The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOOK STREET/COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE C/Z 13-78 1978--- — ` c4.8 _ _ ages s, 4cvEs . vZ000 Ta e3 3321.15 Gouw;1R{ CA -OF, Gt`( �iPn�rs .�}.+. � g i.�� ir1� �i �� fi �' t GE'aiCi�•:-�He._. �F'�A.ti'�. 5: t�'i11's�+._ _.-- _. I ;�� , � �j 4c�.g �xR^ss a�u-� � a� q) � �- � i i '. , _.-.,/ ' �I �' i v t i �� i _9 � ' ... F: __ �:Y.1 � i — � ie -- Ciry t._uti;rs �� '--GCNTEI�-��1��G �_[' _1tJ 1 r: '; :.:bait+ .�RD .•.,- .� .... �. e— .�� •—+.�awaavn•.-�� .'�-'.- � -...�� _�... � ��..e.....�. �.. a.�..-�. � �. r. s� ...�vw �a� a.��-. vus ys �-. P �,�r.`+Ri�n q" :� .i. �•.� :�! Iwo �.'�' 4w"n �..� Cis w .iaL �,e+x•. :lm ,;�•' :� r�eas .c.:' -+.� '► �sosA EMU_ r ir�'�Rjllj��rl�r�, •` R•sfr, a� �% Mll `i ilp �r - Ali �: ,. .iZ��► Ittr� t�r �=-r•— - - `�� i. IL SM \ �e MIN _ a VIA j r ems, JPAI \ pr 1► 140 KWI iMW 'O- all "„�'M� T 00 s It `f PC Vol '6� T ��, guru •aor ` ab psi !4► �I� `iNk 61 ` Oil 7e Lois F tw Mg, w r , �. + fps ww.a► . .�.�� .iT �•� 1 w, ► At1C, r` r �IV9VME ^R► rl IT SON r Rf MTA rc1 I ' p±� � l kwt �►' �/f'� \ \Lyr ,- m00%: ;.�. . rer► . y. fi,�,. �► � fir. £...�. �,�,. •► ! � �� 1� � �, 4�' i�. �`11► \ate ,�, �� ..r �. kIMS w' gag i` �� ► �'IN iL �j�` .� �`� • � ��illt�►;,�;�•w �\\\\\Ys�!'� .,,ii'�'' �,! �,-,,,.+�r'llr��1�::\�j�,d��'.�� '��: �.swai. sNtii► i� •��i��s�k �� .a. •�1 � m # r. :'.a'le:.`.avr...r.�.:sC.aw.::ahec �l.�0��ta��c ::.��r�..a•.;....�:�iYif.,.OID'iib'tVix:....A.' '4J\ri�tS�6�l:.ro.��,..+.:.+.. v:aec..�..,-r.;-a�,..:...,avw,.c,.a11.10olf Courser Res'ldentimal Com. 0 a 20 �Landsdaped Buffer 6.8: A �L L _.l__.1 .. 4.. _ 2 A 1 L ..� r � � E- 3�t r.. r..+..-� r e 5 77-77 12 14 0 .17 (D d w . _ CID C a , `, 30 16 y � t 4: A'.' _ Lake Lake' j y Condom u s 0 1' I 18 �. . w I Condominiums 5 { t 3 Ac- / 10.1 Ac. 1 481). a 1 4 I 64 D.U. �1 1 150 • �� Main. Entry'' } r Practice Fairway Gate _ _ -�1--- // club House <::3 . C I 1 r Condominiums 9 L 1 5.2 Ac. Lake 36 D. U. 2 Lake Condominiums , d i , 3 11.8 Ac. 1 V 80 D.U. t O 4. Ac 25 o 3.7:Ac. -�- 3.2 `Ac.C. �, { , o.?�--f f 3.7; .Ac. O i o J 24 1 .. 0 - o Lake ■ �� C 7 6. r .COUNTRY Landscaped Buffer LAND USE TABULATION GOLF COURSE SCORECARD Residential A_ D.U. D.U./Ac. Open Space Hole Le�ncth Par Hole Length Par -1 Lots 143.5 36.8 552 3.8 - 1 480 4 10 420 4 Condominiums 3_, 2 4 8 2 19.4 (60%) 2 420 4 11 160 3 Total Residential 175.9 451 IS&- 4.4 19.4 3 135 3 12 420 4 Non -Residential 12 4 420 4 13 590 5 Golf Course 152.8 39.2 152.8 5 550 - - 5 14 - -360 4 - Club House 4.8 1.2 4.8 6 160 3 15 350 4 Roads 32.7 8.4 - 7 390 4 16 540 5 Buffer & Landscaping 23.8 61 23.8 8 370 4 17 160 3 Total Non -Residential 2141 54.9 181.4 9 535 5 18 450 4 - - - - --- - - - To_ 390.0 1100.0 780 2.0- 200.8 (51.5%) Out 3460 36 In 3450 36 Street Widening 150 Out 3460 36 Gross Site Area 405.0 _ - Total 6910 72 Golf esidenti'al C Pal mDesert, aliCmfornia A-11arco Developran ens , . Ltdm ID oaoa�� PLANNERS & ARCHITECTS 17848. SKY PARK BLVD IRVINE, CALIF 92714 714. 751 4623 A CALIFORNIA 7A075.E[ PASEO SUITE A 7 PAIN DESERT, CALIF 92260 !714. 5685696 CORPORATION I i CITY OF PALM DEsER7 7 DEPAow.-E'T j rHV1 0Oi'..9ERITq ' SERVICES L f EXHIBIT /l r N0. /% •]Imine Milarco De Tw 072 Pa ?IoO it:"] D t: Am N E r / j/,� /may lL� .I/ _.. III ��/ &l� / /�iT AOL&oif_nUAW AK r—TT Jam. _--- , L�/l��///. -�' Af AIW/ A'K A wf 0 LAf 41 7A� A. Afo lAf A ' AV l� 37.1 7 l� /,Z low —' 7 - t lxo0 790 1, \\F R A, N K\ "\ SIN A T R A \\°� 1 \D R I V E \ ,\ �N89��48' -I�I'E .91 _ -- N ---i+'--'-��--Ic--- - �-_� _--=--=c` - - _ --� - - =t ten_-- - --- ----- ----„- � •� �,... :�.. .':.i'�\ \yl` `.-?-• �L-'T .�yil �� `�..\ .�. ��\{\\\.. .\ \�\ 6.5 sz IUD\ \ l\ \ \ 62.- \ \ �;- 11 I� vvv A \ A� v.\ 6.0 v '.a v 13 v �`:��\ v I 14 II a \ .. A. IN Ica 22 I _ I b1'1 61 1 w y w 267.0 2- 1 10 15 1 4- \\� _ � � t =�\ i J� All Lm r z W I i2` V \\ \ _ �� : ��; 3 0 O I y .> np ol o 1 \ y� rR O253.5 x I)14 I� l 251.0 I III _ o .. j� j N. 256 \ \ z i �, 1 I ell y 1. . .5 \ / 251.5x\ \ eo.s \ v; .+ . � �Ay��, z42.5 237.0 I /v/ 24 .-.5 2.4.0 �. _ I 9 i "1O Tj C� U N T R Y C`� _U B �J I D R I V E P 246.0n1D no AA� AA t__N\ (" a i 0 r -\ ro Af Atfj AV Af 3 i� 4alw lV 372 �. �� 41V A4 s/ice IT 17 • 5104 7AZ \\FRA,N K\ �'o\ 1 \ \20�SINATRA \60 1 \DRI VE N 89\'" .8' -151 E N 89°;-4 ''-15"E66223'1 \ I I ,,, �: .r \ \ \ ,.\ �]^ �-•) ..-:— �+\ \]ll. � �. 1' `�.~` \v `:�. il1\jiyl `'\ `�\ \1\1'li �U1><\— 1J. -.•a� \lam �':.�\' I I C46.5 \I \ \ \ I I \ \ ~\ I P \ Y �7Af' 12 < \ I I . �s \ ', �•. � �• � � � \ \:.. � � \\ 14 16 � 6 o � - 6 I rn -0 G n 1 :� 244. m y ti� I \ 2 0 `.. 18 \ � 2E• 5 267.0 i I I - - Y I ✓ �\ "\• . '•'\ \ \ 223 !rn 259.0 1 III f��.1. \�\15 \ \ \� �\ �;\\ �t\\`• `,, \\ :(2. \';�. .�� \ ..�\ 61 222.0 9 v 4 I I 5 1 \ -I 1 —.-260 � � \` \ . of \ 2535 V�•� �v�.t �: �.. I 256.5 Al Ii II \ 1 ^ \ \\ 1 �24251.01 y /• za I 1 0 -� 2 s - 252 rZZ ICI J� ell 5 II 25� o'er 23 \ �2 5. v 242.5 '�A ■ i isa —� `.`v. / 1 �\ �: / �51� � � • 24 237.0 .5 2. 4.0-77 � \'•,\ \\ � _ / va- -- ------ �`"9*aw44`-T E c -6 643'= --- --_ 10 9Ill-J0 -T C( U N TRY �C`LU B DRIVE sysT Tin f 246.0 M. t 0 µ 0. 0 31 A"5T 1978 TANDIKA CORPORATION DBA COUNTRY CLUB 39-011 del SAFARI DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 (714) 345-2727 JanuaiLy 11, 1979 Wt. RaP-ph A. Ci ptiani Asaociate Ptanne)L City o6 Paem Debent 45-275 Ptick2y Peak Lane Paf-m De6ent, Cati6oania 92260 Deah Mt. Citpxian,i: May I aeknowtedge Aeeeipt o6 youh tetten o6 Janua)ty 9, a copy o6 which I enceoae herewith. roe tece.ived .in .the eame mail the encPosed Legat Notice 67Lom Sheita G.i U-igan. Woutd you ptea6e .tee me which is which as .it i.6 a Zitae con6u.6ing? S.ineenety, (Hu.) V. G, o65man By ducection o6 Jay A2bent Robinson, Executive Vice P7ee6i.dent Enceosune6 V" �1OL cKExff 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT,CAUFORNIA92260 TELEPHONE (T14) 346-0611 January 9, 1979 Mrs. V. G. Hoffman Del Safari Country Club 39-011 del Safari Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Dear Mrs. Hoffman: Please be advised that the City of Palm Desert has approved a Change of Zone from "S" Study to PR-3 (U.A.) (Planned Residential, max. 3 d.u./acre, Upon Annexation) and a pre- liminary development plan to allow 800 residential units on approximately 405 acres west of your development. The Change of Zone and development plan are contingent upon approval of the annexation of the property to the City by the Local Agency Formation Commission. You are welcome to come by the office and view the preliminary plans at your convenience. Sincerely, Ralph A. Cirpriani Associate Planner RAC/ss (__UofLa��:�7 =@=(Dn-D-a 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 January 5, 1979 TELEPHONE (714) 346-06H CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM 'S' STUDY TO PR-3 (U.A.) OR ANY OTHER ZONE DEEMED APPRO- PRIATE AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ON 405 GROSS ACRES AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COOK STREET AND COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE. CASE NOS. C/Z 13-78 & DP 20-78 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider a request by ALLARCO DEVELOPMENT, LTD. for approval of a Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR-3 (U.A.) (Planned Residential, max. 3 du/acre, Upon Annexation) or any other zone deemed appropriate and Preliminary Development Plan to allow 800 dwelling units and an 18 hole golf course at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Country Club Drive, more particularly described as: APN 619-021-001-8, 002-9, & 003-0 /WINT 4 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION / (Negative Declaration) TO: (K Office of the County Clerk From: City of Palm Desert County of Riverside 45-275 Prickly Pear Ln. 4050 Main Street Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Riverside, Ca. 92501 ( ) Secretary for Resources 1416 Ninth St., Room 1311 Sacramento, Ca. 95814 SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 15083(f) of the State EIR Guidelines. Project Title/Common Name C/Z 13-78 ALLARCO Developments Ltd. DP 20-78 State Clearinghouse Number if submitted to State Clearinghouse) Contact Person Telephone Number Murrel Crump Area Code (714) 346-0611 Project Location Northeast corner of Cook Street and Country Club Drive. Project Description Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR-3(U.A.) and Preliminary Development Plan on 405 gross acres. This is to advise that the City of Palm Desert has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1. The project has been approved by the City; 2. The project ( ) will (&-rwill not have a significant effect on the environment; 3. An Environmental Impact Report was not prepared in connection with this project; and 4. A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. A copy of the Negative Declaration may be examined at the above City Hall address. Dated: CASE NO 7�P Za-78 L"NVIItONMtXTAL SERVICES DEPT. INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION CHECKLIST NOTE: The availability of data necessary to address the topics listed below shall form the basis of a decision as to whether the application is considered complete for purposes of environmental assessment. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers, possible mitigation measures and comments are provided on attached sheets). Yes Maybe No 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering,, or modification - of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? * 8g-;a0Xm mEN F S 2. Yes Maybe No 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of / surface water runoff? t/ c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? e. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? f. Reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? 44. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, and crops)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? _ !� 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, or insects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? ✓ d. Deterioration to existing wildlife habitat? �/ 0 Yes M�.be No 6. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? t/ b. Depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? 7. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? v b. Demand upon existing sources of energy, or re- quire the development of new sources of energy? �G 8. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, pesticides, oil, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? L� 9. Economic Loss. Will the proposal result in: a. A change in the value of property and improvements endangered by flooding? b. A change in the value of property and improvements exposed to geologic hazards beyond accepted community risk standards? 10. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels to the point at which accepted community noise and vibration levels are exceeded? # 11. Land Use. Will the proposal result in the as tteration of the present developed or planned land use of an area? 12. Open Space. Will the proposal lead to a decrease in the amount of designated open space? 13. Population. Will the proposal result in: a. Alteration of the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of the City? b. Change in the population distribution by age, income, religion, racial, or ethnic group, occupational class, household type? _ L� �C �►` SF E OZM th L-tli'S' 4. Yes Maybe No 14. Employment. Will the proposal result in additional new long-term jobs provided, or a change in the number and per cent employed, unemployed, and underemployed? L___ j 15. Housing. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in number and per cent of housing units by type (price or rent range, zoning category, owner -occupied and rental, etc.) relative to demand or to number of families in various income classes in the City? !/ b. Impacts on existing housing or creation of a demand for additional housing? 16. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians? _ 17. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for, new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? (/ e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 18. Public Fiscal Balance. Will the proposal result in a net change in government fiscal flow (revenues less operating expenditures and annualized capital expenditures)? *19. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications system? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 20. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. A change in the level of community health care provided? 21. Social Services. Will the proposal result in an increased denand for provision of general social services? 22. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: a. Obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? c. Lessening of the overall neighborhood (or area) attractiveness, pleasantness, and uniqueness? 23. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 24. Archglo ical/Historical. Will the proposal result in an a to—T ration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object, or building? 5. Yes Maybe No L/ J v C/ a Yes MLbe No 25. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment or to curtail the diversity in the environment? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are indi- vidually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Initial Study Prepared By:CZ C/Z 13-78 & DP 20-78 Environmental Evaluation Checklist explanation of "Yes" and "Maybe" answers and comments on evaluation subjects. 1. EARTH c. The proposal will result in a change in the natural topography by virtue of grading activities associated with ultimate development. * e. The proposal may result in future temporary construction impacts related to wind errosion of soils, but City requirements for watering during grading activities should reduce any impact to an insignificant level. Development of the site would tend to stabilize soils to eliminate future wind errosion or blowing sand. * 2. AIR The proposal will involve the use of motor vehicles by project residents, but the proposal will not, of itself, breach any State or Federal Air Quality Standards, or significantly damage valley air quality. * 3. WATER The proposal will pose an incremental increase in demand for domestic water supply, but will not result in an over -draft condition. b. The proposal will result in a change in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff by virtue of future development. * 4. PLANT LIFE The proposal will ultimately replace the existing natural vegetative cover with ornamental landscaping and ground covers. No preceived adverse environ- mental effect will occur. * 5. ANIMAL LIFE The proposal may involve maintaining domestic animals by future project occupants. Existing mammals and rodents and reptiles on the site will probably be displaced. Landscaping on the site will probably provide a new habitat for birds and insects. b. & d. The proposal is within the habitat range of the Fringe -Toed Lizard (a potentially threatened species). Over 200 sq. miles of habitat range would continue to exist after implementation of this proposal. The Palm Desert General Plan makes specific provision for maintenance of a defined natural habitat area (Sand Dunes Park) as a partial mitigation of the impact of urbanized uses. * 6. NATURAL RESOURCES The proposal will use natural resources in the construction of a future project, some of which may not be renewable. The proposal will also involve the continued use of petroleum products by project occupants. The demands of this project are considered to be incremental and are not considered to present a significant adverse impact. * 7. ENERGY Energy efficient standards within the Palm Desert Building Code (adopted version of the Uniform Building Code) will be applied to this project. Motor fuel considerations are discussed in 6, above. * 8. RISK OF UPSET The proposal will not involve the use of hazardous substances. * 9. ECONOMIC LOSS a. & b. The proposal site is not endangered by flooding, but will be subject to strong ground motion in the event of an earthquake. Palm Desert Building Codes provide for lateral seismic loading to mitigate damage from ground motion. * 10. NOISE The proposal itself will not involve new adverse noise other than that associated with urban uses. The residential development will be enclosed by a solid masonry wall to act as a sound barrier to perimeter street noises. * 11. LAND USE The proposal is consistent with the planned land use of the area. * 12. OPEN SPACE The proposal does not involve the use of Over 50% of the project site will, at the common open space. * 13. POPULATION a designated open space area. time of development, be used for a. & b. The proposal will result in approximately 454 more persons in the immediate area (based on 2 persons per household). The popoulation increase is planned as a part of the Palm Desert General Plan, but if rapidly implemented, it could be considered a temporary increase of human population density in the general area. The proposal will probably be owner -occupied, upper middle to high income households. * 14. EMPLOYMENT Significant numbers of new long-term jobs are not anticipated as a result of the proposal. * 15. HOUSING The proposal will result in approximately 227 condominium units. Units will probably be owner -occupied (partially on a seasonal basis) and may serve as a second house, or short-term rental in some instances. Units would probably be offered at prevailing market rates for upper - high income consumers. * 16. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION a. The 'proposal will result in the generation of additional vehicular movements on the order of 908 vehicle trips per day depending on seasonal occupancy fluctuations and resident characteristics (factor of 4 trips/d.u.). The proposal site is served by arterial and major highways (thorough- fares) which are adequate in planned design capacity to handle the anticipated traffic volumes. *** 17. PUBLIC SERVICE (See Public Services Plan, Annexation Area No. 9 ) *** 18. PUBLIC FISCAL BALANCE (See Public Services Plan, Annexation Area No. 9 ) * 19. UTILITIES The proposal site is within the planned service area of all utility companies and will not require new systems to be established. The pro- posal will place a minor incremental demand on the provision of public utilities. * 20. HUMAN HEALTH The proposal will not pose any specific health hazards or effect the level of community health care. Project occupants will become health care consumers, but it is noted that the doctor to patient ratio within the area is more than adequate to accommodate population increases. * 21. SOCIAL SERVICES The proposal is not anticipated to place significant demands for social services, based on anticipated projected occupant profile. 22 23 24 AESTHETICS The proposal does not involve obstruction of scenic vistas, or creation of an aesthetically offensive site; it will establish a neighborhood character of i•ts own, whose attractiveness, pleasantness, and uniqueness will be the subject of the City Design Review process. LIGHT AND GLARE The proposal will probably lighting. Lighting that is levels and will be closely ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL not involve the significant use of night to be established will be maintained at low reviewed to minimize light "spillage" and glare. The proposal will not effect any known or recorded archeological or historic resources. 25. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The proposal is not found to have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. The proposal will not impare achievement of long term environmental goals. The proposal involves minor incremental impacts which are not considered to be cumulatively considerable when viewed in the planned perspective of City development. The proposal does not pose any adverse environmental impacts on human beings. G2.IITF off IF80m nu 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A "DRAFT" NEGATIVE DECLARATION The Director of Environmental Services has determined that the follow- ing listed project(s) will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration should be adopted: CASE NOS. C/Z 13-78 & DP 20-78 Request for approval of a Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR-3 (U.A.) and Preliminary Development Plan on 405 gross acres at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Country Club Drive. An appeal from this determination may be made to the Planning Commission within eight (8) days of the date of posting of this public notice by filing an appeal in accordance with Resolution No. 78-32, with the Dept. of Environmental Services located at 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, California, If no appeal is filed within the said time, this determination shall become final. PAUL A. WILLIAMS, AIP Director of Environmental Services Date of Public Notice Date Appeal Period Expires aZ Z METHOD OF NOTICING: fflTHPosting /'Mailing to owners of property within 300' IT Publication in newspaper CkOther mailing (agencies and other persons requesting notice) 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT,CAUFORNIA92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Pursuant to Title 14, Div. 6, Article 7, Sec. 15083, of the California Administra- tive Code) Case No.: C/Z 13-78 and DP 20-78 Common Project Name (if any) Applicant/Project Sponsor: Allarco Development, Ltd. Project Description/Location: Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR-3 (U.A.) and Preliminary Development Plan on 405 gross acres at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Country Club Drive. The Director of the Dept. of Environmental Services, City of Palm Desert, California, has found that the described project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the Initial Study has been attached to document the reasons in support of this finding. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid poten- tially significant effects, may also be found attached. aul A. Wi liams, AICP / at Dir. of Environmental Services CITY of PALM DESERT INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Case No.:(l z1.6-79 Related Case(s): Received By: TO ACCOMPANY APPLICATION FOR us APPLICANT AL."aco PtN-Jep W& (Please Print or ADDRESS 4io pal" jr'�;L/" IV (Please Print or Type) Street ?,J ,. I.Ap 0 r_•l ty State Zip Code Telephone I. Background Information: 1. Nature of project or activity: No. of Units (if residential): -2>0 dwelling units. Gross Floor Area (if commercial or industrial): square feet, 2. General Location ,a/n/d Size: 3$q acres E, Cdyy�r C'pp�2. 3. Is the project a phase or a portion of a larger project? YES __X_NO If so, identify the larger project: 4. Has an Initial Study or Environmental Impact Report previously been prepared that includes all or part of the project? X YES NO ct: TXL If so, give date submitted and title of proje1"T pfull II. Environmental Impacts: Please answer the following questions by placing a check in the appropriate space. The applicant should be able to substantiate his response to every question. Ex- planations of all "yes/maybe" answers are required in the final section of this re- port. 1. Land (topography, soils, geology) YES or MAYBE NO (a) Does the project site involve a unique City of Palm Desert Initial Study of Environmental Impact Page Two II. Environmental Impacts: (continued) YES or MAYBE NO (d) Will the project involve grading in excess of 300 cubic yards? )( (e) Is the project site located on or adjacent to a known earthquake fault or an area of soil in- stability (subsidence, landslide, or severe blowsand)? X 2. Water (a) Is the project located within a flood plain, a natural drainage channel, or streambed? X (b) Will the project significantly increase the rate and amount of surface water runoff? -X (c) Will the project result in the contamina- tion or deterioration in quality of ground water? 3. Flora and Fauna (a) Are there any rare or endangered species of plant life in or near the project area? X (b) Will any Mature trees be removed? (c) Is the project site adjacent to, or does it include a habitat, food source, water source, nesting place or breeding place for a rare or endangered wildlife species? x (d) Is the project located inside or within 200 feet of a wildlife refuge or reserve? x 4. Pollution (Air, Water, Noise, Land) (a) Will the project create dust, fumes, smoke, or odors? �( (b) Will the project result in the generation of noise levels in excess of those currently existing in the area or in the exposure of people to noise levels above 65dBA? (c) Will the project involve potentially hazardous materials, including pesticides, herbicides, other toxic substances, or radio -active material? X_ (d) Will the proposed project produce light or glare? _X (e) Does the project require variance from estab- City of Palm Desert Initial Study of Environmental Impact Page Three II. Environmental Impacts: (continued) 6. Public Services and Utility Facilities YES or ;MAYBE NO (a) Will septic tanks be utilized for sewage disposal? (b) Will the project overload any of the fol- lowing: (1) Fire Protection? (2) Police Protection? (3) Schools? (4) Parks or Other Recreational Facilities? (5) Electric Power or Natural Gas (6) Communication Systems? (7) Water Supply? (8) Sewer System? (9) Stormwater Drainage System? (10) Solid Waste and Disposal? (c) Will the project require the extension of existing public utility lines? (d) Will the project employ equipment which could interfere with existing communication and/or defense systems? (e) Is the project located within the flight path or noise impact area of an airport? (f) Does the project incorporate measures for the efficient use or conservation of energy and water? 7. Land Use (a) Is the proposed project expected to result in other changes in the land use, either on or off the project site? (b) Could the project serve to encourage development of presently undeveloped areas, or increase de- velopment intensity of already developed areas? (c) Is the project inconsistent with any adopted General Plan, Specific Plan, or present zoning? (d) Does the project involve lands currently pro- tected under the Williamson Act or an Open Space Easement? (e) Is the site for the proposed project within the Scenic Preservation Overlay District or will the project obstruct any scenic view from existing 0 City of Palm Desert Initial Study of Environmental Impact Page Four II. Environmental Impacts: (continued) YES or MAYBE NO 8. Mandatory Findings of Significance (a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or pre -history? i< (b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term en- vironmental goals? (c) Does the project have impacts which are indi- vidually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on " human beings, either direcly or indirectly? III. Discussion of Impacts: Please briefly explain your answer to question 6(f) and, if you.have answered yes to any of the questions in Section II, why you believe that that aspect of the project will have no significant adverse environmental effect. i VI. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) F. REQUEST FOR ACCEPTANCE of Tract Nos. 11215-1 and 13586, o�rto as Cow try Estates, Applicant. Rec: By minute motion, accept Tract Nos. 11215-1 and 13586 as completed and authorize the City Clerk to release the bonds for the subject tracts. G. STATEMENT OF CASH TRANSACTIONS FOR MONTH OF DECEMBER, 1978. Rec: Receive and file. Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Wilson seconded to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried on a 4-0-1 vote. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CASE NOSE C/Z 13-78 ANb DP 20-78, LLARCO DEVELOPMENT LTD., APPLICANT: Cons' t�ion o a,Request or Approval o a Change o one from 'S „S`ttrdy_to PR-3 (U.A.) or Any Other Zone Deemed Appropriate, and a Preliminary Development Plan To Allow 800 Condominium Units on 405 Gross Acres at the Northeast Corner of Cook Street and Country Club Drive. Mr. Williams reviewed the Staff Report indicating that the proposed change of zone would permit 2.035 units to the acre. He stated that the Planning Commission felt it was an appro- priate zone for the property and the development plan is an appropriate project for the City. They recommended approval by Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 440 and 441. Mr. Williams also noted a letter of support from Indian Wells. Mayor Mullins declared the Public Hearing open and invited input in FAVOR of the project and rezoning. MR. STEVE FLESHMAN, 74-075 E1 Paseo, Palm Desert, spoke on behalf of the applicant who was unable to attend the meeting. He stated the applicant's concurrence with both the Planning Commission and Staff recommendation. Mayor Mullins invited input in OPPOSITION, and none was offered. He declared the Public Hearing closed. Councilman McPherson moved to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 201 to second reading, approving a Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR-3, S. P. (U.A.) and a Preliminary Development Plan to Allow 800 Condominium Units. Councilman Newbrander seconded the motion; carried by a 4-0-1 vote B. CASE NOS. C/Z 14-78 AND TV 14032, RIDGEWOOD DEVELOPMENT, INC APPLICANT. Consideration of a Request for Approval of a Change o m PR-4-aUd,jZ.S/to IR-2-8,000 (8) or Any Other Zone Deemed Appropriate, and a Tentative Tract Map for a 238 Lot Residential Subdivision To Provide for 227 Dwelling Units on Approximately 80 Acres Located at the Southeast Corner of Portola Avenue and Country Club Drive. 14- n-�.,..., A rl. �r r11c r4f 1, ih nA 1onoiv019 n rom iocY ORDINANCE NO. 201 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 107, THE PALM DESERT ZONING MAP, BY CHANGING THE ZONE FROM 'S' STUDY TO PR-3, S.P.(U.A.) AND APPROVING A PRELIMI- NARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ALLOW 800 CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON APPROXIMATELY 405 GROSS ACRES AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COOK ST OUNTRY CLUB DRIVE. CASE.N . CZ 13-78 ind DP 20-78 The City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN, as follows: SECTION 1: That a portion of Ordinance No. 107 referencing Section 25. 6-1 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Zoning Map (Chapter 25.46 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code) is hereby amended to read as shown on the attached exhibit, labeled Exhibit 'A'. SECTION 2: The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this Ordinance in the Palm Desert Post, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and the same shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. SECTION 3: That a Development Plan for 800 condominium units on a 405 acre site is hereby granted to ALLARCO DEVELOPMENT, LTD. as indicated in the exhibits on file with the Department of Environmental Services, subject to compliance with conditions attached hereto, labeled Exhibit 'B'. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this 8th day of February , 1979, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Brush, McPherson, Newbrander, Wilson & Mullins NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILUIGAN, CClerk 4 Minutes Palm Desert December 20, Planning Commission 1978 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont.) B. Case No. CUP 14-78 (Cont.) Page Three Chairman Kelly declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant wished to speak at this time. CHARLES MARTIN, 73744 Highway 111, architect for the project stated that the revised tower is now a little over 31 ft. and that it was designed in relationship to the pitch of the roof and it was designed so it could be seen from the High- way so there would be less need for signs. He stated that the entry gate is halfway into the parking lot and there should not be the pro- blem of people dropping their children off be- cause it would not be convenient to do so. Commissioner Fleshman suggested that some parking spaces be deleted and a drive -through area be put in. The applicant stated that he was complying with State Codes and that he wished to leave the parking area as is. Chairman Kelly stated that you encourage people to drop off their children when you have a drop off area. Chairman Kelly asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the proposed project. Being none, she de- clared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission. Commissioner Kryder stated that he forsees problems with park- ing in the morning and afternoon rush times. Commissioner Fleshman suggested that a condition be added that the parking situation be reviewed in a year, which would allow the Commission to make changes or suggestions at that time. Commissioner Kryder suggested that a condition be added that would ask the applicant to consider an alternative parking situation Commissioner Fleshman agreed and this could then be reviewed by the Design Review Board. On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, the Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit by Plan- ning Commission Resolution No. 439 with the addition of Special Condition No. 7 - Applicant shall consider an alternative parking arrangement.; carried unanimously (5-0). THERE WAS A SHORT RECESS AT 1:50 PM. THE MEETING WAS AT 1:55 I Commissioner Fleshman excused himself from the next case due to a conflict of inter� 4 F Minutes Palm Desert December 20, Planning Commission 1978 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont.) C. Case Nos. C/Z 13-78 and DP 20-78 (Cont.) Page Four Commissioner Kryder asked how large the single-family lots would average. Mr. Crump stated they would be a minimum of 10,000 sq. ft. Commissioner Berkey asked why this was before the Commission at this time. He stated that he could not vote on the Development Plan without more indepth information and time for review. This should have been presented at the regular meeting at which Public Hearings are held with a study session prior to that meeting. He did say, however, that he could vote for the Change of Zone at this time as he felt it was appropriate for the area. Chairman Kelly noted her agreement with Commissioner Berkey, and so did Commissioner Snyder. Chairman Kelly stated that she wanted to see a site plan of the area involved and its relationship to the surrounding area and proposed developments. Commissioner Berkey asked for some assurance that Cook Street would remain open all the time and how and who would see that this does happen. Chairman Kelly declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant wished to speak at this time. BRIAN TRACY, Edmonton, Alberta, applicant, stated that he was not aware that the Commission had just received this information. He had been told that it had been submitted three months ago. Commissioner Snyder stated that the Commission needs more information about the plan before they can approve it, but that the Change of Zone is appropriate and can be acted on at this time. He then asked about the flag lots. Mr. Tracy stated that flag lots were used so that all lots would have a view and some would be near the golf course. Commissioner Berkey stated that the Commission could vote on the Change of Zone at this time but would have to continue the Development Plan. He asked if this was agreeable to the applicant. Mr. Tracy noted his agreement. Mr. Tracy then asked if the wording in Special Condition No. 3 could be changed to read - Pro- vide treatment on common property lines between single-family flag lots; and, Special Condition No. 2 - delete "northwest". He noted that the corner lots would be sufficiently buffered and Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission December 20, 1978 Page Five VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont.) C. Case Nos. C/Z 13-78 and DP 20-78 (Cont.) On a motion by Commissioner Berkey, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, the Commission, by Planning Commission Resolution No. 440, recommended to the City Council a Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR-3(U.A.); and, continued the Development Plan until the January 2nd meeting; carried (4-0-1) AYES: Berkey, Kelly, Kryder, Snyder; ABSTAIN: Fleshman. Commissioner Fleshman excused himself from the rest of the meeting. VII. OLD BUSINESS - None VIII. NEW BUSINESS - None IX. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ITEMS - None X. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Traffic Committee Minutes of November 14, 1978, concerning Painters Path. Mr. Beebe indicated that although the outcome of the meeting was to wait for assistance and comment from Rancho Mirage, immediate channelization of the intersection is necessary. It was also noted that any signalization of the intersection should be borne by the first developments in the area involved. Commissioner Snyder stated that something must be done now either by cul-de-sacing or channelization, but it must be done now for safety's sake. B. Consideration of a request to initiate a General Plan Amendment for the area previously known as 'Parcel E', referral from the City Council. Mr. Crump noted that the City Council had requested that this be done as a General Plan Amendmdnt and he referred to the letter received from Mr. C. Robert Hubbard, representing the Leslie Fund and its interest in property at the northeast corner of Deep Canyon Road and Highway 111. C. ROBERT HUBBARD, representing the Leslie Fund, addressed the Commission and noted his clients request that this area be studied before it- is developed so that its potential is best used. He noted that he would like to appear before the Commission to discuss this more fully. On n mntinn by rnmmiRCinner Berkev. seconded by Commissioner 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 January 9, 1979 Mrs. V. G. Hoffman Del Safari Country Club 39-011 del Safari Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Dear Mrs. Hoffman: Please be advised that the City of Palm Desert has approved a Change of Zone from "S" Study to PR-3 (U.A.) (Planned Residential, max. 3 d.u./acre, Upon Annexation) and a pre- liminary development plan to allow 800 residential units on approximately 405 acres west of your development. The Change of Zone and development plan are contingent upon approval of the annexation of the property to the City by the Local Agency Formation Commission. You are welcome to come by the office and view the preliminary plans at your convenience. Sincerely, Ralph A. Cirpriani Associate Planner RAC/ ss n - _... - on+ • N .. ' •''� �� ;�,�•s �.: M� w •�' Sri". S.r• s i_��. �,#�w � _+a � . .r. �'t �'4 a � ' i }i pp Ijr jig may, i�f�' �+ ��,f1i��'_w\'?t�`�a��'.r 's ■rs$.. � �+ ■� � i lo; Li ' ii� �f� oil rrr i i' i1• P� �1•' ,f1 ��,. jp C r \ '; MCI ■ � it ^�; -'� 4 CI a 1p ggi Ab 41 j it 11h►j( i:�:iib '. is •s'. i.4i:�r I d1��r +t' rrr `� r's�F'�� r'• ram:. '�•" ��1� n yap ,11 ■ i ! ; �' a IMF �4 ,�, alL Y • Via• dt'+/ • � :,✓�::��`•��: �� fir' ,r�i� �l�� `' �!�' �"'�, OIL \rr�' ,N�y Iw.1 t"18-7. • own uuf\ ��,. %�f ��{�'• S� far � A• ij�' f�� lM�'AV' ��' �� t i �ouNrr - ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC ___'CY �fST RILL COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (714) 398-2651 DIRECTORS OFFICERS RAYMOND A. RUMMONDS, PRESIDENT LOWELL O. WEEKS, GENERAL AU101GER-DIIEF ENGINEER TELLIS CODEKAS, VICE PRESIDENT OEE J. NDRDIAND,"SEERETART C J. FROST DENNIS M. HAMETT, AUDITOR WILLIAM B. GARDNER _ REDWINE AND SHERRILL. AMMETS S E0.SU%ON December 28, 1978 Dept. of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert P. 0. Box 1977 Palm Desert, CA. 92260 1 File: 0163.11 �1 o421.1 0721.1 Re: P.D. Case No. DP 20-78 W-i, Section 3, T5S, RISE Gentlemen: This area lies on the sandy area Northeasterly of Palm Desert and is considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances. The District will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to said area. in accordance with the currently prevailing regulations of this District. This area shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 16 & 70 of the Coachella Valley County Water District for domestic water service. This area shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 53 & 80 of the Coachella Valley County Water District for sanitation service. Very truly yours, Lowell 0. Weeks G ral Manager -Chief Engineer I<H:dm .cc: Riverside County Dept. of Public Health 46-209 Oasis St. IVIEDNE Cis Indio, CA. 92201 RE Czgr� ; �RlVIIi�NxleNr�t, �I:aiIH�P. QU 99 fflui sma. 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE Jan. 2. 1979 APPLICANT ALLARCO Developments Ltd. c/o Ballew McFarland Inc. 74-075 E1 Paseo A-7 Palm Desert, CA 92260 CASE NO.: C/Z 13-78 and DP 20-78 The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of Dec. 20, 1978. DP 20-78 XX CONTINUED TO January 2, 1979 - DENIED C/Z 13-78 XX APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 440 PLACED ON THE AGENDA OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF FOR CONCURRENCE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION. C/Z 13-78 XX PLACED ON THE AGENDA OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF Jan. 25th FOR PUBLIC HEARING. Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the Director of Environmental Services, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date'of the decision. i�G, a -%z W%-" PAUL A. WILLIAMS, SECRETARY PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSSION cc: Applicant C.V.C.W.D. File r CITY OF PALM DESERT STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report on: Change of Zone and Related Preliminary Development Plan Applicant: ALLARCO DEVELOPMENT, LTD. Case No(s): C/Z 13-78 and DP 20-78 Date: December 20, 1978 I. REQUEST: Approval of a Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR-3(U.A.) and preliminary Development Plan on 405 gross acres at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Country Club Drive. II. LOCATIONAL MAP: III. BACKGROUND: A. Adjacent Zoning/Land Use: North - W-2-20, Vacant South - PR-3, S.P.(U.A.), Vacant/Proposed Condominium Development East - R-5, Golfcourse Country Club Development West - R-1-12,000, Vacant Case Nos. C/Z 13-78 and DP 20-78 December 20, 1978 III. BACKGROUND: 0 E F Land Use Analysis: Single-family Lots Multi -family condominiums Golf Course Clubhouse Buffer & Landscaping Internal Roadways Perimeter Streets Open Space Calculations: Page Two Acres 143.5 32.4 152.8 4.8 23.8 32.7 15.0 Total Acres 405 Required, 50% of net site area = 195 acres Proposed, 51.5% of net site area = 200.8 acres Dwelling Unit Count: Single-family (lots) Multi -family (Condominiums) Total Proposed G Recreational Amenities: 18 hole golf course 11 tennis courts clubhouse IV. DISCUSSION: No. Units 552 248 800 = 2.035 du/acre Change of Zone - The applicant's (amended) request for 800 dwelling units on 393 + gross acres results in a density of 2.035 units per acre and would require PR-3 zoning to implement. The proposed density would ap- pear to be consistant with current land use considerations for the north sphere area. Subsequent to legal noticing, the applicant revised the Development Plan to provide for twenty additional multi-family/condo- minium units, resulting in the present request for 800 dwelling units. To be consistent with the application of the Scenic Preservation Overlay on properties with Cook Street frontage, any Change of Zone approval should include the SP designation. Development Plan - The design of the proposed project incorporates clusters of multi -family density condominiums and single-family lots, arranged around an 18 hole golf course and clubhouse facility. The project is bounded by three major streets (Country Club, Cook Street, and Frank Sinatra Drive). The main project entrance is depicted at the approximate mid -point along the Cook Street frontage, with secondary ac- cess points on Country Club and Frank Sinatra Drive toward the eastern Case Nos. C/Z 13-78 and DP 20-78 December 20, 1978 IV. DISCUSSION: (Cont.) Page Three Five hundred, fifty-two (552) single-family lots encompass approximately 36% of the net site area. In a number of situations throughout the site, flag lots have been used. If these lots are to be marketed in a lot sales program, retaining walls and decorative common property line sepa- ration walls between the front and rear flag lots should be provided prior to sale, so that a degree of design continuity can be achieved. Probably the least desirable locations for lots in the development are in the corners of Cook Street and Country Club, and Cook Street and Frank Sinatra Drive; some consideration should be given to holding lots back from these corners. Perimeter treatment of the site will need to include a decorative boundary wall and wind/blowsand protection planting. The design scheme for orna- mental landscaping and parkway development will need to be estalbished in accordance with a uniform approach for the subject streets. Planning Division Staff will be working on developing design concepts for general parkway treatment. Site grading should establish drainage patterns to accommodate nuisance waters on site. Unusual storm water volumes may be channeled to public street where practical, and approved by the City Director of Public Works. The general objective for development in the North Sphere Area will be to see that this type of policy is carried out. Golf course developments lend themselves quite easily to retaining on site waters. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Observing the comments in the preceding report section, staff finds the overall development concept to be quite acceptable. The Design Review Board at their December 12, 1978, meeting, also had the apportunity to view the development plans and reached a similar conclustion. The plans as presented, at the selected scale, only portray a schematic representa- tion of the attached condominium unit areas. An additional level of detail should be defined and reviewed before proceeding to the next pre- cise (Design Review) application stage. Therefore, it is suggested that an amended Development Plan be presented for the attached condominiums, but that the overall Development Plan be approved in concept as follows: Based on the justification provided in the Resolution, it is recommended that C/Z 13-78 and DP 20-78 be recommended to the City Council for approval by approving Planning Commission Resolution No. —, subject to conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 440 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM 'S' STUDY TO PR-3, S.P. (U.A.) ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COOK STREET AND COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE. CASE NO..C/Z 13-78 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 20th day of December, 1978, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a Change of Zone application from 'S' Study to PR-3 (U.A.) (Planned Residential, max. 3 du/acre, Upon Annexation); and, a Development Plan for an 800 dwelling unit golf course condominium and individual lot project, filed by ALLARCO DEVELOPMENT, LTD. on ap- proximately 405 gross acres generally located at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Country Club Drive, the site being more particularly described as follows: APN 619-021-001-8 APN 619-021-002-9 APN 619-021-003-0 WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32," in that the Director of Environmental Services has deter- mined that the project would not have a significant impact on the environment and the appeal period did expire; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering the testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts to justify their recommendations and actions as described below: Change of Zone: a. The land use resulting from the revised Change of Zone would be more compatible with adjacent exist- ing and proposed land uses. b. The density resulting from the revised Change of Zone would be compatible with densities permitted in the adjacent areas. The proposed Change of Zone would be compatible with the Adopted Palm Desert General Plan. d. The proposed Change of Zone conforms to the intent and purpose of the City's Zoning Ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 440 Page Two NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of a Change of Zone in modified form from 'S' Study to PR-3, S.P.(U.A.) for the reasons set out in this resolution. 3. That the Planning Commission does hereby continue the Development Plan (DP 20-78) to the January 2, 1979, meeting for further review. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 20th day of December, 1978, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: BERKEY, KELLY, KRYDER, SNYDER NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: FLESHMAN ATTEST: PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary /ks I GL R A KELLY, Chairman I ,J l t PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. _ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM 'S' STUDY TO PR-3, S.P. (U.A.) AND A DEVELOP- MENT PLAN FOR 800 DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COOK STREET AND COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE. CASE NOS. C/Z 13-Z8 and DP 20-78 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 20th day of December, 1978, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a Change of Zone application from 'S' Study to PR-3 (U.A.) (Planned Residential, max. 3 du/acre, Upon Annexation); and, a Development Plan for an 800 dwelling unit golf course condominium and individual lot project, filed by ALLARCO DEVELOPMENT, LTD. on ap- proximately 405 gross acres generally located at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Country Club Drive, the site being more particularly described as follows: APN 619-021-001-8 APN 619-021-002-9 APN 619-021-003-0 WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32," in that the Director of Environmental Services has deter- mined that the project would not have a significant impact on the environment and the appeal period did expire; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering the testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts to justify their recommendations and actions as described below: Change of Zone: a. The land use resulting from the revised Change of Zone would be more compatible with adjacent exist- ing and proposed land uses. b. The density resulting from the revised Change of Zone would be compatible with densities permitted in the adjacent areas. C. The proposed Change of Zone would be compatible with the Adopted Palm Desert General Plan. d. The proposed Change of Zone conforms to the intent and purpose of the City's Zoning Ordinance. Development Plan: The proposed project conforms to the intent and pur- poses of the PR Zone District. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. Page Two NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does herby recommend approval to the City Council of a Change of Zone in modified form from 'S' Study to PR-3, S.P.(U.A.) for the reasons set out in this resolution. 3. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of an overall conceptual Development Plan (Exhibit B) as a part of their consideration of the related Change of Zone, subject to those conditions labeled Exhibit C, attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on 1978, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary /ks a regular meeting of the this 20th day of December, GLORIA KELLY, Chairman PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NOS. C/Z 13-78 &-DP 20-78 Standard Conditions: Exhibit Page Three 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with Exhibit A (Case No. DP 20-78) on file with the Department of En- vironmentl Services, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of any uses contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first complete all the procedural requirements of the City which includes, but not limited to, amended Development Plan for the condominium area, Design Review, Subdivision process, and building permit procedures. 3. Construction of the total development may be done in phases; how- ever, each individual phase shall meet or exceed all Municipal Code requirements to the degree that the City could consider each phase as a single project. 4. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of inal approval otherwise said approval shall become null, void and of no effect whatsoever. Further, the total project shall be completed by January 1, 1985. After said date, this approval shall automatically expire for those remaining undeveloped portions of the subject property and the City Council may initiate rezoning procedures to revert said un- developed areas to an S (Study) Zone Designation. 5. Prior to the issuance of any City permits for the commencement of construction on said project, the applicant shall agree in writing to these Conditions of Approval. 6. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and State and Federal Statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 7. All existing electrical distribution lines, telephone, cable antenna television, and similar service wires or cables, which are adja- cent to the property being developed shall be installed underground as a part of development from the nearest existing pole not on the property being developed. 8. All requirements of the City Fire Marshal shall be met as part of the development of this project per attached letter dated December 7, 1978. 9. Construction plans shall be submitted for approval to the City Fire Marshal prior to issuance of building permits. All conditions shall be made a part of construction and no certificate of occupancy shall be issued until completed. 10. Traffic control provisions shall be provided as required by the Director of Public Works. PLANNING COMMISSION Exhibit C RESOLUTION NO. Page Four Standard Conditions: (Cont.) 13. No development shall occur on the subject property prior to the recordation of a tract map. Special Conditions: 1. Provide minimum 32 foot wide private streets where dwelling units occur only one one side of the roadway or in a cul-de-sac and provide min. 40 foot wide private streets where units are located on both sides of the roadway. 2. Move or eliminate lots occuring in northwest and southwest corner of site. 3. Provide retaining walls and decorative garden walls along the common property line between front single-family lots and rear flat lots; to be installed as an improvement of the final Tract Map. 4. File an amended Development Plan for the condominium area which meets all Ordinance standards and considers the following: - Loop the 1,100 foot private access street into a private collection street to provide for through circulation, or reduce the length. - Provide (in the range of 8 to 12) appropriately distributed swimming pools for the condominiums. 5. Provide wind/blowsand protection treatment along north and west boundaries. 6. Provide ornamental parkway landscaping along public street front- ages. 7. Provide minimum six (6) foot high masonry wall around the site. 8. Retain all nuisance waters onsite, by appropriately grading the site; and, provide for drainage of unusual storm water volumes to public streets, as approved by the Director of Public Works. f PLANNING COMMISSI__ RESOLUTION NO. Exhibit C Page Five " RIVERSIDE COUNTY cr. FIRE DEPARTMENT Ir COUN7 IN COOPERATION WITH THE "Is,rN.': CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY �y— DAVID L. FLAKE COUNTY FIRE WARDEN December 7, 1978 Paul A. Williams Director of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: Case No. DP 20-78 Dear Mr. Williams: 210 WEST SAN JACINTO STREET PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370 TELEPHONE (714) 657-3183 Prior to construction of any of the proposed buildings, the following conditions must be met: 1. Install a water system capable of delivering 2500 GPM fire flow for a two (2) hour duration in addition to domestic or other supply. The computation shall be based upon a minimum of 20 psi residual operating pressure in the supply main from which the flow is measured at the time of measurement. 2. Install Riverside County super fire hydrants so that no point of any building is more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant measured along approved vehicular travel ways. A. Hydrants shall not be located closer than 25 feet to any building. B. Exterior surfaces of hydrant barrels and heads shall be painted chrome yellow, and the tops and nozzle caps shall be painted green. C. Curbs (if installed), shall be painted red 15 feet in either direction from each hydrant. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and three (3) copies of the water system plan to the Fire Marshal for review. Upon approval, one copy will be sent to the Building Department, and the original will be returned to the developer. 4. The water system plan shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, and ap- proved by the water company, with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Case Number DP 20-78 is in accordance ... i+l }h- .......... ............}-----..e41.-d 1- }L- T_-_ .. INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: Director of Environmental Services FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: C/Z 13-78 and OP 20-78 DATE: December 5, 1978 It appears that the lots abutting Country Club and the northerly portion of Cook Street that have flag lots adjacent thereto will necessarily have road- ways on two sides of their lots. This possibly can be alleviated if the main street adjacent were relocated so as to accommodate lots on both sides thereof. DEC " 1978 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF PALM DESERT 3700 CENTRAL AVENUE • RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA R. W. RIDDELL Eastern Division Distribution Planning Supervisor Mailing Address P. O. BOX 22M, RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 925M December 7, 1978 Location of Nearest Gas Main: Country Club Drive City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: EIR Case No. C/Z 13-78 and DP 20-78 This letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to serve the proposed project; but only as an information service. Its intent is to notify you that the Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the above named project is proposed. Gas service to the project could be provided from an existing main without any significant impact on the environment. The service would be in accordance with the Company's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual arrangements are rnade. The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action which affects gas supply or the condition under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. We have developed several programs which are available, upon request, to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy conservation techniques for a particular project. if you desire further information on any of our energy conservation programs, please contact this office for assistance. C 12110. 1V E D DEC 13 197; ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF PALM DESERT Paul Weldon Technical Supervisor INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: Director of Environmental Services FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: C/Z 13-78 and DP 20-78 DATE: December 5, 1978 It appears that the lots abutting Country Club and the northerly portion of Cook Street that have flag lots adjacent thereto will necessarily have road- ways on two sides of their lots. This possibly can be alleviated if the main street adjacent were relocated so as to accommodate lots on both sides thereof. DtC " 1979 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF PALM DESERT 3700 CENTRAL AVENUE • RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA R. W. RIDDELL Eastern Division Distribution Planning Supervisor Mailing Address P. O. BOX 220Q RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 925M December 7, 1978 Location of Nearest Gas Main: Country Club Drive City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: EIR Case No. C/Z 13-78 and DP 20-78 This letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to serve the proposed project; but only as an information service_. Its intent is to notify you that the Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the above named project is proposed. Gas service to the project could be provided from an existing main without any significant impact on the environment. The service would be in accordance with the Company's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual arrangements are made. The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action which affects gas supply or the condition under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. We have developed several programs which are available, upon request, to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy conservation techniques for a particular project. If you desire 'further information on any of our energy conservation programs, please contact this office for assistance. DEC 13 19'." ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITYOFPALM DESERT Paul Weldon Technical Supervisor v� c2 i�aq, (7id) 345-2831 45-300 CLUB DRIVE INDIAN WELLS, CALIFORNIA 92260 December 19, 1978 Mr. Paul Williams Director Of Environmental Services City Of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear Mr. Williams: On December 7, 1978 the Indian Wells City Council re- viewed Palm Desert's Development Plan 20-78 and Change Of Zone 13-78 (Allarco Development). The Council unanimously agreed that this project and the necessary annexation within our Sphere Of Influence was acceptable. very truly yours, WILLIAM J. SULLIVAN Community Development Director WJS/tg Country CluJ Dr. Property Irwin Siegel c/o Smoketree Escrow P.O. Box 1746 1729 E. Palm Canyon Dr. Encino, Ca. 91316 Palm Springgs, Ca. 92262 �619-021-001-8 619-060-003-1 Pandika Corp. Allarco Development Ltd. 39001 Del Safari Dr. c/o Ballew/McFarland Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 74-75 El Paseo A-7 Palm Desert, CA 92260 �619-021-012-8 Thomas H. Taylor 1333 Padres Tr. La Canada, Ca. 91011 �620-190-005-5 John T. Drabble 5079 Calatrana Ave. Joodland Hills, Ca. 91364 �620-190-012-1 John R. Morton 316 La Rambla San Clemente, Ca. 92672 �620-190-010-9 look Country Ltd. Pt :/o E. G. Marzicola ?.0. Box 47 ?alm Desert, Ca. 92260 �620-200-033-0 coward A. Frame 587 Fletcher Dr. ltherton, Ca. 94025 b653-400-004-2 )avid Freeman & Co. Inc. 1.0. Box 501 'hermal, Ca. 92274 �653-400-005-3 Bonder Palms Citrus Ltd. ./o M.E. Tennenbaum i5 Water St. 50th F1. dew York, N.Y. 10041 �653-420-004-4 Gf:Q�Tr CgXff 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT,CAUFORNIA92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 January 5, 1979 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM 'S' STUDY TO PR-3 (U.A.) OR ANY OTHER ZONE DEEMED APPRO- PRIATE AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ON 405 GROSS ACRES AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COOK STREET AND COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE. CASE NOS. C/Z 13-78 & DP 20-78 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider a request by ALLARCO DEVELOPMENT, LTD. for approval of a Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR-3 (U.A.) (Planned Residential, max. 3 du/acre, Upon Annexation) or any other zone deemed appropriate and Preliminary Development Plan to allow 800 dwelling units and an 18 hole golf course at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Country Club Drive, more particularly described as: APN 619-021-001-8, 002-9, & 003-0 4 �- CIE 45-7$ tom: O:ff IF8aIlnm�®rPf� 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 January 5, 1979 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM 'S' STUDY TO PR-3 (U.A.) OR ANY OTHER ZONE DEEMED APPRO- PRIATE AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ON 405 GROSS ACRES AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COOK STREET AND COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE. CASE NOS. C/Z 13-78 & DP 20-78 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider a request by ALLARCO DEVELOPMENT, LTD. for approval of a Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR-3 (U.A.) (Planned Residential, max. 3 du/acre, Upon Annexation) or any other zone deemed appropriate and Preliminary Development Plan to allow 800 dwelling units and an 18 hole golf course at the northeast corner of Cook Street and Country Club Drive, more particularly described as: APN 619-021-001-8, 002-9, & 003-0 /24V/ 1O11111 CG UB 3/7/2YO en70 AD'1N170D 3/I/d'O bbZteN/S aNVD� m Cszz��SLs ��OD zS�J np0MR9 ***CHANGE OF ZONE*** DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION City O o.a a mmt 675 Address REQUEST: (Describe specific nature of approval requested) PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 7 516-6 • SCf2 o Telephone Zip- Code 42m- Llenss Acr- S AT- "7dimr- P�-M czf-Or-2 cF GCby- C Coo,r,!�r Cxwe ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 611 -- ()21 EXISTING ZONING -,i 1 IC%j3-� Property Owner Authorization THE UNDERSIGNED STATES THAT THEY ARE THE OWNER IS) OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIB HE p AND HEREBY GIVE AUTHOR- IZATION FOR THE FILING OF THIS APPLICATION. flomwwr II Tti��r 6a3�r SIGNATURE 1 ATE AGREEMENT ABSOLVING THE CITY OF PALM DESERT OF ALL LIABILITIES RELATIVE TO ANY DEED RESTRICTIONS. I DO BY MY SIGNATURE ON THIS AGREEMENT, ABSOLVE THE CITY OF PALM DESERT OF ALL LIABILITIES REGARDING ANY DEED RES- TRICTIONS THAT MAY BE APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN. SGNPI URt Applicant's Signature SIGNATURE (FOR STAFF USE ONLY) ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS ❑ MINISTERIAL ACT E.A. No ❑ CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION ❑ NEGATIVE DECLARATION ❑ OTHER DATE DATE ACCEPTED BY CASE No. d Z /3 - 700 REFERENCE CASE NO. DP +Q 0— -7 9 Supporting Data: 1. Name of Applicant A L zu-o �fc�S,WPM�fJ� LTD 2. This request is made for property described as: —Ms� — is WEST 331I.14-' Exact legal description 3. Total area of site: 4. Existing Zoning: more than 1 zone requested, give subtotal Tor or atta 5. Proposed Zoning: PE. 3 describe here or attach map 6. Assessor's Parcel No.: 7 D. The property is located at czpw �X (stree between and _ (street) The present use of the property is Vr 7xcaj 9. General Plan Designation: RajlLJU 3 es Y% s 10. The applicant offers the following reasons to justify the request for a Change of Zone: I I I Pll 0 WIJ ^t < 11. The applicant shall submit a minimum of twelve (12) accurate scale drawings of the site (one colored) and the surrounding area showing: - existing streets and property lines - existing structures - access and utility easements - topographic contours at intervals of not more than two (2) feet. 12. The applicant shall submit a list of all owners of property located within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the subject property. The list shall be keyed to a map showing the location of these properties and shall include the name and address as shown on the latest available assessment role of the Riverside County Assessor's Office. 13. The applicant shall submit a completed Environmental Assessment form. 14. The applicant shall provide such additional information as the Director of Environmental Services may require to determine whether the granting of a Change of Zone would endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare. The application may be filed only by the owner of said property and shall be signed by the owner or by a person with a Power of Attorney, in writing (attached) from the owner authorizing the application or by the Attorney -at -Law for the owner. Indicate your authority below: I am the owner of said property. I am the agent for the owner of said property (attach written authorization). I have a Power of Attorney from the owner authorizing the application I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. ty Executed at f��Cc this 3 day of N 1