Palm Springs City Council
December 12, 2024

1.0 INTRODUCTION
At the request of Terra Nova Planning & Research, this biological resources assessment report (BRAR) and Agua Caliente Tribal Habitat Conservation Plan (THCP) consistency analysis was prepared by WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. (WSP) for the proposed development of a new gas station and convenience store (project) on the 3.7-acre site (site) in Palm Springs, Riverside County, California (Appendix C, Figure 1). Information contained herein is intended to be used for compliance with the THCP and other relevant environmental regulations.

2.0 SITE / PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 3.7-acre site is located on lands that are under the jurisdiction of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (Tribe) northwest of the junction of Lawrence Crossley Road and Dinah Shore Drive in the city of Palm Springs, Riverside County, California. The four Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) include APN 680-564-002 (0.92 acre), APN 680-564-014 (0.80 acre), 680-564-017 (0.92 acre) and APN 680-564-018 (1.05 acres). It is also located within Section 20, Township 4 South, Range 5 East, United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5’ Cathedral City, Calif. Quadrangle.

Elevation within the site is consistent at approximately 114 meters (m) (370 feet [ft]) above mean sea level (Appendix C, Figure 2).

The proposed project includes the development and operation of a new fueling station and, convenience store on the 3.7-acre, currently vacant and undeveloped site. The site is surrounded on three sides by existing public roadways (Indian Springs Road to the north, Lawrence Crossley Road to the east and Dinah Shore Drive to the south). Undeveloped, natural open space, similar to what is currently present on-site, is located immediately adjacent, west of the site, while other undeveloped, natural open species is also located to the south and east of the site, across Dinah Shore Drive and Lawrence Crossley Road, respectively.

3.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

3.1 Federal
Federal Endangered Species Act
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service are the designated federal agencies accountable for administering the federal Endangered Species Act (FESA). The FESA defines species as “endangered” or “threatened” and provides regulatory protection at the federal level.
 Section 9 of the FESA prohibits the “take” of listed (i.e., endangered or threatened) species.

The FESA definition of take is “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, Item 1C - Page 160
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

capture, collect, or attempt to engage in such conduct.” Recognizing that take cannot always be avoided, Section 10(a) includes provisions for take that is incidental to, but not the purpose of, otherwise lawful activities. Specifically, Section 10(a)(1)(A) permits (authorized take permits) are issued for scientific purposes Section 10(a)(1)(B) permits (incidental take permits) are issued for the incidental take of listed species that does not jeopardize the species.
 Section 7 (a)(2) requires federal agencies to evaluate the proposed project with respect to listed or proposed listed, species and their respective critical habitat (if applicable). Federal agencies must employ programs for the conservation of listed species and are prohibited from authorizing, funding, or carrying out any action that would jeopardize a listed species or destroy or modify its “critical habitat.” As defined by the FESA, “individuals, organizations, states, local governments, and other nonfederal entities are affected by the designation of critical habitat only if their actions occur on federal lands, require a federal permit, license, or other authorization, or involve federal funding.  Section 10(a) of the FESA authorizes the issuance of incidental take permits and establishes standards for the content of habitat conservation plans (HCP). The THCP is an HCP, see discussion below.

Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Treaties signed by the United States, Great Britain, Mexico, Japan, and the countries of the former Soviet Union make it unlawful to pursue, capture, kill, and/or possess, or attempt to engage in any such conduct to any migratory bird, nest, egg, or parts thereof listed in this document. The Secretary of the Interior can issue permits for incidental take of migratory bird species. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) also allows the Secretary of the Interior to grant permits for specific actions for the incidental take of these protected migratory bird species, but this rarely occurs.

National Environmental Policy Act
When portions of a proposed project fall under the jurisdiction of a federal agency (i.e., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE]) they are subject to environmental review pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The NEPA establishes certain criteria that must be adhered to for any project that is “financed, assisted, conducted or approved” by a federal agency. The federal lead agency is required to “determine whether the proposed action will significantly affect the quality of the human environment.”
Clean Water Act
In 1972, Congress enacted the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, also known as Public Law 92–500, 86 Stat. 816, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., commonly referred to as the "Clean Water Act" or simply the "Act." The Clean Water Act's central concept is the Item 1C - Page 161
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

definition of "navigable waters," which encompasses the waters of the United States, including the territorial seas, as defined in 33 U.S.C. 1362(7). On January 18, 2023, the final rule titled "Revised Definition of 'Waters of the United States'" was published in the Federal Register, and it became effective on March 20, 2023.

In 2006, the Supreme Court addressed the scope of "waters of the United States (WUS)" in Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006) ("Rapanos"). The Court noted that no single position in Rapanos commanded a majority, but all nine members agreed that the term "WUS” includes some waters not traditionally considered navigable. A plurality in Rapanos defined it as covering "relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water" connected to traditional navigable waters, as well as wetlands with a "continuous surface connection" to such waterbodies.

Justice Kennedy's concurring opinion emphasized the need for a "significant nexus" to waters that are or were navigable in fact.

The 2023 Final Rule incorporated the two jurisdictional standards from Rapanos into the definition of WUS. The "relatively permanent standard" identifies various types of waters connected to traditional navigable waters, while the "significant nexus standard" assesses their impact on the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of navigable waters.

The term "adjacent" was defined in line with longstanding regulatory practices. "Adjacent" was defined as "bordering, contiguous, or neighboring," and it included wetlands separated from other WUS by man-made dikes or barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes, and similar features.

On May 25, 2023, the Supreme Court decided Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

While the 2023 Rule was not directly before the Court, the Court considered the jurisdictional standards set forth in that rule. The enterprise of the 2023 Rule, to define WUS, was the same as the Supreme Court's enterprise in Sackett: "to identify with greater clarity what the Act means by WUS. The Supreme Court recognized the agencies' definition and utilization of "adjacent" and "significant nexus" "as set out in [the agencies'] the most recent rule," the 2023 Rule, but concluded that the significant nexus standard was "inconsistent with the text and structure of the Clean Water Act."
As a result, the involved regulatory agencies revised the 2023 Rule to remove the significant nexus standard and to amend its definition of "adjacent" as these provisions are invalid under the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Clean Water Act in Sackett.

WUS are no longer considered jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act based on the significant nexus standard, and wetlands are not defined as "adjacent" or jurisdictional under the Act solely because they are "bordering, contiguous, or neighboring... [or] separated from other 'waters of the United States' by man-made dikes or barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes and the like." Furthermore, as a result of the decision in Sackett invalidating the significant nexus standard, the Item 1C - Page 162
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

provision for assessment of streams and wetlands under the additional waters provision of paragraph (a)(5) is no longer valid, as any jurisdictional streams and wetlands are covered by paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of the 2023 Rule.

Finally, the agencies are removing "interstate wetlands" from the 2023 Rule to conform with the decision in Sackett. The Supreme Court in Sackett examined the Clean Water Act and its statutory history and found the predecessor statute to the Act covered and defined "interstate waters" as "all rivers, lakes, and other waters that flow across or form a part of State boundaries." The Court concluded that the use of the term "waters" refers to such "open waters" and not wetlands. As a result, under Sackett, the provision authorizing wetlands to be jurisdictional simply because they are interstate is invalid.

The USACE delineates non-wetland waters in the Arid West Region by identifying the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) in ephemeral and intermittent channels (USACE 2008a). The OHWM is defined in 33 CFR 328.3(e) as:
“…that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impresses on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.”
Identification of the OHWM involves assessments of stream geomorphology and vegetation response to the dominant stream discharge. Determining whether any non-wetland water is a jurisdictional WUS involves further assessment in accordance with the regulations, case law, and clarifying guidance as discussed below.

Wetlands are defined at 33 CFR 328.3(b) as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.” Special aquatic sites are geographic areas, large or small, possessing special ecological characteristics of productivity, habitat, wildlife protection, or other important and easily disrupted ecological values. These areas are generally recognized as significantly influencing or positively contributing to the general overall environmental health or vitality of the entire ecosystem of a region. Special aquatic sites include sanctuaries and refuges, wetlands, mud flats, vegetated shallows, coral reefs, and riffle and pool complexes. They are defined in 40 CFR 230 Subpart E.

Item 1C - Page 163
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

3.2 Regional

3.2.1 Agua Caliente Tribal Environmental Policy
The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (Tribe) set forth the Tribal Environmental Policy Act (TEPA) with the adoption and enactment of Ordinance Number 28 on 7 March 2000. The TEPA established the basic process of conducting environmental review of major Tribal actions which have the potential to significantly affect the quality of the environment. The purpose of the TEPA is to protect the natural resources and environment within the Agua Caliente Indian Reservation (Reservation) while promoting the highest and best use and development of lands within the Tribe’s jurisdiction, while establishing minimum standards for the review and consideration of environmental impacts associated with Tribal actions, including development of Tribal lands.

3.2.2 Agua Caliente Tribal Habitat Conservation Plan
The Reservation, home of the (Tribe, consists of approximately 31,500 acres of land in Riverside County, California. The Reservation occurs within portions of the cities of Palm Springs, Cathedral City and Rancho Mirage, respectively, and is comprised of a checkerboard pattern of landholdings that include Tribal trust land, allotted trust land and fee land. The Reservation supports valuable natural resources and habitats, including mountains, foothills, canyons, wetlands, alluvial fans, and sandy desert flats providing habitat for a wide variety of plants and animals considered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), as well as the Tribe, to warrant protection (Helix 2010).

The Tribe has protected and managed the areas and resources within its jurisdictional territory for hundreds of years. The purpose of the Tribal Habitat Conservation Plan (THCP or Plan) is to continue to exercise the Tribe’s history as the manager and steward of the lands and natural resources on and in the vicinity of the Reservation and to establish a consistent and streamlined permitting process in respect to protected natural resources for the Tribe and third parties participating in the development of the Reservation and other Tribal Lands through the establishment of the permitting process, overseen and implemented by the Tribe (Helix 2010).

The THCP provides the mechanisms for the protection and contributes to the conservation of Federally listed species as well as those species considered as sensitive or designated as otherwise “special status species” by the Tribe and/or the USFWS and that may require listing in the future.

These listed and/or special status species are collectively referred to as the “Covered Species” by the THCP. The Plan recognizes 22 Covered Species, two plants and 19 animals, including eight federally listed species. The THCP provides the means to permit and guide development, manage conservation priorities and objectives, complimenting other existing and on-going and future conservation efforts in the region and serves as an adaptive tool, allowing the Tribe to update and/or revise baseline biological resources data (Helix 2010).

Item 1C - Page 164
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Incorporating and integrating the Tribe’s existing preservation efforts, the main conservation mechanism provided by the THCP is the conservation and protection of significant areas of Covered Species’ habitats through the implementation of new development standards and the creation of a Habitat Preserve that would be managed by the Tribe and/or its third-party designee(s). Assembly, management, and maintenance of the Habitat Preserve is achieved through: (1) authorization of certain activities, including development, which is subject to conservation requirements and guidelines, standards, and mitigation measures; and (2) payment of project or development mitigation fees.

The THCP provides the mechanism for conservation, minimization, and mitigation resulting from unavoidable impacts to the species covered by the Plan resulting, or potentially resulting, from a variety of actions, as long as such actions are consistent with the provisions of the THCP. These actions include (1) covered projects, including construction/development undertaken by the Tribe and/or Third Parties operating within the Plan area (including on non-Tribal fee lands) under a development permit issued by or under Tribal discretion; (2)(a) covered maintenance actions undertaken by or at Tribal discretion within the geographic area of the Plan, including the on- going use, operation, and maintenance of existing public and private facilities within current disturbance footprints; (b) use, operation and maintenance of future public and private facilities provided they are in accordance with the provisions of the Plan; and (c) temporary maintenance activities that are outside of the project/activity disturbance footprint areas that would contribute to the recovery of native habitats in the short term; and (3) covered conservation efforts, including management and monitoring of the existing habitat preserve as well as the management of existing Tribal conservation programs, whether by the Tribe, agents or employees of the Tribe and/or any person acting directly under Tribal guidance or authority (Helix 2010).

The 22 species covered under the THCP include: three plants (Coachella Valley milk-vetch [Astragalus lentiginosusvar. coachellae], triple-ribbed milk-vetch [Astragalus tricarinatus] and Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus [ Linanthus maculatus]); two invertebrates (Coachella giant sand-treader cricket [ Macrobaenetes valgum ] and Coachella Valley Jerusalem cricket [Stenopelmatus cahuilaensis ]); one amphibian (southern mountain yellow-legged frog [ Rana muscosa]); three reptiles (Mojave desert tortoise [ Gopherus agassizii], flat-tailed horned lizard [Phrynosoma mcallii ] and Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard [ Uma inornata ]); nine birds (burrowing owl [Athene cunicularia], southwestern willow flycatcher [ Empidonax traillii extimus], yellow-breasted chat [Icteria virens], summer tanager [Piranga rubra], yellow warbler [Setophaga petechia], crissal thrasher [Toxostoma crissale], LeConte’s thrasher [Toxostoma lecontei], least Bell’s vireo [Vireo bellii pusillus] and gray vireo [Vireo vicinior]); and four mammals (southern yellow bat [Lasiurus ega], Peninsular big-horn sheep [ Ovis canadensis nelsoni], Palm Springs pocket mouse [Perognathus longimembris bangsi ] and Coachella Valley [Palm Springs] round-tailed ground squirrel [Spermophilus tereticaudus chlorus]) (Helix 2010).

Item 1C - Page 165
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

3.3.3.1 THCP Planning Areas
The THCP Action Area is divided into a Mountains and Canyons Conservation Area (MCCA) and a Valley Floor Planning Area (VFPA). The MCCA includes all portions of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains within the action area, generally above the 800-foot elevation contour. The VFPA consists of the balance of the Plan area, generally including the portions of the Plan area lying below 800 feet AMSL and on the floor of the Coachella Valley. Several off-Reservation target Acquisition Areas are identified to the north and east of the VFPA. Together with the VFPA, these areas are referred to as the Valley Floor.

4.0 METHODS

4.1 Literature Review
In preparation for the field assessment, a literature search was conducted to identify special status biological resources known from the vicinity of the site. In the context of this report, and for the purpose of this assessment, vicinity is defined as areas within a 5-mile radius of the site.

The literature search included a review of the following documents:
 California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) RareFind 5 (CDFW 2023a)  Special Animals List (CDFW 2023b)
 California Native Plant Society's (CNPS) Inventory of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants of California (CNPS 2023a)
 THCP (Helix 2010)
 United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Web Soil Survey (USDA, NRCS 2023a)
 USDA NRCS. The Plants Database (USDA, NRCS 2023b)
 USGS 7.5’Cathedral City, Palm Springs, Rancho Mirage and Seven Palms Valley, Calif. quadrangles (USGS 2021a, 2023, 2021b, 2021c)
Scientific nomenclature for this document follows standard reference sources: For plant communities, Sawyer et. al. (2009), Holland (1986) and THCP (Helix 2010); for flora, Jepson eFlora (2023) and the USDA NRCS PLANTS Database (2023); for amphibians, reptiles, and mammals, CDFW (2016); and for birds, California Bird Records Committee (2023).

4.2 Field Assessment
The field assessment was conducted between the hours of 1115 and 1230 on 6 September 2023 by WSP senior biologist Michael D. Wilcox. On-site suitable habitat was assessed based on the presence of constituent habitat elements (e.g., soils, vegetation, and topography) characteristic of the potentially occurring special status biological resources determined by the literature review.

The entire site was assessed on foot with parallel pedestrian belt transects spaced at approximately 10 m. (30 ft.) intervals to record pertinent field data, current site conditions and Item 1C - Page 166
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

compile a detected flora and fauna species list. Where present, adjacent undeveloped areas within an approximate 150-meter (m) (~500-foot [ft]) buffer zone are also assessed visually, from the project site, for burrowing owl. All on-site flora and fauna observed or otherwise detected (e.g., vocalizations, presence of scat, tracks, and/or bones) during the assessment were recorded in field notes and are included in Appendices A and B. General weather and site conditions were also recorded at the beginning and end of the survey. Temperatures and wind speeds were recorded with a handheld Kestrel 3500 anemometer. Percent cloud cover was visually estimated. Digital time, date and latitude/longitude-stamped photographs were taken and are included in Appendix D.

5.0 RESULTS
The unfenced, 3.7-acre site currently exhibits undeveloped, natural open space. Vegetation is generally sparse, consisting of a mixture of native and non-native plant species. Soils are sandy, potentially becoming stabilized. Existing site disturbances included evidence of minor dumping, offroad vehicular activity and accumulation of roadside trash (Appendix D, Photos 1-6).

Existing commercial development occurs to the north, while undeveloped natural open space, similar to the habitat present on-site, is located to the east, west and south. The existing Dinah Shore Drive and Crossley Road border the site to the south and east, respectively. The Whitewater River is located approximately 0.4 mile to the east of the site. Palm Canyon Wash is located approximately 0.5 mile to the south of the site.

5.1 Agua Caliente Tribal Habitat Conservation Plan
The project site is within the Tribes’ Reservation and within the planning area of the THCP. The site is not within any THCP-designated conservation areas or within any target acquisition areas for any of the species covered under the Plan. Upon project approval, the proposed development of the site would be considered a covered activity under the THCP and thus subject to the requirements and conditions of the Plan.

5.1.1 Valley Floor Planning Area (VFPA)
According to the THCP, there are 12 covered species that either currently inhabit or have the potential to inhabit the VFPA. These species include the desert tortoise, burrowing owl, Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard, flat-tailed horned lizard, Palm Springs ground squirrel, Palm Springs pocket mouse, Coachella Valley giant sand treader cricket, Coachella Valley Jerusalem cricket, crissal thrasher, Le Conte’s thrasher, Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus and Coachella Valley milk-vetch. Approximately 56 percent of the VFPA, which amounts to 8,726 acres, has already been developed and no longer serves as habitat for native flora and fauna. The remaining areas that still support native vegetation are fragmented and mostly surrounded by existing development, making them unsuitable for long-term viability. However, there are active and Item 1C - Page 167
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

ephemeral sand fields that offer long-term preservation benefits to the covered species, located in a small portion of the VFPA in Section 6 (Township 4 South, Range 5 East).

5.2 Weather Conditions
Weather conditions during the assessment included clear skies (0% cloud cover). The temperature was 88-91 degrees Fahrenheit. Winds were light with speeds ranging from 1 to 5 miles per hour (mph).

5.3 Topography, Soils and Waters
The elevation of the site is approximately 109 m (360 ft.) AMSL. Existing topography is relatively flat. Mapped soils (USDA NRCS 2023) are Myoma fine sand (MaB), 0-5% slopes (Appendix C, Figure 3). Myoma series soils are fine to very fine sands that range from nearly level to rolling and hummocky in some areas. These soils were formed in wind-blown sand from recent alluvium at elevations of -61 m (-200 ft), below sea level to 549 m (1,800 ft) above sea level.

On-site soils are sandy but appear that they are becoming stabilized or partially stabilized (Appendix D, Photos 1-6). The THCP maps the area of the site as “Active Sand Fields” on one figure and “Stabilized and Partially Stabilized Shielded Sand Fields” on another figure (Helix 2010).

Although the site is sandy, it does not appear to currently contain active sand dunes. Stabilization of the soils on the site is likely as a result of existing and ongoing development to the north and west interrupting the source of much of the aeolian sand deposits that would otherwise contribute to the dynamics of what were likely once active sand dunes and sand fields. No streams, washes, springs, bodies of water, active drifts, rock outcrops, rocky areas, or clay lenses were observed.

The nearest mapped waterways include the Whitewater River (~0.4 mile to the east) and Palm Canyon Wash (~0.5 mile to the south).

5.4 Vegetation
The on-site vegetation community aligns withLarrea tridentata shrubland alliance (creosote bush scrub) as described by Sawyer et. al. (2009) (Appendix C, Figure 4). Holland (1986) and the THCP refer to this community as Sonoran creosote bush scrub. The dominant native perennial plant species observed was mature but sparse creosote bush ( Larrea tridentata ). Other perennials observed were very sparse but included white bur-sage ( Ambrosia dumosa), four-wing saltbush (Atriplex canescens) and indigo bush ( Psorothamnus cf. emoryi). Dominant native herbaceous species observed were also relatively sparse but included fan-leaf tiquilia ( Tiquilia plicata ), California croton ( Croton californica ), pygmy poppy ( Eschscholzia minutiflora ) desert dicoria (Dicoria canescens) and Spanish needles ( Palafoxia arida). The herbaceous non-native annuals Mediterranean grass ( Schismus barbatus ), Sahara mustard ( Brassica tournefortii) and redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium) were also present. Sonoran creosote bush scrub is the predominant vegetation community occurring below 762 m (2500 ft) in the Colorado Desert from the Little San Item 1C - Page 168
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Bernardino Mountains south and eastward into Arizona and Mexico (Holland 1986).

No natural wetland, riparian or otherwise special status vegetation communities were observed on the project site. A full list of the plant species observed during the surveys, including common and scientific names, is appended to this report (Appendix A).

5.5 Wildlife
Vertebrate wildlife directly observed and/or detected otherwise (e.g., scat, bones, tracks, feathers, burrows, etc.) during the surveys was not diverse or abundant, limited to only nine species common to the region. This included four reptiles and five birds (Appendix B). No mammals or amphibians were detected.

The four reptiles detected on-site were the western whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris), zebra-tailed lizard (Callisaurus draconoides), desert iguana ( Dipsosaurus dorsalis) and side-blotched lizard ( Uta stansburiana). All of these species are common in the Coachella Valley and Colorado Desert. Other common reptiles that may occur on-site include, but are not limited to, desert glossy snake (Arizona elegans eburnata), Colorado Desert shovel-nosed snake (Chionactis annulata annulata), red racer (Coluber flagellum piceus) and Colorado Desert sidewinder (Crotalus cerastes laterorepens).

The five bird species observed on-site included: Eurasian collared dove ( Streptopelia decaocto), mourning dove ( Zenaida macroura), common raven ( Corvus corax), verdin ( Auriparus flaviceps) and northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos). Other common avian species that may also occur include but are not limited to house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), Costa’s hummingbird (Calypte costae), great-tailed grackle (Quiscalus mexicanus), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), American kestrel (Falco sparverius) and house sparrow (Passer domesticus).

Although no mammals were detected on-site, common mammal species that may occur include, but are not limited to, Botta’s pocket gopher ( Thomomys bottae), desert cottontail ( Sylvilagus audubonii), white-tailed antelope squirrel ( Ammospermophilus leucurus), black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus) and coyote (Canis latrans).

It should be noted that relatively short-term biological studies of this nature are often limited by the seasonality of annual plants, the migratory habits of many birds, the fossorial and nocturnal habits of many mammals and reptiles, and the timing of field surveys. A complete inventory of the wildlife on the site would require extensive year-round surveys for birds, amphibians, and reptiles, and additional surveys, such as placement of scent stations or tracking stations, for the detection of nocturnal mammals. Knowledge of habitat associations, natural history, seasonality, and distribution is essential in the assessment of the potential for occurrence of the various special status plants and animals known to occur throughout the Coachella Valley. For these reasons, other common and special status species that were not observed on-site may also have the potential to occur based on their geographic distribution, habitat preferences, and the regional Item 1C - Page 169
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

location of the site. The following section summarizes information on sensitive species known to occur in the vicinity of the project site.

5.6 Special Status Biological Resources
Plant or animal taxa may be considered "sensitive" or as having “special status” due to declining populations, vulnerability to habitat change, or because they have restricted ranges. Some are listed as threatened or endangered by the USFWS and are protected by the federal Endangered Species Act. Others have been identified as sensitive or as special status species by the USFWS, or by private conservation organizations, including the CNPS. In some cases, impacts to unlisted sensitive species that do not have formal federal status may nevertheless still be considered significant under the NEPA and TEPA. The THCP provides conservation for 22 imperiled plant and animal species (three plants, two insects, one amphibian, three reptiles, nine birds, and four mammals). These include federal-listed species, species designated with special status by federal resource agencies, and species on the CNPS sensitive species lists. THCP covered species are designated on the tables below. The site is not within designated critical habitat for any special status plants or wildlife. The nearest designated critical habitat is for Casey’s June beetle (Dinacoma caseyi), located approximately 0.5-mile to the southwest, within the Palm Canyon Wash.

The review of the CNDDB, CNPS Online Inventory of Rare Plants, other biological reports from the vicinity, and consultation with other experienced biologists/naturalists resulted in the identification of 78 special status biological resources known to occur in the vicinity (generally within an approximate 5-mile radius) of the project site. 51 of these have no federal conservation status and were therefore omitted due to the lack of jurisdiction over Tribal lands. The remaining 27 federal and/or THCP-designated e federal and/or THCP-designated special status biological resources, their associated legal status, and their respective on-site occurrence potentials.

No special status plant species were detected on-site during the field assessment. The site does, however, contain at least marginally (potentially) suitable habitat for 10 of the special status plant species that have been previously reported from the vicinity. These include Coachella Valley milk- vetch and Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus.

No special status wildlife species were observed on-site or adjacent to the site during the assessment. The review of the CNDDB, CNPS and other biological reports from the vicinity resulted Item 1C - Page 170
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

in a total of 25 federal and/or THCP-designated special status wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity. Of these, 10 are considered to have some (mostly very low to low) potential of occurrence on the site. Limited, at least marginally (potentially) suitable habitat is present for Coachella giant sand treaded cricket, Coachella Valley Jerusalem cricket, flat-tailed horned lizard, Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard, burrowing owl, Palm Springs pocket mouse and Coachella Valley (Palm Springs) round-tailed ground squirrel.

Tables 1 through 6 summarize information on all special status species that have been reported within the vicinity (~5-mile radius) or that occur or are considered to have some potential to occur on-site based on geographic distribution and presence of potentially suitable habitat. Occurrence probability is based on the best available information and the collective expertise of WSP biologists. These tables provide the names, legal or conservation status, general habitat associations, and the probability of occurrence for each of these species.

Table 1. Special Status Plants
Species Status Habitat Probability
Astragalus lentiginosusvar.
coachellae
Coachella Valley milk-
vetch
F: END
C: None
CNPS: 1B.2
State Rank: S1
THCP: Yes
Sonoran Desert scrub; sandy
flats, washes, outwash fans,
sometimes on dunes; 40-665 m
(131-2182 ft); B: Jan–Sep
High
Suitable habitat present, species
tolerant of disturbance and known
from immediate vicinity, 0.5 mi. E
(2020), 0.6 mi. SE (2020). Nearest
designated critical habitat located
approx. 3.8 mi. north.

Linanthus maculatus
Little San Bernardino
Mountains linanthus
F: ND
C: ND
CNPS List: 1B.2
State Rank: S1.2
THCP: Yes
Desert dunes, Sonoran Desert
scrub, Joshua tree woodland,
often associated w/ sandy wash
habitats between 20-2073 m (64-
6800 ft); B: Mar-May
Very Low
Suitable habitat limited, disturbed,
and likely becoming stabilized.

Nearest CNDDB record ~3.6 mi.

NW (1889) & 5 mi. N (1952). Per
the THCP, impacts to habitats
occupied (as determined by
surveys conducted and/or required
by the Tribe) by Little San
Bernardino Mountains gilia
(Linanthus maculatus) must be
avoided to the maximum extent
practicable. For these reasons,
although the species is covered
under the THCP, focused surveys
may nevertheless be required. Any
impacts to this species occupied
habitat requires habitat
conservation at a mitigation ratio of
3:1 per the THCP.

Item 1C - Page 171
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Table 2. Special Status Invertebrates
Species Status Habitat Probability
Overwintering:

Absent
(No trees present. With
Danius plexippus, pop. 1
monarch butterfly,
California overwintering
population
F: C
C: ND
State Rank: S2S3
THCP: No
In California, generally known to overwinter
in wind-protected tree groves (Eucalyptus
sp., Monterey pine [Pinus radiata], cypress)
along the coast with nectar and water
sources nearby. During breeding season,
adults widespread but scarce in the desert.

Larvae require milkweed (Asclepias sp.).

Larval hostplant and important nectar
sources include milkweeds (Apocynaceae)
few exceptions, Monarchs
generally overwinter on
coast).

Foraging:

Low
(May temporarily occur
and nectar on-site but
potential nectar sources
are very limited and not
diverse. Larval host plants
(milkweed) not detected)
Dinacoma caseyi
Casey’s June beetle
F: END
C: None
State Rank: S1
THCP: No
Appears to be entirely restricted to the
mouth and alluvial floodplain of Palm
Canyon Wash and Tahquitz Creek in Palm
Springs, in association with deposits of fine
silts, sands and gravels
Absent
Soils on-site are aeolian
deposits, not alluvial. Site
is not within designated
critical habitat for this
species. Closest current
records ~0.6 mi. SW near
Palm Canyon Wash (pers.
obs.)
Macrobaenetes valgum
Coachella giant sand
treader cricket
F: None
C: None
State Rank: S1S2
THCP: Yes
Active sand dune hummocks and ridges,
sites favorable to permanent habitation
include spring-moistened sand.

Low
Suitable habitat
present but limited and
becoming stabilized.

Closest CNDDB record

2.1 mi. ENE (1960).

Stenopelmatus
cahuilaensis
Coachella Valley
Jerusalem cricket
F: None
C: None
State Rank: S1S2
THCP: Yes
Sandy, moist soils in Coachella Valley
Low
Marginally suitable
habitat present but
limited, disturbed. likely
becoming stabilized and
not notably moist. Closet
CNDDB record 1.4 mi. NW
(1968).

Item 1C - Page 172
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Table 3. Special Status Amphibians
Species Status Habitat Probability
California red-legged frog
Rana draytonii
F: THR
C: SSC
State Rank: S2S3
THCP: No
Permanent sources of deep water
(must last 11-20 weeks for larval
development) in lowlands and foothills,
with dense shrubby or emergent
vegetation
Absent
Aquatic habitats lacking.

Nearest CNDDB record
~5 mi. SW
southern mountain yellow-
legged frog
Rana muscosa
F: END
C: END
State Rank: S1
THCP: Yes
Rocky mountain streams with deep
pools for adults and larvae to
overwinter.

Absent
Aquatic habitats lacking.

Nearest CNDDB record

4.2 mi. W (1967)
Table 4. Special Status Reptiles
Species Status Habitat Probability
Gopherus agassizi
desert tortoise
F: THR
C: THR
State Rank: S2
THCP: Yes
Creosote bush scrub, Joshua
tree woodland, saltbush
scrub); washes, arroyos,
bajadas, rocky hillsides, open
flat desert.

Very Low/Remote/Likely
Absent
Marginally suitable
habitat limited and
disturbed. Site
immediately adjacent to
existing roadways (E and
S) and development (N).

Tortoise sign (burrows,
scat, remains, etc.) not
detected. In Coachella
Valley, tortoises are
primarily limited to
peripheral foothills and
associated alluvial areas,
generally not associated
with the floor of the
Coachella Valley. Site is
not within designated
critical habitat and not
within THCP or CVMSHCP
modeled habitat for
desert tortoise. Nearest
CNDDB record 7.8 mi. S
(1997). A focused survey
for desert tortoise is not
recommended but may
be required to
conclusively determine
absence.

Item 1C - Page 173
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Species Status Habitat Probability
Phrynosoma mcallii
flat-tailed horned lizard
F: None
C: SSC
State Rank: S2
THCP: Yes
Sandy and gravelly areas in
desert washes, edges of
dunes and desert flats;
requires vegetative cover,
ants & fine sand.

Very Low
Marginally suitable
habitat present but
limited, disturbed, and
appears to be stabilizing.

Site adjacent to busy
roadways and existing
development. Nearest
CNDDB record ~1.6 mi. SE
(1957). More recently
reported from ~1.9 mi.

NW (1997).

Uma inornata
Coachella Valley fringe-toed
lizard
F: THR
C: END
State Rank: S1
THCP: Yes
Requires fine, loose,
windblown sand (dunes)
interspersed with hardpan &
widely spaced desert shrubs.

Known only from the
Coachella Valley.

Low
Marginally suitable
habitat present but
limited, disturbed, and
appears to be stabilizing.

Nearest CNDDB record

0.4 mi. SW (1975).

Table 5. Special Status Birds
Species Status Habitat Probability
Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
F: MBTA, BCC
C: SSC (burrows), FGC
State Rank: S2
THCP: Yes*
Open, dry annual or perennial
grassland, deserts &
scrublands characterized by
low-growing vegetation.

Burrow sites essential.

Breeding: Low
Habitat suitable and
suitable burrows present.

No sign (i.e., whitewash,
pellets, feathers, prints,
burrow adornments, etc.)
not observed.

Foraging: Low-
Moderate
Same as above.

Adjacent open space
suitable and potentially
occupied. CNDDB
records ~4.5 mi. NE
(2006).

Calypte costae
Costa’s hummingbird
F: MBTA, BCC
C: None
State Rank: S4
THCP: No
Desert and semi-desert, arid
brushy foothills, and
chaparral, in migration and
winter also in adjacent
mountains and in open
meadows and gardens
Nesting: Absent
Suitable tree & shrub
nesting habitat lacking.

Foraging: Moderate-
High
May nest nearby and
forage over site.

Item 1C - Page 174
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Species Status Habitat Probability
Cypseloides niger
black swift
F:MBT
A, C:

SSC
State Rank: S2
THCP: No
Breeds in small colonies
behind or adjacent to
waterfalls in deep canyons
Nesting: Absent
Nesting habitat lacking.

Foraging: Low
Known to nest at several
locations in the San
Jacinto Mountains and
could potentially forage
over site. Closest CNDDB
record 4.4 mi. W (1986);
species forages widely
from nesting habitat)
Empidonax traillii extimus
southwestern willow flycatcher
F: END, MBTA
C: END
State Rank: S1
THCP: Yes*
Breeds in dense riparian
areas.

Nesting: Absent
Suitable riparian habitat
lacking.

Foraging: Very Low
Occurs in many habitats
during migration.

Nearest CNDDB record
more than 5 mi. NE
(2002).

Falco mexicanus
prairie falcon
F: MBTA, BCC
C: SSC (nesting), FGC
State Rank: S3
THCP: No
Inhabits dry, open terrain,
either level or hilly. Breeding
sites located on cliffs, but
forages far afield.

Breeding: Absent
Suitable nesting habitat
lacking.

Foraging: Low
May nest or winter
nearby & forage over
site. CNDDB records
suppressed but known
from project quadrangle.

Lanius ludovicianus
loggerhead shrike
F: MBTA, BCC
C: SSC (nesting), FGC
State Rank: S4
THCP: No
Open fields with scattered
trees or shrubs, open country
with short vegetation,
pastures, old orchards,
cemeteries, golf courses,
riparian areas & open
woodlands.

Breeding: Absent
Suitable nesting habitat
lacking.

Foraging: Moderate
May nest or winter
nearby & forage over
site. Nearest CNDDB
record from more than 5
mi. E (2005)
Polioptila californica californica
coastal California gnatcatcher
F: THR
C: ND
State Rank: S2
THCP: No
Primarily inhabits coastal sage
scrub below an elevation of
2,000 feet.

Breeding: Absent
Suitable nesting habitat
lacking.

Foraging: Absent
Suitable habitat lacking.

Nearest CNDDB record
from 2.7 mi. NW (1918).

Item 1C - Page 175
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Species Status Habitat Probability
Polioptila melanura
black-tailed gnatcatcher
F:

MBT
A C:

ND
State rank: S3S4
THCP: No
Nests in wooded desert wash
habitat containing mesquite,
palo verde, ironwood, and
acacia. May also occur in
areas with salt cedar,
especially when adjacent to
native wooded desert wash
habitat. Also occurs in desert
scrub habitat in winter.

Breeding: Absent
Suitable nesting habitat
lacking.

Foraging: Moderate
May forage or move
through site from nearby
areas. Nearest known
occurrence 3.9 miles SW
(pers. Obs.)
Pyrocephalus rubinus
vermilion flycatcher
F: MBTA
C: SSC (nesting)
State Rank: S2S3
THCP: No
During nesting, inhabits
desert riparian adjacent to
irrigated fields, irrigation
ditches, pastures, & other
open, mesic areas with nest in
cottonwood, willow,
mesquite, or other large
desert riparian trees.

Nesting: Absent
Suitable nesting habitat
lacking.

Foraging: Low
Known from ~1 mi. SW
(pers. obs.).

Toxostoma crissale
crissal thrasher
F:

MBTA
C: SSC
State Rank: S3
THCP: Yes*
Resident of SE deserts in
desert riparian and wash
habitats, nests in dense
mesquite, ironwood, catclaw,
arrowweed.

Nesting: Absent
Suitable nesting habitat
lacking
Foraging: Very low
May nest or winter
nearby and/or forage
on-site. CNDDB record

4.1 mi. NW (1920).

Toxostoma lecontei
LeConte’s thrasher
F: MBTA, BCC
C: SSC (nesting), FGC
State Rank: S3
THCP: Yes*
Desert resident; primarily of
open desert wash, desert
scrub, alkali desert scrub, and
desert succulent scrub
habitats. Nest in dense, spiny
shrub or densely branched
cactus in desert wash habitat,
usually 2-8 feet above
ground.

Breeding: Absent
Suitable nesting habitat
lacking.

Foraging: Very Low
May nest or winter
nearby and/or forage
on-site. Closest CNDDB
record ~0.7 mi. NE
(1920); 3.8 mi. ENE
(1921)
Vireo bellii pusillus
least Bell’s vireo
F: END
C: END
State Rank: S2
THCP: Yes*
Summer resident in southern
California in low willow
riparian near water or dry
river bottoms.

Nesting: Absent
Suitable habitat lacking.

Foraging: Low
Occurs in many habitats
during migration.

Closest CNDDB record

4.9 mi. SW (1990).
* Species conserved under the THCP, but is still protected by the MBTA and FGC Item 1C - Page 176
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Table 6. Special Status Mammals
Species Status Habitat Probability
Lasiurus xanthinus
western yellow bat
F: None
C: SSC
State Rank: S3
WBWG: H
THCP: Yes
Found in a variety of
habitats: Valley foothill
riparian, desert riparian,
desert wash, and palm oasis
habitats
Roosting: Absent
Suitable tree-roosting
habitat lacking.

Foraging: Moderate
May roost nearby and
forage on-site. Nearest
CNDDB record ~4.1 mi.

NW (1989).

Ovis canadensis nelsoni(Pop. 2)
Peninsular bighorn sheep DPS
F: END
C: THR
State Rank: S1
THCP: Yes
Eastern slopes of the
Peninsular Ranges below
4,600 feet. Optimal habitat
includes steep-walled
canyons/ridges bisected by
rocky or sandy washes w/
available water
Absent
Suitable mountainous
rocky habitat lacking.

Known from San Jacinto
and Santa Rosa
Mountains S of site.

Nearest record ~4 mi. SW
Perognathus longimembris bangsi
Palm Springs pocket mouse
F: None
C: SSC
State Rank: S2
THCP: Yes
Inhabits flat or gently
sloping areas with sparse
vegetative cover and packed
or sandy soils.

Low
Limited suitable habitat
present but disturbed.

Most recent CNDDB
record is 11 mi. NW
(2017).

Xerospermophilus tereticaudus
chlorus
Coachella Valley (Palm Springs)
round-tailed ground squirrel
F: None
C: SSC
State Rank: S1S2
THCP: Yes
Prefers open, flat, grassy
areas in fine-textured, sandy
soil in desert succulent
scrub, desert wash, desert
scrub, alkali scrub, & levees.

Low
Habitat suitable but
limited and disturbed.

Potential ground squirrel
burrows observed.

Nearest CNDDB record

4.1 mi. NW (1916); ~5 mi.

E (1954).

Definitions of status designations and occurrence probabilities for Tables 1-6 Definitions for Species
Italics – Scientific name (i.e., Genus species subspecies) Bold – Standard common name
[Genus] – Previous genus, relatively recent taxonomic revision var. – variety (plants only)
DPS – Distinct Population Segment
Definitions of occurrence probability:

Occurs: Observed or detected on-site by WSP or recently reported by another reliable source.

High: Observed in similar habitat in region by qualified biologists, or habitat on-site is a type often utilized by the species and the site is within the known range of the species.

Moderate: Reported sightings in surrounding region, or site is within the known range of the species and habitat on- site is a type occasionally used by the species.

Low: Site is within the known range of the species but habitat on-site is rarely used by the species Very Low: Habitat is of marginal suitability and/or site is at the edge of species known range or distribution.

Item 1C - Page 177
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Absent: A focused study failed to detect the species, suitable habitat not present, or site is outside the geographic distribution of the species.

Unknown: No focused surveys have been performed in the region, & the species' distribution & habitat are poorly known.

THCP designations
Yes: Conserved by the THCP
No: Not Specifically Conserved by the THCP
Federal designations:(F = federal Endangered Species Act or USFWS designations) END: Federally listed, Endangered
THR: Federally listed, Threatened
CAN: Candidate for Federal listing
MBTA: Migratory Bird Treaty Act
BEPA: Bald Eagle Protection Act (also protects Golden Eagles) BCC: Birds of Conservation Concern
None: No designation
State designations: (C = California Endangered Species Act or CDFG designations) END: State listed, Endangered
THR: State listed, Threatened
CAN: Candidate for State listing
RARE: State listed, Rare
FP: Fully Protected Species
SSC: Species of Special Concern
FGC: Fish and Game Code
WL: Watch List Species
CDFW state rankings are a reflection of the overall condition of an element throughout its California range. The number after the decimal point represents a threat designation attached to the rank:

S1 = Critically Imperiled. Less than (<) 6 Element Occurrences (EOs) OR < 1,000 individuals OR < 2,000 acres S1.1 = very threatened
S1.2 = threatened
S1.3 = no current threats known
S2 = Imperiled. 6-20 EOs OR 1,000-3,000 individuals OR 2,000-10,000 acres S2.1 = very threatened
S2.2 = threatened
S2.3 = no current threats known
S3 = Vulnerable. 21-80 EOs OR 3,000-10,000 individuals OR 10,000-50,000 acres S3.1 = very threatened
S3.2 = threatened
S3.3 = no current threats known
S4 = Apparently Secure. Uncommon but not rare in the state; some cause for long-term concern.

S5 = Secure. Common, widespread, and abundant in the state.

SH = All known California sites are historical, not extant ? = Qualifier: Inexact or Uncertain - A question mark represents a rank qualifier, denoting an inexact or uncertain numeric rank.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS) designations:

Primary Categories
LIST 1A: Plants Presumed Extirpated in California and Either Rare or Extinct Elsewhere LIST 1B: Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and Elsewhere LIST 2A: Plants Presumed Extirpated in California, But Common Elsewhere LIST 2B: Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, But More Common Elsewhere LIST 3: Plants About Which More Information is Needed - A Review List LIST 4: Plants of Limited Distribution - A Watch List
Subdivisions within Categories

0.1: Seriously threatened in California

0.2: Moderately threatened in California

0.3: Not very threatened in California
Item 1C - Page 178
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Western Bat Working Group (WBWG) designations:

The Western Bat Working Group is comprised of agencies, organizations and individuals interested in bat research, management, and conservation from the 13 western states and provinces. Its goals are (1) to facilitate communication among interested parties and reduce risks of species decline or extinction; (2) to provide a mechanism by which current information on bat ecology, distribution and research techniques can be readily accessed; and (3) to develop a forum to discuss conservation strategies, provide technical assistance and encourage education programs.

H: High: Species which are imperiled or are at high risk of imperilment based on available information on distribution, status, ecology and known threats.

M: Medium: Species which warrant a medium level of concern and need closer evaluation, more research, and conservation actions of both the species and possible threats. A lack of meaningful information is a major obstacle in adequately assessing these species' status and should be considered a threat.

L: Low: Species for which most of the existing data support stable populations, and for which the potential for major changes in status in the near future is considered unlikely. There may be localized concerns, but the overall status of the species is believed to be secure. Conservation actions would still apply for these bats, but limited resources are best used on High and Medium status species.

P: Periphery: This designation indicates a species on the edge of its range, for which no other designation has been determined.

6.0 DISCUSSION
The proposed development of the project site would result in the permanent loss of 3.7 acres of relatively natural open space in the Coachella Valley (Appendix C, Figure 5). The habitat currently present on-site is a somewhat disturbed desert sand field vegetated with creosote bush scrub.

The presence of existing adjacent commercial development to the north and the adjacent paved, public thoroughfares, Crossley Road, and Dinah Shore Drive, to the east and south, have greatly reduced the likelihood of some of the special status species occurrence and limited the connectivity of habitat to adjacent areas. Additionally, ongoing soil stabilization, off-road vehicle use, dumping, and trash accumulation on the site has further decreased the chances of these species being present.

The THCP was designed to streamline the permitting process and to mitigate potential impacts resulting from covered projects and the lawful activities of permittees through payment of the requisite development fee and participation in the requirements of the Plan. A few species, which are not covered, or are not yet adequately conserved by the THCP (e.g., Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus, desert tortoise, burrowing owl, nesting birds) may require additional consideration and/or actions, which are detailed below.

6.1 Discussion of the Special Status Biological Resources Tables A review of the CNDDB, CNPS, digital WSP library and the collective knowledge of WSP senior biologists resulted in a total of 27 federal and/or Tribal-designated special status biological resources that are known from the vicinity of the project site (Tables 1-7). These include: two Item 1C - Page 179
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

plants, four invertebrates, two amphibians, three reptiles, 12 birds and four mammals. Of these, 18 are considered to be absent from the site due toa lack of suitable habitat and/or the site being outside of elevational ranges, or as in the case of flying animals (birds and bats), they may only occur on-site to forage (no nesting or roosting habitat present), therefore are not anticipated to be directly impacted by project implementation. The resources that are considered to be absent from the site and/or are not anticipated to be directly impacted include: pygmy lotus overwintering monarch butterfly ( Danius plexippus [pop. 1]), Casey’s June beetle, California red- legged frog ( Rana draytonii), southern mountain yellow-legged frog, desert tortoise, nesting Costa’s hummingbird ( Calypte costae ), nesting black swift ( Cypseloides niger ), nesting southwestern willow flycatcher, nesting prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), nesting loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus ), nesting coastal California gnatcatcher ( Polioptila californica californica ), nesting black-tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura), nesting vermilion flycatcher (Pyrocephalus rubinus), nesting crissal thrasher, nesting LeConte’s thrasher, nesting least Bell’s vireo, roosting southern yellow bat and Peninsular bighorn sheep DPS. With a few exceptions, these special status biological resources will not be discussed further.

Eight of the remaining nine species are fully covered and conserved under the THCP. Participation in the THCP and payment of the requisite development fee is expected to fully mitigate project related impacts (if any) to these species. These species include: Coachella Valley milk-vetch, Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus, Coachella giant sand treader cricket, Coachella Valley Jerusalem cricket, flat-tailed horned lizard, Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard, Palm Springs pocket mouse and Coachella Valley (Palm Springs) round-tailed ground squirrel. These fully covered species will not be discussed further.

The remaining species, which are not covered, or not fully covered, under the THCP are discussed separately below.

6.1.1 Potentially Occurring Plant Species Not Covered, or Not Fully Covered, Under the THCP
There is a very low potential for Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus to occur on-site as stabilized sand fields and Sonoran Desert scrub are present on-site. This species was not detected during the field assessment; however the assessment was conducted outside of this species blooming period (Mar-May). Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus is not listed as threatened or endangered by either the USFWS or CDFW; it is, however, designated as S1.2 by the CDFW meaning that this species is considered to be “Critically Imperiled” and “Threatened” by the CDFW and is a CNPS List 1B.2 species meaning that it is considered by the CNPS to be “rare, threated or endangered in California and elsewhere” and “moderately threatened in California”. Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus is a covered species under the THCP. The Plan requires avoidance of impacts to habitat that is occupied by this species (to the maximum extent practicable).

Although WSP considered there to be a very low potential for Little San Bernardino Mountains Item 1C - Page 180
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

linanthus to occur, the only way to conclusively determine whether the species occurs on-site or not is to conduct a focused survey during the species blooming period, which is March through May.

6.1.2 Potentially Occurring Special Status Wildlife Not Covered Under, or Not Fully Covered Under the THCP

6.1.2.1 Invertebrates
Although Casey’s June beetle is considered to be absent from the project site due to the lack of alluvial substrates and the fact that the site is not within the floodplains of any drainages, the proximity of the site to known occupied habitat warrants further discussion. This species is not a covered species under the THCP and therefore is afforded no protection by the existing Plan.

Casey’s June beetle was federally listed as endangered on 24 October 2011. Critical habitat for this species was also designated at that time. The project site is not located within designated critical habitat for Casey’s June beetle and the site is located just outside of the mapped currently known geographic range of the species (USFWS website, interactive map 2023). Little is known of Casey’s June beetle larval ecology, however, like other members of the Melolonthinae (June beetle subfamily), it is suspected that the larvae feed on the roots of a variety of native plants and/or unground decomposing organic material. Larval development occurs underground within alluvial- derived Coachella fine sand series (CpA) and Myoma fine sands (MaB), although other soils types such as Carsitas sand series and Riverwash soils may also be suitable. These soil classifications are associated with alluvial (water-deposited) terraces, rather than aeolian (wind) deposits. Soils that have been significantly modified, compacted, or are too isolated for females to recolonize by crawling are not likely to support Casey’s June beetle (USFWS 2013). Adults emerge from pupal cells located beneath the surface of the sand to begin their annual flight and courtship activities.

Females are flightless and emit pheromones that attract the flying males. Males are attracted to lights.

Extant populations of Casey’s June beetle are known from Palm Canyon Wash and its associated floodplain which runs through the southern part of the City of Palm Springs, south of the project site. The species also occurs on portions of Agua Caliente Indian Tribal lands and along Tahquitz Creek and within its associated floodplain. Based on currently available data, the beetle’s distribution is confined to an area of less than 800 acres. The closest known records of Casey’s June beetle relative to the project site are from approximately 0.6 mile to the southwest, in Palm Canyon Wash, just east of the Gene Autry Trail bridge (pers. obs). The floodplain of the Whitewater River occurs approximately 0.4 mile to the east of the project site may also contain suitable Casey’s June beetle habitat.

Although the project site is within approximately 0.6 mile from known occupied Casey’s June beetle habitat within Palm Canyon Wash to the southwest and approximately 0.4 mile from Item 1C - Page 181
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

potentially suitable habitat within the Whitewater River to the east, the site is located outside of the historic floodplains of these, or any other drainages. Soils on-site appear to consist entirely of aeolian (wind-blown) deposits (MaB) that are becoming stabilized and do not appear to be alluvial (water deposited), of which Casey’s June beetle is typically associated. For these reasons, it is the opinion of WSP that the project site is unlikely to be occupied by Casey’s June beetle. For these reasons, focused surveys for Casey’s June beetle are not recommended or anticipated to be required at this time.

6.1.2.2 Vertebrates
The desert tortoise is federally and state listed as threatened by the CDFW and USFWS. The site is not within designated critical habitat for the desert tortoise and not within modeled habitat as mapped by the THCP (Helix 2010, Figure 16) or by the CVMSHCP within their adjacent jurisdiction.

Records of desert tortoise on the Reservation are limited to the vicinity of Chino Canyon and Little Eagle Canyon (Helix 2010). This species is a covered species under the THCP, however, further actions may be required in potentially occupied habitat to ensure that take is entirely avoided and/or minimized to the greatest extent possible. No live desert tortoises or sign thereof (i.e., burrows, scat, prints, carcass remains, courtship rings, drinking depressions) were observed on- site during the assessment. The site is relatively small (3.7 acres) and connected to other similar habitat to the east, south and west. It should be noted, however, that existing roadways (i.e., Crossley Road and Dinah Shore Drive), which are busy thoroughfares through the area, are present between the site and other available undeveloped open space to the east and south. Although detrimental to any desert tortoise attempting to cross, these existing roads are not considered to be impenetrable barriers, should desert tortoises occur in the adjacent areas. Additionally, on-site soils are sandy, formerly part of an extensive sand dune system in the Coachella Valley. Desert tortoises are largely absent from the floor of the Coachella Valley, where this large dune system generally occurs. For these reasons, although the vegetation community (i.e., Sonoran creosote bush scrub) is technically suitable for the desert tortoise, other existing site conditions (i.e., sandy soils, adjacent development to the north and adjacent roadways) have resulted in a site that is of low habitat value for the desert tortoise, and as a result this species is not expected to occur on- site. Although creosote bush scrub, one of the desert tortoises preferred vegetation communities, is present on-site, it is highly unlikely that this species would occur on this site given the relatively small size, the disturbed nature of the site, the proximity to busy roadways and existing development; and when considering the extremely low density of the species on the valley floor of the Coachella Valley, especially on dune systems or former dune systems. For these reasons, WSP considers there to be a very low/remote potential for desert tortoise to occur on the project site. In all likelihood, the desert tortoise does not occur on the project site. A focused surveys and/or a take avoidance survey (at a minimum) may, however, be required to conclusively determine the species absence on the site and to ensure total avoidance of direct loss of, or impacts to desert tortoises as required by the THCP. If fresh sign of desert tortoise (i.e., scat, Item 1C - Page 182
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

burrows, tracks, carcass remains, courtship rings, drinking depressions) is found to be present on- site, the site must be fenced with tortoise-proof exclusion fencing and a more intensive clearance survey conducted during the clearance window (15 February through 31 October) to locate all live tortoises on the project site for monitoring and potential relocation. If required, desert tortoise surveys, construction monitoring and relocation would need to be conducted in accordance with the Guidelines for Handling Desert Tortoises During Construction Projects prepared by the Desert Tortoise Council (USFWS 1994, USFWS 1999) or the currently accepted protocol (if revised in the interim). If detected on-site, live tortoises would likely require relocation, as required by the THCP and in accordance with current handling guidelines to an appropriate location as determined by the Tribe.

If found on-site, relocation in accordance with the THCP would be required to avoid injury, mortality/direct loss and minimize project impacts to the desert tortoise. If required, a focused desert tortoise survey and/or the take avoidance survey could most likely be conducted concurrent with surveys required for other species (i.e., rare plants, burrowing owl and nesting birds) at no to little extra cost.

The burrowing owl is not listed as threatened or endangered by the USFWS or CDFW. It is, however, managed as a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) by the USFWS, designated as an SSC by the CDFW, protected from take by the MBTA and FGC. The burrowing owl is also designated and managed as a sensitive species by the Tribe. This species is uniquely vulnerable to ground disturbing activities since it both nests and roosts underground. It occurs in open, dry annual or perennial grasslands, deserts and scrublands characterized by low-growing vegetation (Haug et al. 2011). In southern California, burrowing owls are not only found in undisturbed natural areas, but also fallow agricultural fields, margins of active agricultural areas, livestock farms, airports, and vacant lots. It is a subterranean nester, typically utilizing existing burrows of other animals (e.g., ground squirrels, kit fox, desert tortoise, etc.) as well as using man-made structures (e.g., drainpipes, culverts, piles of debris, etc.). Burrows occupied by burrowing owls can be recognized by sign which includes whitewash, tracks, molted feathers, cast pellets, prey remains, eggshell fragments, burrow adornments (e.g., paper, foil, plastic items, livestock, or other animal dung, etc.) (CDFG 2012). The species is active both day and night and may be seen perching conspicuously at the entrance of their burrows or on the top of fence posts, rocks, or other elevated structures.

Although the burrowing owl is a covered species under the THCP, and payment of the requisite mitigation fee is generally intended to mitigate some of the impacts to covered species, the burrowing owl is one of the species that requires additional, specific measures for full THCP compliance. Although no burrowing owls, or sign thereof, were detected on-site during the assessment, potentially suitable habitat (i.e., sparse Sonoran creosote bush scrub) and burrows of suitable size (i.e., ground squirrel burrows) were detected on-site (Appendix D). For these reasons, and in accordance with the THCP, a focused burrowing owl survey is recommended and will likely Item 1C - Page 183
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

be required to conclusively determine the species status on-site and if present, what level of impact minimization and/or mitigation would subsequently be required. Similar to the desert tortoise discussed above, all covered activities within the VFPA of the THCP must minimize unavoidable impacts to burrowing owl to the greatest extent possible. Impact minimization (if required) may include relocation, as described in section 4.8.4.2(g) of the THCP.

Prior to the commencement of any ground or habitat disturbance, the THCP requires that a pre- disturbance presence/absence survey of the site for the burrowing owl be conducted. The survey is required to be conducted between September 1 and January 31. If burrowing owl is found to be present on-site, relocation may be required, in accordance with the currently accepted relocation protocol. The Tribe and USFWS currently are working together to develop appropriate relocation protocols. It is anticipated that these protocols will, at a minimum, reflect the standards of the CDFG Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (1995, as summarized below). Owls shall be excluded from burrows within the approved limit of disturbance and an appropriate buffer zone as determined by a qualified biologist by installing one-way doors in burrow entrances or other techniques as deemed appropriate by the Tribe. The biological monitor must ensure through appropriate means (e.g., monitoring for owl use, excavating burrows) that the burrows to be impacted are not being used. If active relocation methods are employed, the destination will be selected by the Tribe on a case by-case basis to provide the greatest long-term conservation potential for the species (regardless of whether it is within the action area). Factors to be considered include habitat characteristics, long-term viability, and the presence/status of existing populations of this species on the available sites based on available information or a site reconnaissance by a qualified biologist. Artificial burrows will be constructed at the receptor site under supervision of the qualified biologist. Artificial burrows shall not be required for passive relocation unless there is already conserved land immediately adjacent to the parcel from which the owls will be passively relocated. Occupied burrows shall not be disturbed during the nesting season unless a qualified biologist verifies through non-invasive methods that either the birds have not begun egg laying and incubation or juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and capable of independent survival.

6.1.3 Additional Bird Species Protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act Although the site does not support trees or shrubs sufficient to support the potential nesting of any of the special status bird species known from the vicinity, some ground-nesting common species, such as mourning dove, killdeer ( Charadrius vociferus) and lesser nighthawk ( Chordeiles acutipennis), have the potential to nest on-site. Mourning doves were the most abundant species observed on-site during the assessment. Additionally, a large billboard is present on the southern portion of the project site and provides suitable nesting structure for common raven ( Corvus corax). This billboard structure was inspected during the assessment and no common raven nests, or any nesting materials of any kind, were observed at that time. All common nesting bird species are excluded from coverage under the THCP, are protected by the MBTA, and any impact Item 1C - Page 184
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

to a nesting native bird species need to be avoided. Avoidance of impacts to nesting migratory and resident bird species is a requirement of the federal permit issued for the THCP. In order to avoid potentially impacting nesting birds, either avoidance of the initial project-related disturbance (i.e., grading, vegetation removal, operation of heavy equipment, construction, etc.) during the nesting season (1 February through 31 August) or if the initial project-related site construction activities cannot be avoided during the nesting season, a nesting bird clearance survey conducted by a qualified ornithologist or biologist immediately prior to scheduled on-site disturbance is recommended. If nesting birds are found, no work buffer zones would be recommended until young have fledged. While there is no established protocol for nest avoidance, avoidance buffers of about 100–300 feet for unlisted songbirds and 500 feet for listed songbirds and raptors are generally recommended.

6.2 Jurisdictional Areas
The project site is located in an upland area with stabilized sand fields. There appears to be no potentially jurisdictional waters within the site. The nearest likely jurisdictional water, Whitewater River and Tahquitz Creek, are approximately 0.5 miles to the east and south of the project site, respectively. There is no direct connection between the project site and these waters. No additional measures related to jurisdictional water resources are anticipated to be required.

7.0 CONCLUSION
The proposed project site is located on lands that are under the jurisdiction of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. The main regulatory mechanism for tribal lands is the THCP (Helix 2010).

Therefore, payment of the required development fees for approved projects, with some exceptions, are anticipated to mitigate the impacts and/or potential impacts to covered species resulting from the loss/conversion of the natural open space present on-site. Covered species that are considered to have at least some potential of on-site occurrence include: Coachella Valley milk-vetch, Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus, Coachella giant sand treader cricket, Coachella Valley Jerusalem cricket, flat-tailed horned lizard, Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard, Palm Springs pocket mouse, and Coachella Valley (Palm Springs) round-tailed ground squirrel.

Impacts to these species (if present) and their respective habitat, would be fully covered, and mitigated under the THCP with the payment of the requisite development fee and participation in the requirements of the Plan, with one exception for Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus.

Although Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus is a covered species under the THCP, the Plan requires avoidance of impacts (to the maximum extent practicable) or mitigation in the form of habitat preservation at a 3:1 ratio where this species occurs. The only way to conclusively determine if Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus occurs on-site is to conduct a focused survey during the species blooming period (Mar-May). For these reasons, and despite the very low occurrence potential conclusion, a focused survey for Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus may be considered warranted and therefore may be required.

Item 1C - Page 185
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Although WSP considers the potential for desert tortoise occurrence on the project site to be extremely low, a presence/absence survey and/or a take avoidance survey (at a minimum) conducted in accordance with the currently accepted USFWS desert tortoise survey protocol would conclusively determine that the species status on-site and ensure that no impacts potentially occur as a result of project implementation. The survey could very likely be conducted concurrent with the surveys for other species (i.e., Little San Bernardino Mountains linanthus, burrowing owl and/or nesting birds [where required]). If no sign of desert tortoise is observed, no further actions relative to the desert tortoise are anticipated.

Although no sign (i.e., whitewash, pellets, tracks, feathers, or burrow adornments) was detected, burrows suitable for burrowing owl were observed and the species is therefore considered to have the potential to occur on-site at any time. For these reasons, and in accordance with the THCP, WSP recommends (at a minimum) that a pre-construction (take avoidance) survey for burrowing owl be conducted to ensure potential impacts to and take of burrowing owl is entirely avoided. If burrowing owls are detected on-site, relocation may be required, in coordination with the CVCC and CDFW.

Like burrowing owl, impacts to other bird species protected by the MBTA while nesting, including but not limited to ground-nesting species such as mourning, killdeer and lesser nighthawk, require 100% avoidance. If initial project activities (i.e., site grading, vegetation removal/trimming, earthwork, etc.) are conducted during the nesting season (i.e., generally between 1 February and 31 August), a nesting bird clearance survey conducted by a qualified ornithologist or biologist immediately prior to scheduled disturbance is recommended to ensure impacts to nesting birds are entirely avoided. If project activities are conducted outside of the nesting season, a nesting bird clearance survey could likely be avoided. If nesting birds are found, no work buffer zones would need to be established and observed where no work would be permitted until young have fledged. Periodic monitoring of the nests is also recommended to document the status of the nest(s) and determine when the young have fledged and construction could proceed without impacting nesting birds. While there is no established protocol for nest avoidance, avoidance buffers of about 100–300 feet for unlisted songbirds and 500 feet for listed songbirds and raptors are generally recommended. If active bird nests are found, at any time, proposed project activities would need to be halted and postponed until young have fledged the nest and impacts to nesting birds are entirely avoided.

Covered Projects in the VFPA will be required to pay a mitigation fee that will fund Tribal acquisition and management of replacement habitat. The mitigation fee is $2,371 for each developed acre, collected prior to issuance of any permits allowing ground disturbance (typically grading permits or building permits).

Item 1C - Page 186
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

With participation in and compliance with the requirements of the THCP and implementation of the recommendations above, impacts to special status biological resources are anticipated to be mitigated to a less than significant level.

Item 1C - Page 187
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

8.0 LITERATURE CITED AND REFERENCES
California Bird Records Committee. 2023. Official California Checklist. Accessed online at:
http://californiabirds.org/ca_list.asp.

California Department of Fish and Game. 2012. Staff Report on burrowing owl Mitigation. State of California Natural Resources Agency. March 7, 2012.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2023a. California Natural Diversity Data Base, Rarefind 5. Report for the Cathedral City, Palm Springs, Palm View, Rancho Mirage and Seven Palms Valley, Calif. quadrangles. Accessed at:
dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/mapsanddata.asp
CDFW. 2023b. Special Animals List. July. Periodic publication. Sacramento, CA. Accessed online at: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109406&inline=1 CDFW. 2016. Complete List of Amphibian, Reptile, Bird, and Mammal Species in California.

Accessed online at: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=87155&inline California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2023a. CNPS Rare Plant Inventory. Report for theCathedral City, Palm Springs, Palm View, Rancho Mirage and Seven Palms Valley, Calif. quadrangles.

Accessed online at: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org
CNPS. 2023b. California Rare Plant Ranks. Accessed online at: https://www.cnps.org/rare- plants/california-rare-plant-ranks
Faulkner, D. K. 1990. Current Knowledge of the Biology of the Moth-lacewing Oliarces clara Banks (Insecta: Neuroptera: Ithonidae). Advances In Neuroptelology Proceeding of tile Thlrd International Symposium on Neuropterology, Berg en Dal, Kruger National Park, R, S. A. P. 197-203
Haug, E.A., B.A. Millsap, and M.S. Martell. 2011. Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/061 Helix Environmental Planning Inc. 2010. Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Tribal Habitat Conservation Plan. Accessed online at:
https://www.aguacaliente.org/documents/planning-department/THCPAugust2010.pdf Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California.

Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Game.

Jepson Flora Project (2 nd ed.). 2023. Jepson eFlora . Accessed online at:
http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html
Riverside County Information Technology. 2023. Map My County. Accessed online at:
http://mmc.rivcoit.org/MMC_Public/Custom/disclaimer/Default.htm Item 1C - Page 188
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024

Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A manual of California vegetation (2 nd ed.).

California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2023a. Web Soil Survey. Accessed online at:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/
USDA, NRCS. 2023. The PLANTS Database. National Plant Data Team. Accessed online at:
plants.usda.gov
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2023. Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. Accessed online at: https://www.fws.gov/law/migratory-bird-treaty-act-1918 USFWS. 2009. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; Listing Casey’s June Beetle (Dinacoma caseyi ) as Endangered and Designation of Critical Habitat, Proposed Rule.

Federal Register Vol. 74, No. 130: 32857 - 32875.

USFWS. 2011. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; Determination of Endangered Status for Casey’s June Beetle and Designation of Critical Habitat, Final Rule. Federal Register Vol. 76, No. 184: 58954-58998.

USFWS. 2013. Recovery outline for Casey’s June beetle ( Dinacoma caseyi). Technical report by USFWS Carlsbad Field Office dated March 2013. Federal Register Vol. 76, No. 184: 58954- 58998.

USFWS. 2016. Casey’s June Beetle (Dinacoma caseyi) Survey Guidelines. USFWS publication dated 16 March 2016.

USGS. 2023. Palm Springs, CA 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangle. Accessed online at:
https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht-bin/tv_browse.pl?id=54a9788dc3beac9d19ff015df67a8642 USGS. 2021a. Cathedral City, CA 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangle. Accessed online at:
https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht-bin/tv_browse.pl?id=cc57c2fef2b91684482ea87c04d8a672 USGS. 2021b. Rancho Mirage, CA 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangle. Accessed online at:
https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht-bin/tv_browse.pl?id=eeb049ad1c240aa0a4caab7186618de2 USGS. 2021c. Seven Palms Valley, CA 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangle. Accessed online at:
https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht-bin/tv_browse.pl?id=18c99c6cde5b0f79afedccfe12485ec0 USGS. 2023. US Topo and Historical Topographic Map Collection. Accessed online at:
https://apps.nationalmap.gov/viewer/
Item 1C - Page 189
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024
Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project BRAR & THCP Consistency Analysis Appendix A Vascular Plants
Item 1C - Page 190
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024
Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project BRAR & THCP Consistency Analysis

APPENDIX A
Species List: Vascular Plants
This list reports only plants observed on the site by this study. Other species may have been overlooked or undetectable due to their growing season. [†= special status species,* = non-native species, sp. = identified only to genus, cf= compares favorably with] Asteraceae Sunflower Family
Dicoria canescens desert dicoria
Palafoxia arida Spanish needles
Boraginaceae Borage Family
Johnstonella angustifolia narrow-leaved johnstonella
Brassicaceae Mustard Family
Brassica tournefortii* Saraha mustard*
Chenopodiaceae Goosefoot Family
Atriplex canescens four-wing saltbush
Salsola tragus* Russian thistle*
Ehretiaceae Ehretia Family
Tiquilia plicata fan-leaved tiquilia
Euphorbiaceae Spurge Family
Croton californicus California croton
Stillingia spinulosa broad leaved stillingia
Fabaceae Pea Family
Psorothamnus cf. emoryi Emory’sindigo bush
Papaveraceae Poppy Family
cf. Eschscholtzia minutiflora pygmy poppy
Zygophyllaceae Caltrop family
Larrea tridentata creosote bush
Poaceae Grass family
Schismus cf. barbatus* Mediterranean grass*
Item 1C - Page 191
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024
Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project BRAR & THCP Consistency Analysis Appendix B Vertebrate Animals
Item 1C - Page 192
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024
Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project BRAR & THCP Consistency Analysis

APPENDIX B
Species List: Vertebrate Animals
This list reports only the vertebrate animals observed or detected by WSP during the field assessment. Other species may have been overlooked or undetectable due to their activity patterns or weather conditions. [†= special status species, * = non-native species, sp. = identified only to genus, cf = compares favorably with]

VERTEBRATES

REPTILIA REPTILES
Iguanidae Iguanas
Dipsosaurus dorsalis desert iguana
Phrynosomatidae Spiny Lizards & Relatives
Callisaurus draconoides zebra-tailed lizard
Uta stansburiana side-blotched lizard
Teiidae Whiptails, Racerunners and Allies
Aspidoscelis tigris western whiptail

AVES BIRDS
Columbidae Pigeons & Doves
Streptopelia decaocto* Eurasian collared-dove*
Zenaida macroura mourning dove
Corvidae Crows & Ravens
Corvus corax common raven
Remizidae Penduline Tits & Verdins
Auriparus flaviceps verdin
Mimidae Mockingbirds & Thrashers
Mimus polyglottos northern mockingbird
Item 1C - Page 193
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024
Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project BRAR & THCP Consistency Analysis Appendix C Figures
Item 1C - Page 194
Path: \\sdg1-fs1\GIS\3554_NaturalResources\TerraNova_CrossleyRd\MXD\ReportFigures\Fig1_Project Location.mxd, jason.erlich 9/20/2023 Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) FIGURE 1
Project Location
Crossley Road Gas Station
and Convenience Store Project
Riverside County, California
°0 10.5
Miles
1 inch = 1 miles
Project Boundary
Item 1C - Page 195
E San Rafael Rd
C:
" 'C
.!:.
z
'''11
~
t
~ ..
j
EV1st:iCh1no ~ '-' z
• ..

C:
~
z
0 .,
Palm Springs
E R:amon Rd "O
a::
0 -a;
Vista Chino
C
::,
IJ)
II)
u
w ('""- ..
rn "squiteAve D111sh ~ ••Dr
E Palm Canyon Dr
~
.t-
o:>
~
i
0 <I)
i5
E
~
• ~
0 Cathedral
City
Rancho Mirage
R;imon Rd
O,nah SI
Gerald Ford [
Frank S1natr
Path: \\sdg1-fs1\GIS\3554_NaturalResources\TerraNova_CrossleyRd\MXD\ReportFigures\Fig2_Topo.mxd, jason.erlich 9/20/2023 0 2,0001,000
Feet °
Service Layer Credits: Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed FIGURE 2
USGS 7.5' Topo Quad: Cathedral City
Crossley Road Gas Station
and Convenience Store Project
Riverside County, California
1 inch = 2,000 feet
Project Boundary
Item 1C - Page 196
'''11
' ; 1 Hi ,.tf:• .. :.: . ·······
[
· - •• ~ •• ~,.~'1'~-0--!i:.0 ,0,-'9=~ V-'!. -'l"l-'II- ~, 'i: :: : tr: e· ... c:r- : :: ·
11:..,1 : ::1:
.. . . ..
. . . . . . . .
: : : : : : ~ : . ..... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : ...... . . . . . . : ... . :

Path: \\sdg1-fs1\GIS\3554_NaturalResources\TerraNova_CrossleyRd\MXD\ReportFigures\Fig4_Soils.mxd, jason.erlich 9/20/2023 MaB
0 10050
Feet °
Service Layer Credits: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors FIGURE 3
So
ils
Crossley Road Gas Station
and Convenience Store Project
Riverside County, California
1 inch = 100 feet
Project Boundary
MaB - Myoma fine sand,
0 to 5 percent slopes
Item 1C - Page 197'''11
CJ
1111
Path: \\sdg1-fs1\GIS\3554_NaturalResources\TerraNova_CrossleyRd\MXD\ReportFigures\Fig5_Vegetation.mxd, jason.erlich 9/20/2023 0 10050
Feet °
Service Layer Credits: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors FIGURE 4
Veg
etation Communities
Crossley Road Gas Station
and Convenience Store Project
Riverside County, California
1 inch = 100 feet
Project Boundary
Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub
Item 1C - Page 198
'''11
CJ
1111
FIGURE 5
Proposed Site Development Plan
Crossley Road Gas Station
and Convenience Store Project
Riverside County, California
Path: Q:\3554_NaturalResources\TerraNova_CrossleyRd_322520146\MXD\ReportFigures\Fig5_PropSiteDevPlan.mxd, USJE715251 3/7/2024 °
Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community No Scale
Item 1C - Page 199
W"'-fll)--~-~-'!=
I -~/ \~_·_·- ________ _ ____ _
~
7 ,000 SF 0-STO RE'
·, ;, ·,·
~)·
~ 12 MPDS
. i ~ i .i. .i . .i

I I I I
LOT AREA: 155,405 SF AFTER DEDICATlotlS
'''11
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024
Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project BRAR & THCP Consistency Analysis Appendix D Photographic Exhibits
Item 1C - Page 200
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024
Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project BRAR & THCP Consistency Analysis Photograph 1 - Representative condition of site, soils, and vegetation Photograph 2-Representative condition of site, soils, and vegetation Item 1C - Page 201
E SE I s SW
60 00 120 10 180 210 240
• l • l • l • l • l • l • l • l • l • l • l • l • l • l • l •l• l • l • I o 83°E (T) i> 33°48'33" N, 11s•297•w ±13ft • 361ft
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024
Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project BRAR & THCP Consistency Analysis Photograph 3 – Potentially suitable burrow for burrowing owl Photograph 4 – Potentially suitable burrow for burrowing owl Item 1C - Page 202
NE E I SE s
30 60 00 120 150 te.o
•l • l • l • l • l • l • l • l •l • l• l •l • l • l •l • l• l •I• 0 76°E (TI '.!) 33°48'33.N, 116°29'4"W t9ft • 357ft
-..
•
,. ,,
Biological Resources Assessment Report & Agua Caliente Tribal HCP Consistency Analysis Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project March 2024
Crossley Road Fuel Station & Convenience Store Development Project BRAR & THCP Consistency Analysis Photograph 5 – Representative condition of site, soils, and vegetation Photograph 6 – Representative condition of site, soils, and vegetation Item 1C - Page 203
NE E I SE s
30 60 90 120 150 160 2
i•l • l • l•l•l• l•l•l•l•l•l•l•l• l•l•l•l•I •
0112°E (T) @33°48 '35"N, 116°29'7"W ±13ft • 353ft
...
:.,,,.... -... -\.:-,;__ . _,..
'!!, ff. NW 330 I ~ ,c NE &
l•l•l•l•l•l•l•t• l • l •l•l•l•l•l•l•l•l•I•
C

Appendix C

Cultural Resource Study
Item 1C - Page 204
Cultural Resource Survey in Support of the Proposed
Agua Caliente Fuel Palm Springs Gas Station at the
Intersection of Dinah Shore Drive and Crossley Road in
Palm Springs, California
Felicia V . De Peña, Alyssa Canoff, and James J. Clark
Prepared for
Nicole Criste
T
erra Nova Planning and Research, Inc.
42635 Melanie Place, Ste. 101
Palm Desert, CA 92211
Technical Report 23-89
Statistical Research, Inc.

Redlands, California
Item 1C - Page 205
Item 1C - Page 206
Cultural Resource Survey in Support of the Proposed
Agua Caliente Fuel Palm Springs Gas Station at the
Intersection of Dinah Shore Drive and Crossley Road in
Palm Springs, California
Felicia V . De Peña, Alyssa Canoff, and James J. Clark

Prepared for
Nicole Criste
Terra Nova Planning and Research, Inc.
42635 Melanie Place, Ste. 101
Palm Desert, CA 92211

Technical Report 23-89
Statistical Research, Inc.

Redlands, California

February 2024
Item 1C - Page 207
Item 1C - Page 208

iii

CONTENTS

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... v List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. v Management Summary ............................................................................................................................... vii Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Regulatory Context ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Personnel ............................................................................................................. ............................. 1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................................................... 4 Geology .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Plant Communities ................................................................................................................................. 5 Animal Communities ............................................................................................................................. 5 Cultural Setting ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Prehistoric Background .......................................................................................................................... 6 The Paleoindian Period (12,000–8000
B.P.) .................................................................................... 6 The Archaic Period (8000–1500 B.P.) .............................................................................................. 6 The Late Prehistoric Period (1500–200 B.P.) ................................................................................... 7 Ethnographic Background ...................................................................................................................... 7 Historical-Period Background ................................................................................................................ 8 Cultural Resource Records Search ................................................................................................................ 9 Records-Search Results .......................................................................................................................... 9 Previous Archaeological Research in the Coachella Valley.................................................................. 13 Archival Research ................................................................................................................................. 14 Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File Search ............................................................ 14 Survey Methods .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Survey Results ............................................................................................................................................. 15 Management Recommendations .................................................................................................... ...... 15 References Cited ......................................................................................................................................... 18 Appendix A. Native American Heritage Commission Tribal-Consultation Documentation .................... A.1 Item 1C - Page 209

Item 1C - Page 210

v

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Project vicinity map ....................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Project location map ...................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3. Map showing the locations of selected previous cultural resource studies conducted within the Project records-search area ............................................................................................................. 10 Figure 4. Results map showing modern disturbances ................................................................................. 16 Figure 5. Project area overview showing modern disturbances .................................................................. 17 Figure 6. Project area overview showing modern disturbances .................................................................. 17

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Previously Conducted Cultural Resource Studies in the Project Area .......................................... 11 Table 2. Previously Recorded Archaeological Site within the Project Area ............................................... 12

Item 1C - Page 211

Item 1C - Page 212

vii

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

Statistical Research, Inc. (SRI), conducted a cultura l resource study in support of the proposed gas station and convenience store at the intersection of Dinah Shore Drive and Lawrence Crossley Road (the Project).

The Project area is in Section 20 of Township 4 S outh, Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, on the 2015 Cathedral City, California, 7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey topographic quadrangle. The Project is at the northwest corner of the Dinah Shore Drive and Lawrence Crossley Road intersection, on four parcels of Agua Caliente Reservation fee la nd (Assessor’s Parcel Nos. 680-564-002, 680-564-014, 680-564-017, and 680-564-018) covering approximately 3.7 acres in Palm Springs, California.

The cultural resource study began with a records search and literature review for the 3.68-acre Project area. The records search identified 1 previously recorded historical-period resource within the 1-mile (1.6- km) records-search buffer around the Project area, bu t no previously recorded resources were identified within the Project area. The records search revealed that 100 percent of the Project area has been previously surveyed for cultural resources. Based on geoarchaeologi cal analysis of soil maps of the Project area and the presence of nearby water features, there is a high probability of buried cultural resources in the Project area.

After the records search, SRI surveyed the 3.69-acre Project area, which was dominated by sandy allu- vium and sparse desert vegetation and displayed good ground visibility. No prehistoric or historical-period artifacts or sites were identified in the project area during the survey.

Although no cultural resources were identified in the Project area, it is still sensitive for buried prehis- toric cultural resources. SRI recommends that a Secr etary of the Interior– (SOI-) qualified archaeologist and an Agua Caliente Cultural Monitor be present for all ground-disturbing activities related to the devel- opment.

Item 1C - Page 213

Item 1C - Page 214

1 Introduction
Statistical Research, Inc. (SRI), conducted a cultura l resource study in support of the proposed gas station and convenience store at the intersection of Dinah Shore Drive and Lawrence Crossley Road (the Project).

The Project area is in Section 20 of Township 4 S outh, Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, on the 2015 Cathedral City, California, 7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangle (Figure 1). The Project is at the northwest corner of the Dinah Shore Drive and Lawrence Crossley Road intersection, on four parcels of Agua Caliente Reservation fee land (A ssessor’s Parcel Nos. 680-564-002, 680-564-014, 680-564-017, and 680-564-018) covering appr oximately 3.7 acres in Palm Springs, Califor- nia (Figure 2).

Regulatory Context
The proposed Project is subject to the National En vironmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA; 42 U.S. Code [USC] 4321 et seq. ), and its implementing regulations (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1500–1508). Under the NEPA, a federal agency must determine whether its proposed major actions will significantly impact the environment, including imp acts to cultural, historical, and tribal resources.

There are currently no conditions of approval for the Project; instead, this cultural resource survey was requested by the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indi ans (ACBCI) and will be a component of a future Environmental Assessment submittal for the Project, in compliance with both the ACBCI Tribal Environ- mental Policy Act and the NEPA (42 USC 4321 et seq.), for permitting of the construction of the proposed gas station at the intersection of Dinah Shore Drive and Lawrence Crossley Road.

The NEPA enacted a continuing federal policy that di rects “a systematic, interdisciplinary approach” to planning and decision-making and requires environmental statements for “major Federal actions signifi- cantly affecting the quality of the human environm ent” (42 USC 4332[2][a–b]). The Council on Environ- mental Quality’s implementing regulations (40 CFR 1 500–1508) require federal agencies to identify and assess reasonable alternatives to proposed actions that will restore and enhance the quality of the human environment and that will avoid or minimize adverse environmental impacts. Federal agencies are further directed to emphasize significant environmental issues in project planning and to integrate impact studies required by other environmental laws and Executive Orders (EOs) into the NEPA process. The NEPA pro- cess should therefore be seen as an overall framework for the environmental evaluation of federal actions.

Project Personnel
All SRI personnel meet the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI’s) Professional Qualifications Standards in their respective disciplines. The personnel involved with the implementation of this Project have extensive expe- rience in the region and have worked on a number of cultural resource surveys across southern California. • James Clark, M.A., Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA), principal investigator • Felicia V . De Peña, Ph.D., RPA, senior project director • Alyssa Canoff, M.A., RPA, project director
Item 1C - Page 215

2 Figure 1. Project vicinity map.

Item 1C - Page 216
yll •111

SAN JACINTO

SKY ALLEY
aim S rings
- Project area
Cat h dr
City
Thou rd
P lms
R ncho Mir e1
- Project area
Topographic data from :
http://services .a rcgisonli ne .comlarcg is/services
Statist ical Researc h, Inc., October 2023
Im De sert
0 -0
UJDI 0
Bermu::t
ln:lon W.;, lls
La Quinta
miles 5
--kilometers
une
L
N
UTM
""'

3 Figure 2. Project location map.

Item 1C - Page 217
/
PALM SPR t

UNIC PAL
c,,

7.t
ii "'i 406 - ---­...... ·-·~.

GUA C A LIE TE
DlA. R 0 SERVATIO
Topographic data from:
http:/lservices .a rcgisonli ne .comi'arcg is/services
Statistical Research, Inc., October 2023
?~ ....
• <
.. . : : . . . .
: : : : :
. . . . ... 1
O meters 500
- .irCS. -
0 feet 1,000
ALI
L
N
UTM
goo

4 Environmental Setting
The Project area is in the western part of the Coachella Valley, a low valley sandwiched between the Santa Rosa Mountains to the south and southeast and the Little San Bernardino Mountains to the north. The valley is part of the Colorado Desert geomorphic province, an area that includes both sides of the lower Colorado River and the Coachella and Imperial Valleys of California (Jenkins 1980).

High temperatures during the summer months aver age between 38°C and 42°C (100°F and 108°F, re- spectively). During the winter, the mean temperature fa lls to about 24°C (75°F) during the day, and lows reach near 4°C (40°F) at night. The average annual preci pitation in the area is 14. 4 cm (5.7 inches), most of which falls between December and March (WorldClimate.com 2021), although occasional summer thun- derstorms in August and September provide additional rainfall.

Geology
The Coachella Valley forms the northern extent of the Salton Trough, a northwest–southeast-trending de- pression that reaches from the San Gorgonio Pass to the Gulf of California 280 km (174 miles) to the south.

The valley has been heavily shaped by tectonic forces that involve the interaction of the Pacific and the North American Plates along the San Andreas Fault system (Harden 2004). The valley is a fault-bound depression, and the San Andreas Fault runs along its northern margin. The Banning Fault, a subordinate fault to the San Andreas Fault, runs east–west through the valley between the San Andreas Fault and the San Jacinto Fault to the west. Folding in the earth’s crust caused by the faults has blocked the flow of underground aquifers and resulted in numerous springs and pools. Thes e water sources were crucial re- sources for prehistoric groups (Wilke 1978). The Whitewater River was the other major source of water in the Coachella Valley. The river starts on the flanks on Mount San Gorgonio and enters the Coachella Valley through the Banning Pass, running along the southern e dge of the valley approximately 1 km (0.61 mile) south of the Project area.

The mountain ranges surrounding the Coachella Valley are uplifted blocks of continental crust. The Santa Rosa Mountains are at the northern end of the Peninsular Ranges, a series of mountain ranges running from the Los Angeles Basin southeastward to the tip of the Baja Peninsula (Jahns 1954:3). The valley forms a natural border between the coastal areas to the west and the deserts to the east. The mountains are com- posed of plutonic intrusions that have been uplifted through tectonic activity. The highest point is San Jacinto Mountain, at 3,307 m (10,849 feet) above mean sea level (AMSL), towering above the present-day city of Palm Springs. The Little San Bernardino Mountain s are part of the Transverse Ranges, a series of east–west-trending mountain ranges si milar in composition to the Peninsular Ranges and including large masses of Mesozoic Era plutonic rocks. The summits of the Transverse Ranges exceed 3,500 m (11,483 feet) AMSL at San Gorgonio Peak (Bailey and Jahns 1954).

Much of the valley bottom is at or below sea level, and the deepest areas dip to 80 m (263 feet) below sea level. The Project area is in the middle of the valle y, at an elevation of approximately 75 m (246 feet) AMSL. Both alluvial and aeolian se diments are present in the valley. Geologic mapping of Quaternary sediments in the area by Lundstrom et al. (2001) indicated that alluvial-fan surfaces of probable late Holo- cene age are extensive and show very weak, nonoxidized soils. Recent aeolian sand is also common in the area and has been mapped as dunes and sand ramps fo rming mantles on slopes in the valley (Lundstrom et al. 2001).

The hot and dry climate of the Coachella Valley would normally place significant restrictions on human activities. However, the valley has been inundated repeatedly in the past—a resu lt of flooding brought on by changes in the course of the Colorado River. Over many episodes, the river left its banks and flooded the Salton Trough, resulting in the creation of ancient Lake Cahuilla, also referred to as Blake’s Sea or Lake LaConte (Wilke 1978). At its maximum, the lake reached 184 km (114 miles) long, 54 km (34 miles) wide, and 96 m (315 feet) deep, inundating a considerable portion of the valley. When the Colorado River resumed Item 1C - Page 218

5 its normal course, the lake began to dry. Recent studies have suggested that it would have taken approximately 56 years for the lake to be completely dry after having reached the high-water mark (Laylander 1997).

Between 800 and 300 B.P., there have been at least three documented cycles of flooding and desiccation, but it is not clear whether the lake at that time was primarily full and experienced only minor drying epi- sodes, mostly empty and only occas ionally inundated, or somewhere in-between (Laylander 1997; Waters 1983; Wilke 1978; see also Schaefer and Laylander 200 7). The most-recent stand of Lake Cahuilla may have been brief, occurring between 700 and 500 B.P.

Much of the prehistoric occupation of the Coachella Valley appears to have been correlated to the pres- ence of Lake Cahuilla. The earliest known sites in the valley date to the Late Archaic period, roughly 4000– 1500 B.P. (Love and Dahdul 2002). Most of these sites are at or near the ancient lakeshore, as are several sites dating to the Late Prehistoric period (Sutton and Wilke 1988; Wilke 1978). The Project area is approx- imately 10 km (6 miles) northwest of the maximum s horeline of Lake Cahuilla. Instead of the lacustrine resources available at the lakeside, human use of the Project area would have focused primarily on resources available in the desert, nearby oases, and along the Whitewater River wash.

Plant Communities
The Coachella Valley is part of the Sonoran Life Z one and is characterized by the Creosote Bush Scrub plant community (Hall and Grinnell 1919; Munz 1974; Schoenherr 1992). This life zone is characterized by the presence of creosote bush (Larrea tridentata), mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa), brittlebush (Encelia farinosa), cholla and prickly pear cacti (Opuntia spp.), chuparosa (Beloperone californica), desert lavender (Hyptis emoryi), sage (Salvia spp.), and various grasses. California fan palms ( Washingtonia filifera), the only species of palm native to California, are also present at oases surrounding the valley. Desert oases also provide habitat for a number of other species, including screwbean mesquite ( Prosopis pubescens) and Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii). Many of the plants known to the historical-period Cahuilla (the cultural group that occupied the Coachella Valley at the time of European contact) were medicinal or ther- apeutic in nature (for a detailed discussion, see Bean and Saubel 1972).

Animal Communities
A number of desert animals inhabit the greater Coache lla Valley. They include mammals, such as coyotes (Canis latrans ), gray foxes ( Urocyon cinereoargenteus), various mouse species ( Peromyscus spp. and Perognathus spp.), squirrels ( Spermophilus [Citellus] spp.), and lagomorphs ( Lepus californicus and Syl- vilagus audubonii ); reptiles, including rattlesnakes (Crotalus spp.) and a variety of lizards ( Crotaphy- tus spp., Dipsosaurus spp., Sceloporus spp., Streptosaurus spp., and Urosaurus spp.); and birds, such as turkey vultures ( Cathartes aura ), red-tailed hawks ( Buteo jamaicensis ), mourning doves ( Zenaida macroura), and ravens ( Corvus corax). During prehistoric times and up to the early twentieth century, pronghorns ( Antilocapra americana ) were common in the Coachella Valley, but they have since been pushed out by modern development (Jaeger 1965). Besides representing s ources of food, many of the ani- mals were important components of Ca huilla rituals, and their bones have been found in ritual contexts at sites in Tahquitz Canyon (see Bean et al. 1995).

Cultural Setting
The following section describes the general chronological sequence of cultural development in the Colorado Desert, as it is currently understood.

Item 1C - Page 219

6 Prehistoric Background
The prehistory of the Colorado Desert, including the northern Coachella Valley, is poorly understood, alt- hough a number of recent studies have greatly improve d our knowledge. Treatments of the region include the classic work of Rogers (1945, 1966) and the mo re-recent works of Schaefer (1994), Love and Dahdul (2002), and Schaefer and Laylander (2007). Schaefer (1994) defined three principal prehistoric periods: the Paleoindian, Archaic, and Late Prehistoric periods (see also Love and Dahdul 2002); that sequence is gen- erally followed below.

The Paleoindian Period (12,000–8000 B.P.)
Paleoindian period groups, probably with Clovis complex technology, occupied much of California begin- ning about 12,000 years ago. However, there is very little evidence of Paleoindian period occupation of the northern Coachella Valley. The reasons for this are uncl ear but may be related to a lack of habitat for the large game hunted by Clovis people.

Across much of western North America, the Clovis complex developed into the Western Stemmed Point tradition or Western Pluvial Lakes tradition after 10,000 B.P. (Bedwell 1973), probably in response to the warming and drying climate of the early Holocene. Th is tradition is characterized by crescents and large stemmed, shouldered, and lanceolate points (Willig and Aikens 1988:3). This cultural assemblage is com- monly called San Dieguito in southern California and had an economy presumably based on the exploitation of marsh plants, fish, freshwater shellfish, and large and small game (Rogers 1966). Rogers had originally defined three distinct phases associated with the San Dieguito cultures, but further excavations at the sites where he worked have failed to find evidence to support these distinctions (Vaughan 1982; Warren 1967:171).

There is little evidence of a San Dieguito presence in the northern Coachella Valley—probably just a few “small, mobile bands exploiting small and large game and collecting seasonally available wild plants” (Schaefer 1994:63; see also Schaefer and Laylander 2007). The reasons for this are unclear, but the lack of an early occupation may indicate that Lake Cahuilla was not inundated during this time period.

The Archaic Period (8000–1500 B.P.)
Beginning about 8,000 years ago, the climate became hotter and drier, and it appears that the northern Coachella Valley was basically abandoned at that time (Schaefer 1994:64). At best, the record suggests only minor occupation by relatively few people. It appears that when the climate began to cool after about 4,000 years ago, during the Late Archaic period, th e Colorado Desert was reoccupied (Love and Dahdul 2002; Schaefer 1994:64), and several archaeological sites in the northern Coachella Valley are dated to that time. It seems that as with later occupation, much of the occupation centered on the shores of Lake Cahuilla.

However, very little is known about overall Late Archaic period adaptations or social structure.

One of the best-documented Late Archaic period site s in the Colorado Desert is the Indian Hill Rock- shelter, near Anza-Borrego State Park (McDonald 1992; Wilke et al. 1986), approximately 55 km (34 miles) south of the Project area. Excavators found a number of rock-lined storage pits as well as hearths and Elko Eared projectile points. Radiocarbon dates from these levels indicated that they had been occupied approx- imately 4,000 years ago. McDonald (1992) postulated that the site was a base camp for hunter-gatherers who likely roamed over a large area in search of food. A rockshelter from Tahquitz Canyon also contained rock-lined pits and similar artifacts, but no radiocarbon dates were taken at the site; so, its true age is unclear (Schaefer 2002). Taken together, these two sites suggest that people lived in highly mobile bands and took advantage of a variety of resources in the area.

Excavations at two sites (CA-RIV-1827 and CA-RIV-2642) near Desert Hot Springs, 20 km (12 miles) northwest of the Project area, encountered deposits dating to the transition from the Late Archaic period to the Late Prehistoric period, approximately 1200–1000
B.P. (Dahdul et al. 2008; Drover 1982, 1988; Hogan
Item 1C - Page 220

7 et al. 2010). These sites contained evidence to suggest habitation, including hearth features; activity surfaces and a variety of artifact types, such as flaked stone debitage; faunal remains; and possible human remains.

These sites are adjacent to the ethnohistorically known Seven Palms Rancheria (CA-RIV-154), and it is likely that they represent an early occupation of the village.

The Late Prehistoric Period (1500–200 B.P.)
Beginning about 1500 B.P., Yuman (or Patayan) agricultural groups in the Colorado River area began to influence Colorado Desert groups, particularly in the Coachella Valley. This Patayan pattern included a preceramic phase (Rogers 1945:170; Warren 1984; Wa ters 1982a, 1982b) and three ceramic phases, Patayan I (ca. 1500–1000 B.P.), Patayan II (ca. 1000–500 B.P.), and Patayan III (after ca. 500 B.P.). After about 1000 B.P. (Patayan II), a number of cultural traits, including new ceramic types, small triangular points, and cremations, moved westward from the Colorado River, either through diffusion or perhaps car- ried by some migrating Yuman people. Whichever the case, long-distance trade networks were established between the Coachella Valley and the Colorado River.

Agricultural crops were also probably introduced into the area during this time period. Along the Col- orado River, domesticated crops constituted up to ha lf the Yuman diet (Castetter and Bell 1951). Ethno- graphically (see below), the Cahuilla were known to have large, walk-in wells that could have been used in pot irrigation (Bean and Mason 1962), although small check dams and other simple irrigation technologies likely also were used (Wilke and Lawton 1975:28).

The Late Prehistoric period groups that occupied the Coachella Valley were the direct ancestors of the ethnographic Cahuilla. This period represents a significant increase in human occupation of the valley, and several large archaeological sites from this period have been identified (for examples, see Bean et al. 1995; Schaefer 1994; Sutton and Wilke 1988; Wilke 1978).

Ethnographic Background
The aboriginal group that occupied the northern Coachella Valley during the historical period was the Desert Cahuilla. The Desert, Mountain, and Pass Cahuilla constituted the ethnographic Cahuilla. The Cahuilla spoke a language of the Takic branch of Northern Uto-Aztecan (see Goddard 1996:Table 3), and the Desert Cahuilla spoke a distinct dialect of Cahuilla. Descriptions of Cahuilla culture are present in works by Bar- rows (1900), Hooper (1920), Curtis (1926), Strong (1929), and Bean (1972, 1978). There have been few archaeological studies of the historical-period Cahuilla, but testing at the former Mission Creek Indian Res- ervation, approximately 42 km (26 miles) northwest of the Project area, identified occupations stretching from the Late Prehistoric period into the early twentieth century (Altschul 1986). Similarly, excavations at Tahquitz Canyon (Bean et al. 1995), 20 km (12 miles) west of the Project area, found a large village com- plex dating between A.D. 1600 and 1870.

Villages were located in areas with access to a number of resources, either at springs or where wells could be easily dug. As a result, most villages relied on hand-excavated walk-in wells for water. These wells were dug to depths of about 6 m (20 feet), to reach th e water table. Villages were loose clusters of houses spread over an area up to 1 km (0.6 mile) across. Some of the houses were large (e.g., 6 m [20 feet] in length), and others were smaller, and at least one large ceremonial structure was present in each village (Bean 1972:72). Once established, villages were considered permanent (Bean 1972:74) and were occupied by lineages. Villages were connected to each other by a complex system of trails.

The Cahuilla were organized into moieties and tribel ets (i.e., clans) and then into lineages. The two moieties were the túktem (Wildcats) and ‘istam (Coyotes; Bean 1978; Garcia et al. 2011). The lineages were landholding groups, and each occupied its own village. Th e adjacent lineage, with its own village, would generally belong to the other moiety. That arrangement served to ensure access to different habitats. Each village was economically independent.

Item 1C - Page 221

8 The Desert Cahuilla exploited a large number of plant species (Barrows 1900; Bean and Saubel 1972), and mesquite (Prosopis spp.) on the valley floor was the primary staple. Other important resources, such as agave (Agave deserti), pinyon (Pinus spp.), and acorns (Quercus spp.), were obtained in the mountains to the west. More than 150 species of plants were used for foods, fibers, medicines, manufactures, and dyes.

The Cahuilla exploited a variety of animals, including deer ( Odocoileus sp.) and mountain sheep ( Ovis canadensis) from mountain habitats and pronghorn and smaller animals, such as rabbits and rodents, from desert habitats.

The Desert Cahuilla also grew a few agricultural crops—namely, corn, beans, and squash—that were probably obtained from Native peoples along the Colorado River to the east. Crops were irrigated from springs (Wilke and Lawton 1975). With the arrival of Europeans, wheat, melons, barley, and fruit trees were added (Bean and Mason 1962; Lawton and Bean 1968). By the late eighteenth century, the Cahuilla had adopted ranching as an important industry and also worked as wage laborers on the railroads and on farms and ranches.

After the smallpox and measles epidemic of 1863, the Cahuilla population, originally perhaps as many as 3,000 people, declined rapidly. In addition, the emigration of young people seeking work in the metro- politan areas of southern California resulted in the movement of many Cahuilla away from their traditional areas (Harvey 1967). In 1974, approximately 900 people claimed Cahuilla descent, and most of them lived on one of the many Cahuilla reservations in inland southern California (Garcia et al. 2011:21).

The ACBCI was founded in 1876 by an EO of Pres ident Ulysses S. Grant and was expanded in 1877 and 1907. The reservation covers roughly 31,420 acres and consists of a ll even-numbered sections and all unsurveyed portions of Township 4 South, Ranges 4 a nd 5 East, and Township 5 South, Range 4 East, on the San Bernardino Meridian, with the exception of sections already given out by the government (Garcia et al. 2011:21). The odd-numbered sections had already b een given to railroads as an incentive to develop cross-country rail lines, and so, the reservation appe ars as a checkerboard pattern on maps. In 1891, the U.S. Congress passed the Mission Indian Relief Act, which authorized allotments of reservation land to be given to individuals. The allotment elections were finally approved by the SOI as part of the Agua Caliente Equalization Act of 1959 (25 USC 951 et seq.]), which finalized the individual Native American allotments and set aside certain lands for Tribal use and cemeter ies. The ACBCI is currently the largest single land- owner in the City of Palm Springs. The Tribe is actively acquiring other nonreservation land.

Historical-Period Background
The extreme aridity of the Colorado Desert acted as a deterrent to many early explorers. The earliest rec- orded European visit to the Coachella Valley was ma de in the winter of 1823–1824 by José Romero, the leader of an expedition attempting to reach the Colorado River by a new route (Bean and Mason 1962).

Until the mid-nineteenth century, however, most nonnative forays into the area were confined to the estab- lished prehistoric trail systems. A number of prehistoric trails passed through the western Coachella Valley, including the important Cocomaricopa Trail, which connected Arizona with the cultures along the southern California coast (Bean and Vane 1995).

In 1853, William P. Blake (1857) described the Co achella Valley during the Pacific Railroad Survey expedition, recorded the general environment, noted th e locations of Native American villages, described Native American agriculture in the valley, and recorded some oral traditions of the Native Americans con- cerning life around ancient Lake Cahuilla. In 1855 a nd 1856, the U.S. Land Office Survey surveyed the valley and divided it into townships and sections (Wilke and Lawton 1975).

European settlement of the valley intensified after the completion of the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1877 (Heath 1945). The Edom siding was located on the rail line, approximately 5.8 km (3.6 miles) north- west of the Project area, where there was a grove of trees and four dwellings to house section hands and their families (Moore 1968:13; Thousand Palms Chamber of Commerce 2023). In the 1880s, the Homestead Act and the Desert Land Act opened much public land in the area to private development. Farming was the primary economic activity in the valley and was supported by a variety of wells that accessed sizable un- derground water resources. In 1948–1949, construction of the Coachella Canal supplied additional water to Item 1C - Page 222

9 the valley. Much of the area to the east of the Project area, around the City of Indio, is still an important agricultural center. Vegetables, cotton, citrus, and particularly dates were, and still are, important cash crops.

The development of the state highway system in the early twentieth century opened the valley to further development. State Route 99 (now Varner Road) was completed through the area in 1912. The Coachella Valley became a popular vacation spot for the well-to- do in the Los Angeles Basin. Resorts and hotels, equestrian centers, and, by the mid-twentieth century, country clubs appeared throughout the valley. In par- ticular, the Palm Springs area was made famous by Cary Grant, Bob Hope, and Lucille Ball, among others.

Ramon Road was graded between Palm Springs a nd Edom in 1942 (Thousand Palms Chamber of Com- merce 2023). When Interstate 10 was completed along its current alignment in 1957, it bypassed the Edom business district. Access was improved in 1962, the settlement of Edom was renamed Thousand Palms, and development quickly followed (Thousand Palms Chamber of Commerce 2023). The City of Rancho Mirage developed as a resort community after World War II and was incorporated in 1973 (Newman et al. 2008:21).

During the late twentieth century, development in the Coachella valley expanded rapidly, and scores of country clubs and housing developments appeared along U.S. Highway 111 and Interstate 10. The advent of Native American gaming initiatives has also driven economic development in the valley: at least three casino resorts are present in the valley, and several others are located nearby.

Cultural Resource Records Search
A cultural resource records-search update was conducted by SRI for the Project area at the California His- torical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Eastern Information Center (EIC), Department of Anthro- pology, University of California, Riverside. The records search included examination of all reports from previous archaeological surveys conducted within a 1-m ile (1.6-km) radius of the Project area, as well as all previously recorded historical-period and prehistoric cultural resources within the same 1-mile (1.6-km) radius.

In addition to the research conducted at the CHRIS EIC, archival studies were conducted at other li- braries, research institutions, and government agencies. Valuable data were gathered from these repositories in regard to both prehistoric and historical-period re sources within the Project area. Historical maps were consulted for information regarding specific historical-period land use in and around the Project area. The resources consulted also included historical USGS topographic maps and historic aerial photography.

Records-Search Results
The records search indicated that five previously conducted projects included work in portions of the Project area (Figure 3; Table 1). Together, these studies included 100 percent of the current Project area. Another 32 reports were related to areas within the 1-mile (1.6-km) records-search buffer.

Within the Project area, the first documented ar chaeological work occurred in 1978, when Jennifer Taschek-Ball (1978) with the Department of Anth ropology at San Diego State University conducted a 1,975-acre survey on behalf of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. Three cultural resources were identified, all of which were either lithic scatters or lithic isolates.

Item 1C - Page 223

10 Figure 3. Map showing the locations of selected previous cultural resource studies conducted within the Project records-search area.

Item 1C - Page 224
R
c:J Project area Previous report (polygon)
11 r--, L.......J Records-search area L __ 1 Previous report overv iew (point)  Previous report (point), Rl-1 0008/Rl-11193
0 meters 500 ~ Topographic data :
http://servlces.arcgisonline.coml'arcgis/services
Statistical Research, Inc., NoverTtler 2023
.... •-- N o reel 1,000 UTM
"""

11 Table 1. Previously Conducted Cultural Resource Studies in the Project Area Report No. Report Author(s) Report Year Report Type Project Location RI-00112 Philip J. Wilke 1973 archaeological, field study records-search area RI-00153 Leslie E. Wildesen 1974 archaeologi cal, field study records-search area RI-00181 Jennifer Taschek-Ball 1978 arch aeological, field study Project area RI-00254 Donald E. Lipp 1977 archaeological, field study records-search area RI-00735 James D. Swenson 1979 archaeological , field study records-search area RI-01143 Westec Services, Inc. 1980 archaeological, field study r ecords-search area RI-01846 Swenson, James D. 1985 archaeologi cal, field study records-search area RI-01847 Swenson, James D. 1984 archaeologi cal, field study records-search area RI-02638 Bruce Love and Bai “Tom” Tang 1994 arch itectural/historical records-search area RI-03528 Blodgett, Leslie J. 1992 archaeologi cal, field study records-search area RI-03644 Steven A. Moffitt 1993 archaeologi cal, field study records-search area RI-03756 Bruce Love and Steven A. Moffitt 1994 ar chaeological, field study records-search area RI-04458 Robert S. White and Laurie S. White 1999 archaeological, field study records-search area RI-04483 Andrew R. Pigniolo and Stephanie
Murray
2002 archaeological, field study records-search area
RI-05782 Bruce Love, Bai “Tom” Tang, Daniel
Ballester, and Mariam Dahdul
2002 archaeological, field study records-search area
RI-05838 Bruce Love, Bai “Tom” Tang,
Mariam Dahdul, and Adrian Moreno
Sanchez
2001 archaeological, field study Project area
RI-05947 Bai “Tom” Tang, Michael Hogan,
Casey Tibbet, and Daniel Ballester
2003 archaeological, field study records-search area
RI-06062 Patrick McGinnis, and Michael
Baksh
2004 archaeological, field study records-search area
RI-06371 Bai “Tom” Tang, Michael Hogan,
Matthew Wetherbee, Daniel
Ballester, and John J. Eddy
2005 archaeological, field study records-search area
RI-07517 Scott Crull 2007 archaeological, field study records-search area RI-08339 Deidre Encarnacion and Daniel
Ballester
2010 archaeological, evaluation,
field study, literature search
records-search area
RI-08612 Antonina M. Delu 2010 archaeologi cal, monitoring records-search area RI-08695 Wayne H. Bonner and Arabesque
Said
2011 archaeological, field study records-search area
RI-09009 Bai “Tom” Tang 2014 archaeological, evaluation, field study, literature search
records-search area
RI-09179 Michael Hogan 2014 architectural/historical, field study
records-search area
RI-09728 Josh Smallwood 2015 archaeological,
architectural/historical,
literature search
records-search area
RI-09850 Joan George, Dennis McDougall,
and Vanesa Mirro
2017 archaeological , literature
search
records-search area
continued on next page
Item 1C - Page 225

12 Report No. Report Author(s) Report Year Report Type Project Location RI-10008 Amy Glover, Sherri Gust,
Melinda C. Horne, and Janell Mort
2012 other research Project area
RI-10314 Bai “Tom” Tang and Daniel
Ballester
2017 archaeological,
architectural/historical, field
study
records-search area
RI-10374 Joan George and Venessa Mirro 2013 archaeologi cal, literature search
records-search area
RI-10406 Michael Mirro 2012 archaeological, literature
search
records-search area
RI-11193 Melinda C. Horne 2012 architectural/historical, evaluation, field study
Project area
RI-11219 Tierra Environmental Services , Inc. 2003 archaeological field study, literature search
Project area

In 2001, Love and colleagues (2002) with CRM T ech conducted a 280-acre survey in support of a proposed Mid-Valley Center project, which included c onstruction of a hotel, a golf resort, business units, and an office park. No cultural resources were identified.

In 2003, Tierra Environmental Services, Inc. (20 03), conducted a 40-acre survey in support of a busi- ness park adjacent to the Indian Oasis Resort. No cultural resources were identified.

In 2012, Glover and colleagues (2012) conducted a survey of 76 traffic signals to determine the poten- tial effects that construction related to a traffic-signal-improvement project would have on cultural and his- torical resources. No cultural resources were identified as a result of the survey.

In 2012, Melinda Home (2012) of Cogstone complete d a survey in support of the expansion of Palm Springs’ Intelligent Transportation System. In total, 34 discontinuous areas were surveyed, each measuring approximately 3 by 5 feet. No cultural resources were identified as a result of the survey.

The records search also indicated that in total, one cultural resource had been previously identified within the records-search area: a historical-period bu ilding (Table 2). It is a mixed-use commercial and residential building constructed in the Two-Part Commercial Block or Monterey style (Conroy et al. in pro- gress) between 1929 and 1939. The building was moved to its current location in 1937.

Table 2. Previously Recorded Archaeological Site within the Project Area Primary No. Type Age Description Location
P-33-029138 built environment historical period historical-period mixed- use commercial and
residential
records-search area

Item 1C - Page 226

13 Previous Archaeological Research in the Coachella Valley A great deal of archaeological research has been carried out in the Coachella Valley and the Colorado Desert since the early twentieth century. The earliest work was that of Malcolm Rogers (1929, 1939, 1945, 1958, 1966), who investigated the earliest occupations in s outhern California, the San Dieguito cultural assem- blages, as well as later Yuman occupations along the lower Colorado River. Although more-recent research has refined his original conclusions, Rogers’s work has formed the basis of much of the culture history of the region. In the Coachella Valley, extensive surveys were carried out by the Archaeological Survey Asso- ciation of Southern California (ASA) in the 1950s (M cCown et al. 2001). Although their results were not well reported, the ASA recorded many sites that have since been destroyed by modern development.

Much of the research over the last 35 years has fo cused on the ancient shorelines of Lake Cahuilla, which has formed on numerous occasions during the last 15,000 years (and before [Weide 1976]). Some of that research has focused on the lake itself, and a number of studies have helped to refine the timing of the cycles of inundation and desiccation, particularly over the last 2,000 years (Waters 1983; Weide 1976; Wilke 1978). Earlier models suggested a single, stable lake le vel spanning several centuries, but the lake is now understood to have fluctuated considerably, and at least three or four cycles of inundation and desiccation over the last 2 millennia have been documented (Laylander 1997).

Human adaptation to the cycles of lake infilling and desiccation is of great interest, and a model of changing settlement and subsistence was proposed by Wilke (1978:103–107), based primarily on ethno- graphic analogy and paleofecal data from several sites. When the lake was present, people would have had a stable economic base capable of supporting a substantial population, permanent lakeshore villages, and seasonal camps to exploit terrestrial resources. After the lake disappeared, Wilke (1978) argued, desert con- ditions dominated, but the settlement/subsistence patte rn remained basically the same, aside from being centered on permanent springs rather than the lake. The economic focus would have shifted from aquatic resources to terrestrial ones, similar to the terrestrial subsistence patterns documented during the ethnohis- toric period. That would have resulted in increased utilization of the mountains to the west (see O’Connell et al. 1974; Wilke 1978:113), perhaps with people moving to the lower Colorado River to the southeast, a region densely occupied during the early historical period.

Excavations at the La Quinta site (CA-RIV-1179; Sutton 1993; Sutton and Wilke 1988), along the north- western shoreline of Lake Cahuilla, revealed a seasonal pattern of resource use that did not support the Wilke model. A further reanalysis of the paleofecal data from the La Quinta sites and other sites (Sutton 1998) sug- gested that the La Quinta site was not occupied throughout the year. A study of faunal bones, macrobotanical remains, and other sensitive seasonal indicators suggested that sites along the shoreline were either not occupied during the winter months or only sporadically occupied. Sutton (1998) proposed that the lakeshore would have been intensively occupied only during the spring and summer months, and during the winter, groups would have moved to other areas that, to date, have not been identified archaeologically.

Questions about the impact of Lake Cahuilla on settlement and subsistence and the occupation of the Coachella Valley remain important research topics. It appears possible that the last major stand of Lake Cahuilla could have served as a major attractant to populations in and near the Peninsular Ranges of south- ern California and, as first suggested by Cochran (1965:87; see also Laylander 2007), may have been related to the eastward movement of the Takic, specifically the ethnogenesis of the Desert Cahuilla as they moved eastward from southern California coastal areas and western basins into the northern Coachella Valley.

There has been a relative paucity of archaeological studies focused on desert sites away from the shore- line of Lake Cahuilla. The most-studied areas of the northern part of the Coachella Valley were conducted in Tahquitz Canyon (Bean et al. 1995; Schaefer 2002; Wilke et al. 1975:45–73) and in Andreas and Murray Canyons (Cultural Systems Research 1983), near presen t-day Palm Springs. Excavations at sites in those areas recorded immense cultural deposits containing a variety of features and artifact types. Feature types included house pits, hearths, storage areas, human cremations, and ritual caches and offerings. Most of the occupations at these sites dated to the Late Prehistoric and ethnohistorical periods.

Analysis of artifacts from these sites suggested that the inhabitants exploited a variety of resource areas, such as springs and oases, alpine and mountain environments, and the desert. Numerous bedrock mortars and Item 1C - Page 227

14 other milling features indicated increasing use of seeds and nuts (including acorns), in contrast to earlier pe- riods. Likewise, the presence of faunal remains from animals that live at higher elevations, such as deer (Odo- coileus spp.) and mountain sheep (Ovis canadensis), indicated the importance of montane and other resources.

Recently, in 2018, SRI, in collaboration with the ACBCI, conducted archaeological data recovery and monitoring in support of the Agua Caliente Cultura l Center and Spa, located approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mile) west of the Project area, at the site of the Agua Caliente Hot Mineral Spring (CA-RIV-162), which is known as Séc-he in the Cahuilla language meaning “the sound of boiling water” in Cahuilla (Scott Kremkau, personal communication 2023; Lacy Padilla, personal communication 2024). This hot mineral spring is an important cultural resource that the Trib e has cherished and celebrated for thousands of years as a crucial water source for bathing and drinking as well as for spiritual, healing, and cultural practices.

Prior to the current architectural landscape of Palm Sp rings, this site was the location of the Palm Springs Spa Hotel and, before that, several small residential st ructures as well as a bath house constructed in the late nineteenth century at the hot spring. Major excavations at that site in the 1990s found that the majority of the features and other elements of the site dated to the Late Prehistoric period, within the last 1,000 years.

The results of the archaeological investigations at Séc-he conducted in 2018, however, revealed that the site had been used for thousands of years, and intact deposits dating to 8400–7300 cal B.P. were discovered 4 m (12 feet) below the modern ground surface, making CA-RIV-162 one of the oldest inland sites in southern California and, by far, the oldest site in the Coachella Valley.

Within the Project area, the first documented ar chaeological work occurred in 1978, when Jennifer Taschek-Ball (1978) with the Department of Anth ropology at San Diego State University conducted a 1,975-acre survey on behalf of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. Three cultural resources were identified, all of which were either lithic scatters or lithic isolates.

Archival Research
SRI examined historical-period aerial images and US GS topographic maps to help identify any possible historical-period structures within the Project area. No historical-period structures or features were identi- fied within the Project area in aerial imagery from 1944 (Historic Aerials 1944). Also, no historical-period structures or features were observed within the main Project area on the 1904 Indio, California, 7.5-minute USGS topographic map.

Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File Search Part of the records search and literature review involved contacting the Native American Heritage Commis- sion (NAHC) for a list of traditional-use areas or sacred sites within the Project area and a list of specific Native American groups or individuals who could pr ovide additional information on cultural resources within the Project area. The NAHC record search resulted in negative findings and a list of Tribal contacts who may have additional information about sacred sites within the Project area was provided by the NAHC and is included in Appendix A of this report.

Survey Methods
For this Project, the entire Project area was surveyed using 15-m (49.2-foot) transects. A Geode handheld Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) unit was used to track transects and mark the presence of sur- face finds. Photographs were taken during the survey, to record topography and modern disturbances.

Item 1C - Page 228

15 Survey Results
Pedestrian survey of the Project area was conducted on September 28, 2023, by an SOI-qualified archaeol- ogist. Creosote bush scrub and fine sand were consistent across the surface of the site and resulted in a high surface visibility of 90–95 percent. No cultural resources were identified by the archaeologist during the pedestrian survey. Modern disturbances, such as a dirt road and a billboard, were recorded by the archaeol- ogist as present in the Project area (Figures 4–6).

Management Recommendations
No cultural resources were identified in the Project ar ea. However, the Project area is still sensitive for buried prehistoric cultural resources. For this reason, SRI recommends that an SOI-qualified archaeologist and an Agua Caliente Cultural Monitor be present for all ground-disturbing activities related to the devel- opment.

Item 1C - Page 229

16 Figure 4. Results map showing modern disturbances.

Item 1C - Page 230
Access road
Two-track road
0 Topographic data from :
http:/lservices .a rcgisonli ne .comfarcg is/services
Statistical Research , Inc., October 2023
meters
- -0 feet
100
f:,
- N 200
UTM
goo

17 Figure 5. Project area overview showing modern disturbances, view to the southwest.

Figure 6. Project area overview showing modern disturbances, view to the south.

Item 1C - Page 231

18 References Cited
Altschul, Jeffrey H.
1986 Significance Evaluations for Three Cultural Resources on the Ditz-Crane Mission Creek Prop- erty, Riverside County, California. Technical Series 5. Statistical Research, Tucson, Arizona.

Bailey, Thomas L., and Richard H. Jahns
1954 Geology of the Transverse Range Province, Southern California. In Geology of Southern Cal- ifornia, edited by Richard H. Jahns, pp. 83–106. Bulletin 170. California Division of Mines, San Francisco.

Barrows, David Prescott
1900 The Ethno-botany of the Cahuilla Indians of Southern California. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Bean, Lowell John
1972 Mukat’s People: The Cahuilla Indians of Southern California . University of California Press, Berkeley.
1978 Cahuilla. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 575–587. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 8, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Bean, Lowell J., and William M. Mason
1962 Diaries and Accounts of the Romero Expeditions in Arizona and California, 1823–1826. Palm Springs Desert Museum, Palm Springs, California.

Bean, Lowell J., and Katherine S. Saubel
1972 Temalpakh (from the Earth): Cahuilla Indian Knowledge and Usage of Plants . Malki Museum Press, Banning, California.

Bean, Lowell J., Jerry D. Schaefer, and Sylvia B. Vane
1995 Archaeological, Ethnographic, and Ethnohistoric Investigations at Tahquitz Canyon, Palm Springs, California. Cultural Systems Research, Menlo Park, California. Prepared for Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.

Bean, Lowell J., and Sylvia B. Vane
1995 Ethnography and Ethnohistory. In Archaeological, Ethnographic, and Ethnohistoric Investiga- tions at Tahquitz Canyon, Palm Springs, California, edited by Lowell J. Bean and Sylvia B.

Vane, pp. V10–V19. Cultural Systems Research, Menlo Park, California. Prepared for River- side County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.

Bedwell, Stephen F.
1973 Fort Rock Basin: Prehistory and Environment. University of Oregon, Eugene.

Blake, William P.
1857 Geological Report. In Reports of Explorations in California for Railroad Routes to Connect with Routes near the 35th and 32d Parallels of North Latitude, by Lt. R. S. Williamson, Corps of Topographical Engineers. Reports of Explorations and Surveys, to Ascertain the Most Prac- ticable and Economical Route for a Railroad fro m the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean:

Made Under the Direction of the Secretary of War in 1853–1854, vol. V , pt. II, by the U.S. War Item 1C - Page 232

19 Department. 33 rd Cong., 2 nd sess. Exec. Doc. 78, U.S. Congress, Senate. Beverly Tucker, Printer, Washington, D.C.

Castetter, Edward F., and Willis H. Bell
1951 Yuman Indian Agriculture: Primitive Subsistence on the Lower Colorado and Gila Rivers. Uni- versity of New Mexico School of Inter-American Affairs, Inter-American Series, Studies 2.

University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Cochran, Glen E.
1965 Shoshonean Migration into Southern Califor nia: A Hypothesis and Its Treatment. Undergrad- uate thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Riverside.

Conroy, Jillian L. H., Iream Oz, and Brian F. Smith
In progress A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for th e Palm Springs Self Storage Project, Palm Springs Riverside County, California. Brian F. Smith and Associates, Poway, California.

Cultural Systems Research, Inc.
1983 Paniktum Hemki: A Study of Cahuilla Cultural Resources in Andreas and Murray Canyons.

Cultural Systems Research, Menlo Park, California. Prepared for Andreas Cove Country Club, Palm Springs, California.

Curtis, Edward S.
1926 The North American Indian, vol. 15. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

Dahdul, Mariam, Harry M. Quinn, and Zachary X. Hruby
2008 Final Report, Archaeological Testing and Evaluation Program at Sites CA-RIV-2642, -2643, and a Portion of -2646, near the City of De sert Hot Springs, Riverside County, California.

CRM Tech, Colton, California. On file, California Historical Resources Information System, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside.

Drover, Christopher E.
1982 An Environmental Test Phase of RIV-1825 and -1827, Seven Palms Ranch, Desert Hot Springs, California. On file, California Historical Resources Information System, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside.
1988 An Environmental Impact Evaluation, Mitigation by Data Collection: RIV-1825; -1827; -2645 and 2648, Seven Palms Ranch, Desert Hot Springs, California. On file, California Historical Resources Information System, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside.

Garcia, Patricia, Kim Maeyama, and Rachael Nixon
2011 Agua Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation Office Research Design . Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians, Palm Springs, California.

Glover, Amy, Sherri Gust, Melinda Horne, and Janell Mort 2012 Archaeological Survey Report: Palm Springs Signal Synchronize Project, City of Palm Springs, Riverside County, California. Cogstone Resource Management, Orange, California.

Goddard, Ives
1996 Introduction. In Languages, edited by Ives Goddard, pp. 1–16. Handbook of North American Indi- ans, vol. 17, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Item 1C - Page 233

20 Hall, Harvey Monroe, and Joseph Grinnell
1919 Life-Zone Indicators in California. Proceedings of the California Academy of Science, 4th se- ries, vol. 9, no. 2. California Academy of Science, San Francisco.

Harden, Deborah R.
2004 California Geology. 2nd ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

Harvey, Herbert. R.
1967 Population of the Cahuilla Indians: Decline and Causes. Eugenics Quarterly 14:185–198.

Heath, Erle
1945 Seventy-Five Years of Progress: Historical Sketch of the Southern Pacific, 1869–1944. Southern Pacific Bureau of News, San Francisco.

Historic Aerials
1944 Indio, California. Aerial image. Historic Aerials by NETROnline, Nationwide Environmental Title Research, Tempe, Arizona, https://www.h istoricaerials.com/viewer.com, accessed Sep- tember 25, 2023.

Hogan, Michael, Mariam Dahdul, John D. Goodman II, Zachary X. Hruby, and Harry M. Quinn 2010 Report on the Findings: Archaeological Investigations on a Portion of Locus 1, Site CA-RIV- 2642, near the City of Desert Hot Springs, Riverside County, California. CRM Tech, Colton, California. On file, California Historical Resources Information System, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside.

Home, Melinda
2012 Historic Property Survey Report for the Springs Si gnal Synchronization Project in the City of Palm Springs, Riverside County, California. Cogstone Resource Management, Orange, Cali- fornia.

Hooper, Lucile
1920 The Cahuilla Indians . Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. 16, no. 6.

University of California, Berkeley.

Jaeger, Edmund C.
1965 The California Deserts. 4th ed. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, California.

Jahns, Richard H.
1954 Northern Part of the Peninsular Range Province. Geology of Southern California, vol. 2. Geo- logic Guide No. 5. Bulletin 170. California Division of Mines, San Francisco.

Jenkins, Olaf P.
1980 Geomorphic Provinces Map of California. California Geology 32(2):40–41.

Lawton, Harry W., and Lowell J. Bean
1968 A Preliminary Reconstruc tion of Aboriginal Agricultural Technology among the Cahuilla. In- dian Historian 1(5):18–24, 29.

Laylander, Don
1997 The Last Days of Lake Cahuilla: The Elmore Site. Pacific Coast Archeological Society Quar- terly 33(1–2):1–138.

Item 1C - Page 234

21 2007 The Regional Consequences of Lake Cahuilla. San Diego State University Occasional Papers 1:59–77.

Love, Bruce, and Mariam Dahdul
2002 Desert Chronologies and the Archaic Period in the Coachella Valley. Pacific Coast Archaeolog- ical Society Quarterly 38(2–3):65–86.

Love, Bruce, Bai “Tom” Tang, Daniel Ballester, and Mariam Dahdul 2002 Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report, Proposed Walmart Site, Ramon Road and Crossley Road, City of Palm Springs, Riverside County, California. CRM Tech, Colton, Cali- fornia.

Lundstrom, Scott C., Ralph R. Shroba, and Jonathan C. Matti 2001 Quaternary Geologic Mapping in the Desert Ho t Springs Area, Riverside County, California:

Data to Address the Societal Needs and Geoscience Issues. Paper presented at the Ninety-Seventh Annual Meeting of the Geological Society of America, Cordilleran Section, and American Asso- ciation of Petroleum Geologists, Pacific Section, Universal City, California. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, vol. 33, no. 3, Abstract 3982. Also available online, https://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2001CD/webprogram/Paper3982.html, accessed October 2023.

McCown, Lucile R., Gordon A. Clopine, Doris H. Bowers, Jay von Werlhof, Ruth D. Simpson, Ronald V .

May, and Pat King
2001 The Archaeological Survey Association of Southern California’s Lake Le Conte Survey. San Bernardino County Museum Association Quarterly 48(3).

McDonald, Alison M.
1992 Indian Hill Rockshelter and Aboriginal Cultura l Adaptation in Anza-Borrego Desert State Park, Southeastern California. Ph.D. dissertation, De partment of Anthropology, University of Cali- fornia, Riverside.

Moore, Otho
1968 First Railroad Trains Ran from Indio 1876. In Coachella Valley’s Golden Years, edited by Ole J.

Nordland, pp. 12–14. Coachella Valley Water District, Indio, California.

Munz, Philip A.
1974 A Flora of Southern California. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Newman, Patty, Kay Bell, Judy Muggeridge, and Margo Mateas 2008 A Look Back in Time. Rev. ed. Rancho Mirage City Council, City of Rancho Mirage, California.

O’Connell, James F., Philip J. Wilke, Thomas F. King, and Carol L. Mix (editors) 1974 Perris Reservoir Archaeology: Late Prehistoric Demographic Change in Southeastern Califor- nia. Archaeological Report No. 14. California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacra- mento.

Rogers, Malcolm J.
1929 The Stone Art of the San Diego Plateau. American Anthropologist 31:454–467. 1939 Early Lithic Industries of the Lower Basin of the Colorado River and Adjacent Desert Areas.

Museum Papers No. 3. Museum of Man, San Diego.
1945 An Outline of Yuman Prehistory. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 1(2):167–198.

Item 1C - Page 235

22 1958 San Dieguito Implements from the Terraces of the Rincon-Pantano and Rillito Drainage Sys- tem. The Kiva 24:1–23.
1966 Ancient Hunters of the Far West . Edited by Richard F. Pourade and sponsored by James S.

Copley, with contributions by H. M. Wormington, Emma Lou Davis, and Clark W. Brott. Un- ion-Tribune, San Diego.

Schaefer, Jerry (Jerome) D.
1994 The Challenge of Archaeological Research in the Colorado Desert: Recent Approaches and Discoveries. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 16(1):60–80. 2002 The Chronology and Distribution of Site Type s at Tahquitz Canyon. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society of California Archaeology, Pasadena.

Schaefer, Jerry D., and Don Laylander
2007 The Colorado Desert: Ancient Adapta tions to Wetlands and Wastelands. In California Prehis- tory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity , edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, pp. 247–257. AltaMira, Lanham, Maryland.

Schoenherr, Allan A.
1992 A Natural History of California. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Strong, William D.
1929 Aboriginal Society in Southern California. Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnol- ogy, vol. 26. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Sutton, Mark Q.
1993 Midden and Coprolite Derived Subsistence Eviden ce: An Analysis of Data from the La Quinta Site, Salton Basin, California. Journal of Ethnobiology 13(1):1–15. 1998 Cluster Analysis of Paleofecal Data Sets: A Test of Late Prehistoric Settlement and Subsistence Patterns in the Northern Coachella Valley, California. American Antiquity 63:86–107.

Sutton, Mark Q., and Philip J. Wilke (editors)
1988 Archaeological Investigations at CA-RIV-1179, CA-RIV-2823, and CA-RIV-2827, La Quinta, Riverside County, California. Archives of California Prehistory 20. Coyote Press, Salinas, Cal- ifornia.

Taschek-Ball, Jennifer
1978 Final Report: Archaeological Evaluation of Lands Belonging to the Agua Caliente Indian Res- ervation, Riverside County, California. Department of Anthropology, San Diego State Univer- sity, San Diego.

Thousand Palms Chamber of Commerce
2023 Thousand Palms: The Yesteryears. Thousa nd Palms History. Thousand Palms Chamber of Commerce, Thousand Palms, California. Electronic document, https://thousandpalmscham- ber.com/thousand_palms_history.htm, accessed October 10, 2023.

Tierra Environmental Services, Inc.
2003 Cultural Resource Survey Report for the Agua Caliente Indian Reservation Oasis Business Park Project Riverside County, California. Tierra Environmental Services, San Diego.

Item 1C - Page 236

23 Vaughan, Sheila J.
1982 A Replicative Systems Analysis of the San Dieguito Component at the C. W. Harris Site. Mas- ter’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Warren, Claude N.
1967 The San Dieguito Complex: A Review and Hypothesis. American Antiquity 32:168–185. 1984 The Desert Region. In California Archaeology, by Michael J. Moratto, pp. 339–430. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.

Waters, Michael R.
1982a The Lowland Patayan Ceramic Tradition. In Hohokam and Patayan: Prehistory of Southwest- ern Arizona, edited by Randall H. McGuire and Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 275–297. Academic Press, New York.
1982b The Lowland Patayan Ceramic Typology. In Hohokam and Patayan: Prehistory of Southwest- ern Arizona, edited by Randall H. McGuire and Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 537–570. Academic Press, New York.
1983 Late Holocene Lacustrine Chronology and Ar chaeology of Ancient Lake Cahuilla, California.

Quaternary Research 19:373–387.

Weide, Margaret L.
1976 A Cultural Sequence for the Yuha Desert. In Background to Prehistory of the Yuha Desert Re- gion, edited by Philip J. Wilke, pp. 81–94. Anthropological Papers No. 5. Ballena Press, Ra- mona, California.

Wilke, Philip J.
1978 Late Prehistoric Human Ecology at Lake Cahuilla, Coachella Valley, California. Archaeologi- cal Research Facility Contributions, vol. 38. University of California, Berkeley.

Wilke, Philip J., Thomas F. King, and Stephen Hammond
1975 Aboriginal Occupation of Tahquitz Canyon: Ethnohistory and Archaeology. The Cahuilla Indi- ans of the Colorado Desert: Ethnohistory and Prehistory, pt. 2. Anthropological Papers 3. Bal- lena Press, Ramona, California.

Wilke, Philip J., and Harry W. Lawton
1975 Early Observations on the Cultural Geography of Coachella Valley. In The Cahuilla Indians of the Colorado Desert: Ethnohistory and Prehistory, edited by Philip J. Wilke, pp. 9–43. Anthro- pological Papers No. 3. Ballena Press, Ramona, California.

Wilke, Philip J., Alison M. McDonald, and L. A. Payen
1986 Excavations at Indian Hill Rockshelter, Anza-Borrego Desert State Park, California, 1984– 1985. Archaeological Research Unit, University of California, Riverside.

Willig, Judith A., and C. Melvin Aikens
1988 The Clovis-Archaic Interface in Far Western North America. In Early Human Occupation in Far Western North America: The Clovis-Archaic Interface, edited by Judith A. Willig, C. Mel- vin Aikens, and John L. Fagan, pp. 1–40. Anthropological Papers No. 21. Nevada State Mu- seum, Carson City.

Item 1C - Page 237

24 WorldClimate.com
2021 Palm Springs, Riverside C ounty, California USA: Average Ra infall. Electronic document, http://www.worldclimate.com/cgi-bin/data.pl?ref=N33W116+2200+046635C, accessed June 1, 2021.

Item 1C - Page 238
A.1

APPENDIX A
Native American Heritage Commission Tribal-
Consultation Documentation
Item 1C - Page 239

Item 1C - Page 240

STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

November 14, 2023

Felicia De Pena
Statistical Research, Inc.

Via Email to: [email protected]

Re: Cultural Resources Study for the Proposed Gas Station at Dinah Shore Dr. and Crossley Road in Palm Springs, CA Project, Riverside County

Dear Dr. De Pena:

A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed for the information you have submitted for the above referenced project. The results were negative. However, the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not indicate the absence of cultural resources in any project area. Other sources of cultural resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites.

Attached is a list of Native American tribes who may also have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential adverse impact within the proposed project area. I suggest you contact all of those indicated; if they cannot supply information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. By contacting all those listed, your organization will be better able to respond to claims of failure to consult with the appropriate tribe. If a response has not been received within two weeks of notification, the Commission requests that you follow-up with a telephone call or email to ensure that the project information has been received.

If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify me. With your assistance, we can assure that our lists contain current information.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address: [email protected].

Sincerely,

Andrew Green
Cultural Resources Analyst

Attachment

CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

VICE-CHAIRPERSON
Buffy McQuillen
Yokayo Pomo, Yuki,
Nomlaki

SECRETARY
Sara Dutschke
Miwok

PARLIAMENTARIAN
Wayne Nelson
Luiseño

COMMISSIONER
Isaac Bojorquez
Ohlone-Costanoan

COMMISSIONER
Stanley Rodriguez
Kumeyaay

COMMISSIONER
Laurena Bolden
Serrano

COMMISSIONER
Reid Milanovich
Cahuilla

COMMISSIONER
Vacant

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Raymond C.

Hitchcock
Miwok, Nisenan

NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]
NAHC.ca.gov

Item 1C - Page 241
Tribe Name Fed (F)
Non-Fed (N)
Contact Person Contact Address Phone # Fax # Email Address Cultural Affiliation Last Updated Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians F Patricia Garcia, Director of Historic Preservation
5401 Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA, 92264
(760) 699-6907 (760) 699-6919 [email protected] Cahuilla 7/20/2023 Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission
Indians
F Amanda Vance, Chairperson 84-001 Avenue 54
Coachella, CA, 92236
(760) 398-4722 (760) 369- 7161 [email protected] Cahuilla Cabazon Band of Mission Indians F Doug Welmas, Chairperson 84-245 Indio Springs Parkway Indio, CA, 92203
(760) 342-2593 (760) 347- 7880 [email protected] Cahuilla Cahuilla Band of Indians F Anthony Madrigal, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
52701 CA Highway 371
Anza, CA, 92539
(951) 763-5549 [email protected] Cahuilla 6/28/2023 Cahuilla Band of Indians F Daniel Salgado, Chairperson 52701 CA Highway 371 Anza, CA, 92539
(951) 972-2568 (951) 763-2808 [email protected] Cahuilla 6/28/2023 Cahuilla Band of Indians F BobbyRay Esaprza, Cultural
Director
52701 CA Highway 371
Anza, CA, 92539
(951) 763-5549 [email protected] Cahuilla 6/28/2023 Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and
Cupeño Indians
F Ray Chapparosa, Chairperson P.O. Box 189
Warner Springs, CA, 92086-0189
(760) 782-0711 (760) 782-0712 Cahuilla
Morongo Band of Mission Indians F Ann Brierty, THPO 12700 Pumarra Road Banning, CA, 92220
(951) 755-5259 (951) 572-6004 [email protected] Cahuilla Serrano
Morongo Band of Mission Indians F Robert Martin, Chairperson 12700 Pumarra Road Banning, CA, 92220
(951) 755-5110 (951) 755-5177 [email protected] Cahuilla Serrano
Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma
Reservation
F Jordan Joaquin, President,
Quechan Tribal Council
P.O.Box 1899
Yuma, AZ, 85366
(760) 919-3600 executivesecretary@quechantrib
e.com
Quechan 5/16/2023
Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma
Reservation
F Manfred Scott, Acting Chairman -
Kw'ts'an Cultural Committee
P.O. Box 1899
Yuma, AZ, 85366
(928) 210-8739 culturalcommittee@quechantribe.
com
Quechan 5/16/2023
Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma
Reservation
F Jill McCormick, Historic
Preservation Officer
P.O. Box 1899
Yuma, AZ, 85366
(928) 261-0254 historicpreservation@quechantrib
e.com
Quechan 5/16/2023
Imperial,Los Angeles,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Los Angeles,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
Riverside County
11/14/2023
Counties
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
11/14/2023 03:18 PM
1 of 2
Item 1C - Page 242
Tribe Name Fed (F)
Non-Fed (N)
Contact Person Contact Address Phone # Fax # Email Address Cultural Affiliation Last Updated Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
Riverside County
11/14/2023
Counties
Ramona Band of Cahuilla F John Gomez, Environmental
Coordinator
P. O. Box 391670
Anza, CA, 92539
(951) 763-4105 (951) 763-4325 jgom [email protected] Cahuilla 8/16/2016 Ramona Band of Cahuilla F Joseph Hamilton, Chairperson P.O. Box 391670 Anza, CA, 92539
(951) 763-4105 (951) 763-4325 [email protected] Cahuilla Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians F Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair P.O. Box 391820 Anza, CA, 92539
(951) 659-2700 (951) 659- 2228 [email protected] Cahuilla Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Jessica Valdez, Cultural Resource Specialist
P.O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA, 92581
(951) 663-6261 (951) 654-4198 [email protected] Cahuilla Luiseno
7/14/2023
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Joseph Ontiveros, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
P.O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA, 92581
(951) 663-5279 (951) 654-4198 jontiv [email protected] Cahuilla Luiseno
7/14/2023
Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians F Mary Belardo, Cultural Committee Vice Chair
P.O. Box 1160
Thermal, CA, 92274
(760) 397-0300 [email protected] Cahuilla 10/30/2023
Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians F Thomas Tortez, Chairperson P.O. Box 1160 Thermal, CA, 92274
(760) 397-0300 (760) 397-8146 [email protected] Cahuilla 10/30/2023 Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians F Alesia Reed, Cultural Committee Chairwoman
P.O. Box 1160
Thermal, CA, 92274
(760) 397-0300 [email protected] Cahuilla 10/30/2023 Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians F Abraham Becerra, Cultural Coordinator
P.O. Box 1160
Thermal, CA, 92274
(760) 397-0300 [email protected] Cahuilla 10/30/2023
Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians F Gary Resvaloso, TM MLD P.O. Box 1160 Thermal, CA, 92274
(760) 777-0365 [email protected] Cahuilla 10/30/2023
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resource Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed Cultural Resources Study for the Proposed Gas Station at Dinah Shore Dr. and Crossley Road in Palm Springs, CA Project, Riverside County.

Record: PROJ-2023-005356
Report Type: List of Tribes
Counties: Riverside
NAHC Group: All
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
11/14/2023 03:18 PM
2 of 2
Item 1C - Page 243
Item 1C - Page 244
D

Appendix D

Traffic Impact Study

Item 1C - Page 245

AGUA CALIENTE FUEL –

PALM SPRINGS

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Reference Number Agency Date
September 6, 2024 City of Palm Springs 15579-04 TA Report.docx PREPARED BY: Janette Cachola | [email protected] Marlie Whiteman, P.E. | [email protected]
John Kain, AICP | [email protected]

Item 1C - Page 246

URBAN CROSSROADS

15579-04 TA Report.docx
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................... ii Appendices ......................................................................................................................................................... iv List of Exhibits ..................................................................................................................................................... v List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................................... vi List of Abbreviated Terms ............................................................................................................................... vii 1  Introduction............................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1  Project Overview ........................................................................................................................... 1

1.2  Analysis Scenarios ......................................................................................................................... 1

1.3  Study Area ..................................................................................................................................... 3

1.4  Analysis Findings ........................................................................................................................... 3 2  Methodologies .......................................................................................................................................... 7

2.1  Level of Service ............................................................................................................................. 7

2.2  Intersection Capacity Analysis ...................................................................................................... 7

2.3  Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Methodology ............................................................................... 9

2.4  Minimum Acceptable Levels of Service (LOS) ............................................................................. 10 3  Area Conditions ...................................................................................................................................... 11

3.1  Existing Circulation Network ....................................................................................................... 11

3.2  City of Palm Springs General Plan Circulation Element .............................................................. 11

3.3  Transit Service ............................................................................................................................. 11

3.4  Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities ................................................................................................. 11

3.5  Existing (2023) Traffic Counts ..................................................................................................... 15

3.6  Intersection Operations Analysis ................................................................................................ 20

3.7  Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis .................................................................................................. 20 4  Projected Future Traffic ......................................................................................................................... 23

4.1  Project Trip Generation ............................................................................................................... 23

4.2  Project Trip Distribution .............................................................................................................. 23

4.3  Modal Split .................................................................................................................................. 23

4.4  Project Trip Assignment .............................................................................................................. 24

4.5  Background Traffic ...................................................................................................................... 24 5  Existing Plus Project Conditions Traffic Conditions ........................................................................... 31

5.1  Roadway Improvements ............................................................................................................. 31

5.2  E+P Traffic Volume Forecasts ...................................................................................................... 31 Item 1C - Page 247

15579-04 TA Report.docx
iii

5.3  Intersection Operations Analysis ................................................................................................ 31

5.4  Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis .................................................................................................. 31 6  EAC (2025) Traffic Conditions ................................................................................................................ 35

6.1  EAC Traffic Volume Forecasts ..................................................................................................... 35

6.2  Intersection Operations Analysis ................................................................................................ 35

6.3  Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis .................................................................................................. 35

6.4  Cumulative Improvements.......................................................................................................... 35 7  EAPC (2025) Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................................. 39

7.1  EAPC (2025) Traffic Volume Forecasts ........................................................................................ 39

7.2  Intersection Operations Analysis ................................................................................................ 39

7.3  Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis .................................................................................................. 39 8  Cumulative and Site Access Improvements ........................................................................................ 43

8.1  Recommended cumulative Improvements................................................................................. 43

8.2  Site Access Improvements .......................................................................................................... 44 9  References ............................................................................................................................................... 47

Item 1C - Page 248

15579-04 TA Report.docx
iv

APPENDICES
Appendix 1.1: Traffic Study Scope
Appendix 3.1: Traffic Counts – October 2023
Appendix 3.2: Existing (2023) Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets Appendix 3.3: Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets Appendix 5.1: E+P Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets Appendix 6.1: EAC (2025) Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets Appendix 7.1: EAPC (2025) Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets Item 1C - Page 249

15579-04 TA Report.docx
v

LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1-1: Site Plan ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Exhibit 1-2: Study Area ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Exhibit 3-1: Existing Number of Through Lanes and Intersection Controls ............................................. 12 Exhibit 3-2: City of Palm Springs General Plan Circulation Element .......................................................... 13 Exhibit 3-3: City of Palm Springs General Plan Roadway Cross-Sections ................................................. 14 Exhibit 3-4: City of Palm Springs General Plan Trails Plan ......................................................................... 16 Exhibit 3-5: City of Palm Springs General Plan Bicycle Plan ...................................................................... 17 Exhibit 3-6: Existing Pedestrian and Bike Facilities ...................................................................................... 18 Exhibit 3-7: Existing (2023) Traffic Volumes .................................................................................................. 19 Exhibit 4-1: Project Inbound Trip Distribution .............................................................................................. 25 Exhibit 4-2: Project Outbound Trip Distribution .......................................................................................... 26 Exhibit 4-3: Project Only Traffic volumes ...................................................................................................... 27 Exhibit 4-4: Cumulative Development Location Map .................................................................................. 29 Exhibit 5-1: E+P Traffic Volumes ..................................................................................................................... 32 Exhibit 6-1: EAC (2025) Traffic Volumes ......................................................................................................... 37 Exhibit 7-1: EAPC (2025) Traffic Volumes ...................................................................................................... 40 Exhibit 8-1: Site Access Recommendations and Off-Site Improvements ................................................. 45

Item 1C - Page 250

15579-04 TA Report.docx
vi

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Intersection Analysis Locations ...................................................................................................... 3 Table 1-2: Level of Service Summary ............................................................................................................... 6 Table 2-1: Signalized Intersection LOS Thresholds ........................................................................................ 8 Table 2-2: Unsignalized Intersection LOS Thresholds ................................................................................... 9 Table 2-3: Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Locations ................................................................................... 10 Table 3-1: Intersection Analysis for Existing (2023) Conditions ................................................................. 21 Table 4-1: Project Trip Generation Summary ............................................................................................... 24 Table 4-2: Cumulative Development land use Summary ........................................................................... 30 Table 5-1: Intersection Analysis for E+P Conditions .................................................................................... 33 Table 6-1: Intersection Analysis for EAC (2025) Conditions ........................................................................ 38 Table 7-1: Intersection Analysis for EAPC (2025) Conditions ...................................................................... 41 Table 8-1: Existing plus Ambient plus Project plus Cumulative (EAPC) (2025) Fair Share Calculations .................................................................................................................. 43

Item 1C - Page 251

15579-04 TA Report.docx
vii

LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS
(1) Reference
ADT Average Daily Traffic
CAMUTCD California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Caltrans California Department of Transportation
EAC Existing Plus Ambient Plus Cumulative
EAPC Existing Plus Ambient Plus Project Plus Cumulative HCM Highway Capacity Manual
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
LOS Level of Service
PHF Peak Hour Factor
Project Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs
sf Square Feet
TA Traffic Analysis

Item 1C - Page 252

15579-04 TA Report.docx
viii
This page intentionally left blank
Item 1C - Page 253
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
1 1 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the traffic anal ysis (TA) for Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs (“Project”), located on Agua Caliente Indian Reservation property at the northwest corner of Lawrence Crossley Road and Dinah Shore Drive in the City of Palm Springs, as shown on Exhibit 1-1.

The purpose of this TA is to evaluate the potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed Project, and recommend improvements to achieve acceptable circulation system operational conditions. This TA has been prepared based in accordance with the City of Palm Springs TIA Guidelines (July 2020). (1) Urban Crossroads, Inc. prepared a traffic study scoping package for review by City staff prior to the preparation of this report. The Scope (included in Appendix 1.1) provides an outline of the Project st udy area, trip generation, trip distribution, and analysis methodology.

1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Project is proposed to consist of 24 gasoline/diesel fuel pumps with up to 9,500 square feet of convenience store of which 4,000 square feet would be Class II gaming space. It is anticipated that the Project would open by year 2025. A draft site plan of the proposed Project is shown in Exhibit 1-

1. Access to the Project will be provided along Lawrence Crossley Road (right-in/right-out access), Dinah Shore Drive (right-in/right-out access), and Indian Springs Road (full access).

In order to develop the traffic characteristics of the proposed Project, trip-generation rates provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (11th Edition, 2021) are utilized.

The Project is anticipated to generate a total of 5,011 net added vehicle trip-ends per day with 263 added AM peak vehicle hour trips and 271 added PM peak hour vehicle trips. The assumptions and methods used to estimate the Project’s trip generation characteristics are discussed in greater detail in Section

4.1 Project Trip Generation of this report.

1.2 ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
For the purposes of this traffic study, potential deficiencies to traffic and circulation have been assessed for each of the following conditions:
 Existing (2023) Conditions
 Existing Plus Project Conditions
 Background Conditions: Existing plus Ambient plus Cumulative (EAC) (2025) Conditions  Background Plus Project Conditions : Existing plus Ambient plus Project plus Cumulative (EAPC) (2025) Conditions

1 Item 1C - Page 254

URBAN CROSSROADS
8,600 SF C-STORE
CALL DIG ALERT (811) IN ACCORDANCE WITH
GOVERNMENT CODE 4216
CALL 2-BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE BEFORE

YOU DIG, GRADE, OR EXCAVATE FOR THE

MARKING OF UNDERGROUND MEMBER UTILITIES
STOP

DINAH SHORE DR &

LAWRENCE CROSSLEY RD,
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264

ALL REPORTS, PLANS AND

DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY MARKS

ARCHITECTS SHALL REMAIN THE

PROPERTY OF MARKS ARCHITECTS

AND IS INTENDED FOR USE FOR THIS
SPECIFIC PROJECT ONLY.
marks architects 2024c
SD
OO
TA
E
ST

CF FLA I
NR
AI
RKINA
JLE . MA

RENEWAL DATE
9-30-2025
C-26463
SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL 8/2/24
marks
architects
architecture
interior design
retail
restaurants
space planning
master planning
leed accredited
casp
2643 fourth ave.
san diego ca 92103
619-702-9448
DINAH SHORE DR.

INDIAN SPRINGS RD.

PL 408.88'
PL 374.99'

DECELERATION LANE
12 EV CHARGING STALLS
12 MPDS
NO

PARKING
VAN
NO

PARKING
78 PARKING SPACES + 12 EV CHARGING SPACES
11 CARS PER LANE

GENERATOR
TRASH
FUEL TRUCK 56'
NO

PARKING
SIGN
SITE
PLAN
A0.1

EXTEND TURN LANE

SITE PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 25' - 0"

LAWRENCE CROSSLEY RD
1 2
3 4
5 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
16 17
18 19
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 29
30 31
33 32
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 6 15
14 21
20 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 DO NOT ENTER
6'-4"
40'-0"
40'-0"
121'-0"146'-8"
104'-0" 15'-9"
36'-0" 36'-0"24'-0" 31'-9"
9'-0"
16'-6"
35'-6"
35'-0" 35'-0" 35'-0"
25'-0"
19'-0"
9'-0"
25'-0"
25'-0"
90'-0" 10 VEHICLES @ 9'-0" 90'-0" 10 VEHICLES @ 9'-0" 52'-0" 4 VEHICLES @ 11'-0"
225'-4" 23 VEHICLES @ 9'-0"
72'-0" 8 VEHICLES @ 9'-0" 9'-0" 81'-0" 9 VEHICLES @ 9'-0" 9'-0" 45'-0" 5 VEHICLES @ 9'-0"14'-6" 9'-1"40'-0"
37'-1"
16'-5"
17'-4"2'-0"7'-2"
27'-0"
3 VEHICLES
@ 9'-0"
8'-4"
21'-3"
26'-0" 30'-0"
51'-4"
30'-0"19'-0"12'-7" 19'-0"
19'-0"
19'-6"16'-0" 15'-9"
19'-0" 10'-4"
26'-0" 25'-0"
19'-0"30'-0"31'-7"
40'-0"
45'-0"
108'-0" 9 LANES @ 12'-0" 19'-8"
40'-0"
5'-0"
28'-0"8'-0"
33'-0"
6'-2"
22'-8" 14'-2" 26'-0"
19'-0"
11'-1"
11'-8" 12'-1"
7'-7"
3'-4"4'-0"
13'-5"
304'-0"
8'-0"
10'-4"
5'-1"
8'-0"
7'-7"
12'-7"
61'-3" 57'-2"244'-5"
162'-3"120'-4"
88'-0" 8 VEHICLES @ 11'-0"
146'-6"
90'-0" 10 VEHICLES @ 9'-0"
01 01
02 03
04 05
06 07
08 09
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE

PROPERTY LINE

SITE MONUMENT SIGNAGE

STANDARD PARKING SPACES

ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL FROM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY

ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL FROM ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES AND

PUBLIC WAY TO PUBLIC ENTRANCE

KEY NOTES

MAIN ENTRY DOOR, PROVIDE INTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OF ACCESSIBILITY

EXIT DOOR
6" PIPE BOLLARD WITH PLASTIC COVER AT TRANSFORMER.

TRASH ENCLOSURE
FUELING DISPENSERS.

FUEL CANOPY.
6" CONCRETE CURB

ASPHALT PAVING
UNDERGROUND FUEL TANKS.

ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER

HEALY TANK

PARKING LOT LIGHT

LANDSCAPE AREA

EV/ VANPOOL VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE

NEW DRIVEWAY

BIKE RACK

FUEL VENTS
01 01
01 02 02 02
16 03
04 04
04 04
05 07
24 07
1111
09 21
13 14 14
14 14
14 14
15 26
2626
26 26
26 26
26 26 26
26 26
26 26
26 22
22 22
22 22
20 19
24 07 24 24
24 31
24 24
24 71'-0"
18 1818
18 18
18 18
18 18 18 18
18 18
18 1818
18 18
18 18
17 17
06 12

PROPOSED FIRE RISER (INSIDE BUILDING)
24 24
08 08

EV PARKING SPACES ZONE
23 23

NOT USED
27 GAS ATTENDANT ROOM
27 10
17 NO

PARKING
25'-0"
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
28 SIGNAGE TO BE SUBMITTED THROUGH A SEPARATE SIGN PROGRAM PERMIT 28 TYP.
9'-0"
77 90
19'-0"
19'-0"
19'-0"
19'-0"
19'-0"
29 AIR/WATER STATION
29 460 SF
SIGN
03 28
2 Item 1C - Page 255

URBAN I CROSSROADS
0 15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis
EXHIBIT 1-1: SITE PLAN
:i:

I
I
I
I
r~·
+' I
I
1 I
+ ~
,_
j
1/·~
----- 0
LEGEND:
~ 't.. = RIGHT ·IN/RIGHT ·OUT ONLY
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
3 For the existing study area intersections, traffic count data has been collected in October, 2023 during the AM peak period of 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and PM peak period of 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM.

The Existing plus Project (E+P) conditions analysis determines traffic deficiencies that would occur on the existing roadway system with the addition of Project traffic.

The Existing plus Ambient plus Cumulative (EAC) co nditions analysis determines the potential near- term cumulative circulation system deficiencies without the Project. To account for background traffic growth, an ambient growth factor from Existing conditions of 4.04% (2% per year, compounded annually over 2 years) is included for EAC (2025) traffic conditions. The ambient growth is consistent with the growth used by other projects in the area within the City of Palm Springs . The cumulative project list was compiled from information provided by the City of Palm Springs.

The Existing plus Ambient plus Project plus Cumu lative (EAPC) (2025) tra ffic conditions analysis determines the potential cumulative circulation system deficiencies, including the Project.

1.3 STUDY AREA
The Project study area was defined in coordination with the City of Palm Springs. Consistent with City of Palm Springs TIA Guidelines, the study area in cludes any intersection of “Collector” or higher classification street, with “Collector” or higher classification streets, at which the proposed project will add 50 or more peak hour trips. Exhibit 1-2 presents the study area and intersection analysis locations. The intersections listed in Table 1-1 were selected for this TA with City of Palm Springs technical staff concurrence.

TABLE 1-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS LOCATIONS
# Intersection # Intersection
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dinah Shore Dr. 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Ramon Rd. 2 San Luis Dr. / Dinah Shore Dr. 7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dwy. 1 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) / Dinah Shore Dr. 8 Dwy. 2 / Dinah Shore Dr. 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Indian Springs Rd. 9 Dwy. 3 / Indian Springs Rd. 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Sunny Dunes Rd.

1.4 ANALYSIS FINDINGS
This section provides a summary of the analysis resu lts for Existing (2023), Existing Plus Project, EAC (2025), and EAPC (2025) conditions. Table 1-2 presents a summary of study area LOS conditions for each analysis scenario.

3 Item 1C - Page 256

URBAN CROSSROADS
4 Item 1C - Page 257
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 1-2: TRAFFIC ANALYSIS STUDY AREA
> :i: e.
°' ....
>-
i ... z ...

C)
LEGEND:
0 = EXISTING ANALYSIS LOCATION
@ = FUTURE ANALYSIS LOCATION
~ ~ = RIGHT·IN/RIGHT·OUT ONLY
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY
DINAH SHORE DR.
°' 0
>­... a=
V,
3 ~
V,
e-----r
15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
RAMON~ I ---------- ,01---
SUNNY DUNES RD.
ci a=
>­...
.J
V,
:g
a= u ... u z ... a=
:i:
:3
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
5 1.4.1 EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS
For Existing (2023) traffic conditions, the study intersection of Lawrence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Drive (#1) is currently operating at an unacceptable LOS (LOS “E” or worse) during AM and PM peak hours. A separate westbound right turn lane at this intersection would provide acceptable LOS.

No unsignalized study area intersections currently meet the volume warrants for installation of a traffic signal based upon existing traffic counts.

1.4.2 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
For Existing Plus Project (E+P) traffic conditions, the Lawrence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Drive (#1) intersection operates at an unacceptable LOS, as indicated for Existing co nditions. The separate westbound right turn lane at this intersection, needed to serve ex isting conditions, would provide acceptable LOS for E+P conditions.

1.4.3 BACKGROUND (2025) CONDITIONS
For EAC (2025) and EAPC (2025) traffic conditions, the Lawrence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Drive (#1) and Lawrence Crossley Road / Ramon Road (#6) intersections are found to operate at an unacceptable LOS (i.e., LOS “E” or worse) during pe ak hours, with or without the addition of Project traffic. For EAC and EAPC conditions, no other study area intersections meet the volume warrants for installation of a traffic signal.

Improvements discussed in Section 8.1 for the off-site intersections of Lawrence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Drive (#1) and Lawrence Crossley Road / Ra mon Road (#6) address in tersection operational deficiencies for opening year (2025) conditions, needed without or with the Project.

Detailed Project fair share calculations, for each pe ak hour, are provided in Table 8-1 for these two intersections.

Roadway improvements necessary to provide site access are enumerated in Section 8.2.

5 Item 1C - Page 258

URBAN CROSSROADS
# Intersection AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dinah Shore Dr.
- Without Improvements
- With Improvements N/A N/A
2 San Luis Dr. / Dinah Shore Dr.
3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) / Dinah Shore Dr.
4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Indian Springs Rd.
5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Sunny Dunes Rd.
6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Ramon Rd.
- Without Improvements
- With Improvements N/A N/A N/A N/A
7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dwy. 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A
8 Dwy. 2 / Dinah Shore Dr. N/A N/A N/A N/A
9 Cook St. / Gerald Ford Dr. N/A N/A N/A N/A
Legend:
= A - D = E = F
F:\UXRjobs\_15100-15500\_15500\15579\Excel\[15579 - Report.xlsx]1-2_LOS Summary Existing
(2023) E+P
EAPC
(2025)
EAC
(2025)
TABLE 1-2: LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) SUMMARY
6 Item 1C - Page 259
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
• • •
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
7 2 METHODOLOGIES
This section of the report presents the methodologies used to perform the traffic analyses summarized in this report. The methodologies described are consistent with the City of Palm Springs TIA Guidelines. (1)

2.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE
Traffic operations of roadway facilities are described using the term “Level of Service” (LOS). LOS is a qualitative description of traffic flow based on several factors, such as speed, travel time, delay, and freedom to maneuver. Six levels are typically de fined ranging from LOS A, representing completely free-flow conditions, to LOS F, representing breakd own in flow resulting in stop-and-go conditions.

LOS E represents operations at or near Capacity, an unstable level where vehicles are operating with the minimum spacing for maintaining uniform flow.

2.2 INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The definitions of LOS for interrupted traffic flow (f low restrained by the existence of traffic signals and other traffic control devices) differ slightly depe nding on the type of traffic control. The LOS is typically dependent on the quality of traffic flow at the intersections along a roadway. The 6th Edition Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology expresses the LOS at an intersection in terms of delay time for the various intersection approaches. (2 )The HCM uses different procedures depending on the type of intersection control.

2.2.1 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
The City of Palm Springs requires signalized intersection operations analysis based on the methodology described in the HCM. (2) Intersection LOS operations are based on an intersection’s average control delay. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. For signalized intersections LOS is related to the average control delay per vehicle and is correlated to a LOS designation as described on Table 2-1.

The traffic modeling and signal timing optimization software package Synchro (Version 11) has been utilized to analyze signalized intersections. Synchro is a macroscopic traffic software program that is based on the signalized intersection capacity anal ysis as specified in the HCM. Macroscopic level models represent traffic in terms of aggregate measures for each movement at the study intersections. Equations are used to determine me asures of effectiveness such as delay and queue length. The level of service and Capacity analysis performed by Synchro takes into consideration optimization and coordination of signalized intersections within a network.

A saturation flow rate of 1900 has been utilized for all study area intersections located within the study area. The peak hour traffic volumes are adjusted us ing a peak hour factor (PHF) to reflect peak 15- minute volumes. Common practice for LOS analysis is to use a peak 15-minute rate of flow. However, flow rates are typically expressed in vehicles per hour. The PHF is the relationship between the peak 7 Item 1C - Page 260

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
8 15-minute flow rate and the full hourly volume (e.g. PHF = [Hourly Volume] / [4 x Peak 15-minute Flow Rate]). The use of a 15-minute PHF produces a mo re detailed analysis as compared to analyzing vehicles per hour. Existing PHFs have been used fo r all analysis scenarios. Per the HCM, PHF values over 0.95 often are indicative of high traffic volumes with capacity constraints on peak hour flows while lower PHF values are indicative of greater variability of flow during the peak hour. (2) TABLE 2-1: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LOS THRESHOLDS

2.2.2 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
The City of Palm Springs requires the operations of unsignalized intersections be evaluated using the methodology described in the HCM. (2) The LOS rating is based on the weighted average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle (see Table 2-2) . At two-way or side-street stop-controlled intersections, LOS is calculated for each controlle d movement and for the le ft turn movement from the major street, as well as for the intersection as a whole. For approaches composed of a single lane, the delay is computed as the average of all moveme nts in that lane. Delay for the intersection is reported for the worst individual movement at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.

Description
Average Control Delay
(Seconds), V/C ≤ 1.0
Level of Service,
V/C ≤ 1.01
Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression and/or short cycle length.
0 to 10.00 A
Operations with low delay occurring with good progression and/or short cycle lengths.

10.01 to 20.00 B
Operations with average delays resulting from fair
progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear.

20.01 to 35.00 C
Operations with longer delays due to a combination of
unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable.

35.01 to 55.00 D
Operations with high delay values indicating poor
progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios.

Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay.

55.01 to 80.00 E
Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers
occurring due to over saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths.

80.01 and up F
Source: HCM, 6th Edition
1 If V/C is greater than 1.0 then LOS is F per HCM.
8 Item 1C - Page 261

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
9 TABLE 2-2: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LOS THRESHOLDS

2.3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRAN T ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The term “signal warrants” refers to the list of established criteria used by Caltrans and other public agencies to quantitatively justify or determine the po tential need for installation of a traffic signal at an otherwise unsignalized intersection. This TA uses the signal warrant criteria presented in the latest edition of the Caltrans California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). (3) The signal warrant criteria for Existing study ar ea intersections are based upon several factors, including volume of vehicular and pedestrian traffic, frequency of accidents, and location of school areas. The CA MUTCD indicates that the installation of a traffic signal should be considered if one or more of the signal warrants are met. (3) Specifically, this TA utilizes the Peak Hour Volume-based Warrant 3 as the appropriate representative traffic signal warrant analysis for existing traffic conditions and for all future analysis scenarios for existing unsignalized inters ections. Warrant 3 is appropriate to use for this TA because it provides specialized warrant criteria for intersections with rural characteristics. For the pu rposes of this study, the speed limit was the basis for determining whether Urban or Rural warrants were used for a given intersection. Urban warrants have been used as posted speed limits on the major roadways with unsignalized intersections are 40 miles per hour or below and rural warrants have been used on roadways with speeds greater than 40 miles per hour.

Future intersections that do not currently exist ha ve been assessed regarding the potential need for new traffic signals based on future average daily tr affic (ADT) volumes, using the Caltrans planning level ADT-based signal warrant analysis worksheets. Similarly, the speed limit has been used as the basis for determining the use of Urban and Rural warrants.

Traffic signal warrant analyses were performed for the following unsignalized study area intersection shown in Table 2-3:

Description
Average Control Delay
(Seconds), V/C ≤ 1.0
Level of Service,
V/C ≤ 1.01
Little or no delays. 0 to 10.00 A
Short traffic delays. 10.01 to 15.00 B
Average traffic delays. 15.01 to 25.00 C
Long traffic delays. 25.01 to 35.00 D
Very long traffic delays. 35.01 to 50.00 E
Extreme traffic delays with intersection capacity exceeded. > 50.00 F Source: HCM, 6th Edition
1 If V/C is greater than 1.0 then LOS is F per HCM.
9 Item 1C - Page 262

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
10 TABLE 2-3: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS LOCATIONS # Intersection # Intersection
4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Indian Springs Rd. 9 Dwy. 3 / Indian Springs Rd. 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Sunny Dunes Rd.

The Existing conditions traffic signal warrant analysis is presented in the subsequent section, Section 3 Area Conditions of this report. The traffic signal warrant analyses for future conditions are presented in Section 6 EAC (2025) Traffic Conditions and Section 7 EAPC (2025) Traffic Conditions of this report.

It is important to note that a signal warrant defines the minimum co ndition under which the installation of a traffic signal might be warranted. Meeting this threshold condition does not require that a traffic control signal be installed at a particular location, but rather, that other traffic factors and conditions be evaluated in order to determine whether the signal is truly justified. It should also be noted that signal warrants do not necessarily correlate with LOS. An intersection may satisfy a signal warrant condition and operate at or above acceptable LOS or operate below acceptable LOS and not meet a signal warrant.

2.4 MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF SERVICE (LOS)
The City of Palm Springs’ General Plan recommends a minimum LOS standard of LOS D or better. If during the LOS evaluations an intersection or ro adway segment is found to not meet the requisite LOS standard as established by the’ General Plan , improvement modifications will be evaluated to bring the forecasted deficiency to within acceptable LOS thresholds.

The following deficiency criteria has been utilized for the City of Palm Springs to determine whether the addition of project-related traffic at a study intersection would result in a deficiency:
 For signalized intersections:
o Intersection operating at an acceptable LOS D or better without project traffic in which the addition of project traffic caus es the intersection to degrade to a LOS E or F shall identify improvements to improve operations to LOS D or better.
o Intersection that is operating at LOS E or F wi thout project traffic where the project increases delay by 5.0 or more seconds shall identify improvements to offset the increase in delay.  For unsignalized intersections:
o Addition of project related traffic causes the intersection to degrade from an acceptable LOS D or better to LOS E or F. (case a)
o The project adds 5.0 seconds or more of delay to an intersection that is already projected to operate without project traffic at a LOS E or F. (case b) o The intersection meets the peak hour traffic signal warrant after the addition of project traffic. (case c)
o If the conditions above are satisfied, improvements should be identified that achieve LOS D or better for case a) above or to pre-project LOS and delay for case b) above. 10 Item 1C - Page 263

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
11 3 AREA CONDITIONS
This section provides a summary of the existing circulation network, the City of Palm Springs General Plan Circulation Network, and a review of existing peak hour intersection operations and traffic signal warrant analyses.

3.1 EXISTING CIRCULATION NETWORK
Pursuant to the Project scope (A ppendix 1.1), the study area includes 6 existing and 3 future intersections as shown previously on Exhibit 1-2, wh ere the Project is anticipated to contribute 50 or more peak hour trips or has been added at the di rection of City staff. Exhibit 3-1 illustrates the number of through traffic lanes for existing roadways and traffic controls for study area intersections.

3.2 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT As noted previously, the Project site is located on Agua Caliente Indian Reservation property at the northwest corner of Lawrence Crossley Road and Di nah Shore Drive in the Ci ty of Palm Springs.

Exhibit 3-2 shows the City of Palm Springs General Plan Circulation Element, with planned roadway classifications. Exhibit 3-3 illustrates the City of Palm Springs General Plan roadway cross-sections.

Ramon Road is classified as a Major Thoroughfare which can accommodate six travel lanes in the study area.

Sunny Dunes Road is classified as a Collector within the study area. A Collector typically has two travel lanes.

Dinah Shore Drive is classified as a Secondary Thoroughfare (4-lane divided) within the study area, which typically have two travel lanes in each direction with a center raised median.

Lawrence Crossley Road is classified as a Secondary Thoroughfare within the study area, with one lane in each direction, a center striped median, and on-street bike lanes.

3.3 TRANSIT SERVICE
The City of Palm Springs is currently served by the SunLine Transit Agency; currently, Route 2 is located along Ramon Road to the north. Transit service is reviewed and updated by Sunline periodically to address ridership, budget and community demand needs. Changes in land use can affect these periodic adjustments which may lead to either enhanced or reduced service where appropriate.

3.4 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES
Exhibits 3-4 and 3-5 illustrates the City of Palm Sp rings recreational trails map and bikeway system, respectively.

11 Item 1C - Page 264

URBAN CROSSROADS
12 Item 1C - Page 265
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-1: EXISTING NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES AND INTERSECTION CONTROLS = > 3:
e.
0: ....
> a I= ... :::,
<(
... z ...
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 2
Dinah Shore Dr.
.L
J + L, -r
_J
-v7 tr
y
4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 5 Indian Springs Rd.
.,
_J lt DEF 7
* ~
7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy.1
FUTURE

INTERSECTION
,I
San Luis Dr. &
Dinah Shore Dr.
.L
-, L, -r
_J
-v7 f--
y
Lawrence Crossley Rd. &
Sunny Dunes Rd.
.,
_J lt
~
Dwy. 2 &
Dinah Shore Dr.

FUTURE

INTERSECTION
3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111)
& Dinah Shore Dr.
1==~
., + LL, -r
_J
-v7 t f--
y
6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. &
Ramon Rd.

LDEF
-,L, -r
_J
-
~~r
-' 9 Dwy. 3&
Indian Springs Rd.

FUTURE

INTERSECTION
0:
0 >
iPa:D
... :rs 0::

VI
5 ::::t .J N z
<(
VI
a
N
SUNNY DUNES RD.
--------- ,e 2U
ci
0::
> ...
.J VI
VI
0 0::
u
"' a li1 N ...
0::
~
C>
A ~mo DINAH SHORE DR. A
---- v---... 4 .. 5 ... --------------- u------------- 1 3D 4D I 4D 4D
15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
LEGEND:

C) = INTERSECTION ID
~ = TRAFFIC SIGNAL
_._ = STOP SIGN
4 = NUMBER OF LANES
D
u
=DIVIDED
=UNDIVIDED
~ ---r
DEF = DEFACTO RIGHT TURN LANE
RTO = RIGHT TURN OVERLAP
* = LEFT TURN LANE ACCOMMODATED WITHIN
TWO·WAY LEFT·TURN LANE (TWLTL) MEDIAN
a
N
4D
13 Item 1C - Page 266
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-2: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CIRCULATION PLAN
I
- ··- '
! / L _____ I
i r
.

I
I
j
Sunrise Pli:.wy
LEGEND:
15579 - 01 - Study Area.dwg
Freeway
Expressway
Major Thoroughfare (6 - lane divided)
Major Thoroughfare (4 - lane divided)
Secondary Thoroughfare (4 - lane divided)
Secondary Thoroughfare
Collector (2 - lane divided)
Collector (2 - lane undivided)
Local
\
SOURCE: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS GENERAL PLAN (2007)
[ __ j City Boundary
' ... -... -..
: ______ j Sphere of Influence
• Critical Intersection*
*Intersection improvements
required to maintain acceptable LOS.
14 Item 1C - Page 267
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-3: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TYPICAL STREET CROSS-SECTIONS Major Thoroughfare
R/W (6 Lane Divided) R/W
1·
110 '
·1 r
86' )I 10'
1< )I
Major Thoroughfare
R/W (4 Lane Divided) R/W
1·
100 '
·1 r
76' )I 10'
IE ) I
Secondary Thoroughfare

R/W R/W
1• 1-< _ ao~/_a·-=-------=--1 •1
--.., ______________ ,. ___
Collector Street

R/W R/W
r-====6 0' -66 '====--1
I r 40. )I I
Local Street

R/W R/W
~50~~9
SOURCE: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS GENERAL PLAN (2007)
15579 - 01 - Study Area.dwg
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
15 The existing pedestrian facilities within the study area are shown on Exhibit 3-6. As shown on Exhibit 3-6, existing on-street bike lanes are located along Lawrence Crossley Road. Sidewalks exist on some portions along Ramon Road, Dinah Shore Drive (inclu ding adjacent to the Project), west side of Lawrence Crossley Road from north of Ramon Road to Dinah Shore Drive, east side of Lawrence Crossley Road from north of Ramon Road to the southerly Walmart Access, and east side San Luis Del Rey Drive. Sidewalks also exist on both sides along Sunny Dunes Road, Indian Springs Road, and Gene Autry Trail within the study area.

Shared lane markings for “sharrows” are provided on Sunny Dunes Road to indicate a shared lane environment for bicycles and automobiles.

3.5 EXISTING (2023) TRAFFIC COUNTS
The intersection LOS analysis is based on the traffic volumes observed during the peak hour conditions using traffic count data collected in Oc tober 2023. The City of Palm Springs experiences seasonal population variations over the course of the year, with relatively higher populations during the winter months from January to the end of March. To compensate for the discrepancy, counts not taken during this peak winter period (January 2 to March 31) require seasonal adjustments. A 10% increase is applied to counts taken in October to estimate peak season. This factor is consistent with other nearby jurisdictions within the Coachella Valley area.

The following peak hours were selected for analysis:
 Weekday AM Peak Hour (peak hour between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM)  Weekday PM Peak Hour (peak hour between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM) The raw manual peak hour turning movement traffic count data sheets are included in Appendix 3.1.

The weekday AM and PM peak hour count data ar e representative of typical peak hour traffic conditions in the study area. There were no observations made in the field that would indicate atypical traffic conditions on the count dates, such as construction activity that would prevent or limit roadway access and detour routes. These raw turning volumes have been flow conserved between intersections with limited access, no access and where there are currently no uses generating traffic.

Existing weekday peak hour intersection volumes are shown on Exhibit 3-7.

Existing weekday ADT volumes are also shown on Exhibit 3-7. Where actual 24-hour tube count data was not available, Existing ADT volumes were based upon factored intersection peak hour counts collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. using the following formula for each intersection leg:

Weekday PM Peak Hour (Approach Volume + Exit Volume) x 12.987 = Leg Volume A comparison of the PM peak hour and daily traffic volumes of various roadway segments within the study area indicated that the peak-to-daily relationship is approximately 7.70 percent. As such, the above equation utilizing a factor of 12.987 estimates the ADT volumes on the study area roadway segments assuming a peak-to-daily relationship of approximately 7.70 percent (i.e., 1/0.0770 = 12.987) and was assumed to sufficiently estimate average daily traffic (ADT) volumes for planning-level analyses.
15 Item 1C - Page 268

URBAN CROSSROADS
16 Item 1C - Page 269
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-4: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS RECREATIONAL TRAILS MAP LEGEND:

Trail Heads
~ Hiking/Eques trian
~ 4-Wheel Drive
~ Unpaved Road
_.. ·••••• .•· Proposed Hiking/Equestrian/Back packing
~ Bike Paths
~ Streets
C=:J City and Sphere Limits
15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
SOURCE: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS GENERAL PLAN
17 Item 1C - Page 270
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-5: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS BIKEWAYS MAP
LEGEND:

Existing Bikeways O
Class I, Bike Path
~ Class II, Bike Lane
Class Ill, Bike Route
Mixed Use Bike Route
15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
Top Priority Projects O
.,. Class I, Bike Path
,... "'-. __ ., Class II, Bike Lane
.,...., _,,, Class 111, Bike Route
,,,.........___ _ _, Mixed Use II
SOURCE: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS GENERAL PLAN
2nd Priority Projects O 3rd Priority Projects o
, ····· ... ... Class I, Bike Path , -. ·-" Class I, Bike Path , ···· ••• __ ., Class 11 , Bike Lane , - ••• _., Class II, Bike Lane r ··-... __ ., Class Ill, Bike Route , - ••• _,, Class Ill , Bike Route ~./ Streets
c::::J City and Sphere Umts
18 Item 1C - Page 271
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-6: EXISTING PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE FACILITIES
LEGEND:

C) = INTERSECTION ID
• ft = RIGHT ·IN/RIGHT-OUT ONLY
---- =FUTURE ROADWAY
- = SIDEWALK/PATH
   = MARKED CROSSWALK
- = ON-STREET BIKE LANES
= SHARROW LANE (SHARED LANE)
DINAH SHORE DR.
15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
RAMON RD.

SUNNY DUNES RD.

Ill • ••• o,:---­.. -..
------------ ft ------------ u
ci
0::
>
~
~
0 0::
u ... u z ...
0::
~
19 Item 1C - Page 272
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-7: EXISTING (2023) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
LEGEND:
8 = INTERSECTION ID
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY

10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (lOOO'S)
~ 't.. = RIGHT·IN/RIGHT·OUT ONLY
GEfUtm>Y "'· I a r
(HWY.111) --t
---- e a., I ;
]

AM PEAK HOUR
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 2 San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr.
,-..ono L102 CO N L95 coon L440 ..,...,."' <0~= -+-868 v=~ -+-904 on-.,..., -+-363 .H l ,63 .H l ,21 .Hl ,151
31_j iti 24_j iti 25_j iti 668-- cocoo- 638-- N..,- 253-- -oco-.,. 797 '°~"' 147 687 ......... "' N
4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & Indian Springs Rd. Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd.
co on L24 .,_,-.. on-o -"'o-_ .., ..,..., ..,N _ -+-1551 .H .H .Hl ,301
8_j i t 24_j it 36_j iti 147 ~i 247 ..,N 893-- NO-on
N NN 817 u,-~
7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3&
Dwy. 1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd.

FUTURE FUTURE FUTURE

INTERSECTION INTERSECTION INTERSECTION
15579 - 01 - study area.dwg

PM PEAK HOUR
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 2
Dinah Shore Dr.

N..,CO L135 ,...,!t~ -+-723
.H l ,59
66_j iti 768-- ..,...,.-
867 ...,_~co
4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 5
Indian Springs Rd.

N ,.._o _..,
.H
17_j it 117 coo N,-.. ..,
7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy.1
FUTURE

INTERSECTION
l-0•: L

36.3 m.j 40.1
LAWRENCE "':

CROSSLEY RD. °'
~
0 .,:

SUNNY DUNES RD. C:}

1.3 ci a::
>
""' .J
1/'1 1/'1
0 a:: u
""' .....,__ u .... z .,:
\ ""' a::
~
~
San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111)
Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr.
"'8 L59 ..,. ..... L407 ... coo .., __
-+-734 ..,..,..,. --252
.H l ,6 .Hl ,123
30_j iti 36_j iti 774-- 0--.,.N 264-- -OCON
47 587 "lti7i~
Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. &
Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd.

N L25 "' Nco--.,.N ..,_..,. -+-1090
.H .Hl ,186
36_j i t 44_j iti 357 N- 1438-- onco-o N~ 887 o-o - .., Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3&
Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd.

FUTURE FUTURE

INTERSECTION INTERSECTION
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
20 3.6 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
Existing peak hour traffic operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections based on the analysis methodologies presented in Section 2.2 Intersection Capacity Analysis of this report. The intersection operations analysis results are summarized on Table 3-1, which indicates that Lawrence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Driv e (#1) operates at unacceptable LOS (LOS “E” or worse). The intersection operations analysis worksheets are included in Appendix 3.2 of this TA.

3.7 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
Traffic signal warrants for Existing traffic conditions are based on 2023 peak hour intersection turning volumes (see Appendix 3.3). For Existing (2023) traffic conditions, unsignalized study area intersections are not anticipated to meet volume warrants for installation of a traffic signal.

20 Item 1C - Page 273

URBAN CROSSROADS
Delay3 Level of
Traffic Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound (secs.) Service # Intersection Control1

LTRLTRLTRLTR A M P M AMP M
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 111111120120 58.7 58.2 E E 2 San Luis Dr. / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 110110120120 19.3 17.1 B B 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 12022012011 2 > 37.1 37.6 D D 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Indian Springs Rd. CSS 1* 1001010d000 13.2 13.5 B B 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Sunny Dunes Rd. CSS 110010101000 13.9 13.1 B B 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Ramon Rd. TS 0.5 0.5 111012112d 18.8 34.8 B C 7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dwy. 1
8 Dwy. 2 / Dinah Shore Dr.
9 Dwy. 3 / Indian Springs Rd.
1 TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross-Street Stop
2 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.
3 Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), 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.

BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).

F:\UXRjobs\_15100-15500\_15500\15579\Excel\[15579 - Report.xlsx]E TABLE 3-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS Intersection Approach Lanes2
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; d = Defacto Right Turn Lane; 0.5 = Shared Lane; 1! = Shared Left/Through/Right lane; Future Intersection
Future Intersection
Future Intersection
> = Right-Turn Overlap Phasing; * = Turn lane accommodated within two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL) striped median

21 Item 1C - Page 274
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
22 This page intentionally left blank

22 Item 1C - Page 275

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
23 4 PROJECTED FUTURE TRAFFIC
This section presents the traffic volumes estimated to be generated by the Project, as well as the Project’s trip assignment onto the study area roadway network. The Project is proposed to consist of 24 gasoline/diesel fuel pumps with up to 9,500 square feet of convenience store, of which 4,000 square feet would be Class II gaming space.

It is anticipated that the Project would open by year 2025. Access to the Project will be provided along Lawrence Crossley Road (right-in/right-out access), Dinah Shore Drive (right-in/right-out access), and Indian Springs Road (full access).

4.1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
T r i p g e n e r a t i o n r e p r e s e n t s t h e a m o u n t o f t r a f f ic which is both attracted to and produced by a development. Determining traffic generation for a specific project is therefore based upon forecasting the amount of traffic that is expected to be both attracted to and produced by the specific land uses being proposed for a given development.

In order to develop the traffic characteristics of the proposed project, the trip generation rates provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (11th Edition, 2021) have been utilized (4).

Table 4-1 shows the vehicle trip generation rates for the Project, as well as the vehicle trip generation summary with daily and peak hour trip generation estimates. As shown on Table 4-1, the Project is anticipated to generate a total of 5,011 net added vehicle trip-ends per day with 263 added AM peak vehicle hour trips and 271 added PM peak hour vehicle trips.

4.2 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
The Project trip distribution and assignment proce ss represents the directional orientation of traffic to and from the Project site. The trip distribution pattern is heavily influenced by the geographical location of the site, the location of surrounding uses, and proximity to the surrounding highway network. Trip distribution patterns proposed for the Project for inbound and outbound conditions are illustrated on Exhibits 4-1 and 4-2, respectively.

4.3 MODAL SPLIT
The potential for Project trips to be reduced by the use of public transit, walking or bicycling have not been included as part of the Project’s estimated trip generation. Essentially, the Project’s traffic projections are “conservative” in that these altern ative travel modes would reduce the forecasted traffic volumes.

23 Item 1C - Page 276

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
24 TABLE 4-1: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Trip Generation Rates1
Land Use
ITE LU
Code Quantity 2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Casino/Video Lottery Entertainment 473 4.0 TSF 11.37 8.94 20.31 14.15 13.06 27.21 388.18 Convenience Store/Gas Station - GFA (5.5-10k) 945 24 VFP 15.80 15.80 31.60 13.45 13.45 26.90 345.75

Trip Generation Results
Land Use
ITE LU
Code Quantity 2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Casino/Video Lottery Entertainment 473 4.0 TSF 45 36 81 57 52 109 1,553 Convenience Store/Gas Station - GFA (5.5-10k) 945 24 VFP 379 379 758 323 323 646 8,298 Project Subtotal 424 415 839 380 375 755 9,851
ITE 945 Pass-By (76% AM; 75% PM)3 (288) (288) (576) (242) (242) (484) (4,840) PROJECT TOTAL ADDED TRIPS 136 127 263 138 133 271 5,011

1 Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021). 2 VFP = Vehicle Fueling Position; TSF = Thousand Square Feet 3 Source: 2021 Pass-By Tables for ITE Trip Generation Appendices

4.4 PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT
The assignment of traffic from the Project area to the adjoining roadway system is based upon the Project trip generation, trip distribution, and the arterial highway and local street system improvements that would be in place by the time of initial occupancy of the Project. Based on the identified Project traffic generation and trip distribution patterns, Project weekday ADT and weekday peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-3.

4.5 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC
Future year traffic forecasts have been based upon background (ambient) growth at 2% per year for 2025 traffic conditions. The total ambient growth is 4.04% for 2025 traffic conditions. This ambient growth rate is added to existing traffic volumes to account for area-wide growth not reflected by cumulative development projects. Ambient growth has been added to daily and peak hour traffic volumes on surrounding roadways, in conjunction with traffic generated by the development of future projects that have been approved but not yet built and/or for which development applications have been filed and are under consideration by governing agencies.

24 Item 1C - Page 277

URBAN CROSSROADS
25 Item 1C - Page 278
15 URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-1: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION (OUTBOUND)
-> 3:
e.

Ii ....
> a:: .... => <t
""' z
""' C)
LEGEND:
10 = PERCENT FROM PROJECT
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY
~ 'to = RIGHT·IN/RIGHT·OUT ONL V
11'1
25 DINAH SHORE DR.
15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
RAMON RD.

SUNNY DUNES RD.
15 Ii
0 >
""' a::

VI
5 .J
z <t
VI
15 5
11'1 N
10 15
26 Item 1C - Page 279
15 URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-2: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION {INBOUND)
11'1
LEGEND:
10 = PERCENT TO PROJECT
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY
~ 't.. = RIGHT·IN/RIGHT·OUT ONL V
= > 3: e.

Ii
I-
> a::

I-
=> c(
... z ...

C>
DINAH SHORE DR.
25 15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
Ii
0 > ... a::
"' 5 .J
z
c(
"'

RAMON RD
15 SUNNY DUNES RD.
5 25
11'1 N
0 M
ci a::
> ...
ii!
"' 0 a:: u ... u z ... a::
~
INDIAN SPRINGS RD. ~-----+-,,-._
15 11'1
N
10 15
27 Item 1C - Page 280
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-3: PROJECT ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AM PEAK HOUR • PROJECT PASS-BY
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd. Dwy. I
~o~ Lo 00
-o 00 ... r:-
.H l ,o .H Ji
40_J iti 30_J it 1697 t ·40-- 000 07 00 0
07 ... ,:, V
PM PEAK HOUR • PROJECT PASS-BY
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd. Dwy. I
~o~ Lo a-°'
-o 00 111'f'
Jil ,o Ji Ji
33_J iti 25_J it 1427 t ·33-- 000 07 COIII M
07 "'':" M
LEGEND:
8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3 &
Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd.
a,
L14s co .-a J - -89 ,10
o-- o-- ii 07 00 M
8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3 &
Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd.

V
L124 ... .-a J - -74 ,58
o-- o-- ii 07 0111 N
1-0NRD L

0.8 m.j 0.5
LAWRENCE "?
CROSSLEY RD. -
~
"?
SUNNY DUNES RD. C:}

0.3 ci a::
>
""' .J
VI VI
0 a:: u
""' .....,___ u "! z
\ ""' a::
~
~
INDIAN
0 = INTERSECTION ID
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY

10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (10OO'S)
~ '\. = RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT ONLY
- Q SPRINGS RD. C,
u ~Er .tI:~~
SAN LUIS REY DR.--1 : >>~..; < > SITE: I-I ~ It<><><><>: ... DINAH SHORE DR. f),----------' 1))1 __________ 0 _

1.3 J~ ~ I 1.3 2.1 I~ 0.8
GENE AUTRY TR.--1 d
(HWY. 111) I
---- e

0.8 I d
AM PEAK HOUR • PROJECT ADDED PM PEAK HOUR • PROJECT ADDED 1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 2 San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) 1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 2 San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr. "'°'°'
Lo 000 Lo oo ... L6
JTl -21 -32 -20 ,o Jil ,o Jil ,6
..,oo Lo 000 Lo oo ... L7
-NN -21 -33 -19 Jtl ,o Jil ,o Jil ,1
34_J iti o_J iti o_J iti o-- 000 34-- 000 20-- 00 ...
07 N 07 07
35_J iti o_J iti o_J iti o-- Noo 35-- 000 21-- 00 ...
07 07 07
4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & Indian Springs Rd. Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd. Indian Springs Rd. Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd.

Ost o;;!; 000 Lo
-o J • Ji Jil ,14
Ost o;;!; 000 Lo
-o Ji J • Jil ,14
38_J i t o_J it o_J iti 07 ;;i;o 77 "'~ o-- ~0!:l 207
40_J it o_J i t o_J iti 07 ~o 77 ...... o-- 2ot::i M 207 7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3& 7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3& Dwy. 1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd. Dwy. 1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd. sto •14, -o J • J -13 ,34
sto 2l4, -o J i J _-13 ,35
517 t 34-- o-- ii V 207 a-co
M -...
537 t 35-- o-- ii
Ill 217 00 M NV
15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
28 Exhibit 4-4 illustrates the cumulati ve development location map. Th e cumulative projects listed are those that would generate traffic and would contribute traffic to study area intersections. A summary of cumulative development projects and their prop osed land uses are shown on Table 4-2. If applicable, the traffic generated by individual cumulative projects was manually added to the Opening Year Cumulative forecasts to ensure that traffi c generated by the listed cumulative development projects on Table 4-2 are reflected as part of the background traffic. Cumulative ADT and peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-5.

The near-term traffic analysis includes the followi ng traffic conditions, with the various traffic components:
 EAC (2025)
o Existing (2023) volumes
o Ambient growth traffic (4.04% over 2 years)
o Cumulative development traffic
 EAPC (2025)
o Existing (2023) volumes
o Ambient growth traffic (4.04% over 2 years)
o Project traffic
o Cumulative development traffic
The traffic generated by the proposed Project wa s then manually added to the base volume to determine EAC/EAPC forecasts.

28 Item 1C - Page 281

URBAN CROSSROADS
29 Item 1C - Page 282
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-4: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION MAP
LEGEND:
0 = CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT ID
15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
30 TABLE 4-2: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LAND USE SUMMARY
ID Project Name Land Use1 Quantity Units2
City of Palm Springs
PS1 Walmart Station Convenience Store/Gas Station 16 VFP PS2 Lumen (previously Vibrante) Condominium 41 DU
PS3 Palm Springs Surf Club
(rehabilitation/expansion of existing water park) Water Park 7.746 TSF PS4 Parker Hotel Expansion Hotel 32 RM
PS5 Canyon View Single Family Detached Residential 80 DU PS6 West Coast Self Storage RV/boat Storage 61.658 TSF
PS7 College of the Desert (Phase 1) Junior/Community College 2,949 STU City of Cathedral City
C1 Horizon Hotel
(Conversion of existing senior facility to 68-unit hotel) Hotel 68 RM C2 District East Single Family Detached Residential 43 DU C3 Cree Gas Station Convenience Store w/ Gas Station 8 VFP C4 Nirvana Estates Single Family Detached Residential 103 DU C5 Cathedral City Events Center Event Center 80.0 TSF

1 DU = Dwelling Unit; RM = Room; TSF = Thousand Square Feet; VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions

30 Item 1C - Page 283

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
31 5 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT COND ITIONS TRAFFIC CONDITIONS This section discusses the traffic forecasts for Existi ng plus Project (E+P) conditions and the resulting intersection operations and traffic signal warrant analyses.

5.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for E+P conditions are consistent with those shown previously on Exhibit 3-1, with the exception of Project driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by the Project to provide site access (e.g., intersection and roadway improvements at the Project’s frontage and driveways).

5.2 E+P TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
This scenario includes Existing traffic volumes plus the addition of Project tr affic. The weekday ADT and weekday peak hour intersection turning movement volumes which can be expected for E+P traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 5-1.

5.3 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
E+P peak hour traffic operations have been evalua ted for the study area intersections based on the analysis methodologies presented in Section 2 Methodologies of this TA. The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 5-1, which indicates that the existing LOS deficiency at Lawrence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Drive (#1) continue s to operate at an unacceptable LOS under E+P conditions. The Project increases the intersection delay at this location by a maximum of 2.3 seconds, which is below the City criteria for determinatio n of full Project responsibility. The intersection operations analysis worksheets for E+P traffic conditions is included in Appendix 5.1 of this TA.

Providing a separate westbound right turn lane at the off-site deficient in tersection of Lawrence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Drive (#1) addresses the intersection operational deficiency for existing , as well as E+P conditions. The effectiveness of the recommended improvements at this location is presented in Table 5-1 for E+P traffic conditions. The intersection operations analysis worksheets for E+P traffic conditions, with improvements, are included in Appendix 5.1 of this TA.

5.4 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
The traffic signal warrant analysis for E+P traffic conditions provided in Appendix 3.3. As noted previously, unsignalized study area intersections are not anticipated to meet volume-based warrants for a traffic signal. The remaining unsignalized in tersections are not anticipated to meet peak hour volume-based warrants and daily volume-based warrants with the addition of Project traffic (see Appendix 3.3).

31 Item 1C - Page 284

URBAN CROSSROADS
32 Item 1C - Page 285
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 5-1: EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
LEGEND:
8 = INTERSECTION ID
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY

10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (lOOO'S)
~ 't.. = RIGHT·IN/RIGHT·OUT ONLY
]
l-0•: L

37.1 m.j 40.6 ...

LAWRENCE o
CROSSLEY RD. -
~
...
0 SUNNY DUNES RD. C:}

1.5 ci a::
> ....
...I
1/'1 1/'1
0 a:: u .... ... .....,__ u 0 z
\ .... -a::
~
~
INDIAN
---Q SPRINGS RD. C,
GEfUtm>Y "'· I a r
(HWY.111) --t
---- e

9.7 I
-WIS REY OR. 1 ~ •·• r~:. £ 111~
--t ~ It<><><><>: : DINAH SHORE DR. f), __________ ,.
1 __________
0 _
21 .9 J d I 23.0 23.9 I : 25.5 ;

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 2 San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) 1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 2 San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr. 8'!!:$ L102 CO N L95 v~~ L446
-N- -+-889 v=~ -+-936 .,,..,..., -+-383
.H l ,63 .H l ,21 .Hl ,151
.,,..,_ L135 "'8 L59 M~::t L414 o,$!~ -+-744
.., __
-+-767 ............ --211
.H l ,59 .H l ,6 .Hl ,130
105_j iti 24_j iti 25_j iti 628-- cocoo- 672-- N..,- 273-- -oco- 797 co~i.n 147 687 ..,,.._ ....

N
134_j iti 30_j iti 36_j iti 735-- .,, .... - 809-- 0-VN 285-- -ocoo- 867 o,~CO 47 587 .... -.... "'-
4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & Indian Springs Rd. Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd. Indian Springs Rd. Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd. "' .,,g: -"'o- L24 ~;;: ........ ..,N_ -+-1551
.H .H .Hl ,315
.., "' L25 ........ N Nco-_.., ........ ..,_..,. -+-1090 .H .H .Hl ,200
76_j i t 24_j it 36_j iti 147 "'"' 317 .,_..,. 893-- -o-co =N NV 1017 ..... _!!!
N
82_j it 36_j i t 44_j iti 117 -in 427 .,_..,. 1438-- incoo- ~ .... NO- 1087 ~-;;; .., ..,
7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3& 7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3& Dwy. 1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd. Dwy. 1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd.

N co -N 0 L159 =.., J
-+-31
.H -+-947 ,104
ov .... o"' L166 -N
"' --45
.H J -+-768 ,93
2207 t 812-- 22-- ii "' 207 0-CO .., --o ..,
1957 t 955-- 28-- ii "' 21, oin
"'
N-0 ....
15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
Delay3 Level of
Traffic Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound (secs.) Service3 # Intersection Control1

LTRLTRLTRLTR A M P M AMP M
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 111111120120 58.7 60.1 E E - With Improvements TS 11111112012 1 33.8 34.0 C C
2 San Luis Dr. / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 110110120120 20.8 17.5 C B 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 12022012011 2 > 39.1 40.9 D D 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Indian Springs Rd. CSS 1* 1001010d000 19.9 19.1 C C 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Sunny Dunes Rd. CSS 110010101000 14.8 13.7 B B 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Ramon Rd. TS 0.5 0.5 111012112d 20.5 37.9 C D 7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dwy. 1 CSS 01001000 1 0 0 0 14.3 12.5 B B 8 Dwy. 2 / Dinah Shore Dr. CSS 00000 1 02002 1 14.6 12.7 B B 9 Dwy. 3 / Indian Springs Rd. CSS 0 1! 000001d 0 . 5 0 . 5 09 . 59 . 5 A A 1 TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross-Street Stop
2 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.
3 Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), 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.

BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).

F:\UXRjobs\_15100-15500\_15500\15579\Excel\[15579 - Report.xlsx]EP L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; d = Defacto Right Turn Lane; 0.5 = Shared Lane; 1! = Shared Left/Through/Right lane; > = Right-Turn Overlap Phasing; * = Turn lane accommodated within two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL) striped median; 1 = Improvement TABLE 5-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS Intersection Approach Lanes2

33 Item 1C - Page 286
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
34 This page intentionally left blank
34 Item 1C - Page 287

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
35 6 EAC (2025) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
This section discusses the traffic forecasts for Existing plus Ambient plus Cumulative (EAC) conditions and the resulting intersection operations and traffic signal warrant analyses.

The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for EAC (2025) conditions are consistent with those shown previously on Exhibit 3-1, with the exception driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by cumulative projects to provide site access are also assumed to be in place for EAC (2025) conditions only (e .g., intersection and roadway improvements at the cumulative projects’ frontage and driveways).

6.1 EAC TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
T h i s s c e n a r i o i n c l u d e s E x i s t i n g t r a f f i c v o l u m e s p l u s a n a m b i e n t g r o w t h f a c t o r o f 4 . 0 4 % a n d t h e addition of cumulative projects traffic. The weekday ADT and weekday peak hour intersection turning movement volumes which can be expected for EAC (2025) traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 6-1.

6.2 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
EAC peak hour traffic operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections based on the analysis methodologies presented in Section 2 Methodologies of this TA. The intersection analysis results summarized in Table 6-1, indicate that the Lawrence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Drive (#1) and Lawrence Crossley Road / Ramon Road (#6) intersections are found to operate at an unacceptable LOS (i.e., LOS “E” or worse) under EAC conditions without improvements. The intersection operations analysis worksheets for EAC traffic conditions is included in Appendix 6.1 of this TA.

6.3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
The traffic signal warrant analysis for EAC (2024) traffic conditions provided in Appendix 3.3.

Unsignalized study area intersections are not anticipated to meet peak hour volume-based warrants and daily volume-based warrants for a traffic signal for background conditions (see Appendix 3.3).

6.4 CUMULATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
The following improvements address off-site inte rsection operational deficiencies for EAC (2025) conditions.

Lawrence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Drive (#1)
 Provide separate westbound right turn lane.

Lawrence Crossley Road / Ramon Road (#6)
 Provide separate northbound left turn lane.
 Provide overlap phase for existing northbound right turn lane 35 Item 1C - Page 288

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
36 The effectiveness of the recommended improvements at these locations is presented in Table 6-1 for EAC (2025) traffic conditions. The intersection operations analysis worksheets for EAC (2025) traffic conditions, with intersection improvements, are included in Appendix 6.1 of this TA.

36 Item 1C - Page 289

URBAN CROSSROADS
37 Item 1C - Page 290
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 6-1: EAC (2025) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
LEGEND:
8 = INTERSECTION ID
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY

10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (lOOO'S)
~ 't.. = RIGHT·IN/RIGHT·OUT ONLY
]
l-0•: L

40.0 m.j 43.9 ..,
LAWRENCE .,;
CROSSLEY RD. -
~
...
0 SUNNY DUNES RD. C:}

1.3 ci a::
> ....
...I
1/'1 1/'1
0 a:: u .... .., .....,__ u 0 z
\ .... -a::
~
~
INDIAN
---Q SPRINGS RD. C,
GEfUtm>Y ra. I i r
(HWY.111) --t
---- e

9.4 I
-WISREYOR ~ ~ U t[s:iij:

DINAH SHORE DR. f), __________ ,.
1 __________
0 _

21.7 J d I 22.8 22.8 I :;:! 26.3
;

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 2 San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) 1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 2 San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr. '°O Luz 0 .... L102 ..ociocio L459 -NN 0'N- -+-906 ui=~ -+-946 .,,..,...., -+-379 .H l ,68 .H l ,22 .Hl ,160
~~§ L151 ... L93 "'"' L4z4 - 0 VNN
-+-761
..,. __
-+-773 ............. -+-265
.H l ,65 .H l ,6 .Hl ,134
32_j iti 25_j iti 26_j iti 101-- ...,.,..,, 671-- N...,- 264-- r--vN 837 r--~-o 157 717 M;_;,.._
69_j iti 31_j iti 37_j iti 807-- ..,.,. ... 815-- 0'VN 279-- oo-N 917 .... NOO 47 607 ....... .,,
N "'-
4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & Indian Springs Rd. Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd. Indian Springs Rd. Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd. o:::l "' Lz5 r--0 N.._0 NV ........ ...,NN -+-1642
.H .H .Hl ,366
..,;;; 0 Lz6 ..,.,; ..... .,. ..... _..., ...,_..,. --1155 .H .H .Hl ,256
8_j i t 25_j it 37_j iti 157 N- 257 VN 938-- oooin
-~ NII> 1377 ONO N - N
18_j it 37_j i t 46_j iti 117 0'0 367 ...,0 1513-- 0"'"' NN Nst 1547 .... -... .... - ..., 7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3& 7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3& Dwy. 1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd. Dwy.1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd.

FUTURE FUTURE FUTURE FUTURE FUTURE FUTURE

INTERSECTION INTERSECTION INTERSECTION INTERSECTION INTERSECTION INTERSECTION 15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
Delay3 Level of
Traffic Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound (secs.) Service # Intersection Control1

LTRLTRLTRLTR A M P M AMP M
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 111111120120 59.6 61.9 E E - With Improvements TS 11111112012 1 36.6 40.9 D D
2 San Luis Dr. / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 110110120120 21.9 19.3 C B 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 12022012011 2 > 39.2 41.1 D D 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Indian Springs Rd. CSS 1* 1001010d000 13.9 14.4 B B 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Sunny Dunes Rd. CSS 110010101000 14.8 13.9 B B 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Ramon Rd. TS 0.5 0.5 111012112d 27.7 57.5 C E - With Improvements TS 1 1 1> 11012112d 23.4 34.8 C C
7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dwy. 1
8 Dwy. 2 / Dinah Shore Dr.
9 Dwy. 3 / Indian Springs Rd.
1 TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross-Street Stop
2 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.
3 Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), 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.

BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).

F:\UXRjobs\_15100-15500\_15500\15579\Excel\[15579 - Report.xlsx]EAC TABLE 6-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EAC (2025) CONDITIONS Intersection Approach Lanes2
Future Intersection
Future Intersection
Future Intersection
> = Right-Turn Overlap Phasing; * = Turn lane accommodated within two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL) striped median; 1 = Improvement L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; d = Defacto Right Turn Lane; 0.5 = Shared Lane; 1! = Shared Left/Through/Right lane;

38 Item 1C - Page 291
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
39 7 EAPC (2025) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
This section discusses the methods used to deve lop Existing plus Ambient plus Project plus Cumulative (EAPC) (2025) traffic forecasts, and the resulting intersection operations and traffic signal warrant analyses.

The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for EAPC (2025) conditions are consistent with those shown previously on Exhibit 3-1, with the exception of the following:
 Project driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by the Project to provide site access are also assumed to be in place for EAPC conditions only (e.g., intersection and roadway improvements along the Project’s frontage and driveways).
 If applicable, driveways and those facilities assume d to be constructed by cumulative developments to provide site access are also assumed to be in place for EAPC conditions (e.g., intersection and roadway improvements along the cumulative development’s frontages and driveways).

7.1 EAPC (2025) TRAFFI C VOLUME FORECASTS
This scenario adds Project traffic to cumulative background conditions (existing traffic volumes plus an ambient growth factor of 4.04% plus traffic from pending and approved but not yet constructed known development projects in the area). The weekday ADT and weekday peak hour volumes which can be expected for EAPC (2025) traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 7-1.

7.2 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 7-1, which indicates that the LOS deficiency at the Lawrence Crossley Road / Dina h Shore Drive (#1) and Lawrence Cr ossley Road / Ramon Road (#6) continues to operate at an unacceptable LOS under EAPC conditions. The Project increases the intersection delay at the Lawrence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Drive (#1) by a maximum of 1.2 seconds and at the Lawrence Crossley Road / Ramon Road (#6) intersec tion by a maximum of 3.8 seconds, which are below the City criteria for determination of full Project responsibility.

Cumulative intersection improvements at the Lawr ence Crossley Road / Di nah Shore Drive (#1) and Lawrence Crossley Road / Ramon Road (#6) intersecti ons were previously listed in Section 6.4. These background intersection improvements also accommodate EAPC conditions, as indicated in Table 7.1. The intersection operations analysis worksheets for EAPC traffic conditions without and with improvements are included in Appendix 7.1 of this TA.

7.3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
The traffic signal warrant analysis for EAPC (2025) tr affic conditions provided in Appendix 3.3. As noted previously, unsignalized study area intersections are not anticipated to meet peak hour volume- based warrants and daily volume-based warrants for a traffic signal with the addition of Project traffic (see Appendix 3.3).
39 Item 1C - Page 292

URBAN CROSSROADS
40 Item 1C - Page 293
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 7-1: EAPC (2025) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
LEGEND:
8 = INTERSECTION ID
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY

10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (lOOO'S)
~ 't.. = RIGHT·IN/RIGHT·OUT ONLY
]
l-0•: L

40.7 m.j 44.4
LAWRENCE ::;l
CROSSLEY RD. -
~
SUNNY DUNES RD. C:}

1.6 ci a::
> ....
...I
1/'1 1/'1
0 a:: u .... C! .....,__ u z N
\ .... a::
~
~
INDIAN
---Q SPRINGS RD. C,
GEfUtm>Y ra. I ~ r
(HWY.111) --t
---- e

10.1 I
- WIS .. , 0 •-
1 ~ •·• r ~:. £ 111:
--t ~ It<><><><>: ::? DINAH SHORE DR. f), __________ ,. 1 __________
0 _

23.0 J d I 24.1 25.0 I g 27.0
;

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 2 San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) 1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 2 San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr. "'"'"' Luz 0 .... L102 -co L465 ..,..,. .... -ococo
-N- -+-927 ui=~ -+-978 .,....,..., -+-399
.H l ,6a .H l ,22 .Hl ,166
o,0CO~ L151 .... L93 0-N L431 - 0 -.tN"' Q\~N -+-782
..,. __
-+-806 ..,..,...,. -+-284
.H l ,65 .H l ,6 .Hl ,141
106_j iti 25_j iti 26_j iti 661--
"'"'"'
705-- N"'- 284-- .... ..,..,.
837 0\~-0 157 717 M;_;,.._
137_j iti 31_j iti 37_j iti 774-- .,..,. .... a5o-- 0--.tN 300-- co-o- 917 0-NCO 47 607 ..,...,.,..

N
.,.._
4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & Indian Springs Rd. Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd. Indian Springs Rd. Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd. o:3 "' N.._0 Lz5 .... ..,.

N-.t ..,...,. "'NN -+-1642
.H .H .Hl ,380
N
q-~ Lz6 co"' "'o-"'
-"' ..,_..,. --1155
.H .H .Hl ,210
76_j i t 25_j it 37_j iti 157 ,o- 327 0-.t 938-- 6i2~ =«e "'co 1577 N 83_j it 37_j i t 46_j iti 117 Nin 437 0"' 1513-- 00-N NO- "'3 1747 .,.-o--.., - "'
7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3& 7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3& Dwy. 1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd. Dwy.1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd. .... co _.., 0 L139 ="' J
-+-32
.H -+-994 ,104
o"' ..,. oo L166 -"' "' --47
.H J --an ,93
2207 t a5o-- 23-- ii .... 207 0-CO .... -,o
"'
1957 t 1002-- 29-- ii .... 21, oon in N-0
15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
Delay3 Level of
Traffic Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound (secs.) Service # Intersection Control1

LTRLTRLTRLTR A M P M AMP M
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 111111120120 60.8 62.3 E E - With Improvements TS 11111112012 1 40.0 41.6 D D
2 San Luis Dr. / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 110110120120 24.4 19.8 C B 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) / Dinah Shore Dr. TS 12022012011 2 > 39.8 41.6 D D 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Indian Springs Rd. CSS 1* 1001010d000 21.8 21.0 C C 5 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Sunny Dunes Rd. CSS 110010101000 15.8 14.6 C B 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Ramon Rd. TS 0.5 0.5 111012112d 30.0 61.3 C E - With Improvements TS 1 1 1> 11012112d 25.9 36.1 C D
7 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dwy. 1 CSS 01001000 1 0 0 0 15.3 13.2 C B 8 Dwy. 2 / Dinah Shore Dr. CSS 00000 1 02002 1 15.1 13.0 C B 9 Dwy. 3 / Indian Springs Rd. CSS 0 1! 000001d 0 . 5 0 . 5 09 . 59 . 6 A A 1 TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross-Street Stop
2 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.
3 Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), 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.

BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).

F:\UXRjobs\_15100-15500\_15500\15579\Excel\[15579 - Report.xlsx]EAPC L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; d = Defacto Right Turn Lane; 0.5 = Shared Lane; 1! = Shared Left/Through/Right lane; TABLE 7-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EAPC (2025) CONDITIONS Intersection Approach Lanes2
> = Right-Turn Overlap Phasing; * = Turn lane accommodated within two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL) striped median; 1 = Improvement

41 Item 1C - Page 294
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
42 This page intentionally left blank
42 Item 1C - Page 295

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
43 8 CUMULATIVE AND SITE ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS
Exhibit 8-1 depicts the intersection approach lanes needed to address cumulative conditions as well as Project access.

8.1 RECOMMENDED CUMULATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
Improvements at the off-site intersections of Lawr ence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Drive (#1) and Lawrence Crossley Road / Ramon Road (#6) address intersection operational deficiencies for opening year (2025) conditions.

Detailed fair share calculations, for each peak hour, are provided in Table 8-1 for these two intersections.

The following off-site improvements are recommended to address cumulative traffic capacity needs:

Lawrence Crossley Road / Dinah Shore Drive (#1)
 Provide separate westbound right turn lane (minimum of 150 foot turn pocket length).  Project Fair Share: 55.8%
Lawrence Crossley Road / Ramon Road (#6)
 Provide separate northbound left turn lane (minimum of 150 foot turn pocket length).  Provide overlap phase for existing northbound right turn lane.  Project Fair Share 14.8%
TABLE 8-1: EXISTING PLUS AMBIENT PLUS PROJECT PLUS CUMULATIVE (EAPC) (2025)

FAIR SHARE CALCULATIONS
# Intersection
Existing
(2023)
Traffic
EAPC
(2025)
Traffic3

Project
Only
Traffic
Total New
Traffic1

Project
Fair Share (%)2
1 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Dinah Shore Dr.
• AM Peak Hour 2,458 2,861 225 403 55.8%
• PM Peak Hour 2,502 2,913 213 411 51.8%
6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. / Ramon Rd.
• AM Peak Hour 3,178 3,623 66 445 14.8%
• PM Peak Hour 3,391 3,880 67 489 13.7%

1 Total New Traffic = (EAPC 2025 - Existing Traffic)
2 Project Fair Share % = (Project Only Traffic / Total New Traffic) 3 Existing Plus Ambient Plus Project Plus Cumulative (2025) Conditions 43 Item 1C - Page 296

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
44 8.2 SITE ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS
Access to the Project will be provided along Lawrence Crossley Road (right-in/right-out access), Dinah Shore Drive (right-in/right-out access), and Indian Springs Road (full access). Roadway improvements necessary to provide site access and on-site circulation are assumed to be constructed in conjunction with site development and are described below.

The following access intersection traffic controls are recommended:

Lawrence Crossley Road / Driveway 1 (#7)
 Restrict left turn movements to/from Lawrence Crossley Road by providing raised median from Indian Springs Road to Dinah Shore Drive.
 Provide single eastbound right turn lane within driveway with cross-street stop control.

Driveway 2 / Dinah Shore Drive (#8)
 Provide single southbound right turn lane within driveway with cross-street stop control.  Provide a separate westbound right turn lane (150 foot turn pocket length).

Driveway 3 / Indian Springs Road (#9)
 Provide single northbound shared left-right lane within driveway with cross-street stop control.

The raised median to be constructed along Lawrence Crossley Ro ad between Indian Springs and Dinah Shore Drive is recommended to include a 150 foot southbound left turn pocket and 100 foot northbound left turn pocket.

Vehicles entering the Project site at Driveway 1 shall be restricted from making an immediate westbound left maneuver into the gas pump exiting drive isle as shown on Exhibit 8-1.

44 Item 1C - Page 297

URBAN CROSSROADS
45 Item 1C - Page 298
1 7
URBAN I CROSSROADS Agua Caliente Fuel - Palm Springs Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 8-1: SITE ACCESS AND OFF-SITE CUMULATIVE IMPROVEMENTS Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 4 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 6 Lawrence Crossley Rd. & Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd. Ramon Rd.
~ "'\.1s0' L_DEF
-- --J +L, --r , ,L, --r
_J v7 t 1 _J lt _J v,t r -
DEF7
~ - i T ~ -... ' Lawrence Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3& Dwy.1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd.
, -.-J 1~•sa ..
""\- t - .-1 'I'~ -
~
0 INDIAN SPRINGS ROAD
8,600 SF C-STORE
----------- ----------,? '., > >
T •• •••-. ·••- .,. ••- • ~- :a:aJ.:
r,:'._l;l r,:'",.;l r;:""._l;l :7.~ ('i'.'$) -;-:-~ •. ,: r;:""_g ~ r,:'~ 12 MPDS
LEGEND:
0 = INTERSECTION ID °'- = LANE IMPROVEMENT
~ = TRAFFIC SIGNAL DEF = DEFACTO RIGHT TURN LANE
_._ • STOP SIGN ~ • RIGHT TURN OVERLAP PHASING IMPROVEMENT L • EXISTING LANE 150' • RECOMMENDED TURN POCKET LENGTH 15579 - 01 - study area.dwg
0 0

RAMON ROAD

NORTHBOUND TURN LANE

CUMULATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
REMOVE ON·STREET PARKING

ALONG LAWRENCE CROSSLEY ROAD

SOUTH OF INDIAN SPRINGS ROAD
AND RECONFIGURE BIKE LANE.

PROVIDE A RAISED MEDIAN WITH 100
FT. NORTHBOUND LEFT TURN POCKET

APPROACHING INDIAN CANYON
-----+--<-< SPRINGS ROAD AND 150 FT.

SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN POCKET
APPROACHING DINAH SHORE DRIVE.
150 FT. WESTBOUND RIGHT TURN

LANE CUMULATIVE IMPROVEMENT
'\.,. 150' TURNPOCKETLENGTH
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
46 This page intentionally left blank
46 Item 1C - Page 299

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
47 9 REFERENCES

1. Fehr & Peers. City of Palm Springs Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines. City of Palm Springs : s.n., July 2020.

2. Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 6th Edition. s.l. : National Academy of Sciences, 2016.

3. California Department of Transportation. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). [book auth.] California Department of Transportation. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). 2014, Updated March 30, 2021 (Revision 6).

4. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Manual. 11th Edition, 2021.

47 Item 1C - Page 300

URBAN CROSSROADS
Agua Caliente Fuel – Palm Springs Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
48 This page intentionally left blank
48 Item 1C - Page 301

URBAN CROSSROADS
Crossley / Dinah Shore Gas Station / Gaming Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
APPENDIX 1.1: TRAFFIC STUDY SCOPE

Item 1C - Page 302

URBAN CROSSROADS
Crossley / Dinah Shore Gas Station / Gaming Traffic Analysis

15579-04 TA Report.docx
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Item 1C - Page 303

URBAN CROSSROADS
City of Palm Springs TIA Guidelines
July 2020
34 Project Scoping Form
This scoping form shall be submitted to the City of Palm Spring s to assist in identifying infrastructure improvements that may be required to support traffic from the proposed project.

Project Identification:

Case Number:

Related Cases:

SP No.

EIR No.

GPA No.

CZ No.

Project Name:

Project Address:

Project Opening
Year:

Project
Description:

Consultant: Developer:

Name:

Address:

Telephone:

Fax/Email:

Trip Generation Information:

Trip Generation Data Source:

Current General Plan Land Use: Proposed General Plan Land Use:

Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning:

Urban Crossroads, Inc. - Marlie Whiteman, P.E.
1133 Camelback St., #8329
Newport Beach, CA 92658
(714) 585-0574
[email protected]
Dan Malcolm - Agua Caliente Band of Cahullia Indians
5401 Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA 92264
[email protected]
(760) 883-1945
Crossley/Dinah Shore Gas Station/Gaming
northwest corner of Crossley Road and Dinah Shore Drive 24 gasoline/diesel fuel pumps with a 5,500 square foot convenience store, and 4,000 square feet of Class II gaming space
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (11th Edition, 2021) Neighborhood/Community Commercial Neighborhood/Community Commercial M1 IL (Service/Manufacturing Zone, Indian Land) M1 IL (Service/Manufacturing Zone, Indian Land)

1.1-1
Item 1C - Page 304
City of Palm Springs TIA Guidelines
July 2020
35 Existing Trip Generation Proposed Trip Generation
In Out Total In Out Total
AM Trips
PM Trips
Trip Internalization: Yes No ( % Trip Discount)
Pass-By Allowance: Yes No ( % Trip Discount)
Potential Screening Checks
Is your project screened from specific analyses (see Page 11 of the guidelines related to LOS assessment and Pages 24-26).

Is the project screened from LOS assessment? Y e s N o LOS screening justification (see Page 11 of the guidelines):

Is the project screened from VMT assessment? Yes No
VMT screening justification (see Pages 24-26 of the guidelines):
76%/75% on gas station, not gaming space
0 0 0
0 0 0

136 127 263
138 133 271
See attached VMT screening assessment memo

1.1-2
Item 1C - Page 305
 ~
~ 


City of Palm Springs TIA Guidelines
July 2020
36 Level of Service Scoping
x Proposed Trip Distribution (Attach Graphic for Detailed Distribution):

North South East West
% % % %
x Attach list of Approved and Pending Projects that need to be considered (provided by the City of Palm Springs and adjacent agencies)
x Attach list of study intersections/roadway segments
x Attach site plan
x Not other specific items to be addressed:
o Site access
o On-site circulation
o Parking
o Consistency with Plans supporting Bikes/Peds/Transit
o O t h e r
x D a t e o f T r a f f i c C o u n t s
x Attach proposed analysis scenarios (years plus proposed forecasting approach) x Attach proposed phasing approach (if the project is phased) VMT Scoping
For projects that are not screened, identify the following:
x T r a v e l D e m a n d F o r e c a s t i n g M o d e l U s e d x Attach Screening VMT Assessment output or describe why it is not appropriate for use x Attach proposed Model Land Use Inputs and Assumed Conversion Factors (attach)

See attached traffic scoping letter,
dated October 24, 2023
signal warrants
October 2023

1.1-3
Item 1C - Page 306
City of Palm Springs TIA Guidelines
July 2020
37 Detailed VMT Forecasting Information
Most trip-based models generate daily person trip-ends for each TAZ across various trip purposes (HBW, HBO, and NHB, for example) based on population, household , and employment variables.

This may create challenges for complying with the VMT guidance because trip generation is not directly tied to specific land use categories. The following me thodology addresses this particular challenge among others.

Production and attraction trip-ends are separately calculated f or each zone, and generally:
production trip-ends are generated by residential land uses and attraction trip-ends are generated by non-residential land uses. OPR's guidance addresses resident ial, office, and retail land uses.

Focusing on residential and office land uses, the first step to forecasting VMT requires translating the land use into model terms, the closest approximations are:
x Residential: home-based production trips
x Office: home-based work attraction trips
Note that this excludes all non- home-based trips including wor k-based other and other-based other trips.

The challenges with computing VMT for these two types of trips in a trip-based model are 1) production and attraction trip-ends are not distinguishable after the PA to OD conversion process and 2) trip purposes are not maintained after the mode choice s tep. For these reasons, it not possible to use the VMT results from the standard vehicle assignment (even using a select zone re- assignment). A separate post-process must be developed to re-es timate VMT for each zone that includes trip-end types and trip purposes.

The procedure for extracting VMT from the model is described below:
x Re-skim final loaded congested networks for each mode and time period x Run a custom PA to OD process that replicates actual model steps, but:
o Keeps departure and return trips separate
o Keeps trip purpose and mode separate
o Converts person trips to vehicle trips based on auto occupancy rates and isolates automobile trips
o Factors vehicle trips into assignment time periods
x Multiply appropriate distance skim matrices by custom OD matrices to estimate VMT x Sum matrices by time period, mode, and trip purpose to calculate daily automobile VMT x Calculate automobile VMT for individual TAZs using marginal totals:
o Residential (home-based) - row of departure matrix plus column of return matrix o Office (home-based work) - column of departure matrix plus row of return matrix

1.1-4
Item 1C - Page 307
City of Palm Springs TIA Guidelines
July 2020
38 Appropriateness Checks
Regardless of which method is used, the number of vehicle trips from the custom PA to OD process and the total VMT should match as closely as possible with the results from the traditional model p r o c e s s . T h e e s t i m a t e d r e s u l t s should be checked against the re sults from a full model run to understand the degree of accuracy. Note that depending on how each model is setup, these custom processes may or may not include IX/XI trips, truck trips, or special generator trips (airport, seaport, stadium, etc.).

When calculating VMT for comparison at the study area, citywide, or regional geography, the same methodology that was used to estimate project-specific VMT shou ld be used. The VMT for these comparisons can be easily calculated by aggregating the row or column totals for all zones that are within the desired geography.

1.1-5
Item 1C - Page 308
ATTACHMENTS:
* TRAFFIC SCOPING LETTER
* VMT SCREENING EVALUATION LETTER

1.1-6
Item 1C - Page 309

15579-02 LOS Scope.docx

October 24, 2023

Mr. Rick Minjares
City of Palm Springs
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262

CROSSLEY/DINAH SHORE GAS STATION/GAMING LOS ANALYSIS SCOPE Dear Mr. Rick Minjares:

On behalf of Terra Nova Planning & Research and Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to su bmit this traffic analysis Level of Service (LOS) scope to City of Palm Springs regarding the proposed Crossl ey/Dinah Shore Gas Station/Gaming Area development (“Project”). The purpose of this transmittal is to provide you with an opportunity to comment before we begin this work on behalf of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. The Project is located on Agua Caliente Indian Reservation property at the northwest corner of Crossley Road and Dinah Shore Drive in the City of Palm Springs. The project consists of 24 gasoline/diesel fuel pumps with a 5,500 square foot convenience store, and 4,000 square feet of Class II gaming space.

The remainder of this letter describes the pr oposed analysis method ology, Project trip generation, trip distribution, and Project traffi c assignment/project trips on the surrounding roadway network. The following scoping assumpti ons have been prepared in accordance with the City of Palm Springs TIA Guidelines (July 2020).

A preliminary site plan for the proposed Project is shown on Ex hibit 1. Exhibit 2 depicts the location of the proposed project in relation to the existing roadway network. It is anticipated that the Project would be fully developed by year 2025. Access to the Project will be provided along Crossley Road (right-in/right-out access), Dinah Shore Drive (right-in/right-out access), and Indian Springs Road (full access).

TRIP GENERATION
In order to develop the traffic characteristics of the Project, trip-generation statistics published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (11th Edition, 2021) are used. Table 1 shows the vehicle trip generation rates for the Project, as well as the vehicle trip generation summary with daily and peak hour trip generation estimates.

As shown on Table 1, the Project is anticipated to generate a total of 5,011 net added vehicle trip-ends per day with 263 added AM peak vehicle hour trips and 271 added PM peak hour vehicle trips.

1.1-7
Item 1C - Page 310

URBAN CROSSROADS
20341 SW Birch Street I Suite 230 I Newport Beach, CA 92660 I (949) 660-1994 I urbanxroads.com DINAH SHORE DR.

CROSSLEY ROAD
INDIAN SPRINGS RD.
10/18/23

PROPOSED GAS STATION
NWC DINAH SHORE DR. AND
CROSSLEY RD.

PL 408.88'
PL 374.99'
12 MPDS
91 DIESEL
10K GALLONS12K GALLONS
25K GALLONS
7,000 SF C-STORE40'-4"
32'-0" 19'-0" 10'-0"
38'-0" 38'-0" 38'-0" 38'-0" 38'-0"
75'-5" 44'-8"
157'-1"12'-0"DECELERATION LANE
30'-6"
30'-0"
30'-0"
V8

EV CHARGING STALLS

RETENTION AREA

1.1-8
Item 1C - Page 311
URBAN I CROSSROADS Crossley/Dinah Shore Gas Station/Gaminng Traffic Analysis ,--------..,
~
EXHIBIT 1: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
__ _j- -------------- ~L---7
--------------~
l J I
- - I
j j j j j j
I
I
I
I
I
N - I
~ I
I- - ---- - - - -~-------------F=" I
b -----I::=:~---=~--==-.,:e-=-=------=~--==-.,-:e-=-=------=--==""'---==--~-t- 15579 - 01 - scope.dwg
marks
llEGEN~cts
~ 't. = RIGHT·IN/RIGHT·OUT ONLY

1.1-9
Item 1C - Page 312
URBAN I CROSSROADS Crossley/Dinah Shore Gas Station/Gaminng Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 2: TRAFFIC ANALYSIS STUDY AREA
LEGEND:
0 = EXISTING ANALYSIS LOCATION
@ = FUTURE ANALYSIS LOCATION
~ ~ = RIGHT·IN/RIGHT·OUT ONLY
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY
DINAH SHORE DR.
er:
0 >­... a=
VI
3 ~
VI
e-----r
15579 - 01 - scope.dwg
RAMON~ I ---------- ,01---
SUNNY DUNES RD.
ci a=
>­...
...I
VI
:g
a= u
City of Palm Springs
October 24, 2023

The Project will also interact with pass-by vehicle trips which occur on adjacent roads with or without the development. Pass-by trips are attracted from traffic passing the site on adjacent streets that offer direct access to the Project. These pass-by trips are included in the driveway volumes, but not added to the surrounding street system because they’re already included in the background traffic off-site.

TABLE 1: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Trip Generation Rates1
Land Use
ITE LU
Code Quantity 2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Casino/Video Lottery Entertainment 473 4.0 TSF 11.37 8.94 20.31 14.15 13.06 27.21 388.18 Convenience Store/Gas Station
(GFA 5.5-10k) 945 24 VFP 15.80 15.80 31.60 13.45 13.45 26.90 345.75

Trip Generation Results
Land Use
ITE LU
Code Quantity 2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Casino/Video Lottery Entertainment 473 4.0 TSF 45 36 81 57 52 109 1,553 Convenience Store/Gas Station
(GFA 5.5-10k) 945 24 VFP 379 379 758 323 323 646 8,298
Project Subtotal 424 415 839 380 375 755 9,851
ITE 945 Pass-By (76% AM; 75% PM)3 (288) (288) (576) (242) (242) (484) (4,840) PROJECT TOTAL ADDED TRIPS 136 127 263 138 133 271 5,011

1 Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021). 2 VFP = Vehicle Fueling Position; TSF = Thousand Square Feet 3 Source: 2021 Pass-By Tables for ITE Trip Generation Appendices

TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT
The trip distribution pattern is heavily influenced by the geographical location of the site and the location of surrounding commercial and residential uses. Exhibits 3 and 4 shows the Project trip distribution patterns for outbound and inbound conditions, respectively.

Based on the identified Project traffic generation and trip distribution patterns, Project peak hour intersection turning movement and daily volumes are shown on Exhibit 5.

GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT
The City of Palm Springs General Plan Circulatio n Element is depicted on Exhibit 6, while the accompanying roadway cross‐sections are presented on Exhibit 7.

1.1-10
Item 1C - Page 313

URBAN I CROSSROADS

1.1-11
Item 1C - Page 314
15 URBAN I CROSSROADS Crossley/Dinah Shore Gas Station/Gaminng Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION {OUTBOUND)
-> 3: e. er: ...
> a:: ... => <t
.... z ....

C)
LEGEND:
10 = PERCENT FROM PROJECT
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY
~ 'to = RIGHT·IN/RIGHT·OUT ONL V
11'1
25 DINAH SHORE DR.
15579 - 01 - scope.dwg
RAMON RD.

SUNNY DUNES RD.
15 er:
0 > .... a::

VI
5 ...J
z <t
VI
15 5
11'1 N
10 15

1.1-12
Item 1C - Page 315
15 URBAN I CROSSROADS Crossley/Dinah Shore Gas Station/Gaminng Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION (INBOUND)
11'1
LEGEND:
10 = PERCENT TO PROJECT
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY
~ 't.. = RIGHT·IN/RIGHT·OUT ONL V
= > 3: e. er:

I-
> a::

I-
=> c(
""' z
""' I.!)
DINAH SHORE DR.
25 15579 - 01 - scope.dwg
er:
0 >
""' a::

VI
5 ...J
z
c(
VI

RAMON RD
15 SUNNY DUNES RD.
5 15
25 11'1 N
0 M
11'1
N
~
10 15

1.1-13
Item 1C - Page 316
URBAN I CROSSROADS Crossley/Dinah Shore Gas Station/Gaminng Traffic Analysis EXHIBITS: PROJECT ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AM PEAK HOUR • PROJECT PASS-BY
1 Crossley Rd. & 4 Crossley Rd. & 7
Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd.
0 Lo 00
ooT r::-,r;--o 00
.H l ,o .H Ji
•40_J iti •30_J it •1107 ·40-- 000 07 00
07 ':'"':"'
PM PEAK HOUR • PROJECT PASS-BY
1 Crossley Rd. & 4 Crossley Rd. & 7
Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd.

M Lo °'°' ooc:::' "'"' -o 00
Jl Jil ,o Ji
+33_J iti •25_J it •927 ·33-- 000 07 """' 07 '!'~
LEGEND:

Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9
Dwy. I Dinah Shore Dr.
ao .. L+148
J - -148
t o--
0 "f
Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9
Dwy. I Dinah Shore Dr.
..

N
L+124
J - -124
t o--
M
'!'
Dwy. 3 &
Indian Springs Rd.
.-a
• • 70
o-- ii 07 00
'!'
Dwy. 3 &
Indian Springs Rd.
.-a
• • 58
o-- ii 07 0111
~
1-0NRD L

0.8 _I 0.5
CROSSLEY RD. 7 :
~
"!
SUNNY DUNES RD. C:}

0.3 INDIAN
ci a::
; "!
~
0 a:: u
0 = INTERSECTION ID
---- =FUTURE PROJECT DRIVEWAY

10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (10OO'S)
~ '\. = RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT ONLY
- Q SPRINGS RD. C,
o o-.... -, 0. -·-·- o o··--, I . r~\ o>····> '. J "': to ·SITE .. 1 - SAN WIS REY OR I ! ~ii 0v,:

DINAH SHORE DR. f), __________ , __ 0 __________ 0 _

1.3 J~ ~ I 1.3 1.4 I~ 0.8
GENE AUTRY TR.---f d
(HWY.111) I
---- e

0.8 I d
AM PEAK HOUR • PROJECT ADDED PM PEAK HOUR • PROJECT ADDED 1 Crossley Rd. & 2 San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) 1 Crossley Rd. & 2 San Luis Dr. & 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. Dinah Shore Dr. & Dinah Shore Dr. o~~
Lo 000 Lo oor-- L6
-21 -32 -20 Jil ,o Jil ,o Jil ,6
022 Lo 000 Lo oor-- L7
-21 -33 -19 Jil ,o Jil ,o Jil ,1
34_J iti o_J iti o_J iti o-- 000 34-- 000 20-- oor--
07 N 07 07
35_J iti o_J iti o_J iti o-- Noo 35-- 000 21-- oor--
07 07 07
4 Crossley Rd. & 5 Crossley Rd. & 6 Crossley Rd. & 4 Crossley Rd. & 5 Crossley Rd. & 6 Crossley Rd. & Indian Springs Rd. Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd. Indian Springs Rd. Sunny Dunes Rd. Ramon Rd.

Ost o;;!; 000 Lo
-o J i Ji Jil ,14
Ost o;;!; 000 Lo
-o Ji J i Jil ,14
38_J i t o_J it o_J iti 07 ,;o 77 "'~ o-- ~0!:l 207
40_J it o_J i t o_J iti 07 ~o 77 ,__.., o-- 2ot::i M 207 7 Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3& 7 Crossley Rd. & 8 Dwy. 2 & 9 Dwy. 3& Dwy. 1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd. Dwy. 1 Dinah Shore Dr. Indian Springs Rd. sto ~14, -o J i J -o ,34
sto ~ 4, -o J i J -o ,35
387 t 34-- o-- ii .. 207 "'"" M -....
407 t 35-- o-- ii "' 217 00 M N ..
15579 - 01 - scope.dwg

1.1-14
Item 1C - Page 317
URBAN I CROSSROADS Crossley/Dinah Shore Gas Station/Gaminng Traffic Analysis I
- ··- '
! /
L---··1
i r
.

I
I
j
EXHIBIT 6: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CIRCULATION PLAN
Sunrise Pli:.wy
lk.1' -,_
-~.
·~
·1
\
SOURCE: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS GENERAL PLAN (2007)
LEGEND:
15579 - 01 - Scope.dwg
Freeway
Expressway
Major Thoroughfare (6 - lane divided)
Major Thoroughfare (4 - lane divided)
Secondary Thoroughfare (4 - lane divided)
Secondary Thoroughfare (4 - lane undivided)
Collector (2 - lane divided)
Collector (2 - lane undivided)
Local
[ __ j City Boundary
' ... -... -..
: ______ j Sphere of Influence
• Critical Intersection*
*Intersection improvements
required to maintain acceptable LOS.

1.1-15
Item 1C - Page 318
URBAN I CROSSROADS Crossley/Dinah Shore Gas Station/Gaminng Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 7: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TYPICAL STREET CROSS-SECTIONS Major Thoroughfare
R/W (6 Lane Divided) R/W
1·
110 '
·1 r
86' )I 10'
1< )I
Major Thoroughfare
R/W (4 Lane Divided) R/W
1·
100 '
·1 r
76' )I 10'
IE ) I
Secondary Thoroughfare

R/W R/W
1• 1-< _ so~/_s·-=-------=--1 •1
--.., ______________ ,. ___
Collector Street

R/W R/W
r-====60 ' -66 '====--1
I r 40. )I I
Local Street

R/W R/W
~50~~9
SOURCE: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS GENERAL PLAN (2007)
15579 - 01 - Scope.dwg
City of Palm Springs
October 24, 2023

ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
Consistent with the City’s TA guidelines, intersection analysis will be provided for the following analysis scenarios:
 Existing (2023) Conditions
 Existing Plus Project Conditions
 Background Conditions: Existing plus Ambient plus Cumulative (EAC) (2025)  Background Plus Project Conditions: Existing plus Ambient plus Project plus Cumulative (EAPC) (2025)

STUDY AREA
The traffic impact study area was defined in conformance with the requirements of City of Palm Springs TIA Guidelines. Consistent with the City’s TIA guidelines, study area intersections have been identified for the Project based on the contribution of 50 or more peak hour trips. Based on this criterion, anticipated trip generation and trip distribution, the following intersections will be evaluated:
# Intersection # Intersection
1 Crossley Rd. / Dinah Shore Dr. 6 Crossley Rd. / Ramon Rd. 2 San Luis Dr. / Dinah Shore Dr. 7 Crossley Rd. / Dwy. 1 3 Gene Autry Tr. (Hwy. 111) / Dinah Shore Dr. 8 Dwy. 2 / Dinah Shore Dr. 4 Crossley Rd. / Indian Springs Rd. 9 Dwy. 3 / Indian Springs Rd. 5 Crossley Rd. / Sunny Dunes Rd.

Exhibit 2 identifies the proposed study area intersection analysis locations.

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) CRITERIA
Per the City of Palm Springs’ s General Plan, LOS D as the th reshold for acceptable traffic conditions on the circulation network.

ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
For the purposes of this analysis, signalized intersection operations analysis will be based on the methodology described in the Hi ghway Capacity Manual (6th Edition). Intersection LOS operations are based on an intersection’s average control delay. Unsignalized intersections will be evaluated using the methodology described in the HCM 6th Edition. At two-way or side-street stop-controlled intersections, LOS is calculated for each controlled move ment and for the left turn movement from the major street, as well as for the intersection as a whole. For approaches composed of a single lane, the delay is computed as the average of all movements in that lane.

1.1-16
Item 1C - Page 319

URBAN I CROSSROADS
City of Palm Springs
October 24, 2023