
15%
10%
10%
10%
10%
30%
601
D1 1
D2
D3
SOURCE: MSA Consulting, Inc., 2025 FIGURE 5
Queuing Study Intersection Geometrics
Portola Avenue 1 Frank Sinatra DriveDriveway 1 D1 Frank Sinatra Drive Portola Avenue D2 Driveway 2
Portola Avenue D3 Driveway 3
Legend
X Study Intersection
Stop Sign
Lane Geometrics
Proposed Lane
Geometrics
Proposed Stop Sign PROT PROT
PROT
PROT
DX Right-In/Right-Out
Driveways
Oct 28, 2025 - 8:27am tmathews C:\Users\tmathews\OneDrive - Dudek\Desktop\In Progress\Portola Springs\Graphics\AutoCAD\PortolaSprings_TRAF.dwg Layout: Fig5-QueuingGeometrics Portola Springs Residential Development Project n NOT TO SCALE 602
SOURCE: RIVCOM, 2018
Jul 23, 2025 - 10:56am tmathews P:\300.Environmental\18192_Blue Fern Development USA\03 Task Orders\02_Portola Springs\01 Dudek Work Products\01 Documents\Transportation\Graphics\AutoCAD\PortolaSprings_TRAF.dwg Layout: Fig6-VMT SCREENING MAP Portola Springs Residential Development Project
n NOT TO SCALE
FIGURE 6
VMT Screening Map
TAZ: 1604
TAZ: 1656
TAZ: 1655
TAZ: 1605 TAZ: 1608
TAZ: 1651
TAZ: 1603
TAZ: 1609
TAZ: 1649
TAZ: 1610
603
Attachment A
Approved Traffic Scoping Agreement and Form and
PP25-006 Completeness Review
604

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: MADELAINE LUKE, CONSULTING PLANNER
FROM: CAROLINA FERNANDEZ, ENGINEERING CONSULTANT
SUBJECT: PP25-0006 COMPLETENESS REVIEW
DATE: OCTOBER 1ST, 2025
REVIEWED:

SUBMITTAL PACKAGED DATED AUGUST 2025
CC: CESAR LOPEZ
Engineering Department has reviewed the above-referenced pre-application for a new 156-unit residential development at southwest corner of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue. Please see below for comments and development guidance.

Note: The following comments are specific to the completeness review of this application, please reference response provided October 4, 2024 under PA24-0009 for guidance on technical design and other requirements.

General

1. Traffic Study: It is understood that this application will utilize previously approved CEQA documents (prior approved proposal on site). Since the overall site access points and layout have not been modified and the trips from/to site have decreased (less units proposed), no additional traffic study is being requested.

2. Turning Template Exhibits: Show turning templates on Site Plan or provide separate exhibit. The exhibit/site plan shall show turning templates using CAD or similar software. Templates shall demonstrate adequacy for emergency vehicles to access and service the site.

3. Frank Sinatra Drive is classified as a Balanced Arterial on the City’s General Plan. a. The applicant will be required to construct landscape and irrigation improvements within the parkway along site frontage from Portola Avenue intersection to project limit to the west and connecting to existing (if any) improvements to the west..
b. The applicant will be required to install meandering sidewalk within the parkway along site frontage from Portola Avenue intersection to project limit to the west and connecting to existing (if any) improvements to the west.
c. The applicant shall show utilities and proposed connections on site plan – for reference during review. d. The City’s General Plan identifies a Class 2 bike lane along Frank Sinatra Drive. Plans shall identify existing bike lane. Crossings at driveways shall be per Coachella Valley AG Active Transportation Planning (CVAG ATP) Design Guidelines.

4. Portola Avenue is classified as Balanced Arterial on the City’s General Plan. 605
a. The applicant will be required to construct landscape and irrigation improvements within the parkway along site frontage from Frank Sinatra Drive intersection to project limit to the south transitioning to existing improvements.
b. The applicant will be required to install meandering sidewalk within the parkway along site frontage from Frank Sinatra Drive intersection to project limit to the south and transitioning to existing improvements.
c. The applicant shall show utilities and proposed connections on plans for reference during review. d. The City’s General Plan identifies a Class 2 bike lane along Frank Sinatra Drive. Plans shall identify existing bike lane. Crossings at driveways shall be per Coachella Valley AG Active Transportation Planning (CVAG ATP) Design Guidelines.

5. Site access along Frank Sinatra Drive will be limited to one driveway access with restricted to right-out movements. The general location shown on the preliminary exhibits is acceptable.

6. Site access along Portola Avenue as shown on the preliminary exhibits is generally acceptable – providing two access points to the site. The northerly proposed driveway shall act as the primary access point to the site and shall be restricted to right-in, right-out, and left-in movements. The proposed southerly driveway will be restricted to right-out movements.
a. A southbound right-turn lane for access to the site at the main access point is required. Design will be required to be submitted, length of storage capacity and transition will be per a traffic engineer recommendations and as approved by the City Engineer. Preliminary plans shall show improvements. b. Applicant will be required to provide a median opening to accommodate left-turn lane movement from northbound Portola Avenue onto development at the proposed northerly driveway. The design shall protect existing allowed movements for the development on the east side of Portola avenue – a median crossover with directional left turn bays.

7. Show benchmark and basis of bearings on preliminary exhibits, including proposed Tentative Tract Map exhibit.

8. It is understood from the provided exhibits that the developer may phase the construction of homes within the site. Please note that the project will be conditioned to provide all backbone infrastructure installation/construction with the first phase.

9. Provide list of existing and proposed easements on tentative map exhibit – indicate whether easements will be protected in place, realigned, quitclaimed, or vacated.

10. The preliminary WQMP mentions wedge curbs, please note that wedge curbs are not identified on exhibits and will not be allowed.

11. Maximum infiltration rate for the project shall be 1 in/hour.

12. Show grade break at driveways (access points) – all onsite generated needs to be directed to onsite basins.

Thank you.
606

MEMORANDUM
To: Cesar Lopez, City of Palm Desert
From: Sabita Tewani, AICP, PTP, Dudek
Subject: Proposed Transportation Analysis for the Portola Springs Residential Project, City of Palm Desert
Date: June 10, 2025,
cc: Nicole Cobleigh, Dudek
Kim Molina, Pacific Land Consultants
Attachments: A. Traffic Scoping for Portola Springs Residential Project B. Excerpts from the Transportation Analysis for Portola /Frank Sinatra Residential, March 2022, prepared by Urban Crossroads Inc.

C. Excerpts from the Transportation Impact Analysis for Catavina Residential Project, February 2025, prepared by Michael Baker International.

Dudek is preparing the transportation analysis for the Portola Springs Residential Project (project) which proposes to construct 156 single family homes in the southwest quadrant of the Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra intersection in the City of Palm Desert (City). Access to the proposed project would be via three right-in-right-out only driveways.

Of the total three driveways, two driveways are located along Portola Avenue and one driveway is located along Frank Sinatra Drive. Based on the project team’s discussion in the June 5, 2025, meeting with the City staff, the following memorandum provides the proposed project’s consistency with the previously approved project and transportation analysis conducted for the Portola/Frank Sinatra Residential Project in March 2022. Based on these studies, Dudek proposes to conduct a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) screening analysis per CEQA requirements and a Site Access Analysis of the project driveways per non-CEQA requirements for transportation analysis for the proposed project (see Attachment A).

Previously Approved Project
A comprehensive analysis for larger residential development of 402 multi-family units was prepared for the project site in July 2022 and the final MND was certified in December 2022. The project included one right-out access (exit only) along Frank Sinatra Drive, one right-out access (exit only) along Portola Avenue, and one right-in/right-out/leftin access along Portola Avenue.

Please note that based on
comments received on October
1,2025, the access
assumptions for Driveways 2
and 3 along Portola Avenue
were updated to include a left-in
at Driveway 2 and only right out
at Driveway 3, as shown in the
Site Access and VMT Memo,
dated November 10, 2025.
607

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS FOR THE PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, CITY OF

PALM DESERT
18192 2
JUNE 2025
Table 1 provides a comparison of the proposed project’s trip generation with the approved project using the trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021.

Table 1. Trip Generation Comparison
Land Use
Daily Trip
Rate/Unit
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Rates and Trip Generation1
Multi-family housing (Low-rise) 6.74 trips/DU 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.32 0.19 0.51 Single-family housing (Detached) 9.43 trips/DU 0.18 0.53 0.70 0.59 0.35 0.94 Land Use Units Daily
Approved Project (multi-family) 402 2,709 40 121 161 129 76 205 Proposed Project (single family) 156 1,471 27 82 109 93 54 147 Net New (Proposed – Approved) -1,238 -13 -39 -52 -36 -22 -58 Notes: DU = Dwelling unit
1 Trip rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition.

The approved project’s trip generation was estimated to be 2,709 daily trips, 161 AM peak hour trips (40 inbound and 121 outbound), and 205 PM peak hour trips (129 inbound and 76 outbound). As shown in Table 1, using the ITE trip rates for the single family detached units, the proposed project would generate approximately 1,471 daily trips, 109 AM peak hour trips (27 inbound and 82 outbound), and 147 PM peak hour trips (93 inbound and 54 outbound). Compared to the approved project trip generation, the proposed project would generate net negative (or fewer trips): (-) 1,238 daily trips, (-) 52 AM peak hour trips (-13 inbound and -39 outbound), and (-) 58 PM peak hour trips (-36 inbound and -22 outbound). Therefore, the proposed project would add fewer trips to the intersections and roadway segments in the vicinity of the project site.

The study area of the previously approved project included 11 intersections which were analyzed using the Highway Capacity Manual) HCM) analysis methodology. All intersections were shown to operate at LOS D or better under Existing (year 2022), Existing plus Ambient Growth plus Project, and Existing plus Ambient Growth plus Project plus Cumulative Project conditions (year 2024). As such, no traffic impacts were identified, nor off-site intersection improvements were required. Because no traffic effects or improvements were identified in the transportation analysis of the approved project, the proposed project would not likely result in operational deficiencies or level of service below LOS D. Excerpts from the Transportation Analysis for Portola /Frank Sinatra Residential, March 2022 are provided as attachment B to this memo.

Additionally, results of the recently completed transportation study for the Catavina Residential Project (February 2025) were reviewed. The Catavina Residential Project would construct 546 single family dwelling units on a vacant site adjacent to the proposed project site. Vehicular access to the Catavina Residential Project be provided via a full access driveway on Frank Sinatra Drive (directly across from Hollister Drive) and a full access driveway on Portola Avenue (directly across from Desert Willow Court). The Catavina Residential Project is anticipated to be completed in Year 2027 and is forecast to generate approximately 4,810 daily trips with 349 AM peak hour trips and 490 PM peak hour trips. The study area included 8 intersections (including project access driveways) and 3 roadway segments which were analyzed using the HCM methodology. All intersections and roadway segments were 608

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS FOR THE PORTOLA SPRINGS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, CITY OF

PALM DESERT
18192 3
JUNE 2025
shown to operate at LOS D or better under Existing (year 2025), Existing plus Project, Opening Year 2027 and Opening Year 2027 plus Project. As such, no traffic impacts were identified, nor off-site intersection improvements were required. Excerpts from the Transportation Impact Analysis for Catavina Residential, February 2025 are provided as Attachment C to this memo.

Vehicle Miles Traveled Screening
The VMT screening analysis for the previously approved project and Catavina Residential Project was conducted using the RIVTAM/RIVCOM travel demand model to satisfy the map-based screening criteria using the County of Riverside thresholds. Both the proposed project site and the Catavina Residential Project site are located within the same traffic analysis zone (TAZ). The average VMT per capita of the Project TAZ is lower than the County’s VMT per capita (18.26). As shown in the scoping form (Attachment A), the proposed project would also screen out and not require further VMT analysis. The impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.

Proposed Scope of Work for Portola Springs
Based on the information provided above, it can be concluded that because the proposed project generates fewer trips than the previously approved project and has similar residential use as the TAZ it is located within, the proposed project would not result in significant LOS or VMT impacts.

The proposed project access driveways would allow right-in-right-out movements from westbound Portola Avenue and southbound Frank Sinatra Drive. Based on the project’s trip distribution (see Figure 3 and Table 2, Attachment A), few trips would make northbound U-turn and eastbound U-turn at the Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection to access the proposed project. Dudek will also provide an analysis of right turn deceleration lane in the proposed analysis. From the preliminary analysis, the proposed project would warrant a southbound deceleration right turn lane at Driveway 2/Portola Avenue access to facilitate access into the project site. Driveway 1 or Driveway 3 would not warrant a right turn deceleration lane. As shown on Figure 1 in Attachment A, all the project driveways have a width of 32 feet. None of the driveways would have gates and would provide both vehicular and emergency access to the proposed project.

Dudek has revised the scope of analysis for the proposed project to include a Site Access Analysis of the project’s driveways (Driveways 1, 2 and 3) for Existing plus Project conditions only. A screening analysis using RIVCOM travel demand model to demonstrate map-based screening for project’s VMT has been included in Attachment A. Please review Attachment A Traffic Scoping for Portola Springs Residential Project. The results of the proposed project’s VMT Screening and Site Access Analysis will be provided in a technical memorandum. 609
Attachment A
Traffic Scoping Memo for the Portola Springs
Residential Project
• Scoping Form
• Table 1: Project Trip Generation
• Table 2: Project Trip Assignment for Site Access Analysis • Figure1: Site Plan
• Figure 2: VMT Screening Map
• Figure 3: Trip Distribution and Assignment
• Worksheets from Vistro Software: Intersection and Driveway Trips 610




 





  
!"#$%&'()'*++,+&-(.#*(-*)..%"(%,$)"-(!-/01  2



34


2
5
6


7

2
 4 8
92
4:;

5

 <
;
=
;
>
2
?
;


6





7

;9  5
@9A B2
:

5
A            8
@
A             
C

@
DEA          
8
6
A                   5 6
;

 @
A              
A              

2
A              FA               )G(-HIJ('KLKHMNIOL(!OPHQKR((DF5
FE       5
 <S
A

<S
A 5
T
A

T
A  5


 



   B   B  ?  UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU ?  UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU  
4
AUUUV
 UUU@ D W6E X4
AUUUV
 
X
W4


92
X8
 


8
;
42


 
9 
D
2



EA                      ( 156 single family homes located in the southwest quadrant of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive, Palm Desert
VMT Analysis: The project's VMT screening analysis was conducted using the baseline VMT from the RIVCOM Travel Demand Model. Figure 2 provides the VMT per capita of the project's TAZ, which is 9.86. The County's threshold VMT is 18.20 VMT per capita.

Therefore, the project can be screened out of a detailed VMT analysis. The project's VMT impact would be less than significant. .

The project access is via three right-in-right-out driveways. See Figure 1 Portola Springs (previously Catavina East) 620-400-031 Sabita Tewani, Dudek Kim Molina,Pacific Land Consultants 760-479-4109 714-782-4271 [email protected] [email protected] TC Neighborhood TC Neighborhood 0 0 0 27 82 109 0 0 0 93 54 147 ✔ ✔
P.R.22 P.R.22
611

 

 




 
 
!"#$%&"'()*$+&,%-".%/0$%120%)34"5 6 7 6 8 6 96  :;
<; 



= 
>!" +-?*$)23@"#$+AA%-B 

C
DE
F
B           

G;H
B         
;
F
:=B            I;


C


J
B         K

L


;



B         
.!M02@N"%30($/(-0%)3/4 " :OPQRSTUVWXYZ[T[\T]Y^_`_\aTbc[Y]T\[dY]Te]\XYZ[`fT[]_eTgYaY]b[_\ahi_`[]_WV[_\aTb]YTiY[Y]j_aYifT\]T Z\jjYa[`Tc]\jT\[dY]TbgYaZ_Y`kTlbeT_`T]YmV_]YikTnaTgYaY]bofT[dYTj_a_jVjTb]YbT[\TWYT`[Vi_YiT`dbooT_aZoViYTbapT_a[Y]`YZ[_\aT\cTqT \]Tj\]YTrs\ooYZ[\]tT\]Td_gdY]TZob``_c_Zb[_\aT`[]YY[`fTb[Tud_ZdT[dYTe]\e\`YiTe]\XYZ[Tu_ooTbiiTvwT\]Tj\]YTeYbxTd\V]T[]_e`fTa\[T YyZYYi_agTbTvzj_oYT]bi_V`Tc]\jT[dYTe]\XYZ[T`_[YkTQdYT{VWo_ZT|\]x`T}Yeb][jYa[TjbpT]YmV_]YTiY^_b[_\aTc]\jT[dY`YT]YmV_]YjYa[`T Wb`YiT\aT[dYTo\Zb[_\ak~A Site Access analysis is proposed for the following under Existing plus Project conditons:   €
 
  ‚ 
   ƒ 
 "
„!"M02@N"
)+@†+N"M(*‡(30/4:OPQRSTUVWXYZ[T[\T]Y^_`_\aTbc[Y]T\[dY]Te]\XYZ[`fT[]_eTgYaY]b[_\ahi_`[]_WV[_\aTb]YT iY[Y]j_aYifT\]TZ\jjYa[`Tc]\jT\[dY]TbgYaZ_Y`kTlbeT_`T]YmV_]YikTnaTgYaY]bofT[dYTj_a_jVjTb]YbT[\TWYT`[Vi_YiT`dbooT_aZoViYTbapT _a[Y]`YZ[_\aT\cTqT\]Tj\]YTrs\ooYZ[\]tT\]Td_gdY]TZob``_c_Zb[_\aT`[]YY[`fTb[Tud_ZdT[dYTe]\e\`YiTe]\XYZ[Tu_ooTbiiTvwT\]Tj\]YTeYbxTd\V]T []_e`fTa\[TYyZYYi_agTbTvzj_oYT]bi_V`Tc]\jT[dYTe]\XYZ[T`_[YkTQdYT{VWo_ZT|\]x`T}Yeb][jYa[TjbpT]YmV_]YTiY^_b[_\aTc]\jT[dY`YT ]YmV_]YjYa[`TWb`YiT\aT[dYTo\Zb[_\ak~ 
€
  
 "
ˆ!‰0,($"Š2$%/@%-0%)3+‹"Œ‡&+-0/4  ;
C
G;

E



ŽF
5
  



C
B         "
"



'!M%0("‹+3:


;


= ‘!"„’%/0%3*">)3@%0%)3/4"“Q]bcc_ZTZ\Va[Tib[bTjV`[TWYToY``T[dbaTqTpYb]`T\oikT{]\^_iYT[]bcc_ZTZ\Va[Tib[Y`T_cTV`_agT\[dY]T[dbaT qzpYb]z\oiTZ\Va[`k”aoY``T\[dY]u_`YTbee]\^YiTWpT[dYTs_[pTRag_aYY]fTZ\Va[`T`dbooTWYTeY]c\]jYiTiV]_agT•z–TbkjkTbaiT—z˜TekjkfT j_iibpTudYaTaYb]WpT`Zd\\o`™kTUYb`\aboTeYbxTcbZ[\]TjbpTWYT]YmV_]YiT[\TWYTbeeo_YiT[\TZ\Va[`T[bxYaTiV]_agT[dYT\cc`Yb`\aT_aT[dYT s\bZdYoobTšbooYpk~ ›
:= 



4.

5. ƒ
15 30 40 15 2028 NA NA NA NA Driveway 1 - D1/Frank Sinatra Dr Driveway 3 - D3/Portola Ave Driveway 2 - D2/Portola Ave ✔ NA
612


F
 

 





  !"#$%&'()('#(**+&*#,-#.&#/001&**&0#(2#,3&#$,+04#5(2#/00(,(-2#,-#,3&#*,/20/10#/2/64*(*#0&*'1(.&0# (2#,3&#7+(0&6(2&89

:; <=>?@ABCDBEFGBEHIDDJKBLEMNOBLEIEGLBEFIEBPIBEHIDDJKBLJQRISBJLTIUUGIHLBEVBWGBXIHHIREGNYB<VHBLJZJSIHBLEIEGZGRE[BIEBIRBG\JLEJRQB MRLJQRISJ]GNBVEFGHBLUGKJDJKBJEGZLBEVBWGBINNHGLLGNBMRNGHBG\JLEJRQBKVRNJEJVRL^B_`FVMHBIUUHVIKFBEHIDDJKBaVSMZGBJRDVHZIEJVRBZMLEB WGBLMWZJEEGNBJRBINNJEJVRBEVBEFGBUGIbBFVMHSOBEMHRJRQBZVaGZGREBKVMRELBDVHBEFIEBJREGHLGKEJVRcBdUGKJDJKBJEGZLBEVBWGBINNHGLLGNBIHGB XIHHIREBIRISOLJL^BLJEGBIKKGLL^BVR`LJEGBKJHKMSIEJVR^BUIHbJRQ^BKVRLJLEGRKOBXJEFBUSIRLBLMUUVHEJRQBWJKOKSGL^BUGNGLEHJIRL^BIRNBEHIRLJE^B IRNBVEFGHLcBeEEIKFBUHVUVLGNBIRISOLJLBLKGRIHJVLB<OGIHLBUSMLBUHVUVLGNBDVHGKILEJRQBIUUHVIKF[BIRNBIEEIKFBIBUHVUVLGNBUFILJRQB IUUHVIKFBJDBEFGBUHVfGKEBJLBUFILGNc[B               

g&'-hh&20&0#.4i# j%%1-k&0#$'-%(2l#jl1&&h&2,i#                :mn


o
 p
 p

p
o

q
o
 p
                 p


rs p
 
q




q
t n
o
t #
?FGBuJEOBVDBvISZBwGLGHEBHGLGHaGLBEFGBHJQFEBEVBMLG^BLFIHG^BIRNBHGUHVNMKGBEFGBJRDVHZIEJVRBJRKSMNJRQ^BWMEBRVEBSJZJEGNBEV^BEHIDDJKB KVMREL^BG\FJWJEL^BIRNBLMHaGOLBUHVaJNGNBJRBISSBLMWZJEEGNBEHIDDJKBLEMNJGLBIRNBxy?BILLGLLZGRELcBBuFIRQGLBEVBEFGBLKVUGBVDBXVHb^B LJEGBVKKMUIRKOBVHBMLG^BLzMIHGBDVVEIQG^BIRNTVHBUGHZJEEGNBIKEJaJEJGLBZIOBHGzMJHGBIBHGLMWZJEEISBVHBIZGRNZGREBEVBEFGBLKVUJRQB IQHGGZGREc B B{|}~{€~‚ƒƒ„
€†‡ˆ‰Š€†ˆ‹Œ„‡‡‚€ŽŒ€‚‰€‡‘’€‚“““„‚‡’€ƒ’’€Œˆ”‡€‹’€”ˆ‹Œ„‡‡’‰€•„‡‘–€€“„€ ‡€‡‘’€”ˆ‹Œ„‡‡‚€ƒ€‡‘„”€ƒŒ—€˜’“‚‡Œ’‡€ƒ€˜’™’“Œ’‡€†’™„ ’”€”‡‚ƒƒ€•„€‡€“
’””€‡‘’€ †
“„š€›š’’Œ’‡€“„€‡€’
’„“‡€ƒ€‡‘’€ƒ’’—€ Sabita Tewani, Dudek June 10, 2025
613
In Out Total In Out Total
Single-family (detached) 210 9.43 0.18 0.53 0.70 0.59 0.35 0.94 Single Family Homes 210 156 DUs 1,471 27 82 109 93 54 147 1,471 27 82 109 93 54 147
Notes:

PM Peak Hour
Total
per DU
Trip Generation
Trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation, 11th Edition , 2021.

Table 1
Project Trip Generation Summary
Land Use Size/Unit Daily
AM Peak Hour
Trip Rates
ITE Code
Trip Generation, Portola Springs 614
Project Driveway/Intersection Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Right-turn
deceleration lane
warranted?
NBL
NBT
NBR 62 42
SBL
SBT
SBR
EBL
EBT
EBR 4 14
WBL
WBT 12 8
WBR
NBL
NBT 8 28
NBR
SBL
SBT 12 29
SBR 16 53 Yes
EBL
EBT
EBR 6
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT 8 28
NBR
SBL
SBT 14 9
SBR 7 26
EBL
EBT
EBR 10 6
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBU 8 28
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT 4 14
SBR
EBU 12 8
EBL 12 8
EBT 33 23
EBR 5 3
WBL 11 37
WBT
WBR
Table 2. Project Trip Assignment for Site Access Analysis Portola Avenue/Frank Sinatra
Drive
Driveway 1/Frank Sinatra
Drive
Driveway 2/Portola Avenue
Driveway 3/Portola Avenue
615
SOURCE: MSA Consulting, Inc., 2025
Jun 10, 2025 - 3:49pm tmathews C:\Users\tmathews\OneDrive - Dudek\Desktop\In Progress\Portola Springs\Graphics\AutoCAD\PortolaSprings_TRAF.dwg Layout: ScopeFig1-SitePlan Portola Springs Residential Development Project n NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 1
Site Plan
616
SOURCE: RIVCOM, 2018
May 30, 2025 - 4:00pm tmathews P:\300.Environmental\18192_Blue Fern Development USA\03 Task Orders\02_Portola Springs\01 Dudek Work Products\01 Documents\Transportation\Graphics\AutoCAD\PortolaSprings_TRAF.dwg Layout: ScopeFig4-VMT SCREENING MAP n NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 2
VMT Screening Map
Portola Springs Residential Development Project 617
1 3

FRANK SINATRA DR PORTOLA RD

COUNTRY CLUB DR

COOK ST
D1
D2
D3
2 May 30, 2025 - 4:05pm tmathews P:\300.Environmental\18192_Blue Fern Development USA\03 Task Orders\02_Portola Springs\01 Dudek Work Products\01 Documents\Transportation\Graphics\AutoCAD\PortolaSprings_TRAF.dwg Layout: ScopeFig2-PrjDist-Asgn

NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Bing Maps 2025 FIGURE 3
Project Trip Assignment and Distribution
Portola Springs Residential Development Project n
Cook Street 2 Frank Sinatra Drive
Portola Road 3 Country Club Drive
(25) 18
(8) 5 (3) 9
(8) 28
(3) 9
10 (3)
(2) 9
(8) 5
(8)
5 (8) 5
North Project Access D1 Frank Sinatra Drive
Portola Road D2 Central Project Access
(4) 14
(62) 42
(12) 8
(10) 6
28 (8)
(12)
29 (16) 53
(10) 6
28 (8)
(14)
9 (7) 26
Portola Road D3 South Project Access
Portola Road 1 Frank Sinatra Drive
(12) 8
(33) 23
(5) 3 (11) 37
(4)
14 (8) 28
(12) 8
Legend
X
Percentage
Distribution XX%
Study Intersection
(X) Weekday AM Peak Hour
X
Traffic Volumes
Weekday PM Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
DX Right-In/Right-Out
Driveways
Site Boundary
15%
15%
10%
10%
10%
10%
30%
618
Attachment B
Vistro Worksheets
619
Trip Generation summary
Report File: P:\...\Proj_AM.pdf 5/23/2025
Vistro File: P:\...\18192_Portola Springs.vistro Scenario 1 Project_AM Portola Springs
Zone ID: Name Land Use variables Code Ind.

Var. Rate Quantity % In % Out % Int.Capture
Trips In
Adj.

Trips Out
Adj.

Total
Trips Adj.
% of Total
Trips
1: Zone 0.000 50.00 50.00 0.00 27 82 109 100.00
Added Trips Total 27 82 109 100.00
Added Trips
Portola Springs
AM Peak Hour
Scenario 1: 1 Project_AM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
620
Trip Distribution summary
Report File: P:\...\Proj_AM.pdf 5/23/2025
Vistro File: P:\...\18192_Portola Springs.vistro Scenario 1 Project_AM Portola Springs
Zone 1: Zone
To Zone: From Zone:

Zone / Gate Share % Trips Share % Trips
2: Gate 15.00 4 15.00 12
3: Gate 15.00 4 15.00 12
4: Gate 30.00 8 30.00 26
5: Gate 10.00 3 10.00 8
6: Gate 10.00 3 10.00 8
7: Gate 10.00 3 10.00 8
8: Gate 10.00 3 10.00 8
Total 100.00 28 100.00 82
Portola Springs
AM Peak Hour
Scenario 1: 1 Project_AM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
621
Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips
Portola Avenue/Central ProjePortola Avenue/South Project Portola Ave/Frank Sinatra Dr Cook St/Frank Sinatra Dr Portola Ave/Country Club Dr North Project Access/Frank S Portola Springs
AM Peak Hour
Scenario 1: 1 Project_AM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
622
Trip Generation summary
Report File: P:\...\Proj_PM.pdf 5/23/2025
Vistro File: P:\...\18192_Portola Springs.vistro Scenario 2 Project_PM Portola Springs
Zone ID: Name Land Use variables Code Ind.

Var. Rate Quantity % In % Out % Int.Capture
Trips In
Adj.

Trips Out
Adj.

Total
Trips Adj.
% of Total
Trips
1: Zone 0.000 50.00 50.00 0.00 93 54 147 100.00
Added Trips Total 93 54 147 100.00
Added Trips
Portola Springs
PM Peak Hour
Scenario 2: 2 Project_PM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
623
Trip Distribution summary
Report File: P:\...\Proj_PM.pdf 5/23/2025
Vistro File: P:\...\18192_Portola Springs.vistro Scenario 2 Project_PM Portola Springs
Zone 1: Zone
To Zone: From Zone:

Zone / Gate Share % Trips Share % Trips
2: Gate 15.00 14 15.00 8
3: Gate 15.00 14 15.00 8
4: Gate 30.00 28 30.00 18
5: Gate 10.00 9 10.00 5
6: Gate 10.00 9 10.00 5
7: Gate 10.00 9 10.00 5
8: Gate 10.00 9 10.00 5
Total 100.00 92 100.00 54
Portola Springs
PM Peak Hour
Scenario 2: 2 Project_PM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
624
Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips
Portola Avenue/Central ProjePortola Avenue/South Project Portola Ave/Frank Sinatra Dr Cook St/Frank Sinatra Dr Portola Ave/Country Club Dr North Project Access/Frank S Portola Springs
PM Peak Hour
Scenario 2: 2 Project_PM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
625
Attachment B
Excerpts from the Transportation Analysis for Portola
/Frank Sinatra Residential, March 2022
626

PORTOLA/FRANK SINATRA

RESIDENTIAL

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS

CITY OF PALM DESERT
PREPARED BY:

John Kain, AICP
[email protected]
(949) 375-2435
Marlie Whiteman, P.E.
[email protected]
(714) 585-0574
Janette Cachola
[email protected]
AUGUST 18, 2022 REVISED
MARCH 21, 2022
14677-03 TA Report.docx
627
EX. C/L FRANK SINATRA DRIVE Pool Dog Park / Retention Spa Yoga Lawn Pool PROP. PROJECT BOUNDARY & R/W (TYP.) EX. CURB & GUTTER
PROP. ENTRY KIOSK EX. PROJECT BOUNDARY & LOT LINE (TYP.) EX. PROJECT BOUNDARY & LOT LINE (TYP.) EX. C/L (TYP.) PROP. SIGNAGE PROP. PROJECT BOUNDARY & R/W (TYP.) EX. C/L (TYP.)

PORTOLA AVENUE
N 27°46'33" E 840.48'
N 01°21'56" E 1923.00'
N 89°52'08" E 686.08'
N 04°19'04" E 58.45'
=23°27'29" R=1937.0 ' L=793.05'
=11°29'14" R=1863.0 ' L=373.51' N 47°57'11" W 29.27' Park PROP. LANDSCAPE PARKWAY (TYP.) PROP. LANDSCAPE PARKWAY (TYP.) PROP. LANDSCAPE PARKWAY (TYP.) EX. PROPERTIES TO BE MERGED WITH FINAL DESIGN PLANS PROP. PROPERTY FENCE PER LANDSCAPE & ARCHITECTURE PLANS (TYP.) PROP. PROPERTY FENCE PER LANDSCAPE & ARCHITECTURE PLANS (TYP.) 24' WIDE “ALL-WEATHER SURFACE” MADE UP OF A COMBINATION OF CONCRETE & TURF BLOCK ABLE TO WITHSTAND A FULLY LOADED FIRE VEHICLE TO THE SATISFACTION AND APPROVAL OF THE FIRE MARSHALL 24' WIDE “ALL-WEATHER SURFACE” MADE UP OF A COMBINATION OF CONCRETE & TURF BLOCK ABLE TO WITHSTAND A FULLY LOADED FIRE VEHICLE TO THE SATISFACTION AND APPROVAL OF THE FIRE MARSHALL

PARKING NO
NO

PARKING NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING NO

PARKING NO
PARKING PROP. BUILDING 1 TYPE "C" 10,300 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,300 SF (2ND FLOOR) 10,300 SF (3RD FLOOR) 30,900 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 2 TYPE "C" 10,300 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,300 SF (2ND FLOOR)
10,300 SF (3RD FLOOR)
30,900 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 3 TYPE "C" 10,300 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,300 SF (2ND FLOOR)
10,300 SF (3RD FLOOR)
30,900 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 4 TYPE "B" 10,833 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,833 SF (2ND FLOOR)
10,833 SF (3RD FLOOR)
32,499 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 5 TYPE "A" 10,752 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,752 SF (2ND FLOOR) 10,752 SF (3RD FLOOR) 32,256 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 6 TYPE "B" 10,833 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,833 SF (2ND FLOOR) 10,833 SF (3RD FLOOR) 32,499 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 7 TYPE "A" 10,752 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,752 SF (2ND FLOOR) 10,752 SF (3RD FLOOR) 32,256 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 8 TYPE "A" 10,752 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,752 SF (2ND FLOOR) 10,752 SF (3RD FLOOR) 32,256 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 9 TYPE "A" 10,752 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,752 SF (2ND FLOOR) 10,752 SF (3RD FLOOR) 32,256 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 10 TYPE "B" 10,833 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,833 SF (2ND FLOOR) 10,833 SF (3RD FLOOR) 32,499 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 11 TYPE "D" 9,819 SF (1ST FLOOR) 9,819 SF (2ND FLOOR) 9,819 SF (3RD FLOOR) 29,457 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 12 TYPE "A" 10,752 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,752 SF (2ND FLOOR) 10,752 SF (3RD FLOOR) 32,256 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 13 TYPE "E" 44,361 SF (1ST FLOOR) 44,361 SF (2ND FLOOR) 44,361 SF (3RD FLOOR) 133,083 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 14 LEASING / CLUBHOUSE 17,311 SF PROP. BUILDING 15 FITNESS 2,553 SF (1ST FLR) 2,049 SF (2ND FLR) 4,602 SF (TOTAL)

32.8'

43.7'

45.1'

42.8'

31.4'

34.5' 33.2'

30.5' 20.5' 17.8' 20.5' 16.2' 18' 30' 18'

21.8'
18'
32'

11.5'

22.8'
63'
20'

32.6'

46.3'

10.9' 18'

13.9' 55.6' 309.6' 17' 20.5' 74.1' 14.9' 20.5'

45.1'

23.6'

30.6'
24'
10' 24'

29.1'

30.5' 18' 16' 20.5' 30'
30'
18'

20.4'
18'
30'
18'

20.5'

20.5'

26.9'
23'
36'
23'
20'
26'
128'

20.5'
30'

20.5'

26.4'
18'
30'
18'

22.8'
24'
29'
29'
117.2'

59.4' 21.6' 21.6' 21.6'
18' 23.1'
9'
TYP.
18'

29.4'
30'

20.5'

39.8'

68.1'

19.5'

20.5'
30'

20.5'

21.9'
22'
18'
18'

15.2' 21.4' 18'
30' 81.2' 60.3' 20.5'
10'
10'
10'
18'

20.5' 30.5' 20.5'
117.5' 38.9'
144.2'
=1 °29'14" R=1863.0 ' L=373.51' PORTOLA AVENUE Parking To Be Developed if Necessary PROP. LANDSCAPE PARKWAY (TYP.) EX. PROPERTIES TO BE MERGED WITH FINAL DESIGN PLANS PROP. PROPERTY FENCE PER LANDSCAPE & ARCHITECTURE PLANS (TYP.) 65 PROP. BUILDING 9 TYPE "A" 10,752 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,752 SF (2ND FLOOR)
10,752 SF (3RD FLOOR)
32,256 SF (TOTAL) PROP. BUILDING 10 TYPE "B" 10,833 SF (1ST FLOOR) 10,833 SF (2ND FLOOR) 10,833 SF (3RD FLOOR) 32,499 SF (TOTAL) 20'
26'

19.5'

20.5'
30'

20.5'

21.9'
22'
18'
18'

15.2' 21.4' 18'
30'
10' MSA CONSULTING ,INC.

Civil E
n
gin
e ring
La
nd
S
urveying
La
n
d
s
c
a
pe
Arc
hitecture
Pla
n
ning
Enviro
n
me
ntal Services
Dry
Utility
Co rdin
ation
GIS 34200 Bob Hope Drive Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 | 760.320.9811 | MSAConsultinginc.com EAST NORTH SOUTH WEST CENTERLINE EASEMENT EXISTING ABBREVIATIONS (E) (N) (S) (W) C/L ESMT. EX. ACREAGE AC CURB AND GUTTER C&G ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER A.C. ASPHALT CONCRETE APN E/P EDGE OF PAVEMENT MAX. MAXIMUM BOUNDARY BNDRY M.B. MAP BOOK EXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONS EXISTING CONTOURS EXISTING CABLE EXISTING IRRIGATION DRAIN LINE EXISTING EASEMENT EXISTING ELECTRIC EXISTING GAS EXISTING IRRIGATION EXISTING OVERHEAD TELEPHONE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY EXISTING SEWER EXISTING SEWER FORCE MAIN EXISTING WATER EXISTING PROJECT BOUNDARY PROPOSED PROJECT BOUNDARY PROPOSED AND EXISTING CENTER LINE PROPOSED CURB PROPOSED EASEMENT PROPOSED LOT LINE PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY LEGEND EXISTING LOT LINE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT EXISTING TELEPHONE MIN. MINIMUM NUMBER PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY TYPICAL NO. PROP. P.U.E. PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT R/WSF SQUARE FEET TYP. RADIUS R STANDARD N.T.S. NOT TO SCALE P/L PROPERTY LINE R-L LOW DENSITY (RESIDENTIAL) STD. UG UNDERGROUND OVERHEAD O/H OPEN SPACE / PARKS OS/PP PAGE PG. PROPOSED PARKING STALLS X CUP SITE PLAN DATA TABLE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: EXHIBIT DATE: AUGUST 17, 2022 620-400-030 & -031 SOURCE OF TOPOGRAPHY: ADDRESS: INLAND AERIAL SURVEYS, INC. 7117 ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUITE "A" RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92503 DATE OF TOPOGRAPHY: DECEMBER 22, 2021 EXHIBIT PREPARER: ADDRESS: MSA CONSULTING, INC. 34200 BOB HOPE DRIVE RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270 CONTACT: PAUL DEPALATIS, AICP TELEPHONE: (760) 320-9811 REVISIONS NO. DATE IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DESCRIPTION A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 6 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN. TELEPHONE: (951) 687-4252 APPLICANT / ADDRESS: CONTACT: HAYES DIETRICH, LLC 5021 VERNON AVENUE, SUITE 201 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55436 CALVIN HAYES LAND OWNER: LAND USE DESCRIPTION: EXISTING GROSS ACREAGE LANDSCAPE & RETENTION AREAS 6.85 AC. 299,070 SF 38% TOTAL BUILDING AREA (GROUND FLOOR AREA) 4.40 AC. 191,203 SF 24% 6.90 AC. 300,538 SF 38% GARAGES, ACCESS ROADS, HARDSCAPE & PARKING ACREAGE 18.31 AC. SF797,567 SF PERCENTAGE - - PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDING: TYPE "A" (5, 7-9 & 12) - PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDING: TYPE "B" (4, 6 & 10) 53,760 SF 32,499 SF 1.23 AC. 0.75 AC. - - DATA TABLE (CONTINUED) EXISTING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE: PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE: PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, 22 DU/AC. (P.R.-22) PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, 22 DU/AC. (P.R.-22) TOWN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD TOWN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD BUILDING DESCRIPTION: STORY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING: TYPE "A" (BUILDING NO(S). 5, 7, 8, 9 & 12) 3 STORY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING: TYPE "B" (BUILDING NO(S). 4, 6 & 10) 3 STORY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING: TYPE "C" (BUILDING NO(S). 1-3) 3 STORY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING: TYPE "D" (BUILDING NO. 11) 3 STORY PROPOSED PUBLIC STREET RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION 0.16 AC. 6,756 SF - (FRANK SINATRA DRIVE) PROPOSED NET ACREAGE 18.15 AC. 790,811 SF 100% PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL: TYPE "A" SURFACE PARKING PROVIDED 240 STALLS 515 STALLS ONSITE PARKING DATA: COUNT PARKING RATIO UNITS / SF 120 UNITS -
-- (BUILDING NO(S). 5, 7, 8, 9 & 12) TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 394 UNITS - 788 STALLS PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL: TYPE "B" (BUILDING NO(S). 4, 6 & 10) PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL: TYPE "C" (BUILDING NO(S). 1-3) PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL: TYPE "D" (BUILDING NO. 11) 72 UNITS - 72 UNITS - 21 UNITS - 144 STALLS 144 STALLS 42 STALLS DATA TABLE (CONTINUED) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING: TYPE "E" (BUILDING NO. 13)LEASING / CLUBHOUSE BUILDING: (BUILDING NO. 14) 3 STORY 1 STORY FITNESS BUILDING: (BUILDING NO. 15) 2 STORY - PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDING: TYPE "C" (1-3) 30,900 SF 0.71 AC. - - PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDING: TYPE "D" (11) 9,819 SF 0.23 AC. - - PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDING: TYPE "E" (13) 44,361 SF 1.02 AC. - - PROPOSED LEASING / CLUBHOUSE BUILDING (14) 17,311 SF 0.40 AC. - - PROPOSED FITNESS BUILDING (15) 2,553 SF 0.06 AC. - UNDERGROUND PARKING PROVIDED 157 STALLS - - SUB-TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 672 STALLS - 1.7 STALLS PER UNIT PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL: TYPE "E" (BUILDING NO. 13) 109 UNITS - 218 STALLS PUBLIC UTILITY PURVEYORS: FEMA FLOOD ZONE DESIGNATION: ZONE "X": AREAS DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE THE 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOODPLAIN LIQUEFACTION: MODERATE LIQUEFACTION ZONE NOTES: 1. ELECTRIC: GAS: TELEPHONE: WATER: CABLE: SEWER: USA: THIS MAP INCLUDES THE ENTIRE CONTIGUOUS OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND DIVIDER. 2. THERE ARE NO EXISTING DWELLINGS, BUILDINGS, OR OTHER STRUCTURES KNOWN ON THIS PROPERTY. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT SPECTRUM COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT (800) 684-8123 (877) 238-0092 (800) 921-8101 (760) 398-2651 (877) 719-3278 (760) 398-2651 (800) 227-2600 SCHOOL DISTRICT: DESERT SANDS UNIFIED AS SHOWN ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS, COMMUNITY PANEL MAP NUMBER: 06065C1595G EFFECTIVE DATE: AUGUST 28, 2008 DATA TABLE (CONTINUED) PROOF OF PARKING PROVIDED - - 65 STALLS TOTAL WITH PROOF OF PARKING PROVIDED - 1.9 STALLS PER UNIT 737 STALLS PROOF OF PARKING EXHIBITSEE BELOW FOR PROOF OF PARKING EXHIBIT R:\2746\Acad\Planning\Site Plan\2746 Technical Site Plan.dwg, 8/17/2022 3:43:09 PM, dgallerani, MSA Consulting, Inc. 2 628
4 629
#Intersection
Existing
(2022)
EAP
(2024)
EAPC
(2024)
1 Monterey Av. / Frank Sinatra Dr.
2 Portola Av. / Central Access
3 Shepherd Ln. ‐ N. Access / Frank Sinatra Dr.
4 Portola Av. / Frank Sinatra Dr.
5 Cook St. / Frank Sinatra Dr.
6 Portola Av. / Retreat Cir. (N)
7 Portola Av. / Retreat Cir. (S)
8 Portola Av. / Willow Ridge
9 Portola Av. / Country Club Dr.
10 Portola Av. / South Access
11 Cook St. / University Park Dr.
6 630
In Out Total In Out Total
Multifamily Housing (Low‐Rise) 220 402 DU 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.32 0.19 0.51 6.74 In Out Total In Out Total
Multifamily Housing (Low‐Rise) 220 402 DU 40 121 161 129 76 205 2,709 F:\UXRjobs\_14600‐15000\14677\02_LOS\Excel\[14677 ‐ Report.xlsx]Trip Gen TABLE 4‐1: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Trip Generation Rates1
Land Use
ITE LU
Code Quantity2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
2 DU = Dwelling Unit
1 Trip Generation Source:  Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021).

Trip Generation Results
Land Use
ITE LU
Code Quantity2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
22 631

L T R L T R L T R L T R AM PM AM PM
1 Monterey Av. / Frank Sinatra Dr. TS 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 20.0 22.2 C C 2 Portola Av. / Central Access ‐‐
3 Shepherd Ln. ‐ N. Access / Frank Sinatra Dr. CSS 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 d 12.0 10.4 B B 4 Portola Av. / Frank Sinatra Dr. TS 1 3 d 1 3 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 24.5 23.1 C C 5 Cook St. / Frank Sinatra Dr. TS 2 2 0 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 12.3 25.4 B C 6 Portola Av. / Retreat Cir. (N) CSS 0 3 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11.5 11.8 B B 7 Portola Av. / Retreat Cir. (S) CSS 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11.4 11.7 B B 8 Portola Av. / Willow Ridge CSS 0 2 1 1* 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 d 16.3 16.7 C C 9 Portola Av. / Country Club Dr. TS 1 2 1 1 2 d 1 2 1 1 2 1 40.7 38.2 D D 10 Portola Av. / South Access ‐‐
11 Cook St. / University Park Dr. TS 1 3 1>> 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5.8 5.7 A A 1  When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped.  To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
2 Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (HCM6), overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control.

For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown.

Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 11 analysis software. 3 TS = Traffic Signal;  CSS = Cross‐Street Stop
F:\UXRjobs\_14600‐15000\14677\02_LOS\Excel\[14677 ‐ Report.xlsx]3‐1 L  =  Left;  T  =  Through;  R  =  Right;  >>  =  Free Right Turn Lane;  d  =  Defacto Right Turn Lane;  *  =  Turn lane accomodated within two‐way left‐turn lane (TWLTL) Level of
Service2
#Intersection
Traffic
Control3
Intersection Approach Lanes1 Delay2
Northbound Southbound Eastbound (Secs)
TABLE 3‐1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING (2022) CONDITIONS Intersection Does Not Exist
Intersection Does Not Exist
Westbound
20 632

L T R L T R L T R L T R AM PM AM PM
1 Monterey Av. / Frank Sinatra Dr. TS 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 20.9 24.0 C C 2 Portola Av. / Central Access CSS 1 3002 1 00 1 0 0 0 10.7 10.0 B B 3 Shepherd Ln. ‐ N. Access / Frank Sinatra Dr. CSS 0 0 1 00112002d 12.5 11.5 B B 4 Portola Av. / Frank Sinatra Dr. TS 1 3 d 1 3 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 28.8 25.8 C C 5 Cook St. / Frank Sinatra Dr. TS 2 2 0 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 16.4 30.0 B C 6 Portola Av. / Retreat Cir. (N) CSS 0 3 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11.7 12.0 B B 7 Portola Av. / Retreat Cir. (S) CSS 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11.6 12.2 B B 8 Portola Av. / Willow Ridge CSS 0 2 1 1* 2000010d 17.3 18.4 C C 9 Portola Av. / Country Club Dr. TS 1 2 1 1 2 d 1 2 1 1 2 1 41.3 39.2 D D 10 Portola Av. / South Access CSS 03002000 1 0 0 0 10.6 10.0 B B 11 Cook St. / University Park Dr. TS 1 3 1>> 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5.9 5.8 A A 1 When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped.  To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
2 Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (HCM6), overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control.

For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown.

Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 11 analysis software. 3 TS = Traffic Signal;  CSS = Cross‐Street Stop
F:\UXRjobs\_14600‐15000\14677\02_LOS\Excel\[14677 ‐ Report.xlsx]5‐1 TABLE 5‐1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EAP (2024) CONDITIONS L  =  Left;  T  =  Through;  R  =  Right;  >>  =  Free Right Turn Lane;  d  =  Defacto Right Turn Lane;  *  =  Turn lane accomodated within two‐way left‐turn lane (TWLTL) # Intersection
Traffic
Control3
Intersection Approach Lanes1 Delay2
Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound (Secs)
Level of
Service2
1  =  Improvement
31 633

L T R L T R L T R L T R AM PM AM PM
1 Monterey Av. / Frank Sinatra Dr. TS 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 24.1 40.4 C D 2 Portola Av. / Central Access CSS 1 3002 1 00 1 0 0 0 11.5 10.8 B B 3 Shepherd Ln. ‐ N. Access / Frank Sinatra Dr. CSS 0 0 1 00112002d 13.6 12.7 B B 4 Portola Av. / Frank Sinatra Dr. TS 1 3 d 1 3 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 30.8 29.4 C C 5 Cook St. / Frank Sinatra Dr. TS 2 2 0 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 19.5 41.0 B D 6 Portola Av. / Retreat Cir. (N) CSS 0 3 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12.7 14.6 B B 7 Portola Av. / Retreat Cir. (S) CSS 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12.2 13.6 B B 8 Portola Av. / Willow Ridge CSS 0 2 1 1* 2000010d 20.1 24.6 C C 9 Portola Av. / Country Club Dr. TS 1 2 1 1 2 d 1 2 1 1 2 1 45.4 44.4 D D 10 Portola Av. / South Access CSS 03002000 1 0 0 0 11.4 10.8 B B 11 Cook St. / University Park Dr. TS 1 3 1>> 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 16.4 11.0 B B 1 When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped.  To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
2 Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (HCM6), overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control.

For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown.

Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 11 analysis software.

BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS). 3 TS = Traffic Signal;  CSS = Cross‐Street Stop
F:\UXRjobs\_14600‐15000\14677\02_LOS\Excel\[14677 ‐ Report.xlsx]6‐1 TABLE 6‐1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EAPC (2024) CONDITIONS L  =  Left;  T  =  Through;  R  =  Right;  >>  =  Free Right Turn Lane;  d  =  Defacto Right Turn Lane;  *  =  Turn lane accomodated within two‐way left‐turn lane (TWLTL) 1  =  Improvement
# Intersection
Traffic
Control3
Intersection Approach Lanes1 Delay2
Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound (Secs)
Level of
Service2
36 634
AM PM Peak Hour Volume AM PM
2 NBL 16 52 PM 52 200 30 38
SBR 24 77 PM 77 200 NOM 3 NOM 3
EBR 36 23 AM 36 >50 34 31
3 NBR 73 46 AM 73 >75 53 70
4 EBL 79 100 PM 100 120 102 121
EBR 132 126 AM 132 230 49 62
6 SBL 5 25 PM 25 100 23 37
10 EBR 12 8 AM 12 >75 33 27
3 NOM = Nominal, average length less than 10 feet.

F:\UXRjobs\_14600‐15000\14677\02_LOS\Excel\[14677 ‐ Report.xlsx]6‐2 1 Queue length calculated using SimTraffic.
2 Proposed length of storage.

Portola Av. / Central Access
Shepherd Ln. ‐ N. Access / Frank Sinatra Dr.

Portola Av. / South Access
Portola Av. / Frank Sinatra Dr.

Portola Av. / Retreat Cir. (N)
TABLE 6‐2: EAPC (2024) PROJECT TURN LANE STORAGE LENGTHS ID Intersection
Turning
Movement
Lane
EAPC (2024)
Storage
Length2
(feet)
95th Percentile
Queue Length
Per Lane (feet)1
37 635
Attachment C
Excerpts from the Transportation Impact Analysis for
Catavina Residential Project, February 2025
636

5050 Avenida Encinas, Suite 260, Carlsbad, CA 92008
Office: 760.476-9193 | Fax: 760.476.9198
Contact: [email protected]
JN 205082

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS
Catavina Residential
PREPARED FOR:

Pacific Land Consultants
2168 Dickinson Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
February 28, 2025
637
Catavina Residential ___________________________________________________________________________________ TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS

ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS
I-10 EB Ramps to Gerald Ford Drive Vehicular Oriented Arterials 45,000 35,067 0.78 C 36,510 0.81 C Gerald Ford Drive to Frank Sinatra Drive Vehicular Oriented Arterials 45,000 29,028 0.65 C 30,712 0.68 C Hollister Drive to Portola Avenue Balanced Arterials 30,000 7,061 0.24 C 8,504 0.28 C Portola Avenue to Cook Street Balanced Arterials 30,000 10,362 0.35 C 12,286 0.41 C Frank Sinatra Drive to Desert Willow Court Balanced Arterials 30,000 17,497 0.58 C 19,181 0.64 C Desert Willow Court to Country Club Drive Balanced Arterials 30,000 17,813 0.59 C 19,256 0.64 C LOS= Level of Service
V/C= Volume to Capacity Ratio
Roadway Classifications and LOS C Capacities were taken from the City of Palm Desert's General Plan, Mobility (Chapter 4).

Portola Avenue
Existing
Roadway Segment
Existing Plus Project
Roadway Classification LOS C
Capacity
Cook Street
Frank Sinatra Drive
TABLE 1 –EXISTING AND EXISTING PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION LOS SUMMARY Study Intersection
Existing
Traffic
Control
Existing Conditions Existing Plus Project
Conditions Improv.

AM PM AM PM Required?
Delay-LOS Delay-LOS Delay-LOS Delay-LOS
1 - Cook Street & I-10 WB On Ramp Signal 22.0 – C 2.2 – A 22.1 – C 3.8 – A No 2 - Cook Street & I-10 EB On Ramp Signal 40.7 – D 33.4 – C 33.5 – C 34.6 – C No 3 - Cook Street & Gerald Ford Drive Signal 30.2 – C 34.5 – C 30.4 – C 34.7 – C No 4 - Frank Sinatra Drive & Hollister Drive TWSC 14.9 – B 15.7 – C 17.4 – C 23.3 – C No 5 - Frank Sinatra Drive & Portola Avenue Signal 34.5 – C 37.9 – D 36.3 – D 44.2 – D No 6 - Frank Sinatra Drive & Cook Street Signal 19.0 – B 25.0 – C 22.1 – C 27.5 – C No 7 - Portola Avenue & Desert Willow Court TWSC 15.2 – C 19.4 – C 30.8 – D 32.7 – D No 8 - Portola Avenue & Country Club Drive Signal 42.1 – D 39.5 – D 45.5 – D 40.9 – D No Notes:

Delay is expressed in seconds per vehicle.

LOS = Level of Service
TWSC = Two-Way Stop Control, worst approach delay and LOS reported.

TABLE 2 – EXISTING AND EXISTING PLUS PROJECT ROADWAY SEGMENT LOS SUMMARY 638
Catavina Residential ___________________________________________________________________________________ TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS

ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS
I-10 EB Ramps to Gerald Ford Drive Vehicular Oriented Arterials 45,000 0.94 C 43,668 0.97 C 42,225 Gerald Ford Drive to Frank Sinatra Drive Vehicular Oriented Arterials 45,000 0.80 C 37,608 0.84 C 35,924 Hollister Drive to Portola Avenue Balanced Arterials 30,000 0.25 C 8,946 0.30 C 7,503 Portola Avenue to Cook Street Balanced Arterials 30,000 0.36 C 12,840 0.43 C 10,916 Frank Sinatra Drive to Desert Willow Court Balanced Arterials 30,000 0.69 C 22,274 0.74 C 20,590 Desert Willow Court to Country Club Drive Balanced Arterials 30,000 0.70 C 22,362 0.75 C 20,919 LOS= Level of Service
V/C= Volume to Capacity Ratio
Roadway Classifications and LOS C Capacities were taken from the City of Palm Desert's General Plan, Mobility (Chapter 4).

Portola Avenue
Roadway Segment Classification LOS C
Capacity
Opening Year 2027
Without Project
Opening Year 2027
Plus Project
Cook Street
Frank Sinatra Drive
TABLE 3 – OPENING YEAR 2027 WITHOUT PROJECT & OPENING YEAR 2027 PLUS PROJECT

INTERSECTION LOS SUMMARY
Study Intersection
Existing
Traffic
Control
Opening Year 2027
Without Project
Conditions
Opening Year 2027
Plus Project Conditions Improv.

Required? AM PM AM PM
Delay-LOS Delay-LOS Delay-LOS Delay-LOS
1 - Cook Street & I-10 WB On Ramp Signal 24.7 – C 8.0 – A 24.9 – C 9.3 – A No 2 - Cook Street & I-10 EB On Ramp Signal 50.7 – D 48.6 – D 53.0 – D 51.6 – D No 3 - Cook Street & Gerald Ford Drive Signal 49.8 – D 51.9 – D 50.2 – D 53.9 – D No 4 - Frank Sinatra Drive & Hollister Drive TWSC 15.5 – C 16.4 – C 18.1 – C 24.8 – C No 5 - Frank Sinatra Drive & Portola Avenue Signal 35.7 – D 39.4 – D 37.6 – D 46.4 – D No 6 - Frank Sinatra Drive & Cook Street Signal 19.7 – B 29.4 – C 22.9 – C 32.0 – C No 7 - Portola Avenue & Desert Willow Court TWSC 15.7 – C 20.4 – C 30.4 – D 31.6 – D No 8 - Portola Avenue & Country Club Drive Signal 45.6 - D 43.1 – D 50.4 – D 44.9 – D No Notes:

Delay is expressed in seconds per vehicle.

LOS = Level of Service
TWSC = Two-Way Stop Control, worst approach delay and LOS reported.

TABLE 4 – OPENING YEAR 2027 WITHOUT PROJECT AND OPENING YEAR 2027 PLUS PROJECT

ROADWAY SEGMENT LOS SUMMARY

1.2 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
To satisfy California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) screening assessment and analysis was prepared for the Project under a separate memorandum. 639
Not to Scale
Exhibit 3
Project Site Plan
640
Catavina Residential ___________________________________________________________________________________ TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS

5 PROPOSED PROJECT
The Project proposes to construct 546 single family homes on vacant and undeveloped land. Regional access to the site is provided via the Interstate 10 & Cook Street interchange. Vehicular access to the site will be provided via a new full access driveway on Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue.

5.1 PROJECT FORECAST TRIP GENERATION
In order to calculate vehicle trips forecast to be generated by the proposed Project, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition) was used to calculate the trip generation rates as summarized in Table 9 which are based on the proposed land use quantity.

Table 10 summarizes the vehicular trip generation forecast to be generated by the project using the rates shown in Table 9. The site is vacant and undeveloped, therefore, no trip generation credit has been applied. As shown, the proposed Project is forecast to generate approximately 4,810 daily vehicle trips with 349 AM (87 inbound and 262 outbound) peak hour trips and 490 PM (309 inbound and 181 outbound) peak hour trips.

TABLE 9 - ITE TRIP GENERATION RATES
Land Use ITE Code 1 Daily Trip
Rate
AM Peak Hour Rate PM Peak Hour Rate
Total In : Out Total In : Out
Single-Family
Detached Housing 210 8.81 /DU 0.64 /DU 25% : 75% 0.90 /DU 63% : 37% 1 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition.

TABLE 10 - PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Land Use Intensity Daily
Trips
AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
Total In : Out Total In : Out
Single-Family
Detached Housing 546 DU 4,810 349 87 : 262 490 309 : 181 Notes:

DU = Dwelling Units

5.2 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT OF PROPOSED PROJECT Project trips were assigned onto the surrounding roadway network based on the location of the Project relative to the area transportation network such as access to freeway interchange and primary arterials.

Exhibit 10 shows the forecast trip percent distribution of Project traffic within the study area. The distribution of Project traffic assumes 15% travel north on Portola Avenue, 30% travel south via Portola Avenue, 15% travel west on Frank Sinatra Drive and 40% travel east towards Cook Street via Frank Sinatra Drive.

Exhibit 11 shows the corresponding forecast assignment of daily and AM/PM peak hour projectgenerated trips assuming the trip percent distribution shown in Exhibit 10. 641
Trip Generation summary
Report File: P:\...\Proj_AM.pdf 11/7/2025
Vistro File: P:\...\18192_Portola Springs_Updated Scenario 1 Project_AM Driveways.vistro
Portola Springs
Zone ID: Name Land Use variables Code Ind.

Var. Rate Quantity % In % Out % Int.Capture
Trips In
Adj.

Trips Out
Adj.

Total
Trips Adj.
% of Total
Trips
1: Zone 0.000 50.00 50.00 0.00 27 82 109 100.00
Added Trips Total 27 82 109 100.00
Added Trips
Portola Springs
Scenario 1: 1 Project_AM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
642
Trip Distribution summary
Report File: P:\...\Proj_AM.pdf 11/7/2025
Vistro File: P:\...\18192_Portola Springs_Updated Scenario 1 Project_AM Driveways.vistro
Portola Springs
Zone 1: Zone
To Zone: From Zone:

Zone / Gate Share % Trips Share % Trips
2: Gate 15.00 4 15.00 12
3: Gate 15.00 4 15.00 12
4: Gate 30.00 8 30.00 26
5: Gate 10.00 3 10.00 8
6: Gate 10.00 3 10.00 8
7: Gate 10.00 3 10.00 8
8: Gate 10.00 3 10.00 8
Total 100.00 28 100.00 82
Portola Springs
Scenario 1: 1 Project_AM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
643
Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips
Portola Avenue/Central ProjePortola Avenue/South Project Portola Ave/Frank Sinatra Dr Cook St/Frank Sinatra Dr Portola Ave/Country Club Dr North Project Access/Frank S Portola Springs
Scenario 1: 1 Project_AM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
644
Trip Generation summary
Report File: P:\...\Proj_PM.pdf 11/7/2025
Vistro File: P:\...\18192_Portola Springs_Updated Scenario 2 Project_PM Driveways.vistro
Portola Springs
Zone ID: Name Land Use variables Code Ind.

Var. Rate Quantity % In % Out % Int.Capture
Trips In
Adj.

Trips Out
Adj.

Total
Trips Adj.
% of Total
Trips
1: Zone 0.000 50.00 50.00 0.00 93 54 147 100.00
Added Trips Total 93 54 147 100.00
Added Trips
Portola Springs
Scenario 2: 2 Project_PM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
645
Trip Distribution summary
Report File: P:\...\Proj_PM.pdf 11/7/2025
Vistro File: P:\...\18192_Portola Springs_Updated Scenario 2 Project_PM Driveways.vistro
Portola Springs
Zone 1: Zone
To Zone: From Zone:

Zone / Gate Share % Trips Share % Trips
2: Gate 15.00 14 15.00 8
3: Gate 15.00 14 15.00 8
4: Gate 30.00 28 30.00 18
5: Gate 10.00 9 10.00 5
6: Gate 10.00 9 10.00 5
7: Gate 10.00 9 10.00 5
8: Gate 10.00 9 10.00 5
Total 100.00 92 100.00 54
Portola Springs
Scenario 2: 2 Project_PM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
646
Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips
Portola Avenue/Central ProjePortola Avenue/South Project Portola Ave/Frank Sinatra Dr Cook St/Frank Sinatra Dr Portola Ave/Country Club Dr North Project Access/Frank S Portola Springs
Scenario 2: 2 Project_PM
Version 2024 (SP 0-4)
Generated with
647
SimTraffic Performance Report
Existing AM Peak Hour
Portola Springs Residential Project SimTraffic Report
Dudek Page 1
1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive Performance by movement 648
Attachment C
SimTraffic Worksheets
649
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing AM Peak Hour
Portola Springs Residential Project SimTraffic Report
Dudek Page 2
Intersection: 1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB
Directions Served UL T T R UL T T R UL T T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 124 133 118 99 156 86 73 84 281 350 308 97 Average Queue (ft) 56 59 53 45 75 40 30 42 203 172 137 30 95th Queue (ft) 106 108 101 77 134 79 65 69 317 434 361 78 Link Distance (ft) 583 583 4436 4436 481 481 481
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 120 230 143 100 257
Storage Blk Time (%) 2 0 1 0 0 20 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 0 1 0 0 16 1
Intersection: 1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive
Movement B10 B10 SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T UL T T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 37 20 203 702 675 326
Average Queue (ft) 3 1 193 458 385 133
95th Queue (ft) 32 15 236 824 750 266
Link Distance (ft) 103 103 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 178
Storage Blk Time (%) 55 11
Queuing Penalty (veh) 124 29
650
SimTraffic Performance Report
Existing PM Peak Hour
Portola Springs Residential Project SimTraffic Report
Dudek Page 1
1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive Performance by movement 651
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing PM Peak Hour
Portola Springs Residential Project SimTraffic Report
Dudek Page 2
Intersection: 1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB
Directions Served UL T T R UL T T R UL T T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 135 172 72 62 99 56 52 56 265 252 220 132 Average Queue (ft) 116 105 46 39 61 33 29 36 231 168 145 92 95th Queue (ft) 166 256 86 70 118 66 56 59 291 268 232 149 Link Distance (ft) 583 583 4436 4436 481 481 481
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 120 230 143 100 257
Storage Blk Time (%) 21 0 6 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 23 0 10 0
Intersection: 1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive
Movement SB SB SB SB
Directions Served UL T T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 203 351 263 159
Average Queue (ft) 169 258 176 78
95th Queue (ft) 252 381 301 186
Link Distance (ft) 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 178
Storage Blk Time (%) 24 11
Queuing Penalty (veh) 36 29
652
SimTraffic Performance Report
Existing plus Project AM Peak Hour
Portola Springs Residential Project SimTraffic Report
Dudek Page 1
1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive Performance by movement 4: North Project Access & Driveway 1/Frank Sinatra Drive Performance by movement 5: Portola Avenue & Driveway 2 Performance by movement
6: Portola Avenue & Driveway 3 Performance by movement
Total Network Performance
653
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing plus Project AM Peak Hour
Portola Springs Residential Project SimTraffic Report
Dudek Page 2
Intersection: 1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB
Directions Served UL T T R UL T T R UL T T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 139 152 137 110 142 90 89 103 282 484 420 83 Average Queue (ft) 76 70 69 47 80 37 32 45 235 255 179 26 95th Queue (ft) 130 128 119 84 137 76 71 78 338 572 465 65 Link Distance (ft) 583 583 4436 4436 481 481 481
Upstream Blk Time (%) 13 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 22 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 120 230 143 100 257
Storage Blk Time (%) 4 1 1 0 0 36 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 1 1 1 0 29 0
Intersection: 1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive
Movement B10 B10 SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T UL T T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 23 21 203 580 522 264
Average Queue (ft) 16 7 186 346 286 133
95th Queue (ft) 80 49 242 598 524 234
Link Distance (ft) 105 105 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 3 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 178
Storage Blk Time (%) 38 13
Queuing Penalty (veh) 87 33
Intersection: 4: North Project Access & Driveway 1/Frank Sinatra Drive Movement NB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 64
Average Queue (ft) 30
95th Queue (ft) 56
Link Distance (ft) 114
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
654
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing plus Project AM Peak Hour
Portola Springs Residential Project SimTraffic Report
Dudek Page 3
Intersection: 5: Portola Avenue & Driveway 2
Movement EB NB NB NB B10 B10
Directions Served R L T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 39 40 27 16 79 46
Average Queue (ft) 9 4 10 1 5 3
95th Queue (ft) 32 23 59 17 39 26
Link Distance (ft) 157 811 811 481 481
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Intersection: 6: Portola Avenue & Driveway 3
Movement EB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 29
Average Queue (ft) 7
95th Queue (ft) 28
Link Distance (ft) 109
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 185
655
SimTraffic Performance Report
Existing plus Project PM Peak Hour
Portola Springs Residential Project SimTraffic Report
Dudek Page 1
1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive Performance by movement 4: Driveway 1 & Frank Sinatra Drive Performance by movement 5: Portola Avenue & Driveway 2 Performance by movement
6: Portola Avenue & Driveway 3 Performance by movement
Total Network Performance
656
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing plus Project PM Peak Hour
Portola Springs Residential Project SimTraffic Report
Dudek Page 2
Intersection: 1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB
Directions Served UL T T R UL T T R UL T T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 145 276 196 83 166 154 100 81 282 380 302 170 Average Queue (ft) 121 95 64 41 87 45 38 38 206 178 151 98 95th Queue (ft) 171 234 138 69 154 106 78 65 305 326 271 161 Link Distance (ft) 583 583 4436 4436 481 481 481
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 120 230 143 100 257
Storage Blk Time (%) 23 1 0 2 0 0 0 8 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 28 1 0 2 0 1 0 13 0
Intersection: 1: Portola Avenue & Frank Sinatra Drive
Movement SB SB SB SB
Directions Served UL T T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 203 403 338 190
Average Queue (ft) 176 227 156 71
95th Queue (ft) 234 384 268 164
Link Distance (ft) 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 178
Storage Blk Time (%) 19 6
Queuing Penalty (veh) 30 15
Intersection: 4: Driveway 1 & Frank Sinatra Drive
Movement NB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 54
Average Queue (ft) 25
95th Queue (ft) 48
Link Distance (ft) 114
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
657
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing plus Project PM Peak Hour
Portola Springs Residential Project SimTraffic Report
Dudek Page 3
Intersection: 5: Portola Avenue & Driveway 2
Movement EB NB NB SB B10 B10
Directions Served R L T TR T
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 55 6 13 58 23
Average Queue (ft) 5 13 0 0 4 1
95th Queue (ft) 22 43 4 5 28 11
Link Distance (ft) 157 811 105 481 481
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: Portola Avenue & Driveway 3
Movement EB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 29
Average Queue (ft) 5
95th Queue (ft) 23
Link Distance (ft) 109
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 90
658
659
660
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.___

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM

DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PRECISE PLAN FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A 156 UNIT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

COMMUNITY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FRANK

SINATRA DRIVE AND PORTOLA AVENUE AND ADOPTING AN

ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED INITIAL STUDY AND

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND FINDING THE PROJECT

EXEMPT FROM CEQA PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES
SECTION 15183
CASE NO. PP/EA 25-0006
WHEREAS, Blue Fern West (“Applicant”), submitted a Precise Plan and Addendum to the 2022 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH #2022120165) for the Frank Sinatra and Portola Project to construct 156 single family residential units on approximately

18.3 acres, including onsite circulation, utility infrastructure, stormwater facilities, lighting, and open space areas. The project is located South of Frank Sinatra Drive and west of Portola Avenue on APN 620-400-030 & 620-400-031 (“Project”); and WHEREAS, the Project site is within the PR-22 zoning district, and is designated as Town Center Neighborhood by the Palm Desert General Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed Project establishes site layout, minimum lot sizes, circulation, recreation and open space areas; and
WHEREAS, for approval of the home design and development, the Project would need to apply for subsequent Precise Plan(s) applications to establish development standards, including setbacks and height, and architecture, including landscaping, consistent with the conditions of approval listed herein; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Project conforms to the General Plan land use designation for Town Center Neighborhood and the development standards listed in the City’s Zoning Ordinance for the PR-22 zoning district; and
WHEREAS, under Section 21067 of the Public Resources Code, Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), and the City of Palm Desert’s (“City’s”) Local CEQA Guidelines, the City is the lead agency for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Project has been reviewed in compliance with the 2024 Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act for the City of Palm Desert (Resolution No. 2024-035), and, pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Addendum to the previously approved Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and considered to address changes to the Project, based upon which it was determined that no new significant environmental impacts would occur and that no previously identified impacts would be substantially more severe than those analyzed in the approved IS/MND; and
661
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 3rd day of February, open a duly noticed public hearing on the request by the Applicant regarding the above noted Project, which public hearing was continued to a date certain of February 17th; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 17th day of February continue a previously opened public hearing to consider the request by the Applicant for approval of the above noted Project request; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, projects that are consistent with an adopted General Plan for which an EIR has been certified do not require additional environmental review except to address impacts that are peculiar to the project or site and were not analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the Project does not result in any new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of impacts previously identified in the General Plan EIR, and that all potential impacts are either:
• Adequately addressed in the General Plan EIR, or
• Mitigated through compliance with City standards, adopted mitigation measures, and conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, the IS/MND Addendum and supporting technical studies constitute substantial evidence in the record demonstrating that the Project qualifies for CEQA streamlining pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183; and WHEREAS, at the said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons, which are outlined in the staff report, exist to justify approval of said request:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as substantive findings of this Resolution.

SECTION 2. Findings on Precise Plan. Under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section

25.72.030(E), the findings for the PP25-0006 are the following:

1. The proposed location of the Precise Plan is in accord with the objectives of this title and the purpose of the district in which the site is located.

Project Compliance: Yes. It is the purpose of the PR district to provide for flexibility in development, creative and imaginative design, and the development of parcels of land as coordinated projects involving a mixture of residential densities and housing types, and community facilities. The PR district is further intended to provide for the optimum integration of urban and natural amenities within developments. The PR district is also established to give a land developer 662
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
3 assurance that innovative and unique land development techniques will be given reasonable consideration for approval and to provide the City with assurances that the completed project will contain the character envisioned at the time of approval.

2. The proposed location of the Precise Plan under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

Project Compliance: Yes. The Project has been reviewed in accordance with all applicable requirements of the PR-22 Zoning Ordinance, as well as engineering, building, fire safety, and utility regulations, to ensure compliance with all relevant safety and usability standards. The Project was found to not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the public, nor will it be materially injurious to the properties in the vicinity. The Project provides setbacks from adjacent properties that meet the standards of the PR-22 zoning district.

3. The proposed Precise Plan use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this title, except for approved variances or adjustments.

Project Compliance: Yes. The proposed development conforms with all applicable standards of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, including all standards of the PR22 zoning designation. The Project conforms with all applicable development standards. Approval of the home design and development, the Project would need to apply for subsequent Precise Plan(s) applications to establish development standards, including setbacks and height, and architecture, including landscaping, consistent with the conditions of approval listed herein. This can be established per single or multiple planning areas identified on TTM 39307. Per Palm Desert Municipal Code section 25.10.050(B)(14), two-story, single-family detached buildings shall be setback a minimum of 100 feet. The Commission may waive this requirement when adjacent developments are planned simultaneously. The Applicant has submitted applications for a development directly abutting this west perimeter, as the same ownership, and requested to meet the allowance of twostory homes.

4. The proposed conditional use complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the City’s General Plan
Project Compliance: Yes. The proposed use complies and is consistent with the site’s Town Center Neighborhood land use designation as outlined by the Palm Desert General Plan. The Project provides a single family housing and aligns with the surrounding neighborhood. The Project meets objective design standards and incorporates drought-tolerant landscaping throughout the site, enhancing sustainability and reducing water consumption in accordance with the City’s planning and environmental goals. The following General Plan Policies are implemented with this Project:

Land Use Policy 3.15 – The Project provides on-site recreational open space as required by the General Plan.
663
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
4 Land Use Policy 3.16 – The Project provides single family residential units at a scale and density consistent with the surrounding uses and satisfy the City’s objective for transitional development.

Land Use Policy 3.20 – The Project enhances and preserves the characteristics of the existing surrounding neighborhoods.

SECTION 3. CEQA. The Planning Commission finds that the Project has been reviewed in compliance with the 2024 Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the City of Palm Desert (Resolution No. 2024-035).

Pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Addendum to the previously approved Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and considered to address changes to the Project. Based on the Addendum, it was determined that no new significant environmental impacts would occur and that no previously identified impacts would be substantially more severe than those analyzed in the approved IS/MND. The Planning Commission hereby adopts the Addendum to the approved Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Project qualifies for CEQA streamlining pursuant to Section 15183, and the City may rely on the existing environmental record to support approval of the Project. The City shall file the appropriate Notice of Determination and/or Notice of Exemption within five (5) working days in accordance with CEQA.

SECTION 4. Project Approval. The Planning Commission hereby approves the Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration as identified in Exhibit A, and approves PP/EA 25-0006, subject to the conditions of approval identified in Exhibit B.

SECTION 5. Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at the City’s office at 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260. Rosie Lua, the Secretary to the Palm Desert Planning Commission, is the custodian of the record of proceedings.

SECTION 6. Execution of Resolution. The Chairperson of the Planning Commission signs this Resolution, and the Secretary to the Commission shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption thereof.

ADOPTED ON February 17, 2026.

LINDSAY HOLT

CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:

ROSIE LUA

SECRETARY
664
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
5 I, Rosie Lua, Secretary of the City of Palm Desert Planning Commission, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2913 is a full, true, and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert on February 17, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RECUSED:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Desert, California, on February 17, 2026.

ROSIE LUA

SECRETARY

EXHIBIT A

ADDENDUM TO THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
665
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
6 EXHIBIT B

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CASE NO. PP25-0006 (Precise
Plan)

1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with the approved plans and exhibits on file with the Development Services Department, except as modified by the following conditions. Any variation from the approved plans must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to building permit issuance and may require review and approval by the ARC, Planning Commission, and/or City Council.

2. The Applicant agrees that in the event of any administrative, legal, or equitable action instituted by a third party challenging the validity of any of the procedures leading to the adoption of these Project Approvals for the Project, or the Project Approvals themselves, the Developer and City each shall have the right, in their sole discretion, to elect whether or not to defend such action. The Developer, at its sole expense, shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City (including its agents, officers, and employees) from any such action, claim, or proceeding with counsel chosen by the City, subject to the Developer’s approval of counsel, which shall not be unreasonably denied, and at the Developer’s sole expense. If the City is aware of such an action or proceeding, it shall promptly notify the Developer and cooperate in the defense. The Developer, upon such notification, shall deposit with City sufficient funds in the judgment of the City Finance Director to cover the expense of defending such action without any offset or claim against said deposit to assure that the City expends no City funds. If both Parties elect to defend, the Parties hereby agree to affirmatively cooperate in defending said action and to execute a joint defense and confidentiality agreement in order to share and protect the information under the joint defense privilege recognized under applicable law.

As part of the cooperation in defending an action, City and Developer shall coordinate their defense in order to make the most efficient use of legal counsel and to share and protect information. Developer and City shall each have sole discretion to terminate its defense at any time. The City shall not settle any thirdparty litigation of Project approvals without the Developer’s consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed unless the Developer materially breaches this indemnification requirement.

3. All conditions are subject to field verification. The City may withhold building or occupancy permits until compliance with applicable conditions and mitigation measures is demonstrated.

4. The Precise Plan approves site layout and development consistent with the Conceptual Site Plan dated January 30, 2026. This includes site layout, common open space provided, recreation area location/size, and lot sizes.

5. All development within this Precise Plan will need to adhere to PDMC Section

25.10.050(B).
666
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
7 6. Prior to the issuance of any building or landscaping permit an application for a Precise Plan is required for approval for architecture, landscaping, development standards, setbacks, and all other requirements identified for the Precise Plan and within the Palm Desert Municipal Code at time of application, subject to approval from the City’s Architectural Review Commission and Planning Commission.

Precise Plan 25-0006 and all of the conditions herein will still remain in effect in the event a future Precise Plan approvals unless specifically specified in a resolution.

7. The Precise Plan has identified common areas for recreation, open space and retention. The Applicant shall submit a Design Review application subject to Architectural Review Commission approval for the design of these areas.

8. All future Precise Plans and development will need to adhere to the approved pad elevations as identified in the Preliminary Grading Exhibit, dated January 29, 2026.

Any revisions would need to comply with PDMC Section 27.12.045.

9. The City Engineer and Development Services Director reserve the right for any pad elevation revision within this development to require any further studies, drawings, or analysis to ensure the entirety of the project meets City requirements and is consistent with the original approval. The City Engineer and Development Services Director reserves the right for any pad elevation revision within this development to be subject to Planning Commission approval, compliant with PDMC Section

27.12.045.

10. A signed copy of all pages of this Resolution of approval shall be printed onto the first page of the construction drawings upon submittal for building permits.

11. All construction documents, including grading, building, civil, landscape, and improvement plans, shall identify the applicable Precise Plan number on the cover sheet.

12. The Precise Plan shall expire two years from the date of this approval, and shall become null and void unless a time extension is granted per PDMC Section

26.20.140, any extension legislation from the Governor or State Legislature.

13. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein, which are in addition to the approved development standards listed in the PDMC and state and federal statutes now in force or which hereafter may be in force.

14. Prior to any construction approval, “will serve” letters shall be obtained from all affected agencies, including but not limited to the jurisdictional agencies; Coachella Valley Water District, Southern California Edison, Spectrum Cable, Frontier Telephone and Burrtec Waste and Recycling of the Desert.

15. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall submit an address plan including the recorded street names and addresses for approval by the Development Services Director, in consultation with the Planning, Police, and Fire Departments, and shown on the Final Map.

16. The applicant shall have recorded Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) as a part of the establishment of a Home Owners Association (HOA) to 667
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
8 the satisfaction of the City Attorney and City Engineer after the recordation of the Final Map. Said HOA shall be responsible for the ongoing and perpetual maintenance of all common areas and improvements established and required within the tentative map area. The CC&Rs shall include but not be limited to provisions for the ongoing maintenance of frontage streets including Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue, private interior streets, recreational amenities, landscaping (including street parkways, landscape easements, parks and drainage facilities, including pipelines and retention basins), blows and and nuisance water mitigation features (e.g. fencing, landscaping irrigation, sand impoundment areas, and soil stabilization, bubblers), and the ongoing maintenance of the exterior of any project perimeter walls including graffiti removal. The CC&Rs shall have clearly labeled exhibit(s) that demonstrate maintenance obligations for all improvements within each associated phase. The CC&R’s shall be recorded subsequent to the recordation of the final map for each associated phase.

17. The CC&Rs and other homeowner association documents shall clearly state that all private onsite drainage facilities, including pipelines and basins, are the responsibility of the HOA for regular upkeep and maintenance.

18. Plant materials shall emphasize drought-tolerant species compatible with the Coachella Valley climate. Turf shall be limited to recreational or functional openspace areas only. Landscape coverage shall achieve at least 50 percent ground coverage within two years of installation.

19. The pedestrian network shall conform to the Pedestrian Accessibility Plan dated January 30, 2026, including internal sidewalk connections, and safe crossings to the recreation area. Any revision to pedestrian routes shall require Planning Division review.

20. A photometric plan demonstrating compliance with the City’s illumination levels and shielding standards shall be submitted to the Planning Division for approval prior to issuance of building permits. The Photometric Plan shall include the following:
a. A catalog of each type of lighting used.
b. A detail of any freestanding light that includes height, type of fixture, and decorative base.
c. The Photometric level at property line should be “0”

21. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted State Clearinghouse Number 2022120165 and amendments. All mitigation measures shall be implemented at the timing specified therein, and verification shall be provided to the Planning Division.

22. In the event that any human remains are discovered the applicant shall cease all work and contact the Riverside County Sheriff and Riverside County Coroner’s Office and work shall not resume until such time that the site has been cleared by County Coroner and/or the Palm Desert Sherrif’s Office of any criminal matter. The applicant will also be required to consult with the Agua Caliente Tribal office.

23. During grading and construction, the applicant shall implement SCAQMD Rule 402 668
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
9 and 403 dust-control measures, including daily watering, covering of haul trucks, stabilization of access points, and vehicle idling limits of 5 minutes.

24. An exception to the 100-foot setback requirement per Section 25.10.050 Development Standards (B)(14) is approved for two-story single-family detached homes. Setbacks shall be reduced to 45 feet along the west property line and 32 feet along Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra. No residential structure shall exceed two stories or 35 feet in height as measured per PDMC § 25.10.050. Rooflines and massing shall maintain visual variety and avoid monotonous repetition along internal streets.

25. Wall heights, materials, and finishes shall match those shown on the approved walland-fence plan. Decorative treatments facing public rights-of-way shall include textured stucco, stone veneer, or similar high-quality finishes. Chain-link fencing is prohibited except as temporary construction security fencing. Barbed Wire, Acrylic, and Serpentine Fences are specifically prohibited.

26. The recreation/open-space area shown on the approved Precise Plan shall include a pool area, passive lawns, and shaded seating. The preliminary landscape plan shall be submitted for review and approval of the Architectural Review Commission.

Final design details shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to building permits for those facilities. The completion of these areas shall be completed prior to the completion of any residential phase within the development.

27. Prior to grading permit, the Applicant shall submit plans and obtain permits for the construction of the perimeter wall along the west, east, and north side of TTM 39307. These property walls shall meet the City of Palm Desert Municipal Code and do not require Architectural Review Commission approval. They may be approved by the Development Services Department at a ministerial level. The Applicant is responsible for conducting a precise survey of the property to verify all boundary lines.
a. Wall heights, materials, and finishes shall match those shown on the approved wall-and-fence plan. Decorative treatments facing public rightsof-way shall include textured stucco, stone veneer, or similar high-quality finishes. Chain-link fencing is prohibited except as temporary construction security fencing. Barbed Wire, Acrylic, and Serpentine Fences are specifically prohibited.
b. All walls adjacent to a public street shall be designed to provide undulation (offset of at least 18 inches) or pilaster at least every 30 feet of linear extent of the wall pursuant to PDMC Section 25.40.080(F)(3).
c. In the event that the survey identifies existing improvements (i.e. fences, structures, landscaping) encroaching into the subdivision from adjacent properties, the Applicant shall be responsible for addressing such conflicts.

This includes making good-faith efforts to resolve encroachments through coordination with property owners, which may involve relocation of improvements and processing of lot line adjustments. Any proposed lot line adjustment shall be submitted for review and approval of the City and must 669
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
10 be finalized prior to recordation of the Final Map.
d. Construction of the site perimeter walls (west, east and north perimeter walls) shall be completed prior to first Certificate of Occupancy issuance

28. The applicant shall prepare a final landscape plan that contains the information prescribed by the Development Services Director and is consistent with all City Design Guidelines. This includes the final landscape plan for all common areas, retention, and recreation area as identified in Condition #7.

29. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit perimeter landscape plans consistent with existing landscape across Frank Sinatra Drive, Portola Avenue and consistent with the project to the west. The southwest corner of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue shall include enhanced landscaping.

The conceptual plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Architectural Review Commission.

30. All frontage landscape improvements (Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue) shall be maintained by the Homeowners Association.

31. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, all perimeter landscaping shall be installed.

32. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, applicant shall install monumentation sign in a location designated in the landscape plan or approved by the Director of Development Services

33. All subdivision signs shall be subject to Palm Desert Sign Code.

34. In compliance with the City of Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 12.16.020, all utility extensions within the site shall be placed underground unless otherwise specified or allowed by the respective utility purveyor.

35. The Applicant shall pay all applicable City of Palm Desert fees, charges and other costs such as development impact fees as prescribed by City Ordinance. The applicant is hereby advised that the fees may change at the time they become due and payable, as permitted by applicable law.

NOTICE TO APPLICANT: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), the 90 day period to protest the imposition of any impact fee, dedication, reservation, or other exaction described in this resolution begins on the effective date of this approval and any such protest must be in a manner that complies with Section 66020(a), and failure to timely follow this procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void or annul imposition.

The right to protest the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions does not apply to planning, zoning, grading, or other similar application processing fees or service fees in connection with this project.

LAND DEVELOPMENT:

36. The following plans are hereby referenced: Preliminary Grading Exhibit prepared by MSA Consulting on January 29, 2026 updated by and supporting Tentative Tract 670
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
11 Map No. 39307 exhibit prepared by MSA Consulting on January 30, 2026.

37. It is assumed that easements shown on the preliminary grading exhibit are shown correctly and include all the easements that encumber the subject property. A current preliminary title report (30 days current) for the site shall be submitted during technical plan review. The Applicant shall secure approval from all easement holders for all grading and improvements, which are proposed over respective easements, if any, or provide evidence that the easement has been relocated, quitclaimed, vacated, abandoned, easement holder cannot be found, or is otherwise of no effect. Proof of authorization shall be provided to the Land Development Department prior to issuance of grading permit.

38. Should such approvals or alternative actions regarding the easements not be provided and approved by the City, the Applicant may be required to amend or revise the proposed site configuration as may be necessary.

39. The Applicant shall comply with Palm Desert Ordinance No. 843, Section 24.20 Stormwater Management and Discharge Ordinance.

40. Prior to a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare a final grading plan for the site.

No grading or other improvements shall be permitted until a final grading plan has been approved by the City Engineer. Grading plans and all grading shall conform to the approved Preliminary Grading Exhibit, the California Building Code, Palm Desert Municipal Code (PDMC) Title 27 Grading, and all other relevant laws, rules, and regulations governing grading in the City of Palm Desert. a. The final grading plans shall show and identify all proposed onsite improvements in accordance with the approved preliminary grading exhibit. b. Design shall be in compliance with the accessibility standards in the California Building Code (current) and Americans with Disability Act (ADA) regulations. Plans shall show running and cross slopes along accessibility path from building entrances to designated parking stalls and to public pedestrian infrastructure.
c. All private improvements shall be kept within private property. Non-standard encroachments into proposed public right-of-way will not be permitted, unless clearly identified on these conditions of approval. d. The project’s Geotechnical Engineer shall sign the final grading plans.

41. Prior to grading plan approval, the Applicant shall pay all appropriate drainage fees in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code Section 26.49 and Palm Desert Ordinance No. 653.

42. Prior to grading plan approval, the Applicant shall pay all appropriate park fees in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code Section 26.48.060.

43. Prior to issuance of the grading permit for the development, the Applicant shall pay all appropriate signalization fees in accordance with the City’s Resolution No. 79- 17 and 79-55.

44. Prior to grading permit, the applicant shall record the related land subdivision 671
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
12 (TTM39307) final map.

45. Prior to grading permit, the Applicant shall submit improvement plans for required improvements along Frank Sinatra Drive as outlined in these conditions of approval.

The plans are required to be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. Applicant shall provide:
a. Right-of-way dedication to provide a minimum 65-foot right-of-way from street centerline to property line is required.
b. Additional right-of-way dedication at project driveways required to accommodate ADA-compliant public infrastructure within public right-ofway, if needed, shall be dedicated. c. All public infrastructure shall be within public right-of-way, prior to plan approval the Applicant shall provide proof of proposed design will meet criteria.
d. Street improvements include, but are not limited to, meandering sidewalk, landscaped parkway, and curb & gutter.
e. Improvement plans shall include Class II Bicycle Lane along the project frontage per Coachella Valley AG Active Transportation Planning (CVAG ATP) Design Guidelines Section 5.3.
f. The project driveway at Frank Sinatra Drive shall be restricted to right-in and right-out movements. Right-in movements shall be made from a rightturn only pocket providing minimum 200-feet of vehicle storage length, or as approved by the City Engineer. The design shall be per AASHTO Green Book and Caltrans Highway Design Manual and be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
g. Separate signing and striping plans for Frank Sinatra Drive shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer. h. The Applicant shall guarantee all(any) improvements within the public rightof-way for a period of one year from the date of final acceptance and the improvement guarantee shall be backed by a bond or cash deposit in the amount of ten percent of the surety posted for improvements.

46. Prior to grading permit, the Applicant shall submit improvement plans for required improvements along Portola Avenue as outlined in these conditions of approval.

The plans are required to be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval.
a. Right-of-way dedication to provide minimum 63-foot right-of-way from street centerline to property line.
b. Additional right-of-way dedication at project driveways required to accommodate ADA-compliant public infrastructure within public right-ofway shall be dedicated. c. Street improvements include, but are not limited to, meandering sidewalk, landscaped parkway, and curb & gutter.
672
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
13 d. Improvement plans shall include Class II Bicycle Lane along the project frontage per Coachella Valley AG Active Transportation Planning (CVAG ATP) Design Guidelines Section 5.3.
e. The Applicant shall restripe the existing lane configuration to accommodate a dedicated right-turn lane onto the development at the Portola Avenue driveways with a minimum of 200-feet pocket length, or as approved by the City Engineer. The design shall be per AASHTO Green Book and Caltrans Highway Design Manual and be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
f. The Applicant shall construct a median opening at the northerly Portola Avenue driveway to accommodate a northbound left-turn lane into the development, providing a minimum 200-foot storage length. The design shall account for the existing southbound left-turn movement from Portola Avenue onto Retreat Circle North and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
g. Separate signing and striping plans for Portola Avenue shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer. The restriping shall provide for 2 southbound through lanes along the project frontage, and 2 southbound through lanes and a 1 right-turn lane at the project driveways. Adequate transitions shall be provided.
h. The Applicant shall guarantee all(any) improvements within the public rightof-way for a period of one year from the date of final acceptance and the improvement guarantee shall be backed by a bond or cash deposit in the amount of ten percent of the surety posted for improvements.

47. Prior to approval of the grading plan, the Applicant shall prepare a final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for approval of the City Engineer. a. LID BMPs shall be designed in accordance with the Riverside County Whitewater River Region Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice Design Handbook for Low Impact Development, dated June 2014. b. Any onsite and offsite BMPs shall be designed and sized for a maximum infiltration rate of 2 inches/hour as supported by the infiltration report. Any changes to the proposed BMP sizing, design, and type; and impacts to the referenced exhibits, may require additional approvals.

48. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a signed and notarized WQMP Operations and Maintenance Agreement to the City. The agreement shall include provisions for the maintenance and operation of all onsite water quality BMP facilities by the property owner.

49. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a PM10 application for review and approval. The Applicant shall comply with all provisions of PDMC Section 24.12 regarding Fugitive Dust Control.

50. Prior to approval of the grading plan, the Applicant shall prepare a detailed final hydrology and hydraulics report for approval of the City Engineer. The report shall 673
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
14 encompass the entire development project area and offsite tributary areas to the site, and be prepared in compliance with all relevant laws, rules, and regulations governing the City of Palm Desert.
a. Site is required to handle the 100-year 24-hour event. Final report shall show the site is designed to meet requirement.
b. Design shall incorporate emergency overflow outlet in the event the drainage improvements exceed full capacity.
c. A maximum infiltration rate of 2 inches/hour is allowed to be used for this project per the City of Palm Desert Stormwater Infiltration Rate Policy and as determined by the City Engineer during the entitlement review of this project.

51. Prior to approval of the grading plans, the Applicant shall provide the City Engineer with evidence that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with the State Water Resources Control Board. Such Evidence shall consist of a copy of the NOI stamped by the State Water Resources Control Board or the Regional Water Quality Control Board, or a letter from either agency stating that the NOI has been filed and their WDID number is depicted on the grading plan before approval.

52. Prior to grading permit it shall be the sole responsibility of the Applicant to obtain any and all proposed or required easements and/or permissions necessary to perform the grading shown on the preliminary site plan exhibit. Proof shall be provided to the Land Development Department prior to issuance of grading permit.

53. Prior to issuance of grading permit and in compliance with the City of Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 27.24, the Applicant shall enter into an agreement and post financial security guarantee for all grading work related to this project.

54. Prior to issuance of grading permit, where grading involves import or export, the Applicant shall obtain relevant permits, from the Public Works Department where the material is coming from or going to, including import/export quantities and hauling route.

55. Prior to grading permit issuance, a copy of the recorded development specific Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be submitted for review and concurrence of maintenance responsibilities by City Engineer and City Attorney.

56. Prior to grading permit sign-off, the final grade certification shall be submitted in conformance with the approved grading plans. A licensed land surveyor shall certify the completion of grading in conformance with the lines and grades shown on the approved grading plans.

57. Prior to grading permit sign-off, the Applicant shall field verify that all BMPs are designed, constructed, and functional in accordance with the approved WQMP.

BMPs shall be inspected by City staff.

58. Upon completion of grading work, the project’s Geotechnical Engineer shall certify to the completion of grading in conformance with the approved grading plans and the recommendations of the geotechnical report approved for this project. A licensed land surveyor shall certify to the completion of grading in conformance with 674
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
15 the lines and grades shown on the approved grading plans.

59. Prior to grading sign-off, the required associated improvements shall be completed or bonded in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer and City Attorney.

60. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall submit a Signing and Striping Plan for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plan shall identify all proposed on-street parking restrictions and signage, and shall restrict parking along designated sections of the street, excluding the area identified as Section A-A. No Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued until the Signing and Striping Plan has been approved and implemented.

61. The applicant shall complete all public improvements per the provisions of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
a. Prior to the first certificate of occupancy of an individual lot within the proposed subdivision, all improvements within existing public streets, Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue, will be required to be constructed in conformance with current City standards.

FIRE DEPARTMENT:

62. Protection Water Supplies/Fire Flow - Minimum fire flow for the construction of all buildings is required per CFC Appendix B. Prior to building permit issuance for new construction, the applicant shall provide documentation to show a (existing/proposed) water system capable of delivering the required fire flow.

Specific design features may increase or decrease the required fire flow. a. Will Serve Letters from the responsible water purveyor are required prior to a map recordation.

63. Fire Protection Water Supplies/Hydrants - The minimum number of fire hydrants required, as well as the location and spacing of fire hydrants, shall comply with CFC Appendix C and NFPA 24. Fire hydrants shall be located no more than 400 feet from all portions of the exterior of the building along an approved route on a fire apparatus access road, unless otherwise approved by the Fire Department. Where new water mains are extended along streets where hydrants are not needed for protection of structures, standard fire hydrants shall be provided at spacing not to exceed 1000 feet along streets for transportation hazards. Fire hydrants shall be at least 40 feet from the building it is serving. A fire hydrant shall be located within 20 to 100 feet of the fire department connection for buildings protected with a fire sprinkler system. The size and number of outlets required for the approved fire hydrants are 4” x 2 ½” x 2 ½” (super hydrant). Reference CFC as amended and NFPA 24.

64. Fire Department Access - Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided to within 150 feet of all exterior portions of buildings, unless otherwise approved by the Fire Department. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with an approved turn around. The minimum required turning radius of a fire apparatus access road is 45 feet outside radius and 24 feet inside radius. The 675
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
16 construction of the fire apparatus access roads shall be all weather and capable of sustaining 75,000 lbs. Unless otherwise approved, the grade of a fire apparatus access road shall not exceed 16 percent and the cross slope shall not exceed 2.5 percent. The angles of approach and departure for fire apparatus access roads shall be a maximum of 6 percent grade change for 25 feet of approach/departure.

Reference CFC as amended and Riverside County Fire Department Policies and Standards.
a) Fire Lane marking: Identification and marking of fire lanes, including curb details and signage shall be in compliance with Riverside County Fire Department Standards.

66. Fire Department Access Turn Around - Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with a bulb turnaround at the terminus measuring a minimum of 45 feet outside radius and 24 feet inside radius. Parallel parking around the perimeter of the bulb is acceptable provided the bulb outside turning radius is increased by 8 feet. In-lieu of a bulb, a hammer-head type turnaround is acceptable where the top of the “T” dimension is 120 feet with the stem in the center. Additional turnaround designs may be acceptable as approved by the Fire Department. Reference CFC as amended and Riverside County Fire Department Policies and Standards.

67. Secondary Access – Unless otherwise approved by the Fire Department, dead end fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed 1,320 feet. Secondary egress/access fire apparatus access roads shall provide independent egress/access from/to the area or as otherwise approved by the Fire Department. Secondary egress/access fire apparatus access roads shall be as remote as possible from the primary fire apparatus access road to reduce the possibility that both routes will be obstructed by a single emergency. Additional fire apparatus access roads based on the potential for impairment by vehicle congestion, condition of terrain, climatic conditions, anticipated magnitude of a potential incident, or other factors that could limit access may be required by the Fire Department. Reference CFC as amended and Riverside County Fire Department Policies and Standards.

68. Fire Department Building Construction Plan Review - Submittal of construction plans to the Fire Department will be required. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when the Fire Department reviews the plans. These conditions will be based on California Fire Code, California Building Code (CBC), and related codes/standards adopted at the time of construction plan submittal. Reference CFC as amended.

69. Traffic Calming Devices - Requests for installation of traffic calming designs/devices on fire apparatus access roads shall be submitted for evaluation purposes, resulting in denial or approval by the Fire Code Official. Reference CFC as amended.

70. Gate Access - All electronically operated gates shall be provided with Knox key switches and automatic sensors for access. These gates shall be provided with access to gate equipment or another method to open the gate if there is a power failure. (Manual gates shall not be locked unless a Knox padlock or Knox Box 676
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2913
17 containing the key to the lock is installed in an approved location on the approach side of the gate). A pedestrian gate, if used to provide access, shall be a minimum 3 feet wide and provided with a Knox Box/Padlock if locked. Reference CFC as amended.

71. Water Plans - If fire hydrants are required to be installed, applicant/developer shall furnish the water system fire hydrant plans to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, and shall confirm hydrant type, location, spacing, and minimum fire flow. Once plans are signed and approved by the local water authority, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Department for review and approval. Reference CFC as amended.

72. Fire Planning Review: This planning case will also be reviewed by the Riverside County Fire Department’s Fire Planning Division for the cumulative impact on the Fire Department’s ability to provide an acceptable level of service. Additional requirements may be conditioned by Fire Planning to mitigate these impacts.

Questions for Fire Planning can be addressed to
[email protected].
677
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.____

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM

DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR A 156 UNIT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY LOCATED AT THE

SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FRANK SINATRA DRIVE AND PORTOLA

AVENUE AND ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY

APPROVED INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
(CEQA) AND FINDING THE PROJECT EXEMPT FROM CEQA PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183
CASE NO. TTM25-0005 (TTM 39307)
WHEREAS, Blue Fern West (“Applicant”) submitted a Tentative Tract Map and Addendum to the 2022 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH #2022120165) for the Frank Sinatra and Portola Project, proposing the subdivision of approximately 18.3 acres to allow for the development of 156 single-family residential units, including onsite circulation, utility infrastructure, stormwater facilities, and open space areas. The project site is located south of Frank Sinatra Drive and west of Portola Avenue, on Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 620- 400-030 and 620-400-031 (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Project site is within the PR-22 zoning district, and is designated as Town Center Neighborhood by the Palm Desert General Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed Project establishes site layout, minimum lot sizes, circulation, recreation and open space areas; and
WHEREAS, TTM 39307 is a 156-lot single-family subdivision proposed as a phased subdivision for final map approval; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Project conforms to the General Plan land use designation for Town Center Neighborhood and the development standards listed in the City’s Zoning Ordinance for the PR-22 zoning district; and
WHEREAS, under Section 21067 of the Public Resources Code, Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), and the City of Palm Desert’s (“City’s”) Local CEQA Guidelines, the City is the lead agency for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Project has been reviewed in compliance with the 2024 Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act for the City of Palm Desert (Resolution No. 2024-035), and, pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Addendum to the previously approved Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and considered to address changes to the Project, based upon which it was determined that no new significant environmental impacts would occur and that no previously identified impacts would be substantially more severe than those analyzed in the approved IS/MND; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 3rd day of February, open a duly noticed public hearing on the request by the Applicant 678
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2914
2 regarding the above noted Project, which public hearing was continued to a date certain of February 17; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 17th day of February continue a previously opened public hearing to consider the request by the Applicant for approval of the above noted Project request; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, projects that are consistent with an adopted General Plan for which an EIR has been certified do not require additional environmental review except to address impacts that are peculiar to the project or site and were not analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the Project does not result in any new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of impacts previously identified in the General Plan EIR, and that all potential impacts are either:
• Adequately addressed in the General Plan EIR, or
• Mitigated through compliance with City standards, adopted mitigation measures, and conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, the IS/MND Addendum and supporting technical studies constitute substantial evidence in the record demonstrating that the Project qualifies for CEQA streamlining pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183; and WHEREAS, at the said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons, which are outlined in the staff report, exist to justify approval of said request:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as substantive findings of this Resolution.

SECTION 2. Findings on TTM 39307 Subdivision Map. Under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.20.100(C), the findings for the TTM are the following:

1. That the density of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans;
Project Compliance: Yes. The map has been found to be consistent with the density, lot development standards, and land uses of the Planned Residential PR-22 zoning district and the Town Center Neighborhood General Plan land use designation.

Approval of the home design and development, the Project would need to apply for subsequent Precise Plan(s) applications to establish development standards, including setbacks and height, and architecture, including landscaping, consistent with the conditions of approval listed herein. This can be established per single or multiple planning areas identified on TTM 39307.
679
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2914
3 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans;
Project Compliance: Yes. The proposed use complies and is consistent with the Planned Residential PR-22 zoning district and the Town Center Neighborhood land use designation as outlined by the Palm Desert General Plan. The Project provides a single family housing type consistent with the intended character of the neighborhood. The following General Plan Policies are implemented with this Project:

Land Use Policy 3.15 – The Project provides on-site recreational open space as required by the General Plan.

Land Use Policy 3.16 – The Project provides single family residential units at a scale and density consistent with the surrounding uses and satisfy the City’s objective for transitional development.

Land Use Policy 3.20 – The Project enhances and preserves the characteristics of the existing surrounding neighborhoods.

3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development; Project Compliance: Yes. The site is physically suitable for the proposed 156 single family residential units, with appropriate access and zoning. Grading and drainage will be engineered per approved plans. The Project proposes public sidewalk improvements to support pedestrian connectivity and accessibility along the street frontage. The Project will been graded to ensure that all water is captured in retention basins and will not cause flooding or negative health impacts. The project will comply with all requirements of the South Coast Air Quality District and not cause any negative impacts to air quality. The Project falls within the acceptable density range and is not anticipated to generate traffic impacts or congestion.

4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development; Project Compliance: Yes. The site is physically suitable for the proposed 156 single family residential units, consistent with the density requirements of the Planned Residential PR-22 zoning district and the Town Center Neighborhood General Plan land use designation. The Applicant has prepared technical studies that consist of Air Quality, Traffic, and Noise confirming site suitability, and the Project conforms with all applicable development standards.

5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantial and unavoidable injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat;
Project Compliance: Yes. The design of the subdivision and improvements will not cause damage or substantially injure wildlife habitat with the implementation of mitigation measures recommended by the project biologist in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The subject property is in an urbanized area of Palm Desert and is near 680
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2914
4 major roadways. The 18.3-acre previously disturbed and was previously the Santa Rosa Country Club, the club house still currently remains on site. Additionally, the site is surrounded by existing residential development. With mitigation incorporated, the Project site improvements are unlikely to cause any environmental, fish, or wildlife damage.

6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not cause serious public health problems;
Project Compliance: Yes. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious health problems or adverse effects with the implementation of mitigation measures explained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The site plan and grading plan have been reviewed to confirm the design provides the protection of the public’s health, safety, and general welfare. The site is adequately serviced by utilities and the grading plan was reviewed in accordance with City requirements. The Project provides setbacks from adjacent properties that meet the standards of the PR-22 zoning district. Ground-disturbing activities are conditioned to prepare plans to control fugitive dust, ground vibration, and excessive noise.

7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public.

This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

Project Compliance: Yes. It is assumed that easements shown on the Tentative Map exhibit are shown correctly and include all the easements that encumber the subject property. A current preliminary title report (30 days current) for the site shall be submitted during final map and technical plan review. The Applicant shall secure approval from all easement holders for all grading and improvements, which are proposed over respective easements, if any, or provide evidence that the easement has been relocated, quitclaimed, vacated, abandoned, easement holder cannot be found, or is otherwise of no effect. Proof of authorization shall be provided to the Land Development Department prior to issuance of grading permit.

Should such approvals or alternative actions regarding the easements not be provided and approved by the City, the Applicant may be required to amend or revise the proposed site configuration as may be necessary.

SECTION 3. CEQA. The Planning Commission finds that the Project has been reviewed in compliance with the 2024 Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the City of Palm Desert (Resolution No. 2024-035).

Pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Addendum to the previously approved Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and considered to address changes to the Project. Based on the Addendum, it was determined that no new 681
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2914
5 significant environmental impacts would occur and that no previously identified impacts would be substantially more severe than those analyzed in the approved IS/MND. The Planning Commission hereby adopts the Addendum to the approved Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Project qualifies for CEQA streamlining pursuant to Section 15183, and the City may rely on the existing environmental record to support approval of the Project. The City shall file the appropriate Notice of Determination and/or Notice of Exemption within five (5) working days in accordance with CEQA..

SECTION 4. Project Approval. The Planning Commission hereby approves TTM 39307, subject to the conditions of approval identified in Exhibit A.

SECTION 5. Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at the City’s office at 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260. Rosie Lua, the Secretary to the Palm Desert Planning Commission, is the custodian of the record of proceedings.

SECTION 6. Execution of Resolution. The Chairperson of the Planning Commission signs this Resolution, and the Secretary to the Commission shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption thereof.

ADOPTED ON February 17, 2026.

LINDSAY HOLT

CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:

ROSIE LUA

SECRETARY
I, Rosie Lua, Secretary of the City of Palm Desert Planning Commission, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2914 is a full, true, and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert on February 17, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RECUSED:
682
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2914
6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Desert, California, on February 17, 2026.

ROSIE LUA

SECRETARY

EXHIBIT A

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with the approved plans and exhibits on file with the Development Services Department, except as modified by the following conditions. Any variation from the approved plans must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to building permit issuance and may require review and approval by the ARC, Planning Commission, and/or City Council.

2. The Applicant agrees that in the event of any administrative, legal, or equitable action instituted by a third party challenging the validity of any of the procedures leading to the adoption of these Project Approvals for the Project, or the Project Approvals themselves, the Developer and City each shall have the right, in their sole discretion, to elect whether or not to defend such action. The Developer, at its sole expense, shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City (including its agents, officers, and employees) from any such action, claim, or proceeding with counsel chosen by the City, subject to the Developer’s approval of counsel, which shall not be unreasonably denied, and at the Developer’s sole expense. If the City is aware of such an action or proceeding, it shall promptly notify the Developer and cooperate in the defense. The Developer, upon such notification, shall deposit with City sufficient funds in the judgment of the City Finance Director to cover the expense of defending such action without any offset or claim against said deposit to assure that the City expends no City funds. If both Parties elect to defend, the Parties hereby agree to affirmatively cooperate in defending said action and to execute a joint defense and confidentiality agreement in order to share and protect the information under the joint defense privilege recognized under applicable law. As part of the cooperation in defending an 683
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2914
7 action, City and Developer shall coordinate their defense in order to make the most efficient use of legal counsel and to share and protect information. Developer and City shall each have sole discretion to terminate its defense at any time. The City shall not settle any third-party litigation of Project approvals without the Developer’s consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed unless the Developer materially breaches this indemnification requirement.

3. This Tentative Tract Map, and any Final Map recorded thereunder, shall comply with the requirements and standards of Government Code §§ 66410 through 66499. 58 (the " Subdivision Map Act"), and Title 26 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code (" PDMC"). The final map shall be approved by the City Council and recorded prior to the issuance of any Building Permits.

4. The development of the property shall conform substantially with the approved exhibits contained in PP25-0006 and TTM 39307 on file in the Development Services Department, except as modified by the following conditions.

5. The Tentative Tract Map shall expire two years from the date of this approval, and shall become null and void unless a time extension is granted per PDMC Section

26.20.140 or any extension legislation from the Governor or State Legislature.

6. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein, which are in addition to the approved development standards listed in the PDMC and state and federal statutes now in force or which hereafter may be in force.

7. Prior to Final Map approval “will serve” letters shall be obtained from all affected agencies, including the jurisdictional Coachella Valley Water District/, Southern California Edison, Spectrum Cable, Frontier Telephone and Burrtec Waste and Recycling of the Desert.

8. Prior to Final Map approval, all proposed street names shall be submitted to and approved by the Development Services Director, in consultation with the Planning, Police, and Fire Departments, and shown on the Final Map.

9. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted State Clearinghouse Number 2022120165. All mitigation measures shall be implemented at the timing specified therein, and verification shall be provided to the Planning Division.

10. The applicant shall prepare and record Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) as a part of the establishment of a Home Owners Association (HOA) to the satisfaction of the City Attorney and City Engineer. Said HOA shall be responsible for the ongoing and perpetual maintenance of all common areas and improvements established and required within the tentative map area. The CC&Rs shall include but not be limited to provisions for the ongoing maintenance of frontage streets including Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue, private interior streets, recreational amenities, landscaping (including street parkways, landscape easements, parks and 684
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2914
8 drainage facilities, including pipelines and retention basins), blowsand and nuisance water mitigation features (e.g. fencing, landscaping irrigation, sand impoundment areas, and soil stabilization, bubblers), and the ongoing maintenance of the exterior of any project perimeter walls including graffiti removal. The CC&Rs shall have clearly labeled exhibit(s) that demonstrate maintenance obligations. The CC&R’s shall be recorded subsequent to the recordation of the final map.

11. The CC&Rs and other homeowner association documents shall clearly state that all private onsite drainage facilities, including pipelines and basins, are the responsibility of the HOA for regular upkeep and maintenance.

12. All applicable mitigation measures and conditions adopted for Tentative Tract Maps 39307 remain in effect. These conditions supplement those approvals and govern site design, building placement, landscaping, lighting, and aesthetic treatment.

LAND DEVELOPMENT:

13. The City Engineer and Development Services Director reserve the right for any pad elevation revision within this development to require any further studies, drawings, or analysis to ensure the entirety of the project meets City requirements and is consistent with the original approval. The City Engineer and Development Services Director reserves the right for any pad elevation revision within this development to be subject to Planning Commission approval , compliant with PDMC Section 27.12.045.

14. The following plans are hereby referenced: Tentative Tract Map No. 39307 prepared by MSA Consulting and dated January 30, 2026 and supporting Preliminary Grading Exhibit prepared by MSA Consulting on January 29, 2026.

15. It is assumed that easements shown on the Tentative Tract Map exhibit are shown correctly and include all the easements that encumber the subject property. A current preliminary title report (30 days current) for the site shall be submitted during final map and technical plan review.

16. It is understood that the Tentative Map exhibit correctly shows acceptable centerline elevations, all existing easements, necessary travelled ways, and drainage courses, and that the omission or unacceptability may require that the subdivider amend, revise or re-process the tentative map as may be necessary to allow a finding on the final map of substantial conformance by the City. The Final Map shall include appropriate easements for streets, public utilities, and emergency access which shall be dedicated on the Final Map. Additional right-of-way at project driveways required to accommodate ADA-compliant public infrastructure within public right-of-way shall be dedicated on the map.

17. Prior to approval of Final Map, the Applicant shall pay all appropriate drainage fees in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code Section 26.49 and Palm Desert Ordinance No. 653.

18. Prior to approval of Final Map, the Applicant shall pay all appropriate park fees in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code Section 26.48.060. 685
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2914
9 19. Prior to approval of Final Map, the Applicant shall pay all appropriate signalization fees in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code Section 10.12.030.

20. In compliance with the City of Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 12.16.020, all utility extensions within the site shall be placed underground unless otherwise specified or allowed by the respective utility purveyor.

21. Prior to final map approval, a copy of the development specific Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be submitted for review and approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall include, but not be limited to, frontage landscape and maintenance, access easements (fire and emergency), reciprocal access, private and/or public utility easements as may be relevant to the project, and maintenance (in perpetuity) of common spaces and BMPs associated with the development of the site.

22. Prior to final map approval, the subdivider is responsible for the construction of all offsite and onsite public improvements as outlined on these conditions of approval.

Public improvements include those associated with Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue. Improvements include roadway, pedestrian facilities, and public utilities. In compliance with the Subdivision Map Act, if said improvements are not constructed prior to final map recordation, the subdivider shall guarantee the completion of all improvements required to support the development, within the boundaries of the final map, by executing a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with the City and posting the required security.

23. Prior to final map approval, the subdivider shall submit a final grading plan. Subdivider shall guarantee the completion of all improvements required to support the development, within the boundaries of the final map, by executing a Grading Agreement with the City and posting the required security.

24. Prior to final map approval, in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act, the subdivider shall provide the surveyor’s certification for placement of monuments or provide monument bond in the amount and form compliant with the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 27 and as approved by the City Engineer.

25. Prior to Final Map approval, the Applicant shall submit improvement plans for required improvements along Frank Sinatra Drive as outlined in these conditions of approval.

The plans are required to be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. a) Right-of-way dedication to provide a minimum 65-foot right-of-way from street centerline to property line is required.
b) Additional right-of-way dedication at project driveways required to accommodate ADA-compliant public infrastructure within public right-of-way, if needed, shall be dedicated.
c) All public infrastructure shall be within public right-of-way, prior to plan approval the Applicant shall provide proof of proposed design will meet criteria. 686
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2914
10 d) Street improvements include, but are not limited to, meandering sidewalk, landscaped parkway, and curb & gutter.
e) Improvement plans shall include Class II Bicycle Lane along the project frontage per Coachella Valley AG Active Transportation Planning (CVAG ATP) Design Guidelines Section 5.3.
f) The project driveway at Frank Sinatra Drive shall be restricted to right-in and right-out movements. Right-in movements shall be made from a right-turn only pocket providing minimum 200-feet of vehicle storage length, or as approved by the City Engineer. The design shall be per AASHTO Green Book and Caltrans Highway Design Manual and be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
g) Separate signing and striping plans for Frank Sinatra Drive shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer.
h) The Applicant shall guarantee all(any) improvements within the public right-ofway for a period of one year from the date of final acceptance and the improvement guarantee shall be backed by a bond or cash deposit in the amount of ten percent of the surety posted for improvements.

26. Prior to Final Map approval, the Applicant shall submit improvement plans for required improvements along Portola Avenue as outlined in these conditions of approval. The plans are required to be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. a) Right-of-way dedication to provide minimum 63-foot right-of-way from street centerline to property line.
b) Additional right-of-way dedication at project driveways required to accommodate ADA-compliant public infrastructure within public right-of-way shall be dedicated.
c) Street improvements include, but are not limited to, meandering sidewalk, landscaped parkway, and curb & gutter.
d) Improvement plans shall include Class II Bicycle Lane along the project frontage per Coachella Valley AG Active Transportation Planning (CVAG ATP) Design Guidelines Section 5.3.
e) The Applicant shall restripe the existing lane configuration to accommodate a dedicated right-turn lane onto the development at the Portola Avenue driveways with a minimum of 200-feet pocket length, or as approved by the 687
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2914
11 City Engineer. The design shall be per AASHTO Green Book and Caltrans Highway Design Manual and be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. f) The Applicant shall construct a median opening at the northerly Portola Avenue driveway to accommodate a northbound left-turn lane into the development, providing a minimum 200-foot storage length. The design shall account for the existing southbound left-turn movement from Portola Avenue onto Retreat Circle North and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. g) Separate signing and striping plans for Portola Avenue shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer. The restriping shall provide for 2 southbound through lanes along the project frontage, and 2 southbound through lanes and a 1 right-turn lane at the project driveways. Adequate transitions shall be provided.
h) The Applicant shall guarantee all(any) improvements within the public right-ofway for a period of one year from the date of final acceptance and the improvement guarantee shall be backed by a bond or cash deposit in the amount of ten percent of the surety posted for improvements.

27. The Applicant shall guarantee all aforementioned improvements for a period of one year from the date of final acceptance and the improvement guarantee shall be backed by a bond or cash deposit in the amount of ten percent of the surety posted for improvements.

28. Prior to Final Map approval, the Applicant shall submit improvement plans for the proposed internal private streets as outlined in these conditions of approval. The plans are required to be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. a) Street sections and improvements shall be as shown on the proposed Tentative Map exhibit. Required improvements include, but are not limited to, landscape, sidewalk, curb and gutter, and drainage infrastructure. b) For proposed streets with minimum 40-foot roadway, on-street parking will be allowed on both sides of the street unless it creates a sight-line or Fire Department difficulty.
c) On-street parking will not be allowed on streets providing 32-foot roadway and providing access to main internal roadways.
d) Parking along private driveways, corresponding to Section B-B, Section C-C, and Section D-D of the tentative map exhibit, will not be allowed. 688
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2914
12 689
690
691
692
693
694

PLANNING COMMISSION

CITY OF PALM DESERT

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 17, 2026

Present: Commissioner John Collum, Vice Chair John Greenwood, Chair Lindsay Holt, Commissioner Alex Meyerhoff, Commissioner Joshua Nickerson

1. CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Holt on Tuesday, February 17, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, City Hall, located at 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California.

2. ROLL CALL

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Meyerhoff led the Pledge of Allegiance.

4. NON­AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
To approve the consent calendar as presented.

Motion Carried (4 to 0)

5.a APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approve the Minutes of February 3, 2026.

Motion Carried

6. ACTION CALENDAR
None.

7. PUBLIC HEARINGS

7.a CONSIDERATION OF A PRECISE PLAN AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF 156 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AT THE

SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FRANK SINATRA DRIVE AND PORTOLA
AVENUE (CASE NOS. PP25-0006, EA25-0006, AND TTM 25-0005 (TTM39307))
Chair Holt and Vice Chair Greenwood disclosed for the record that each had met separately with the applicant.

Siji Fernandez, Senior Planner, narrated a PowerPoint presentation and responded to Commissioner inquiries.

Docusign Envelope ID: 37B1E61F-0682-4EF1-A61E-47E15EAF6652 695
City of Palm Desert Planning Commission Minutes
February 17, 2026
2 Kim Molina, applicant representative, provided a report and responded to Commissioner inquiries.

Rob Bernheimer, attorney representing the applicant, responded to Commissioner inquiries.

David Hubbard, attorney representing the applicant, explained that the project qualifies for a CEQA exemption under Section 15183 because it is consistent with the 2016 General Plan and zoning designations analyzed in the certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR), with no new significant or peculiar impacts identified, providing an independent basis for approval in addition to the addendum.

Chair Holt closed the public hearing there being no members of the public wishing to speak.

Motion by: Vice Chair Greenwood
Seconded by: Commissioner Nickerson

1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2913 entitled, “A

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PRECISE PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 156 UNIT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

COMMUNITY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FRANK

SINATRA DRIVE AND PORTOLA AVENUE AND ADOPTING AN

ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED INITIAL STUDY AND

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PURSUANT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) (CASE NO.

PP/EA 25-0006)” as amended to include “and find that the project also qualifies for an exemption under 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines.” add a condition requiring the applicant “The Applicant shall construct a median opening at the northerly Portola Avenue driveway to accommodate a northbound left turn lane int the development, providing a minimum 200- foot storage length. The design shall account for the existing southbound left-turn movement from Portola Avenue onto Retreat Circle North and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.” and to revise and reformat Condition No. 62 to correct a clerical error.

2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2914 entitled, “A

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR A 156 UNIT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY

LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FRANK SINATRA DRIVE
AND PORTOLA AVENUE (CASE NO. TTM25-0005 (TTM 39307))” as amended to include to include “and find that the project also qualifies for an exemption under 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines,” to omit Condition No. 28 and to amend Condition No. 10 to add language as the following “and the landscape within the City right-of-way.”
Motion Carried (5 to 0)
Docusign Envelope ID: 37B1E61F-0682-4EF1-A61E-47E15EAF6652 696
City of Palm Desert Planning Commission Minutes
February 17, 2026
3 8. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & COMMENTS

8.a SUMMARY OF CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS
Rosie Lua, Director of Development Services, provided an update on recent actions taken by the City Council.

8.b COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES

8.b.1 Cultural Arts Committee
Commissioner Collum provided an update on recent action taken by the Cultural Arts Committee.

8.b.2 Parks and Recreation Committee
None.

8.c PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Meyerhoff requested that the Planning Commission be invited to the library groundbreaking ceremony.

Vice-Chair Greenwood, with support from Commissioner Nickerson, requested consideration of objective design standards for single-family residential development.

8.d CITY STAFF
None.

8.e ATTENDANCE REPORT
Report provided; no action taken on this item.

9. ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:11 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Michelle Nance, Assistant City Clerk
Recording Secretary
_________________________
Rosie Lua, Director of Development Services
Staff Liaison
Approved by the Commission on 03/03/2026
Docusign Envelope ID: 37B1E61F-0682-4EF1-A61E-47E15EAF6652 697
698

CITY OF PALM DESERT

DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California 92260
Phone (760) 776-6483 [email protected]

APPEAL APPLICATION HANDOUT
Appellant Name:

Phone:

Mailing Address: Fax:

City: State: Zip: Email:

Appealing Decision of the:

Date of Decision: ___________________________________________________________________________________ Appealing Case Number: _________________________ Appellant/Representative Signature: By signing this application, I certify that the information provided is accurate. I understand that the City might not approve what I am applying for and/or might require conditions of approval. Print Name: Signature: Date:

Reason for Appeal (Attach additional sheets if necessary): ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ 699
700
Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L A W Y E R S
2762 Gateway Road
Carlsbad, California 92009
760.431.9501
760.431.9512 gdandb.com
T
F
March 23, 2026
By Email ([email protected],
[email protected])
Evan Trubee, Mayor
Joe Pradetto, Mayor Pro Tem
Karina Quintanilla, Councilmember
Gina Nestande, Councilmember
Jan Harnik, Councilmember
Palm Desert City Council
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260-2578
[email protected]
[email protected]
Re: Blue Fern Response to SAFER Appeal re Portola Springs Residential Project (PP25-0006; EA25-0006, and TTM 25-0005 (TTM 39307)
Dear Mayor Trubee, Mayor Pro Tem Pradetto, and Honorable City Councilmembers:

This firm represents Blue Fern Development (“Blue Fern”), applicant on the Portola Springs residential development project (the “Project”), which was approved by the City of Palm Desert’s Planning Commission on February 17, 2026. The Project is now the subject of an administrative appeal to the City Council. The appellant, Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (“SAFER”), filed its appeal on February 27, 2026, claiming the following:

The Addendum prepared for this Project is improper under the California Environmental Quality Act because the Project is not within the scope of the 2022 MND and there is new information available since certification of the 2022 MND indicating new significant impacts and/or the availability of new mitigation measures. Furthermore, the addendum fails to consider the Project’s cumulative impacts with the recently approved Catavina Residential Project.

SAFER also objects to the Planning Commission’s determination that the Project qualifies for a CEQA exemption and/or streamlining under CEQA Guidelines section 15183. According to SAFER, the section 15183 exemption is unavailing “because the Project has peculiar impacts, including cumulative impacts, that are not mitigated by uniformly applied standards and policies.” SAFER did not, and has not, explained why it believes the Project falls outside the scope of the 2022 MND. Nor has SAFER identified any “new” information showing that the Project will create significant impacts not covered in the 2022 MND, including cumulative impacts. Finally, SAFER 701
Evan Trubee, Mayor, et al.

Palm Desert City Council
March 23, 2026

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L A W Y E R S
has provided no evidence to support any of its claims, including its assertion that that Project will cause significant and “peculiar” impacts that disqualify it from CEQA streamlining under CEQA Guidelines section 15183.

Even if one sets aside SAFER’s failure to meet its evidentiary burden, a close review of the administrative record establishes that there is no merit to SAFER’s appeal. Specifically, when the City Council approved the original 394-unit residential project at the Portola Avenue site in January 2023, and adopted that project’s MND, no party – not SAFER or anyone else – filed suit to challenge those actions. The time to bring such a lawsuit has long since passed, as the statute of limitations ran on February 22, 2023. Blue Fern, as the successor-in-interest to the original applicant, Hayes Dietrich, LLC (“Hayes Dietrich”), could simply build the original 394-unit multifamily project and SAFER would have no legal ability to stop it.

Blue Fern, however, intends to build a less intense project, one that consists of 156 single-family homes on the same 18.3-acre footprint, resulting in reduced environmental impacts.1 Because the
proposed Project was consistent with, but less intense than, the previously-approved Hayes Dietrich project, City staff determined it could lawfully be approved with a CEQA addendum to the 2022 MND.

Under CEQA Guidelines section 15164, an addendum is appropriate where, as here, “only minor technical changes or additions are necessary” and “none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.” Section 15162(a) provides that no subsequent EIR or negative declaration is necessary unless substantial evidence in the record shows one of the following:
“(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
“(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or “(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
1 For example, the proposed Portola Springs Project will generate 1,471 average daily traffic trips, compared to the original Hayes Dietrich project, which would have generated 2,709 average daily trips. 702
Evan Trubee, Mayor, et al.

Palm Desert City Council
March 23, 2026

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L A W Y E R S
“(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
“(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
“(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project; or
“(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.”
The CEQA Guidelines quoted above establish a clear doctrine in favor of finality once a lead agency has approved a project and certified an EIR or adopted a negative declaration. (Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College Dist. (2016) 1 Cal.5th 937, 949-950, citing Bowman v. City of Petaluma (1986) 185 Cal.App.3d 1065, 1074.) In such situations – which is precisely what we have here – the legislature and the California Resource Agency determined that no further CEQA review would be required or allowed unless the previously-approved project, prior to implementation, changed so dramatically as to implicate significant impacts not studied or contemplated in the earlier EIR or negative declaration. (See Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College Dist., supra, 1 Cal.5th at pp. 944, 951-59.) In short, the CEQA Guidelines create a very high bar for anyone who wishes to challenge revisions to a project that was previously approved and is otherwise immune from legal review.

SAFER has not cleared that bar.

There is no evidence in the record – and SAFER has provided none – showing that the revised Project (Portola Springs) is so different from the approved Hayes Dietrich project that it will create significant effects not studied or anticipated in the original MND approved by the City Council in January 2023. That is, SAFER has not shown that any of the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15162, quoted above, have been met. As a result, SAFER has not earned the legal right to reopen the CEQA process and demand a new EIR for the Portola Springs project.

SAFER attempts to deflect from its evidentiary shortcomings by claiming that the Addendum is deficient because it “fails to consider the Project’s cumulative impacts with the recently approved 703
Evan Trubee, Mayor, et al.

Palm Desert City Council
March 23, 2026

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L A W Y E R S
Catavina Residential Project.” (SAFER Appeal Notice.) SAFER, however, is factually mistaken.

When the City approved the MND for the Hayes Dietrich project, it did so after taking into account the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts, including those related to buildout of property in the Town Center Neighborhood section of the City. This would include the Catavina property located directly to the west of the project site.

Furthermore, the City’s 2016 General Plan Update EIR (the “GPU EIR”) assumed full build-out of both the Catavina property and the subject site, at densities considerably greater than either project – Catavina or Portola Springs – is now proposing. Thus, the GPU EIR already analyzed the cumulative impacts of both projects (indeed, of all projects consistent with the General Plan), made determinations as to the significance of those cumulative impacts, and adopted feasible mitigation measures where necessary. (See 2016 GPU DEIR, pp. 2-1—2-2, and Table 2-1.) Both the Catavina MND and the current Addendum for the Portola Springs project are entitled to rely on the findings of the GPU EIR unless SAFER can show that conditions have changed so radically that those findings are no longer valid. SAFER has made no such showing. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15152(d)).

Then there is the matter of CEQA Guidelines section 15183, which affords streamlining benefits to projects like Portola Springs that are consistent with the land use and zoning designations assigned to the project site in the applicable general plan – here, the 2016 GPU. On February 17, 2026, the Planning Commission determined that the Project qualified for a section 15183 exemption because it complies with (a) the site’s Town Center Neighborhood general plan designation and (b) the site’s Planned Residential zoning designation and density limit (7 to 22 du/ac).

SAFER, however, argues that the Project will create significant and peculiar impacts not considered in the 2016 GPU EIR, claiming that such impacts make the Project ineligible for streamlining under section 15183. But SAFER has not identified any such impacts nor provided evidence they exist. The administrative record, on the other hand, provides substantial evidence that the Project not only complies with the site’s assigned land use and zoning designations, but will result in impacts less severe than those assumed and analyzed in the 2016 GPU EIR.

Accordingly, the Project qualifies for section 15183 streamlining, just as the Planning Commission determined. (See Lucas v. City of Pomona (2023) 92 Cal.App.5th 508, 536-538 [Section 15183 exemption will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence in the record]; see also Hilltop Group, Inc. v. County of San Diego (2024) 99 Cal.App.5th 890, 910 [confirms that substantial evidence test applies to section 15183 determinations.] For the foregoing reasons, the City Council should reject SAFER’s appeal, uphold the findings of the Planning Commission, adopt the Addendum, and affirm the Commission’s approval of the Portola Springs project.

704
Evan Trubee, Mayor, et al.

Palm Desert City Council
March 23, 2026

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L A W Y E R S
Thank you for your consideration. Should you have any questions about the content of this letter, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,
David P. Hubbard
cc: Rosie Lua, Director of Development Services,
City of Palm Desert
Kim Molina, Pacific Land Consultants
Shane Bouchard, Blue Fern Development
Tiffany Michou, Best Best & Krieger LLP
Amada Daams, Best Best & Krieger LLP
705
706

C I T Y O F P A L M D E S E R T
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEL: 760-346-0611
[email protected]

CITY OF PALM DESERT

PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CASE NO. APPEAL PP/EA25-0006, TTM 39307

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BEFORE THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF THE APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 39307 FOR A 156

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVAL OF A CEQA

ADDENDUM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND EXEMPTION UNDER 15183 OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES.

PROJECT LOCATION: Southwest corner of Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue, City of Palm Desert, California; Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs): 620-400-030 and 620-400-031 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The appellant, Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility, has filed an appeal regarding the approval of Precise Plan (PP25-0006), Environmental Assessment (EA25-0006), and Tentative Tract Map (TTM 39307) for the Portola Springs Residential project. The proposed project includes the development of 156 single-family residential (SFR) lots on approximately 18 acres, with on-site circulation, utilities, stormwater facilities, and open space areas. PP/EA25-0006 was approved by the Planning Commission via PC Resolution No. 2913, and TTM 39307 was approved by the Planning Commission via PC Resolution No. 2914, both on February 17, 2026, at a duly noted public hearing.

PUBLIC HEARING: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, will hold a Public Hearing at its meeting on April 9, 2026. The City Council meeting begins at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 707, this meeting will be conducted as a hybrid meeting, allowing public access via teleconference or in person. Options for remote participation will be listed on the Posted Agenda for the meeting at https://www.palmdesert.gov/government/meetings.

COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Those wishing to comment on this application may either appear in person at the public hearing or submit written comments, which must be received by 10:00 a.m. on the day of the hearing. Written comments should be sent to the City of Palm Desert at 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California 92260, Attention: City Clerk, or emailed to:
[email protected].

Any challenge of the proposed project in court may be limited to raising only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at or prior to the public hearing. [Government Code Section 65009(b)(2)].

Si necesita ayuda con esta notificación por favor llame a la Ciudad de Palm Desert y comuníquese con Damian Olivares (760) 346-0611.

PUBLISH: THE DESERT SUN ANTHONY MEJIA, MMC, CITY CLERK
March 27, 2026 CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA
707