Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix C_Cultural Resources Report_RedactedCatavina Residential Development Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration September 2025 Appendix C Cultural Resources Report Catavina Residential Development Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration September 2025 This page intentionally left blank. Office: 760-603-6251 | Fax: 909-974-4004 February 10, 2025 JN 205082 BLUE FERN DEVELOPMENT Kim Molina, President SUBJECT: Cultural Resources Assessment for the Blue Fern Catavina Project in Palm Desert, Riverside County, California Dear Blue Fern Development, In support of the Blue Fern Catavina Project (proposed project), Michael Baker International completed a South Coastal Information Center (SCIC) records search, literature and historical map review, Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File search, archaeological field survey, and buried archaeological site sensitivity analysis to determine if the project area contains historical resources, as defined in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15064.5(a), that may be impacted by the project. The project is subject to CEQA review; the City of Palm Desert (City) is the lead agency. The cultural resources identification efforts identified no cultural resources within the proposed project area. The cultural resources identification study's methods, results, and findings are summarized below. 1.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The approximately 77.8-acre project site is located in Palm Desert in the Coachella Valley in Riverside County (Attachment A, Figure 1, Regional Vicinity). The site is mapped on the Cathedral City and Myoma 7.5-minute United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangle maps within Township 05 South, Range 06 East, Section 5 (Attachment A, Figure 2, Project Location). The project site is south of Frank Sinatra Drive and west of Portola Avenue, with Desert Greens Drive E just west (Attachment A, Figure 3, Project Area). The proposed project includes the development of 546 single- and two-story residences, on-site circulation, utility infrastructure, stormwater improvements, and open space areas. The site is divided into four planning areas to allow for a variety of housing product types. In the northwest portion of the project site, the project will develop 88 single-family units on 5,000- square-foot lots. The northeast portion of the site will be developed with 43 six-pack clustered single-family units, for a total of 255 homes on lots ranging from 2,120 to 2,460 square feet. A total of 103 single-family homes on 3,000-square-foot lots will be constructed in the central portion of the project site. The southern portion will be developed with 100 single-family units on 4,050- square-foot lots. We Make a Difference INTERNATIONAL MBAKERINTL.COM Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 2  Approximately 15.4 acres of common open space will be distributed throughout the project site. Four retention basins totaling 2.78 acres are proposed. The project will dedicate approximately 2.5 acres of public right-of-way along Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue to the City of Palm Desert. The project will be constructed to conform with the City of Palm Desert Zoning Code (Municipal Code Title 25, Zoning), which includes design standards related to building size, height, setback, and materials, as well as landscaping, signage, and other considerations. To minimize visual impacts on existing adjacent residential development, all units along the project’s western and southern boundaries would be single-story. 2.0 SETTING 2.1 Environmental Context The project is in the Coachella Valley in Riverside County, part of the Inland Empire area. The project area is in the northern Salton Trough, an active tectonic basin. The City of Palm Desert is located in the Colorado Desert, a Sonoran Desert subregion. The Sonoran Desert is in southern Arizona, the southeastern corner of California, Sonora Mexico, Baja California, and the Gulf of California (Arizona-Sonoma Desert Museum 2025). The Inland Empire is a region in Southern California, east of Los Angeles County. The Inland Empire extends from the San Gabriel Mountains through the San Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains, formed by the Pacific and North American tectonic (Inland Action 2021). The project area's soil is mapped as Myoma fine sand with 0 to 5 percent slopes (50.4 percent) and 5 to 15 percent slopes (46.7 percent). Water makes up the remaining 2.8 percent of the area. Myoma fine sand is formed from sand blown from recent windblown alluvium fans, and is composed of a combination of very fine sands (National Cooperative Soil Survey [NCSS] n.d; NRCS 2024). Vegetation within Riverside County is primarily characterized by high desert landscape, including salt grass (Distichlis spicata), rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus), creosote bush (Larrea tridentata), goldenhead (Acamptopappus spaerocephalus), hairy lotus (Acmispon strigosus), and burro bush (Ambrosia Dumosa) (NPS 2023; Calscape 2024). The wildlife of this region consists of fringe- toed lizards (Uma inornate), red-diamond rattlesnakes (Crotalusruber), Virginia opossums (Didelphisvirginiana), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus californicus), bobcats (Lynx rufus), coyotes (Canis latrans ochropus), and mountain lions (Puma concolor) (RCRP 2025; RCRCD 2025; RCDAS 2025). Elevations on-site range from approximately 285 feet in the north along Frank Sinatra Drive to 267 feet in the south near Desert Greens Drive. East and west elevations average around 275 feet, with the center elevation at 270 feet. Dried-out ponds in the project area reach a lower elevation of around 261 feet. INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 3  2.2 Lake Cahuilla Environmental conditions in the Colorado Desert area have changed greatly during the millennia of human occupation. Probably the most important environmental change in the Colorado Desert in the past 2,000 years was the formation of Lake Cahuilla, also known geologically as Lake Le Conte and historically as Blake’s Lake. Lake Cahuilla formed numerous times throughout the Pleistocene and Holocene epochs in response to the western diversion of the Colorado River into the Salton Trough. During each filling of Lake Cahuilla, water was impounded north of the barrier created by the Colorado River Delta. The lake continued to fill until the water reached an altitude of 12 meters (40 feet), the minimum crest of the delta at Cerro Prieto, where excess discharge would overflow into the Gulf of California (Waters 1983: 374). The shoreline of the most recent documented stands of Lake Cahuilla extended from about 20 miles south of the international border with Mexico to just northwest of Indio. Inundating the entire lower portion of the Coachella Valley, Lake Cahuilla was approximately 115 miles long, about 34 miles wide, and nearly 320 feet deep; during these periods, the elevation of the lake was 40 feet above mean sea level (Wilke 1976: 53). When inflow from the Colorado River was sufficient to maintain a relatively stable lake level, extensive marshes would have formed around its margins and freshwater fish and shellfish populations would have flourished. Thus, Lake Cahuilla offered an especially productive environment for aboriginal populations of the western Colorado Desert. When filled, Lake Cahuilla was on the Pacific Flyway for migratory birds; hence, ducks, geese, and other migratory birds would have been available. It is likely that 30 years of progressive recession during one of the many occurred during one of the lake’s desiccation phases, which were part of its natural cycles of filling and drying out. These cycles happened multiple times between approximately AD 1200 and 1700, or lowering the surface of the lake by approximately 60 feet, would have sufficiently altered the chemical and ecological balance of the lake to eliminate its economically important plant and animal resources. However, as Lake Cahuilla gradually desiccated, mesquite thickets expanded to follow the retreating shoreline, generating different resource exploitation patterns by the prehistoric inhabitants of the region (Smith and Brock 1998). 2.3 Precontact Context Introduction The Palm Desert area in the Coachella Valley of Southern California boasts a rich prehistoric cultural history shaped by its desert environment, diverse ecological resources, and long-term human adaptation. This region falls within the traditional territory of the Cahuilla people, who have occupied the area for thousands of years. Archaeological evidence indicates a deep history of human habitation, spanning from the Paleoindian period through the Late Prehistoric period. The following cultural chronology provides an overview of prehistoric lifeways in the region. Paleoindian Period (ca. 12,000–8,000 BP) The earliest known human occupation in the Coachella Valley dates to the Paleoindian period, coinciding with the late Pleistocene and early Holocene epochs. During this time, the region was INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 4  significantly wetter than today, featuring pluvial lakes and more extensive grasslands that supported large Pleistocene megafauna such as mammoths, mastodons, and bison. While direct Paleoindian sites are rare in the Palm Desert area, Clovis and other fluted projectile points found in surrounding regions suggest that early hunter-gatherers exploited now-dry lakebeds and river systems (Tang 1993). Sites from this period are typically associated with high mobility, large game hunting, and the use of sophisticated chipped stone tools. Archaic period (ca. 8,000–2,000 BP) Human populations adapted to increasingly scarce water sources as the climate became more arid in the early Holocene. The Archaic period is characterized by a shift toward more generalized foraging, with people relying on small game, plant foods, and freshwater resources found in springs, washes, and along the ancient shorelines of Lake Cahuilla. The presence of Pinto and Gypsum projectile points, as well as milling tools such as manos and metates, suggests a diversified subsistence strategy. Sites from this period often include rock shelters, temporary campsites near water sources, and lithic scatters indicating seasonal movements across the desert landscape (PCAS 2010). During the later part of the Archaic, the periodic filling of ancient Lake Cahuilla—a massive freshwater lake fed by the Colorado River—provided abundant fish and waterfowl, attracting human populations to its shores (PCAS 2010). Archaeological evidence indicates that these lake stands supported substantial human populations, as evidenced by numerous habitation sites along its former shorelines. Late Prehistoric Period (ca. 2,000–450 BP) The Late Prehistoric period marked the development of more complex social and economic systems, including increased sedentism, the introduction of bow and arrow technology, and intensified plant processing. This period corresponds with the rise of the Patayan cultural tradition, associated with Yuman-speaking groups of the Lower Colorado River and the Cahuilla people, who became the dominant group in the Palm Desert region (Riverside Cultural Resources Study 2007). During this time, Lake Cahuilla remained a key environmental feature, supporting large populations when filled. Cahuilla settlements were established along its shoreline, where people practiced fishing, hunting, and plant collection. The Cahuilla also developed extensive trade networks, exchanging goods such as obsidian, marine shells, and processed plant materials with neighboring groups (Riverside Cultural Resources Study 2007). Material culture from this period includes ceramic vessels, which were used for cooking and storage, and steatite artifacts traded from the Channel Islands. Floodplain horticulture also appears along the Colorado River around the same time as the ceramic vessels. New projectile points, such as the Desert Side-notched and Cottonwood Triangular points, show the notable arrival of the bow and arrow (Joan George and Justin Castells 2017). Rock art, trails, and petroglyphs in the region suggest a well-developed ritual and symbolic tradition (PCAS 2010). INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 5  Notably, burial traditions shifted from extended burial to cremation (Joan George and Justin Castells. 2017) The Patayan Pattern marks new artifacts and innovations within the Late Prehistoric Period in the Colorado Desert and far western Arizona. Three phases of Patayan are generally recognized and are defined by changes in pottery and by cultural and demographic shifts of ancient Lake Cahuilla (Joan George and Justin Castells. 2017). Patayan I phase appears to have been confined to the Colorado River vicinity and began approximately 1,200 years ago with the introduction of pottery. Artifacts of this phase typically have higher rates of similarity from artifacts of the Hohokam. Beginning about 950 years ago, The Patayan II phase reveals that new ceramic types show that non-marine clays from the Peninsular Range were being used. Patayan III, beginning approximately 500 years ago, encompassed Peninsular I–III phases and is characterized by new pottery types that reflect changes in settlement and communication patterns among the tribes of the Colorado River and Peninsular Range. This phase continued into the early historic period, ending in the late nineteenth century. The Patayan III peoples include the Cahuilla, who occupied the western Colorado Desert region, and the Quechan, Mojave, and Cocopa of the Colorado River region (Joan George and Justin Castells. 2017). Protohistoric and Ethnohistoric Period (ca. 450 BP–Present) By European contact in the 18th century, the Cahuilla had established a sophisticated social and economic system based on seasonal resource exploitation. They lived in autonomous clans, each controlling specific territories with access to water, food, and trade routes. To sustain their communities, the Cahuilla utilized extensive knowledge of desert plants, including mesquite, agave, and various cacti (Rockport Ranch Cultural Resources Report 2017). Spanish explorers, Mexican ranchers, and later American settlers disrupted traditional lifeways through disease, missionization, and land dispossession. However, the Cahuilla persisted and adapted to changing conditions, maintaining cultural traditions that continue to shape their identity today (Rockport Ranch Cultural Resources Report 2017). 2.4 Ethnographic Evidence The project site is located within the ethnographic territory of the Cahuilla Takic speakers, who are descended from the Late Prehistoric populations of the region. Takic is part of the larger Uto- Aztecan language stock, which migrated west from the Great Basin (Bean and Smith 1978). At the time of contact, the Coachella Valley was occupied by the Cahuilla, from whom the valley gets its name. Cahuilla villages were typically located in canyons or on alluvial fans near perennial water sources. Cahuilla homes were typically domed structures constructed of arrowweed framework covered by palm fronds or other herbage, depending on the local environment. These homes surrounded a larger structure occupied by a chief and smaller structures used as sweathouses. The Desert Cahuilla also constructed substantial step wells. For subsistence, the Cahuilla relied heavily upon mesquite beans, acorns, and agave, which were gathered seasonally INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 6  in a broad area surrounding the village that included numerous environmental niches (Bean 1974, 1978). In the Cahuilla dialect, ivia, the Cahuilla called themselves the Iviatim. The word Cahuilla is derived from the ivia word for master, kawi'a. Their territory included the Coachella Valley and the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountain ranges. Bean and Shipek (1978) estimated that the Cahuilla numbered between 6,000 and 10,000 people at the time of Spanish contact. Ethnographers have divided this population by habitation locale (Mountain, Pass, and Desert), whereas the Cahuilla divided themselves by patrilineal descent clans and one of two moieties (Wildcat and Coyote). Further distinctions were made within clans of politically important and independent subsidiary lineages. These lineages occupied their own villages as documented by Cahuilla ethnographic consultants in the early twentieth century and from Franciscan mission records (Earle 2004). Politically and ceremonially, Cahuilla clans were led by a chief or net. The net had charge of the sacred dance house and the sacred bundle, masut, which consisted of matting that was wrapped around items sacred to the clan, such as ritual paraphernalia. Importantly, the masut was the sacred expression of each clan. A paha, the ritual assistant, was also found among other Takic- speaking groups. However, the office of paha varied as it was not always present within some of the southernmost Desert Cahuilla clans (Bean and Saubel 1972; Hooper 1920). Like other Takic- speaking groups, the Cahuilla would publicly gather for the naming of children, marriage, female and male initiation ceremonies, the ascendency of a net, an eagle-killing ceremony, and the mourning ceremony. The mourning ceremony took place to collectively mourn all those who had died since the previous mourning ceremony. Each person was cremated along with his or her individual possessions in a ceremony separate from the mourning ceremony. Mourning ceremonies were one of the most important ceremonies for clans in that sacred songs were sung, sacred dances were danced, and moieties exchanged food and valued goods. The three ethnographically documented zones of Cahuilla habitation (Pass, Mountain, and Desert) serve as general guidelines for understanding their subsistence practices. In general, Mountain and Pass Cahuilla diet emphasized acorn (salvia islay), yucca, agave, and pinyon gathering in the mountain and foothill regions. In contrast, Desert Cahuilla focused on the gathering of mesquite, cactus, and hard seeds such as screwbean, juniper, and mesquite (Bean and Saubel 1972). These generalizations can only be broadly applied as the Cahuilla inhabiting different zones were not mutually exclusive to each other. Desert Cahuilla in the Coachella Valley retained gathering areas in the Santa Rosa Mountains or other upland regions. Desert Cahuilla also utilized the resources in the foothills; for example, the eastern foothills of the Coachella Valley produced agave and hard seeds, and the foothills on the western side produced cactus, agave, and hard seeds and, higher upslope, pinyon. Further divisions can be made for the biotic subregions of the Coachella Valley. Kelly (1977) distinguished the “agave desert” located in the Coachella Valley, the west side of the Salton Sea, and in Imperial Valley, and the “severe desert” located east and south of these regions. In Kelly’s estimation, the Cahuilla and others adapted to the agave desert but not the severe desert. This adaptation involved the seasonal movement from desert floors to mountain foothills. INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 7  The Cahuilla were also observed to cultivate small quantities of corn, beans, squashes, pumpkins, melons, and wheat as early as 1824 by the Romero expedition. These crops and the cultivation of them potentially made their way from the Colorado River area to the Coachella Valley. The inhabitants of the Coachella did not practice flood recessional agriculture of the Colorado River groups (Bean and Lawton 1993). Based upon ethnographic interviews, Strong (1929: 38) noted that Francisco Nombre had told him that his grandfather told him that the cultivation of corn and other crops by the Cahuilla was a recent practice and that the Cahuilla used to obtain corn from the “Yumas.” Corn would have been available to the Cahuilla via exchange systems between foraging groups with access to resources outside the Colorado River and horticulturalists along the river. Regardless of the timing of cultivation of these crops, by the 1850s, oasis gardens and, to a lesser extent, canyon gardens were important sources of foodstuffs (Bean, Schaefer, and Vane 1995). 2.5 Historic Setting Historic-era California is generally divided into three periods: the Spanish or Mission period (1769 to 1821), the Mexican or Rancho period (1821 to 1848), and the American period (1848 to present). Spanish Period (1769–1821) This period is represented by the European exploration of the region, the establishment of the presidios (military forts) and chain of 21 missions throughout Alta (upper) California, and the introduction of livestock, agricultural goods, and European architecture and construction techniques. Early exploration of the Riverside County area began in 1772 when Lieutenant Pedro Fages (then Military Governor of San Diego) crossed through the San Jacinto Valley (Lech 2004). In 1774, Captain Juan Bautista de Anza crossed the San Jacinto Valley; the party came across what is now Mystic Lake. Anza’s expedition crossed the Cahuilla Valley, came around the Santa Rosa Mountains and up through Coyote Canyon, and descended into the San Jacinto Valley via Bautista Creek, continuing northwest across the San Jacinto Valley into Moreno Valley. From there, the expedition passed through the Riverside area and crossed the Santa Ana River near present-day Jurupa, then continued northwest to reach the mission at San Gabriel. Permanent European settlement began about the turn of the eighteenth century through the issuance of land grants and grazing permits, and Spanish influence continued to some extent after 1821 due to the continued implementation of the mission system (Lech 2004). Mexican Period (1821–1848) The Mexican period began with Mexican independence from Spain and continued until the end of the Mexican-American War. The Secularization Act of 1833 resulted in the transfer through land grants (called ranchos) of large mission tracts to politically prominent individuals. Approximately 14 ranchos were granted in Riverside County, the first to Juan Bandini in 1838. In the mid-1840s, cattle ranching was a more substantial business than agricultural activities, and trade in hides and tallow increased during the early portion of this period. Until the Gold Rush of 1849, livestock and horticulture dominated California's economy. INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 8  American Period (1848–Present) The American period is distinguished by the influx of American and European settlers into the area. In 1848, gold was discovered at Sutter’s Mill near Coloma on the south fork of the American River, thereby kicking off the California Gold Rush and spurring a mass migration to the state from all over the country. The American period began with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, which officially ended the Mexican-American War; in 1850, California was accepted into the Union of the United States primarily due to the population increase created by the Gold Rush of 1849. The cattle industry reached its greatest prosperity during the first years of the American period. Mexican period land grants had created large pastoral estates in California, and demand for beef during the Gold Rush led to a cattle boom that lasted from 1849 to 1855. However, beginning about 1855, the demand for beef began to decline due to imports of sheep from New Mexico and cattle from the Mississippi and Missouri Valleys. When the beef market collapsed, many California ranchers lost their ranchos through foreclosure. A series of disastrous floods in 1861–1862 was followed by two years of extreme drought, which continued to some extent until 1876, altering ranching forever in the southern California area. 2.6 The City of Palm Desert The City of Palm Desert, located in the Coachella Valley, originated in the 1850s when land developers acquired tribal land from the Montoya family and Rancho San Cayetano. The area was initially called Old MacDonald Ranch, but in the 1920s, it was renamed Palm Village when date palms were planted by indigenous farmers (City of Palm Desert n.d.; Coachella Valley Independent 2024; PalmDesert.com n.d.). In the early 1900s, white settlers began moving into the valley, and by the 1930s, homes and lots emerged in a development called Palm Village, north of Highway 111 (Desert Sun 2023; HSPD n.d.). Palm Village grew slowly after World War I but served as a military vehicle pool in World War II, and nearby land was used for the Army’s Desert Training Center (Desert Sun 2023). Palm Desert began to thrive in the postwar years, attributed mainly to Cliff and Randall Henderson. Randall and his partner, J. Wilson McKenney, identified the area as an ideal site for their business, Desert Magazine. Cliff Henderson, his brothers, brother-in-law Tommy Tomson, and investors developed 1,600 acres (Desert Sun 2023; HSPD n.d.). In 1945, Cliff formed the Palm Desert Corporation with investors and enlisted his family to help realize his vision. They developed the Shadow Mountain Club, which opened in 1948 and became a social hub, driving neighborhood growth (Desert Sun 2023). The town officially changed its name to Palm Desert in 1951 and incorporated Palm Village (Coachella Valley Independent 2024). As Palm Desert grew, discussions about incorporation fluctuated throughout the 1950s and 1960s. In 1972, the Concerned Citizens of Palm Desert opposed county-approved developments. They joined forces with the Palm Desert Property Owners Association and the Chamber of INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 9  Commerce to form an incorporation committee. The city was officially incorporated on November 26, 1973 (City of Palm Desert n.d.; Desert Sun 2023). Today, Palm Desert serves as a hub of the desert communities, featuring The Shops at Palm Desert, art galleries, museums, upscale shopping, the McCallum Theatre, and a zoo (Coachella Valley Independent 2024). Currently, the city has a population of 51,163 (US Census Bureau 2025). 3.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES IDENTIFICATION METHODS AND RESULTS Below are the methods and results of the SCIC records search, NAHC Sacred Lands File search, literature and historical map review, archaeological field survey, and archaeological sensitivity analysis. 3.1 South Coastal Information Center (SCIC) Methods Michael Baker International staff requested a records search conductd at the SCIC on January 14, 2025. The SCIC, as part of the California Historical Resources Information System, California State University, San Diego, an affiliate of the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), is the official state repository of cultural resources records and reports for Riverside County. The objective of this records search was to determine whether any precontact or historic cultural resources have been recorded within the project area or vicinity. As part of the records search, the following federal and California inventories were reviewed:  California Inventory of Historic Resources (OHP 2025a).  California Points of Historical Interest (OHP 2025b).  California Historical Landmarks (OHP 2025c).  Built Environment Resources Directory (OHP 2025d): The directory includes resources evaluated for listing and listed in the National Register of Historic Places, National Historic Landmarks, California Register of Historical Resources, California Historical Landmarks, and California Points of Historical Interest for Riverside County. Results The project area is located in Riverside County, whose records were previously managed by the Eastern Information Center, now closed. On January 14, 2025, a records search was completed on-site at the SCIC, where the records for Riverside County are now housed, by Michael Baker International Associate Archaeologist Epifanio Figueroa. The records search included the project area and a 0.5-mile buffer. It included archaeological and historical resources, locations, and citations for previous cultural resource studies and a review of the state OHP historic properties directory. The records search summary is included in Attachment B. According to SCIC records, eleven studies have been completed within a half-mile search radius of the project area, as identified in Table 1. Three of the previous studies address the current project area. INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 10  Table 1: Previous Cultural Resource Investigations within 0.5 Miles of the Project Area Report No. Author(s) Date Title Publisher In Project Area? RI-03625 Hogan, Michael, and Tom Tang 1993 Archaeological Survey of the Carver Project Located in the City of Palm Desert Riverside County, California Archaeologic al Research Unit University of California No RI-06566 Tang, Bai “Tom”, and Michael Hogan 2006 Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report: The Catavina Project Assessor's Parcel Nos. 620-400- 015 and -016 CRM Tech No RI-08263 EarthTouch, Inc. 2005 CO Submission Packet – FCC Form 621 EarthTouch, Inc. No RI-09279 Tang, Bai “Tom”, and Michael Hogan 2015 Phase I Historical/Archaeological Resource Survey: Santa Rosa Gold Club and Catavina Property. City of Palm Desert, Riverside Count , California CRM Tech Yes RI-09849 Justin Castells, Kholood Abdo- Hintzman, and Joan George 2017 Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment for The Coachella Valley Water District’s Well NO. 5683-1 Project in Palm Desert, Riverside Count , California Applied Earth Works, Inc. No RI-09889 Tang, Bai “Tom”, and Michael Hogan 2016 Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 694-300-001, - 002, -005, -014, 015, and 694- 310-002, -003, -006, -007 City of Palm Desert Riverside County, California CRM Tech No RI-10266 Tang, Bai “Tom”, and Michael Hogan 2018 Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Revel Palm Desert Project Assessor’s Parcel Nos.620-430-025 and -046 City of Palm Desert, Riverside County, California CRM Tech No RI-10275 Smith, Brian F. 2017 Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for The Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra Drive Property City of Palm Desert, Riverside Count , California Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. Yes RI- 10299 Tang, Bai “Tom”, and Michael Hogan 2015 Identification And Evaluation of Historic Properties Chromium-6 Water treatment Facilities Project Coachella Valley Riverside Count , California CRM Tech No RI-10820 Porras, L., and B. Vargas 2018 Coachella Valley Water District Non-Potable Connections Project Cultural Resources Stud Rincon Consultants, Inc. Yes INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 11  Report No. Author(s) Date Title Publisher In Project Area? RI-11211 Clayton Group Services 2002 NEPA Screening for Wireless Telecommunication Site – Desert Willows, 74000 Country Club Drive, Palm Desert, Riverside Count , California Clayton Group Services No According to SCIC records, no previously recorded cultural resources were within the proposed project area. One resource, CA-RIV-5080, has been documented within the half-mile search radius. The resource is a site encompassing a prehistoric pottery scatter (Table 2). Table 2: Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within 0.5 Miles of the Project Area Primary No. (P-33-) Trinomial (CA-RIV-) DPR Form Recorder and Updates Description Proximity to Project Site (meters) 005080 5080 1993 M. Hogan and K. Moffitt (Archaeological Research Unit, University of California Riverside AP3. Ceramic Scatter ~680 3.2 Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File Search On January 8, 2025, Michael Baker International sent an email requesting that the NAHC search the Sacred Lands File for any tribal cultural resources that might be affected by the project and a list of tribal contacts that may have knowledge regarding cultural resources in the vicinity of the project area. The NAHC responded in a letter dated January 23, 2025, that the search of the Sacred Lands File was negative. Additionally, the NAHC appended a list of tribal contacts who may have knowledge about and interest in tribal cultural resources located within the project vicinity. The NAHC correspondence is presented in Attachment C. No further outreach has been conducted by Michael Baker International. The City will conduct outreach per Assembly Bill 52 and the results will be included in the associated environmental document. 3.3 Historical Aerials and Topographic Map Review and Site Development Review Historical topographic maps from the first half of the twentieth century and aerial photographs from the 1950s show that the project area remained undeveloped and unoccupied from the early 1900s up to 1978 (USGS 1904; UCSB 1953, 1965; NETR 2025: 1959, 1972, 1977). The Santa Rosa Golf Course was opened in May 1978 and included two structures: the clubhouse and a maintenance facility. The clubhouse, a central hub for members, included dining areas, locker rooms, and a pro shop. It was a place where members could relax and socialize before or after their rounds of golf. The maintenance facility housed equipment and tools necessary for the upkeep of the course, ensuring that the greens and fairways were always in top condition (Abeyta INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 12  2024). Aerial imagery from 1979 shows the newly opened golf course and the two associated structures (NETR 2025: 1979). No notable changes occurred to the project area from the golf courses opening until recent years (UCSB 1981, 1990; NETR 2025: 1996, 2002, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020; USGS 1984). The golf course was closed in May 2015 and has remained vacant since then (Abeyta 2024). By 2022, the grass on the golf course had died, while the two structures in the southwest corner of the project area remain standing (NETR 2022). Attachment D includes all aerials referenced herein of the project area from NETR’s HistoricAerials.com website. 3.4 Archaeological Field Survey Methods An archaeological survey of the project area was conducted on January 16, 2025, by Michael Baker International archaeologists Epifanio Figueroa and Rachel Garcia. Before fieldwork, a map was created in ArcGIS Online that included the project area and GIS feature classes, including point, line, and polygon features for collecting data in the field. The maps were then downloaded in Esri’s Field Maps app on Apple iPads and coupled via Bluetooth with a Trimble DA2 Catalyst GNSS GPS receiver with submeter accuracy. The archaeologist used the tablets and GPS units to locate and survey the project area accurately and to map any newly discovered cultural or built environment resources should they be encountered. After the fieldwork, this information was imported into Esri’s ArcGIS Pro to create digital maps. Digital photographs documented the project environment and the survey area's general character. A daily survey summary form was completed at the end of the survey to convey the conditions of the survey area and summarize findings. This form included a description of vegetation cover (including contextual photographs), as well as estimates of ground surface visibility, rated as poor (0-25 percent), fair (26-50 percent), good (51-75 percent), or excellent (76-100 percent). Evidence for buried cultural deposits was opportunistically sought by inspecting natural or artificial erosional exposures and the spoils from rodent burrows. In the daily survey notes, the archaeologists assessed the potential for buried sites based on geomorphology. Results The perimeter of the project area is composed of sparse, hard-packed dirt, while the interior is predominantly loose, sandy soil. Constructed remnants of cement cart paths wind throughout the former golf course, connecting various sections of the area. At the center of the project area are two large, dried-up ponds: one in the northern section and one in the central section. Part of the golf course’s pumping station is northwest of the northern pond. Approximately 17 x 16 feet, the fence that once surrounded the equipment has crumbled, exposing it to the elements. A bathroom approximately 16.5 x 7 feet in size is located along a paved concrete path near the southwest corner of the central pond. Additionally, north of the central pond lies another structure, approximately 12 x 26 feet, likely a part of the golf course’s plumbing and maintenance. Its southwest wall has collapsed, and the remaining standing walls have been disturbed by graffiti marks. Southeast of the project area, north of the extant buildings, there is a large tee-platform. A parking lot is in front of the extant buildings, while a watered lawn and two occupied trailers are INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 13  behind them. The two existing buildings are rectangular in shape and share a central yard enclosed by a gated fence. The southern structure, the maintenance facility, features metal siding walls and a mostly flat metal roof. Its east-facing side includes three metal garage-style doors (Photo 1). The northern building, the clubhouse, constructed from brick concrete, also has a mostly flat, reddish metal roof (Photo 2). Vegetation in the project area included California peppertrees (Schinus molle), common burrobrush (Ambriosia Salsola), prickly saltwort (Kali turgida), desertbroom (Baccharis sarothroides), oleander (Nerium oleander), and brittlebush (Encelia farinose). Ground visibility was good, with approximately 55 to 60 percent visibility (Photo 43). The soil type consisted of a light pale brown sand. Sections of the project area had soil that was stained blue, and a pile of stained blue rocks was located in the southern portion, along one of the paved concrete roads. Freshwater bivalve shell scatter was identified throughout the project area, but particularly in large scatterings around all the pond features (Photo 4). Perimeter concrete block wall fencing exists along the site’s northern and southern boundaries. The project’s eastern boundary is partially fenced with a concrete block wall south of the site entrance; the border north of the entrance is comprised of a mix of chain link fencing, shrubs, or is fully unfenced. The project’s western boundary is comprised of a chain-link fence and concrete block wall. Photo 1: Maintenance facility’s east-facing side; photo facing west. INTERNATIONAL J |Illi) 2P or were 5 _A Michael Baker IIIIIIIIH |||| |     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 14  Photo 2: Clubhouse’s northeast face; photo facing southwest. Photo 3: Project area’s ground visibility example; photo facing east. INTERNATIONAL I Per u t ' __ HU. ==• -3: f ■ Paise4 ar -Sue* ■ Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 15  Photo 4: Freshwater bivalve shell scatter example; photo facing down. 3.5 Archaeological Site Sensitivity Analysis Sensitivity for cultural resources consisting of archaeological sites is considered low to moderate. The records search from the SCIC did not identify any previously recorded archaeological sites within the project area but did identify one within the half-mile radius. Additionally, the NAHC Sacred Lands File search returned negative results. The project area is within the area of ancient Lake Cahuilla, a valuable resource for Native American inhabitants of the area over the last 1,300 years. Several Indigenous groups, including the Quechan (Yuma) people, the Cahuilla, and the Kumeyaay, utilized the resources provided by ancient Lake Cahuilla. The soils within the project area are formed from alluvial fans, which are often associated with buried archaeological deposits due to the dynamic processes of sediment deposition in floodplain and basin environments. The slow permeability and fine textures of these soils can help preserve organic and cultural materials. Alluvial settings have demonstrated archaeological potential. They often contain layers of sediments that may cover and protect ancient sites and artifacts. The project area has experienced disturbance associated with built environment and recreational use. However, intact buried archaeological deposits may remain at depths below construction or in other areas not previously disturbed. INTERNATIONAL s ) et 8 sent’ :is " is gl 1 4 I.n elaans Michael Baker y d 111 ‘s — - .. ■ 1 8 4h 1 i 2 33 F     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 16  4.0 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 Results Summary The SCIC records search, literature and historical map review, and field survey identified no historic resources, as defined by CEQA Section 15064.5(a), within the project area. No other cultural resources were identified within the project area during the pedestrian survey. 4.2 Impact Assessment Sensitivity for buried archaeological resources is low at the surface but increases to moderate in undisturbed deposits. As there is a potential for disturbing previously unknown archaeological resources during excavation into native soil, a significant impact to previously unidentified archaeological resources may occur. 4.3 Recommendations and Mitigation Measures Mitigation to reduce potential impacts on unknown cultural resources would, therefore, be required in the form of archaeological and Native American monitoring during project construction. The archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities about the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery. The preconstruction training shall be held in conjunction with the project's initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be halted while the on-call archaeologist is contacted. The resource shall be evaluated for significance, and tribal consultation shall be conducted in the case that it is a tribal resource. If the discovery proves to be significant, the long-term disposition of any collected materials should be determined in consultation with the affiliated tribe(s), where relevant. 5.0 PREPARER QUALIFICATIONS James Daniels, MA, RPA, Principal Investigator and Senior Archaeologist, and Rachel Garcia, MA, Associate Archaeologist prepared this document. Epifanio Figueroa assisted in conducting the archaeological pedestrian survey. James Daniels, MA, RPA, Principal Investigator/Senior Archaeologist Mr. Daniels has 17 years of cultural resources management experience in California, Nevada, and North Carolina. His experience includes archaeological surveys, evaluations of historic and precontact sites for listing in the California and National Registers, site mitigation data recoveries, mitigation monitoring, and preparation of archaeological resource management reports and cultural resources technical reports. As a senior archaeologist, he supports projects needing compliance with CEQA, National Environmental Policy Act, National Historic Preservation Act Section 106, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, Assembly Bill 52, US Army Corps of Engineers 404 permits, and local cultural resource regulations. He assists with environmental impact statements/reports and alternative mitigation measures for clients, including interpretive signage, informative website design, brochures, and ethnographic studies. INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 17  He also assists in Native American consultation and coordination of Native American monitoring. Mr. Daniels provides advanced technical services for clients, including geophysical surveys with ground-penetrating radar, obsidian and ceramic sourcing using portable X-ray fluorescence, photogrammetry, and GIS predictive modeling and data collection using Esri Field Maps. He meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology and historic preservation. Rachel Garcia, MA, Associate Archaeologist Ms. Garcia is an archaeologist specializing in prehistoric and historical archaeology with cultural resource management experience in California and the American Southwest, notably New Mexico. Her experience encompasses archaeological surveys, mapping, and excavation techniques. Additionally, she earned her MA in history where she has honed her skills in historical pedagogy, critical source analysis, research methodologies, and historical documentation interpretation. Ms. Garcia meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for history. Epifanio Z. Figueroa, Associate Archaeologist Mr. Figueroa has worked in various capacities in cultural resource management since 2010. He has worked as a staff archaeologist and lab assistant on various projects located in Cyprus and the states of Arizona and California. He has provided Native American tribal consultation support and supported cultural resource identification studies and evaluations and report writing. He has been involved in developing various digital survey forms and geodatabases using Esri’s AGOL/ArcGIS Pro, ArcSurvey123 and Field Maps. Additionally, Mr. Figueroa worked as a full-time staff geophysicist for approximately five years, in both Pennsylvania and California, gathering, analyzing, and mapping geophysical data. He has worked as a geophysicist on previous projects when collecting geophysical data, developing mapped figures, mapping stratigraphic columns, and writing reports. Lastly, Mr. Figueroa’s versatile degrees have enabled him to utilize his geosciences background when providing support for paleontological monitoring. Sincerely, James T. Daniels, Jr, MA, RPA Senior Archaeologist Rachel Garcia, MA Archaeologist Epifanio Figueroa, BA Archaeologist Attachments: Attachment A – Figures Attachment B – SCIC Records Search Results Attachment C – NAHC Sacred Lands File Search Results and Native American Outreach Attachment D – NETR HistoricAerials.com Aerial Imagery INTERNATIONAL AC& Rachel Garcia, MA Michael Baker 4.0704D, James T. Daniels, Jr, MA,RPA Senior Archaeologist /     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 18  6.0 REFERENCES Abeyta, Andy. 2024. "A Look at the Former Site of the Santa Rosa Country Club." The Desert Sun, September 2, 2024. https://www.desertsun.com/picture- gallery/sports/golf/2025/01/29/a-look-at-the-former-site-of-the-santa-rosa-country- club/75052152007/ Arizona-Sonoma Desert Museum. 2025 “Regional Natural History and Image Galleries.” Accessed January 2025. https://www.desertmuseum.org/desert/sonora.php. Arnold, Jeanne E., Michael Walsh, and Sandra E. Hollimon. 2004. “The Archaeology of California.” Journal of Archaeological Research 12(1):1–73. Bean, Lowell John. 1974. Mukat’s People: The Cahuilla Indians of Southern California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Bean, Lowell John. 1978. “Cahuilla.” In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, edited by William C. Sturtevant. Smithsonian Institution. Bean, Lowell J., and Harry W. Lawton. 1993. “Some Explanations for the Rise of Cultural Complexity in Native California with Comments on Proto-Agriculture and Agriculture.” In Before the Wilderness: Environmental Management by Native Californians, edited by Thomas C. Blackburn and Kat Anderson. Ballena Press. Bean, Lowell J. and Katherine S. Saubel. 1972. Temalpakh (from the Earth): Cahuilla Indian Knowledge and Usage of Plants. Malki Museum Press. Bean, Lowell J., J. Schaefer, and S. Vane. 1995. Archaeological, Ethnographic, and Ethnohistoric Investigations at Tahquitz Canyon, Palm Springs, California. Cultural Systems Research, Inc. Submitted to Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Bean, Lowell J. and Florence C. Shipek. 1978. “Luiseño.” In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, edited by William C. Sturtevant. Smithsonian Institution. Bean, Lowell John and Smith, Charles R. (1978). Cupeño. In Robert F. Heizer (Ed.), California (Vol. 8, pp. 588-591). Washington: Smithsonian Institution. Calscape. 2024. “California Native Plant Society.” Accessed January 2025. https://calscape.org/search/?plant=&orderBy=&location_name=Palm%20Desert%2C%2 0CA%2C%20USA&lat=33.7222445&lng=- 116.3744556&page=1&perPage=60&height_from=&height_to=&width_from=&width_to= City of Palm Desert. n.d. “History of Palm Desert.” Accessed January 2025. https://www.palmdesert.gov/residents/living-in-palm-desert. INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 19  Coachella Valley Independent. 2024. “CV History: How the Henderson brothers Established the Planned City of Palm Desert.” November 18. https://cvindependent.com/2024/11/cv- history-how-the-henderson-brothers-established-the-planned-city-of-palm-desert/ Desert Sun. 2023. “Once An Outpost, Palm Desert Celebrates 50 Years As A City, With More Growth On The Way.” November 19. https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/local/palm- desert/2023/11/19/palm-desert-still-booming-as-it-celebrates-50th-anniversary-as-a- city/71531245007/ Earle, David D. 2004 Native Population and Settlement in the Western Mojave Desert in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. In Proceedings of the Millennium Conference: The Human Journey and Ancient Life in California’s Deserts, May 9-12, 2001 Maturango Museum Press, Ridgecrest, California. Goldberg, Susan. 2001. Directions for Future Research. In Final Report of Archaeological Investigations, Vol. IV, edited by Susan K. Goldberg. Applied EarthWorks, Inc. Submitted to the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Eastside Reservoir Project. Goldberg, Susan K., Cynthia J. Klink, Jill A. Onken, W. Geoffrey Spaulding, Mark C. Robinson, Melinda C. Horne, and Rebecca L. McKim. 2001. “Prehistoric Archaeology Synthesis of Findings,” edited by Melinda C. Horne and Susan E. Rapp. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Eastside Reservoir Project Final Report of Archaeological Investigations, Vol. IV, edited by Susan K. Goldberg. Applied EarthWorks, Inc. Prepared for Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Los Angeles. Hooper, Lucile. 1920. “The Cahuilla Indians.” University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 16:315-380. HSPD (Historical Society of Palm Desert). n.d. “History of Palm Desert.” Accessed January 2025. https://hspd.org/history-palm-desert/. Inland Action. 2021. “The Inland Empire.” Accessed January 2025. https://www.inlandaction.com/the-inland-empire/. Joan George and Justin Castells. 2017. “Class III Cultural Resource Survey For The Whitewater River Groundwater Replenishment Facility – Bureau Of Land Management Right-Of- Way Grant Project, Riverside County, California.” Prepared for Luke Stowe, Coachella Valley Water District. Kelly, William H. 1977. “Cocopa Ethnography.” Papers of the University of Arizona No 79. University of Arizona, Tucson. Lech, Steve. 2004. Along the Old Roads: A History of the Portion of Southern California That Became Riverside County, 1772–1893. Published by author. INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 20  Love, Bruce, and Mariam Dahdul. 2002. “Desert Chronologies and the Archaic Period in the Coachella Valley.” Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 38(2&3):65-86. Moratto, Michael J. 1984. California Archaeology. Academic Press. NCSS (National Cooperative Soil Survey). n.d. “Myoma Series.” Accessed January 2025. https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/M/MYOMA.html. NETR (National Environmental Title Research, LLC). 2025. Historic aerial views of the project area 1959, 1972, 1977, 1979, 1996, 2002, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020, 2022. Accessed January 2025. Historic Aerials: Viewer. NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2024. National Soil Database. Accessed January 2025. https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. NPS (National Park Service). 2023. “Plants.” Accessed January 2025. https://www.nps.gov/moja/learn/nature/plants.htm. OHP (California Office of Historic Preservation). 2025a. California Inventory of Historic Resources. Riverside: California Department of Parks and Recreation. Electronic database. Accessed February 2025. https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=33. ———. 2025b. California Points of Historical Interest. Riverside: California Department of Parks and Recreation. Electronic database. Accessed February 2025. https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=33. ———. 2025c. California Historical Landmarks. Riverside: California Department of Parks and Recreation. Electronic database. Accessed February 2025. https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=33. ———. 2025d. Built Environment Resources Directory for Riverside County. Electronic database. Accessed February 2025. https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=30338. PalmDesert.com. n.d. “History of Palm Desert And the Greater Palm Springs Area.” Accessed January 2025. https://palmdesert.com/palm-desert- history/#:~:text=In%201943%2C%20residential%20development%20connected,its%20n ame%20to%20Palm%20Desert. PCAS (Pacific Coast Archaeological Society). 2010. Desert Chronologies and the Archaic Period in the Coachella Valley. Accessed February 2025. https://www.pcas.org/assets/documents/desertchronologies.pdf. RCDAS (Riverside County Department of Animal Services). 2025. “Wild Animal Resources.” Accessed January 2025. https://rcdas.org/wild-animals-resources INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 21  RCRCD (Riverside-Corona Resource Conservation District). 2025. “Native Species.” Accessed January 2025. https://www.rcrcd.org/native-species RCRP (Riverside County Parks). 2025. “About SW RivCo Multi-Species Reserve.” Accessed January 2025. https://rivcoparks.org/sw-rivco-multi-species- reserve#:~:text=The%20San%20Diego%20horned%20lizard,bobcats%2C%20coyote's %20and%20mountain%20lions. Riverside Cultural Resources Study. 2007. Cultural Resources Study for the City of Riverside. Accessed February 2025. https://riversideca.gov/cedd/sites/riversideca.gov.cedd/files/pdf/planning/general- plan/vol3/Appendix_D.pdf. Rockport Ranch Cultural Resources Report. 2017. Cultural Resources Assessment Report for the Rockport Ranch Development, Riverside County, California. Accessed February 2025. https://files.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/198352-2/attachment/VXuFeG8mDW- HjlWKLdWelEjXrIk5pFQb1lBUS6KOn6Bg07egwjwDfC6oquaHO2mFUylRCEDp47AmaqI e0. Rockwell, Thomas K., Aron J. Meltzner, Erik C. Haaker, and Danielle Madugo. 2022. “The Late Holocene History of Lake Cahuilla: Two Thousand Years of Repeated Fillings Within the Salton Trough, Imperial Valley, California.” Quaternary Science Reviews 282; 107456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2022.107456 Schaefer, Jerry. 1994. “The Challenge of Archaeological Research in the Colorado Desert: Recent Approaches and Discoveries.” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 16(1):60-80. Smith, Brenda D., and James Brock. 1998. “From Shoreline to Mesquite Dune: Changing Subsistence Strategies at CA-RIV-4754, La Quinta.” Archaeological Advisory Group, Pioneertown. Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology, Vol. 12, pp. 1–4. Spaulding, W. Geoffrey. 2001. “The Paleoenvironmental Context of the Study Area.” In Synthesis of Findings, edited by Susan E. Rapp and Susan K. Goldberg. MWD Eastside Reservoir Project Final Report of Archaeological Investigations, Vol. IV, edited by Susan K. Goldberg. Applied EarthWorks, Inc. Prepared for Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Los Angeles. Strong, William Duncan. 1929. “Aboriginal Society in Southern California.” University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 26:1-358. Tang, Tom. 1993. Phase I Cultural Resources Report: Carver Project, Palm Desert, California. Accessed February 2025. https://egovpublic.s3.us-west- 2.amazonaws.com/DSRT%2BSurf/Appendix%2BD%2B- %2BCultural%2BReport%2Bw%2BComments.pdf. INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     Cultural Resources Assessment Report January 2025  Blue Fern Catavina Project Page 22  Thomas, Roberta and Michael Mirro. 2018. “Cultural Resources Assessment for the City of Beaumont General Plan Update, City of Beaumont, Riverside County, California.” Prepared for Albert A. Webb Associates. True, D. L., C. W. Meighan, and H. Crew. 1974 Archaeological Investigation at Molpa, San Diego County, California. University of California Publications in Anthropology 11. Berkeley, California. USGS (US Geological Survey). 1904, edited 1904. Indio, CA. 1:125,000. Electronic resource map. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#11/33.5188/-117.2107. USGS (US Geological Survey). 1984, edited 1986. Palm Springs, CA. 1:100,000. Electronic resource map. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#11/33.5188/-117.2107. UCSB (University of California, Santa Barbara). 1953. Single-frame aerial photo by Pacific Air Industries. Flight AXM-1953B, Frame 3K-78. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. UCSB (University of California, Santa Barbara). 1965. Single-frame aerial photo by Universe Aerial Surveys. Flight Universe -Special, Frame 1-34. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. UCSB (University of California, Santa Barbara). 1981. Single-frame aerial photo by Regents of the University of California. Flight AMI_RIV_81A, Frame 11229. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. UCSB (University of California, Santa Barbara). 1990. Single-frame aerial photo by USGS, Inc. Flight NAPP, Frame 1802-124. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. US Census Bureau. 2025. “Palm Desert city, California.” Accessed January 2024. https://data.census.gov/profile/Palm_Desert_city,_California?g=160XX00US0655184 Waters, Michael R. 1983. “Late Holocene Lacustrine Chronology and Archaeology of Ancient Lake Cahuilla, California.” Quaternary Research 19:373–387. Wilke, Philip J. 1976. Background to Prehistory of the Yuha Desert. Ballena Press Anthropological Papers No. 5. INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker     ATTACHMENT A Figures     rl —Agua Caliente Rancho Miraged 10 Palm Desert Indio >10/ La Quinta ■ O 9 J Torres-Martinez 7AReservationI ____SANTA ROS^A SAN JACINTO MOUNTAINS Santa-Rosa Reservation ANZA MOUNTAIN 9 O % // 8699 ft ___ * HOMAS JUNTAIN 4 $ Palm Springs OX % < 0 0 t San State rk ( ‘NO/o“/g I’s 62 / Desert Hot Springs ©r “9u, SKY VALLEY 111 °C%4 / S [Pu3lLu ★ Riverside County Si V o O INTERNATIONAL Michael Baker Legend Y7 Blue Fern Catavina Project Area 0 2.5 5o Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, National Geographic World Map: Lancaster, California CATAVINA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Regional Vicinity Figure 1 PN : 2 0 5 8 0 2 \ s     — 1 1 I Vt-n I ' l.y Us-d T$6, I 3 C i :> s Cs oAi o o' W I 1 .37.3 « r I 3 5 2 10 1O Trailer Park O g c ■ ", 8 p ' £1 J " m J8 - 3 7 I % t % %0 S 0 / / ^SQ // \ 4 9 % 332 300; Legend C ] Blue Fern Catavina Project Area • USGS 7.5' Quad Boundary 0 0.25 0.5oINTERNATIONAL Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, Lancaster West USGS 7.5-Minute topographic quadrangle maps: Palm Desert, California Michael Baker CATAVINA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Project Location Figure 2 My o m a 1 PN : 2 0 5 8 0 2 \s a n t c a l h u b \ T E M E C A 1 F S 1 \ H R O O T \ p 50 8 2 \ G I S \ A P R X \     * ge34 t e Ps.0 K ‘e‘h 10/ V e 9. -5 aner DY- F $ 1 et‘ re / 1L * ' s M" tr w 14 □ 11Jr! 3 i n.sgh ett T t %lu.m 3 t. Mllhire yme.-pl‘ 9—5 de u 19saee2. t thelt ataeHMREustela T * t ii J W > • •* H £ g Fasi DETSNEY L as f ! Legend C ] Blue Fern Catavina Project Area 0 250 500oFeet INTERNATIONAL Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, 2023 Nearmap Imagery: Palm Desert, California Michael Baker CATAVINA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Project Area Figure 3 i Bw t Ji d $ — .4 0. , t 53 ! ta s s 2 A s i 41 i t a 1 sh 8 s r "l a me s s i . a a t k . st y w ■ ■ w ne " ’ 2 w ■d . 54 . t 1 92 —Y E Hi E t JI ME U F L L E E E — l nr Mi T s II । hn n D e s e rt G r e e n s L WU U U r m u u p r j u u u a ns D r ' E -1 AE N 1. A e ■ — —I i 4. 1 S. 4 ; mi d * ' -- - - - Pg ■s # 2 1 ‘r t 7e r W s , pa r t . ta b e t - M. “ a r e e s ca r . De n n i se e n e a - "o e n g g Ge y * ". ) m a l 3 ( I )A an y o n - D I RH i H N g z i SG E E d I a i     ATTACHMENT B SCIC Records Search Results     ATTACHMENT C NAHC Sacred Lands File Search Results and Native American Outreach 5050 Avenida Encinas, Suite 260 | Carlsbad, CA 92008 Office: 760-476-9193 | Fax: 760-476-9198 | mbakerintl.com MBAKERINTL.COM January 8, 2025 Laura Miranda California Native American Heritage Commission 1550 Harbor Blvd., Suite 100 West Sacramento, CA 95691 nahc@nahc.ca.gov Re: Cultural Resources Inventory for the Blue Fern Catavina Palm Desert Project, Palm Desert, California Dear Chairperson Miranda, Michael Baker International is conducting a cultural resources inventory for the proposed Blue Fern Catavina Palm Desert in Palm Desert, CA. The cultural resources inventory will be conducted in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act in Section 106. The proposed site plan includes a 546-unit residential development with open spaces, a recreation area, and retention basins on a 81.4 gross acres. The site access will be from Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue. Michael Baker International will conduct a cultural resources records search of the project area and a 0.5- mile search radius surrounding it at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), a Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) search, literature, historic map and aerial photo review, local historical society consultation, a built environment and archaeological pedestrian survey, and an archaeological sensitivity analysis of the project site. We would also like to request a list of Native American tribes that may have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area or who may wish to be notified of the investigation. Please submit your response to me via e-mail at rachel.garcia@mbakerintl.com. Sincerely, Rachel Garcia, MA Archaeologist rachel.garcia@mbakerintl.com Your Requested Information: County – Riverside USGS Quad – Cathedral City and Myoma Township and Range – T 05 S R 06 E, Sec 5 We Make a Difference INTERNATIONAL arcia Michael Baker Attachments: 1. 1:24,000 Scale Location Map of Project Area 2. Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request - 1.% V t 332 300: % 0 S 0 1 Trailer Park s !V7o 1 S 5 x. 0* O (o_ Hi — —C 2 /7 :LK.W C % ?6ot -- O 3 .8 =Fa EASC 0 0.25 0.5oINTERNATIONAL Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, Tustin USGS 7.5-Minute topographic quadrangle maps: Cathedral City and Myoma, California Michael Baker i /1 ? > I i Legend — Blue Fern Catavina Project Area 2 - 1/2 Mile Search Area • USGS 7.51 Quad Boundary ( E o ■ CATHEDRAL CITY AND MYOMA USGS 7.5-MINUTE TOPO QUADS T 05 S R 06 E, SECTION 5 U BLUE FERN CATAVINA PROJECT PALM DESERT, CA Record Search Map C — Q ] || O r 3 t-n I / S O G c 1 g 4 . y c P 9( ✓ / / 1 I J____ r O- 4 r • i s X X X X 1 f I1 (a — Ie I I I X x X Sacred Lands File & Native Americ an Contacts List Request Native American Heritage Commission 1550 Harbor Blvd, Suite 100 West Sacramento, CA 95691 916-373-3710 916-373-5471 – Fax nahc@nahc.ca.gov Information Below is Required for a Sacred Lands File Search Project: ______________________________________________________________________ County:______________________________________________________________________ USGS Quadrangle Name:_______________________________________________________ Township:__________ Range:__________ Section(s):__________ Company/Firm/Agency:_________________________________________________________ Street Address:________________________________________________________________ City:______________________________________________ Zip:______________________ Phone:_____________________________________________ Fax:_______________________________________________ Email:_____________________________________________ Project Description: Blue Fern Catavina Palm Desert Project Riverside Cathedral City and Myoma 05 S 06 E 5 Michael Baker International 5050 Avenida Encinas Suite 260 Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 603-6251 rachel.garcia@mbakerintl.com The proposed site plan includes a 546-unit residential development with open spaces, a recreation area, and retention basins on a 81.4 gross acres. The site access will be from Frank Sinatra Drive and Portola Avenue. STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION Page 1 of 2 January 23, 2025 Rachel Garcia Michael Baker International Via Email to: Rachel.Garcia@mbakerintl.com Re: Native American Tribal Consultation, Pursuant to the Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), Amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014), Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 (m), 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2 and 21084.3, Blue Fern Catavina Palm Desert Project, Riverside County To Whom It May Concern: Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (c), attached is a consultation list of tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the above-listed project. Please note that the intent of the AB 52 amendments to CEQA is to avoid and/or mitigate impacts to tribal cultural resources, (Pub. Resources Code §21084.3 (a)) (“Public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural resource.”) Public Resources Code sections 21080.3.1 and 21084.3(c) require CEQA lead agencies to consult with California Native American tribes that have requested notice from such agencies of proposed projects in the geographic area that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribes on projects for which a Notice of Preparation or Notice of Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration has been filed on or after July 1, 2015. Specifically, Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (d) provides: Within 14 days of determining that an application for a project is complete or a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, the lead agency shall provide formal notification to the designated contact of, or a tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, which shall be accomplished by means of at least one written notification that includes a brief description of the proposed project and its location, the lead agency contact information, and a notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation pursuant to this section. The AB 52 amendments to CEQA law does not preclude initiating consultation with the tribes that are culturally and traditionally affiliated within your jurisdiction prior to receiving requests for notification of projects in the tribe’s areas of traditional and cultural affiliation. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) recommends, but does not require, early consultation as a best practice to ensure that lead agencies receive sufficient information about cultural resources in a project area to avoid damaging effects to tribal cultural resources. The NAHC also recommends, but does not require that agencies should also include with their notification letters, information regarding any cultural resources assessment that has been completed on the area of potential effect (APE), such as: 1. The results of any record search that may have been conducted at an Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), including, but not limited to: CHAIRPERSON Reginald Pagaling Chumash VICE-CHAIRPERSON Buffy McQuillen Yokayo Pomo, Yuki, Nomlaki SECRETARY Sara Dutschke Miwok PARLIAMENTARIAN Wayne Nelson Luiseño COMMISSIONER Isaac Bojorquez Ohlone-Costanoan COMMISSIONER Stanley Rodriguez Kumeyaay COMMISSIONER Laurena Bolden Serrano COMMISSIONER Reid Milanovich Cahuilla COMMISSIONER Bennae Calac Pauma-Yuima Band of Luiseño Indians ACTING EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Steven Quinn NAHC HEADQUARTERS 1550 Harbor Boulevard Suite 100 West Sacramento, California 95691 (916) 373-3710 nahc@nahc.ca.gov CP C SCZ - & / ol"K: Page 2 of 2 • A listing of any and all known cultural resources that have already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE, such as known archaeological sites; • Copies of any and all cultural resource records and study reports that may have been provided by the Information Center as part of the records search response; • Whether the records search indicates a low, moderate, or high probability that unrecorded cultural resources are located in the APE; and • If a survey is recommended by the Information Center to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present. 2. The results of any archaeological inventory survey that was conducted, including: • Any report that may contain site forms, site significance, and suggested mitigation measures. All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for public disclosure in accordance with Government Code section 6254.10. 3. The result of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) check conducted through the Native American Heritage Commission was negative. 4. Any ethnographic studies conducted for any area including all or part of the APE; and 5. Any geotechnical reports regarding all or part of the APE. Lead agencies should be aware that records maintained by the NAHC and CHRIS are not exhaustive and a negative response to these searches does not preclude the existence of a tribal cultural resource. A tribe may be the only source of information regarding the existence of a tribal cultural resource. This information will aid tribes in determining whether to request formal consultation. In the event that they do, having the information beforehand will help to facilitate the consultation process. If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify the NAHC. With your assistance, we can assure that our consultation list remains current. If you have any questions, please contact me at my email address: Andrew.Green@nahc.ca.gov. Sincerely, Andrew Green Cultural Resources Analyst Attachment Olneuwr XH-leerl Tribe Name Fed (F) Non-Fed N Contact Person Contact Address Phone # Fax # Email Address Cultural Affiliation Last Updated Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians F Lacy Padilla, Director of Historic Preservation/THPO 5401 Dinah Shore Drive Palm Springs, CA, 92264 (760) 333-5222 (760) 699-6919 ACBCI-THPO@aguacaliente.net Cahuilla 1/11/2024 Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians F Tribal Operations, 84-001 Avenue 54 Coachella, CA, 92236 (760) 398-4722 info@augustinetribe-nsn.gov Cahuilla 4/18/2024 Cabazon Band of Cahuilla Indians F Doug Welmas, Chairperson 84-245 Indio Springs Parkway Indio, CA, 92203 (760) 342-2593 (760) 347-7880 jstapp@cabazonindians-nsn.gov Cahuilla Cahuilla Band of Indians F Erica Schenk, Chairperson 52701 CA Highway 371 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 590-0942 (951) 763-2808 chair@cahuilla-nsn.gov Cahuilla 2/1/2024 Cahuilla Band of Indians F Anthony Madrigal, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer 52701 CA Highway 371 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 763-5549 anthonymad2002@gmail.com Cahuilla 6/28/2023 Cahuilla Band of Indians F BobbyRay Esparza, Cultural Director 52701 CA Highway 371 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 763-5549 besparza@cahuilla-nsn.gov Cahuilla 6/28/2023 Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeño Indians F Ray Chapparosa, Chairperson P.O. Box 189 Warner Springs, CA, 92086-0189 (760) 782-0711 (760) 782-0712 Cahuilla Cupeno Morongo Band of Mission Indians F Ann Brierty, THPO 12700 Pumarra Road Banning, CA, 92220 (951) 755-5259 (951) 572-6004 abrierty@morongo-nsn.gov Cahuilla Serrano Morongo Band of Mission Indians F Robert Martin, Chairperson 12700 Pumarra Road Banning, CA, 92220 (951) 755-5110 (951) 755-5177 abrierty@morongo-nsn.gov Cahuilla Serrano Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation F Jordan Joaquin, President, Quechan Tribal Council P.O.Box 1899 Yuma, AZ, 85366 (760) 919-3600 executivesecretary@quechantrib e.com Quechan 5/16/2023 Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation F Manfred Scott, Actin Chairman - Kw'ts'an Cultural Committee P.O. Box 1899 Yuma, AZ, 85366 (928) 210-8739 culturalcommittee@quechantribe. com Quechan 5/16/2023 Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation F Jill McCormick, Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 1899 Yuma, AZ, 85366 (928) 261-0254 historicpreservation@quechantrib e.com Quechan 5/16/2023 Ramona Band of Cahuilla F Joseph Hamilton, Chairperson P.O. Box 391670 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 763-4105 (951) 763-4325 admin@ramona-nsn.gov Cahuilla Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians F Vanessa Minott, Tribal Administrator P.O. Box 391820 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 659-2700 (951) 659-2228 vminott@santarosa-nsn.gov Cahuilla 4/8/2024 Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians F Steven Estrada, Tribal Chairman P.O. Box 391820 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 659-2700 (951) 659-2228 sestrada@santarosa-nsn.gov Cahuilla 4/8/2024 Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Jessica Valdez, Cultural Resource Specialist P.O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA, 92581 (951) 663-6261 (951) 654-4198 jvaldez@soboba-nsn.gov Cahuilla Luiseno 7/14/2023 Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Joseph Ontiveros, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA, 92581 (951) 663-5279 (951) 654-4198 jontiveros@soboba-nsn.gov Cahuilla Luiseno 7/14/2023 Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians F Gary Resvaloso, TM MLD P.O. Box 1160 Thermal, CA, 92274 (760) 777-0365 grestmtm@gmail.com Cahuilla 10/30/2023 Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians F Abraham Becerra, Cultural Coordinator P.O. Box 1160 Thermal, CA, 92274 (760) 397-0300 abecerra@tmdci.org Cahuilla 10/30/2023 Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians F Mary Belardo, Cultural Committee Vice Chair P.O. Box 1160 Thermal, CA, 92274 (760) 397-0300 belardom@gmail.com Cahuilla 10/30/2023 Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians F Alesia Reed, Cultural Committee Chairwoman P.O. Box 1160 Thermal, CA, 92274 (760) 397-0300 lisareed990@gmail.com Cahuilla 10/30/2023 Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians F Thomas Tortez, Chairperson P.O. Box 1160 Thermal, CA, 92274 (760) 397-0300 (760) 397-8146 thomas.tortez@tmdci.org Cahuilla 10/30/2023 Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego This list is current onl as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve an person of statutor responsibilit as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safet Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Pub Resources Code. This list is onl a licable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1 for the ro osed Blue Fern Catavina Palm Desert Pro ect, Riverside Cou Record: PROJ-2025-000391 Report Type: AB52 GIS Counties: Riverside NAHC Group: All Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List Riverside County 1/23/2025 Counties Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 01/23/2025 08:47 AM 1 of 1     ATTACHMENT D NETR HistoricAerials.com Aerial Imagery 30 0 m       10 0 0 f       20 2 2 a e r i a l p h o t o g r a p h US D A ( 2 0 2 2 - 0 4 - 1 5 - 2 0 2 2 - 0 7 - 0 5 ) pr e p a r e d F e b r u a r y 4 , 2 0 2 5 - - H i s t o r i c A e r i a l i m a g e r y © 2 0 2 5 , N E T R o n l i n e , L L C . 4 . 7I —it ir.L.5 1 Au)J . 5 -T-1 J 1Ceoemm •1 nfamain "1y . Irt ■| will —nr a - Ar tI-eene —I M* 2. Th-i:T jl. It "" sm —t-,i .T.TE i -■ =R*-i I •II 7 NCT > k . 3: i ‘12 YF G3 !■ “2II ... 4 - I -1 hi.Y — - S H-T. il:’*ri sa n t[ J lT-El7U.yJ30lag.3 — y * —a T i H l ■:fJi J U.TVif L Iles P i T *111 ‘A32 1 1 ¥1 1UOJTNIT Ai ..11—** A13 ? 7,1 II r ' । wurW. -‘= 5: ) 4-: 4. ■ 4,, . ■■ - =4 51 st 2 » , t2569 Tv s” 0 —t1 i r J510" OF S3 2 hy . ‘e - —d "w 4 , • r —t “Wa- U . 3 rrmn’ Jul l ”‘i —el —N. ) a - -y) 9 ■ is J 13. J. A.F)-.ya s’ s # ls ' I sm 11 * C Pa l m D e s e r t Gr e e n s AC W T E H u F B s E 300m      1000f       2020 aerial photograph USDA (2020-04-15 - 2020-06-15) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. -0Taaa) I tEF 2-4 r: : rij I 5 IP'fl Is sh2"Es iofojo@Ijat-Yas ■JI TP4 t r r j-1 । = Li. TH-.1.-11 । " tl: ir*T74 -Pn Cive■I CumenikMDS mrg HiU..4"P’Trr IK“15 f : ‘is 1 ' d • 0<>20 (e 2s 1 ; Me /“9t s sldr -- Mie sh A NVJY9) 4Wh / 16 •. •• : ( 2 2/, r-- I f Nh— 7PM I) TTT 111/72 j ITU, MM Whrret t ■7 he H Ws E B Palm Desert Greens FT i .}। Tra” AABAAARAN2 <r THHTH rhutia —t-t Pr • PIT? rat F 4 4 71 T1dyi 1 r r L I — im i 10 1 I 2r < 1 । I 300m      1000f       2018 aerial photograph USDA (2018-06-29 - 2018-09-07) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. % 4. wl E. — • L* m a"" lace Drivi e Drive kh' l G 714 ,rd 1 A "2 I 1 th s ( - binePs ZT.■ji, Ns I' 41m JLRTm"n ", 11.7 (/1.ala aadY i —C 1,34 ‘ J atw e 109 rt / J 19 t-£ looker K. i ‘t V T t: ■ r me =, " 4. • 2 TT g m •A *, it 11 ■ i8J I I aw a - ‘t R’ ' " | ‘7,/. r, z r rar, ' AestKokopeillCir-- Rpeus Kokopelll Cirgle11. . --0/2! ts ? srm isus#iAAJs sidiliJliiae * : hs =ubonyOJene F A N g H Ww E ■ Palm Desert Greens r r — L I 11 2 "7 i 4 le a u s r b a r s n u n y u i , 7 am m 300m      1000f       2016 aerial photograph USDA (2016-04-16 - 2016-07-16) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. 4. a i .*71 ♦ a "h. -L‘ Rllpr, u. UNJEMED. "Anmmmpav?linD ' tsg a 34 saartl)(WHasausbggani.. 7 I 447 s r -U E oxer 7 •j: C 7) ___ _ (mi Alan its Li I. ly ■ ft : e ■ ? s • v,l F, 1 pigo"3: U 1 33 MFeulL--9ua, ----- (111 Bj[e E.Tl i II ■AndL’ALA hri:-r 1405, • » ! — * । iee ss ‘ r r* aerY "YIers — -e ■’ J AJ,IIUTTS mr ■ ... ■: - ' .LPUUUiL A d l 4 f!c U fj f Palm Desert J Greens H W E a L I r r — Tf u a s ’ g eb p u mp e r t t h a t 300m      1000f       2014 aerial photograph USDA (2014-05-15 - 2014-06-06) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. "T —A.F F ekimm geeg.AORLTLISJT l “I ll-9iaL 7, un 10.$LA FI.-rePUTd 1we. ■ ; 7 2)-- UTsTeTL al OLITT’CIl '■1 4 4JL11—Hn * I . ■ t t' IP Vi IV .7; n Cf EU » 2MM 1 ■7ei WH1yhitYt l!L -P UU 7 sli -i r r.:#Z i-4-4 s’ *—samuis MP 2,. gi .. 1 217. 1 1, cr) I -t 2 •dEii wlT at 01,100 Ls ae - Tr. Ly 3 L l y J 11- E T1 J1| IF 1.5N % us -LE’I’s’ H Ws E B Palm DesertJ Greens | — L I r r As e a c l i’ f A p • 4f C‘ 4 1 i . . . s a d i a k e 300m      1000f       2012 aerial photograph USDA (2012-04-23 - 2012-07-20) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. 2 IT 7 017HIHHh J f UT‘+" I .1 Uri un (» HJ . r y IA.T IErem pA —f 7 p'?hn 7 r ■ff t4 1r tw.r IT? X ’ “go A SP r 1 ms i* 1 ■ 4 iT th IUil j । nr. wet“W‘t F7 Wf ff -the . — 02 1 r ■ v r L4 ■ “ : [. A wh-11 _ J e e TinA l I 7.1eeuik h 'I L W - ,0; ner T H‘t L se — _> Jl I uaJrCss etIi h d * hh5— ; MU Whi Gills == 1 cll taoene o -temreO: 2s : i TaWK . IP - A <“r * ■ K tre AmnananuvrP 4 TWOBNAH-upeNNuSt BABbuudvuarg,’) H Ww E Palm Desert Greens r r i l — TE I : J J2. j ‘1 "7 30 0 m       10 0 0 f       20 1 0 a e r i a l p h o t o g r a p h US D A ( 2 0 1 0 - 0 4 - 2 4 - 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 1 0 ) pr e p a r e d F e b r u a r y 4 , 2 0 2 5 - - H i s t o r i c A e r i a l i m a g e r y © 2 0 2 5 , N E T R o n l i n e , L L C . 921 o. I 4""AL. gl JTT.1drLu39 MMuns t 4 -- MH 4 7 pinr B a .±' 17 • ITTT 1 ALr. -irmtc 1 - P7., A C i Lt211. ... Ik sh r " -fl ler* —aMAY iiP t-J .g ' 11 0 1-- L al 3 • p P " ILL ■ i , Yhr* T.' 1 Lj I, Aly i f. J 3 HP <. - r mpejar t Drexel Drive ANTEEIMAHFT 66Rose Ridge Drive i 4 • - : ■ ’■ a. * S. - I I u 41 - l Pe r s. . , ” - x * e. h ‘d : Mu s o Wh i a t LJ| T e IH P s A l . d— 3 f 7 " W — r . i " I. . . — - 3 " . ■ . r 2 * ■ Br I Ca m G" Pa l m D e s e r t Gr e e n s 300m      1000f       2009 aerial photograph USDA (2009-05-28 - 2009-07-18) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. J I A’ n IIi'.4*ar ii ■-1 1 17 i23 • 1 UUACWT1. L ■JITexRI " —n— 77=—ITid ■J —Tr i ICe’d I f • { .1 ■ T | i 555 ~ "0ri 1win7 ■yrll -L I 4 4 i ’ 4I—TC in H Ws E B I a S Zhaveerenbkgk 1 * I A wousnuuro") w" TRarrpevo bar -- aepth I :MU Whi Palm Desert Greens A’l Gif — I 8 L I r r T W —[ I ""4 7- ___ __...... . n L r 1'4 Th fl T-N9g‘‘1===== —1-3 A R * F pi Pure I;♦ de—cen-, f; 1037813 tn ' i FT .4 -8 siGeellge—a J®5 -1. 300m      1000f       2005 aerial photograph US Departmen of Agriculture (2005-05-29 - 2005-09-29) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. Kokopelli Circleiilser is 2-dsI1 Eadh288Wilington J 0 Roadg-am 2*. Alpine Lane gQ Heatherwood Drive 22 L Pele Place 2 Daisy Lane I, . ■ T 1... no a 1 12 Kokopelli Circle East . T College View cirde-- College View Circle Westh f■ t • 1 L. .3-" oenupeuyI ■ r i ■ - ■ ■ T =- = ai) Chinook Circle sraceal. 1W.L.y he ■ I • veg•fr i • o g JNPARAIISLA till H4 IF “Jail A4A1Aas ARD I 1 1we 1 didJalnnaky // ‘as15..oaas ammnnumssemenEC1 * ** " • "g’e Canyon Way 9s 51J 1 J .1 t r j 4 J 1500 H Ww E B —Palm Desert I temem.r 1 re i: T s. 1 I Greens — P=-U S ige sa g Ridge Drive Adge Drive prere asa NA r r Ro s e R i d g e Dr i v e J s Ty u if A R " 300m      1000f       2002 aerial photograph USGS_DOQQ (2002-02-10 - 2002-09-10) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. IIjl gg D $039) 0 X lb'Vlw T II.“he st I(V I"" Li2 13h"s.:■ j r I’Il itmgtTmni J “F -It r >• 11 7 J T t ; %"** - > •yJ" “y l, 1 s .J: 2 .1" *Fi 20 .fr ?££4,0171. *3 I 4•X" t Sil 2 4 >gl—£ re 4‘,d IT- 1 «-J -Bieli-eLaarples"’V ib 4 3 t t a • i' "A tumoo ------ - — 5 i | MI ATTT 72**’* P1 ■' ili4 7 5 al. 1 15 : 3 r. Li. f"F J • 1-1 • • s 'MU. 1 — — . - s..., •—W” j .AIore ws s ge 21 2 M H Ws E B — Palm Desert Greens L I r r • ■ t - Ur .. 3 -■ * F ■ d 2. . r t l | A ■ CN . AT As wP e ■ * J v ! . wa i 300m      1000f       1996 aerial photograph USGS DOQQ (1996-06-04 - 1996-10-10) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. I *’ * - / i*hee,t 4 wh « &th 4.0 - 297, aruyle 4*sA Ge t J H 11i W E a r r i I —Palm Desert Greens In2 5 * * • / J o "I 10 4 wr 44 . i 4 r27 ,, w- - r E , ’ - * 15 . 5 -P H H s » > . i . il k ' -L A 1 . 7 t‘ s -- - - - - at D. ) “M o e L. " . I! ar r d e d r , — e M o d i d ) RA s wa m a y r dt“r er , y “t r 3 M ? - V — = < f — ‘ e *5 • • r ——* * r c t , 1 3 _ 1 # " 1 1 . 2 . I 4 7 21 XU ri ' 25 Li l A f - C J - 1- 4 |- 4 4 a t Z s f e rw Fr e t te 26 IJ h |i I Cl 3 A > ? ‘t—— r t * •= , — 0 1 1 7 - s “ su e al J y Gi 9 -- ■ T T _ p g I p g *= = - 7 ; a. . " L 2 -- - - - I J. • . • — .) ■ . . 300m      1000f       1984 aerial photograph USDA NHAP84 (1984-08-24 - 1984-10-08) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. 4' w* - t—- TP T "cuumdJ FT;M 7 L y :‘TAt 7 If1 ‘g ai wees217 1.mieyT'J T r -C I zifaL > f I * ■■ Jill. 1,l H 1II Ws E 2Palm Desertgu■■ r r • ■ । I t 1 i | 2 a3 V ♦ me * - it "t" 5nm — Lhas £•3 300m      1000f       1979 aerial photograph USGS - BLM (1979-07-02 - 1979-08-02) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. . i 279 SS I.' l —8:! —197 he J L* .l H 1II W E Ir । I EAEAHE (B •44i 0s 858. lan d ail -- k Circle East Kokopelli Circle East College View Circle East Alpine Lane j______Pele Place Daisy Lane Chinook Circle Chinool Kokopelli Circle 2 / Palm Desert Greens ju 5 x C. 8 0 a • yIL 4 m C 21 w w %a % 6 ‘C — = 6 tn KT b V M i s . I 22 5 A wa k s h i n t i - “ — H n I !. n E U (O n. =n i mo . CM — 2 $ 1 \ \ ' 1 14 5 7 Y• _ sy u n le g a c r e e k Dr i v e , zu o x n m r n d e n a n n i @ ’ r " , „ wa m S p r i n g s D h v e - 2 * Md r o n g a C a n y o n D i v e - “ w F a . u r a u T h s M s " pe r so w 3 w E L % X s th ) % if J, sCci m . 5 gg % St o r y sB l u e i 2) g - 6i ; . — S - sh i m a g __ ay . wt M a n z a n i t a Dr i v e " m i l i h s i h u n a v u e i m i me r l i m s in -D d n o m e w e r -- - - - - - ta m m u p p a l s . "o s t i i y al &l * 3 3 —s c £ A ^ ■ H a i n a n q Su * mi d d i h a n ■ Za l l i s d ’ a e s i a o f c § — Dr e x e l l D r i v e 27 P — - .. . Ro s e R i d g e D r i v e 300m      1000f       1977 aerial photograph USGS (1977-10-02 - 1977-11-14) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. HRWg"E" r - —I Lull Js-pje; ae ‘he -J2, - 2 i ;■ In N ■ J■ Lit -1 ===— $— 1 ■ - ——a r 5 " i 74: ■ — C ,, , JE -I f 5 FTf de de V.11 1,l H 1II Ww E t 2Palm Desert Greens 12 C Circle East in Circle East College View Circle East 0o8 SWilin PlaceHeatherwood 8Daisy Lane Iddei"anea’s e r r "d p. - C 2 1 I F West (215 1, (A teii ---r 1 “f ■ 7 - --- 11 T/ Ya ■' i. S. m ce / & c P *" nm === — - - - L — n ' 12- - U- ----- ——P College View CIr illlngton Road Alpine Lane Drive T ♦ A « •Y .tahi La * & so se F L re 300m      1000f       1972 aerial photograph USGS (1972-01-18 - 1972-04-16) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. I I e ere. ? 0 h yB.g: 1 A / Ye ■' T F IL | L 1 |8! 1AI ja — ; ; A"9—m J H Ww E Mi Whi — Palm Desert Greens | L I r r ( ‘ |A ) t sr - 2 )* 119 -. - N 300m      1000f       1959 aerial photograph USDA (1959-06-05 - 1959-11-10) prepared February 4, 2025 -- Historic Aerial imagery © 2025 , NETRonline, LLC. Co %, Hidden Water Place Mustang RIIdge Drive Mustang Ridge Drive White Canyon Drive SA If § I D g Sawmill Canyon Way Oak Flats Drive ■Kl • M 1,l H 1II W E 2Palm Desert Greens C I I 89 r r Chinook Circle Chinook Circle East Kokopelli Circle Kokopelli Circle East College View Circle East Road Alpine Lane rive Daisy Lane Circle West Pele Place 2 On e H o r s e W a y Ma n z a n i t a D r i v e Cl e g a C r e e k D r i v e 5 T —= = — — — n n ) . Wa r m S p r i n g s D r i v e - Mo r o n g a C a n y o n D r i v e O D (0 I X an u d s O u p d s u m e . Po p p e t C a n y o n D r i v e 3 s Dr e x e l l D r i v e Ro s e R i d g e D r i v e 9 !3 51 I e