Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTT 25296 BIGHORN 1990 RESOLUTION NO. 97-51 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. REVISED VESTING TT 25296 Department of Community Development: 1 . The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development as modified by the following conditions. 2. The approval of this vesting tentative map shall expire at the end of the same time period, and shall be subject to the same extensions, established by the Subdivision Ordinance for the expiration of the approval of a tentative map. 3. That the rights contained in the tentative vesting map shall expire if a final map is not approved prior tQ the expiration of the vesting tentative map as provided in condition 2 above. If the final map is approved then construction of a portion of said project shall commence within two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null, void and of no effect whatsoever. 4. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes as provided for vesting tentative tract map§_pursuant to the California Subdivision Map Act. 5. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following I agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Desert Sands Unified School District Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the Department of Building and Safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 6. That the setbacks for dwellings in this project shall be as shown on map exhibits. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 97-51 7. That the approval for Vesting Tentative Tract 28575 shall be null and void unless said property is annexed to the City of Palm Desert. 8. All mitigation measures contained within FEIR as amended by the Second Addendum —are_incorporated_herein_by_reference as conditions of this approval. 9. Project landscaping shall emphasize drought tolerant plant materials and irrigation technology to the greatest extent feasible. 10. The project shall be subject to all currently applicable fees including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, TUMF, and school mitigation fees. 11 . Provisions shall be made for convenient project access and on-site parking for all construction, service workers and other employees associated with the project. 12. Provisions for solid waste disposal shall include residential and commercial recycling where applicable. 13. Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these conditions. Applicant will enter into an agreement to maintain said landscaping for the life of the project, which agreement shall be notarized and which agreement shall be recorded. It is the specific intent of the parties that this condition and agreement run with the land and bind successors and assigns. The final landscape pIan shall include along-term maintenance program specifying among other matters appropriate watering times, fertilization and pruning for various times of the year for the specific materials to be planted, as well as periodic replacement of materials. All to be consistent with the Property Maintenance Ordinance (Ordinance No. 801) and the approved landscape plan. 14. Win mar Palm Desert, an LLC, and Safeco Properties, Inc. (referred to in this paragraph as "Indemnitors") hereby jointly and severally agree to defend at their sole cost and expense, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Desert, its agents, officers and employees, from any claim, action or proceeding filed against the City of Palm Desert, its against, officers, attorneys and employees, as a result of the local agency's approval of GPA 96-1, C2 96-7, vesting TT 25296 (revision), and vesting TT 28575, and/or the City certification of the Second Addendum to the EIR for this project, including but not limited to: 1) actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul such approvals; or 2) actions or proceedings that seek damage as a result of the finding, requirement or condition that a buffer area be established on Winmar property, including but not limited to any action for inverse condemnation. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 97-51 The City of Palm Desert shall promptly notify Indemnitors of such claim, action or proceeding. Further, Indemnitors shall conduct the defense and control the defense. The City of Palm Desert shall cooperate fully in the defense of any such action or actions. Department of Public Works: 1 . Drainage fees, in accordance with Section 26.49 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code and Palm Desert Ordinance Number 653, shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map or issuance of grading permits. 2. Drainage facilities shall be provided to the specifications of the Director of Public Works. In addition, proposed drainage facilities/improvements shall be subject to review and approval by the Coachella Valley Water District. 3. Storm drain construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works and the Coachella Valley Water District. Said study will include, but not be limited to, the investigation of both upstream and downstream impacts with respect to existing and proposed conditions. 4. Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map or issuance of precise grading permits. 5. Full public improvements, as required by Sections 26.40 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, shall be installed in accordance with applicable City standards. All improvements within State Highway 74 right-of-way shall be in accordance-with Caltrans standards. 6. Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to project final. 7. Improvement plans for all improvements, public and private, shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and Caltrans. The installation of such improvements shall be inspected by the Public Works Department/Caltrans and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits. S. Landscaping maintenance on State Highway 74 frontage.and Indian Hills Way shall be provided through a property owners association. Applicant shall be responsible for executing a declaration of Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions, which 5 RESOLUTION NO. 97-51 declaration shall be approved by the City of Palm Desert and recorded with the County Recorder. The declaration shall specify: (a) the applicant shall oversee the formation of a property owners association; (b) the property owners association shall be formed prior to the recordation of the final map; and O the aforementioned landscaping maintenance shall be the responsibility of the property owners association. 9. As required under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.28, and in accordance with Sections 26.40 and 26.44, complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. Offsite improvement plans for all improvements within existing and proposed public rights-of-way to be approved by the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the installation of required offsite improvements prior to recordation of final map. Such offsite improvements shall include, but not be limited to, curb and gutter, asphalt paving and concrete sidew alk in an appropriate size and configuration and provisions for deceleration/acceleration lanes at the main project entry. "As-built" plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Director of Public Works prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the City of Palm Desert. 10. Waiver of access to State Highway 74 and Indian Hills Way except at approved locations shall be granted on the Final Map. 11 . In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.44, complete grading tans-and-specification"hall-be-submitted-to-the-Director-of-Public-Works-for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. 12. As required by Sections 26.32 and 26.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code and in accordance with the Circulation Network of the City's General Plan, dedication of half-street right-of-way at 67 feet on State Highway 74 and right-of-way sufficient to provide for a full street right-of-way of 60 feet on Carriage Trail shall be provided on the final map. 13. As required under Section 12.16 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, any existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground per each respective utility districts recommendation. If such undergrounding is determined to be unfeasible by the City and the respective utility districts, applicant shall agree to participate in any future utility undergrounding district. 14. Traffic safety striping on State Highway 74 shall be provided to the specifications of the Director of Public Works and Caltrans. A traffic control plan must be submitted 6 RESOLUTION NO. 97-51 to, and approved by, the Director of Public Works and Caltrans prior to the placement of any pavement markings. 15. Improvement of interior streets shall be as shown on the tentative tract map and shall be designed in accordance with Section 26.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Those adoba-designated as"Emergency Access Road"-shall-be designed-to-the satisfaction of.the Fire Marshall and the Director of Public Works. 16. Complete tract maps shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. Permits for mass grading may be issued prior to the tract map submittal subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works. 17. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works and Caltrans, as applicable. 18. A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. 19. Proposed building pad elevations are subject to review and modification in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 20.---Prior-to-the-start-of-construction/issuance-of-permits-for-offsite-improvements applicant shall submit a construction phasing plan for review and approval by Director of Public Works for all required offsite improvements for this project. 21 . Site access, with respect to size, location and number, shall be subject to review and approval by the Department of Public Works and Caltrans. 22. Provision for the continuation of any existing access rights which may be affected by this project shall be included as a part of the final map process. 23. Applicant shall comply with the provisions of Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 12.12, Fugitive Dust Control. 24. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF). Payment of said fees shall be at the time of building permit issuance. 25. Prior to start of construction, the applicant shall submit satisfactory evidence to the Director of Public Works of intended compliance with current and subsequent 7 RESOLUTION NO. 97-51 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permits (Permit # CAS000002) for storm water discharges associated with construction activity. Riverside County Fire Marshal: 1 . With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plan check, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal Codes, NFPA Standards, CFC, and CBC and/or recognized fire protection standards. The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per California Fire Code Sec. 10.401 . 2. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 1 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure must be available before any combustible materials are placed on the job site. 3. Provide, or show there exists, a water system capable of providing a potential gallon per minute flow of: a► 1500 gpm for single family dwelling; and b) 3000 gpm for clubhouse and maintenance buildings. The actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given water main shall be 1500 gpm for a two hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure. 4 — The...required_fireJ.low_shall_be_available_from-a-Super_hy-diantlsl_(6"x 4" )(_2-11.2"x 2-1/2"1, located not less than 25' nor more than: a) 200' from single family structure; and b) 150' from clubhouse and maintenance buildings. Distances shall cover all portions of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travel ways.. Hydrants installed below 3000' elevation shall be of the "wet barrel" type. 5. Provide written certification from the appropriate water company having jurisdiction that hydrant(s) will be installed and will produce the required fire flow,,or arrange for a field inspection by.the Fire Department prior to scheduling for a final inspection. 6. The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit process to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separations, or built-in fire protection g 9 measures such as a fully fire sprinklered building. 7. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and fire department connection shall be located to the front of the building, not less than 25' from the building and within 50' of an approved Super hydrant. This applies to 8 RESOLUTION NO. 97-51 all buildings with 3000 square feet or more building area as measured by the building footprint, including overhangs which are sprinklered as per NFPA 13. The building area of additional floors is added in for a cumulative total square footage. Exempted are one and two family dwellings. Applies to clubhouse and maintenance buildings. 8. nstall-a-fire-alarm-(waterflow)-as-required-by-the-Uniform-Building-Code-Sec 33803— for the fire sprinkler system(s). Install supervisory (tamper) alarms on all supply and control valves for sprinkler systems. 9. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes and shall be clearly marked by painting and/or signs as approved by the Fire Marshal. Painted fire lanes and/or signs shall be stenciled or posted every 30' with the following: a) No Parking Fire Lane - CFC 10.205 10. Install a fire alarm as required by the California Building Code and/or California Fire Code. Minimum requirement is UL central station monitoring of sprinkler systems per NFPA 71 and 72. Alarm plans are required for all UL central station monitored systems and systems where any interior devices are required or used. (CFC Sec. 14.103(a)). 11 . Install portable fire extinguishes per NFPA 10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Fire extinguishes must not be over 75' walking distance and/or 3000 sq. ft. of floor area. In addition to the above, a 40BC fire extinguisher is required for commercial itchens. 12. Install a Hood/Duct automatic fire extinguishing system if operating a commercial kitchen including, but not limited to, deep fat fryers, grills, charbroilers or other appliances which produce grease laden vapors or smoke. (NFPA 96, 17, 17A1. 13. All buildings shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall be not less than 24' of unobstructed width and 13' 6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is allowed, the roadway shall be 36' wide with parking on both sides, 32' wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150' shall be provided with a minimum 45' radius turn around (55' in industrial developments). Fountains or garden islands placed in the middle of these turn-arounds shall not exceed a 5' radius or 10' diameter. City standards may be more restrictive. 14. Whenever access into private is controlled through use of gates, barriers, guard houses or similar means, provision shall be made to facilitate access by emergency vehicles in a manner approved by the Fire Department. All controlled access devices 9 RESOLUTION NO. 97-51 that are power operated shall have a Knox Box over-ride system capable of opening the gate when activated by a special key located in" emergency vehicles. Devices shall be equipped with backup power facilities to operate in the event of power failure: All controlled access devices that are not power operated shall also be approved_by_the_Fire_Departmeat.—Minimum_opening-width-shall-be 16'with_a minimum vertical clearance of 13'6". 15. A dead end single access over 500' in length will require a secondary access, sprinklers or other mitigative measure approved by the Fire Marshal. Under no circumstances shall a single dead end access over 1300 feet be accepted. 16. A second access is required. This can be accomplished by two main access points from a main roadway or an emergency gated access into an adjoining development. 17. Contact the fire department for a final inspection prior to occupancy. 18. All new residences/dwellings are required to have illuminated addresses meeting both City and Fire Department approval. Shake shingle roofs are no longer permitted in the cities of Indian Wells, Rancho Mirage or Palm Desert. 19. All fire sprinkler systems, fixed fire suppression systems and alarm plans must be submitted separately for approval prior to construction. Subcontractors should contact the Fire Marshal's office for submittal requirements. 20. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve months. 21 . Other: Provide for Fire Marshal approval the following items: a. Emergency.vehicle access plan for connection of dead end cul-de-sacs. b. Emergency vehicle egress plan for private shared driveways. C. Detail of all non paved cleared areas that are to be used as part of emergency access. 10 HILLSIDE STUDY REPORT HIGHWAY 74 COUNTRY CLUB HILLSIDE ZONE Job No. H15-1-15 September 1989 PREPARED FOR: JIM HAYHOE DEVELOPMENT, INC. PREPARED BY: HOUSLEY ASSOCIATES, INC. k INTRODUCTION Mr. Ray Diaz, Director of community Development, informed Mr. John Hayhoe, our client at a meeting held on September 12, 1989, that a Hillside Study was required on the portion of the Highway 74 Project that was within the designated "Hillside Zone" as stated in the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance. To conform with the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance, Mr Hayhoe authorized Housley Associates to perform the Hillside Study of the proposed development within the Hillside Planned Residential District. Method of Analysis The procedure outlined in the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance, Section 25.15.030, was used to determine the number of dwelling units permitted on the hillside parcel. Three options from the Zoning Ordinance were used to conduct the study: 1. Option No. 1 - Parcel Average Slope Method 2. Option No. 2 - Toe of Slope 3. Option No. 3 - Dwelling Unit Building Site The fourth option described in the Zoning Ordinance does not apply to this project according the City's staff. Aerial topography at a scale of 1"=100' was used to evaluate the slopes in this study. A plan measure wheel was used to measure contour lengths and a planimeter was used to calculate areas. RESULTS OF STUDY The results of the Hillside Study are shown on the attached Figure 1. Option 1 Option 1 calculates an Average Slope "S" over the area of the entire parcel of 26%, and using this slope, specifies 1.66 acres per dwelling unit density and requires 77.5% of the lot areas to remain in a natural state. This option allows a Maximum Total Number of 39 Dwelling Units on the entire 64 acre parcel. Option 2 Option 2 allows a density of 3 dwelling units per acre for areas that are adjacent to the valley floor (toe of slope) which have a average slope "S" less than 10%. These areas are delineated and shown on Sheet 1 of the H.P.R. ,D. Zone Slope/Density Study. Two Cases are investigated using Option 2. Case 1 assumes that no changes are made to the Golf Course alignment shown on the current land plan. Outside of the Golf Course boundaries there are 13.56 acres that meet the requirements to be developed at a density of 3 units per acre; thus yielding a total number of 41 units that can be located in the toe of slope area. Case 2 assumes that the land plan is changed so that the Golf Course is not placed within the designated Hillside Zone and that the hillside area is developed with the maximum number of units possible. Based on this assumption, there are 23.8 acres that qualify to be developed at 3 units per acre yielding a total number of 71 units. Option 3 Option 3 deals with specific dwelling unit sites whose slopes are twenty percent or less and are not adjacent to the valley floor, if the following criteria is met: 1. Minimum area of one-half acre 2. Minimum dimension of one hundred feet 3. Maximum of overall density of one dwelling unit per acre. Evaluating the same Case 1 as described earlier (Golf Course unchanged) , there are 15.2 acres in the parcel that have a slope "S" less than 20% as described in this Option; however, the overall area of 23.0 acres controls (Criteria No. 3) and permits 23 units (See Sheet 1) . Case 2 (Golf Course removed) contains 17.8 acres of property with "S" less than 20% and the overall area is 40.4 acres. Thirty-six (36) units are permitted on this portion of the parcel. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Option 1 is very restrictive on development density on this parcel probably due to the averaging of the very steep slopes with the mild slopes. It is believed that a more representative and useable average slope "S" can be obtained if areas are isolated and categorized. Combining Options 2 and 3 separates the slopes into categories and allows different densities accordingly. Adding the results of Options 2 and 3 for Case 1 gives the recommended maximum number of dwelling units for the hillside parcel area of 64 units. The total number of planned lots is 60, (50 whole lots and fractions of 17 lots, which are roughly equivalent to 10 whole lots) . Adding the sum of Options 2 and 3 for Case 2 gives the recommended maximum number of dwelling units for the hillside parcel area of 107 units, however, since the golf course would have to be redesigned this is probably not acceptable. It is recommended that the dwelling units be located on the areas delineated on Sheet 1 of the H.P.R. ,D. Zone Slope/Density Study at the appropriate density. The intention of the Hillside Planned Residential District Zone is, as stated by the City Ordinance, "to encourage only minimal grading in hillside areas that relates to the natural contours of the land and will not result in extensive cut and fill. .." Care should be taken in locating lots and street layout in order to meet these objectives. i ADDENDUM INTRODUCTION Mr. Phil Joy of the City of Palm Desert Planning Department requested that we extend our slope analysis to include two additional parcels. The first parcel is an agreed upon portion of the property currently owned by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) and zoned O.S. A zone change to P.R.-5 has been proposed by our client. The second parcel is that portion of the Del Gagnon property which is included in the Highway 74 Country Club Project. It is currently zoned P.R.-7. No zone change is proposed. Method of Analysis The same method of analysis was used in this addendum as was used in the original report. However, only option No. 2 and 3 were considered and only case 1 (Golf Course unchanged) was evaluated for this addendum. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The CVWD and Del Gagnon Hillside Study Areas are shown on sheet 2 of the H.P.R. ,D. Zone Slope/Density Study with the different slope areas delineated. CVWD Property: An area of approximately 9.8 acres was found to have a slope equal to or less than 10%. The total allowable number of units in this area is 29 units. The total number of planned lots is 11, (10 whole lots and fractions of 4 lots which are roughly equivalent to 1 whole lot) . Del Gagnon Property: A portion of the Del Gagnon property was analyzed in the original study. The addendum considered only that portion of the property that is within the P.R.-5 zone. A 2.4 acre portion of the property was found to have a slope of less than 100. Under the Hillside Zoning Ordinance this portion could have a density of 3 du/acre or a yield of 7 units. The remainder of the property considered, approximately 8.7 acres, has about 5.2 acres in which the slope varies between 10% to 20%. The allowable number of units on this portion would be 10. However, this allowance is further constrained by the maximum overall density limitation of 1 du/acre, so the yield in this area is limited to 8 units. Therefore, the total number of units allowable in the remainder of the Del Gagnon property considered is 15 units. The total number of planned lots is 13, (12 whole lots and fractions of 4 lots which are roughly equivalent to 1 whole lot) . f CITY OF PALM DESERT I.S. # 73-510 Fred Waring Drive RECE:1,f_D Palm Desert, CA 92260 Prof. Ref.: CZ 89-16 OCT 11 1991 NOTICE OF DETERMINATIONMMRm OEVEtorMEM OEr,1RTMEM GttI IUE R�LM OEISIER1� D TO: Office of Planning and Research County Clerkg0k1400 Tenth St., Room 121 County of Rie Sacramento, CA 95814 SEp 1 y 1991 FROM: Community Development Department SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with ICtao EP Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code a [QJect It f.'esx-yb ba''a3_- -..--yr `[a b.-. ,a -..a w.. a"r o"���"w."N,, �¢.. . LY .. t Str SbW c R S2N o-y b a 3E$ wa2 k13 xx 53 ap c.'Q`<dRR `'&baR - e L � a''FhY26Y Lb 6 �flc'�8 f3 S ang+}me(µ tsf 7AnC D.`l 16 S Yf 3i G f 0 L °`��Q�Wk 3$R xFbw>nPoL L fl R fl be,J ib fl3. e L 3 2 SCR L ?"C2'] 0 ° m>oavie:.°v.."C wb" °c n M C?tr- $ . ..°2:?.w.R,.R.:?:,°:.»;:.R...... . axe.'<Raea,R>.L>�RR>..>... " °Y,SC",.n 3w<:. ° °.bw°° .09.a :bL<:° .. 8tatat learu�ghotue i amber2xi subttldie�to'SLatC�lCaltd lAaS } $ M.. L °:a /o:°:A3 8 RL o3 5 bg x 8 -- 2 RR e w,P fx&$0 S'i E� ':b84:E Yn:358y^,:fl R3 s3 f nS g L]8$ 3 2�5�B }�+I>�7., °a.°..:i'.$':Y%@°>:.8.>.0..31.x..i?.CE,8.,oa.:3R3R o33,.; 5 Ytla�.°.fy3' :8&8.�2.43:mimQ. .&S..i. .5S8iiE2i�oS 3.�. a.°a x.C2 ,b2$:.M. Vf:IAA%rc MCY C`y9 a$B.w.R°�°.$"e.tr, R Ct 8 b b L b b k w..8w3i:eRi?�85Ca3F bx aRa L < P 3'2 b c'S 2 33 �C� w3$4.2'.L.b.SF.9.'[.C"S*£L $ ge d kkpii3[8'S.L�B"8i3�b RFC 8.S`TL b ,S S L V $ 8:S22$&Y4'L°?��.0 R%1— R N_1M.%.".iF.a..i?..<?i C.:S2,:<k�RRB$n$`$:k<'0'r�`g3S,S'^i'3.'S:a2�8�`RBL:.�6b>o.w.w'..'.w.y4°o3:°<t�`�3?:<:" � a.;f,. a.:ylu tRfl,.,..>.u..C...">.C.<C... .w.u�'.�.,nv.[.n.n..n°n cw.w<i:[C.[c..<C:. ..>..C..a!2:........:.w.C..e..C:...a.w..a.e.<.a.......C:.::Y[.[:.C:.C..C..C:.C:..C:.:n..:..C..e..C..a.....L..C:.w.[:.a..a... ..:...........a...R:.............Rik.k>:..":{fR.:R.:n..,...:..:..n..n"...n.:n.........S'S y,Ca'a>:Cy.:[,:'.::<>. .r. 2:."'q'R:<:%fl¢C:nfC:w:[?'<.C...aa:[.C.i; y 3 YR.d�>-:.SvgiSo'3).�3>R&R383 �d�3 R 3°°8o°.btu'.:-°E .9L '� <3 m'o °.. ntaFt Pc7StlF1. g F T SL: e1e Ii,Qr�t C w W 3` 3 na t k a b;.a s°x oSm;3a3a%<,2$i'N. L.s33$x[ ,:x2 i$.s:;3°;Yfr°3F'' snba.su> `.'oie<�$�b" S p n.RQ trYEy fs` E.e( 3.<4<?8°wb°R38bL2 ads u.a:u'rt.>R'RC..:...:.,y.:...,.ia.:]tr., .:cL u',£:`:£ .:.°.:Q.vr...[:«. :a 2«[,r..f l a: <CRnRa':..::'[:SaW::'fpv.°',b;R.'L, y �s��rt[ ..S. : .:.1"C'ghr?<S LxL::b<L:°<b'!5:.: Pkfil A4Y3Efihltflttdt:.' l?°'eso`:uo$:$?:<i.m.3. S[S:..Rn" :was.b.i.cy:<L..S:.":oa`a:o`.$''.'V3 . .: V'W1'.v:A:L>: y. "k".$'""3ny/.. .;,.E.::9"8SR`:<':°:.R:.:3:r,:.R:.p:.s:<?xF,:<3 a:La:'x :»:<.ac>:v'un3:`3Y.:rA.:3a:Y::<:f>$"bRf:3.:b'SBaS: 'rba:baF:<8:>.Ca.RSrn>:ba:b:T:<Sa:S:<:w..C....... ...5 y.y..�:<..?..r.N.y.".>G'�E'.'n..C:n..C.L.<:.:b:<.<':".. ...R.>s<•:a. v.:f a::n:.: ....1$,.x. >: ".$n.:.:�f.2n£>.8..2a.L:.w..Yy.2:CR2.>8<2:[3: ^ 2.<2..�..?.6t<5.. -....R:.R �`k�u!:u!2;!i:.ai':Sia. i:...°B..8a.a.&i.°.!$o:'?ili. : :w ,.3"..a"° ...✓"° nsba.a�.n,.,y.°"n ..".3..,."":.�'.:.„$.R;":essasa<an.tt.3:<,psarR:.?f 3Q A S. SS RS CC 33:^fi a C I'tv) a l[a u`ad RF t ss1 HtglfW� 41>dtWceli Polftllx Ave..w'"4 the tlyBtrunda%y b3 b g Y j e k T5 S ai 3 b� RS S <68158_y 03.{ Y� ,4Y 'd Y S8'S$YL RYb 3 RZy b0 Y [><R36�R RL RL'R$LS$b YLL Y LC?)�S`[ a.bC3'. S3C <R ,; CRb R C C b n<C <°`4.SYd ug>Eb"0 S.3 3 3Y5 b.bxb.0�C C Q C" 3 gCL 2 £ @. 9 Y@` :b fojdct D crilstit�tf' Ztsft 9. ott 23 c't ,b ilt�'saxg y¢°darteaE]p xo?t�d...... ......... 2(npcn Space}t 'X2 sd{Ptanne8. C`trn. Y P'Y C Q C 9 88J'Y 842 33w.- 3bx 0 L R tdentto'1 dw 1Cm um an 13PR I3r d Plann td t � <>es $ e $ tsxper�cre� 5 L ljst a ed3Res enfta) lfl u: F tr 'u W'G 3'8' Axw3 8S^tr18 yL L' flfl y8F 2 CF8- b Lb S fl 9 6 R g`L.. pa:R•'a Y" v�<<S4$'C V ?:..n°<fa::..:. RFiifl S.nb'S>.o`°'so`°$aR;'is[r.'"?3:u::"a'?.:'"L:°<SRu'<• ..w.f?>:>C:a>.a'� :'�'8:n:'•:8i:•^.is.:b:2a>:Laa�u<$:['F.2�A::�:::3�:�<8�212:Yip:' .>vi ... .ea. 3tt"a�ii'9A;C.xs-.i F..'a.a..:.3Rg:<. ..$..¢..:ns:a>:a ,a ce;ab:<,:w:<v:c.aw.'iRe>g.?.?.[..ys...R.Y.:,a,.:v> 'C�,$.a ZC ..eaR.:. m.S.'ro' °-la:kmxS:�3x2,tr.8..ua.."v...:....,k,:Y..�83:C:ynxRno;m.S:un� .°>:R.....8.$?R::3 E'.^': >:°x°:I°»R[b.° ..L..a.... .......'>.. .5...... ....>..:.C. :...........tr...:.......Ra....:.:.,..F.....a... .........,.... .......... ... °.O.b A:Lye:%a.`Ctin,2.? u w.<b..,c,.:.ny.u<nr�<..uP,..,a,..,...,..ay.w,,..2.F,.:.,..:y.o b..,..y ys..&,.3,..¢.'N,.b,... .E,..y..E,..Ra. .b C..?..C.. .0 [.A.i:TS:`SSnB:a SYE°L�w a°z:bu:!b:F,C,S,C, e3w>:°:<a:.°::a::a..arb.:a...>.a:ww.aaa.°:.a:..:..a..,..a:.S. .w.a::a.w... �':..a. �'.S.,"i?...';!?iPoa&;<il��,,:::a:":%:Q6Yz"3:`:C Q'R>:°>g.. ..8:..� ."V.. :..k 3a..:'9..:2 C 3. `S>'s'..3l S:<S..S.:a:.a..< nzS:.: .�.. C. :'.L,uisi's�i3!3$:.LisQCF>S:G:ka:.S..Y:)b:N.: .:y:[w..:< .:So.°"..;: >m:<a.:««<°.°>:°:<°:.axw:..>:w:°xL:<w:<3:°.w:..>::.:°>trY>:b>:<.>::..ww..:a.:w....°..<�:.....a....d?,.._.....e....._......_...4.R>.:.... r.r..fo-..>.ma>.a.R.a..R�F..fi... � 8i.:"nE 3�4a:v:..F'. NoUcc is arc y given t at t e City o Palm Desert, Community eve opment apartment as ma e t e o owing determination on the above-described project: 1. The project was approved by the City Council on August 5, 1991. 2. The project [x] will [ I will not have a significant effect on the environment. [x] An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA [ ] A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures[x]were [ ]were not incorporated into the project through conditions of approval and project design. 4. For this project a Statement of Overriding considerations was [x] adopted [ ] not adopted. 5. For this project a De Minimis Impact Finding pursuant to Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code was M made [ ] not made. 6. A copy of the EIR or Negative Declaration and the record of the project approval is on file and i*4Wh4leVm*ed at the CommtGT(dpdtF.APDepartment, City of Palm Desert, 73-510 Fred Waring �FCv �litiod5e>�r7ne@pt 92260; tefe�hon8 (619Yt�346-0� �1. D � Per�MD 21152 Date: Au st 1991 L5 Signature: �,.--.� �` J � 11QQI s WILUAM E. NE Title: Director of Community Devel EfTL9Yt�u . 199t COUNTY ERK Copt Comlty ' fliversld , ate nit» County of Rlversic) ,State of U tornia 2y CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME C E R T I F I C A T E O F F E E E X E M P T I O N De Minimis Impact Finding Project Title/Location (include county) : Change of Zone CZ 89-16 Altamira Country Club Located in the City of Palm Desert, County of Riverside, east of State Route 74, between Portola Avenue and the southern City boundary. Project Description: Zone change proposing to redesignate 25 acres of drainageway from O.S (Open Space) to PR-5 (Planned Residential-5 units per acre) and HPR (Hillside Planned Residential) . Findings of Exemption (attach as necessary) { Approval of the project will have no significant effect on fish or wildlife resources. Based on the substantial evidence contained in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project, no significant fish or wildlife resources exist in the 25 acre site comprising the project that will be adversely impacted by adoption of the rezoning. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the public agency has made the above finding and that the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Chief Planning Offi ial D Title. Director of Community Development SLP19 1991 Lead Agency: City of Palm Desert RVEFSIDE 00JN1V Date: August 5, 1991 RMNI%DEPARrW&i INDIO%AM Section 711. 4 , Fish and Game Code DFG: 12/90 CEQA3 (1/91) DECEIVED CITY OF PALM DESERT I.S. # OCT 1 1 1991y��1y2 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Proj. Ref.: TT 2529COMMUNITY DLYELOPMU n DEMNiMENI CITY Of PALM DMRL NOTICE OF DETERMINATION �� TO: Office of Planning and Research County Clerk ® 1400 Tenth St., Room 121 � County of Riverside $EP 1 y �991 E' Sacramento, CA 95814 FROM: Community Development Department RNERS OE COUNTY IKAMiNG O PAHrWW SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with INDIooRICE �Y Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code s?4QYSR�FSRao E4 b �]4�a b _ _ H _811._�F,3.l j 0 a. L 8 S s S.P 3 8 y3�3(L(Sx$Ex'bR` 3 e 3'�c.p E °]R 4gyEgY o sTentativcfatd TTm529 � aPa3a3 s,gF @ 3c 9� 8sfi3;asSPw68Po $%EaKys .,w.:(:`(../.. :P. /. -tr ;:'$F .sq.3?k.o,.3;£;:�e:EsE::3: :s:$i 'a r r:E e o C:,^9,x'LE:y`,:�^>,�p.3yEE (f�..°$z° ,?$&$;.$;$,.az?, .o-$a e%'on.a�, a. ; �! .x3(trn8 5.,8..8....&4..$'.yax.,3.843. .,;:a::3�..a:Ew.(3:�::¢>:S?':,E:xs: :,: :a.:>:>:,.; �£v.9.z,3,:.r.; B.E:.E.$..,.(. :. ,E:.16,n8w.E.R.3..�>.°:o..:..:..^.. /...2.:.E:r..8..E^2..?.. rE:. .n Pr..?.E..].r ,. '$E)..N.2S:4.En3.(E:.°.,°n°.:w..wi.(w, ,2 9.,8,>.,r,..:by.6..L>.Q,:4.,..wy. ,:°:t:(w(°r,3.!lEs'g3%8,:Er3:m:e..2:(8:..•..0.F,.a ). 3n.".a3 S' 3 BS S Z' 3 .$ R F 4, a 3, 3 > E S.a b a. g E 9 4 s 4 Y E2 �Fe�S b P l 4 YREE% .. L'6 P PE P k(Fy'E Sfat6lrmghonSC t9nmber(,f subm,tted to Slate Clearutgitongc}� 3 ER E gLf b 5 PF P3$2MaE 5EM av 3 My/�(1 4 q'> e s eb a s Zn 8 S Y E 8 E8 SL Ex x E 8 F 8 d65, 4'ySx E E L F'E X(1X,r 14 & 3 EE L Y333 4 ?:.s,..3.$8nk 4Eb�SE3a'S$08 S,SgS $4 #b .. M.<$ 9$aSwa o.8 3"3a:E o�9 f $ o$,e 3 8:2P$Ea8E8 P.3, p°ff W afraESpiR¢: a d'3 3 b w yYyEn4( w�8y.O �°]g F .F8 4> 4<.„b . ....^,,...:(.y.•r.:i4tl:..0'Q:C(::'"isQ:xt:xt. :'G>:.°.(¢m:°.rP:w. ...:E F . ,!F$..:.3,8w3:3:E"L:'b>a:(.>'9:°>:.r.,.:(°°,:.Y:°e.:S3?4?'# `2:'.^o." (y:(x:«...:.. :E:.r.:., .;.E.Y:d.:.°: yxE-g.E 8..... �( x°E'S:x.:.:5°<.`b: fl.:3:(w>:S.E:.:S:(a:m:/: 3:.:(%-8^,,:.8,..4(.4a.4..(:P:... :E..8R5, -:(a.:.. .£^P�:3::si�23:2a.::8""r:i.:$.: n}aeE 1Pnran aN E 2n8"A8ab w. �e hone C F&S 8P FEgEa 6 o ' 3lr`.a r p �] 3 b.3N ..4 8 m s8�x.3.c w,'a'.iE.«.E P 3 xn3.o ES%3.noao°•y::i$$:S`p�3n. 3 a' a 3» i e Fi b ♦oL�3�A.°• :3f361 6...?..tr..h.?.y:: P..(yEe"`.(FSga, s`aeoo� 8:,a'»E b M. k4 3 R 3k 4 P 34.:3.k3.&q.o.°.WR)'y N`6'fEb aE E• aoSn36:,-0-0 ? �...�°. S uwl a W 3 G'So✓'. 3 k 4 $ '4 � 8 E.`.,r 8.(nm°.°.°.w..>na(F n.n.E b 3 $ >an ,..,.,,a .sa..a ..°...$3°:�;.x.'a °Enn%L.».•.r.ca°.°.°+�.�,.a,°,(°°Ea °] PP m?a°°3s°v^ten&,,�.$ a�°.a r83'63£Eha xa�°.?.(F >tr 4(}b,.,s..c^.'.F,• .•s.)2.mE:m^nS,>:SYa.x°/psaCu$$4m? .E..z°..:q3 a $./x8iy?a:E'(•:ism M t ex atU ow3g wEA� e or.. QS .ennmW. Y& ME ..a.w.a.?°.;'by( o 'ap4 knE9 mtru .Yaa °( m (•m v x R F --Tz(3 3 8 b, i'toj8c2 3eact pdtw not tive r t tU W. th WtlSbs�ebojscreatSug a Sfl tveU�bg n3,# conht y clnb1srb ct andit;hng: 'P t b m@ Y 8 oK m .4 '. b t a ] 1$hole got is ur4e and ancEllary faahlies incladLhg clublEouse a nvEng4rsngeYiCrmtsb ttris,notnmumtyYl,potsanit epas 43 F g axb # § ax F9 xyr ° b .6'E aaib ES,$ °s'd Pa (y: i $ W $ H P 4 �3 b e� r:•n2`�Tsk,e.'(..(,4:,`oke$f uawwa.3,�°h°z3Ent.>°C3E}rq,9 j..t P,,.4a.�;.V(u..S,?i!}?S,tra,.,°,aF,.nas,.wmw4>ni<,a na4�]/././ 4 n.nh.n.a:.°.°°.w..°:a°SoR',<,°u<()y?,N°.AET°3::'0 4°•z.. C F rtr�°� nmm V�S.n :ibF Py4 4 (n$ao uEaYi�e$ui 4 i 4 b Yk 4ut"Tt4�k43uu w'E°° °°oOi;konfn`°'Nn%° m(°°jY°< P '�ES"t •:trwy'i o ot,ce is hereby given that the City of Palm Desert, Community Development Department has made the following determination on the above-described project: 1. The project was approved by the City Council on August 5, 1991. 2. The project [x] will [ ] will not have a significant effect on the environment. Ixl An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA I ] A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures[x]were []were not incorporated into the project through conditions of approval and project design. 4. For this project a Statement of Overriding considerations was [x] adopted [ ] not adopted. 5. For this project a De Minimis Impact Finding pursuant to Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code was ( ] made [XI not made. 6. A copy of the EIR or Ne ative Deel ration and the record of the project approval is on file ar@=py$ttaSlfiined. at the Communitsvo �ni drtment, City of Palm Desert, 73 510 Fred Waring tan11 92260; telepff a (t9) 3"1 S' n Filed pw PPAL- 1 POSTED Date: August 1991 L"' Signatur . AUG 91 � S s 91 WILLIA E.CONER Title: Direr or of Communi Deve TY CLERK Copt tretside,S a form rcd gll (SCouCounty of Riverside, a of Calaoa y T ®� RECEI O E® LAID/ OFFICES OF DE CASTRO.WEST. CHODOROW &1 BURNS. INC. NOV 0 1 1990 EIG TEENTH FLOOR _G960 WILSF IRE SOULEVARD �M ' /✓35T PXI DEPIRTMEM ._ . . _ P, - v __ _ i r, _Cc pNGELES, CALIFORNIA 9002a-3804 CM UU��PAL7A'pESENT ..__ c:I _E LE= TELEPHONE (213147B-2541 HCCIVEU -RITERs' of==c- olaL .�ur..aeP s noE,c- o_ =Esc ca = _ C 1 s z_ E .,,_ 3q�E S GLG -__.. �c__� _. .c sF T ELEGO PIER (213) <73-0123 sL,_P�, __- "n. October 30, 1x9o0CT 2 1119111 _=E- N t sljl. -EI v_ F 3 CITY CLERKS G- . _-+__ _. GLc+=e_c ­Ill a. F_rEEwsien OUR FILE NUMBER VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Members of the City Council City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Warning Drive Palm Desert, CA 92280 RE: Altamira Tentative Tract Map No. 25296 and Change of Zone 89-16 Dear Council Members: This letter is in response to the letters dated October 24 , 1990 and October 25, 1990 from the Big Horn Institute addressed to you. The Big Horn Institute (the "Institute") letters of October 24 , 1990 and October 25, 1990 are but another in a long line of attacks by the Institute on you, your Planning Commission and your Staff in an effort to deter you from performance of your duty and a decision on the merits of the Big Horn Venture (the "Ventures") project. The Institute' s letter of October 24 , 1990 asserts that the lawsuit by Ventures against the Institute is a "S.L.A. P.P. " lawsuit. It is not. The Ventures lawsuit seeks to have the County prepare an EIR for the Institute 's project and to declare the Institute a nuisance to the extent the Institute requires 105 acres of the Ventures ' land as a buffer. The Institute insists that it needs the 105 acre buffer. To obtain that buffer, the Institute insists the City of Palm Desert prepare an EIR. Yet, the Institute refuses to prepare an EIR for its project which consists of a change of zone, a laboratory to study diseased sheep, a caretaker' s residence, a helipad, a museum, a parking lot, and other improvements. Then, when Ventures sues to require an EIR for that project, the Institute cries !'S.L.A. P. P. suit" . In other t DE CAST RO, WEST, CHODOROW 6 BURNS, INC. Members of the City Council Page -2- October 29, 1990 words an EIR is appropriate for adjoining landowners but not for the Institute. Does that sound fair to you? Moreover, it should not be forgotten that the lawsuit stems in part from the fact that the Institute mislead the City of Palm Desert and Ventures with respect to the Institute's requirement of the buffer. Had the Institute been honest and forthright with the City of Palm Desert' s staff and Ventures, both would have fought to have the County do an EIR rather than a negative declaration before the County approved the Institute 's project. Had that occurred, the lawsuit would have been unnecessary. And, it should not be forgotten that the Institute misled the County when, at the County's Board of Supervisor' s meeting, Mr. DeForge, in answer to a direct question about any problem with the 1000 houses "going up to the north of you" , did not mention any need for a buffer or any other problem with adjacent development. He said that the Institute intended to "wall off people from walking on the property or anything else. " Thus, the Ventures ' lawsuit is not a "S. L.A.P.P. suit" . Rather it is an attempt to require the Institute to abide by the law, just as Ventures has done. And, with respect to the California Department of Fish and Game Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") with the Institute, it is Ventures ' position that the Department of Fish and Game must do an EIR before it can grant the permission contained within the MOU. The Department of Fish and Game has not even prepared an environmental assessment to determine if an EIR is needed. Both the Department of Fish and Game and the Institute must abide by the law. Ventures has and will abide by the law. The Institute and the Department of Fish and Game should do likewise. Similarly, with respect to Venture' s investigation of whether or not the Institute is entitled to exempt status under the Internal Revenue Code and the California Revenue and Taxation Code. Ventures has not made any attack whatsoever on that tax exemption but reserves its rights if the Institute abuses its privilege. Ventures has been and continues to be mindful that the Institute is chartered to preserve the Bighorn Sheep. To that end, before acquiring its land, Ventures inquired as to whether or not its development would cause any problem for the Institute J • LA'.v � - CcS OF • DE CASTRO, WEST, CHODOROSY- BURNS, INC. Members of the City Council Page -3- October 29, 1990 and was told by Mr. DeForge it would not. To that end Ventures voluntarily undertook an EIR for its project. To that end Ventures inquired of noted reputable scientists as to whether or not a buffer was really needed. Those scientists replied that only a 50 yard buffer would be needed and Ventures quickly agreed to such a buffer. To that end Ventures has offered a 400 hundred yard clear buffer and the balance of 105 acres with only golf holes therein despite fervently believing that the Institute's requirement of any such buffer was and is a figment of the Institute' s psyche without any basis in scientific fact or evidence. The Institute repeatedly points to a December 9, 1989 meeting of "scientists" wherein the buffer was "validated" by that group. Those scientists were hand picked by the Institute. Neither Ventures nor any but the Institute's hand picked scientists had a voice. Now the Institute wants those "scientists" from that same group (but not necessarily the same people) to be on the proposed commission to study the Institute' s buffer needs. Mind you, the Institute doesn't want scientists with degrees and pedigrees. It wants scientists that it knows are already biased to its views. Witness the fact that the Institute demands commission members who have had field experience only. The scientists who are of the opinion that only a 50 yard buffer is needed have degrees as Ph Ds. and D.V.Ms. and they have had field experience. Any group blended between those with field experience and those with degrees would be a reasonable compromise. But, no. The Institute insists on only those with field experience. The reason is obvious. The Institute feels that those with only field experience are more likely to adhere to its views than those with degrees. The Institute's claim that only those with field experience should be on the commission is a ploy. It is a ploy to stack the deck in the Institute's favor. However, this is academic as a new EIR is to be prepared and the commission idea is behind us. The idea of a buffer is not behind us, however. It remains an irrational aberration of the Institute. Indeed the Institute 's own Director Mr. DeForge cannot rationally explain why a buffer is required. Initially he says that a buffer is required because the Institute's sheep need a clear view to breed and to lamb. That assertion is belied by the fact that sheep breed and lamb in the Living Desert Institute and at zoos. In fact, some breeding and lambing takes place in very very close proximity to humans and even while they are watching! When Mr. DeForge is confronted by these facts, he dissembles and says that if there is no buffer the sheep in the Institute' s pens will be LPV/ OF=1C=5 OI DE CASTRO,WEST, CHODOROW G BURNS, INC. Members of the City Council Page -4- October 29, 1990 "urbanized" and become accustomed to humans thereby being unable to exist in the wild. ' The Institute itself urbanizes the sheep. The sheep are kept in pens, they are fed by humans, they are in close proximity to humans, they are treated by humans. Mr. DeForge even calls the sheep by name ("Adam", "Eve" , Ames", etc. ) and when he does, they come to him. So much for "urbanization" . Indeed, when the laboratory is built and the museum is built, even more humans will come to the Institute. Thus Mr. DeForge' s assertion of "urbanization" is contradicted by his plans for the Institute and his own actions with the sheep. Moreover, published studies tell us that Mr. DeForge' s assertions regarding the need for a buffer are incorrect. And, sheep which are claimed to have been "urbanized" can be trained to return to the wild and survive. Thus, the Institute's position regarding the necessity for a buffer is not borne out as is evidenced by observable facts, scientific reports and the Institute' s own activities. We believe that the Institute can indeed receive a fair and impartial hearing by the Palm Desert Planning Commission and City Council. We believe that the Palm Desert Planning Commission and City Council cannot lawfully delegate their responsibilities under the State Planning Law, the Subdivision Map Act or the California Environmental Quality Act. We believe the Institute is raising issues of bias in an attempt to delay and obfuscate. Its purpose in doing so is plain - economically break Ventures so that the project will not be built. The Institute and its attorneys will attack anything and everything, anybody and everybody in order to gain their objective which is 105 acres of Ventures ' land. The Planning Commission and City Council of Palm Desert should not be misled 'Notice - no answer is given by Mr. DeForge to the fact that sheep breed and lamb in close proximity to humans at the Living Desert Institute and at zoos. Rather, he shifts to "urbanization" . LAW DE CASTRO. WEST, CHODOROW 6 BURNS, INC. Members of the City Council Page -5- October 29, 1990 or intimated. They should perform their duty. You know in your hearts, as we know, that you are not biased one way or another and that your will do you duty as the law requires. jVertruly yours, - G L G. Burns De Castro, Chodorow & Burns, Inc. MGB:ba cc: David Erwin, Esq. (via fax) Ronald White (via fax) MEMORANDUM City of Palw Desert TO: City Manager through the City Attorney"s Office FROM: Assistant City Manager/Director of Community Development DATE: September 12, 199(-) SUBJECT: Attorney General `s Position on Altamira Project In my discussions with Richard Tom of the California. State Attorney General 's Office concerning that agency"s entrance into the: Altamira project hearings, I mentioned to hind that it would appear that it would be a possibility that the city would face litigation. I asked him if his office would defend the city :if the project were denied . He indicated that the Attorney General 's Office does not defend cities. I then asked if his office WOUlcl litigate against the city if the project were approved; he indicated that was a possibility, depending upon his examination of the records. I believe that this would constitute a threatened litigation against the City of Palm Desert and that the subject could therefore be discussed in closed session. l AAMON A. D.T.Az ASSISTANT CITY MAN L, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DF_VELOPME_'NT/PLANNING /tm � x UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE co,"v` BERKELEY DAMS IRVINE LOSANGELES RIVERSIDE SANDIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SANTABARBARA SANTACRU2 Boyd Deep Canyon Desert Research Center P.O.Boz 1738 Mr. Phil Joy Pat.Desert,California 92261-1738 City of Palm Desert Telephone: (619)361-3655 Planning Department 73-510 Fred Waring Dr. Palm Desert, CA 92260 May 28 , 1990 RE: DEIR Altamira Country Club Project Dear Mr. Joy, The Philip L. Boyd Deep Canyon Desert Research Center is referenced in your comments in the DEIR for the proposed Alta- mira Country Club. The following information is provided in response to your comments. Page 2 , Comment 4-5: "Please document sightings in Deep Canyon since Dr. Muth has previously stated in personal communication that the closest natural tortoise to this area was in the Chi- riaco Summit area. " The desert tortoise occurs on the Deep Canyon floodplain in low numbers. We have not attempted to quantify the density of tor- toises, but there are two ways that we can document their occur- rence: informal observation notes; and vertebrate transect data. We have casually noted sightings since 1980 in an informal observation book. The observation book is a general interest notebook where users and staff record sightings and natural his- tory observations that may be of interest to others at the Cen- ter. The observation book lists 32 sightings of tortoises since 1980 . Hatchling, juvenile, and adult tortoises were sighted. The occurrence of vertebrates has been recorded at the Center since 1958 . The vertebrate species list and transect data are part of the formal Deep Canyon Database which is compiled by staff biologists. Desert tortoises were noted to be present on the Deep Canyon floodplain in May, 1958. A list of vertebrates and their habitats is enclosed. I do not recall the conversation alluded to as a personal commu- nication in which I allegedly stated that "the closest natural tortoise to this area was in the Chiriaco Summit area. " I may have said something like they are here in low numbers, but we can't be sure if they were always here in low numbers or if this The University does support units that are known as organized Research Units that are appropriate to focused research pro- grams. However, these Units lack the autonomy and administra- tive freedom of the private sector. If the Institute were to pursue affiliation with the University, ultimately the President and Board of regents would need to consider the matter. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the DEIR for this project. Please add the Center to the mailing list for this project. Sincerely, A%e4e_ Allan Muth, Ph.D. Director cc: B.H.I. (3) II 3 0 ,f , 73-510 FRED WARINO DRIVE,PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 , TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 May 18, 1990 CITY OF PALM DESERT - LEGAL NOTICE CASE NOS. C/Z 89-I6 and TT 25296 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will he held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Bighorn Ventures for .. . approval of a master tentative map subdividiong 362 acres into a 4134 unit country club - a first phase of 108 units - a change of zone for 25 acres of drainageway from O.S. to PR-5 and H.P.R. and focused environmental impact report southeast of Highway 74 and Indian Hills Way, also described as: A.P.N.'s 631-110-013, 120-004 thru 006, 130-001. 002, 010 and 011, 150-003 thru 005, I 160-001 thru 003, 005 and 07006, 771-030-003, 005 thru 006 INN Irll R-, is oo Ili P w PA E R Da14�9 �a .� B67t , SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 5, 1990 at 7:00 p.m. In i the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert City Hall, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, i Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all Interested persons are I Invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items f covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of + the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration Is available for review In the department of community development/planning at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and I - 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed, actlons in I . court, you may be limited to raising only those issues your or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission (or city council) at, Or j prior to, the public hearing. f PUBLISH: Desert Post RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary May 25, 1990 Palm Desert Planning Commission i f 13-610 FRED WARIN0 DRIVE,PALM DESERT CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(6191 346-0611 OCTOBER 19, 1989 CITY OF PALM DESERT 'j LEGAL NOTICE - CASE NOS. C2 89-16 and TT 25296 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing .111 be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Bighorn Ventures *Far approval of a master tentative map subdividing 362 acres Into a 484 unit country club - a first phase of 108 units on 35 acres - a change of zone far - .. 25 acres of drainage.., From O.S. to PR-5 and H.P.R. - any negative declaration of environmental Impact, southeast of Highway 74 and Portole Avenue, more Particulary described asi A.P.N.'s 631-110-013, 120-004 thru 006. 130-001, 002, 010. oil. 150-003 thru i 005. 160-001 thru 003. 005. 006. 771-003, 004, 007 and 000- i 4. �i .']' •].g�P1,"�' 11 R-1 12 00 ; on n �� fl .°�' "� •::© tin ` .. - - ;,7:' M >,,q :dot = J3 ;. 1, S 1. run o,sces ury LIVIT cavnn or u•usms � _ ' SAID Public hearing will beheld,on Tuesday.•November•'7. ,1989. at 7:00 p.m. In ' the Council Chamber at the Palm 0esert City Hall. 73-510 Fred Waring Drive. - ' Palm Desert. California, at which time and Place .11 Interested Persons are Invited to attend and be heard. IF you challenge the proposed actions In court, you may be limited to raising only those Issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described In this notice, or In written _ correspondence delivered to the city councll for planning commission) at, or - Prior to, the public hearing. . . PUBLISH: Desert Post RAMON A. OIA2, Secretary " October 27. 1989 Palm Desert Planning Commission APPENDIX C NOTICE OF COMPLETION State of California Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Project Title ALTAMIRA Project Location — Specific Southeast of Highway 74 and Portola Avenue Pro ect Location - City Project Location — County Palm Desert Riverside Description o Nature, Purpose, an Beneficiaries o Project 484 unit• country club Lead ABency Division City of Palm Desert Planning r e s a I Ee—r—e— py o IR s va a e 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert Library Palm Desert, CA 92260 45-480 Portola Avenue Review Palm Desert, CA 92260 Per 45 days Contact Person Area Code Phone Extension Phil Joy 619/346-0611 Revised March 1986 277 MR11 tot State clearin¢n,ae, 1400 Tenth street. Booms in, Socrsento, Ch 95831 - 916/415-0613 See NOSE Dales 1UnM or O.aULMIDI AUD RA MO0Sa1D1g, DOC72Rff"LMISKrrML KM 1. Project Titlet Al tami ra 2. LandAgannry, City of Palm Desrt Phil Joy - re ar3 ng ri ve '' Contact �`�°°` �°• 6i`e°t AOi®at 3D. sty, Palm Desert Couty, Riverside 3d. Nip. 3e� Phone 61 9/346-0611 1n�c1m= c. wr Riversi a / -Talon Des- ert 4D. Assessor's PecoelNa.See Attacheqe b. at�1�sertie,t See Attached Twp �« Sa. does streets, Highway 74/Portola For Rural, N®reat Sb. OM ityf State Air- Rau- 6. Within 2 adlest a. � Nater- 1 D. ports C. ways- d, rate 7. ID�J�E a. Imo= 9. trmNsaven-= �e 01. -General Plan Update al. X N�idanua1, UnIta484 no[® 362 M. _ice 06. __Iyz 02. _New El®e,t 02. -Oftice, Sq. Ft. 02._early (Ana 07. X NOC 03. -General Plan Ammut nt Act® Dtplot'eas 03. _peg Dec 08. -MD 01. _)faster Plan 03. StOPPing/Comsrcfal, 06. _Draft eIs Ft. O5. a„w:ation act® Exployeas . 05. SuWao sent lax 06• --Specific Plan a. Sq. Ft. (P[iof SOS No.t 07. -C®unity Plan Acras 9xp101 e'aea 1 08. aedevelopuent 05. -pater Facilities, MGU IM 09. ---Rezone Raft 06. -Trarnepo[tetion= 1Yce 09. -NCI Il. -MS 10. -X-jald Division 07. ---Mining_ Apra L. 10. _FOSSi 12. -FA (sLbdivfsion, Parcel Map, Tract Map, etc.) 08. -Power, TVce Natte A^ L1HER 11. -Use Permit 09. -ywte Treatmentt 1Voe 13. _Joint Doclmnt 12. _}iaste Mgt Plan 10. _005 Related 16. pinal Doament 13. _,Cancel A9 Preserve U. -Other, 15. __Other 11. -Other Ia. 212ML AmEs, 362 N/A 12. 15. -septic Syet®s 23. _}later Quality O1. X a.wl,.tic/vlanal _-X O8. _Floodiny0rainage 16. �r Capacity 2e. -pater Stpply 02. -Agricultural Ia,d 09. -Geologic,/seimic 17. social 03. _Air Quality 26- - at��Ferlan tY 10. -Joke/sa,eing Balance 18. -soll Erosion 26. wildlife 01. _Ardmeological/Bisto[iaal ll. )Wwrals 19. gQUd Waste 27. X Growth Inducltg 05.__mnatel Zane 12. -Noise 20. -7onl4NezardDus 28. X r_T tibia fandm 06. d,..,.afc 13. ___piblic Services 21. -Traffic/Circulation 29. JLCtmtiative Effects 07. Fire Berard U. BchDola . 22. Vegetation 30. -other 13• JEEM (appro:) Federal $ state $ 1, Total S t 15. , 484 Unit Country Club 16. sno mu'ar IAD AOMIQ S ROMMMIt May 18, 1990 1=1 Clearinjnues will assign ids,tlfic tion nmbere fo al new Projects. If a SCB ember alreacb exists for a project (e.g. fn a Notice of Preparation or p[evi" draft dx=ment) Please fill it in. PMA RIVIM 4/96 -MWEACES 01159 MM DISMUBPrXK Do RMUM r r � TERRA NOVA PLANNING & RESEARCH INC April 26, 1990 Mr. Philip Joy Planning Department City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: Hayhoe/Altamira Project EIR Transmittal and Public Hearing Schedule Dear Phil: Per our telephone conversation yesterday, I am writing to confirm the tentative schedule for transmittal of the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the above referenced project and the public hearing schedule for same. I would also like to affirm that I have spoken with Robert King at the OPR State Clearinghouse and he cites Section 15206 of the CEQA Guidelines as requiring the 45 day review period on this EIR. The potential impacts to State Highway 74 require this minimum review time. As regards the processing and hearing schedule we discussed yesterday, the following major milestones are anticipated: May 8,1990 City Transmittal Of DEIR June5,1990 1st Planning Commission Hearing June 19,1990 2nd Planning Commission Hearing June22,1990 DEIR Comment Period Ends July6,1990 Completion of Response To Comments July 12,1990 1st City Council Hearing July A1990 2nd City Council Hearing As we discussed, it may be appropriate in the next few weeks to also consider a special hearing of the City Council. You may also want to have us to present the project at study sessions over the next few weeks. Please let us know your thoughts on this so that we can have presentation materials ready. 275 NORTH EL CIELO, SUITE D-3 0 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 0 (519) 320-9040 1 s We are looking forward to receipt of the draft EIR for our review and timely comment. We will also need the technical appendicies for our consultants to review. We want to make every effort to adequately address all issues of concern, including those related to the Bighorn Institute and other biological resource issues. Thanks to you and staff for your cooperation in this process. If you have any questions regarding the above, or if we can be of any assistance please do not hesitate to contact me. Since hn D. Criste, CP JDC/ms SOCIETY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BIGHORN SHEEP Non-Profit Organization 3113 Mesaloa Lane BOARD MEMBERS ROBERT S CAMPBELL Pasadena, California 91107 BE DAVID 818-794-7680 JOHN DAVID BOLL STEVEN HILL q- DONALD JONES (UL L JOIN E.O B VVVV LARRONOE OFFICERS JOHN T. NELSON `I BILL W. PARRACK IST ONCE PRESIDENT LORE. L. L TZ,KER D.B.S. MAT i 1990 AL SOD LEY ZN VICE RIDEN STEVEN C. KERR 1' RILL SHIRLEY SND VICE PRESIDENT ;STEVEN DILL GLENN W, SUDMEIEN ERD VICE TA PRESIDENT JOHN E, D. VICKREYARROND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DAVE TA LLEY TREASURER :JOIN E.o. LA gRONDE CITY}F PALM DESERT BEORCE TAYLORSON TREASURER SHIRLEY VIC Kq EV IKE AO VIS OR :IVOCE KENNETX WILLIAME RONALD D. VC ' SHIRLEY VICNRR EY Y HISTORIAN JOHN T, NELSON BRITT W WILSON EDITOR GEORGE TAYLOREON MAEVIN WOOD PETER G. ZABRISKIE April 23 , 1990 City of Palm Desert Attn : Planning Department 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, Calif. 92260 Re : Alta Mira (?) Project Dear Planning, It has recently come to our attention that you are considering the above referenced project. We would appreciate getting copies of whatever documents , plat maps , location maps etc, that you have on this project. Please be advised that we would be opposed to any construction within Desert Bighorn habitat or historic habitat areas . At the very least, we would like to see some type of Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) in- itiated or some other type of mitigation fee. We look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible . Thank you. Sincerely , Society For The Conservation of Bighorn Sheep '4 W Britt W. Wilson Board Member c . c . George Taylorson Loren Lutz II } I 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346.0611 April 3, 1990 Mr. Mike Pexroni Smith, Peron & Fox Planning Consultants, Inc. 980 E. Tahquitz Way, Suite C Palm Springs, California 92262 Re: Altamira Focused E.I.R. Dear Mike: Here are the comments we would like to be included in the draft E.I.R. for the Altamira project. We felt that the draft did a good job of analyzing a difficult subject and with the insertion of answers to comments made by myself and Ray Diaz, the document will provide the city council with the information to base their decisions on. The length of the comments will explain the length of time this review has taken (7 working days) and together with the changed status of the tortoise and spring plant survey constitute additional information to make findings and necessitate a second screen check. Therefore, we look forward to seeing a revised copy of this document to review prior to being released for public comment. Very truly yours. PHIL JOY ASSOCIATE PLANNER PJ/tm Attachments: 1. Prior tortoise study 2. Letter from Mosquito Abatement District 3. City zone change 08-81 description 4. County PP 11393 report 5. BLM E.A. 6. Bighorn buffer recommended by experts as given to staff ADDITIQNAL CCMEWS FOR ALTAMM PRDJECr DRAFT S.I.R. Page Number 1-6 How close were buildings and associated parking shown to the pens. Didn't county PP 11393 application also include other items such as heliport? Exhibit #4 shows project site incorrectly. 4-3 Please include discussion here as to haw much water (in terms of c.f.s. ) were directed by construction of the Palm Valley Charnel and how much the wash currently carries. 4-3 Please clarify statement, "washes that empty onto the valley floor." Include definition of "valley floor", "empty" and how it relates to statements concerning undisturbed. Please state where the other two washes are and if they may be purchased. Please state the density of smoke trees inside and outside the wash and include the wash that bisects the area project west to east behind the CVWD levee. Also include the significance of smoke trees if they are inside or outside the wash. Please list the other washes that were evaluated in the valley and define the boundaries of the Colorado desert and Coachella Valley. Please list what the densities of smoke trees in these other washes were and state what the significance of a smoke tree wash is in the Coachella Valley vs. the Colorado desert. Please state whose opinion it is that this is the best example of a wash and include any documentation to substantiate this. Include an improvement plan from CVWD which shows the levees and dikes on the site and a statement indicating if the floodwater would be confined to this wash area if the levees and dikes were not present. Please also verify this with CVWD. 4-3 Please coordinate "rocky hillside habitat" with "rock outcroppings" from aesthetic study and locate the outcropping on Exhibit #8. 4-3 Please state if wash will continue in its significance due to the diverting of Dead Indian Creek, Carrizo Creek, Grapevine (reek and Ebbens Greek into the Palm Valley Channel. Please list these blue- line streams that were diverted and state if this wash is considered blue-line. 4-5 Please show range maps for the three plant species as you agreed to through your proposal. Define "of special concern" and explain impact. Was there prior evidence of these species in this area in recent years? Which governmental agency has jurisdiction over these ADDITICDAL CCN 43M To ALTAbfM PIKLq P DRAFT E.I.R. species. What, if any, are the permit procedures for taking of these plants. Please include any plans for these plants if no permit procedures exist. 4-5 Please state federal plans for the desert tortoise and explain permit 10a procedures. Please discuss distinctions between tortoises that naturally occur on the site and those that may have been released from somebody's backyard. Please also include range maps as agreed to through your proposal. Please document sightings by citing the source and location. Please show location and estimated age of tortoise shell fragment found and the location of any other evidence of tortoise habitation on the site (i.e. burrows, tracks, scat) . Please document sightings in Deep Canyon since Dr. Muth has previously stated in Personal communications that the closest natural tortoise to this area was in the Chiriaco Summit area. Please show how a tortoise could emanate or migrate from Deep Canyon to the subject site. Please review tortoise study ouTpleted by The Planning Center. 4-6 Please define the term "threatened". Please state how the tern "occasionally traversed" compares to the "Santa Rosa Mountains Wildlife Habitat Management Plan" and it's habitat boundaries for bighorn sheep. Please elaborate on bighorn sightings in the past 12 months since personal communications indicated that penned bighorns attracted others to the area. Can bighorn continue to browse in a development adjacent to a hillside? Please cite the knowledgeable persons that provided input regarding the bighorn habitat area and why DFG and BEM defined the habitat area differently when preparing the HmP. Please state how the B.H.I. environmental assessment addressed archaeology, tortoise habitat and compatibility of planned or future development or necessity of enviramiental/bighorn buffer. Please state who selected the site and if alternate sites were looked at, and if so where? Please state if the necessity of an environmental buffer on adjacent property was looked at when selecting the site and if such a buffer should have been included in the site selection process. . Please include in history of institute if attention was paid to the proposed Hyatt Hotel described on attached sheet and findings and rationale made by BIM and the county concerning adjacent lands when permits were issued for initial pens (give approximate date) and C.U.P. (give approximate date). 2 ' ICI AMITICNAL CCMEN18 TO ALTAMIRA PROJECT DRAFT E.I.R. Please give the distance from the pens to proposed structures at B.H.I. and the rationale/envircr mental mechanisms used to allow this construction and fencing to occur within wild and planned bighorn habitat area. Please state purposes of the heliport planned on the site and the distance this facility is or was planned from the pens.4-9 Please attach copy of site selection study and all criteria since the criteria you show doesn't show criteria that was previously said to have been included. Please state who determined the criteria to be used. Please document all of the sheep experts who gave the B.H.I. meager chances of succeeding and state if they would have looked at site selection differently had they known that this was going to be a long term operation. 4-9 Please correct distance from pens to development from 150 feet to 400 feet and state that the development provides 100 of the 400 feet on Hayhoe's property as currently shown. Please state where human activities adjacent to the pen primarily presently occur now and state these distances. Is the term "preserve a viable population of Peninsular Bighorn" the reason the B.H.I. is in existence. Is there a certain period that B.H.I. will occupy the site. 4-11 On first line does statement "negatively impacted" mean "significant adverse impact" as defined by CEQA - please clarify. 4-11 The 4 items must be reviewed in a manner that addresses our earlier concerns. 4-11 Again, please state impact of the Palm Valley Channel on wash and state how far away will development impact the wash. Please state what CEQA law is concerning leaving the wash undisturbed. 4-11 How does tortoise impact compare to fringe-toed lizard and is such a habitat establishment the answer - again, what is USFWS doing. Please also relate prior evidence and expand on it. Please also explain how federal government rationale for killing tortoises at China Lake by rocket and bombing testing. 3 ADDITIONAL 0344E M TO ALTAMIRA PROJECT DRAFT E.I.R. Again, what were mitigation measures for other threatened or endangered species such as tortoise besides preserving habitat. Is preservation of habitat a personal or legal conclusion? 4-12 Considering bighorn activity in Thunderbird Heights is there really a significant impact on the sheep. Again, please elaborate on the term occasional use and relate to the Santa Rosa Mountains WHNP. What is the area of potential habitat that is privately owned vs. publicly awned that will be preserved. 4-12 Please again correct 150 foot figure to 400 feet and clarify which figure the experts consulted analyzed. Didn't some feel 600 yards was a better buffer. Please cite which experts felt a 1/2 mile buffer was appropriate and which ones felt 400 yards was appropriate and state why such a buffer was not set up when B.H.I. located and if such a buffer should have been set up. 4-12 Responding to experts' concerns - please compare construction equipment noise of Altamira to that occurring during H.H. I. construction; compare a OCR policy restricting pets and restricted access via a gate guarded community to existing situation where there is nothing to prevent an individual from walking their pet up to the pen's fence; and cite current frequency of individuals that currently utilize site for such purposes: Please better define human activity. Please quantify visual disturbances: Again, don't coyotes currently inhabit the area and state effects of a perimeter wall will have on this and relate developments in Rancho Mirage that border primary habitat to this concern: Please coordinate this statement with input from Mosquito Abatement District and/or a qualified entomologist. 4-12 Please state where the 400 yard measurement is measured from - the top of the circular peak or the fence line. 4-13 Why was BUM the lead agency here when bighorn sheep are only a state listed species not federal of which BIN is - when looking for a site? Why weren't all government owned lands looked at besides BIM holdings? Why couldn't BLM trade land which they have done before? How does term "outright purchase" on second paragraph differ from what is presently proposed? Please show on map the area you reviewed for other sites and analyze if locating the institute adjacent to one of the fastest growing cities was appropriate. 4-13 Please give citation to statement that "moving the pen is deemed an unacceptable alternative." 4 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO ALTAMIRA Pro= DRAFT E.I.R. 4-14 Again, please state that the most direct line between the fence and the development includes a 100 foot buffer on the Altamira site. (1st sentence. ) If development attracts coyotes, aren't coyotes already passing through area to reach the next development moving down the hill? Won't the restricted access of the development actually benefit the institute by keeping stray cogs away or are you making a statement that stray dogs are a camon situation in country clubs? Again, please coordinate statements concerning gnats with Mosquito Abatement District as directed by DFG. If a buffer is absolutely necessary then who's responsibility should it be to pay for it? Please state if you disagree with the experts as to the minimums buffer length and if so what are the reasons? Please stow on buffer map the 400 yard radius area and extension area. Were there any other significant plant or animal sightings? In reviewing mitigation measures please analyze moving the fence away from the development but keeping it below the top of the circular Peak and increasing acreage of the pen away from development. Please state if bighorn research is or was conducted at Living Desert and why, if they are successful in breeding African gazelles can't they breed bighorn. Does the breeding of the gazelles prove that breeding need not occur in close proximity to natural terrain. Please state the size of the Deep Canyon Research Center and why this was not looked at as a potential site for bighorn research since it is a state listed species and this is a state facility. Please also state ultimately who has the authority to permit this operation if this were pursued. Please also give current status of B.H.I. as to if they have a vested right to operate at the present location. The letter we received from the group of bighorn experts recamiended a buffer up to 1/2 mile and now you're saying the experts said 400 yards. Please clarify the experts opinion. Please quantify noise and visual requirements for buffer to rule out arbitrary recommendations. 5 0 ADDITICCNAL 0344 Nr3 TO ALTAMIRA PR M7PI.T DRAFT S.I.R. 5-2 Westinghouse will not develop all 778 acres. 5-3 Wash is not in a natural state due to Palm Valley Channel and levees - smoke trees have re-propagated. 5-5 Palm Desert doesn't collect property tax but other agencies do - Palm Desert would collect tax increments through its Redevelopment Agency. What about a typical single-family subdivision i.e. Summit, Monterra - as alternatives. Please also include alternative that shows build- out to maximum density permitted.by zoning as we discussed. 6-10 What happened to the alternatives we also discussed were a single family subdivision or built out to maximum density permitted by zoning ordinance. 6-10 Does single family include duplexes Hayhoe is proposing.? 6-12 Was there a significant impact to begin with? 6-16 What is the best alternative to residents of the Summit and Ironwood, who were concerned with their golf course being washed away during storms which occur now. 6-17 Again - was there ever a significant impact found here? 6 RCQ BY.:XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 4- 3-90 10:08AM 6193222290-8 6193417098:# 2 A P R -- - 9 0 T U E 1 1 2 T H G - P A L M S r- I N G S P 9 2 171WVk ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS COMMENTS ON THE "BIOLOGICAL INVENTORY AND IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED ALTAMIRA PROTECT" PREPARED BY CORNETT & ASSOCIATES Syrnmary This report is highly biased against development. It is more of a personal position statement than a scientific report. The four major conclusions in the' report are not supported by the data presented. No supporting documentation is' provided that the desert wash habitat is unique or, significant. One-shell fragment does not, establish the presence of tortoises on the property and certainly not a significant number. Effects of development on free-ranging bighorns could hardly be considered significant considering the small proportion of habitat that will be impacted and the few sightings of sheed in the area, No evidence that the development will impact the research activities of the Institute is provided. It is unknown whether any of the three plant species mentioned is present on the property, and the status of all of them is unknown. Specific Mlior Comments p,5 - Physical Features - The water diversion channel which greatly restricts flow on the property is not mentioned. The levee on the property hardly "enhances" the wash: it localizes flow. Its wash was probably created by the existing levee, p,7 - Why 'were small mammals trapped? On page 8, the justification for no invertebrate surveys is that no officially-listed species were @xpected. Were any officially-listed small mammals expected? p.4 - The wash may be relatively undisturbed on-site but the hydrology has been changed drastically by the diversion channel; Official lists of rare and endangered species and plant communities are kept at a national, state, or rarely regional level. Restricting the area of concern to a small geographic area is likely to misrepresent the real status. Deep- Canyon Wash appears to us to support a higher density of smoke trees than the one at Altamira. Numerous other smoke tree washes exist. within the region. Smoke tree is widespread in the Colorado and Mohave deserts, and is not listed or being considered for listing by any state or federal agency, The statement that washes provide sites for desert tortoise burrows seems to conflict with results of wildlife surveys, which reported no burrows. p.l 1 - How old was the tortoise shell fragment? Shell fragments which are abundant in some dune areas of Arizona have been shown• to be thousands of years old. One shell fragment and undocumented spQradic sightings do not support the conclusion that much of the project area.lies within the range of the desert tortoise. Because of the lack of suitable soils for burrowing, this area appears to be extremely poor for tortoise. The range, that was delineated, based on one shell fragment is not supported by the facts. p.12 - The bighorn habitat analysis fails to mention that the Bighorn institute site was chosen partly because it was NOT bighorn habitat. Recent sightings appear to, be of sheep attracted by the penned sheep. It also fails to mention the very low population of ---.T ELECOPIER ?010 : 4- 3-90 10:08AM : 6193222290-3 6193417098:# 3 T UE 1 1 3 T H G - FA L rQ SF I NGS P 0 r ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS sheep in the Santa Rosa mountains. At best, Figure 3• should be labelled "Potential '..` bighorn habitat," and the sheep's status'should'be discussed. P.13 - Absence of wild bighorn in the area should be included in the reasons for the Institute's location.. The statement that the circular peak enclosed by the pen is unique should be explained, Every point on the earth is unique. , There are other circular ,peaks that could be enclosed by pen in the area. 1 The last sentence in -the ' last full paragraph referring to ",,.Other factors, not scientifically understood..:' says nothing and should be explained or deleted. p.15 - The first sentence in Findings and Recommendations is not supported by the report. No supporting documentation is provided that the desert, wash-.habitat is unique or significant. One sh6ll fragment does not establish the presence of any tortoises on the property and certainly not a significant number. Effects of development on free- i. ranging bighorns could hardly be considered significant considering the incredibly small proportion of habitat that will be impacted and the few sightings of sheep in the area. No evidence that the development will impact the research activities of the Institute is provided. It is unknown whether any of the theee plan't species mentioned is present on the property, and the status of all. of them is unknown, A plant, survey should be conducted, Comments on the wash have > een made above. We question whether it is the best remaining in the Coachella Valley and if it is as rare or significant as stated here, j p.16 - Desert tortoise is listed as Endangered, not Threatened, The status was'stated correctly on p. 11. The range map lacks any documentation. Very little of the ",,.erosion of the sheep's range,,." has been caused .by residential development", which is not a ".-primary factor in their present threatened status:' p.17 - Subsequent meetings involving these and additional sheep experts have resulted in reconsideration of some of these statements, A 400-yard buffer was selected without consideration for any other mitigation measures. Some experts feel that this distance can be reduced with additional mitigation measures, All of the issues mentioned in the second paragraph can be mitigated better by measures other than distance. Moving or adding to the pens is still worth considering, not only to reduce impacts of development but to benefit the current situation. Additional areas suitable for pen relocation appear to exist on-site or immediately adjacent to the- Institute. p.18 - How was two square miles arrived at? This is much larger than the area occupied by the existing Institute, 2 LCLVr1CK 'rutu 6193222290-� -----.._- ----- , 6193417098:# 4 - eTUE 11 - .a .y TH PALM SP--` INGS P 0 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS There are no data showing the penned sheep are unstressed. Bighorn sheep have been ' raised elsewhere and there is no reason to expect that the Institute would be unsuccessful in a new location, Analyses of potential noise, visual, and predatOr,impacts indicate that mitigation measures can reduce potential impacts mote effectively than a 400•yard buffer, All of these development impacts can be reduced to pre-development levels or less of unoccupied land. Visual barriers along the subject property would only block the'sheep's view for a small part of their viewshed. That the noises and visual impacts associated with development will increase stress in the Institutes sheep has not been demonstrated. The Institute's !; sheep are not wild, Access of coyotes through the development is easily controlled with walls. According to this report, coyotes are already abundant in the area (p. 11). Some harassment of sheep occurs now. Proper development will not increase the numbers of coyotes or increase the interactions, (A six-foot wall is,probably not high enough,) p.19 - No evidence exists which indicates that development will increase disease vectors as stated. No evidence exists that indicates the abundance and diversity of vectors will i decrease inversely with an increase in distance. Some sheep experts feel that mitigation measures would be more effective than distance, p,20 - The author's conclusion that all four resources are highly significant is opinion not supported by documgntation. Benefits are not "compelling." Establishing 'the preserve does not eliminate the need for the plant survey, DO all of these plants occur only in washes? What if they occur on other parts of the property? What if they do not Occur at all? d:90419-1.com ' 3 ELECOPIEk' 7010 3-28-90 9:42NM 6193417098:# 2 r / 1 i _ e Cornett & Associates Ecological Consultants P.O.Box 846 Palm Sprinp,California 92263 (61.9) 322-1479 i March 21, 1990 � Michael Peroni Smith, Peroni and Fox Planning Consultants, Inc. 980 East Tahquitz Way, Suite C Palm Springs, California 92262 Dear Mr. Peroni: �Vc: have conducted a spring plant survey, as requested, on the Altamira Project Site and within one hundred yards of the project site boundaries. The field work was conducted on M.i rch 16, 18, and 19, 1990. The survey was specifically conducted to determine the presefice of three plant species of special concern: California ditaxis (Ditaris caiif>raica), Deep canyon snap dragon (Antirrhinum cyanthiferum) and Ayenia (Ayenia comps(-1a). None of the three species were found on, or immediately adjacent, the site. This dues not "lean that they do not ever occur on site: only that they could not be found this year, l.,ess than average precipitation has fallen this past winter and it is not surprising that rare plant specie would not be in evidence. Even many common ephemerals are not in evidence this spring. Next year is also likely to experience drought conditions. Qecausc additional surveys this, or even next, year would undoubtedly prove negative, no further surveys are recommended and no mitigation is considered necessary. Sil artily, Jan1C> W. Cornett Projccl Ecologist r � L J TERRA NOVA PANNING & RESEARCH INC MEMORANDUM Date: March 21, 1990 To: Phil Joy, Palm Desert Planning Department From: John D. Criste,AICP Subject: Comments On Cornett Biology Study -Altamira EIR I am writing to convey my comments on the Biological Inventory and Impact Analysis of the Altamira Proiect prepared by Jim Cornett. We also sent a copy of the report to Dr. LaPre who has provided comments. Some of my comments are general in nature while others are more specific. * Scope of Analysis Page one of the report states that the report has been prepared " to ascertain the impacts... ...on the plant and animal species and their habitat within and adjacent to the project area." However, the vast majority of his comments center on the BHI facilities which already exist and those planned for development adjacent to the Hayhoe property. This site has not been vested with the right to develop and proper permits have not yet been secured. The same page and discussion point out that 'listed" plant and animal species are one of the primary focuses of the study and yet the California Native Plant Society listings are used as the criteria for "significant" biological (floral)resources. While some of the resources identified are more rare than before development of the Coachella Valley, they do not by the biologist's arbitrary wishes become "significant" resources. The discussions relating personal communications and telephone conversations regarding the occurrence of plant and/or animal species in an area are not adequately described. Information gathered in this way can be interpreted as second-hand and of questionable value. The phrasing of questions, the maps and other materials provided to these informal commentors and the spin placed on these questions are unknown. The value of information collected in this manner is insubstantial and easily challenged. A case-in-point is the discussion on page 13 where the project is described as coming within 150 feet of the pens. The closest point of contact of the subject property is approximately 160 feet. The closest portion of the development, the edge of a road, is approximately 400 feet from the pens and the closest location of any residence is 450 feet from the pen. It might also be pointed out that the closest development portion of the Altamira project to the peak within the pen is more than 1,200 feet. 275 NORTH EL CIELO, SUITE D-3 ❑ PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 ❑ (619) 320-9040 1 Desert wash Habitat As is pointed out in Dr. LaPre's comments, this is a gross exaggeration regarding the subject wash being the last of three in the Coachella Valley. Please refer to Dr. LaPre's letter for a through and more authoritative listing of these type of habitat and their occurence in the Coachella Valley.This is not a significant biological resource. Rare and Endangered Plants As stated in his letter, Dr. LaPre does not feel that the plants listed by the California Native Plant Society,but not listed by the state or federal government, should be considered as significant biological resources. Neither does he believe that these plants are sufficiently important to warrant another field survey this spring. Desert Tortoise This tortoise has been listed on an emergency basis and the Coachella Valley is recognized as an area which does not support large populations. Nor is development in the Coachella Valley expected to have a significant impact on habitat of the tortoise, which is most extensive in the Mohave Desert with millions of acres. Dr. LaPre's comments are particularly appropriate in this regard. The developer should not be forced to preserve marginal habitat for this animal nor should this animal contribute in an incremental way to provide an argument for the occurrence and preservation of significant biological resources. I might add that the author recently completed a bio study for us where tortoise were believed to occur but not special fuss was made or mitigation measures recommended. Bighorn Sheep It would be unreasonable to argue that portions of the Hayhoe development have not been "occasionally traversed by sheep", even within the past 12 months. This is also true of lands adjacent to the Thunderbird Cove subdivision (where one of the BHI board members lives) and the Ritz-Carlton Hotel. Other examples of sheep taking advantage of landscaping and water adjacent to developments exist however, these anecdotal stories have not been included by the biologist in this report. There is evidence of sheep bedding down on the southwest facing slopes above the Ritz-Carlton (LaPre field survey February-March, '90). While Dr. LaPre had permission from CDF&G to conduct this survey, we should probably not broadcast this fact at this time. Institute Site Selection Criteria If this is an appropriate discussion for this report, then the issues of land use compatibility and the incompatible nature of the BHI facility with properly General Plan designated and zoned Palm Desert lands should also be addressed. The BHI and its facilities are not the issue and lack vesting of planned operations. The criteria for a "remote location" has not been satisfied by the site selected. Visibility to Highway 74 to secure public support would argue that the Living Desert Reserve is inappropriately placed. It has a basis for an argument of this sort but a research/veterinary facility is more appropriate in an isolated location. The bio study is turning into a cry of protection for a land use (not sensitive habitat) which has yet to be properly vested. Nothing in the discussion refutes the argument that alternative pen sites exist on the existing BHI holding. These are private and presumably available lands immediately south of the BHI holding which could provide the BHI with ideal pen conditions without ever a fear for future human encroachment. 2 Project Impacts On Sheep&BHI After extensive description of the BHI pens and planned facilities, there is no accurate or objective description of the proposed Altamira development. Potentially inflammatory statements regarding proximity of subdivision improvements being within 150 feet of the pens is incorrect and misleading. No wonder Cornett was able to get so many other biologists to take an extreme position with respect to the impacts on the sheep. The report must state what is the impact in concrete terms. What is the point or purpose of the pens and the BHI?Do BHI goals intend to continue"research" or to repopulate the northern Santa Rosas with a more diverse and healthy herd of bighorns? BHI Facilities Impacts On Sheep Habitat It should be apparent that the facilities and activities of the BHI have and will continue to have an impact on the use of the BHI property as foraging habitat in the future. As BHI activities, including the use of helicopters, expand, the are will become less suitable for use by wild sheep. This is not discussed in the report. There is a brief discussion of concerns regarding "human activities" on page 17 of the report. What human activities are a problem for the sheep? Are electric golf carts and golfers a minimum of 500 feet from and out of sight of the pens a problem? Are lands within 1,200 feet from the pens in golf course and without any night time lighting or activities a significant impact on these sheep? It is interesting that one of Cornett's rational for not recommending the relocation of the BHI or its pens is that"relocation to one of these sites would simply delay land use conflicts to some time in the future." (page 17) Is it better to come into conflict with land uses well within the developable portions of the Coachella Valley, rather than to find a more isolated site with properly designated surrounding land uses? Vectors are only mentioned in passing. The occurrence of infectious gnats is the many watering holes and oases visited by the sheep are not mentioned. This is not balanced in its presentation. There are private and probably available holdings immediately adjacent to the BHI lands which are perfect for the type of pen areas claimed to be needed. The statement (page 18) that the BHI would require a purchase on additional lands on the scale of two square miles to adequately protect its operations is a contradiction to the currently planned location for these facilities. Also see Dr. LaPre's comments in this regard. Mitigation Measures The minimum buffer that the biologist thinks is necessary is a 400 yard undisturbed set back from the pens. This precludes the development on any of this area for golf course or any recreational use. Excessive screening is not recommended since the animal's visibility is important to its sense of security. It should be noted that nowhere in this report does it describe the differences in elevation between the pens and the planned development portions of the Hayhoe site. The nearest portion of the pens are at least 130 feet higher in elevation to the 3 nearest roadway planned in the development. The peak in the pens is at an elevation of 1,160 feet, more than 310 feet higher than the southern-most portion of the Hayhoe development. If visibility is a premium for the sheep, then the differences in elevation of the two properties is also significant. I wonder how aware these various experts interviewed were of these topographic differences?To add to the buffer, the biologist would like to see an expansion of the buffer beyond the 400 yard to include all of the estate lots where development will be least intensive and most distant, more than 1/4 mile from the pens. Its arguable using this logic that the setback should be infinite. The recommendation for a six-foot masonry wall are fine but how is drainage supposed to be conveyed through the project site? Significant Resources In the recommendations section on page 20 the author states that the "four distinct biological resources deemed highly significant in this study." The request for a buffer in excess of 400 yards, not to mention the 400 yard recommendation itself, is unsubstantiated. Criteria for determining resources significant are not discussed and are contrary to past experience with this biologist and the opinions of other professionals. Much of this report remains unsubstantiated anecdotes based on questionable project descriptions provided by the biologist. This makes much of his "evidence' questionable and subject to attack. The BHI facility is discussed as a given, although it has not been yet vested with development rights. There appears to be a slant to this report and it may not enhance our efforts to work out a mutually acceptable compromise which addresses the needs of the developer and the BHI. I encourage you to make every effort to have an objective and clearly focused report submitted with and as a part of the Altamira EIR. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. JDC/ms Attachments 4 Tierra Madre Consultants O Environmental Analysis and Resource Planning Endangered Species Surveys e Mitigation Design C Ecological Services o _ 1271 Columbia Ave., Suite F-10 Riverside, CA 92507 (714) 684-7081 (FAX) 784-5647 March 18, 1990 John Criste Terra Nova Planning & Researci. Tnc. 275 N. E1 Cielo, Suite D-3 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Re: Hayhoe Development Biological Study. Dear John: 1 My comments on the Cornett report, submitted with the screencheck draft EIR to the City of Palm Desert, are given below. 1. The smoke tree wash (page 9) on the site is claimed to be one of the best remaining undisturbed desert washes in the Coachella Valley. This statement needs backup. I can think of several areas, such as Little Morongo Canyon in Desert Hot Springs, Deep Canyon in Palm Desert, Thousand Palms Canyon, Painted Canyon in Mecca, and others that remain in a natural condition and may possess outstanding smoke tree washes. We could review a map or aerials to determine how many smoke tree washes really remain in the region. The Santa Rosa Mountains from Palm Desert south to the San Diego County line has Bear Creek", Guadaloupe Creek, Toro Ca^.yG c, Martinez Can sc:, and Bart ., Canyon The ..Little .San Bernardino Mountains have the Morongo Canyons, Long Canyon, Wide Canyon, Deception Canyon, Pushawalla Canyon, Berdoo Canyon, and Fargo Canyon. Thermal Canyon, Painted Canyon, Box Canyon, and others drain the Mecca Hills and contain smoke tree washes. Others are present in the Orocopia Mountains, such as the Salt Creek wash that contains smoke trees, along with the rare plant Orocopia sage and the endangered desert pupfish. 2 . The correct reference (pages 10 and 22) for the California Native Plant Society rare plant list is the fourth edition, published in 1988 . The edition cited has been revised considerably, but the three rare plants cited are retained in the new edition. A comparison of the rarity of these plants with respect to the region or to other listed plants is in order so that the reader can determine the significance of their loss if they are found to be present in the spring. 3 . Desert tortoise (pages 11, 16 and 27) - The location of the shell fragment is not shown on Figure 4 . Page 16 should say "emergency listed as endangered" (not threatened) . The emergency listing for 240 days will be made permanent or removed on April 4 , 1990. It has been challenged in court and may not hold up. The discussion of what must be done if tortoises are present is too brief. An additional intensive spring survey for the tortoise could determine whether or not any tortoises are present. No reference to active burrows was made, and I cannot tell if tortoises are present now or if only a single old shell fragment was detected. Because the tortoise is listed as endangered, sit will be necessary to better define its occurrence on the site. The Fish & Wildlife Service will not allow projects to proceed that result in taking of this endangered species. Relocation is not a viable option at this time without special permission from the FWS. 4 . Wild Bighorn - The discussion should reference the Santa Rosa Mountains Wildlife Habitat Management Plan , a BLM and DFG document that defines the habitat areas for wild bighorn. Two sample pages from that document are enclosed. The review of private property for relocation of the sheep pens seems superficial. The western portion of the Westinghouse property might be suitable for example. It is adjacent to an area (Dead Indian Canyon) used by wild sheep. It may contain the necessary hills with slopes facing in all directions, and access i5 OK. Cornett notes that the coyote attraction impact can be mitigated with a solid wall around the project. Therefore, this impact may not be significant. Although the indirect role of gnat vectors may be unknown, it is certainly predictable that this project will not contribute any more to their spread than the other 72 golf courses in the Coachella Valley. Natural springs and water sources in the mountains can also harbor gnats. 2 5 . Rare plants and spring plant survey - (page 20) . No description of the habitat or conditions suitable for the rare plants has been given, so no conclusion can be made on whether the plants would be preserved in the recommended buffer. 6 . The Biological Preserve (page 30) appears to contain additional lands to the southwest that were not mentioned as essential in the report. The same appears to be true for the northeast part of the recommended preserve. 7 . Species lists - Golden eagle and burrowing owl sightings are noteworthy. The hydrology issues that you referenced from Maniero Smith at the Westinghouse meeting may or may not be detrimental to smoke trees. Recall that they respond favorably to intensive flooding, and that the seeds require scarification in order to germinate. If the velocities are high in the wash, the smoke trees will benefit over the long run. Please let me know of your comments and the results of any revisions t4at might be made by the City prior to release of the draft EIR. Sincerely, TIERRA MADRE CONSULTANTS, INC. Lawrence F. LaPre, PhD i 3 F Y 1 • .i MAP#4 SANTA ROSA f t _ WILDLIFE HABITAT r y MANAGEMENT PLAN BOUNDARY OF SANTA ROSA WILDLIFE HABITAT AREA " El OF SAN BERNARDINO NATIONAL FOREST r VITAL y y A INTERMITTENT • O LAMBING 4 I -� i A� a, O PRIMARY —7'` SECONDARY ZONE OF DEFICIENCY ' BIGHORN SHEEP DISTRIBUTION BOUNDARY i i s � ,, Lam..=' _. ,_• '�;�,•._ of l� .•:'�S i •.a � � ' ' �-���- n���■�� -- BIGHORN N '�- SHEEP DISTRIBUTION l •'ram �l� � ,..t• � ;�1 '' i � r t �' � l `r, F .1 ,. ��� � A i �r i Q �41• •9.y+�'�S\ ---- � 1 '��. � ,� ' ' E 1 ° 0 . _ -!,V -i i P fi, �•�� '�ijj ^'� .I x n - Z 1 _cn_ l� }t "I+ t ��- Y* •/ .+-�, l' �� / /t JJ , { cry 3�� .✓ 4, �`" , V �� x � ;� i'• I '� r$ i ' 8 " 1 � "�' .. `ham- � { r / � 4�'- _- -.G � I ,�'.7�/yJ� - ThJ°'J ' P1 , 'Lf.•��i 1. 1 C '� � /S . S Y � �� D_ - S �Ya ±_ _! S ` ' ♦ _ x.._ J I r {` b {�. I �J`b 3 �h���5 t' rr PJ�3'l.�'��LU'„{� t �;. { i� • t t. �r�� /. � � t �'_ j.:� �`/I 'i, , y� k' ,i ry • I it i �{(' ' 4 .I. > 1 1 ti. l ly f !3 i�f -•� h. . { •,. t / ��' \•� a / r 1 ` '� P. I \ �� . tl rl 2 �c. A f i 1� Iq�/�'I Et'c \ t- '�? ��- .i- � dIl �..I t I� c � 1 ��J� li `.� _ ..a -,.i1 _•, }� i � � 4r� •{tK ^\1 7 c ' S � ` ' E.j"'_ II ^t I :� � r-1 It(-7 iv�' I J• ri .. _ , �Y_ f �' t`/ I'C. � 1 •m, I I �f .:� t :�' � � ,��� ;il �/ �����Q��� � � i�, �' a... i■ 1 JIM HAYHOE DEVELOPMENT INC. March 13 , 1990 City of Palm Desert 75-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Attention: Mr Phil Joy, Planner Dear Mr. Joy, I understand that the Planning Staff is recommending changes of zoning on our property, the Altamira project, as discussed in tentative tract map number 25296 which differs from our application. I also understand that these recommended changes are minor in nature and do not affect the proposed site plan nor are these staff changes in any way inconsistent with our proposed development plan. With this understanding, we concur with the staff recommendation for the zoning changes. Sincerely, JIM HAYHOE DEVE ENT, INC. es S. a o , P e ident jsh/mk P. O. BOX 4378, INDIAN WELLS , CALIFORNIA 92261, (619) 340-6423 'min 73.510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 PLA?OEDU Oa44ISSICN NIEEPIlW, NDTICE OF ACTION Date: February 22, 1990 Bighorn Ventures P.O. Box 4378 Indian Wells, CA 92210 Re: TT 25296 and C/Z 89-16 The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of February 20, 1990. PLANNDIG OMWESSI(N CWrR DED TT 25296 AND C/Z 89-16 TO A DATE UNCMDUN AND DIRE1CM STAFF TO RE-ADVER= THE PUBLIC EEARING. NMCN CARRIED 5-0. Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the Director of Cammn-dty Development, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. Iq RANDN A. DIAZ, S PALM DESERT PLANNING SSION RAD/tm cc: Coachella Valley Water District Public Works Department Building & Safety Department Fire Marshal CITY OF PAIM DESERT DEPARTI-g OF OcM4mw DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: February 20, 1990 CASE NOS.: TT 25296 and CZ 89-16 REQUEST: Approval of a master tentative map subdividing 362 acres into a 484 unit country club - a first phase of 108 units on 35 acres - a change of zone for 25 acres of drainageway from O.S. to PR-5 and H.P.R. - and negative declaration of environmental impact - southeast of Portola Avenue and Highway 74 APPLICANT: Bighorn Ventures Post Office Box 4378 Indian Wells, CA 92210 I. DISCUSSION• The draft E. I.R. for the project will not be complete until approximately February 20, 1990. The applicant has asked that a response to comments be included in the draft that is presented to the commission extending the process. This procedure is not normally followed at the commission level for projects which ultimately will need council approval but which the applicant has agreed to. II. REOQ44EZMATION• Continue matter until aforementioned review is completed - late April or May - and re-advertise new hearing date. III. ATTACHMENT: a. Letter from Jim Hayhoe Prepared by: � Reviewed and Approved by: PJ/db j FEB-08-'90 14:37 ID:SAN BDND P1AT MGMT TEL 110:714-3e3-4936 #740 P02 STATE OF CAUFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEIIAN, Oovsnw DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - DISTRICT 8, F.O. BOX 231 J SAN BIRNARDINO, CA 92/02 ` TDD (714) 383-4W j February 8, 1990 08-Riv-74-94 ._3 I Mr. Phil Joy City of Palm Desert Planning Department 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear Mr. Joys I, We have received your letter of February 7 , 1990 regarding Tentative Tract 25296 (Big Horn Ventures) and have the following comments: Although it is a Lead Agency decision of whether to include a Traffic Study in a Focused Environmental Impact Report, we still believe it is a necessary part of the review process . In the future the City should consider the cumulative impact of projects this size so that mitigations for the cumulative impact can be addressed and mitigated properly. In order to reduce congestion in the Coachella Valley, this project should provide demand management strategies such as: * Coordination with the Sunline Transit Agency to provide bus bays to serve this development. * Provision of bicycle trails and facilities. * Participation in a program to reduce home based work trips. If you have any questions, please call Richard Malacoff of my staff at (714) 383-4550, Very truly yo rs, HARVEY . SAWYER Chief, Transportation Planning Branch B 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 February 7, 1990 Mr. Richard Malacoff CEQA/IGR Coordinator California Department of Transportation Post Office Box 231 San Bernardino, California 92403 Dear Richard: This letter is to confirm our telephone conversation pursuant to your letter dated January S, 1990, regarding Tentative Tract No. 25296. Based on input received from Caltrans and the city's traffic engineer, a detailed traffic study as you requested in your letter will not be included in the focused environmental impact report for the project. Traffic studies conducted by city staff show that the project will not significantly impact the state highways. Improvements to the state highway include normal road widening and curb and gutter installation, in addition to providing a deceleration/acceleration lane to the project's single access Point and a continuous left turn lane adjacent to the site which presently does not exist. Our conversation ended with the conclusion that your recommendation that a detailed traffic study be conducted, but you would not object if such a study was not included in the focused environmental impact report. Please respond by February 14, 1990, if you are not in agreement with the previous statement. Sincerely, PHIL JOY ASSOCIATE PLANNER PJ/db r ' ''ECEIVED FEB 0 7 i930 JIM HAYHOE DEVELOPMENT INC. "By Messenger" February 6, 1990 Mr. Mike Peron.i Smith, Peroni_ & Fox 980 E. Tahquitz Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Dear- Mr. Peroni : Enclosed is a :development plan and colored map for Al.tam.i.ra Country Club per your request. If you have any questions, please contact me at the number below. Regards, J ay hoe F' sident Enclosure cc: John Criste Terra Nova Planning P O B0 7. . 1 N DIA N Rk EL L_ . CA L I 1OR C I A 92M1 I . 161 o 1 340-642 i DEVELOPMENT PLAN The development plan encompasses the acquisition of the site in 1989 through sales and operations beginning in 1991 to final sellout in 1997. It encompasses initial development of the golf course, country club and supportive infrastructure, development of homes and lots and operations of the country club and design center which are described below. . The timing of the plan calls for the completion of the golf course, country club and common project improvements , such as grading and initial landscaping, to occur from the fourth calendar quarter of 1990 through the first three quarters of 1991. Lot development will begin in the second quarter of 1991, with construction of the first residences starting in the second quarter of 1991. COUNTRY CLUB DEVELOPMENT TIMING: The construction of the golf course and clubhouse, including site development, irrigation, grading and related landscaping is scheduled to begin in the first quarter of 1991 and to be completed by the end of the third quarter of 1991. GOLF COURSE : The residences at Altamira Country Club will be situated along a private 18 hole golf course designed by Ted Robinson, an internationally renowned golf course architect. CLUBHOUSE :The clubhouse will be approximately 40,000 square feet in area and have commanding views of the mountains and Coachella Valley below. The club- house will include men' s and women' s locker room with food and beverage facilities. The main dining room will seat between 350 and 400 people, with a maximum capacity of 400 people. In addition , a private dining room will accomodate between 100 and 150 members and their guests . A lounge with complete bar service will double as a week- day lunch spot. Catering facilities will be available for the members of Altamira. The club- house will also include a pro shop and a snack bar for golfers and their guests . Tennis courts will adjoin the clubhouse. GOLF COURSE The construction -of the golf course and clubhouse AND will begin in the first quarter of 1991, CLUBHOUSE and be completed in the third quarter of CONSTRUCTION: 1991. This phase of development includes the mass grading, irrigation and installation of the golf course's water features , in addition to the landscaping and seeding required for transformation of the desert landscape. Clubhouse construction, inclu- . . ding parking and lighting, are also included in this phase. AMENITIES : The Altamira Country Club will include , in addition to the Ted Robinson designed 18- hole championship golf course and a clubhouse, a driving range, putting course, tennis courts and swimming pools. SITE DEVELOPMENT TIMING: The project common improvements described below are scheduled to begin in the third quarter of 1990 and to be completed by the end of the third. quarter in 1991. PROJECT COMMON Project common improvements are those which IMPROVEMENTS : must be made prior to the commencement of homesite development and residence construc- tion. These include the design and construction of the off-site water system required at the site, as well as relocation of the water storage tank currently located above the site. The construction of the wall and fence sur- rounding the property, including the lands- caping of these security features , is also included in project common improvements , as are the entry gate and water feature construction. The design and construction of drainage systems and roads is also part of these improvements . WATER The Altamira Country Club will feature several FEATURES : lakes to add to the oasis-like setting of the private country club which contrasts sharply with the natural desert environment. WALLS AND The property will be surrounded by a wall and FENCES : fences to ensure the privacy of Altamira' s residents . These barriers will be appropriately landscaped to match the natural environment to the greatest extent possible. ENTRY GATE : The sole entrance to Altamira Country Club will be through a manned gate located on Highway 74. As this entrance will provide the first impression to visitors and potential residents , the design and surrounding landscaping of the entry gate have been carefully planned to enforce the upscale image of the club . There will be a second gate to be used as a service gate. CONSTRUCTION: Construction of duplex, patio and production custom homes begins immediately following lot development, typically in the second and third quarter of each year. The construction is timed to ensure that completed residences are available for sale during the peak sales season which runs from late fall to early spring. The construction of the residences at Altamira will combine the highest quality materials with an equally high level of craftsmanship to create homes of great comfort and utility. The style of the residences is Mediterranean, and the general construction type is a one-level wood frame structure with stucco exterior on a concrete slab base. The residences will have a multi-zoned climate control and adequate insulation for the desert environment. In keeping with the country club atmosphere, garage parking is provided for automobiles and golf carts. In addition, the residences are designed to withstand earthquakes of up to 7.5 on the Richter scale. A description of the features of each residence are included below. MAIN ENTRANCE : The main road leading from the entry gate to the clubhouse will also reinforce the exclusivity of Altamira. The road will pass by the lush, green fairways and lakes of the golf course, with dramatic views of the mountains in the distance:. The road will lead directly to the elegantly-designed clubhouse. SERVICE AND The country club will also be accessible EMERGENCY through a service entrance and through an ENTRANCE : emergency entrance which will be located on Highway 74 and Portola Avenue. SECURITY: The residents of Altamira will be served by a private security patrol, managed by JHD, which will man the main gate and patrol the property. In additiion, each residence is equipped with an alarm which is wired directly to the main gate to provide prompt response in the event of a security or medical emergency (see "Residence Development" below) . RESIDENCE DEVELOPMENT TIMING: Residence development will be completed in six phases (see chart entitled "Typical Development Phase Life Cycle") . The first phase of lot development starts. in the 2nd quarter of 1991 , with construction beginning in the 2nd quarter of 1991. .The first phase of residence sales begins in the 4th quarter of 1991. PHS. 1 PHS. 2 PHS- 3 PHS. 4 PHS. 5 PHS. 6 1990 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 4th Qtr 1st Qtr 1st Qtr 1st Qtr 1st Qtr 1st Qtr DUPLEX 42 26 22 16 0 0 PATIO 43 46 38 53 39 38 CUSTOMS 0 0 6 5 6 6 LOTS 0 0 12 11 10 11 Residence construction begins in the quarter following lot 'development, and takes six months to complete. 0FIGURE3-A moo. ,'����-�-' � • - � �e' ,,,:;, �cg� T = L @�Q l rhy�44�✓1yf1 ��t`J'-ti�' ^� CONCEPT PLANIs r �;�_ 1 1 ua . c 1(2 47 40 _y"z pKASE OIFLEX SFD. CUSTOM TOTAL .. _ N 18 83 18 86 n• i,}i ti i III-3 JIM HAYHOE DEVELOPMENT INC. February 5, 1990 Mr. Philip Joy, Planning Department City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Dr. Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Re : TTM # 25296-Complete Draft & Final EIR and Public Hearings Dear Phil, I would appreciate the postponing of the February 20th meeting until such time the EIR is completed. According to the information I have, that should be sometime around May lst. As I understand the situation today, the draft EIR is expected to be ready for submittal to staff around February 20th. If that happens , I'm told it could be ready to mail for comments sometime around March 1st. Allowing 45 days for comments and 2 weeks to respond to comments , the EIR could be final around May 1st. Allowing 10 days or so for staff review, we could have a .public hearing at the Planning Commission in early May and hopefully, the Council 2 weeks later if not at a joint meeting with the Planning Commission. We are hoping to resolve our problems with the BHI prior to that . time and we will keep you informed. We are looking forward to reviewing the draft with you around February 20th. Please let me know your thoughts on this proposal. Regards , IP4 HAYHOE .D . ELOPMENT INC. H residento e, P. O. BOX 4378, INDIAN WELLS , CALIFORN [A 92261 , (619) 340-6423 F.1-1J EY:),EF'.LO. TELE'-=UF'IEF, rC10 c-c0-90 10:4ZLM o193L22290- 019.541?1798:tt 2 �. F S 8 .i- 2 0 - 9 0 T.U E J .- 0 3 7 T . H . G . - PAL M g R I N G S P . 02 F,F•E - 1 �. - gp PRI 11 : 0e AHI P 0 3 FRIENDS OF THE BIGHORN P.O. Box 1652 Palm Desert, CA 92261 February 5, 1990 Dear Friendsl This is the first of our newsletters. I have enclosed copies of a letter I received from Jim DeForge of the Bighorn Institute, which I hope will be of interest to all. I have also included a map of the Hayhoe and Westinghouse developments. Outlined in red is the boundry which the Bighorn Institute would like to see maintained, The primary function of "The Friends of the Bighorn" is to show coc=unity grass roots support for the Bighorn Sheep in Deep Canyon. I feel that we can beat accomplish this goal by attending pertinent public hearings which will be held at the Palm Desert City Hall and to become familiar with the problems of the wild sheep in the Santa Rosa Mountains. As a group I don't think that we need to push any particular agenda, but we do need to become well informed and show the folks at the Palm Desert City Hall that we are concerned with the natural environment here is the desert as well as the surrounding mountains. There will be a public hearing held at the Palm Desert City Hall on Tuesday, February 20th, at 7:00 pm. which will concern the Hayhoe Development and the future of our Bighorn sheep, I hope you will all set this evening aside and plan to attend. We need to act now to make sure that some of our beautiful desert is set aside for wildlifev not just golf courses and buildings. If we don't do it now, it won't get done at all. Sincerely, Bob Tyler P.O. Box 1652 Palm Desert, CA 92261 Ph.d 341-3222 RCV B`f:XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 2-20-90 10:43AM 6193222290-� 6193417098:ti 3 'FEB' 0 - 90 TIDE I 38 T . H . G — PALM ' R I NG3 P . 03 F E B — 1 6 — 9 0 F R I 1 1 0 7 Li H I P . ja4 t Bighorn Institute Dedicated to the conservation of the world's wild sheep through research and education MoncOFPUNOAIaSING February 2 , 1990 Grew R t6ra jah PnWdrM et the Vnn,1$Wn _ BOARD OF DIRECTORS Che,ksW J,nna. DVM.• Mr . Robert Tyler Modem P.O. BOX 1652 Richard V Medem McCk•rq• VW palm Desert, CA 92261 Kant A. Ro cial ve.PrRoem Dear Bob. Dave Svocktaa• "°°A"ad"" On behalf of the Board of Directors and all of us at the °"° r ct4°Ae°m� Bighorn Institute, I would like to thank you for your Bob Hawed• interest and concern for the welfare of the bighorn sheep. h°"""' We welcome your support in our battle against neighboring rJalee A. Ago development in order to protect this threatened s ecies , Wolfgangng F P. Been cAe.on• p the Peninsular Desert Bighorn. Dote Bergen* Wdttnn Bone Bighorn sheep numbered between 1 ,500,000 and 2,000 ,000 at Jeek Bntnnghuo the beginning of the nineteenth century. Today they total t,aw+anee A. Cone. MD• John It Euhat approximately 40 ,000 in all of North America , In Califon- . LrnorMahn nia , bighorn populations have 'been lost from sixteen moun- RahertMcAaWan tain ranges in the last forty years , leaving approximately flnnMaga 4 ,700 in the state today. The desert bighorn population in Sim na•mine the Santa Rosa Mountains of California was once one of the 'E=rnUMCa,aal largest in the state. However, since 1977 approximately 90% of the lambs have been dying here each year resulting ADMINISTRATION in these animals becoming a threatened species . The Jem..w efore.P. Bighorn Institute was established as a nonprofit organiza- A°"a�.he�.aa. Lion in 19$2 to initiate a research, rescue, and recovery program to ensure the survival of this bighorn population . ADVISORS There are now less than 50 bighorn left in the northern Raban Pauly Santa Rosa range (north of Highway 74) , of which half have eoxra*°Sim o"°"" M.nbn. Semis een,a,rw'en been sick lambs nursed back to health at the Institutets M°wU RI"uR.°e.0 W1100 facilities or lambs born within our pen enclosures and Donald Bu"e later released into the wild . Me^Mr-cwrNaianm Tony E.Came DV M.. Ph D MmIeV. The Bighorn Institute is the only facility in North America Cd W"..N Dp.e,ovK L.W.1m exclusively dedicated to bighorn sheep research and that is Koichi&Clark 1e041 ca.�W activelp working toward the conservat on of the threatened Geaw A� Jo.evP. DVM. Peninsular Desert Bighorn of the Santa Rosa Mountains. C.°t"^b Gp 44 FM ama a.r. We feel that construction of the "Bighorn Ventures" 484 Macka Jorgenun unit country club and 18 hole golf course as proposed Aeao0aoIrO00""�°��re within less than 100 yards of the Institute ' s 30 acre pen Glenn R, stewan, Ph D. coftvn,WMm.ft.-* enclosure , would be extremely stressful to the bighorn Raul Vetde°. PhD housed ' there due to the excessive close and continuous Nor MI."Sim.UmW.er exposure to human disturbance. In order to ensure our �aanwm9n:nsl continued success in raising viable bighorn for release RCV BYf :xEFCr TELECOF'IEF: 7010 2-20-9.0 10:44Gh1 6193222290= 6143417055;# 4 P E B +- 2 0 - 9 0 T U E 1 3 9 T . H . G _ - P A L M -' R I N G S P . 0 4 f= E•B - 1 6 - 9 0 P R I 1 1 8 T b H I P 0 S I a efforts for the conservation of these animals, we have set the requirement of a minimum bighorn environmental buffer of 400 yards of "open space" around the 30 acre pen perime- ter . This buffer includes approximately 110 acres of Jim' Bayhoe's property which includes the only smoke tree wash left in Palm Desert and approximately 60 acres of alluvial hillside , both which we feel should be protected from development anyway. In the current lawsuit filed against the Institute by Bayhoe Development , Inc . Mr . Bayhoe is trying to stop the construction of our new animal care and research lab facilities due to the enforcement of the buffer requirement and resulting loss of the use of a portion of his land . we feel that community support will greatly help us in winning this battle by enforcing the buffer requirement for all surrounding development projects. The bighorn are one of the oldest residents of the Coachella Valley and it is the responsibility of all of us to protect these magnifi- cent animals . With the efforts of concerned people like yourself we can be sure that bighorn sheep will roam the Santa Rosa Mountains for generations to come . On Tuesday, February 20th at 7e00 p.m. there will be a public hearing held at Palm Desert City Ball in regards to the 6ayhoe development project. The outcome of this hear- ing will greatly determine the future of the bighorn sheep of the surrounding Santa Rosa •Moutains. We would like very much for you and anyone else interested, to attend this meeting to show your support for the Bighorn institute and most importantly the bighorn. Again, we thank you for your support and if you have any questions please feel free to call us at the Institute 346-7334 . I have enclosed our latest newsletters and a fact sheet to provide you with more information on the Institute . We will send you a reminder notice for the February 20th hearing and certainly hope that you will be able to attend on behalf of the bighorn. sincerely, Jmes�% DeForge Execute Director Research Biologist RC'J B'Y:xEROx TELECOP[ER ?0iQ ; 2-20-90 1F1:45HP1 ; 61' 52c=290, 61':�7:417098;#; S F E S„— 2 0 — 9 0 T U E 1 40 T _ H G — PAL M " B R I N G S P 9 5 • FE$ — 1 5 -- 90 FR Z 1 1 09 ISH Y P 0 7 PACT SHEET ON THE BIGHORN INSTITUTE WINTER 1990 0. What is the Bighorn Institute? A. The Bighorn Institute is a nonprofit tax-exempt corpora- tion , that was created in 1982 by a group of biologists and veterinarians , to investigate the Causes of bighorn decline . The Institute is dedicated to safeguarding against the extinction and to promoting the proper manage- ment of the bighorn by conducting research into the ecology of the species . 0. why do the bighorn need this Institute? A . Bighorn sheep numbered between 1 ,500 ,000 and 2 ,000400 at the beginning of the nineteenth century . Today they total approximately 40 ,000 in all of North America . In Califor- nia , bighorn populations have been lost from sixteen moun- tain ranges in the last forty yearsr leaving approximately 4 ,700 in the state today. The desert bighorn population in the Santa Rosa Mountains of California was once one of the largest in the 'state . However, since 1977 approximately 90% of the lambs have been dying here each year , causing great concern among wildlife officials and the general public . 0. What is the institute 's major research project? A. The Institute 's major research project is an investigation into the causes of high lamb mortality in the Santa Rosa Mountains , just south of the Coachella valley. Beginning in March and on into the summer , activity at the Institute centers on the rescue and study of sick and dying bighorn lambs . Each lamb can require up to a month of round-the- clock care after capture and several additional weeks of continuous intensive care . The goal of the institute s study in the Santa Rosas is twofold: 1) to learn from the sick lambs as much as possible about the causes of the die- off in order to arrest this high lamb mortality and 2) to return treated and healthy bighorn back to the wild where they will hopefully produce healthy offspring to help replenish the Santa Rosa population . 0. What is the Institute doing to help the bighorn? A. Since the Institute ' s beginning in 1982 , thirty-five sick and dying bighorn lambs have been captured , tested anal -1_ Mlv L. :I.CRU.0 ICLO_i it 1CR (Ulu : =U—'d✓] iU:40H1'I : G1'd�.-G_"dl'7� Gi CL4i lQ;d;9 0 F E B — 2 0 — 9 0 T U E 1 4 0 •T _ H _ G _ — PAL M F . R I F{ G S P 0 6 F E B — % 6 — 9 0 FRI 3 i : e s DHX • P 0 8 treated at the facilities while their disease processes were being studied . In addition to these wild-caught lambs , twenty-one healthy bighorn have been born and suc- cessfully raised within the Institute 's captive herd . From both the captured lambs and those born at the Institute, twenty-five have been successfully released in the Santa Rosa Mountains to date , with the balance making up the institute 's captive herd for conducting further studies . This is the only facility in Nett), AnjCcica of its kind in which intensive vaccine and medical research on bighorn sheep is being conducted . The Institute 's findings have caught the interest of many and at the request of state and federal wildlife management agencies , our biologists have been called into ten western states (Arizona , California, Colorado, Idaho , Montana , Nevada, New Mexico , Oregon , Texas , and Utah) , as well as Mexico and Mongolia , to help with their wild sheep concerns . 4. What has the Institute accomplished so far? A . The Institute has made several important scientific discov- eries in the past few years . Through extensive bighorn disease research, Institute biologists have proven that viruses can and often predispose bighorn lambs to a fatal bacterial pneumonia . we have found the parainfluenaa-3 (PI-3) virus to be the greatest killer of bighorn sheep both here in the Santa Rosas as well as in the other west- ern states and Mexico in which we have worked . A major breakthrough in this research came in 1986 when the Institute isolated a new strain of the deadly parainfluenaa-3 virus . Originally the 'PI-3 virus found in the bighorn was thought to be the same as found in domestic sheep and cattle . However , the biological properties of this new variant are different and therefore may be Specific to bighorn sheep. Since 1977 , the Peninsular bighorn population in the northern Santa Rosa Mountains (north of Highway 74) has drastically decreased from approximately 150 to about 50 . Close to half of these few remaining bighorn have been sick and dying lambs that were rescued , studied . and treated at the Institute facilities , then released as healthy adults , as well as bighorn born at the Institute . In the winter of 1986-07 Institute researchers completed preliminary testing with our captive herd , on a new method of administering vaccines to bighorn sheep through the use of a compressed air powered rifle called the fiallistivet gun . This method requires no physical contact with the animal as the nonlethal vaccine "bullet" can be shot safely into the hindquarters from a distance of up to 30 feet . -2- RCV BY:xERUX TELECUPIER 7010 20-90 1@:47A1"1 5153222290y 6193417098:# 7 FEE - 20 — '30 TUE 1 - 4 1 ,T . H . G . — PALM .^ IR I NGS P . 07 P Ea: — 1 6 - 90 FR T 1 1 : 2 0 nH _ Test results from the vaccinated bighorn showed a favorable Immune response to the PI-3 vaccine . This immune response was additionally detected in those not vaccinated , indicat- ing that autovaccination had occurred , These positive results prove that the BallistiVet vaccine "bullet" may serve as a practical means of disease protection for big- horn in the range . This method 's efficacy in free-ranging bighorn is how being tested through the efforts of the Bighorn Institute and the California Department of Fish and came in a controlled study begun in April 1988 in the Santa Rosa Mountains ' population . By remotely vaccinating a large segment of. the Santa Rosa herds against PI-3 , we are hopeful that immunity will be spread throughout the range to eventually provide protection against this deadly virus for the entire population . On April 14 , 1988 , the first documented twinning in North American wild sheep occurred at the Bighorn Institute . Cimarron , one of our captive rare Peninsular bighorn ewes , gave birth to healthy female twins . Also on May 2 , 1989 , Squeeze , another one of the Institute's captive ewes gave birth to healthy male twins , thus documenting the second twinning of wild sheep in North America . During the spring and summer months of 19eep Institute researchers began investigating the development of the immune system in bighorn lambs . With the testing of aerial blood samples taken from our captive born lambs at 0-36 hours after birth, at 2-3 weeks of age and 2-3 months of age, we are hopeful of learning more about the development of an immune response or lack thereof in bighorn sheep, and their disease susceptibility. The purpose of this study is to explore the proposed possibility that bighorn die-offs in North America may be due in part to an immune system deficiency in the species , rendering them susceptible to deadly diseases such as that caused by the PI-3 virus . 0, what facilities are in use at this tim'ea A . The Bighorn Institute is located on 292 acres of land that we purchased from the Bureau of Land Management . A proximately 40 acres constitute research pens for the captive bighorn herd . A new animal care and research facility will soon be developed adjacent to the pen enclosures with plans for a future museum and education center as well . A home on adjoinin proterty is presently being leased by the Institute to tom orar ly house laboratories and offices until construction of the research center is completed . Institute laboratories are furnished with state-of-the-art medical and diagnostic equipment . -3- RCV BY':XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 2-20-90 13:4?API 619Z2222904 6193417098;# 8 F E B .- 20 - 90 T U E 1 42 ,T . H . G — PALM R I NGS P _ 08 F'E $ — 1 Ea — S0 Fr x 1 1 : i l ]7N I Q, Who makes up the Bighorn institute? A . General Memberships Over 600 President Gerald R. Ford - Honorary Chairman Of Fund-raising Board of Directoras Kent Roberts - President , Ernest Rahn - Executive Vice President Charles W. Jenner , D .V.M, - Vice President Dave Stockton - Vice President Peter E . Cyrog , D .V.M . - Secretary Richard C , McClung - Treasurer Eloise R. Agee Michael Dee Cindy Austin John V. Earhart Wolfgang F. Baere Bob Howard Doug Bergen Robert McGowan William Bone Bruce McNall Jack Brittingham Finn Moller Lawrence A. Cone , M .D . Stan L. Timmins Executive Directors Jim DeForge -4- IS�..� DI •�CfCU�', IGLC..Ur 1Cl', iVLJ • �-cU-�J iV�-iJNI'I • G17L+ccGc=V'J Gl��•yl ikJbOi,3 _ FEB - 20 - 90 TIDE 1 l : 43 �T H G — PALM Sr R I FIGS P _ 09 fr•E`B — 1 6 — 9 8 FRI ;41 1VC / ✓r/ •.r ,••j�..dM/•!I I'II fll/,i11Y11,1 !'.J! f + I►Pllil,Yjj' { '1 �L••h IY1 \�,r /V q-• wn•r•• „• \�I Wf► Y F�!"'r •�F .• iw rt ,f C'•G,r.• r !^;. '' jJ wl✓..ti'I+IwnY ��•w'rr�.y{,41 • I %' A 1 1.1 r� i • � •,.r ' '• Is. r'. 1 .1 -; � 'r '.vim ��, .' ` � •, � '�.\ • ',r �1n•iY•IY.�x' � \ ' I,' 1,•,►.:+wl • '.✓; •jam= 1 I it��A1 • 1 •x,1 .,.,'1' . � { • l ; , ';, } �{��Y � •.' ., y I r I �. ,// `.�Y-]�•G�'1'�; rq� r .: ry'! y '74a1r-q v1M ti ,•.. •r1.rxJrxr•Y.1♦JYY!r �YI [�'[�Jy(,�'1�A /L'♦ •S !•�, lfff; r• a . �.�,• . NA L••1 \� ♦� ' '�\• �.. • `\yam,♦.�'���' Yj + /�, A' 1� / � �. r,r.r�"r'+•"A? ( � ,L• '�:•j N .�y.M�, \ .�.i.�r `•r.l;�.�r 477 ,* kk hw.�� IM 1.:Y /. iyr •� � • ♦ y pM I IAY1101!D17VI;L0PN11 N I INC, February 5 , 1990 Mr. Philip Joy, Planning Department City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Dr. Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Re : TTM # 25296-Complete Draft & Final EIR and Public Hearings Dear Phil , I would appreciate the postponing of the February 20th meeting until such time the EIR is completed. According to the information I have, that should be sometime around May 1st. As I understand the situation today, the draft EIR is expected to be ready for submittal to staff around February 20th. If that happens , I 'm told it could be ready to mail for comments sometime around March 1st . Allowing 45 days for comments and. 2 weeks to respond to comments , the EIR could be final around May 1st . Allowing 10 days or so for staff review, we could have a public hearing at the Planning Commission in early May and hopefully, the Council 2 weeks later if not at a joint meeting with the Planning Commission. We are hoping to resolve our problems with the BHI prior to that time and we will keep you informed. We are looking forward to reviewing the draft with you around February 20th. Please let me know your thoughts on this proposal. Regards , IM HAYH�OlE D UELOPMENT INC. J es S . H oe , resident 3s Imk i`. 0 11 o N i 1 7 S I N N I A N VA' II I. I S , CAI 1 1 O R N I A 2 o I I t• 1 `) 1 1 1 0 1 2 1 RCV BY:XEROX TELECOPIEF: 7010 2-12-9p 4:56PM 6193466039� 6193417093Jp 2 • P E E FM&2 wV�9,0ir nLldv cNa� .# 4 a D H I P 0 2 • MEMAM�Nn(7M 08 dD1UDR8T]►IubTNG Between the California Department of Fish and Game and the bighorn Institute, T_ H . 0 WHEREAS, the California pepartnent of Fish and Game (herein- after raforred to as Department) has peen craated under the low of the state of California, and WIMIAS, the sighorr► Inseiluta (pravleusly called eigharn Rssaarch Instituta, hereinafter referred to as Institute) , a nonprofit organization deAires re mists? the nepnrtmsnt of Fish and Game in conducting research on bighorn sheep in California, and WHEREA9 , , the Department : af Fish and Game and the Bighorn Institute agree that the management goals for bighorn in Califor- nia are as followdt l .. 1httPVWri tlid *Lot" vf, }p'iyhorn sheep in ealitvrnia so chat subpopulations li'sted' as threatened or fully protected Can be removed from 'those aliasifications , 70 Maintain and impbove bighorn habitat where possible . 9 . . R9svtablish* bighorn populations on historic ranges where feasibie ,� 4 , Provide for aesthetic, educational, and other recraational uses of bighorn sheep, .and W14MkS , those goals confarm with 1e0ie1ative Seliey and Section 1e01 of the fish and Game . Code, NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the pdprties to thIA w4a enta WL11 VWVVVAKblVeiy COACIAUe the OngO1nj approved stud Nd subject to the lollowinq: The 'Department of fish and Game wily 1 , provide guidance, direction, and critique of bighorn studies approved by the Fish and Game Commission and funded by the Institute. Z . Review and consider for publieation in e, igRr JA Figb and gA= (a quarterly scion titic Journal) any suitable papers that result from the above studies . RCV HY:xEROx TELECOPIER 7010 2-12-9Q 4:56PM 6193466039-� 61934170987# 3 F E B'- 1 2 - 9 9 M O N 1 4 8 D H I P 34 FROM WDCI <PRLM DCSERI 2. S. t990 0S �• 3 . aaqgast •outside review of fgture study proposals and reports as deemed necessary. A joint DapArtment and institute vaccination trial 'conducted in 1988-90 will be subject to review by a virologist, an epidomialogist, and Department repre$entativaA, ry 4 . Designate a ragibnal contact parson to be responsible for coordination of meetings , Lenq Beach-based airplane use and releasinq data and progress reports (wildlife Management Supervisor, Region 5) . S. Attempt to provide fixed-winq aircraft radio telemetry six times a year as the schedule of Dapartment pilots and Insti- tute researchers dictate. The primary purpose for thee* flights will be to. asaist in the assessment of the vaccina- tion trial , Dates to be coordinated by Region I Wildlife Management Supervisor, the Department ' s pilots; Region ! , Project Coordinator •(Jessup) and the lnstitutefs Executive Director, s . Designate a project Leader (Jessup) to be responsible for the blologigil AdRects of this study, function as A teahhim cal advisor, assist in data analysis, and coordination of meetings. And the Institute will : I . Sponsor, fund, and solicit funding to study the cause of poor lamb survival in the Santa Rosa. Mountains as approved y the Fish and Game Commission. I . provide an annual. prograss report at least two weeks prior to the October coordination ma*Cingj and provide additional information on the status of this abudy on an oecasidnol - basis,, shouXd the Department so raquest, provide for review of progress and completion ra arts prior to publication for raises*. Submit.to the Department project Leader for review scientific papers resulting from bighorn studies in Califor- nia, 1 . where possible, pick up bighorn carcasses that may yield information from necropsy, coordinate this work with the Department of Fish And Game wildlife investigations Labora- tory (WIL) , and submit samples to the wIL, Paae w ralia ap. bacteria cultured- from bighorn will be submitted to' the WIL. 4 , Radio monitor on a frequent (weakly from february-July, monthly August-January) basis the bighorn sheep collared within the study area , complete radio monitoring field data will be mach available to the oepartmont, RCV BY:AEROX TELELUPIER 7010 ; 2-12-90 4:57FM 6193400039� 8193417098;R 4 F E B,- 1 2 - 9 0 M Q hl E R J A. J. 1�)V: 4 9 D H I P . 0 4 • FROM WDC1 (PALM I T 6 . Monitor and report lamb survival from ewes vaccinated againGt blvetonque and px-1 tot oompariseri 'With orlepring of unvaceiriated ewes in other populations, 6 . Helicopter survey the entire Santa Rosa Mountain Range in October with ,pprior approval or the Department (and in April it lamb mortality.dictates) . The Department Unit Supervisor (Paulak) should be notified 96 hours prior to these two flights . periodic short helicopter flights to check on lamb survival and the fate .of bighorn released IXOM captivity may be conducted with Department •pprdvel , 9 . Helicopter survey -the Sin Jacinto Mountains in October 19e9 reaordinq total number of bighorn, locations and lamb/ewe ratio. a , Capture, mark, sample, vaccinate, and release vg to 10 'adult bighorn north of Highway 74 . Captures will be by drive net or net gun and will be coordinated with Departm ant, Project 9 . Capture -by hand or with a net gun for study, up to four sick lambs from the northern Santa Rosa Mountains study area. lot Capture by hand or with a net gun, up to lour sick lambs for study from within Ant& 9orrego Park. This may ,include the inkopah and- Jaeumba mountains, as well as the Santa Rosa Mountains.' Locations, dates, and methods to be approved by Departmant Project Leader and Region S Wildlife Management Supervisor, 11 • At their discretion, accept up to four sick lambs from other mountain ranges with Department appproval , At no time will more than eight wild-caught lambs be kept in captivity at the institutd. 12 . Provide adequate housing before airy bighorn lamb is taken into captivity. This is to bi determned by Department Project Leader and Region 3 Wildlife Management supervisor. 13 , Any mortality of captive' bighorn will be immediately report-. ad to both the Region 9 wildlife Management Supervisor and Department Project Leader. 14 . No capture of bighorn, o�har than moribund individuals will occur without a California licensed veterinarian present at the Capture site* vaterinary participation will be limited to Drs . Jenner Hicks, Cftoq, Dryers, 9urbank, and Melehert or other veterinarian, approved by Department Project Leader. whenever possible, a Department veterinarian, will also participate. RL'v' MYL�phU� IGLGLUrICrt l�l� : G-1C-oLJ 4:GGr•19 : GLyJKGG�Jb� G1�Jti1rUbG:R G P E H - 1 2 - 9 0 M O N 1 - : 5 0 DHI P r0 ' FROM WDCI (PALM DESERT 2. 5. 1999 i6 is, Release back into the Santa Rosa Mountaihs study area from , 4-9 of the lambs born at the Institute or captured in 1947 or lose . A 1%st of alternative release site$ will be sub* witted to the Department by February 19890 releases to be Completed between February and June 1969 in locations host likely to allow optimal survival and disperse' bighorn popu- lations through -their historical range in the northern Santa Rosa Mountains . All bighorn to be released must have tested' negative tor Opp antigen within ' 2 months prior. to release• All releases to be coordinated with Department project Leader and Region S, Wildlife, Management Supervisor. The Institute will conduct radio telemetry follow-up studies to determine the Cate of released animals- is . As opportunity• and manpowas permits, assist the Department in blood sampling cattle in or #near the study area for evidence of exposure, to diseases shared with bighorn sheep. 174 Conduct laboratory resasrah on isolates of pI-3 virus under the .general supirvision 'of Ors . Tony Castro and David Jesa- up, conduct studies of immunoglobulin levels and other indicators of the immune response in sick and healthy big- horn lambs.. This may include skin grafting procodurss to be conducted by a .California licensed veterinarian, 18 , Work with the De.partmant towards practical lvnq-term disease control, including water source manipulation and gnat con- trol: CDC light traps will be used to sample gnat popula• tione in the Santa Rosa Mountains and near ths , institute at least monthly. , 19 , submit annually 'a proposed study plan for the following year. 20 . Frovide "'full documentation, inoludihq .a satisfactory litera- ture search, as justification for all future study proposal$ or major. modifications to this study, The Department *and the Institute will : 1 . Mast once each year, in October, or more' often if necessary to share and review findings and progress, and to plan future activities , Issuas to be addressed will include mechanisms to convey message$ to the public or the press, 2 . qt a suitable study Plan 1n wvitt", reviewed, and appruved by the Department project Loader, the Department and the Institute will cooperatively conduct a vaccination trial to test a modified-live FI-7 vaccine in tree-ranging bighorn sheep during the winter-sprinq 19s9-90 . The Department will sup ly the vaccine in bioabsorbabls bullets a gun to pro3ect. them, and technical aasistance. Ali vaccinations RCV BY:XEROx TELECOPIER 7010 7 2-12-90 4:S9PM 6193466039-) 6193417098714 6 P E B•- 1 2 - 9 0 M O N 1 : S 1 DHI P . 06 FROM WDLI <PRLM DESER ■ 2. 5. 1998 IQ? P. S will be done by or in the pre4enc4 of a Department veteri- narian. Th'e Institute' will hind helicopter costs and pro- vide follow-up. This .will consist of An assessment of clinical signs of , pneumonia and survival of vaccinated and unvac4inated bighorn .shaep. Ail data and results will be shared and pub;ication will Credit al1 . appropriate organixa- ti• %ions , 34 will r%yiew annually study plans proposed to become a part of a MbU. , 4 . . Review use of and need :for captive breeding population. ' S'. Terminate any capture effort at any time for the welfare of the bighorn, xf any bigQhorn dies as a result of any Capture effort, the operation will cease until authorized to contins ua by the Director of .the 04partment of fish and C¢ms. 6, Cooperate in colleotinqq blood samples from freshly hunter- killed or road-killed deer. ' it THIS AGREEMENT is valid and enforceable only if suffici4nt funds are made available by the Budget act for the purposes of this program. to addition, this agreement is subject to any additional restrictions, limitations, or conditions enacted by the Lelqiflature and Contained in %he 6udg4t bills or any statute snaoto by legislation which may affect the provisions, terns, or funding of this agreement in any manner. IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have exoouted this Memorandum of Understanding as of the date signed below. ey= J�•�•�r--yam oatA 4 11IS Q00 pet• Sontadol1j, Director . .Department of Fish and Came �G per' gy s : . Data t e orge, x utive Dirootor i li horn rnstit e S�w. M e.s• �"�•b 14 -1 C �t ti �r,c RCV BY:AEF.OX TELECOPiER -010 ; 2-12-90 11:59PM ; b193400039y 6193417098;9 -, F E B — 1 2 — 9 O M O N 1 — : S 1 L H I P . 07 California 1 4" California "It sends a firm message to all state government agencies to trends stop their long practice of In Bradley Inman truding on private property rights, said Hopper, who rec- ommended that the governor consider such an executive Governor i$SUeS order. r proclamation for The Pacific Legal Foundation is encouraging governors In Col- property rights orado, New Mexico, Texas, Gov. George Deukmejian re Florida and Nevada to issue G ce um similar proclamations. y jumped on the private Hopper argues that the order Property rights bandwagon also gives assurances to land- when he issued a proclamation owners and private business 1. requiring state agencies to abide firms who maybe deliberating a by the Fifth Amendment of the `decision to invest in California EU.S. Constitution which guaran- property. "California has a rep- tees the rights of private property. � utation for heavily regulating what landowners can do with Executive Order D-78-89 was- ! their property, but this decision released on Dec. 20 with tittle should soften that dubious dis- fanfare. But supporters of the unction," said Hopper. governor's action said it was an Deukmejian's proclamation important step in the campaign was modeled after a similar t to protect landowners against measure issued by then-Presi- government regulations. den! Reagan in March 1988, ' The order shows that the 1 ,�. .which requires federal agencies i governor is willing to stand up to balance private property And be counted on private prop• rights when enacting govern- erty rights, said Reed Hopper, ment regulations. attorney with the Pacific Legal Reagan's order is more spe- Foundation in Sacramento, ciflc, requiring the Department The proclamation requires, 'of Justice to draft guidelines for fl. "Ail state agencies, depart• federal agencies to use when ments, boards and commissions regulating private property. _ .. o evaluate their regulatory ac• Both proclamations come on i lions...to ensure the appropri- the tail of several court cases � ate protection of private that have ruled in favor of pri- .: property" 11 Examples of government ac- vale property rights. p lions that the agencies must At the center of the debate is �. avoid are physical invasion or the Fifth Amendment, which 1damage to private property, provides". . .nor shall property . which interferes with the use be taken for public use,without and enjoyment of, or access to just compensation." and from,private property,"ac- More than 50 years ago, Jus• 2 cording to the executive order. uce Oliver Wendell Holmes The governor identified the r said, 'While property may be Department of General Services as the agency responsible for of. t regulated to a certain extent, if feting assistance to other state regulation goes too far,it will be agencies in complyin w e recognized as a taking (of pri- g 'executive order. g " ''''� vat* property). { However, Deukmejian's edict :. i+ For decades the legal contro- k{ ,calls for no specific changes In ."•' versy has focused on defining state policy and does nothing to what 1s "too far." I. wipe out or modify current laws Bradley Inman writes this that govern the development of weekjy column for ■ nymber 'private property. - of Getifornia newapap4.v. But advocates for private t property rights claim that there I is more to the proclamation than symbolism. i RCtI BY:>tERu% TELEC)F'IER 'IDIC:12- 1-89 9:360m 6193466039-r 619341T1y99;h -J DISC- 1 -0 9 F R I: 1 C 29 D. I P . OT 6 FRIDAY.DDEVIMER 1.IM Chese Hunters Are Also the Hunted ,;. di, .l - Inc coldo's wl wolifC mANgemenl them. Bighorn sheep:Turd f, p •.>. {, divblon,.sick,"I would challenge '"bond In Met u9 m the nigh qy:d.;,•�•:^ -noel hunt hCg10g .i J4, J -) Nem W Put Meet nine am manor lid in Me early mmninge am atualhrday lit id pr011519 '��i\.f �, one effort into bighorn a elk (cathehumencomingup,eml reseambprlecb.Wegetpeoptem, then they would dog the hunter.," 'f - A bucket brigade prying Cement Younge.ld. lid high emotions. �. 9 up.MII to build a Illtle gutumn for Al an ortenullon her this year" YRICN ROOERTS -"n the demrl wndll(e.Where aro that nunl<n. Young edvlcctl Petdn<e. t LRICHI..'ems • when we lie dolnHtMt1" He Oldn't like No ram..rill the , '; The anU.bunter way that the Iltnday. ,' �`v•-1., ?( . It a strange, the,-way inn- t DEYl's prole... artindCly InNbo TTa hunt will M herd- M- '� .unittlon,l unter-mad with rune. •. 'W popWeOmu, and Nat advmaln tame C Note peoplq but by no 'rotnter -mod who air limn, �. I. went le have moll sheep m meentlmpoaible"hraold. ' Ignom once olmed only with . Y� ., they can kill Nem. The DM D - enswen that Brit rider rams Pan O Hdity and warms" "•'s ' lhetr gyrime at 6 to 11 Year,are Lost year the DFO and Dune!of TM1e,Is little rnpttt between - taken bees....of the'"legal she n<rumen P,loctim 1,OXII snot s tp" Land ManeHement werdem clued' ' 1 ,�'>. X "is rvto mmiling about a ND-degrees three proleelen but made no ar ahi tithey.ndrc or lha mlmel. -'� cool In the norm, end the older reee. The Nel.dn to dc.erll bighon ,h,p wpuld soon die C slvNen, They didn't want to get In- P' A-p b a magnlncend treasure. smemvr Jta a..xron. 'Etpeduly when Yin+catch'am On anyway vo1vM In Caking pmluce emlon. a he hodmn Ili. In Ih.l'Wmhl'a SletGly bighOm ShtGP 6180d et Uh-bub,,ure."Bardlntsaid."it beoun .. 111 A p.11MAI had 1 led'ppinme;say.Tracy Bartlett of Center Of hunting Wnh0Y0rY. they want to follow It around until potato, Young ram. XI or it dies field age,and then take Me TTl,ynr may M different,but )' m pll. hus,Ney can do Not" rut I CMN of a new Auto law One m the Ironic,I,that then I s y an overlap between hurler, ad At the Hart of Ian Yeae-hunt. 0 pre hlbitln6[ the henelment of . asrgle Ids most from EarNFirdl Deem and Bdcknell Mod s tl- hunter.. 77s1 Celli only for s {' rh-e have boon Mocs when enN- million Iml. hut the Lida-for Scott Young M Orange County dulion on the @at °ffene am :enmenulss or anNbunters nave ...suit and Marc.M false limit hunted Ian Year am book.ram doem't became.miseemearurun- „�' ,,Mrdupinteor arm with hunters am imprCadnment(in a horse till- with California-racON Norm.But tl the second offense.by which . became they are some C the low at), violation of Civil HHhb and his.atffactIon VIA tempered be- time the hunt is over. people that appreciate wilderness9thew oth-mmpdalntx Jun last weck, nose he was unable 0 do It with Instead the Fish and Game - - But that wont M eme Case In the .n arbltnto. for Ire Sacramento his preferred a h'u-as" Commission he.designated the outer-Mcieve Bison the nest two County Superior Court denied the P Sei g two homing min a t"tha , week,.ram during California',Mild Claim. him he waanu n0able bo get cloget a management .boos,meaning that _ mnmllimlltdblgtwmhunt oilers But the ants-hunlen hedalready e ' ebOulWYerds-t°gets pmnters Could be Immediately q moratorium C 114 Years.If any- taken meal'im m revenge.teat 8 amstM and lolled on mbdemnmr , M14.the Mille Jinn have been y.M they came with two-way in aa, Bunhod Ito a nnei on the tharge-s of disturbing wildlife, hardened am the emotive emblt. radio and a bcter game Plan.Two Nlyd or fourth Cloy when Ithe demonstrating without a permit. teredbYwhathmgoneW 's. of the eight lottery huntcn"led edivlsl.J actually ruined the dim hotlines.,refmtng be obey a runt,"be ald.'Pan of hurling b When the hunt nine Saturday togelthelr.beep. Min abic m watch Me animal.In law olflcer m behaving in m at down.Bartlett wlllM Writ with am Blotch of the DFO aid, being old environment...the Ursaie Conner-oath a getting Fenhfln0. the 11un1 Sabonure '"ihe two hunter,didnt all 1e11 Mrea and mhar Ninggs.Nat live In belwm°a hunter and his pry. fM omen who go into Ne held to sfi,p btnme the (rnkm were the d.crt TTe kW Ion the runt. net Cattle wasn't used Bunn66 'ea-rice their Objections to trophy erekn,an amMa,wlld6le hiol• tepttlally with a how and orrow, the fin no Cache Qeek tole elk . ;bunting. The hunt le ever lnl until the huntl Of is pe niC.t homeocall,when I Wardens (tom the Department ogisl haocl in Bl.hop worked with In, ou y ragW .,an of 15 permit benen got i of FIN are Dame will M ready for Bob Vemdy and the retired Betts ,at Noe people alr0 rvnnlnH (heir elk.but four m five Other , .Nem, det'nomed to protect Me Weorer to cumDlle much of the through bfowlnnHH OG their hurt.. IMlealed Net they were fd11M by 1 d8hs of eight hunlen wM are OFG'e research Clan that permed- and dlstmbNg the entire ailu.tior, Protesters. �,:r •� sutborlaM by the Hale fin this M Nc nets legbbture to Blow a You Imo everything•The Aural b Bartlett luck will Mlntertrt• mee t--a-Iimume ogaortunhy to limited. -penmer hunt unto -plea The Chanrn of laid" Ng W see whot strategic game$go ' ,Cake we blghonaPMtt, lea 1, u(93.The eslh slid(Inn mmeNing with a bow am arrow on lh o Year."ere are different no, m oven tom aM.woo- Mint is as for December Ol der Nose tireumname,would Dom for lnterrer<nte-elso new A- In.Their name$w-a drawn from 1992 be jot blind luck-one In a mil' tapeelt) 10, legal action. They •`v�: .t more than 2,500 APPllcants.One Is Blelch has dam to.how how the li.. didn't Us,whet W do with m an archer.One Is Dom Michigan. blgh°ms Mve thrived through to". The fired Yes.the aNCna tried become Nen wasn't any opecific,!It .s„r the hurt fern funaeskenl who provement of neblul-Ddln'dly. m follow the honer, from their statute on the book..Now then •., Picked frwo At out-W-$tm0 the construction of year-round Colors.Let year they wined fin a." .ppllc.nu veat"hoist,f"guaiers"—m the r r' 1 Anlnth hunts".Bober 6enrr of bunt nth among Me Old Dad t 11 1'D New N.mp.Nre,his Clearly kilted Pack-%elm Mdnotelo tin mutb- \v f jMs ram.fie bought his permit la,I Coal M Baer and to a Inter degree $40,000 sultan sM w..Privileged In the Marble Mountains (Inner Cox start huntln two weets sga out all . 1 Tha S40,000 w11PH0 be help rerun sit" July a 19111 the ship . Ne ryecln lie kllltd.hPny,indeed. population them Me grow'° to we yea.ago,when 0, ppro- sbM 61D timpie hunting am the "It.we.lomely mg-clu.11 'capture and lren Wait 98 almW nine huntcn gm Nob Keep In the W Other historic ran66n where pmeess,two Dmtntm-Lyn Dr,- hunting s not ailOwM The law ' -am AM detained by Loren LuCa, who hunt upbl6$ofNepoPul.ton- tlalmeO he had made cltl,n.an• 15 thnp-but only nine have bee° nu.W e b yan yreaidenI of Me offered each year.Sacfair for the then of Ssewlde,Nelson.Mve grown Big horn Sheep NC in Concert with In numbers from a DFU sWmaeOf the DFD he a workM b ..era H,Tf 11.IBlr to 3,764. Nebo-popu"ions be hiatode Cali- huBnlenhwdoe"Ituld be Mae, U ant tomb ranges. 1 a ...us cinmed that Lull "YW WWI feadp with throe struck him with . lodal'from people,"he Wd."TTeyve Sol a MrmMck am that Wti. inn Cola.tot am naMi.s Met.".at ' Bennso Ourched bum AM broke his soya b a-\..change Nat BY God, _ --roe,Nen iecked both In.bone Ney,oa.mbelon am they Are , Inllar f-shoot ll noun unDlDPo rlgbh regardle.sCfaxu," am".-rived to like Nem to Tory MslWkld•albtut Chef, Ave 4 i w Feb°nary 2, 1990 SMITHPERONI & FOX PLANNING CONSULTANTS,INC. Mr. Phil Joy ` 980 East TahquitzWay,Suite Associate Planner Palm Springs,California 92262 City of Palm Desert ! 619/322-0900 Planning Department 73510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Subject: State Clearinehouse and Other Comments Received in Connection with the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Altamira (Bighorn Ventures) Project (TT 25296 and CZ 89-16) Dear Mr. Joy: We have received from your office various comments transmitted to the City regarding the referenced project. We have taken note of those items which relate to the issues being studied in the focused EIR. Other topics such as traffic and circulation should, in our opinion,be pursued with the commenting party. The process would benefit if all peripheral issues which have not otherwise been made a part of the focused EIR, are resolved before the Draft document is released. We would be most interested in keeping abreast of this situation and are available to adjust our scope of services should you require other assistance. Very truly yours, Michael A. Peroni Vice President MC:MAP:km off Fda P&w[M 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 PLANNING 014USSION MEETING, NOTICE OF ACPICN Date: January 19, 1990 . Bighorn Ventures P.O. Box 4378 Indian Wells, CA 92210 - -M Re: SIT 25296) and C/Z 89-16 The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of January 16, 1990. PLANNING CONMLSSICN CONTINUED MIIS MATTER 70 FEBROARY 20, 1990, SY MIN= MOTION. CARRIM 3- Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the Director of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. RAMON A. DIAZ„ SE PALM DESERT PLANNING ISSION RAD/tn cc: Coachella Valley Water District Public Works Department Building & Safety Department Fire Marshal MIIdli'ES PAIM DESERT PLANNING 034-IISSICN JANUARY 16, 1990 Action: Moved by O mmissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Richards, approving the consent calendar by minute motion. Carried 3-0. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued Case Nos. '1T 25296 C/Z 89-16 - BICUI VBUURES, Applicant Request for approval of master tentative map subdividing 362 acres into a 484 unit country club, a first phase of 108 units on 35 acres, a change of zone for 25 acres of drainageway from O.S. to PR-5 and H.P.R. , and a negative declaration of environmental impact located southeast of Portola Avenue and Highway 74. Mr. Diaz explained that a continuance was being requested to February 20 and could possibly be continued after that, due to the environmental impact report requiring a 30 day review period. He indicated that the envirommantal impact report was being written by the firm of Smith, Peroni & Fox. Mr. Diaz stated that it was staff's intent to readvertise the public hearing after the environmental impact report preparation was completed. Commissioner Richards felt there were probably some people present who were unaware of the continuance. Chairperson Whitlock opened the public testimony and asked if anyone present wished to address the commission either in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one. Action: Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, continuing this matter to February 20, 1990. Carried 3-0. B. Continued Case No. 7.OA 89-2 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for approval of an amendment to the city's parking lot tree ordinance. Mr. Diaz explained that the purpose of the ordinance was to clarify the types of trees and how they should be planted to give the developer better direction. He indicated that the amendment was 2 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMEM OF CCK4JNITY DEVELOPNIH3dT CITY OF PALM DESERT TO: Planning Ccmrdssion DATE: January 16, 1990 CASE NO.: TT 25296 APPLICANT: BIGHORN VENTURES P.O. Box 4378 Indian Wells, CA 92210 I. DISCUSSION• The EIR preparation has taken longer than initially expressed. The consultant feels that another month is sufficient time to complete the work. II. RBOOM ENDATION• Continue matter to the meeting of February 20, 1990. PJ/db .STAtTt OF;CMIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGEN GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN,Governor DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES P. 0. Box 6598 LOS ANGELES 90055.1598 $i January 10, 1990 City of Palm Desert 73510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA' 92260 Attention: Phil Joy Subject: Notice of Preparation of DEIR for Altamira Project, for 484 Units Country Club Project, dated December 1989, SCH# 89020221 Your referenced document has been reviewed by our Department staff. Recommendations,. as they relate to water conservation and flood damage prevention, are attached. The Department recommends that you consider implementing a comprehensive program to use reclaimed water for irrigation purposes in order to free fresh water supplies for beneficial uses requiring high quality water supplies. For further information, you may wish to contact John Pariewski at 213-620 -3591• Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this report. Sincerely, Charles R. White, Chief Planning Branch Southern District Attachments cc: Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 ;rr � Cr DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES RECOMMENDATIONS FOR WATER CONSERVATION AND WATER RECLAMATION To reduce water demand, implement the water conservation measures described here. Required The following State laws require water-efficient plumbing fixtures in structures: o Health and Safety Code Section 17921 requires low-flush toilets and urinals in virtually all buildings as follows: "After January 1, 1983, all new buildings constructed in this state shall use water closets and associated flushometer valves, if any, which are water-conservation water closets as defined by American National Standards Institute Standard A112.19.2, and urinals and associated flushometer valves, if any, that use less than an average of 1-1/2 gallons per flush. Blowout water closets and associated flushometer valves are exempt from the requirements of this section." o Title 20 California Administrative Code Section 1604(f) (Appliance Efficiency Standards) establishes efficiency standards that give the maximum flow rate of all new showerheads, lavatory faucets, and sink faucets, as specified in the standard approved by the American National Standards Institute on November 16, 1979, and-known as ANSI A112.18.1M-1979. o Title 20, California Administrative Code Section 1606 b (Appliance Efficiency Standards) prohibits the sale of fixtures that do not comply with regulations. No new appliance may be sold or offered for sale in California that is not certified by its manufacturer to be in compliance . with the provisions of the regulations establishing applicable efficiency standards. o Title 24 of the California Administrative Code Section 2- 0 b (California Energy Conservation Standards for New Buildings) prohibits the installation of fixtures unless the manufacturer has certified to the CEC compliance with the flow rate standards. o Title 24 California Administrative Code Sections 2- 2 i and address pipe insulation requirements, which can reduce water used before hot water reaches equipment or fixtures. These requirements apply to steam and steam-condensate return piping and recirculating hot water Piping in attics, garages, crawl spaces, or unheated spaces other than - between floors or in interior walls. Insulation of water-heating systems is also required. o Health and Safety Code Section 4047 prohibits installation of residential water softening or conditioning appliances unless certain conditions are satisfied. Included is the requirement that, in most instances, the installation of the appliance must be accompanied by water conservation devices on fixtures using softened or conditioned water. o Government Code Section 7800 specifies that lavatories in all public facilities constructed after January 1, 1985, be equipped with self-closing faucets that limit flow of hot water. To be Implemented where applicable Interior• 1. Supply line pressure: Water pressure greater than 50 pounds per square inch (psi) be reduced to 50 psi or less by means of a pressure-reducing valve. 2. Drinking fountains: Drinking fountains be equipped with self-closing valves. 3. Hotel rooms: Conservation reminders be posted in rooms and restrooms." Thermostatically controlled mixing valve be installed for bath/shower. 4. Laundry facilities: Water-conserving models of washers be used. 5. Restaurants: Water-conserving models of dishwashers be used or spray emitters that have been retrofitted for reduced flow. Drinking water be served upon request only." 6. Ultra-low-flush toilets: 1-1/2-gallon per flush toilets be installed in all new construction. Exterior:" 1. Landscape with low water-using plants wherever feasible. 2. Minimize use of lawn by limiting it to lawn-dependent uses, such as playing fields. When lawn is used, require warm season grasses. 3. Group plants of -similar water use to reduce overirrigation of low-water-using plants. 4. Provide information to occupants regarding benefits of low-water-using landscaping and sources of additional assistance. "The Department of Water Resources or local water district may aid in developing these materials or providing other information. 5. Use mulch extensively in all landscaped areas. Mulch applied on top of soil will improve the water-holding capacity of the soil by reducing evaporation and soil compaction. 6. Preserve and protect existing trees and shrubs. Established plants are often adapted to low-water-using conditions and their use saves water needed to establish replacement vegetation. 7. Install efficient irrigation systems that minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize the water that will reach the plant roots. Drip irrigation, soil moisture sensors, and automatic irrigation systems are a few methods of increasing irrigation efficiency. 8. Use pervious paving material whenever feasible to reduce surface water runoff and to aid in ground water recharge. 9. Grade slopes so that runoff of surface water is minimized. 10. Investigate the feasibility of using reclaimed waste water, stored rainwater, or grey water for irrigation. 11. Encourage cluster development, which can reduce the amount of land being converted to urban use. This will reduce the amount of impervious paving created and thereby aid in ground water recharge. 12. Preserve existing natural drainage areas and encourage the incorporation of natural drainage systems in new developments. This aids ground water recharge. 13. To aid in ground water recharge, preserve flood plains and aquifer recharge areas as open space. FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION In flood-prone areas, flood damage prevention measures required to protect a proposed development should be based on the following guidelines: 1. It is the State's policy to conserve water; any potential loss to. ground water should be mitigated. 2. All building structures should be protected against a 100-year flood. 3. In those areas not covered by a Flood Insurance Rate Map or Flood Boundary and Floodway Map, issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the 100-year flood elevation and boundary should be shown in the Environmental Impact Report. 4. At least one route of ingress and egress to the development should be available during a 100-year flood. 5• The slope and foundation designs for all structures should be based on detailed soils and engineering studies, especially for hillside developments. 6. Revegetation of disturbed or newly constructed slopes should be done as soon as possible (utilizing native or low-water-using plant material) . 7• The potential damage to the proposed development by mudflow should be assessed and mitigated as required. 8. Grading should be limited to dry months to minimize problems associated with sediment transport during construction. i 'STATE OFM CA _A A—BUSINESS, TRANSPORT...�JN �D HOUSING AGENCY '�- GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8, P.O. BOX 231 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92402 TDD (714) 3834609 January 8 , 1990 08-Riv-74-94 . 3 SCH# 89020221 i. Mr. Phil Joy Assoicate Planner City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear Mr. Joy: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact . Report for Tenative Tract 25296 We have reviewed the above-referenced document . and request consideration of the following comments: The Draft Environmental Impact Report should include a Traffic Study that contains the following from a worst case scenerio viewpoint: existing and future average daily traffic (ADT) volumes, traffic generation (including peak hour) , traffic distribution, analysis of peak hour demand and capacity, intersection capacity utilization (ICU) analysis along with current and projected capacities of local roads, State highways and freeways that might be impacted. Specifically, this project should examine Route 74 with respect to signals, access, and traffic flow. ! : r Discussion of the impacts should also include traffic growth, traffic safety, drainage, and any impact associated with the construction, maintenance, and operation of any anticipated highway improvements. In addition, the Report should list the funding source of any potential improvements to the State highway. Given the intense population growth coupled with increasing traffic congestion, demand mitigation programs are a necessary solution to congestion. The City of Palm Desert should develop a plan .that facilitates the use of carpooling, vanpooling, public transit, and accommodations for both pedestrians and bicycles as mitigations for the effect of cumulative traffic. In addition, the City should implement a program where each project proponent contributes towards a City-wide Park and Ride Program which will reduce the number of homebased work trips. Concerning drainage, care should be taken when developing this property to preserve and perpetuate the existing drainage pattern of the State highway. Particular consideration must be given to cumulative increased storm runoff to insure that a highway drainage problem is not created. �.. I , i Mr. Joy Page 2 .of 2 January 8, 1990 It is recognized that there is considerable public concern about noise levels adjacent to heavily traveled highways. Land development, in order to be compatible with this concern, may require special noise attenuation measures. Development of this property should include any necessary noise attenuation. It is a Caltrans policy to support economic growth and orderly land use development; however, new development that significantly impacts state highway facilities should have mitigation measures addressed. All jurisdictions should take measures available to fund improvements and reduce total trips generated. . In view of the fact there are limited funds available for infrastructure improvements, we recommend the City of Palm Desert take the lead in developing a fair-share mechanism in which each project can fund improvements for the decrease in Level of Service for which it is responsible. We urge early and continuous liaison with Caltrans on proposed plans as they affect State highways. When available, please send the Draft Environmental Impact Report to: Richard Malacoff CEQA/IGR Coordinator California Department of Transportation P.O. Box 231 San Bernardino, CA 92402 If you have any questions, please contact Richard Malacoff at (714) 383-4550. Very truly your , HARVEY J. SAWYER Chief, Transportation Planning Branch B G Y OF RANCHO MIkmGC December 12, 1989 Ray Diaz City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: Response to Notice of Preparation of Draft EIR for Altamira (Bighorn Ventures) Project Dear Ray: Thank you for the opportunity to address the scope and content of the environmental informa- tion for the proposed project. The focused EIR should provide information and an analysis in the following areas of concern: 1. A summary that identifies alternatives that would reduce or avoid significant effects in- cluding alternative site and a down-sized project as stated in the Goleta case. 2. Mitigation measures for impacts on biological resources. The preparation of biological assessments and the encouragement of preservation to the greatest extent possible. 3. Particular attention should be directed toward mitigating the impacts on existing peninsular bighorn lambing areas located south and adjacent to the proposed project. The EIR should incorporate the mitigation measures of establishing an environmental buffer or conservation easement consisting of natural open space in sufficient acreage to protect the bighorn sheep biological rescue efforts carried out by, the Bighorn Institute and to preserve the critical lambing areas that are vital to the survival of this threatened species. Our City Council recently approved an additional 60 units for the Mirada project. May we suggest one of those mitigation measures be incorporated into this project: A Bighorn Sheep biologist specialist chosen by the City, involved with the Bighorn Institute and paid for by the applicant, will survey the site prior to and during grading and report findings to the State Department of Fish and Game and Federal Bureau of Land Manage- ment. Should the biologist determine that the sheep are being significantly impacted 69-825 HIGHWAY 111 1 RANCHO MIRAGE, CA 92270/(619) 324-4511 /FAX (619) 324-8830 ! Z Ray Diaz December 12, 1989 Page two 3. during and after construction, the applicant shall implement any reasonable additional mitigation measures required by the biologist. The homeowners association shall hire the same biologist or his designee each year at lambing time to monitor the intrusion of the subdivision's impact on the Bighorn Sheep and their habitat area. 4. The EIR should address areas of controversy, including issues raised by agencies, the Bighorn Institute and the public. 5. Issues to be resolved, including the choice among alternatives and how to mitigate the significant effects. 6. A statement briefly describing the intended uses of the EIR, including a list of the agen- cies that are expected to use the EIR in their decision making. 7. Require archaeological reviews to be performed by qualified archaeologists who are mem- bers of the Society of Professional Archaeologists and include record searches and a thorough field survey. Pending survey results and evaluation of the significance and uniqueness of the site(s), further mitigation measures may be warranted. 8. The use of a certified archaeologist to perform a subsurface test-level investigation and surface collection for all cultural resource sites that have not previously undergone ade- quate testing. Address preservation if identified archaeological sites or the professional retrieval and curation of artifacts prior to the development of the site. We suggest the developer be required to have an approved archaeologist on site during grading with au- thority to halt earthwork should archaeological evidence be uncovered. 9. It is noted that the 484 unit country club proposed focused EIR does not list traffic and circulation impacts as an item of concern. Consideration should be given to the cumulative effects that continued development in the subject area will have on the transportation system along State Highway 74 from a worst case viewpoint. Accommodations for trails, pedestrians and bicycles, and public transit should be identified. A project containing this number of dwelling units deserves a traffic study to quantify impacts, identify their significance and mitigate them. 10. Impacts on water resources and drainage: The project appears to be located in a major drainage area. Any blockage could have an adverse effect on the Bighorn Institute. Ray Diaz December 12, 1989 Page three Finally, more specific comments may have been solicited if sufficient information were in- cluded in the NOP [Section 15082 (1.)] of CEQA states: The Notice of Preparation shall provide the responsible agencies with sufficient information describing the project and the potential environmental effects to enable the responsible agencies to make a meaningful response. For instance, the project description states that the project extends into the foothills, but this is not evident as to the location or the extent of hillside encroachment on the transmitted public hearing "map". This would aid responding agencies in more fully understanding the scope of the project. Thank you for allowing us to comment. Please transmit to us a copy of the draft EIR when it becomes available. Sincerely, Steve Nagle Admin. Analyst SN:msa pc Carl Hatfield, Jr., City Manager Robert Brockman, Director of Community Development STATE O _AUEORNIA--0FFiCE OF THE GOVERN._ri GEORGE DEUKME!IAN, Goremor OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 , DATE: December 11, 1989 TO: Reviewing Agencies RE: City of Palm Deserts NOP for Altamira SCH#89020221 Attached for your comment is the City of Palm Desert's Notice of Preparation of a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Altamira Project. Responsible agencies must transmit their concerns and comments on the scope and content of the EIR, focusing on specific information related to their own statutory responsibility, within 30 days of receipt of this notice. We encourage commenting agencies to respond to this notice and express their concerns early in the environmental review process. Please direct your comments to: Phil Joy City of Palm Desert 73510 Fred [daring Dr., Palm Desert, CA 92260_ with a copy to the Office of Planning and Research. Please refer to the SCH number noted above in all correspondence concerning this project. If you have any questions about the review process, call John Keene. at (916) 445-0613. Sincerely, David C. Nunenkamp Deputy Director, Permit Assistance Attachments cc: Phil Joy SCHAP:C1 Q� I SKI.31m Weddell Deparlmml of Trartaportado0 Flail and Guns-Roglonal OAioea Regional Water GnAlfty Control Board California lllghwsy Rod DIS1,10 Conpcb lung Ran'.Rennin,Sainte Gap Skeey,Reglael M.mger NOR'111 COASf R EGION(11 '.S':Sent by Lead 'X':Sent by SC!/ Plsm,ing and Aml,ia Divuio, Jo S.eford ❑ Depamtem of Fah ud Game 1440 Unn.,ille Rd. 2555 Firs,Mo.. Can..Dia.icsI 601 lucue Smm R.,,.CA 9WI S.mncnto,G 95818 El 106 Unite Strca Rc6lir,g,G 9G001 Bob... 916/445-1981 Bumk.,CA 95MI 916/225-2300(8-N2) t_ 7O//5ffi2220(8-590) ❑ 11 2 Q So—,Blood I102 Q Svmr 70//445-6671 IS SJtl) BAN J a.SSCO NAY REGION(2) Ssmnsnw,('A 93814 N'Illl.mnard..A. Ik DpNot Mmeof Pa &Ga..Msmga Oa) .CA 94607 Roan bap 9I yJ22-8267 © 915 Ca Capitol maan lkrimg" MI...Garroc,2 ❑ 1701 Nucmnln.hAUrr A ❑ 415AM- 25946W 9D Capiml MdI,Roan 2Stl ❑ 107 Ri .imkD2 P/OINlmbu.Msd,SuimA 413p61-1255(8-56q Karen Csgle CA 95811 RcMipg,CA a Driw Rudto W22(8y G 95670 ❑ 16V stnont ngk Wawrwaya 91NJ22-T191 916/22e,G 96W1 916255092E(8-4J8) CEMRAurclI COAST REGION Q) 1629 S Shat 91 WL25-J259(8-N2) I IO2A Iaud I. Btoaraanw,G 93814 Run,K,,.Ub,$ R./lutht,Rcgimd Mm.ger S.I.it Obirlc,G 9WI 91 W4456281 ❑ Office of l total,Raervuim B,I..J.Smllh ❑ Dcpunnrm of Fhb ud Game ❑ 805/349-3147(&6N) P.O.Box 942896 C.Inuq D,h,J P.O.Bo.47 l Gap LRollway S.—neut.,CA942960WI 703 BShcct Yovnrv01e,CA94599 LOS ANGELES REGION(4) I ❑ Califani.Could Cmimuriun 9 1 63 22 9 621 ❑ MsprvBle,CA 95901 7MIVM.5519 101 Cana Pua Drive 631 llu«ud Stocct,4th R. 9IN7414277(8-41" ❑ Mmmmy Park G 91754 Sm Pmmiru,G 94105 Mlks WTI. G.Nukes,RcgiaW h4anega 213/6204460("0) 4151543-8555 Dept.of Puka and l(caeatlm W.&Green Ikpanoem ofl*ub uA Gum P.O.Be.942896 Caltrua,DuMct 4 1234 R16TShar Avwm CENTRAL VALLEY REGION(5) T<rp hLderm Samrrrnw,G WN&DI01 ❑ P.O.Box 7310 Pmmo,G 93710 303 Rmticr Road,SuimA ❑ unit I,."Cmuuu.wn 910M] 121 Sao Fraacuw,G RIM 2WIM-3761(8421) Stmrmaw,CA 95827-3BBI Pinch SvmL Rm 2W 415/557-9162.(&597) 9 10 61-5 60 0 j a.uncow,CA 95814 Gorge Wrath Fred A.Werlhley,lr.,Rcg.M.mga j 916/311-3227 Public Utilities Canmudm Jerp flamer Departnrrae(Puhud Oum Frana Booeh ODke j 505 Van Not.A•enue Cdtruu,Dharice 5 3M Gddcn Shan,Suim 50 3774 Eau Shohlm Avanm,R.18 Sandy llaru rd Sm Prtueism,G 94102 ❑ P.O.Bo.$114 Iory BeadSG 9080E O Pmano,G 93726 ❑ Co.-Divoim of Aeron,aia 415/557-1375(8-597) Sanfuo ObuPo,G 9340J-8114 2131590-5113(8-6J5) 209/445 5116(8-421) P.O.Boa 942874 805/349-3161(8-629) } Ssmmcnw,G R ZIC0001 A..Laru Brmwo 9.3 E.Mail Redding Brach OM,. 91yf241831 ❑ R.J.h nBoard F I.vm .lrchlld ❑ Marine R. .R.gim IWP tCpimu Avenm t 14I6NinWSvxtR..706 Cdharu,Disiriad 3W Gdhn She O a,Suim 50 Redding,CA 96OOZ ill( Gorge Smllh S.cramm.w,G 95814 P.O.Bout M16 Loor Bco b,G 9MM 9I6f225-2015(8-442) ❑ C.I.-Raoning 91632E-3740 Pmm,CA 93773 113/5905155 IS05) PO.Do.WM4 2M276-5989(&422) Smatmnv.,G 942740001 Norrk Milliken Slab Wabr Roaommn Centel Baud LA21,.In N Boob, (Q 9161445-5570 SP.Bay Ca0erva0m k Devi Coma. Gap McSweeney 2W2Lake Tdne BwlcvW 30Vm Ncn.Avamm,Romn20II Calm,Duvic47 All.Rlwn P.O.Do.El 942A Dennl.O'Bpal San Pmncuco,CA 94102 ❑ 120Stuth Spring BaSoo,al ❑ Soo,Water Re.ourm.Coard Board South Lake Taboo.CA 95771 E (� 916/544-I481 D,Pt.of Cmsavnim 415/557-3686 Im Angcic.,CA 90012 Divuicn of I.A Grow 5 1416 Ninth Sheaf,Reran 13:A-2 2131620-2376IS 640) P.O.An.944212 Vkhn0k Branch OM. Y S....CA95814 Jaook Bkkaik, S.mmww,G 942A4-2120 O 9161322,5973 C.d'd 5F1J ❑ .Wujc.Mwgc srmvl Brand q dd ""v Sawyer 916/179-4414 15428(Jvic Driver,Snim1W Viaorvillq CA 92392,2359 1020Nhub Strmt,Rmm300 (� Cdh.nt,Duhi"t! 619241-6583 Div.of Mi.."On.1m S.,.,CA 95814 II 7'(�II 247 Wcn Thu or d Shoot Ed Anwo 9163Z7-0454 Sao Bcrnrdino,G 9M03 Smm Water Rcwmms Conant Road COLORADORIVER BASIN RFGION(7) Div.of Od and Gu 714/3834W8(8-00) Divulanu(Wtmr Quality 73-271 Highway U 1.Saito 21 Ted Fukushlm. P.O.Boa.100 PA.Dcud.CA 92]60 and Rawuas Protect.Unit Smm Lod.Conwivim Andy Wean Samncow,G 95WI r 619/d46-7491 IBW-13th Su«t Glmw,UiaMs.9 9164459552 1 s admk C.M." S....G 95814 SW Smth Maio Street ❑ tof V.W"Ancdmm 916322-7813 Bohrp,CA 94514 pare Derin r SANfA ANABEUIO uRm g 619,'872-OW3(8-62 ❑ Sam W.mr 1b,..Cmtrd Bwd ❑ 68M xkkbod[,C A.enue,Buim 200 12M N Svat,Roan 104 Riwakk,CA 923W Samnento,CA 95814 N.&A Gaye. Nita Unit 714Q824130(8 632) 91632E-5227 Depcof Water Resauws Al Johnson P.O.Daa 2000 1416 Ninth Sunset,Room 2154 Co..Dmi's 10 So.., 93910 SAN DIEGO REGION(9) Samocnto,(A 95814 P.O.Be.20M 91632298]0 Dw..facaurer 91(V"5-7416 Stad:lm,G 95201 9TI1 Cl.kemmr McuBlvd.,SuimB Ucpr.o[Powaq 109ry48-]838(8423) - • MRa Fflkewkln El Sw Diceo,G 92I24-1331 1416 Ninth Sunct,Room 1516-2 Sam W nmr Fc.oum Control Rwrd 619265-5114(8-636) S.mnenw,CA 95814 Reed❑dderman Sum C."Cmwcrvacy ]I tm Chahlre Divimo.If Wemr R)glw 916327.01]8 ❑ APCD/AQA1D: D30Bad.CA suite IIW ❑ Calton,Rout 85406I/1 S...tt Roberl8leppy OtkIW,CA 9461E P.O.Boa.85406 Sommmte,G 95814 Dept.ofGcrrsd Serviwt 1151464-1015 2829)son Bvect 9161324-56M Y S 4W P S.I.Suim 34WSanDkgo,CA 92138-54 W f S.v.mepto,G 95814 pRSITSGp: 619/M-6755(8-631) OTIIDR: E R.b,tjmeph �. 3.Ar ^h.nce • C.@anat Ui t 12 .j 2501 PuBr. St ' (' 714 P Smc;IR..1253 sutra/wA 9T70$ S'yv�rrcnto,CA 95814 714221-2061(e-655) 9.tT323 6111 t; �. . CA-14622 Environmental Assessment j EA RCA-066-4-4 I . Background The Desert Bighorn Sheep Research Institute, a nonprofit organization, .i has applied for a Recreation and Public Purpose permit (R&PP) for public land in the northern Santa Rosa Mountains, Riverside County. The Institute is working in the Santa Rosa Mountains in cooperation with with the California Department of Fish and Game (COF&G) to study diseases and related lamb mortality in the rare Peninsular bighorn sheep herd in .! the Santa Rosa Mountains . II . Location The site is located due east of the junction of Dead Indian Canyon and Highway 74 in the Santa Rosa Mountains (T. 6 S. , R. 6 E. , Section 6, Lot 7, E1/2 SW1/4, E1/2 NWJ,/4 SWI/4, SEI/4) . The R&PP application encom- passes all public land (297 . 34 acres) in the southern half of this section . The tract is situated at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains and includes a portion of the rugged mountain terrain, a small terrace, and a wash at the northern edge of the boundary. Access can be gained to the property via a dirt road south of the wash off Highway N. III . Proposed Action The Institute plans to augment existing pen facilities with the following permanent improvements : - access road (gravel ) 12 ' x 3,300' off Highway 74 - electrical service, buried because of Scenic Highway requirements - water well , septic tank - laboratory facilities - parking lot - museum/Instit,ute headquarters - rain pens permanent shelters inside of pens Affected Environment IV, Vegetation Vegetation at the site includes both creosote bush scrub and desert wash communities. Dominant plant species on the rocky hillsides include creosote bush, brittle bush, and burrobush. 4ccassional ocotillo and barrel cactus occur here also . Perennial vegetation in the dry washe.s includes desert avendar, sweetbush, indigo bu and brandegea, among many others. This vegetation is fairly common in the Colorado desert, but is decreasing in areas within the Coachella Valley due to extensive urban expansion . A records check of Indio Resource Area files and California Native Plant Society Rare Plant maps indicated a possibility of suitable habitat at this site for a rare and endangered perennial plant species, "California ditaxis" (Ditaxis californica) . This species grows in sandy soil in the Coachella and�liuc hl va a Teys, often at the base of mountains in small washes. "California ditaxis" is a candidate for federal listing and is a BLM sensitive species. ' ! Although the soil and topography appeared to be potential Habitat for this plant , no individuals of this species were observed on site. The rocky hillside habitat also to be included inside pens is not expected to support any rare or endangered plants. Wildlife r' j The project area is located within the Santa Rusa Habitat Management jArea which was established for the management of the State listed rare Peninsular bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) . One of the primary concerns in finding a location for tTie Yioldrng pens was to minimize any impacts t,o the Santa Rosa herd . The applicant selected this location in consul- t ation with BLM staff biologists because of its relative isolation from the rest of the range and easy access. there are no water sources located nearby and the ridge was not considered bighorn sheep habitat in the habitat map developed jointly by the BLM and COFRG for the Santa Rosa HMP (1980) . No evidence of bighorn sheep use was observed on site. There are no other rare, threatened , endangered , or sensitive species known to occur on site. Archaeology/Native American Concerns While the project falls within an area of low/unknown cultural resource sensitivity (Desert Plan Sensitivity Maps) , it adjoins an area of very high sensitivity (Polygon 451 ) . Most of the sites in this polygon are j located in Deep Canyon . Ethnog - raphic records indicate that the area was used for seasonal collecting and hunting of deer and bighorn sheep. A field inspection of the propety was made on November 7,r 19B3. The terrace was surveyed at I00% level . other portions of the site were selectively surveyed based on the terrain' s likelihood to contain artifacts. No archaeological materials were located . V. Anticipated Impacts Vegetation Construction of the access road, permanent sheep shelters, museum and parking lot will result in the removal of approximately 10 acres of 2 native vegetation. This will cause either long-terin or permanent <; I removal of habitat for native plants at the site . Vegetation will also be disturbed during construction of buried electrical lines and septic o facilities, but this will not result in permanent removal of habitat. { Construction of these facilities may alter the drainage of run-off 1 through the site, and consequently affect the vigor of individual plants in the wash. Natural drainage patterns in this area have already been changed by construction of flood diversion dikes, but further c i tion may again affect distribution and vigor of vegetation estabblishelished c- in the washes. `r! Some surface disturbance will occur during construction of fences for the proposed ram pens, but because the fence is to be built by hand the impacts should be negligible . However, vegetation inside the enclosures may experience a decline in vigor and total biomass due to browsing by,,. bighorn sheep in a confined area. These impacts are expected to be negligible when viewed on a desertwide scope . The proposed facilities are not expected to impact threatened or endan- r gered plant species, although the area was suspected to support habitat suitable for California ditaxis (Ditaxis californica) , a rare species found locally in similar habitat .lniitviduais oof—this species were not observed by BL14 staff when the site was field surveyed on November 7, 1983, although habitat did appear suitable. Wildlife There will be minimal impacts to wildlife as a result of this project. Peninsular bighorn sheep ar'e not expected to be impacted because of the isolated nature of this ridge. Inq>acts to general wildlife will be related to the minor surface disturbance resulting froru construction and increased grazing pressure within the pen areas. The impacts are not expected to significantly alter the wildlife values of the general area ``•. r although the numbers of rodents on site and predator use on site is •;,.;i expected to drop because of the human presence and increased grazing endangered wildlife species are expected pressure. No threatened or to be impacted . Cultural Resources Because of the lack of . archaeological sites, no impacts are expected to result from the proposed project . Since most of the property will be used for bighorn sheep, which are indigenous to the area and were hunted here by Native Americans, no impacts are anticipated to Native Amer ndeed, the purpose of he pro ican con- cerns . I the is to study declining bighorn populations in an attempt to increase herd health and numbers. If the project is successful , it may enhance the survival of a species of great significance to Native hnericans. 3 RCV BY:XEROX TELECOF'IER '701:7 ➢ 12- -_,C� 4: 13F1h1 o1534E6033� 61'9s�,,.. ,D E.G- 7 — 8 9 T H U 1 — 0 5 DHI P . 1�",6,.� RECOMMENDATION/RATIONALE I . Recommendation 1. It is recommended that a 20 year lease be issued to the Bighorn Research Institute, for the purpose of establishing a bighorn sheep laboratory to study diseases and related lamb mortality in the Peninsular bighorn sheep herd in the Santa Rosa Mountains of Riverside County in California. The Institute and its auxiliary facilities would be located on: T. 6 S. , R. 6 E. , S.B.B.M. , Secton 6, Lot 7, E 1/2 SW 1/4, E 1/2 NW 1/4 SW 1/4, SE 1/4. (297.34 acres) 2. The rental should be reduced by 60% to reflect the following public benefits: 1. Basic Public Benefit Allowance: 40% 2. Public Support Allowance: 20% 3. It is also recommended that a stipulation be added to the lease requiring the lessee to submit yearly reports on the methods and results of all research activities conducted on the subject lands. 11 . Rationale The lands are physically suited for the proposed use. The environmental impacts are considered to be insignificant compared to the benefits obtained from the research of Bighorn sheep diseases. All present and potential uses and users have been taken into consideration. No local , State or Federal programs would be adversely affected. The authority to,lease or convey public lands for the proposed use is granted to the Secretary under the Recreation and Public Purposes Act of June 14, 1926, as amended (43 U.S.C. 869 et seq. ) � J 4 � C ar a c e Date J Ja E.C.— 7 — $ 9 T H IJ 1 c 0 4 D H I P E $ VI . , Recommended Mitigating _Measures The Desert Bighorn Sheep Research Institute should provide the BLM Indio Resource Area Office with copies of all progress and final reports, and an annual update on all actions taken on public land , including construc- tion of facilities, and studies undertaken. VII. Consultation and Coordination The following groups were contacted concerning this project : University of California Philip L . Boyd Deep Canyon. Research Center California Department of fish and Game VIII . List of Preparers Faye Davis: Wildlife Biologist, Team Leader Robin Kobaly: Botanist Judyth Reed : Archaeologist Mark Hatchel : Realty Specialist 4 r�J bY:xthux ILLtUUl-1L- -: ,L1U ; ic-- -__l 4: isF[I b153466 J:�y o19 417✓J58;ti 5 y FE 7 — 2 9 T H U 1 -' o cA L H I P 9 9 T Serial dCA-14622 LAND REPORT AND DECISION RECORD Type of Action R&PP Lease District California Desert Applicant 's Name Bighorn Research Institute Resource Area Indio Address P.O. Box 262 State California Palm Desert, CA 92261-0262 County Riverside LANDS INVOLVED Township Range Meridian Section Subdivision Acres Length Width 6 S. 6 E. S.B.B.M 6 lot 7,E.4NW',SWT ,SE4,E�SW, 297.34 A, Environmental Compliance We have reviewed the environmental assessment prepared to analyze the environmental effects of the proposed action and have determined that the proposed action and approved mitigation measures would not have significant environmental effects on the human environment. Therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required to further analyze the environmental efforts of the proposed action. Environmental Assessment reviewed by: Area Manager ��1��r ( (ell Date Environmental Coordinator lld� �,�� / r Date I concur : ACTINODistrict Manager ` (��?a�jl� l.,ti�� y �i'c Date B. Review/Decision Review. I have reviewed the recommendations on the land use proposal contained in the Land Report .and find that they are technically ade- quate and that consideration has been given to all resource values. We recommend that the recommendation on the approved action be approved as the Bureau's decision on the proposed action , Prepared by: '�,� Realty Specialist � ` � ' �V Date Reviewed by: Area Manager 7, . �)' l' p (� S( Date Decision . I have reviewed the recommendation on the proposed action con a ned in this Land Report and approve the recommendation( s) as the decision of the Bureau on the proposed action. ACTING District Manager _�� //� 1/_9/6ate DJE2A/11 BEST, BEST & KRIEGER w vwr+raenawiv vlcwwllo vaoernaiollwL wvvovw.aas LAWYERS 39700 BOB HOPE DRIVE,SUITE 312 RIVERSIDE R E ONTARIO POST OFFICE BOX 1555 C E I y �.�1 (na)686-1450 RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA9227LL0( ha) 989-656a PALM SPRINGS TELEPHONE(619) 560-261fi ULl! .�.� p19 3 30 (619) 325-7264 TELECOPIER(619) 340-6690 CITY CLERKS U, JUL December 7, 1989 Lantson E. Eldred Attorney at Law 42-600 Cook Street, Suite 170 Palm Desert, California 92260 Re: Villages of Villa Vista Dear Lance : Responding to your letter of November 22, 1989 , I think your suggestion that future applications in any other property in that area be conditioned upon area-wide improvements that provide a benefit. We will get that into our process so that we are assured of these participations . Toward that end, what I hope to do is initiate a study on a Mello-Roos District or some appropriate district of that sort for that entire area so that the district will potentially be in place and we will not need to really worry about this. Yours very truly, DAVID J. ERWIN DJE/vcd cc: Ray Diaz , City of Palm Desert(/ i APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION TO: Hank Lewandowski FRO(vI: CITY OF PALM DESERT Caltrans, District 8 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Post Office Box 231 Palm Desert, CA 92260 San Bernardino, CA 92402 SUBJECP: Notice of Preparaticn of a Draft Ehvircmental Impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTAMLRA Project Applicant, if any: BIGHORN VENIURFS DATE: December 6, 1989 Signature: Title: Associa�e er Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION TO: Patricia A. Larson FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT Superior Fourth District 73-510 Fred Waring Drive County of Riverside Palm Desert, CA 92260 Post Office Box 1330 Indio, California 92202 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Envirormental Impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, esthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTAMIRA Project Applicant, if any: BIGHORN VENTURES DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: Title: Associate Planner Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATIM TO: Riverside County Planning Dept. FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT 79733 Country Club Drive, Suite E 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 Palm Desert, CA 92260 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft EnvisrnnPntal Impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTAMIRP, Project Applicant, if any: BIGHORN VENTURES DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: Title: Associate P1 z Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15O82(a), 15103, 15375 6 APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION TO: U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT 24000 Avila Road 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Laguna Niguel, CA 92656 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: Field Supervisor SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Envixonrkental impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTANIIRA Project Applicant, if any: BIGHORN VENTURES DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: Title: Associate P1 r Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION TO: Dept. of Fish and Game FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Long Beach, CA 90802 Palm Desert, CA 92260 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Fnvisorirkental Impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTAMIRA Project Applicant, if any: BIGHORN VENTURES DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: Title: Associate P1 er Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION TO: Coachella Valley Water District FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT Post Office Box 1058 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Coachella, CA 92236 Palm Desert, CA 92260 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Ehvirormeotal Impact Repot The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to }avow the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTAMIRA Project Applicant, if any: BIGHDRN VENft7RFS DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: Title: Associate P anner Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION TO: Russell Kaldenberg FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT Bureau of Land Management 73-510 Fred Waring Drive 400 So. Farrell Drive, Suite B205 Springs, CA 92262 Palm Desert, CA 92260 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Errgirormental Impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address sham above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTAMIRA Project Applicant, if any: BIOHDRN VENTURES DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: Title: Associ e P anner Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 I APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION TO: Coachella Valley Audobon Society FR(M: CITY OF PALM DESERT Post Office Box 248 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 Palm Desert, CA 92260 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR Prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTAMLRA Project Applicant, if any: BIGHORN VaMJRFS DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: Title: Associat annex Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION TO: Mr. Arthur Greenwald FRCM: CITY OF PALM DESERT Chairman, Tahquitz Group 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Sierra Club Palm Desert, CA 92260 Post Office Box 1122 Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Ermiromental Impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR Prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the Project- The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address shorn above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTAMIRA Project Applicant, if any: BIG )ORN VENTURES DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: Title: Associate Tanner Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION TO: Steve Nagle FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT City of Rancho Mirage 73-510 Fred Waring Drive 69-825 Highway ill Palm Desert, CA 92260 Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Envircruiental Impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTAMIRA Project Applicant, if any: BIGHORN VEI ARMS DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: Title: Associa e lanner Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION T0: Bighorn Institute FI M: CITY OF PALM DESERT Post Office Box 262 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92261-0262 Palm Desert, CA 92260 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Envirnmental Impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to }mow the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the Project- The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, Your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTANIIRA Project Applicant, if any: BIGHDRN VENIURFS DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: �. Title: Associate P anner Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Coale, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 APPENDIX J NOTICE OF PREPARATION TO: Superintendent-District 6 FRCM: CITY OF PALM DESERT State Parks and Recreation 73-510 Fred Waring Drive 1350 Front Street, Room 6054 Palm Desert, CA 92260 San Diego, CA 92101 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Envirorxnental Impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert,. Attention Phil Joy, at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTAMIRA Project Applicant, if any: BIGHDRN VENIVRFS DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: F" L Title: Associate P14Tmer Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 0 APPENDI% J NOTICE OF PREPARATION TO: Drew Pallette FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT Coachella Valley Archaeological Society 73-510 Fred Waring Drive 68045 Monterico Palm Desert, CA 92260 Desert Hot Springs, CA 92240 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report The City of Palm Desert will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to }mow the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information with the proposed project. your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the Project- The areas of focus will be wildlife habitat, drainage, asthetics, archaeology. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to City of Palm Desert, Attention Phil Joy, at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: ALTAMIRA Project Applicant, if any: BIGHORN VENTURES DATE: November 9, 1989 Signature: /Z Title: Associate Planner Telephone: (619) 346-0611 Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 ALTANIIRA PRQ7DCP DESCRIMON The project consists of a 484 unit country club, with golf course and clubhouse, on 362 acres southeast of Highway 74 and Portola Avenue. The units will be both detached and attached fronting primarily around the golf course, but also extending into a foothill area, as does two holes of the golf course. Please refer to the attached notice of public hearing for location and property limits. The project is in a portion os Sec. 31, T5S, R6E and a portion of Sec. 6, T5S, R6E, S.B.M. The possible environmental effects are on wildlife, drainage, asthetics and archaeology. IIM HAYHOE DEVELOPMENT INC. M E 11 0 R A N D U M Da te : No vember 30, 1989 To : Distribu 'on List From: Jim Hayhoe Subject : Bi horn V n ures - Altamira CC on Highway 74 Please be advised that John Hayhoe is no longer involved with the planning or development of my project on Highway 74. John has been involved up to this point in the intitlement process and has dealt with most of you on' our behalf. He has done a good job and helped us all. From now on, I would like all questions , comments and communications regarding the new project directed to me, personally. Furthermore, I would appreciate your treating my project in confidence and not discussing it with anyone not directly in our employ other than those who would have access to any information by virtue of the information being of public knowledge. If you have any questions or comments regarding this memorandum, please contact me. Otherwise, we are looking forward to working with you on the development of this project. We are hoping to be through the intitlement process in March. As you may or may not know, there has been a delay of approximately 90 days to prepare a focused EIR. We fully expect the project to be approved in the same configuration it has been applied for. cc : John Hayhoe Distribution List : John Elloriaga City of Palm Desert - R. Diaz, Phil Joy Housley & Associates Ted Robinson CVWD-Tom Levy John Chapman & Assocs. Del Gagnon Co. Bighorn Institute Bob Williams Tom Cullinan Dick Gibson Sam Alacano Pekarek-Crandall Ron Gregory I` U R 0 X 4 �7 1 v: P IA .A V. 1: 11 CA I. I POR .NIA I i n 11) i 40-o4 �ATEq ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY ��STRICj COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058• COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236•TELEPHONE(619)398-2651 DIRECTORS OFFICERS TELLISCODEKAS,PRESIDENT THOMASE.LEVY,GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER RAYMOND R.RUMMONDS,VICE PRESIDENT BERNARDINE SUTTON,SECRETARY JOHN P.POWELL KEiTH H.AINSWORTH,ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER DOROTHY M.NICHOLS REDWINE AND SHERRILL,ATTORNEYS THEODORE J.FISH November 28, 1989 File: 0421.2 Hayhoe Phil Joy, Associate Planner City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Dear Mr. Joy: This is in response to your Notice of Preparation Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Altamira Project by Bighorn Ventures. Please include that Coachella Valley Water District will require on-site or off-site above ground water storage reservoirs at different elevations to serve the different pressure zones. In addition, this project will require on-site and off-site booster stations and transmission pipeline facilities. If you have any questions please call John A. Corella, domestic water engineer, extension 269. Yours very truly, e om Levy General Manager-Chief Engineer JAC:ra TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY _\a a ENT O, United States Department of the Interior WP � +` •L ' o FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA FIELD OFFICE Fish and Wildlife Enhancement Federal Building, 24000 Avila Road Laguna Niguel , California 92656 In Reply Refer To: — November 27 , 1989 FWS/LNFO ( 1-6-90-TA-46) Phil Joy Associate Planner City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Dear Mr. Joy: The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the notice of preparation of a draft environmental impact report for the Bighorn Ventures Country Club. The proposed project, which would be located within the City of Palm Desert in Riverside County, consists of a 484 unit country club with golf course and clubhouse. The Service believes the following issues should be thoroughly addressed in the draft report: 1 . The draft report should fully describe the biological resources of the project area and provide lists of the plant and animal species which can occur on-site. Particular emphasis should be placed on sensitive species, such as Federal and State listed and candidate species , including the peninsular bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis cremnobates) . The report should also describe the potential impacts to these species and the measures which will be included as part of the project to mitigate these impacts . 2 . Projected water use by the proposed project and its effects on the area' s biological communities should be discussed. The report should also evaluate the cumulative impacts of water use in this arid region and examine alternatives to project features which are extremely water-consumptive, such as golf courses. 3 . The report should examine the potential impacts on surrounding natural areas of pesticide and fertilizer use on the golf course. Means of mitigating these impacts should be investigated and presented in the draft report. Mr. Joy 2 i 4. Preparers of the report should be aware of the requirements of the Clean Water Act with regard to the placement of fill material in washes and wetland areas. For further information, please contact: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 2711 Los Angeles , California 90053 Attn: Regulatory Branch ( 213 ) 798-5606 5 . The draft report should consider the indirect and cumulative impacts of the project on surrounding natural habitats. These impacts include, but are not limited to, increased human populations, increased pet and feral animal populations , noise, lighting, and trash. 6 . The report should consider project alternatives, especially if the environmental impacts of the proposed project can not be avoided or mitigated to insignificance. The Service appreciates the opportunity to participate in your planning process. If you have any questions , please contact Ray Bransfield of my staff at FTS 796-4270 or ( 714 ) 643-4270. Sincerely, P1ru4L Brooks Harper Acting Field Supervisor I�Ldn�InC mcmigrmm PFC : 10339D0 November 27 , 1989 Mr . Phil Joy , Associate Planner City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: Notice of Preparation for Altamira (Bighorn Ventures ) Project Dear Mr . Joy : Thank you for providing the Riverside County Planning Department on opportunity to comment on the notice of preparation for the Altamira (Bighorn Ventures) project. The Department has commented on this_ project previously by letter dated October 5 , 1989 , which )is attached and incorporated, along with all enclosures, by �th�s reference into this letter . Of note in the October 5th letter was an -observation that an ecological open space buffer be considered along the southerly pro,7J�t boundary given the long standing use . of"" adjacent property f,orp scientific and environmental purposes phis €o servat-ion Est,again reiterated in ft � , )� connection with this-:opmmenut letter . ' , { I note that the. r_otice of,_preYarC'tioh makes no mention of traffic impacts . A !project of nearly 500 dwelling units with other multiple use facilities, should include a traffic element in the project EIR. The State'4ighway, 74 abuts the project and certainly involves CALTRANS. I suggest-'a traffic study be included in the EIR . When the Draft EIR document becomes available for public review, please forward a copy to the Department at the Bermuda Dunes address listed below. In addition , I request that the Department be placed on the hearing notice lists, and receive notice, of all public hearings and other meetings regarding this project as provided by CEQA and the Government Code . Notices should be mailed to the Bermuda Dunes address . 4080 LEMON STREET, 9TH FLOOR 79733 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, SUITE E RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 BERMUDA DUNES, CALIFORNIA 92201 (714) 787-6181 (619) 342-8277 H' t Mr. Phil Joy , Associated Planner City of Palm Desert Page 2 Again , thank you for providing to the Department a copy of the notice of preparation for this project. Should you have any questions or require assistance please contact me at (619 ) 342-8277 . 4 Very truly yours, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Roger S. Streeter, Planning Director 4�al F. Clar Principal Planner PFC: cdr Enclosures cc: Mark Balys K. Lind R. Nagle 'KERCiX TELECGPIER 701C : 11-22-89 4:CI7PF1 ;y Bighorn Ventures J� -To (E Environmental Impact Report Biological Assessment Scope of Work cis j TIERRA MADRE CONSULTANTS, INC. S,r1 Tierra Madre Consultants , Inc . proposes to investigate biological resources of the 362 acre site by performing the following tasks: 1 . We will make a data request to the California Natural Diversity Data Base, a unit of the California Department of Fish and Game. This request will indicate potential rare, threatened and endangered species and significant natural communities in the region. 2 . We will check the supporting maps to the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan for significant natural areas, biological resources, and rare and endangered species. 3 . A literature search of environmental documents ' from nearby areas will be conducted . Scientific literature and regional biological field guides will also be consulted. 4 . Field surveys will be initiated after the literature review and records checks . Since sensitive elements are known to occur nearby, thorough on-the-ground coverage is essential . Our report and biological assessment will provide: 1 . A discussion of the existing vegetative communities and wildlife habitat found on the site. 2 . Documentation and mapping of any rare, threatened, or endangered species or significant natural communities and a discussion of any agency plans for this area that concern biological resources. j 3 . A discussion of anticipated impacts resulting from the proposal and alternatives, including potential indirect and off- site impacts. 4 . Suggested mitigating measures that will reduce the level of biological impact. we will focus on specific mitigation suggestions to protect any sensitive biological resources that are located on the property. 5 . A biological inventory, including listing of all plant and animal species detected during field surveys. 6 . A discussion of the effects of organically rich water resulting from heavy watering and golf course water hazards on the abundance of Cu acoides gnats . These gnats are known to transmit viral diseases to bighorn sheep. 1 LAW OFFICE OF LANTSON E. ELDRED A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION - TELEPHONE 42-600 COOK STREET TELECOPIER 16191 773-4888 SUITE IJO 1619) 340-9713 PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92200 November 22, 1989 David Erwin City Attorney, City of Palm Desert .. Best, Best & Kreiger 39700 Bob Hope Drive, Suite 312 Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 o; .a C-0 Re: Villages of Villa VistCJ T f l Dear David: r, Pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph 12 of the Devei3opment Agreement dated January 12, 1989, entered into between thertity of Palm Desert and Beachstone Joint Venture Limited, as predec`.e,ssor in interest to Westinghouse Desert Communities, Inc., the City of Palm Desert is obligated to require, as a condition to development of any property in the vicinity of the Sun Creek and Villages of Villa Vista property, that the owner of such property enter into reimbursement agreements regarding construction of off-site improvements benefiting such property. It is my understanding that there are currently pending, or proposed to be submitted to the City of Palm Desert, requests or applications in connection with the improvements and development of property contiguous to the Westinghouse Villages of Bella Vista property, specifically including the Heyhoe tract and the Big Horn Sheep Tract. While I am not aware of any area wide off-site improvements constructed to date which would benefit such adjacent properties, and which accordingly would be subject to a reimbursement agreement, I am aware of plans currently under consideration by Coachella Valley Water District regarding provision of domestic water service and sewerage delivery treatment facilities to this general area which might be subject to reimbursement by property owners in this area. Further, I am aware that additional area wide infrastructure is also under consideration which likewise David Erwin -2- November 22, 1989 might be the subject of reimbursement agreements. Accordingly, I would request that, in consideration of any applications submitted to the City of Palm Desert in connection with the development of property in this area, the city confirm the potential applicability of area wide improvements which may benefit such property and that the City impose, as a condition of development, a requirement that the property owners make appropriate reimbursement as provided in the Development Agreement, if such improvements have been constructed,_ or agree to participate in the future costs and expenses and pay appropriate reimbursement with respect to such area wide facilities which may ultimately be constructed and which would benefit such properties. As always, I appreciate your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, Zntson . Eldred LEE.jb cc: Mr. Roy Ramsey Bighorn Institute Dedicated to the conservation of the world's wild sheep through research and education HONORARY CHAIRMAN ,tjkl f,$;(.t�N'L OF FUNDRAISING November 21, 1989 FFF���999 car_e Gerald R. Ford 3Uni81h NOV2 Presid ent of the United States ,(J 1989 CObl"D'"ITY DEVELOPMENT UEPARTMEN1 BOARD OF DIRECTORS CITY 11' Charles W. Jenneq DV M.' s' PALM DESERT , President MEMO Richard C. McClung' Vice President Kent A. Roberts' Vice President To: Mr. Ramon A. Diaz Dave Stockton' Director of Community Development/Planning Vice President Peter E. Cyrog, DV.M. City of Palm Desert Secretory Bob Howard' From: Jim DeForge Treasurer Eloise R. Agee Cindy Austin Please find enclosed, copies of letters from Jim Hayhoe and ' Wolfgang Baere his attorney as well as our reply regarding the proposed _ Doug Bergen' "Bighorn Ventures" development adjacent to Bighorn Institute . William Bone Jack Brittingham We would like to keep you informed on these matters . Lawrence A. Cone, M.D' John E. Earhan Ernest Hahn Robert McGowan Finn Moller Stan L. Timmins 'Executive Council ADMINISTRATION James R. DeForge ' Executive Director Research Biologist .. ADVISORS Robert Presley California State Senator Member,&note Committee oa Natural Resources and Wildlife Donald C. Buns Hunter Conservationist Tony E. Castro, DV.M., Ph.D. Virologist Cal Veterinary Diagnonic Laboratory Hirschi&Clark Legal Counsel David A. Jessup, DVM, California Dept.of Fish and Game Mark C. Jorgensen Anza Bormigo Desen Stale Park Glenn R. Stewart, Ph.D. Col Pat,University.Damara Raul Valdez, Ph.D. New Mexico Stale Uniuers", Michael Valencia Liaison to Wild Sheep Studies in Mexico A Nonprofit Tax-Exempt Organization P.O. BOX 262 / PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92261-0262 / TELEPHONE (619) 346-7334 �._. - JIM HAYHOE DEVELOPMENT INC. 9\5, iOV 2 2 1989 COMMU 6TY OEVELOPMEW DEPARTMENT Ci1Y,}F PALM DESERT November 15 , 1989 Bighorn Institute P. O. Box 262 Palm Desert, Ca. 92261-0262 Attn : Mr. James R. DeForge, Executive Director Gentlemen : As you know, we intend to develop the land adjacent to your 290 acre Institute with 484 residences and accompanying club house and recreational facilities . We have applied to the City of Palm Desert for appropriate land use approvals for our project , which you have opposed. You, on the other hand, applied to Riverside County to change the zoning of your 290 acres and for a plot plan approval which was granted by Riverside County, on October 17 , 1989 . We have advised you that we believe the environmental assessment and negative declaration which were used in order for you to obtain your approvals were not prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act . We have also advised you that we intended to file a lawsuit on or before November 16;. 1989 seeking to invalidate your approvals because of non- compliance with CEQA. If we do not file such lawsuit on that date , our right to file it may be barred. You have induced us not to file that lawsuit and have promised us that in consideration for our not filing it you will not commence construction of any building or other facilities on your 290 acres until the City of Palm Desert' s approval of our project is final. If any part of the foregoing is incorrect , please advise me immediately and in writing,. Otherwise , I will rely upon it. 1'. O: BOX 4 37 ti. I .N D I A N WE LLS , CAI-1 POIZ N I A 1) 2261 , 16191 1 -10-642 1 Bighorn Institute November 15 , 1989 Page Two We look forward to a mutally satisfactory solution to our respective view points concerning the location of your buildings and facilities and the location of. our residences and recreational facilities . We will work with you toward that end with the hope that we will resolve our ,differences and develop our respective properties for our mutual benefit. To begin that process , I would appreicate an opport- unity to confer with your Board of Directors at its meeting on November 17 , 1989 . Please advise me if that is possible. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely41H1ayhX J S. Pr dent jsh/m F JIM HAYHOE DEVELOPMENT INC. �b '')V 2 2 1989 June 8 , 1989 COMP-UNITY DEvELUFIY,ENT DEPARTMEM CITY QF PALM DESERT Mr. Jim DeForge, Executive Director Bighorn Institute P.O. Box 262 Palm Desert , Ca. 92261-0262 Dear Jim, John and I want to thank you for taking your valuable time to visit with us yesterday. We have heard about your activities for two or three years from various people and have read about the Institute in the newspapers . Until the visit yesterday, we had an appreciation of what you are doing but not a real awareness of the derails involved. I would like you to know that we want to be good neighbors and assist the Institute in its program. We will be keeping you informed as we go along and would welcome your input. We also have some ideas that might help eliminate the dog problem. We also , as mentioned, would seriously consider a benefit function for the Institute. Again, thank you for your time. If you have any questions or comments at any time, please feel free to call us. Regards , TJ es S. Hayhoe P sident jsh/m 1, 0 ROS 477K_ A' 1l1AV' Bighorn Institudte Dedicated to the conservation of the world's wild (sheep through lresearch and education HONORARY CHAIRMAN OF FUNDRAISING November 20 , 1989 2 2 1989 Gerald R. Ford ssth A.smenl of the United stale GOaih pf,rTY DBELDPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY X PALM DESERT BOARD OF DIRECTORS Charles W. Jennen D.V.M.' Pnsidenl Mr . James S. Hayhoe Richard C. McClung' President Via,Retdenl - KentA. Robem Jim Hayhoe Development Inc . vice Pn,mem P.O. Box 4378 Dave Stockton' Indian Wells , CA 92261 We PieNdrnt Peter E. Cyrog, D.V.M.' s,antary Dear Mr . Hayhoe, Bob Howard' Tnmuter We received your letter dated November 15, 1989 in regards to Eloise R. Agee your proposed "Bighorn Ventures" development adjacent to the Wolfgangng F Baereg c Austin' Bighorn Institute . There are a number of statements and ere Doug Bergen' conclusions in this letter which are highly inaccurate . I William Bone believe it is time to set forth in writing the actual events Jack Bdttingham which have led us into the current situation. Lawrence A. Cone. M.D.' John E. Earhart Ernest Hahn On June 7 , 1989 : Robert McGowan At your request, I agreed to meet you and your son John Finn Moller at the Bighorn Institute . This was the first time I Stan L.Timmins received a briefing of your proposed development. 'Executive Council On June 9 , 1989 : ADMINISTRATION I received a letter from you dated June 8 , acknowledging James R. DeFurge the meeting of the previous day which allowed you to ExeuBue Duerr,, Res,anh Biologist develop a better understanding' of the Bighorn Institute. In the letter you stated, "we will be keeping you in- ADVISORS formed as we go along and would welcome your input . " Robes Presley cabmrnia am Senlu.,"m On October 2 4 1989 : Member S.nan Commmee on / Nalun1 Roouiae and Wiidllts I received a phone call from Phil Joy, an Associate Donald C. Butts Planner for the City of Palm Desert asking me about your Humer'com,nononiss / Tony E. Castro, D.VM., Ph.D. proposed "Bighorn Ventures . " I asked if I could come Vlaloglrl down to City Hall and look at the proposed site plan to Cal VNerinary Diagnostic mc1r L&CIa,1g see what was involved, and met with Mr. Joy that morning. HI LL.almco lmK I was also informed for the first time of the public David A. Jessup. D.VM hearing which would be held November 7th to address your Cmao,nlaDept of Fish and Come proposed development project before the Palm Desert Plan- Mark C. Jorgen.,k nin Commissions We had Aneo Bomga C. Jorgensen Part 9 just two weeks to prepare our Glenn R. Stewart, Ph.D. comments . cal Poly Unmenity,Pomona Raul Valdez,Ph.D. Contrary to the written statement in your letter of June Now Mexkc store University Michael Valencia 8th, that you would "keep us informed" and "welcome our I.W..m Wild She,Sludies in Memo A Nonprofit Tax-Exempt Organization P.O. BOX 262 / PALM DESERT. CALIFORNIA 92261.0262 / TELEPHONE (619) 346-7336 James S. Hayhoe November 20 , 1989 Page 2 input, " no such dialogue ever took place at any time between your letter of June 8th and my phone call from Mr . Joy on October 24th. On October 25 , 1989 : I met with you again for a very short period of time to discuss your project . During that time you informed me that while you were interested in hearing our concerns , that if we were asking you to cut out any of your pro- posed land use , you could not do that, and thus you ended the conversation and left . On November 4 , 1989 : Kent Roberts , Bighorn Institute Executive Vice President and I met with your son John and Mr. Tom Olsen, your environmental consultant . The four of us talked for over two hours on subjects ranging from the Institute 's need for an environmental buffer to the necessity of a focus- sed Environmental Impact Report (E .I .R. ) study for your project. John agreed that a focussed E.I .R. was probably warranted considering the circumstances . Mr. Roberts stated that he felt your company should request a contin- uance of the Planning Commission meeting in order for you to have adequate time to address our request for an environmental buffer. On November 6 - 7 , 1989 : You had a series of telephone calls with Mr . Roberts in which it was finally agreed that it would be in the best interest of Hayhoe Development to request a focussed E .I .R. and seek a continuance of the proposed development at the Planning Commission meeting. Since public notice had already been given by the City, a public hearing on your proposed development would take place the evening of November 7th. The morning of November 7th we received a letter from attorney Marvin Burns representing your firm, stating your concern about the Insti.tute 's recent negative decla- ration, zone change , and approval from the County of Riverside . The Institute ' s property was rezoned from R-1 to NA, natural assets , an "open space" type of zoning. On the evening of November 7th we voiced our objections to your project "as proposed, " before the Palm Desert Planning Commission and stressed the -inadequacies of the "Bighorn Ventures" negative declaration and the need for a focussed E .I .R. James S. Hayhoe November 20, 1989 Page 3 After this meeting, you reiterated to us the fact that you would perhaps need to appeal the negative declaration issued by the County of Riverside on the Institute ' s property. On November 13 , 1989 : At your request , after your phone conversation with Mr. Hahn I believe of November loth, a meeting was set here at the Institute for 1 :30pm on Monday the 13th. Direc- tors Ernest Hahn, Dick McClung, and I met with you, your son John, and your engineer to discuss your project and its impact on the Bighorn Institute . Mr. Hahn expressed our desire to work the concerns out without litigation. On November 16 , 1989 : We received your letter of November 15th by hand delivery stating , "you have induced us not to file that lawsuit and have promised us that in consideration for our not filing it you will not commence construction of any building or other facilities on your 290 acres until the City of Palm Desert ' s approval of our project is final . " This is a completely inaccurate statement and does not reflect any statements made by Mr . Hahn, Mr. Roberts , or myself , which would allow the timing on your project to control the destiny of the Bighorn Institute in perpe- tuity. We would like to make it clear that we did not "induce" or offer "consideration" of any kind to prevent you from exer- cising any rights that you believe you may have as it relates to an appeal of Bighorn Institute ' s negative declaration received from the County of Riverside . Mr. Hahn did agree that we would not start construction for a two or three week time period to give you adequate time to work out your concerns with the City as they relate to estab- lishing an environmental buffer. Furthermore, Mr. Hahn said he would inform you the day before we would begin construc- tion of the Institute ' s facilities . This , we felt , was simply a reasonable offer to help an adjoining property owner with a specific concern. On November 6th and in our latest meeting of November 13th, we stated that the Bighorn Institute staff needed at least 30 days to review your proposed project and define the bounda- ries of the environmental. buffer . We also felt that the time James S . Hayhoe November 20 , 1989 Page 4 was needed to solicit input from a number of sources which would allow us to be as objective as possible in our presen- tation to you . That schedule has not changed. The Institute Board of Directors has appointed a committee of Board members and staff led by Chairman Ernest Hahn to pursue the resolution of the problems that exist with your proposed development adjacent to the Bighorn Institute . I will be contacting you shortly to establish a line of communication on the items that concern both of us . Institute Directors Ernest Hahn, Kent Roberts , and Dick McClung have received this letter and agree with its content and conclusions . Sincerely, r e J s R. Dt rg E e utive Director R earch Biologist cc: President Gerald Ford Congressman Al McCandless Senator Robert Presley Supervisor Patricia Larson, County of Riverside Mayor Buford Crites , City of Palm Desert Mayor Pro Tem Walter H. Snyder , City of Palm Desert Roy Wilson, Councilmember - City of Palm Desert Jean Benson, Councilmember - City of Palm Desert Richard Kelly, Councilmember - City of Palm Desert Ramon Diaz , Director of Community Development/Planning - City of Palm Desert Bighorn Institute Board of Directors ,. l. e^�NT Os r u.x oenrarta TMe�aro i United States Department of the Interior o .z. A BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT * ^° PALM SPRINGS-SOUTH COAST RESOURCE AREA 400 S. FARRELL DRIVE, SUITE B-205 PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92262 IN REPLY REFER TO: 2800 CA-066. 20 g 0 NOV 1989 City of Palm Desert Mr. Phil Joy Assoc. Planner 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, Ca 92260 RE: Altamira Environmental Impact Report Thank you for including the Bureau in your identification of the scope of the subject environmental impact report being prepared. Because of our historical involvement and investment with the Bighorn Institute and other resource management issues in the Santa Rosa Mountains, we would like to see the subject report focus on the following issues: Wildlife: Potential impacts and mitigation measures for on- site and secondary off-site impacts to bighorn sheep and desert tortoise populations and habitat. Cultural and Native American Values: Inventory and evaluation of both potential impacts to archaeological resources and Native American traditional use of the subject vicinity. Sinc ly, CvC�C.� Russell L. K ldenber Area Manger IN uff ApwxMERIfA� ■ Notice of Preparatit LL appendix J P ea rc L, (Agency) - J (Acidr s M) -CrALA'\e-c- FC'A 9S811-4- Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report Lead Agency: Consulting Firm (if applicable): Agency Name C141 Firm Name Street Address 135 1100'Eeo � oL?-i Street Address IH80-e.�kg/t� (� �g S� C City/State/Lip� lv- `,�eSer� ON a(6O s City/State/Zip 1gJw iv �t t` A q a Contact { 4i L Joy A Contact 1 Croh t i will be the Lead Agency and will prepare an environmental impact report for the project identified below.Weneedtoknowtheviewsofyouragencyastothescopeandcontentoftheenvironmentalinformationwhich is germane to your agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project.Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The project description,location,and the potential environmental effects are contained in the attached materials.A copy of the Initial Study(❑ is Ois not) attached. Due to the time limits mandated by State law,your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to at the address shown above.We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: A 1--ctl n r.0. Project Location: Ay �, o{ f f —7 Cary(nearest) County Project Description: (brief) Date -� - (//2!� Signature�J Title 4roc/li Telephone _6l,/ Reference:California Administrative Code,Tide 14,(CEQA Guidelines)Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375. Revised October 1989 JIM HAYHOE DEVELOPMENT INC. November 15, 1989 Bighorn Institute P.O. Box 262 Palm Desert, Ca. 92261-0262 Attn : Mr. James R. DeForge, Executive Director Gentlemen : As you know, we intend to develop the land adjacent to your 290 acre Institute with 484 residences and accompanying club house and recreational facilities . We have applied to the City of Palm Desert for appropriate land use approvals for. our project , which you have opposed. You, on the other hand, applied to Riverside County to change the zoning of your 290 .acres and for a plot plan approval which was granted by Riverside County on October 17, 1989. We have advised you that we believe the environmental assessment and negative . declaration which were used in order for you to obtain your approvals were not prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. We have also advised you that we intended to file a lawsuit on or before November 16 ; 1989 seeking to invalidate your approvals because of non- compliance with CEQA. If we do not file such lawsuit on that date, our right to file it may be barred. You have induced us not to file that lawsuit and have promised us that in consideration for our not filing it you will not commence construction of any building or other facilities on your 290 acres until the City of Palm Desert' s approval of our project is final. If any part of the foregoing is incorrect , please advise me immediately and in writing. Otherwise , I will rely upon it. I'. 0. hOX 4 S 7 S. I N'I11 A N WFL1.5 . CA L i POR K IA 9? 261. 16191 340-6423 rF y Bighorn Institute November 15, 1989 Page Two We look forward to a mutally satisfactory solution to our .respective view points concerning the location of your buildings. and facilities and the location of. our residences and recreational facilities. We will work with you toward that. end with the hope that we will resolve our differences and develop our respective properties for our mutual benefit. To begin that process, I would .appreicate an opport- unity to confer with your Board of Directors at its meeting on November 17, 1989. Please advise me if that is possible. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, J S. Hayh Pr dent Jsh/m bc : Ray Diaz, City of Palm Desert IINi'EImFFICE NamAPIDIM CITY OF PALM DESERT TO: CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER FROM: RAMON DIAZ, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR OF j CCMNUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 1989 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR CONTRACT WITH SMITH, PERONI AND FOX The Planning Commission, at it's meeting of November 7, 1989, approved the staff recommendation that a focused Environmental Impact Report be prepared for a project submitted by Jim Hayhoe Development. The project proposes to f develop a residential country club on the east side of Highway 74, the northerly boundary of the Bighorn Institute, and the southerl Summit. Y boundary of The Staff recommends that the firm of Smith, Peroni and Fox of Palm Springs be retained to prepare this document with the cost to be born by the developer. The contract would not be executed until the appropriate funds were placed in the city's hands by Jim Hayhoe Development Company. s RAMON A. DIAZ, ASSIST CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT j RD/db E 4 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 PLANNING OC44ISSION MEETING NDTICE OF ACTION Date: November 9, 1989 Bighorn Ventures P.O. Box 4378 Indian Wells, CA 92210 Re: Tr 25296 and C/Z 89-16 The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of November 7, 1989. PL MNING CCM IISSION OCNTINUED THIS CASE TO JRWM 16, 1990 By MIN[ITE MOTION MJTILJN CARRIED 4-0 (CHAIRPERSON WIiITIACiC WAS ABSENT). Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the Director of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. RAMON A. DIAZ, SE PALM DESERT PLANNING SSION RAD/tm cc: Coachella Valley Water District Public Works Department Building & Safety Department Fire Marshal MIId[TI'ES PALM DESERT PLANNING 0016MSSICN NWFSIDER 7, 1989 VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS E. Case Nos.CTT 25296 and C/ZA89_16� BIGIMN VESnEW, Applicazit Request for approval of master tentative map subdividing 362 acres into a 484 unit country club, a first phase of 108 units on 35 acres, a change of zone for 25 acres of drainageway frc m O.S. to PR-5 and H.P.R. , and a negative declaration of environmental impact located southeast of Portola Avenue and Highway 74. Mr. Diaz indicated a continuance to January 16, 1990 was being requested to enable staff to have prepared a focused environmental impact report to address several concerns: flora/fauna and the impact on the bighorn sheep in general and the Bighorn Institute and the issues of drainage. Staff indicated that if anyone in the audience wished to have other items examined as part of the focused EIR it could be included. Vice Chairman Richards stated that he would like a review of the proposal. Mr. Jim Hayhoe, developer of the project, indicated that the project would be called the Altamira Country Club and gave a description of the project. He indicated that the continuance to January 16 would allow them to do the focused environmental impact report. Mr. Diaz noted that staff would re-advertise the public hearing. Vice Chairman Richards o ed the public testimony and asked if anyone present wished to address the conudssion. MR. JIM DEFORGE, representing the Bighorn Institute, reviewed the history of the Bighorn Institute's involvement in the bighorn situation in the valley. He indicated the present site was chosen to simulate a similar captive state to produce survival offspring and what was needed to allow the sheep to lamb. Due to the bighorn sheep being a threatened species, he stressed the sensitivity of the environmental situation. He indicated that his concerns were based on the pen facility and the survival of the bighorn sheep in the Santa Rosa Mountains. Commissioner Downs requested that Mr. DeForge review why it was important for the bighorn sheep to survive in this area. Mr. DeForge indicated there were people who were sensitive to survival of wild creatures. 2 MINVPES PALM DESERT PLANND G Ca�MSSION NX04aER 7, 1989 Canmissicner Jonathan asked if Mr. DeForge had an objection to the project as a whole or if there were certain specific objectionable areas that could be mitigated. Mr. DeForge stated that they were looking for an environmental buffer that would allow for the sheep to produce and provide adequate research to continue; he felt the land use was appropriate, but their specific concern was with the northeast corner. Commissioner Exwood asked how certain the commission could be that Mr. DeForge's interpretation of what was a sufficient mitigation measure would be sufficient. Mr. DeForge indicated that it would be wise to have other people involved in this. Vice Chairman Richards reviewed the history prior to when the Bighorn Institute was approved. He felt that it was understood that when the institute was approved it was clear that this flat land would be developed. MR. ERNIE HAHN, 47-015 El Dorado Drive in Indian Wells, stated that he was a director of the Bighorn Institute for some time. He felt the development was a good one and had no objection to a country club development. He was pleased that there would be an environmental impact report. He noted there were CEQA rules as to endangered species and felt this could be mitigated without causing undue hardship. He indicated that the lambing area could not be changed or the contours and noted that they were ready to break ground on a $1 million research facility. He stated that Mr. Hayhoe tried to contact him and they were willing to sit down and work out a solution; he indicated that he was not happy about the letter he received that questioned the Bighorn's right to get a permit. He did not feel that sort of approach would serve the purpose and encouraged Mr. Hayhoe to meet with them so that they would not have to appear in opposition to the development. He felt that this was not an asset that could be replaced. He indicated that a buffer was needed and wanted staff, the developer and the Bighorn Institute to get together. MR. ARTHUR NERNESS, 72-565 Rolling Knoll, a resident of Indian Hills and representing the board of directors, stated that based upon the information they received, they had no major objection. He felt the development would enhance the immediate area and Palm Desert. He indicated that the present plans call for an emergency exit to be at the dead-end of Portola. He wanted it 3 MINM S PALM DESERT PLANNING OCbTIISSION NXEMBER 7, 1989 investigated that it be moved to a more westerly portion of Portola because of security and noise. M. DONNA STEEEY, manager of the Indian Hills Mobile Home Park, stated that on behalf of the owner, he was in favor of the development. MR. CAL HARDEN, 48-751 North View Drive in the Summit, expressed concern for line-of sight and views on North View and Spyglass. MR. MEL HOMES, 48-900 Shade View, did not have any ocmments because he had not seen the plans and requested that they be made available after the meeting to allow the residents who had not seen it to review it. MR. CLAY THYCE, 48-871 North View Drive, stated that he was in favor, but shared concerns as to line-of-sight and views. He noted that the northern section had a lake in the middle of it to handle part of the drainage. He indicated that they would prefer that the road be moved farther from their wall and the houses coved slightly back and the lake made smaller, they would have a better overview, less traffic and a greenbelt between their wall and the street. He appreciated the type of development that was being proposed. MR. JORGENSEN, 48-551 Valley View, spoke in favor of the project. He indicated that his only problem was the drainage in the northeast corner of the project. He noted there was a perimeter road that was starting on Highway 74 at their entrance area, running north, cutting across to the east and going north again and going to the northeast corner. He indicated there was a street-flow condition there and felt it should be checked to see how much water could be carried across the easement from the northeast point to the street north to the flood canal. He also questioned how much water would be put into the basin from the golf course. He also addressed the phases of construction: one would start with approximately 100 units and would have a club house and the golf course; at that time the barren land would be graded for the golf course and without the perimeter streets in there would be a flow problem. He noted that there was about three feet of water against the wall and the water came under the wall. He also indicated that the view angles and setbacks, were all right. MR. KENT ROBERTS, board member of the Bighorn Institute, submitted a handout on their response to the negative 4 14ENUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING 0a4 IISSION NlOVEMBER 7, 1989 declaration. He outlined the contact that had taken place between the developer and the institute. He indicated that this was the ccnmission's opportunity to make a difference; he stated that he did not want to be here 30 years from now and have someone ask him what a bighorn sheep was. He informed commission that he was doing his part to make a difference. He felt there was a willingness on the part of the developer to work with them. Canmissioner Jonathan asked Mr. Roberts for confirmation that when the present location was approved by the county it was understood that the institute would be compatible with the planned land uses for adjacent property. Mr. Roberts indicated that not only was the county aware of it, but since then the county sent a letter saying they had a problem with the Hayhoe development. By changing some of the golf course layout, changing some of the density on the remaining acreage giving a buffer could probably accomplish 80 percent of what they set out to do. Camiissioner Jonathan clarified that when they went into their present location, were they aware of the planned use of adjacent property. Mr. DeForge answered yes, to some degree. He stated there was no other consideration but a negative declaration because the county looked at then enhancing the environment and asked to go from R-1 to NA, which was looked at as open space. MS. ROBIN NEGAL, senior assistant to Patricia Larson, 46-209 Oasis Street, Roan 414 in Indio. She distributed a handout to the camnission (see attachment). She alluded to the attachments to her letter and City of Palm Desert comments to their proposal. She indicated that the NA zone is the county's most restrictive zone and did not perceive by that zoning that they would be creating any impact on the project next door. She stated that she assumed the city would have responded had they perceived that to be a problem. Mr. Diaz noted that this item was requested to be continued to January 16 to address concerns. He felt the appearance had been given that the Palm Desert City Staff was "asleep at the switch". He stated that the reason no camnent had been made was because of the planning commission staff report dated September 13 indicated no impact on adjoining property in terms of consistent development. He noted that the October 5 meno seems to contradict that particular finding. His point now was to continue this matter and the legal issues and ramifications of findings that had been brought out has nothing to do with the EIR. whether the county had proper findings and evidence to make those findings was not at issue here. Staff agreed that the work of the bighorn institute was important; the 5 MINL1TES PALM DESERT PLANNING, 031-1MISSION NMEMBER 7, 1989 protection of the habitat of the bighorn sheep was important and that was why staff wanted to proceed. Staff did not know until the October 5 memo the importance of the buffer area that would be necessary; staff was told it would not make any difference. That was why staff was requesting a continuance to January 16 to allow these issues to be addressed. He noted that Palm Desert has committed itself to never adopting a statement of overriding considerations on any environmental impact report and staff did not intend to start recommending that now. He noted that the consultant that will be hired will be under contract to the city and hoped the issue would be solved to everyone's satisfaction--that is staff's goal. MS. NEGAL pointed out that the issue had been raised about the county's process. She felt the letter to the Bighorn Institute threatened legal action against the county's approval. She wondered if the agenda was to solely resolve the conflict between two approved uses, both of which had been there for some time, or merely to put together the best lawsuit possible to hold up the institute's project. Mr. Diaz indicated that he saw a copy of that letter which requested that the attorney's for the Bighorn Institute contact the applicant's . attorney. He expressed the desire that everyone get together. It was up to the applicant as to why he sent that letter. MR. DOUG GRIFFITHS, 49-240 Sun Rose, representing Ironwood Country Club, expressed concern that the development will not create a problem with drainage at Ironwood or in other parts of the Coachella Valley. MR. DREW PALLET, 68-045 Monterico Road in Desert Hot Springs, stated that he was an archeologist and president of the Coachella Valley Archeological Society. He noted they have a monitoring program looking at development. He indicated that sane members called expressing concern for the archeology in the area of this development. He did a site search at UCR and found that there were two existing sites recorded there and the area had not been fully surveyed. He stated that he spoke to staff about having an archeological assessment and survey as minimum. Staff wrote that into the conditions. He was not opposed to the development and requested that this go on for all the projects in Palm Desert. Mr. Diaz stated that it would also be made a part of the environmental impact report. 6 14 NUT S PALM DESERT PLANPTEU Oa4IISSIOK N VEMBER 7, 1989 MS. JANEr ABRAMS, 510 North Desert Falls Drive, was present because Palm Desert recommended a negative declaration for this project. She stated that she was proud to be a neighbor of the institute and felt its work was significant. She did not feel now was the time for anyone to turn their back on the institute and felt that Mr. Hayhoe should be a good neighbor and provide mitigation measures to alleviate the impact on the sheep. DR. ALAN MUrH, P.O. Box 1738 in Palm Desert, stated that he was concerned about the negative declaration; he shared the concerns of the Bighorn Institute. He stated that there was another endangered species problem that had not been raised and that was the desert tortoise. It is listed in California as threatened and by the Fish and Wildlife Service as endangered. The project is in the historic habitat. He felt this should be addressed in the EIR. He recommended a condition that prior to grading permits, permits from both resources agencies who have jurisdiction over endangered species. MR. F.M. STEPHENSON, 49-581 Canyon View in Ironwood, concurred with comments by Mr. Griffiths. He wanted to add that while they were concerned with the quantity of water, they were also concerned with the velocity. He felt that if there was a problem, he would like to be assured that the developer would work with them. MR. STEVE NEGAL, 69-605 Carren Way in Rancho Mirage, thanked the commission for allowing the comments. He stated that members of the institute was present because they had heard that the institute did not belong where it is and should be moved and the institute was creating a negative impact on the developer. He felt the institute had been a good neighbor for over seven years. He also indicated that everyone seemed satisfied with the way things were proceed in this meeting and the developer would be a good neighbor by following state law and mitigating the development's impact on the institute. MR. JOHN BLASHEIM, chief ranger for BEM, supported the EIR and expressed two concerns: the habitat for any endangered species that might occur in the area and the cultural resources. He informed commission that their staff was available for any type of help or assistance that might be needed. MS. TONYA MULCH, 2563 E. Mesquite in Palm Springs, stated that she was raised in the desert and felt that the bighorn sheep were an important contribution to the valley. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANN.II3 COMMISSION IO7IIMBER 7, 1989 MR. MARIO PASaia-IIE, resident near Highway 74, stated that he lived in the desert for 17 years. He was all for the bighorn sheep as well as the proposed development. He felt the proposal would be a good border for Highway 74. Vice Chairman Richards expressed concern for water flow, drainage, and was concerned about the endangered species. He explained how the water presently flows and wanted to make sure that Harold Housley was present at the next meeting to convince him that the water is going to flaw the direction they say it will. He was also concerned about the existing residents at the Summit. He felt that the developer should seriously consider the design of the project. A golf course had a lot of roan for grass and not hones which could be used to mitigate problems. Vice Chairman Richards indicated that if there were no problems with the Indian Hills residents and mitigate the measures on the Summit residents and put the water where it should go, and alleviate the concerns of the Bighorn Institute, the project should be able to proceed. He expressed the wish that the developer would bring in a world-class designer to design the golf course. He felt this was one of the finest pieces of property left in the valley. Action: Moved by Vice Chairman Richards, seconded by Cbmnissioner Downs, continuing TT 25296 and C/Z 89-16 to January 16, 1990 to allow a focused environmental impact report to be prepared. Carried 4-0. Mr. Diaz indicated that people could go to the Community Services Conference Roan to view the plans. A TIN MINUTE RECESS WAS CALLED AT 8:29 P.M. A. Continued Case No. TT 25102 - CHAZAN DEVEUNNE NV COMPANY, Applicant Request for approval of a tentative tract map subdividing 20 acres into 68 single family dwelling lots on the east side of Deep Canyon Road, 1325 feet north of Fred Waring Drive. Mr. Smith reviewed the background and explained that the matter had been continued to allow the traffic issues to be studied by the public works department. Mr. Safavian reviewed the findings of the public works department and discussed the traffic alternatives. 8 • LAW OFFICES OF HUGO D. DE CASTRO DE CASTRO,WEST, CHODOROW 6 BURNS. INC t]j, HILTON CHODOROWI)Cll!�� BERT 5.WESTI MARVIN G. BURNS EIGHTEENTH FLOOR nW EEE��� gE IRE D)E TI � JEROME A. RABOW 10960 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD NEIL CARREY RICHARD H. HICKS LOS ANGELES, CAIIFORNIA 90024-3604 - G(lV� �1 7�Q(j LAWRENCE R. RESNICK 1 of BRUCE S. GLICKFELD TELEPHONE (2131 476-2541 EUGENE D. SILVERMAN TELECOPIER (213) 473-0123 QOA1�AUp�7Y DEVELDPfoLw DEPARTMENT BUDDY EPSTEIN JAMES A. GINSBURG CIT y . if PALM DESERT EDMUND S. SCHAFFER" MENASCHE M. NASS MICHAEL W. LUCAS NONA J. MACPHERSON DAVID C. RUTH OUR FILE NUMBER MICHAEL R.WHITE JONATHAN I. REICH SCOTT M. MENDLER RICHARD S. ZEILENGA YAAKOV G.VANEK ALAN J. EPSTEIN JEFFREY S.WOLIN MICHAEL C. COHEN MARCELLUS A. MCRAE November 7 , 1989 VIA EXPRESS MAIL Big Horn Institute P. O. Box 262 Palm Desert, CA 92261-0262 Attn. : Mr. James R. DeForge, Executive Director Gentlemen: We represent Jim Hayhoe Development, Inc. , which is very concerned about your recent negative declaration, zone change and approvals from the County of Riverside relating to the Institute ' s property adjacent to Highway 74. Our client believes that the negative declaration may have been improper; that the zone change may have been improper; and that any pending permits or other development on your land will thus be improper. There is only a short time left to file a lawsuit to protect our client ' s rights . Under those circumstances, we wish to invite you to have your lawyers communicate with _ C LAW OFFICES OF -�DE CASTRO,WEST, CHODOROW G BURNS, INC. Big Horn Institute November 7 , 1989 Page -2- us immediately so that we can attempt to resolve this matter. Please comply. lVerV truly yours, Markin G. Burns of DE CASTRO, WEST-, CHODOROW & BURNS, INC. MGB/cam . (copy via hand delivery) i i 4 PATRICIA (CORKY) LAQ60N 1 cvt yr . Supervisor. Fourth District COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE November 8 , 1989 Chairman Richard Erwood Members, Palm Desert Planning Commission 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 RE: CZ 89-16 ; TT 25296 (Ri.ghorn Ventures ) Dear Chairman Erwood and Commissioners : Before you for your consideration is the above-referenced project, which proposes 484 dwelling units and an 18-hole golf course. It has been brought to my attention that there is serious concern as to the proposed project' s impact on and compatibility with the Bighorn Institute, which is located immediately adjacent to the project site. The Bighorn Institute is an important regional resource, dedicated to the preservation of a threatened sub-species of Bighorn sheep. The importance of this effort is widely recognized, as demonstrated by the cooperation of the Bureau of Land Management' s with the Institute in the establishment of the existing facility, as well as the Institute ' s subsequent acquisition of the property outright from BLM. Riverside County continued this spirit of cooperation by expediting the processing of the Institute ' s land use applications (CZ 5552 and PP 11393 ) . Given the delicate environment required for the Institute ' s ongoing work, I am asking that you ensure that all environmental factors be considered, and that adequate mitigation be required of the developer. County staff, in correspondence to the City of Palm Desert dated October 5th, 1989, raised the concern about the need for an adequate buffer zone between the Institute and the proposed project. In addition, I would request that the City also examine the possibility of redesigning the project, to provide an adequate open space buffer . In short, I would suggest that a project of this magnitude, in this location, merits an Environmental Impact Report, to ensure that all impacts are identified and adequate mitigation provided for. Respectfully submitted, PATRICIA A. CARBON PAL:RN:vc District Office: 46209 Oasis Strecl. P.O. Drawer 1330. Indio.California 92202. (619)342-8211.(619)345-1072 MII fES OF THE BOARD OF SUPER ORS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA a IC; .2a&b i : 3o p . ;n . be ; nq the time set for hearing on the adoption of ti-.sa negative dec1al-ation "tor EA 34143 and on the application of 9igho;- :, Institute , in Case No . 5552, for changing the zoning on certain pr'oport ioc� ated rn the Cathedral City/Palm Desert area from R- 1 to -A � and Plot Plan 11393 ter a noncommercial menagerie and accessory care, akers and research buildings , the Chairman -died the matters for hearing . The matters were presented by Paul Clark of the Planning it appeari-ng that no one else present washed to speak- on the matII-Qr , the Chairman declared the hearing closed . On motion of Supervisor Larson , seconded by Supervisor Ceiucc.ros and duly carried by unanimous vote , IT WAS ORDERED that the Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No . 34143, is adopted , and IT WAS FURTHER ORDERED that the zone change and pint clan are approved as recommended by the Planning Commission , and County Counsel is instructed to prepare an ordinance to effect the change for adoption by the Board . --------------- I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of an order made and entered on October 17 , 1989 of Supervisors Minutes. WITNESS my hand and the seal of the Board of Supervisors Dated: October 17 , 1989 Gerald A. Maloney, Clerk of the Boar of Supervisors, in and (seal) for the County of Riverside. /State o �alifornrn,ia.. By: �'% %/ ,i.I.( . y %/L- Deputy AGENDA NB. 10 . 2a&b xc: Planning, Land Use, Applicant, Survey, Co.Co. IORM 11 0(6/83) =.HEARINIGGE �w' EP'rA Zoning District: Cathedral City-Palm Desert CHANGE OF ZO NONE1N . 5552 Supervisorial District : Fourth PLOT PLANE. A. No . 34143 Regional Team III Planning Commission: 9/13/89 Agenda Item: 2-3 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT ` i � 1 . Applicant : Bighorn Institute 2. Type of Request : Change of Zone from R-I to N-A; plot plan for a noncommercial menagerie and accessory caretakers and research buildings 3. Location: Easterly of Highway 74, southerly of Cahuilla Way 4. Parcel Size: 290 acres 5. Existing Roads: Highway 74 6. Existing Land Use: Mobilehome , pens 7. Surrounding Land Use: Residence, vacant , mountainous S. Existing Zoning : R-I 9. Surrounding Zoning : R-10 N-A; and PR-5 within the City of Palm Desert 10. General Plan Elements: LAND USE: Wildlife/Vegetation (Western Coachella OPEN SPACE : Wildlife/Vegetation Valley Plan) CIRCULATION: Highway 74 (Variable) 11 . Agency Recommendations: ROAD: See transmittal dated 8/23/89 FLOOD: See RCFC transmittal dated HEALTH: See transmittal dated 8/17/89 WATER: See CVWD transmittal dated 8/16/89 FIRE: See transmittal dated 8/23/89 12. Sphere of Influence: City of Palm Desert 13. Letters: No letters received as of 8/28/89 ANALYSIS: The applicant for Change of Zone Case No. 5552 requests approval of a change of zone from R-1 (One Family Dwelling ) to N-A (Natural Assets ) on 290 acres . The site is located easterly of Highway 74, southerly of the City of Palm Desert . The applicant concurrently filed Plot Plan No . 11393 for a noncommercial menagerie and accessory caretakers and research buildings. The site is predominately vacant with natural mountainous vegetation, sheep pens, and a caretakers mobilehome. Immediately west of the site is a large residence where the headquarters of the Bighorn Institute (BHI ) currently exist . The BHI began operations of the 290 acre site in 1985 through a lease by the United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM) . In February 1989, the LM granted a patent to the BHI for the 290 acre site. The BHI .)riginated in order to breed and study the rare Peninsular Bighorn Sheep . There are approximately 50 sheep in this area , the north end of the Santa Rosa Mountains, of which 23 have been released into the wild by the BHI . r'LOT PLAN NO. 11393 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 Staff Report Page 2 Plot Plan No. 11393 proposes a 6,800 square foot disease laboratory/ administration building, a 2,800 square foot residential structure with four bedrooms and common kitchen/living facilities, and accessory grain and maintenance structures. The plot plan also includes provisions for a seven acre pen and a 30 acre pen which will house the current stock of 19 lambs and sheep , a figure which usually ranges between 15 and 25. Surrounding land uses are vacant and mountainous with scattered mountain cottages . Immediately northerly and northwesterly of the site, within the City of Palm Desert , is a large 675 acre site on which a conceptual specific plan (Bella Vista) has been approved for 350 acres of open space, 1000 low density dwellings on approximately 300 acres, and a 13 acre hotel site with amenities . Farther northeasterly of the site along Portola Avenue is the Living Desert Reserve, a zoo environment for the viewing and showing of desert animals and vegetation. The Living Desert Reserve assisted in the commencement of the BHI in 1985. The Living Desert has a small population of Peninsula Bighorn Sheep for public viewing but is unable to conduct breeding procedures because such a process needs isolation. The two facilities are different but yet compliment each other due to their caring for and research of the Bighorn Sheep. . F IgUMMENIAl ASSESSMENT : ��%a non• ASSESSMENT : - The Initial Study performed pursuant to Environmental Assessment No . 34143 identified environmental concerns associated with project development as including: Slopes Wildlife Scenic Highway Public Facilities Cultural Resources Circulation The initial study (a copy of which is attached) determined that approval of the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment . All environmental impacts would be clearly mitigated to a level of insignificance. A monitoring program was incorporated into the initial study. i PLOT PLAN NO. 11393 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 Staff Report Page 3 GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY: The site is designated "Wildlife/Vegetation" on the Western Coachella Valley Plan (WCVP) . The Open Space and Conservation Policies of the Comprehensive General Plan specify that areas that are mapped "Wildlife/Vegetation" on the open space map are for the conservation of critical wildlife and vegetation. The policies also specify that only the following uses are permitted in wildlife/vegetation designations: open space, limited recreation, and research or educational uses. The applicant ' s intention to use the land for research and educational uses for the nurturing and breeding of the state rare Peninsular Bighorn Sheep is compatible with the "Wildlife/Vegetation" designation and the open space policy requiring careful control and management of the utilization of natural resources including wildlife. The Open Space and Conservation policies also specify that open space designated parcels shall be appropriately zoned. The proposed N-A zone has been applied within the Coachella Valley Preserve, for the threatened Coachella Valley Fringe-toed Lizard , and in other wildlife/vegetation designated areas within the Western Coachella Valley Plan. DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN THE R-1 AND N-A ZONES: The existing R-1 zone primarily permits one-family dwellings and requires a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet . The R-1 zone allows growing of field crops and tree crops along with such recreational facilities as golf courses, country clubs, and public parks and playgrounds. Planned residential developments are permitted through the land division process. Plot plan approval is required for beauty shops, horticultural nurseries, kennels and catteries, and temporary real estates offices, while mobilehome parks require a conditional use permit . The proposed N-A zone also permits one-family dwellings, field and tree crops, apiaries, and grazing of cattle, horses, sheep . or goats not exceeding two animals per acre. Subject to plot plan approval the following uses are permitted : public utility substations, museums , menageries, water wells, and agricultural worker mobilehomes. Fishing lakes, golf courses, riding academies, well water extraction, mining , RV and mobilehome parks, and resort hotels are all permitted uses subject to the granting of a conditional use permit. The applicant proposes a noncommercial menagerie for Peninsular Bighorn Sheep , a herd which in the past five years has not exceeded 25 sheep . Since the BHI ' s origination, approximately 50 percent of the current stock of sheep located in this area of the Santa Rosa Mountains have been released from the BHI ; had these sheep not been released the stock would be next to extinction. i PLOT PLAN NO. 11393 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 Staff Report Page 4 PLOT PLAN CONSIDERATIONS: The applicant is proposing a noncommercial menagerie that for the most part is a veterinary hospital and research center for sheep . The following are a list of uses that staff is recommending approval of pursuant to Plot Plan No . 11393 and a list of future uses that would require additional permits: RECOMMENDED FUTURE Disease laboratory/ Future Museum Administration Building Concrete Helicopter Pad Existing Pens Future Site New Residence Guard House Grain Storage Car Storage e3 parking spaces The applicant submitted the change of zone and plot plan on July 28, 1989 and the cases were expedited to hearing due to the need for approval and construction of the facility before winter . The noncommercial menagerie proposed by the applicant is not open to the public , however , on occasion an educational class will field trip to the BHI . The BHI according to the applicant has long range plans to include a museum and education center in the future which will be open to the public . These uses would require additional permits prior to construction. The proposed project is not expected to generate traffic , it is however subject to the TUMF fee as adopted by the Board of Supervisors in January, 1989. CITY SPHERE OF INFLUENCE: The site is within the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert . The city staff participated in the review of the project plan. The city responded with "No Comment" on a transmittal dated August 3, 1989. The staff of the City of Rancho Mirage also reviewed the project and their comments are attached in a transmittal dated August 8, 1989. Y PLOT PLAN NO. 11393 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 Staff Report Page 5 FINDINGS- 1 . The applicant requests approval of a change of zone from R-1 to N-A on 290 acres located easterly of Highway 74. 2. The applicant concurrently filed Plot Plan No . 11393 which is an application for a noncommercial menagerie and accessory caretakers and research buildings. 3. The applicant , The Bighorn Institute (BHI ) , has been in existence since 19B5 and has recently received a patent for the 290 acre site from the U. S. Bureau of Land Management . 4. Surrounding parcels are zoned R-1 , N-A; and PR-5 within the City of Palm Desert . 5. Surrounding land uses are predominately vacant with mountainous vegetation, and scattered mountain cottages. `= 6. The findings of Environmental Assessment No. 34143 (a copy of which is attached ) are incorporated herein by reference. 7. The Western Coachella Valley Plan designates the site "Wildlife/Vegetation. " B. The Open Space and Conservation Policies of the Comprehensive General Plan specify that research and educational uses are permitted in the "Wildlife/Vegetation" designation. 9. The Comprehensive General Plan lists the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep as a "Rare" species. 10. The BHI has been responsible for increasing the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep herd at the north end of the Santa Rosa Mountains by approximately 50 percent. 11 . The site is within the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert . S PLOT PLAN NO. 11393 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 Staff Report Page 6 RECOMMENDATION : ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No . 34143. The planning Department has found that approval . of the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and has completed a Negative Declaration; ANDt APPROVAL of Change of Zone Case No . 5552 from R-1 to N-A in accordance with Exhibit 2, based on the above findings and the following conclusions: AND: APPROVAL of Plot Plan No . 11393 subject to the attached conditions , based on the findings listed above, and on the following conclusions: 1 . The project is consistent with all the elements of the Comprehensive General Plan and the Western Coachella Valley Plan. 2. The project ' s overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,, -safety and welfare. 3. The project will conform to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future uses of the surrounding property. LAM:csa 8/31/89 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 13, 1989 (AGENDA ITEM 2-3 - Tape 1B) CHANGE OF ZONE CASE 5552 - EA 34143 - Big Horn Institute - Cathedral City/Palm Desert District - Fourth Supervisorial District - 290± acres, easterly of Highway 74 - R-1 to N-A, etc. with PLOT PLAN 11393 - PROJECT: Noncommercial Menagerie and accessory Caretakers and Research Buildings Hearing was opened at 10:56 a.m. and was closed at 11:14 a.m. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adoption of the Negative Declaration for EA 34143, approval of Change of Zone 5552 and approval of Plot Plan 11393 based on the findings and conclusions listed in the staff report. The applicant requested to change the zone on 290 acres from R-1 to N-A on property located easterly of Highway 74 and southerly of the City of Palm Desert. The applicant also proposes to construct a noncommercial menagerie, with accessory caretakers and research buildings, for the breeding and study of the rare Peninsular Bighorn Sheep. The site is currently vacant, with a mountainous area, a caretaker's mobilehome and pens for the Bighorn Sheep. West of the site is a large residence, the headquarters of the existing Bighorn Institute (BHI) , which began operations in 1985 through a lease from the BLM in order to begin the study and research of the Bighorn Sheep. A patent was received from the BLM in February of 1989 for the 290 acre site. The surrounding area is predominantly vacant and mountainous. Immediately north of the site is the City of Palm Desert. There has been an approved Specific Plan which covers the area north of the site on both sides of Highway 74 and within the city limits. The specific plan proposes a thousand low-density residential units, 350 acres of open space, and a hotel with amenities on 5.13 acres. Northeasterly of the site, on Portola Avenue, is the Living Desert reserve, a zoo type environment which also has a small population of the Bighorn Sheep, but the sheep are only to show to the public and are not for breeding. Surrounding zoning is R-1 and N-A, with PR-5 within the City of Palm Desert. The Western Coachella Valley Plan designates the site Wildlife/Vegetation, which is for areas for the conservation of critical wildlife or vegetation according to the policies of the Western Coachella Valley Plan. The Open Space designation is also Wildlife/Vegetation which requires that property is appropriately zoned. The proposed N-A zone has been applied to several other areas in the WCVP area, which is designated Wildlife/Vegetation, specifically in the Coachella Valley Preserve area near Thousand Palms Canyon. Staff advised that the site is set back off of Highway 74, and the proposed plot plan identifies a laboratory/research/office area and a residential structure for the housing of scientists doing research on the habitat of the Bighorn Sheep. Future plans of the Institute include a museum, perhaps a helicopter pad, and future pen areas which would require additional permits. 13 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 13, 1989 TESTIMONY OF PROPONENTS: Jim DeForge (Executive Director, Bighorn Institute, 5100 Highway 74, Palm Desert) said that he was there to answer any questions. Commissioner Beadling asked where the main entrance was going to be. Mr. DeForge said that they have a main easement going into the middle of the property, and the rest of the roads are all dirt, just for the use of their own vehicles. The entrance road will not be paved. Commissioner Beadling asked whether the parking lot was existing, and Mr. DeForge said that it was not, but was proposed for the future when there is a museum education center. Commissioner Beadling asked about the area where there appears to be a series of steps. Mr. DeForge said that that was the entrance into the facility. He indicated the site of the future museum on the map as well as the other structures planned for the future. Harvey Mescala (Altoon & Porter Architects, 3275 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles) , architect, showed the location of the administration, care facility, and the wash. He said that there would be steps, with minimum paving, provided to reach the building. He said that there is a gravel walk to the residential structure. Mr. DeForge said that they have 40 of the 50 animals monitored and are still losing lambs, with about a 90% lamb mortality. They keep the animal for a year, then release it into the wilds. They have developed a vaccine for the animals, and are the only facility in North America which is working with the Bighorn Sheep. Mr. DeForge said that the most successful way to breed sheep in a captive state has been to have minimal contact between people and the animals. They put the sheep in research pens in a hill type habitat. He said that they have had success in restocking the animal in the wild. They continue to have as the number one priority the better care of those animals as well as expanded research. He felt that theirs was a unique facility. Commissioner Beadling asked about the thousand houses which will be going in north of their site. Mr. DeForge said that he talked to the developer and understood that it will not necessarily be a high density project, but that is an issue that they will have to address when it happens. It was it was their intent to wall off people to keep then from walking onto their property because of the nature of the work they do. He said that Westinghouse has been very much interested in their operation in trying to make it something that will work for everyone. He said that the Living Desert has the same subspecies that they have, but has had problems trying to reintroduce those animals into the wild. The reason their program works is because they minimize contact with people, and use the hillside environment with the animals. Mr. Mescala advised that the residential structures will be constructed with the Type R nonrated material . The administration/animal care facility will be 14 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 13, 1989 Type 5, 1 hour. They have an agreement with the Fire Department regarding some 2 hour separation walls within the facility in order to give greater protection in case of fire. Commissioner Beadling asked about the local water supply. Mr. Mescala advised that there is an active well adjacent to one of the pens at this time and they have agreed to create a reservoir or an automatic sprinkler system in the administrative/animal care facility. Mr. Mescala said with the advent of the Westinghouse development, there is a possibility of bringing water up for that facility. If so, they may wish to deal with the storage facility on a temporary basis, then tie into the water system once it arrives. Mr. DeForge said that Westinghouse intends to put very nice hones on the property to the west and north. There was no one else who wished to speak on this matter. The hearing was closed at 11:13 am. . Commissioner Beadling said that she felt that they were lucky to have this project here and wished then success. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The applicant requests approval of a change of zone from R-1 to N-A on 290 acres located easterly of Highway 74; the applicant concurrently filed Plot Plan No. 11393 which is an application for a noncommercial menagerie and accessory caretakers and research buildings; the applicant, Bighorn Institute (BHI), has been in existence since 1985 and has recently received a patent for the 290 acre site from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management; surrounding parcels are zoned R-1, N-A, with PR-5 within the City of Palm Desert; surrounding land uses are predominately vacant with mountainous vegetation, and scattered mountain cottages; the findings of Environnental Assessment No. 34143 are incorporated herein by reference; the Western Coachella Valley Plan designates the site "Wildlife/Vegetation"; the Open Space and Conservation Policies of the Comprehensive General Plan specify that research and educational uses are permitted in the "Wildlife/Vegetation" designation; the Comprehensive General Plan lists the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep as a "Rare" species; the BHI has been responsible for increasing the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep herd at the north end of the Santa Rosa Mountains by approximately 50 percent; and, the site is within the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. The project is consistent with all the elements of the Comprehensive General Plan and the Western Coachella Valley Plan; the project's overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and welfare; the project will conform to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future uses of the surrounding property; and, will not have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Beadling, seconded by Commissioner Donahoe, and unanimously carried the Commission recommend to the Board adoption of the Negative Declaration for EA 34143, approval of Change of Zone 5552 from R-1 to N-A, in accordance with Exhibit 2, and approval of Plot Plan No. 11393, subject to the conditions of approval and based on the above findings and conclusions. 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 13, 1989 ROLL CALL VOTE RESULTED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: Commissioners Turner, Donahoe, Beadling, and Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Purviance (AGENDA ITEM 3-1 - Tapes 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B) CHANGE OF ZONE 5310 - EIR 220 - U. S. Windpower - Whitewater Area - Third Supervisorial District - 26± acres, southerly of I-10 and westerly of Hwy 62 - R-R to W-2 with WECS PERMIT NO. 75 - PROJECT: Operate and Maintain an Array of 281 WECS Hearing was opened at 1:33 p.m. and was continued to 2:00 p.m. on October 11, 1989. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Certification of EIR 220, approval of Change of Zone 5310 and approval of WECS Permit No. 75 based on the findings and conclusions listed in the staff report. The applicant proposed to change the zone from R-R to W-E on approximately 22 acres of a 635 acre site located southerly of I-10 and westerly of Highway 62. The applicant filed a WECS Permit No. 75 concurrently with the change of zone which proposes to construct, operate and maintain an array of 277 horizontal axis downwind turbines of up to 110 feet in height with accessory structures. The zoning of the site is currently W-E and R-R. Surrounding zoning is R-R, W-1 and W-2. Existing on the site is a gravel extraction area, utility easements and vacant property. Surrounding land uses are windfarms and vacant property. There are several nearby communities, the closest of which is the Whitewater community located about a half mile northeast of the site. Staff noted that WECS No. 75 is a reapplication of WECS No. 48 which was denied by the Planning Commission in April of 1985. The related Change of Zone No. 4302, which applied the W-E zone on the 690 acre parcel , was approved through an appeal of the Planning Commission decision by the Board of Supervisors in September of 1985. The Board, at that same hearing, referred WECS No. 48 back to staff level for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report due to such concerns as noise and visual constraints. Staff issued a Notice of Preparation in February of 1986 for WECS No. 48. The applicant did not prepare the EIR in time and WECS No. 48 was deemed abandoned. The applicant then made a technical resubmittal under WECS No. 75 to staff. The initial study for EA 33239 identified the following as insignificant because mitigation will be clearly provided through conditions of approval for future development permits and compliance with existing codes and ordinances: Geotechnical , safety, cultural resources, biological , air quality, public facilities and traffic. There were two biological studies done on site, and 16 I Date: September 29 , 1989 RIV - 74 - 93 . 64 (Co-Rte-PM) TTM 25296 (Your Reference) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: 1 ) Our records indicate that per General Plan Section (Circulation Network) for the City of Palm Dessert, the state highway 74 at this location is designated as a "Major Thoroughfare" with right of way dedication of 110 ft and street improvement width of 716 ft. If contrary to this, please advise . , 2 ) Vehicular access points on the state highway at about 1/4 mile spacing are acceptable to Caltrans . Based on this reasoning, any tWo of the following options would be acceptable to us . a)\� `he proposed street "A" be relocated somewhere halfway between C huilla Way and Carriage .Trail rather then about 200 ft n rth of Cahuilla Way b) W would prefer, if possible, a joint use vehicular access be d veloped with the property on the south (AP # 771-030-002 ) . T is new access shall be in line with the existing Cahuilla W y (on west of state highway 74 ) . Ic) a would also prefer Carriage Trail be used as a joint use vehicular access. Jf/Pjfesfej�ll' Iti 1 __._-�C TAP Mi�'9F>hun lv+oglvilJ/ / wN 4o !U?Y"PSS I�Crr �Ills — l-e-l��a� Pw�orTe�e� eX 14N�w� - !`h / ✓ter �n lice /1/0A,ey 47 r - ovr�y �,DIoJII� -ho� n 1-J14 fl- T,lei 4f Aff4A& Jle✓ AA/I t� LA Ye/o rie aIUc�1 ��e f�,yo�✓�� —y�a��,y,� va(�,�, ofw�� Gl CC i torn--1. Item 10. 2A and 10. 2 B Changes Zone 5552 - The Big Horn Institutes project in the Cathedral City - Palm Desert area with a plot plan associated. Thank you Madam Chairman. Members of the Board, Paul Clark, Planning Staff. The project is located southerly of the City of Palm Desert in the Western Coachella Valley planning area. The site itself is currently zoned R 1 contains approximately 300 acres. It is adjacent to Highway 74. To the surrounding zoning and land use is largely NA and mountainous to the south. There is R 1 zoning to the west and is flat, desert and mountainous land which is, I believe, planned for future residential and resort development. here is some scattered residential parcels here in the d Hills area. Of interest ** the City of . Palm Desert has recently proposed or accepted an application for approximately 480 lot residential tract mapping golf course development on this parcel to the north of the Institute's property. The applicant is requesting a NA zone in order to implement his plot plan. As I have indicated, it is on the western Coachella Valley land use area Ind is desigpated wild life-vegetation on that 4iep which would allow%for scientific research stations as a permitterd use in that designation. The, entire parcel is indicated previously as sort of a blow up, the site itself is only a small portion of that much larger parcel which is largely mountainous and a blow up of the site itself accesses off of 74 to a parking lot, several gravel walkways to- the primary research center and caretaker's dwelling. I would ask the Board at this time to amend the planning condition incorporating the Health Department's letter we received a new letter dated September 13 , 1989 from the Health Department and they request that be added to the previous letter of August 17, 1989 . It indicates that this Department would like to add the following comment to statement number 2 of our conditions of approval . The proposed holding tank installation as allowed shall be governed under the current Riverside County ordinance number 650 . And that would be condition number 6 of the Plot Plan that would be added to. With that the planning commission and staff recommend adoption of a negative declaration from assessment number 34143 and approval of changes zone 5552 from R 1 to NA in accordance with exhibit 2 and approval of plot plan 11393 in accordance with the minutes and conclusions as indicated in this staff report. I'm available for any questions. PLANNING C344MION RiSOLUrI N NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING OOMvffSSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMNQNIDING TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF MASTER PLAN FOR A 484 UNIT COUNTRY CLUB - A FIRST PHASE OF 108 UNITS - A ZONE CHANGE FROM O.S. TO PR-5 AND H.P.R. - A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF HIGHWAY 74 AND PORTOLA AVENUE CASE NO. TT 25296 and CZ 89-16 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 7th day of November, 1989, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by Bighorn Ventures for above described project; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89, " in that the director of ccmTuzity development has determined that the project will not significantly impact the environment, and a negative declaration is hereby recommended for approval; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all 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 approval of the tentative tract map: (a) That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. (b) That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision. is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. (c) That the site is physically suitable for the type of development. (d) That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. (e) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. (f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. (g) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. (h) Proposed zone change is consistent with general plan. WHEREAS, in the review of this tentative tract map the planning commission has considered the effect of the contemplated action on the housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing these needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of Palm Desert and its environs, with available fiscal and environmental resources. l PLANNING OCM41SSICN RESOLUPICN NO. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Ctnudssion of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby approve the above described Tentative Tract Map No. TT 25296, subject to fulfillment of the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Ccmmission, held on this 7th day of November, 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CAROL WHITLOCK, Chairperson ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary /db 2 PLANNDG C244ISSICN RESOLUTION ND. OONDITICNS OF APPROVAL CASE NOS. TT 25296 and CZ 89-16 Department of Environmental Services: 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the department of environmental services, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Development shall be subject to fees in keeping with city policy, such as school and art-in-public-places. 3. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within 24 months from the date of final approval unless an extension of time s granted by the planning commission; otherwise said approval shall became null and void and of no effect whatsoever. 4. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force or which hereafter may be in force. 5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Public Works Department Palm Desert Architectural Commission City Fire Marshal Coachella Valley Water District Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the Department of Building and Safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 6. Subdivision shall be provided with six foot high block wall around project (except for approved openings), and shall provide for anticipated adjacent grades. 7. Any entrance to the project from Portola Avenue shall be for emergency vehicle only. 3 PLANNING CX244ISSICN RFSOLUTICN NO. 8. Private street proposed adjacent to The Summit shall not exceed in elevation 3 feet from top of curb to concrete swale located within the perimeter of The Summit, or 5 feet below the top of the wall. 9. Proposed pad elevations adjacent to hone on A.P.N. 631-160-004 shall not exceed natural terrain. 10. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, developer shall cause City of Palm Desert to retain a qualified archaeologist at developers expense, to review prior archaeological study. If subject site is not completely covered by previous study(s), on-foot survey of site shall be done and mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery shall be prepared. The plan shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two-week review and ocament period. At a minimum the plan shall: a. Identify the means for digging test pits; b. Allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and C. Provide for further testing if the preliminary results show significant materials are present. The final plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for final review and approval. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, the Developer shall have retained a qualified cultural resources management firm and ocmpleted the testing and date recovery as noted in the plan. The management firm shall monitor the grading activity as required by the plan or testing results. A list of qualified archaeological monitor(s), cultural resources management firm employees, and any assistant(s)/representative(s), shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Depar rent. The list shall provide the current address and phone number for each monitor. The designated monitors may be changed frrm time to time, but no such change shall be effective unless served by registered or certified mail to the Planning and Development Department. The designated monitors, or their authorized representatives, shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are oonpleted. 4 PLANNDG CU4IISSICN RESOLUTICN NO. Upon completion of the date recovered, the developer shall cause three copies of the final report containing the data analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 11. Final grading 'plan for hillside area shall be subject to review by planning cornnission prior to grading activity in this area. Golf course integrate natural terrain and landscaping into course design. 12. Final grading plan for hillside area to include re-naturalization measures as specified in hillside ordinance. 13. Hanes and roadway within 500 feet of southern property line shall include installation of mature trees to mitigate light generation and vistas from bighorn pens. 14. Set backs for the detached units shall be: front - 20 feet side - 5 feet rear - 10 feet For attached units, set backs shall be: front - 20 feet side - 5 feet - 16 feet between buildings rear - 10 feet Department of Public Works: 1. Drainage fees, in accordance with Section 26.49 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code and Palm Desert Ordinance Number 507, shall be paid prior to recordation of final map. 2. Drainage facilities shall be provided to the specifications of the Director of Public Works. In addition, proposed drainage facilities/improvements shall be subject to review and approval by the Coachella Valley Water District. 3. Storm drain construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works and the Coachella Valley Water District. Said study will include, but not limited to, the investigation of both upstream and downstream conditions with respect to existing and proposed conditions. 4. Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid to recordation of final map. 5 PLANNING OOMM ISSICN RFSCURION NO. 5. Full public improvements, as required by Sections 26.40 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, shall be installed in accordance with applicable City standards. All improvements within State Highway 74 right-of-way shall be in accordance with Caltrans standards. 6. Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to project final. 7. Improvement plans for all improvements, public and private, shall be received and approved by the Public Works Department. The installation of such improvements shall be inspected by the Public Works Department and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits. 8. As required under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.28, and in accordance with Sections 26.40 and 26.44, complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. Offsite improvement plans for all improvements within existing and proposed public rights-of-way to be approved by the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the installation of required offsite improvements prior to recordation of final map. Such offsite improvements shall include, but not be limited to, curb and gutter, asphalt paving and concrete sidewalk in an appropriate size and configuration and provisions for deceleration/acceleration lanes at project entry points. "As-built" plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Director of Public Works prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the City of Palm Desert. 9. Landscaping maintenance on State Highway 74 and Portola Avenue (Carriage Trail) shall be provided by the owners association. 10. Waiver of access to State Highway 74 and Portola Avenue (Carriage Trail), except at approved locations, shall be granted on the Final Map. 11. In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.44, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. 12. As required by Sections 26.32 and 26.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, and in accordance with the Circulation Network of the City's General Plan, dedication of half-street right-of-way at 55 feet on State Highway 74 shall be provided on the final map. 6 PIANNIIM Ca44ISSION RFSOLiTPION NO. 13. As required under Section 12.16 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, any existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground per each respective utility districts recommendation. If such undergrounding is determined to be unfeasible by the city and the respective utility districts, applicant shall agree to participate in any future utility undezgrounding district. 14. Traffic safety striping on State Highway 74 shall be provided to the specifications of the Director of Public Works and Caltrans. A traffic control plan must be submitted to, and approved by, the Director of Public Works and Caltrans prior to the placement of any pavement markings. 15. Full improvement of interior streets based on residential street standards in accordance with Section 26.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal. Code shall be provided. 16. Complete tract map shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval and be recorded before issuance of any permits associated with this project. 17. Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works and Caltrans, as applicable. 18. A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. 19. Pad elevations, as shown on the tentative map are subject to review and modification in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. 20. All required offsite improvements for this project shall be installed in conjunction with the first phase of development. In addition, provisions for secondary emergency access shall be a part of, and coincide with, the first phase of the development. 21. Site access, with respect so size, location and number, shall be subject to review and approval by the Department of Public Works and Caltrans. 22. Applicant shall comply with those recommendations specified in the Caltrans Development Review dated September 29, 1989. 23. Applicant shall provide a phasing plan which specifies the project construction activity with respect to on-site/off-site infrastructure improvements as well as possible final map filing. 7 PLANNDU CCR-IISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24. Provision for the continuation of any existing access rights which may be affected by this project shall be included as a part of the final map process. City Fire Marshal ; 1. The Fire Department is required to set a mini,m,m fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per Uniform Fire Code Sec. 10.301C. 2. Provide, or show there exists, a water system capable of providing a potential fire flow of 3000 gpm for the commercial and assembly areas, 2500 gpm for the multifamily areas, 1500gpm for single family areas and the actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given water main shall be 1500 gpm for 2 hours duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure. 3. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 2-hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. 4. RESIDENTIAL AREAS - The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant (s) (6" x 4" x 2-1/2" x 2-1/2"), located not less than 25' nor more than 165' from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. Hydrants installed below 3000' elevation shall be of the "wet barrel" type. 5. Ca41ERCIAL/ASSEMBLY AREAS - A combination of on-site and off-site Super fire hydrants, (6" X 4" X 2-1/2" X 2-1/2"), will be required, located not less than 25', or more than 165' , from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 6. The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit process to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separations, or built-in fire protection measures. 7. Prior to the application for a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and two copies of water system plan to the County Fire Department for review. No building permit shall be issued until the water system plan has been approved by the County Fire Chief. Upon approval, the original will be returned. One copy will be sent to the responsible inspecting authority. 8 PLANNUC OCMUSSIGN RESOLUMON ND. 8. Plans shall conform to fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plan shall be signed by a Registered Civil Engineer andy may be signed by the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department". 9. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 10. All buildings shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall be not less than 24' of unobstructed width and 1316" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is allowed, the roadway shall be 36' wide with parking on both sides, 32' wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150' shall be provided with a minimum 45' radius turn-around (55' in industrial developments). 11. Whenever access into private property is controlled through us of gates, barriers, guard houses or similar means, provision shall be made to facilitate access by emergency vehicles in a manner approved by the Fire Department. All controlled access devices that are power operated shall have a radio-controlled over-ride system capable of opening the gate when activated by a special transmitter located iri emergency vehicles. Devices shall be equipped with backup power devices to operate in the event of power failure. All controlled access devices that are not power operated shall also be approved by the Fire Department. minimum opening width shall be 121 , with a minimum vertical clearance of 1316". 12. Provide secondary access to project. Dead-end streets in excess of 600 feet must be provided with alternative access (Alternative-Developer must agree to sprinkler all dwellings on all those streets that exceed 600 feet). Street grades may not exceed 15%. 9 HUGH V• JORGENSEN co O C9 O N Z cc U. Lu c. ZC �f�bP�— lffl� /GUG/ems'ZU 5�-— • ,G/ ZG��plc'l�f /Y�C/ ��-GG�/✓r�� i j �or'GD/ S-,J/✓7 .�- ,�' /.GEC S o WLu f3YL�f P�jlf�Oe l/bIUPS. J E� ,r Lo u co GENERAL CONTRACTOR / LICENSE NO. 530952 Bighorn Institute Dedicated to the conservation of the world's wild sheep through research and education HONORARY CHAIRMAN OF FUNDRAISING Gerald R. Ford November 7, 1989 38th President of the united state, BOARD OF DIRECTORS Charles W. Jena.,. D.V.M.' Planning Commission P.esidem City of Palm Desert Richard C. McClung' Vice President Rent A. Roberts're Vice President We have reviewed the Environmental Assessment Form submitted Dave Stockton by Bigihorn Ventures for the 362 acre development North of Vice President the Bighorn Institute. Peter E. Cyrog, D.V.M.' _ stands, Bob Howard' It is our understanding that a Negative Declaration r^°rer should be prepared only when it can be firmly established Eloise R. Agee that the proposed project could not have a significant . Cindy Austtn• effect on the environment. Wolfgang F. Baede Doug Bergen' William Bone We believe the applicant did not answer a number of questions Jack Braingham correctly on pages five and six of the Environmental Lawrence A. Cone, M.D. Assessment Form (#21 thru 33) . All of these questions Jahn E. Earthed relate directly to the effect of their development on the Emest Hahn Robed McGowan environment. Finn Moller Stan L.Timmins The questions, applicants answer and our response are 'Execuliae Council noted below. It is our opinion that there are a sufficient number of issues to justify a full environmental review. ADMINISTRATION James R. Delcuge Question # 21: Change in existing features of hillsides, Reamiiae D""`°'lgria or substantial alteration of ground contours. Executive Bioscon, ADVISORS Applicants Answer: Yes Robed Presley Cadfomia state senaro. Question # 22: Chanae in the dust, ash, smoke, fumes or Member.Senate Committee oa Natural Resources and Wildlife odors in the project vicinity. Donald C. Butts Hunter Cons`rvat1pnist Applicants Answer: No Tony E. Casno, D.V.M., Ph.D. Virologist Cal Vetsma,Diagnostic Laboratory Bighorn Institute response: Yes would be the proper answer. Hirscht&Clark Legal Counsel David A. Jessup, D.V.M. The development of 362 acres with a golf Califmma Da,1.of Fish and Game course, club house and 484 homes will bring Mark C. Jorgensen about a substantial change in emmissions Ame-Bormgo Desen State Park caused by vehicles, and activities of a Glenn R. Stewart, PhO.. Cut Poly University.Pomona population that could exceed 1,000 people. Raul Valdez, Ph.D. N`.AIr.,°a Save Dnasonsay Question # 23: Subject to or resulting in soil errosion by Michael Valencia wind or flooding. Lamson m Wild Sheep Sndles in Mesita Applicants Answer: Yes A Nonprofit Tax-Exempt Organization P.O. BOX 262 / PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92261-0262 / TELEPHONE (619) 346-7334 - t ' Planning Commission Palm Desert November 7, 1989 Page 2. Question # 24: Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. Applicants Answer: No Question # 25: Change in existing noise or vibration level in the vicinity. Subject to roadway or airport noise (has the required acoustical report been submitted?) Applicants Answer: No Bighorn Institute response: Yes would be the proper answer. The construction of 484 homes on 362 acres will change the existing noise level in the vicinity. Vehicular traffic, backyard parties, etc. would result in servere problems for the Bighorn during birthing season. Question #26. Involves the use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives. Applicants Answer: No Question # 27: Involves the use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy. Applicants Answer: No. Question # 28: Changes the demand for municipal services (police, fire, sewage, etc. ) Applicants Answer: No. Bighorn Institute response: Yes would be the proper answer. The potential increase in population (I ,000 or more) affects the demand on current municipal services including increase demand of police, fire, paramedic and public works services. Substantial increases in sewage flow and solid waste collection would also be a factor. Question # 29: Changes the demand for utility services, beyond those presently available or planned in the near future. Applicants Answer: Yes Planning Commission Palm Desert November 7, 1989 Page 3. Question # 30: Significantly affects any unique or natural features, including mature trees. Applicants Answer: No Bighorn Institute response: Yes would be the proper answer. The natural feature of the site will be chanoed significantly by the full development of the proposed site and the estimated 3 million cubic yards of dirt being moved. Question # 31: Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public land or public roads. Applicants Answer: No Bighorn Institute response: Yes would be the proper answer. The change in the visual vista from the Pens of the Bighorn will have an adverse effect on our Bighorn population at the Institute. Increased stress will impede the scientific work of the Institute and further complicate the process of increasing local populations of Bighorn. Question # 32: Results in the dislocation of people. Applicants Answer: No Question # 33: Generates controversy based on aesthetics or other features of the project. Applicants Answer: No Bighorn Institute response: Yes would be the proper answer. The total development of the 362 acre project adjacent to the Bighorn Institute is certainly controversial . The environmental assessment does not provide the mandatory findings of significance as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. Specifically there is no response to the potential to degrade the environment as it related to animals that are listed as rare, threatened or endangered according to the Federal Endangered Species Act. Planning commission Palm Desert November 7, 1989 Page 4. It is the opinion of the Board of directors of the Bighorn Institute that a full focused E. I .R. is warranted. Best regards, BIGHORN INSTITUTE By: KENT A. ROBERTS 1ST VICE PRESIDENT KAR:clw BIGHORN INSTITUTE BIGHORN ISSUES OF CONCERN IN REGARDS TO THE PROPOSED HAYHOE DEVELOPMENT 1 . Lamb survival and isolation from humans . 2 . Lambing within our 30 acre pen enclosure takes place on the north/northeast side of the hill currently away from the view of humans . The proposed Hayhoe development directly adjacent to the Institute ' s 30 acre enclosure will certainly create a stressful environment for the bighorn due to human occupancy, lights , noise , and dis- turbance . 3 . Bighorn lambs at the Institute can not become habituated to homes , human occupancy, lights , etc . as they are to be released into the wild . Any form of extreme habituation to man could result in the lambs being unable to survive in the wild . HISTORY OF THE BIGHORN INSTITUTE AND OUR CONSERVATION EFFORTS FOR WILD SHEEP Formation of the B�ghorn Institute Since 1977 approximately 90% of the Peninsular Desert Bighorn lambs born in the Santa Rosa Mountains each year have been dying before reaching the age of 3 months . These losses have resulted in a drastic decrease in the Peninsular Desert Bighorn population in the northern Santa Rosas (north of Highway 74) from 150 to about 50 bighorn today. The Bighorn Institute , a nonprofit organization, was formed in 1982 by a group of biologists and veterinarians to look into the cause of bighorn population decline . The Institute began a bighorn rescue and research operation in 1982 to study the disease problems of the threatened Peninsular Desert Bighorn in the Santa Rosas . More than half of the remaining 50 bighorn in the northern Santa Rosa Mountains today are those which have been released from the Institute . The Bighorn Insti.tute ' s work has been. a federal , state , and locally supported effort . Possession of the Institute ' s Property and Construction of the Bijhorn Pen Enclosures The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) provided the Institute 6 parcels of land to select from for the location of our pen facilities . The present site off of Highway 74 was chosen as it provided a complete hill to fence around for the most natural and suitable setting possible for the largest pen that would house most of the Institute ' s captive bighorn sheep . Lambing in the north end of the Santa Rosas usually occurs on north or northeast .slopes , and we felt our present 30 acre pen location provided the proper topography and limited exposure to human occupancy to produce viable off- spring. The Bighorn Institute leased the chosen 297 .34 acres of land off of Highway 74 from the BLM on July 16 , 1984 . The Insti- tute ' s isolation pens were built in November 1984 to house sick and recovering bighorn lambs and we began building the 7 acre pen enclosure in January 1985 .. On April 13 , 1985 the first bighorn lamb was born at the Institute ' s facilities . In November 1985 we began building our 30 acre research pen and it was completed in January 1986 before lambing that year . Secretary of the Interior Donald Hodel came to the Institute in June 1988 , saw our operation, and along with Congressman Al McCandless , initiated efforts for the Institute to take ownership of the land. In February 1989 the Institute pur- chased 292 acres of the land which had been leased from the BLM, with 5 .34 acres still under lease from the Bureau . The Institute ' s Conservation Efforts for the Survival of the Threatened Peninsular Desert Bighorn Through extensive bighorn disease research, Institute biolo- gists have proven that viruses can and often predispose bighorn lambs to a fatal bacterial pneumonia . To date , 35 sick and dying bighorn lambs have been captured from the Santa Rosa Mountains and adjacent Peninsular Desert Bighorn ranges for testing and treatment at the Insti.tute ' s facili- ties while their disease processes were being studied . In addition to these wild-caught lambs , twenty-one healthy bighorn have been born and successfully raised within the Institute ' s captive herd. From both the captured lambs and those .born at the Institute , twenty-six bighorn have been successfully released in the Santa Rosa Mountains to date , with the balance making up the Institute ' s captive herd for conducting further studies . This is the only facility in North America of its kind in which intensive vaccine and medical research on bighorn sheep is being conducted . The Institute ' s findings have caught the interest of many and at the request of state and federal wildlife management agencies , our biologists have been called into ten western states (Arizona, California , Colorado, Idaho, Montana , Nevada , New Mexico, Oregon, Texas , and Utah) , as well as Mexico and Mongolia, to help with their wild sheep concerns . _ i HISTORY OF THE BIGHORN INSTITUTE AND OUR i CONSERVATION EFFORTS FOR WILD SHEEP Formation of the Bighorn Institute Since 1977 approximately 90% of the Peninsular Desert Bighorn lambs born in the Santa Rosa Mountains each year have been dying before reaching the age of 3 months . These losses have resulted in a drastic decrease in the Peninsular Desert Bighorn population in the northern Santa Rosas (north of Highway 74) from 150 to about 50 bighorn today. The Bighorn Institute, a nonprofit organization, was formed in 1982 by a group of biologists and veterinarians to look into the cause of bighorn population decline . The Institute began a bighorn rescue and research operation in 1982 to study the disease problems of the threatened Peninsular Desert Bighorn in the Santa Rosas . More than half of the remaining 50 bighorn in the northern Santa Rosa Mountains today are those which have been released from the Institute . The Bighorn Institute ' s work has been a federal , state , and locally supported effort . Possession of the Instit_ute ' s Property. and Construction of the Bighorn Pen Enclosures The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) provided the Institute 6 parcels of land to select from for the location of our pen facilities . The present site off of Highway 74 was chosen as it provided a complete hill to fence around for the most natural and suitable setting possible for the largest pen that would house most of the Institute ' s captive bighorn sheep . Lambing in the north end of the Santa Rosas usually occurs on north or northeast slopes , and we felt our present 30 acre pen location provided the proper topography and limited exposure to human occupancy to produce viable offspring. The 297 .34 acres of land off of Highway 74 was leased from the BLM on July 16 , 1984 . The Institute ' s isolation pens were built in November 1984 to house sick and recovering bighorn lambs and we began building the 7 acre pen enclosure in January 1985. On April 13 , 1985 the first bighorn lamb was born at the Institute 's facilities . In November 1985 we began building our 30 acre research pen and it was completed in January 1986 before lambing that year . Secretary of the Interior Donald Hodel came to the Institute in June 1988, saw our operation, and along with i l � r Congressman Al McCandless , initiated efforts for the Institute to take ownership of the land. In February 1989 the Institute purchased 292 acres of that which had been leased from the BLM with 5 .34 acres still under lease from the Bureau . The Institute ' s Conservation Efforts for the Survival of the Threatened Peninsular Desert Bighorn Through extensive bighorn disease research, Institute biologists have proven that viruses can and often predispose bighorn lambs to a fatal bacterial pneumonia. To date , 35 sick and dying bighorn lambs have been captured from the Santa Rosa Mountains and adjacent Peninsular Desert Bighorn ranges for testing and treatment at the Institute ' s facilities while their disease processes were being studied. In addition to these wild-caught lambs , twenty-one healthy bighorn have been born and successfully raised within the Institute ' s captive herd. From both the captured lambs and those born at the Institute , twenty-six bighorn have been successfully released in the Santa Rosa Mountains to date , with the balance making up the Institute ' s captive herd for conducting further studies . This is the only facility in North America of its kind in which intensive vaccine and medical research on bighorn sheep is being conducted . The Institute ' s findings have caught the interest of many and at the request of state and federal wildlife management agencies , our biologists have been called into ten western states (Arizona , California , Colorado, Idaho, Montana , Nevada , New Mexico, Oregon, Texas , and Utah) , as well as Mexico and Mongolia, to help with their wild sheep concerns . i N4 4 . I C I �(3 � F e/✓lewiV A e�ciPf �, ve r ale �o,..�-,��y� ��/ /� '��/1.+1 ✓,c�_,�P��. U' S_��h a•••o'L1 Ll��rt'C'.S✓ r y/C e Lae\ v o LAO� vo k-.; /A/c /e �/ o� �v c 1.p iL /�e �3 o�— i i i I �I n I 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 INITIAL STUDY ENVIROISN)QSPAL CINDMIST I. Background Qq 1. Date 2. Case No. a5a9(o 3. Applicant `BI( -H0T-?Pl VEFQTlJKE--- S II. Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) Yes Maybe No 1. Earth. will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of — soils, either on or off ,the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? y g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? I • j Yes Maybe No 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of di- rection of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage pat- K: terns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? / C. Alterations to the course or low of flood V waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? _ e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, in- cluding but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? / f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow �C of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Substantial reduction in the amount of . water otherwise available for public water supplies? i. 'Exposure of people or property to water re- —L lated hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a• Change in the diversity of species, or num- ber of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? Q Yes Maybe No b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare / or endangered species of plants? — c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- / ment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? — 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, ies, or numr land bers of any species a animals including reptiles, fish and shell- / fish, benthic organisms or insects)? — b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migra- tion or movement of animals? — d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? — 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in. a. Increases in existing noise levels? J� — b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Z 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? — S. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a sub- stantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? — — g. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? — 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? — �[ i Yes Maybe No . b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing hous- ing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional — / — vehicular movement? ✓ b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or — demand for new parking? c. Substantial impact upon existing transpor- tation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, / bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered gov- ernmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? i Yes Maw No b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the / following utilities: V 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential / health hazard (excluding mental health)? v b. Exposure of people to potential health / hazards? V/ 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? y 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing — recreational opportunities? -20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or — historic archaeological site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect / unique ethnic cultural values? d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially ,reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, re- duce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered, plant or animal or eliminate .r t . Yes Maybe No important examples of the major periods of — California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a rela- tively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the / future.) V a. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively con- siderable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) .d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? III, Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. �. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date Signature For PCNSES TO ENVIRONMENTAL CHECIQ.IST 1 C. The foothill area will experience some change in topography, but is not considered significant due to the location of specific dwelling unit sites. £. The character of the wash will change from a sandy to grass bottom, but this will stabilize rather than cause erosion to this area. 2) a. Air emissions resulting from traffic will be less than anticipated on the site due to the density at 1.3 d.u./ac. rather than the 3-7 designation on the general plan. 3) c,f,i Presently the storm levee on the site directs runoff from the Bighorn Institute land to the south of the rocky knoll and reservoir site, and this proposal will redirect this water north of this area into the Ironwood Channel. Due to the construction of the Palm Valley Channel, these flows are significantly reduced; and according to Coachella Valley Water District, will be easily controlled by this existing channel. 4) a. Native plants will be replaced by others that probably will be non-native, but landscape checks by C.V.W.D, will assure water conservation. 5) b. Not determined yet 6) a, 7) The proposed country club will produce increased noise and light; however, this amount is normal to any residential development. 13) a,c According to regional transportation plans, the density of development is far less than that planned for, thereby negatively affecting plans in place for these systems. 18) Not to the public, but still to be determined for the bighorn. 20) a. Archaeological sites have previously been located on the site and the project will be conditioned to survey, document and recover new finds in the area. 21) a. Still to be determined BY:XEROX TELECOPIER ?010 : 10-31-89 12:33PM :+49 511 668122 6193417098:ri 3 Oct 31, 19P 12: 30 Page 3 SUBLvid TAL TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISO.d 3 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA FROM: Planning Department SUBMITTALDATE: 9-13-89 SUBJECT: CHANGE OF 20NE NO . 5552 - PLOT PLAN NO. 11393 Bighorn Institute - Cathedral City/Palm Desert Zoning District Fourth Supervisorial District - 290 Acres - R-1 to N-A. RECOMMENDED MOTION: The Planning Commission and Staff recommend : -ADOPTION of a Negative Declaration for E . A. No . 34143 based on the findings incorporated in the environmental assessment and the conclusion that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment ; AND: APPROVAL of Change of Zone No. 5552 from R-1 to N-A in accordance with Exhibit 29 based upon the findings and conclusions incorporated in the Planning Commission minutes dated September 13, 1989 . AND: APPROVAL of Plot Plan No . 11393 in accordance with Exhibit A--3, Amended No . 1 , based on the findings and conclusions incorporated in the Planning Commission minutes dated September 13, 1989. rI ' f I Roge S. Streeter , PlarvningDire`ctor t: B b � M csf 21/89 f? ,:.. f- i Prev.Agn.ref. Depts.Comments Dist. AGENDA NO. RCV BY:XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 ; 10-31-89 12:32PM ;+49 511 868122 6193417098;# 2 Oct 31, '9 12:29 Page 2 5 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ay l0.za&h 1 30 p .m. being the time set for hearing on the adoption of the negative declaration for EA 34143 and on the application of bighorn Institute, in Case No . 5S52, for changing the zoning on certain property located in the Cathedral City/Palm Desert area from R-1 to N-A and Plot Plan 11393 for a noncommercial menagerie and accessory caretakers and research buildings , the Chairman called the matters for hearing . The matters were presented by Paul Clark of the Planning Staff. It appearing that no one else present wished to speak' .on the matter , the Chairman declared the hearing closed . On motion of Supervisor Larson, seconded by Supervisor Ceniceros and duly carried by unanimous vote , IT WAS ORDERED that the Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No . 341431' is adopted , and IT WAS FURTHER ORDERED that the .zone change and plot plan are approved as recommended by the Planning Commission, and County Counsel is instructed to prepare an ordinance to effect the change for adoption by the Board . --------------- I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of an order made and entered on October 17, 1989 _ of Supervisors Minutes. WITNESS my hand and the seal of the Board of Supervisors Dated: __„_. October 17, 1989 Gerald A. Maloney, Clerk of the Board "f Supervisors. in and (seal) for the County of nRiverside, State of a ' ornia. By: �%! - i� Deputy AGENDA N . 10 .2asb xc: Planning, Land Use, Applicant, Survey, Co.Co. tot� ,� ,mac© MW A `01AW ►��.wa�ii�:MICIA gel©6 R�l=�_ Y IN Ir AV, WAM Cl All a MIS Jim ED / Fit° ail pm'® �► �.� 1 mp ,41��►► )ram , �,► (OR � c�iL' 1-�-b_7ll3n3n 1[�ts�c;�3Ptb 1 I 73-510 FRED WARINO DRIVE,PALM DESERT CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(6101 346 0011 OCTOBER 19, 1909 Cln OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NOS. CZ 89-16 and TT 2S296 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Bighorn Ventures 'for approval of a master tentative map subdividing 362 acres Into a 404 country club - a first Phase of 108 units on 35 acres 8 unit •'.� zone For 25 acres of dralnageway From O.S. to PR-5 and M.P.R. - any negative declaration OF environmental Impact, southeast of Highway 74 and Portole Avenue, more particulary described as: A.P.N.'s 631-110-013. 120-004 th,u 006, 130-001, 002, 010. oil. 150-003 thru 005, 160-001 thru 003, 005, 006, 771-003. 004, 007 and 008 • •� ' ' �,J,�_- .�li v^� :i ,;;=•:• tie, - A—��i':'� �;.�- t / �z�✓� _ JZ I -L �! �r // :4. ', ).g.P•;'i. R-1 12 00 5 PA. . r:::}}} �,_.' _ram-.TAT• . I . - •...nnrs,un P• coven or SAID Public hearing will be held on Tucsday. November 7. 190q, at 7:00 p.m. In the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert City hill, 73-5I0 Fred Raring Drive, Palm Desert. Callfornin, at which time end Place all Interested Persons ere Invited to attend and be heard. IF you challenge the proposed actions In l court• you may be 11mlted to raising only those Issues you or someone else raised at the puhllc hearing described In this notice, or In written correspondence delivered to the city council (or Planning comnlsslon) at, or - prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Post RAMQN A. DIAZ. Secrcte,y October 27. 1989 Palm Desert Planning Coomlsslon 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 October 26, 1989 ARQIITECPURAL REVIEW OOVMISSICN ACTION CASE NO.; IT 25296 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): BIGHORN VENTURES, P. 0. Box 4378, Indian Wells, CA 92210 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Conceptual approval of plans for a 484 unit country club LOCATION: Southeast of Highway 74 and Portola Zoe• PR-5 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission granted conceptual approval by minute motion to the hone elevations and the entryway and perimeter landscape plans. Connssion expressed concern with the following: 1) lack of solar protection in hone design 2) stray golf balls impacting traffic on Highway 74 3) apparent lack of stacking for vehicles entering and exiting the property Date of Action: October 24, 1989 Vote: Carried 2-0 (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STAFF CCVPMgTS: Please read the attached minutes. It is your responsibility to submit the plans approved by the architectural ccnudssion to the department of building and safety. CONTINUED CASES: In order to be placed on the next meetings agenda, new or revised plans must be submitted no later than 9:00 a.m. the Monday prior to the next meeting. AfbUTECRML C(144TSSICI .00 OBER�24, 1989 LOCATION: 73-303,11ighway ill ZONE: Cl Approval of awning granted by minute motion with the conditions that the drapes be Omitted and the posts then be finished in the burgundy or gray to match the building. 7. CASE NO. : 1645 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): BRIGHT LITE NEON CORP., P. O. Box 9207, North Hollywood, CA 91609 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Change Bullocks Wilshire signage to I. Magnin 6 Co. LOCATION: Palm Desert Town Center ZONE: PCi 8. CASE NO. : CUP 89-7 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) OLIPHANT, LIZZA AND ASSOCIATES, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PR0.7ECT/APP120VAL SOUC3lT Preliminary approval of 16,692 sq. ft. office building LOCATION: Northwest of Monterey and Fred Waring ZONE: O.P. 9. CASE NO. : TT25296 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): BIGHORN VENTURES, P.O. Box 4378, Indian Wells, CA 92210 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SO1"Yr: Conceptual approval of plans for a 484 unit country club 3 t a'IMWES ARCHITELMML CCNHIISSIO,. -OCIMER) 24, 1989 LOCNTICN_ Southeast of Highway 74 and Portola ZCHE: PR-5 Conceptual approval granted to the home elevations and the entryway and perimeter landscape plans. Cemtission expressed concern with the following: i) lack of solar protection in home design ii) stray golf balls impacting traffic on Highway 74 iii) apparent lack of stacking for vehicles entering and exiting the project 10. APPLICAM (AND ADDRESS): JIM LOHLAND, 73-771 Fred waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL So[jU1 ': Final approval of front yard wall exception • LOCATION: 73-771 Fred Waring Drive ZONE: R-3 Approved by minute motion with the condition that the easterly end of the wall radius back at a tighter angle. III. CASES- 1. CASE ND.: 349C APPLICAM (AND ADDRESS): SHELL OIL CO., P. O. Box 6848, Anaheim, CA 90803 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOOGM: Final approval of exterior facia remxlel LOCATION: S.E. Corner of Highway 111 and Highway 74 ZONE: C.1. Applicant req uested to have case continued to November 14, 1989 meeting. 4 ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY u ��S iRICt COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058• COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236•TELEPHONE(619)398-2651 DIRECTORS OFFICERS TELLIS CODEKAS,PRESIDENT THOMAS E.LEVY,GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER RAYMOND R.RUMMONDS,VICE PRESIDENT BERNARDINE SUTTON,SECRETARY JOHN P.POWELL KEITH H.AINSWORTH,ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER DOROTHY M.NICHOLS REDW INE AND SHERRILL,ATTORNEYS THEODORE J.FISH October 2'C6; 11_989�. r}.. File: 0163.1 IL 1989 Department of Environmental Services COMMUNITY DEVELUPMENT DLPARTMENT City of Palm Desert CITY 'F PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Gentlemen: Subject: Tentative Tract 25296, Change of Zone 89-16, Portion of Sections 6, Township 6 South, Range 6 East, and Section 31, Township 5 South, Range 6 East, San Bernardino Meridian A portion of this area is not within the boundaries of the Stormwater Unit of this district. This area is protected from stormwater flows by the Palm Valley and Dead Indian Stormwater Channels and may be considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances. However, runoff from adjacent properties can cause serious damage to improvements. The Design of interior drainage works should include provisions for solving this problem. Plans for interior drainage works shall be submitted to us for review. Plans for the relocation of the Dead Indian Stormwater Channel and Highway 74 Dike shall be submitted to us for review and approval. A portion of this area is designated Zone B on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. A portion of this area is shown to be subject to shallow flooding and is designated Zone A, on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. A portion of this area shall be annexed to the Stormwater Unit of the Coachella Valley Water District. The district will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this district. These regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change. TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY Department of Environmental. Services -2- October 26, 1989 This area shall be annexed to Improvement District No. 6 of Coachella Valley Water District for domestic water service. The district will need additional facilities to provide for the orderly expansion of its domestic.water system. These facilities may include wells, reservoirs and booster pumping stations. The developer will be required to provide land on which some of thesefacilities will ,be-located. These sites shall be shown on the tract map as lots to be deeded to the district for such purpose. This area shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 54 and 80 of-Coachella Valley Water District for sanitation service. There are existing district facilities not shown on the development plans. There may be conflicts with these 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. Plans for grading, landscaping, and irrigation systems shall be submitted to Coachella Valley Water District for review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management. If you have any questions please call Bob Meleg, stormwater engineer, extension 264. Yours very truly, PLevyGCiC/ — Tom General Manager-Chief..Engineer RF:lmf cc: Don Park Riverside County Department of Public Health 46-209 Oasis Street Indio, California 92201 4, . YJ INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Department of Community Development/Planning Attention: Phil Joy FROM: Richard J. Folkers, Asst. City Manager/Public Works Director SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT 25296, BIGHORN VENTURES DATE: October 17, 1989 The following should be considered conditions of approval for the above- referenced project: (1) Drainage fees, in accordance with Section 26.49 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code and Palm Desert Ordinance Number 507, shall be paid prior to recordation of final map. (2) Drainage facilities shall be provided to the specifications of the Director of Public Works. In addition, proposed drainage facilities/improvements shall be subject to review and approval by the Coachella Valley Water District. (3) Storm drain construction shall be contingent upon a drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer that is reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works and the Coachella Valley Water District. Said study will include, but not be limited to, the investigation of both upstream and downstream conditions with respect to existing and proposed conditions. (4) Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to recordation of final map. (5) Full public improvements, as required by Sections 26.40 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, shall be installed in accordance with applicable City standards. All improvements within State Highway 74 right- of-way shall be in accordance with Caltrans standards. (6) Improvement plans for water and sewer systems shall be approved by the respective service districts with "as-built" plans submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to project final. (7) Improvement plans for all improvements., public and private,shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. The installation of such improvements shall be inspected by the Public Works Department and a standard inspection fee shall be paid prior to issuance of grading permits. (8) As required under Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.28, and in accordance with Sections 26.40 and 26.44, complete improvement plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking approval before construction of any improvements is commenced. Offsite improvement plans for all improvements within existing and proposed public rights-of-way to be approved by the Public Works Department and a surety posted to guarantee the installation of required offsite improvements prior to recordation of final map. Such offsite improvements shall include, but not be limited to, curb and gutter, asphalt paving and concrete sidewalk in an appropriate size and configuration and provisions for deceleration/acceleration lanes at project entry points. "As-built" plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Director of Public Works prior to the acceptance of the improvements by the City of Palm Desert. (9) Landscaping maintenance on State Highway 74 and Portola Avenue (Carriage Trail) shall be provided by the homeowners association. (10) Waiver of access to State Highway 74 and Portola Avenue (Carriage Trail) except at approved locations shall be granted on the Final Map. (11) In accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 26.44, complete grading plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval prior to issuance of any permits. (12) As required by Sections 26.32 and 26.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, and in accordance with the Circulation Network of the City's General Plan, dedication of half-street right-of-way at 55 feet on State Highway 74 shall be provided on the final map. (13.) • As required under Section 12.16 and 26.44 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, any existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground per each respective utility districts recommendation. If such undergrounding is determined to be unfeasible by the City and the respective utility districts, applicant shall agree to participate in any future utility undergrounding district. (14) Traffic safety striping on State Highway 74 shall be provided to the specifications of the Director of Public Works and Caltrans. A traffic control plan must be submitted to, and approved by, the Director of Public Works and Caltrans prior to the placement of any pavement markings. (15) Full improvements of interior streets based on residential street standards in accordance with Section 26.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code shall be provided. (16) Complete tract map shall be submitted as required by ordinance to the Director of Public Works for checking and approval and be recorded before issuance of any permits associated with this project. (17) Any and all offsite improvements shall be preceded by the approval of plans and the issuance of valid encroachment permits by the Department of Public Works and Caltrans, as applicable. (18) A complete preliminary soils investigation, conducted by a registered soils engineer, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of any permits associated with this project. (19) Pad elevations, as shown on the tentative map are subject to review and modification in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. (20) All required offsite improvements for this project shall be installed in conjunction with the first phase of development. In addition, provisions for secondary emergency access shall be a part of, and coincide with, the first phase of development. (21) Site access, with respect to size, location and number, shall be subject to review and approval by the Department of Public Works and Caltrans. (22) Applicant shall comply with those recommendations specified in the Caltrans Development Review dated September 29, 1989. (23) Applicant shall provide a phasing plan which specifies the project construction activity with respect to on-site/off-site infrastructure improvements as well as possible final map filing. (24) Provision for the continuation of any existing access rights which may be affected by this project shall be included as a part of the final map process. RICHARD J. FOLKERS, P.E. (pttapsltr25296.cnd) v ARTICLE XVb N-A ZONE (NATURAL ASSETS) SECTION 15.200. USES PERMITTED a. Uses Permitted. (1) One-family dwellings, guest dwellings, automobile storage garages, accessory buildings. (2) Field and tree corps. (3) The grazing only of cattle, horses, sheep or goats, subject to the following restrictions: a. Not more that two animals for each acre shall be permitted. - b. The limitation on the amount of animals shall apply to mature breeding stock and maintenance stock, and shall not apply to the offspring of such stock, if such offspring are being kept, fed and maintained solely for sale, marketing or slaughtering at the earliest practical age. The permissible number of animals per parcel of land shall be computed upon the basis of the nearest equivalent ratio. 4 Apiaries. 5 Deleted. Deleted. 1 Deleted. MDeleted. On-site signs, affixed to building walls, stating the name of the structure, use, or institution, not to exceed 5 percent of the surface area of the exterior face of the wall upon which the sign is located. b. Uses Permitted .Subject to Approval of a Plot Plan. The following uses are permitted, upon approval of a plot plan pursuant to Section 18.30, on parcels of land not less than 7200 square feet in size, with a minimum front yard depth of 20 feet and minimum side and rear yard de th of 10 feet: 1 Public utility substations. 2 Water wells and appurtenant pump houses. 3 Picnic grounds for day use only. 4 Museums and menageries, commercial and non- commercial. (5) An additional one family mobilehome, excluding the principal dwelling, shall be allowed with a Section 18.30 plot plan approval for each 10 acres gross being farmed. Said additional mobilehome shall be located on a parcel being farmed and occupied by the owner, operator, or employee of the farming operation as a one family residence provided that: (a) The mobilehome shall each have a floor area of not less than 450 square feet. 143 (b) The mobilehomes are not rented or held out f , (c) The mobilehomes are located not less than 50 feet from any property line. (d) The mobilehomes are screened from view from the front property line by shrubs or trees and have a sprinkler system installed to insure the proper maintenance of plant materials. (e) The arrangement of the mobilehomes, sanitary facilities and utilities conforms with all of the requirements of the Health Department, the Department of Building and Safety, and state law. (f) The number of dwellings for employees shall not exceed two per established farming operation. c. Uses permitted by Conditional Use Permit. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted: 1 Travel trailer parks. 2 Recreational trailer parks. 3 Migrant agricultural worker mobilehome parks. 4 Resort hotels. 5 Any mining operation which is exempt from the provisions of the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 and Riverside County Ordinance No. 555. (6) Rock crushing plants, aggregate washing, v scree ning and drying facilities and equipment. �' (7) Extraction and bottling of well water including the incidental manufacturing of bottles only for use for the permitted extraction and bottling operation. (8) Golf courses with standard length fairways and customary appurtenant facilities, including club houses, restaurants, and retail shops. (9) Riding academies and stables, commercial and noncommercial.mme cial. (10) Fishing lakes, commercial and noncommercial. d. The following uses are permitted provided p p ov ded that the operator thereof holds a permit I p it to conduct surface mining operations issued pursuant to Riverside County Ordinance No. 555 which has not been revoked or suspended: (1) Any mining operation that is subject to the f California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975. i e. Kennels and catteries are permitted provided they are approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.45 of this ordinance. Amended Effective: 11-11-82 (Ord. 348.2104 08-02-84 (Ord, 348.2338; 4 144 04-04-87 (Ord. 348.2669) 12-18-88 (Ord. 348.2452) SECTION 15.201. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following shall be the standards of development in the N-A Zone, except for the above-listed uses that are specifically allowed a lesser standard: a. Minimum lot size. 20 acres with a minimum gross width of 400 feet. b. Minimum yard depths. Front 100 feet, sides 50 feet, rear 50 feet. c. No building shall exceed 20 feet in height.._ d. Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of this ordinance. Added Effective: 04-17-68 Ord. 348557) 08-23-73 Ord. 348:1190) 09-13-73 (Ord. 348.1201) 05-30-74 (Ord. 348.1327) 06-20-74 (Ord. 348.1340) 09-08-77 (Ord. 348.1588) 07-02-81 Ord. 348.1968 v 11-11-82 Ord. 348.2104 08-02-84 Ord. 348.2338 " 12-18-88 Ord. 348.2452 145 R1VeNDE co.u.m. ?LAnninG uERO Mor PFCs10314 DO October 5, 1999 City of Palm Desert Community Development Department 93-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert , CA 92260 Attention : Phil Joy Res TT25296 , CZS9-16 ( Bighorn Ventures ) Dear Mr . Joys Thank you for the opportunity to let our agency comment on the above project , The Western Coachella Valley Plan land use designation for the area to the south of the project site is "Wildlife/Vegetation" . The Open Space and Conservation Policies of the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan specify that areas that are mapped "Wildlife/Vegetation" on the open space map are for the conservation of critical wildlife ; and vegetation . The policies also specify that only the following uses are permitted in wildlife/vegetation reso0r.'Ceksi open space , limited recreation, and researcn and educational uses. On September 13, 1999, this Riverside County Planning Commission approved Change of Zone No . 5552 to re2one 290 acres south of your project site from R-1 ( single family residential ) to N-A (Natural Assets) . A copy of the staff report is enclosed . A related case that was approved concurrently was Plot Plan No . 11393 to allow the Bighorn Institute to construct a noncommercial menagerie, a caretakers ' dwellings and accessory research buildings. .In light of this approved sensitive land use to the south of your project site, our department feels that consideration should be given to having an open space buffer zone between the southern most property line of your project site and future homes . You should contact Jim DeForge of the Bin, Horn institute at 346-7334 for comments on your proposed project . Smction 15206 of the State CEDA Guidelines indicates that proposed residential developments of more than 500 dwelling units shall be considered to be of regional or area wide significance . 4080 LEMON STREET, ON FLOOR 46.209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92601 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (7141 787.9191 ___ __ --___ __ __ ____ _ __. 1619) 342-A277 ___ 11, AE„ 81:� 17:45 a_25ne.=2 G'• '-' City of Palm Desert Attention: Phil Jay October 5 , 19B9 Page S Since the Bighorn Venture- .is proposing 484 dwelling unit-- , consideration should tie given by your- staff as to whether or not this is a project of regional significance. State Highway 74 is i ! sted On the Wectern Coachella 'Valley Flan as a scenic (:orriapr . rnerefore , consideration should be given to having generous perimeter landscaping And decorative fencing along the project ' s Higrnway 74 boundary , The proposed golf Course adjacent to Highway 74 is a positive design clement . Very truly yours , RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Roger S, Streeter , Planning Director Paul F. Clark , Principal Planner PFCiJmp Enclosures: Staff Report for cases CZ 5552 s PP 11393 N-A Zone requirements RCV BY:XEROX TELECOF'IEF'. 7010 : 12— 7-89 4:09FIl 6193466039-i 61934170983# 2 D E C; r — S S T H U 1 7 7 0 0 D H I I � F @ 2 Bighorn Institute Dedicated to the conservation of the world's wild sheep through research and education July 25, 1989 HONORARY CHAIRMAN OF FUNDRAISING Gtreld R. %,d �n a�vet.r Supervisor Patricia Larson BOARD OF DIRECTORS County of Riverside Charlel w Jennn. OVM" P.O. Drawer 1330 r+•rdt^r Indio, CA 92202 Rkhard C. MCClung' Vk.Aeae.n Rant A. Rcbtno Dear Supervisor Larson , VK.hvbni Do,aslxlrleT The Bighorn Institute originated as a private nonprofit °"'r"°eanr corporation in 1982 , dedicated to the conservation Of the Rrer E, Croy.,VM' world's wild sheep and specifically to the preservation of Bob Howard, the threatened Peninsular bighorn population of the Santa T..,V, Rosa Mountains of Riverside County. Through a special Elaoo R. Aide fund-raising effort supported solely by private donations , cigPA°'ar, the Institute has obtained funding for the construction of Doug wonyan9nnagn' a much needed animal care and research lab facility. With orif William tam B this new state-of-the-art facility, institute researchers Jock Binmnghom will be better equipped to combat the ongoing battle Lawence A. Cant_ M D' against disease in order to help rebuild local dwindling JohEmd, Hahn n bighorn herds . Building plans are currently being final- Rob.n McGoWen ized with hopes of beginning construction in late September Finn McVtt or early october of thic year and reArhing completion by Stan L. flmm,no March 1 , 1990 . 'GIt>.dw Cwaar We are requesting the County' s assistance in helping us ADMtm1rRnnON meet this completion date (March lst) by expediting the James R. 04%ts, processing of this building project. It is important that A`'".a�e construction is completed prior to spring lambing at the Institute to avoid any excessive disturbance of the preg- AWISORS nant captive bighorn ewes that reside adjacent to the Ruben Nifty building site . In order to accomplish this we would need cokfw .Sim 7.� & to begin construction no later than October . Additionally, NI-W... st.m.C.mm.m. .. V.mrer Fna ".n.w'rolk being that the Institute is a nonprofit organization Donald c, Built dependent on outside funding , we are asking that the County K `'"'""'" consider waiving all building permit and application fees troy e. G� ovMV� that we may be subject to . t/a.unnrg a1°g^O'K Le.eaw .. "iz" colark We hope that Riverside County will look favorably upon UporDavid A. JessOy. DVM am these requests Provide and we would uin thi greatly eatter appreciate any assis- c4*" N r,A and c . you can a Mad C. Jorgtnun Ana 8a g.b7r..n s,.1.Ark Glann R. Srewam. Ph.D Sincerely, GI A✓.Uti.r�N.Aino.. nn /f/ R.id Valdot Ph A County of Riverside TO.- LOR1 4n$S P DATE; 7-26-89 lannin g/Indio ROM. R08YN NAGLE Supervisor Larson 's Office RE. BIGHORN INSTITUTE In follow-up to our tale hone appear on the Board a P conversation, attach and I an agenda next Tuesday,follow- attached is a copy of the agenda LIP no problem with this one8-1-89. The Board has item which will approved other such requests, It is my understanding that re;.:.� for a zone change representative of the it would g and/or plot plan prior Institute may be filing seem logical to aces to next Tuesda g their applications 4i Presents no major bookkeepi❑gplyroblempplpleasenleCithout �payment offfees,the pasdlongBoard action, Thanks. me know if this cannot b as this e done. ,3 , f 'I ;a :j s� i� RCV BY:XEROX TELECOF'IEF 7010 : 12- 7-89 4:09FT1 : 61934660 9-i .D E C; 7 - E 9 T H U 1 'r - 0 1 DHI P - 0 3 L • SUBMITTAL TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. STATE OF CALIFORNIA FROM: SUBMITTAL DATE: 7_26-89 1• , . Supervisor Larson SUBJECT: BIGHORN INSTITUTE FACILITY CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDED MOTION: That the Board of Supervisors direct that all County application and permit fees for the new facility at the Bighorn Institute be waived, and that the processing of this project be expedited. JUSTIFICATION: As the attached letter indicates, the Bighorn Institute is planning to construct a new facility at its present location in the Coachella Valley. The Institute was established to preserve the Desert Bighorn Sheep, which is an endangered species. Various public agencies, including the Bureau of Land Management and the City of Rancho Mirage, have worked closely with the Institute, which is a non-profit agency funded by contributions. The Institute will shortly be filing land use applications (zoning and plot plan) for the new facility, to be followed by permits relating to the construction, and is requesting that the County assist in the project by waiving all application and permit feeszegard to the waiving of County fees. ' In addition, time is of the essence due to the need to have the project as complete as possible prior to next Spring's lambing season. PATRICIA 9AASO i I I i va.w a. 'v-Di iG %V°si„U11Ur . Neninc Daanrom DATE : Juy 31 .198Q 46-209 OASIS ST. , ROOM 30qq.� . (619) 342-8277 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92204sw j�LtS 'v u TO: Assessor's RE: CZ 5552 i� '; 3 1989 Building and Safety �.,,•,, Road and Survey Dept. General LocaEioi(_',EA qlr',? i of''Hwy 74; Health Department Section 6, T6S, R6E. Fire Protection Flood Control :-MCQ/CVVID/EBL Applicant: BIG HORN INSTITUTE t1fY' e a1m-rDesert Zoning District: C.C.- P.D. N1 School District D.S.U.S. Zoning: R-1 Super of School . . . .Mrs.Beadling Supervisorial District: 4th. . B.L.M. P.S. . . . . .Sup.Larson Schedule: N/A Waiver: N/A Regional Water APN: 771-040-009 6 012 C.Y. Ecological P.D. State F b G. Proposal : Noncommercial Menagery U.S.F. 3 W. Indio SCE. . . .SCG. . . .GTE Cal .Trans. N8 Sheriff Please review the case described above and the attached map/exhibit(s). Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to Aug. 18 1989 or as soon as possible in order to include them in the staff report for this item. Should you have any questions regarding this item, please contact Lori Moss at (619) 342-8277. RELATED CASE FILED: PP 11393 COMMENTS: 21,0 i � L� lVJl6UUL� © UUf1lUU11 AUG 101989 nmmm axtm air "DEPAMWIxr OM OFFICE DATE: 'J' SIGNATURE PLEASE PRINT NA14E AND TITLE: P.A. 17iq?1 /�sr Gtr /1ISy l7ir. Co.,rni . l�Gd• RETURN TO: COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 46-209 OASIS ST. , ROOM 304, INDIO, CA. 92201 CITY OF PALM DESERT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Phil Joy FROM: Brent Conley RE: TT25296 DATE: October 3, 1989 The Police Department would like to reserve comment on this project until the housing units are submitted. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at ext. 288. Sincerely, Brent Conley Crime Prevention Officer BC/rh } '4 1 ..1 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA [fl COMPANY q 1981 LUGONIA AVENUE, REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA MAILING ADDRESS: P O BOX 3003, REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373-0306 September 29, 1989 City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 ATTENTION: Phil Joy RE: 484 Unit Country Club on 362 Acres - Case TT-25296, C2 89-16 The Southern California Gas Company has a 4" main in Highway 74 near the project. Distribution lines could be extended from these mains to serve the proposed development 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 conditions under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. Typical demand use for: a. Residential (System Area Average/Use Per Meter) Yearly Single Family 799 therms/year dwelling unit Multi-Family 4 or less units 482 therms/year dwelling unit Multi-Family 5 or more units 483 therms/year dwelling unit These averages are based on total gas consumption in residential units served by Southern California Gas Company, and it should not be implied that any particular home, apartment or tract of homes will use these amounts of energy. b. Commercial Due to the fact that construction varies so widely (a glass building vs. a heavily insulated building) and there is such a wide variation in types of materials and equipment used, a typical demand figure is not available for this type of construction. Calculations would need to be made after the building has been designed. To insure the existing facilities are adequate to accommodate the new development, an engineering study will be required. Detailed information including tract maps and plot plans must be submitted to the Gas Company Market Services Representa- tive, 1-800-624-2497, six months prior to the actual construction of the natural gas pipeline. 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 our Area Market Services Manager, P.O. Box 3003, Redlands, CA 92373-0306, phone 1-800-624-2497. Sincerely, Wayne Toomoth Technical Supervisor WT:mac CC: Environ Affairs - ML209B ADDENDUM TO HILLSIDE STUDY REPORT HIGHWAY 74 COUNTRY CLUB HILLSIDE ZONE Job No. H15-1-15 September 1989 PREPARED FOR: I. HAROLD HOUSLEY, P.E. , PRESIDENT, HOUSLEY ASSOCIATES, INC. PREPARED BY: STEVEN R. LEHMAN INTRODUCTION Mr. Phil Joy of the City of Palm Desert Planning Department requested that we extend our slope analysis to include two additional parcels. The first parcel is an agreed upon portion of the property currently owned by the CVWD and zoned O.S. A zone change to P.R.-5 has been proposed by our client. The second parcel is that portion of the Del Gagnon property which is included in the Highway 74 Country Club Project. It is currently zoned P.R.-5. No zone change is proposed. Method of Analysis The same method of analysis was used in this addendum as was used in the original report. However, only option No. 2 and 3 were considered and only case 1 (Golf Course unchanged) was evaluated for this addendum. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS CVWD Property: An area of approximately 9.8 acres was found to have a slope equal to or less than 10%. The total allowable number of units in this area is 29 units. Del Gagnon Property: A portion of the Del Gagnon property was analyzed in the original study. The addendum considered only that portion of the property that is within the P.R.-5 zone. A 2.4 acre portion of the property was found to have a slope of less than 10%. Under the Hillside Zoning Ordinance this portion could have a density of 3 du/acre or a yield of 7 units. The remainder of the property considered, approximately 8.7 acres, has about 5.2 acres in which the slope varies between 10% to 20%. The allowable number of units on this portion would be 10. However, this allowance is further constrained by the maximum overall density limitation of 1 du/acre, so the yield in this area is limited to 8 units. Therefore, the total number of units allowable in the remainder of the Del Gagnon property considered is 15 units. JIM HAYHO@ DEV[I_CllWI NT INC:_ June 8, 1989 Mr. Jim DeForge , Executive Director Bighorn Institute P.O. Box 262 Palm Desert , Ca. 92261-0262 Dear Jim, John and I want to thank you for taking your valuable time to visit with us yesterday. We have heard about your activities for two or three years from various people and have read about the Institute in the newspapers . Until the visit yesterday, we had an appreciation of what you are doing but not a real awareness of the details involved. I would like you to know that we want to be good neighbors and assist the Institute in its program. We will be keeping you informed as we go along and would welcome your input. We also have some ideas that might help eliminate the dog problem. We also , as mentioned, would seriously consider a benefit function for the Institute. Again, thank you for your time. If you have any questions or comments at any time, please feel free to call us. Regards , J es S. Hayhoe P sident jsh/m R. 0. 11 0 S 4 1 7.1 1 S 1) 1 A E I. I. C A L I F() R K I A . '0 1 . I r 1 9 1 1 -r 4 i ' STj:TE'OF'e,_ALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTA AND HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor 'DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8, P.O. BOX 231 ; SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92402 TDD (714) 383-4609 September 29, 1989 RECEIVED Development Review 08-Riv-74-93 . 64 OCT 10 1989 Your Reference: TTM 25296 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Gz $9 -16 CITY OF PALM DESERT Director of Public Works Attention Ramon A. Diaz City of Palm Desert P.O. Box 1977 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear Mr. Diaz : Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed Tentative Tract Map 25296 located east of Pines to Palms Highway (State Highway 74) at Cahuilla Way in Palms Desert. Please refer to the attached material on which our comments have been indicated by the items checked and/or used by those items noted under additional comments. " If any work is necessary within the state highway right of way, the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the Caltrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work. If additional information is desired, please call Mr. Thomas J. Neville at (714) 383-4384 . Very truly yours, H. N. LEWANDOWSKI District Permits Engineer Date: September 29 , 1989 RIV - 74 - 93 . 64 (Co-Rte-PM) TTM 25296 (Your Reference) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS : 1 ) Our records indicate that per General Plan Section (Circulation Network) for the City of Palm Dessert, the state highway 74 at this location is designated as a "Major Thoroughfare" with right of way dedication of 110 ft and street improvement width of A ft . "''If contrary to this , please advise. ; 2 ) Vehicular access points on the state highway at about 1/4 mile spacing are acceptable to Caltrans . Based on this reasoning, any o the following options would be acceptable to us . Fa))01 he proposed street "A" be relocated somewhere halfway between C huilla Way and Carriage Trail rather then about 200 ft n rth of Cahuilla Way W would prefer, if possible, a joint use vehicular access be d veloped with the property on the south (AP # 771-030-002 ) . T is new access shall be in line with the existing Cahuilla W y (on west of state highway 74 ) . a would also prefer Carriage Trail be used as a joint use vehicular access . CALTRANS DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FORM T_ TI\/I 25L9(� _ 9 - 2 , _ 8� (Your Reference ) Date "RAY SHAH V — 74, _ 91 i6 Plan checker ( Co Rte PM) WE WOULD LIKE TO NOTE : Constsuction/Damlition within present or proposed State right of way should be investigated for potential hazardous waste (asbestos, petrochemicals, etc.) and mitigated as per requirements of regulatory agencies. U When plans are submitted, please conform to the requirements of the attached "Handout". This will expedite the review process and titre required for Plan Check. Although the traffic and drainage generated by this proposal do not appear to have a significant effect on the state highway system, consideration must be given to the cumulative effect of continued develoment in this area. Any measures necessary to mitigate the cumulative impact of traffic and drainage shall be provided prior to or with development of the area that necessitates then. It appears that the traffic and drainage generated by this proposal could have a significant effect on the state highway system of the area. Any measures necessary to mitigate the traffic and drainage impacts shall be included with the development. This portion of state highway is included ill the California %ster Plan of State Highways Eligible for Official Scenic Highway Designation, and in the future your agency my wish to have this route officially designated as a state scenic highway. This portion of state highway has been officially designated as a state scenic highway, and development in this corridor should be compatible with the scenic higlay concept. It is recognized that there is considerable public concern about noise levels adjacent to heavily traveled highways. Land developTent, in order to be compatible with this concern, may require special noise attenuation measures. Development of property should include any necessary noise attenuation. WE REQUEST TIIAT THE ITEMS CHECKED BELOW BE INCLUDED IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT: 1� Normal right of way dedication to provide 5 S half-width on the state highway. Normal street improvements to provide -- half-width on the state highway. Curb and gutter, State Standard Jq2- e?along the state highway. V Parking shall be prohibited along the state highway by painting the curb red and/or by the proper placement of "no parking" signs. V � 3 S radius curb returns be provided at intersections with the state highway. A standard wheelchair ramp must be provided in the returns. V A positive vehicular barrier along the property frontage shall be provided to limit physical access to the state highway. Vehicular access shall not be developed directly to the state highway. Vehicular access to the state highway shall be provided by existing public road connections. Vehicular access to the state highway shall be provided by standard driveways. Vehicular access shaU riot be provided within _of the intersection at V____,Vehicular access to the state highway shall be provided by a road-type connection. Vehicular access connections shall be paved at least within the state highvey right of �a . gh Y Access points to the state highway shall be developed in a manner that will provide sight distance for _ mph along the state highway. Landscaping along the state highway shall be low and forgiving in nature. A left-turn lane, including any necessary widening, shall be provided on the state highway at Consideration shall be given to the provision, or future provision, of signalization and lighting of the intersection of and the state highway. A traffic study indicating on- and off-site flow ;patterns and volmes, probable measuresin>pacts, and proposed rdtigation measures shall. be prepared. Adequate off-street parking, which does not require baddng onto the state high sy, shall be provided. Parking lot shall be developed in a nanner that will not cause any vehicular imvement conflicts, including parking stall entrance and exit, within of the entrance from the state highway. Handicap parking shall not be developed in the busy driveey entrance area. Care shall be taken wlten developing this property to preserve and perpetuate the existing drainage pattern of tkae state highway. Particular consideration should to given to cumulative increased stonn runoff to insure that a iighnay drainage problem is not created. Any necessary noise attenuation shall be provided as kart of tree develop.ent of this property. Please refer to attaciiea additional corrrents. WE REQUEST : A copy of any conditions of approval or revised approval. A copy of any doctrents providing additional state highway right of ray upon recordation of the nap. WE REQUEST TUE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEIJ DURING THE APPROVAL PROCESS : V Any proposals to f utner develop this property. A copy of d e traffic or environrrental study. �-�A check print of the Parcel or Tract rep. 1i A check print of the Plans for any irrprovaments within the state highvay right of ray. l,- A deck print of the Grading and Drainage Plans for this property Wien available. STAT): OF-CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION A HOUSING AGENCY - GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8, P.O. BOX 231 I� SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92402 TDD (714) 383-4609 September 29, 1989 RECEIVED Development Review 08-Riv-74-93 . 64 OCT 1. 0 1989 Your Reference: TTM 25296 j ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CZ b5 -[6 CITY OF PALM DESERT Director of Public Works G, Attention Ramon A. Diaz City of Palm Desert P.O. Box 1977 , Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear Mr. Diaz : Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed Tentative Tract Map 25296 located east of Pines to Palms Highway (State Highway 74) at Cahuilla Way in Palms Desert. Please refer to the attached material on which our comments have been indicated by the items. checked andyor used by those items noted under additional comments. If any work is necessary within the state highway right of way, the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the Caltrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work. If additional information is desired, please call Mr. Thomas J. Neville at (714) 383-4384 . Very truly yours, H. N. LEWANDOWSKI District Permits Engineer l,ALINANb JLVLLU1'MLN'1 REVIEW FORM T Tl�j 252- 9 ,1' _ �i - 2 � _ g� ( Your Reference ) Date � A ) SHA-H `i�iy - -7/f. _ 93 . 64. Plan checker ( Co Rte PM ) WE WOULD LIKE TO NOTE : V Constnrtion/Demolition within present or proposed State right of way should be investigated for Potential hazardous waste (asbestos, petrochemicals, etc.) and mitigated as per requirements of regulatory agencies. V Mien plans are suhmdtted, please conform to the requirements of the attached "Handout". This will expedite the review process and time required for Plan Check. Although the traffic and drainage generated by this proposal do not appear to have a significant effect on the state highway system, consideration must be given to the cunulative effect of continued develarnnt in this area. Any measures necessary to mitigate the cum-lative impact of traffic and drainage shall be provided prior to or with development of the area that necessitates then. It appears that the traffic and drainage generated by this proposal could have a significant effect on the state highway system of the area. Any measures necessary to mitigate the traffic and drainage impacts shall be included with the development. This portion of state highway is included in the California Master Plan of State Highways Eligible for Official Scenic Highway Designation, and in the future your agency may wish to have tills route officially designated as a state scenic highway. This portion of state hi&ay has been officially designated as a state scenic high ay, and development in this corridor should be compatible with the scenic hid ay concept. It is recognized that there is considerable public concern about noise levels adjacent to heavily traveled highways. Land development, in order to be compatible with this concern, may require special: noise attenuation measures. Development of property should include any necessary noise attenuation. WE REQUEST THAT THE ITEMS CHECKED BELOW BE INCLUDED IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT: i V Normal right of way dedication to provide r 5 half-width on the state highway. V Normal street improvements to provide -- half-width on the state highway. "Sce Add i 4"v> L" eui�"ient4-r. V Curb and gutter, State Standard fIZ- ralong the state highway. 1� Parking shall be prohibited along the state .highway by painting the curb red and/or by the proper placement of "no parking" signs. V 3 5 radius curb returns be provided at intersections with the state highway. A standard wheelchair ramp must be provided in the returns. A positive vehicular barrier along the property frontage shall be provided to limit physical access to the state highway. Vehicular access shall not be developed directly to the state highway. Vehicular access to the state highway shall be provided by existing public road connections. Vehicular access to the state highway shall be provided by standard driveways. Vehicular access shall not be provided within _of the intersection at _V___'Vehicular access to the state hijnay shall be provided by a road-type connection. — Vehicular access connections shall be paved at least within the state higlnay right of ray. — Access points to the state hightiay shall be developed in a manner that will provide sight distance for _ mph along the state higlnay. — Landscaping along the state highway shall be low and forgiving in nature. — A left-turn lane, including any necessary widening, shall be provided on the state highvay at — Consideration shall be given to the provision, or future provision, of signs lization and lighting of the intersection of and the state highvay. A traffic study indicating on- and off-site flow patterns and volures, probable imyacts;wand proposed rdtigation ueasures shall be prepared. — Adequate off-street parking, which does not require icking onto the state highway, shall be provided. — Parking lot shall be developed in a roamer that will not cause any vehicular irovarent conflicts, including parking stall entrance and exit, widen of the entrance from the state higTwey. — Handicap parking shall not be developed in the busy drivevay entrance area. Care shall be taken wizen developing this property to preserve and perpetuate the existing drainage, pattern of tke State highway. Particular consideration should be given to cumulative increased stonn runoff to insure that a highway drainage problem is not created. Any necessary noise attenuation shall be provided as part of the developirnt of this property. Please refer to attaciiea additional corvents. liE REQUEST : A copy of any conditions of approval or revised approval. A copy of any docurents providing additional state hugIr ay right of gay upon recordation of the nap. WE REQUEST TILE OPPURTUNITY TO RY,VIEi4 DURING THE APPROVAL PROCESS : Any proposals to further develop this property. _ A copy of die traffic or envirorurentl study. �i A check print of the Parcel or Tract i•bp. >/ A check print of the Plans for any inprovarents within the state highvay right of hay. I/ A check print of the Grading and Drainage Plans for ties property Mien available. Date: September 29 , 1989 RIV - 74 - 93 . 64 (Co-Rte-PM) TTM 25296 (Your Reference) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: 1 ) Our records indicate that per General Plan Section (Circulation Network) for the City of Palm Dessert, the state highway 74 at this location is designated as a "Major Thoroughfare" with right of way dedication of 110 ft and street improvement width of .7,6 ft.% If contrary to this , please advise . (�b 2 ) Vehicular access points on the state highway at about 1/4 mile spacing are acceptable to Caltrans . Based on this reasoning, any two of the following options would be acceptable to us . a) The proposed street "A" be relocated somewhere halfway between Cahuilla Way and Carriage Trail rather then about 200 ft north of Cahuilla Way b) We would prefer, if possible, a joint use vehicular access be developed with the property on the south (AP # 771-030-002 ) . This new access shall be in line with the existing Cahuilla Way ( on west of state highway 74 ) . c ) We would also prefer Carriage Trail be used as a joint use vehicular access . Handout Page -2- A. Title Sheet The Title Sheet or Cover Sheet shall have a vicinity map with the project site indicated. General and/or construction notes, legend, quantities, and index of sheets . The vicinity map must cover a minimum of two (2) miles along the State route and at least one major intersection. The following statements, that are applicabto . oti.-i , -- appear in the nano.--. •• "H A N D O U T" STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANS February' 15 , , 1989 (Rev) I . INTRODUCTION This "Handout" is intended to provide the permittee and his representatives with a few guidelines for the design of typical roadway improvements and grading proposals within the State right of way. It does not contain all the design criteria that may be used in the review of a specific project nor does it contain any treatment for unusual situations which call for special consideration. Additional information and design standards may be found in the latest editions of the following publications: -Caltrans Highway Design Manual -AASHTO ' s "A Policy on geometric Design of Highways and Streets" -Caltrans Standard Plans -Caltrans Standard Specifications It should be noted: When work is necessary within the State highway right of way, the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the District 8 Office, State 247 West .Third_Street, San Handout Page -3- 7 . All fences relocated to facilitate construction of this project inside State right of way shall be replaced with CL-6 fence, as shown in the State ' s Standard Plans, or block wall in accordance with acceptable local agency standards . B . Where Type CL-6 fence does not exist, the right of way fence must be upgraded to Type CL-6 fence, as shown in the Standard Plans. 9 . Structural section shown within the State right of way is for estimating purposes only. The actual section will be designed by a soil engineer after native soil testing has been completed. A traffic index (TI) of shall be used in the design of the travelled way, and a TI of shall.be. used for the shoulder design. The laboratory- _ reports and the design calculations . shall be submitted to the State 's representative for approval prior to construction of the structural section. 10. All State drainage structures must first be completely cleaned of debris, and/or silt, by the contractor prior to making the connection. . 11 . The contractor shall be responsible for insuring that any State drainage facility which is connected to or directly affected by contractors operation shall be clean and operational prior to final acceptance of permit work by State. Adequate clean-outs and access openings shall be provided in any construction within the State ' s right of way for future maintenance and repair work, as needed. This work shall be furnished at no cost to the State. 12 . Where survey monuments exist, such monuments shall be protected or shall be referenced and reset, pursuant to Business and P ofessions Code, Sections 8700 to 8805 (Land Surveyor' s Act) . 13 . The pavement must be sawcut 2 ' from the edge of pavement. The sawcuts must be perpendicular or parallel to the State highway centerline. Handout Page -5- ------ ---------- --- — —---- Handout Page -4- 14 . All signs , roadside markers, electroliers , etc. , shall be protected and/or replaced in kind to the current State Standa-. d Plans and current Traffic Manual , at no cost to the State. 15 . All conflicting signs shall be either removed or relocated by the contractor. Relocatable signs shall be installed as specified on plans or as determined in the field by the State' s representative. 16 ; All conflicting striping and pavement markings not shown on the plans shall be removed ftom the pavement by sandblasting by the contractor. 17 . All signing, striping and pavement markings sha12.: be in conformance with the current edition "Traffic Manual" published by the State of California, Department of Transportation and the Special Provisions. 18 . The exact location of all signs shall be determined in the field by the State' s representative. B. Plans All plans shall include and distinguish the existing and proposed construction in plan view. Details and dimensions must be included to ascertain accurately the proposed work and how it will " fit" existing conditions. The existing centerline, bearings, distances, stationing, and any monumentation, shall also be included. Please contact our Public Affairs office at (714) 383-4229 for a Right of Way Map if you need one. All dimensions and offsets shall be referenced from centerline of State highway at specific stations. Right of way and property lines shall also the plans. All plans must inc lude cross be included on p sections. There must be Construction Notes for each z . — . 4: Tan v and thpv mliCt* hp rrfArpnce to Handout Page -6- ratios shall also be indicated on the plans . The top and toe of the side slopes must be indicated for the proposed grading. A profile of drainage facilities shall be provided (channels, pipes, ditches, etc. ) . Hydraulic calculations must be provided for all new drainage systems calculated at 100 year storm (Q100) . . When a connection is to be made to an existing ctrlvert in the State right of way, the junction structure must have a cleanout; this may be a Flood Control District design. The flow in an unlined channel shall not exceed. the permissible velocity stipulated in Table 862.-2 of the State Highway Design Manual. All lined channels must be constructed per Table 872 . 2 of the Highway Design Manual . Wire mesh will not be allowed in the State right of way. 4 . Cross Sections: Cross sections are required for any work within State right of way. A section every 50 ' is required along the proposed improvement and special sections are required where existing or proposed conditions change significantly, such as a driveway. On projects 200 ' or .less in length, cross sections every 25 ' are required with a minimum of four cross sections . Additional cross sections at the center of culverts, drainage inlets, driveways and road connections may also be necessary. Cross sections must show existing ground or pavement surface, proposed pavement widening, overlay and grading within the limits of the work. The thickness of any structural section or overlay must also be detailed. Cross sections shall indicate both vertical and horizontal scales and must not be distorted by more than a factor of five (vertical = 1/5 of horizontal) . Existing and proposed elevations shall be shown at grade breaks. Cross slopes between grade breaks shall be indicated on the finish surface. Curbs, gutters, driveways and sidewalks shall also be 1 _ • 1" Handout Page -8- 7 . Signal Plans: Signal Plans must be prepared separately but must be a part .of includes Streer_T,�- -___ _ Handout page -7- indicated. on cross sections, the centerlines , property lines and right of way lines shall be indicated by a vertical line and must be labeled accordingly. It is important that the cross section stationing correspond to the stationing on the plans, and that the work indicated on the cross sections and plans is within the same limits . Cross sections shall begin and end 100 ' beyond the proposed project. 5 . Striping and Signing Plan: The Striping and Signing Plan may be shown on the Street Improvement Plans, but separate Striping and Signing Plans are preferred. There must be the following items depicted on the Striping and Signing Plan: a. All existing signs and striping must be shdWn, identified, and dimensioned as shown-- in the Traffic Manual . b. All relocated and new signing and striping must be shown, dimensioned and identified as shown in the Traffic Manual . C. All existing and proposed signals and detector loops must be identified. d. All striping, marking, and markers must be shown and conform to the State Traffic Manual . 6 . Landscaping and Irrigation Plans: All Landscape plans must be signed by a State registered landscape architect. The fixed object-traffic hazard rule must be followed. All landscape f �DeQ@0940A Company REAL ESTATE and INVESTMENTS September 25 , 1989 Mr . Ramon Diaz Planning Director City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert , CA. 92260 Re: Bighorn Ventures Highway 74 Country Club Project Dear Mr . Diaz : I represent the partnership that currently owns approximately 12 acres of undeveloped property adjacent to the southwest corner of the property owned by Bighorn Ventures . An agreement has been reached with Bighorn Ventures to include our property into their development on a joint venture basis with our partnership. In view of this agreement , our partnership acknowledges and has granted permission to Bighorn Ventures to submit a development plan including our property, for city review and approval . If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me . Sincerekagnon R e t De o_ _ 73-612 HIGHWAY 111 0 PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 61 ,_ 346 1101 IBMITTAL TO THE BOARD OF SUPER"SORS JNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CAL )RN1A FROM: Planning Department SUBMITTALDATE: 9-13-89 •� SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 - PLOT PLAN NO. 11393 Bighorn Institute - Cathedral City/Palm Desert Zoning District - Fourth Supervisorial District - 290 Acres - R-1 to N-A. RECOMMENDED MOTION: The Planning Commission and Staff recommend: ADOPTION of a Negative Declaration for E. A. P;Ta q 34143 based on the findings incorporated in tF� +,,, ,.. -, SEP 2 8 198i 455,y' environmental assessment and the conclusion t a`t :. ). the proposed project will not have a significan effect on the environment; RIVt�,5:JcCOUNTY PLANNING,DEPARTMENT AND: APPROVAL of Change of Zone No. 5552 from R-1 to N-A in accordance with Exhibit 2, based upon the findings and conclusions incorporated in the Planning Commission minutes dated September 13, 1989. AND: APPROVAL of Plot Plan No , 11393 in accordance with Exhibit A-3, Amended No . 1 , based on the findings and conclusions incorporated in the Planning ` Commission minutes dated September 13, 1989. Roge S-: Streeter , Planning Director PFC:csf 9/21/89 i U Prev.Agn.ref. Depts.Comments Dist. AGENDA NO. Po%111-A 412/82) i Zoning District: Cathedral city-Palm Desert CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 Supervisorial District: Fourth PLOT PLAN NO. 11393 Regional Team III E. A. No. 34143 Planning Commission: 9/13/89 Agenda Item: 2-3 i RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT ACT Applicant: Bighorn Institute 1 .2. Type of Request : Change of Zone from R-1 to N-A; plot plan for a noncommercial menagerie and accessory caretakers and research buildings 3. Location: Easterly of Highway 74, southerly of Cahuilla Way 4. Parcel Size: 290 acres { 5. Existing Roads: Highway 74 6. Existing Land Use: Mobilehome, pens 7. Surrounding Land Use: Residence, vacant , mountainous l 8. Existing Zoning: R-1 C 9. Surrounding Zoning: R-1 , N-A; and PR-5 within the City of Palm Desert i 10. General Plan Elements: LAND USE: Wildlife/Vegetation (Western Coachella OPEN SPACE: Wildlife/Vegetation Valley Plan) CIRCULATION: Highway 74 (Variable) 11 . Agency Recommendations: ROAD: See transmittal dated 8/23/89 FLOOD: See RCFC transmittal dated HEALTH: See transmittal dated 8/17/89 WATER: See CVWD transmittal dated 8/16/89 FIRE: See transmittal dated 8/23/89 12. Sphere of Influence: City of Palm Desert `. 13. Letters: No letters received as of 8/28/89 t ANALYSIS• The applicant for Change of Zone Case No. 5552 requests approval of a change of zone from R-1 (One Family Dwelling) to N-A (Natural Assets) on 290 acres. The site is located easterly of Highway 74, southerly of the City of Palm Desert . The applicant concurrently filed Plot Plan No. 11393 for a noncommercial menagerie and accessory caretakers and research buildings. The site is predominately vacant with natural mountainous vegetation, sheep pens, and a caretakers mobilehome. Immediately west of the site is a large residence where the headquarters of the Bighorn Institute (BHI ) currently exist. The BHI began operations of the 290 acre site in 1985 through a lease by the United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM) . In February 1989, the LM granted a patent to the BHI for the 290 acre site. The BHI -originated in order to breed and study the rare Peninsular Bighorn Sheep. There are approximately 50 sheep in this area, the north end of the Santa Rosa Mountains, of which 23 have been released into the wild by the BHI . r'LOT PLAN NO. 11393 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 Staff Report ' Page 2 } Plot Plan No. 11393 proposes a 6,800 square foot disease laboratory/ administration building , a 2,H00 square foot residential structure with four bedrooms and common kitchen/living facilities, and accessory grain and maintenance structures. The plot plan also includes provisions for a seven acre pen and a 30 acre pen which will house the current stock of 19 lambs and sheep , a figure which usually ranges between 15 and 25. Surrounding land uses are vacant and mountainous with scattered mountain cottages. Immediately northerly and northwesterly of the rt, is a large 675 acre site on which site, within the City of Palm Dese a conceptual specific plan (Bella Vista) has been approved for 350 acres of open space, loon low density dwellings on approximately acres, and a 13 acre hotel site with amenities. Farther northeasterly of the site along Portola Avenue is the Living Desert Reserve, a zoo environment for the viewing and showing of desert animals and vegetation. The Living Desert Reserve assisted in the commencement of the BHI in 1985. The Living Desert has a small population of Peninsula Bighorn Sheep for public viewing but is unable to conduct breeding procedures because such a process needs isolation. The two facilities are different but yet compliment each other due to their caring for and research of the Bighorn Sheep. RN V IRONMENTAL AS5952WNT: The Initial Study performed pursuant to Environmental Assessment No. 34143 identified environmental concerns associated with project development as including: Slopes Wildlife Scenic Highway Public Facilities Cultural Resources Circulation The initial study (a copy of which is attached) determined that approval of the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment . All environmental impacts would be clearly mitigated to a level of insignificance. A monitoring program was incorporated `/ into the initial study. -s._'t-�•e:�:�a'a.,.-.E:.:tri_.:t ,wt.W:v:a::a8:sa,.is.i+.-:+?.u.uya...�v_n�v. -..r�..u_....:.. .'.. �..:,•r:,.��a�w.a .�_..:.:....r...�ea.•:.�>.�.:..a.w...,.....s ate.: PLOT PLAN NO. 11393 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 Staff Report Page 3 61ENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY: The site is designated "Wildlife/Vegetation" on the Western Coachella Valley Plan (WCVP) . The Open Space and Conservation Policies of the Comprehensive General Plan specify that areas that are mapped "Wildlife/Vegetation" on the open space map are for the conservation of critical wildlife and vegetation. The policies also specify that only the following uses are permitted in wildlife/vegetation designations: open space, limited recreation, and research or educational uses. The applicant ' s intention to use the land for research and educational uses for the nurturing and breeding of the state rare Peninsular Bighorn Sheep is compatible with the "Wildlife/Vegetation" designation and the open space policy requiring careful control and management of the utilization of natural resources including wildlife. The Open Space and Conservation policies also specify that open space designated parcels shall be appropriately zoned. The proposed N-A zone has been applied within the Coachella Valley Preserve, for the threatened CN, Coachella Valley Fringe-toed Lizard, and in other wildlife/vegetation designated areas within the Western Coachella Valley Plan. DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN THE R-1 AND N-A ZONES: The existing R-1 zone primarily permits one-family dwellings and requires a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. The R-1 zone allows growing of field crops and tree crops along with such recreational facilities as golf courses, country clubs, and public parks and playgrounds. Planned residential developments are permitted through the land division process. Plot plan approval is required for beauty shops, horticultural nurseries, kennels and catteries, and temporary real estates offices, while mobilehome parks require a conditional use permit. The proposed N-A zone also permits one-family dwellings, field and tree crops, apiaries, and grazing of cattle, horses, sheep or goats not exceeding two animals per acre. Subject to plot plan approval the following uses are permitted: public utility substations, museums, menageries, water wells, and agricultural worker mobilehomes. Fishing lakes, golf courses, riding academies, well water extraction, mining, RV and mobilehome parks, and resort hotels are all permitted uses subject to the granting of a conditional use permit. The applicant proposes a noncommercial menagerie for Peninsular Bighorn Sheep, a herd which in the past five years has not exceeded 25 sheep. Since the BHI ' s origination, . approximately 50 percent of the current stock of - ' sheep located in this area of the Santa Rosa Mountains have been released from the BHI ; had these sheep not been released the stock would be next to extinction. :.c'v.f.}a�::r.:, ac:isru........-w..e.�s.+�:�._.u......arc....._e���...�__.>.�.��....�...-c._..._..:a.a._;..,1....,�.c�..r:�._. �.�.....�...a..ar...w.vr_:.n._...us.xty7'1..:';.......... i 1 PLOT PLAN N0. 11393 i CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 i Staff Report I Page 4 PLOT PLAN CONSIDERATIONS: The applicant is proposing a noncommercial menagerie that for the most part is a veterinary hospital and research center for sheep. The following are a list of uses that staff is recommending approval of pursuant to Plot Plan No. 11393 and a list of future uses that would require additional permits: RECOMMENDED FUTURE Disease laboratory/ Future Museum Administration Building Concrete Helicopter Pad Existing ,Pens Future Site New Residence Guard House Grain Storage Car Storage 23 parking spaces The applicant submitted the change of zone and plot plan on July 28, 1989 and the cases were expedited to hearing due to the need for approval and construction of the facility before winter. The noncommercial menagerie proposed by the applicant is not open to the public , however, on occasion an educational class will field trip to the BHI : The BHI according to the applicant has long range plans to include a museum and education center in the future which will be open to the public. These uses would require additional permits prior to construction. The proposed project is not expected to generate traffic , it is however subject to the TUMF fee as adopted by the Board of Supervisors in January, 1989. CITY SPHERE OF INFLUENCE: The site is within the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert . The city staff participated in the review of the project plan. The city responded with "No Comment" on a transmittal dated August 3, 1989. The staff of the City of Rancho Mirage also reviewed the project and their comments are attached in a transmittal dated August 8, 1989. .:a/ita,v:'3e.S.:r.�:a:v±�-_�'..a..:a.r'.�,:.u:::.r.�..�.w4y.s.:.e:.�ts�....'�.r,L.�+.uux.':.... _. ....ud..�..zs:�.a....:::n.�.:+j:��: .. . . ._. . .. __ -..a�_ai,✓...a...t=a: ? PLOT PLAN NO. 11393 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 Staff Report Page 5 FINDINGS• 1 . The applicant requests approval of a change of zone from R-1 to N-A on 290 acres located easterly of Highway 74. 2. The applicant concurrently filed Plot Plan No . 11393 which is an application for a noncommercial menagerie and accessory caretakers and research buildings. 3. The applicant, The Bighorn Institute (BHI ) , has been in existence since 19e5 and has recently received a patent for the 290 acre site from the U. S. Bureau of Land Management . 4. Surrounding parcels are zoned R-1 , N-A; and PR-5 within the City of Palm Desert. 5. Surrounding land uses are predominately vacant with mountainous vegetation, and scattered mountain cottages. 6. The findings of Environmental Assessment No. 34143 (a copy of which is attached) are incorporated herein by reference. 7. The Western Coachella Valley Plan designates the site "Wildlife/Vegetation. " B. The Open Space and Conservation Policies of the Comprehensive General Plan specify that research and educational uses are permitted in the "Wildlife/Vegetation" designation. 9. The Comprehensive General Plan lists the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep as a "Rare" species. 10. The BHI has been responsible for increasing the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep herd at the north end of the Santa Rosa Mountains by approximately 50 percent. 11 . The site is within the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. '4J 1v'a_..L l\v.rurwu..�. we.�.u�a ..�c .. -'.u.w�Y1.iee..v' - .e..�..ua.0 3r ara .� ur r.� . i.r - - u�v u•�......�._.....n... PLOT PLAN NO. 11393 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5552 Staff Report Page 6 RECOMMENDATION: ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 34143. The planning Department has found that approval of the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and has completed a Negative Declaration; ANDS APPROVAL of Change of Zone Case No. 5552 from R-1 to N-A in accordance with Exhibit 2, based on the above findings and the following conclusions: AND: APPROVAL of Plot Plan No. 11393 subject to the attached conditions, based on the findings listed above, and on the following conclusions: 1 . The project is consistent with all the elements of the Comprehensive General Plan and the Western Coachella Valley Plan. 1' 2. The project ' s overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, -safety and welfare. 3. The project will conform to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future uses of the surrounding property. LAM:csa I 8/31/89 t l 4 Li 1 CZ 5552 LAND USE t v CITY OF <; r PALM DESERT • y . J: J. • yl: • Z. 74 l : : }: y �O 12 _ y 1 OJa�P`� .4P PN� G AOD• BIGHORN INSTITUTE ;LOCATONAL MAP RANCHO Use NONCOMMERCIAL sAENAGERY Dist. CC ANO PO SW�L 4 MIRAGE M Sec. 6 T. 6 S..R.6E. Assess or's Sk.771 P9. 040 vALM INDIAN Circulation HIGHWAY 74 - ARTERIAL 110' DESERT! WELLS EkffwW e '-�_N Rd. Sk. Pg. 113 Date 6-21-89 Drawn 9y ROS Lz20004 AnTRWE COlfi WY P AMVAMG DEPARTAAWr .%ii^.,9. i�aa.�".:'rc�:'L�t.•.i.eY�i�i`s-uw.:.a:.c.'.u .fe:..bii.�.�.reu::us...�.•:..i_�_a�' - - Sri i.::J.: .-tia:..•.>.i.'.� CZ 5552 PROPOSED ZONING 2 $f R-1-12000� o CITY OF P.R:6 P.o. .:.i = a' PA M DESERT . `! GQ i P.R-7 P.R.-7 . . 0' 00 G' R-1 20,000 4 O.S. e P.R.1,0 N.P.R„D - u J P.R-$ yl. 3: Z: n ' �2= �: N-A o. R-1 I , , 12 — N�� N A AVD• BIGHORN . INSTITUTE LOCATIONAL MAP f RANCNO } Use NONCOMMERCIAL t,IENAGERY Dist. CC AND P O Sup Dist 4 MIRAGE N Sec. 6 T.6 S..R.6 E. AM M'S 8k.7 71 Pip. 040 — 1PAIM i Ci►CUICtWn HIGHWAY 74 - ARTERIAL I10' ER l.WELLSI INDIAN Et�m4nt e . Rd. Bk. Pg. 113 Date 8-21-89 Drawn By ROS .... j ��. I"■ 2 0 0 0' RN£RSYDIE cowry AAMbm DEPARTMENT .eaed I'?�:v �••,, ... . y�i:...L:av`. �L n...e:;3�rnsyc.,.s�u`� v.9. .ya�.+f.ueCvla+.lL.a—r s ... CITY OF • = PALM DESERT 7I � t AO AI i 3 A a: J: J 3 Z: . .. . ..<. .. .•. ..: D z� MOUNTAINOUS AREAS o r7 U: a 12 �o MOUNTAINOUS AREAS WATIQNAL MA► ADD• BIGHORN INSTITUTE RANCHO Use NONCOMMERCIAL MENAGERY MIRAGE Dist. CC A N O P D Sup.Dist 4 _ ler Sec. 6 T. 6 S..R.6 E. AesagW's ek.7 71 ft 040 INDIAN NCirculation HIGHWAY 74 - ARTERIAL e DESERTS WELLS C_ Elon"nt N_3 ... Rd. 8k. Pg. 113 Data 8-21-89 Drawn 8r RDS r 602 0 00, RATfiwei coeovTY a AAwm DEPARTmwr HILLSIDE STUDY REPORT HIGHMY 74 COUNTRY CLUB HILLSIDE ZONE Job No. H15-1-15 September 1989 PREPARED FOR: I. HAROLD HOUSLEY, P.E. , PRESIDENT, HOUSLEY ASSOCIATES, INC. PREPARED BY: WILLIAM ENOS, P.E. THERESA HOUSLEY, C.E. TECHNICIAN I I INTRODUCTION Mr. Ray Diaz, Director of community Development, informed Mr. John Hayhoe, our client at a meeting held on September 12, 1989, that a Hillside Study was required on the portion of the Highway 74 Project that was within the designated "Hillside Zone" as stated in the Palm Desert Zoning ordnance. To conform with the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance, Mr Hayhoe authorized Housley Associates to perform the Hillside Study of the proposed development within the Hillside Planned Residential District. Method of Analysis The procedure outlined in the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance, Section 25.15.030, was used to determine the number of dwelling units permitted on the hillside parcel. Three options from the Zoning Ordinance were used to conduct the study: 1. Option No. 1 — Parcel Average Slope Method 2. Option No. 2 — Toe of Slope 3. Option No. 3 — Dwelling Unit Building Site The fourth option described in the Zoning Ordinance does not apply to this project according the City's staff. Aerial topography at a scale of 1"=100' was used to evaluate the slopes in this study. A plan measure wheel was used to measure contour lengths and a planimeter was used to calculate areas. RESULTS OF STUDY The results of the Hillside Study are shown on the attached Figure 1. Option 1 Option 1 calculates an Average Slope "S" over the area of the entire parcel of 26%, and using this slope, specifies 1.66 acres per dwelling unit density and requires 77.5% of the lot areas to remain 'in a natural state. This option allows a Maximum Total Number of 39 Dwelling Units on the entire 64 acre parcel. option 2 option 2 allows a density of 3 dwelling units per acre for areas that are adjacent to the valley floor (toe of slope) which have a average slope "S" less than 10%. Two Cases are investigated using option 2. Case 1 assumes that no changes are made to the Golf Course alignment shown on the current land plan. outside of the Golf Course boundaries there are 13.56 acres that meet the requirements to be developed at a density of 3 units per acre; thus yielding a total number of 41 units that can be located in the toe of slope area. Case 2 assumes that the land plan is changed so that the Golf Course is not placed within the designated Hillside Zone and that the hillside area is developed with the maximum number of units possible. Based on this assumption, there are 23.8 acres that qualify to be developed at 3 units per acre yielding a total number of 71 units. option 3 option 3 deals with specific dwelling unit sites whose slopes are twenty percent or less and are not adjacent to the valley floor, if the following criteria is met: 1. Minimum area of one--half acre 2. Minimum dimension of one hundred feet 3. Maximum of overall density of one dwelling unit per acre. Evaluating the same Case 1 as described earlier (Golf Course unchanged) , there are 15.2 acres. in the parcel that have a slope "S" less than 20% as described in this option; however, the overall area of 22.0 acres controls (Criteria No. 3) and permits 22 units. Case 2 (Golf Course removed) contains 17.8 acres of property with 'IS" less than 20% and the overall area is 40.4 acres. Thirty--six (36) units are permitted on this portion of the parcel. SOMMARY AND CONCULSIONS option 1 is very restrictive on development density on this parcel probably due to the averaging of the very steep slopes with the mild slopes. It is believed that a more representative and useable average slope S can be obtained if areas are isolated and categorized. Combining options 2 and 3 separates the slopes into categories and allows different densities accordingly. Adding the results of options 2 and 3 for Case 1 gives the recommended mazi=ml mamba= of dwelling units for the hillside parcel area of 63 units. Adding the sum of options 2 and 3 for Case 2 gives the recommended maximum number of dwelling units for the hillside parcel area of 107 units, however, since the golf course would have to be redesigned this is probably not acceptable. It is recommended that the dwelling units be located on the areas delineated in Figure 2 at the appropriate density. The intention of the Hillside Planned Residential District Zone is, as stated by the City ordinance, "to encourage only minimal grading in hillside areas that relates to the natural contours of the land and will not result in extensive cut and fill..." Care should be taken in locating lots and street layout in order to meet these objectives. It is emphasized that this analysis is a result of our interpretation of the city's Hillside Planned Residential District Zone. The City's representatives may not agree with our interpretation of the ordinance. Therefore, we recommend you consider meeting with the City's planning staff prior to submittal of the development plans for processing. t HILLSIDE STUDY RESULTS HIGHWAY 74 PI?OTECT OPTION I „ S „ _ 26 % MIN. ACRE S/OWELLIAX UNIT= /.66 MW NO. UNITS = 39 MAX. IVO. DWELLING UNITS- 39 % OF LOT LEFT UIVGRAXD _ 77.51 HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT OPTION 2 SIDS. SEC. 25.15.030 CASE I ; LEAVE GOLF COURSE AS IS. TOE OF SLOPE AREA = I3.6 K. CITY OF PALM DESERT. *MAX. 0. DWELLING UNITS= ''/ MAY N0, G>1�ITS CASE 2 ; REMOVE GOLF COURSE FRaAHILLSIDE TOE OF SLGPE AREA - 23.8 AC. EASE I 6? 1:MAX. NO. DWELLING UNITS -71 CASE 2 = /07 OPT/OIV 3 CASE I LE4VEGOLF COURSE AS IS MAX, M. DWELLING UNITS ABDUE TdEGFSUPC = 22 CASE 2 : REMOVE GCLF COURSE FPCM HILLSIDE MAX. N0. UWELLING 61NlTSMOVE TOE OF SLOPC= 3(0 MAY RELIUIRE RELOCATION OF PROP05EO 0TER 79/M' FIGURE 1 n� -a ^ � • f ♦{ -a 1, V1 ly�1r •- M1�•1.Sa ��r "»• V�'� 1••;� :���\�_' _ +. :'•, a• �-•t f i. � ^M1 L�i i,f 1- ei!aC�_� .ry i 1 - r-'..�a%�;..y ) ' �+:•� .+.. ' �""? s. !•,� . . ..�.1 r •sa, .5 }• ia_ `, a .ti2L {.�1 �.1,�ti..y,♦'� yl..�+•.wrlr•' \`�'�� a. _ a.':f t {a •C -'Ri+,t>:;v t�' c•�.. to �-. i.+ a' P •5' n .,}., :.i\'., a ♦ :F'•. ,p5. '..�'-.,a1 -s'. ,.�. .f.M1 . .a..i i_- a.r+ tr• !'J;•i'{rr�• 7♦'•ti._ r.., .r.ai :r, .•5," r}> S'� ?a `;;]T�•.rj .a..r_ •I w� -l. h•a' •. .•~a}• •2' Ja T't.�• `<•-••- 5 _ 'L . J.' .Z..SSs i .:w' W__.• `t �t ' .: k.5'.� :, i :y:�,r _..[-£'.r'#:Y ..�.��. ,j'\�kl• . ••�i -v' .4 • ^.�.`.Va��.=iii}��.t^• i`��.�< - � e° f:..• '��•ad:../�j ..%r;.d'1.;4^#`4::'�70... ; y`p's, j _ , ra to fit + 5• .•'•- C•.,' a' ., o:,';+•- '\.. •:«.ice:. � . . ' {{ r'�,'_ � =�, 'Sr...�:...• >: , n:.: ''Tdt•M1-- :. •,• 5 [.`.1.. 1J J: vM1 'M1J i_ 'i "ii.l ,. ��-. :y j.w..\.`L +•�;�+n r'�: 5.. � q,:Ta�S' '_ .;:T({� ' \'t••?-a. :'a -�F.' :i : �25:�;�- ".� "- • > •F..'^•�{.�-91��'s -.t.�:�' .:rY, ttt♦ ��>.�. .�..:2.i=2;� rYlt•z .a.. ;5. ';• r �,♦:. a- . i;�t^��'•a. 'w :.4 t. ?'R:L. [. J�a� r'L�ajl,.��; 'r i.. -�. ••.�:5.�::;>, r... y;,r,. 'ri�.Y��a. lli-. ,t�L:'-[�,:�.r:�;--;5:?2''�t�Y._•• ,�•�)!_ :^ti•�`SyT��y�5�.7, :r . `-'!*y.y}�y>,:� ;�5:�.� ••,ty;-:1 Er'h-'�,�.�.;,... :. ' -�',�T<.. :'J �. �� - `s ;i:.'y`��7'= sc... •r>` yr ".♦ 'w• •�a1'•., r y' .f I., a +A'S'e�'+_��t•. `'�y�a t.' (-J- :xY'r=: sa....� - r ♦ ) S' Y 1 �:+laa a':aa � 4.'- ..•J L {..) •':� r �..y. .: •• Y s% �.' �',,.ifP ^ tt;r�._• r.• •.'sCr.- 4j y1l t,_�7 G . ;�5♦ppf rsi ;., v�r . , ``_".'La\Ls )'C.- \^wrt� .t\.p ajt •-. t{_R�7rfY.' • tc4 s>.;c� S. �, l " s : '` .+.axiT.� ; s t is 'r -r s •.. .. r c,,5•ate Y •a•5�1 l.i.�+„ ` 1 •�j1!?'^�. aj?•Kry'� ��.'fraw F.•�<.�:.R.y3.Z•'�'a:...,4+'a".'_ C+-r h��,� ��M,� sS"� S f ����1c'�''• f i r:. . ' ti'�" ,j•: •- �iy�, t.N•`t�Sr%•ly~•V. ��.�t�•�>��t-�±��• . .•, w� ��,'f� rS:<�' � r' '[r�� � !. � � ''ip ,s3�f (Y err: �'��r�sebC!L V t ..a /•d� r lip+y f7•�+S � yM1 -# x z`Cf--t, L�� �Sr� �1♦r.y ��' C r����p� �L .� s.�' „i ,.� fir` � a,,.. t .�Ar-'F 'a ��L <1f; •'.. :r!'4 r l sZ ~ S�•�� .x •e .j. a_�C' L rf trtcaq/%; j`'w ,LS.Y' Cy >ti 7l l�.f,}�;A - :. 1a��L J.- NM1,• lG• 'Y �. .<•� �f.j►'� Si^�i �C�w.` .: �" i1•+SG`�>.�5x:1" .���. a � M7f� i .t :a ti• CIA _L]s y<� y�.T,,'�• • � i •:' Y >.�� �•1}�'{way� i:•t�." i 1`.' r :.7s :��"�!=��.,• 1 �,�. '�r_ 1,ra t R� ���,' `. _ �n. �y '?t•.:� 4=;q�7CTTT��1� 'Y_ `'.t � -•� '� � � r� a.'rlv��rrf'ttyS� e>. .1.� Ta ••�bq,�F .f � . L.. {7 .N. ! yJ ,'(SL'4.Y'�.ie4j •• t++rr+....:aiy.,r�1(4 "Pug' -4v t5 3�• ' "`"�*•'<-•.. '0>4 p�'�C .:{•F 4 r.rt n• P 5 •11 -+~- '' 1.�Y,•rysYji>ti.� . •-' ^ aC. ng r. � d \Y '�'.7.•i''Z., ♦.,sa %••\' .. ^+fwu Sri [} x'i - Y '. '� r� Ilan A.•- �� T1 >�RN f•'�Ly�' ''��.I1_ .L�"4' � r•.}1 1 4 ys; L' 7• . r`,. ' /1 1'1-> �r�t 1 � � lF �3:[' '_ L V`i ...•a 55��. a� i. tr i .,,J G;ji'� - •.ai ,:,' d a..� �'r ':CaT bc. �51r'���YyLr`r+�yy". t 3 .)��1 `+ J^J. .(i'ay;♦. r�3 •y�.:, ' ' h ^'r•rt r`5+. Z r AM, •��t,7� `� a�� 4 ♦ -f . -.iL k!��=, :c' 'y� �n 4. s.. - j'i.t 9 1�•Hyw,�+-r _ K. 5 t- h� [ .�F Fa M1-u �a �M. ;�1•>j � �V ��'y�Y[`• y. �Gl� ram. ! L F .t .. 3a'-' ��P•�Y. r � �,J:. { l • k NtL �Zn^.,- ;Y.Z-i_� �' {• � 'Z 'x7 i f. P •r- l7iJ Y0r••s,'}` YL S� a r:+tt`�j 1 � 4 vt i.11 r -�•[ �• ' `}}� '�•?ir fit. � + , y ,w. y.� .:'w_-i., ts... of N•♦ riY' t" '_- -, L i N � Ji• �t ?'� L:+Xfir "� 'rtd-� i•I J 'oil ' 1r::'.. rj•ati..�.'` ."!i✓ KSf+ iff i' .74'� ,. yr+9�►i:Ott r. 'i.>P ,.1 - 1{ G. '��• ,'`t 1 r� � ti 'fi.L . a d �{f., ��' - rY"t4�1 [ "�t,�. 'tls �:I '_ • '¢ ,�^jam r�"si{'- t•,(. '�, h +rCtk �l] _ 5''t y`f�'�=f� '•4<�.1�re��`.•1� L�6�.. . a( ��4f {�,4t�,.,w+4�� r '• •�� 5 1�'< � F}�K}slfr�dl F, ybt.�A � 513�,1.� . 'pr- �'Y"' - .���• .F` T i -e �v�4r�r�V�)n'31!'L�>r�-a., s.li•i �K•r•1 L .4 .' .4 j, + : t"y r t t M1i �.rSs T.Hs�i' <.t�,.�_Stl�-1ea�t.+i_ >+J'"'J 3�� i :+A-:�h .- .ar •"VyJr'�'. ,'� -� " {ter .�' •� < �, TY-1`J = a��••'r 7!�3 �_. BI�.:f�_�C ,'. LvSYf-y. f. 5 IA. '�� - �,` T •O J• S- . •� I{. _ _� `t`�•tF.L�„e. ?.fir -Y -,•( '-fK,�/'i 11•'•a$rfLw,, ( ♦ ��. �• ' '.'�'• .ya'n X :4. i• - .i -""Jia. �^ i. a!�•. ♦ 4• .. �'_Q" aT� 1n r T' �� .w•r :tr -K��"1 a'„��o'�'-i•4 ..+5��.55.�� <�'�� }��:*� _h' .P. L•.iy„��i1T, ry� ,s [?'-•(��'a Ok •(�"F(•riy yrS. .�A'^ .i 1 4 `�.. . s�. '7a ) ��.s�_k�,.-J-r,:f�%. :r !�1'+,r.�.'-1'.'.\•.yi ��l '"�^. as r �� ':r "'y., �� ��?i...:'1 .4,34i_ �....�• �+R: .<�;� .;�j..,.:<'' �<! i.[, f:Ti. �YI� syi� 1_�`'•''V3- •h `, •"r'9T=a'S J:-�f...f.Y,.l 4'. 'i �,-�. v S ram,. A f!'i .A' t �. Y': '`• .ia r. . �. i ,..:t�e-• T. r � �i,ayy,��,�. L• ` � � �r. a i C._ � J -•� :._ �� •+•r R.�. j ��.•�,'�\'vr5- .{� •' ��'J,..L � .�,.y �Y. .3Y� rl� '''� •il•..fA• f._ � aY•V Y,n I Ty..r �s� �� J Rom:'-3 a ,tw ! j i-�1 ,y�.�'� f5,`.rL;} .. � I 1 �Fi�lA�yy}�'1r�[rS, t?•a\' Y s O r'c- �''� ):5� • �. - e: 'ti [t�1jL-`�♦•i Z.Asµ f' ,{� n,w �` * •' _s� 15r• � �T{ t' -��•�"'n ai i5 t6 ,r a:�w1 LR°`', � i - _ :.� .,q +5 ((M1P1;a ,yt•*�•.•���i.a+r• �j��'T ;[ � _ tZ'fn"a' fi 3tL�$ �-L, '`6'!!'. �i> • irY...I rj -� k• y ti���-,��r' S: ce 'S{{-jam:., +��\ "y`r.a'V ��rtt:�• ��:�.. �' r' � �r ��._ • of t•rr � "•C 5s*. �a�- tom:.�\� y-�<•F�'��•:•ri�: �'�i1C'. , .'� �L ."•• t{ES It - � .. _ Ms wh .i`a�.'. � 7n .t(Jaw. •FwtM1w¢X�'. bryzxf ` ,r, '.r.; �i •aJ ,ar `rr t ta•Rarl" ji+•� - � f r�r..��1'' ��• ��0 4V'�f�u,�:t•r•,. .. r'iy .+'w �`���i'.�1 a.!'�Tf`'\ r �.IF �(.ri='Pr,.. � n . ; µF Jw r ��'f•.n� yL' }�.(Yr1 "v ^•' r •-5 •� �. �..: .f S'.r � r��li.0�J�.`!`5. a+a,{. l' :r i ya r 7 _a� rpm �.'� 1111....�-�(�jyn3?"�'.�*SZ�� •#y.-r`t,+a�F' ' 'yea.:.: :' =i.:t=fr-..11'i'� Sf'�. !'f `'_rr �>•.�Fyy :.a ..T -r. G•r` !'C- �: : �h':�?y��47 �.i]•. •fi •,q;ah::: •:r .. . ., _ � _.. <.,J: ryl.�'. .. . ./"S4 rrir i\♦\'.:J. r..�,iti-:a•:.: -4 r1.'i�'�•�•. _ - ..�,. w', .ia' t _ ^.. w;.1. g2 4 )•+,a t/,..�,.JIL. _ �:.•!_s- rt,. ♦- r: �. ''y'i:�_'•- 'Si•�• iIL.. `y-t•.- :fn•;:r...a:.:. •. .c�F;F.'�rtil, �f'�. F::i.�•:+y. j.i{:iR'i..V'i..;d-c'�afT`v: gµ1fORNq FIRERIVER EPPARTMENT pE.SIDE COUNTY F16114T Of%E PROTECp,4 r IN COOPERATION WITH THEr• `6( CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY ' r nfi UNT Y ' C 7 "� ,h AND FIRE PROTECTION� RSID p aJJs' RIVEE , aivjqJ,pNEw7, AU �a1� ,F ��E_C�I F� -�+• 10 1989 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE C04WUftl0Y DEVELON.ENT DEPAO-WIEI'T 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE COVE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU CITY OF PALM DESERT PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370 44.900 ELDORADO DRIVE TELEPHONE: (714) 657.3183 INDIAN WELLS, CA 92210 October 10, 1989 To: Ray Diaz, Dir. Comm.Dev./Planning Attn;Phil Joy Re: . TT 25296, CZ89-16 Bighorn Ventures With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced =5296 , the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with Uniform Fire code and/or. recognized Fire Protection Standards: The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per Uniform Fire Code Sec. 10. 301C. Provide, or show there exists a water system capable of providing a potential fire flow of 3000 4pm for the commercial and assembly areas, 2500 gpm for the multifamily areas, 1500gpm for single family areas and the actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given water main shall be 1500 gpm for 2 hours duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure. A fire flow of 1500 gpm for a 2 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. RESIDENTIAL AREAS-The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant (s) (6" x 4" x 2-112" x 2-112" ) , located not less than 25' nor more than 165 ' from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. Hydrants installed below 3000 ' elevation shall be of the "wet barrel" type. COMMERCIAL/ASSEMBLY AREAS-A combination of on-site and off-site Super fire hydrants, (6" x 4" x 2-112" x 2-112" ) , will be required, located not less than 25 ' or more than 165 ' from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant (s) in the system. The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit process to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separations, or built-in fire protection measures. Prior to the application for a building permit, the developer shall furnish the original and two copies of the water system plan to the County Fire Department for revie,.. No building permit shal .-be issued until the water system plan has been approved by the County Fire Chief. Upon approval , the original will be returned. One copy will be sent to the responsible inspecting authority. Plans shall conform to fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed by a Registered Civil Engineer and may be signed by the local water company with the following certification: " I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department . " Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. All buildings shall be accessible by an all-weather roadway extending to within 150 ' of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story. The roadway shall be not less than 24 ' of unobstructed width and 13 ' 6" of vertical clearance. Where parallel parking is allowed, the roadway shall be 36 ' wide with parking on both sides, 32 ' wide with parking on one side. Dead-end roads in excess of 150 ' shall be provided with a minimum 45 ' radius turn-around (55 ' in industrial developments) . Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates, barriers, guard houses or similar means, provision shall be made to facilitate access by emergency vehicles in a manner approved by the Fire Department . All controlled access devices that are power operated shall have a radio-controlled over-ride system capable of opening the gate when activated by a special transmitter located in emergency vehicles. Devices shall be equipped with backup power facilities to operate in the event of power failure. All controlled access devices that are not power operated shall also be approved by the Fire Department . Minimum opening width shall be 12 ', with a minimum vertical clearance of 13 '6" . OTHER: Provide secondary access to project . Dead end streets in excess of 600ft . must be provided with alternate access (Alternative-Developer must agree to sprinkler all dwellings on all those streets that exceed 600 ft . ) . Street grades may not exceed 15%. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Fire Protection/Inspection Staff. Sincerely, GLEN NEWMAN Ranger in Charge County Fire Chief V�- By im Reeder ire Protection Specialist bbzn m 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92269 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO(S) : aS��1(o 1CZ 89 - I(o PROJECT: APPL I CANT: IUM�N Uts F E S Enclosed please find materials descrlb.ing a project for which the followin . being requested: A'�ro yq/ oc g Is 3(oa c� rMas/ccI�c� Ia1r am+p 5, 'Wividt"��C.reS Iv( CL q{ 54 v"� Co�h� ry , O 8 Ly Uhi'45 Oh SIC 11akyP �[' zoine 'her. a5 aCl-ef/ of gra�viR�e�.�, J 'r . alo � PPace Emil'-7ah0( Ne�h� i✓e .C�Ci/aYs�ioHS� t��S o� N A/� row �, �• A-• I`J G3!- I)p -013) lao vi0)) -oo4 �p0�,130-0ol,00a,o I r lso-oo3� 005; jbo_ool � op3.00s,00� �� 3 > The attached data was ' ) -�-C3A(9q,C07a,J O06 Prepared ty the applicant and Is .be Ing forwarded to you for countments and ,reconmended conditions of approval , Tfie city Is Interested In the probable i,(npacts on the environment ( including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, nolse, ob•ject5 of historical or aesthetic significance) and 'reconmended conditions of. approval based on your expertise and area of .concern. Your cornrnents and reco[ntnended conditions of approval must be recelved by this Office prior to 4:30 p.m. Q-( - —� 9 , I n order land division committee. ne land division conxnittee (comprised director to be discussed by the i of community development; city huiItJing. ofFi,c:.lal , city engineers fiore marshal and a representative of.. CVWD) I .1,1. ..discuss the comments and recommended conditions of approval and wlII forward them to the planning cOITmission through the staff report. Any Information received by this office after the receipt deadline will not be discussed by the land division committee. Sincerely, —PH IL- r RAMON A. DIAZ DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY• DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING /tm Attachments PLEASE RC111Rii MAP i1I111 COIVIr11rG ff I I I = i 1. 4 4-1 1 � I n s s It , t st �l . t , tl ��i - �i� ,i, (� iflll� 'ilii jiE ;t;tt. t t Itl,• Egli i -- MOUSLEYASSOCIATESJNC. �� �- t ..� WESTINGHOUSE DESERT COMMUNITIES, INC. 74-090 E1 Paseo, Suite 103 Palm Desert, CA 92260 (619) 341-1554 September 22, 1989 Mr. Ramon Diaz Planning Director City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: Bighorn Ventures Highway 74 Country Club Project Dear Mr. Diaz: Westinghouse Desert Communities, Inc. is planning development of a residential country club project adjacent to a portion of the south and west border of the property owned by Bighorn Ventures, on which a residential country club project is also being proposed. The specific property lines of the two respective properties is not currently a straight line, due to the fact that Westinghouse Desert Communities owns a 10 acre parcel that extends east into the property owned by Bighorn Ventures. I Westinghouse Desert Communities, Inc. has reached a tentative agreement with Bighorn Ventures, to re-align the existing property line via a property transfer and lot line adjustment. The specific process has not yet been completed but we anticipate it may be completed in the near future. Because Bighorn Ventures is submitting their project for consideration at this time, their development plan has been prepared based on the future location of the proposed property line. Please be advised that Westinghouse Desert Communities, Inc. acknowledges the preparation of the development plan to cover a portion of Westinghouse Desert Communities, Inc. property, and we have granted permission to Bighorn Ventures to submit such a development plan, based on our tentative agreement to re-align property lines. Mr. Ramon Diaz September 22, 1989 Page Two If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me. Sincerely, c Roy W R sey, Jr. Vice res dent RWR/clh plaLA DG� P 17 n�Rk� SUBDIVISION hlr .UPU 4UON BORN: departunsint ce gnwjr0n uoSntM0 36"gCSa a pUSuauoewg allnaodmaa Bighorn Ventures , A California Partnership Applicant (please print) P.O. Box 4378 340-4640 Mailing Aadrefs Indian Wells , CA Telephone' 92210 Gh' Stole Zlp-Cone REQUEST: (Desrtoe specific nature of approval requested). Approval of master Tentative map, conditional use permit and first phase tentative tract map for Country Club on Highway 74, South Palm Desert . PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: - Approximately 362 acres - currently undeveloped east of Highway 74, south of Portola . ;. ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. Several - See enclosed maps . EXISTING ZONING Varies - See existing Land Use designation and Zoning man Pn Tosed . Propeny Owner Authorft The undersigned states riot they are the owner(s) of the property described herein and hereby give a.Action for the fill "ll pplicotion. - James S . Ha hoe 9/14/89 Agrr Date eement aasolNnq me Gfy of Defect.af all Ilobllines relative to airy deed rMtrletlans. 1 DO By MY SIGNATURE ON THIS AGREEMENT, Absolve the City of Palm Desert of all liabilities at ropy be applicable to the regain. any sled restnc property described herein. James S . Hayhoe. 9/14/89 • Siq^btu • General Partner Date Apsfieoni s Signature Hayho Sl pnatu re 9/14/89 General Partner Oats (FOR STAFF USE ONLY) Environmental Status Accepted by, ❑ Ministerial Act E.A. No. ❑❑ Categorical Esi Negatie Declaration CASE Had ❑ Other R•Hrence Case No. •^.._�--.w..�umrcor era r-�r-sx — �,__ BIGHORN VENTURES Listing of Project Represenatives and Consultants for Highway 74 Country Club in south Palm Desert DEVELOPER Bighorn Ventures , a California Limited Partnership Jim Hayhoe, General Partner P.O. Box 4378 Indian Wells , Calif . 92210 Tel : 619-340-4640 DEVELOPER John Hayhoe REPRESENTATIVE 75-451 Desert Park Dr. Indian Wells, Calif . 92210 Tel : 619-340-0850 CIVIL ENGINEER Housley Associates Harold Housley 45-175 Panorama Dr. Suite F Palm Desert, Calif . 92260 Tel : 619-340-4569 GOLF COURSE Ted Robinson ARCHITECT 352 Third St . Suite 301 Laguna Beach, Calif . 92651 Tel : 714-497-5501 LAND PLANNER John Chapman Land Planning John Chapman 4 Corporate Plaza Suite 202 Newport Beach, Calif . 92660 Tel : 714-644-6921 ARCHITECT Pekarek - Crandell Phil Pekarek 23672 Birtcher Dr. El Toro, Calif . 92630 Tel : 714-837-9050 LANDSCAPE Ronald Gregory Associates ARCHITECT Ron Gregory 73-960 Highway 111 Suite 2 Palm Desert , Calif . 92260 Tel : 619-568-3624 SOILS ENGINEER Buena Engineers Norm Jackson, Jr. 79-811 Country Club Dr. Bermuda Dunes, Calif . 92201 JIM HAYHOE DEVELOPMENT INC. M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mr. Phil Joy FROM: John Hayhoe DATE: September 22 , 1989 RE: Bighorn Ventures Highway 74 Country Club Project Application Supplemental Information Requirements Pursuant to supplemental information requirements for the application package for the above referenced project, I am submitting this memorandum to summarize our specific submittal of this information, and to offer a written statement of explanation for those items which do not have specific submittal documents. Subdivision Development Plan ---------------------------- 1. We are submitting 12 copies of Master Tentative Map #25296 which represents the project master site plan and development plan. This map has been prepared in accordance with city requirements Subdivision Building Plans -------------------------- 1 . We are submitting 10 copies of the conceptual design plan and elevation for the Highway 74 entrance gate. 2 . We are submitting 10 copies of the conceptual design elevation for the Clubhouse facility. 3 . We are submitting 10 copies of three conceptual residential elevations for the project. These conceptual designs are intended to reflect the proposed architectual style of the project . Stormwater Control Method ------------------------- 1. We have included conceptual drainage and grading as part of Master Tentative Map #25296. Please refer to that map for specific conceptual storm drainage design. P- O. BOX 4378, INDIAN WELLS, CALIFORNIA 92261 . (619) 340-6423 - Mr. Phil Joy September 22 , 1989 Page 2 Preliminary Soils Report ------------------------ 1. We are submitting a Soils Report prepared by Buena Engineers as part of the application package. Proposed Landscape Designs ------------------------- 1. We are submitting 10 copies of a proposed conceptual landscape plan for the parkway frontage along Highway 74 2 . We are submitting 10 copies of a typical elevation rendering of the conceptual landscape for the parkway frontage along Highway 74. 3 . We are submitting 10 copies of typical proposed landscape plans for residential areas within the project . Covenants, Conditions, & Restrictions ------------------------------------- We have not included a draft copy of the proposed C,C&R's for the project as that document has not yet been prepared. We will be submitting the document at such time as it is completed. Sewage Disposal Method ---------------------- The project will be connected to the sanitary sewage disposal system owned and operated by the Coachella valley Water District (CVWD) . A sewer main connection stub exists at the northeast corner of the project property which is of sufficient size to accomodate the entire project development . This information can be confirmed with the CVWD. Private Street Maintenance -------------------------- Maintenance of streets, landscaping, and other common improvement within the project will be accomplished by the Homeowners Association that will be established in conjunction with the opening of the project . Homeowners Association budgets and dues will be prepared so that regular maintenance and necessary maintenance reserves are funded. CASE NO., Environmental Assessment Form TO THE APPLICANT: Your cooperation in completing this form and supplying the information requested will expedite City review of your application pursuant to the. California Environmental Quality Act. The City is required to make an environmental assessment on all projects which it exercises discretionary approval over. Applications submitted will not be considered complete until all information necessary to make the environmental assessment is complete. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1 . Name, address, and telephone number of owner, applicant or project sponsor: Biahorn Ventures c/o Jim Hayhoe Develoblment Inc . P.O. Box 4378 Indian Wells CA 92210 619-340-4640. 2. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted con- cerning the project (such as architect, engineer, or other repre- sentative) : John Hayhoe , P .D. Box 4378 Indian Wells CA 92210 619-340-0850. 3. Common name of project (if any): Not named as of yet . 4. Project location (street address or general location) : East side of Highway 74 south of Portola S. Precise legal description of property (lot and tract number, or meets 8 bounds) : see legal description attached to this form. Exhibit A . 6. Proposed use of the site (project for which the form is filed; describe the total undertaking, not just the current application approval being sought) : Country Club development with 18 hole golf course and 484 total residential properties innl „Ain, d-upiexes detached patio homes , and custom homes . 7. Relationship a larger project or series of rojec-s (describe how this project relates to other activities , hzses , and davelop- ments planned, or now underway) : pro r rty is not related to an of har n F 8. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, to go fo rgard, including those required by the City, Regional , State and Federal agencies (indicate sub- sequent approval agency name, and type of approval required) : Tentative Tract Map(s) approval by City of Palm Desert . Master Plan approval by City of Palm Desert ,Grading Plan approval by City of Palm Desert . Conditional Use Permit auoroval by City of Palm Desert . EXISTING COi101TIOPIS 9. Project site area: e rAs . Size of property in sq. ft. or acreage) Varies : PR-1 , Varies : 10. Present zoning: PR-5 ,PR-7 .HPRD (Proposed zoning) :PR-1 consolidated/HPRT 11 . General Plan land use designation: Medium density. 5-7 DU/ACRE 12. Existing use of the project site: Undeveloped 13. Existing use on adjacent properties: (Example - North, Shopping Center; South, Single Family Dwellings; East, Vacant, etc. ). South - Bighorn Sheep Institute West - Undeveloped pronArty / Highway 74 North - Residential - Attached/Detached East - Undeveloped / Country Club Development ' 14. Site topography (describe): Generally flat with overall slight or.ade one outrropnina Of oast jd 15. Are there any natural or manmade drainage channels through or adjacent to the property? NO YES x 16. Grading (estimate number of cubic yards of dirt being moved) : 3 million C .Y. 17. List the number, size and type of trees being removed: r.PGG than , D, 18. Describe any cultural , historic, or scenic aspects of the project site: None in par ' �ular 19. Residential Project (if not residential do NOT answer) A. Num�er and type of dwelling units (Specify no. of bedrooms) : 484 Total Dwellings . Duplexes-3 bedroom. Patio Homes 3-4 bedrooms . Custom Homes 3-5 bedrooms . B. Schedule of unit sizes : Duplexes 2300sf - 2600sf; Patio Homes 3500sf - 5000; Custom Homes 3500 - 4500sf , C. Number of stories l Height 18 feet. * 0. Largest single building' (sq. ft. ) 5200sf (hgt. ) 18 - E. Type of household size expected (population projection for the project) : F. Describe the number and type of recreational facilities : G. Is there any night lighting of the project: street , Mailbox and T.andscane Iichtincr . H. Range of sales -prices or rents : $ 400 . ono to $ 2 non . 00n I. Percent of total project devoted to: Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . % Paving, including streets. . . . . . . . % Landscaping, Open, Recreation Area . . . . . % * Does not include Clubhouse building. (40, 000sf ) 20. Commercial , Industrial , Institutional or Other Project: A. Type of use(s) and major function(s) (if offices, specify type & number) : B. Number of square feet in total building area : C. Number of stories Height feet. 0. Largest single building (Sq. Ft. ) (Hgt. ) E. Number of square feet in outdoor storage area: F. Total number of required parking spaces , number provided G. Hours of operation: H. Maximum number of clients, patrons, shoppers, etc. , at one time: I. Maximum number of employees at one time: J. If patron seating is involved, state the number: K. Is there any night lighting of the project: Yes No L. Percent of total project devoted to: Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . % Paving, including streets. . . . . . . . . . N Landscaping and Open Space (Recreation). . . b Are the following items applicable to the project or its ef=ac_s : Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary) . YES NO 21 . Change in existing features of hillsides , or substantial alteration of ground contours. X See Attached 22. Change in the dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors Response in the project vicinity. X 23. Subject to or resulting in soil errosion by wind or flooding. See Attached 24. Change in ground water quality or quantity, or Response alteration of existing drainage patterns. X 25. Change in existing noise or vibration level in the vicinity. Subject to roadway or airport noise (has the required acoustical report been submitted?) y_ 26. Involves the use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives. y _ 27. Involves the use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy. _ 28. Changes the demand for municipal services (police, fire, sewage, etc. ) _ 29. Changes the demand for utility services , beyond those presently available or planned in the near future. 30. Significantly affects any unique or natural Attached features, including mature trees. y Response_ 31 . Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public land or public roads. X 32. Results in the dislocation of people. X YES r1l0 33. Generates controversy based on aesthetics or other features of the project. X [XX ] Additional explanation of "yes" answers attached. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above ana in the attached exhibits presant the data and information required for this initial evaluation, to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements and information presented are true and correct to the best of my,knowledge and belief. Bighorn Ventures Name Print nP Type For f�f tIAl ignature Date INITIAL STUDY FEE: $30. 00 (Make check payable to the City of Palm Desert and sub- mit with this form. ) RESPONSES 21 - The project includes development of some custom home lots in southeast corner of property which is currently a gentle slope hillside area . The lots will result in a very low density, high quality developed area , but it does change the current undeveloped area . The general topography of the developed project will be substantially the same as existing, however the specific contours will be modified to accomplish golf course grading and lot development grading. 23 - Existing conditions subject to some flooding and flooding erosion. Development activity will include storm drainage improvements to eliminate flood erosion on site . 29 - Developer will be responsible for development of domestic water supply to project site . CVWD will direct this effort . 7777- EXHIBIT A REVISED LEGAL nFsr.RIPTION PORTIONS OF SECTION 31 , TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH , RANGE 6 EAST, AND A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH , RANGE 6 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN , LOCATED IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED. AS FOLLOWS : BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 31; THENC048 ' 57" WEST NORTHEAST I40 . 59 CORNERFOFTSAIDNG THE SECTIONO6; LINE OF THENCE , SOUTH 00021 '02" EAST 2, 538 . 91 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 6 TO THE EAST QUARTER CORNER THEREOF; THENCE, SOUTH 89044 '32" WEST 2, 508 .48 FEET ALONG THE HID=SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 6; THENC FEET TO A NORTH LINETHOFOSAIDI6" EAST SECTION 6, 5ALSOB POINT BEING THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 31 : THENCE , SOUTH 89°48 '57" WEST 48 . 90 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 31 TO THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER THEREOF; THENCE , NORTH 88045 "24" WEST 1 ,450 . 92 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 31 TO IT 'S INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHEASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF STATE HIGHWAY 74 ; THENCE, NORTH 17"55 '43" EAST 2 , 786 . 89 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY TO A POINT ON THE MID-SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 31 ; THENCE , SOUTH 69046 ' 27" EAST 1 , 185 . 73 FEET ALONG SAID MID-SECTION LINE TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT NO, 5057 AS FILED IN BOOK 79 , PAGES 30 TO 35, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY; THENCE , NORTH 01"39 '46" WEST 664 . 02 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT NO . 5057 TO A CORNER OF TRACT NO . 13008 , AS FILED IN BOOK 106 , PAGES 24 TO 30 , RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY; THENCE , SOUTH 89049 * 09" EAST 669 . 96 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT NO. 13008; THENCE , SOUTH 01038 '06" EAST 664 . 54 FEET ALONG THE WEST BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT NO . 13008 TO A POINT ON SAID MID-SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 31 ; THENCE , SOUTH 89046 '27" EAST 631 .41 FEET ALONG SAID MID-SECTION LINE TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF TRACT NO . 20960 , AS FILED IN BOOK 155 , PAGES 60 TO 63, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY; THENCE , SOUTH 01°37 '41" EAST 666 . 72 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT NO . 20960 TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF , ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 3 , 1956 , AS INSTRUMENT NO . 68464 , OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY; LONG THE THENCE , INEST SAID47 . 28 FEET INSTRUMENTANO . 68464 ; , LINE OF THENCE , SOUTH O1°32 '06 EAST 363 . 62 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHCOACHELLA OVALLEY PROPERTY COUNTY DESCRIBED THE DEED DIISTRICTRECORDEDGRANTED THE APRIL 12 , 1956 , AS INSTRUMENT NO . 26163, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE , CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 3, 025 . 00 FEET, AND A RADIAL BEARING OF SOUTH O8044 * 36" WEST ; NOTE : THE FOLLOWING 3 COURSES ARE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 26163; THENCE , SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 422 . 50 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF O8"00'09" ; THENCE , - SOUTH FEET O THE TANGENT CURVE, S 0 T C0NCAVESOUTHEASTERLY7" EAST 7HAVINGA RADIUS GOFN3,02O5 . 00 FEET ; THENCE , SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 206 . 81 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 31 ; THENCE , SOUTH O1037 '43" EAST 1 , 310 . 62 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 31 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING . EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THE ORDER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO RECORDED FEBRUARY 21 , 1985 , AS INSTRUMENT NO . 35179 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY FOR TAX PARCEL NO . 631-160-004-1 . CONTAINING 351 .02 ACRES, MORE OR LESS . 1 l Bighorn Institute Dedicated to the conservation of the world's wild sheep through research and education HONOOFRUCHAIRMAN NDRAISING December 12 , 1989 Gerald R. Ford 381h President of the United States BOARD OF DIRECTORS Charles W Jamuu, DV.M.' President Mr . Phil Joy Richard C. McClung' Associate Planner Vice President Kent A. Roberts' City of Palm Desert Vice President 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Dave Stockton' Palm Desert, CA 92260 Vice President Peter E. Cyrog, DVM.' seeata,y Re: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Bob Howard' Report for Altamira (Bighorn Ventures) Project veasamr Eloise R. Agee Dear Mr . Joy: Cindy Austin' Wolfgang F. Baere Doug Bergen* Thank you for providing the Bighorn Institute an opportunity William Bone to comment on the preparation of the environmental impact Jack Brittingham report for the Altamira (Bighorn Ventures) project . As has Lawrence Cone, Johohnn E. Earhart been stated in previous communications with the City of Palm E. Ernest Hahn Desert , the Institute ' s main concerns involve the very close Robert McGowan location of the proposed Altamira development project to the Finn Moller Bighorn Institute ' s 30 acre bighorn pen enclosure . We feel Stan L.Timmins there would be a significant impact on the Institute ' s cap- •ExecudyeCouncil tive bighorn research herd due to the resulting stress from close and continuous exposure to human occupancy. The ADMINISTRATION Bighorn Institute is the only organization in North America James R. DeForge exclusively dedicated to bighorn sheep research. The Insti- Executive Director Research Biologist tute ' s conservation efforts have been concentrated in the Santa Rosa Mountains south of the Coachella Valley where the ADVISORS largest population of the Peninsular Desert Bighorn (Ovis Robert Presley canadensis cremnobates) exist . These animals have been cSenateCo Committee listed as "threatened" by the California Fish and Game Com- Member Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Wildlife mission since 1971 and are a category 2 candidate for listing Donald C. Bores as an endangered species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- Hunter.Conservationist Tony E. Castro, DV.M., Ph.D. vice . Without the success of the Institute ' s bighorn disease Virologist research, rehabilitation, and captive breeding program, the Cal Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory very existence of the Peninsular Desert Bighorn in the local Hirschi&Clark Legal Co..set northern Santa Rosa Mountains (north of Highway 74) would David A. Jessup, DVM. most certainly be in question. C.hkim a Dept. of Fish and Game Mark C. t State Park The Peninsular Desert Bighorn are a very unique art of the Anza-13o.reao Desert State Jorgensen 9 Y q P Glenn R. Stewart, Ph.D. Coachella Valley and our native heritage . The Bighorn Insti- Cal Poly University,Pomona tute was established as a private nonprofit organization in Raul Valdez, Ph.D. 1982 with our focus on a research, rescue, and recovery New MexMichael Valencia program to ensure the survival of the dwindling bighorn Michael Valencia Linton to Wild shee,Sudies population in the Santa Rosa Mountains . More than half of inm—lco the remaining 50 bighorn which roam the north end of the A Nonprofit Tax-Exempt Organization P.O. BOX 262 / PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92261-0262 / TELEPHONE (619) 346-7334 Santa Rosas today are animals which have either been rehabil- itated or born within the Institute facilities and released into the wild . With the conservation of the threatened Peninsular Desert Bighorn species in mind , we feel the focused environmental impact report for the Altamira project should provide rela- tive information and detailed investigations into the following concerns: 1 . The Institute ' s on-site bighorn research and conservation success has been largely dependent on the maintenance of as natural an environment for the captive herd as possible . Impacts of close and continuous exposure to human occupancy need to be thoroughly investigated . The introduction of variables resulting from the association of human occupancy would alter the stable secluded environment which the bighorn require . It is necessary to address the impacts on the successful rehabilitation of sick bighorn and production .of viable offspring within the Institute ' s facilities , particu- larly within the 30 acre pen enclosure which is located closest to the proposed development . Being within a confined area, the captive bighorn are already limited as to their flight distance available . Additionally, the ewes that are housed in the Institute ' s 30 acre pen would not be allowed the seclusion they require on their lambing grounds which are on the north and northeast facing slopes that directly over- look the proposed development . The potential resulting stress could result in lowered resistance to disease and bighorn health concerns along with the inability to success- fully produce viable offspring. 2 . The habituation of bighorn to human occupancy often results in the unsuccessful release of these animals to the wild . Possible impacts on the Institute ' s bighorn release program and the ultimate effect on the survival of the already dwindling population of threatened Peninsular Desert Bighorn must be addressed . 3 . Impacts of the close presence of domestic pets, e .g . dogs and cats , on the welfare of the Institute 's captive bighorn must be addressed . The need for the Institute ' s captive bighorn to maintain a comfortable and desired distance from such stressors is essential . Also the noise impact of dogs barking must be taken into consideration. Mitigation mea- sures as to the disallowance of pets particularly for home owners within line of sight of the bighorn in the Institute ' s pen enclosures need to be addressed . 4 . Effects of cars traveling in close proximity to the Institute ' s bighorn pen enclosures and the expected increased traffic on Highway 74 must be investigated as to the poten- -2- tial impacts on the Institute ' s captive bighorn herd . The additional vehicular noise generated and car lights at night particularly within the line of sight of the Institute ' s lambing area on the north and northeast slopes is of great concern. Lambing often takes place in the darkness of late night or early morning hours . Special consideration should be given to the design of street locations and direction of vehicular travel in order to alleviate the stress concerns of car noise and lights effecting the Institute ' s captive big- horn sheep. 5 . Impacts of house lights and reflective finishes on the welfare of the Institute 's captive bighorn need to be consid- ered . Special attention must be given to derive specifica- tions on building pad locations and exterior lighting design and intensity of brightness allowed for homes particularly within line of sight of the north and northeast slopes of the 30 acre pen enclosure . Disallowance of reflective surfaces on any structures and careful planning of the location of any other objects that may periodically produce reflections in view of the captive bighorn should be addressed . 6 . Alternatives which would reduce and help avoid signifi- cant impacts on the Institute 's captive herd and ultimately our bighorn conservation efforts must be addressed . The need for an open space environmental buffer area with sufficient acreage that would help alleviate any undue stress within the Institute 's captive herd and preserve their historical lamb- ing areas within our pen facilities , must be explored . 7 . Potential human impacts including increased noise levels and indiscriminate human contact with the Institute ' s captive bighorn must be addressed . Mitigation measures to establish a barrier (wall or fencing) around the proposed housing development so as to discourage human trespass and wandering of domestic pets within the proposed environmental buffer area, need to be considered . 8 . Impacts from biological vectors of disease associated with golf courses is of great concern. Mitigation measures to establish pest control programs for golf course lakes and surrounding moist and wet areas that may encourage insect propagation need to be considered . 9 . Impacts from increased utilization of adjacent proposed water sources by various wildlife species including the pos- sibility of increased introduction of disease and attraction of bighorn predators should be taken into consideration. We feel it is necessary that a thorough investigation of the above listed factors is conducted to ensure the welfare of the Institute ' s captive bighorn herd and ultimately the sur- -3- vival of the threatened Peninsular Desert Bighorn of the Santa Rosa Mountains . Again, we appreciate this opportunity to provide our comments on the environmental impact report for the Altamira (Bighorn ventures) project . Enclosed are copies of two papers that I have published on changing environments and stress in desert bighorn sheep which I hope will help develop a better understanding of our bighorn concerns . Sincerely, mes R. DeForge xecutive Director Research Biologist ,I i i t I -4- nn ` © � Figure XXVI -1 a ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 0 O 1 Bannon 1 COACHELLA VALLEY CP MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT � SCALE : 1:348,480 PREPARED BY: CJ F /�7 1" = 29040 Feet Comarc Design Systems bznann i 5Y2 Miles and ' + EisnerSmith Planners 0 1 T 3 4 9, Mt. seoann c` d PREPARED FOR: OQD Coachella Valley Association of Governments { NAAugust 7980 ')n1l\ UO Axer,r{ 1 d o a Q a b tesnnnn ����� �ss�nn l l l l zoiannn zntman zntmon zimnea ziaonoa zssnnnn aisannn NOTE: This map is for illustrative p y. � purposes only. For actual dat< analysis , refer to the full scale maps aroduced durinc She CVAf, MFA Prniptt (at 1 -4o rnn