Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutALAMO/SKYWARD WAY/CHIA DRIVE C/Z 05-78 1978'3 - .�iF!aL'it11I�M; aYjHZ .y I� is !d f � I m rz CH IA 456,. O6' DRIVE •� c -N, -A --� ©o N � '� s � z O -A C1 gip, o0 1T} I4 CITY OF PALM DESERT STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report On: Change of Zone and related EIR and Development Plan Case Nos.: C/Z 05-78, C/Z 05-78(EIR), DP 10-78 and 133MF Applicant: BUREAU OF TEACHER AID AND RETIREMENT SERVICES Date: July 5, 1978 I. REQUEST: Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 10,000 to R-2 6,000 on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive , the related EIR and approval of a related Development Plan and preliminary Design Review to allow for a 72-unit retirement apartment project on said site. II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1) By Planning Commission Resolution No. 386, recommend denial to the City Council of the proposed Change of Zone and approval and certification of the final environmental impact report as complete. 2) By Planning Commission Resolution No. 387 deny the request for approval of the proposed Development Plan. Justification is based upon the following for recommending denial of the Change of Zone. 1. The land use resulting from the proposed Change of Zone would not respect predominant existing uses in the adjacent areas. 2. The density resulting from the proposed Change of Zone would not be compatible with densities permitted in adjacent areas. Justification is based upon the following for denying the proposed Development Plan: 1. The proposed development exceeds the density permitted within the zone in which the site is located and it does not comply with all other requirements of the existing zone. 2. The site of the proposed project is not the most appropriate site for the proposed use. Alternate sites are available that are more appropriate. 3. Due to the location of the proposed development, the commercial district and social services would not be readily accessible to the Case Nos. C/Z 05-78, C/Z 05-78(EIR), DP 10-78 and 133MF July 5, 1978 Page Two III. BACKGROUND: (Cont.) EIR Finding: An Environmental Impact Report was required by the Director of Environmental Services and said report has been submitted. Proposed No. of Units: 72 units Proposed Density: Approximately 6.54 du/acre Size of Units: 1 bedroom units - 714 sq. ft. 2 bedroom units - 978 sq. ft. IV. DISCUSSION RELATING TO CHANGE OF ZONE REQUEST AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN: The present zoning of R-1 10,000 represents a density of approximately 4.4 du/acre. Given that the subject site is approximately 11.1 acres in size, approximately 49 units could be constructed under the present zoning. The proposed Change of Zone to R-2 6,000 would allow approxi- mately 81 units representing a density of approximately 7.3 du/acre. As a result, the proposed density would represent a substantial in- crease over that permitted by the present zoning; specifically, an increase of 2.9 du/acre. In terms of compatibility with adjacent den- sities, the proposed zoning does not appear compatible. The highest density permitted on adjacent property is 4.4 du/acre with most of the adjacent zoning permitting only 2.17 and 3.35 du/acre. In terms of land use compatibility, the land use resulting from the pro- posed Change of Zone would not respect predominant existing uses in the adjacent areas. Presently, the area is a single-family residential neigh- borhood. There are no fourplex units now existing in this area. Aes- thetically, the project would not be complementary to existing residen- tial uses. Assuming the Change of Zone were not approved, the proposed development would exceed the density permitted within the R-1 10,000 zone. Additionally, the project would not comply with many of the development standards mandated by the R-1 10,000 zone. With regard to the Development Plan, Staff believes the site of the pro- posed project is not the most appropriate site for the proposed use as a retirement project. Alternate sites are available that are more appropriate. The project's distance from the commercial district is excessive for the elderly, nearly 2.5 miles. The only written comments received regarding the proposed Change of Zone are from Dr. and Mrs. Eugene Kay who oppose both the proposed Change of Zone and development plan. Their comments relative to the density issue appear valid. .However, the tax exempt status of the project in addition to the issue of affordability of the units are issues that do not appear appropriate to discuss in conjunction with the Change of Zone request or Development Plan proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 386 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1 10,000 to R-2 6,000 ON APPROXIMATELY 11 ACRES LOCATED EAST OF ALAMO, SOUTH OF SKYWARD WAY AND WEST OF CHIA DRIVE AND APPROVAL AND CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRON- MENTAL IMPACT REPORT AS COMPLETE. CASE NOS. C/Z 05-78 and EIR WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 1st day of August 1978, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a Change of Zone application, filed by the BUREAU OF TEACHER AID AND RETIRMENT SERVICES from R-1 10,000 (Single- family Residential, min. 10,000 sq. ft. lot size) to R-2 6,000 (Single- family Residential, min. 6,000 sq. ft. lot area per du) on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive and the related Environmental Impact Report, the site being more particularly described as: APN 630-190-012 WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32," in that an Environmental Impact Report was required by the Director of Environmental Services and said report has been submitted; 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 and reasons do exist to deny the request for a Change of Zone: The land use resulting from the proposed Change of Zone would not respect predominant existing uses in the adjacent areas. 2. The density resulting from the proposed Change of Zone would not be compatible with densities permitted in adjacent areas. WHEREAS, said Environmental Impact Report does conform to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and consti- tute the findings of the Commission in these cases. 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby deny the requested Change of Zone from R-1 10,000 to R-2 6,000 for the reasons set out in PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 386 Page Two PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular- meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 1st day of August, 1978, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: KRYDER, SNYDER, FLESHMAN NOES: NONE ABSENT: KELLY ABSTAIN: BERKEY Walter Snyder, Vice -Chairman ATTEST: PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary /ks PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 387 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ANNOUNCING FIND- INGS AND DENYING APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 72-UNIT RETIREMENT APARTMENT PROJECT ON AP- PROXIMATELY 11 ACRES EAST OF ALAMO, SOUTH OF SKY- WARD WAY AND WEST OF CHIA DRIVE. CASE NOS. DP 10-78 and 133MF WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 1st day of August 1978, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a verified application from the BUREAU OF TEACHER AID AND RETIREMENT SERVICES requesting approval of a Develop- ment Plan and Preliminary Design Review to allow construction of a 72- unit retirement apartment project on approximately 11 acres east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, more particularly described as: APN 630-190-012 WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32," in that an Environmental Impact Report was required by the Director of Environmental Services and said report has been submitted; 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 and reasons to exist to justify the denial of the subject Development Plan: 1. The proposed development exceeds the density permitted within the zone in which the site is located and it does not comply with all other requirements of the existing zone. 2. The site of the proposed project is not the most appropriate site for the proposed use. Alternate sites are available that are more appropriate. 3. Due to the location of the proposed development, the com- mercial district and social services would not be readily accessible to the potential retired residents for which the project is being designed for. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and consti- tute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. The Planning Commission does hereby reject Development Plan DP 10-78 and preliminary Design Review 133MF for reasons stated. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 1st day of August 1978, July 20, 1978 Mr. Paul Williams rz i V E LP Planning Commission Palm Desert City Hall JUL241978 Palm Desert, Calif. ENVIRONMENTAL SFRVICES Dear Mr. Williams: As I am unable to attend the Aug. 1st, meeting for the hearing on the Teachers Retirement Project, I would appreciate your reading my points in protest to this project. 1. As a life member of the California Teacher's Association and an active member of the Palm Springs Desert Division of California Retired Teachers, I am definitely opposed to this project in this location. 2. I have talked with other teachers in the area and they concur with me that retired teachers receive substantial retirement and see no reason why the rest of the community should pay taxes for services to support a group of this kind in a TAX FREE PROJECT! I signed a petition protesting this venture and received a letter from the Teachers Aid and Retirement Services stating as following: "Item 7-A The California Teachers Association, like certain other institutions, has exemptions under California Law from property taxes. Our Counsel believes that the subject propetty will be exempt." 3. In this same letter, items 6 and 9 states as follows: "These are active people of means who often will be traveling during the off-season" and "They pay $20,000. membership fee plus a monthly rental fee of �350, to $485, per month." This substantiates my first point, if they are people of means and can travel and pay $20,000. memberships and rent from $350, to $485, per month------ let them pay their share of taxes with the rest of us, and either rent or buy a home. 4. The site of these retirement houses is located in one of the best residential areas of Palm Desert. Why break it up with a project of this kind --- TAX FREE--- ?? Let's keep it a first class residential area. Yours /2yr tp ly Frank Little Bureau of ^ s'' Tea e i f,o nw* R � e t� s ,��, VJ Goo California Teachers Association June 28, 1978 TO: Concerned e ' ents of alm Desert FROM: Robert M. Al o Director Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services California Teachers Association RE: Proposed Teacher Aid and Retirement Services Palm Desert Project A significant number of residents in your area have ex- pressed opposition to our proposed project, so I wish to clear up misconceptions and provide you with informa- tion which will permit you to make a judgment based on facts. The attached sheets discuss the principal objections which have been expressed to the city of Palm Desert, Our consultant, Mr. George Berkey can provide you with additional information, if you call him at (714) 346-6677.. Incidently, he will not participate in any deliberation of this project by the city either as our spokeman or as a member of the Planning Commission, R,M,A.. f 1— 1125 West Sixth Street / Los Angeles, California 90017 / (213) 482-5660 I. PROJECT HAS TOO HIGH DENSITY. A. Based upon our facilities at Pasadena and Santa Barbara, the population of the project is expected to be 86 persons (1.2 per unit). If the land was developed with 47 single-family residences, as permitted under the current zoning, the projected population would be 113 persons. B. Instead of 47 houses there will be only 18 single story residential buildings which have been designed to have the appearance of large homes. There will also be a recreation building in the center. Thus, there will be large landscaped open spaces in a park -like setting instead of resi- dences in close proximity to each other. 2. THE FOOTAGE OF THE LIVING QUARTERS ARE INADEQUATE AND NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH SURROUNDING HOMES. A. Each person occupying a "single" unit will have a bedroom, bath, kitchen and living -dining room totaling 714 square feet, so four such units in one building total 2856 square feet. This can be compared with a average 4-bedroom single-family home for a man, wife and their 2 children. There are not many surrounding homes having 2856 square feet. 3. COMPARABLE HOMES FOR THE ELDERLY IN CALIFORNIA HAVE GONE BANKRUPT AND THIS PROJECT COULD BECOME A "SLUM" AREA AND DEVALUATE SURROUND- ING PROPERTY. A. The "bankrupt facilities" are not comparable. Our facilities at Pasadena and Santa Barbara have five-year waiting lists and the California Teachers Association is extremely sound. The structures and landscaping will be maintained by experts in a manner which is superior to that of the average owner of a single-family residence. 4. PRESENT STREETS ARE NOT PREPARED FOR THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION. A. With a population of less than single-family development less traffic will be generated. B. The residents of our project will be inclined to engage in car-pooling, a mini -bus or the public bus service, so fewer automobile trips than normal for the population will be generated. C. There will be only one entrance for ingress and egress of normal traffic. That will be on the east side of the project on Chia Drive. For all trips to the commercial and recreation areas Chia will be used and there will be no need or inclination whatsoever to use Somera,Skyward, Bel Air, Homestead or Alamo. Chia will be improved Southerly to the project entrance and also Northerly to connect with Haystack. It has been deter- mined that Little Bend should not be extended Westerly of its present terminus, so no traffic can go from the project through Silver Spur Ranch Streets. Palm Desert Project Page 2 D. If the project land were to be developed with single-family residences and the customary street patterns, there would be direct connections to the West and Alamo, Somera, Skyward, Bel Air and Homestead would be affected. 5. TO WHOM WOULD THE MEMBERSHIP IN THE PROJECT COMMUNITY BE TRANSFERRABLE? A. The initial fee, which will be paid by the retiree for the privileges of occupancy, will be recovered by that retiree upon the termination of his or her residency. The ownership of the project will be retained by The Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services of The California Teachers Association who will restrict the "membership" transfer to eligible mem- bers of the Association. 6. ELDERLY TEACHERS CAN FIND A BE= "ALL -YEAR LIVING" AREA WHERE THEIR STRUCTURE SIZE, TRAFFIC AND C HER PROBLEMS ARE ACCEPTABLE. A. The Retired Teachers who expect to occupy the project are comparable to the hundreds of other retirees who occupy residential units of all kinds throughout Palm Desert. They are active people or means who often will travel during an off-season. A number of occupants of our Santa Barbara facility expressed a preference for the desert as opposed to the foggy cooler climate on the coast. There will be no facilities to care for inactive retirees at Palm Desert, so one should not imagine the occupants as being extremely old bed -ridden people. B. We already own our property free and clear and wish to use it . 7. IS THE PROJECT "TAX-FREE"7 WHY? A. The California Teachers Association, like certain other institutions, has exemptions under California law from property taxes. Our Counsel believes that the subject property will be exempt. B. It should be noted that our project would have no impact on the school system which historically collects over one-half of each property tax bill and that Palm Desert does not now have a property tax. 8. THE DEVELOPMENT IS APPROXIMATELY 2.5 MILES FROM THE SHOPPING AREA. THIS WOULD POSE A PROBLEM FOR SENIOR CITIZENS OF LIMITED MOBILITY. A. There are few people of any kind who walk to shopping areas and our re- tirees can drive or ride in vehicles as well as anyone else. Our facili- ties in Santa Barbara are adjacent to single-family residences and are located 5.0 miles from shopping. We fail to understand this objection. 9. WHY WOULD ANYONE PAY A $20,000 MEMBERSHIP FEE PLUS A MONTHLY RENTAL FEE OF $350 TO $485 PER MONTH? A. One might also ask why retirees are paying $20,000 or more for small mobile home lots. The fee is recovered by the retiree when he terminates his residency. B. The monthly fee includes numerous services, privileges and recreational facilities in addition to rental of a unit. Palm Desert Project Page 3 10. THE PROPERTY IS FAR T00 VAUMBLE TO BE USED FOR A RETIRHS' M DEVELOPMMU. A. We already own it and our potential occupants believe it is an ideal location. We believe our retirees are in the best position to make a judgment. 11. THE ZONE SHOULD BE CHANGED TO R-I-I3000 RATHER THAN LOWERED. THE PROJECT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT AND DEPRECIATE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. A. Silver Spur Ranch is directly to the east and we note that probably a majority of the lots are only 7200 Square feet (80' x 90') from Little Bend Trail Northly. To the east of the single family lots is Corsican Villas with Pr-6 zoning and far less open space than we are proposing. OUr project is superior to those conditions and environment. B. Ironwood has a Pr-7 designation, permitting more units per acre than we are proposing. C. Our park -like development with limited access, free from barking dogs, free from noisey hot -rods and motor bikes, free from open garage doors opening on public streets, etc. would provide a more pleasing environment than the average single-family development. Its effect on the area would be far more beneficial than adverse. 12. LITTLE BEND TRAIL SHOULD NOT BE EXTENDED TO BRING TRAFFIC THROUGH SILVER SPUR. A. We agree and believe the city does also. 13. FIRE PROTECTION IN THE VICINITY IS INADEQUATE. A. We agree. The city has money in the proposed 1978-79 budget for a nearby fire station. We understand that it will be built by the time our project is ready for occupancy. 14. NO NEW DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE PERMITTED UNTIL THE CITY HAS FUNDED A PROGRAM TO HANDLE THE FLOOD PROBLEM. A. Each new Palm Desert development is required not only to secure approval of its freedom from flooding but also must contribute to the city drainage funds and provide channels, levees, etc, as necessary. Thusr our project and development to the South will tend to complete drainage plans and to protect houses to the North of us on Skyward? Somera and Haystack. 15. THE "POND" WILL TEND TO BE A BREEDING PLACE FOR MOSQUITOS. A. There are many similar ponds or lakes at Marrakesh and Ironwood. Appro- priate measures will be taken or our occupants would be the f7.rst to complain, 46.10 Southern California Edison Company 36 IGO CATHEDRAL CANYON DRIVE CATHEDRAL CITY. CALIFORNIA 92234 July 20, 1978 �p �r RGCGIVG V TO: City of Palm Desert JUL24 i9%e 45275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, California 92260 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Project: Case No. DP 10-78 and Environmenta Impact Report Gentlemen: This is to advise that the subject property is located within the service territory of the Southern California Edison Company, and that the electric loads of the project are within parameters of projected load growth which Edison is planning to meet in this area. Unless the demand for electrical generating capacity exceeds our estimates, and provided that there are no unexpected outages to major sources of electrical supply, we expect to meet our electrical load requirements for the next several years. Our total system demand is expected to continue to increase annually; and, if our plans to proceed with future construction of new generat- ing facilities are delayed, our ability to serve all customer loads during peak demand periods could become marginal by 1981. In addition, the major fuel used in Edison's generating facilities is low sulfur fuel oil. We now believe our low sulfur fuel oil inventory, together with our contractual commitments for delivery, and our customers' conservation efforts, will permit us to meet the forecasted demand for electricity during 1978. It is our intention to continue to do everything that can reasonably be accomplished to provide our customers with a continuous and sufficient supply of electricity. G Very truly yours, Glenn Buchanan Customer Service Planner GB:ae (Rev. 11/77) TO: Mr. Paul A. Williams, Director of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert FROM: Mike Murray, R.S., Supervising Sanitarian Riverside County Health Department - Desert District DATE: June 15, 1978 SUBJECT: CZ 05-78 The Riverside County Health Department has no comments at this time. However, prior to the issuance of any permit to construct, we will require confirmation from Coachella Valley County Water District that they will provide sewage disposal and potable water. We will also require that plans to construct any commercial swimming pools or food preparation establishments be submitted to us for our approval prior to the issuance of permits to construct. MM: j s REvFIV,L JUN 2 0 l9?" ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: Director of Environmental Services FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: CZ 05-78 DATE: June 13, 1978 No comment, ' -SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA[A COMPANY R. W. RIDDELL _l. 3700 CENTRAL AVENUE • RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA Eastern Division Distribution Planning SuperviiaNVIR0IVMEN EHVICE CITY OF PALMW DESERT M.ESERT Mailing Address P. O. BOX M. RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92WG June 14, 1978 Location of Nearest Gas Main: Skyward Way City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: CA 05-78 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. 0 EUGENE M. KAY, M.D. RECEIVED 73020 HOMESTEAD ROAD PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 -.. ENVIRONMENTAL S§RVfDES 78 City of Palm Desert CITY OF PALM DESERT 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Attention: Mr. Paul A. Williams Director of Environmental Services Re: Proposed Project for Teacher Aid and Retired Services in Palm Desert Dear Mr. Williams, The proposal to rezone 11.1 acres of land South of Skyward Way and West of Chia Drive, which is at present zoned R1-16,666 single family dwellings to R2-6,000 and multiple family dwellings is objectionable for many reasons: The projected development of 61 one bed room units having only 714 sq. ft. and 12 two bed room units of 978 sq. ft. would mean 4 units per acre instead of one to two houses which the land is presently zoned for. With the addition of the proposed recreational building the d.nsity would be-6.87 or nearly 7 units per acre. At present the surrounding land is zoned: To the South - R1 - 20,000 sq. ft., single family & condominiun To the. North - RI - 129000 to 15,000 sq ft. single family To the East --RI - 1-0,000 sq. ft., single family To the West -RZ - 10,000 sq. ft., single family and condominiums with 1.8 units per acre. The rezoning, as requested, would slso allow two story buildings which would hurt the entire area. In addition, according to the Environmental Impact Report, the entire project would be tzx exempt! That would mean our young, struggling city would be required to furnish services without compensation. In the proposed report a map shows a large pond in the center of the development which would mean mosquitoe breeding to the detriment of the entire area. Furthermore it is very possible that a membership fee of 320,000.00 plus a monthly charge of 4350.00 to 3485.00 could prove too steep for many of the retired teachers. Therefore if the project is not financially successful what would prevent the Bureau of 'Teachers' Aid and Retirement Services from selling the extremely small units to outsiders with large families, creating a slum -like area in thecenter of the most desirable land still available in Palm Desert? For these reasons we feel we must join other objectors to the project. 4- /f J4 Sincerely, �ouNry ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY �fSTRIGT COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (714) 398-2651 DIRECTORS OFFICERS RAYMOND R. RUMMONDS, PRESIDENT LOWELL O. WEEKS, GENERAL MANAGER -(MIFF ENGINEER TELFIS CODEKAS, VICE PRESIDENT OLE J. NORDLAND, SECRETARY C. J. FROST WALTER R. WRIGHT, AUDITOR WILLIAM S. GARDNER REDWINE AND SHERRILL, ATTORNER STEVE D. BUXTON June 20, 1978 File: 0163.11 0421,1 _ 0721.1 we 11VL Department of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert JUN2' to Post Office Box 1977 Palm Desert, California 92260 ENVIRONMENTAL OF PALM SERVICES CITY OF PALM DESERT Re: Change of Zone 05-78 D.P. 10-78, Sec. 29, T5S, R6E Gentlemen: This area is protected from stormwater flows by a system of channels and dikes. This area may be 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. 54 and 80 of the Coachella Valley County Water District for sanitation service. There may be conflicts with existing District facilities. We request the appropriate public agency to withhold the issuance of a building permit until arrangements have been made with the District for the relocation of these facilities. Very truly yours, Lowell 0. Weeks G neral Manager -Chief Engineer cc: Riverside County Department of Public Health 46-209 Oasis Street Indio, California 92201 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: Director of Environmental Services FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: DP 10-78 DATE: June 13, 1978 This development shall pay the drainage and park fees as required by the City of Palm Desert ordinances. 2. Traffic safety lighting shall be installed on Little Bend Trail and the entrance to the development at Chia Drive. 3. It is recommended that the entrance off of Little Bend Trail be widened to a minimum of 32 feet. SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION FOR THE PROPOSED TEACHER AID AND RETIREMENT SERVICES PROJECT (Draft Environmental Impact Report and Supplemental Information Completes Final Environmental Impact Report) INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Palm Desert Planning Commission FROM: Paul A. Williams, Director of Environmental Services SUBJECT: Summary of the draft environmental impact DATE: July 5, 1978 report on the proposed Teacher Aid and " Retirement Services Project and Staff Recommendations. SUMMARY The draft environmental impact report attached hereto, was prepared to ac- company a request for zone change and development plans for an 11 + acre parcel of land located south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, extended. The proposed project will develop the land into a retirement community con- sisting of 18 buil:dings of four=units per building, a total of 72 single - story units. The project will also include a recreation building, swimming pool, and a large pond. The impacts associated with the project determined to be most significant by the City of Palm Desert, are summarized below. Hydrology and Drainage A natural storm channel traverses the southeast corner of the project site. This channel carries storm water from'ahe adjacent 38-acre site located to the south, to the 15-acre park site located east of.Chia Drive. On -site protection from flooding will be provided by the depression of the intersec- tion of Chia Drive and Little Bend Trail, extending the proposed swale from the 38-acre site to the park site, and berming along the southern project boundary. Additional off -site and regional.facilities are needed to provide adjacent properties and downstream areas with adequate flood protection. Land Use and Land Use Compatibility The project site, which is currently vacant and undeveloped, is zoned R-1-10,000 single-family dwellings. Property to the west and north of the project site is zoned R-1-10,000 and R-1-13,000, which would allow a density of approximately 3.3 to 4.3 dwelling units per acre. This property is only partially developed at this time. Property to the east of the project site is zoned R-1-10,000. The City is proposing.to develop this property into a park site. Property to the south of the project site is zoned R-1-20,000, which would allow a density of approximately 2.2 dwelling units per acre. However,a zone change has been requested on this property to PR-4,.which designates a planned residential development at a maximum density of four dwelling units per acre. The project proponent for that site proposes to develop the land at a density of approximately 3.4 dwelling units per acre. The Palm Desert General Plan land use designation for the project site and land immediately to the, -east, west, north, and south is Low Density Residential (three to five dwelling units per acre). -2- Land Use and Land Use Compatibility (Cont.) The implementation of the proposed zoning will change the zoning classifica- tion from R-1-10,000 to R-2-6,000, single and multi -family dwellings. The project has been designed to mitigate the visual impact of the project. Traffic and Circulation The proposed project will improve portions of Chia Drive in conjunction with project implementation. The proposed project, upon completion, is projected to generate between 216 and 576 vehicle trips per day. Public Services and Utilities No impacts are anticipated in providing water, sewer, gas, or electric service to the proposed project. No impacts on school facilities are anticipated. Con- cerns have been raised by the Fire Marshal concerning the inadequacy of fire protection services to this region of the City. Scenic Quality The project will transform the visual character of the site from that of a vacant parcel of land to that of a residential community. In the long-term, the cumu- lative impact of urban light on the views of the nighttime sky will be incre- mentally increased as a result of this project. Energy Consumption and Conservation The project is estimated to have an annual energy consumption (gasoline, natural gas, and electricity) roughly equivalent to 2,900 barrels of oil. Suggested measures for reducing gasoline consumption include the use of car pools, bicycles, and public transportation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Staff has reviewed the draft environmental impact report for the subject project and finds it to be a complete and comprehensive study of the impacts associated with the proposed development. The report has addressed the environ- mental factors of concern to Staff and mitigation measures have been provided to eliminate or reduce significant environmental impacts. Accordingly, the Staff is recommending that the EIR be certified as complete. It should be noted that approval of the EIR does not necessarily constitute approval of the subject project. Thus, other relevant Staff reports should be reviewed for recommendations regarding the project. Also attached herewith are comments received from other agencies and the public, along with the Staff responses, as appropriate, to said comments. Since a number of relevant issues were raised in the letters received, they have been summarized with responses on the following pages. It should be noted however, that only those issues not already addressed in the EIR are included in the summary. Those sta STAFF RECOMMENDATION (Cont.) considered to be irrelevant or merely indicating an objection to the project have not been addressed. Assuming sufficient responses are received at the Public Hearing, the final EIR and all environmental documentation for this project will be considered complete. ISSUES OF CONCERN ITIM Past performance of other CTA projects in Southern California. Include membership fees and taxing structure. Response: To be answered by applicant at Public Hearing. Traffic and Circulation. Two concerns were raised: 1) the location of proposed streets with respect to existing streets; and, 2) the adequacy of local streets to carry the additional traffic. Response: It should be noted that the street arrangements have been re- designed to permit only one access to the project on Chia Drive extended. The extension of Little Bend Trail has been eliminated and a secondary emergency access has been provided on Barberry Lane. Thus the primary access point to the project would also permit direct access to Haystack via Chia Drive. Accordingly, if the project were developed in this manner, Staff does not believe that traffic circulation would be a problem. Also, our studies indicate that traffic, with regard to adjacent subdivisions, would not be a problem if developed or planned. With respect to traffic volumes, it should be noted that this does not appear to be a relevant issue since any development in this area would increase existing traffic volumes. The proposed change in street locations would also appear to adequately handle projected traffic volumes. Alternate sites available within the City for this type of project. Response: Alternate sites were not considered as a part of the EIR -- con- sideration was only given to other projects on this site. Since alternate site locations are not required as a part of the project EIR, no further analysis was made. Such sites, however, are discussed in other Staff Reports. Distrance of project from commercial and social services centers. Response: The project sponsor has indicated that bus transportation can be provided to the site which would mitigate the distance, how- ever, it should be noted that such transportation is limited and unreliable. SUMMARY OF ISSUES OF CONCERN ETC. (Cont.) 5. Status of parcel of land located immediately south of Chia Drive which would permit extension of Chia Drive and ultimate access to the project. Re onse: This is a key parcel for development of this project. Both access and circulation are contingent upon this parcel. The applicant will address this matter at the Public Hearing. 6. Consideration of pond alternatives. Response: It should be noted that the pond is for aesthetic purposes only. Accordingly, it may be removed from the project, thus, eliminat- ing any adverse effects, However, should the applicant decide to keep the pond, other mitigation measures maybe applied pur- suant to the Mosquito Abatement District requirements. Other experts may also be used to guarantee that no health hazards would be involved. 7. Notice of intent to serve project with sewer from C.V.C.W.D. Response: Such notice has been received from C.V.C.W.D. 8. Adequacy of fire protection. Response: This concern was addressed in the EIR. No additional mitigation measures have been provided than that described, which indicates that an additional facility has been planned. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT . IN COOPERATION WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY DAVID L. FLAKE COUNTY FIRE WARDEN Paul A. Williams Director of Planning City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear Mr. Williams: May 24, 1978 210 WEST SAN JACINTO STREET PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370 TELEPHONE (774) 657-3183 Re: Environmental Impact Report Teacher Aid E Retirement Services Palm Desert Project We thank you for the opportunity to review the subject EIR. Our primary concerns for the subject project are expressed on pages 31 and 32 of the report. We have no additional comments at this time. to Sincerely, DAVID L. FLAKE County Fire Warden BY LC�� ;. David J. Ortegel Fire Marshal Rat "1131= 19 / ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF PALM DESERT �ouNrr ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY �15 T RICZ COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (714) 398-2651 DIRECTORS OFFICE" RAYMOND R. RDMMONDS, PRESIDENT LOWELL O. WEEKS, GENERAL MANAGER-OIIEF FNGINFER TELLIS CODEKAS, VICE PRESIDENT OLE J..NORDLAND, SECRETART C. J. FROST WALTER R. WRIGHT, AUDITOR WILLIAM B. GARDNER REDWINE AND SHERRILL, ATTORNETF SIEVE D. ER XTON IYIHY �$ 1 197 File: 0034.19037 Paul A. Williams City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, California 92260 Re: EIR SW,'—, Sec. 29, T5S, R6E, S.B.B & M Dear Mr. Williams: We reviewed the Environmental Impact Report for the proposed retirement community for the Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services and have no comments to make. KEH : j rf Very truly yours, Lowell 0. Weeks Zl Manager -Chief Engineer D J1 1 "3 1 ION ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES NOUN}� ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY °jsralcr COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1053 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (714) 398-2651 DIRECTORS OFFICERS RAVMOND R. 0.UMMONDS, PRESIDENT LO'NFLt J. WEEKS, GENEML MAwAO[R -CHIEF Feu; u6tR TELLIS COC€KAS, Y.CE PRESIDENT ME J. NCRCLAND, SECRETARY C" 1 FROST WALTER R. WRIGHT, AUDITOR WILLIAM R GARDNER REDWINE AND SHERRILL. AITCRNEY' STEVE D. SNATCH .tune 20, lg7S File: 0163-11 0421.1 0721.1 Department of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert (!' Post Office Box 1977 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Palm Desert, California 92260 CITY of PALM DESERT Re: Change of Zone 05-78 D.P. 10-78, Sec. 29, T5S, R6E Gentlemen: This area is protected from stormwater flows by a system of channels and dikes. This area may be 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. 54 and 80 of the Coachella Valley County Water District for sanitation service. There may be conflicts with existing District facilities. We request the appropriate public agency to withhold the issuance of a building permit until arrangements have been made with the District for the relocation of these facilities. Very truly yours, Lowell 0. Weeks General Manager -Chief Engineer SR:dlb cc: Riverside County Department of Public Health 46-209 Oasis Street Indio, California 92201 flay 2S, 1970 Beparb;ient of Envi tom-eatat Se w,Lced 45275 /' i c' r!cf l9ea z ,'one i paA., Deaer-t, CaLt . 92260 Cev�tCn+;:en: ,2e: cnv;-�omzels a Pinoart l\"enoa-t on Via 6.topodad `Jecch- . Rid and P.e:iiereru` gehv.icea l=ab"! Jeae&t l}tog.ect ')aepated Gy Eiwiita f"'p- obiedt to .the above captLoned pao�ect doh the, gotlow;0're reado":- 1) Soo hiqA den d,i ttl; 2) 9he �ootagth az o A th' t i.vdl r,. qua tter,,4 are inadecvmte c ul ramp -too vLO L; cehta.iv l not an. con�otrfrquz I);v'tottndiw,, 6aea o� tevcpculet.; 3) Cownczab>..e horeea %o* the. dull a ;n CcJ i oaiu a have cone, banh&vn>' and we �-ecr th i aerie eowld happen to -th iA pao�ec t cnd, in .t d. paeae.vt estate o --ux .t ti.v;.nr•. ovcrterd, ;,t covid become. a''e%wx" area end dwti e aU ,daA.ovnd-ina phope�ty; ') 0" p�eae 4tteeL ate, not pate ated on de&. zned Ao2 .the tta, conqeation owt%utedI S) On page $, prrar�caph 2 it id atcted filze'r,:erbehel ip o� S202000 Ld utan.�¢eauG 1 e; .to whom r. -it be t tcnd),-;rr ed'? 61 We, feet Via etdeV ty xe-,vied .teac" can $. nd a bete-. "rd t=yea& tw%nc_" c tea where the.4 'dt&uctme, yVie, tta��ic cw.d othpi p2oto) c,&e accept.,cb%e; and 71 NW' th_-.,t do-cal,l ed " oeul" beco:r:e r,:oagv tto Gxeed nr area? ;gtdo� we ahe lbz= r o&.;:ed z. ii4 p tog ect wiV be tax- Zee, (1J'u,? J I ' � 5� � VlL•5o. � • �� A-) Ae�4 filljY a 1973 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF. PALM DESERT TerrAaent o* Avinonmen,`nt SeA.uzow May 25, t973 45275 ' aic1 G1 ; eat "'one AS l er an tl A.Lr ' 92260 �+entlPx,�en: 'e: jKvIsonmewtcL .9mnlat WON on the n•topo4ed Seachc't 1"id owed 1'e.tir. e�;:eN✓t J22U-i.cea r"a.�rc 7e4ea•t i Roject p repased Gu FtWi4ta one -1-,J P. 1 �ato)", 1doa&te!j '-e object to the above cr,,nt0ned nooleet ion the ZoVowana- 4eawnw- I) 50o high dywity; 2) Te �±'oo�tacz o+- flee. d,%u�n. auarfes4 aice inadequate air much tooar,:ct; ce2,:anfb, not in ern- . JO2mance with wtsouK r-Cf7f Saw o' fiOXOoyeQ4: 7) CoY',n(J!a0ty home]. 0, the eaJ,-y in Ca,Yoolni. We none bart'w-t n4d tot �eGt t':e drr-.v_ eouLl, ha;'nen yO t",;.d n'o?-ect Gil", 'n Z04 n4ewnt Wate. 01 yiii.L-Lr.U'ci'eG tibia/Yten d, il� CDat/' bPwFpe r 42.:.Yi{ C42.f/. ^n'' deUr✓l.v.:ste atl. 4c/AROtinw,wi' ^'2O7n2tyl 4) As naeaent ataeefi-4 ate not incanted lot TV Milk- cnlueit%.on outlined; S) Cn nano ', 7l•/GQC..//,anh 2 it 'A. 7%f..tef: tip,!! Y>rabew/Ox" o'1 ? 09000 0 MandXetnobte-; to whom wishwishi it be .{t�n�al eaxed? 6) .e :set ,the of✓-eWq teashend can ?Anda betten; kegs �iU;sYr oea whets . , c , .1 A,e �t � Otis, nRO,-teY,i1 aRe aCeer-•tOylE; and 7) �e Coe n}t�:0 "Y.:..!'� ti'tlt this n2o%ec/t W ..� e 'ta - nee f..htf 94, 1 SI+LVE�+R PUR ENr RONM✓,NIAL SEt�yICES Crof: PAEM DESERT P.O. Box 680, Palm Desert, Califomia 92260 June lh, 1970 Cite c' ) -art 45275 _ric :l,r -:ear Lane Palm Desert, C> 92260 ttn: Paul A. `lilliams Di~ecter of Environmental ervices Dear ^r. ailliams s Thic is in reply to the Envirormiental Impact ?eport on the Teachers -lid and 3etirement Project. .re, the Board of Directors of the Silver. ypur ~ranch, agree that the density of 6.5 dwellings per acre would be :;such greater than those in surrounding areas, and that a density such as this would be very undesirable. ,,e also agree with the fact that the development area is approxim;-tely 2.5 miles from the closest shoppin- area, _n4 th t definitely pose a problem for senior Je are at a loss to unOerstand rrhy anyone ,owl`: - in initial me bership fee of approximately "'20,000 plus a monthly rental fee of "350.00 to 'W1 5.00 per month to lure in a one -bedroom unit mith 714 sq. ft. or a 2-bedroom unit with P78 sq. ft. The property is far too valuable to be used for a retirement development. It could be sold for enough money to buy 25 or 30 acres elsewhere in a much more suitable location close to shopping, transportation, etc. This property is rresently zoned for -1 10,000, ar.d. if there is to be a zone chan_°e it should be chanced to -1-1 13,000 rather than be lo.^,ered to -2 6000. This rro ect with a. density of 6.5 dwellings !Der acre_ is "got in any T.,.?ir compatible with the surrounding area. This type of development mould have a serious adverse effect on all of the surrounding areas, and would cause a substantial depreciation of adjacent nrorerties. The nviron'rPnt-,7 _^r^.ct . eport again mentions an entrance or exit on the sout'. - -'. 'c :.: _ __aerded Little -end Trail. ,e stated our C7ity of palm Desert June 1�., 1978 p.2 -position on this point as far as the Chacahuala d.evelo-,meat was concerned, and we repeat we are very much opposed to more traffic beinS diverted onto ?ittle Deed Ira.il and t;irouCh the Sij.ver Spur ranch. The EIR. state; that the fire department has indicated that because of the rapid growth of the area the fire station is rapidly reaching a point of saturation, and that fire protection in the vicinity is inadequate, and will be until such time as a new station is in operation in the area. We feel that there should be no new development permitted in this area until the City of Falco Desert has a funded drainage program adeouate to handle the flood problem. ,,e respectfully request that this zone change and building permit for this development be denied. Sincerely, SILVEIR SPUR R NCHERS ASSCCIATICI,1, INC. gyred .rriE gs, J41'. Fresiaent FC.: ltv Department of Environmental Services June 12, 1978 45275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Deserts Calif„ 92260 Attention: Mr. Paul Williams Re: Environmental Impact Report on the proposed Teacher Aid and Retire- ment Services Palm Desert Projects prepared by Envista Inc. and I. Harold Housley Gentlemen: I strongly object to the above captioned project for the following reasons: 1) I am informed the attorneys for the Nolan Estate have retained for said estate a parcel of land 60'xl20'=alongside the eastern side of this projects commencing at Skyward and proceeding in a southerly direction which would prevent Chia Drii-e from becoming access roads thereby also prohibiting ingress or egress to the project. This would place the burden of traffic on Homestead Road Skyward Road and Bel Air Road; this would also add to the dangers of Alamos which stands as one of your highest in repairs and the City has not seen fit to protect residences by installing curbs and gutters. We have no sidewalks and there are manys many children residing on these streets; heavy traffic from the project would present real danger to these children. 2) I can find no swaless or other flood deterrents employed to ac- commodate drainage or flood waterss if any in this project. With so many small structures occupying the land areas Lw can the ground percolate this water? 3) When we find it impossible to get improvement of curbs and gutters so needed on Alamo and in these days of tax -conscious concerns will the City of Palm Desert employ an abatement district to take care of the mosquitoes which might breed in that so`called "POND" of this project? Very_trulg yours, �' ( sue- Katherin R. Craig 72922 Bel Air Road Pal Deserts Calif. 92260 P,S, I am within the 300 foot radius of this project as it crosses Bel Air Road, ENvIR^NMENTAL SERVICES r,ra :mac PALM DESERT V ._ a g i, ENVIRoNf;;",I;,It CEI;VICES PITY oc PALM 0ESEaT DepartTent of Environmental Services 45275 Prickly Pear Lane ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Palm Desert, Calif. 92?�'n CITY OF PALM DESERT Gentlemen Re: Envir-nvental Tm^act Report on t_in nro used Tenc'_er Aid and Retirement services %lm neser} Project prepared by Envista Inc. and I. Harold N_ousley We object to the above canticned project for the folloain3 reasons: I)Too high density: 71 The footage of the living quarters iri in3deluate and much too small; certainly not in conformance with surrounding homes of taxpayers; 3) Comparable homes for the elderly in California have gone bankrupt and we fear the same could hannen to this project and, in its present state o: small living quarters, it could become a "slum" area and devaluate all surrounding property; 4) our present streets are not prepared for the traffic Oon';estlon outlined; 51 on page 9, nara-ranh 2, it is stated the membership of $20,000 is transferrable; to whom might it be transferred?; E) We feel the elderly teachers cn- `ind 3 better ".ill -•,ear livin3" aYea where their structure size, trnffi 3nl other -roblems a--s 3cce^table; and 7) We are PtForm.ed that this rrn e.t •a:ill he "tax—free?".ZGIiC!'..aL'ti. `t e, 4'' 7 - ��-L�R_C� _._ 31 _..e i-j `%R tC. -Y t. �,'. :t_.2..<sE _-1' i x., .�''•i . �. ! i10—_--- '� I .�, y n,I?� �,,<..Y '�`�!%� �F1!�Z. (v��Q4I�;,• __ I^tiCYJ__�:'40. ��'t. _ mil„ z� z-off z 6/7-//1, ENVIRONMLIvfAL SERVICES CITY Of Palm DESERT; Departipent of Environmental Services 45275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 Gentlemen: Re: Environmental Impact Report on the proposed Teacher Aid and Retirement Services Palm Desert Project prepared by Envista Inc, and I. Harold Housley We object to the above captioned project for the following reasons: 1)Too high density; 2) The footage of the living quarters are inadequate and much too small; certainly not in conformance with surrounding homes of taxpayers; 3) Comparable homes for the elderly in California have gone bankrupt and we fear the same could happen to this project and in its present state of small living quarters, it could become a "slum" area and devaluate all surrounding property; 4) our present streets are not prepared for the traffic congestion outlined; 5) on page 8, paragraph 2, it is stated the membership of $20,000 is transferrable; to whom might it be transferred?; 6) We feel the elderly teachers can find a better "all -year living" area where their structure size, traffic and other problems are acceptable; and 7) We are informed ghat this project will be "tax-free". Why? -7 `i - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF PALM DESERT STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR..GOVERNOR CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD COLORADO RIVER BASIN • REGION 7 73-271 HIGHWAY 111, SUITE 21 PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 Phone: (714) 346-7491 June 2, 1978 Mr. Paul A. Williams Director of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear Mr. Williams: Pursuant to your letter dated May 15, 1978, Regional Board. staff has reviewed the "Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Proposed Teacher Aid and Retirement Services, Palm Desert Project". The report states, on pages 30 and 31, that sewer service is to be rovided by the Coachella Valley County Water District (CVCWD3 following the project's annexation to the appropriate improvement district. Pursuant to the Regional Board's "Guidelines for Sewage Disposal from Land Developments", the proposed density of this project would necessitate discharge to a central sewerage system. A Notice of Intent to Serve this proposed development from the CVCWD must be included in the final report. The report states and illustrates,.on pages 1 and 10, that the proposed development will include a "large water pond". Further discussion on the proposed pond is then omitted from the report. The question as to whether the use of water from an overdrafted groundwater basin for an ornamental pond con- stitutes a "reasonable use" of water, as defined by the State Water Resources Control Board, must be addressed in the final report. Pond design to prevent the development of nuisance water quality conditions from algal and macrophyte growth and insect popula- tions must be detailed in the final report. Further, com- putations as to water volunes used over periods of time due to water loss from evaporation and percolation (i£ not lined) must be included in the final report. The above considerations must be addressed pursuant to the State EIR Guidelines. I£ you have any questions, please contact our office at (714) 346-7491. WILLIAM D. WINCHESTER Environmental Specialist II WDW/ks K F, i V E fii JUG! 5 131' ENVIRUIVMu11AL StKVICES UTf QE PALM DESEU 0'L m� EUOENE M. KAY, M.D. 73020 HOMESTEAD ROAD PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 ' City Palm Desert ENVIRONMENTAL S�kVK`.EVe y O f CITY OF PALM DESERT 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Attention: !rlr. Paul A.. Williams Director of Environmental Services ,ate: Proposed Project for Teacher Aid and Retired Services in Palm Desert Dear kr. Williams, The proposal to rezone 11.1 acres of land South of Skyward [Jay and ;lest of Chia Drive, which is at ,present zoned Rl-10,000 single family dwellings to R2-5,000 and multiple family dwellings is objectionable for many reasons: The projected development of 61 one bed room units having only 714.sq: ft. and 12 two bed room units of 978 sq. ft. would mean 64 units per acre instead of one to two houses which the land is presently zoned for. With the addition of the proposed recreational building the density would be.6..87 or nearly 7, units per acre. At present the surrounding land is zoned: To the South - k1 - 20,000 sq. ft., single family & condominiu,, To the.North - R1 - 14 000 to 15,000 sq ft. single fancily To the East —R1 - 1.0,000 sq. ft., single family To the :lest. -RI — 10,000 sq. ft., single family and condominiums with 1.8 units per acre.. The rezoning, aa requested, would slso allow two story buildings which would hurt the entire area. In addition, according to the Environmental Impact Report, the entire project would be tzx exempt! That would mean our young, struggling city would be required to furnish services without compensation. In the proposed report a map shows a large pond in the center of the development which would mean mosquitoe breeding to the detriment of the entire area. Furthermore it is very possible that a membership fee of W20,000.00 plus a monthly charge of 4350.00 to :485.00 could prove too steep for many of the retired teachers. Therefore if the project is not financially successful what would prevent the 3ureau of Teachers' Aid and Retirement Services from selling the extremely small units to outsiderswith large. families, creating a slum -like area in thecenter of the most desirable land still available in Palm Desert? For these reasons we feel we must join other objectors to the project. 6{ / Sincerely, Department of Envi ronmental Services 45275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Deserts Calif, 92260 Gentlemen: Re: Environmental Impact Report on the proposed Teacher Aid and Retirement Services Palm Desert Project prepared by Envista Inc and I, Harold Housley _ We object to the above captioned project for the following reasons: 1) Too high density; 2) The footage of the living quarters are inadequate and much too small; certainly not in conformance with surrounding homes of taxpayers; 3) Comparable homes for the elderly in California have gone bankrupt and we fear the same could happen to this project ands in its present state of small living quarters, it could become a "slum" area and devaluate all surrounding property; 4) Our present streets are not prepared for the traffic congestion outlined; 5) On page 8, paragraph 2, it is stated the membership of $20,000 is transferrable; to whom might it be transferred? 6) We feel the elderly teachers can find a better "all year living area" where their structure size, traffic and other problems are acceptable; and 7) We are informed that this project will be "tax-free% Why? nf1�_ 7.3 V3-67'�/ ` > �; at�Zc� / f ��t ✓_c'/-c�--- �� 7� �C' � .6�r��: ��rD 4Ait`� 1 f ^ a,, 73-- cS6 LP Li _ r` l-r -�' < • l /? :•� it ') � -F �/_ _ ,�„ ., _ c' j2 � % RE %0 rl ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY Of PALM DESERT Department of Environmental Services 45275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 Gentlemen: Re: Environmental Impact Report on the proposed Teachers Aid and Retirement Services Palm Desert Project prepared by Envista Inc, and 1. Harold Houslev We object to the above captioned project for the following reasons: 1) Too high density; 2) The footage of the living quarters are inadequate ani much too small; certainly not in conformance with surrounding homes of tax- payers; 3) Comparable homes for the elderly in California have gone bankrupt and we fear the same could happen to this project and, in its present state of small living quarters, it could become a "slum' area and devaluate all surrounding property; 4) Our present streets are not prepared for the traffic congestion outlined; 5) On page 8, paragraph 2, it is stated the membership of $00,000 is transferrable; to whom might it be transferred?; 6) We feel the elderly teachers can find a better 'all -year living area" Where their structure size, traffic and other problems are acceptable; and 7) We are in!ormed that,;this project will be "tax-free". idhy'. �ryi ` ;I- - %5G0 l I I Department of Environmental Services June 141 1978 45275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, Calif, 92260 Gentlemen: Re: Environmental Impact Report on tthe proposed Teacher Aid and Retirement Services Palm Desert Project prepared by Envista Inc. and I,. Harold Housley We object to the above captioned project for the followings reasons: 1) Too high density; 2) footage of the living quarters are inadequate and - much too small; certainly not in conformance with surrounding ho-mes­of tax- payers; 3) Comparable homes for the elderly in California have gone bankrupt and we fear the same could happen to this project and, in its present state of small living quarters, it could become a "slum" area and devaluate all surrounding property; 4) Our present streets are not designed for the traffic congestion outlined; 5) On page 8, paragraph 2, it is stated the membership of $20000 is transferrable; .to whom might it be transferred? 6) We feel the elderly teachers can find a better "all -year living area" where their structure, traffic and other problems are acceptable; 7) We are informed the Nolan estate has retained a parcel of land 60'xl2O' commencing at Skyward and proceeding southerly, in that area known as Chia Drive, thereby prohibit- ing access and/or ingress/egress to this development. This would force all traffic into the residential areas of Skyward,, Bel Air Road and Homestead Roads which cannot handle this load of traffic and it would endanger lives of -children; and 8) We are informed that this project will be "tax free"j1hy? Sul y 24, 1978 Jepatfiaent og Cvw-i tonrtentat seWice& 45275 Pt2� Peat k9avte Patin -�eae tt, Ca. 92260 lie: 1nui�zowcentat ,96wact neno2t on the phopoaed `Jeachrt R.id and Reti&d- rcent Se wised- Ptr fin 3e4ett Ptoject ptepared b y Cnv.r. 9nc. and 9. Genttemen: ghe 7eachet q d avid Pvti&enent Sewic a-twe td each tedident .that d,isned .the peti.- taon objectiu to thi4 ptoject with, a tette t datad 9urre 289 1978. 9 have 4iw-,�ied thef t tepd y eatlut4 and have One ouet -theae cytounde, 9 obkct• novae than ever to thiA tvvwante ptOk,ct, eapeciatty caL1. your attazti.on to the-i t 9-tem 7, which read&: "94& -the Paokct "gay--9tee'? lUhy? 9he Cwligotnia `Jeachaha fijwc. ati,on, Like ceatain other b%ti tcztron-d had exWntione undeA CaWO4..p a taw gro,;c pro x_aKed- Out Comtet be)..ievea that the aubg ect ptope tty <vi Lt be exaript "Is. 9-t-alwuld be noted tho't owt ptojert wouCd have no act on .the achoo-t 4yate6s which, hi itot;-c4 q cod t" oueA one-hcL1.>'. o each rtoperty -toy- biU and .that Patrz 3e4ett doeti not now haue a ptop"tq " 9 have paid taxes in .the state of Cal.igotnia got welt ouet 40-yeaaa; 28 yea" of thoae taXna went to .Goes grace," County euand 22 q" of tmcea were paid to Piveiuiide (Palm 3�tt County eaeatea�, and-9 have net had a ch td do the Cal, i-Ott achooti. Maybe 9 &how d demaiud a rebate. Many a o� the tezid&& of Pan Deaett have aeti ted on gait teen gunda-thcut the ev�. pinn mien aehalca and now we a-te expected to-bert the.iit pto testa of taxed, afUt we have d-teady contributed to the pen.,n guncd they now receive. l 04--m- thia. Witt be a eonce,,�n 0? the tilde 4, awl when- you cute not Liat&ajtry to the blare of the ambwCcwtee avten, the Cotovtet i.i eatLuacy. ?hey WiR be the tip ec-evzta. of every protection gtor. Police, 9dite to Prvbutance Seow.ice which ate .incCuded in out taKee. and we aee no tea,wn topay their pto testa. RetuaVq, _',1 don't aee how out "yoiuuy" city can afford the 1u�iaq o tlZe i�i tea i dense, - / -d)"q' thuLl gouts, /.. _ Mrd. Kafiherdne pC'. Ctai, y. 72992 diet hit PDad � pa ft ibeae t t, Ca. 92260 4 AGENCIES NOTIFIED OF -TARS P-ROJ_ECT EIR Lowell 0. Weeks Coachella Valley County Water District Alan K. Straezer Southern California Air Pollution Control District Joe Richards County of Riverside 'Planning Commission Harold Horsley U.S. Post Office, Palm Desert Joe Benes or James De Friend Coachella Valley Television Ben Dobbins Riverside County Road Department Gary Wiedle Coachella Valley Association of Governments D.R. MacPherson College of the Desert Don Shayler. Pacific Rim Environmental Consultants Richard Rust University of California at Riverside Coachella Valley Recreation and Park_ District Southern California Association of Governments R.W. Riddel - Paul Weldon Southern California Gas Company Roger Harlow Desert Sands Unified School District Kermit Martin Southern California Edison Company Page Two D.M. Pinkstaff General Telephone Company Karen Fowler Living Desert Reserve Jim Langdon Palm Desert Disposal Services, Inc. Stanley Sayles Palm Desert Community Services District Moe Kazen Regional Water Quality Control Board Lloyd Rogers Riverside County Health Department Todd Beeler Riverside County Planning Department Concerned Citizens of Palm Desert Captain Barnes Riverside County Fire Department Fred Griggs, Jr. Silver Spur Ranchers Association Palm Desert Public Library Lt. Froemming Riverside County Sheriff's Department Coachella Valley Regional Library To: State of California The Resources Agency Secretary for Resources 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 From: City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane P. 0. Box 1977 Palm Desert, CA 92260 NOTICE OF COMPLETION Project Title: Teacher Aid and Retirement Services (TARS) Project Project Location: The 11.1 + acre site is located in the south- central portion of the City of Palm Desert. More specifically, the project site is situated to the east of Alamo Drive, to the south of Sky- ward Way, and westerly of Chia Drive (extended), also known as Arrow Trail south of the project site. Project Description: The proposed project, a retirement community to be owned and operated by the Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services (TARS), is the development of 72 residential units on approximately 11.1 acres of land, with a density of about 6.5 dwelling units per gross acre. The project will have 18 buildings, with 4 units in each building with a total of 12 two -bedroom units and 60 one -bedroom units. Lead Agency: City of Palm Desert Department of En.vironmental.Services Copies of EIR are available at: Palm Desert City Hall Palm Desert -Public Library College of the Desert Palm Desert Post Office Coachella Valley Regional Library Review Period: 45 days (May 15, 1978 to June 30, 1978) Contact Person: Ron Knippel (714) 346-0611 ext. 53 I - GfL11Z7 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 May 15, 1978 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 LEGAL NOTICE CITY OF PALM DESERT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a draft Environmental Impact Report has been completed for a proposed retirement community for the Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services to be located'on an 11.1 acre site in the south-central portion of the City of Palm Desert, Riverside, County, California. The draft EIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and Resolution No. 78-32 of the City of Palm Desert. Any interested citizen wishing to comment on the draft document must submit writ- ten comments no later than June 30, 1978, to the Department of Environmental Services, Palm Desert City Hall, 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, Cali- fornia, 92260. Copies of the draft EIR are available for review at: Palm Desert City Hall; Palm Desert Branch Library; Palm Desert Post Office; College of the Desert; and Coachella Valley Regional Library. SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California PUBLISH: Palm Desert Post May 15, 1978 (U:MW7 o Ia3 a =@McDn-0ia 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT,CAUFORNIA9226O TELEPHONE (714) 346-O6II May 15, 1978 Dear Sir: Attached hereto is a copy of a draft Environmental Impact Report for a proposed retirement community for the Bureau of Teacher Aid.and Retire- ment Services to be located on an 11.1 acre site in the south-central portion of the City of Palm Desert. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and Re- solution No. 78-32 of the City of Palm Desert, the draft EIR must be made available for review by the public 45 days prior to action by the approving agency of the project. Accordingly, the copy .of the draft EIR enclosed herewith is provided for your information and as a reference source to facilitate public review. June 30, 1978, ends the public review period. We would, therefore, ap- preciate your cooperation in assisting the City in fulfilling its statua- tory responsibility by making this document readily available to the public until the above date. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Ronald R. Knippel of our staff at (714) 346-0611 ext. 53. truly yours, Paul A. Williams, A.I.P. Director of Environmental Services rk/pw/ks Enc. 6 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 May 15, 1978 Dear Sir: Attached hereto is a copy of a draft Environmental Impact 'Report (EIR) for a proposed retirement community for the Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services to be located on an 11.1 acre site in the south- central portion of the City of Palm Desert. The EIR was prepared pur- suant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and Resolution. No. 78-32 of the City of Palm Desert and is transmitted herewith for your review and comments. Comments on the draft EIR should address probable impacts of the project on the natural environment, such as water and air pollution, and on pub- lic resources, such as utilities and public,services. The review period for this draft document is 45 days. Accordingly, com- ments must be received in the office of Department of Environmental Ser- vices no later than June 30, 1978. If comments are not received by that date it will be assumed that you have no comments to make. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesi- tate to contact Mr. Ronald R. Knippel of our staff at (714) 346-0611 ext. 53. truly yours, Paul A. Williams, A.I.P. Director of.Environmental Services rk/pw/ks Enc. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS 600 South Commonwealth Avenue, Suite 1000, Los Angeles, California 90005 May 31, 1978 V +- 11. The bi-weekly Clearinghouse Listing is distributed to provide your agency with informatiog concern- ing federally assisted project proposals as covered by OMB Circular A-95. In addition, we 44clude notification regarding environmental document reports on State -funded or State -initiated projects, or local projects and plans. SLAG documents --plans and reports --are placed at the %Yffi&"L9TQe,EHVICES Listing. Should you wish copies of these documents, please contact SCAG. r1TV Ow PALM DESERT The Listing is organized by counties. Projects in each county are grouped by type of review (A-95's; Environmental Documents; State Plans; Local Plans; State -Funded Projects) and funding sources. Projects which have multi -county impacts that have been identified during the initial Processing of applications have been cross-referenced by county. State plans and other multi - county plans, projects and proposals are grouped under Multi -County heading at the beginning of the Listing. Should you wish to indicate the interest of your jurisdiction and/or comment on a proposed project's relationship to comprehensive planning, areawide coordination or environmental impacts, please contact Gayle Chick (21 3 ) 385-1000, Extension 372, prior to: June 14, 1978 SCAG DOCUMENTS (proaram) Southern California Association of Governments SCAG File Number: MC-7076-SO Draft 1978 Regional Transportation Plan SCAG has prepared the Draft Regionwide Multi -modal Transportation Plan. The documents includes: overall goals and objectives; and a description of multimodal program development and policies and actions for specific modes, including transit, highways, airports, maritime, and rail. Comments should be received by July 7, 1978. The Plan will affect the Counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura. Southern California Association of Governments MC-7998-SO Draft Report, "Areawide Policy Alternatives for Water Quality Management", 208-23, May 1,978 The Draft Report describes and evaluates 25 water quality issues and policies for use in the South Coast 208 Program. Public workshops and hearings on the report will be held during May and June, 1978. Comments on the Draft Report should reach SCAG by June 30, 1978. MULTI -COUNTY PROJECTS A-95: Coastal Management - DOC California Coastal Commission MC-7989-SP Coastal -Energy Impact Program S190,000 (Project Cost) / S190,000 (Grant Request) The Commission is applying for funds under Section 308 (b)(4)(c) of the Coastal Energy Impact Program. The grant will be used for the design and implementation of programs and strategies to prevent, reduce or ameliorate losses of environmental and recreational resources in the State's coastal zone. A-95: Urban Mass Transit - UMTA/00T Southern California Association. of Governments MC-3020-MT Overall Transportation Work Program for FY 1978-79 S3,350,000 / S2,680,000 Funds requested for development of the Regional Transportation Plan as required by Federal and State law and regulations. Application is for comprehensive work program with portions of study being conducted by counties, cities, and transit districts in the region. UMTA funds requested are combined with HUD, FAA, EPA, Federal Highway Administration Act, State and local match in the SCAG overall work program. A-95: Omnibus Crime Control Act - LEAA/OCJP Tri County Council on Criminal Justice MC-7977-CJ 1978 Comprehensive Criminal Justice Plan Ind Juvenile Justice and Delinquency prevention Plan The Tri County Council has submitted a Plan analyzing the incidence of crime and the availaole resources in the Criminal justice system, and a plan for the expenditure of local, State, and federal money endorsed by local and (tri-county) regional committees. The Plans affect San Bernardino, Imperial and Riverside Counties. A-95: Older American Act - FEW Santa Monica Hospital Medical Center MC-7960-AG Comprehensive Community Care System for Partially Sighted Older persons Funds requested t0 establish a model project to develop a comprehensive community Care system for the partially sighted elderly. The program is designed t0 assist these persons to carry Out a full range of activities. Funding amount not determined at this date. Los Angeles and Orance Counties will be served oy this program. , Vay 31, 1978 Page 12 RIVERSIDE COUNTY (cont'd) Environmental Documents (cont'd) City of Palm Desert RI-8016-ED Teacher Aid and Retirement Services Palm Desert Project A Draft Environmental Impact Report has been submitted for a proposed retirement community to be located on an 11.1-acre site in the south-central portion of the City of Palm Desert. The project will include 72 units, a recreation building, swimming pool and pond. A zone change from single- family to multi -family residential use will be required. The project area is bounded by Alamo Drive, Skyward Way, and Chia Drive (also known as Arrow Trail). SCAG Documents Southern California Association of Governments "IC-7976-SO Draft 1978 Regional Transportation Plan See MC-7976-NCO Southern California Association of Governments MC-7998-SO Draft Report, "Areawide Policy Alternatives for Water Quality Management", 208-23, May 1978 See MC-7998-SO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY A-95: Urban Mass Transit - UMTA/DOT Southern California Association of Governments MC-8020-MT Overall Transportation 'Work Program for FY 1978-79 S3,350,000 / S2,680,000 See MC-8020-MT A-95: Water Pollution - EPA Mojave 'Water Agency SB-7986-WP Wastewater Facilities Needs of Unsewered Communities S200,000 / $150,000 / S25,000 (State) The project is a request for a Step 1 grant and consists of a plan of study to determine the feasibility of interceptor sewer lines to the City of Adelanto, the Apple Valley County Water District, and the Hesperia County Water District in San Bernardino County. The study will also cover the feasibility of collector systems for these areas. A-95: Omnibus Crime Control Act - LE.AA/OCJP Tri County Council on Criminal Justice MC-7977-CJ 1978 Comprehensive Criminal Justice Plan and Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Plan See MC-7977-CJ A-95: Older American Act - MEW City of Fontana SB-7981-AG Senior Citizen Center Alteration Project $13,750 / $10,312 Funds requested to expand the central room of the Senior Center by enclosing the east and west patios. This alternation will result in an additional 558 square feet of usable space for recreational and croup activities. County of San Bernardino SB-7982-AG Senior Citizen Center Improvements Project S3,168 / S3,168 Funds requested to repair and resurface the existing parking lot and to construct a concrete shuffleboard court at the New Leisure Center. A-95: Outdoor Recreation Assistance Program - DOI/BOR California State Department of 'Water Resources MC-7991-LW Ritter Canyon Recreation Area S400,000 / S200,000 See MC-7991-LW A-95: Community Action - CSA - Merced County Community Action Agency MC-8016-CA Federal Food Programs S250,000 / S250,000 See 4C-8016-CA 12 HugA,td t 1, 1978 Mx. Pawl WiVZwd oepa-tton nt of Eno"tonmentc.,C SeWAWd. 45275 N i ckA/ Peat .Cane Faun 3e,-t.t, C'ati,. 92260 lie: erwi2onmewtat !)mpaot kepo tt on the p topoiez� ?eacheA,i Aid an l\9eti aeraen t SetwiceA I a&,: Deae-tt Aw4ect beah M2. Wvli ui+d: .9t, health p& wenti aq peta nct appea xce -tmr ht as 9 wV-1 app&eciate it iloa w� e.>Cp2e" mil view,& on -the above canti,oned wttez. 9 tece-uved a t8tteli, darted �cme 29, 19780 f4ura -the S'uteait of `Jeach,-A Aid awl l`etihersent Setvicei, Co Li'oarua �eacicen� f7410ciat;-on, in G*ZWet ,to a pe?iti.ors ¢ibed with your depattnent, and attertptinu .to avviweh W ptoteat. made. 9 have¢one i to ,thL maitet cate�iaA an9 do not cha,, a ray mend about any of AR ob`,ection-triAPd. 9 dpecL,icaUq ob�.ect -to .tie ¢tact that &i4 p2o�ect &i, "tax-�aee°. 9 am a to/ma& .teacAeh. `Jhe -teache-d' rpen4. on M� corvtci*. r,- to 2ata od -tax confitZba n alit made. 9 have ao -w in Cal i.�oaruaSchaotd, ao why Ihoc" t ruly p to t y be ,tax- ,tee? 'I�N�_I�muuit we. be buutdened with .tbeZn t a1c2e of .the. ta,, . C'an om City afiold ��UC-4 a pto�ect within iti boundc✓t, ei? (IJUl thetl het the .uune pto-tec t-Lon og f i ie and oVwA jar. it-iea as o.thea -taxpcu/e�td? Oexy l yo 4y fld then 9. gob e ad 72965 Bet flit Poad Palm �eae�t, CaUi . 92260 AUG — 1 1978 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES P. Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission August 1, 1978 Page Two VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont.) A. Continued Case No C/Z 05-78, /Z 05-78 EIR, DP 10-78 and 133MF - BUREAU O AND RETIREMENT SER- VICES, Applicant Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 10,000 to R-2 6,000 on approximately 11 acres lo- cated east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, the related EIR and approval of a related Development Plan and preliminary Design Review to allow for a 72-unit retirement apartment project on said site. Mr. Williams reviewed the FIR and noted the concerns of the various reviewing agencies and letters received from petitioners regarding their concerns of the success of previous projects done by this applicant. He further noted that the FIR is complete and does address the environmental impacts of the area if the project was completed. Mr. Williams noted that Staff recommended that the Commission certify the FIR as complete. !' ] UT`$AMENL)i Mr. Williams then reviewed the proposed Change of'Zone> noted that Staff feels that the zone requested is not adequate. He noted the letters of concern received and the letter from the Bureau of Teacher Aid addressing these concerns. Mr. Williams then stated the Staff recommends that the Commission deny the re- quested Change of Zone as it is not compatible with adjacent zoning. Mr. Williams reviewed the Development Plan and noted that it is good in terms of layout but not good in terms of the area in which the project is proposed. He stated that Staff recommends denial. Vice -Chairman Snyder asked if the Commission had any ques- tions of Staff at this time. Commissioner Fleshman asked Mr. Williams if Staff had done any checking to verify if 47 single-family units is correct. Mr. Williams noted that he believed this information was correct as stated in the EIR. Vice -Chairman Snyder declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant wished to speak at this time. EMMETT WILLIAMS, project representative, noted the existence of two other projects in Santa Barbara and Pasadena and the success of these two projects. HENRY WRIGHT, project architect, stated that if the area involved were done as single- family residences it could possibly bring about 152 residents, whereas, this project mnnlA nnly ollrnn Qd �nA norLinm fnr A9 Wore 4 Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission August 1, 1978 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont.) Page Three A. Case Nos. C/Z 05-78, C/Z 05-78 EIR, DP 10-78 & 133➢4F (Cont.) GEORGE ANDERSON, Admin. of Vista Del Monte, also noted that there will be no health care facilities on this project, it is only a residential project. He noted that the project will be an asset to the community with the residents contributing to the communities well-being. Commissioner Fleshman noted that the Commission is not concerned with the type of people but more with the project and its merits to the area for which it is proposed. Mr. Anderson stated that it will be a secure feel- ing project with services that are not offered in a regular residential area, i.e., utilities are paid, etc. Mr. Wright stated that there would be a total of 18 buildings, 3 - 3600 sq. ft. & 15 - 2800 sq. ft. DEL WEBBER, Treasurer, noted that if people are concerned with the financial aspects of the Bureau that there need be no concern as the finances are very good with not much chance of failure. EVERETT WYNN, Pres. of Palm Springs Desert Division of the California Teachers Assoc., noted that many members had expressed a great need for a facility of this type in this area. Vice -Chairman Snyder asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR of the project. There were none. Anyone in OPPOSITION. SILVIA WINTER, 73-163 Somera, asked about the square footage per unit and noted that this would be far below the homes in the area. She stated that this would be "crackerbox" size and would bring the value of the homes in the neighborhood down. EUGENE KAY, lives west of development, objected to Chairman Berkey being a consultant on the project and serving as Chairman of this Commission even though he excused himself from the discussion. Also he objected to the size of units proposed and how they will devalue the larger homesin the area. Further, the project will not bring the City any taxes. KAY CRAIG, 72-992 Belair, stated she is against the project due to the tax free aspect, size of the units, the flood control issue, and the fact that projects of this type are depressing with the ambulance sirens Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission August 1, 1978 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont.) Page Four A. Case Nos. C/Z 05-78, C/Z 05-78 EIR, DP 10-78 & 133MF (Cont.) Mr. Wright noted that the lower corner of the site is being reserved for flood control purposes. Also, he noted that the units are like 4 bedroom homes not like pods. HAROLD HOUSLEY, Project Engineer, reviewed the flood control issue, noting that the City has a Master Plan for flood control and that the pro- ject has planned for flood control by having high pads and low streets. He also noted that projects will pay for flood control before the City can get bonds passed to do the same. Vice -Chairman Snyder declared the 9ublic Hearing closed and asked for the pleasure of the Commission. Commissioner Kryder noted that the project would be an a c aet. w. to the Community but the proposed Change of Zone. He was also con- cerned with the property if it was sold, what would the project then become. Further, the current zoning should be respected or the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan should be revised. This is a good project but in a wrong location. Commissioner Fleshman noted his concerns were the visual im- pact as far as the character of the neighborhood is concerned; the traffic issue; is it the best use for the area and the community; & would flood control as proposed by the City be sufficient. Vice -Chairman Snyder stated that the zoning is the issue and that the project should be placed in an area that is zoned to pro- perly handle it. Also the proposal does not meet zoning requirements. On a motion by Commissioner Kryder, seconded by Commissioner Fleshman, the Commission denied the Change of Zone request and ap- proved and certified the Final Environmental Impact Report as com- plete by Planning Commission Resolution No. 386; carried unanimously (3-0). On a motion by Commissioner Fleshman, seconded by Commissioner Kryder, the Commission denied the request for approval of a proposed Development Plan by Planning Commission Resolution No. 387; carried unanimously (3-0). THERE WAS A BRIEF RECESS AT 8:30 P.M. THE FETING WAS RECONVENED AT 8:40 P.M. B. Continued Case Nos. DP 09-78 and 126MF, CHACAHUALA, LTD., Applicant (zE)O 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-06I1 REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE August 2, 1978 APPLICANT Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services 1125 W. Sixth St. Los—Angeles.CA 90017 CASE NO. C/Z 05-78 EIR, DP 10-78 and 133MF The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of , August 1, 1978 . CONTINUED TO C/Z 05-78 XX DENIED BY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 386 DP 10-78 & 133MF XX DENIED BY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 387 EIR XX APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 386 PLACED ON THE AGENDA OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF FOR CONCURRENCE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION. PLACED ON THE AGENDA OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF 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. PAUL A. WILLIAMS, SECRETARY PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSSION cc: Applicant C.V.C.W.D. File CITY OF PALM DESERT STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report On: Change Zone and related EIR and Development Plan Case Nos.: C/Z r, C/Z 05-78(EIR), DP 10-78 and 133MF Applicant: BUREAU OF TEACHER AID AND RETIREMENT SERVICES Date: July 5, 1978 I. REQUEST: Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 10,000 to R-2 6,000 on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive , the related EIR and approval of a related Development Plan and preliminary Design Review to allow for a 72-unit retirement apartment project on said site. II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1) By Planning Commission Resolution No. , recommend denial to the City Council of the proposed Change of Zone and approval and certification of the final environmental impact report as complete. 2) By Planning Commission Resolution No. deny the request for approval of the proposed Development Plan. Justification is based upon the following for recommending denial of the Change of Zone. 1. The land use resulting from the proposed Change of Zone would not respect predominant existing uses in the adjacent areas. 2. The density resulting from the proposed Change of Zone would not be compatible with densities permitted in adjacent areas. Justification is based upon the following for denying the proposed Development Plan: The proposed development exceeds the density permitted within the zone in which the site is located and it does not comply with all other requirements of the existing zone. 2. The site of the proposed project is not the most appropriate site for the proposed use. Alternate sites are available that are more appropriate. 3. Due to the location of the proposed development, the commercial Case Nos. C/Z 05-78, C/Z 05-78(EIR), DP 10-78 and 133MF July 5, 1978 Page Two III. BACKGROUND: (Cont.) EIR Finding: An Environmental Impact Report was required by the Director of Environmental Services and said report has been submitted. Proposed No. of Units: 72 units Proposed Density: Approximately 6.54 du/acre H. Size of Units: 1 bedroom units - 714 sq. ft. 2 bedroom units - 978 sq. ft. IV. DISCUSSION RELATING TO CHANGE OF ZONE. REQUEST AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN: The present zoning of R-1 10,000 represents a density of approximately 4.4 du/acre. Given that the subject site is approximately 11.1 acres in size, approximately 49 units could be constructed under the present zoning. The proposed Change of Zone to R-2 6,000 would allow approxi- mately 81 units representing a density of approximately 7.3 du/acre. As a result, the proposed density would represent a substantial in- crease over that permitted by the present zoning; specifically, an increase of 2.9 du/acre. In terms of compatibility with adjacent den- sities, the proposed zoning does not appear compatible. The highest density permitted on adjacent property is 4.4 du/acre with most of the adjacent zoning permitting only 2.17 and 3.35 du/acre. In terms of land use compatibility, the land use resulting from the pro- posed Change of Zone would not respect predominant existing uses in the adjacent areas. Presently, the area is a single-family residential neigh- borhood. There are no fourplex units now existing in this area. Aes- thetically, the project would not be complementary to existing residen- tial uses. Assuming the Change of Zone were not approved, the proposed development would exceed the density permitted within the R-1 10,000 zone. Additionally, the project would not comply with many of the development standards mandated by the R-1 10,000 zone. With regard to the Development Plan, Staff believes the site of the pro- posed project is not the most appropriate site for the proposed use as a retirement project. Alternate sites are available that are more appropriate. The project's distance from the commercial district is excessive for the elderly, nearly 2.5 miles. The only written comments received regarding the proposed Change of Zone are from Dr. and Mrs. Eugene Kay who oppose both the proposed Change of Zone and development plan. Their comments relative to the density issue appear valid. However, the tax exempt status of the project in addition to the issue of affordability of the units are issues that do not appear appropriate to discuss in conjunction with the Change of Zone request or Development Plan proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSI0N OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING DENIAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1 10,000 to R-2 6,000 ON APPROXIMATELY 11 ACRES LOCATED EAST OF ALAMO, SOUTH OF SKYWARD WAY AND {VEST OF CHIA DRIVE AND APPROVAL AND CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRON- MENTAL IMPACT REPORT AS COMPLETE. CASE NOS. C/Z 05-78 and EIR WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 1st day of August 1978, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a Change of Zone application, filed by the BUREAU OF TEACHER AID AND RETIRMENT SERVICES from R-1 10,000 (Single- family Residential, min. 10,000 sq. ft. lot size) to R-2 6,000 (Single- family Residential, min. 6,000 sq. ft. lot area per du) on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive and the related Environmental Impact Report, the site being more particularly described as: APN 630-190-012 WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32," in that an Environmental Impact Report was required by the Director of Environmental Services and said report has been submitted; 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 and reasons to exist to recommend denial of the request for a Change of Zone: 1. The land use resulting from the proposed Change of Zone would not respect predominant existing uses in the adjacent areas. 2. The density resulting from the proposed Change of Zone would not be compatible with densities permitted in adjacent areas. WHEREAS, said Environmental Impact Report does conform to the .provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and consti- tute the findings of the Commission in these cases. 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend denial PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. Page Two PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a special meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 1st day of August1978, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: GEORGE BERKEY, Chairman ATTEST: PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary /ks PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF 1HE PLANNNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ANNOUNCING FIND- INGS AND DENYING APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 72-UNIT RETIREMENT APARTMENT PROJECT ON AP- PROXIMATELY 11 ACRES EAST OF ALAMO, SOUTH OF SKY- WARD WAY AND WEST OF CHIA DRIVE. CASE NOS. DP 10-78 and 1.33MF WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 1st day of August 1978. hold a duly noticed Public [fearing to consider a verified application from the BUREAU OF TEACHER AID AND RETIREMENT SERVICES requesting approval of a Develop- ment Plan and Preliminary Design Review to allow construction of a 72- unit retirement apartment project on approximately 11 acres east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, more particularly described as: APN 630-190-012 WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution No. 78-32," in that an Environmental Impact Report was required by the Director of Environmental Services and said report has been submitted; 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 and reasons to exist to justify the denial of the subject Development Plan: 1. The proposed development exceeds the density permitted within the zone in which the site is located and it does not comply with all other requirements of the existing zone. 2. The site of the proposed project is not the most appropriate site for the proposed use. Alternate sites are available that are more appropriate. 3. Due to the location of the proposed development, the com- mercial district and social services would not be readily accessible to the potential retired residents for which the project is being designed for. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and consti- tute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. The Planning Commission does hereby reject Development Plan DP 10-78 and preliminary Design Review 13311F for reasons stated. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a special meeting of the July 20, 1978 ;+ir. Paul Williams Planning Commission Palm Desert City Hall Palm Desert, Calif. Dear liir. Williams: J U L 2 L 1978 ENVInONMENTAL CERVICES As I am unable to attend the Aug. 1st. meeting for the hearing on the Teachers Retirement Project, I would appreciate your reading my points in protest to this project. 1. As a life member of the California Teacher's Association and an active member of the Palm Springs Desert Division of California Retired Teachers, I am definitely opposed to this project in this location. 2. I have talked with other teachers in the area and they concur with me that retired teachers receive substantial retirement and see no reason why the rest of the community should pay taxes for services to support a group of this kind in a TAX FREE PROJECT! I signed a petition protesting this venture and received a letter from the Teachers Aid and Retirement Services stating as following: "Item 7-A The California Teachers Association, like certain other institutions, has exemptions under California Law from property taxes. Our Counsel believes that the subject property will be exempt." 3. In this same letter, items 6 and 9 states as follows, "These are active people of means who often will be traveling during the off-season" and "They pay $20,000. membership fee plus a monthly rental fee of *3350, to 8485. per month." This substantiates my first point, if they are people of means and can travel and pay t20,000, memberships and rent from 350, to S485, per month------ let them pay their share of taxes with the rest of us, and either rent or buy a home. 4. The site of these retirement houses is located in one of the best residential areas of Palm Desert. Why break it up with a project of this kind --- TAX FREE--- ?? Let's keep it a first class residential area. ` Yours very my Frank Little�`�� Bureau of leacher Aid And Retirement Services California Teachers Association June 28, 1978 TO: Concerned Rek'dentsso of Desert FROM: Robert M. Al oxr, Director Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services California Teachers Association RE: Proposed Teacher Aid and Retirement Services Palm Desert Project A significant number of residents in your area have ex- pressed opposition to our proposed project, so I wish to clear up misconceptions and provide you with informa- tion which will permit you to make a judgment based on facts. The attached sheets discuss the principal objections which have been expressed to the city of Palm Desert, Our consultant, Mr. George Berkey can provide you with additional information, if you call him at ;7141 346-6677. Incidently, he will not participate in any deliberation of this project by the city either as our spokeman or as a member of the Planning Commission, R.M.A. a r= 2 1125 West Sixth Street / Los Angeles, California 90017 / (213)482-5660 PALM DESERT PROJECT Teacher Aid and Retirement Services I. PROJECT HAS TOO HIGH DENSITY. A. Based upon our facilities at Pasadena and Santa Barbara, the population of the project is expected to be 86 persons (1.2 per unit). If the land was developed with 47 single-family residences, as permitted under the current zoning, the projected population would be 113 persons. B. Instead of 47 houses there will be only 18 single story residential buildings which have been designed to have the appearance of large homes. There will also be a recreation building in the center. Thus, there will be large landscaped open spaces in a park -like setting instead of resi- dences in close proximity to each other. 2. THE FOOTAGE OF THE LIVING QUARTERS ARE INADEQUATE AND NOT IN . CONFORMANCE WITH SURROUNDING HOMES. A. Each person occupying a "single" unit will have a bedroom, bath, kitchen and living -dining room totaling 714 square feet, so four such units in one building total 2856 square feet. This can be compared with a average 4-bedroom single-family home for a man, wife and their 2 children. There are not many surrounding homes having 2856 square feet. 3. COMPARABLE HOMES FOR THE ELDERLY IN CALIFORNIA HAVE GONE BANKRUPT AND THIS PROJECT COULD BECOME A "SLUM" AREA AND DEVALUATE SURROUND- ING PROPERTY. A. The "bankrupt facilities" are not comparable. Our facilities at Pasadena and Santa Barbara have five-year waiting lists and the California Teachers Association is extremely sound. The structures and landscaping will be maintained by experts in a manner which is superior to that of the average owner of a single-family residence. 4. PRESENT STREETS ARE NOT PREPARED FOR THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION. A. With a population of less than single-family development less traffic will be generated. B. The residents of our project will be inclined to engage in car-pooling, a mini -bus or the public bus service, so fewer automobile trips than normal for the population will be generated. C. There will be only one entrance for ingress and egress of normal traffic. That will be on the east side of the project on Chia Drive. For all trips to the commercial and recreation areas Chia will be used and there will be no need or inclination whatsoever to use Somera,Skyward, Bel Air, Homestead or Alamo. Chia will be improved Southerly to the project entrance and also Northerly to connect with Haystack. It has been deter- nined that Little Bend should not be extended Westerly of its present terminus, so no traffic can go from the project through Silver Spur Ranch Streets. Palm Desert Project Page 2 D. If the project land were to be developed with single-family residences and the customary street patterns, there would be direct connections to the West and Alamo, Somera, Skyward, Bel Air and Homestead would be affected. 5. TO WHOM WOULD THE MEMBERSHIP IN THE PROJECT COMMUNITY BE TRANSFER'R_A=-, A. The initial fee, which will be paid by the retiree for the privileges of occupancy, will be recovered by that retiree upon the termination of his or her residency. The ownership of the project will he retained by The Bureau of Teacher ?lid and Retirement Services of The California Teachers Association who will restrict the "membership" transfer to eligible mem- bers of the Association. 6. ELDERLY TEACHERS CAN FIND A BETTER "ALL —YEAR LIV=" APIA W�UE THEIR =C= SIZE, TRAFFIC AM OTHER PROBLEMS ARE ACCEPI'AJEE. A. The Retired Teachers who expect to occupy the project are comparable to the hundreds of other retirees who occupy residential units of all kinds throughout Palm Desert. They are active people or means who often will travel during an off-season. A number of occupants of our Santa Barbara facility expressed a preference for the desert as opposed to the foggy cooler climate on the coast. There will be no facilities to care for inactive retirees at Palm Desert, so one should not imagine the occupants as being extremely old bed -ridden people. B. We already own our property free and clear and wish to use it 7. IS THE PROJECT "TAX-FREE"? WHY? A. The California Teachers Association, like certain other institutions, has exemptions under California law from property taxes. Our Counsel believes that the subject property will be exempt. B. It should be noted that our project would have no impact on the school system which historically collects over one-half of each property tax bill and that Palm Desert does not now have a property tax. 8. THE DEVELOPMENT IS APPROXIMATELY 2.5 MILES FROM THE SHOPPING AREA. THIS WOULD POSE A PROBLEM FOR SENIOR CITIZENS OF LIMITED MOBILITY. A. There are few people of any kind who walk to shopping areas and our re- tirees can drive or ride in vehicles as well as anyone else. Our facili- ties in Santa Barbara are adjacent to single-family residences and are located 5.0 miles from shopping. We fail to understand this objection. 9. WHY WOULD ANYONE PAY A $20,000 MEMBERSHIP FEE PLUS A MONTHLY RENTAL FEE OF $350 TO $485 PER MONTH? A. One might also ask why retirees are paying $20,000 or more for small mobile home lots. The fee is recovered by the retiree when he terminates his residency. B. The monthly fee includes numerous services, privileges and recreational facilities in addition to rental of a unit. Palm Desert Project Page i0. THE PPOPER Y IS FAR TOO I)AUMLE TO P,F USED FOR A RETIRT*NT DEVELOP"M'. A. We already own it and our potential occupants believe it is an ideal location. We believe our retirees are in the best position to make a judgment. 11. THE ZONE SHOULD BE CHANGED TO R-I-23000 RATHER THAN LOWERED. THE PROJECT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT AND DEPRECIATE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. A. Silver Spur Ranch is directly to the east and we note that probably a majority of the lots are only 7200 Square feet (80' x 90') from Little Bend Trail Northly. To the east of the single family lots is Corsican Villas with Pr-6 zoning and far less open space than we are proposing. OUr project is superior to those conditions and environment. B. Ironwood has a Pr-7 designation, permitting more units per acre than we are proposing. C. Our park -like development with limited access, free from barking dogs, free from noisey hot -rods and motor bikes, free from open garage doors opening on public streets, etc. would provide a more pleasing environment than the average single-family development. Its effect on the area would be far more beneficial than adverse. 12. LITTLE BEND TRAIL SHOULD NOT BE EXTENDED TO BRING TRAFFIC THROUGH SILVER SPUR. A. We agree and believe the city does also. 13. FIRE PROTECTION IN THE VICINITY IS INADEQUATE. A. We agree. The city has money in the proposed 1978-79 budget for a nearby fire station. We understand that it will be built by the time our project is ready for occupancy. 14. NO NEW DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE PERMITTED UNTIL THE CITY KAS FUNDED A PROGRAM TO HANDLE THE FLOOD PROBLEM. A. Each new Palm Desert development is required not only to secure approval of its freedom from flooding but also must contribute to the city drainage funds and provide channels, levees, etc. as necessary. Thus{ our project and development to the South will tend to complete drainage plans and to protect houses to the North of us on Skyward, Somera and Haystack. 15. THE "POND" WILL TEND TO BE A BREEDING PLACE FOR MOSQUITOS., A. There are many similar ponds or lakes at Marrakesh and Ironwood. Appro- priate measures will be taken or our occupants would be the fixst to complain. 46.10 Southern California Edison Company -6-100 CATHEDRAL CANYON DRIVE CATHEDRAL CITY. CALIFORNIA 92$96 July 20, 1978 TO: City of Palm Desert JUl 21: 1Q78 45275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, California 92260 ENVIRONMENTAL CERVICES Project: Case No. DP 10-78 and C2 05-78 Environmental Impact Report Gentlemen: This is to advise that the subject property is located within the service territory of the Southern California Edison Company, and that the electric loads of the project are within parameters of projected load growth which Edison is planning to meet in this area. Lkless the demand for electrical generating capacity exceeds our estimates, and provided that there are no unexpected outages to major sources of electrical supply, we expect to meet our electrical load requirements for the next several Years. Our total system demand is expected to continue to increase annually; and, if our plans to proceed with future construction of new generat- ing facilities are delayed, our ability to serve all customer loads during peak demand periods could become marginal by 1981. .In addition, the major fuel used in Edison's generating facilities is low sulfur fuel oil. We now believe our low sulfur fuel oil inventory, together with our contractual commitments for delivery, and our customers' conservation efforts, will permit us to meet the forecasted demand for electricity during 1978. It is our intention to continue to do everything that can reasonably be accomplished to provide our customers with a continuous and sufficient supply of electricity. Very truly yours Glenn Buchanan Customer Service Planner GB:ae (Rev. 11/77) TO: Mr. Paul A. Williams, Director of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert FROM: Mike Murray, R.S., Supervising Sanitarian Riverside County'Health Department - Desert District DATE: June 15, 1978 SUBJECT: CZ 05-78 The Riverside County Health Department has no comments at this -time. However, prior to the issuance of any permit to construct, we will require confirmation from Coachella Valley County Water District that they will provide sewage disposal and potable water. We will also require that plans to construct any commercial swimming pools or food preparation establishments be submitted to us for our approval prior to the issuance of permits to construct. MM:js i C 1r a®4 V ,�,v ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITV C� PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: Director of Environmental Services FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: CZ 05-78 DATE: June 13, 1978 No comment. _ _ J it tit: R. W. RIDDELL Eastern Division t_ g:_I(JlCES Distribution Planning SupervifiWARUl� NIEli t CIV L" PAL.n 9L-�ER7 City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: CA 05-78 6 U 3700 CENTRAL AVENUE • RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA Mailing Address P. O. BOX 2200, RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92506 June 14, 1978 Location of Nearest Gas Main: Skyward Way 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 ,,:here 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 tine 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 he 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. EUGENE M. KAY, M.D. 713020 HOMESTEAD ROAD PALM DESERT, CALIPORNIA 92260 / am. Zt o Palm Desert ENVIRONMENTAL sWkiS 78 l y f CITY OF PALM DESERT 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Jesert, Ca. 92260 Attention: Nr. Paul A. Williams Ji.rector of Environmental cervices Re: Proposed Project for 'Teacher aid and Retired Services in Palm Desert Dear I•r. Williams, 'he proposal to rezone 11.1 acres of land South of :skyward :Jay and ;'Vest of "hia Drive, which is at present zoned R1-10,000 single family dwel.lings to R2-6,000 and multiple family dwellings is objectionable for many reasons: The projected development of 61 one bed room units having only 714.sq. ft. and 12 two bed room units of 978 so. ft. would mean 6,4 units per acre instead of one to two Acuses which the land is presently zoned for. With the addition of the proposed recreational building the ddnsity would be 6.87 or nearly 7 units per acre. At present the surrounding land is zoned: To the South - R1 — 209000 sq. ft., single family & condominium. To the North - RZ - 12,000 to 15,000 sq ft. single family To the East — R1 - 10,000 sq. ft., single family To the West -RI — 10,000 sq. ft., single family and condominiums with 1.8 units per acre. The rezoning, as requested, would slso allow two story buildings which would hurt the entire area. In addition, according to the Environmental Impact report, the entire project would be tzx exernpti That would mean our young, struggling city would be required to furnish services without compensation. In the proposed report a map shows a large pond in the center of the development which would mean mosquitoe breeding to the detriment of the entire area. Furthermore it is very possible that a membership fee of '20,000.00 plus a monthly charge of ;050.00 to :Y485.00 could prove too steep for many of the retired teachers. Therefore if the project is not financially successful what would prevent the Bureau of Teachers' Aid and Retirement cervices from selling the extremely small units to outsiders with large families, creating a slum -like area in thecenter of the most desirable land still available in Palm Desert? For these reasons we feel we must join other objectors to the project. Sincerely, %l/KA4 couNry E STABLISH.D IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY �15TR1C� COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE Box 1058 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 P TELEPHONE (714) 398-2651 DIRECTORS GEFICER$ RAYMGND 0.. RUMMON05, VREAOENT LOW€LL U. WEEKS, GENERAL MANAf.[P -CX¢F fNG tNFEP TELLIS CODEKAS, VILE PRESIUNT OLE J. "RCI.AND, '-C'ZTART C J. FROST WALTER R. WRIGHT, Ppc'TIA WILLIAM R. GARDNER REDWINE AND $ EPRILL, .•TCRN ttI STEVE D. BUXTON June 20, 1979 File: 0163.11 0421.1 . ., 0721.1 Department of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert Post Office Box 1977 <NVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Palm Desert, California 92260 CITY O" PALM DESERT Re: Change of Zone 05-78 D.P. 10-78, Sec. 29, T5S, R6E Gentlemen: This area is protected from stormwater flows by a system of channels. and dikes. This area may be 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. 54 and 80 of the Coachella Valley County Water District for sanitation service. There may be conflicts with existing District facilities. We request the appropriate public agency to withhold the issuance of a building permit until arrangements have been made with the District for the relocation of these facilities. Very truly yours, `Lowell 0. Weeks General Manager -Chief Engineer SR:dlb cc: Riverside County Department of Public Health 46-209 Oasis Street Indio, California 92201 !NTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: Director of Environmental Services FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: DP 10-78 DATE: June 13, 1978 1. This development shall pay the drainage and park fees as required by the City of Palm Desert ordinances. 2. Traffic safety lighting shall be installed on Little Bend Trail and the entrance to the development at Chia Drive. 3. It is recommended that the entrance off of Little Bend Trail be widened to a minimum of 32 feet. SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION FOR THE PROPOSED TEACHER AID AND RETIREMENT SERVICES PROJECT (Draft Environmental Impact Report and Supplemental Information Completes Final Environmental Impact Report) INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Palm Desert TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Palm Desert Planning Commission FROM: Paul A. Williams, Director of Environmental Services SUBJECT: Summary of the draft environmental impact DATE: July 5, 1978 report on the proposed Teacher Aid and Retirement Services Project and Staff Recommendations. SUMMARY The draft environmental impact report attached hereto, was prepared to ac- company a request for zone change and development plans for an 11 + acre parcel of land located south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, extended. The proposed project will develop the land into a retirement.community con- sisting of 18 buildings of four -units per building, a total of 72 single - story units. The project will also include a recreation building, swimming pool, and a large pond. The impacts associated with the project determined to be most significant by the City of Palm Desert, are summarized below. Hydrology and -Drainage A natural storm channel traverses the southeast corner of the project site. This channel carries storm water from the adjacent 38-acre site located to the south, to the 15-acre park site located east of Chia Drive. On -site protection from flooding will be provided by the depression of the intersec- tion of Chia Drive and Little Bend Trail, extending the proposed Swale from the 38-acre site to the park site, and berming along the southern project boundary. Additional off -site and regionalfacilities are needed to provide adjacent properties and downstream areas with adequate flood protection. Land Use and Land Use Compatibility The project site, which is currently vacant and undeveloped, is zoned R-1-10,000 single-family dwellings. Property to the west and north of the project site is zoned R-1-10,000 and R-1-13,000, which would allow a density of approximately 3.3 to 4.3 dwelling units per acre. This property is only partially developed at this time. Property to the east of the project site is zoned R-1-10,000. The City is proposing to develop this property into a park site. Property to the south of the project site is zoned R-1-20,000, which would allow a density of approximately 2.2 dwelling units per acre. However, a zone change has been requested on this property to PR-4, which designates a planned residential development at a maximum density of four dwelling units per acre. The project proponent for that site proposes to develop the land at a density of approximately 3.4 dwelling units per acre. The Palm Desert General Plan land use designation for the project site and land immediately to the east, west, north, and south is Low Density Residential (three to five dwelling units per acre). -2- Land Use and Land Use Compatibility (Cont.) The implementation of the proposed zoning will change the zoning classifica- tion from R-1-10,000 to R-2-6,000, single and multi -family dwellings. The project has been designed to mitigate the visual impact of the project. Traffic and Circulation The proposed project will improve portions of Chia Drive in conjunction with project implementation. The proposed project, upon completion, is projected to generate between 216 and 576 vehicle trips per day. Public Services and Utilities No impacts are anticipated in providing water, sewer, gas, or electric service to the proposed project. No impacts on school facilities are anticipated. Con- cerns have been raised by the Fire Marshal concerning the inadequacy of fire protection services to this region of the City. Scenic Quality The project will transform the visual character of the site from that of a vacant parcel of land to that of a residential community. In the long-term, the cumu- lative impact of urban light on the views of the nighttime sky will be incre- mentally increased as a result of this project. Energy Consumption and Conservation The project is estimated to have an annual energy consumption (gasoline, natural gas, and electricity) roughly equivalent to 2,900 barrels of oil. Suggested measures for reducing gasoline consumption include the use of car pools, bicycles, and public transportation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Staff has reviewed the draft environmental impact report for the subject project and finds it to be a complete and comprehensive study of the impacts associated with the proposed development. The report has addressed the environ- mental factors of concern to Staff and mitigation measures have been provided to eliminate or reduce significant environmental impacts. Accordingly, the Staff is recommending that the EIR be certified as complete. It should be noted that approval of the EIR does not necessarily constitute approval of the subject project. Thus, other relevant Staff reports should be reviewed for recommendations regarding the project. Also attached herewith are comments received from other agencies and the public, along with the Staff responses, as appropriate, to said comments. Since a number of relevant issues were raised in the letters received, they have been summarized with responses on the following pages. It should be noted however, that only those issues not already addressed in the EIR are included in the summary. Those -3- STAFF RECOMMENDATION (Cont.) considered to be irrelevant or merely indicating an objection to the project have not been addressed. Assuming sufficient responses are received at the Public Hearing, the final EIR and all environmental documentation for this project will be considered complete. SUMMARY OF ISSUES OF CONCERN AS EXPRESSED IN COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC AND OTHER INTERESTED AGENCIES Past performance of other-CTA projects in Southern California. Include membership fees and taxing structure. Response: To be answered by applicant at Public Hearing. Traffic and Circulation. Two concerns were raised: 1) the location of proposed streets with respect to existing streets; and, 2) the adequacy of local streets to carry the additional traffic. Response: It should be noted that the street arrangements have been re- designed to permit only one access to the project on Chia Drive extended. The extension of Little Bend Trail has been eliminated and a secondary emergency access has been provided on Barberry Lane. Thus the primary access point to the project would also permit direct access to Haystack via Chia Drive. Accordingly, if the project were developed in this manner, Staff does not believe that traffic circulation would be a problem. Also, our studies indicate that traffic, with regard to adjacent subdivisions, would not be a problem if developed or planned. With respect to traffic volumes, it should be noted that this does not appear to be a relevant issue since any development in this area would increase existing traffic volumes. The proposed change in street locations would also appear to adequately handle projected traffic volumes. 3. Alternate sitesavailable within the City for this type of project. Response: Alternate sites were not sideration was only given alternate site locations EIR, no further analysis discussed in other Staff considered as a part of the EIR -- con - to other projects on this site. Since are not required as a part of the project was made. Such sites, however, are Reports. 4. Distrance of project from commercial and social services centers. Response: The project sponsor has indicated that bus transportation can be provided to the site which would mitigate the distance, how- ever, it should be noted that such transportation is limited and unreliable. -4- SUMMARY OF ISSUES OF CONCERN ETC. (Cont.) 5. Status of parcel of land located immediately south of Chia Drive which would permit extension of Chia Drive and ultimate access to the project. Re onse: This is a key parcel for development of this project. Both access and circulation are contingent upon this parcel. The applicant will address this matter at the Public Hearing. 6. Consideration of pond alternatives. Response: It should be noted that the pond is for aesthetic purposes only. Accordingly, it.may be removed from the project, thus, eliminat- ing any adverse effects, However, should the applicant decide to keep the pond, other mitigation measures maybe applied pur- suant to the Mosquito Abatement District requirements. Other experts may also be used to guarantee that no health hazards would be involved. 7. Notice of intent to serve project with sewer from C.V.C.W.D. Response: Such notice has been received from C.V.C.W.D. 8. Adequacy of fire protection. Response: This concern was addressed in the EIR. No additional mitigation measures have been provided than that described, which indicates that an additional facility has been planned. It I16 R S I DI.�.,.., RIVERSIDE CDUNTY FIRE DEFAP.TIAENT IN COOPERATION WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY DAVID L. FLAKE COUNTY FIRE WARDEN Paul A. Williams Director of Planning City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 0 Dear Mr. Williams: May 24, 1978 210 WEST SANJACINTO STREET PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370 TELEPHONE (716) 657-3183 Re: Environmental Impact Report Teacher Aid & Retirement Services Palm Desert Project We thank you.for the opportunity to review the subject EIR. Our primary concerns for the subject project are expressed on pages 31 and 32 of the report. We have no additional comments at this time. to Sincerely, DAVID L. FLAKE County Fire Warden By David J. Ortegel Fire Marshal :.4- x 1 1M &r PO t !97u ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF PALM DESERT �OUNiY ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY OFSiRIGS COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (714) 398-2651 DIRECTORS OFFICS RAVMOND RUMMOND$, PRESIDENT LOWELL O. WEEKS, GENENANIFEGINF( TELLS CODEKAS, VRF PRESIDENT OLE J. NORDLND, $ECREIDe' C. 1. FROST WALTER R. WRIGHT, AVOITOR WILLIAM 8. GARDNER REDWINE AND SHERRILL. ATTORNFTI SIEVE D. ELKTON mki 61197a File: 0034.19037 Paul A. Williams City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, California 92260 Re: EIR SW4 Sec. 29, T5S, R6E, S.B.B & M Dear Mr. Williams: We reviewed the Environmental Impact Report for the proposed retirement community for the Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services and have no comments to make. KEH: j rf Very truly yours, i :a '�L Lowell 0. Weeks General Manager -Chief Engineer R fi %r 'LSE 3 V Id j i'i's 1. 1;17 i1 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES C=/ CSTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 TELEPHONE (714) 398.2651 DIRECTORS CFEICfRy a ELLIS CD I AS, lI CN OS, ➢RFSIO ENi LO V.'E LL a, WEEKS. GENFV^r !A �Af.Fv-O�'(F ('�fi111.a T€LEIS CST B, r �E ➢aFS10Evi tGLI J � IrRCU.:D, ' 1. FM 8 ,''1 STEVtIRY . B GARO\Fa W ^L iEi -'. µGIiXT. ^ CrtCR STEM D. 9UYT04 June 20, 1978 aECN'I Nf AhD SPf➢RILL. File: 0163.11 0421.1 0721.1 Department of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert Post Office Box 1977 Palm Desert, California 92260 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY C? PALM DESERT Re: Change of Zone 05-78 D.P. 10-78, Sec. 29, T5S, R6E Gentlemen: This area is protected from stormwater flows by a system of channels and dikes. This area may be 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. 54 and 80 of the Coachella Valley County Water District for sanitation service. There may be conflicts with existing District facilities. We request the appropriate public agency to withhold the issuance of a building permit until arrangements have been made with the District for the relocation of these facilities. Very truly yours, ' Lowe I1 0. Weeks General Manager -Chief Engineer cc: Riverside County Department of public Health 46-209 Oasis Street Indio, California 92201 hru� 2S, 1970 �el,a2t::sesat a ` ?nu-�ea::,:entcL Jeiai.efi uS27S ; 2•ic:'a.; '-ecz .C�ste 'O�^ cede-±.t, �:�.�:. 922 j60 c'ULt-\e: Cnu JSL9•?Gt +\,C_O.`,i`, On tAe !)%o„oced �2QG•`:['h %Yi�� cr'r, . e,_.i'ecccrv.: ;eau.?ced ; r,�:: ect , e�r;cred �q Cr.u•i��ta q .:,e obi.ect to ere cwoue cant,Anec. pao:,ect 'oa •tite ;o r.. aecioiV-:- !1 0 lLioh ( ✓!1; 21' ghe •!00•�OLcC 0= !/:.0 •li(.V '::!%. CyLIG2teh6 C'leUZCCL;CG.u.GitC :1:� Y,utc! II��iAO 41'!r ; Ce/�G.•- L I not •J2 cowl oltrtnice t?i�'L litz"Ot+wlritr. ^Ar.!ed o �! ta"cAlehd; 3) Conpatali/..e ;wr!v_d -Olt the e%ttq %� CrJ i -Oai2K l:cue ro)x bc,uG✓ cmr cfs-1 we •--eat 'vtz a.^•;•!e co "v, ",)ex to t,:-v pao%emit cm, un it4 )aadcplt mate. o 4r;t} gvrttehd %t could beeone a ",.tmn" c-,ec. rrul dwalve e (7) .yyrA!'nCIitN2 ntorervttt; +'1 C�wL naedCn t_:]f2en_fd a✓te not �o.tepciced Oa c!edirn_ed -LOa -tile. tac•.iVl' t cuzd,a,vwb&; to ac": fvnd a bettea paob7es� ace aeaen Atzo� o2e ate ,:v`oa .V j 1 Gr acre i4 nrraarcw!': 2 it • d state l therte:%eaa in o,� S20 000 id r.: nirlLt. it be =✓t•rj-,�L.'ea�:ed'- 6) �;'e seem .-e elda .l �tet�✓ce:� ,tecc)teri �I-IleCI. iu-." or_e.a wltPle -t'teit 4.thuctvhe v ze xhcsy'i ,�-LC GN,(1. Ot'iLPh 71 (r.W_ th.x do-crA'ed "poiti�" Deco;-e r,!oac,U,!o b2eeds^c wea? pno%vct : �ii.. be tax -face ,-4��;,.��- L (,' L 4N, 2 7v� L �� t 1 y q-.iY-s • aSi4 �z-mot YSO ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY DF pALM DESERT fir:^ _,�,._:.; ..�::u.:::alt.....,.',�, [U•%^a i5'.ar .- . ".�, 77 _=�Pi^✓`.i.ELCJq: �f: f'UJ'�^Of �:SnY i,'-w�. ;!if!.7nCL ".0--o:-t On y%i2 "20POden� --zG'P2 :..1G risel F.:::.^i L'. �.CIU4_C'C4 ,. G•G"I .��'¢n^L : !o,'.eC•il. �7•>e7G.L?. C� Jll CI^JI•✓.LLa e a ob-aPc't ...aB r%lovp CCi/7.t:one2 ')/.O/.eGt !OG •';P, Jp0 21 O'. .`:e ..l.U.ifq.� CL.', ^/ iy ,,'n I'r? l:;w 't t n�;. C;, I r r• }+i.� 2d e. 2r.. cur. c' r!,_cr toc �„ ed.i`.,. I„a�. -in. r.^;:- n -'O!Y,1.^t:Gn. ::Iq.r%i. n_!•..a0:!N.: 'q." �}O!':fG p!`i.F7✓N2rd: �l -... J:�?rGh%^ (?CC!?np/; �.%i2 •?•u �2 �.:f.; -f'.1 /.p :; 2<_� !:GLe roll'? UE:+�:_.. _ >.Nr .7 'or..- 'jo nc;::4 GO. ! - ,nl; -p 1',%�iA ^..,^C. t;:% 4.� i,%d•`ed•^.,._ ai_J:e O � y., �•L %.iu-v ::• %l C %�.C!d C7 i%1 `):^.!7 •:'P n _ .:C� rle- '".^.r! ��eUG!_ - rl /' dtLC2C!fS�i'AJ?!. ^.40" . v(�.t�" L� Ca.l +7?.e�?I'7� ,�'_ �C�'.d rse lA ,grro C '. :,"Or r P' -tom/:' ^G Cl,i Lf fn •IA(t C,b'✓','JZC (.�� j ..:Z �7 Cc(-.: OC.C,/°•:G..'i ✓1 ,J,:T,e G' ':?^ n)/ri- �.. ��r•,:) i `h.^ 'O,`.aC'•%iw.w^' :O :J.^ 1 ' _ L._ !f of GC. � it.•! w ` fl.u. - ,. .. �'pt �1..-: ✓J. _�Le/ . .'e_ 1�. ✓ e lJ.I '2, C7,erd �� •J cC Ue ate � :� er.it .,.J r, ;, : ,.8-_ � 2 kQ/L d•S-.e ..Ee feLvl )CO ,eG•L 1P-i1 . .!.G:.- "•',[C? :ait, -. '/��/ y'✓ �1 � Y- 1 r — i v _ 7 .h , f '•W «. £NVIRON;,; Eta f CITY OF PACL 8 flESERTES P.O. Box 680, Palm Desert, California 91160 -an =a1-.,-?^Ort,� 7 7 e, t e .oard of =hc r.e1._Sy .`r 02 .. (t..rel - __' ^aC� __ Un_. ... t:^OSe i S Ir_O,_.711a1.. _ a_"oa.., ^.a v. t n..A _.. _ ��l h a.. nf be ver.. Ise of -O. -t. Or .7? ♦ r+-♦ toc l .. -"O ••.a. •_ inn -� ^O"?r7 ^" _-'_l j (1 r,, n.i} ,,,-.1. ... .,n..�n .--•__n •.- ._•',^.'-t ".-.. _. .,tea -_., - l �-: �.� .�. 7. r" `lie-C:_I+1 -.i-t � t�..A n_. _� �� "-"r.0 _� _'_�.. .e �J Fitt- of ;a.lm 'lose,.+ fume lh, 107R '9 _!osition on this "oint as fe.r as u_?e "11acai11.1 1, .,as concerned, and eve rez eat eve are. Verb :?!uch c-^cosed to more traffic ^ein diverted onto little .anch. - _.',e _I', states that the fire department has indicated that because of the rapid growth of the area the fire station'is raroidlf reachin- a TiOi lt.of Saturation, anrt_ "tha.t 'ire -protection In the'vicinity is ina_d.equa-te, and ;.rill be u'2til such time as a :l e!'d station is in oT'e"fatio-n in the. area. . '.'e feel that there should be no neN develorment r rani ttefi in tli- area ivntil the City of alm 'lesert has S. funned drain 7a_ me E, ra^t ad.enisate to handle the flood `rrobl_em. rpn ee rec-aectfl.ll_l .t _toot that this ?O't1e C''lanarp ai'1_r? ;�t;il _a ip,c -ter..,.it for ^ . s 'evelo ne: t be denied. - `:inc�rel?, -ire si ntom Department of Environmental Services June 12, 1975 45275 Prickly_ Pear Lane Palm Deserts Calif. 92260 Attention: Mr, Paul Williams Re: Environmental Impact Report on the proposed Teacher Aid and Retire- ment Services Palm Desert Project; prepared by Envista Inc,. and I, Harold Houslev Gentlemen: I strongly object to the above captioned project for the following reasons: 1) I am informed the attorneys for the Nolan Estate have retained for said estate a parcel of land 60'xl20',alongside the eastern side of this projects commencing at Skyward and proceeding in a southerly direction which would prevent Chia Drit•e from becoming access roads thereby also prohibiting ingress or egress to the project, This would place the burden of traffic on Homestead Road Skyward Road and Bel Air Road; this would also add to the dangers of Alamo, which stands as one of your highest in repairs and the City has not seen fit to protect residences by installing curbs and gutters, We have no sidewalks and there are many, many children residing on these streets; heavy traffic from the project would present real danger to these children, 2) I can find no swales, or other flood deterrents employed to ac- commodate drainage or flood waters, if an_vs in this project, With so many small structures occupying the land areas how can the ground percolate this water? 3) When we find it impossible to get improvement of curbs and gutters so needed on Alamo and in these days of tax -conscious concern, will the City of Palm Desert employ an abatement district to take care of the mosquitoes which might breed in that so`called "Pom" of this project? Very. -truly, yours, (mtsp_)r Katherine' R, Craig 72992 Bel Air Road Palti Deserts Calif, 92260 P.S. I am within the 300 foot radius of this project as it crosses Bel Air Road, SCi.:ICES FNVIR^N"ENT.AL SERVICES r,, :mac PALM DESERT •�F Jrr -'d sae { •`.i „e tJ De-irt,ent of Environmental Services 45275 Dric!cly ?ear Lane ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Pali Desert, Calif, CITY OF PALM DESERT Gentlemen; _R9o-a : Envi_:_^n%?••l - ^-7C-. �: �•n ='? ';�:) •r�; '.a a c r.7 Dn�9.-nTonr ter. -:2C '�Fi l-1 T="�i:Y r0an --c -•,•n' •� a ' I _Envista Tnc a^d T ilarCid :jousteT- T•7e n1JI tO tl_le ai+rge _70Y _.__?d Pv-niect tOr t!ae r,) lCw4n'i =ea SDns: L)Too broil ,r;P?iS^t�T• 7\ 'T nP 'En to^n t in lip .->+ r+'^-- o-••> "- - - 7._:�,. '7� - J=-:� (-1a�_ _S .__ i^ade^I•:jYa 3 T]d R`17Ch tCO STOa II; certainly not zn ^^nf ^_ma:;ce -:•=tb ^'1r �"C'1'?.'3 iilg hoi:,eS of taxpayers; 3) Comparable hones for the elderly in California have gone bankrupt and we fear the snme could hann?n :o this proj ct 3nd, in i`_S present etatp :)c small liv1-''-^•'!'lart?rs' it Co'11C) beC^:re a "-l'1r^-' ^tea and dsvaluat-e. al.L S17.'_-Y. rll-ldi_n� nr.;,)prr*�• '.} roIr-Y•csent st%ners .-i,c not pry^ared 1')r the If.;; is Con-pstion n, It., ine���~Sl n>, -_: c.?P. ?, ^-i7 �":?^,T �:�}; �9 1t iS Stilted the membership of Y20,000 is transferrable; to whcm might it be transferred?; 6)?e feel the elderly to C o t hd batY�r i,.il1 >e� li'J_n 9" c7 ?i',v?rp their' etr'ictL?!•? S4__ r-'-7=.$_n -,,;�•i nY?-cr '17 e szej_.•-r^•7iC_Jlnms . -ic -tabja , and r ll mil`; _ . l` �FG✓> L'YLCV i`� 'L __ u/ _If(C )yLr j_c J17_ ' �Cu. — �c 4,7 L= --/ f`>, _�,°'-./c L'; s' �/l.'.-c_� L _ ^' /�.l �/c .__.___�___- _. .._ — I["cl'-='•'l�L c.�;c�� /C �>`" .ENVIRUNML,ifAL SERVICES CIT'' QE PhL:k DESER-C DenartTent of Environmental Services L5275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, Calif, 92260 Gentlemen: Re: Environmental Impact Report on the proposed Teacher aid and Retirement Services Palm Desert Project prepared by Envista Inc, and T. Harold Houslev We object to the above captioned project for the following reasons: 1)Too high density; 2) The footage of the living quarters are inadequate and much too small; certainly not in conformance with surrounding homes of taxpayers; 3) Comparable homes for the elderly in California have gone bankrupt and we fear the same could happen to this project and, in its present state of small living_.quarters, it could become a "slum" area and devaluate all surrounding property; 4) our present streets are not prepared for the traffic congestion outlined; 5) on page 8, paragraph 2, it is stated the membership of S20,000 is transferrable; to whom might it be transferred?; 6) We feel the elderly teachers can find a better "all -year living" area where their structure size traffic.and other problems are acceptable; and 7) We are informed .that this project will be "tax-free", Why? yr t -� � / • .ur- Y2fr /rlc��, . 7W .. - % `i - 1 :� 4 P 1,) _ ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITE' OF PALM DESERT STATE OF CAU[FORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR.. GOVERNOR CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD COLORADO RIVER BASIN a REGION 7 73-271 HIGHWAY 111, SUITE 21 PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 Phone: (714) 346-7491 June 2, 1978 Mr. Paul A. Williams Director of Environmental Services City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear Mr. Williams: Pursuant to your letter dated May 15, 197$, Regional Board staff has reviewed the "Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Proposed Teacher Aid and Retirement Services, Palm Desert Project"., The report states, on pages 30 and 31, that sewer service is to be provided by the Coachella Valley County Water District (CVCWD) following the project's annexation to the appropriate improvement district. Pursuant to the Regional Board's "Guidelines for Sewage Disposal from Land Developments", the proposed density of this project would necessitate discharge, to a central sewerage system. A Notice of Intent to Serve this proposed development from the CVCWD must be included in the final report. The report states and illustrates, on pages 1 and 10, that the proposed development will include a "large water pond". Further discussion on the proposed pond is then omitted from the report. The question as to whether the use of water from an overdrafted groundwater basin for an ornamental pond con- stitutes a "reasonable use" of water, as defined by the State Water Resources Control Board, must be addressed in the final report. Pond design to prevent the development of nuisance water quality conditions from algal and macrophyte growth and insect popula- tions must be detailed in the final report. Further, com- putations as to water volumes used over periods of time due to water loss from evaporation and percolation (if not lined) must be included in the final report. The above considerations must be addressed pursuant to the State EIR Guidelines. If you have any questions, please contact our office at (714) 346-7491• G'V.f_t.�ct:cr V 11 i,•ii.GG�('ti��; WILLIAM D. WINCHESTER Environmental Specialist II WDW/ks JUN ENVIkUNMuvv,L Zi[nVICES QT_X Of E&M DESEQL J i ELCENc M. KAY, M.D. 73020 HOh1ESTEAD ROAD ., PALM DESERT, CALIPORNIA 92260 03 City of Palm Desert EN CITY Nti'.tN7M DESERT CITY C4 PALM DESERT 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Desert, Ca. §2260 Attention: Sr. Paul A. Williams Jirector ofnuironmental Services Be: Proposed Project for Teacher Aid and Retired Services in Palm Jesert Dear kr. Williams, The proposal to rezone 11.1 acres of land South of :Skyward Way and lest of Chia Jrtue, which is at present zoned Rl-10,066 single family dwellings to 32-5,000 and multiple family dwellings is objectionable for many reasons: The projected development of 61 one bed room units hcuirg only 714 sq. ft. and 12 two bed room units of i78 sq. ft. would mean 6A units per acre instead of one to two houses which the land is presently zoned for. With the addition of the proposed recreational building the dansity would be 6.37 or nearly 7 units per acre. At present the surrounding land is zoned: To the Wouth - NJ - 20,000 sq. ft., single family a condominiu,. To the forth - R1 - 12,000 to 15,000 sq ft. single fanny To the mast - -al - 10rJ00 sq. ft-, single family To the Best -31 - 10,000 sq. ft., single family and condominiums with 1.8 untts per acre. The rezoning, as requested, would slso allow two story buildings which would hurt the entire area. In addition, according to the environmental impact reyort, the entire project would be tzx exempt! IQ& would mean our young, struggling city would be required to furnish services without compensation. In the proposed rnport a cap shows a large nand in the center Of the development which would mean ,mosquitoe breeding to tKe detriment of the entire area. Y urthermore it is very possible that a membership fee of 02.,000.G0 plus a monthly charge of 050.00 to ;435.00 could prove too steep for many of toe retired teachers. Therefore if the project is not financially successful what would prevent the 3ureau of Teachers' Aid and ,retirement Services from selling the extremely small units to outsiders with large families, creating a slur -like area in thecenter of the most desirable land still available in Palm Jesert? For these reasons we feel we must join other objectors to the project. J Sincerely,i`:�ti Department of Envi i rental Services 45275 Prickly Pear Lane Palm Deserts Calif. 92260 Gentlemen: Re: Environmental Tmpact Report on the proposed Teacher aid and Retirement Services Palm Desert Project prepared - Envista Inc and 1, Harold Rouslev We object to the above captioned project for the follo--Ano -reasons: 1) Too high density; 2) The footage of the living quarters are inadequate and much tco small; certainly not in conformance with surrounding homes of tax -payers; 3) Comparable homes for the elderly in California have gone bankrupt and we fear the same could happen to this project and, in its present state of small living quarters, it could become a "slum" area and devaluate all surrounding property; 4) Our present streets are not prepared for the traffic congestion outlined; 5) On page 8, paragraph 2, it is stated the membership of $2O,0O0 is transferrable; to whom might it be transferred? 6) We feel the elderly teachers can find a better "all year living area" where their structure size, traffic and other problems are acceptable; and 7) We are informed that this project .gill 'be "tax-free". Why? P % _ _0 73-a�.r l c c _ a i L 73- I-J, Z2 �,-,4, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CITY OF PALM DESERT Department of nvironmental ervices 45275 Frickly rear Lane Palm Desert, Calif. 92250 Gentlemen: Re: EnvirOLime n rat Impact iZen Ort On ._he pro:,OSe(J Teachers Al.d and retirement Services Palm Desert Project p_:ep-irad by Envista Inc. and I. ?Ia; old �onsle•, hill -la ObJect t0 the above captioned proj�Ct "Or i_h2 f0_lOW_na �23SORS: i) i00 liil-h density; 2) T_he f00t.Aoe of file liq as r;:ers are inad equa to a?1 much too Small; certainly not in conformance with surrolindi_nU homes o= tax- payers; 3) GOuma=able holies for the elderly in C.c:li.fOraia h:1ve EOIIe 'Oatlk;.r!1pt and We fear the same could happen to this prOjec.t and, in its present s-tac= Or small 11Vino OLart2YS2 It COLId become a "slum' area and devalua Ce all surroundin.- propert,'; G) Ouz- present streets are not prepared Eor the traffic Con.g2stion outlined; 5) On page 3, pa,a�raph 2, 1t 15 St3 ted 'tC18 membership of $20,000 is transferrable: to whoa might it ba transferred?; f-el the elderly b) We teachers can find a better all -,ear liVi^.o area'( traffic and ot.1P_r problems ire ncc2Ji:able: and 23here their StYllCtur2 SiZ23 7) We are in=o_med that this Dro ject will be ' tax -=Tees. Department of Environ---tal Service- June i4. i97s 45275 Prickly Bear La Palm Deserts Calif, J_-b0 Gentlemen: Re: Environmental Impact Repo=-t on the proposed Teacher Aid and Retirement Services Palm Desert Project prepared by Rnvista Inc. and T, 'Harold Houslev We object to the above captioned project for the followings reasons: 1) Too high density; 2) footage of the living quarters are inadequate and much too small; certainly not in conformance with surrounding hones of tax- payers; 3) Comparable homes for the elderly in California have gone bankrupt and we fear the same, could happen to this project and, in its present state of small living quarters, it could become a '•'slum" area and devaluate all surrounding property; 4) Our present streets are not designed for the traffic congestion outlined; 5) On page 3, paragraph 2, it, is stated the membership of *20,000 is transferrable;=:to whom might it be transferred^: b) We feel the elderly teachers can find a better "all -year living area" where their structure, traffic and other problems are acceptable; i) We are informed the Nolan estate has retained a parcel of land 601x120' commencing at Skyward and proceeding southerly, in that area k=,n as Chia Drive, thereby prohibit- ing access and/or ingress/egress to this development, This would force all traffic into the residential areas of Skyward, Eel Air Road and Homestead Roads which cannot handle this load of traffic and it would endanger lives of -children; and S) We are informed that this project will be "tax free"Jdhy? 1.z 9444 24, 1978 Depaurent og Env4hopviantat Sewaces 45275 PtirJ&tq Peet Xane Pa t Deactt, Ca. 92260 Pe: £fu itocwsentat 9rzcct e-^oat on the o-Onclect 1eacFteJc n^ic1 and r�o<t,e- aent 3eaett Ato`ect p'leo'cted by £rwi4ta 94-- cnd 9. RrAo.td IdoueeL r Gent ,gen: ghVe gecc wt rid and Pei i tereent Se+rvec" anuue&ed each•,ted, d that a.+rned .the n_et i- tion- oba eCVna: -to vlE4 p to;-eet with d tet-t" datM llurze 28, 1978. .? have dtav,% ed ,the.+.t aep- ec✓te uvtj and hove gone over the46 Citovndd 9 obi ca- note thrrc eue4 to .this unwanted pao�ect, eapeci� catt yoar attention .o t/iei t 9terL 7, wh,icA teach: "91 -the P2ocect 6Ul:y? ghe Ca' ,'ornr a `Jecehe 4 Ra don i.c,:t-i.on tZee ce tta,n o ba4 exer.rt.ion,i vxu!ea Cci� .'ofirt a Law'Aoi,, p opty .tor tea. C�v t Cow-�e.t be),i ea dial• .the dubjeat paope�tty wii,tt be exe,;:pt. T. 9-- 41xu .d be noted ,that ovit p2o�eCi wocurd have no in�act on tr'z ac voL ayatert wh c/z h� o .calLr co,!)cta ove2 orte-hat''o, each rho^�-zty tax brLL and that Pate. doea' not now have a pnopetttrl tax.» 9 have paid taK ;n ,the State o¢l Catico-cnia. �ot�vett over d0-yeat4; 28 yec-ca o� -thoae tc>C^a wen to .t'oi Pn-e.ted County crud 22 yeah os,- -toxeA were aic. 'to 1?�uer�%de County (Plat 3eae&t atea), and' 9 have reeve t had a � .in the Ca�:'o�u-t&-, achood i. Marrbe 9 ahowtd demand 0 �tcbcte� Nayul o�' -the 2eii- :_&a4 0 Pates De/.evt have �tetited on T'ar deya Juyula--then xhe pen�.ion -, ven teaciaet..f. and now we ate expected .to beat •the. -it p�to aorta o tcxei, Dylan we have aLiaMa contxibttted to the nena,ion g,LYd t'ney now tecewe. U)044e, y, thw.i,L.t be a concczration o r_he at,e. q, and when you c.,e nat -LLiteYLU2r to �. e 6&e, o' &-s cmbud =e d✓aenthe Cononeit till ceUIuv-„ `9,'Wtl w-i,Lt be the 2ec p,ieix e o� evetq p,-ctc ,ion to,z Police., ;5Ze to t"e,, alcwxs Scwice which, cte incLtal8d .n ours taxed, avid we aee no tea4on-to pcu� thew pao data. gc.NaU/, _ri don't nee lww orvt "uor -s` ctity can as ord the -Lu &-q o-` try%✓ e.utence, I&.q t2wLg rloura, a >d. `Kathe&i, a R. C din 72992 net rtin 9)ad Pa)-,! D�tt, Ca. 92260 0 0 AGENCIES NOTIFIED OF TARS PROJECT EIR Lowell 0. Weeks Coachella Valley ;County Water District Alan K. Straezer Southern California Air Pollution Control District Joe Richards County of Riverside Planning Commission Harold Horsley U.S. Post Office, Palm Desert Joe Benes or James De Friend Coachella Valley Television Ben Dobbins Riverside County Road Department Gary Wiedle Coachella Valley Association of Governments D.R. MacPherson College of the Desert Don Shayler Pacific Rim Environmental Consultants Richard Rust University of California at Riverside Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District Southern California Association of Governments R.W. Riddel - Paul Weldon Southern California Gas Company Roger Harlow Desert Sands Unified School District Kermit Martin Southern California Edison Company ^ r _ Page Two D.M. Pinkstaff General Telephone Company Karen Fowler Living Desert Reserve Jim Langdon Palm Desert Disposal Services, Inc. Stanley Sayles Palm Desert Community Services District Moe Kazen Regional Water Quality Control Board Lloyd Rogers Riverside County Health Department Todd Beeler Riverside County Planning Department Concerned Citizens of Palm Desert Captain Barnes Riverside County Fire Department Fred Griggs, Jr. Silver Spur Ranchers Association Palm Desert Public Library Lt. Froemming Riverside County Sheriff's Department Coachella Valley Regional Library To: State of California The Resources Agency Secretary for Resources 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 From: City of Palm Desert 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane P. O. Box 1977 Palm Desert, CA 92.260 NOTICE OF COMPLETION Project Title: Teacher Aid and Retirement Services (TARS) Project Project Location: The 11.1 + acre site is located in the south- central portion of the City of Palm Desert. More specifically, the project site is situated to the east of Alamo Drive, to the south of Sky- ward Nay, and westerly of Chia Drive (extended), also known as Arrow Trail south of the project site. Project Description: The proposed project, a retirement community to be owned and operated by the Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services (TARS), is the development of 72 residential units on approximately 11.1 acres of land, with a density of about 6.5 dwelling units per gross acre. The project will have 18 buildings, with 4 units in each building with a total of 12 two -bedroom units and 60 one -bedroom units. Lead Agency: City of Palm Desert Department of Environmental Services Copies of EIR are available at: Palm Desert City Hall Palm Desert Public Library College of the Desert Palm Desert Post Office Coachella Valley Regional Library Review Period: 45 days (Slay 15, 1978 to June 30, 1978) Contact Person: Ron Knippel (714) 346-0611 ext. 53 off :-_FMD_aM 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 May 15, 1978 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 -LEGAL NOTICE CITY OF PALM DESERT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a draft Environmental Impact Report has been completed for a proposed retirement community for the Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services to be located on an 11.1 acre site in the south-central portion of the City of Palm Desert, Riverside County, California. The draft EIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and Resolution No. 78-32 of the City of Palm Desert. Any interested citizen wishing to comment on the draft document must submit writ- ten comments no later than June 30, 1978,to the Department of Environmental Services, Palm Desert City Hall, 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, Cali- fornia, 92260. Copies of the draft EIR are available for review at: Palm Desert City Hall; Palm Desert Branch Library; Palm Desert Post Office; College of the Desert; and Coachella Valley Regional Library. SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California PUBLISH: Palm Desert Post May 15, 1978 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CAUFORNIA92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 May 15, 1978 Dear Sir: Attached hereto is a copy of a draft Environmental Impact Report for a proposed retirement community for the Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retire- ment Services to be located on an 11.1 acre site in the south-central portion of the City of Palm Desert. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. of 1970 and Re- solution No. 78-32 of the City of Palm Desert, the draft EIR must be made available for review by the public 45 days prior to action by the approving agency of the project. Accordingly, the copy of the draft EIR enclosed herewith is provided for your information and as a reference source to facilitate public review. June 30, 1978, ends the public review period. We would, therefore, ap- preciate your cooperation in assisting the City in fulfilling its statua- tory responsibility by making this document readily available to the public until the above date. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Ronald R. Knippel of our staff at (714) 346-0611 ext. 53. truly yours, Paul A. Williams, A.I.P. Director of Environmental Services rk/pw/ks Enc. 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 May 15, 1978 Dear Sir: Attached hereto is a copy of a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for a proposed retirement community for the Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services to be located on an 11.1 acre site in the south- central portion of the City of Palm Desert. The EIR was prepared pur- suant to the California Envirormental Quality Act of 1970 and Resolution. No. 78-321 of the City of Palm Desert and is transmitted herewith for your review and comments. Comments on the draft EIR should address probable impacts of the project on the natural environment, such as water and air pollution, and on pub- lic resources, such as utilities and public services. The review period for this draft document is 45 days. Accordingly, com- ments must be received in the office of Department of Environmental Ser- vices no later than June 30, 1978. If comments are not received by that date it will be assumed that you have no comments to make. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesi- tate to contact Mr. Ronald R. Knippel of our staff at (714) 346-0611 ext. 53. truly yours, Paul A. Williams, A.I.P. Director of Environmental Services rk/pw/ks Enc. ___...ER'I CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS :. -600 South Commonwealth Avenue, Suite 1000, Los Angeles, California 90005 May 31, 1973 _ •'� j. �,, s __`., The Si -weekly Clearinghouse Listing As distributed to provide your agency with information concern- ing federally assisted project proposals as covered by OMB Circular A-95. In addition, weiigciudz notification regarding environmental document reports on State -funded or State -initiated projects, or ocumers--plans and repots --are Listing, pShould 5you awishncopies Aofdthesendo uments,Pleasercontact SCAG. at the �Ty L&IieSEH,/ICES .opp4l.�Lf DESERT The Listing is organized by counties. Projects in each county are grouped by type of review (A-95's; Environmental Documents; State Plans; Local Plans; State -Funded Projects) and funding sources. Projects which have multi -county impacts that have been identified during the initial processing of applications have been cross-referenced by county. State plans and other multi - county plans, projects and proposals are grouped under Multi -County heading at the beginning of the Listino. _ Should you wish to indicate the interest of your jurisdiction and/or comment on a proposed project's relationship to comprehensive planning, areawide coordination or environmental impacts, please contact Gayle Chick (213). 385-1000, Extension 372, prior to: - June 14, 1978 SCAG DOCUMENTS (program) Southern California Association of Governments SLAG File Number: MC-7g76-SO Draft 1978 Regional Transportation Plan SCAG has prepared the Draft Regionwide Multi -modal Transportation Plan. The documents includes: overall goals and objectives; and a description of muitimodal program development and policies and actions for specific modes, including transit, highways, airports, maritime, and rail_ Comments should be received by July 7, 1978. The Plan will affect the Counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura. Southern California Association of Governments MC-7993-SD Draft Report, "Areawide Policy Alternatives for 'dater Quality Management", 208-23, May 1978 The Draft Report describes and evaluates 25 water quality issues and policies for use in the South Coast 208 Program. Public workshops and hearings on the report will be held during May and June, 1978. Comments on the Draft -Report should reach SCAG by June 30, 1973. MULTI=COUNTY PROJECTS A-95: Coastal Manaaer..ent - DOC California Coastal Commission MC-7989-SP Coastal Energy Impact Program S190,000 (Project Cost) / S190,000 (Grant Request) The Commission is applying for funds under Section 308 (b)(a)(c) of the Coastal Energy impact Program. The grant will be used for the design and implementation of programs and strategies to Prevent, reduce or ameliorate losses of environmental and recreational resources in the State's coastal zone. A-95: Urban Mass Transit - UMTA/OOT Southern California Association of Governments MC-8020-''T Overall Transportation 'Work Program for FY 1978-79 S3,350,000 / S2,680,000 Funds requested for developnent of the Regional Transportation Plan as required by Federal and State law and regulations. Application is for comprehensive work program with portions of study beino conducted by counties, cities, and transit districts in the region. UMTA funds requested are combined with HUD, FAA, EPA, Federal Highway Administration Act, State and local match in the SLAG overall work program. A-95:. Ornibus Crime Control Act - LEAA/OCJP Tri County Council on Criminal Justice- MC-loll-CJ 1978 Comprehensive Criminal Justice Plan and Juvenile Justice and Oelincuency prevention Plan The Tri County Council has submitted a Plan analyzing the incidence of crime: and the availaple resources in the criminal justice system, and a plan for the expenditure of local, State, and federal money endorsed by local and (tri-county) reaional cormittees. The Plans affect San Bernardino, Imperial and Riverside Counties. A Older=merican Act - PEW Santa Monica Hospital Medical Center MC-7960-AG Comprehensive Com. unity Care System for Partially Sichted Older Persons Funds requested to establish a yodel project to develop a comprehensive community care system for the partially sighted elderly. The program is designed to assist these-ersons to carry out a fullrange of activities. Funding amount not determineC at this date. Los Angeles and Orange Counties will to serve] oy this program. May 31, 1978 Page 12 RIVERSIDE COUNTY (cont'd) Environmental Documents (cont'd) City of Palm Desert RI-8016-ED Teacher .Aid and Retirement Services Palm Desert Project A Draft Environmental Impact Report has been submitted for a proposed retirement community to be located on an 11.1-acre site in the south-central portion of the City of Palm Desert. The project will include 72 units, a recreation building, swimming pool and pond. A zone chance from single- family to multi -family residential use will be required. The project area is bounded by Alamo Drive, Skyward Way, and Chia Drive (also known as Arrow Trail). SCAG Documents Southern California Association of Governments 4!C-7976-SO Draft 1978 Regional Transportation Plan See MC-7976-HCO Southern California Association of Governments MC-7998-SD Draft Report, "Areawide Policy Alternatives for Water Quality Management", 208-23, May 1978 See MC-7998-SO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY A-95: Urban Mass Transit - UMTA/DOT Southern California Association of Governments MC-802044T Overall Transportation Work Program for FY 1978-79 S3,350,000 / S2,680,000 See 14C-6020-MT A-95: 'dater Pollution - EPA Mojave Water Agency SS-7986-WP Wastewater Facilities Needs of Unsewered Communities S200,000 / S150,000 / S25,000 (State) The project is a request for a Step 1 grant and consists of a plan of study to determine the feasibility of interceptor sewer lines to the City of Adelanto, the Apple Valley County Water District, and the Hesperia County Water District in San Bernardino County. The study will also cover the feasibility of collector systems for these areas. A-95: Omnibus Crime Control Act - LE.AA/GCJP Tri County Council on Criminal Justice MC-7977-CJ 1978 Comprehensive Criminal Justice Plan and Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Plan See MC-7977-CJ A-95: Older American Act - HEW City of Fontana SB-7981-AG Senior Citizen Center Alteration Project 513,750 / S10.312 Funds requested to expand the central room of the Senior Center by enclosing the east and west patios. This alternation will result in an additional 558 square feet of usable space for recreational and grouo activities. County of San Bernardino SS-7982-AG Senior Citizen Center Improvements Project S3,168 / S3,158 Funds requested to repair and resurface the existing parking lot and to construct a concrete shuffleboard court at the New Leisure Center. A-9i: Outdoor Recreation Assistance Proaram - DOI/SOR California State Department of 'Water Resources MC-7991-LW Ritter Canyon Recreation Area 5400,000 / 5200,000 See MC-7991-LW A-95: Community Action - CSA Merced County Commmnity Action Agency 4C-8016-CA Federal Food Programs ' S250,000 / S250,300 See 4C-8016-CA 72 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE July 6, 1978 APPLICANT Ruraau of TParhpr Aid and Retirement Services Inc Angplae CA 90017 CASE No.: C/Z 05-78, CU 05-78(EIR), DP 10-78 and 133MF The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of July 5. 1978 XX CONTINUED TO August 1, 1978 DENIED APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PLACED ON THE AGENDA OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CONCURRENCE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION. PLACED ON THE AGENDA OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF 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. PAUL A. WILLIAMS, SECRETARY PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSSION cc: Applicant C.V.C.W.D. File Minutes Palm Desert Planning Commission July 5, 1978 Page Seven VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont.) C. Case Nos. DP 09-78 and 126MF (Cont.) Commissioner Fleshman noted the following items that would be needed prior to the cases being discussed or acted on: Detail of road crossing the channel; detail of all exterior walls and how they relate to adjacent property; specifics on channel and how it will carry the water; the units on Arrow Trail are not appropriate; need 40 ft. setbacks along Silver Spur area; no more than 2 units joined together; minimum 1,600 to 2,100 sq. ft. units are appropriate as proposed; and, circulation, no more than 20% of the units should exit on Alamo. On a motion by Commissioner Snyder, seconded by Commissioner Fleshman, the cases were continued to the meeting of August 1, 1978; carried unanimously (5-0). D. Case No . C/Z 0 C/Z 05-78(EIR), DP 10-78, and 133MF, B OF TEACHER AID AND RETIREMENT SERVICES, Applicant. Mr. Williams noted that a written request for a continuance had been received and Staff recommended that the cases be continued to the August 1st meeting. On a motion by Commissioner Snyder, seconded by Commissioner Fleshman, the cases were continued to August 1, 1978; carried unani- mously (5-0). Commissioner Fleshman left the room due to a conflict of interest. E. Case No. TT 12784, SILVER SPUR ASSOCIATES, Applicant Request for approval of a Tentative Map which would create a 2-lot subdivision to provide for 100 air- space condominiums and recreational amenities on approximately 10 acres within the PR-7 zone located north of Irontree Drive, west of Mariposa Drive and south of Foxtail Lane. Mr. Williams reviewed the case and noted points of the proposed Development Plan. He pointed out the memorandum received from the Fire Marshal and letters freceived regarding concerns with the density and traffic. Mr. Williams noted Staff's recommendation of approval and reviewed the various conditions of approval. Chairman Berkey asked if density was part of the approval sought. Mr. Williams noted that it was. Chairman Berkey declared the Public Hearing open and asked if the applicant wished to speak at this time. LARRY SPICER, representing Ironwood Country Club, stated that this project was not proposed as a CONCERNS WITH CTA REZONING REQUEST 1. Existing zoning would permit maximum of 36 dwelling units. Proposed zoning would permit 81 dwelling units. (11.1 + acre site) 2. Adjacent land uses are residential permitting a maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre. 3. Proposed project is not compatible with existing land uses or zoning. 4. Projects distance from commercial center is excessive for the elderly. (2.5 miles) 5. Letters of objection received. a. opposed - 7 signatures b. opposed - 1 " C. opposed - 21 " d. opposed - 1 " e. opposed - 1 " f. no comment - 1 " g. Qualified - 1 " 1) requires notice of intent from CVCWD 2) "reasonable use" of pond? h. opposed - 7 signatures i. opposed - 1 it 6. Transportation circulation considerations. �s as�c2. M 9-/-. 4e 1 ,ems WHL-�kS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, nas held a duly notice6 Public Hearing on October 14, 1976, on the Final Environmental impact Report on a single-family re<idential subdivision submitted by U. S. LIFE SAYINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIAIP% and located on a SC -acre site east of Portola Avenue, west of Deep Canyon Road, extended, and south of the Nhitewater River Storm Channel, more particularly described as: A portion of 0e S060rest 1/4, Section 16 T.55, R.6E, SBB 6 M WHEREAS, said Environmental Impact Report dues conform to the pr,visions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and the Palm Desert Resolution Number 74-14, on Envfionental Quality Procedure. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the Cityy of Palm Desert as follows: That it does hereby certify as complete that certain Final Environmental impact Report attached hereto as Exhibit 'A', and incorporated by reference herein as though fully set forth at length, together with all comments received from other agencies, organizations, and community groups thereon, and the responses to such comments prepared by the City staff, as the Certified Final Environmental impact Report for the Park view Subdivision project. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on the 14th day of October, 1976, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: McPherson, Mullins, Newbrander, Seidler 6 Brush HOES: Morse 0ww (IN$thaT ®S r s�,.n,,,, 43-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT. CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 /YLd Janice e A50 Fairn, a, s L. Karnowski Va. 22030 0 o:ff IFIZl rrsm =®=onV070 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CAUFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 June 12, 1978 LEGAL NOTICE CITY of PALM DESERT Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 10,000 to R-2 6,000 on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Avenue. CASE NO. CZ 05-78 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Robert N. Ricciardi for approval of a Change of Zone from the R-1 10,000 (Single-family Residential, minimum 10,000 sq.ft. lot size) zone to the R-2 6,000 (Single-family Residential, minimum 6,000 sq.ft. lot area/d.u.) zone on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, more particularly described as: APN 630-190-012 TACK —ROAD C Z 05-78 R-I 10,000 1 .,ROAD TO - �- - R-2 6, o00 HOMESTEAD AD R� o _i sj - - B-1 A 2_T B Remit EN AI Cuftll�J' ' OO s IT1 t51 11D(:!S0=c&01 i27Q 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT,CAUFORNIA92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 June 12, 1978 LEGAL NOTICE CITY OF PALM DESERT Request for approval of a Development Plan to provide for a 72-unit Retirement Apartment Development with a community room and recreational area on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive. CASE NO. DP 10-78 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Robert Ricciardi to provide for a 72-unit retirement apartment development with a community room and recreational area on approximately 11 acres within the R-2 6,000 (Single-family residential, minimum 6,000 sq.ft./d.u.)zone, located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, more particularly described as: APN 630-190-012 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 349-06I1 w U F. tiO ,,.r oy > W �'r�•�s W W z a Z h S & C Development Co. l 1153 San Lucas Road` Palm Springs, Ca. 92aE2 Cu$fl� (m): ff 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CAU FORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 June 12, 1978 LEGAL NOTICE CITY of PALM DESERT Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 10,000 to R-2 6,000 on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Avenue. CASE NO. CZ 05-78 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Robert N. Ricciardi for approval of a Change of Zone from the R-1 10,000 (Single-family Residential, minimum 10,000 sq.ft. lot size) zone to the R-2 6,000 (Single-family Residential, minimum 6,000 sq.ft. lot area/d.u.) zone on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, more particularly described as: APN 630-190-012 HAYSTACK -ROAD R-1 10,000 TO R-2 b,000 CZ 05-78 -HOME S'EAD---r-BQAD� 4 Y>_RtN 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 June 12, 1978 LEGAL NOTICE CITY OF PALM DESERT Request for approval of a Development Plan to provide for a 72-unit Retirement Apartment Development with a community room and recreational area on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive. CASE NO. DP 10-78 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Robert Ricciardi to provide for a 72-unit retirement apartment development with a community room and recreational area on approximately 11 acres within the R-2 6,000 (Single-family residential, minimum 6,000 sq.ft./d.u.)zone, located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, more particularly described as: APN 630-190-012 PROOF )L ISLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIAj ss. County of Riverside I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of PALM DESERT POST, a newspaper of general circu- lation, published weekly, in Palm Desert, County of Riverside, and which newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Riverside, State of California, under date of October 5, 1964, Case Number 83658; that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates to -wit: 6/ 7-5 - - --- - ------ - ------ _ .. I certify (or declare) under penalty or perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature Date --- -- - --Junk 15 ----- 197_8 at Palm Desert, California i� This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp Proof of Publication of City_ of Palm De_a_ert----_..------------ ----__-- Casa__ NII.- CZ_A5_-T8-_ - - Paste clipping of Notice SECURELY In This Space CITY-ALM DESrRT PeaueSt for approval of a Change of Zone fron4-1 10.000 to R-2 6,000 on approximately 11 acres located eastot Alamo, south of Skvwwtl Way and West of Chia Avenue. NOTICE IS HEREBY O GIVEN se No. Ctthat aBpublic hearing will be field before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a a �H reaae5f ay K RICClaral r approval at a Change M Lade' from the R-I ISingl'f ft. lot y Residential, nlinimOm 10,0pp sq. size to R-g minimum 6.000 sq. ft. I/br acres located A 000 (Single-family Residehlial, u.' zone on aoproximdfehl . ih east of o, Chia Drive, more art Of Skyward Way and westaT ribetl as. pariicu APN 190-012 SAID public hewing will be on Wednesday, Jul 1978, at hewn. 00 p m. in the Council Chambers in the Palm DeserT City Hall, PAUL A. WILLIAMS. Secretary nd p Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, California, at which time Palm Desert Planning Commission ntl place, all interested M"50lls we invited to attend and be 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 Nolan Alvasii Ramira R. Richman 121 S. Palm Canyon Drive 'Ili Palm SpringS, Ca. 92262 aw JN,�1p (� 6 Z W zO UA Yy/ 0 Z U w G:5-(I� (M)if 1PDMM =, =D®=c�no-Q7v 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 June 12, 1978 LEGAL NOTICE CITY of PALM DESERT Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 10,000 to R-2 6,000 on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Avenue. CASE NO. CZ 05-78 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Robert N. Ricciardi for approval of a Change of Zone from the R-1 10,000 (Single-family Residential, minimum 10,000 sq.ft. lot size) zone to the R-2 6,000 (Single-family Residential, minimum 6,000 sq.ft. lot area/d.u.) zone on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, more particularly described as: -HAYSTACK�ROAC APN 630-190-012 `,� j R-I 10,000 �� TO R-2 6,000 CZ 05-78 a ,,!N Z 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 June 12, 1978 LEGAL NOTICE CITY OF PALM DESERT Request for approval of a Development Plan to provide for a 72-unit Retirement Apartment Development with a community room and recreational area on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive. CASE NO. DP 10-78 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Robert Ricciardi to provide for a 72-unit retirement apartment development with a community room and recreational area on approximately 11 acres within the R-2 6,000 (Single-family residential, minimum 6,000 sq.ft./d.u.)zone, located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, more particularly described as: APN 630-190-012 T C`A. /80/, /806 ...•.. 31172 inn �s «!� RS. 54/29 °ei, TRACT NO.4980-/ MS 77140-41 TRACT No. 4980 M.8. 90/43 - 45 Oo/o. 0 L.O.; M.B. 50135,54; 50054-66-4i64 R/S 5412R por of S. 112 of SW 114 of SEC. 29, T55, R 6E m1 6 76 tAt. C C t sgr A 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Case No.: CZ 05-78 Project: Change of Zone Applicant: Robert H. Ricciardi Enclosed please find materials describing a project for which the following is being requested: approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 10,000 to R-2 6,000 on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive. The attached data was prepared by the applicant and is being forwarded to you for comments and recommended Conditions of Approval. The City is interested in the probable impacts on the natural environment (e.g. water and air pollution) and on public resources (e.g. demand for schools, hospitals, parks, power generation, sewage treatment, etc.) Your comments and recommended conditions of approval must be received by this office prior to 5:00 p.m. June 23 , 1978, in order to be discussed by the Land Division Committee at their meeting of June 28th. The Land Division Committee (comprised of Director of Environmental Services, City Building Official, City Engineer, Fire Marshal and a representative of CVCWD) will discuss the comments and recommended conditions of approval and will forward them to the Planning Commission through the staff report. Any information received by this office after the receipt deadline will not be discussed by the Land Division Com- mittee nor will it be forwarded to the Planning Commission for consid- eration. Very truly yours, Paul A. Williams Director of Environmental Services P,IJ; S PLEASE RETURN MAP WITH COMMENTS CIRCULATION LIST FOR ALL CASES Circulation of Tentative Maps, Parcel Maps, CUP's, GPA's, etc: REVIEW COMMITTEE: ✓1. Palm Desert Director of Environmental Services - Paul Williams ✓A. Palm Desert Director of Building & Safety - Jim Hill UA Palm Desert Director of Public Works - L. Clyde Beebe (-X Palm Desert Fire Marshall - Bud Engel 5. Robert P. Brock Office of Road Commissioner and County Surveyor Administration Office Building, Room 313 46-209 Oasis Street Indio, California 92201 (Phone: 347-8511, ext 267) 6. Lloyd Rogers / Supervisor - Riverside County Health Department County Administration Building, Room.. 46-209 Oasis Street Indio, California 92201 (Phone: 347-8511, ext 287) 7. Lowell 0. Weeks General Manager - Chief Engineer Coachella Valley County Water District (C.V.C.W.D.) P. 0. Box 1058 Coachella, California 92236 (Phone: (714) 398-2651) 8. R. J. Lowry Project Development Services California Department of Transportation P. 0. Box 231 San Bernardino, California 92403 (Phone: (714) 383-4671) 9. _ Director of Planning and Building City of Indian Wells 45-300 Club Drive Indian Wells, California 92260 (Phone: 345-2831) 10. Director of Planning City of Rancho Mirage 69-825 Highway 111 Rancho Mirage, California 92270 (Phone: 328-8871) 11. Kermit Martin Southern California Edison Company P. 0. Box 203 Palm Desert, California 92260 (Phone: 346-8660) 12. Chuck Morris Circulation List for All Cases Page Two 14. Roger Harlow Director - Pupil Personnel Service Desert Sands Unified School District 83-049 Avenue 46 Indio, California 92201 (Phone: 347-4071) 15. Jim Langdon Palm Desert Disposal Services, Inc. 36-711 Cathedral Canyon Drive P. 0. Drawer LL Cathedral City, California 92234 (Phone: 328-2585 or 328-4687) 16. Stanley Sayles President, Palm Desert Community Services District 44-500 Portola Avenue Palm Desert, California 92260 (Phone: 346-6338) 17. Regional Water Quality Control Board 737271 Highway 111, Suite 21 Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 (Phone: ) 18. Harold Horsley Foreman/Mails U. S. Post Office Palm Desert, California 92260 (Phone: 346-3864) 19. Joe Benes Vice President & General Manager Coachella Valley Television P. 0. Box 368 Palm Desert, California 92260 (Phone: 346-8157) 20. Don McNeely President - Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce P. 0. Box 908 Palm Desert, California 92260 (Phone: 346-6111) 21. Scott McClellan, Senior Planner Riverside County Planning Commission County Administration Building, Room 304 46-209 Oasis Street Indio, California 92201 (Phone: 22. James Whitehead Superintendent - District 6 State Parks and Recreation 1350 Front Street, Room 6054 San Diego, California 92101 347-8511, ext. 277, 278, & 279) (Phone: (714) 236-7411) 23. Les Pricer Redevelopment Agency 73-677 Highway 111 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CAUFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611 June 12, 1978 LEGAL NOTICE CITY of PALM DESERT Request for approval of a Change of Zone from R-1 10,000 to R-2 6,000 on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Avenue. CASE NO. CZ 05-78 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Robert N. Ricciardi for approval of a Change of Zone from the R-1 10,000 (Single-family Residential, minimum 10,000 sq.ft. lot size) zone to the R-2 6,000 (Single-family Residential, minimum 6,000 sq.ft. lot area/d.u.) zone on approximately 11 acres located east of Alamo, south of Skyward Way and west of Chia Drive, more particularly described as: APN 630-190-012 - NA Y STACK- ROAD CZ 05-78 R-1 10,000 - -- _ IN 6,000 HMO MIES'EA�ROAD- R 9RiK& �� ***CHANGE OF ZONE*** DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES PLANNING DIVISION Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services (TAR) Applicant ( please oval) 1125 West Sixth Street Mailing Address Los Angeles, California City state REQUEST: (Describe specific nature of approval requested) Approval of 72 Unit Apartment Development with a Community Room and Recreational Area PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: See Attached Sheet ASSESSOR IS PARCEL NO. EXISTING ZONING Property Owner Authorization THE AGREEMENT ABSOLVING THE CITY OF I DO BY MY SIGNATURI Applicants Signature 0 (FOR STAFF USE ONLY) ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS ❑ MINISTERIAL ACT E.A. N.. ❑ CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION ❑ NEGATIVE DECLARATION ❑ OTHER 32S (213) 482-5660 Telephone 90017 Zip- Code THEY A fT1 OWNER (5) OFT PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN AND HER BY GIVE AUTHOR- CPP { f/ ✓ DA E -- AALV O ANY DEED RESTRICTIONS. CITY OF PALM D ERT OF ALL LIABILITIES REGARDING NY DEED RES- T MAY BE APP ABLE TO THE PROPERTY DES IBED REIN. 7AiE Imo' GATE ACCEPTED BY CASE No. (2 o.S=Z y� REFERENCE CASE NO. ��' 9 /3,3 oo,— I Supporting Data: 1. Name of Applicant Bureau of Teacher Aid and Retirement Services (TAR) 2. This request is made for property described as: Exact legal description See Attached Sheet 3. Total area of site: more than i zone requested, give 4. Existing Zoning: R-1 - 10,000 describe here or attach map 5. Proposed Zoning: R-2 - 600 describe here or attach map 6. Assessor's Parcel No.: East of Alamo, to the south of Skyward Way 7. The property is located at Westerly of Chia Drive street address between and street street 8. The present use of the property is Vacant 9. General Plan Designation: R-1 - 3 - 5 Per Acre 10. The applicant offers the following reasons to justify the request for a Change of Zone: The existinq zoninq would allow 40 3 - 4 Bedroom Residential Units or aooroximatel 140 people (3.5 people per unit). This proposed TAR Development averages 1.2 people per unit. There are 72 units contemplated or 86 people total (See Section 2.04 Project Characteristics Page 8 TAR Environmental Report). This project will be less dense than existing zoning. 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 pena y of perjury t at the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at this 5 day of 19 79 NAME AND ADDRESSES OF FOR PUBLIC HEARING OM PROPERTY OWNERS CASE NO. 8-VI JOB NO. PARCEL NO. NAME ADDRESS Murphey Thomas A. Jr., 73-186 Somera Rd. i30-301-003 Murphey, Marguerite S. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 i30-301-004 Purpura Michael S. P. 0. Box 817 Purpura Josephine H. La Quinta, Calif. 92253 i30-301-005 Nugent Michael A. 2244 Lansdowne Rd. Nugent Leora Victoria B. C. Canada 006 " i30-301-007 Granik Steven A. 73-086 Somera Rd. Granik Jeanette I. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 i30-301-008 Calddonian Lands Ltd. 531 E. #3 Road Richmond, B C Canada i30-301-009 Bell Anita J. 73-040 Somera Rd. Bell Jeffrey P. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 i30-302-002 Daino Donald F. 73-043 Somera Rd. Daino Nancy J. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 i30-302-003 Mathis Dennis H. 73-067 Somera Rd. Mathis Janet M. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 i30-302-004 Smith Glenn D. 73-087 Somera Rd. Watkins Lawrence E. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 i30-302-005 S & C Development Co. P. 0. Box 358 Huntington Valley, Pa. 19006 NAME AND ADDRESSES OF PROPERTY OWNERS FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE NO. JOB NO. PARCEL NO. NAME ADDRESS 30-302-006 S & C Development Co. 1153 San Lucas Rd. Palm Springs, Ca. 92262 30-302-007 Winner Allan M 73-163 Somera Rd. Winner Sylvia D. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 30-302-008 Karnowski Janice A. 5220 Claridge Ct. Karnowski Dennis L. Fairvax, Va. 22030 30-302-009 Sacher Stephen G. 73-211 Somera Rd. Sacher Marie E. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 30-302-010 Garcia Ernesto 73-237 Somera Rd. Garcia Raquel Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 30-303-001 pall Jessie J. 73-015 Skyward Way a Irene A. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 30-303-002 Nugent Leora 2244 Lansdowne Rd. Nugent Michael A. Victoria BC Canada 30-303-003 S & C Devlopment Co. P. 0. Box 358 Huntington Valley, Pa. 19006 30-303-004 Plotkin Helen 3325 Wrightwood Dr. Plotkin Sheldon Studio City, Calif. 91604 30-303-005 Burton Susan 73-082 Bel Air Rd. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 30-303-006 Nugent Michael A. 2244 Lansdowne Rd. Nugent Leora Victoria BC Canada NAME AND ADDRESSES OF PROPERTY OWNERS FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE NO. JOB NO. PARCEL NO. NAME ADDRESS 630-303-007 Nugent Leora 2244 Lansdowne Rd. Nugent Michael A. Victoria BC Canada 630-303-008 Sommer Rene P. 16476 Refugio Rd. Sommer Janice E. Encino, Calif. 631-170-001 Nolan Alvasina 121 S. Palm Canyon Drive Ramira R. Richman Palm Springs, Calif. 92262 631-181-002 Baldwin Henry P. Jr. 860 S. Lorraine Blvd. Baldwin Virginia M. Los Angeles, Calif. 90005 631-181-003 Wilson Wayne A. 73-320 Buckboard Trail Wilson Harriet E. Palm Desert, California 92260 631-182-001 Siemen Evelyn P. 0. Box 44 Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 631-182-002 Stevenson William E. P. 0. Box 776 Stevenson Elsie M. -Palm Desert, California 92260 631-182-012 Woolard Clifford 73-264 Broken Arrow Trail Woolard Hazel P. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 630-301-001 Norman R. Spitz 73-236 Somera Rd. Cecily S. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 630-301-002 Harold R. Leach 73-210 Somera Rd. Junette G. Palm Desert, California 92260 CERTIFIED PROPERTY OWNERS' LIST AFFIDAVIT STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF PALM DESERT ) I, ROBERT H: RICCIARDI hereby certify that the attached list contains the names and addresses of all persons to whom all property is assessed as they appear on the latest available assess- ment role of the County within the area described on the attached application and -fora distance of -three hundred (300)-feet- from the -exterior 7boundaries- -- - - of the property described on the attached application. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. (signed) (date) CERTIFIED PROPERTY OWNERS' LIST AFFIDAVIT STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF PALM DESERT ) I, ROBERT H RICCIARDI hereby certify that the attached list contains the.names and addresses of all persons to whom all property is assessed as they appear on the latest available assess- ment role of the County within the area described on the attached application —and-for-a-distance of three hundred (300)-feet from the exterior boundaries - - of the property described on the attached application. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. (signed) (date) 0/ 5 00 Thomas A. & Marg.S. Murphey Allan M. & Sylvia D. Winner Wayne A. & Harriet E. Wilson 73-186 Somera Road 73-163 Somera Road 73-320 Buckboard Trail Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Michael S. & Josephine Purpura P.O. Box 817 La Quinta, Calif. 92253 Michael A. & Leora Nugent 2244 Lansdowne Road Victoria, B.C. Canada Steven A. & Jeanette Granik 73-086 Somera Rd Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 Caledonian Lands Ltd. 531 E. #3 Road Richmond, B.C. Canada Anita J. & Jeffrey P. Bell 73-040 Somera Road Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Donald F. & Nancy J 73-043 Somera Road Palm Desert, Calif. Daino 92260 Dennis H. & Janet M. Mathis 73-067 Somera Rd. Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Glenn D. Smith & Lawrence E. Watkins 73-087 son -era Rd. Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 S & C Development Co. P.O. Box 358 Huntington Valley, Pa. 19006 Janice A. & Dennis L. Karnowski 5220 Claridge Ct. Fairvax, Va. 22030 Stephen G. & Marie E. Sacher 73-211 Somera Rd. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 Ernesto & Raquel Garcia 73-237 Somera Rd. Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 Siemen,Evelyn P.O. Box 44 Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 William E. & Elsie M. Stevenson P.O. Box 776 Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Clifford & Hazel P. Woolard 73-264 Broken Arrow Trail Palma Desert, Ca. 92260 Jessie J. & Irene A. Hall Norman R. Spitz 73-015 Skyward Way Cecily S. Spitz Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 73-236 Somera Road Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Michael A. & Leora Nugent Harold R. Leach 2244 Lansdowne Road Junette G. Leach Victoria, B.C. Canada 73-210 Somera Rd. Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Helen & Sheldon Plotkin Bureau of Teacher Aid 3325 Wrightwood Drive and Retirement Services Studio City, Calif. 91604 1125 W. Sixth St. Los Angeles, CA 90017 Susan Burton Robert Ricciardi 73-082 Bel Air Road 73-700 Highway 111 Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Rene P. & Janice E. Sommer 16476 Refugio Road Encino, Calif. C/Z 05-78 t / Nolan Alvasina D41 70/1& Ramira R. Richman 121 S. Palm Canyon Drive Palm Springs, Ca. 92262 S & C Development Co. 1153 San Lucas Road Palm Springs, Ca. 9Z3E2 Henry P. & Virginia M. Baldwin 860 S. Lorraine Blvd. Ins Anaeles. Ca. 90005