HomeMy WebLinkAboutDP 11-78 - RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 1978 �� � .
� � , �-�
.�
���
�` ��
►r � � �\
�'
/ i \
j
� �� �� �
L ' � i �r
� � / "� -
ti
I
r?
4 .
_-. - � _
"= -
� .
,i !
. �
.�o � �
��
Development Plan
RANCHO ' BELLA VISTA
City of Palm Desert' '
City of Palm Desert
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR
RANCHO BELLA VISTA
Approved by the City Planning Commission
on
Approved by the City Council
on
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SECTION I - INTRODUCTION 1
A . The Planned Residential District Approach 1
B . Planning Objectives 2
C . General Description of the Project 3
D . Alternative Development Concepts 5
SECTION II - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 7.
A . Residential Development Standards 7
B . General Development Standards 13
C . Openspace and Recreation Concept 17
SECTION III - STATISTICAL SUMMARY 23
A. Purpose and Scope 23
B . Land Use Allocation 23
C . Residential Summary 23
SECTION IV - REVIEW REQUIREMENTS 25
A. Purpose and Scope 25
B . Site Plan Review 25
C . Design Review 26
D . Streetscape Review 26
SECTION V - PHASING 27
SECTION VI - GENERAL NOTES 30
A . Relationship to Municipal Code 30
B . General Notes 30
SECTION VII - LEGAL DESCRIPTION 32
SECTION I - INTRODUCTION
A. The Planned Residential District Approach
The Palm Desert General Plan provides guidelines at the broadest
community level . These guidelines are implemented at the most
detailed level by a recorded tract map . The purpose of this
Development Plan is to provide the framework , between these two
extremes , upon which the Rancho Bella Vista planning program will
be structured .
A project of the scale of Rancho Bella Vista ( 680 acres ) will not
be constructed overnight . It will consist of many phases and
component parts , each being more complex and detailed than the
last . It will take years to complete and will require careful
design and programming .
There is a hierarchy of decision making events established by or
linked to the planning process which leads from the very general
to the very detailed . It is important that this chain of events
occur in a logical order and not be interruped by inappropriate
decisions at the wrong level . For example , the City could not
be expected to initiate the decision making process at the
tentative tract map level without first having an adopted general
plan , zoning plans and other pertinent information . It would be
impossible to understand the impacts of such a project on the
City support systems or even the general growth of the City
without first adopting goals , objectives and policies for the
City .
Conversely , the developer of the property cannot initiate the
project at a level of detail similar to that required at the
tentative tract map level without first knowing what the General
Plan will allow him to do , the types of densities he can logically
expect from the zoning of the property and what other requirements
might be imposed upon him. The developer must always be concerned
about changing market conditions and City officials , changing
attitudes , needs and demands of the residents of the City . Both
the developer and the City must rely on each other to provide
assurances that the objectives and expectations of each are met .
At the same time flexibilities must be incorporated into the
program to accommodate changing conditions .
The application of the PR Planned Residential District Regulation
to the Rancho Bella Vista project is the most logical way to
address the issues presented by a project of this magnitude at
this particular point in the planning process . As stated in the
1
regulations , " It is the purpose of the PR District to provide
for flexibility in development , creative and imaginative design ,
and the development of parcels of land as coordinated projects
involving a mixture of residential densities and housing types ,
and community facilities both public and private . The PR District
is further intended to provide for the optimum integration of
urban and natural amenities within developments . The PR District
is also established to give a land developer assurances that
innovative and unique land development techniques will be given
reasonable consideration for approval and to provide the City
with assurances that the completed project will contain the
character envisioned at the time of approval . "
The purpose of the Rancho Bella Vista Development Plan is to
provide for the classification and development of parcels of
land as coordinated , comprehensive projects so as to take
advantage of the superior environments which will result from
large scale community planning .
This Development Plan is intended to provide guidelines for
development which are more detailed , yet consistent with the
philosophies of the City ' s General Plan and , although specifically
oriented to Rancho Bella Vista , ensure compliance with the pro-
visions of the Municipal Code . The planning program is designed
to provide for review of subsequent planning efforts as they
evolve in the latter stages of the project design ( see Section
VI , Review Requirements ) .
The Development Plan is structured in accordance with the provisions
of the PR Planned Residential District of the Zoning Ordinance
of the City of Palm Desert and applies to the property legally
described in Section VII of this report .
B . Planning Objectives
The following are objectives which have guided the preparation
of the overall Development Plan . They are general in nature in
that they are community-wide in orientation . More detailed
guidelines are provided for each land use category or develop-
ment area as outlined herein . Even more specific guidelines
will be developed as precise plans are developed at a more
detailed level of planning .
Objectives of the Rancho Bella Vista Development Plan :
1 . To ensure a broad range of housing opportunities
through the provision of a variety of densities and
housing types throughout the project .
2
2 . To maintain the desert environment through the
preservation of the hills , ridgelines , rock out-
croppings and other natural features of the site.
3 . To provide a community of vitality through the
provision of recreation facilities , trails systems ,
and a variety of housing types .
4. To provide for the safety and well -being of those
residing in and around the community through the
provision of adequate and safe streets , storm
drain and flood control facilities , and pedestrian
and bicycle trails which provide safety from the
automobiles .
5 . To provide a community design theme through a land-
scape concept , open space system and architectural
controls which create a sense of place and design
harmony .
6. To preserve and enhance the scenic qualities of the
Palms to the Pines ( Route 74 ) Highway through special
landscape treatment , set backs and the preservation
of the hills in their natural state .
C . General Description of the Project
The General Development Plan ( Exhibit A) outlined in this report
proposes the phased construction of 1428 dwelling units at an
average density of 4. 6 dwelling units per acre for the develop-
ment area . The total unit count consists of 81 single-family
"rancho" lots , 278 single-family detached units ( 3 DU/AC . ) , 227
single-family cluster units ( 6 DU/AC . ) , 416 clustered condo-
miniums ( 7 DU/AC . ) and 476 apartments ( 11 DU/AC . ) . Other overall
features of the project include a 9 . 5 acre park site , reservation
of a 200 foot wide strip of land through the project for a future
regional flood control facility and the establishment of over
half of the site as an open space area and wildlife preserve .
The selection of the land use concept represented by the
Development Plan , and generally described below , is based on an
analysis of the constraints and opportunities presented by the
site . The major constraining factors which have influenced the
plan are : 1 ) the topographic features of the site , 2 ) water run-
off and flooding conditions , 3 ) geology and 4 ) water availability .
Positive factors include : 1 ) the view potential of the site , 2 )
readily available access to the site , 3 ) lack of encumbrances
such as easements , existing urban development , etc . , and 4 ) the
3
general high quality of the development along the approach route
from the north .
The development plan embraces several concepts which build upon
the positive aspects of the site and neutralize , and in some
instances even use in a constructive way , the constraints or
negative features presented by the property.
The design is intended to provide a graduation of densities . The
higher densities are planned to occur on the relatively level
land adjacent to Highway 74 where access is readily available .,
Medium density development , single family detached homes , will
be located generally in the middle of the project and low density
ranchos will occur along the edge of the hills where carefully
selected building sites will blend and transition into the back-
drop of the rugged mountainous terrain . Condominiums , clustered
around a central recreation facility will be located along the
northern edge of the property at a density level comparable to
the adjacent mobile home park and clustered single-family develop-
ment , also focused on a recreation facility , is proposed in the
southern portion of the property in an area where the maximum
view potential will be utilized .
By providing clustered types of development along the east and
southeast periphery of the property some of the resulting common
open space can be effectively utilized to provide special treat-
ment areas to serve as buffers to adjacent , already developed ,
areas and to enhance the scenic qualities of the Palms to the
Pines Highway .
Drainage problems will be alleviated by the preservation of the
two hundred foot wide area , previously mentioned , which will
accommodate the construction of the Dead Indian flood Control
Channel . This area will separate the apartment area from the
single-family detached housing area . Although the design of
the channel has not been initiated it is possible that some
of the right-of-way might be utilized for landscaping and a
trail system.
The various residential developments will be tied together by
a loop or collector street . This collector will provide two
major entry points to the project . Each entry point will
receive special landscape treatment designed to serve as a
strong entry statement. A continuation of this landscape
concept along the entire route will provide the community with
a landscaping theme which will be continued in other areas ,
thus providing continuity to the entire project .
4
An area of approximately ten acres will be preserved at the
mouth of Dead Indian Canyon for public park purposes . This
area is identified on the City ' s General Plan as a historical
park and amphitheater . Across the highway to the east (Area
8 on the General Development Plan ) is a seven acre parcel which
has been identified as " Other Open Space . " This parcel is
currently subject to flooding . However , with the channeli -
zation of Dead Indian Creek it is conceivable that it could be
put to a practical use which might have some relationship to
the proposed park . In fact it could be used now as an off-
road scenic vista point or rest stop for travelers using the
scenic highway.
The dominant rocky hills and mountains which occupy the
westerly one-half of the site provide a magnificant backdrop
for the community which is proposed . The preservation of these
hills through dedication to the City will also ensure the
preservation of a valuable desert wildlife habitat . Over 50%
of the property will be reserved in a natual open space status .
D . Alternative Development Concepts
Several alternative development concepts were explored and
studied prior to the selection of the plan which is described
in this report. All of the alternatives had three common
elements : 1 ) the preservation of the rugged , hilly area of
the site as permanent open space and wildlife preserve , 2 ) the
preservation of the open space corridor through the site for
the flood control channel , although several on-site drainage
studies were conducted and evaluated , and 3 ) the recognition
of the requirement for special treatment of the area along
Highway 74 to protect the scenic qualities of the road .
The feasibility of a golf course and golf course related
residential development was studied initially . This alter-
native was rejected after a special study of the availability
of underground water proved that insufficient amounts of water
would be available for the maintenance of a golf course .
A conventional development of single family detached homes at
an approximate density of three units per acre was studied .
It was concluded that this type of development was not in
keeping with the character of the City of Palm Desert which
is noted for its planned developments with recreational
orientations . The objectives of preserving the hills and the
scenic qualities of Highway 74 , plus the effort to preserve
enough land for the Dead Indian Channel dictated a concept
which would provide for a certain amount of clustering and
5
density transfers to allow the open space to be preserved .
In addition , it was decided that the objective of a community
of " vitality" with a variety of housing unit types was over-
riding to any benefits which might be accrued through an
exclusively low density concept .
Several variations to the graduated density concept inherent
in this plan were also explored and evaluated . The first
variation , which is referred to as Alternative "A" in the
EIR which is a comparison document to this report , was
basically the same as the General Development Plan with the
exception of the area immediately adjacent to Highway 74
and east of the proposed Dean Indian Channel . This area
was designated for mobile homes . The concept was rejected
because it was felt that a half mile of mobile homes along
Highway 74 , in addition to the existing mobile home park to
the north would impact the scenic quality of the highway and
not provide the variation necessary to give the project site
a strong identify . It was also concluded that it would be
difficult to provide a major entry point into the project
through a mobile home park which would project the desired
impact of the community .
Another variation to the proposed Development Plan replaced
the single family detached area with a patio homes concept.
This alternative provided the highest number of dwelling
units but did not optimize the concept of providing a broad
range of product types .
After all alternatives and variations were studied and
evaluated it was determined that the selected alternative ,
the Development Plan represented by this report , was in
keeping with the character of the City , most consistent with
the goals of the project applicant and would provide the
best planning concept which was most sensitive to the con-
straints and opportunities presented by the site .
6
SECTION II - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The Development Plan consists of two basic land use desig-
nations - Residential , which is divided into five categories
(Single Family Ranchos , . Single Family Detached , Clustered
Condominiums , Single Family Clusters and Apartments ) and ,
Open Space , which is divided into four categories (Wildlife
Preserve , Public Park , Private Recreation Facilities and
Other Open Space) .
The standards which are described on the following pages are
Ili ' designed to implement the Development Plan and provide for
uses or operations for each of the land use categories .
A. Residential Development Standards
(This section is intended to provide for all residential
development indicated on the General Development Plan ,
Exhibit A.
1 . Development Standards for SINGLE FAMILY RANCHOS
a . Purpose/Objectives & Guidelines : It is the
purpose of the Single Family Ranchos develop-
ment area to serve as a special transition
zone between the conventional single family
area and the Wildlife Preserve characterized
by the rugged hills which comprise the western
half of the site .
It is an objective to maintain the natural
features of this area through minimal grading ,
special siting of each building pad and the
careful location and design of access roads
to minimize their visual impact . Lot sizes
will vary and be irregular in shape so that
optimum sighting may be achieved and a blending
of the land uses will occur .
It is intended that lots should be oriented ,
when designed at the precise planning level ,
to maximize the view potential of the site
and/or achieve privacy.
b . Permitted Uses :
1 ) Accessory buildings , uses , and structures ;
2 ) Domestic animals ;
3 ) Guest dwelling ;
4 ) One single family dwelling per lot ;
5 ) Public recreational facilities ;
6 ) Servant quarters ;
7 ) Public utility and public service facilities ;
8 ) Stables for boarding horses ;
9 ) Private greenhouses , horticultural collections ,
flower and vegetable gardens ; and
10 ) Temporary uses including :
- construction of garage or shed for sub-
division construction ,
- garage/yard sales ( limited to sixty con-
secutive hours ) ,
- model homes , model home sales offices ,
- parking and storage of earth-moving equipment ,
- storage of materials incidential to the
carrying on of a public works project , or
subdivision or construction project ,
- real estate tract sales office , and
- such other uses as the zoning administrator
may consider to be within the intent and
purpose of this planned development .
The above listed temporary uses require a Temporary
Use Permit .
C . Minimum Lot Specifications : The minimum lot area
shall be fifteen thousand square feet , however , the
average lot area of any development in the S . F .
Rancho category shall be a minimum of thirty
thousand square feet .
1 ), The minimum lot depth shall be one hundred and
twenty-five feet .
2 ) The minimum lot width shall be ninety feet .
d . Yards : The minimum yards shall be :
1 ) Front yard : twenty-five feet
2 ) Side yards : fifteen feet with a combined
distance of forty feet for both side yards
3 ) Rear yard twenty feet
8
e . Building Site Coverage : The maximum building
site coverage shall be twenty-five percent .
f. Building Height : The maximum building height
shall be eighteen feet .
g . Minimum Dwelling Unit Size shall be fifteen
hundred square feet .
2 . Development Standards for SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
a . Purpose , Objectives and Guidelines : It is the
purpose of the Single Family Detached category
to provide for conventional single family homes .
The objective is to development of a high quality
neighborhood which is integrated into the variety
of residential types afforded by this plan through
the use of landscaped open spaces , trails , and an
interconnecting street system.
b . Permitted Uses :
1 ) Uses permitted in Paragraph lb above .
2 ) The additional following uses may be per-
mitted subject to a Conditional Use Permit :
- day nurseries and nursery schools ,
- public educational institutions .
c . Minimum Lot Specifications : The minimum lot size
or any individual lot shall be eight thousand
square feet , but the average lot size in any
tentative tract map increment shall be no less than
nine thousand square feet .
1 ) The minimum lot width shall be seventy feet .
d, Yards : The minimum yards shall be :
1 ) Front :ard twenty feet
Y Y
2 ) Rear yard : fifteen feet
3 ) Side yards : fourteen feet combined , each of
which shall be not less than five feet
4 ) Street side yards : ten feet
e . Building Site Coverage : The maximum building site
coverage shall be thirty-five percent .
f . Building Height : The maximum height shall be
eighteen feet .
9
g . Minimum Dwellin Unit Siunze : The minimum dwelling
e size shall be tw ve red square feet .
3 . Development Standards for SINGLE FAMILY CLUSTER
a . Purpose , Objectives and Guidelines : It is the
purpose of the Single Family Cluster category to
provide for a variation to the conventional single
family detached development concept . The objective
is to promote innovative site design concepts which
take advantage of the natural features presented by
the property and to site dwellings in such a manner
that open space can be preserved for the purposes of
developing recreational facilities , creating passive
open space areas and preserving views . The Single
Family Cluster category provides an additional
opportunity to incorporate still another type of
residential development into the community .
b . Permitted Uses :
1 ) Uses permitted in Paragraph 2b above and ,
2 ) Combinations of attached or detached dwellings
including duplexes , dwelling groups and town-
houses ;
3 ) Private recreational facilities such as tennis
and swim clubs , with incidential , limited
commercial uses which are commonly associated
and directly related to the primary use .
c . Minimum t Lo Specifications : Each dwelling unit shall
be located on an individual lot of record . There
shall be no minimum lot size except as established
in the review process specified in Section VI , herein .
d . Building Separations and Setbacks : The following are
the minimum distances for building locations :
1 ) Rear of building facing common open space or
greenbelt - no minimum ,
2 ) Rear of building facing rear of another building -
thirty foot building separation ,
3 ) Rear of building facing side of another building -
twenty foot building separation ,
4 ) Side of building facing side of another building
where common walls do not exist - 20 foot building
separation ,
5 ) Front of building facing street 20 foot setback ,
6 ) Front of building facing courtyard or driveway -
10 foot setback , and
7 ) Side of building facing street - ten foot setback .
10
e . Building Site Coverage : The maximum building site
coverage shall be fifty percent .
f. Minimum Site Area Per Dwelling Unit : The minimum
site area per dwelling unit shall be four thousand
square feet.
g . Building Height : The maximum building height shall
be thirty feet or two stories whichever is less .
4 . Development Standards for CONDO CLUSTERS
a . Purpose , Objectives and Guidelines : It is the
purpose of the Condo Cluster category to provide
for a variation to the Single Family Ranchos and
Single Family Detached homes and a modification to
the Single Family Cluster concept . The objective
is to promote innovative site design concepts which
promote the preservation of common open space areas
for the purposes of developing recreational facilities ,
creating passive open space areas and creating buffer
areas between the project and neighboring land uses .
b . Standards : Development standards for Condo Clusters
shall be as provided for in this section , Paragraph
3 above , except that each dwelling need not be
located on an individual lot of record . Dwelling
units may be individually owned on land which is
owned in common . Individually owned dwelling units
may also be stacked one above the other providing
the maximum height and story limitation provided for
in sub-paragraph 3g above is not exceeded .
5. Development Standards for APARTMENTS
a . Purpose , Objectives and Guidelines : It is the
purpose of the Apartment land use category to
provide for the development of living units of a
different character than established for the other
residential land use categories of the Development
Plan , thus providing for the variation in life-
style sought through this plan and the community
vitality which is also an objective of the Plan .
The apartment area is located adjacent to the Palms
to Pines Highway where access is readily available .
The area is separated from the lower density single
family areas by the open land preserved for the
11
flood control facility . It is buffered from the
traffic of the highway by a 32-foot landscaped
area which will contain berms and walls to mitigate
highway noises and provide beautification features .
The area will be served by a system of pedestrian
and bicycle trails which will link with the major
recreation facilities of the project . In addition ,
each apartment complex or cluster of apartment units
will have its own recreational facilities such as
swimming pools , tennis courts , saunas , volleyball
courts , etc .
b . Permitted Uses :
1 ) Uses permitted in Paragraphs 2 , 3 and 4 of
Section II above .
2 ) Combinations of attached or detached dwellings ,
including duplexes , multi -family structures ,
dwelling groups and townhouses .
c . Minimum Building Site : The minimum building site
shall be 10 ,000 square feet . The minimum site area
per dwelling unit shall be two thousand five hundred
square feet .
d . Yards :
1 ) The minimum front yards shall be fifteen feet .
2 ) The minimum rear yard shall be ten feet .
3 ) The minimum side yards shall be twenty feet
combined , each of which shall not be less than
eight feet .
4 ) The minimum street side yard shall be ten feet.
e . Building Site Coverage : The maximum building site
coverage shall be fifty percent .
f. Open Space : The group usable open space per dwelling
unit shall be three hundred square feet .
g . Building Height : The maximum building height shall
be thirty feet or two stories whichever is less .
Two stories or thirty foot height will be allowed
adjacent to any single family detached area pro-
viding there is an additional ten foot setback from
the edge of the property adjacent to the single
family district or there is an open space feature
such as a flood control channel , landscaped trail
or street .
12
6 . Additional Requirements :
All residential development shall be subject to
Section IV , REVIEW REQUIREMENTS , herein and other
applicable sections of this Development Plan .
B . General Development Standards
1 . Purpose and Scope :
The General Development Standards section of this
Development Plan is established to provide standards
for uses or operations that may be a part of any
planning area but with special emphasis placed on
non-residential uses .
a . Uses Permitted :
1 ) Accessory structures and uses located on the
same site with a permitted use including barns ,
stables , tank houses , storage tanks , windmills ,
and other outbuildings ;
2 ) Field and truck crops and horticultural
specialities ;
3 ) Nurseries , greenhouses , and 'botanical con-
servatories ;
4) Orchards ;
5 ) Signs subject to compliance with the Municipal
Code except , signs shall be specifically
prohibited in areas identified on the Develop-
ment Plan as Wildlife Preserve ;
6 ) Passive public and private recreation and
open space uses ;
7 ) Hiking and riding trails ; and
8 ) Other uses similar in character to those listed
above which the Planning Commission finds to be
compatible with the surrounding permitted uses .
b . Additional Uses Permitted : The following additional
uses will be permitted subject to approval as
required by SECTION IV , REVIEW REQUIREMENTS , herein ,
and compliance with the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance .
1 ) Water storage facilities , fire stations , and
other public and quasi -public facilities .
2 ) Public and private recreational facilities
including clubhouses .
3 ) Accessory structures and uses necessary or
customarily incidential to a basic permitted use .
13
4) Public or private roadways .
5) Other uses similar in character with those
listed above , which the Planning Commission
finds to be compatible with the surrounding
permitted uses .
c . General Standards : Unless otherwise specified ,
all development shall be in compliance with the
provisions of the Palm Desert Zoning Ordinance ,
the Planned Residential District Regulations and
Chapter 26 , Subdivision of Land .
1 ) Road Standards : All roads will be provided in
accordance with standards acceptable to the
City Engineer and shall be consistent with
Adopted City standards .
2 ) Parking : Parking shall be as provided for in
accordance with the City of Palm Desert Zoning
Ordinance .
3 ) Highway Greenbelt : A setback of thirty-two ( 32 )
feet parallel to the western edge of the ultimate
curb line of Highway 74 shall be provided . Said
greenbelt shall be improved by the developer at
the time of development in accordance with
development phasing and the landscape design
criteria established as provided for in Section
IV herein .
4) Flood Control Facilities : Flood control facilities
shall be provided in accordance with standards
acceptable to the City Engineer and the Coachella
Valley Water District Master Plans .
5 ) Grading : Grading may be permitted in all land
use areas permitting urban uses . Grading of
natural terrain which exceeds 10% slope shall
be subject to the following criteria :
- Grading shall be consistent with the objectives
of the purpose and intent of the Hillside
Development Overlay District , of the City of
Palm Desert .
- Grading shall furthermore be generally con-
sistent with the other more specific provisions
of Chapter 25 . 52 of the Zoning Ordinance .
However , where the purpose of Chapter 25 . 52
may be achieved by innovative design considerations
that may not be consistent with the mathematical
formulas provided in Chapter 25 . 52 , then the
grading may be permitted .
14
- Grading shall be designed in a manner which
will result in natural appearing land forms ,
and adequately landscaped to enhance the
overall visual qualities of the development .
6 ) Noise Barrier : A barrier consisting of an
effective combination of earth berms and walls
shall be constructed between the residential
development and Highway 74 as conceptually
indicated on Exhibit D herein .
7 ) View Shed Setback : A setback for two-story
dwellings of 150 feet from the ultimate curb
line of Highway 74 shall be provided to pre-
serve the scenic character of this highway .
Within this setback area , no building shall
be constructed in excess of one story .
15
p�
-2EHERAL
Ar
r. ` /
Wildlife Apts.
` Preserve Clustered /
�Condos /-------------
S.F. Aandl ps S.F.D., Apts5 i
u
/
S.F._Detached
Wildlife , Preserve -' �, - _
4 ' '`
l
- g � R
S.F. Cluster /
j t _ 6-
8j
Public
I - _ 7 Park
LEGEND
ACRES DUAC 0,ASL
1 S.F. RANCHOS S10 1. 881 6 WILDLIFE PRESERVE
2 S.F. DETACHED 92.6 3.0 278 7 PUBLIC PARK
3 S.F. CLUSTER 37.8 6.0 227 8 OTHER OPEN SPACE
4 CONDO CLUSTER 52.3 7.0 366 R PRIVATE REC. FACILITY
5 APARTMENT 43.3 11.0 476 MAJOR HIGHWAY EXHIBIT
TOTAL 307.0 4.6m 1428 COLLECTOR AR
16 � - � - _
C . Openspace and Recreation Concept
The following is a description of the Open Space Concept of
the Development Plan . Its purpose is to provide the framework
upon which more detailed recreation , open space and landscaping
plans should be based as they are prepared at the site planning
level .
The open space element of the Development Plan is divided into
four component parts ; the Wildlife Preserve , Public Park , Private
Recreation Facilities and Other Open Space . It is the purpose
of the plan to tie these features into one system which not
- only provides vitally needed recreation facilities and open space
but will provide a theme and establish continuity for the new
community as well .
There will be two forms of open space . That which is preserved
in its natural state , the Wildlife Preserve , and that which is
man-made . The man-made open space system is designed to utilize ,
to the maximum extent possible , the circulation system , flood
control right-of-way and drainage facilities . However , the use
of native plant materials will be emphasized in the man-made
areas to ensure a continuity between those areas and the natural
areas . This concept will also ensure that the "desert environ-
ment" will be maintained . The most predominant landscape treat-
ment areas will be the greenbelt area , which will be developed
along the west side of Highway 74, the major entry points into
the project from the highway and the loop road which ties the
community together ( see Exhibit D for conceptual illustration ) .
Community recreation activities will be focused in two centers
which will be located in the Condo area in the northern portion
of the community and the Single Family Cluster area in the
southern part of the project. These two facilities ( see Exhibit
A-3 for conceptual illustration ) will be linked by a backbone
_ trail system which penetrates the Single Family Detached area .
Minor trails will connect to the system which will provide
pedestrian and bicycle access to. the recreation areas with
minimization of conflict points with the road system.
Secondary trails will be provided in two locations which pri -
marily serve the apartment area . One of these will be planned
into the greenbelt right-of-way adjacent to the scenic highway
and the other adjacent to the flood control right-of-way . Both
of these trails will provide direct access to the public park
proposed to be located at the mouth of Dead Indian Canyon .
Approximately 9 . 5 acres of land will be reserved at the point
where Dead Indian Canyon and Highway 74 intersect for the City
�( 17
Park . This park will not only serve the residents of Rancho
Bella Vista , but the entire population of the City of Palm
i
Desert as well .
The apartment area will be designed so that the apartment
complexes or clusters of units will have individual recrea-
tional facilities such as swimming pools , tennis courts ,
putting greens , saunas , etc . The large lot Ranchos will have
no community type recreation facilities . It is assumed that
private recreation facilities will be developed in this area
on a custom basis by the homeowners .
A landscape theme for the total community will be developed
and used throughout the project . The theme will be illustrated
through a community landscape concept plan which will be sub-
_ mitted with the first area plan submittal .
The landscape theme will be based on the extensive use of native
plant materials to ensure the desert environment and as a con-
servation measure to preserve water .
I
r
18
i
CIRCULATION AND TRAILS
000
p o 0
° ■o° Oo ■0 0 0 ■,
0 ^0■p O ■ ■-
00
'Ynfi�r�5f�t� `�r'� ✓ T'T,f 't Ft`i�r �} � 0 ° p O °Oe000 ■ .
i�„4`rtfrj t. ^r 2 7`?6c'f`rf f,rf .rah'✓ a`•f"C ��? ° • 0 p 0° ■
�r',I'tYf�ktnriif'f ems. " "der rf� rrr�s,'{rl4'r" u�rr O �. 00 ■
ffS r"rr rho tr- f �£di "°fi f r�ie�4 f ,a ptr fr 4 r
f� r o o• p ■ ■
�rizi. ifrL'. ffr( t° r+ a CY'E�F"dSF 'f�.it`"J�PF✓�fF.-e[^..� O O p O ■
t}✓r{' r ' •�� ^fir {5^G.PC{.k ?' • 0p 0 p 0Wawp op ma O O ■�
p ■�- ■ ■
+� �� Tr • s
(�`^•F• 's+ �/ f 'rf'..'' , O p'p•ppp ■ A
l ff:CCf lS ■
Yt F-rFr r t,,:C'f f
000 000 ■ ��er
<Cia�^{ti.x7atsr` ' ■ ■
.�xF � o- tr frA +S 4r,rt'Q+' f�.•,f4'nt �f(� ■ Q
'rf+'x(u-r+�,�ro i�•trr n� f.'•" 3�i3"F'r ,tlY - ' 0 ■°■ ,.j1
o00 000 • • S
a
��Frir•,r•��r yF �•afr�<v'f� Crr�":rpFJr(rfrif� ��vr r. �, O• 1�1AI��/X]�)�(}-
.rrGe� ? �" J, rrr fr'�Fr�` y`•.�elt { r✓✓'�Hii rr.r • 't1 •�C� '✓ffrT�. 'CCX `✓'�7 �✓ r ^rC � �r C� fC�rfi t ✓rC�fF OOO■ p °0 ■
rSCi"Y`�.CTr�(w• �' f C (' O ■ ■
rr,,}r ✓t c-fsL'S^:'S, *, �r ' ` �frF,," ,F ? � � �,f�,,,,. 0 O
0
o po ■.
'f�'r zr ,�<" rth`r "a�ry.R• ff`, �'t LT`C;r'r r"Asy*��,,,KwSO' C'_ p o ° o■®
0 On
�x^T-S C,r 2'F� ���s�,�F..'� �'F.. 6 �^��.y's 4 '4�'�' �,�.t �f-f�� < `■.V
Lu
£ 4l Z
' e+
1 ■
PUBLlC
LEGEND - PARK
VIEWS AND VISTAS ■muse GREEN BELT
ft e MAJOR HIGHWAY °0000 TRAILS
AO 4t# INTERIOR LOOP ROAD ® COMMUNITY RECREATION
PRIMARY ENTRY ,r NATURAL OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT
Al
y� (WILDLIFE PRESERVE)
7F SECONDARY ENTRY
i — 19
OPEN SPACE AND GREENBELTS
3gp ]- -
iz1
.° i"
ylid �" ,-t4ti'
.,
c+v�y a 3
t4v Ili
yrLSr'w'jy!' >
as�°J S',� o"'a`�t*ii � �...' ,j�,.��,$y 'xi'3•�,3�"�a a�.y� .Yi.n - �
7,T, 'a
'��3�'X+."t''� �;3't�-•r'V ,'�''r,'^t „ice' 1',d���a J ' ,.{,3,.��°J'3,,� t�3���J"� _+
rJS�'3 ? ��J��Y�r�'s.�'..,ky� `3�S>}• 5' 'dsJy,..+J,ii,.;ir"F.!'-sr 3��'' Y
♦a� r7�+ .r„aX� a'�,���.a�;r i,i�,a9t �w*�a�5,nf�„�`a��s'j���i,�t��.+;a,3 y',°.r�."i
.s�re
�.+r,•z;�rYr��.i111':i't7�a. o.3 .t„��'y��4� .���: U#i^��i a_'� � V�.d
PUBLIC PARIC
LEGEND
NATURAL OPEN SPACE ` ENTRY POINTS-SPECIAL TREATMENT
(WILDLIFE PRESERVE)
LANDSCAPED GREENBELTS LANDSCAPED COLLECTOI STREET
AND TRAILS O COMMUNITY RECREATION
EXHIBIT
20 .
A 2
L
�111j"If
s �
A1111111h 'I
i, � � 1�11111111 � �� • �� i�
AL
• �a a
...
� F4
' ` r��,�
SECTION III - STATISTICAL SUMMARY
A . Purpose and Scope :
The purpose of this section is to summarize in statisticall form
the intended land use and density allocations for Rancho Bella
Vista .
The acreages indicated herein and on the General Development
Plan are indicated to the nearest one-tenth acre based on plani -
meter readings . Slight modifications that may result from
technical refinements in the tract map and design review process
will not require an amendment to this development plan .
B . Land Use Allocation
Land Use Gross Acres Percentage
Residential 307 . 0 44 . 8%
Wildlife Preserve 348. 7 50 . 9%
Public Park 9 . 5 1 . 4%
Major Circulation 12 . 0 1 . 8%
Other Open Space 7 . 2 1 . 1%
684 . 4 100 . 0%
C . Residential Summary
1 . Area Summary
Percentage of
Residential Area in Total Residential
Category Acres Area
S . F. Ranchos 81 . 0 26 . 4%
S . F. Detached 92 . 6 30. 2%
S . F . Cluster 37 . 8 12 . 3%
Condo Cluster 52 . 3 17 . 0%
Apartments 43 . 3 14. 1%
307 . 0 100. 0%
23
2 . Density Summary
Total
Dwelling Percentage of
Residential Gross Units Total Residential)
Category Density* Permitted Dwelling Units
S . F. Ranchos 1 . 0 81
S . F. Detached 3 . 0 278
S . F . Cluster 6 . 0 227
Condo Cluster 7 . 0 366
Apartments 11 . 0 476
4. 6 avg . 1428
i
If
I.
*NOTE : The Gross Density does not represent lot size . It is
based on the average number of dwelling units per gross
acre for the particular residential category identified .
24
SECTION IV - REVIEW REQUIREMENTS
A . Purpose and Scope :
The purpose of this section is to provide for the review
requirements of all development within this development plan .
B . Area Plan Review:
Prior to or concurrently with the approval of any Site Plan.
or Tentative Tract Map , an Area Plan and supporting maps
shall be approved by the Planning Commission . The Area Plan
shall show the relationship of the specific project (Site
Plan or Tentative Tract Map) with the surrounding area , the
circulation system, trail systems , adjacent land uses , land-
scape themes , and other community design elements .
C . Site Plan Review:
Prior to or concurrently with the approval of any Tentative
Tract Map , a Site Plan and supporting maps shall be approved
consistent with the provisions of Chapter 25 . 24 . 070 , Paragraph
B . Said Site Plan shall include the following maps and support-
ing information :
1 . The existing site conditions including contours
at two-foot intervals , watercourse , floodplains ,
unique natural features and any forest cover ;
2 . Proposed lot lines and plot design ;
3 . The location and floor size of all existing and
proposed buildings , structures and other improve-
ments including maximum heights , types of dwelling
units , density per type and nonresidential structures
including preliminary architectural renderings of
typical structures ;
4 . The location and size in acres or square feet of
all areas to be conveyed , dedicated , or reserved as
common open spaces , public parks , recreational areas ,
school sites , and similar public and semipublic uses ;
5 . The existing and proposed circulation system of alter-
ial , collector , and local streets including off-street
parking areas , service areas , loading areas , and major
25
I
points of access to public rights-of-way . Notations
of proposed ownership , public or private ;
6 . The existing and proposed pedestrian circulation
system , including its interrelationships with the
vehicular circulation system ;
7 . The existing and proposed utility systems ;
8 . A general landscape plan indicating the treatment
of materials for private and common open areas ;
9 . Preliminary grading plan ;
10. Eno-ugh information on lands adjacent to the project
to indicate the relationships between the proposed
development and adjacent areas ;
11 . The proposed treatment of the perimeter of the project
including materials and techniques used such as
mounding , screens , fences and walls ;
12 . Any additional information as required by the City
necessary to evaluate the character and impact of the
proposed development .
D. Design Review
Prior to the issuance of any building permits the applicant shall
receive Design Review approval as provided for in Chapter 2 . 70 of
the Zoning Ordinance .
E. Streetscape Review:
Concurrently with the first increment of development , the applicant
shall submit landscape plans for Highway 74 as part of the Site
Plan Review submittal described in this section , Paragraph B� above .
This exhibit ( s ) shall indicate the ultimate overall design treat-
ment for the highway greenbelt and noise barrier.
26
SECTION V - PHASING
The General Development Plan calls for a ten-stage phasing
plan as shown on Exhibits B and B1 . This plan provides four i
construction of approximately 200 units per year beginning
in 1979. The first phase provides for a mixture of housing
types by including approximately 105 apartment units and 100
single family detached units . Thereafter development will
follow the basic pattern outlined in Exhibits B and B1 with
construction beginning in the flatter elevation of the north-
west portion of the property and then proceeding toward th
base of the hills .
Community support facilities such as recreation facilities ,
trails , landscaped areas , roads , and public facilities wi ll
be developed concurrently with each development phase . The
basic water and sewer, systems will be designed and constructed
with Phase One . As development moves westerly additional
water storage and distribution systems will be constructed
A more complete description of the public service systems and
utility systems required for this project is contained in the
Environmental Impact Report .
27
I ' ;Cluster Cluster':
1 192 units 226 units
511�
00
1 Jt I
\ +�
�'�'1�,C1111,tf��Pl,/r���fM,.�^ ��f�iSzn���' •, ,
7� l\� 1. i\ly 9' V""1 'l y .f. \ � q�wM✓.�.��1}.W llj .'.P`/
l i�a='-• - -. aj: :_y� �� � v,r.!") ���l�i�.a!i?; j�.iii _.y
., 1
��/\\�.�i .;�//.�:i�A/ I l ��.:r�'���Ilill:S\T��:1���l•��P4ti:.r^:\:.����,.`•CKu�.lr \� 1 � .� \
tu
1
LEGEND
S.F. RANCHOS
S.F. DETACHED
S.F CLUSTER
CONDO CLUSTER
APARTMENT EXHIBIT
TOTAL
B
II 28 I —�
I'78I '79 080 81 '82 '83 '8�
PHASE 1
(100 APTS.,i00 S.RD) I I
PHASE 2
(163 APTS) I
PHASE 3
(130 AM)
PHASE 4
(226 CONDOS I
PHASE 5
(192 CONDOS I
PHASE 6
(100 S•F.D.)
I
PHASE 7
(227 S.F. CLUST.) I
PHASE 8
(80 S.F-D) I I 1
PHASE 9
(50 RANC UOS) I I
PHASE 10
(30 RANCHOS I I
-PLANNING]JENclNfM%lNL7 EXHIBIT
eo,�s7-¢.vcTory p
29
it
SECTION VI - GENERAL NOTES
A. Relationship to Municipal Code :
All development within Rancho Bella Vista shall comply with
the Palm Desert Municipal Code.
B . General Notes :
The following general notes are provided to clarify and supple-
ment the provisions of this development plan .
1 . Public Services and Utilities will be provided by :
a . Water - Coachella Valley County Water District
b . Sewer - Coachella Valley County Water District
c. Flood Control Coachella Valley County Water District
d . Solid Waste Disposal - Palm Desert Disposal Services
e . Electrical - Southern California Edison Company
f. Natural Gas - Southern California Gas Company
g . School Facilities - Palm Springs Unified School
District and Desert Sands Unified School District 1
h . Public Parks - City of Palm Desert and Coachella
Valley Recreation and Park District
i . Fire Protection - Riverside County Fire Department
j . Police Protection - Riverside County Sheriff ' s Dept .
2 . Terms used herein shall have the same meaning as
defined in the Palm Desert Municipal Code unless other-
wise specified .
3. As used herein , the phrases " Rancho Bella Vista , " and
"the development plan" are interchangeable .
4. Any details not specifically covered by this development )
plan shall be subject to the regulations of the Palm
Desert Municipal Code .
30
5. All references herein to ordinances are to ordinances
of the Palm Desert Municipal Code currently written
unless expressly indicated to the contrary . To the
extent legally permitted , in the event of any conflict
between this development plan and the General Plan ,
ordinances , or adopted policies of the City of Palm
Desert , then this development plan shall prevail . In
the event that any condition or term herein set forth
is declared illegal or unenforceable , the other terms
and conditions shall remain in full force and effect
to the full extent permitted by law.
6 . The Rancho Bella Vista Development Plan includes Sections
I through VIII , Exhibits A through D , and any subsequent
amendments to same .
7 . The configuration of each site or land use is generally
depicted on the Development Plan , Exhibit A. The
final boundaries of each planning area may be adjusted ,
at the discretion of the Planning Commission , during
subsequent levels of plan refinement and implementation ,
to the extent that the spirit and intent of the plan
can be retained . Density designations for any land use
area shall be the maximum limit of development .
8 . Residential areas are calculated in acres which include
the entire residential area exclusive of projected
public highway right-of-way , but may include areas for
recreation facilities , greenbelts , storm drainage
facilities , local public or private streets , trails , and
other open space uses .
9. All land included within this development plan shall be
zoned as indicated on Exhibit E . Zoning shall be
governed by the applicable provisions of the zoning
classification specified .
31
SECTION VII - LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Rancho Bella Vista - that portion of Section 1 , Township 6
South , Range 5 East , San Bernardino base meridian described
as follows :
Beginning at the northeast corner of said Section 1 ;
thence westerly along the northerly line of said Section
1 4 , 200 feet ; thence south 2 ,450 feet ; thence south 850
east 900 feet ; thence south 510 east 1 , 550 feet ; thence
east 500 feet ; thence south 550 feet ; thence south-
easterly to a point on the southerly line of said Section
lying 500 feet westerly of the southeasterly corner
thereof; thence easterly along the southerly line of
said Section 1 to the southeast corner thereof of said
Section 1 ; thence northerly along the east line of said
Section 1 to the point of beginning . Excepting there-
from any portion lying within right-of-way of State
Highway 74.
32
�STORN ORM FACIffES
Cluster
fi t r �r Condos /
p „ rr �Z Nsy>>
Wild
F.D.l ;
� (� i��n�1'p�, s Siry��� ! . �'� -'�fie' ' '1C��/♦��C'< L';�\�' ' t � ( /
._S.F Detaclled /
�,-
��'�'1 G�I�J .—ls 1 , n����`•"l�U-�\\� J.. rf���,�.,�.� \`�P�f` a-�l r� �� � , -
/fi —
�'��f�irl t � ` .)���c�r',V?��7\tit��r��L�G.�.�v.5,���C~, �,'���y},;J�•.�`r�'�i[�; ,.. //�
,L.
,�,-;r� ... . __����;.,` ,..�.�::• f.>✓ �� N: ��%���•, .S.F. Cluster jry
p In
pace
fie
�,Ls../, f �\ t $}s i f` ,"�'tL��'���\��'�. �m A<�'•�f^-��) r l�~/''� Irk. � {F •�.
LEGEND
MCollector Channel, Regional
Collector Swale, Local EXHIBIT
Main Watershed Runoff C
Small Flows To Be Picked Up \ Hcvul
On Street Drainage 1 4
33 _
%
\
$
� §
� \
i
\ �
%
i E
%
6
�
� � -- — --- - �
«
U. U) W W- d\o G s�
[ wo §■ & ■_
u � ,Q �
a ■
)
I
�{ 0�
PROPOSED SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR
VILLAGES OF BELLA VISTA
1. .That portion of Highway 74 which is immediately adjacent
to any Development Area (s) shall be dedicated and fully N
improved from the center line of said highway (one half
width improvement) as a condition of such Development Area (s) .
2. Safety lighting shall be installed by the developer in
accordance with design standards established in development
plans.
3. The project will include a total of not more than 1, 266
residential dwelling units.
4 . Developer may obtain a permit for rough grading upon
approval of Tentative Tract map (s) , Grading may extend
beyond the limit of the boundaries of the T. T. map (s) ,
but must be contained within the Villages of Bella Vista
project boundaries,
J5. Models/model complex may be constructed prior to recorda-
tion of final map subject to conditional use permit approval.
J6. Land designated as natural open space on Exhibit shall
be dedicated to the BLM upon approval of the Master Plan
and Overlay Zone. The deed or deeds for such land shall be
placed into an irrevocable escrow with instructions to
deliver said deed or deeds to BLM upon recordation of the
final subdivision map for the last phase of development
or whichever first occurs.
7. A right-of-way will be reserved by the developer for the
Palm Valley Channel through the project area, Building
permits shall not be issued for any development Area (s)
which will have a material adverse impact on the City/County
wide flood control .probiem until a solution to such flood
control problem, satisfactory to the County, has been
achieved, (a
8. On-site drainage facilities, other than the Palm Valley
Channel, will be constructed by developer subject to the
approval of the Coachella Valley Water District.
9 . All streets within the project, with the exception of High-
way 74 , will be privately owned and maintained by the master
homeowners association. C•C. JR__)
10. Prior to the development of the property, further detailed
archaeological investigations and recordings will be
accomplished (see EIR) .
11. Prior to extending the sewer and providing sewage treatment
to the site or any portion thereof, the developer shall
annex the property located within the affected Development
Area (s) to the appropriate district and pay the required
annexation fees.
12. Two water reservoirs will be allowed in the natural open
space areas.
13. Prior to any water service being extended to any affected
Development Area(s) , said Development Area Cs) will bey
annexed to the appropriate improvement district,
14. The Specific Plan and Overlay Zone Application as required
by the County and a Master Tentative Map, will be processed
and approved by the County concurrently. Final maps may be
recorded on Development Area (s) without the necessity of
recording the Master Tentative Map.
15, The Development Plan and Tentative Tract mapCsj on the.
Development Area (s) may be submitted, processed and approved
by the County concurrently,
16, Developer shall pay all fees and charges required as a
condition of approval of final subdivision map which shall
be calculated and paid in accordance with ordinances -of the
County in effect on June 1, 1981.
17. Utilities (electrical, telephone and television cables)
shall be installed underground.
i
Ae
Al
4Kl
7
N •,
v,L . m —Poo— — ----- --._-
J `J ORDINANCE NO. 1986 j fib
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT,
CALIFORNIA APPROVING A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM 'S' STUDY TO PR-3
S.P. (U.A. ) and O.S. (U.A. ) , AND A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
TO ALLOW 732 DWELLING UNITS AND RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND OPEN
SPACE ON APPROXIMATELY 680 ACRES, 3 MILES SOUTHWEST OF THE INTER-
SECTION OF HIGHWAYS Ill AND 74 ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 74 AND
CERTIFICATION OF THE RELATED EIR AS COMPLETE.
CASE NOS. : CZ 08-78 and DP 11-78
The City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN, as follows:
Section 1 : A Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR-3 S.P. (U.A. ) and
O.S. (U.A. is hereby approved for property described as:
APN 635-040-1 ,2,4,5 6,7,8
APN 635-050-1 ,2,3,4,5,6
APN 771-040-1 ,3
APN 771-030-1
as indicated on the attached Exhibit 'A' Case No. CZ 08-78.
Section 2: Based upon the recommendation of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission as stated in Resolution No. 413 and pursuant to Section 25.24.060 of the
Palm Desert Municipal Code, said Change of Zone is hereby made subject to compliance
with the Development Plan known as Case No. DP 11-78 as indicated on Exhibit 'B'
attached hereto, which is also hereby approved subject to compliance with the
following conditions:
STANDARD CONDITIONS:
1 . The development of the subject property shall conform substantially
with Exhibit "A" Revised (Case No. DP 11-78) on file with the Depart-
ment of Environmental Services as modified by the following conditions.
2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of any
uses contemplated by this approval , the applicant shall first complete
all the procedural requirements of the City which include, but are not
limited to, Area Development Plans (CUP Process) , Design Review,
Subdivision process, and building permit procedures.
_ . .._ _ . _.... _ .... 3. Construction of the total development may be done in phases; however,
each individual phase shall meet or exceed all municipal code require-
ments in that the City shall consider each phase as a single project.
4. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one
year from the date of final approval , otherwise said approval shall
,become null , void, and of no effect whatsoever. Further, the total
project shall be completed by January 1 , 1989. After said date,
this approval shall automatically expire for those remaining undeveloped
portions of the subject property and the City Council may initiate
rezoning procedures to revert said undeveloped areas to an 'S' Study
Zoning Designation.
5. Prior to the issuance of any City permits for the commencement of
construction on said project, the applicant shall agree in writing
to these conditions of approval .
6. The development of the property described herein shall be subject
to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are, in
addition to all the requirements, limitations, and restrictions of
all municipal ordinances and State and Federal Statutes now in
force, or which hereafter may be in force.
7. Any/all existing electrical distribution lines, telephone, cable
antenna television, and similar service wires or cables, which are
on or adjacent to the property being developed shall be installed
underground as a part of development from the nearest existing pole
- — - not on the property being developed.
ORDINANCE NO. 198E (Continued)
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
1 . The maximum number of dwelling units shall be 732.
2. Each phase of construction shall conform to all requirements of
Chapter 25.24 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code.
3. All buildings shall conform to a unified architectural theme.
4. All landscaping shall conform to an overall Master Landscape Plan
with particular emphasis on that portion of the development abutting
Highway 74, with emphasis on use of natural vegetation.
5. Development adjacent to Highway 74 should have setbacks in the range
'of 50' to 200' . Flexibility within the range is assigned to the
Design Review Board process in recognition of the fact that a flood
control channel will be dedicated in the vicinity of the easterly
boundary and where a 200' setback would unfairly eliminate useable
acreage, the setback may be reduced to 50' minimum.
6. All development and improvements proposed in Hillside Areas shall conform
to all requirements of Chapter 25. 52 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code,
the Hillside Development Overlay District. Hillside areas are defined
as those areas as having average slopes before grading in excess of
ten percent.
7. The developer shall provide the Coachella Valley County Water District
the necessary rights-of-way across the development, along with ingress
easements for maintenance, for the extension of the Palm Valley Stormwater
Channel to allow implementation of a flood control master plan for the
Palm Desert area.
8. The first phase of development shall include the dedication of all
proposed wildlife preserves and other public open space.
9. A wildlife watering facility of a design and location acceptable to the
Bureau of Land Management shall be provided as a part of the development
of the single-family Ranchos area.
10. Each area plan shall be designed to include the incorporation of the
suggested mitigation measures provided in the Final E. I.R.
11 . Development adjacent to Section 36 should have setbacks in a range from
50' to 200' . Flexibility within the range is assigned to the Design Review
Board Process and should be adjusted to provide compatibility with the
large lots and low density development existing in the Cahuilla Hills.
12. No apartments shall be allowed.
13. The developer shall construct such on-site drainage facilities as are
necessary for the protection of the units within the development, and shall
construct an on-site .drainage channel for the 100-year storm.
Any area lying westerly of the future Palm Valley Stormwater Channel in
(7) above shall be designed to drain into the 100-year storm channel when
it is built by the developer, and then diverted northerly to flow into the
jexisting Palm Valley Stormwater Channel . The design of such a facility
1 shall be such as to safely transport flows resulting from the 100-year storm
and shall require the approval of the CVCWD and the City of Palm Desert, and
shall satisfy Federal Flood Insurance requirements.
Up until such time as the channel is constructed and accepts stormwater,
drainage of the entire property may be directed in its natural flow pattern
to Highway 74.
14. The developer shall provide the CVCWD with a completed engineering design
for the Palm Valley Stormwater Channel portion of the Flood Control Master
Continued .
- 2 -
ORDINANCE NO. 198E (Continued)
SPECIAL CONDITIONS (Continued)
(14) Plan for the Palm Desert area. Said engineering is to cover the
Channel length from the mouths of Dead Indian and Carrizo Canyons
northerly to Highway Ill and is to be performed by a consulting
firm satisfactory to the CVCWD and on a time schedule satisfactory
to the CVCWD. The design shall be such as to safely transport
flows resulting from the Standard Project Flood and shall include
the design of a reduced interim facility providing for the 100-year
storm. Performance criteria for the design shall be determined in
advance by the CVCWD and the City of Palm Desert. The cost of the
design shall not exceed $225,000 under any circumstances. Not less
than two copies of said engineering design shall be furnished to and
shall become the property of the City of Palm Desert.
15. In addition to the on-site requirements of Special Condition #13, the
developer shall be responsible for the off-site right-of-way acquisition
construction, and improvement of a channel from the north boundary of
the property to the existing Palm.Valley Stormwater Channel and of the
existing Palm Valley Stormwater Channel north to Highway 111 . Any
right-of-way acquisition by the developer shall involve, atedeveloper' s
option, the cooperation and participation of the City, the CVCWD, or
both, along with utilization of all facilities described herein shall
be such as to safely transport flows resulting from the 100-year storm
and shall require the approval of the CVCWD and the City of Palm Desert,
and shall satisfy Federal Flood Insurance requirements. To every extent
possible, the design and construction shall be compatible with facilities
needed to transport the Standard Project Flood, so as not to require costly
removal of facilities when the ultimate facility is built.
16. At a point in time when building permits have been issued for 80% of
the total units to be constructed, no further permits will be issued
until and unless all the requirements of (7) , (13) , (14) , and (15) above
have been met.
17. To assure ultimate performance of (15) above, a performance bond in the
amount of $1 ,000,000 shall be posted in favor of the City of Palm Desert,
prior to the .date of the filing of the first application for a grading
permit. Each year, on the anniversary date of such bond, the amount of
such bond shall be increased to reflect inflation in accordance with the
recognized Consumer Price Index increase for the prior full calendar year.
The developer shall have the option at any time to decrease said bonded
amount by the deposit of cash. The developer may, at any time, declare
his intention not to make the improvements required by (15) , in which
case, within 30 days of such intention, he shall make a cash deposit with
the City in the then required bond amount. The City, and/or its appointed
agencies, shall then forthwith undertake the required improvements of
(15) to the extent that said cash deposit is of sufficient amount to complete
them, and shall relieve developer of Condition (15) .
All cash deposits and any monies accruing to the City of Palm Desert as a
result of bond collection shall be placed in trust by the City, such trust
to be used solely for the accomplishment of (15) above. l
- 18. The property shall be annexed into the Stormwater Unit of the District.
19. No two-story structures shall be permitted.
-3-
ORDINANCE NO. 198B (Continued)
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Palm
Desert, California, on this 8th day of February 1979, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Brush, McPherson, Newbrander, Wilson & Mullins
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
D ARD D. M LLINS, MAYOR
ATTEST;
r,.
SHEILA R. GIL N, CITY CUW
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFO IA
J
-4-
A.
z.
7
Off
00
�Z
op
........ . ....
57
n
IL-
. ...................
z.......
...........
4
.................
.............
........................ ....................
................
.... ... ... ......
-�A
Nsl.....f"4
—00-,
..........
. ...... ....
....... ..... .....
I U-0
'N
�� %' � _ice.<r'-= =i-;j�-��r 1� p�,:�,>,�.k�,o �Y ��i�, �� �;l (�
wo
-,nft\\)�j
12
CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL
�ul ORDINANCE NO. 1986
DATE February 8, 1979
d S2
owl
0.
//-73
__ $
- Wildlife
Preserve
y
ETBAC
J 1 Lry .r
I Wildlife Prey rvd_
I rt.
/ R �
/ k
PL 5
--= - - - - Park
LEGEND
DvVLE LL)NG
UNIT i 6 WILDLIFE PR-SERVE
TOi l. 7 PUBLIC PARK
8 OTHER OPEN SPACE
�R PRIVATE REC. FACILITY
l MAJOR HIGHWAY
Ji COLLECTOR I
i
CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL
z4L K - co � BOO ORDINANCE NO. 198E
o �� DATE February 8, 1979
QPal�%T OF�yF 0' _ IN REPLY REFER TO
WT United States Department of the Interior 1792 (C-066.25)
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
F,,, Riverside District Office
1695 Spruce Street
Riverside, CA 92507
JAN Z 6 1979
-Paul A. Williams, AIP
Director, Environmental Services
City of Palm Desert
45-27S Prickly Pear Land
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Dear Mr. Williams :
We would like to clarify a letter sent to you on August 30, 1978, concerning
the Rancho Bella Vista Project. There has been a misunderstanding with the
phrase public ownership," which is often used to describe Bureau of Land
Management ownership. The Palm Deser't,Planaing,Commission using the word
in a broader sense to also denote City ownership, -interpreted the letter to
mean that the Bureau would not accept"the donation/of-,the land if it were
offered by the developers, Western Allied Properties, Inc.
On; the contrary, the Bureau is._interested in the area proposed as a wildlife
area/open space. The area would be a valuable addition to those Bureau lands
in the Santa Rosa Mountains being studied jointly with the California State
Fish and Game Department and managed for the Peninsular bighorn sheep, a
state listed rare species. The proposed wildlife-Area/open space abutts
. Bureau land, receiving regular bighorn sheep use, on two sides, common
ownership of the land would 'facilitate management and habitat improvement,
giving added protection for this rare species.
We hope that this will clear up any misunderstanding of our interest.
Sincgrely yours,
ACTING Gerald E. Hillier
District Manager
Q�JOLUTION e
Oft
i
U C�Z
M
m
� 2
2
7j>6 19"16
r
VIII . RESOLUTIONS (Continued)
approval of Resolution No . 79-10 .
Councilman Wilson moved and Councilman McPherson seconded to
waive further reading and adopt Resolution No . 79-10 . Motion carried
on a 4-0-1 vote.
G. RESOLUTION NO. 79-11 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO.
78-80 , SECTION 1 , TABLE OF SALARY RANGES FOR CLASSIFICATIONS
AND POSITIONS , AND THUS ESTABLISHING A REVISED TABLE OF
AUTHORIZED SALARY RANGES FOR CLASSIFICATIONS AND POSITIONS .
Mr. Ortega reported that when the 1978-79 fiscal budget
was formulated, we were looking at Proposition #13 and
the effect it would have on Palm Desert . Subsequently,
Council decided to grant a request for a 5% cost-of-living
increase. This resolution grants an additional 2 . 5% cost-
of-living increase which the City Manager has recommended
for approval. -
Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Wilson seconded to
waive further reading and adopt Resolution No . 79-11 . Motion carried
on a 4-0-1 vote.
IX. ORDINANCES
For Introduction:
None
For Adoption:
A. ORDINANCE NO. 198 (AMENDED) - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CHANGE OF
ZONE FROM ' S' STUDY TO PR_3 $ .P . (U.A. ) AND O. S . (U.A. ) , AND
A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ALLOW 732 DWELLING UNITS
AND RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND OPEN SPACE ON APPROXIMATELY
680 ACRES , 3 MILES SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAYS
111 AND 74 ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY E CITY OF
PALM DESERT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 74 D CERTIF ?CATION
DP�TAD EIR AS COMPLETE. CASE NOS : C/Z 08-78 AND
11-78.
r. rtega stated that this ordinance approved the change
of zone and development plan for Annexation #7 which, as
explained previously, has been withdrawn. Nevertheless ,
it is Staff' s recommendation at this time that the City
continue with the adoption of the ordinance to establish
the City' s position with regard .to what it wants there .
The City Manager has talked with Mr . Tettemer, our Flood
Control Consultant , and as a, result of these talks , some
changes to the Special Conditions are being recommended, as
follows :
#5 - Makes provision for an ultimate channel right-of-way
wider than 200 ft.
#7 - Provides for legal ingress easements to the channel
as may be necessary for maintenance .
#13 Makes it clear that the developer must build the
100-year storm channel on his property. Also recog-
nizes that Federal Flood Insurance Agency could take
years to "approve" a design and thus changes wording
to "satisfies their requirements"
#14 Makes it clear that both a Standard Project Flood
design and a 100-year storm design are required.
Takes out one as an "alternative" to the other. Also
provides for CVCWD and City to set performance criteria
(flow, veolcity, debris vs . clearwater, etc . ) for the 1
Standard Project Flood Channel . Also makes certain
that at least two copies of the plans will be given
- - _ - — Pi
IX. ORDINANCES (Continued)
to the City.
#15 - Reinforces requirements for on-site channel improvements
by developer. Also requires "to every extent possible"
that the 100-year storm channel be "a part of" the
Standard Project Flood.
#16 - Corrects a typographical error " (12) " should read " (13) " .
#17 States that the bond of one-million dollars is only
for the off-site channel improvements . If the
_ developer should give the City the million dollars ,
the developer would still have to accomplish his own
on-site channel improvements .
Mr. Ortega that Ordinance No . 198 Amended (copy attached and
made a part of these minutes as Exhibit "A") would now
require a first reading , with the changes , as Ordinance No .
198B.
Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Newbrander seconded to
waive further reading and pass Ordinance No . 198B to second reading.
Motion carried on a 4-0-1 vote.
X. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER
None
XI. CONTINUING BUSINESS
None
XII. NEW BUSINESS
A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Technical Traffic Committee Recom-
mendations .
Mr. Beebe stated that the Council had never had Traffic
Committee minutes presented to them before , and Staff felt
it should be done from now on to make Council aware of what
action is being taken. The Council' s approval would also
make the action more official .
Councilman Newbrander moved and Councilman Wilson seconded to
approve the actions of the Traffic Committee . Motion carried unanimously.
XIII. OLD BUSINESS
None
XIV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
XV. REPORTS AND REMARKS
A. CITY MANAGER
None
B. CITY ATTORNEY
I
None
C. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
I
Councilman Wilson inquired about the progress on the Rancho
Road/Buena Circle Project . Mr. Ortega responded that it is
HUD money which has already been approved. It is now a
matter of getting the engineering work done by Mainiero &
Smith and putting it out to bid. This should be done in
about 60 days .
January 25 , 1979 Page 8 r
EXHIBIT "A"
ORDINANCE NO. 198 (Continued)
(AMENDED)
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
1 . The maximum number of dwelling units shall be 732k ,La Y
2. Each phase of construction shall conform to all requirements of
Chapter 25.24 of the Palm Desert.Municipal Code.
n
>3 All buildings shall conform to a unified architectural theme.
- 4. All landscaping shall conform to an overall Master Landscape Plan i
with particular emphasis on that portion of the development abutting
Highway 74., with emphasis on use of natural vegetation.
9N.^CIJ't^'�R-` lwUa�
—>5. Devea.opment adjacent to Highway 74 should have setbacks in the range
of 50' to 200' . <Flexibility within the range is assigned to the
Design Review Board process in recognition of the fact that a 200' ( �J-
flood control channel will be dedicated in the vicinity of the (Y
easterly boundary and where a 200' setback would unfairly eliminate
useable acreage, the setback may be reduced to 50' minimum.
6. All development and improvements proposed in Hillside Areas shall
conform to all requirements of Chapter 25.52 of the Palm Desert
`c Municipal Code, the Hillside Development Overlay District. Hill-
side areas are defined as those areas as having average slopes
before grading in excess of ten percent.
7. The developer shall provide the Coachella Valley County Water Dis-
trict the necessary rights-of-way across the development for the
extension of the Palm Valley Stormwater Channel to allow implemen-
tation of a flood control master plan for the Palm Desert area.
8. The first phase of development shall include the dedication of all
proposed wildlife preserves and other public open space.
9. A wildlife watering facility of a design and location acceptable
^ `A2 to the Bureau of Land Management shall be provided as a part of
the development of the single-family Ranchos area.
9J(C?10. Each area plan shall be designed to include the incorporation of
the suggested mitigation measures provided in the Final E.I .R.
11 . Development adjacent to Section 36 should have setbacks in a range
from 50' to 200' . Flexibility within the range is assigned to the
Design Review Board Process and should be adjusted to provide com-
patibility with the large lots and low density development existing
in the Cahuilla Hills.
- 12. No apartments shall be allowed.
13. The developer shall construct such on-site drainage facilities as
are necessary for the protection of the units within the development.
Any area lying westerly of the future palm Valley Stormwater Channel
in (7) above shall be designed to drain into the future channel at
such time as it is built, and then diverted northerly to flow into
the existing Palm Valley Stormwater Channel . The design of such a
facility shall be such as to safely transport flows resulting from
the one-hundred year storm and shall require the approval of the
CVCWD, the Federal Flood Insurance Administration, and the City of
Palm Desert.
�_- U P until such time as the channel is constructed and accepts storm-
water, drainage of the entire property may be directed in its natural
flow pattern to Highway 74.
14. The developer shall provide the CVCWD with a completed engineering
design for the Palm Valley Stormwater Channel portion of the Flood
Control Master Plan for the Palm Desert area. Said engineering is
to cover the Channel length from the mouths of Dead Indian and
Carrizo Canyons northerly to Highway 111 and is to be performed by
a consulting firm satisfactory to the CVCWD and on a time schedule
satisfactory to the CVCWD. The design shall be such as to safely
transport flows resulting from the Standard Project Flood and shall
include as an alternative, the design of a reduced interim facility
_ _ 2 _ _
EXHIBIT "A"
ORDINANCE NO. 198 (Continued)
(AMENDED)
SPECIAL CONDITIONS (Continued) :
14. Continued
providing for the 100-year storm. The cost of the design shall not
exceed $225,000 under any circumstances.
15. The developer shall be responsible for the off-site right-of-way
acquisition, construction, and improvement of a channel from the
north boundary of the property to the existing Palm Valley Storm-
water Channel and of the existing Palm Valley Stormwater Channel
north-to Highway 111 . Any right-of-way acquisition by the developer
shall involve, at developer's option, the cooperation and partici-
pation of the City, the CVCWD, or both, along with utilization of
their powers of eminent domain as may be necessary. The design of
all facilities described herein shall be such as to safely transport
flows resulting from the one-hundred year storm and shall require the
approval of the CVCWD, the Federal Flood Insurance Administration ,
and the City of Palm Desert.
i
16. At a point in time when building permits have been issued for 80%
of the total units to be constructed, no further permits will be
issued until and unless all the requirements of (7) , (1•3) , (14) ,
and (15) above have been met.
17. To assure ultimate performance of (13) and (15) above, a performance
bond in the amount of $1 ,000,000 shall be posted in favor of the City
of Palm Desert, prior to the date of the filing of the first appli-
cation for a grading permit. Each year, on the anniversary date
of such bond, the amount of such bond shall be increased to reflect
inflation in accordance with the recognized Consumer Price Index
increase for the prior full calendar year.
The developer shall have the option at any time to decrease said
bonded amount by the deposit of cash. The developer may, at any
time, declare his intention not to make the improvements required
by these conditions , in which case, within 30 days of such intention ,
he shall make a cash deposit with the City in the then required bond
amount. The City, and/or its appointed agencies , shall then forthwith
undertake the required improvements , to the extent that said cash
deposit is of sufficient amount to complete them, and shall relieve
developer of Conditions (13) , (15) , and (16) above.
All cash deposits and any monies accruing to the City of Palm Desert
as a result of bond collection shall be placed in trust by the City,
such trust to be used solely for the accomplishment of (13) and (15)
above.
18. The property shall be annexed into the Stormwater Unit of the District.
19. No two-story structures shall be permitted.
I
Pa�� I ?
January 25 , 1979 3 -
z.
ORDINANCE NO. 198B
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT,
CALIFORNIA APPROVING A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM 'S' STUDY TO PR-3
S. P. (U.A. ) and O.S. (U.A. ) , AND A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
TO ALL014 732 DWELLING UNITS AND RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND. OPEN
SPACE ON APPROXIMATELY 680 ACRES, 3 MILES SOUTHWEST OF THE INTER-
SECTION OF HIGHWAYS Ill AND' 74 ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 74 AND
CERTIFICATION OF THE RELATED OMPLETE.
CASE NOS. : CZ 08-78 and 11-78
The City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN, as follows:
Section 1 : A Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR73 S.P. (U.A. ) and
O.S. (U.A. is hereby approved for property described as:
APN 635-040-1 ,2,4,5 6,7,8
APN 635-050-1 ,2,3,4,5,6
APN 7717040-1 ,3
APN 771-030-1
as indicated on the attached Exhibit 'A' Case No. CZ 08-78.
Section 2: Based upon the recommendation of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission as stated in Resolution No. 413 and pursuant to Section 25.24.060 of the
Palm Desert Municipal Code, said Change of Zone is hereby made subject to compliance
with the Development Plan known as Case No. DP 11 -78 as indicated on Exhibit 'B'
attached hereto, which is also hereby approved subject to compliance with the
following conditions:
STANDARD CONDITIONS:
1 . The development of the subject property shall conform substantially
with Exhibit "A" Revised (Case No. DP 11-78) on file with the Depart-
ment of Environmental Services as modified by the following conditions.
2: Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of any
r. �4 uses contemplated by this approval , the applicant shall first complete
the procedural requirements of the City which include, but are not
limited to, Area Development Plans (CUP Process) , Design Review,
Subdivision process, and building permit procedures.
3. Construction of the total development may be done in phases; 4itweer;
-each-4-ndi-vidual-phase -shall--meet-o.r.-exceed all muni-c.ipal--code-require)
ments i-n that-the-Gi-ty shall consider eacii phase as a single_project.
4/ Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one'
year from the date of final approval , otherwise said approval shall
\v become null , void, and of no effect whatsoever. Further, the total
„! project shall be completed by January 1 , 1989. After said date,
this approval shall automatically expire for those remaining undeveloped
portions of the subject property and the City Council may initiate
rezoning procedures to revert said undeveloped areas to an 'S' Study
Zoning Designation.
G'u;� Prior to the issuance of any
City permits for the commencement of
construction on said project, the applicant shall agree in writing
U to these conditions of approval .
6: The development of the property described herein shall be subject
'to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are, in
addition to all the requirements, limitations, and restrictions of
all municipal ordinances and State and Federal Statutes now in
force, or which hereafter may be in force.
7. Any/all existing electrical distribution lines, telephone, r
antenna television, and similar service wires or cables, wh'
/ on or adjacent to the property being developed shall be ins
underground as a part of development from the nearest exist.
not on the property being developed.
O1 1ANCE NO. 198E (Continued)
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
1 . The maximum number of dwelling units shall be 732.
2. Each phase of construction shall conform to all requirements of
'yy Chapter 25.24 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code.
3. All buildings shall conform to a--unif-i-ed—ar-c-hitec-tural theme..
4. All landscaping shall conform to an overall Master Landscape Plan
with particular emphasis on that portion of the development abutting
Highway 74, with emphasis on use of natur l vegetation.
5. Development adjacent to Highway 74 should have setbacks in the range
of 50' to 200' . Flexibility within the range is assigned to the
Design Review Board process in recognition of the fact that a flood
control channel will be dedicated in the vicinity of the easterly
boundary and where a 200' setback would unfairly eliminate useable
acreage, the setback may be reduced to 50' minimum:
6. All development and improvements proposed in _Hillside Areas shall conform
to all requirements of Chapter 25.52 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code,
the Hillside Development Overlay District. Hillside areas are defined
I as those areas as having average slopes before grading in excess of
ten percent.
7. The developer shall provide the Coachella Valley County Water District
the necessary rights-of-way across the development, along with ingress
easements for maintenance, for the extension of the Palm Valley Stormwater
Channel to allow implementation of a flood control master plan for the
Palm Desert area.
8. The first phase of development shall include the dedication of all
( proposed wildlife preserves and other public open space.
111 ` '93 A wildlife watering facility of a design and location acceptable to the
� Pz"' Bureau of Land Management shall be provided as a part of the development
of the single-family Ranchos area.
10. Each area plan shall be designed to include the incorporation of the
suggested mitigation measures provided in the Final E. I .R.
11(. Development adjacent to Section 36 should have setbacks in a range from
j 50' to 200' . Flexibility within the range is assigned to the Design Review
Board Process and should be adjusted to provide compatibility with the
large lots and low density development existing in the Cahuilla Hills.
M, 2. No apartments shall be allowed.
�.�.r
13. The developer shall construct such on-site drainage facilities as are
necessary for the protection of the units within the development, and shall
construct an on-site drainage channel - for the 100-year storm.
^� Any area lying westerly of the future Palm Valley Stormwater Channel in
(7) above shall be designed to drain into the 100-year storm channel when
it is built by the developer, and then diverted northerly to flow into the
existing Palm Valley Stormwater Channel . The design of such a facility
shall be such as to safely transport flows resulting from the 100-year storm
and shall require the approval of the CVCWD and the City of Palm Desert, and
shall satisfy Federal Flood Insurance requirements.
t
i Up until such time as the channel is constructed and accepts stormwater,
drainage of the entire property may be directed in its natural flow pattern.
to Highway 74.
1.4%I The developer shall provide the CVCWD with a completed engineering design
1 � � 1 for the Palm Valley Stormwater Channel portion of the Flood Control Master
Continued-_
- 2 -
ORDINANCE NO. 198E (Continued)
SPECIAL CONDITIONS (Continued)
(14) Plan for the Palm Desert area. Said engineering is to cover the
Channel length from the mouths of Dead Indian and Carrizo Canyons
northerly to Highway 111 and is to be performed by a consulting
firm satisfactory to the CVCWD and on a time schedule satisfactory
to the CVCWD. The design shall be such as to safely transport
flows resulting from the Standard Project Flood and shall include
the design of a reduced interim facility providing for the 100-year
storm. Performance criteria for the design shall be determined in
advance by the CVCWD and the City of Palm Desert. The cost of the
design shall not exceed $ 2_000 under any circumstances. Not less
than two copies of said engineering design shall be furnished to and
shall become the property of the City of Palm Desert.
15. In addition to the on-site requirements of Special Condition #13, the
developer shall be responsible for the off-site right-of-way acquisition
construction, and improvement of a channel from the north boundary of
the property to the existing Palm.Valley Stormwater Channel and of the
existing Palm Valley Stormwater Channel north to Highway 111 . Any
right-of-way acquisition by the developer shall involve, at developer' s
option, the cooperation and participation of the City, the CVCWD, or
both, along with utilization of all facilities described herein shall
be such as to safely transport flows resulting from the 100-year storm
and shall require the approval of the CVCWD and the City of Palm Desert,
i and shall satisfy Federal Flood Insurance requirements. To every extent
j possible, the design and construction shall be compatible with facilities
! needed to transport the Standard Project Flood, so as not to require costly .
removal of facilities when the ultimate facility is built.
16. At a point in time when building permits have been issued for 80% of
the total units to be constructed, no further permits will be issued
until and unless all the requirements of (7) , (13) , (14) , and (15) above
have been met.
17. To assure ultimate performance of (15) above, a performance bond in the
amount of $1 ,000,000 shall be posted in favor of the City of Palm Desert,
prior to the date of the filing of the first application for a grading
permit. Each year, on the anniversary date of such bond, the amount of
such bond shall be increased to reflect inflation in accordance with the
recognized Consumer Price Index increase for the prior full calendar year.
The developer shall have the option at any time to decrease said bonded
amount by the deposit of cash. The developer may, at any time, declare
his intention not to make the improvements required by (15) , in which
case, within 30 days of such intention, he shall make a cash deposit with
the City in the then required bond amount. The City, and/or its appointed
agencies, shall then forthwith undertake the required improvements of
(15) to the extent that said cash deposit is of sufficient amount to complete
them, and shall relieve developer of Condition (15) .
All cash deposits and any monies accruing to the City of Palm Desert as a
result of bond collection shall be placed in trust by the City, such trust
to be used solely for the accomplishment of (15) above. _
18. The property shall be annexed into the Stormwater Unit of the District.
r`19. No two-story structures shall be permitted.
-3-
t
ORDINANCE NO. 198E (Continued)
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Palm
Desert, California, on this 8th day of February 1979, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Brush, McPherson, Newbrander, Wilson & Mullins
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
i3zn f
D ARD D. M LLINS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/D
SHEILA R. GILtTnAN, CITY C
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALI IA
f
-4
}
OMNI
j > f
—j�J�,
-
.,-' ��
/"�% /�/1 Sf1l �i�• '.. /.(y.-1; � l -I, � Ihr' f 4 � ^• \ i i tl(� _� _ �i
t \ 1
���✓ d,• 1�� f� : `_\ \. � /� i" I�r .�v io 1L�/ � � H lilwFJl�^.// 7
1.
8 V l
� .. o Lf o _ '!lam, ter" ,�' �/`'�"`•) ^�'' ` �'` ' �
rjo
I
CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE N
< OATS " February 8;
i
I
i
LAP /I-73
_. .1- -_ SooE3Acic
Wildlife
Preserve
�i
�P y
75.
/SETBACK
3 j / . .
ia
Public
= 7 Pay
LEGEND
6 WILDLIFE PRESERVE
UNITS
S 7 TojAL PUBLIC PARK
8 OTHER OPEN SPACE
�R PRIVATE REC. FACILITY l
MAJOR HIGHWAY
COLLECTOR I
CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL
C ��C� OO � BOO �1 ORDINANCE NO. 1-
o 3 DATE =February 8, 1974
5
regular City Council Meeting of October 26 , 1978 . )
Mr . Williams advised that the applicant had filed a letter
requesting that this item be continued again to the meeting
of December 14 , 1978 .
Mayor Mullins invited input in FAVOR of the zone change , and
none was offered.
Mayor Mullins invited input in OPPOSITION to the zone change ,
and none was offered.
Councilman Wilson moved and Councilman McPherson seconded to 1
continue the matter to the meeting of December 14, 1973 . Motion
carr-ied unanimously.
B. ANNEXATIO14 NO . 5 - MONTEREY AVENUE-COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE :
Consideration of Any and All Protests Regarding the Pro-
posed Annexation to the City of Palm Desert of 1 ,,046 Acres
Located Southerly of Country Club Drive Between Monterey
Avenue and Cook Street .
Mr. Williams reported that this annexation request was
initiated in June of 1978 by Resolution No. 78-81 whereby
Council instructed the City Clerk to file the application
with LAFCO. The annexation was requested by 35% of the
property owners in this area. The application was forwarded
to LAFCO and based upon its being a logical expansion of
our City' s boundaries , it was approved by the Commission
on September 14, 1978 , with direction to the City to com-
plete the procedure including holding a public hearing to
receive any protests .
Mayor Mullins declared the Public Hearing open and invited input
in FAVOR of the annexation. None was offered.
Mayor Mullins invited input in OPPOSITION to the annexation , 1
and none was offered. He declared the Public Hearing closed, 1
noting that no written protests had been received either.
Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Wilson seconded to
conclude the Public Hearing on protests and continue the matter to
the meeting of December 14 , 1973 elr-�_0 'd ys . Motion carried unani-
mously.
C. CASE NOS . C/Z 08-78 , DP 11-78 WESTERN ALLIED PROPERTIES :
Consideration of a R quest for Approval of a Change of Zone
from ' S ' Study to and O. S . (U .A. ) on Approximately
680 Acres and a Related Residential Development Plan to Allow
1 , 428 Dwelling Units and Related Recreational Amenities and
Open Space , the Site Being Generally Located 3 Miles South-
west of the Intersection of Highways 111 and 74 Adjacent to
the Southerly Boundary of the City of Palm Desert on the
West Side of Highway 74 and Certification of the Related
EIR as Complete.
Mr. Paul Williams reviewed the Staff Report in detail
(original on file with the City Clerk' s Office as Official
Record) . In addition, he reviewed each letter individually
which had been received relative to the case . He reported
that the Planning Commission had held 2 public hearings on
this case and dealt with the major concerns of density
from ' S ' , mitigation of traffic, negative scenic impacts ,
and impact on services . After much deliberation , it was
their recommendation to the City Council to recommend a
zoning of PR-3 , S . P . (U .A. ) , limiting the number of units
to 732 on 2-44-acres ; no structure within 200 feet of
Highway 74J to address the noise element of the development ;
dedication of all land and wild life preserves as part of
the first phase of the development ; no construction within
200 feet of Section 36 ; no apartments to be allowed; . imposing
of conditions as set forth by the Coachella Valley County
[dater District ; and no two story structures permitted any-
where in the development .
November 9 , 1978 Page
He pointed out that this recommendation had carried on a
3-1-1 vote , with Commissioner Kelly voting NOE and Commis-
sioner Berkey abstaining. Mr . Williams also reviewed a
letter from Mr. John Tettemer , the City' s Flood Control
Consultant , which expressed concern over the development
and the important issues with regards to this project in
the area of flood control. He recommended that the C_ounc-i-1
withhold and approval until the City is satisfied that the
work downstream is going to be adequate^o receive the pro-
posed diversion of waters or until the request of this diver-
sion is fully discl.o.s,ed Secondly prior to app 0 1;-£he
out ncil sho'uldasc_ertain_the_prop.o-sed Qs and debris control
facilities are appropriate and negotiatemaintena—n. can
siderati6na to be met to the satisfaction of the C`ety to
ensu e _ ey are integratable intotheplans for regional
fcLd oc ntroa wor-ks: -h-`sdl-y`,the'mantenance of-these
facilities should be supported financially by the_su
divider and carried-,gut by _a responsible governmental
agency; and fourthly , the City should indicate-the
for-mi- 4�g-at on—o-f'-the diversion andincrease in runoff
proposed.
Mayor Mullin s declared the Public Hearing open and invited
input in FAVOR of the project .
MR. RICHARD ROMMELLA, Planning Center, Newport Beach,
California, addressed Council as representative of Western
Allied Properties . He elaborated on the development plan
indicating that the intent and purpose of their plan was to
be creative and imaginative in design. He felt that it met
all the requirements of the City relative to density and
amenities . However, it was not a detailed plan but gives
two parts - prezoning (U .A. ) and the development plan report .
This plan is consistent , in his opinion , with the City ' s
plans and policies as he thought was pointed out in the first
Planning Commission report .
Mr. Rommella continued that the centers of the plan include
a mixture of densities ; densities graduating away from
Highway 74; preservation of land to make the land use ele-
ment of the General Plan; solution to flood control problems
as it is in general alignment with the Bechtel Report ;
particular attention to the Scenic Highway and preservation
of the desert . There are 16-17 parcels of land involved in
this ; promotes solutions to drainage and flood control ;
provides land for Dead Indian Park; ensures preservation of
approximately 345 acres of open space ; wildlife preserve ;
creates a continuing review process throughout the life of
the project ; provides ideal terminus for the area. He pointed
out that one of the specific issues discussed at the Planning
Commission level was that of the effect on schools . He
passed out a letter from the Desert Sands Unified School
District (on file as Official Record in the City Clerk ' s
Department) which indicated that there was an actual decrease
in students at the present time , and their first phase would
generate 10-20 students . He pointed out that Highway 74
is currently being widened and whereas it is currently
designed to handle 11 ,000 trips per day , it will handle
19 , 000 trips per day when completed. Co3c�rn_w.as_al-s_c
�re.ss.ed_th.at t e.ir n_r 3
1s d�d-r_a n in-to the—Cah i�1
Hi1 , and he did not feel tha.twas—eorrec�:A=little—of-
tria't area wil _, but it_� w_- ii_ncre.as.e—t-he—amount of—ru-nof_f---
by on.l� -y�+.1%.
Mr. Rommella expressed objection to the following recommen-
dations :
- Felt it impractical to remove 36 acres from the plan just
because 11 acres drain into the Cahuilla Hills .
- The apartment area was originally proposed to the Commis- J
sion at a reduction in density to 10 . 1/du. Although that
was low, his firm agreed to it . It was also suggested
that it be limited to single story. Under the existing
County zoning, 35 ' and 2-1/2 story buildings are allowed.
As an alternative , he suggested that no more than 50%
November 9 , 197S Pagk4
of the units should be 2 story and 100-150 ' setbacks from
the highway. There are design review procedures that allow
the City to veto two-story plans if they won ' t work.
- The EIR addressed the wildlife habitat , although it was
expressed that the 29 acre area was not a critical habitat
area.
- The issue of the low denim_, even_s.inglez-f-family estates ,
was�iscussed—but he`felt that t.o aban- don_.any growth,,at
a,l.l ou. e to= ac away from the City and develop—in
the Country They were concerned about annexing this land
to the howeve'r :whey fe.Lt it_shoul,d_be_in the Q ty.
- He did not feel that the acreage figures were consistent
between the Zoning Map and the development plan.
Th opos.ed=chang-e f.,zone w.ould=b_e comp,atib1,q in t_ha_t
t e General P1an �how_s,3=5:units—p.e.r acre .
It -is imp_oss.ible to make_this p,r__oj,ec.t workt t_=a .he_density
p esc_ibed by the P=ka-nn ng---G-ommis-s-ion_. ., -
Mr. Rommella expressed opposition to the following Special
Conditions :
1 . The restricted number of dwelling units (732) makes the
project impractical.
5 . This condition has never been imposed on any other
developer and he felt it discriminatory . He reviewed
the surrounding development to show that they did not
have 200 ' setbacks . He suggested that if the City
felt there was justification for 200 ' setbacks , that
they should outline them for all developments .
7 . No one knows where the drainage channel will occur.
A lot of planning needs to be done by all of the
engineers ; however, imposing no development westerly
is premature.
12 . Apartments are a form of ownership ; they are the same
as condominiums .
18 . Two-story structures are allowed under the existing
zoning of the County.
Mr. Rommella presented an alternative plan which proposed
PR-4 or a total of about 1., 200 units . He reviewed the plan
in detail noting that it did include apartments but that it
met the design criteria established by the City . The total
area in the request was 337 acres . Mr. Williams pointed out
that there was some type of discrepancy here in that the
original application had dealt with only 307 acres . Mr.
Rommella stated that this plan was drummed up in response
to the Planning Commission and concerns heard during the
hearings . It is not one unit per acre , but it is a facility
consistent with Planned Residential requirements .
Councilman Wilson asked what the applicant ' s reasoning
was in finding Special Condition #7 unacceptable inasmuch
as it seemed very necessary to him to protect existing l
and surrounding development . J
MR. RICHARD ROEMER, 115 LaCerra Drive , Rancho Mirage ,
addressed Council as President of Western Allied Properties .
He stated that before Council contemplated any further , they
should ask themselves :
1 . Do you want this land annexed?
2 . Do you want to go a long way in expediting a solution to
flood control problems that now exist and will continue
to exist unless development is allowed under the super-
vision of the C . V. Water District?
November 9 , 1978 Page 4
He pointed out that , while it looks very valuable , the
property consists of 15 different parcels of property with
numerous property owners . This will be the City ' s last
chance to consider it as developable in one unit . It can
be developed in fragmented pieces , but it will not give
engineering to the flood problem. The flood conditions the
City is imposing will cost over 1/2 million dollars , and the
property owners will be paying for it . He felt that the
negative comments received from the residents of the Cahuilla
Hills were of an emotional nature . His firm was presenting
the City the best possibility and maybe the only .possibility
of developing the land as one project . He stated that they
felt discriminated against inasmuch as he felt every other
annexation has at least received a PR-4 designation , par-
ticularly pointing out the Monterey Country Club annexation.
He continued that this piece of property is being singled
out with PR-3 with. numerous unreasonable conditions . He
stated that they are not presenting a give-away program.
They have spent a considerable amount of money in master-
minding this plan. The County zoning on that property is
R-1 , 'not R-1-1 , but it can be developed at 7 ,200 sq . ft .
lots and 2-1/2 story buildings . They would have to go back
to the County for approval . He concluded by stating that
his plans were entirely consistent with the General Plan
and he didn' t know what else they could do . He requested
a decision from Council in that the matter had been dragging
out for many months . He requested an adjustment to the
zoning to an overall PR-4 with reference to the newly sub-
mitted Alternative A.
The following other individuals spoke in FAVOR of the
project :
MR. GEORGE VALEUR, 74-500 Highway 74, Palm Desert , as a
Cahuilla Hills property owner and on behalf of Mrs . Ruth
Valeur and Mrs . Louise Shilling .
MR. HAROLD HOUSLEY, Project Engineer , Palm Desert , outlined
in more detail the proposed drainage information indicating
that they had to enter into an agreement with the C . V. Water
District whereby Bechtel would study their plans for this
area , at the developer ' s cost , and make changes/recommenda-
tions before any development could be started . He felt that
as a result of a letter he had received from Mr . Leon Berg ,
Federal Flood Insurance , that the flood insurance rates in
the City could be reduced as much as 90% with the implemen-
tation of the flood control facilities on this project .
Mayor Mullins invited input in OPPOSITION to the project , and
the following individuals spoke relative to their strong concerns
on flood control ; extremely high density ; and wildlife protection :
MR. JOSEPH W. CADY, 71-855 Jaguar Way , Cahuilla Hills
MR. HAROLD BARTEL, 71-250 Oasis , Cahuilla Hills
MR. STEVE LOSHER, 71-745 Cholla, Cahuilla -Hills
MR. DAVID SALVATERRA, 48-655 Coyote , Cahuilla Hills
MR. DAVID WARDELL, 71-251 Cholla , Cahuilla Hills
MRS . ANNE COOPER, 71-750 Cahuilla Way , Cahuilla Hills , on
behalf of all signers of the petition submitted to the
the Planning Commission.
l MRS . FAY DAVIS , 1695 Spruce Street , Cahuilla Hills
1 MRS . KATERINE KATIE , 71-855 Jaguar, Cahuilla Hills
MRS . ROSA KLINE, 71-795 Jaguar , Cahuilla Hills
Mayor Mullins recessed the meeting at 10 : 10 p .m. He reconvened
the meeting at 10 : 15 p .m.
MR. LOWELL WEEKS , General Manager and Chief Engineer of the
Coachella Valley County Water District , addressed Council
stating that he was not taking a position for or against the
project . He pointed out that the City of Palm Desert has a
high-risk flood designation because of two areas - Cat Canyon
and Dead Indian/Carizo Canyon. The Water District is now
working with Cal Trans to resolve the problem with the Dead
Indian Canyon. If the problem at Cat Canyon could be
November 9 , 1978 Page 5
_ 1�
resolved through this development , with both problems being
resolved by October , 1979 , then this designation would be
lifted. However , under Proposition #13 , there are no funds
and no solutions as to where to get funds . What the Water
District was looking at was working with the developer and
trying to get the flood insurance problem off the map for
the City, and the District has agreed to work with them
providing :
1 . They would have to pay Bechtel to do design for the
project .
2 . They would have to pay for final construction drawings
from the Episcopal Church to the southwest corner of
Silver Spur , and the cost will be $150-200 , 000.
3 . After that design is out , that portion of the property
will have to be dedicated for stormwater purposes .
4. They will have to construct a channel to withstand a
100-year flood to satisfy the Federal Flood Insurance
Plan, probably $500-700 , 000. The District did not -
agree to anything less than that .
Councilman McPherson asked what happened from Rocky Point to
Whitewater. Mr. Weeks responded that as far as the Federal
Flood Insurance is concerned , the rest is alright for a 100
year storm. The District has no plans to do anything with
it . It is adequate .
Mayor . Mullins invited rebuttal :
MR. ROMMELLA addressed Council pointing out that the dis-
crepancy stated by Mr . Williams relative to the 337 acres
on the revised plan vs . the 307 applied for on the applica-
tion was their mistake . He was looking at the overall
acreage , but they had no intention of going beyond the 307
acres . He pointed out that most of the input in opposition
to the development was to the originally submitted plan and
asked Council to consider their newly presented alternative .
Mayor Mullins asked how many units would be involved in the
new alternative , and Mr. Rommella responded 1 , 184 units .
MR. GEORGE VELEUR spoke in rebuttal pointing out that the
opposition received was from individuals outside the City
limits and of an emotional nature .
Mayor Mullins declared the Public Hearing closed .
Councilman Wilson stated that he personally did not feel
that the location of apartments in this area of town was
in keeping with the intent of the General Plan which is
to develop them near the Core Commercial Area. Both the
density and apartment issue have an impact on traffic . He
had had the opportunity to hear much of the Planning Commis-
sion deliberations and agreed with their lower density
recommendation from PR-5 to PR-3 . This particular area is
a transitional area in that it moves from very low density
presently existing to the proposed populated development .
He felt the PR-3 achieved a compromise or blend towards
moving from one type to another . l
Mayor Mullins stated that he felt that by the time Council J
tacked on all of these conditions , the developer was being
priced out of the market .
Councilman Newbrander stated that it is a very special type
of terrain and will take a very special type of development .
She indicated that she had attended the Planning Commission
meetings and concurred with their decision that 732 units
should be the maximum allowed.
November 9 , 1973 Page 6
Councilman Brush expressed the following alternatives he
felt Council had before them:
1 . No growth with R-1/acre .
2 . Follow the Planning Commission recommendation which is
somewhere between the first alternative .
3 . Let the developer build in the County where they can
put up 2-1/2 story buildings on as small as 7 ,200 sq .
ft . lots .
He indicated he would like to see what the County would per-
mit as their past record was no guarantee . He asked if this
alternate plan could be sent back to the Planning 'Commission
for review and have Staff work with the developer Ito see if
there is some possible compromise between the Planning
Commission recommendation and the new proposal , and also
have Staff investigate what the County will permit
Councilman Newbrander stated she felt this was passing the
buck again and stated she was ready to support the Planning
Commission recommendation with an additional condition that
the plans be approved by our flood control consultant .
Councilman McPherson stated that he felt this alternative
should be sent back to the Planning Commission simply as
a matter of courtesy. His prime concern was with the Palm
Valley Cannel . When Council had talked with Mr . Tettemer
a ways back , he expressed concern about it as it gets to
the Sandpiper development . If the developer fixes the
upper section and the lower section cannot handle the
watar , what then? He suggested that before any decision
be made , Mr. Tettemer should meet with Council again.
Councilman Brush stated that this project is large enough
and so vital to the community that it would be foolish to
jump in and make a hasty decision . The flood control ques-
tion is not answered yet and neither is the issue of what.
the County will permit .
Councilman Brush moved to send the alternate plan back to the
Planning Commission to allow them to look at it and give Council their
comments ; to have the flood control consultant review this and give
Council more information; to direct staff. to work. with the developer
to answer some of his concerns ; and to get further information from
the County relative to what they would permit . Councilman PcPherson
seconded the motion.
Councilman Wilson stated that the new plan clearly con-
tradicted the philosophy of the Planning Commission ; it
shows apartments and no setbacks while the Commission ' s
position and information was very clear. He indicated
he could support additional time to get some answers
relative to the Palm Channel., If there was such a con-
tinuance , the Planning Commission , in the meantime ,
could informally discuss the new plan, if they so
desired.
Councilman McPherson stated that he felt one of the func-
tions of the Planning Commission was to review these plans
and come up with a mutual compromise .
Mr . Bouman stated that he felt that if the matter were sent
back to the Planning Commission, they would want the same
information Council did. This could extend clear into
January. From Staff ' s standpoint , they would like to get
the additional information and be able to present it to
both the Planning Commission and the City Council .
Mayor Mullins called for the vote on the motion on the floor .
The motion was defeated by a 4-1 vote with Councilman McPherson voting
AYE .
November 9 , 1978 Page 7
Councilman Wilson moved to reopen the Public Hearing and con-
tinue the matter to November 30 , 1978 , directing Staff to : 1) schedule
a meeting with the flood control consultant to get a comprehensive
report ; 2) determine what type of development the County will allow;
and 3) work with developer to answer any concerns he may have . Council-
man Brush seconded the motion. Motion carried on a 4-1 vote , with
Councilman Newbrander casting a NOE vote .
Mayor Mullins declared the Public Hearing REOPENED.
VIII . RESOLUTIONS
A. RESOLUTION NO. 78-138 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
F THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLU-
TION NO. 78-79 AND THUS ESTABLISHING A REVISED TABLE OF
AUTHORIZED POSITIONS FOR THE 1978/79 FISCAL YEAR.
Mr . Bouman reported that this resolution and the next ,
No. 78-139 , dealt with two minor changes to the Table
of Classified positions in the Department of Building
and Safety. One change is a downward classification -
primarily because in the City' s recruitment , we were
fortunate to recruitsomeone extremely qualified but
lacking one of the requirements of the higher classi-
fication; thus the request for the downward change in
the Table of Classified Positions . The other request
is for a move of a Building Inspector Aid to Inspector I
in that this employee has been with the City under CETA
funding and has proved so capable that the advancement
is well-justified. Also the CETA funding has been can-
celled. -
Councilman Newbrander moved and Councilman McPherson seconded
to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No . 78-138 ; carried
unanimously. l
B. RESOLUTION NO. 78-139 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT , CALIFORNIA, ATTENDING RESOLUTION )I
NO. 78-80 , SECTION 5 , AUTO ALLOWANCES , AND THUS ESTABLISHING
A REVISED TABLE OF AUTHORIZED AUTO ALLOWANCES .
Mr. Bouman reported that this resolution established the
mileage allowances for the positions listed in Resolution
No . 78-138 .
Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Newbrander seconded
to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No . 78-139 . Motion
carried unanimously.
C . RESOLUTION NO. 78-140 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT , CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE 1978/79
BUDGET TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR REFUND OF
PRIOR YEAR' S REVENUE IN THE GENERAL FUND .
Mr. Bouman stated that Staff has no way of knowing how much
money we will need in this fund when it is established to
refund monies collected for unused applications . This
resolution requests an allocation .of $4 ,000 to the fund.
Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Newbrander seconded
to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No . 78-140 ; carried l
unanimously. J
D. RESOLUTION NO. 78-141 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS
FOR CITY ANNEXATION NO. 6 AND INSTRUCTING THE CITY CLERK TO
FORWARD THE ATTACHED PLAN FOR SERVICES TO LAFCO.
Mr. Williams reported that the Council had previously con-
sidered this annexation relative to prezoning' on the two
parcels . It is now time to consider annexation , and this
resolution initiates the annexation proceedings with LAFCO .
November 9 , 1978 Page 8
.:T
45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE (714). 346-0611 _
i
October 30, 1978
LEGAL NOTICE
CITY OF PALM DESERT
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
TO ALLOW 1 ,428 DWELLING UNITS AND RELATED RECREATIONAL
AMENITIES AND OPEN SPACE ON APPROXIMATELY 680 ACRES WITHIN
THE PR-5(U.A. ) AND O.S. (U.A. ) ZONES ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED 3 MILES SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAYS
111 AND 74 ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 74.
CASE NO. DP 11-78
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm
Desert City Council to consider a request by WESTERN ALLIED PROPERTIES
INC. for approval of a Residential Development Plan to allow 1 ,428' dwelling
units and related recreational amenities and open space on approximately 680
acres within the PR-5(U.A. ) (Planned Residential , max. 5 du/acre, upon annexa-
tion) 3 miles southwest of the intersection of Highway Ill and 74 adjacent to
the southerly boundary of the City of Palm Desert on the west side of Highway
74, more particularly described as :
APN 635-040-1 , 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
APN 635-050-1 , 2, 3, 4, 5 , 6
APN 771 -040-1 , 3 & APN 771-030-1
C (U
x
_ v
OF o,ylu _5E3T
�0
COUNTY OF Al:'_RS10E i
2
SAID Public Hearing will be held on Thursday, November 9, _1978., at 7:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers in the Palm Desert City Hall , 45-275 Prickly Pear
Lane, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place, all interested per-
sons are invited to attend and be heard.
SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert, California
POSTED: October 31 , 1978
L'
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY - SEPTEMBER 20, 1978
1 : 00 PM - CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I . CALL TO ORDER
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission was called to order by Chairman Kelly at 1 : 00 p.m. in
the Council Chambers of the Palm Desert City Hall .
II . PLEDGE Commissioner Fleshman
III . ROLL CALL
Present : Commissioner Fleshman
Commissioner Kryder
Commissioner Snyder
Chairman Kelly
Excused
Absence: Commissioner Berkey
Others
Present : Paul Williams - Director of Environmental Services
Murrel Crump - Principal Planner
Martin Bouman - City Manager
Clyde Beebe - Director of Public Works
Ralph Cipriani- Associate Planner
Kathy Shorey - Planning Secretary
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes of regular meeting of September 5, 1978
The following corrections were noted :
Page 1 , 6th paragraph from the bottom, 2nd sentence :
Commissioner Berkey "elected" should read "nominated" .
Page .3 , 5th paragraph from the bottom, "Exhibit A"
should be deleted. 2nd paragraph from the bottom,
"Exhibit B" should read "Exhibit A" .
Page 4 , last paragraph, 1st sentence, "unappropriate"
should read "inappropriate" .
Page 7 , 6th paragraph, 1st sentence, motion should be
by Fleshman and seconded by Snyder; !IpR=4'!should read
"Pit .
Page 5, 1st paragraph add : Commissioner Fleshman was
of the opinion that a maximum of 3 units to the develop-
able acre was the best solution.
Page 8 , 6th paragraph, add : All signs should be in
conformance with a total sign program for the complex; &
add quotation marks to the word restaurant ,
On a motion by Commissioner Snyder, seconded by Commissioner
Kryder , the minutes were approved as corrected; carried unanimously (4-0) .
V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
A. Letter from Richard Roemer-,—President of Western Allied
Properties, Inc. reques ng a 3kge of hearing dates for
Case Nos. C/Z 08-78 acid DP 11-78 .
RICHARD ROEMER, Pres. of .Western Allied Properties, Ind .
addressed the Commission noting the expense of delaying
these cases any longer .
{ Y
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission
September 20, 1978 Page Two
V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS (Cont . )
Commissioner Snyder noted that the Commission wants to make
the best decision and they need time to consider all the aspects of
these cases, including the EIR.
There was some discussion as to whether the cases could be
considered at the October 3rd meeting. The agenda already being
a very lenghty one for the 3rd, the Commission on a motion by Com-
missioner Fleshman, seconded by Commissioner Kryder , elected to
have a special meeting on October 5th at 7 : 00 p.m. to consider this
case; carried unanimously (4-0) .
B. Memorandum from the Director of Public Works to the
Director of Environmental Services regarding traffic
concerns of the Planning Commission.
Mr. Williams noted that the status of Painters Path will be
discussed at the next Traffic Committee meeting.
VI . PUBLIC HEARINGS
Chairman Kelly explained the Public Hearing procedures to those
present .
A. Case No. CUP 13-77 (Extension of Time) - BRUCE BEDIG,
Applicant
Request for a 1-year extension of time on the approval
of a Conditional Use Permit which provided for the
expansion of an existing mobile home park by adding
17 spaces to the Silver Spur Mobile Manor .
Mr . Crump reviewed the cases and noted the addition of two
new conditions covering the Drainage and Signalization Fund contri-
butions to be required of the applicant .
Chairman Kelly declared the Public Hearing open and asked
if the applicant wished to speak at this time.
BOB SAUNDERS, Silver Spur Mobile Manor, noted that
lot 17 had been deleted per the Design Review Board
and he asked if Condition No. 19 referred to these
16 units only. It was confirmed that it does.
Chairman Kelly asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in
FAVOR or in OPPOSITION to the proposed project extension of time.
Being none, she declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for the
pleasure of the Commission.
On a motion by Commissioner Kryder , seconded by Commissioner .
Snyder , the Commission approved the Extension of Time with the addi-
tion of the two new conditions by Planning Commission Resolution No.
404 ; carried unanimously (4-0) .
VII . OLD BUSINESS L
Mr . Williams stated that the Cahuilla Hills documentary would
be presented at the College of the Desert Library at 3 : 30 p.m. today
for any of the Commissioners that missed its previous showing.
VIII . NEW BUSINESS - None
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission
October 5, 1978 Page Two
IV. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . )
Commissioner Berkey left the room at this time due to a conflict
of interest .
A, ontinu om September 5 , 1978, Case Nos. C/Z 08-78 ,
DP 11-78 arch Related EIR - WESTERN ALLIED PROPERTIES ,
Applica
Request for a Change of Zone from ' S ' Study to PR-5(U .A. )
and O. S . (U.A. ) on approximately 680 acres, approval of
an overall conceptual Residential Development Plan to
allow 1 , 428 dwelling units and related recreational
amenities and open space, and certification of the re-
lated Environmental Impact Report as complete ; the site
being located approximately 3 miles southwest of the
intersection of Highways Ill and 74, adjacent to the
southerly boundary of the City of Palm Desert on the west
side of Highway 74 .
Mr . Williams reviewed the case and noted correspondence received
from various people opposing the change in density and the problems it
will create for the City & the area in question. He also noted the
concerns of the Design Review Board which included the discouragement
of the apartment area.
Chairman Kelly asked that the applicant clarify a few concerns
with regard to drainage.
RICHARD ROMELLI , the Planning Center , reviewed the
proposal and noted several important points that
should be considered : it is a mixture of resident-
tial types; it preserves the open space; it solves
flood problems; the scenic highway has been preserved;
land is being donated for a park; and, it helps solve
drainage problems. He also noted, that with the first
phase it should only create between 10-20 additional
students for the school district ; 51 . 97o will remain
open space; the proposal is in'-conformance with the
General Plan; development should only add 9, 000 trips
per day. He also reviewed the drainage problems.
Commissioner Fleshman noted that the General Plan shows 3-5
units in the area.
Chairman Kelly asked if the drainage plan proposed would take
care of the drainage problems in the Cahuilla Hills and the Silver
Spur Mobile Home park area. Commissioner Snyder indicated that this
proposal would tie in with the existing channel and those proposed
by the C.V. C.W.D .
HAROLD HOUSLEY, Project Engineer, stated that the
developer will improve the channel through the pro-
ject to the existing channel with the approval of
the C.V.C.W.D. as proposed in the Bechtel report.
Commissioner Kryder noted that he was absent from the last meet-
ing at which time these cases were dicussed, but that he had listened to the
tape of that meeting. He asked about the timing of the project .
Mr . Romelli reviewed the phasing map of the project L
and noted that the construction would be as described
in the Development Plan that was submitted to the
Staff . The general Development Plan goes through 1984-85.
RICHARD ROEMER, President.of Western Allied Properties, thanked
the Commission for having this special meeting to discuss
this case. He noted the advantages of having this area
developed as one project instead of "piece meal" .
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission
October 5, 1978 Page Three
IV. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont. )
A. Case Nos. C/Z 08-78 , DP 11-78 and Related EIR (Cont . )
ROBERT RICCIARDI , project representative, referred
to the Flood Insurance meeting held the previous
-- Friday, noting that if this project is put through
within two years, the basins could be put in and
serious flood problems could be controlled . He
also stated that PR-5 is not high density. He
also presented a petition, attached hereto as
Exhibit A , from the people that live downstream from
the proposed project stating that they are in favor
of this type of project .
Chairman Kelly noted that the Commission had met in a study ses-
sion prior to the meeting for the purpose of clarifying the staff recom-
mendations. No decisions were reached. Chairman Kelly then explained
the Public Hearing procedures to those present . She then asked if there
was anyone wishing to speak in FAVOR of the proposed project .
RUTH VALEUR 50-500 Highway 74, noted her agreement
with the proposal .
AMANDA MCMILLAN, 74-619 Catalina Way, stated she
had driven through the area and feels that this
proposal would be good for the area.
GEORGE VALEUR, 50-500 Highway 74 , he noted that in
the wild life area there is poaching and there is
dumping by many people of their trash in the area.
Also , the flora and fauna are being destroyed with
no control of construction in the area.
BOB LINSBEE, 73-382 Goldflower, in favor in the
project as he was hurt by the last flood .
CLAIRE GRAHAM, 73-307 Goldflower , stated she is not
for or against , but that the shooting and 'dumping
are a hazard in the area. Also , the density should
be considered seriously and she is also concerned
with the proposed apartments.
RUSS JOHNSTON, 73-266 Goldflower, stated he is for
the project with some reservations . He noted that
this is one of the best EIR' s he has ever read
and that he likes the project for the following
reasons: it is phased - over ten years; each phase
will be reviewed by the Planning Commission before
being approved; it is better to have a well designed
plan than a scattered one; need apartments in area
if they will have reasonable rates; flood control
proposed will be helpful for area; Planning Commission
must watch carefully the services for the area so that
they are able to keep up with the growth, these ser-
vices include gas, electricity, roads, traffic , and .
traffic control ; the low rise apartments should have
parking out of sight from the road ; and , CC&R' s should
be established for the Rancho area.
Chairman Kelly asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in
OPPOSITION to the project .
JOE CADY, 71-855 Jacguar , noted his concerns for the
flood control connections proposed, the drainage not
being adequate and referred to a letter he received
from the C.V.C .W.D . stating that there is no plan
for flood control improvements in this area other than
those proposed in the Bechtel report . He also noted
his opposition to the 400 apartments proposed as they
will become a ghetto in 10 years. He also referred to
a letter from CALTRANS stating that they will be im-
proving Highway 74 from E1 Paseo to Homestead within a
few years. What is a few years?
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission
October 5, 1978 Page Four
IV. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . )
A. Case Nos. C/Z 08-78 , DP 11-78 and Related EIR (Cont . )
DR. GERRY MEINTZ , 74-450 Painted Canyon, stated that he
is responsible for the student production of the film
about the Cahuilla Hills aired on Channel 10. He stated
that the City governments job is to choose a plan that
reflects the character of the area involved. He noted
that the kind of project proposed is his concern , as it
is not right for the area. He stated that the Planning
Commission should either reject the project or limit
it to 1 dwelling unit per acre.
ANNA HUNGER, 11 Cholla Lane, noted her concerns with
the increased traffic and need for traffic lights and
signals, and the accessibility of emergency vehicles
to the area and the number of emergency vehicles avail-
able.
STEVE LOSIN, 71-745 Chia, noted his concerns with the
apartments being low or medium income, the roads are
inadequate, developer should have to help with the
improvements in the area that he would be creating a
need for , and the density should not be the issue, it
is the type of development .
ANN COOPER, 71-750 Chia, the population increase would be
great ; services for area are not adequate, she objects to
the condos being next to her property.
ROSS DOW, #3 , Cahuilla Hills, stated he moved to the
Cahuilla Hills because Palm Desert is too dense, the
roads are a concern and the residents in the area paid
for the roads that are paved in the area. He favors
leaving the area as it is presently zoned.
HAROLD BARTOW, 71-250 Oasis Trail , stated that transporta-
tion in an emergency is concern and that flood control
is a concern .
TOM WADELL, 71-251 Cholla Way, should be area in City
that is kept natural and the City should not give into
these big developers. They should fight for good develop-
ment .
LEW CHAMBERS, 71355 Oasis Trail , flood control is concern,
if the roads are paved there will be no more perculation.
MRS. HANNA, Canyon Way, stated that the County won ' t
allow her to improve her residence so why is the project
going to be allowed.
FRED SCHACK, Hawthorne , Ca. , stated he has been concerned
with this area for over 25 years and he feels that any
decision on this area should be postponed until the pro-
blems that exist are solved.
MR. CADY, noted that the Cahuilla Hills residents paid
for the water pipes that are going in up Highway 74.
FAY DAVIS, representative of the Bureau of Land Manage-
ment , stated that the BLM would like to create a buffer
between the development and the wild life area. They
would like to set up a habitat management plan and they
are working in coordination with the Department of .Fish
and Game.
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission
October 5, 1978 Page Five
IV. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . )
A. Case Nos. C/Z 08-78, DP 11-78 and Related EIR (Cont . )
CHRIS COKER, 44-800 Verbenia, noted his concern
with the Big Horn Sheep and preserving them.
DAVID SALVATOR, 48-655 Chia Road, noted his concern
with the apartments being put in first which would
create immediate growth and the school can ' t handle
more students. He also stated he has been trying
to get electricity hooked up to his home for a
month and still doesn' t have it .
Chairman Kelly asked if the. applicant had any rebuttal to make
a this time.
Mr . Romelli , noted that most of the problems in the
Cahilla Hills are due to the piece meal growth and
poor planning. These problems could be solved with
controlled planning. He restated the comments on
growth and traffic and noted that the park land could
be useful and the flood control in the area would
be improved. He noted that he only objected to
Conditions No. 3 and 4 and that he felt these could
be worked out .
Harold Housley, stated that based upon a discussion
with CVCWD, the flood control downstream is adequate
but no more water can be dumped in the channel until
certain improvements have been made . He noted the
Ir letter sent to Mr. Williams that stated some condi-
tions that Mr. Weeks feels should be applied to the
l case. (This letter is part of the staff report ) .
Mr . Roemer , stated that he would like a decision to-
night and he does not want the case continued any
longer .
Chairman Kelly declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for
the pleasure of the Commission.
Commissioner Kryder stated that development is inevitable and
it is the Planning Commission ' s duty to see that growth is controlled.
He noted that he likes the plan in itself and the EIR is very good.
The City would benefit from the flood control and this is important
and essential for the project . He is in favor of the open space to
the east . It should be considered that this project will be done in
phases and that this will not be a general approval of the entire
development , whatever decision is made at this time. . He noted that
the concerns of the citizens are well founded, but each phase will
be public noticed and the citizens can speak again at that time . The
density should be cut down from what is being proposed by the developer .
Commissioner Fleshman stated that he appreciated the attendance
and hopes that the citizens will continue to work together and with the
( . City. He then noted that the area should stay at the low end of the
Il density range as stated in the General Plan, 3-5 per developable acre
is good. Commissioner Fleshman referred to the area in the canyon and
stated that it should not be developed . He stated that he would like
to see the City have the opportunity to approve some type of develop-
ment on this property, but not apartments and not at this density.
Commissioner Snyder stated that the City' s General Plan should
be adherred to and that he is in favor of lower density which would
allow an applicant to create a development in keeping with the character
of the City.
11
- 1
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission
October 5, 1978 Page Six
IV. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont . )
A. Case Nos. C/Z 08-78 , DP 11-78 and Related EIR (Cont . )
Chairman Kelly stated that she was glad to see the citizens here
to speak regarding this project . She stated that she agrees with the
comments that have been made and that she is not in favor of the pro-
posed density, but in favor of the area being developed as one develop-
ment . She asked for more reassurance on the flood control .
Mr . Beebe stated that the City will have very little say in
the flood control , that is CVCWD' s territory. He then noted that the
flood control program as proposed would be good for the City.
Chairman Kelly stated that she was still not satisfied and that
traffic on Highway 74 is also a concern.
Mr. Williams stated that the City is participating with CALTRANS
to improve Highway 74 between El Paseo and Homestead.
Mr . Beebe stated that the project Mr . Williams referred to is
being held up by an EIR. He noted that CALTRANS will call for bids
no earlier than January of 1980 and the City would then have to rethink
their stand as the price will be greater at that time and the City will
have to contribute more.
Chairman Kelly stated that she thinks the area on Highway 74
should be S.P. and there should be no two-story apartments. She then
referred to a joint meeting between the City Council and the Planning
Commission some two years ago and the opinion at that time had been
to keep the density low along Highway 74 .
Commissioner Fleshman proposed as a motion that the zoning
be PR-3 , S.P. and reduce the area by 26 acres (the canyon area mention-
ed previously) which would make 244 acres and a total of 732 units.
He then noted revisions to the conditions and Mr . Williams reviewed
those conditions and revisions to the Resolution as follows :
The heading of the resolution shall be changed to read
PR-3 , S.P. (U.A. ) and a total of 732 units; & continued
Public Hearing to October 5, 1978 ; 2nd page should also
note PR-3 , S .P. (U. A. ) ; modification of the map to ex-
clude the 26 acres (reasoning being that the comments
from BLM regarding the wild life preserve as being
dominant in the wash and it would limit development and
allow for natural drainage) ; Exhibit B is modified
similar to Exhibit A with the unit figure being changed
to 732 and the legend numbers 1-5 being replaced.
Special Condition No. 1 - units changed to 732
5 - No structure within' 200 feet
of Highway 74 (reasoning being
the noise element on Highway 74)
8 - Dedication of all land and wild
life preserves as part of the
first phase.
11 - No construction within 200 feet
of Section 30.
12 - No apartments shall be allowed.
13, 14, 15, & 16 - the Conditions
as proposed by the CVCWD.
17 - No two-story structures permitted
anywhere in the development .
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Snyder, that the Com-
mission approve the cases with the changes as noted by Planning Com-
mission Resolution No. 413 ; carried ( 3-1-1 ) AYES : Fleshman, Kryder ,
Snyder ; NOES : Kelly; ABSTAIN: Berkey.
IAINUTF_S AMENG[O
r
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission Exhibit A
October 5 , 1978 Page 1
We the undersigned, residents of the City of Palm Desert, hereby express
our approval of a project of the type proposed on the approximately 680 acres
I
located 3 miles southwest of the Intersection of Highways 111 and 74, adjacent
to the southerly boundary of the City of Palm Desert on the west side of
Highway 74 - because it will provide a substantial beginning toward,solving
Palm Desert's flood problems and provide for the orderly development of a large
single tract of land as opposed to the fragmented development of numerous
separate parcels which might not include the flood control solutions .
.Name Address
�ez
_- � G,2..(:�, f �C?i-'-tl:✓��4/ 1 L� -- � VQ � !' ! � �iy�Cr'.as_,i' I% ,:' ` ,
✓t
I
�/0
r i
C�LLO� .r "'/'/►� ! 7 Z
I �
II
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission Exhibit A
October 5, 1978 Page 2
We the undersigned, residents of the City of Palm Desert, hereby express
our approval of a project of the type proposed on the approximately 680 acres
located 3 miles southwest of the Intersection of Highways 111 and 74, adjacent
to the southerly boundary of the City of Palm Desert on the west side of
Highway 74 - because it will provide a substantial beginning toward solving
Palm Desert's flood problems and provide for the orderly development of a large
single tract of land as opposed to the fragmented development of numerous
separate parcels which might not include the flood control solutions.
Name Address
so
d /Lo -7
zll� 0—
Of
P- �a
AO& I P,�,
/ ,
Minutes
Palm Desert Planning Commission Exhibit A
October 5, 1978 Page 3
I
i
We the undersigned, residents of the City of Palm Desert, hereby express
our approval of a project of the type proposed on the approximately 680 acres
' I
located 3 miles southwest of the Intersection of Highways 111 and 74, adjacent
to the soXecause
�dary of the City of Palm Desert on the west side of
Highway 7 it will provide a substantial beginning toward solving
Palm Deseod problems and provide for the orderly development of a large
single tract of land as opposed to the fragmented development of numerous
separate parcels which might not include the flood control solutions.
Name Address
�h 73- 20Y
�I
I
i
I
I'
45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611
REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
DATE Oct . 6 1978
APPLICANT WESTERN ALLIED PROPERTIES
Rancho Bella Vista
Suite 1270, Union Bank Tower
1515 Hawthorne Blvd.
Torrance, CA_9.
CASE NO. : C/Z 08- DP 11-78 , nd Rleated EIR
The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request
and taken the following action at its meeting of
Oct . 5, 1978.
CONTINUED TO
DENIED
XX APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 413
PLACED ON THE AGENDA OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
FOR CONCURRENCE WITH THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DECISION,
)C PLACED ON THE AGENDA OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
N�V -O� k FOR PUBLIC HEARING.
Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the Director of Environmental
Services, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. _
PAUL A. WILLIAMS, SECRETARY
PALM DESERT PLANNING COPiviIISSSIO N
cc: Applicant
C.V.C.W.D. -
File
4
Cuf:a�zr OO ap 1EDM.TI=
45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE,`PALM DESERT,CAU FOR N IA 92260
TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611
September 25, 1978
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CHANGE OF MEETING DATE
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
TO ALLOW 1 ,428 DWELLING UNITS AND RELATED RECREATIONAL
AMENITIES AND OPEN SPACE ON APPROXIMATELY 630 ACRES WITHIN
THE PR-5(U.A. ) AND O.S. (U.A. ) ZONES ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED 3 MILES SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAYS
Ill AND 74 ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 74.
CASE NO. DP 11-78
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm
Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by WESTERN ALLIED PROPERTIES
INC. for approval of a Residential Development Plan to allow 1 ,428 dwelling
units and related recreational amenities and open space on approximately 680
acres within the PR-5(U.A. ) (Planned Residential , max. 5du/acre, upon annexa-
tion) 3 miles southwest of the intersection of Highway Ill and 74 adjacent to
the southerly boundary of the City of Palm Desert on the west side of Highway
74, more particularly described as:
APN 635-040-1 , 2, 4, 5,.6, 7, 8
APN 635-050-1 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
APN 771-040-1 , 3 & APN 771-030-1
--'mil•=. �: ) .EIT ',: :.(...�
pr eaw rssn t�
C°YHTY Oi PIVEP,I pE , �
OP //-78
3
L.�
SAID Public Hearing, previously scheduled on Wednesday, October 18, 1978, will
be held on Thursday, October 5, 1978, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in
the Palm Desert City Hall , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, California,
at which time and place, all interested persons are invited to attend and be
heard.
PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
PUBLISH: Palm Desert Post
September 28, 1978
-
45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT,-,CALLFO`RNIA9226On ,, I.
TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611
Sep_tember__l1.,_.1.9.78
LEGAL NOTICE
CITY OF PALM DESERT
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
TO ALLOW 1 ,428 DWELLING UNITS AND RELATED RECREATIONAL
AMENITIES AND OPEN SPACE ON APPROXIMATELY 680 ACRES WITHIN
THE PR-5(U.A. ) AND O.S. (U..A. ) ZONES ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED 3 MILES SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAYS
Ill AND 74 ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 74.
CASE NO. DP 11-78
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Palm
Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by WESTERN ALLIED PROPERTIES
INC. for approval of a Residential Development Plan to allow 1 ,428 dwelling
units and related recreational amenities and open space on approximately 680
acres within the PR-5(U.A. ) (Planned Residential , max. 5 du/acre, upon annexa-
tion) 3 miles southwest of the intersection of Highway Ill and 74 adjacent to
the southerly boundary of the City of Palm Desert on the west side of Highway
74, more particularly described as :
APN 635-040-1 , 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
APN 635-050-1 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
APN 771-040-1 , 3 & APN 771-030-1
z;T
O
11
y'
- CIT OF R4Lw CE SERT
WUNTY OF RIVERSIDE F�
#w 78 } -
SAID Public Hearing will be held on Wednesday; .October -1 8, 1978, at;7:00 -p.-m.
in the Council Chambers in the Palm Desert City Hall , 45-275 Prickly Pear
Lane, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place, all interested per-
sons are invited to attend and be heard.
PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
PUBLISH: Palm Desert Post
, September 14, 1978
u
t
HYDROLOGY ,
10 CFS - 20-CF -
r t
TO STORM CHANNEL
` BO CFS .- - ... ERAL
' IZ
ti
;HIS AREA DRAINS EASTWARD
-'� - mo -
S.F. E
LEGEND
SINGLE FAMILY ESTATES . AREA 2 WATERSHED
El, PROPOSED ZONING AREA 3 WATERSHED rj TR�Lii�G
AREA I'WATERSHED L7 AREA 4 WATERSHED 9 'C°xoo '$T
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIAl ss.
County of Riverside
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen
years, and not a party to or interested in the above Proof of Publication of
entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer
of PALM DESERT POST, a newspaper of general circu-
lation, published weekly, in Palm Desert, County of ...CSTY---OF__PALNL__DES_EAT------______-
Riverside, and which newspaper has been adjudged
a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior CASE NO. DP 11-78
Court of the County of Riverside, State of California, ------"..""_"."----------------------------
under date of October 5, 1964, Case Number 83658;
that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy,
has been published in each regular and entire issue of LEGAL NOTICE —
CITY OF PALM DESERT
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ALLOW'1,428'
said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on DWELLING UNITS AND RELATED RECREATIONAL AMENITIES AND OPEN SPACE ON,.
APPROXIMATELY 680 ACRES WITHIN THE PR-5(U.A.) AND'O.S.(U.A.) ZONES ON PROP-
the followingdates to-wit: ERTY GENERALLY LOCATED 3 MILES SOUTHWEST OF THE JNTERSECTION OF HIGH-
es WAYS 11) AND 74 ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF PALM,
DESERT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 74.
0p CASE NO.. DP 11-78 p Desert'lm
ng will be
approVal of a Residenttia DevelaomNOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN hnf Plonat a u ollal low 1r1428 dwellinnynu its and related eld before the recreational .
Plonnin Commission to consider 0a request b WESTERN ALLLIED PR PERTIES INC. for
amenities and open sooce on approximately 680 acres within the PR,-5(U.A.) (Planned Residential;'
max. 5 du/acre, upon annexation) 3 miles southwest of the intersectlon of Highwav 111 and 741
atllocenI to the southerly boundary of the City of Palm Desert an the west side of HIVhwav 74,more
_...._. _________9L14/78____-----------'------------.__.._. ParfIC91Pr1V described as: �. ;K1j?v,
APN 635-040.1, Z 4. 5, 6. 7, 8
APN 635-050-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 eh
APN 771-040.1, 3 6 APN T71-030-1 ,
:il v
—............. \
r, 8-3 43560(9)I0,
I certify (or declare) under penalty or perjury that the IN\\'�J.6 ".eR-i;D'
foregoing is true and correct.
G J , ..,.r,
c" or .4 `u .ccsc4r "' I
-
S' - - 1 tga
nature COUNT OF rvea siplt
Al
Date---------- - - `�e�t '-t 4+—-- • 197__B
at Palm Desert, California
SAID Public Hearina will be held on Wednesdav, October 18;:'19t 7:00 P.m. In the Council`
_ Chambers In the Palm Desert Gtv Halt. 45-275 Prlddv Poor.LanelkPalm Desert, California, at.
which time and Place, oil interested persons are Invited to attend pnd be heard.
PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary'
Palm Desert Planning Commission
?SSTA:�O POPA/1411
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIAJ ss.
County c Riverside
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen
years, and not a party to or interested in the above Proof of Publication of
entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer
of PALM DESERT POST, a newspaper of general circu-
lation, published weekly, in Palm Desert, County of ---C.ITY__OF—PALM__IIESE&T_------_____—__
Riverside, and which newspaper has been adjudged
a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior CASE NO. DP 11-78
Court of the County of Riverside, State of California, "-"-""""""""'-"""""—""---"""""'" "-- -- -- --- --"—
under date of October 5, 1964, Case Number 83658;
that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy,
has been published in each regular and entire issue of CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on REQUESTCHANGE OF MEETING DATE
FOR APPROVAL OF A RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ALLOW 1,428 DWELLING-UN.TS'
the following dates to-wit: SPACCEONAPPROXIND RELATED MA O OPEN
APPROXIMATELY CRESWITHINTHEPR-5
(U.A.)ANDO.S.(U.A.)ZONESON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED 3 MILES SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION
OF HIGHWAYS III AND 74 ADJACENT TOTHE SOUTHERLY
BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT ON THE t
WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 74.
CASE NO.DP 11 78
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hecringwlil beheld
9/2 8/7 8 before the Palm Desert Plannina Commission to consider a
__ reduest by WESTERN ALLIED PROPERTIES INC.for approval
'--------
---
----------
---------------------
---
—------
'-----
—---
------- Of a Residential Development Plan 10 allow 1,428 dwelling units
and related recreational amenities and open space on
approximately 680 acres within the PR-5(U.A.) (Planned.
ResI cnttol,max.5du/acre,upon annexation)3 miles southwest of
the Intersection of HIQhway Ill and 74 acl acent 10 the south(trly r
boundary of the City of Palm Desert on the west side of Highway
74,more Particularly described as: �L—_—_____-_ APN 635-040-1,2,4,5,6,7,8
APN 635-050-1,2.3,4,5,6 •'N
4 APN 771-03b13 r
I certify (or declare) under penalty or perjury that the a
w
foregoing is true and correct.
.tea
Si azure -
DP //-78 3`
Date__- --- --- @ ept�_7 @'-- 1978__ a a
at Palm Desert, California ,
:Y
SAID Public Hearin0,previously scheduled on`WednesdOV,
October 18, 1978,will be held on Thursday,October 5,1978,a1 7'00
p.m.in the Council Chambers In the Palm Desert City Holl.91 ,t175
Prickly Pear Lane,Palm Desert,California,at which time and
'place,all interested persons are invited to attend and be hedFd.,
PAUL A.WILLIAMS
Secretary „v1
Palm Desert Plannlnpv COmMI55100
I PDP-9/2811 •Ml
Y '
CITY OF PALM DESERT �'}YA to
STAFF REPORT
'Report On: Change of Zone, Related Development Plan, and EIR^ -
To: Planning Commission `X.''•, '
Applicant: Western Allied Properties
Case Nos: CZ 08-78, .DP 11-78, and Related EIR
Date: September 5, 1978
I . REQUEST:
1 . Request for a change of zone fro m.�S-'-Study to PR-5 (U A:) and O S�
�("U 7)on approximately 680 acres generally located 3 miles southwest
of-the:intersectiron-of Highways 111 and 74,adjacent to'theessoutherly
boundary`of-the City of-Palm Desert on the'west side of Highway 74.
2. Request_ for�appr-oval of an overall�conceptuaJoesidential Development
Plan io'allow 1 ,428 dwelling units and related recreational amenin,aes
and-open space on approximately 680 acres within the PR=5-(U-A:)-and
O-S—(U-A')`zones-at-th-e same 1`(jation.
3. kRequest for certif_icati.on_of_the_related-Envi_r-onmental_Impact Report
as complete.
II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
By Planning Commission Resolution No 1, recommend to the City Council
approval of the Change of Zone as modified, certification of the related
EIR as complete, and approval of the overall conceptual Development Plan.
Justification:
1 . For the Change of Zone:
a) The land use resulting from the revised Change of Zone would be
f more compatible with adjacent existing and proposed land uses .
b) The density resulting from the revised Change of Zone would be
compatible with densities permitted in the adjacent areas.
c) The proposed Change of Zone would be compatible with the Adopted
Palm Desert General Plan.
d) The proposed Change of Zone conforms to the intent and purpose of
the City's Zoning Ordinance.
2. For the Environmental Impact Report:
a) The EIR has been completed in accordance with the requirements
of CEQA.
b) Any potential adverse impacts have been considered as a part of
the EIR submitted.
E
3. For the Development Plan:
a) The proposed project conforms to the intent and purpose of the
PR Zone District.
b) The proposed project is well suited for the specific site and is
compatible with existing and proposed development in the area.
i,
c) The proposed project will not be detrimental to the health, safety,
and general welfare of the community.
Case Nos. CZ 08-78, DP 78, and Related EIR Page 2
September 5, 1978
III . CONTENTS:
A. Background Material for Proposed Change of Zone.
B. Discussion Pertaining to Proposed Change of Zone.
C. Background Material for Proposed Development Plan.
D. Discussion Pertaining to Proposed Developme t Plan. _
E. Proposed Planning Commission Resolution No.28
F. Proposed Phasing Plan.
G. Summary Report for Environmental Impact Report.
H. Related Maps and/or Exhibits , Correspondence Received.
A. BACKGROUND MATERIAL FOR PROPOSED CHANGE OF ZONE:
a. Location: Approximately 3 miles southwest of the intersection of
Highways Ill and 74, adjacent to the southerly boundary
of the City of Palm Desert on the west side of Highway 74,!
b. Property Description: APN - 635-040, 1 , 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
APN - 635-050-1 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
APN - 771-040-1 , 3
APN - 771-030-1
c. Parcel Size: Approximately 680 Acres.
d. Proposed Change of Zone: 'S' Study to: PR-5 - 307 Acres
co'.S. - 373 Acres
e. Existing Zoning: Riverside County - R-1 (One Family Dwelling)
and -(N-A (Natural Assets)
f. Adjacent Zoning:
North - City of Palm Desertr R M�
Riverside County R-1-1 (One Family Dwelling: 1 Acre)
South - Riverside County - (Natural Assets)
East - Riverside County - R-1 (One Family Dwelling)
Riverside County N_A(Natural Assets)
West - Riverside County -�Rr 1 0 e Family Dwelling: 1 Acre)
g. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential , 3-5 d.u./acre.
B. DISCUSSION PERTAINING TO PROPOSED CHANGE OF ZONE:
a
Change of Zone Request:
The applicant is requesting a Change of Zone from 'S' Study to PR-5 (U.A. )
and O.S. (U.A) on approximately 680 acres. The PR-5 (U.A. ) Zone designa-
tion is being sought on approximately 307 acres of the site and the O.S.
(U.A. ) Zone designation on approximately 373 acres. Both zones being
requested are compatible with the Palm Desert General Plan in terms of
land use and density. That portion of the site on which the PR-5 (U.A. )
is being requested is designated as Low Density Residential (3-5 d.u./
acre) on the General Plan. The remaining portion of the site on which
the O.S. (U.A. ) is being requested is designated as Wildlife Preserve.
There is no doubt that the Planned Residential Zone ought to be applied
to the developable portion of the site in order to achieve flexibility
in dealing with the natural topographical constraints that exist. The
question, then, is the most appropriate density. The General Plan per-
mits a density of from 3-5 d.u./acre so that the options for the developable
portion range from PR-3 to PR-5 without requiring a General Plan Amendment.
The resulting number of dwelli.n.g_units-al-lowed-wou7.d_r_ange from a low of
9P1 units under the PR-3 to 1 ,535 units under—the PR-5Y The proposed
Development-Plan-that--i-s..being submitted in conjunctio with the Change
of Zone provides for"Ji 428 dwelling units which actually represents a
density of approximately, 4.6 d?.u./acre, slightly below the PR-5 being
Case Nos. CZ 08-78, DP 78, and Related EIR Page 3
September 5, 1978 .
sought in the Charvge of Zone Application. In the Draft Environmental
Impact Report, the applicant discussed an alternative to the proposed
PR-5 zoning, Alternative "A" , which was based upon PR-3 zoning. By
determining that 921 dwelling units could be constructed on the 307
usable acres under PR-3 zoning rather than the 1 ,428 proposed, it was
stated in the EIR that a lesser incremental demand on community services
could result. However, it was pointed out that there is a continuous
interplay among various factors that determines demand on community
services and energy and that the suggestion of a lesser incremental
demand on community services due merely to a lower overall density is
not true. Due to the market mechanism, densities established by the
PR-3 might result in a predominance of traditional single-family
detached units which might, in turn, produce a higher incremental demand
for services and energy rather than a lower demand as this type of
development would encourage a more permanent population. Therefore,
discussion of the probably impacts associated with PR-5 development as
opposed to PR-3 development in terms of demand on community services
and energy is such a gray area due to its complexity that it is obvious
that the validity of PR-5 zoning.must be considered on its own merits.
As the proposed PR-5 does conform with the adopted General Plan, would
offer flexibility in dealing with the natural topographical constraints
on the usable portion of the site, would assist in protecting scenic
views and would be compatible with adjacent areas in terms of use and
density, the applicant's request for a PR-5 designation appears to be
a valid one.
Proposed Modification to the Change of Zone Request: _
The Staff is recommending a slight modification to the pro.pos-e.d_Change
of Zone to provide for-the-exclusion-of-approxi mately`36.5 acres in�the
northwestern area_of the_site_fr_om the_P.R-S_ designation—The designated
area presents major problems with regard to drainage since development
in the area would force surface runoff to drain to the Cahuilla Hills
area to the north. Therefore, Staff believes it would be in the public's
best interest to designate the 36.5 ac-r_es as O.S,(Open Space). The
proposed modi-f-i.cat.ion_would result in 270.5 acres of developable-lind
tversus_the proposed_3O7_acres of-PR=5'
C. BACKGROUND MATERIAL FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN:
(See attached Development Plan submitted by Western Allied Properties , Inc.
and prepared by the Planning Center. )
D. DISCUSSION PERTAINING TO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN:
Purpose of The Document Itself:
The purpose of the overall conceptual Development Plan is. to provide the
developer and the City with the means to agree upon specific goals and
objectives to be achieved on the property while at the same time providing
both parties with the flexibility to respond to both changing market con-
ditions and changing attitudes , needs and demands of City residents. A
Change of Zone application from 'S' Study to PR-5 (U.A. ) and O.S. (U.A. )
has been submitted in conjunction with this Development Plan as the
application of the PR zone appears the most logical way to confront the
major planning issues involved in designing a development for the subject
site. The overall Development Plan is intended to provide general guide-
lines for development that are consistent with the City's General Plan
and the provisions of the Municipal Code.
Development Plan Objectives:
The-pr-i-nci-pal-object9veswo.f_the Dev.eIopmen.t_P_lan to ensu are re-a�broad
(range of housing opportunities, maintain the desert environment; provide
for community activity and safety, provide a community design theme, ands
enhance the scenic qualities_of_the_P,alms-to-Pines_Highwa
Case Nos. CZ 08-78, DP 78, and Related EIR Page 4
September 5, 1978
General Discussion:
A detailed description of the proposed Development Plan can be found on
Page 3 of the attached "Rancho Bella Vista Development Plan". Basically,
the Development Plan outlines the proposed number of units , the corre-
sponding proposed densities , and the constraints and opportunities rela-
tive to the site which Have influenced the design of the project. Addi-
tionally, the document contains alternative development concepts that
were studied and explains their shortcomings as opposed to the design
finally proposed. Section II contains the Development Standards intended
to implement the Development Plan and provide for uses and operations for
each of the land use categories. Section III presents statistical data
relative to land use allocation, residential categories , and density
throughout the project. Section IV outlines review requirements and
breaks down the review process into three basic areas : site plan review;
design review; and streetscape review. Section V indicates the proposed
phasing of the project and Section VI indicates the Development Plan's
relationship to the Palm Desert Municipal Code.
The proposed Development Plan is obviously the product of intensive
research and sound planning principles. Once the Commission has come
to terms with t de he question of nsity,jthe.next �ss.important issue is the
mi-xtTr-d6T residential categories proposed:There-can be no doubt that
the-mixed categorieses`create-a-broader range of housing opportunities and
a more visually exciting project in addition to making it possible to
set aside so much of the site as common open space. Staff believes
some flexibility exists in the allocation of units to each residential
category. The plan proposed appears to have provided a balanced distri-
bution with the exception of the allocation to the apartment category
which_ ofmay be a bit_hi �.-gh-. herefor_e-, in order to reflect the suggested
reduction potential developable area�_to approzimate-ly-270-5 acres
the=Staff is recommending that t_h_e_apartment area be limited to a density
of 10.09 d.u./acre`
The proposed Conditions of Approval emphasize the fact that the Planning
Commission and City Council would only be_appr-oving_a_highly generalized
document_at this time-andf_hateach phase of development would be required
to proceed through the entire review process , as mini-development plans'-'
would be required for each phase with the related legal noticing and
bublic hearings in addition to proceeding through Design-Review,the
Subdivision_process_,_and_bui-lding_permit.procedures. Nonetheless , the
proposed Development Plan does provide a concrete framework from which
decision-making in the future on each phase will be far easier than
experiences we have had with other large developments in the City. This
is due to the fact that the proposed development outlines specifically
the number of units and types of units to be constructed in each phase
right at the beginning of the development process. Condition No. 4
requires that the developer adhere to a timetable for development,
otherwise risk losing approvals and the present zoning on the property
as the Staff recognizes the rapidity at which change may occur in the
vicinity and in the community at large.
The proposed Special Conditions of Approval guarantee that the total
number of dwelling unit would be limited to 1 ,3527. Any deviation
from this number would require an amendment to the approved Development
Plan. Special Condition No. 2 requires that each phase of construction
conform to all of the requirements of the Planned Residential Zone to
ensure that the same level of quality i.s_obtained i.n the-de-velopment as
others all_ov-er the_Ci-ty-.Special Condition No. 3 requires-that-ILIA
buildings conform_to.-a..uni-fied-architectural theme r This requirement
need not stifle innovation or imagination, but will guarantee harmony
and a pleasant blend, all of the aesthetic aspects of the project to
be reviewed by the City's Design Review Process-.,I-n-a-simal.ar fa_s_hion,
Special_Conditi-on-No:-4-requi-res-an-overall Master Plan of Landscaping
which should be used-to-unify--separate-residential projects within the.
Cove.ra_l- development.`—Spec-i-a-l-Conditi-on4No. 5 guarantees the preservation',
of scenic views along Highw.ay-74-and-the-Design-Review Process wil-1
guarantee extensive-landscaping along that corridor. Special Condition
(-No. 6 Ts extremely-imp-ortant_in_its_attempt-to-preserve-the natural
r .
Case Nos. CZ 08-78, DP •78, and Related EIR Page 5
September 5, 1978
contours and vegetation of the hillside areas by requiring compliance
with the City's requirements for development within the Hillside Overlay
District. The same Condition of Approval reiterates the Municipal Code's
definition of hillside areas as any area having-an average slope before
grading in excess of ten percent.
Drainage is a critical element of the. dverall Development Plan. A 200
foot wide strip of land is being reserved through the project for a future
regional glood control facility. A collector swale running from the
southeast to the northwest where it would empty into the future Palm
Valley Channel is proposed to carry most of the site's storm runoff.
Small flows-wou-ld_be picked up_on_str_eet_drainage.J A Master Plan of
Drainage would have to be approved by the Director. of Public Works and
he Coachella Valley County_Water_District prior to any construction.t .
M
l __
t rrt::•'+/-. ...
Q ' V;l ��1 / % 1 (l'`l \ Y `, r �t �tlll1l_ 1<<\ , 1 J
\..1� 'Ij " \')) ~\ �� \-11' :q —.1 Water'!
•1 1 t \ r` �I\, 1- '�'x
),� � � ) ^ne \ ,,.. s3 )/J \ff xl) �Pa•.� 1 " - e'�.•��
f' \' `J,r\'• � � \/f _ ltl girl 1 \//1,/ j\\� \ r�\ 11''� `
J1,
Jl7,
J ` t, ..;' 1� \� (•:, ��t ./'� �s 'i ��S / ' t�\'1 /�1��` It " :.j`''�wa �� , ...: .. " q` '.N4 \, �. 00
I � _ , \\\ � \� - ... � )'( ;.'/' � \ -1 - tWa r � L \ � - 'w\. I ' 7�_ Ste' �_ I o.���.is �'� \•
.1,. :i J r i. \�-°, /�1 \;� 1 it (It �y/ W ler• a ! \t o ``,rl /l�f t _ .ry�j "\j Water
_reek . , x . t\ ,: ` �p\y� 31`� $ i
Jl,J — x x
+\Cahu la HIIIS t:� Parky�;� ':'-_-as---- "\• F•-. �x '
! I t
��� .........
aPJ
' I 1X1, (,.L—\ fi 791 —� .,x�\ ! l` •y rl ` I;;.
1., 1 ¢e. U6t,\.,' >.— �`� ;.\ '° 11 / :1 I _ � /� al_I � •: . �,� \� , �'^" \ F. ' _
�r i �b tr,,l v .1� .1 .�-=')r,v °�)• �V v -;_f� t 1 ) L �1• � I � � , I `�G �\ `hc�l l`/�v v�2C �I t
[j_) <' yyc .x i➢ I ` o
ilC`` �( t 4"�=sue :�e
\` 1 l l A.YIaIM 0 Y lI'i• 1 1 \ t r \
\ �� � P.R.. 5
/....
eO
l \\�\ ?.t „'� , , ; J 1 \ /�. - <-�,\opl o� <4��` ' =rxc�1, �e o �• �C /- :1�. l.J' �/ {, J�f
.1
gJ ee.•�. � \ � rr� ��,) � -"\ �, �,I-,..� ...�(C \y(_ �
"1; i;` U1 //� i t� l �-y �_.�\ \ ?O.S: 1..\, ), .A ! -`J / i \ 1 '? \ ✓�`f�`, �� /\nrl �
,1 ,. / `\ �_ ` (i /� C ''lrl. ` '\f `����. t \. q.�� tl\Qoo I J \IIJ'II\.Il tt` j I \tom 1, (��•\ \ t
fl / _, •. tl `* ; ` o, �. J`� .CI ( �., .;O\\,�' lx / O \ � j � .\�\\�\ �I, � \ , -'�' 1 �� \ 1�G�✓ \l ? 1
��r `e\�� f 1,•� 1 \ 1 ,dam l\t - _ ��l ).' ! t i� / 1I ` �,I AA !!P � rN
1 :1 1 � ^ P ) � � •�\ , 1 1 . \ " f - 1 1 ! I I /1: \ ��� 1 q`li, 1 11( Il \ mil\\J ,/� � .\t
� I 1 ^ / J of \ \ l\ \ � , \•.. �i-.�- \ ! ! 1 \c i I! ! i((`—'\ 1 1 � ,
l� \ \\ I �-�fA\• L"\ \t S) /��� � , \ is ' '(Vine \\ '� 111 S, i � �, � 7 C .f `) j\/\r "F/ ,(li i�L� I ) 'i �,(��\ ;
° f , off - - jCl \ \1i.•
\,� `\ � �.��( / \ � f ill �v � l\ ✓/ ` ,`� r �( ��( <! 1 /
t 1 il` ,,� \ � �5��� '\•rr ,Z �.��\ f\` \ l '\/ 1'� � t� � - \ � ` \ t Ji � tJ�� ts\ \` .
111 Li?i-)1� I)) o`J,� \ ,/ 1 \\ �Z,�f4 I �,\\l�l /� .1-1F�, ,\ ��^�) \ I� `,�.v\^'\$ ._� �l ,/� 7 .��• J f / /1\'\!1)
1. �i tA� Ili) 1 �Il .. .ry� „ � v / . . )1�)•;-'�.na�����l.t ��fr" lT(�.'.- / �. . .
i 5' Condo 4Condo
I Cluster Clustera
192 units 226 units
6 s lei
L�
� ycz
\ v
i_
- I - i
J
LEGEND
S.F. RANCHOS
S.F. DETACHED
S.F CLUSTER
CONDO CLUSTER
4 APARTMENT EXHIBIT
TOTAL
Pr 'NNING COMMISSION
A RESOLUTION of RESOLUTION NO 39
pALM, bESERT THE PLANNING --� /
CITY COUNCIL CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING ON
AND O.S. A CHANGE OF OF THE CITY OF
pLETE, (U'A' ) , CERTIFICq ION FROM 'S APPROVAL TO THE
DEVE AND APPROVAL pF STUDY TO PR-5
AMENITIES T LAN FOR FA REVISED
OVERALL LCOED EIR AS Co�A. )
LOCATED APPROXIMATELY
pp OPEN SPACE ON DWELLING UNITS REEPTUAL
CREATION
ILES
OF HIGHWAYS ROX MATELY APPROXIMATELY RECREATIONAL
OF THE CITY 71 AND 74 ADJACENT SOIITHWEST . 680 ACRES GENERALLY I
CASE NOS. CZ PALM
DpSE DESERT ON THE EST SIDE HERLY BOUNDARY 8, AND RELATED OF HIGHWAY 74.
EIR.
did WHEREAS, the Pl
sider a an y °f Se scion
tial', max,he 9eho zone AaPtemberMm1978 Of the City of
tion), the 5 d'u /acre pplicat . , , hold
n from 'S, duly notice
Upon anne Palm Desert, California,
Plan for related Environmental I 'on) and S to pR-5 d Public Hearing
recreatioa 1 ,428 unit Pla ImPact Re O.S. N.A. ) (U.A. ) (Plann t0 co -
located anal 'al- Planned nned Residential port and (Open Space,(Planned Residen_
adjacent pprphematelys3an pen space on aDevelopmeht and Vera ll upon annexa-
HighwaY 74 more Particularly de�Outhofsthefpp o�fteeso680 ac e$, the Siteonal °pment
I cribed t Palm Highways lllgeneral )y
635- as: Desert on the west si and de o74
APN APN 040-1 2 6 7
APN 731 -050-1 2 ' 3' 4, 5 , 6 > 8
71-040-1 , 3 �$ qpN 771-030-7 - and
��Cit WHEREAS, said '
thatY °f Palm Desert Environcation has
a draft Env mental comPlied With
requirements of �r°nmental Impact Quality Procedure the requirementsof the
pact EQA; and Report has been completedtipn No. 78- f e
WHEREAS, at d Public Hearing with the
in
and arguments of all -said accordance
nsfderi
ieow:id the fol lowin interested ted persons de
eSponn9 and
hearing
Zone: to justify their 'ng to be rec mmendatiodoandd Planning CommissionI. Change of ns actions
a) The 1as described
wouldand use bp land
ercompatng from revised
Propose the
and uses. with adjacent Change Of Zone
b) The densityresulexisting and
wouadjacent compatible
�nwith°densi revised Chan Zone
c) The
Proposed Change
Adopted Palm Deset °f Zone would be
d) The pro os General Plan. compatible t
Chan with
he
ed Change of
Purpose of the Ci � Zone co
2, t.Y s Zoni nforms to the intent and
Environmental Impact n9 Ordinance.
a) The EIR has boeen Report:
b) re quirements f CEgq completed in accordance with the
Y potential adv
as a part erse
Impacts have been considered
Develo
3• of the EIR submitted.
pment Plan:
The
a) Purp0sesoOfdtheProject conforms
b) The PR Zone District the intent and
site Proposed prandoject
development inmtheareaW thIs lexistulti 9 for
the
eific
I
I
Ir l -
L-
Planning Commission
Resolution No. Page 2
3. Development Plan (Continued) :
c) The proposed project will not be detrimental to the
health , safety; and general welfare of the community.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE .IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Palm Desert, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true, correct, and constitute the
findings of the Commission in these cases. ,
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council approval of a Change of Zone from ' S' Study to PR-5 (U.A. ) and O.S.(U.A. ) as
shown on the attached map labeled Exhibit "A"
3. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
certification of the related EIR as complete. o,P N pI&0
4. That the Planning Commission does herby recommend to the City Council
approval of the overall conceptual Development Plan`(Exhibit B) as part of their
consideration of the related Change of Zone, subject to those conditions labeled
Exhibit "C" , attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at the regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 5th day of September, 1978, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
°i=RRGt __....- Chairman
ATTEST: \
PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Secretary
/sg
r i
l_
r
I co
��
boo
II
itL. ______--__'—_ - �.____-�✓_•_-"/y �/ l 'r � ��- � /
it :••��.'i• m � ��o ��� .
n
/�
7,1
(IVh!
-I,S I_o�/%�r'i v -0�. � �• • l II err � '��� ��:� � r'Y; 1�J �
H/1 id
� ��I��✓�-'� °�. li .it W I�, ii ,:� �' � y/�'! � .J.'s -r� E ���'I,l t
��,.-)� a -�-��q I II u � {� }'(� v :: ,,✓�, � � o°�� �I
I I
A.4- �
j\ f t✓(�/�7 I � U sa���`r n I " / ] �.�-�.t0 4i+�.i i�� r,l(r/ �/�j
��I () fj� �� � {i �/_r�� ) �r. .� � �t�1Vl{4�✓r r: `\1i�11 /�J�i�1
1 ( . \� ��`�CFRJ//���
///�//�f ` p S�,�J�V/�^��v C�-J"//�I I�i). //,,,,'✓✓������o o /`�� fj/�=-�s' �,� �� �'1;,
1 1I p �� � , �J t� -"� Gam, ''75 r� ti��('��' � ✓
si
CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
co RESOLUTION N0. � 7
o Y: o3 E-cj�—�l DATE
i
CASE No.
0 ,15
- \ 4 �l
I Wildlife
ldlif ve Clustered Apts.
Condos
I — -- -----
I ` S.F. Fianctios 5 /
I _ _ S.F.D. Apts. /
/
x1 r& f /
> s S_F_Detached /
�. -
I Wildlife Preserve �
4x -z; S.F. Cluster
Public i $
. . _
Park
LEGEND
DUAL Has ion Y'1
1 S.F. RANCHOS }45 1.0 44 6 WILDLIFE PRESERVE
2 S.F. DETACHED 92.6 3.0 278 7 PUBLIC PARK b 7�
3 S.F. CLUSTER 37 6.0 227 ���� ( 8 OTHER OPEN SPACE
4 CONDO CLUSTER 52.3 7.0 366 PRIVATE REC. FACILI SZ 3 46
5 APARTMENT 43.3110.1 437 3 MAJOR HIGHWAY
TOTAL 270.5 5 11352'
-� COLLECTOR
D_kYiJ
ELT
q .10
�7a8 s I e
Zll
Y3.5 )j t 110
L
CITY OF PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO.
5 DATE
In I
45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611
REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
DATE Sept. 6, 1978
APPLICANT WESTERN ALLIED PROPERTIES
RANCHOBEEL V ST
Suite 1270, Union Bank Tower
21515 Hawthorne Blvd.
Torrance, CA 90503
CASE NO. : C/Z 08-78, DP 11-78 and Related EIR
The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request
and taken the following action at its meeting of
Sept. 5, 1978
XX CONTINUED TO Oct. 18, 1978
DENIED
APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PLACED ON THE AGENDA OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
FOR CONCURRENCE WITH THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DECISION.
PLACED ON THE AGENDA OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
FOR PUBLIC HEARING.
Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the Director of Environmental
Services, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision.
PAUL A. WILLIAMS, SECRETARY
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSSION
cc: Applicant
C.V.C.W.D.
File
�/)
5S s
Condo 4Condo`'
Cluster Cluster '
1 u 192 units 226 units
.t
L4-'ll L �j ��( r' {��r{
} q 4
1�. ;. t\tip lY ✓
# '
ni
y -•:rl ' ry ,� T-
o"
_ S �, o(
�7 I S✓` J ��` j�,: r// irl�„1 ll' \y C.�\U \S- ''�'J �_� \__-`- 4f J
.'0,.
i
LEGEND
S.F. RANCHOS
S.F. DETACHED
S.F CLUSTER
CONDO CLUSTER
APARTMENT FIGURE.
TOTAL 6
�y�r�csnar
FIT,
\
13
\ \ \I ,,�
r
;r
�� �
�� _ __ ��y`��J�
���a:r���� �l
�- - ��- �
��'
�� ,�F
, �
�r
i �
' 1.� � �,D
,. � h
, �
� � �.
r•
�� �.. '..
1,,:
„ Y
4 �.. ., �.
��
y ..";
�„
i .
• 1
1 _
�- -� �
� �F
,�
yt
�?`p _.
'+' �G..
x -:
�UY^ - � "
. . ��
a�-
;,
�.
� ,
,3 ��-- �
"_ -.
� F •4
`M
� '� �•
I� r ' �
r- -
roc
`:y;RtV7� ,p
� � �
� � _ �
�..� � - ;
1
1-
? ��k
�{ �; �!, p
.»
T ' _
��
' i
', .
;� . � i'�
,,,.
i
��
,,.,
� ,
1��,� � �
�_
�_ --
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5 C.C.P.) /
,'1 v
'r f
STATE OF CALIFORNIAJ ss.
County of Riverside
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen
years, and not a party to or interested in the above Proof of Publication of
entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer
of PALM DESERT POST, a newspaper of general circu-
lation, published weekly, in Palm Desert, County of CITY OF PALM DESERT----------------_---
Riverside, and which newspaper has been adjudged
a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior
Court of the County of Riverside, State of California, CASE---UO...... P-_ -------------
under date of October 5, 1964, Case Number 83658;
that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
has been published in each regular and entire issue of
er ,LEGALNOTICE
said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on CITY OF PALM DESERT
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOP-
UNITS AN RE
the following dates to-wit: LAiEV RECREAT ONAL AM NWT ESI NG AND OPEN SPA E
,ON APPROXIMATELY 680 ACRES WITHIN THE PR-5(U.A.)
ND O.S. (U.A.) ZONES ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LO-.
Al F_D 3 MILES SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF
IGHWAYS III AND 74 ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERLY
EST BOURY OF NDADE OF,THE CITY
I YY7OF PALM DESERT' ON THE
CASE NO. DP 11.78
"NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN.that o'Pubile Hearing will be
6/ 7/7$_ ___—__--_ ----- held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a
------------------- request by WESTERN ALLIED PROPERTIES INC.for a0prov-
ot`of a Residential Development Plan to allow 1,428 dwellinc
urift and related recreational amenities and open space on an-
p roxlmateiv 680 acres within the PR-S(U.A.) (Planned Resider-
flat,max. 5 au/acre,upon annexation) 3 miles southwest of the
Intersection of HI?hwaV Ill and 74 adjacent to the soviheriv
boundary of the Cltv of Palm Desert on the west side of Highway
------------------------------—_____.—_.___—___---------------- 7_4 more particularly described as:
o. APN 635-040-1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
APN 63S-0SU-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
APN 771-040-1. 3 & APN 771-030.1
I
I certify (or declare) under penalty or perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct. JV,
Sign#ure2% 2x...,.
OP 11-746
Date.--------------------------——A°@___ + 197$_
at Palm Desert, California
r SAID Public Hearing will be held on Tuesday. September S.
78401 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers In the Palm Desert
I1V Hall,45.275 Prickly Pear Lpne;P61m Desert,California,of
• hich time and place,all interested persons are invited to attend
End be heard.
•PAUL A. WILLIAMS. Smrctary
olm Desert Planning Commission
POP-8/17N
f
' fv
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
City of Palm Desert
TO: Paul A. Williams, Director of Environmental Services
FROM: Ron Knippel , Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: C CaseVNo_�CIZ. 08-78 & DP 11;78 DATE: Aug. 14, 1978
An EIR has been completed and submitted for this case.
See Rancho Bella Vista EIR file.
i
Vv '
45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Case No. : DP 11-78
Project: Racidantial Development Plan
Applicant: Waatarn Allied Prnp ertiec _ Tnr-
Enclosed please find materials describing a project for which the
following is being requested:
Approval of a Residential Development Plan to allow 416 condominium
units, 476 apartment units, 536 single-family units-and related re-
creational amenities & open space on approximately 680 acres generally
located 3 miles southwest of the intersection of Highways III and 74
adjacent to the southerly boundary of the City of Palm Desert on the
west side of Highway 74 within the PR-5 (U.A. ) and O.S. (U.A. ) zones.
The attached data was prepared by the applicant and is being forwarded
to you for comments and recommended Conditions of Approval . The City
is interested in the probable impacts on the natural environment (e. g.
water and air pollution) and on public resources (e.g. demand for
schools, hospitals , parks, power generation, sewage treatment, etc. )
Your comments and recommended conditions of approval must be received
by this office prior to 5:00 p.m. Aug 18--, 1978, in order to be
discussed by the Land Division Committee at their meeting of Aug. 23rd
The Land Division Committee (comprised of Director of Environmental
Services, City Building Official , City Engineer, Fire Marshal and a
representative of CVCWD) will discuss the comments and recommended
conditions of approval and will forward them to the Planning Commission
through the staff report. Any information received by this office after
the receipt deadline will not be discussed by the Land Division Com-
mittee nor will it be forwarded to the Planning Commission for consid-
eration.
Very truly yours,
Paul A. Williams
Director of Environmental Services
PAW/ks
PLEASE RETURN MAP WITH COMMENTS
CIRCULATION LIST FOR ALL CASES
Circulation of Tentative Maps, Parcel Maps, CUP's, GPA's, etc:
REVIEW COMMITTEE:
Palm Desert Director of Environmental Services - Paul Williams
�_/2. Palm Desert Director of Building & Safety - Jim Hill
Palm Desert Director of Public Works - L. Clyde Beebe
✓4. Palm Desert Fire Marshall - Dave Ortegel
5. Robert P. Brock
Office of Road Commissioner and County Surveyor
Administration Office Building, Room 313
46-209 Oasis Street
Indio, California 92201 (Phone: 347-8511, ext 267)
6. Lloyd Rogers
Supervisor - Riverside County Health Department
County Administration Building, Room
46-209 Oasis Street
Indio, California 92201 (Phone: 347-8511, ext 287)
7. Lowell 0. Weeks
General Manager - Chief Engineer
JCoachella Valley County Water District (C.V.C.W.D. )
P. 0. Box 1058
Coachella, California 92236 (Phone: (714) 398-2651)
8. R. J. Lowry
Project Development Services
California Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 231
San Bernardino, California 92403 (Phone: (714) 383-4671 )
9. _
Director of Planning and Building
City of Indian Wells
45-300 Club Drive
Indian Wells, California 92260 (Phone: 345-2831)
10.
Director of Planning
City of Rancho Mirage
69-825 Highway 111
Rancho Mirage, California 92270 (Phone: 328-8871)
11. K 'rmit Martin
(Southern California Edison Company
v P. 0. Box 203
Palm Desert, California 92260 - (Phone: 346-8660)
12. Chuck Morris
General Telephone Company
62-147 Desertaire Road
Joshua Tree, California 92252 (Phone: 366-8389)
13. R. W. Riddell
/ Engineering Department
Southern California Gas Company
P. 0. Box 2200
Riverside, California 92506 (Phone: 327-8531, ask for Riverside
extension 214)
I.
Circulation List for All Cases
Page Two
14. Roger Harlow
Director - Pupil Personnel Service
Desert Sands Unified School District
83-049 Avenue 46
Indio, California 92201 (Phone: 347-4071)
15. Jim Langdon
Palm Desert Disposal Services, Inc.
36-711 Cathedral Canyon Drive
P. 0. Drawer LL
Cathedral City, California 92234 (Phone: 328-2585 or 328-4687)
16. Stanley Sayles
President, Palm Desert Community Services District
44-500 Portola Avenue
Palm Desert, California 92260 (Phone: 346-6338)
17.
Regional Water Quality Control Board
73-271 Highway 111 , Suite 21
Palm Desert, Ca. 92260
(Phone: )
18. Harold Horsley
Foreman/Mails
U. S. Post Office
Palm Desert, California 92260 (Phone: 346-3864)
19. Joe Benes
Vice President & General Manager
Coachella Valley Television
P. 0. Box 368
Palm Desert, California 92260 (Phone: 346-8157)
20. Don McNeely
President - Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce
P. 0. Box 908
Palm Desert, California 92260 (Phone: 346-6111)
21. Scott McClellan,
/ Senior Planner
Riverside County Planning Commission
County Administration Building, Room 304
46-209 Oasis Street
Indio, California 92201 (Phone: 347-8511, ext. 277, 278, & 279)
22. James Whitehead
Superintendent - District 6
State Parks and Recreation
1350 Front Street, Room 6054
San Diego, California 92101 (Phone: (714) 236-7411)
23. Les Pricer
Redevelopment Agency
73-677 Highway 111
Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 (Phone: 346-6920
24. Robert I . Pitchford, Chairman
Architectural Committee of the
Palm Desert Property Owners Assoc.
73-833 E1 Paseo
Palm Desert, Ca. 92260
Q LLXL
LU
u 45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT CA. 92260
/�����ZS�/nS��S02S�J L4 OZSl32SUZS "DEVELOPMENT PLAN"
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES RESIDENTIAL
PLANNING DIVISION
WESTERN ALLIED PROPERTIES , INC .
Applicant (Please Pant)
Suite 1270 Union Bank Tower, 21515 Hawthorne Blvd . 213/370-4507
Mailing Address Telephone
Torrance , California 90503
City State Zip-Code
REQUEST: (Describe specific nature of approval requested)
Request the approval of the attached Development Plan for Rancho
Bella Vista as required as a part of the approval process for the
accompanying Planned Residential zone change request .
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 680 acres .located in Section 1 and a portion of Section
6 (T6S , R5E , - 5131311) approximately 3 miles southwest of the intersection
of Highway 111 and 74 . The property is immediately adjacent to the
southerly boundary of the City on the ,west side of Highway 74 - see
Attachment Figure 2 .
ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. AP-635-040-1 , 2 ,8 ,4 , 5 , 6 ,7/AP-635-050- 1 , 3 , 2 , 5 , 4 , 6 and
AP-771-040- 1 , 3 and AP-771-030-1
EXISTING ZONING Riverside Count - Zonin R1 and N-A One Famil Dwelling
and Natural A¢ 'Ptc cpp Attachment Fiqurp 10
Property Owner Authorization THE UNDERSIGNED STATES THAT THEY ARE THE OWNER(S)OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN AND HEREBY GIVE AUTHOR-
IZATION on A eemelltS IZATION FOR THE FILING OF THIS APPLICATION. r
Y option W STERN ALLIED PROPERTIES INC. ,
dated 3/22/78 and Byb/� t�nchyy��6� /i1.4� 8/3/78
4 26 78. -- ��V��,E� 16 T DATE
AGREEMENT ABSOLVING THE CITY OF PALM DESERT OF ALL LIABILITIES RELATIVE TO ANY DEED RESTRICTIONS.
I DO BY MY SIGNATURE ON. THIS AGREEMENT, ABSOLVE THE CITY OF PALM DESERT OF ALL LIABILITIES REGARDING ANY DEED RES-
MAY PUCABLE TO THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN.
ISTERN ALLIED PR6W � = V Z. ,
/b/ nch el Vista ///
8/3/78
Itr MGNATLYRI DATE
Applicant's Signature WESTE ALLIED PROPERTIES, INC. ,
d/b/�a ancho 1 a V' a
g 8/3/78
SIGNATURE DATE
(FOR STAFF USE ONLY) ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS ACCEPTED BY
❑ MINISTERIAL ACT E.A. No.
Ll CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CASE NO.
❑ NEGATIVE DECLARATION
❑ OTHER REFERENCE CASE NO,
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Rancho Bella Vista - that portion of Section 1 , Township 6
South , Range 5 East, San Bernardino. base meridian described-
as follows :
Beginning at the northeast corner of said Section 1;
thence westerly along the northerly line of" said Section
1 4 ,200 feet; thence south 2 ,450 feet; thence south 850
east 900 feet; thence south 510 east 1 ,550 feet; the.nce
east 500 feet; thence south 550 feet; thence south- --
easterly to a point on the southerly line of said Section
lying 50O .feet westerly of the southeasterly corner
thereof; thence easterly along the southerly line of
said Section 1 to the southeast corner thereof of said
Section 1 ; thence northerly along the east line of said
Section .1 to the point of beginning. Excepting there-
from any portion lying within right-of-way of State .
Highway 74.
Figure 1
Yam'
r V pt ` J
Water
� ah illaq` -.ills
o 79
rV
2 1
.1 y✓—"�i ���.��,. @c
lea _ 1640,
11���jA
L�ji V r �iA� V oV �' �F V , �tTV� U f � �'
A r^ d �--. �L
ff
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP FIGURE
RANCHO MIRAGE QUADRANGLE . 1957
PHOTOREVISED 1972 6
't r, s• �!. r9 itr 6: . __ r°.. -, �. � ! E
4 � �" ��•� � �'k•• e�� -- � 14.E �d � �' �' t � Si � -%'
r ->r
3
r ..
t
„r w'40.L
P
AL
CITY OF .
PALM
DESERT
W-2 I
I
np �
CAMILLA
HILL R77
R1
R- 1-1
PROJECT N -A
AREA ;
W-2 ,
ZONING - COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
LEGEND
R-1 ONE FAMILY DWELLING
R-1-1 ONE FAMILY DWELLING: ONE ACRE
N-A NATURAL ASSETS
W-1 WATERCOURSE, WATERSHED AND
CONSERVATION AREAS
W-2 CONTROLLED DEVELOPMENT AREAS
FIGURE
10
THE FOR�NG
&RESEARCH
240 NEWPORT CENTER DWE SWTE 215
18 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660. (714) 640-4911
WESTERN ALLIED PROPERTIES , INC . ,
d/b/a Rancho Bella Vista
Suite 1270 Union Bank Tower
21515 Hawthorne Boulevard
Torrance, California 90503
August 3, 1978
PETITION
TO: THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA
In accordance with the proposed annexation of the
real property described below located in the County of
Riverside, pursuant to the Uninhabited Territory Act of 1939 ,
as amended, Government Code §§35300-35326, we respectfully
represent as follows:
1 . Pursuant to those certain Option Agreements
dated March 22 , 1978 and April 26 , 1978 , both of which are
recorded in the office of the County Recorder of Riverside
County in Book 1978 , page 60700 and Book 1978 , page 100411,
respectively, the undersigned is the prospective owner of
that certain real property described on Exhibit A attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference and bearing
Assessor' s Parcels as follows :
Book 635 at page 040 - Parcels 1, 2, 8, 4, 5,
6 and 7;
Book 635 at page 050 - Parcels 1, 3, 2, 5, 4
and 6 ;
Book 771 at page 040 - Parcels 1 and 3; and
Book 771 at page 030 - Parcel 1,
which have an assessed value as shown on the Equalized Assess-
ment Roll of the County of Riverside.
2 . The undersigned requests that said real prop-
erty be annexed to the City of Palm Desert with said real
property being zoned in accordance with Exhibit E 'attached
to the General Plan of Development concerning said real
property filed concurrently herewith, said Exhibit E being
entitled "Zoning" . This annexation Petition requests the
zoning designations set forth in the said Exhibit E and
should said zoning as applied for not be granted, applicant
reserves the opportunity to withdraw this Petition.
3. There are less, than twelve ( 12) registered
voters living within said real property.
WESTERNLLIED PROPERTIES , INC. ,
d/b/a. 'R cho Be a Vista
By (. /
Richard/ I. Roemer, President
2 .
CERTIFIED PROPERTY OWNERS' LIST
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF PALM DESERT )
I, RohPrt H_ Ricciardi hereby certify
that the attached list contains the names and addresses of all persons to
whom all property is assessed as they appear on the latest available assess-
ment role of the County within the area described on the attached application
and for a distance of three hundred (300) feet from the exterior boundaries
of the property described on the attached application.
I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.
(signed)
(date) / /7
NAME AND ADDRESSES OF PROPERTY OWNERS
FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON
CASE NO. JOB NO.
PARCEL NO. NAME ADDRESS
141 W. Jackson Blvd .
635-030-005 Edmund O'Connor Chicago, Ill . 60604
635-040-001 F.T. & Elizabeth A. Kiley 2777 E. Baristo Rd.
Palm Springs, Ca. 92262
686-320-016 State of California 1416 Ninth St. Room 1206-22
Dept. of Fish & Game Sacramento, Calif. 95814
686-380-010 Katherine E. Lindeman 3245 Watson Blvd,,
St. Louis, Mo. 33139
686-380-011 Dennis A. Cantor 881 Thomas Ave. #24
San Diego, Calif. 92109
686-380-012 William C. Bertrand 310 N. Hopi Trail
Rose Bertrand Yucca Valley, Calif. 92284
686-380-013 Harold LeRoy Ryker 2017 Argyle Ave.
Los. Angeles, Calif. 90028
686-380-014 Francis & Lola R. Perron 1430 Cataline Ave.
Seal Beach Calif. 90740
686-380-015 Carrell & Patricia Griffin P. 0. Box 80
La Puente, Calif. 91747
686-380-016 Michael & Mary Ann Scott 68-555 H. Street
Cathedral City, Calif. 92234
686-400-015 William & Jonna Cox, P. 0. Box 967
Cox Family Trust Palm Desert, Calif. 92260
NAME AND ADDRESSES OF PROPERTY OWNERS
FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON
CASE NO. JOB NO.
PARCEL NO. NAME ADDRESS
686-400-016 Grace G. Bramet P. 0. Box 304
Palm Desert, Ca. 92260
686-400-017 Danavon L. Horn 9262 Magnolia Ave.
Riverside, Calif. 92503
686-400-020 George A. & Beatrice Martin 11309 S. Inez Ave.
Whittier, Calif. 90605
686-400-021 Peter D. & Ann C. Cooper 1845 McFarlane St.
San Marino, Calif. 91108
686-400-022 Joseph W. Cady 1715 West Drive
San Marino, Calif. 91108
686-400-024 Everett & Faith Shilling 2200 N. Altadena Dr.
Pasadena, Calif. 91107
686-400-031 George J. & Mary L. Schubert 6056 Castana
Lakewood, Calif. 90712
771-030-002 Susan P. Walker 436 Citrus Ave.
Susan P. Souders Los Angeles, Calif.
771-040-002 Oliver & Carol D. Biederman P. 0. Box 365
Encinitas, Calif.
771-040-00 William M. Stewart 100 College Rd.
Fairbanks, Ak 99701
771-040-00 William M. Stewart
NAME AND ADDRESSES OF PROPERTY OWNERS
FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON
CASE NO. JOB NO.
PARCEL NO. NAME ADDRESS
771-040-008 Dept. of Interior Washington, D. C. 21401
771-050-001 Marvin & Rosemary Shirley P. 0. Box 130014
Sacramento, Calif. 95813
631-150-004 Beverly Gant 77 San Antonio
Helen & David Russell San Diego, Calif. 92106
The London Building
631-150-007 Silver Spur Mobile Manor 160 Franklin St.
( c/o Bruce E. Bedig Oakland, Calif. 92607
4
"EXHIBIT A"
OPTION AGREEMENT between ELIZABETH A. KIELEY, F. THOMAS KIELEY,
RUTH B. VALEUR LOUISE SCHILLING, SECURITY NATIONAL BANK, A NATIONAL BANKING
ASSOCIATION, TRUSTEE Under the Will of Owen Earl Coffman, Deceased, as to
8/10th interest in 240 Acres herein
referred to as "Optionors", and GEORGE L. GRAZIADIO and
ROBERT H. RICCIARDI, herein referred to as "Optionees".
DESCRIPTION:
in the unincorporated area of the County of Riverside, State of California,
described as follows:
PARCEL 1: Optioned by Ruth B. Valeur
The South half of the North half of the Northeast quarter of Section 1,
Township 6 South, Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian.
PARCEL IA: Optioned by Ruth B. Valeur
A right of way for road purposes over the Easterly 40 feet of the South-
half of the Northeast quarter and over the Easterly 40 feet of the
Northerly 990 feet of the Southeast quarter of Section 1, Township 6
South, Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridia.n.
PARCEL 2: Optioned by F. Thomas Kieley and Ruth—B Valeur 3at,, h
The North half of the North half of the Northeast quarter of Section 1 ,Township 6 South, Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian. 2,�,,.
EXCEPTING therefrom that portion deeded to the County of Riverside, b document recorded December 17, 1975 as Instrument No. 157124 of Official
Records of Riverside County, California.
PARCEL 2A: Optioned by F. Thomas Kieley and Ruth B. Valeur �� �C�i51be+h ,e,t.0
A right of way for road purposes over the Easterly 40 feet of the South half of the Northeast quarter, and over the Easterly 40 feet of the
Northerly 990 feet of the Southeast quarter of Section 1, Township 6 South, Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridians
PARCEL 3: Optioned by Ruth B. Valeur _
The South half of the North half of Northwest quarter of Section 1,
Township 6 South, Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian.
PARCEL 4: Optioned by Ruth B. Valeur and Louise Schilling
The South half of the northeast quarter of Section 1, Township 6 South,
Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian;
EXCEPTING therefrom the Northerly 330.00 feet thereof.
PARCEL 5: Optioned by Ruth B. Valeur and Louise Schilling
The South half of the Northwest quarter of Section 1, Township 6 South,
Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian.
EXCEPTING therefrom the norther.ly 330.00 feet thereof.
PARCEL 6: Optioned by Security Pacific National Bank "
I
The North half of the North half of the Southwest quarter of Section 1,Township 6 South, Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian.
A":
PARCEL 7 Optioned by Security Pacific National Bank
The North half of the North half of the Southeast quarter of Section 1,
Township 6 South, Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian;
EXCEPTING therefrom the Northeast quarter Of the Northeast quarter of
the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter, and the Easterly ,So feet
Of the Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast
quarter of the Southeast quarter of section 1, Township 6 South, Range 5
East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian-
PARCEL 8: Optioned by F. Thomas Kieley and Elizabeth A.. Kicley
The North half of the North half of the Northwest quarter of Section 1 ,
Township 6 South, Range 5 East, San Bernadino Base and Meridian.
PARCEL 9: Optioned by Security Pacific National Bank and Elizabeth A. Kieley
The South half of the South half V: t Ck he;Sout.h half of the North half of !L!}_f
the South half of Section 1, Township 6 South, Range 5 East, San Bernardi
Base and Meridian. no
EXCEPTING therefrom the Easterly 80 feet of the Northeast quarter of the
Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of � 1
Section 11 Township 6 South, Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and / Ji
Meridian;
.EXCEPTING therefrom that portion lying with the Pines to Palms Highways.
PARCEL 10: Optioned by Ruth B, .Valeur
The Northerly 330.00 feet of the South on half of the North one half of
Section 1, Township 6 South, Range 5 South, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian.
. PARCEL 11 : Optioned by Security Pacific National Bank
That portion of the Southeast quarter of Section 1, Township 6 South, T
Range 5 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, described as follows:
a
BEGINNING at the Northeast corner of said Southeast quarter;
THENCE Westerly on the North line of said Southeast quarter a distance
of 330.00 feet;
THENCE South 00" 01 ' East and parallel to the East line of-said Southeast
quarter a distance of 330.00 feet;
THENCE Easterly, and parallel to said North line, a distance of 250.00
feet;
THENCE South 00" 01 ' East, .and parallel to said East line, a distance of
740. 55 feet, more or less, to the Northwesterly line of State Highway
No. 74 (Palm to Pines Highway) ;
THENCE north 17' 56' East along said Northwesterly line a distance of
260. 05 feet; to the East line of said Southeast quarter;
THENCE North 00" o" west along said Fast line a distance of 823.21 feet
to the Northeast corner of said Southeast quart G�.=and the Poiht of
Beginning.
PARCEL 12: Optioned by Ruth B. Valeur
That portion of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of the
Southwest quarter of Section 6, Township 6 South, Range 6 ,East,
San Bernardino Base and Meridian, which lies Northwesterly of the
Northwesterly line of the Palms to Pines Highway.
Page 2
See attached pages for maps \t,
6 �
o
P.v.rcTs.G / t
/�/9eGEL /yfJ �GEG 4z- 1
- I
I ,
N ,
f 635-05 T.a�..or S12 SEC.i T.6S, R.Se +\
1.2
PEEP
i
> O
^ pA.ec e•G 6
II
o.
r.i•1- .1 �.• �
_ Page 3
Parcels 1- 11
Section 1
' t
•• / II
O O-, Z
o I
j. yOh t}
5
BOO .
V/
• __ � 80.00
h W pol
y �
Q jo faw N •
7
37.3 4 �....^
_a 12 7
Sl. ll;, o_r V1/1-64P
• 25-8-89 - '
R/S -10/13 .
` i
Page 4
Pat col 12
Section 6
That portion of the Northwest quarter of Section
6, Township 6 South, Range 6 East, San Bernardino
Basin Meridian, which lies northwest of the north-
westerly right-of-way line of Palms to Pines Highway
No. 74, as shown by Map filed in Book 60, Page 50 of
Records of Survey, Records of Riverside County.
EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING:
The northerly 42.00 feet of that portion of
Government Lot 4 of Section 6, T. 6 S . , R. 6 . E. ,
S.B .M. , according to the official plat thereof, lying
westerly of the westerly line of State Highway No . 74,
described as follows :
Beginning at the northwesterly corner of said
Section 6; thence S . 880 45 ' 50" E. , along the
northerly line of said Section 6, a distance of
1102 . 38 feet to a point of intersection in said
westerly line of State Highway No . 74 (100 feet wide) ;.
thence S . 17° 55 ' 56" W. , along said westerly line, a
distance of 43.85 feet; thence N. 880 45 ' 50" W. ,
parallel with and distant 42.00 feet southerly of,
measured at right angles from the northerly line of
said Section 6, a distance of 1088 . 86 feet to a point
of intersection in the westerly. line of said Section
6; thence N. 000 01 ' 00" W. , along said westerly line,
a distance of 42.00 feet to the point of beginning.
Containing 1.056 acres, more or less .
Reference is hereby made to Right-of-Way Map
No. 840-T on file in the office of the County Surveyor
of Riverside County, California.
EXHIBIT A A
-------------------------------
i
i
i
r
F i •- �i
_---------- ---------------------- --- 1-j
RESIDENTIAL * COMMUNITY RECREATION
NATURAL OPEN SPACE -4 SPECIAL ENTRY POINTS
- PUBLIC PARK • LANDSCAPED COLLECTOR
- LANDSCAPED GREENBELT
OPEN S PAC 7SYSTEM
ancho ist
8ella ,a
591
o � 1N to ��+•�� I�� •� _,,
31
Cahuilla Hflls.
1 / Y
791
Waie••
f- sta-Ir\�
•. 7� ��.ge oerACHm �Yegk,
2 SF EsmrES
o
Dead. I
c
I �T
r
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT,
ENT
PLAN
S.F. Estates /
0
LEGEND
• A�A�D�„� TOTAL �:;�- '
D S
S.F.ESTATES a1U 1A 8] mom WILDLIFE PRESERVE
S.F.DETACHED 92.6 10 ¢78 }, PUBLIC PARK
S.F.C*STER , B78'78.0 2;'7 PRIVATE REC. FACILITY
CONDOMINIUNt. 523 70 36tj
APARTMENT a3.3'11.0 476 MAJOR HIGHWAY
TOTAL 307.0 g.5 ia28 COLLECTOR
41(a.in ('yam M 771 rI1
' Bella
- "st
44 �tc1, gran
r � .
EXISTING MOBILE HOME PARK l
—_--- — —��—-- ---- BUFFER '
j,
GREENBELT
O
0 / LANDSCAPED
U / AREA
8 /
np
LL
ONE STORY
' HEIGHT LIMIT
APARTMENT AREIA .