Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout333122 vtILUUY puxb V �'.::..a,•�t t,.•;, �' `iv�s. N,,}{ft.rq a .,t +. " . area'm a�G 3 a e "vim La°� . . L. Qu nta a� 'k ,r �Du u_'S"vr•.w !'� .,y,={yet ' iwyk Bermuda. nesj Sun City;<: pushed for c14y;s'sphere By k ,PHIL-HAMPTON a+,q ;f 3tY I. AThe.Desert Su - F .=]iermuda Dunesand SunlCrty4r$j: Palm Springs,Ae 5,800-unit;ret re merit,cotiimunity,should fall,within: r- I.a;:Quinta's`sphereAl ft influence, a' w report says.., ' v, t i eThe rec mmenda t on by the staff <�+ t of the Riverside Lcc'I Agency Fore- mation Commission contradicts - results';ofeairecen4surveyswhichry a•.; � 'ifound,,that Berm s fresia• , dents overwhelminglyprefer Palm; Desert tq U.,Quintalifixhe unmcory ttporated area,must be addedtto-a+- �., . city's sphere"a,,5 rxsi' t _ Residents are almost evenly splits y on whether the area should.join'a;` ` city or1remain.dnincorporated,"ac-" cording to the;survejconducted by. 4 the"Bermuda'tDunes'�Community; Council;,which advises the RiverJ. side County Board;of Supervisors:. The Desert Sun The commission" Jsr.scheduled: 1 Thursday to consider competing re-;' cemetery.d ofl�e' r quests to add Bermuda Dunes to thej e cem spheres of La Quints,and Palm De;`," , oI, sert. Gaining a sphere of influence: is the logical .firstr step: toward ies - annexation. -. - K 1. Any annexation is subject twa , d .: . '.: y vote by landowners and registered;,' of to voters.. ut"I've g y daughter," City'officials'4in"La'Quin taland r. Palm Desert say they-wouldn't try thefts, which ' to annex the land without first hav. . d acres of the sing the consent of.residents. kson Street. , The commission is a state-man-j a dozen comt dated agency that draws municipal,•,' get any;' Kes- ;boundaries in Riverside County. I- The commissions staff'recom- more than 200 mends 5,104 acres north and southr t do something : of Interstate 10 between Washing-?., ted the signa- ton and Jefferson streets be added'. t board Oct. 8 t to La Quinta's sphere of influence:}.:: aid the district The area north of I-10 includes Sun' " d hiring securi-_ `City Palm Springs, the 5,800-uni I retirement community approved' o families who last month by the county Board of . Kestell said.' Supervisors. there. Frank Pankratz,a vice presidentf`, access to the, with Sun City developer Del Webb. , Corp., said the company is neutral.,. ' rilf's deputies A group of Bermuda Dunes resi- ; re often, said, .dents has requested that 2,205 acres ob Kamstra. t south of the freeway be added to' t . -Palm Desert's sphere. That section' includes only` the.area generally` "considered` Bermuda's Dunes " ®Viabout 31/z square miles south of the, .freeway and north of Fred Waring ' Drive between Washington and Jef 's centered on ferson streets. the site.•., j r The commission'staff thinks the; sites already area would be a more logical exten al'use that the Sion of La Quinta's boundaries than hey said. > Palm Deserts,said Assistant Exec-' . 'Grady's corn utive Officer Patricia'Bowler. ial traffic in' "[Washington Street is more par-'1': o.Just pulling ticularly identified with Pa Quinta,; nough." { Bowler said;and placing that free hief executive •way offrarrip in;the city's sphered. lemorlal; said' .would provides more equitable dis- eriously hurt Aribution of economic, opportuni-` ley with dupli, ties. Besides • Indian' Wells, La ' , 1, Quinta is the only city in the Coa-, agreed that a' chella Valley without a freeway; Quintu ie de. nifrlilnp, overallowing The commission includes county ' location. supervisors Kay Ceniceres and Nor;' ton Younglove; Cathedral City Coun- e was disap- cilwoman Rena "Pat" Murphy; and e,but that the F. Gillar Boyd, Jr., chairman of the, e the project. Desert Water Agency board. v January 13, 2000 STATMONT OF PuRPOBE BERNIIDA DDNBS CORKWITY COUNCIL FACT FINDING COMKITTE$ PURPOSE- To develop an unbiased study of the available options for consideration of the Bermuda Dunes County Administrative Area. This study is to be provided to the Bermuda Dunes residents so they may evaluate potential annexation. The purpose of the study is to provide information that may help decide what action is necessary to preserve the integrity of the community. OPTIONS: 1. Sphere of Interest - pre-annexation to a city 2 . Community of Interest - Riverside County study period 3 . Annexation to Palm Desert 4 . Annexation to La Quinta S. Maintain status quo The study is to include the advantages/disadvantages of each option. The study will be as detailed as deemed necessary by the Fact Finding Committee, and written in terms that will be easy to understand, REASON FOR ACTION: The Bermuda Dunes area is continually decreasing in size due to adjoining cities annexing choice parcels that are adjacent to their boundaries . If this continues, an island will remain that does not produce tax revenue. This island will remain in the county and the services provided will be scarce or non-existent . There was no interest to become a part of Indio. Therefore, Indio was not contacted. COM41TTZE NZMERS: Jay Steele 345-5380 Bobbie Steele 345-5380 Warren Bachtel 345-2246 Bob Rakoz 772-2114 Joe Deisenwroth 772-5840 Page 1 AA f Summation of respontee by the dtles: February 10, 2000 Questions: Palm Desert la Qulnte I. level of Police service: 1.5 officers/1000 1.0 officers/1000 2. level of Fire service: remain the same remain the same 3. Existing Fire Station on 421 : Open&staffed by volunteers 4. Existing zoning: Adopt existing review zoning S. Repairs on the existing streets: Determine needs Probable assessment 6. Change in the electrical service provider: no no 7. Change in property taxes: fire tax $48.00 to be determined S. How much are the assessments: Same as 7 above 9. Change In the Cable provider: no no 10. Any additional parks provided; Coachella valley Recreation District 11. Will the proposed park be affected: Same as 10 above 12. Additional recreational benefits: Reduction in fees none Reservation priority 13. Change in school districts: no no 14. Building fees: cost of service per schedule 15. Architectural requirements: per zoning per zoning 16. Policy on streedights: controlled/signalized Intersections 17. Existing businesses: license required license required 18. Existing home businesses: see 17 above 14. Additional requirements on the airport: no no 20. Sewer requirements: connect to available sewers on failure of septic 21. Existing homes required to conned to sewer: see 20 above 22. Bermuda Dunes obtain their own Zipcode: manclated.by postal regulations 23. Existing 2V2 plus acre lots, fanned or livestock: residential estate review zoning 24. Existing rural use be permitted: see 23 above Page 2 SURVEY ADVANTAGES TO BEING ANNEXED BY A CITY February 10, 2000 1. Higher property values 2. Easier accessibility to elected officials 3. Better control over development DISADVANTAGES TO BEING ANNEXED BY A CITY 1. Probable assessment fees for street Improvements 2. RestrIcWn on property use 3. Additional bureaucracy OPTIONS TO BERMUDA DUNES RESIDENTS----- PLEASE CIRCLE ONE CHOICE 1. Remain with Riverside County a. Community of Interest(2 year study period) (1) preserve the Integrity of estatdished unincorporated communities (2) allow specifled communities a fixed period of time to develop their long-term Jurisdictional organization plans b. Remain status quo and allow adjoining cities to annex the selected areas. 2. City of Palm Desert a. Request a sphere of influence and then be annexed to the city 3. City of La Qulnta a. Request a sphere of influence and then be annexed to the city 4. City of Indio a. Request a sphere of InRuence and then be annexed to the city This is a sample survey to get an idea of the desires of the community. The Council may decide to mail a ballot, If the Interest Is expressed, NAME: Print Signature ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER : Page 3 EXHIBIT t STUDY AREA MAP BERMUDA DUNES ANNEXATION AREA a a 9r�as.Ei Way H �^ d � b t o ,Una& a O a Or a w a d nd A� r n 1 Avenue f States S Or 4 �®g Dr di h St I I Y PI D� Berm T Or v Rd tthp in Ct la y _v 4a Ave �► red Wa ' S Was o a o a d v s V 0 Q% O 19%G*470�GWW Cap. ad Ao CD.Im. .._. 'r ' PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 # # k t k # # • t t t • t # 4 # k k t k •k t k t t k # k # t # E. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL o Cry Council Requests for Action: 1. Consideration of Adding Bermuda Dunes to City of Palm Desert's Sphere of Influence (Mayor Pro-Tempore Jim Ferguson). The following is a verbatim transcript of this portion of the City Council meeting: KeX BAC Mayor Buford A. Crites JF Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Ferguson RAS Councilman Robert A. Spiegel RSK Councilman Richard S. Kelly WG Wayne Guralnick MS Mike Smith FG Frank Goodman ED Ernie Dunlevy DJE David J. Erwin, City Attorney JMB Councilmember Jean M. Benson PD Phil Drell, Director of Community Development RAD Ramon A. Diaz, City Manager RDK Rachelle D. Klassen, Acting City Clerk BAC We have one item that is listed, and that is regarding annexation of Bermuda Dunes to Palm Desert's Sphere of Influence. Mr. Ferguson... IF This is actually a recommendation from the Annexation Committee that Councilmember Spiegel and I sit on. I see several members of Bermuda Dunes here this evening. We've been approached at various times over the past, I think, five or six years but more recently by representatives from Bermuda Dunes about — Does Palm Desert want to annex Bermuda Dunes? I've talked to Frank Goodman about it, I've talked to Ernie Dunlevy on innumerable occasions about it, and as an Annexation Committee, every time there's an article about La Quinta or Indio or the County or Palm Desert, I start getting phone calls from people in Bermuda Dunes. I also get phone calls from people in Bermuda Dunes who claim that the Community Council doesn't want to be annexed, or they want to go somewhere else, and Councilmember Spiegel and I decided rather than the question being phrased, "Does Palm Desert warn to annex Bermuda Dunes?", the question really ought to be,. "Does Bermuda Dunes want to come to Palm Desert?" And we met and the recommendation that we made to the City Council was that it, Bermuda Dunes, in a unified voice, decided it wanted to come to the City of Palm Desert. And by unified, we meant 75% or more, of the people asked say 24 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 • r * • * • . s s * • s ■ r r s • r s * + • s s s � • s r s . they want to come to Palm Desert, and it can be made financially feasible to come in, however mechanism that Bermuda Dunes wants to take a look at doing that, that Palm Desert would welcome them into our community. And so, rather than having us continually being asked, "Do you want us?", the answer now is, "Sure, but you need to take the steps to make that happen." And that was the recommendation from the Annexation Committee to the Council for discussion. BAC Mr. Spiegel? RAS I have...there's something I'd like to add to that, Mayor Pro-Tem Ferguson. We have done a fiscal impact report on annexing Bermuda Dunes in the past, as most of you are aware, and La Quinta has also done a fiscal impact report on annexing Bermuda Dunes. That's all of Bermuda Dunes. That's not cherry picking, that's all of Bermuda Dunes. And the report gave us a, really, a negative impact. In other words, it would be a financial hardship on the City of Palm Desert to annex Bermuda Dunes, to bring Bermuda Dunes up to the codes of the City. And the last time that we looked at this, we pretty much told Bermuda Dunes, "Look, we couldn't annex you because of the financial impact." So, what I would like to suggest, along with what Mayor Pro-Tem Ferguson said, is that we send the fiscal impact report that was prepared for Palm Desert and for La Quinta to the groups (I think there are two, maybe three groups) in Bermuda Dunes for them to review, with the understanding that, from my standpoint anyway, that without some sort of an assessment district set up so that it would not affect, financially, the City of Palm Desert to annex Bermuda Dunes, I would not be in favor of that. Now that doesn't mean that it couldn't be put into our sphere of influence with that understanding, that if it were ever annexed, that it would be financially neutral. But in order to bring Bermuda Dunes into the City, this is from me, I would not like to see the negative impact, and you should be privy to that so that you can take a look at what it might cost. JF I want to add one... BAC Councilman... RSK Are you finished? JF He's actually (unclear) RSK I thought you were done. JF I did, too. The last time we had a community of basically your size, not geographically but population-wise, that wanted to become identified with Palm Desert, we followed this exact same procedure. It was Del Webb's Sun City. They applied to be in our sphere of influence. We, as I understand it, did not object. They have a Palm Desert address, they're identified with Palm Desert. Financially, it hasn't penciled out yet to extend police and fire and all the other services to them at a cost that makes sense. So, we're in the same situation with Del 25 5 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 Webb as we would be in if you'd want to make that application to LAFCo, but I'm not sure that we've ever said no to somebody who has come to us and wants to be part of our community in a unified voice where it made financial sense or made no financial non-sense to bring them in. So we're trying to apply the same policy uniformly. BAC. Councilman Kelly. I i RSK Well, I had thought we approved, a couple of years ago, bringing them in the sphere of influence. But, as I remember, Palm Desert Country Club wasn't exactly a...it was a slight economic minus, but also, things have changed in Bermuda Dunes a lot, too, and a large portion of that is a gated community which is a lot less impact as far as the requirement for services and streets and roads and things like that. And I'm not sure, there was some discussion that all of the revenues that would be derived from that annexation were included in that last report, so I'd like...because I don't know if anybody mentioned that...that we take a look at that last report and update it to make it more current. And I suspect that that will make it closer to a break even point than it was at that time. BAC Okay. Any other comments? (Unclear) do that, I would also guess it may very well increase some of the cost figures from that point. So, I'm not sure I share your suspicion that it makes it more likely to be fiscally feasible, but nonetheless, the data need to be examined in an unimpassioned fashion so that we can get some honest readings about what this would or would not do for the current citizens. RAS And I think it would be a good idea for them to see what the reports that we have...they're public record. BAC Fair enough. RAS And there's no reason why you shouldn't have them. BAC Okay. Mr. Guralnick, you wanted to offer comment. WG I'll be brief. Honorable Mayor, Honorable Councilmembers and staff. My name is Wayne Guralnick. I am General Counsel for Bermuda Dunes Community Association and the Security Association. I'm here to represent to you tonight that within one week of getting Councilman Ferguson's phone call asking for input, we got 400 people who have actually responded, and of those, over 90% were in favor. We really want to be in your city. We also understand the first step is getting within the sphere of influence, and we would like, if it is within your power, to do everything you can to get that moving along because that's not a step that will cost you a whole lot of effort other than staff time to get us within the sphere of influence through LAFCo and would like to do that. Also, the Bermuda Dunes Country Club itself, its board unanimously voted to support this proposition. I don't know the answer to this question, but I do believe since the Security Association became the entity that is responsible 26 7 - PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 * r r w r r r w r r r * * r r r w r w w w r * r r w r * w r * for the streets, and the place became gated, I would think then that the obligation to upgrade those streets may not come within the parameter;of the City's requirements for public streets. They would be exempted therefrom, and possibly then the concerns for the upgrade costs would not be as great as may be suggested by that report, which I have not also seen. So to the extent that that could be reviewed and potentially could change the large picture on that. And then, obviously, if that becomes the case, then maybe the need for an assessment district may be optional if the Bermuda Dunes gated community wants to upgrade from a septic system to a sewer system and curbs and gutters, which it does not have now in many locations. So, but we want, with all due speed and haste and whatever you can do. I know that the Community Association is dedicated to provide human resources to assist you and a volunteer that we can get to. Whatever you need, we want to assist you and we want to be in the City. Thank you. BAC Thank you, sir. May I assume that Mr. Guralnick's sentiments are shared by the folks with him here in the audience? Okay, be it so recorded. If there is anyone else who wishes to offer (unclear) support or request for testimony. MS Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Councilmembers. My name is Mike Smith, and I'm the manager of the Bermuda Dunes Airport, located in Bermuda Dunes. 'I'm here tonight to speak in favor of us being included in the sphere of influence as well as the possibility for annexation down the road. I did want to mention a couple of things...that I've polled the folks in the businesses that are at the Airport. There are six or seven businesses there, about 50 employees, and in total, they're in favor of us coming under the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. I would like to mention a couple of things about the Airport, that airports usually are funded by the city or by the municipality or county or somebody like that. And it costs a whole bunch of money to run this airport, so expect to put out a lot...no, you won't have to put out a dime. The Airport at Bermuda Dunes is privately owned and privately funded, and it is a public use airport, just like an airport that you would have if you wanted to develop one in your city. So, I think that's an important feature of our operation, and we do have...we're probably one of the largest land holders in the community. We have about 110 acres there at the Airport, and we do service all of the cities in the desert here. We do find that about 50% of our.clients are either...have a destination or origin with the City of Palm Desert. So we think we're closely tied to Palm Desert, and we've been there going on 40 years, and I've been there a long time. And we certainly would want you folks to know that we're very, very much in favor of being part of the City of Palm Desert. Thank you. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. BAC Thank you, sir. Any questions? Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to offer comments this evening? FG Good evening. I'm Frank Goodman. I've been working on this for many, many years, as all of you do know. I think it is quite reasonable to assume that we are not going to be annexed 27 ` 1 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 s t t • r r r s r r t t s t s s s s r a r r s s s r s t t r r in any near future. However, I implore you to help us to get into the sphere of influence, and t is not going to cost you any money, and let's get it done. Thank you. that g g BAC Thank you, sir. RAS_ Thank you. JF Well, I have...sorry. BAC We have someone else who wishes... ED I'm Ernie Dunlevy, a resident of Bermuda Dunes, obviously. I would like to add to what Mike Smith has said with regard to the Airport. We are not going to look to the City for any funds, nor are we going to share any profits with the City... RAS That was said. ED ...if there are any. And, hopefully, there will be. In any case, I think that all of the people here tonight, and we had three days' notice, I think we heard of this meeting Monday, and, as Mr. Guralnick said, some 400 people responded in favor. I think that we would be very happy to become a...in your sphere of influence, with the understanding that at so.- date, we will have to pay the price of annexation, and we're willing to do that. Thank you. BAC Thank you, sir. RAS Thank you. . BAC There being no one else, then, I think direction from the Committee... RSK Well, we've talked about doing this before. What do we have to do to make sure the process moves forward? JF Well, that's why I wanted to...this normally would have been put on the Agenda as a recommendation from the Annexation Committee for the Council to take action to accept them in our sphere if they apply and meet all the requirements of LAFCo. It wasn't put on there like that. It was put on there as a Council request for action, so I'm asking, if I would like a vote on that question, to I need to add it by 4/5ths vote, or... DJE No, sire, it's shown as consideration of that action being taken, and that's the requirement. JF So we can just vote on it. DJE Yes. 28 PRELIMINARY MINUTES JANUARY 27, 2000 REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING rt # rt rt • t i • • • • • • • # # • # i • • # i t t t • • i • rt IF Well, then I would make that motion. BAC Okay, let's get a second first. RSK Second. BAC Okay, there's a motion and a second. Does that, then, include the issues of looking at financial feasibility and such things as that? IF I think it's to accept them in our sphere, with a clear understan � ding, as articulated by Mr. Goodman and Mr. Dunlevy, that unless it can financially make sense, that we will not annex them. RSK But we put them in the sphere of influence. JF And they will have a Palm Desert address and be affiliated with Palm Desert, secure in the knowledge that they aren't going to have raids by La Quinta or Indio. RSK Well, they wouldn't have to have a Palm Desert address. JMB They don't get a Palm Desert address for sphere of influence. JF According to the Post Office. PD Yes, the location of the Post office...I'm not sure, we went through a process with Del Webb in dealing with the Post Office and whether that...maybe we can talk to (unclear) find out how we did that. But, more importantly, I think the question is, "Should the City be the initiator of the application of LAFCo?" or you're just directing that we will cooperate with the residents' application. JF The Annexation Committee's recommendation was that Bermuda Dunes be the applicant. BAC Okay. RAS Yes, that's correct. RSK And that we will cooperate in that process, so the folks from Bermuda Dunes need to understand they need to get that application in and get it going. So it's kind of up to you to see how quick that can happen. RAS And then you have the support of Council. That's really what we're kind of indicating tonight, that...I think in all of the annexations, at least since I've been on the Council, that has 29 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 w s s * w r w s s s s ■ • s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s happened, the people have come to us and then it has gone forward rather than the City going to the people. So we're asking that you work with the County to put in the application. WG Could we have a staff member who we could work with to assist us in that process? RAS Phil Drell? RAD Phil Drell. WG Okay. And maybe he even has applications available. If not, we can... JF Well, and I'll be real up front with you, Wayne, the reason we're doing it this way is because every time you say you want to come into Palm Desert, and I don't doubt it, and the survey that was done five years ago overwhelmingly said you did, we get a call from another Mike Smith, and the Council says, "No, no, no, no, people want to go to La Quinta," and I have a hard time believing that, but as we put the ball in your court, the burden of getting around that and unifying is on you, not on us. WG But it's a long process even among cities that we can expect that once we make the application, that...can the ball then be handed off to staff so that... RAS Yes, it will go to LAFCo, and it will have to go through the whole process. BAC And, again, it's also your business to make, from this one person's perception, to make sure the people understand the difference between sphere of influence and a promise of annexation, that those are very different issues. WG I concur that that distinction needs to be made so people understand that. BAC Because, you know, I may not certainly be on this Council more than a few more months, but whoever sits in this seat should not be approached three years from now with a, "Well, you guys put us in your sphere, now da-da, da-da." h RAS You owe us. BAC And that's going to be something that, at least my vote is going to attempt to make it very clear, and it's not an unfriendly issue, but it's the exact same thing that if Bermuda Dunes was j a part of Palm Desert and another community said, "We'd like to be in the sphere of ltilj influence," that I would feel personally obligated to do for Bermuda Dunes citizens as part of �� Palm Desert, and that is to make sure that any future annexation does not impact the existing �! residents in a way that they would not choose to have happen financially. WG I understand. 30 , y A PRELIMINARY MINUTES JANUARY 27, 2000 REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING s e s t t s t s s s r s s t s t . w t s s ■ t • t s a w • s s + In fact, what I'm going to do, Wayne, is ask our City Clerk to have verbatim Minutes of this IF the Council and the Association, and the City will discussion made, and I will present it to keep a copy so it's very clear what we're doing here. And Mayor Crites' reluctance is well taken, is that we don't want to artificially raise expectations of annexation simply by taking the step to put yo in our sphere, with the commitment that we'll work with you to try and make it work out, with the understanding that if it doesn't financially work out, we have an u obligation to the rest of the City. WG The clarity is, once we make the application and we have the support, I am potentially concerned with the City of La Quinta saying, "Uh-uh, we want that being our sphere of influence" at that point in time. I'm hopeful staff will then come to our aid, along with Council, to support that application as they need to. And would that be a fair statement? BAC And certainly LAFCo primarily then goes to residents to look for their choices on that, and so...yes, sir. JF Right. RAD Excuse me, Mr. Mayor and Mr. Guralnick, you've known me fora couple of years. When we get there, just call my office, and we'll arrange it. And to indicate to the rest of the Council, the things that the Annexation Committee goes through with this particular issue, we have another group, the Bermuda Dunes Community Council, for where e, is eaving a and meeting on February the loth to discuss Palm Desert, La Qu Y this is why the Committee and Councilmember Ferguson said, you know, very, very succinctly why the recommendation that we have. IF Right. BAC Okay. IF We're doing everything we can do, given what we're being told by folks in Bermuda Dunes. BAC Alright, there is a recommendation, there's a second to it, please cast a ballot. RDK Motion carries by unanimous vote. 2 Palm Desert Senior Games (Councilman Robert A. Spiegel). Ms. Scully stated that a meeting bad been held earlier in the week between herself, representatives of the Coachella Valley Recreation & Park District, and officers of the California Senior Olympics Foundation. She said they were asking the City and District to co-sponsor regional Senior Olympic Games in February 2001. She noted that a staff report would be brought to Council in 31 Bermuda Dunes residents: ,tentative ori,aX riexationa a , `BY JENNiPPR IIBBRUht 05 '•�� `•"� :: i ME DESERT SUN t1} W 1 BERMUDA oU'N� Whoa, That s,'what residents here,•, i seemed to be,,saying,to com- munity leaders at a meeting Thursday night where the sibility'of having the umneor- 'r porated community annexed by 'one-of its east Coachella Valley" neighboiswasdiscussed. The crowd of more than lbb ^` p.who turned Out for the lim RAIAN GRAGIN THE DESERT SUN` +at James Monroe. Elementary School had differing views on annexation.Some thought it m members of the public;assured evitable, others-opposed it..liutf the"ciowd that the meeting was the.overwhelming concern was about gathering information that;much morelmfoiination withcommuftitymvolvement' was needed "Most'of�the tune, we:have "We can't make an educated two`people in the audienc decisron,iftwe`don't`have the noted 'coutici]^member"'�eiag facts _resident Marilyn Ramos Sims., i'ut annexation iin`the said.-".We,nee¢more�tnfdtma-C Agent a" and';look"wrist"hap lhon I'don t want Y9 17e ty+eated pens: s.,�a} rxrd "''' Lke a fosterci»ild Wepee fto be '$•Oflicrals" e ttvo rcities in a position to-sell`ourselves "`the'imincarpo a d'tarea would; 1 KCornntunit Cgrfucilti-them , like to tart to Ia Qurnta'arid beis who"said'they.often hold' Palm Desert-_were mvited.to see . l ... . lonely m meetings with feW if attp�'1`Please see BEt2MUDAoBC. $4 Friday,,Janu' sraj,,f 5, 1994 tI If I IVACMSS tl r r t i x ) t 41 exed what they wanted and left vs in ,t Bermuda V � r the cold." ( ( f j Joe,Deisenroth agreed, and said Contuued from B1�' �' that s t "' - ,� was in e-r� . take the crowd's p seed answer for th erect a's�-0tuge.i ,j� /// gtrestionst. exatg�n is almost a he Pahn Desert had its -own City Sal, -qr to•happen-$utsho'uldwe M Counc! meeting at the same time and not be looking at wwhattcity we wain to no oiiF apppeamil on itq bQnehna�s'Mq a Comwith mun Council Secret ry the macro hone to Ia or John Peria`aand'Councihnaann Stan Amy Aguer said the time m4explore ley Sniff. " the possibilities is now. Most in attendance wanted to know . "Our commercial property is being whether or not the move would just picked'off.Soon, (what's left) won't mean higher taxes, or if,real im- be viable." provements would be made. They Chain Mike Smith indicated,the also expressed concern that there is discpssions would continue and it no commercial advantage to a parmery, would be put to'the voters after that. i m a potential annexation. i f Peue said'the topic has itot,been ' The disadvantage is that we don't ' discussed by la'Quinta's council and Lave any commem property left,"ar�v,that they were lookmg at Thermal for +satdJIarry I1oyd. 'Canes have an`t 'annexation. ,. E FA � 1 RECEAVEr NOV 1 ^ 2000 00MUUNI1YC-'VFL0PMsrI DEPARTMENT November 9 , 2000 CITY OF PALAI DESERT TO: Distribution FROM: George J. Spiliotis, Executive Officer SUBJECT: COMMISSION ACTIONS IN THE BERMUDA DUNES AREA As you are probably aware, on September 28 , 2000, the Commission approved LAFCO 2000-11-4—Sphere Of Influence Amendment to the City of La Quinta and Reorganization to Include Annexation 10 to the City of La Quinta and LAFCO 2000-18-3—Amendment to the Sphere of Influence of the City of Palm Desert (Addition) . Both proposals are in the Bermuda Dunes area. The Commission approved both proposals with modified boundaries . Before we can transmit the Commission resolutions for these actions, the legal descriptions must be altered to correspond with the amended boundaries approved by the Commission. The engineers retained by the respective applicants are currently performing this work. As soon as this office receives approved legal descriptions and maps, we will transmit the Commission Resolutions to the appropriate parties . Please feel free to give me a call if you have any questions regarding the processing of these proposals . Sincerely, Geor Spiliotis Executi e Officer RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION o 1485 SPRUCE STREET.SUITE J e RIVERSIDE. CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909) 369-0631 FAX(909) 369-8479 1 Bermuda Dunes Proposals Page 2 November 9, 2000 Distribution : City Clerk, La Quinta City Clerk, Palm Desert Wade Ellis Wayne Guralnick, BDCA Fred Caterina, BDCA Bob Lyman, TLMA Supervisor Roy Wilson Jerry Lugo, BDCC Denys Arcuri , 4th Supervisorial District Jim McPherson Jeanne Rogers, Warner Engineering Steve Sobotta, Warner Engineering Steve Smith, Palm Desert Jerry Herman, La Quinta John Johnson, County Executive office Gerald Maloney, Clerk of the Board RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 1485 SPRUCE STREET, SUITE J• RIVERSIDE. CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909) 369-0631 FAX(909) 369-8479 ® ■n n Sol �I �eir•♦♦:iiiii •w—w 1• OL�t '� ♦. r •w � �mT�1s ■.,.�#lam `�"^ TT 'smart ..'-yI e_ettaa�WlT� Tdi 1�i11�1 a •w•r tttt►•fnntwettttw ettt�•:.� - 1 1� ...•, ... coot _ I��;,,i,y ^�'♦- yla: �1111111111��1131M11N I?1 un .•� p._. .1 �° .:re ■! 001 _rf»H� 99PP!I�- ripp ��!�'; ` r o r� � , �•[ !�' I 3 �` pi ��' �Ilili3lr � � �i111��111�1��f�f�I■ �� �� .�; '� II' 1 �� �j tr , � jr• I'= y g z_ ♦ 1 ���„1� ..r -7 it • � �, �• 1 �� �ii��r I .• •ri. ram' � � ��• °.'x'•..... •s :fie ;1€ ='1���1� ..'� ''� •' .ra'sc•2y:•°iM17d8f =i EN wil 1 � Y ��% �i��iF4 , •• •rr all. �� _ l[a K• ra �i'.rruriiliriin �„'n . _ 60 r�A will JJ�S�i1//T city of PALM >.�t , 1�, !�!1 illlllll�all1�=��� �_��.�..♦♦♦ y ' _ pnuvno.....•• I nun r:� 1 . � ♦, '.I � 5::::::::::[v:.::m iliililillr I;ri;i;il;IICII?Y•.4i:: I , t�'�,-._.._.::eG nn�_ .IIIIIIvS:•6:•nuw-': Or ����• �nrnw munuunum nn nuuun: . •1 I a sl ���O" :�� �1111111111��11�1�11�L I - _ - '�� ■■""1�• .. - ..........noul,�nl nunnnnm[�nnu � Pmnul '. T:j.•,"•'1'.:.' ..T:Zi'•@��'''''�����•j�____��'ii•TI.-T:f.. 7 =;nnm■i�:ai ':'::.: :r<.�1��' [' [�rn[�un:�mumu.n—•�•.;;������ ... Ir � .noun rj... � ♦ _I � ':•�•vo� �� _.� •nrnm 'iF •��♦ b � bq •��•1.L:I:r _ ,� ^ _i�■111�'elefl o �; "S; . b:�:•• ..�0;��41 I � r ��I'll �/ �i4�.• .yam 4 4�.��•' vy. ;NOR oil LIP mn�r '•A�// Illn,rlll�IL Ir4S � — °"= -_ rqH I en.se r mnir.m r ``� ' '�E'�_F� d` �.I •l :I -I: .1 n m nlllll 01 R f 111 If 1_n 1 A 11;BI\ i. 0111 1 ly - t 1 e�f I,an rt •os � rc �' r.r7 I[' 1 I 111 •. � r �iti iii ` � �� '1 � • ••�weA'f y �� � • 11 oar PUBLIC NOTICE MEETING OF THE RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION Thursday September 28, 2000 9:00 A.M. Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room 4080 LEMON STREET, 14T` FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA AGENDA NOTICE: Anyone present at the hearing who is involved with any annexation to be considered and who has made a contribution of more than $250 in the past twelve (12) months to any member of the Commission will be asked to state for the record the Commission member to whom the contribution was made and the matter of consideration with which they are involved. 1 . CALL TO ORDER AND SALUTE TO THE FLAG. 2 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 24, 2000 . 3 . HEARINGS: Continued: a. LAFCO 2000-09-2-Reorganization to Include . Dissolution of County Service Areas 2, 12 , 17 , 20, 23. & 24 . b. LAFCO 2000-10-1-Reorganization to Include Concurrent Annexations to the City of Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District, and Concurrent Detachments from the Riverside County Waste Resources Management District and County Service Areas 143 and 152 . New: C . LAFCO 2000-17-2-Reorganization to Include Annexation 94 to the City of Corona and Concurrent Detachment from the Riverside Waste Resources Management District. Od LAFCO 2000-11-4-Sphere of Influence Amendment to the City of La Quinta (addition) and Reorganization to Include Concurrent Annexation 10 to the City of La Quinta and Concurrent Detachment from County Service Area 121 and the Riverside County Waste Resources Management District. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION• 1485 SPRUCE STREET, SUITE J •RIVERSIDE,CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 FAX(909)369-8479 r LAFCO AGENDA PAGE 2 September 28, 2000 LAFCO 2000-18-4-Sphere of Influence Amendment (addition) to the City of Palm Desert. 4 . EXECUTIVE SESSION: LITIGATION: With respect to every item of business to be discussed in closed session pursuant to Section 54956 .9 : CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION: Subdivision (a) Of Section 54956 . 9 a . City of Lake Elsinore v. LAFCO et al. (Cleveland Ridge UC/SOI Amendment-Riverside Superior Court Case No. RIC- 311942) b . City of Lake Elsinore v. LAFCO et al. (Meadowbrook UC/SOI Amendment-Riverside Superior Court Case No. 317305) 5 . REQUEST FOR FEE WAIVER/REDUCTION FOR LAFCO 2000-21-3- ANNEXATION TO BEAUMONT-CHERRY VALLEY WATER DISTRICT- HOVCHILD. 6 . AMENDING COMMISSION ACTION (RESOLUTIONS 03-99 AND 04-99) TAKEN ON LAFCO 98-12-1&2-SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENTS AND REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION 18 TO THE CITY OF NORCO AND CONCURRENT DETACHMENT FROM THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AND ANNEXATION 83 TO THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AND CONCURRENT DETACHMENT FROM THE CITY OF NORCO. 7 . AUTHORIZATION FOR EXECUTIVE OFFICER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS FOR LIMITED LEGAL SERVICES. S . MISCELLANEOUS STAFF REPORTS. 9 . PUBLIC COMMENTS. 10 . ADJOURNMENT. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 1485 SPRUCE STREET,SUITE J •RIVERSIDE.CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 FAX(909) 369-8479 I 1 BERMUDA DUNES ANNEXATION FISCAL FEASIBILITY REPORT March, 1996 Prepared for: City of Palm Desert 73-51.0 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260-2578 (619) 340-5776 Prepared by: Aosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. 540 North Golden Circle, Suite 305 Santa Ana, California 92705 (714) 541-4585 BERMUDA DUNES ANNEXATION FISCAL FEASIBILITY REPORT I. BACKGROUND The City of Palm Desert ("City") engaged the Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. ("RSG") to prepare a fiscal feasibility analysis of annexing the community of Bermuda Dunes. This Report can be used to meet certain applicable requirements of the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act if and when the City desires to pursue annexation of the Bermuda Dunes community. Prior to determining whether to pursue annexation, the City wants to ascertain the fiscal standing of the Bermuda Dunes community. This Report will focus on what City services will be provided within the Bermuda Dunes area, the forecasted cost of those services, and what revenues could reasonably be expected to be available to fund those services. This Report will focus on a compilation of the forecasted revenues and expenditures of the annexation area projected to fiscal year 1998-99 using a range of potential fiscal impacts. It should be understood that there will usually be differences between the forecasts and actual results because events and circumstances frequently do not occur as expected, and those differences may be material. The Bermuda Dunes area 1995 population is estimated at 5,362. The subject area is comprised of approximately 3.2 square miles of territory. The estimated population figure is based on 1990 census information and enhanced by various trends and modeling techniques, including actual population growth in the surrounding communities. A population estimate of 6,000 was shown in a past application as submitted by a Bermuda Dunes community organization to the Local Agency Formation Commission. A national research bureau has estimated the 1995 population of Bermuda Dunes at 6,266. This population projection was derived using generalized assumptions based upon age specific fertility rates, life expectancy, and net immigration. However, we believe, based on actual population growth in the area, the population estimates are too high. Even if these higher population figures were used, the forecasted expenditures would still far exceed forecasted revenues. The higher population figure would lower the fiscal deficits by approximately $75,000 or 8%. At the present time, the number of structures or dwelling units in the proposed annexation area include approximately 700 apartments, 1,200 single family residential units, 300 condominiums, 200,000 square feet of commercial space, an airport, a 27-hole golf course and clubhouse, and a 41-unit hotel. Bermuda Dunes is located in the central region of Riverside County. The boundaries of the Bermuda Dunes community is generally the area along the Interstate 10 Freeway to the north, excluding the Indio city limits, the east boundary Indio city limits, Fred Waring Drive and the La Quinta city limits to the south, and along Washington Street up to the Interstate 10 Freeway to the west. Most of the area is still of a rural nature and similar to areas of the Coachella Valley. Bermuda Dunes is predominantly residential and rugged terrain (refer to Exhibit 4). Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation March, 1996 1 Fiscal Feasibility Report , The major public agencies currently providing services in the Bermuda Dunes community are the County of Riverside, County Service Area 121, and a Landscape and Lighting Assessment District. The County of Riverside is currently responsible for policymaking and administration, law enforcement, animal control, planning and land use regulation, building inspection, flood control, and the maintenance and improvement of roads. Street lighting services within the Bermuda Dunes area are currently provided through County Service Area No. 121. The landscaped median located along 42nd Street between Limahall Road and Glass Drive is currently being maintained by Riverside County through a special assessment district formed pursuant to the 1972 Lighting and Landscape Act. Upon annexation, the City would administer the special district as the taxes would be transferred to the City and detached from the County. Water is currently supplied in the Bermuda Dunes area by the Myoma Dunes Water Company and the Coachella Valley.Water District. Upon annexation, the Myoma Dunes Water Company and Coachella Valley Water District will continue to supply water to the Bermuda Dunes area as the services is currently in place. Sewer service is currently, and will continue to be, provided by Septic Systems and Coachella Valley Water District. Sewer lines currently exist at Fred Waring Drive, Washington Street, and 42nd Avenue. The County of Riverside currently provides fire protection services to the Bermuda Dunes community. Currently, one fire station, Riverside County Fire Station No. 31, is located at 42nd Avenue and services a three-mile radius. The County of Riverside is currently responsible for providing police services within the Bermuda Dunes area. The law enforcement facility responsible for the Bermuda Dunes area are the Palm Desert and Indio substations. Upon annexation, no change in fire or police protection services are anticipated because police and fire protection services are provided by the same Riverside County organization. The roads within the Bermuda Dunes area are currently maintained by the County of Riverside. Upon annexation, the City of Palm Desert will be required to maintain the existing roads. Many of the General Fund and Road Fund revenues and expenditures were either calculated on a per capita basis, a marginal cost basis using actual budget figures from the City of Palm Desert, or a case study methodology. ' Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation March, 1996 2 Fiscal Feasibility Report II. REVENUES A. GENERAL FUND The primary sources of General Fund revenues are noted below and shown on Exhibit 1 : 1 . Taxes: a. Property and Parcel Taxes: The City's property tax revenue is based on the historical property tax ratio of 25%/75% between the City and the County respectively as set forth in Resolution No. 81-133 adopted September 24, 1981. Upon annexation, the City would receive approximately 25% of the total General Fund property tax revenue and the County would retain the remaining 75% of General Fund property tax revenue. In addition, the City would also assume service responsibilities of County Services Area ("CSA") No. 121. CSA No. 121 is wholly within the community of Bermuda Dunes and provides funding for street lighting. Upon annexation, CSA No. 121 would be dissolved. One hundred percent (100%) of this special`district's levies would be transferred to the City (refer to Exhibit 2). b. Property Transfer Taxes: Y The amount of Property Transfer Tax received will depend upon the level of resale activity within Bermuda Dunes. These revenues have been estimated using an average of previous three (3) year property transfer activity within Bermuda Dunes at the rate of .550 per $1,000 of assessed values. C. Homeowners Property Tax Relief: Revenue estimates generated from the Homeowner's Property Tax Relief were not specifically projected because this analysis bases the Property Tax Apportionment on assessed valuation gross of the Homeowners Exemption. Therefore, revenue from the Homeowner's Property Tax Relief is included . in the Property Tax Apportionment. r ' Rosenow Spevacek Croup,Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation Marcb, 1996 3 Fiscal Feasibility Report d. Sales Taxes: Upon annexation, the City will be eligible to receive a percentage of the sales tax charged on qualifying retail sales from businesses within Bermuda Dunes. The State Board of Equalization estimated that the commercial areas within Bermuda Dunes are generating approximately $114,500 in sales tax revenues annually. RSG has assumed a modest 3% increase on these sales tax revenues for Bermuda Dunes (refer to Exhibit 3). e. Transient Occupancy Taxes: Upon annexation, the City will receive the Transient Occupancy Tax. The City's Transient Occupancy Tax rate is 9%. Bermuda Dunes has one (1) lodging establishment, the New Inn located within the Bermuda Dunes Country Club, which has a total of 41 rooms. RSG has estimated the Transient Occupancy Tax based on an occupancy factor and average room rate. 2. State Subventions (Motor Vehicle Fees): Upon annexation, the City will be eligible to receive Motor Vehicle In-Lieu taxes. These taxes are collected by the State's Department of Motor Vehicles and allocated to cities on a per capita basis. Off-road Vehicle taxes are also allocated to cities by the State on a per capita basis. Both subventions are based on 5,362 which is the estimated population for Bermuda Dunes. The per capita figures used in the revenue summary have been provided by the State Controller's office for the 1995-96 fiscal year. 3. Franchise Fees: Upon annexation, the City will receive the franchise fees currently paid to the County by Continental Cable Television, the Southern California Gas Company, Waste Management, and Western Waste. These fees have been estimated on a per capita basis using budget figures from the City of Palm Desert. Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation March, 1996 4 Fiscal Feasibility Report 4. Development Related Fees: The fees described below are not included in Exhibit 1 because these fees specially offset costs of development related services, only the "net" cost of these services are indicated under "Expenditures". a. Land Use Planning and Regulation Fees: The City is authorized to charge fees for all land use planning and regulation services. The City would utilize the City's existing fee schedule. These fees should off-set most of the City's cost in providing these services. b. Building Inspection and Permit Fees: The fees collected for these building and permit inspection services should, in most cases, totally offset the cost of these services. C. Engineering Fees: The City is also authorized to charge fees for plan checking, public works inspection, permit issuance and review and other engineering services. The fees collected for these services should, in most cases, offset the cost of these services. d. Development Fees: Under the provisions of State law, the City may collect development fees for the purpose of construction or improving capital facilities. Fees received must be segregated from the General Fund in order to avoid commingling. Certain fees must be spent or committed within five years from the time they are collected. 5. Other Revenues: a. Fines and Forfeitures: This represents both Motor Vehicle Code fines, Municipal Code fines, and other miscellaneous fines and forfeitures. Motor Vehicle and Municipal Code fines from Bermuda Dunes were estimated on a per capita basis using current budget data ' from the City of Palm Desert. ' Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation March, 1996 5 Fiscal Feasibility Report b. Business License Tax: Upon annexation, the City will be eligible to impose the City's current Business License Tax. The Business License fee for the City of Palm Desert is calculated based upon gross sales. Based on discussions with City staff, RSG has estimated the amount of Business License Tax using an average Business License fee for the local sales tax generators identified within the Bermuda Dunes annexation area (refer to Exhibit 3). C. Proposition A Fire Tax: The Proposition A Fire Tax is calculated using a per parcel cost. This figure is estimated using an estimated 700 apartments and 300 condominiums at a per parcel cost of $36 per unit, and an estimated 1,200 single family residential units at $48 per unit. d. County RDA: Currently there exists along Washington Street and 42nd Avenue a County redevelopment project area. A small portion of the County Redevelopment Project Area is located within the City of Palm Desert, and the remaining portion exists in the unincorporated Bermuda Dunes territory (refer to Exhibit 5). This e County Redevelopment Project Area consists of commercial and multifamily residential use and is located along Washington Street between Mountain View to the south and just north of 42nd Avenue. In this analysis, it is assumed the City would not take over the County Redevelopment Project Area and continued to be maintained as a County Redevelopment Project Area. Because the County Redevelopment Project Area would not be taken over by the City, no revenues have been forecasted in this analysis. e. Interest: Because expenditures exceeded revenues resulting in no excess cash, RSG did not include interest in this analysis. 1 Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation Marcb, 1996 6 Fiscal Feasibility Report B. ROAD FUND All Road Fund subventions are calculated and allocated to the cities on a per capita basis, with the exception of Section 2107.5. The State.Subvention Section 2107.5 is allocated to the cities based upon total population size. Because the annexation of Bermuda Dunes is only adding 5,362 population to the existing 37,573 of Palm Desert, the added population will not put the City's population above the next threshold. As such, no revenue is reflected relative to Section 2107.5. Similar to other state subventions, road fund revenues initially would be based at the estimated population of 5,362. Other Road Fund revenues include the voter- approved Measure "A" sales tax distributed by the County Transportation Commission. Revenues attributed to these gasoline taxes are restricted for use on road related maintenance expenditures. III. EXPENDITURES A. GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Expenditures have been categorized by departments within the City's organizational structure and are estimated as f6llows: 1 . General Government: e a. Administration: The analysis assumed no new positions, equipment or major operating costs would be incurred because of the annexation. Minimal expenditures including legal costs, advertising, postage, and other selected services and supplies were estimated. Costs associated with the 1997-98 election are shown. Costs were estimated based on a case by case analysis or a per capita rate using City budget data. b. Insurance: Upon annexation of Bermuda Dunes, it is probable that the cost of the City's insurance policy will be impacted. RSG has estimated these costs based on existing infrastructure and other public facilities within Bermuda Dunes in relationship to the City's budgeted expenditure forecasts. ' Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation March, 1996 7 Fiscal Feasibility Report c. Animal Control: Upon annexation of Bermuda Dunes, the current City animal control contractor, California Animal Care, will assume animal control services for this area. Costs were estimated assuming additional personnel and equipment as required by California Animal Care. These costs are net of any animal license fee revenues. d. County Property Tax Collection Charges: Beginning in 1992-93, the County Auditor-Controller's Office charged cities and local districts receiving property tax revenue for incidental administrative costs. These charges are estimated at 2% of all property tax revenues. 2. Public Safety: a. Sheriff's Contract: The Riverside County Sheriff's Department estimates service costs on a per capita basis. The City has indicated a desire to maintain a patrol beat to population ratio of 1.5:1000, or approximately 9 officers for the Bermuda Dunes area. RSG believes this estimated service level appears excessive in this particular community due to the existing calls for service and the open space character of Bermuda r Dunes. Thus, RSG has assumed based on discussions with City and County staff that only 5 beats will be needed to provide sufficient police services to the merchants and residents of Bermuda Dunes. b. jail Booking Fee: Riverside County collects from its Cities a flat fee for jail bookings. Currently, the present jail booking fee is approximately $110. Bermuda Dunes jail booking fees were estimated based on jail bookings for the County incorporated areas in this area and for the City of Palm Desert. C. Fire Protection: The Cities of Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and Rancho Mirage have entered into a joint Powers Agreement forming the Cove Communities Public Safety Commission in order to provide fire and paramedic services. These costs are net of the property tax levy of the County Fire District. Fire Protection expenditures were estimated using Riverside County Fire budget costs. This expenditure reflects a percentage of the assessed valuation based upon the 1995-96 total cost. The estimated budget figure includes fire services staff costs, a one-time $110,000 for new equipment and $12,000 for training and other maintenance services. This ' Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation March, 1996 8 Fiscal Feasibility Report estimated budget figure does 'not include optional paramedic services, which would be an additional $330,486. This total was reduced to reflect the net cost of services (less the 1% of the total assessed valuation of the Bermuda Dunes area multiplied by the Structural Fire Tax rate of .06025). Currently one (1) fire station, Riverside County Fire Station No. 31, is located at 42nd Avenue and services a 3-mile radius. 3. Community Development: Upon the annexation of Bermuda Dunes, the Community Development Department will assume the processing of all land use related services. These services will, in most cases, be off-set by fees. However, the City will be responsible for the preparation of a Specific Plan. This one-time cost in 1996-97 reflects duplicating fees, printing, maps, and other miscellaneous costs associated with the in-house preparation of the Specific Plan. a. Code Compliance Officer: Upon annexation, it is anticipated that an additional Code Compliance Officer will be required to provide code enforcement services within the area of Bermuda Dunes. This expenditure is calculated using the first step in the City's payroll salary range for Code Compliance Officer at $2,604 per month. RSG has included an additional 35% of the annual salary to reflect benefits and an additional 10% for supplies, minor equipment, and other overhead costs. 4. Public Works: For purposes of this Report, it is assumed that the current level of service of maintenance programs is sufficient to the community's needs. Upon annexation, CSA No. 121 and other County responsibilities will be assumed by the City. The Public Works cost estimates also include an allowance for contract services to administer these programs. a. Administration: A minimal administrative cost impact based on a per capita factor using City budget data is reflected. This cost represents supplies, meeting and travel costs, equipment, and other services. ' Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation March, 1996 9 Fiscal Feasibility Report b. Street Sweeping: Upon annexation of the Bermuda Dunes area, the City will provide street sweeping services to this area. This expenditure was based on discussion with City staff using a curb mile estimate cost based on City budget data. Street sweeping services are performed bi-weekly by the City of Palm Desert. c. Street Lighting: Street lighting services within the Bermuda Dunes area are currently provided through CSA No. 121. Upon annexation, CSA No. 121 will dissolve and all funds will be transferred to the City. The forecasted expenditure is based on current CSA No. 121 budget data (refer to Exhibit 2). 5. Parks and Recreation: There is no anticipated financial impact relative to existing landscape maintenance services. The landscaped median located along 42nd Street between Limb Hall and Glass Drive is currently being maintained by Riverside County through a special assessment distritt formed pursuant to the 1972 Lighting and Landscape Act. Upon the annexation of Bermuda Dunes, the City would administer the special district as the taxes would be transferred to the City and detached from the County. Thus, the median would continue to be maintained by the assessment district. Currently the Bermuda Dunes area has no public park or open space areas. Additional costs associated with the City's exiting recreation program is not anticipated. 6. Contingency: A 10% contingency factor has been added to the General Fund expenditure estimate to meet unforeseen programs or emergency needs. 7. Roads: a. Capital Improvements: Upon annexation, the City of Palm Desert will be required to pay for the 25% local share for the proposed improvements at the interchange of Washington ' Street and Interstate 10 Freeway. This forecasted expenditure, reflected in the 1997-98 fiscal year, is the City's share of the estimated construction cost plus a 10% contingency. No outside revenue source has been identified to fund this ' capital improvement expenditure. ' Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation Marcb, 1996 10 Fiscal Feasibility Report Upon annexation, it is the City's policy to upgrade existing infrastructure systems within the annexation area to meet or exceed current City standards. The funding sources for capital improvements within the Bermuda Dunes annexation area were not identified because a capital improvement program (CIP) was not developed nor required as part of this analysis. Therefore, in order to prepare a CIP plan for the Bermuda Dunes annexation area, it would require the preparation of an extensive and detailed infrastructure assessment analysis. 8. Road Maintenance: a. Street Maintenance: The street maintenance expenditure was estimated based upon estimated curb miles and area size using budget data from the City of Palm Desert. This cost reflects a 3% increase which includes general street maintenance; City-wide street slurry sealing, overlaying and resurfacing, new and replaced curbs and gutters, centerline striping, and safety and sign painting. b. Traffic Signal Maintenance: Upon annexation, the City of Palm Desert will be required to maintain additional traffic signals. The City of Palm Desert currently maintains 50% of the traffic signals located along Washington Street at 42nd Street, Country Club Drive, and Avenue of the States. Upon annexation of the Bermuda Dunes area, the City will be required to maintain 100% of these three (3) traffic signals and 25% of the traffic signal located at Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. IV. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Based upon this fiscal analysis of annexing the community of Bermuda Dunes, the forecasted expenditure estimated for fiscal year 1996-97 through 1998-99 concerning the general and road funds exceed the estimated total revenues. Forecasted expenditures and revenues have been calculated using conservative methodologies and modest escalation factors. The forecasted expenditures exceed the estimated revenues for fiscal year 1996-97 by $982,549, $1,400,980 for fiscal year 1997-98, and $977,050 for fiscal year 1998-99. Because of the residential character and rural nature of Bermuda Dunes, the estimated ' amount of local sales tax generated annually was minimal. For Bermuda Dunes area, there were only 22 retail establishments identified with taxable sales amounts as provided by the State Board of Equalization (refer to Exhibit 3). The Bermuda Dunes community has very little ' commercial activity with only one lodging establishment. Therefore, the City's forecasted business license tax and transient occupancy tax amounts are significantly low. 1 ' Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation March, 1996 17 Fiscal Feasibility Report Because states subventions are allocated to cities on a per capita basis, the Bermuda Dunes area with only a population of 5,362 will receive minimal motor vehicle and off-highway fees. Based upon discussions with the City and County staff, RSG has assumed that only five patrol units would be required to provide sufficient police services to the Bermuda Dunes area. The forecasted expenditure was calculated based upon per capita costs utilizing the existing supported rate for Riverside County Sheriff and using an escalation rate of 7%. The estimated expenditure for the Sheriff contract amount for public safety services in fiscal year 1996-97 is nearly 96% of the total general fund revenue estimate. The Cities of Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and Rancho Mirage are part of a Joint Powers Agreement in order to provide fire and paramedic services. The expenditures reflected in this analysis are commensurate with the City's desire to maintain a high level of service in terms of structural fire protection and suppression. The forecasted expenditure for structural fire protection services in fiscal year 1996-97 is approximately 60% of the grand total general fund revenue estimate. Thus, the expenditures for public safety services alone exceed the general fund available by 88%. Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Bermuda Dunes Annexation March, 1996 12 Fiscal Feasibility Report 'r O� vi 7 v1 O �O M M N 7 7 ^' �n V .-• h al b � b N � h O N M r+l M M M ri 7 ^ O T N in h T T Vl W r oo V •-' �D vt �l � N � N �O N N O \O �O � O h �D �p D•, W O o0 00 O D•\ N O �O � O �O M O O N N N d w C ° L U y N U U U � E E: l�tl• L ' U O ° a � a d .� d adi v d o F; b rr�� C7Qv� Q V UZU w' � :; w a' ¢ virn � a _] . bU 'D 0 R L C� h O o0 �n N h m 0 �O `D �n vi vi vi O O O � ^ M Vl � h V1 V1 Vl O1 01 O T v1 7 h O O �n V O 'n O� T N N O O o0 eo 00 M o h h rn a o 0 0 o ao a O T N � •--� O N m 7 V M M vi vi O O 00 h � � N O. �O T V 7 O O � .-• b �° � b h 55oa � r a mW w � O` C o `n W F- v� wa. F cl � � O wC7 Ow m Lz7 a F C7 � N W N O a0 oa O N O o ao O R 00 ON �O p Q' t� Q vi a\ % f�1 O r O O O O O V1 C\ e 21, T � O �n vi Vi Vl N pp O� na � y N ❑U❑ U L N = d w O o N U N G p u p 5 .� bp w oa Na A C4 tad N m F p W :� F O N T a\ O O p T � T y d U n m O� O O O OQO VI Q 0 O a O C M CO 1� n b N N � V � V ID w z Gti W Q F+ y a 06Wa a § , ) I Ol § \ � / ® ) _ 60) ow ( ) } } 2 ` ) cn § \ FtAA § 2 Z ƒ6 \ / ( S j \ ± t / ) ) \ \ } ) \LL) I \ ) 2 § t� ) � EXHIBIT 3 LIST OF LOCAL SALES TAX GENERATORS WITHIN THE BERMUDA DUNES ANNEXATION AREA 1. Subway 4100 Washington Avenue #101 2. Lizett's Hair Design 4100 Washington Avenue #103 3. Ernst & Ernst Foods 4100 Washington Avenue 4. So Much More Wallpaper 4100 Washington Avenue #119 5. Carmen's Mexican Food 4100 Washington Avenue #123 6. Clam's Up 4100 Washington Avenue #125 7. Wonder Cuts 4100 Washington Avenue #129 8. Armond's Wholesale Merchandise 4100 Washington Street #133 9. Teddy's Donuts 2 4100 Washington Avenue #139 10. Lilli's Chinese Cuisine 4100 Washington Avenue #141 11. Circle K Food Stores 4100 Washington Avenue #142 12. Carl's Jr. 4050 Washington Avenue 13. Unocal 76-Chemic Inc. 4010 Washington Avenue 14. Goodyear Jack,Sauter" 78105 Country Club Drive 15. Murph's Gaslight/Murphy's Original Pan Fried Chicken 79860 42nd Avenue 16. Bermuda Dunes Country Club 42360 Adams Street 17. Darby West Care 78260 Darby Road 18. Larry Shaw Wholesale Plants 78400 Darby Road 19. California Desert Nursery 78600 Darby Road 20. Vintage Nursery, Inc. 78755 Darby Road 21. Cameron Nursery and Turf Products 78850 Darby Road 22. Desert Cities Nurseries 41555 Yucca Lane Source: State Board of Equalization 1 pammukxm Sun City I - �a I o" ci \\ I -aluibD � Palm Desert --} Lr`� °`e - ` m t1J—L 42NDAvenue \ stage/0 --- _��, �1 Bermuda Dunes _ o Indio C o - ` i- I La Quinta Fred Waring Drive Jndig[-Wells � 1• 1. North Source: Urban Decision Systems Inc. Exhibit 4 Bermuda Dunes Annexation Area I: 0 4 F K 0 W S P F V d C F K V R () l' P I V i WARMN RD t W City of Palm Desert _ r A 42ND Avenue 4;I l Fnyn : HC Avenue of the States<<' DR ' Bermuda Dunes ! c i '? T ....... T T I Fr T I Mountain View 1 r r Darby Road I I I n C JI ° _rFF[ o � Project Area Boundary I I ro l N Commercial 3 (8-18Multi-FDU/AC)sldential Exhibit 5 County Redevelopment Project Area tRozr- eua.,,,SPeVAcen GRoi, P 1 > c. r CITY OF LA QUINTA BERMUDA DUNES AREA PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS December 15, 1999 PREPARED BY: ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. 540 NORTH GOLDEN CIRCLE, SUITE 305 SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92705 r + PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS BERMUDA DUNES AREA TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction......................................................................................................................................1 Executive Summary and Recommendations...................................................................................I OperabTFtsral bryxtcts................................................................................................................ 1 Capital bnprumn nt Fisurl bnpaas................................................................................................ 2 ExistingSetting.................................................................................................................................3 Pre-Annexation Services....................................................................................................................4 GeneralServices..i......................................................... ..............................................................4 CamryofRirmideGener-al Ftmd.................................................................................................. 4 OtherService Providers................................................................................................................4 Cowny Ralecarop+raert Agency-Desert CmImmitia Rerk dop vu Prod ........................................ 4 Lartd%ape and Ligb6VAssessmeuDistrta No. 89-1-CansoUttai.................................................. 4 Carroty SerzticeAnw 121 and 152................................................................................................. 4 Anticipated Post-Annexation Services and Impacts on City...............................................................6 GeneralFund...............................................................................................................................6 Rezews...............................................................................'.......................................................6 Expendjntm................................................................................................................................ 7 GasTax Fund..............................................................................................................................7 CapitalImprovements..................................................................................................................7 NextSteps and Annexation Process..................................................................................................9 F:\RS G\L AQUINT A\ANNEX ATION\REP OXTJ.DOC r PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS BERMUDA DUNES AREA INTRODUCTION The City of La Quinta("City")is contemplating annexation of the Bermuda Dunes vicinity("Study Area"). The Study Area is located within unincorporated Riverside County("County"), as depicted on Exhibit 1. If an annexation effort is pursued,the City must submit an application to the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO"), which would include an analysis of the annexation proposal's fiscal impacts. This report presents a preliminary analysis of the fiscal impacts of annexation. Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. ("RSG")has developed this report to assist the City in assessing the effects of annexation andto outline a course of action to pursue the effort. The Study Area is bound by the City of Palm Desert city limits along Washington Street to the west, Interstate 10 to the north,the City of Indio city limits near Jefferson Street to the east,and the City of La Quinta city limits along Fred Waring Drive to the south. RSG estimates that the total size of the Study Area is approximately 2,020 acres. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS RSG's analysis concludes that, because of the City's significantly higher levels of municipal services, annexation of the Study Area would provide widespread service enhancements to Study Area residents and businesses. Areas of acute service enhancements include police, code enforcement, and public works maintenance. However, funding the City's higher service levels would necessitate development of substantially more revenue-generating resort,hospitality,commercial, and industrial uses than has been historically proposed for the Study Area. The fiscal impacts of annexation of the Study Area are summarized below: OPERATING FISCAL IMPACTS • ISSUE: Both today and at buildout,the Study Area is, and will be,primarily a residential community. Because residential uses generally do not generate General Fund revenues, annexation of the Study Area is anticipated to have a detrimental impact on the City's General Fund. Consequently,the City would be required to: (1)absorb these impacts,(2) pursue voter approval for a tax increase to offset revenue shortfalls,or(3)modify the land use plan to permit development of more revenue-generating uses. • FISCAL IMPACT:RSG projects a first year General Fund shortfall of$523,563,increasing to $2,961,496 upon buildout. • POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS: The City could absorb the revenue shortfall with existing surplus General Fund revenues. While this may be a simple short-term alternative,long-term absorption of these costs may not be feasible as other City service costs increase. ROSENOW SPEVACER GROUP, INC. 1 PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS DECEMBER 15, 1999 CITY OF LA QUINTA r � • Encourage development of additional revenue generating uses, such as resort, commercial uses along the Interstate 10 Corridor. • With an apparent trend towards locating regional retailers along the Interstate 10 Corridor,the City could alter the land use plan for the Study Area and designate more property for retail commercial use. Under the County General Plan, only 11 of the 2,020 acres in the Study Area are currently planned for retail commercial use. RSG estimates another 61 acres of retail commercial uses would be needed to generate enough sales tax revenue to offset the$2,961,496 General Fund shortfall projected at buildout. Some of the manufacturing use properties along Country Club Drive could be rezoned to commercial uses. Further investigation of the viability of retail versus manufacturing uses would be needed. The City could also consider rezoning vacant, residentially designated property to commercial. This would have a dual benefit: increase sales taxes and reduce service costs by lowering the number of dwellings and households in the Study Area. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FISCAL IMPACTS ■ ISSUE:The Study Area requires substantial capital improvements to elevate roadways to the City's higher standards, as well as additional improvements to meet ultimate (buildout) demands. • FISCAL IMPACT: Based on projections from the City Public Works Department,interim improvements to the City's standards could entail an $8 million expenditure. Ultimate improvement costs could reach nearly$11 million,for a total capital improvement need of $19 million. ■ POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS: ■ Adjust City's Development Impact Fee program to fund $19 million of ultimate improvements caused by future development. Consider levying special assessments to meet capital improvement needs in developed areas,where Development Impact Fees cannot be exacted. ROSENOW SPEVACER GROUP, INC. 2 PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS DECEMBER 15, 1999 CITY OF LA QUINTA EXISTING SETTING The Study Area is approximately 2,020 acres in size,and contains an estimated 6,433 residents according to a December 1999 study by National Decision Systems. Major land uses in the Study Area are residential, resort,industrial,commercial vacant,and aviation uses. Approximately one half of the Study Area(1,175 acres)is developed;the remaining 845 acres of undeveloped land includes 780 acres of future residential uses, 54 acres of future industrial uses, and 11 acres of future commercial uses. Breakdown of Existing Land Uses M Developed ■Undeveloped- Future Res. ❑Undeveloped - Future Ind/Comm As the Study Area builds out under the County General Plan,the number of residential units will increase from the 3,446 existing today,to 6,726 permitted. As a result,the Study Area's population will increase by 96%,to 12,600. The County General Plan does not envision the same level of development for commercial and industrial uses;RSG's research indicates that only another 65 acres of commercial and industrial uses are proposed for the Study Area, representing an increase of less than 19% over the 356 acres of existing commercial and industrial uses today. The imbalance of future residential and nonresidential uses planned for the Study Area impairs the ability of the area to independently generate sufficient tax revenues to support service costs,because residential uses rcial and industrial use typically generate typically generate most of the municipal expenditures,while comme typ y g the majority of tax revenues. ROSENOW SPEVACER GROUP, INC. 3 PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS DECEMBER 15, 1999 CITY OF LA QUINTA PRE-ANNEXATION SERVICES Several agencies provide the municipal services to the Study Area, as described below: GENERAL SERVICES COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE GENERAL FUND The County's General Fund provides most essential operational services in the Study Area. These services include basic law enforcement,planning/budding,public works,and general government. There are no park or recreational facilities currently in the Study Area. Upon annexation,the City would be responsible for all municipal services provided by the County General Fund. Revenues would be shifted to the City pursuant to the Master Property Tax Agreement(City Council Resolution 83-28). The Master Property Tax Agreement provides that 25%of the County's property tax levy(outside the Redevelopment Project Area boundaries)is to be shifted to the City of La Quinta;all other tax revenues (sales,property transfer, etc.) are transferred to the City in their entirety. OTHER SERVICE PROVIDERS COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-DESERT COMMUNITIES REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT On December 22, 1986,the County Board of Supervisors adopted the Redevelopment Plan for Desert Communities Redevelopment Project,thereby entitling the County's Redevelopment Agency to collect all future property tax revenue growth in the Project Area. The Project Area,which includes the merged Redevelopment Project Area No. 4 and the Airports-1998 Project Area, is comprised of numerous noncontiguous areas located throughout the County,totaling 26,809 acres. Less than 1.5%of the Study Area Les within the Project Area,including commercial properties along Washington Street,immediately north and south of 42°d Avenue. The County's Redevelopment Agency retains all property tax revenues in excess of amounts received in 1986-87. Upon annexation,tax increment revenue from any new development,increases in property values,or property sales within the Project Area would not be paid to the City. LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 89-1-CONSOLIDATED The County currently operates a Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District(89-1-Consolidat4 that maintains the median on 42nd Avenue between Lima Hall Road and Glass Drive. Median maintenance is funded by property owner assessments that are currently$178.58 per acre per year. A total of 113 property owners are assessed. Upon annexation,RSG has assumed that the City and County would jointly administer this Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District to continue maintenance of this median in the Study Area. COUNTY SERVICE AREAS 121 AND 152 There are two County services areas(CSA)that provide municipal services to the Study Area. CSA 121 provides street lighting to portions of the Study Area, as well as other unincorporated areas north of Interstate 10. The County currently collects approximately$20,000 in property taxes each year to fund street lighting operation costs. Upon annexation,the City may detach the Bermuda Dunes portion of CSA 121 and collect these property taxes directly through the City's general property tax levy. A second County service ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. 4 PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS DECEMBER 15, 1999 CITY OF LA QUINTA area in the Study Area is CSA 152 that funds street sweeping costs throughout the County and in the Study Area. Upon annexation,the City would receive this property tax revenue that would offset approximately 25% of the street sweeping costs in the Study Area. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. 5 PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS DECEMBER 15, 1999 CITY OF LA QUINTA ANTICIPATED POST-ANNEXATION SERVICES AND IMPACTS ON CITY Upon annexation,the City of La Quinta would be responsible for providing all municipal services to the annexed area. This report analyzes the forecasted marginal or incremental cost of City services,as well as the revenues that could be reasonably expected to fund such services. The funds impacted by annexation include the General Fund,Gas Tax and Capital Improvements Funds. A summary of these revenue and expenditure impacts projected in the first,fifth,tenth and twenty-fifth(assumed buildout)years of annexation is presented in Table 1. GENERAL FUND With the exception of road maintenance,most operational services would be provided through the City's General Fund. Revenues and expenditures projected for the Study Area are enumerated below. REVENUES Table 2 projects impacts to General Fund revenues. The primary sources of General Fund operating revenues would be property taxes,motor vehicle license fees and sales taxes. Other sources of General Fund revenues include franchise taxes, document transfer taxes, AB 939 recycling fees, Proposition 172 supplemental sales taxes,fines and forfeitures,sales of publications and maps,and property transfer taxes. Other revenues not specifically identified in Table 2(such as fees and licenses)are offset by service costs and excluded from this analysis. The County currently operates a Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District(89-1-Consolidated)that maintains the median on 42nd Avenue between Lima Hall Road and Glass Drive. Median maintenance is funded by property owner assessments that are currently$178.58 per acre per year. A total of 113 property owners are assessed. Upon annexation,RSG has assumed that the City and County would jointly administer this Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District to continue maintenance of this median. There are two County services areas(CSA)that provide municipal services to the Study Area. CSA 121 provides street lighting to portions of the Study Area, as well as other unincorporated areas north of Interstate 10. The County currently collects approximately$20,000 in property taxes each year to fund street lighting operation costs. Upon annexation,the City may detach the Bermuda Dunes portion of CSA 121 and collect these property taxes directly through the City's general property tax levy. A second County service area in Bermuda Dunes is CSA 152 that funds street sweeping costs throughout the County and in Bermuda Dunes. Upon annexation,the City would receive this property tax revenue that would offset approximately 25% of the street sweeping costs in Bermuda Dunes. The revenue forecast assumes some increases in revenues to account for inflationary factors over the 25- year duration of this analysis. These assumptions are briefly summarized below: 3.5%annual increase in property assessed values to account for Proposition 13 adjustments and resales; ■ 2.5% annual increase in taxable sales and transient occupancy taxes; and 2%annual increase in franchise taxes,sales of maps and publications,fines and forfeitures, and AB 939 recycling fees. ROSENOW SPEVACER GROUP, INC. 6 PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS DECEMBER 15, 1999 CITY OF LA QUINTA EXPENDITURES Estimated annual General Fund expenditures are itemized in Table 3. The largest General Fund expenditures relate to public safety services. Public safety cost estimates were compiled by RSG,based on discussions with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. According to the Sheriff's Department, annexation of the Study Area to La Quinta would result in a higher level of service than Bermuda Dunes residents currently enjoy;this would result from an increased physical presence of patrol cars and increased patrol resources available to meet peak levels of service. Annexation would provide Bermuda Dunes residents with a dedicated patrol beat (5 deputies year round),a community services officer,and an additional member of the investigation support team. Currently, Sheriff deputies patrol areas outside Bermuda Dunes,including Sun City,and other unincorporated areas as much as 35 miles away. Also the Sheriff does not provide a community services officer or additional investigation support to Bermuda Dunes. Other General Fund operating expenditures relate to City Clerk,Finance,Community Services,Building and Safety,Community Development,and Public Works maintenance functions. RSG's assumed service enhancements for these areas include incremental staffing and supply increases to absorb the impact of the increased service demands from the annexed area. The projections of City costs incorporate the following assumptions to account for cost inflation: 3.5%annual increase in public safety contract costs,with some economies of scale benefits realized as the area builds out; 2.5% annual increase in City Clerk supply costs, fiscal personnel costs,code compliance costs, animal control program expenditures, planning personnel costs, and street maintenance costs; and A contingency factor equal to 10% of the total annual expenditures. GAS TAX FUND Upon annexation,the City's Gas Tax Fund would be entitled to State subventions pursuant to Sections 2105,2106,2107,and 2017.5 of the Streets and Highways Code. These revenues are apportioned to the City by the state on a per capita basis,except for Section 2107.5 subventions,which are determined by population thresholds. These funds could be employed by the City to underwrite road maintenance projects either in the annexed area, or elsewhere in the City. Table 4 summarizes annual Gas Tax Fund revenues. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS The City Public Works department conducted an analysis of Study Area roadway needs in September 1999. This analysis characterized public street improvement needs into two categories. The first is referred to as the"Interim Condition"which would result in improvements that elevate the condition of existing traffic lanes to the City's higher standards. Interim Condition improvements do not involve increasing of roadway capacity. The second category is the"Ultimate Condition"which involves improvements to increase capacity to accommodate future buildout. Together, the Interim Condition and Ultimate Condition improvements result in the total cost of roadway improvements in the Study Area. Currently,the City does not have a funding mechanism to construct these improvements. In general, RSG understands that the City may fund some of these costs through development exactions pursuant to the ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. 7 PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS DECEMBER 15, 1999 CITY OF LA QUINTA City's Development Fee Program. The extent that the Development Fee can accommodate these costs is not known at this time. Any shortfalls in Development Fees would either need to be deferred,or made up by the City,through other resources(such as state and federal grants and road fund revenues)used to fund capital improvements throughout the City. Indeed,the Study Area does not generate surplus operating revenues that can be pledged to meet infrastructure program needs in the Study Area. ROSENOW SPEVACER GROUP, INC. 8 PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS DECEMBER 15, 1999 CITY OF LA QUINTA NEXT STEPS AND ANNEXATION PROCESS If the City desires to pursue annexation of the Study Area,RSG recommends that the City first consider the market viability of revenue generating uses in the Study Area,such as hotels,regional-serving retail space, wholesalers,and industrial space. These uses will be necessary to ensure that the City's General Fund collects sufficient revenues to offset service costs. Otherwise,development of service-demanding residential uses will significantly curtail the ability of the City to meet service needs,and the City could be forced to consider a reduction in services in the Study Area. If the City desires to proceed with an annexation application,the City would need to do the following: 1) Amend the City's Sphere of Influence to include the proposed annexed area. 2) Enter into a pre-annexation agreement with the County of Riverside to provide the City the ability to review future development proposals,and facilitate future annexations of the Study Area as the area builds out. 3) Prepare a plan for services that assesses current service providers,current City service levels, and the City services to be extended. 4) Prepare and submit a fiscal impact analysis that assesses the annexation's effects on both the City and the County. 5) Conduct at least one public workshop to discuss the annexation proposal with affected residents. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. 9 PRELIMINARY ANNEXATION ANALYSIS DECEMBER 15, 1999 CITY OF LA QUINTA EXHIBIT 1 STUDY AREA MAP BERMUDA DUNES ANNEXATION AREA in tv a o 0 - oC, O m n m a 39t (n N O ame�Ra 0 N m m 0 7 40th sass.-Eir M III ay. . H_rri n Cal so Rd Cascadia, - s . fd , � Cage x � 3 h Bermutla DunesAicp. w w O'df abassa Dr ,� Roval Ave Cn 42nd Av 42nd Ave. . RunawaTBa7yDrCOD N—m 86 Avenuem, f ie States S;I j i-mas Dr °7 a nes Dr Mar cayPl � Berm' Edl oro Fi St ,� -` .' Torea Dr Start gFjt L ick Pi ngston nBa 1 wm d c s Da. w Rd + m r B thpoint Ct ilia 0) a m - 44th-Ave o c red Waring Dr r_ � 0 O. m \�9f 0 0 esq a o'sf acca Miles Ave V 0 O - O 1996 GeoSystems Global Corp. and Pro CD,Inc. 0 TABLE I -FUND SUMMARY Year 1 Year 5 Year 10 Buildout KEY ASSUMPTIONS Residential Units 3,446 4,102 4,758 6,726 Residential Population(Permanent 6,433 7,700 8,900 12,600 New Retail Development(sq ft) - - - 105,902 New Industrial Development(sq ft) - 100,000 1,058,312 GENERALFUND Revenues $ 992,961 $ 1,290,405 $ 1,540.145 $ 2.950,988 Expenditures 1,516,524 1,889,352 2,475,207 5.912,484 Revenues Less Expenditures $ (523,563) $ (598,947) $ (935.062) $ (2,961,496) GAS TAX FUND Revenues $ 115,022 $ 137,676 $ 159,132 $ 226,288 Expenditures n/a nla nla nla Revenues Less Expenditures nla nla nla nla CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND(Cumulative Costs) Interim Improvement Cost $ $ 8,341,344 $ 8,341,344 $ 8,341,344 Ultimate Improvement Cost - 11,055,161 11,055,161 Total Cost $ $ 8,341,344 $ 19,396,505 $ 19,396,505 TABLE 2-GENERAL FUND REVENUES Year 1 Year 5 Year 10 Buildout Taxes Property Tax General Fund $ 302,946 $ 424,555 $ 594,473 $ 1.708,027 CSA 121 (street lighting) 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 CSA 152(street sweeping) 4,500 4,500 4,500 4,500 Assessment 89-1-C 14,700 14,700 14,700 14,700 Document Transfer Tax 29,393 41,168 41,168 57,477 Sales Tax 126,387 201,597 201,597 228,088 Proposition 172 Sales Tax 3,160 5,040 5,040 5,702 Transient Occupancy Tax 53,136 58,652 58,652 66,360 Franchise Tax 103,965 122,001 141,015 199.639 Subtotal $ 658,186 $ 892,213 $ 1.081.144 $ 2,304,492 Licenses and Fees Business License Fees $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 Other Licenses&Fees Cost Offset Cost Offset Cost Offset Cost Offset Sale of Maps and Publications 1,385 1,625 1,878 2,659 Subtotal $ 9,385 $ 9,625 $ 9,878 $ 10,659 Intergovernmental Motor Vehicle License $ 286,654 $ 343.112 $ 396,584 $ 561,456 Fines&Forfeitures 12,178 14,290 16,517 23,384 AB 939(Recycling Fees) 26,558 31,165 36,022 50,997 Subtotal $ 325,390 $ 388,567 $ 449,123 $ 635,837 Total $ 992,961 $ 1,290,405 $ 1,540,145 $ 2,950.988 TABLE 3•GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Year 1 Year 5 Year 10 Buildoul Public Safety Sheriff s Contract $ 895,292 $ 1,248,806 $ 1,703,481 $ 4,670,855 General Government Legislative $ - $ - $ - $ City Manager Econ.Dev.Contract Services Econ.Dev.All Other Subtotal $ - $ $ - $ City Clerk Services and Supplies $ 17,830 $ 20,924 $ 24,185 $ 34,239 All Other - - - - Subtotal $ 17.830 $ 20,924 $ 24,185 $ 34,239 Finance Fiscal Personnel S 39,658 $ 43,775 $ 54,669 $ 71,730 Fiscal Services and Supplies 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Fiscal Capital Equipment - - - - Central Services-Svc&Sppls 50,000 50,000 50.000 50,000 Central Services-AII Other - - Subtotal $ 94,658 $ 98,775 $ 109,669 $ 126,730 Community Services Administration $ - $ - $ - $ - Reaeation 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Senior Center 33,627 33,627 33,627 33,627 Subtotal $ 43,627 $ 43,627 $ 43,627 $ 43,627 Building&Safety Administration $ - $ $ $ - Code Compliance 58,211 64,254 80,245 105,288 Animal Control 15,934 18,698 21,612 30,597 Building&Safety-All Other Subtotal $ 74,145 $ 82,952 $ 101,856 $ 135.884 Community Development Admin.-Contract Services - Admin.-All Other - - - Planning 136,906 151,119 188,726 247,625 SCAOMO General Plan Amendment 50,000 - Subtotal $ 186,906 $ 151,119 $ 188,726 $ 247,625 Public Works Administration $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 Development&Traffic - - - Street Maintenance 50,000 55,191 62,443 99,825 Landscape&Lighting Maintenance 14,700 14,700 14,700 14,700 Subtotal $ 66,200 $ 71,391 $ 78,643 $ 116,025 Subtotal 1,378.658 1,717,593 2,250,188 5.374,986 Contingency(10%) 137,866 171,759 225,019 537,499 Total $ 1,516,524 $ 1,889,352 $ 2,475,207 $ 5,912,484 TABLE 4-GAS TAX FUND REVENUES Year 1 Year 5 Year 10 Buildout Gas Tax Subventions Section 2105 $ 38,791 $ 46,431 $ 53,667 $ 75,978 Section 2106 21,937 26,257 30,349 42,966 Section 2107 54,295 64,988 75,116 106,344 Section 2107.5 - - 1,000 Total $ 115,022 $ 137,676 $ 159,132 $ 226,288 i TABLE 5-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND PROJECT COSTS(Cumulative Costs) Year 1 Year 5 Year 10 Buildout Interim Condition 11 Local Street $ - $ 2,553,351 $ 2,553,351 $ 2,553,351 Secondary Arterial - 930,513 930,513 930,513 Primary Arterial - 3,893,018 3.893,018 3,893,018 Major Arterail - 964,462 964,462 964.462 Subtotal $ - $ 8,341,344 $ 8,341.344 $ 8,341,344 Ultimate Condition 21 Local Street $ - $ $ 2,492,588 $ 2.492,588 Secondary Arterial - 1,305,016 1,305,016 Primary Arterial 6,049,097 6,049,097 Major Arterail 1,208,460 1,208,460 Subtotal $ $ $ 11,055,161 $ 11,055,161 Total $ $ 8,341,344 $ 19,396,505 $ 19,396,505 11 Assumes buildout to City's higher improvement standards. Assumed to be constructed by the fifth year of annexation 21 Assumes buildout to ultimate improvement standards. Assumed to be constructed by the tenth ye of annexation 0 »��'� aa � n 7 1� mo ' S a �� h � � mo � �" w�.m�•� m r� c .�,R I'm � .7 � a m woa •q m c m �e 7 � p m 3� go m o. m v° � a o .. � $• r e w a v �v a.�d n.5. -"'e tQ no g [Ilk S�. P Q" t��f tcr�� o.w .F°n C. :° `� �''9 0�• o PG . m omay � > x � 'q'�•e 8 � � 5' m op p $ .oe •° � u � n a �. m O m go • 0Eti n11Y p b �m�m qm om m '0 po ro go ,�°. BmE1u. a o a mv8 " a ' a `-' G Qamy �i � �.a E'm�a3 � .e� `,.°.o, 6 m� 5. 9'o m " $ s s s" yt ��. �� Mbm � a•ax �: p m ��.a »� �$$ � b �$ P .� �.� F, � s. S,g c• pv .gv E �„° ° "a � a < :• � T 5. 1 �� 'fie ' �• m 7 8 5' 7 e 8 - m o•A�[�.@; �. m m ro^ Y m & 9. eo.m oam rQr��'O7 e�°t:,,mmo ° Sm {g� �W Pj r a .p m �F.,K E+� � °, a .o .ggu B _ N�iA ma ski' m 3 E��.o < a < m .5' F •`4 m � m m q8:9 m m ° � q. mo .. ..qq C' � `g �pym � m n Fd� S.a o-���S'e ' c m Yo'' � � �' x Nb � r 9 ^�` � m pc � F 30 o �+,mm � 6 3�o.Ir m�G � .a £ ; o O P•O mn.K �yc i9 pC � g ,a 'iC�.m o ;;, a o o E `a.. Fad"•�•.�tl,' �°. °•� m F3� cr 9 a 6a.?�� oM9 e. Po CJR A 3 y m 7. '§ r ''ma 3�t. p. E' y - 'r M m YF 6�,'00 m <. � G o a w r w m 7 O m n.O a•C..n d}o {L}� a O t� e � O m fn° m m O v ? � O P y� .� FI tt G m dm ry O m ��.., Sl O �S Ol m m G c 5' A O p S o �'s,3 a o p p [' a. yq; e am .p G.00 GP.I �o+ m a1F'' ry�pyQG. a ,mm �y+ g$ �J• m 7 5 . QO0p6 � m pmog p - mo@. �Cm m9 m 'NiW y6 o m10 � m 7 m o.R O �A�..�Smoa �' vor m � bmO �� a 4 � m � U°a .� o''y� gg� S'oe' a sA vm Q�. � Crd3.m hl l01�� 5 5O n 18,@@ 5 N M a mr P p 'G C r .g n n uPYa o K Z. �S S xmomPr p� oo,� (s'.C � mm $�� � a �m om �° � ��S`m � edd�gg'�a•G�,� ��° �.i Q ci m Np. (� m O O M X ea S 'O O tm tyl m �� 2 � lD � �• a�e F ,�y �m � � ?° m� d 0+ r° a f° S� m 6i O m � a. �O N �Z w+p, g� 'a�1D a �' °a 50. `• 4° o $P^ �� &eC ,e `° b' � .� 8g o � 8 `P o^� R� � � .,`n_ � o �� v5• Y ry`�8 � e g �['� 3 �8 m � !(�Q �. � m$ bm m 7�mjp 8.8 � a � � o „•a•��. ni e•5 N tryi i $% `< � �°.,:d � a m iy0 m �� .� T Ma� •e. O.S�m Mho' e � '+ �^ E S � � � m 2 ryry'Q�y cq' � •�e�} a� � � � a '� � `e [/� �d � E 2:�. n �� 8 0 i� Qi N � �� p m ..� �,•s "� w rn O � C y'+,C C a'. � �O p `�'G Sc p �+'w � �'m mmm� R 8 9 oG'" - m W � ' . � n'o a •.��»m n s' ,t9 ml � � .°s O.n `^ _ 2 r r+ 'i! °• {o @p•p� a'_ � Ia o r• }a 3 � 5 8 �r o•° 8�g�f 918 g, . roar` `$e' `8..d pn'ilS�sa+ 1m� � 1D �. ' pM•e'� �C] �to �`� �' � mS' .�•d ,e oS.� •°s rnp 7 �.� n +�°o C] n C �D 9 ro a �an O O'�ygy� pS! �•!!!ppp5���ttt p O (���D• pl 2 S �i ,f3'i C�• rm-� m G Oam� F •� v p•G. M •1 4 w O• ��pp a c+ y S'. WE '.! `•' J M O m Y' m ^ a M FT m P' w Y' .mJ m S. m � 1D.° �i6' da.°i � ' sO �04 cb b �� o �, o'� 5' � ° Roet v 6 �• �' Ib �' �• t �' m M. R EA G.,08 �5. i m e a'.d°a °• `�, '° � m 8 �o �. ,� a `"m 5 "a r o.� m 1ro�E� � 5 3R2 � � Fo, R � � .°8 8 �' Ep�i• `pig,g°��� `�aw� �'e• �•� ��.3 �. � � p � m .ar� a8 ?x � �- S.�"� � �� o•�° �: a � ,� 8 �o pid m � 2� � � �r� a .o x <. 8 S°8" c 8 m 8 5 � 1a �, .°� ap �� ��+ c� •�� a 8 �. .a308,5'8�.2 �'8, � 4 �cg2mm e Y a�FT. m [[CGGyy ��'�o'''� pa m�`'`<n� C �° 3 �m n E .r�'�.� � C _.•`� m m'�a n m � .°'o T.' n. q �'•.G�. i m m m � � � a• �. �°•O m < S YJ � a�a m 5 o ° c c 6• m aea 1P n `.� 5'e r8,'eioni� � m,a 22Ft � �8 ,m� ��n'�e3�-•s5C;.p�� a �vp ,o.� �(066 8 a � �.� � dim �o NfgZ • R Y !I 5 °a •< ec1 1p F ry^� 8. m v n pa . m 52 m •psi S- Tr'5-B�' g •D�. p� m o •s 7 5 Big a m P -°• 3 :'+ o.•°s .Z d u -g.. Sia nt3 m$rl{ l boll, h *� < K^ esr a 5.18•e�5:� m8 r o 0 Et m m R .. a .��° '° o• 5 ga� C �5ry^ �-"' o, �'y ° ° c 1r', m�' N o a a o$g F a y Hug m f7 o p a�°+aW .A SP � m . T C a p o ry8 �y.1D a7 " oMB �.� �� Ro�� � esBm $ � 8r'86 o,•q��. 0.3 m �, ry o J° @•..•S, m n Fo' �aog a 8 � C 5' .°.em .°.• ,a.. o �' n ro9 •q `8. a t•r o88 •ya8 o a m C C8� m8C � '. �8 Li $ � R3 a' ry-E °,d •ems' , m �.m �8 C y O ,I7 � 9op�. •p 4'� �e �v �• �'°�� ef � �Pmmo+ m L° C0a' ,m,'o sao E �. 7 og � 62 �p ePBcSpcc pa oy �.m'c 'he iA'a ''•• p'� gc pJ y - �E,1••S �B. ly. �5" m `° c� � $ a: a•°, o'7 a gm om m � o m np o 8aS C o• 0. m S mir ° 5' v 0 .a. •a `E},�o 6i' n•e88 •°.. •e add a ?• n . !°.e a „y�"' g a no 4 5 M @'w m 8 �'8•R f°i w6�u m a ,°y aro•q w ,� 85'y my `D ra my d a 0 rn m a� e z � 8 E cr p 5 m g,ym . mm So �'•B �A. 6' n c$ �' Sao A�vmmB 8b ��Oa ac a a �• Saoao m e '� � S mb•a p �,m.�� .0 8 ,� mQ�m m °p �° °.`' 5'•8'° r mN tl m1D � F: ti 8 [r.� p Ei o tr.o °, 8 `8 �p o •p 6 ° moa oamn ra _ as 6 � �° ° •*o5m m,o ym 5,•°e 'd .°,v J 7 °• m 8 ,� ro �. 'a �b`< a a '+ S:as �'�.� �� ��.��. a��oe ° ww � „¢¢•o � I�Y't° �.o � �b Ems, O ^m' o mo G. O � .� eY 3 0 � •-�'� ] Q � N n N Oe��n m� �"my �-n O� m � m6� y C O G'h0 N •1• 'y �F. M men Y' m P.r l~D 6 C E:.W..• q ae 0 �.�i CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: CARLOS L. ORTEGA, CITY MANAGER/RDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FROM: STEVE SMITH, PLANNING MANAGER DATE: OCTOBER 2, 2000 SUBJECT: LAFCO HEARING - BERMUDA DUNES SPHERE OF INFLUENCE Per our discussion of Friday, September 29, 2000, please find attached a letter dated February 8, 2000 from Acting City Clerk Klassen to Mr. Wayne Guralnick which outlines the City's position on the addition of Bermuda Dunes to the Palm Desert Sphere of Influence. A review of the minutes of the January 27, 2000 city council meeting indicates that the minute motion carried by unanimous vote. Also enclosed is a letter dated July 31 , 2000 from Mayor Crites to LAFCO which concludes, "The City of Palm Desert's City Council supports the request of the Bermuda Dunes Community Council and urges LAFCO to expedite the application process." Tuesday, September 26, 2000, Mr. Spiliotis of LAFCO had called me to ask if the city would be represented at the meeting on September 28, 2000. 1 told him that I had not received an agenda nor staff report. He briefly outlined his position and offered to fax the report. Immediately after the call I talked to Rachelle Klassen and Monica O'Reilly thinking the agenda and report may have been sent to the city clerk or city manager. When the report and agenda failed to show up in other departments and did not arrive in Tuesday's mail, I called LAFCO early Wednesday morning and requested the report to be faxed ASAP. The report was faxed at 9:46 a.m. on Wednesday, September 27, 2000. The report did not include the attachments which were included in reports sent to other interested parties (i.e., letters of support from the various groups involved in the sphere request and the letter of support submitted by the City of Palm Desert). As of the writing of this memo on Monday, October 2, 2000, the agenda and report have not arrived so I can only conclude that it was never sent to the city which might be explained by the fact that the city was not the applicant as we typically are in annexation applications. I spoke with Mr. Spiliotis of LAFCO and he indicated that we should have received it but they have been having problems with the mail out. I should note that I had several telephone conversations with Mr. Spiliotis early in September 2000. He was seeking information to include in his report. So while I knew that the matter was coming along we never received official notice of the matter and only received the full explanation of the LAFCO staff position on Wednesday, September 27, 2000. (WP%MEM0.AFC0.CL0) CITY MANAGER LAFCO HEARING - BERMUDA DUNES SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OCTOBER 2, 2000 I attended the LAFCO meeting on September 28, 2000 and supported the Bermuda Dunes Sphere of Influence request as originally submitted. In response to a question from Ms. Lowe of the Commission, I clarified that that was the larger area including the Ellis piece at Fred Waring and Jefferson and the section on Darby Road currently in the La Quinta sphere. Elis has an approved tract map from La Quinta for 379 single family dwellings in a gated community on 122 acres (3.1 units per acre). With respect to the Ellis annexation to La Quinta, I stated, "The city council has not taken a specific position on the Ellis annexation but generally supports maintaining the existing . integrity of the Bermuda Dunes Community boundaries." With respect to possible timing of any annexation of the area to Palm Desert I indicated that if it ever occurs it would be at least 3-5 years off in that we have only just begun our general plan update which will include the Bermuda Dunes area. It was interesting to hear the comments of others who spoke at the hearing. Mr. Guralnick represented the Bermuda Dunes Country Club, who were the actual applicants in the sphere application supported the LAFCO staff recommendation (i.e., Ellis to La Quinta and Darby Road staying in La Quinta sphere with the rest to Palm Desert). Mr. Herman of La Quinta staff and several persons supported the Ellis property to La Quinta. Mr. Jerry Lugo, Chairman of Bermuda Dunes Community Council referred to his letter on file and supported the LAFCO staff recommendation. Mr. Jay Steel, a member of the Bermuda Dunes Community Council, spoke and supported the entire area going to Palm Desert (i.e., deny Ellis annexation to La Quinta and Darby Road remaining in La Quinta sphere). The LAFCO staff report at page 6 outlines the reasons for recommending that the Ellis property go to La Quinta as follows: "Some time ago, a representative of the Sand Harbor annexation area made an effort to follow the direction of the Bermuda Dunes Community Council if the outcome was annexation. The landowner indicated up front, however, that he was not willing to wait for an extended time. Approximately seven months later, Mr. Ellis began processing a specific plan and annexation through the City of La Quinta. This area is not an integral part of the Bermuda Dunes JWRMEM%LAFCO.CLOI 2 CITY MANAGER LAFCO HEARING - BERMUDA DUNES SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OCTOBER 2, 2000 community. The proposed residential development is also not likely to significantly impact any future evaluation by the City of Palm Desert to annex Bermuda Dunes." The commission ultimately supported the LAFCO staff recommendation and the smaller sphere area (i.e., excluding the Ellis property and Darby Road area) was added to the Palm Desert sphere on a 5-1 vote with Commissioner McFadden voting nay although I have been advised that he may have changed his vote after it was displayed on the screen. One last observation. During the summations by commissioners, it was interesting that Ms. Terry Henderson (a Councilwoman from La Quinta I have been given to understand) stated that she did not understand why Palm Desert was requesting the larger sphere area in that she had recently spoken to two Palm Desert Councilmen who stated that they did not support annexation of the area to Palm Desert. CONCLUSION: The LAFCO action brings a significant section of Bermuda Dunes into the Palm Desert sphere. Not having the Ellis property probably will not negatively impact any future consideration of the merits of annexation (specifically fiscal impacts). Had we known earlier officially of the LAFCO hearing perhaps we could have arranged a meeting of the "annexation committee" to better orchestrate our position and determine our level of input at LAFCO. I understand that the LAFCO report and agenda were mailed on or about September 20, 2000 and received by others around September 22, 2000. This would not have permitted a review at a regularly scheduled city council meeting. Had the city made a higher profile presentation, would it have made a difference in the LAFCO action? That is difficult to assess but the vote on the Ellis annexation was unanimous 6-0. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. STEVE SMITH PLANNING MANAGER Am Attachment(WFtMEWAFC0.CL01 3 I _ MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 E. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL o City Council Requests for Action: 1. Consideration of Adding Bermuda Dunes to City of Palm Desert's Sphere of Influence (Mayor Pro-Tempore Jim Ferguson). The following is a verbatim transcript of this portion of the City Council meeting: Key BAC Mayor Buford A. Crites JF Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Ferguson RAS Councilman Robert A. Spiegel RSK Councilman Richard S. Kelly WG Wayne Guralnick MS Mike Smith FG Frank Goodman ED Ernie Dunlevy DIE David J. Erwin, City Attorney JMB Councilmember Jean M. Benson PD Phil Drell, Director of Community Development RAD Ramon A. Diaz, City Manager RDK Rachelle D. Klassen, Acting City Clerk BAC We have one item that is listed, and that is regarding annexation of Bermuda Dunes to Palm Desert's Sphere of Influence. Mr. Ferguson... IF This is actually a recommendation from the Annexation Committee that Councilmember Spiegel and I sit on. I see several members of Bermuda Dunes here this evening. We've been approached at various times over the past, I think, five or six years but more recently by representatives from Bermuda Dunes about — Does Palm Desert want to annex Bermuda Dunes? I've talked to Frank Goodman about it, I've talked to Ernie Dunlevy on innumerable occasions about it, and as an Annexation Committee, every time there's an article about La Quinta or Indio or the County or Palm Desert, I start getting phone calls from people in Bermuda Dunes. 1 also get phone calls from people in Bermuda Dunes who claim that the Community Council doesn't want to be annexed, or they want to go somewhere else, and Councilmember Spiegel and I decided rather than the question being phrased, `Does Palm Desert want to annex Bermuda Dunes?", the question really ought to be, "Does Bermuda Dunes want to come to Palm Desert?" And we met and the recommendation that we made to the City Council was that it, Bermuda Dunes, in a unified voice, decided it wanted to come to the City of Palm Desert. And by unified, we meant 75% or more, of the people asked say 24 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 they want to come to Palm Desert, and it can be made financially feasible to come in, however mechanism that Bermuda Dunes wants to take a look at doing that, that Palm Desert would welcome them into our community. And so, rather than having us continually being asked, "Do you want us?", the answer now is, "Sure, but you need to take the steps to make that happen." And that was the recommendation from the Annexation Committee to the Council for discussion. BAC Mr. Spiegel? RAS I have...there's something I'd like to add to that, Mayor Pro-Tem Ferguson. We have done a fiscall impact report on annexing Bermuda Dunes in the past, as most of you are aware, and La Quinta has also done a fiscal impact report on annexing Bermuda Dunes. That's all of Bermuda Dunes. That's not cherry picking, that's all of Bermuda Dunes. And the report gave us a, really, a negative impact. In other words, it would be a financial hardship on the City of Palm Desert to annex Bermuda Dunes, to bring Bermuda Dunes up to the codes of the City. And the last time that we looked at this; we pretty much told Bermuda Dunes, "Look, we couldn't annex you because of the financial impact." So, what I would like to suggest, along with what Mayor Pro-Tem Ferguson said, is that we send the fiscal impact report that was prepared for Palm Desert and for La Quinta to the groups (I think there are two, maybe three groups) in Bermuda Dunes for them to review, with the understanding that, from my standpoint anyway, that without some sort of an assessment district set up so that it would not affect, financially, the City of Palm Desert to annex Bermuda Dunes, I would not be in favor of that. Now that doesn't mean that it couldn't be put into our sphere of influence with that understanding, that if it were ever annexed, that it would be financially neutral. But in order to bring Bermuda Dunes into the City, this is from me, I would not like to see the negative impact, and you should be privy to that so that you can take a look at what it might cost. IF I want to add one... BAC Councilman... RSK Are you finished? IF He's actually (unclear) RSK I thought you were done. JF I did, too. The last time we had a community of basically your size, not geographically but population-wise, that wanted to become identified with Palm Desert, we followed this exact same procedure. It was Del Webb's Sun City. They applied to be in our sphere of influence. We, as I understand it, did not object. They have a Palm Desert address, they're identified with Palm Desert. Financially, it hasn't penciled out yet to extend police and fire and all the other services to them at a cost that makes sense. So, we're in the same situation with Del 25 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Webb as we would be in if you'd want to make that application to LAFCo, but I'm not sure that we've ever said no to somebody who has come to us and wants to be part of our community in a unified voice where it made financial sense or made no financial non-sense to bring them in. So we're trying to apply the same policy uniformly. BAC Councilman Kelly. RSK Well, I had thought we approved, a couple of years ago, bringing them in the sphere of influence. But, as I remember, Palm Desert Country Club wasn't exactly a...it was a slight economic minus, but also, things have changed in Bermuda Dunes a lot, too, and a large portion of that is a gated community which is a lot less impact as far as the requirement for services and streets and roads and things like that. And I'm not sure, there was some discussion that all of the revenues that would be derived from that annexation were included in that last report, so I'd like...because I don't know if anybody mentioned that...that we take a look at that last report and update it to make it more current. And I suspect that that will make it closer to a break even point than it was at that time. BAC Okay. Any other comments? (Unclear) do that, I would also guess it may very well increase some of the cost figures from that point. So, I'm not sure I share your suspicion that it makes it more likely to be fiscally feasible, but nonetheless, the data need to be examined in an unimpassioned fashion so that we can get some honest readings about what this would or would not do for the current citizens. RAS And I think it would be a good idea for them to see what the reports that we have...they're public record. BAC Fair enough. RAS And there's no reason why you shouldn't have them. BAC Okay. Mr. Guralnick, you wanted to offer comment. WG I'll be brief. Honorable Mayor, Honorable Councilmembers and staff. My name is Wayne Guralnick. I am General Counsel for Bermuda Dunes Community Association and the Security Association. I'm here to represent to you tonight that within one week of getting Councilman Ferguson's phone call asking for input, we got 400 people who have actually responded, and of those, over 90% were in favor. We really want to be in your city. We also understand the first step is getting within the sphere of influence, and we would like, if it is within your power, to do everything you can to get that moving along because that's not a step that will cost you a whole lot of effort other than staff time to get us within the sphere of influence through LAFCo and would like to do that. Also, the Bermuda Dunes Country Club itself, its board unanimously voted to support this proposition. I don't know the answer to this question, but I do believe since the Security Association became the entity that is responsible 26 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 for the streets, and the place became gated, I would think then that the obligation to upgrade those streets may not come within the parameters of the City's requirements for public streets. They would be exempted therefrom, and possibly then the concerns for the upgrade costs would not be as great as may be suggested by that report, which I have not also seen. So to the extent that that could be reviewed and potentially could change the large picture on that. And then, obviously, if that becomes the case, then maybe the need for an assessment district may be optional if the Bermuda Dunes gated community wants to upgrade from a septic system to a sewer system and curbs and gutters, which it does not have now in many locations. So, but we want, with all due speed and haste and whatever you can do. I know that the Community Association is dedicated to provide human resources to assist you and a volunteer that we can get to. Whatever you need, we want to assist you and we want to be in the City. Thank you. BAC Thank you, sir. May I assume that Mr. Guralnick's sentiments are shared by the folks with him here in the audience? Okay, be it so recorded. If there is anyone else who wishes to offer (unclear) support or request for testimony. MS Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Councilmembers. My name is Mike Smith, and I'm the manager of the Bermuda Dunes Airport, located in Bermuda Dunes. I'm here tonight to speak in favor of us being included in the sphere of influence as well as the possibility for annexation down the road. I did want to mention a couple of things...that I've polled the folks in the businesses that are at the Airport. There are six or seven businesses there, about 50 employees, and in total, they're in favor of us coming under the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. I would like to mention a couple of things about the Airport, that airports usually are funded by the city or by the municipality or county or somebody like that. And it costs a whole bunch of money to run this airport, so expect to put out a lot...no, you won't have to put out a dime. The Airport at Bermuda Dunes is privately owned and privately funded, and it is a public use airport, just like an airport that you would have if you wanted to develop one in your city. So, I think that's an important feature of our operation, and we do have...we're probably one of the largest land holders in the community. We have about 110 acres there at the Airport, and we do service all of the cities in the desert here. We do find that about 50% of our clients are either...have a destination or origin with the City of Palm Desert. So we think we're closely tied to Palm Desert, and we've been there going on 40 years, and I've been there a long time. And we certainly would want you folks to know that we're very, very much in favor of being part of the City of Palm Desert. Thank you. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. BAC Thank you, sir. Any questions? Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to offer comments this evening? FG Good evening. I'm Frank Goodman. I've been working on this for many, many years, as all of you do know. I think it is quite reasonable to assume that we are not going to be annexed 27 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 m s m * � * ■ � � : x * a � � � :s � � a � � * � a * s � m in any near future. However, I implore you to help us to get into the sphere of influence, and that is not going to cost you any money, and let's get it done. Thank you. BAC Thank you, sir. RAS Thank you. JF Well, I have...sorry. BAC We have someone else who wishes... ED I'm Ernie Dunlevy, a resident of Bermuda Dunes, obviously. I would like to add to what Mike Smith has said with regard to the Airport. We are not going to look to the City for any funds, nor are we going to share any profits with the City... RAS That was said. ED ...if there are any. And, hopefully, there will be. In any case, I think that all of the people here tonight, and we had three days' notice, I think we heard of this meeting Monday, and, as Mr. Guralnick said, some 400 people responded in favor. I think that we would be very happy to become a...in your sphere of influence, with the understanding that at some future date, we will have to pay the price of annexation, and we're willing to do that. Thank you. BAC Thank you, sir. RAS Thank you. BAC There being no one else, then, I think direction from the Committee... RSK Well, we've talked about doing this before. What do we have to do to make sure the process moves forward? JF Well, that's why I wanted to...this normally would have been put on the Agenda as a recommendation from the Annexation Committee for the Council to take action to accept them in our sphere if they apply and meet all the requirements of LAFCo. It wasn't put on there like that. It was put on there as a Council request for action, so I'm asking, if I would like a vote on that question, to I need to add it by 4/5ths vote, or... DJE No, sire, it's shown as consideration of that action being taken, and that's the requirement. IF So we can just vote on it. DIE Yes. 28 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 IF Well, then I would make that motion. BAC Okay, let's get a second first. RSK Second. BAC Okay, there's a motion and a second. Does that, then, include the issues of looking at financial feasibility and such things as that? IF I think it's to accept them in our sphere, with a clear understanding, as articulated by Mr. Goodman and Mr. Dunlevy, that unless it can financially make sense, that we will not annex them. RSK But we put them in the sphere of influence. IF And they will have a Palm Desert address and be affiliated with Palm Desert, secure in the knowledge that they aren't going to have raids by La Quinta or Indio. RSK Well, they wouldn't have to have a Palm Desert address. JMB They don't get a Palm Desert address for sphere of influence. IF According to the Post Office. PD Yes, the location of the Post Office...I in not sure, we went through a process with Del Webb in dealing with the Post Office and whether that...maybe we can talk to (unclear) find out how we did that. But, more importantly, I think the question is, "Should the City be the initiator of the application of LAFCo?" or you're just directing that we will cooperate with the residents' application. IF The Annexation Committee's recommendation was that Bermuda Dunes be the applicant. BAC Okay. RAS Yes, that's correct. RSK And that we will cooperate in that process, so the folks from Bermuda Dunes need to understand they need to get that application in and get it going. So it's kind of up to you to see how quick that can happen. RAS And then you have the support of Council. That's really what we're kind of indicating tonight, that...I think in all of the annexations, at least since I've been on the Council, "that has 29 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 happened, the people have come to us and then it has gone forward rather than the City going to the people. So we're asking that you work with the County to put in the application. WG Could we have a staff member who we could work with to assist us in that process? RAS Phil Drell? RAD Phil Drell. WG Okay. And maybe he even has applications available. If not, we can... JF Well, and I'll be real up front with you, Wayne, the reason we're doing it this way is because every time you say you want to come into Palm Desert, and I don't doubt it, and the survey that was done five years ago overwhelmingly said you did, we get a call from another Mike Smith, and the Council says, "No, no, no, no, people want to go to La Quinta," and I have a hard time believing that, but as we put the ball in your court, the burden of getting around that and unifying is on you, not on us. WG But it's a long process even among cities that we can expect that once we make the application, that...can the ball then be handed off to staff so that... RAS Yes, it will go to LAFCo, and it will have to go through the whole process. BAC And, again, it's also your business to make, from this one person's perception, to make sure the people understand the difference between sphere of influence and a promise of annexation, that those are very different issues. WG I concur that that distinction needs to be made so people understand that. BAC Because, you know, I may not certainly be on this Council more than a few more months, but whoever sits in this seat should not be approached three years from now with a, "Well, you guys put us in your sphere, now da-da, da-da." RAS You owe us. BAC And that's going to be something that, at least my vote is going to attempt to make it very clear, and it's not an unfriendly issue, but it's the exact same thing that if Bermuda Dunes was a part of Palm Desert and another community said, "We'd like to be in the sphere of influence," that I would feel personally obligated to do for Bermuda Dunes citizens as part of Palm Desert, and that is to make sure that any future annexation does not impact the existing residents in a way that they would not choose to have happen financially. WG I understand. 30 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 27, 2000 JF In fact, what I'm going to do, Wayne, is ask our City Clerk to have verbatim Minutes of this discussion made, and I will present it to the Council and the Association, and the City will keep a copy so it's very clear what we're doing here. And Mayor Crites' reluctance is well taken, is that we don't want to artificially raise expectations of annexation simply by taking the step to put you in our sphere, with the commitment that we'll work with you to try and make it work out, with the understanding that if it doesn't financially work out, we have an obligation to the rest of the City. . WG The clarity is, once we make the application and we have the support, I am potentially concerned with the City of La Quinta saying, "Uh-uh, we want that being our sphere of influence" at that point in time. I'm hopeful staff will then come to our aid, along with Council, to support that application as they need to. And would that be a fair statement? BAC And certainly LAFCo primarily then goes to residents to look for their choices on that, and so...yes, sir. JF Right. RAD Excuse me, Mr. Mayor and Mr. Guralnick, you've known me for a couple of years. When we get there, just call my office, and we'll arrange it. And to indicate to the rest of the Council, the things that the Annexation Committee goes through with this particular issue, we have another group, the Bermuda Dunes Community Council, for example, is having a meeting on February the loth to discuss Palm Desert, La Quinta, to stay where they're at, and this is why the Committee and Councilmember Ferguson said, you know, very, very succinctly why the recommendation that we have. IF Right. BAC Okay. JF We're doing everything we can do, given what we're being told by folks in Bermuda Dunes. BAC Alright, there is a recommendation, there's a second to it, please cast a ballot. RDK Motion carries by unanimous vote. 2. Palm Desert Senior Games (Councilman Robert A. Spiegel). Ms. Scully stated that a meeting had been held earlier in the week between herself, representatives of the Coachella Valley Recreation &Park District, and officers of the California Senior Olympics Foundation. She said they were asking the City and District to co-sponsor regional Senior Olympic Games in February 2001. She noted that a staff report would be brought to Council in 31 r� - RECEIVED ocT - 4 2000 3.d. & e. y� COMMUNITY DEUELONMENTDEPARTMENT 9/28/2000 CRY OF PALM DESERT TO: Local Agency Formation Commission FROM: George J. Spiliotis, Executive Officer SUBJECT: LAFCO 2000-11-4—SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION 10 TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CONCURRENT DETACHMENT FROM THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND DETACHMENT FROM CSA 121 ; AND LAFCO 2000-18-3—AMENDMENTS TO THE SPHERES OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITIES OF PALM DESERT (ADDITION) AND LA QUINTA (REMOVAL) PRIOR AGENDASIRELATED ACTIONS: October 1991, Commission denied two competing proposals to place all of Bermuda Dunes in Palm Desert and La Quinta spheres of influence and approved a 156 acre annexation to La Quinta. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This report addresses two conflicting proposals in an area that is primarily outside of any municipal sphere of influence. First, we have an application for a 122-acre sphere of influence amendment and reorganization that includes an annexation of the Sand Harbor Specific Plan to the City of La Quinta. The second proposal would place the entire Bermuda Dunes area, including the aforementioned annexation proposal to La Quinta, within the Palm Desert SOI . tel Approxima y 120 acre of Bermuda Dunes is currently VICINITY within the La Quinta SOI . LAFCO 2000-18-4 The sphere proposal is the result of a decade long, on-and-off dialogue within the community, culminating City of N in a recent advisory palm Desert Bermuda election, which indicated 1-10 strong support for an Dunes eventual annexation to Palm Desert. The recommendation L is for approval of the La Quinta sphere amendment and Hwylll 200 1 -4 reorganization proposal, with slightly modified City Of boundaries, and addition of Indian the remainder of Bermuda Wells City Of City Of Dunes currently outside the La QUlnta Indio La Quinta sphere, to the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert . RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION - 1485 SPRUCE STREET,SUITE J -RIVERSIDE, CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909) 369-0631 - FAX(909)369-8479 I LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 2 September 28, 2000 LAFCO 2000-18-4 GENERAL INFORMATION: APPLICANT: Wade Ellis, the sole property owner, has initiated the proposed sphere amendment and annexation to La Quinta. The proposal to place Bermuda Dunes in the Palm Desert SOI has been initiated by Fred Caterina, president of the Bermuda Dunes Community Association (BDCA) , the largest property owners ' association in Bermuda Dunes . LOCATION: The reorganization proposal is located on the northwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. The Palm Desert SOI application covers all of Bermuda Dunes, bounded by Interstate 10 on the north and the Cities of Palm Desert, La Quinta and Indio on the west, south and east, respectively. POPULATION: The population within the reorganization area is zero. The Bermuda Dunes area has a population of approximately 6, 000 . REGISTERED VOTERS : The Registrar of Voters reports no registered voters on the reorganization site, making the proposal legally uninhabited. The area proposed to be included in the Palm Desert SOI includes 2, 754 registered voters . ACREAGE: The total area of the reorganization is approximately 122 acres . The Bermuda Dunes SOI amendment covers approximately 2 , 046 acres . CEQA DETERMINATION: The City of La Quinta, as lead agency for the reorganization, has prepared an environmental assessment that resulted in the filing of a Negative Declaration. Regarding the Palm Desert SOI amendment, staff recommends the Commission find the proposal exempt from CEQA, as it can be seen with certainty that the proposal will not have a significant impact on the environment . PROPERTY TAX EXCHANGE: Both the City and the County have adopted corresponding master property tax resolutions . EXISTING CONDITIONS : The reorganization site is vacant. The remainder of the Bermuda Dunes area contains a mixture of residential uses ranging from multiple-family to large lot semi- rural residential, industrial and commercial uses, pockets of vacant land scattered throughout the area and the Bermuda Dunes Airport . LAND USE PLANS: The City of La Quinta has adopted the Sand Harbor Specific Plan, which encompasses the entire reorganization area. The Specific Plan calls for a gated community of 379 single-family homes with common amenities . County plans allow single-family residential development on 9, 000 square foot lots. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 1485 SPRUCE STREET, SUITE J•RIVERSIDE, CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 FAX(909)369-8479 `LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 3 September 28, 2000 LAFCO 2000-18-4 The City of Palm Desert has not yet included the Bermuda Dunes area within its general plan. An upcoming general plan update will likely establish land use designations for the area. SIGNIFICANT ISSUES: BOUNDARY ISSUES: There are three significant boundary issues associated with these proposals . First, the proposals are mutually exclusive . Whereas, the Bermuda Dunes proposal seeks placement of the entire community within the Palm Desert SOI, the reorganization application proposes annexation of a portion of the same area to La Quinta. The issue is whether this entire area should be treated as one entity. Commissioners may recall that discussion of our current Community of Interest policy began with the example of Bermuda Dunes . In 1992 , then-Supervisor and LAFCO Commissioner Larson recounted the ongoing dialogue that had been occurring in Bermuda Dunes regarding the benefits of incorporation, annexation to La Quinta or Palm Desert, and remaining unincorporated. The concern expressed by the community through Commissioner Larson was that, while debate was occurring within Bermuda Dunes, piecemeal annexations by surrounding cities were limiting their future options . Thus was born the COI designation, a two-year study period for a community to evaluate jurisdictional the CO2 designation. es. Ironically, Bermuda Dunes never applied fo That is not to say the community has not considered its options . Approximately five years ago, members of the Bermuda Dunes community approached the City of Palm Desert regarding annexation. The City prepared an analysis of the fiscal impacts of annexing Bermuda Dunes on the City. That analysis indicated revenues generated by the annexation would fall well short of service costs . In March of 1996, the City informed the Bermuda Dunes Community Council (BDCC) that "...Palm Desert does not encourage or support annexation of Bermuda Dunes at this time . Approximately two years ago, the BDCC once again began evaluating annexation to both Palm Desert and La Quinta. That effort culminated in an advisory election called by the Board of Supervisors on May 16, 2000 . The results of the election, which are attached to this report, ' generally indicate support for annexation. Among those favoring annexation, there is a three-to- one preference for annexation to Palm Desert . These results are the basis for BDCC' s support of the BDCA proposal . It should be noted, while Palm Desert is Supportive of this SOI amendment, the City, s position on annexation has not changed. Again, the question for the Commission is whether the Sand Harbor Specific Plan area should be allowed to go its separate way from the remainder of Bermuda Dunes. In a meeting with a BDCC subcommittee in February 1999, a representative of Wade Ellis indicated that the owner would be happy to annex to either Palm RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 1485 SPRUCE STREET, SUITE J • RIVERSIDE.CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909) 369-0631 FAX(909)369-8479 LAFCo 2000-11-4 PAGE 4 September 28, 2000- LAFCo 2000-18-4 Desert or La Quinta, in accordance with the direction of the BDC C. it made t clear, however, that he could not wait an extended period of time for the Community Council to make a decision. An application was submitted to La Quinta in September of 1999 . The second issue involves the portion of Palm Desert SOI proposal that is currently within the La Quinta SOI . In 1991, in conjunction with approval of an annexation on the northeast corner of Fred Waring and Washington, the Commission added 120 acres to the La Quinta SOI just north of the annexation. Additionally, the Commission conditioned the annexation upon the City entering into a maintenance agreement for a road within that sphere area. According to La Quinta, residents of this area have expressed some interest in annexation. The City would like to keep this area within its sphere . The third boundary issue is specifically related to the annexation proposal . . As proposed, only the land owned by the applicant, the Sand Harbor Specific Plan area would be annexed to La Quinta. Such a configuration would leave a wedge of unincorporated territory fronting on Jefferson between the Cities of La Quinta and Indio. The jurisdictional pattern along Jefferson. Street would be confusing, with maintenance responsibility divided between La Quinta, Indio and the County. The "wedge" is comprised of two parcels . The City and applicant are now attempting to contact the owners of these parcels to determine whether they favor annexation at this time. If the Commission determines it should approve this annexation, it should include the wedge parcels along Jefferson Street up to the Indio City boundary. If written consent from these other owners is not obtained prior to the hearing, the matter should be continued for at least one month. REORGANIZATION SERVICES: The City of La Quinta has submitted a Plan of Services in support of the application. That plan is attached to this report. In general, the application represents a relatively small extension of services . Staff has only one service related concern with this application as indicated below. Water/Sewer Service: There is some inconsistency in the service provider information accompanying the application as follows: Water Provider Sewer Provider Application Form Myoma Dunes Water Co. Myoma Dunes Water CoJCity of La Quinta Plan of Services Coachella Valley Water District Coachella Valley Water District Sand Harbor Myoma Dunes Water Co. Coachella Valley Water District Specific Plan RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION FAX ON• 148 SPRUCE T ET.SUITE J• RIVERSIDE.CA 92507-2445 PHONE OI 0 L 1 ` LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 5 September 28, 2000 LAFCO 2000-18-4 It has been confirmed that the applicant' s preference is for Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Co. to provide water to the site. Correspondence from CVWD to the City of La Quinta, however, indicates that it will provide both water and sewer to the proposed development. It is apparent that there is potential for future conflict between CVWD and Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company regarding which agency will provide water to the site. Similar conflict has resulted in disputes and sometimes litigation in other areas of the County. At face value, it makes little sense for two entities to provide services that are capable of being provided by one. The Commission, however, has no ability to directly limit the authorized services provided by an agency within its service area . Furthermore, in this instance, the Commission has no jurisdiction over Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company, a private utility. At present, it is up to the property owner to choose which water purveyor will provide water to the project . The applicant has cited lower cost and the proximity Of facilities as the primary factors in choosing Myoma Dunes . The Commission has addressed this problem in the past by requiring the annexing agency to enter into an agreement defining service responsibilities with the overlapping agency. If the Commission' s position is that CVWD should determine who is best positioned to provide both water and sewer to the site, it should consider a condition requiring the applicant to enter into an agreement with CVWD defining service responsibilities . The applicant intends to provide additional information prior to the hearing that will demonstrate that Commission intervention is unnecessary. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE CRITERIA: A sphere of influence is defined as a plan for the probable physical boundaries and service area of a local agency. A statement of determinations addressing four factors is required by state law to be adopted by the Commission in conjunction with any sphere amendment. As noted above, two overlapping sphere amendment proposals have been submitted. The City of La Quinta must amend its sphere of influence in order to effect the proposed Sand Harbor reorganization. The Bermuda southDunes of community wishes to place all unincorporated territory Interstate 10 within . the Palm Desert SOI . The recommended statement of determinations for the proposed amendments is attached to this report. DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY WASTE RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (RCWRMD) : On March 24, —9 '-, the Commission approved the formation of the RCWRMD as a separate financial and legal entity to operate and finance solid waste facilities in 19Riaverside party of the District became effective on May 2, Commission' s action, it determined that future annexations to cities should detach from the RCWRMD unless those cities have annexed to the District. This is based on an understanding between the County and the COGS that annexation of cities to RCWRMD will be accomplished in an organized fashion to ensure RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 1485 SPRUCE STREET.SUITE J •RIVERSIDE.CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 FAX(909)369-8479 LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 6 September 28, 2000, LAFCO 2000-18-4 appropriate representation on the governing board of the District. Therefore, staff will recommend concurrent detachment from the RCWRMD. DETACHMENT FROM CSA 121 : If the Commission approves annexation to the City of La Quinta, the area will be automatically detached from CSA 121 . CSA 121 funds street lighting within areas of Bermuda Dunes . Obviously, this vacant site is not receiving street lighting at this time, but portions of the site were previously annexed to CSA 121 . Residential street lighting is not a citywide service provided by La Quinta . WAIVER OF AUTOMATIC DETACHMENT FROM CSA 152 : County Service Area 152 was initially formed to implement programs pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System required by the Federal Clean Water Act. If the Commission approves the proposal, the Commission should make specified findings in order to waive automatic detachment from the CSA, since the City has opted to annex into CSA 152 . COMMENTS FROM AFFECTED AGENCIES/INTERESTED PARTIES: Letters of support for the Bermuda Dunes SOI application have been submitted by the City of Palm Desert, the Bermuda Dunes Community Council and Supervisor Roy Wilson. Letters have also been received from several Bermuda Dunes residents/property owners supporting annexation to Palm Desert. The fact that many of the residents' letters of support do not reference a sphere of influence amendment suggests that much of the community believes an annexation application is before the Commission. The City of La Quinta has transmitted a letter indicating opposition to the removal of the Darby Road area from its sphere. The Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District has sent comments stating it would like to collect Quimby fees in the annexation area. CONCLUSIONS: Some time ago, a representative of .the Sand Harbor annexation area made an effort to follow the direction of the Bermuda Dunes Community Council if the outcome was annexation. The landowner indicated up front, however, that he was not willing to wait for an extended time. Approximately seven months later, Mr. Ellis began processing a specific plan and annexation through the City of La Quinta. This area is not an integral part of the Bermuda Dunes community. The proposed residential development is also not likely to significantly impact any future evaluation by the City of Palm Desert to annex Bermuda Dunes. As long as the boundaries include the additional parcels fronting on Jefferson, staff recommends approval of the reorganization. The remaining area has demonstrated an affinity for Palm Desert. A sphere of influence determination, however, is more than a popularity contest . Nevertheless, Palm Desert is a fiscally strong city with the capacity to extend services to Bermuda Dunes . RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 1485 SPRUCE STREET, SUITE J •RIVERSIDE. CA 92507-2445 PHONE)909)369-0631 FAX(909)369-8479 `LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 7 September 28, 2000 LAFCO 2000-18-4 Staff does have a concern, based on the City' s position on annexation, that placing the Bermuda Dunes area within the Palm Desert SOI could relegate the area to permanent island Status. Hopefully, placing this area within the City' s sphere will be the first step in opening up a new dialogue between residents, the City and the County directed at making annexation a reality. The Commission may want to revisit the sphere issue in three to five years if no progress toward annexation has been made. Regarding the approximately 120 acres within La Quinta' s SOI, staff recommends leaving that area within that sphere for the time being. As a result of a LAFCO imposed condition, the City has been responsible for road maintenance in the area. Although this maintenance responsibility is minimal, staff believes it would be inequitable to suddenly remove the area from the City' s SOI after the Commission has assigned it this .duty. Additionally, the City has indicated that there has been some interest in annexation expressed by residents . The City should be allowed some period of time to pursue annexation. However, if at some point Palm Desert is prepared to annex the remainder of Bermuda Dunes, potentially leaving this area as an island, this area should go with the rest of Bermuda Dunes. SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS: Based on the factors outlined above, IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Commission: LAFCO 2000-11-4: 1 . Find the City of La Quinta, as lead agency, has a prepared pared an initial study that resulted in the filing of ve Declaration on the proposal and the City has complied with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and all appropriate State Guidelines, and the Commission has reviewed and considered the environmental documentation; 2 . Adopt the attached Statement of Determinations; 3 . Approve LAFCO 2000-11-4—SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA; 4 . Determine the proposed reorganization is consistent with the spheres of influence of the City of La Quinta, as amended, and all other affected agencies; 5 . Determine the proposed reorganization is legally uninhabited; RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION�CO 3 MISSION0 • 1485SPRUCE 909)STREET, 6 8479 SUITE J• RIVERSIDE.CA 92507-25 LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 8 September 28, 2000, LAFCO 2000-18-4 6 . Approve LAFCO 2000-11-4--REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION 10 TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CONCURRENT DETACHMENT FROM THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND DETACHMENT FROM CSA 121 with modified boundaries as shown in the attached exhibit identified as STAFF RECOMMENDATION, subject to the following terms and conditions : a. In accordance with Government Code Sections 56844 (t) and 57330, the subject territory shall be subject to the levying and collection of any previously authorized charge, fee, assessment or tax of the City. b. The City of La Quinta shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission ( "LAFCO" ) , its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against LAFCO,_ its agents, officers, and employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of LAFCO concerning this proposal . C. In accordance with Government Code Section 56375 (p) , waive automatic detachment from County Service Area 152 based upon the following findings: i . County Service Area (CSA) 152 is a funding mechanism for the implementation of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) emanating from the Federal 1972 Clean Water Act, and re-authorized under the Federal 1987 Clean Water Act. ii . The City annexed into CSA 152 and is included within the CSR' s service area. iii . Detachment would deprive the area residents services needed to ensure their health, safety or welfare. iv. Waiving detachment will not affect the ability of the City to provide any services . 7 . Designate the City of La Quinta as conducting authority. LAFCO 2000-18-4: 1 . Find the proposal is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b) (3) , as it can be . seen with certainty that the proposal will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2 . Adopt the attached Statement of Determinations. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION• 1485 SPRUCE STREET,SUITE J •RIVERSIDE, CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 FAX(909)369-8479 LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 9 September 28, 2000 LAFCO 2000-18-4 3 . Approve LAFCO 2000-18-4—SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT with modified boundaries to exclude the territories included within LAFCO 2000-11-4 and within the existing La Quinta SOI as shown in the attached exhibit identified as STAFF RECOMMENDATION. Respectfully s tted, �a Geor iliotis Exec t ' fficer RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION• 1485 SPRUCE sTREET. SUITE J •RIVERSIDE,CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 FAX(909) 369-8479 STATEMENT OF DETERMINATIONS FOR LAFCO 2000-11-4 and LAFCO 2000-13-4—SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENTS TO THE CITIES OF PALM DESERT AND LA QUINTA 1. THE PRESENT AND PLANNED LAND USES IN THE AREA, INCLUDING AGRICULTURAL AND OPEN SPACE USES: The reorganization site is vacant. The remainder of the Bermuda Dunes area contains a mixture of residential uses ranging from multiple-family to large lot semi-rural residential, industrial and commercial uses, the Bermuda Dunes Airport and pockets of vacant land scattered throughout the area. The City of La Quinta has adopted the Sand Harbor Specific Plan within the reorganization area. The Specific Plan calls for a gated community of 379 single-family homes with common amenities. County plans allow single-family residential development on 9,000 square foot lots on this now vacant site. The City of Palm Desert has not yet included the Bermuda Dunes area within its general plan. An upcoming general plan update will likely establish land use designations for the area. 2. THE PRESENT AND PROBABLE NEED FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES IN THE AREA: Virtually no services are required on the reorganization site at this time. Development of the site as called for in the specific plan would require the full range of municipal services, such as sewer, water, recreation, and police and fire protection. The remainder of Bermuda Dunes, being relatively urbanized, requires the full range of urban services over much of the area. Portions of Bermuda Dunes are on private septic systems and are anticipated to remain so. 3. THE PRESENT CAPACITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND ADEQUACY OF PUBLIC SERVICES . WHICH THE AGENCY PROVIDES OR IS AUTHORIZED TO PROVIDE: The reorganization area represents a relatively small expansion of La Quinta's service area. Existing facilities and services are adequate to provide service to the area. The City of Palm Desert provides a very high level of services to its residents. The largely inhabited area of Bermuda Dunes, however, would place a substantial demand on some services the City currently provides. Although the County provides public safety services to the City by contract,the contracted levels of service are higher than those provided in the unincorporated area. In order to maintain its current officer to population ratio of approximately 1.5 per 1,000,the city would have to add about nine officers. A 1995 analysis prepared for the City indicated,based on historical call information,five additional officers would be sufficient to serve the area. While basic fire protection service will be provided from the same facilities regardless of annexation, the City also provides a paramedic service to its residents. The City has made it clear,however,that it will not support annexation until the area can support the additional cost for these service levels. 4. THE EXISTENCE OF ANY SOCIAL OR ECONOMIC COMMUNTIES OF INTEREST IN THE AREA: The Bermuda Dunes Community Council and the Bermuda Dunes Community Association both support the placement of the entire Bermuda Dunes area into the Palm Desert SOI. An advisory election conducted in the area indicated a preference for eventual annexation to Palm Desert. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 1485 SPRUCE SrREEr.SUrrE J •RIVERSIDE, CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 FAX(909)369-8479 SOI Amend (addition) to the City of La Quinta & Reorganization to Include Annex 10 to the City of La Quinta - LAFCO 2000-11 -4 and SOI Amendment (addition) to the City of Palm Desert LAFCO 2000-18-4 WILDCAT Del Webb — p Palm Desert F C S N 40th AV COUNTRY CLUB k city '-_, �gRNF City of °f D 41st AV Indio Palm Bermuda e�,�4da Desert w"�Sgi�pa Dunes n SAVANNAH E 42nd AVE PORT ROYAL > cAMELBACK Cn R = r G) o � e r .STARLIGHT ^ n 4 MWNO T I DARBY --� C 2 LAFCO 09 € $ 2000-11-4 FRED WARIN City Of City of La Quinta Indian Wells © LAFCO 2000-11-4 PROPOSED CITY OF LA QUINTA PALM DESERT SOI 7 LA QUINTA SOI f CITY OF INDIO ® LAFCO 2000-18-4 PROPOSED © CITY OF PALM DESERT INDIO SOI PROPOSAL SOI Amend (addition) to the City of La Quinta & Reorganization to Include Annex 10 to the City of La Quinta - LAFCO 2000-11 -4 and SOI Amendment (addition) to the City of Palm Desert LAFCO 2000-18-4 WIL° T Del Webb j A Palm Desert N P 40th AV COUNTRY CLUB C,O : City City of Of tel AV 0 Indio Palm Bermuda Desert Dunes U"esq��o _ SAVANNAH a 42nd AVE PORT ROYAL C C M ELSACK D R Z L� Z DARBY � 2 M LAFCO 3 b000-11-4 FRED WARIN City Of City of La Quinta Indian Wells ©LAFCO 2000-11-4 RECOMMENDED ©CITY OF LA QUINTA PALM DESERT SOI f✓LA QUINTA SOI CITY OF INDIO ®LAFCO 2000-18-4 RECOMMENDED ©CITY OF PALM DESERT INDIO SOI STAFF RECOMMENDATIONED BOUNDARIES S LA QUINTA PLAN OF SERVICES AND CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING WATER SERVICE i RECEIVED RIVERSIDE LOCA1 AGENCY ; CITY OF LA QUINTA EORHATION COMHISSION PLAN FOR SERVICES ADDENDUbh SEP -g COMMUNITY SERVICES AM 9: 2( ANNEXATION #10 Date:September 6, 2000 PARKS AND RECREATION: The City of La Quinta established a Community Services Department to address the needs of its residents in order to accomplish the following objective. Objective: Develop a high quality public park system with adequate space and facilities to provide an appropriate mix of recreation activities for the City's residents and workforce. The Department is located at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-495 Calle Tampico. The Department staff provides recreational services such as special events, classes, seminars, adult sports, trips for youth and adults, and much more. The Community Services Department distributes a detailed recreational brochure three times a year. An example of activities that are provided include: Excursions Br Special nth Newport Beach Breakfast with Santa poppy Festival in Lancaster Tiny Tot Olympics Beach Train to San Clemente & Oceanside Easter Egg Hunt & Chalk Draw Contest Legoland Tiny Tot Turkey Trot Algodonas, Mexico Tiny Tot Halloween Carnival San Diego Zoo Ice Cream Social with Gamby Temecula Wine Tour Community Picnic Orange County Performing Arts Theatre Tree Lighting Ceremony Culture in the Courtyard Trio Camas for Kids Spring Break Classes Yoga Park Facilities Low Impact Aerobics Fritz Burns Park & Swimming Pool Ballroom Dance Fritz Burns Park Rec Room Computers La Quinta Sports Complex Oil & Watercolor Painting Adams Park Learn to'Draw Eisenhower Park Gourmet Cooking Community Park (Westward Ho & Adams Guitar Lessons Park French & Spanish Lessons La Quinta Senior Center YMCA Building sp—orts La Quinta Historical Museum Adult Soccer Coed Volleyball 2 On 2 Grass Volleyball Punt, Pass & Kick Summer Golf Tour La Quints Senior Center The La Quinta Senior Center is located at 78-450 Avenida La Fonda on the Civic Center Campus in the City of La Quinta. This "state of-the-art," 10,500 sq. ft. facility offers a variety of activities and events designed especially for seniors. Activities range from the educational, recreational and healthy living courses to social events and informational services. Medical Assistance, Legal Consultation, Income Tax Assistance and Energy Assistance, Homeowners/Renters As 9Y Assistance are only a few of the free services available to seniors. Other activities, classes and services include: Health & Fitness Proarams Dance Classes Yoga Classes Ballroom Dance Tai Chi Classes Tap Dance Exercise Classes Line Dance Dancercize Classes Health Screenings Educational Programs CPR Classes Computer Classes & Computer Tutoring Creative Writing Classes Arts & Entertainment Bridge Lessons Painting Classes Spanish Lessons Ceramics Classes Cooking Classes Arts & Crafts Classes Dog Training Classes Wall Hangings & Rug Hooking Classes Educational Seminars Musical & Theatrical Performances Golden Tones Senior Singing Group_ Special Events Monthly Theme Luncheons Annual Tennis Tournament/Luncheon Annual Health Fair & Free Flu Shots Monthly Putting Contests & Tournament "Step Out For Senior Centers Walk Senior Sports Day Senior and Youth Talent & Art Show Inter-generational Programs Senior Travel, Trips & Tours - During the past 19 months (January 1999 to July 2000), the Community Services Department had participation in the following programs from La Quinta and Coachella Valley residents as reflected below: PROGRAM TITLE NUMBER OF PEOPLE SERVED Special Events 12,312 Senior Center Classes & 12,237 Activities Adult Sports 10,308 Leisure Classes 5,818 Total People Served 40,675 In addition to the noted recreational activities, the City has developed,the following parks and recreation facilities since it's incorporation: NAME CLASSIFICATION ACREAGE OWNER Eisenhower Park Neighborhood Park .3 City of La Quinta Fritz Burns Park & Neighborhood Park 7.7 City of La Quinta Recreation Room 18.2 Desert Sands Unified La Quinta Sports Community Park School District/City of Complex La Quinta Adams Park Neighborhood Park 2.8 City of La Quinta La Quinta Senior Community Center 10,500 s.f. City of La Quinta Center Multi-Use Trails Class I-Exclusive Bicycle/Pedestrian 5.75 miles .75 miles Class II-On Road Bicycle Lane 33 33 miles Class III-Shared Facilities .75 The following non-City park and recreation facilities are within the City limits and are available to its residents: Frances Hack Park & Community Center Lake Cahuilla County Park The City anticipates the development of the following parks and recreation facilities: NAME CLASSIFICATION ACREAGE OWNER Bear Creek Park Community Park 35.9 City of La Quinta g Miles Avenue Park Neighborhood Park 1 .4 City of La Quinta Neighborhood Park 4.0 City of La Quinta La Quinta Palms Park* g g South Cove Park Neighborhood Park 13.7 City of La Quinta Eisenhower Park Expansion Neighborhood Park 3 City of La Quinta Westward Ho Park Community Park 18.0 City of La Quinta g Desert Pride Park Neighborhood Park 3.0 City of La Quinta * The La Quinta Palms Neighborhood Park will be located just south of the Annexation area adjacent to Fred Waring Road. Acquisition of this Park area will occur when this property is developed. The City has worked .to provide park facilities and recreational programs for its residents. The annexation area residents will have access to these current and any future parks and recreation programs developed by the City. CITY OF LA QUINTA PLAN FOR SERVICES ANNEXATION #10 Date: May 15, 2000 The City has adopted a General Plan Resolution and a PreAnnexation Ordinance which would designate the area as Low Density Residential (2-4 units per acre) and a Low Density Residential zoning respectively. In addition the City has processed a Specific Plan and tract map for the property creating 374 lots on 117 acres with related recreational amenity lots. The developer/owner has received approval from the City the development of this property. _ Police Protection The County Sheriff currently provides primary response for calls for this area, but upon annexation the area would be included within the City's jurisdiction and covered under our Contract with Riverside County. The City's current level of services includes 16 patrol officers, two person target team, school resource officer, community services officer, two investigators, and 82 patrol hours per day. The City has access to the Emergency Service Team, Hostage Negotiate Team, Hazardous Device Team, Forensics Services Unit, Sheriff's Posse and Aviation Unit, canine and handler, volunteers, Special Events Enforcement, Rescue Units and Explorer Post. The City continues to evaluate its contract and when necessary modify it to respond to the needs of the community, which will including this area. Because the proposed annexation area is undeveloped, no immediate increase in police, staff, or equipment will not be necessary. However, when the property develops, the City will evaluate the existing agreement with the County and make necessary changes as warranted. Fire Protection/Paramedic . The County Fire Department/CDF currently provides primary response to calls from the area. The.City will continue to use these services for this area. The City has identified a site for a new fire station at the intersection of Westward Ho Drive and Adams Street which will enhance fire protection services to the northern part of the City including this annexation area. No anticipated increase in funding would result from this annexation. nnex#t0.w d C.\My*DocumentslWPDOCS\A P i Public Roads The site can be served by the following streets: Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. These streets have been designated as Primary Arterials on the City's General Plan Circulation System Policy Diagram. In addition, the City is currently working with other agencies to widen Jefferson Street. This owner/developer will be responsible for widening a portion of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street to accommodate this development. The City maintains the public streets and the developer will maintain all private streets. Internal street can be either private or public, and are at the discretion of the owner/developer. Currently, the City sweeps public streets that have curb and gutter. Once the area develops, street sweeping will be provided for public streets with curbs and gutters. These services are funded in the City's Budget. The City also has adopted a Dark Sky Ordinance. This ordinance limits the amount of night lighting. However, major intersections will have lighting. These will be installed at the time development takes place and at the developers expense. Flood Control The stormwater drainage system in the City is administered by Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), which maintains and operates a comprehensive system to safely collect and transport flows through the City. The City will require this developer/owner to retain storm water on site. Water & Sewer Water and sewer services are provided by CVWD. Any development of the property must comply with their requirements. CVWD has indicated they have the capacity and ability to provide water and sewer service to the site. The developer/owner will be responsible for financing any extensions. Waste Disposal The solid waste collection and disposal services for the City are operated and administered by Waste Management of the Desert(WMD), which transports non- hazardous, mixed municipal solid waste. The City currently has a required AB 939 and AB 2907 collection policy to promote waste management practices including Source Reduction and Recycling Elements and Household Hazard Waste Elements. The City has a mandatory collection service and Waste Management of the Desert will provide trash pick up services for the site. Future residents will pay for the service on a monthly basis 'until such time as they can be included on the City's Tax Rolls. C:\My Documents\WPD0CS\Annex#1o.wpd i Gas Gas services are provided by Souther California Gas Company. The owner/developer will finance any extensions. Phone Service Phone services are provided by General Telephone Company. The owner/Developer will finance any extensions of the service. Electrical Electrical service is provided by Imperial Irrigation District. The owner/developer will finance any extensions of service. Library = The City is served by a public library located in the Village which is administered by the Riverside County Library System. The existing facility opened in 1988 and contains approximately 2,065 square feet and approximately 18,000 volumes. A new 9,000 square foot facility is planned as a component of the City's municipal complex. The additional facility will provide adequate library space to serve the residents of La Quinta. Schools This annexation area will be serviced by Desert Sands Unified School District which is processing a new school at Dune Palms Road and Miles Avenue. La Quinta High School has also been constructed and will accommodate this area. The school district generally receives funding from the following sources: the State, local construction bond issue, State mitigation fees, and Redevelopment Pass Through Agreements. Other City Services Currently the County's Planning and Building Department, and the Department of Transportation provide these services. Upon annexation, these services will be provided by the City's Building and Safety Department including Code Enforcement, Public World including Parks and street maintenance. The Community Services Department which includes park design, recreational services, and the Senior Center will provide the recreational services, facilities and amenities. In addition, Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District provides services to the residents of La Quinta at the Francis Hack Park at their recreation center. In summary the City of La Quinta can provide the necessary services to the property upon annexation. C:\My Documenis\WPDOCS\Annex#10.wpd y z V � . P.O. Box 1504 (760) 7 7 7-7 0 0 0 78-495 CALLe TAMPICO (TDD) (760) 777-1227 E`b Of'(�1F'O LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 September 7, 2000 Mr. George Spiliotis, Executive Officer LAFCO 1485 Spruce Street, Suite J Riverside, CA 92507-2445 Dear,George: Enclosed is an Addendum to the Plan for Services previously prepared and submitted -. to you by the City of La Quinta. This Addendum has also been prepared by the City of La Quinta to address Park and Recreation Services for Annexation Area #10. er In addition, the applicant's submittal identified the water rovider as Myoma CVWD was identified tas District, however, when the City processed the applications, the provider of water and sanitary systems (see..attached letter dated November 24,:: 1999). The City does not have a preference as to who provides these services, only that they meet.the fire standards for the City. Should you have any questions, please contact me. o _ m s� Sincerely, , 2� m CO V Y JERRY HERMAN - x Community Development Director JH:bjs Enclosures " � I .fJ ATE/,' • ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY LA qU� COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT G POST OFFICE BOX 1068 COACHELLA,CALIFORNIA 92236•TELEPHONE(760)398-26T�. 11999 F, Q�ELOQ� OFFICERS THOMAS E.LEVY,GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER DIRECTORS DIREC CODEKAS. PRESIDENT BERNARDINE SUTTON.SECRETARY RUSSELI KITAHARA, VICE PRESIDENT OWEN M[COOK,ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER RUSSjOKN LLW. KIT A ARA.DEN November 24, 1999 REDWINE AND SHERRILI,ATTORNEYS JOHN P. POWELL. 1n DOROTHY M. NICHOLS File: 0163.1 050717-40 T C <n x „ 7 9 � —+o m Planning Commission 1 z r m City of La Quinta Co o < post Office Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 H N ` Gentlemen: Subject: Specific plan 99-040,Tentative Tract 29323, General Plan Amendment 99-064, Change of Zone 99092 _ Env ironm ental Assessment 99-389 limits of the Bermuda Dunes Drainage Study area. The Bermuda This project is within the ement for new developments to retain 100 percent of Dunes Drainage Study established a requir the stormwater runoff for a 100-year event and was agreed upon by all of the participating agencies including the cities of Palm Desert, Indian Wells,La Quinta, Indio and Riverside County. Since the stormwater issues of this development are local drainage, the district does not need to review drainage design further. This area is designated Zone C on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. The district will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this district. These regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change. The district will need additional facilities to provide for the orderly expansion of its domestic water and sanitation systems. These facilities may include wells, reservoirs,booster pumping stations. The developer will be required to provide land on which some of these facilities will be located. These sites shall be shown on the tract map as lots to be deeded to the district for such purpose. TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY 0 1 Planning Commission City of La. Quinta -2- November 24, 1999 Additional domestic water and sewer pipelines will have to be installed by the subdivider in order for the district to provide service to all parcels. Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the district for review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management. If you have any questions please call Joe Cook, planning engineer, extension 292. Yours very truly, C om Levy General Manager-Chief Engineer cc: Don Park Riverside County Department of Public Health 82-675 Highway 111, Second Floor Indio, California 92201 JEC jI\eng\sw\nov\tt29323 COACHELLA PALLET WATER DISTRICT /!{yonea (/KKa3 /{{utKal Watat 79450 AVENUE 44 aERMWA DUNES.CAL1rORNIA 94901 July 19, 1999 Mr. Michael A. Smith Warner Engineering 73-185 Highway I11,Suite A Palm Desert, CA 92260-3907 Dear Mike, . Tentative Tract Map 929323 is located within the service area of the Myoma Whter Company. Myoma has sufficient capacity and is willing to serve this project with domestic water service. Sincerely, 4)44 M /1 Warren R. Stallard General Manage WRS lms RACQived JUL S 1 IRN Warner k-ng,tteering -Phone Number: 760-345-2694 •Fax: 760-345-9761 -Email Address: myomawlr@earthlink.net n•ri 1 �yo a Waft a** . 044D1 8ER1Al1DA DUNES. C�LLIFORWA April 17, 2000 Mike Smith Warner Engineering 73-185 Highway 111, Suite A Palm Desert, CA 92260-3907 Dear Mr. Smith: Contingent upon acceptance of a Myoma approved,water system, Myoma will operate, maintain and serve domestic water for Tentative Tract Map#29323. Sincerely, Warren R. Stallard General Manager - -WRS/md - Warrior.Engineering -Phone: 76N345-7694 Far: 760IJ45-9761 Email: myama.wa'-.@91e.nd 7245 Joshua Lane,Suite B 73.185 Highway 111,Suite A -F-9 Warner t engmeenng Yucca Valley,California 92284.2968 palm Desert,California 92260.3907 Phone(760)365-7638 Phone(160)341.3101 60)341.5999 Fax(760)365.2146 Fax(7 U21 Rolm ' Wm.H.Wane 0 FPS CVY o,nona ca p.0 January 19, 2000 J oT-f Mr. Tom Levy, General Manager COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Post Office Box 1058 Facslmifs' (760) s�8-3711 Coachella, CA 92236 SUBJECT: TTM 29323 — provisions for providing water service, Wade Ellis, Applicant Tom, Thank you for setting aside the time to review water connection options during our January 4, 2000 meeting relative to the above project for our client, Wade Ellis. After reviewing the options that you presented, it has been decided to remain with the Myoma Dunes Water District. To accommodate a looped water system, the proximal location of adjacent the proposed tentative tract map site available water service is immediately ection located north and west of the subject site through four(4) available points of conn at the Bermuda Dunes Country Club. Checking with the Myoma Dunes Water District, since the project site is situated at the edge of their water district boundary, it will therefore not be necessary to make provisions to extend water lines east to Jefferson Street. As per your suggestion, we will be contacting Bruce Clark of your agency to review sanitary sewer connection options. Although water service for his project wed these will not be served by CVWD, nonetheless we appreciate the plans with you. Our client looks forward to this being a successful project of local and regional benefit. If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me any time at our Palm Desert office at(760) 341-3101. Yours very truly, WARNER ENGINEERING By: Michael A. Smith Vice President LA QUWTA ANNEXATION : OTHER CORRESPONDENCE STAMKO DEVELOPM ENT CO. sl P 15 2000JE D 2205 N. Poinsettia Ave. PLACrTY OF NNING LAQUINTA Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 DEPARTMENT (310) 874-4800 September 15, 2000 VIA HAND Mr. Jerry Herman Community Development Director City of La Quinta 78-496 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: ASSESSOR PARCEL #606290002-7 Approximately 9 acres on west side of Jefferson Street north of bYed Waring Drive (directly across from Heritage Palms) Dear Jerry: In response to our September 11, 2000 telephone conversation,Stamko Development Co:requests that the above referenced parcel, Assessor Parcel #606290002-7,be annexed into the City of La Quinta. If you have any questions, please call me at(310) 874-4800. Very y Yours 1 e General Partner /cfc cc: Peter Kontny LOCAL AGENCY FOR'ATION COMMISSION RIVERSIDE LAFCO NO. 2000- -°- - F--1 SURVEY T =i „n aTAna F--1 PLANNING--CEQA ONLY PROPOSAL n T„ i _ (J . GUERIN) fl to the r ' = n . a F-X--3COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE Detachment from CSA 121 & the Riv. (J . JOFaSON) Co . Waste Resources Mat. Dist . �� REGISTRAR OF VOTERS (t�4Y) F-x--lCALIFORVIA HIGHWAY PATROL (CHP) FORWARDED ON August 3:; 2000 f—y -1 CALTRANLS--DISTRICT *******RETURN TO LAFCO********** F-X---1 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL NO LATER THAN 8/20/00 BOARD--REGION X I *********x***x***xx***x*x*xx*x F—Xl SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SCAQMD) m r m f y—lRIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) - IT F-X-1 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION D OF GOV-ERDMENTS (SCAG) i F-X--1 COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF Y„t GOVERNMENTS (CVAG) OR ] WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (WRCOG) X1BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS (BIA) X - m- - - o �= o t_ r , CITY OF INDIO 0 m ro y" DESERT SANDS-INDIO UNIF .SCHOOL r DESERT COMMUNITY COLLEGE -- Cv^. REG.PARTC AND OPEN SP.DIST. CSA ADMINISTRATOR my vn_ *, _F v rm ??- _ ___ _ _ _ ___ C1 L - DATE. IF APPROPRIATE, INCLUDE SUGGESTED TERMS NECESSARY. PLEASE SIGN AND AND CONDITIONS AAID/OR RECOMMENDATIONS . PLEASE COORDINATE YOUR RESPONSE WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE IF YOU ARE A COUNTY DEPARTMENT/AGiNCY��r�+` FZcc.rc-�fr:•• , �'�. G•oe-<-4 4 !/e/>.s7 (�zc. �tcrK 11yy 1,Ky -fo Gd//scf rvlift'ywt'� fees �jyn�ar tkc Q 7 a�f) wkek 4-k's in -b'Sf1 /Z( f 2 oe LA QUINTA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-15-06 99 :42 City of r.awurn* a - -' STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT Roc4t4 20000146 lsad Agency: CITY OF LA UINIA Dare: 03/0312 0 0 0 Counry Agrn-J of Filing: RIVERSIDE Docnarru No: 20000146 ! Projea Ntle: SP 99-040 Projen ApPLrmu xame: EUJS WADEG T]ji75T'EE P7 uxur+ba: — `p O 41111, RC^ErYr j Project Applicant Addrrrr: 41 865 BOARDWALK S'fE 212 PALM DESERT CA 92211 ' „_ APR2620M 1 fV EV PrajcaAppGcanr: PRNATE ENTITY ,fir NOe� CNECC APPUCARPE 7W., ❑ EnvjmwwNai Lr[Drra Report t � Nrgodve Deelmati0>t ❑ AppHeadm Fee Water DiY MON(SOW Waur Reroute,Conni Bond Ono) _--�---- ❑ Projem Subject to Cert*d Rega=rY Progromr S 7ft M ® Co-ty A&Wsimmim he ❑ mea chatk=vMrfromfn+'(DrVon -s F—V60n) .. ❑ Projec Nat it=Mptfrmnfmr(mu-cfFiarpdon) Signnlure and ark olFcrsan rcceivin¢paPnent: r���� NOTICE OF DETERMINATION To: _ Attlee of Planning and Research From: (Public Aaenevl CITY OF r e ntnNTA 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento CA 95814 x County Clerk County f a vsrslde attention: Gherria Seed 34470 1 nth Street . FlIverlide re 149501 1R01 - - i Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Noiect Trtle: Sand Harbor Specific Plan 99-040 State Clearinghouse Number __d Agency Contact Person n + Code1Teleohone1Exte02i00 of Emitted to Clearinaheusel Christine di lor)o (760)777.7071 N/A Project Location (Include County): Currently located outside the City limits at the northwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, within the County of Riverside. nexation General an Project Description: General Plan Amendment un'rts9 per acre) to Low Density Reside nialf(2-4 un super ace): Zone Change b P 040 Designation from County Designation 2 .( n R-1-9000 to Low Density Residential; Specific Plan 99 Designation io 99-o92Recommending Recommending a Change from County 9 Development; and Approval Recommending Approval of Development Standards and Design Guidelines for a Residential Develop of Tentative Tract Map 29323 to Allow the Development of 379 Residential Units on 117 Acres i as This is to advise that the City of La Ouinte_has approved the above described project on gblll36L t I Lead Agency _Responsible Agency), and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1. The project Lwill.X- will not) have a significant effect on the environment* he provisions 2, _ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to t - CEQA pr I X A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the were not) made a Condition of the-approval.of the proje - 3, Mitigation measures I X were 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations L was_� w s not) adopted for Findings ( X were ._wer e not this project. ) made pursuant to p 6. 9 e ntal Documents (EA 99-389). with any comments, responses and record of, This is to certify that the final Environmental project approval, are available to the General Public at: CommunityDev elopment ment Department City of La jJuinta, p.0. Bo P 78.495 Calle Tampico/P.O. Box 1504, La Quints, CA 92253 l�tAd a�.t� L US a NaG -cOp o'P.q. 1 ' Name/signature (Public Agency) R1yEPSIDE COUNTY Fke POSTED Date received for filing at OPR: MAR -3 2000 MAR —A 2000 GARY L,��O�RSO Removad: 3•o—� 91' 42, '&aJ4A& C.Saatiar BK---- �.'" c:\My Documents\WPDOCSNForm- NOD.wpd dJ Do" County cl Rrrars,3:, Ssa,. A O fT Environmental Checklist Form • Zr m - o co it m 1, Project Title: Sand Harbor Specific Plan (Sp 99-040) General Plan Amendment 99-064 Change of Zone 99-092 Tentative Tract 29323 ^' Name and Ad dress: City of La Quinta w_ 2, Lead Agency 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Christine 5 io 6712 4. Project Locatio n:n: Northwest co rner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street Ellis 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: 4 Wa65 de Boardwalk, #212 Palm Desert, CA 92211 -5 units per acre 6, General Plan Designation: Riverside County: 2B, 2 Proposed.La Quinta: Low Density Residential 7. Zoning: Riverside County: R-1/9,000 Proposed La Quinta: RL, Low Density Residential 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, itel ding bst necessary limitary ted tfolater its phases of the project, and any secondary, support, o implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Pre-annexation application to establish General Plan.designation, Specific Plan and Tentative Tract Maps for vacant lands located at the northwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street..Specific Plan will establish standards for the development of 379 dwelling units on 117 acres. 9, Surrounding Lane Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. Lands to the north and west are developed single family residential neighborhoods. The Bermuda Dunes Golf Course is also located to the north. Lands to the south are vacant, and lands to the southwest are developed as single family dwellings. Lands to the east are partially developed with a golf course and single family residential. 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits,financing approval, or participation agreement.) Local Agency Formation Commission p:\cHTusn\cnvir.ddist sp 99.040.wpd i - Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving volvin at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. M"y Plannin X Transportation/Circulation Public Services Housing X Biological Resources X Utilities and Service S stems blems Ener and MineralAesthetics HazarCultural Resources X Noise Recreation Mandato Finds of Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a potentially significant impact or potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, r including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signature Date Printed Name For U •� PACHRISTnenvirsklist Sp 99-040.wpd Evaluation of Environmetital Impacts: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except ,No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potent'ially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4)1 "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analysis are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. See the sample question below. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 7) This is only a,suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different ones. Ul �t PACHNSTI\cnviccklist sp 99-040.wpd 3 1 Sample question: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Significant unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Landslides or mudslides? (1,6) X (Attached source list explains that 1 is the general plan, and 6 is a USGS topo map. This answer would probably not need further explanation.) I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (General X Plan Land Use Map) X b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? (General Plan EIR, p.4-1 ff.) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?(General X Plan Land Use Map, Aerial Photograph, Exhibit A of Specific Plan) d)Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to X soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? —] e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established X community (including a low-income or minority community)? (Aerial Photograph, Exhibit A of Specific Plan) II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population X projections? (General Plan Master Environmental Assessment, p. 2-32 ff.) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly X (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension or major infrastructure)? (General Plan Goal 2-3, Objective 2-3.1) P9CHRISTIknviccklist sp 99-040.wpd - Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Mitigated Impact Impact c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? X (Aerial Photograph, Exhibit A of Specific Plan) III, GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.2-3, page 4-35) X b) Seismic ground shaking? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) X c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (General Plan X EIR, Exhibit 4.2-3. page 4-35 and page 4-30 ff.) L d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) e) Landslides or mudflows? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) X f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions X from excavation, grading, or fill? (Southland Geotechnical, Geotechnical Investigation, June 24, 1999) g) Subsidence of the land? (Southland Geotechnical, X Geotechnical Investigation, June 24, 1999) E: h) Expansive soils? (Southland Geotechnical, Geotechnical X Investigation, June 24, 1999) L: i) Unique geologic or physical features? (General Plan, page 8-7) X IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and X amount of surface runoff? (Specific Plan p. 19 ff., Tract Map 29323) d hazards such X b) Exposure of people or property to water relate as flooding? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit4.3-1. page 4-53) U P.\CHRISTI\envirA'Iist sp 99-040.wpd Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No [::1s:suer.1(andpporting Information Sources): Impact mitigated Impact Impact c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface X water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? (Specific Plan document, p. 19 ff.) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? I J (Specific Plan document, p. 19 ff.) - e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water X movements? (General Plan EIR, page 4-51 ff.) f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct X additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? (General Plan EIR, page 4-55 ff.) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? (General X Plan EIR, page 4-55 ff.) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? (General Plan EIR, page 4- X 57 ff.) i) Substantial reduction in the arhount of groundwater otherwise X available for public water supplies? (General Plan EIR, page 4- 57 ff.) V. AIR QUALITY Would the proposal: a)Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or X projected air quality violation? (General Plan EIR, page 4-171 ff.) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (General Plan EIR, X page 4-171 ff.) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any X change in climate? (General Plan MEA, page 5-33 ff.) d) Create objectionable odors? (Specific Plan project description) X PACHRISTNnvirsklist sp 99.040.wpd 1 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Mitigated Impact Impact VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (RKJK&Assoc., X Traffic impact Analysis, November 23, 1999) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or X dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses (e.g.. farm equipment)? (RKJK&Assoc., Traffic impact Analysis, November 23, 1999) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? X (Specific Plan Site Plan) E:i d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (Specific Plan, X p. 17) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (Specific X Plan, p. 17) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative X transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Specific Plan p. 17) g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (General Plan MEA) X VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats X (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.4-1, page 4-69, and page 4- 71 ff.) b) Locally designated species (e''g., heritage trees)? (General X Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.4-1, page 4-69, and page 4-71 ff.) ki P:\CHRISTI\cnvir.cklist sp 99-040.wpd - Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant 'Unless Significant No Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Mitigated Impact Impact c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, X coastal habitat, etc.)? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.4-1, page 4- 69, and page 4-71 ff.) d) Wetland habitat(e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? X (General Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.4-1, page 4-69) e)Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (General Plan EIR, X page 4-71 ff.) Vill. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? (General I ^ Plan MEA, page 5-26 ff.) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? (General Plan MEA, page 5-26 ff.) ` J c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource X that would be of future value to the region and the residents of IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a)A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous X substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? (Specific Plan Project Description) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or X emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA, page 6-27 ff.) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? I —J (Specific Plan Project Description) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health X hazards? (Specific Plan Project Description) U1� j PACHRISTIknvirsklisi sp 99-040.wpd ,1 ,1 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Mitigated Impact Impact e) increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or X trees? (Specific Plan Project Description) X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? (Douglas Eilar 8 X Associates, Acoustical Analysis, August 5, 1999) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (Douglas Eilar& X Associates, Acoustical Analysis, August 5, 1999) S. Would the proposal have an effect XI or resullt LIC inaRnel dE or new or altered go ernment services of the following areas: a) Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff,) X b) Police protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff.) X i X c) Schools? (General Plan MEA, page 4-9) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (General X Plan MEA, pages 3-3, 4-7) t_ e) Other governmental services? (General Plan MEA, page 4-14 X ff.) XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? (General Plan MEA, page 4-26) b) Communications systems? (General Plan MEA, page 4-29) X tJ .� P9CHIUSTIknvir.cklist sp 99-040.wpd Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No =issues Supporting Information Sources): Impact Mitigated Impact Impact c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? X (General Plan MEA, page 4-20) d) Sewer or septic tanks? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24) Xt- e) Storm water drainage? (General Plan MEA, page 4-27) X f) Solid waste disposal?-(General Plan MEA, page 4-28) X g) Local or regional water supplies? (General Plan MEA, page X 4-20) XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a)Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? (General Plan Exhibit X CIR-5) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? (General X Plan EIR, page 5-12 ff.) (Specific Plan 26 X c) Create light or glare. (Sp P ) XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? (Paleontological Lakebed X Determination Study, Community Development Department) b) Disturb archaeological resources? (Archaeological X Associates, Archaeological Assessment of TT 29323, August 31, 1999) c)Affect historical resources? (Archaeological Associates, X Archaeological Assessment of TT 29323, August 31, 1999) U2 PACHRISTlknvir.cMist sp 99-040.wpd , Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless significant No Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Mitigated . Impact Impact d) Have the potential to cause a physicalngehit would X affect unique ethnic cultural values. (Archaeological Associates, Archaeological Assessment of TT 29323, August 31, 1999) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential X impact area? (Archaeological Associates, Archaeological Assessment of TT 29323, August 31, 1999) XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or X other recreational facilities? (Specific Plan Project Description) b)Affect existing recreational opportunities? (General Plan, X Exhibit PR-1) XVi. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of X the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare to endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to X the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but X cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) d) Does the project have environmental effects which will X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directory or indirectly? P:\CHRISTI\cnvir.cklist sp 99.040.wpd , r „ XVII. EARLIER ANALYSIS. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are"Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,"describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. PACHRISTIIenvir Alist sp 99-040.wpd . Addendum to Environmental Checklist, EA 99-389 I. a) The proposed project is not currently within the City's jurisdiction. The County General Plan designation, however, and that sought by the applicant as part of this application, are consistent. Differences between the two general plans relating to the intent of the land use designations are insignificant. Through the annexation process, the project will be assigned a City designation, which is compatible with P ' existing development both under County and City jurisdiction. II. a) The proposed project is not currently within the City's jurisdiction, nor was it analyzed for future annexation in the existing General Plan. As such, the project area, and the 948t people it will generate at buildout were not previously analyzed by the City. However, the land use designation assigned this site by the County is compatible with the proposed land use designation, and the additional population would therefore have been analyzed under County plans. The project is not likely to significantly-impact population projections for the region. Ill.a), b) & c) The City is located in a seismically active area. The proposed project is located in a Zone IV groundshaking zone. The project site is not within a liquefaction hazard area. The City has implemented provisions in the Uniform Building Code for seismically active areas. The project will be required to conform to these standards. A geotechnical investigation was performed for the proposed project'. It recommends specific foundation and soil compacting requirements which will mitigate the impacts of seismic activity. These mitigation measures will ensure that impact from seismic activity will be reduced to a level of insignificance. Ill.f), g) & h) The project falls within a blowsand hazard zone, and is composed of potentially unstable soils. Construction of the project will be subject to City Engineer review, the preparation of dust control plans, and the mitigation measures contained in the geotechnical study cited above. The recommendations contained in this study, and continued City review of the project, will reduce the potential impact from erosion of soils to a level of insignificance. All earth moving activities shall be coordinated to ensure that the mitigation measures contained under section XIV (Cultural Resources) of this addendum shall be properly implemented. IV.a) & b) The construction of structures on currently vacant lands will reduce the amount of land available for absorption of water into the ground, and has the potential to increase surface runoff. The City will require the retention of the 100 year 24 hour storm on-site, and the Tentative Tract Map has been prepared to reflect the "Geotechnical Investigation Tentative Tract29323 La Quints, California, Southland Geotechnical, June 24, 1999. U41 :1 p:\CHRISTI\envir.cklist sp 99-040.wpd 13 construction of a number of retention basins. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the project proponent shall submit hydrologic analysis to the City Engineer for review and approval which will demonstrate that the planned retention basins are sufficient to retain the 100 year storm. This will reduce the potential hazard associated with increased runoff to a level of insignificance. V. a) The Coachella Valley is currently in a non-attainment area for PM10 (particles of 10 microns or less). The proposed project will result in 379 single family dwelling units. The primary long term air quality impact caused by these units will be from the operation of automobiles; short term impacts are also likely from construction activities. The proposed project shall implement the following mitigation measures to mitigate Impacts to air quality. 1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. 2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on-site power generation. 3. Construction 'personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 4. Construction parking shall be configured to minimize traffic interference. 5. Construction of improvements on Fred Waring and Jefferson shall be scheduled for off-peak traffic hours and shall minimize obstruction of through-traffic lanes. 6. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site. 7. The project shall submit a PM10 Plan to the City which includes adequate provisions for fugitive dust and wind erosion control, both during and after P gradingoperations. The PM10 Plan shall be approved by the City prior to the issuance of any grading permit on the site. S. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre-watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading activities. 9. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on-going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each work day. PACHRISTRenvir.cklist sp 99.040.wpd 14 10. All disturbed areas shall be treated to prevent erosion until the site is constructed upon. Pad sites which are to remain undeveloped shall be seeded with either a desert wildflower mix or grass seed. 11. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. 12. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of construction-related dirt on approach routes to the site. 13, Construction roads other than temporary access roads shall be paved as soon as possible, and once paved shall be cleaned after each work day. All unpaved roads shall be posted with a 15 mile per hour speed limit. 14. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. 15. All buildings on the project site shall conform to energy use guidelines in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. 16. The project proponent shall comply with all applicable SCAQMD Rules and Regulations. VI. a), b), d), & e) A traffic impact analysis was prepared for the proposed Specific Plan 2. The analysis included existing conditions analysis, trip generation forecasts, and future traffic volumes. The total estimated traffic generation is estimated to be 3,627 daily trips, of which 284 are expected during the morning peak hour, and 382 during the evening peak hour. The improvements required with or without project implementation include the signalization of Jefferson Street at both Country Club Drive and Miles Avenue, and the widening of Fred Waring and Jefferson to their ultimate rights of way in the vicinity of the proposed project. The traffic impact analysis includes the following mitigation measures, which shall be implemented as part of the development of the project site: 1. The project proponent shall improve both Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, along their entire property boundary, to their ultimate 120 right of way (half width).in conjunction with the first phase of development. 2. Sight distances shall be reviewed to conform with City of La Quinta standards at the time of preparation of final grading, landscaping and street improvement plans. "Tentative Tract Map No.29323 Traffic Impact Analysis(revised),"RKIK&Associates,November 23, 1999. v � U IP:\CHRISTI\envir.cklist sp 99.040.wpd — — — 15 3. The project proponent shall participate in the City's traffic mitigation fee program. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, and the planned improvements associated with the implementation of the City's General Plan, all projectY related roadways will operate within acceptable levels of service (LOS D or better) at project buildout. The project is therefore not expected to have a significant impact on the circulation system. The Specific Plan includes an interior trail system. The trail system interfaces with the interior street system at a number of locations. In order to ensure that no significant hazard occurs to pedestrians using the trail system, the project proponent shall be required to install stop signs and crosswalks at all intersections between the trail and a paved roadway. The stop signs shall be for pedestrian traffic. VI I. a), b) & c) The site occurs within an area designated as potential habitat for the Giant Sand Treader Cricket in the General Plan. In conjunction with the first application for Site Development Permit;the project proponent shall submit a focused survey for Giant Sand Treader Cricket to the City for review and approval. The survey shall include mitigation measures, if necessary, and a mitigation monitoring program. The project e for the Coachella Valle Fringe-toed Lizard. also occurs in the mitigation fee area Y 9 The project proponent q ro onent shall be required to pay the fee in effect at the time of issuance of building permits to mitigate impacts to this species. Should the project, or any portion of the project, occur after implementation of the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan, any mitigation required by that plan shall be applied to the project, or any portion of the project. X. a) & b) A noise analysis was prepared, and subsequently amended, for the proposed project'. The project area lies in a currently impacted noise corridor. Residential dwelling units are considered sensitive noise receptors. The City's General Plan requires that exterior noise levels for any portion of a residential lot not exceed 60 dBA CNEL, and that interior noise levels not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. The study found that varying heights of walls were needed to mitigate exterior noise levels along Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. The study also recommended the elevation of certain pads to mitigate noise levels. Finally, the study requires the preparation of additional analysis to recommend mitigation mea sures for interior noise levels for any home to be constructed with a second story which has a full or partial view of either Fred Waring or Jefferson. In order to ensure that noise levels are mitigated to meet City standards, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented. "Acoustical Analysis Report," Douglas Eilar&Associates,August 15 &November 29, 1999. t PACHPJSTI\cnviccklist sp 99-040.wpd 16 In conjunction with Site Development Permit application for any phase of 1. development which includes homes with a partial or full view of Fred Waring or Jefferson, a noise analysis based on final pad elevations shall be prepared which demonstrates that both exterior and interior noise levels shall . meet or exceed City standards. 2. The design and location of the outer perimeter wall shall conform to the recommendations of the November 29, 1999 amendment to the noise analysis, and shall combine a six foot block or slumpstone wall, constructed to City standard, with adequate berming to achieve the needed heights shown on the table labeled " Barrier and Berm Heights at Perimeter Lots to Achieve 60 CNEL." XI. a) - e) The proposee project is not expected to result in substantial adverse impacts to public services. The residences within the project will impact the school system, and such an impact must be mitigated through the imposition of school fees. XII. a) - g) The proposed project is served by local utilities and water and sewer districts. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall be required to demonstrate, through "will serve" letters, that all services are available to the site. No significant impact to service providers is expected from this project. XII La) The proposed project occurs along one of the City's Primary Image Corridors. The General Plan requires a setback of 20 feet, which the project has proposed on its map. The implementation of the setback requirement will lower the impact to scenic resources to a less than significant level. XIV. a) The site occurs above the recorded shoreline of ancient Lake Cahuilla, as mapped on City maps. No significant impact to paleontologic resources is expected from this project. XIV.b), c), & d) A site specific Phase I cultural resource study has been completed for the proposed project". The study found a potentially significant sites within the project boundary. Site CA-RIV-6349 was found to be potentially significant, and necessitate further study. The following mitigation measure shall therefore be implemented: "An Archaeological Assessment of Tentative Tract 29323...," Archaeological Associates,August 31, 1999. PAtHPJSTRenvir.cklist sp 99-040.wpd 17 l)l+ 1. In conjunction with the first Site Development Permit application for the project, the project proponent shall submit, for review and approval by the City, a comprbhensive Phase II archaeological investigation, performed in conformance with City standards. The Phase II study shall include mitigation measures, and a mitigation monitoring plan. 2. An archaeological monitor shall be on site during any grubbing, earth moving or excavating activity. Should a resource be identified by the monitor, he or she shall be empowered to halt or redirect grading activities while the resource is properly identified and studied. The monitor shall file a report with the City of his or her findings, including disposition of any resource identified. P:ICHRISTI\cnvicckl ist sp 99.040.wpd ra 18 BERMUDA DUNES ADVISORY ELECTION RESULTS ILt'.JUL1J RIVERSIDE COUNTY BERMUDA DUNES ADVISORY ELECTION ; MAY 16, 2000 Election Results as of 05/16/2000 at 05:00:00 PM Please be sure to hit your browsers Refresh button to get the latest results... TOTAL REGISTERED VOTERS 2757 TOTALTURNOUT lOH3 - PERCENTTURNOUT ANNEXATION Vote Count Percentage -- SUPPORT Annexation 620 OPPOSE Annexation 424 40.6% - I If you voted YES on Annexation which of the following cities do you prefer? Vote Count Percentage INDIO LA OUINTA 141 21.7% PALM DESERT 503 77.5% ` If you OPPOSE Annexation,do you favor being placed in the sphere of influence of one of the following cities? . ._----— 1� Vote Count Percentage INDIO 7 1.6% - LA OUINTA 41 9.3% PALM DESERT 134 31.2% - NOSPHEREOFINFLUENCE 254 57.9% If qou OPPOSE Annexation,would you like to form a community of interest? Vote Count Percentage - FORM 239 55.5% -- ACOMMUNITYOFINTEREST DO NOT FORM E 192 44.5% - ACOMMUNITYOFINTEREST PALM DESERT SOI AMENDMENT CORRESPONDENCE EITY OF Pfl1M OESERI 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE s ' , .PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-o6i I FAX: 760 340-0574 cityhali@ix.neccom.com OFFICE OF THE MAYOR CD oa a �m c = � July 31, 2000 ti .a 1 O r 1 ITI n m m c.i a Mr. George Splilotis o Z Executive Officer cC3> Z LAFCO 1485 Spruce Street, Suite J Riverside, California 92507 RE: ENDORSEMENT OF REQUEST FOR SPHERE OF INFLUENCE Dear Mr. Spiliotis: At its meeting of July 13, 2000, the Bermuda Dunes Community Council approved by a 5-0 vote the filing of an application with LAFCO for the placement of the community of Bermuda Dunes into the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. It is our understanding that an application is being prepared on behalf of the Bermuda Dunes Community Association and will be forthcoming. The City of Palm Desert's City Council supports the request of the Bermuda Dunes Community Council and urges LAFCO to expedite the application process. BUF RDA. CRITES MAYOR BACJCF:wjm •' I I m.............. t> PJVMME OFFICE: Durmcr OFFICEMIAIL.G ADDRESS: 4 46.200 oasis Street,Ste.318 080 Lemon Street.loth Floor Riverside,CA 92502.1647 t Indio,CA 1.5933 x (760)863-83-8211 (909)955.1040 Fax(760)863-8905 Fax(909)955.2194 x , SUPERVISOR ROY WILSON FOURTH DISTRICT July 20, 2000 Mr. George Spiliotis Executive Officer, LAFCO 1485 Spruce Street, Suite J Riverside, CA 92507 RE: ENDORSEMENT OF REQUEST FOR SPHERE OF INFLUENCE Dear George: Attached please find one copy of the official notification of a request for a Sphere of Influence designation from the Bermuda Dunes Community Council. I wholeheartedly support the request and urge LAFCO to move forward as quickly as possible. cere , i y Wilson ourth District S pervisor C n= C o G L =a C yti rn rn cc: Jerry Lugo, Chairman ` Bermuda Dunes Community Council rn Z. N G7 Honorable Buford Crites o Mayor, City of Palm Desert F.\IEgENGEV FB IF,R5\2wo\SP1I-IOTIS.BDDOC INTERNET: distriat4QQ CO.riversldexams I _ -Bpt3,B.If STEELE ILL NG . (OU-Juv Bermuda Dunes Community Council Jerry Lugu, Chairman Jny Steele, Secretary P. O.Box 10854 Palm Desert,CA 92255-0854 Phone: (760) 345-5380 FAX: (760) 360-6553 Mr. Roy Wilson Supervisor Fourth District County of Riverside District Office 46-200 Oasis St., Ste 318 Indio, CA 92201-5933 Dear Supervisor Wilson, At the Bermuda Dunes Community Council meeting of July 13,2000,the following motion was passed by a vote of 5-0: - "The Bermuda Dunes Community Council recommends to the Ttiversidc County Board of Supervisors to expedite the Applicution to LAFCO to place the community of Bermuda Dunes under the Sphere of Influence of the City of Palm Desert." The BDCC feels this motion was the intent of tlkc results of the recent Advisory Ballot of the rcgislered voters of the cmnunity. The Bermuda Dunes Communily Association is in the process of applying to LAFCO for the placement of the community of Bermuda Dunes into the sphere of inthtence of the City of Palm Dcsert.It is the intent of the 13DCC that we work with the BDCA in their efforts of having the application approved by LAFCO and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors. Sincerely, I Jag Secretary cc: Georgc Spiliotis,LAFCO Jerry Lvgo, BDCC Wayne Gurahrick,BDCA Attorney Fred Catarina,BDCA President Joe Sitko,BDSA President ' RECEIVED fORHATION COHNISSION 00 SEP 1 1 PM 12: 20 September 9, 2000 George Spilidtis Executive Officer Local Agency Formation Commission(LAFCO) 1485 Spruce Street—Suite J Riverside, CA 92507 Reference: Possible Annexation of Bermuda Dunes Dear Mr. Spilidtis: We have just learned of the date of the hearing regarding the possible annexation of the unincorporated Community of Bermuda Dunes and, unfortunately, will be unable to attend, as we will be out of state. Since this is of the up most importance, I wanted to make sure you and all members of the commission are aware of our desires in this endeavor. My wife and myself are strongly in favor of the annexation of Bermuda Dunes by the City of Palm Desert. In our opinion, Palm Desert is the most financially stable city in the valley and has shown the desire for planned and controlled growth over the years. Palm Desert is the ONLY choice for our community. I really wish we could be there to voice our support for this, but I hope that this letter will have equal weight and be of assistance in reaching a timely decision. Sin erely, ruce C. Kelly Adair Kelly Ryan Way Bermuda Bermuda Dunes, CA 9 201 I .RCEIVEO September,08,2000 Gordon C. and Sharon L. Price 77661 Justin Ct. ..OiwSlOE CONNiSSiON Palm Desert, Ca. 92211 fp�NA>70N Mr. George Spilidtis 00 SEP PM 12 20 Executive Officer LAFCO 1485 Spruce St.-Suite J Riverside, Ca. 92507 Dear Mr. Spilidtis: My wife and I are having a new home constructed on St Margaret's Bay in Bermuda Dunes Country Club and it should be completed around October 10, 2000.` We would love to see this area annexed to Palm Desert and have the opportunity to connect to the sewer system and have the fire protection and police protection. O'Ltho� RIVERSIDE Omce: Dtsrmcr OmcDMAnsiG ADDRESS: 4080 Lemon Street,14th Floor 46-200 Oasis Street,Ste.318 Riverside,CA 92502.1647 t Indio,CA 92-101.5933 (909)955.1040 s - (760)863-8211 Fox(909)955.2194 e t Fax(760)863-8905 SUPERVISOR ROY WILSON _ FOURTH DISTRICT �O a M xr• -m CO ...� July 14, 2000 S N� tV N C3 ` W Mr. George Spiliotis Executive Officer Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission 1485 Spruce Street, Suite J Riverside, CA 92507-2445 Dear George: Please be advised that the Bermuda Dunes Community Council voted 5-0 to move forward with being placed in the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. Additionally, I have pledged to support that effort. Should you have any questions regarding the action of the Community Council, I would be more than happy to address your concerns personally. oy Wilson . urth District Supervisor c: Jerry Lugo, Chair Bermuda Dunes Community Council F:\Aezeli\Letters\2000\SpiliotisO7t4OO.doc INTERNET: district4Qco.riversidexa.us Z 5 > QU&rC4(j P.O. Box 1504 760) 777-7000 g'eO 75.495 CALLE TAMPICO F'y OF LA LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 (TDD) (760) 777-1227 September 14, 2000 Mr. George Spiliotis, Executive Officer LAFCO 1485 Spruce Street, Suite J Riverside, CA 92507-2445 SUBJECT: LAFCO NO. 2000-18-4 SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT Dear Mr. Spiliotis: The City of La Quinta is in receipt of the above-noted application. Exhibit "A" of the application includes a portion of the City of La Quinta's Sphere of Influence along both sides of Darby Road, east of Washington Street and North of Fred Waring Drive. The City requests that this property be removed and retained in the City of La Quinta's Sphere for the following reasons: 1 . When the City's Annexation #6 (LAFCO No. 90-1 15-4) was approved LAFCO included the remainder of Darby Road on both the north and south sides of the street for a duration of 4,000 feet, into the City's Sphere of Influence and required the City to maintain the full length of Darby Road pursuant to an Agreement between the County and the City of La Quinta. 2. Should that portion of Darby Road east of our City limits be included in the City of Palm Desert's Sphere of.lnfluence, it could cause confusion for emergency response.personnel not recognizing the different.City boundaries. 3. The City has been contact by numerous property owners in this area wishing to be annexed into La Quinta. For these reasons, it is our opinion that this area should remain in the City of La Quinta's Sphere of Influence and because of its logical inclusion in our municipal boundaries. Should you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, 9S 1 Wd 61 d3S 00 JERRY HERMAN NOISSIHH00 N011y'H801 Community Development Director 1TI33V 1y001 301S019 03AI303H JH:bjs a Fred CiminolBermvda Dunes RealtY RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION 00 SEP 19 PH I= 16 September 18, 2000 George Spilidtis Executive Officer LAFCO 1485 Spruce Street, Suite J Riverside, CA 92507 As a business and property owner in Bermuda Dunes I am strongly in favor of Bermuda Dunes being annexed to Palm Desert. Quoting Jim Battin, Republican=La Quinta,that Palm Desert is one of the best-run cities in the state and has shown great foresight in planning for the future. I fully agree. Ve urs, Fred Cimino Bermuda Dunes Realty FC:md ,. 79050 AVENUE 42 BERMUDA DUNES CA 9220f �619j 345-2501 ROE gyliQ +:.. t RIVERSIOE LOCAL. ACENCT FORMATION COMMISSION 00 SEP 19 PM I- 16 Z ,4 / q99 >- 5 �, 'a..~,--- 0. its-�-�'�/•Q'L-- L /� 57 O ti 60 L f� F CO PAa ,,,_ qv RONALD C. EBEL, M.D. 3163 DEER RUN AVENUE SOUTH SALEM, OREOON 973M 14 September 2000 George Spilidtis Executive Officer Local Agency Formation Commission WCO) 1485 Spruce Street-Suite J Riverside,California 92507 Dear Mr. Spilidtis: It appears that I will be unable to attend the meeting of LAFCO on Thursday,September 14,2000, However I would like to add my voice to those that support the annexation of our area,Bermuda Dunes into the City of Palm Desert Palm Desert is directly contiguous geographically,is easily accessible,and is our natural shopping area with stores on Washington Street and on Highway 111. It appears that Sun City has or will soon be annexed into Palm Desert on our West. I vigorously support the annexation of Bermuda Dunes into Palm Desert for these reasons.Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, // Ronald G.Ebel,MD. 43580 Old Harbour Drive Bermuda Dunes, California 92201 0 0 C/) rn n y 0 m zo m o? < _ _ N� rn w a 0 s Sezznuda Buzzes 79,050 AVENUE Q BERMUDA DUNES CAUFDBNIA 92201 (760)745-2694 September 18, 2000 George Spilidtis Executive Officer Local Agency Formation Commission(LAFCO) 1485 Spruce Street, Suite J Riverside, CA 92507 As the original Developer of Bermuda Dunes and presently a property owner in several areas of Bermuda Dunes we are very much in favor of being a part of Palm Desert's Sphere of Influence. Hopefully this will lead to annexation at some future,not too distant date. We trust this letter will be considered at the September 28 h LAFCO meeting. Yours truly, Ernie Dunlevie FC:md ' ,. .. DESERT BERMUDA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Pelriein Laflin �.4 42-905 Caballeros e Ga b Il Dr.Bermuda Dunes, Gnli{ornia,92201 September 18, 2000 George Spilidtis, Executive Officer Local Agency Formation Commission(LAFCO) 1485 Spruce Street Suite J Riverside, California 92507 Dear Mr. Spilidtis: We are writing to support other Bermuda Dunes residents in their appeal to have our area included in the city of Palm Desert. We realize that Palm Desert must want to annex this area makes a natural extension of the city of Palm Bermuda Dunes,but we feel that include very desirable commercial and residential Desert toward the freeway and that we property. We have both lived in the Coachella Valley for more than fifty years- We have watched . the birth and growth of many of our present nine cities. We do not believe there should be another,independent city, but favor including this area in either Palm Desert or La Quinta,preferably the former. We have been well impressed with Palm Desert's planning and management of the city and would be pleased to be a part of Palm Desert. Our present coup status has left us without many of the services a city can provide, and we r county P ice. are more than willing to assume the tax burden m exchange for serve Your consideration of our request is appreciated. Sincerely, Ben Laflin Patricia Laflin �r� � � _--- - -- �� _�c�i _— �-�ca—� _ _ _- c.�cO -- - --ice s� i _ - -- � — - �� �- a�— _ � �-�e= — - - — - — -- So—'-rn-"��_ —c�u,r�1' C'���- cam/' __ �-n,�, - - — — - — _ _ _ CESERT ' � 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-o6i I fIY Df PR � RI D 7 FAx: 760 340-0574 in(n@palm-dese n.org February 8, 2000 Mr. Wayne S. Guralnick Guralnick& Gilliland Attorneys at Law 74-399 Highway 111,Suite M Palm Desert, California 92260 Dear Mr. Guralnick: Subject: Consideration of Adding Bermuda Dunes to Palm Desert's Sphere of Influence At its regular meeting of January 27,2000,the Palm Desert City Council considered the subject matter and took the following action: By Minute Motion, approved the addition of Bermuda Dunes to Palm Desert's Sphere of Influence conditioned upon Bermuda Dimes being the initiator of the application process through the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo), with Palm Desert providing its frill cooperation in that process, and that the potential annexation was proven to be an action that would have a financially neutral effect on Palm Desert. As promised, enclosed is a copy of the March 1996 Bermuda Dunes Annexation Fiscal Feasibility Report, accepted at the March 28, 1996,Regular Palm Desert City Council Meeting. For your reference,I have also included a copy of the Minutes from that meeting. Minutes of the January 27, 2000,meeting will be available once they are approved at the Council's meeting of February 10. If you have any questions or need for further assistance from our office,please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, RACHELLE D. KLASSEN ACTING CITY CLERK rdk Enclosures (as noted) cc: Ramon A. Diaz, City Manager Philip Drell, Director of Community Development 7 CI1Y 0f P 0 [ M OESEI� 73-5 r0 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-o6i I FAX: 760 340-0574 ' info@palm-Janoorg February 8, 2000 Mr. Wayne S. Guralnick Guralnick& Gilliland Attorneys at Law 74-399 Highway 111,Suite M Palm Desert, California 92260 Dear Mr. Guralnick: Subject: Consideration of AddingBermuda Dunes to Palm Desert'sh 1r►fl At its regular meeting of January 27,2000,the Palm Desert City Council considered the subject m r"and the following action: By Minute Motion, approved the addition of Bermuda Dunes to Palm Desert's Sphere of influence conditioned upon Bermuda Dunes being the initiator of the application process through the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo), with Palm Desert providing its full cooperation in that process, and that the potential annexation was proven to be an action that would have a financially neutral effect on Palm Desert As promised, enclosed is a copy of the March 1996 Bermuda Dunes Annexation Fiscal Feasibility Report, accepted at the March 28, 1996, Regular Palm Desert City Council Meeting. For your reference,I have also included a copy of the Minutes from that meeting. Minutes of the January 27, 2000,meeting will be available once they are approved at the Council's meeting of February 10. If you have any questions or need for further assistance from our office,please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, RACHELLE D. KLASSEN ACTING CITY CLERK rdk Enclosures (as noted) CC' Ramon A. Diaz, City Manager Philip Drell,Director of Community Development hA .__-_ - - __ ��J(/((�J,/���''X ✓_ 0 - _ �' . -3 .. V5 Sep 27 00 09: 46a Riverside LRFCO (909] 369-8479 p. 1 FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: NUMBER OF PAGES : / Z (Excluding cover sheet) TO: FROM: ��e ✓tee Sn-.: �, G �,,,-�� : a . LA Ice, o FAX NUAB& 7 /c (� � � �- 7109 � IF THERE ARE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THIS TRANSMISSION, PLEASE CALL: (909) 369-0631 l MESSAGE : IS RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FOAMATKW-GQKMMSfQN,. 1485 SPRUCE STREET, SUC_]E J•RIVERSIDE. CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 - FAX(909) 309-8479 Received Sep-27-2000 09:37am From-909 369 8479 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 001 r� Sep 27 DO 09: 47a Riverside LAFCO (909) 369-8479 p. 2 3od. & e. 9/28/2000 TO: Local Agency Formation Commission FROM: George J. Spiliotis, Executive Officer SUBJECT: . LAFCO 2000-11-4—SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION 10 TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CONCURRENT DETACHMENT FROM THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND DETACHMENT FROM CSA 121; AND LAFCO 2000-18-3-AMNDMENTS TO THE SPHERES OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITIES OF PALM DESERT (ADDITION) AND LA QUINTA (REMOVAL) PRIOR AGENDAS/RELATED ACTIONS: 001obar 1991,Commission domed two competing proposals Io place aD of Bermuda Danes in Palm Desert and La Quiata sphatnt of influanae and approved a 156 sae annexation to La Quinta, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This report addresses two conflicting proposals in an area that is primarily outside of any municipal sphere of influence. First, we have an application for a 122-acre sphere of influence amendment and reorganization that includes an annexation of the Sand Harbor Specific Plan to the City of La Quinta. The second proposal would place the entire Bermuda Dunes area, including the aforementioned annexation proposal to La Quinta, within the Palm Desert Sol. Approximately 120 acre of — Bermuda Dunes is currently VICINITY within the La Quinta SOI . The sphere proposal is the LAFCO 2000-18-4 result of a decade long, on-and-off dialogue within the community, culminating in a recent advisory election, which indicated i strong support for an eventual annexation to Palm Desert. The recommendation y is for approval of the La Quinta sphere amendment and reorganization proposal, a t+ with slightly modified boundaries, and addition of ..Rddtf i �•ftih the remainder of Bermuda Dunes currently outside the � ,, ,...;x�.a '` � La Quinta sphere, to the sphere of influence of the s ar '1 City of Palm Desert. "w•- ?<+K•8 `+• RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION• 1485 SPRUCE STREET, 5U1TE i•RIVERSIDE, CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 • FAX(009)369-6479 ' Received Sep-27-2000 09:37am From-909 369 8479 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 002 Sep 27 00 09: 47a Riverside LRFCO (909) 369-8479 p. 3 LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 2 LAFCO 2000-18-4 BeHtember 28, 2000 GENERAL INFORMATION: APPLICANT: Wade Ellis, the sole property owner, has initiated the Proposed sphere amendment and annexation to La Quinta. The Proposal to place Bermuda Dunes in the Palm Desert SOI has been initiated by Fred Caterina, president of the Bermuda Dunes Community Association (BDCA) , the largest property owners' association in Bermuda Dunes . LOCATION: The reorganization proposal is located on the northwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. The Palm Desert SOI application covers all of Bermuda Dunes, bounded by Interstate 10 on the north and the Cities of Palm Desert, La Quinta and Indio on the west, south and east, respectively. POPULATION: The population within the reorganization area is zero. The Bermuda Dunes area has a population of approximately 6, 000 . REGISTERED VOTERS: The Registrar of Voters reports no registered voters on the reorganization site, making the proposal legally uninhabited. The area proposed to be included in the Palm Desert SOI includes 2, 754 registered voters. ACREAGE: The total area of the reorganization is approximately 122 acres. The Bermuda Dunes SOI amendment covers approximately 2, 046 acres. CEQA DETERMINATION: The City of La Quinta, as lead agency for the reorganization, has prepared an environmental assessment that resulted in the filing of a Negative Declaration. Regarding the Palm Desert SOI amendment, staff recommends the Commission find the proposal exempt from CEQA, as it can be seen with certainty that the proposal will not have a significant impact on the environment. PROPERTY TAX EXCHANGE: Both the City and the County have adopted corresponding master property tax resolutions . EXISTING CONDITIONS : The reorganization site is vacant. The remainder of the Bermuda Dunes area contains a mixture of residential uses ranging from multiple-family to large lot semi- rural residential, industrial and commercial uses, pockets of vacant land scattered throughout the area and the Bermuda Dunes Airport. LAND USE PLANS: The City of La Quinta has adopted the Sand Harbor Specific Plan, which encompasses the entire reorganization area. The Specific Plan calls for a gated community of 379 single-family homes with common amenities . County plans allow single-family residential development on 9, 000 square foot lots. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION• 1486 SPRUCE STREET, surm 1•RIVERSIDE, CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 • FAX(909)369-8479 Received Sap-27-2000 09:37am From-909 369 8479 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 003 Sep 27 00 09: 48a Riverside LAFCO (909) 369-8479 p. 4 LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 3 September 28, 2000 LAFCO 2000-18-4 The City of Palm Desert has not yet included the Bermuda Dunes area within its general plan. An upcoming general plan update will likely establish land use designations for the area. SIGNIFICANT ISSUES: BOUNDARY ISSUES: There are three significant boundary issues associated with these proposals . First, the proposals are mutually exclusive. Whereas, the Bermuda Dunes proposal seeks placement of the entire community within the Palm Desert Sol, the reorganization application proposes annexation of a portion of the same area to La Quinta. The issue is whether this entire area should be treated as one entity. Commissioners may recall that discussion of our current Community of Interest policy began with the example of Bermuda Dunes. In 1992, then-Supervisor and LAFCO Commissioner Larson recounted the ongoing dialogue that had been occurring in Bermuda Dunes regarding the benefits of incorporation, annexation to La Quinta or Palm Desert, and remaining unincorporated. The concern expressed by the community through Commissioner Larson was that, while debate was occurring within Bermuda Dunes, piecemeal annexations by surrounding cities were limiting their future options. Thus was born the COI designation, a two-year study period for a community to evaluate jurisdictional alternatives. Ironically, Bermuda Dunes never applied for the COI designation. That is not to say the community has not considered its options. Approximately five years ago, members of the Bermuda Dunes community approached the City of Palm Desert regarding annexation. The City prepared an analysis of the fiscal impacts of annexing Bermuda Dunes on the City. That analysis indicated revenues generated by the annexation would fall well short of service costs. In March of 1996, the City informed the Bermuda Dunes Community Council (BDCC) that "...Palm Desert does not encourage or support annexation of Bermuda Dunes at this time. " Approximately two years ago, the BDCC once again began evaluating annexation to both Palm Desert and La Quinta. That effort culminated in an advisory election called by the Board of Supervisors on May 16, 2000 . The results of the election, which are attached to this report, generally indicate support for annexation. Among those favoring annexation, there is a three-to- one preference for annexation to Palm Desert. These results are the basis for BDCC's support of the BDCA proposal . It should be noted, while Palm Desert is supportive of this Sol amendment, the City's position on annexation has not changed. Again, the question for the Commission is whether the Sand Harbor Specific Plan area should be ,allowed to go its separate way from the remainder of Bermuda Dunes. In a meeting with a BDCC subcommittee in February 1999, a representative of Wade Ellis indicated that the owner would be happy to annex to either Palm RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION- 1485 SPRUCE STREET, Surm J-RIvERSIDE,CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909) 369-0631 • FAX(909)369-8479 Received Sep-27-2000 09:37am From-909 369 8479 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 004 Sep 27 00 09: 48a Riverside LRFCO (909) 369-8479 p. 5 LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 4 September 28, 2000 LAFCO 2000-18-4 Desert or La Quinta, in accordance with the direction of the BDCC. He made it clear, however, that he could not wait an extended period of time for the Community Council to make a decision. An application was submitted to La Quinta in September of 1999. The second issue involves the portion of Palm Desert SOI proposal that is currently within the La Quinta Sol. In 1991, in conjunction with approval of an annexation on the northeast corner of Fred Waring and Washington, the Commission added 120 acres to the La Quinta Sol just north of the annexation. Additionally, the Commission conditioned the annexation upon the City entering into a maintenance agreement for a road within that sphere area. According to La Quinta, residents of this area have expressed some interest in annexation. The City would like to keep this area within its sphere. The third boundary issue is specifically related to the annexation Proposal . As proposed, only the land owned by the applicant, the Sand Harbor Specific Plan area would be annexed to La Quinta. Such a configuration would leave a wedge of unincorporated territory fronting on Jefferson between the Cities of La Quinta and Indio. The jurisdictional pattern along Jefferson Street would be confusing, with maintenance responsibility divided between La Quinta, Indio and the County. The "wedge" is comprised of two parcels. The City and applicant are now attempting to contact the owners of these parcels to determine whether they favor annexation at this time. If the Commission determines it should approve this annexation, it should include the wedge parcels along Jefferson Street up to the Indio City boundary. If written consent from these other owners is not obtained prior to the hearing, the matter should be continued for at least one month. REORGANIZATION SERVICES: The City of La Quinta has submitted a Plan of Services in support of the application. That plan is attached to this report. In general, the application represents a relatively small extension -of services . Staff has only one service related concern with this application as indicated below. Water/Sewer Service: There is some inconsistency in the service provider information accompanying the application as follows: Water Provider Sewer Provider Application Form Myoma Dunes Water Co. Myoma Dunes Water CoJCity of La Quinta Plan of Services Coachella Valley Water District Coachella Valley Water District Sand Harbor Myoma Dunes Water Co. Coachella Valley Water District Specific Plan RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION• 1485 sPRucE s=Er, su rE.7.RIVERSIDE. CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909) 369-0631 • FAX(909)369-8479 Received Sep-27-2000 09:37am From-909 369 8479 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 005 Sep 27 00 09: 49a Riverside LRFCO (909) 369-8479 p. 6 LRFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 5 September 28, 2000 LRFCO 2000-18-4 It has been confirmed that the applicant' s preference is for Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Co. to provide water to the site. Correspondence from CVWD to the City of La Quinta, however, indicates that it will provide both water and sewer to the proposed development . It is apparent that there is potential for future conflict between CVWD and Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company regarding which agency will provide water to the site_ Similar conflict has resulted in disputes and sometimes litigation in other areas of the County. At face value, it makes little sense for two entities to provide services that are capable of being provided by one. The Commission, however, has no ability to directly limit the authorized services provided by an agency within its service area. Furthermore, in this instance, the Commission has no jurisdiction over Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company, a private utility. At present, it is up to the property owner to choose which water purveyor will provide water to the project. The applicant has cited lower cost and the proximity of facilities as the primary factors in choosing Myoma Dunes. The Commission has addressed this problem in the past by requiring the annexing agency to enter into an agreement defining service responsibilities with the overlapping agency. If the Commission' s position is that CVWD should determine who is best positioned to provide both water and sewer to the site, it should consider a condition requiring the applicant to enter into an agreement with CVWD defining service responsibilities . The applicant intends to provide additional information prior to the hearing that will demonstrate that Commission intervention is unnecessary. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE CRITERIA: A sphere of influence is defined as a plan for the probable physical boundaries and service area of a local agency. A statement of determinations addressing four factors is required by state law to be adopted by the Commission in conjunction with any sphere amendment. As noted above, two overlapping sphere amendment proposals have been submitted. The City of La Quinta must amend its sphere of influence in order to effect the proposed Sand Harbor reorganization. The Bermuda Dunes community wishes to place all unincorporated territory south of Interstate 10 within the Palm Desert SOI . The recommended statement of determinations for the proposed amendments is attached to this report. DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY WASTE RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (RCWRMD) : On March 24, 1994, the Commission approved the formation of the RCWRMD as a separate financial and legal entity to operate and finance solid waste facilities in Riverside County. The District became effective on May 2, 1994 . As part of the Commission' s action, it determined that future annexations to cities should detach from the RCWRMD unless those cities have annexed to the District. This is based on an understanding between the County and the COGS that annexation of cities to RCWRMD will be accomplished in an organized fashion to ensure RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION• 1485 SPRUCE STREET.SUM:J•RNERSIDE,CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369.0631 • FAX(909)369-8479 Received Sep-27-2000 09:37am From-909 369 8479 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 006 Sep 27 00 09: 49a Riverside LRFCO (909) 369-8479 p. 7 LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 6 September 28, 2000 LAFCO 2000-1s-4 appropriate representation on the governing board of the District. Therefore, staff will recommend concurrent detachment from the RCWRMD. DETACHMENT FROM CSA 121 : If the Commission approves annexation to the City of La Quinta, the area will be automatically detached from CSA 121 . CSA 121 funds street lighting within areas of Bermuda Dunes . Obviously, this vacant site is not receiving street lighting at this time, but portions of the site were previously annexed to CSA 121, Residential street lighting is not a citywide service provided by La Quinta, WAIVER OF AUTOMATIC DETACHMENT FROM CSA 152 : County Service Area 152 was initially formed to implement programs pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System required by the Federal Clean Water Act. If the Commission approves the Proposal, the Commission should make specified findings in order to waive automatic detachment from the CSA, since the City has opted to annex into CSA 152 . COMMENTS FROM AFFECTED AGENCIES/INTERESTED PARTIES. Letters of support for the Bermuda Dunes SOI application have been submitted by the city of Palm Desert, the Bermuda Dunes Community Council and Supervisor Roy Wilson. Letters have also been received from several Bermuda Dunes residents/property owners supporting annexation to Palm Desert. The fact that many of the residents' letters of support do not reference a sphere of influence amendment suggests that much of the community believes an annexation application is before the Commission, The City of La Quinta has transmitted a letter indicating opposition to the removal of the Darby Road area from its sphere. The Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District has sent comments stating it would like to collect Quimby fees in the annexation area. CONCLUSIONS: Some time ago, a representative of .the Sand Harbor annexation area made an effort to follow the direction of the Bermuda Dunes Community Council if the outcome was annexation. The landowner indicated up front, however, that he was not willing to wait for an extended time. Approximately seven months later, Mr. Ellis began processing a specific plan and annexation through the City of La Quints. This area is not an integral part of the Bermuda Dunes community. The proposed residential development is also not likely to significantly impact any future evaluation by the City of Palm Desert to annex Bermuda Dunes. As long as the boundaries include the additional parcels fronting on Jefferson, staff recommends approval of the reorganization. The remaining area has demonstrated an affinity for Palm Desert. A sphere of influence determination, however, is more than a popularity contest. Nevertheless, Palm Desert is a fiscally strong city with the capacity to extend services to Bermuda Dunes . RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMhTION COMMISSION- 1485 SPRUCE STREET.5UME,I -RNERSIDE,CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369.0631 - FAX(909)369-8479 Received Sep-27-2000 09:37am From-909 369 8479 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 007 Sep 27 00 09: 50a Riverside LAFCO (909) 3GS-8479 p. 8 LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 7 September 28, 2000 LAFCO 2000-18-4 Staff does have a concern, based on the City' s position on annexation, that placing the Bermuda Dunes area within the Palm Desert Sol could relegate the area to permanent island status. Hopefully, placing this area within the City's sphere will be the first step in opening up a new dialogue between residents, the City and the County directed at making annexation a reality. The Commission may want to revisit the sphere issue in three to five years if no progress toward annexation has been made. Regarding the approximately 120 acres within La Quints's Sol, staff recommends leaving that area within that sphere for the time being. As a result of a LAFCO imposed condition, the City has been responsible for road maintenance in the area. Although this maintenance responsibility is minimal, staff believes it would be inequitable to suddenly remove the area from the City's Sol after the Commission has assigned 'it this duty. Additionally, the City has indicated that there has been some interest in annexation expressed by residents. The City should be allowed some period of time to pursue annexation. However, if at some point Palm Desert is prepared to annex the remainder of Bermuda Dunes, potentially leaving this area as an island, this area should go with the rest of Bermuda Dunes. SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS: Based on the factors outlined above, IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Commission: LAFCO 2000-11-4: 1 . Find the City of La Quinta, as lead agency, has prepared an initial study that resulted in the filing of a Negative Declaration on the proposal and the City has complied with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and all appropriate State Guidelines, and the Commission has reviewed and considered the environmental documentation; 2 . Adopt the attached Statement of Determinations; 3 . Approve LAFCO 2000-11-4—SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA; 4 . Determine the proposed reorganization is consistent with the spheres of influence of the City of La Quinta, as amended, and all other affected agencies; 5 . Determine the proposed reorganization is legally uninhabited; RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION• 1485 SPRUCE STREET.SUrrE a•RIVERSIDE, CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0031 FAX(909)369-8479 Received Sep-27-2000 09:37am From-909 369 8479 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 008 Sep 27 00 09: 50a Riverside LRFCO (909) 369-8479 p• 9 LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 8 September 29, 2000 LAFC0 2000-18-4 6. Approve LAFCO 2000-11-4--REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION 1.0 TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CONCURRENT DETACHMENT FROM THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND DETACHMENT FROM CSA 121 with modified boundaries as shown in the attached exhibit identified as STAFF RECOMMENDATION, subject to the following terms and conditions : a. In accordance with Government Code Sections 56844 (t) and 57330, the subject territory shall be subject to the levying and collection of any previously authorized charge, fee, assessment or tax of the City. b. The City of La Quinta shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission ( "LAFCO" ) , its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against LAFCO, its agents, officers, and employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of LAFCO concerning this proposal . C. In accordance with Government Code Section 56375 (p) , waive automatic detachment from County Service Area 152 based upon the following findings : i . County Service Area (CSA) 152 is a funding mechanism for the implementation of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) emanating from the Federal 1972 Clean Water Act, and re-authorized under the Federal 1987 Clean Water Act. ii . The City annexed into CSA 152 and is included within the CSA's service area. iii . Detachment would deprive the area residents services needed to ensure their health, safety or welfare. iv. Waiving detachment will not affect the ability of the City to provide any services . 7 . Designate the City of La Quinta as conducting authority. LAFCO 2000-18-4: 1. Find the proposal is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b) (3) , as it can be seen with certainty that the proposal will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2 . Adopt the attached Statement of Determinations. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION• 1485 SPRUCE STREET, SUITE J•RIVERSIDE, CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 • FAX(909)369-8479 Received Sep-27-2000 09:37am From-909 369 8479 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 009 Sep 27 00 09: 51a Riverside LAFCO (909) 369-8479 10. 10 LAFCO 2000-11-4 PAGE 9 September 28, 2000 LAFCO 2000-18-4 3 . Approve LAFCO 2000-18-4—SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT with modified boundaries t0 exclude the territories included within LAFCO 2000-11-4 and within the existing La Quinta SOI as shown in the attached exhibit identified as STAFF RECOMMENDATION. Respectfully zu4qtted, �A Geor iliotis Exec fficer RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION• 1485 SPRUCE STREET. SUITE J •RIVERSIDE,CA 92507-2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 FAX(909)369-8479 Received Sep-27-2000 09:37am From-909 369 84T9 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 010 Sep 27 00 09: 51a Riverside LFFCO t909) 369-8479 p. 11 STATEMEN'f OF DETERMINATIONS FOR LAFCO 2000-11.4 and ILAFCO 2000-18-0--SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENTS TO THE CITIES OF PALM DESERT AND IA QUINTA 1. THE PRESENT AND PLANNED LAND USES IN THE AREA INCLUDING AG ICUI TURAL AND OPEN PACE USES: The reorganization site is vacant The remainder of the Bermuda Dunes area contains a mixture of residential uses ranging from multiple-family to large lot semi-rural residential, industrial and commercial uses, the Bermuda Dunes Airport and pockets of vacant land scattered throughout the area. The City of La Quinta has adopted the Sand Harbor Specific Plan within the reorganization area. The Specific Plan calls for a gated community of 379 single-family homes with cownon amenities. County plans allow single-family residential development on 9,000 square foot lots on this now vacant site. The City of Pahu Desert has not yet included the Bermuda Dunes area within its general plan. An upcoming general plan update will likely establish land use designations for the area. 2. THE PRESENT AND PROBABLE N Ell FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES IN THE AREA: Virtually no services are required on the reorganization site at this time. Development of the site as called for in the specific plan would require the full range of municipal services, such as sewer, water, recreation, and police and fire.protection. The remainder of Bermuda Dunes, being relatively urbanized, requires the full range of urban services over ,Huth of the area. Portions of Bermuda Dunes are on private septic systems and are anticipated to remain so. 3. THE PRESENT CAPACITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND ADEQUACY OF PUBLIC SE= c WHICH THE AGENCY PROVIDES OR IS AUTHORIZED TO PROVIDE: The reorganization area represents a relatively small expansion of La Quinta's service area, Existing facilities and services are adequate to provide service to the area. The City of Palm Desert provides a very high level of services to its residents. The largely inhabited area of Bermuda Dunes, however, would place a substantial demand on some services the City currently provides. Although the County provides public safety services to the City by contract,the contracted levels of service are higher than those provided in the unincorporated area. In order to maintain its current officer to population ratio of approximately 1.5 per 1,000,the city would have to add about nine officers. A 1995 analysis prepared for the City indicated,based on historical call information,five additional officers would be sufficient to serve the area. While basic fire protection service will be provided from the same facilities regardless of annexation, the City also provides a paramedic service to its residents. The City has made it clear,however,that it will not support annexation until the area can support the additional cost for these service levels. 4. THE EXISTENCE OF ANY SOCIAL OR ECONOMIC COMMUN—TEKS OF INTEREST IN THE AREA: The Bermuda Dunes Community Council and the Bermuda Dunes Community Association both support the placement of the entire Bermuda Duties area into the Palm Desert SOI. .An advisory election conducted in the area indicated a preference for eventual annexation to Palm Desert. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION• 1485 SPRUCE STREET,SUITE J •RIVERSIDE, r:A 92507�2445 PHONE(909)369-0631 FAX(909)369-8479 Received Sep-27-2000 09:37am From-909 369 8479 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 011 I ' • 1 1 1 . rt is,�, ish ree: / I • 4 t_�`9"3' ' r �,sy ;�s�W~`�t« x"�+''l�iy..C+�+ Pii 1"t'' >'� a • #Srrtrti hzs�w� kazr`> F�. r�F��'` Lam `•. , t � a .K„ `" a '� F�1AYv • ® i - � : Y��,}�yp-nIt1Y+:�gry.�'nv u.t'K: IT3iawiC^S�,a_..c 'M 'm y3 4�M 'k K v�.Hr,,i3 t v{c• ,z `i tt • �\\u^* "^ ua. Y ✓�. �4 ����� '�"'ri acl'i xc�vhSW f l°M''CC .M E, t4 \i ,.`�Fµ /_ ■, .�a at ma y. /�r4 dd �� �°r'a e '^ ! YI 4 • i ro �� � M'�o K�S Er'��.L"� �� 4¢� , �tzvey JSC'tm 11 r r a r 4tS • - � 1 • • � � • 1 1 1 J • ' • 1 1 1 : r h 4'- ��i' •I p ' J 'fa X J ,��,>c x`r$'1'vCi � k x �iS yyG Js .> N4 5; r� h ''uti sr,p14 r %� �.��� LrZ N; �Y5 I fJ�aJ}i�b � { 5 rr �^ c 1 Pr: i i G S r}'V'". i �. .�. W't' r�'h< r r yt 6fk�`n ilrr yrrF1 .l ;tit ! ����rill fF"x"'�3t L •srJ �Y�.^r{ ^ trY�.�i}'i" � �.rfi. .e.t�', a °cy t> t 1 4 .s a 3lr F • � � � "L zt'e ��.'�'�t4 rs-s �Y • �r * �j W i sr..ram•..-yw,�l! Yt Yhy `.0 krR � i i ♦1�I V�{ ! J� x � �J i • ,� r � `xr Y •�'Y 1 N •.!` Ill ` M 1) I. .a ��_ i t + sSsc'z A'r„ ."rr a� •a Z =+T. —� nrr-r:.lr—�14�i� e5 .Artie t � � x -} • � F> Ii r ( fir } N. L�r r S Jr+ 5 fa • L ji Lyj • A • �4�CInL:L.�: . . CIIY 01 P 0 1 M OESERi 73-5t0 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-o6i i FAX: 760 340-0574 civrhall @ia.nn<om.com OFFICE OF THE MAYOR CD O o a a �rn July 31, 2000 �o I ors m 2r M x 22 m S = n o N L7 ivir. Gcofgc Spiliotis ti rn O 'L Executive Officer w =� LAFCO 1485 Spruce Street, Suite J Riverside, California 92507 RE: ENDORSEMENT OF REQUEST FOR SPHERE OF INFLUENCE Dear Mr. Spiliotis: At its meeting of July 13, 2000, the Bermuda Dunes Community Council approved by a 5-0 vote the filing of an application with LAFCO for the placement of the community of Bermuda Dunes into the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. It is our understanding that an application is being prepared on behalf of the Bermuda Dunes Community Association and will be forthcoming. The City of Palm Desert's City Council supports the request of the Bermuda Dunes Community Council and urges LAFCO to expedite the application process. BUF RDA. CRITES MAYOR BAC/JCF:wjm i� October 24 , 1991 TO: LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION FROM: GEORGE SPILIOTIS, EXECUTIVE OFFICER PAT BOWLER, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE OFFICER SUBJECTS: 1. LAFCO 90-115-4--SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT- CITY OF LA QUINTA AND CITY OF INDIO � 2 . LAFCO 90-120-4--SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT-CITY(� OF PALM DESERT ` 3 . LAFCO 91-19-4--SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT 7 AND CONCURRENT ANNEXATION 6 TO CITY OF LA QUINTA PROPOSALS: This report addresses three related proposals as follows: 1. The City of La Quinta proposes the amendment of its existing sphere of influence (SOI) by 5, 104 acres. The affected territory is located immediately north of its existing corporate boundaries extending from Fred Waring Drive northerly beyond Interstate 10 up to Avenue 36. North of I- 10, Sections 5 and portions of Sections 6 and 8 are within the existing SOI of the City of Indio, as adopted by the Commission in 1974. 2. By petition of affected landowners, the Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee proposes an amendment to the City of Palm Desert's existing SOI by 2,205 acres. The proposal encompasses Washington Avenue east to Jefferson Avenue and I- 10 north to Fred Waring Drive. 3. This proposal, submitted by the City of La Quinta, proposes annexation of 156 acres of uninhabited territory to the City of La Quinta for municipal purposes. The property is located RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 3403 TENTH STREET, SUITE 620 • RIVERSIDE, CA 92501-3676 PHONE (714) 369-0631 FAX(714) 369-8479 fir LAFCO 90-115-4, Page 2 October 24 , 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4 , LAFCO 91-19-4 on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive, contiguous on two sides to La Quintals northern boundary and also adjacent to Annexation J3, approved by the Commission in January 1989. The proposal is not currently within any city's sphere of influence. A concurrent request for a sphere amendment was received in addition to the sphere proposals described above. LEGAL REOUIREMENTs: Both sphere of influence proposals have met all legal filing requirements. The maps and legal descriptions were approved by the County Surveyor on February 19 and March 18, 1991, respectively. The Cities, acting as lead agencies for California Environmental Quality Act purposes, conducted environmental assessments resulting in the filing of a negative declaration for each proposal. The annexation proposal has met all legal filing requirements. The map and legal description were approved by the County Surveyor on June 3 , 1991. The City has conducted an environmental assessment. ' which resulted in the filing of a Negative Declaration (attached to this report) . SPHERE ANALYSIS: SPHERE OF INFLUENCE CRITERIA: A sphere is a tool available to the Commission, applicants, and interested parties for evaluating changes of organization, preventing future duplication of services, and to provide public agencies a geographic base for service and facilities planning for their ultimate probable physical boundaries. Government Code Section 56425 sets out four factors for which the Commission must consider and make a written statement of determinations as follows: 1. THE PRESENT AND PLANNED LAND USES IN THE AREA, INCLUDING AGRICULTURAL AND OPEN-SPACE LANDS: Territory south of Interstate 10 is located within the Bermuda Dunes Sub-Area-Riverside County Lower Coachella Valley Land Use Planning Area. The County General Plan states the Bermuda Dunes community consists primarily of Category II (Urban) and Category III (Rural) residential land uses. The County Registrar reports 1,977 registered voters within these southerly boundaries. The community is centered around the Bermuda Dunes Country Club, a 27-hole golf course, club house and attendant facilities; and the Bermuda Dunes Airport (primarily private RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 3403 TENTH STREET, SUITE 620 • RIVERSIDE. CA 92501-3676 I'Hr,'CF: 17:4` 369 's31 • FAX (7141 359 8479 • LAFCO 90-115-4, Page 3 October 24 , 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4, LAFCO 91-19-4 airplane use) . Primary land uses around the airport are single-family residences. Portions of residential developments (e.g. , Bermuda Golf Club Estates) are gated. Several condominium and apartment complexes are also present. Approximately 200,000 square feet of commercial (along Washington and Country Club Drive) and industrial development located primarily along Country Club Drive are contained within Bermuda Dunes. A substantial number of parcels are still unimproved. The City of La Quinta states it would retain present land use and zoning designations assigned by the County. Future annexations would be subject to pre-zoning as required by LAFCO. Territory north of interstate 10 is also located within the Riverside County Lower Coachella Valley Land Use Planning Area. Much of the land is unimproved at this time. Scattered residential units and some agricultural uses are present. The County Registrar reports 207 registered voters within these northerly boundaries. The Riverside County Planning Commission recommended approval of the Del Webb Sun City Palm Springs project. The project, proposing 5,800 homes within 1,575 acres, would expand beyond the La Quinta proposal including a majority of Section 30. County Planning advises it will be an all-seniors, gated residential project, including some commercial development along I-10, a recreation center, golf courses and serviced by private roads. The County Board of Supervisors approved the proposal on September 10 and it is expected to break ground for construction of the golf course within the next month. A majority of Sections 5,6 and 8 are presently within the City of Indio's SOI. Also within this northerly region, Section 29, immediately northeast of the Sun City Palm Springs project, is the Adams 34 Ranch Specific Plan currently being held in abeyance at the request of the landowner. This proposed development is not a part of the proposal. 2 . THE PRESENT AND PROBABLE NEED FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES IN THE AREA: With a present estimated population of 3,000 within territory both north and south of I-10 and a projected population growth exceeding 11,000 within the next ten years due to approved development plans, the need for public facilities and services is evident. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 3403 TENTH STREET. SUITE 620 • RIVERSIDE. CA 92501.3676 PHONE (7141 369 0631 FAX (714) 369-8479 L I I'. LAFCO 90-115-4, Page 4 October 24, 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4, LAFCO 91-19-4 south of I-10: At present, the County provides extended levels of service to landowners within territory south of I-10 through annual assessments paid into County Service Areas 26 for lighting and parkway maintenance and CSA 121 for lighting. On-going consideration by the Bermuda Dunes Community Council for, among other services, higher levels of road improvements for traffic and safety purposes and landscape maintenance services is underway. Of primary concern is the question of financing. The County has established an 86-acre redevelopment project called the Palm Desert County Club Vicinity along Washington Avenue. Portions of the project area fall within the SOI of Palm Desert and Indian Wells. The City of La Quinta has expressed concern for development standards along Washington Street as it serves as a visible gateway for the City. Of primary concern are provisions for ample landscaping and set- back requirements. Specific public improvement programs and objectives of the County Redevelopment Project Area include expansion of existing library facilities, a proposed elementary school, construction of a recreational center, traffic signalization, flood control, drainage, water and sewer systems and encouragement of residential development opportunities located easterly of Washington Avenue on both sides of 42nd Avenue. North of I-109 With the Riverside County Board of Supervisor's approval of the Del Webb Sun City Palm Springs project, a total of 5,800 homes on 1,575 acres over a ten-year build-out period, population within the general vicinity will quadruple. Probable traffic and circulation impacts will be substantial, primarily around Washington Avenue and Varner Road. Impacts to Washington Avenue, an 110-foot arterial, and Varner road, a secondary 88-foot road, will require realignment. According to County Planning staff, coordination with CALTRANS and other agencies including the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, will occur during Step 2 of the project. The overall territory lies within Riverside County Circulation Study Area 8. Recognizing the Board of Supervisors' administrative planning policy concerning its recognition of SOI's for planning purposes, the City of Indio, in an advisory capacity could, as any other interested agency or individual, comment on this major development project. However, it can be said that the Washington Avenue Interchange traveling south is more readily identified with the City of La Quinta as it leads to its City RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION - 3403 TENTH STREET, SUITE 620 - RIVERSIDE. CA 92501-3676 nt;on :^ f7l 4l Irn 'r. I . 1',4X f7141 369 S479 C LAFCO 90-115-4, Page 5 October 24, 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4 , LAFCO 91-19-4 Hall, the Plaza La Quinta Shopping Center and other urban centers within the nucleus of La Quinta and, to a lesser extent, the City of Palm Desert, however, there is no point of contiguity at this time. If the Commission approves Annexation 28 to Palm Desert as proposed, approximately one- eighth linear mile of contiguity, along the westerly right-of- way of Washington Avenue, will be established. Land Use standards within the County General Plan indicate within affected territory north of I-10 fire facilities are not presently available to service the proposed development. As determined by the County Fire Department, Category I (Heavy Urban, II (Urban) and V (Planned Community) projects may be required to contribute to the improvement of fire protection services including such measures as: dedication of a fire station site; construction of a new station; provisions of new equipment or upgrading existing equipment, etc. 3 . THE PRESENT CAPACITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND ADEQUACY OF PUBLIC SERVICES WHICH THE AGENCY PROVIDES OR IS AUTHORIZED TO PROVIDE• In the event of a proposed annexation, the affected cities of Palm Desert, La Quinta or Indio would be required to detail service levels. Each agency either contracts for or provides its service requirements directly. The Cities of La Quinta and Palm Desert contract with the County of Riverside Sheriff's Department and Fire Department/CDF for law enforcement and fire protection services. Facilities for these services would remain essentially the same. Discussions with the County Sheriff's Department disclosed that both agencies contract for service levels exceeding one officer per 1,000 population. The location of present structural fire protection service--County Fire Station No. 31 in Bermuda Dunes--would not alter under either agency. Among other services provided, the City of Indio provides its own law enforcement (exceeding one sworn officer per 1,000) and structural fire protection from three different stations (the closest approximately three miles away at Jackson Street) and animal control services. As the Commission is aware, establishment of a SOI does not change service levels or current services providers. All present services and providers of those services, such as Riverside County Sheriff's Department for law enforcement, County Fire Protection, County Planning and County Building and Safety will continue as provided. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 3403 TEN-M STREET, SUITE 620 • RIVERSIDE. CA 92501-3676 PHONE (714) 369 0631 FAX (714) 369 8479 t I LAFCO 90-115-4, Page 6 October 24, 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4, LAFCO 91-19-4 4. THE EXISTENCE OF ANY SOCIAL OR ECONOMIC COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST IN THE AREA: South of I-10: The area is urbanizing at rates commensurate with other urbanizing centers within Riverside County. In recognition of this and its need for comprehensive planning and the community's desire for involvement, the Bermuda Dunes Community Council was recently formed to communicate its concerns to the County and other governmental agencies. Several years ago, members of the community explored the possibility of incorporation; however, these efforts have been abandoned due to infeasible fiscal projections. Submitted to LAFCO have been numerous petitions or letters in support and opposition for any of the above proposals; as well as those expressing preference for no change in their present no-SOI status. Due to the advisory nature of these documents, tabulations were not compiled, however, samplings are attached to this report. Additionally, the Bermuda Dunes Community Council is currently collecting responses to a recently conducted mail survey and is planning to communicate results to the Commission prior to its October 24 public hearing. The City of La Quinta states the site is within a logical growth pattern for the City and recommends the establishment of a Land Use Advisory Committee comprised of citizens within Bermuda Dunes if the Commission approves the subject proposal and any subsequent annexations. La Quinta is contiguous to Bermuda Dunes along its entire northern boundary. As the Commission is aware, a 48-acre annexation (LAFCO 88-91-4-- ANNEXATION 3 TO CITY OF LA QUINTA) north of Fred Waring Drive was approved in 1989. The annexation merged a portion of Bermuda Dunes within the City of La Quinta and is now a fully built-out residential development actually receiving municipal services provided by the City. An affected landowner immediately west is also proposing annexation of approximately 156 acres to the City of La Quinta (LAFCO 91-19-4) at this hearing date. The landowner is processing a commercial and residential plot plan with the City and desires a higher level of municipal services. The City of Palm Desert's recent annexation of Section 11 (LAFCO 90-95-4--ANNEXATION 27 TO PALM DESERT) was approved by the Commission in the fall of 1990 yet remains undeveloped territory due in part to prevailing economic conditions. The most recent annexation proposal to the City, on this month's agenda, includes largely developed portions of Sections 1, 2 and 3 to the City of Palm Desert immediately RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 3403 TEN"ITI STREET, SUITE 620 • RIVERSIDE. CA 92501-3676 PHONE 1714) 369 0631 FAA f714) 369-?479 LAFCO 90-115-4, Page 7 October 24 , 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4 , LAFCO 91-19-4 south of I-10. If the Commission approves the proposal, the city's frontage along I-10 will double. Additionally, in late 1989, the Commission placed portions of Sections 14 and 15 within the City of Palm Desert's SOI (the fully built-out Palm Desert Country Club) thereby expanding the City's SOI by an additional 977 acres or 1.53 square miles. The presence of the City of Palm Desert to the west of Bermuda Dunes is evolving towards Washington; however, upon approval of the aforementioned annexation, Palm Desert will have only about 600 feet of contiguity with Bermuda Dunes. Monterey Avenue's intersection with I-10 guides traffic into the heart of the City's commercial district, E1 Paseo, intersects with Highway ill and becomes Highway 74 within the heart of Palm Desert. In consideration of this factor, predominate identification with Palm Desert exists at the Monterey Avenue intersection at i-10, rather than Washington Avenue. Potential direct access to Interstate 10 is perceived as an important economic privilege and necessity enjoyed by most desert municipalities--Indian Wells is an exception by choice and the City of Desert Hot Springs to the north is currently undertaking this goal. The benefits include high visibility, potentially valuable commercial development, and direct influence and regulation of strategic land use decisions. A significant number of planning and land use decisions are yet to be made over the next ten years. The City of La Quinta states it intends to recognize the Bermuda Dunes community through land use committees similar to other recognized communities within the City's boundaries such as PGA West, La Quinta County Club, Santa Rosa Cove and Indian Springs. North of I-10: Territory north of Interstate 10, sought by the City of La Quinta only, has been approved by the County for the Del Webb Sun City Palm Springs Specific Plan. It is highly probable that a number of social and economic impacts, such as the quadrupling of population in the vicinity of the Bermuda Dunes community, will create significant circulation/traffic impacts. There are no fire protection facilities presently available to service the area requiring mitigation funding for new fire protection facilities. Increased law enforcement requirements will also be required for commercial development as well as overall protection for the walled residential community areas with private security patrols. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 3403 TENTH STREET, SUITE 620 • RIVERSIDE, CA 92501-3676 PHONE (7l4) 3690631 FAR (714) 3698479 • i� I A LAFCO 90-115-4, Page 8 October 24, 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4 , LAFCO 91-19-4 COMMENTS FROM AFFECTED LOCAL AGENCIES: CITY OF INDIO: The City of Indio opposes the proposed amendment, approximately 1, 580 acres, to its sphere of influence by the City of La Quinta. Attached under Appendix, the Commission will find- a copy of an executed inter-agency agreement regarding self-imposed annexation boundary limitations between the two affected agencies dated May 1986. Specifically, the City of Indio has agreed to neither initiate nor accept a SOI or annexation west of Jefferson Avenue within the affected vicinity; the City of La Quinta has agreed to neither initiate nor accept a SOI or annexation east of Jefferson Avenue within the affected vicinity. Although the Commission is not bound by this agreement, in light of it, the City of La Quinta's proposal remains consistent with the agreement' s intent as the subject proposal does not overlap territory east of Jefferson Avenue. PALM DESERT• In summary, the City of Palm Desert's position is that it supports the community's ultimate decision. RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT: The Indio Station states it supports the logical placement of Bermuda Dunes within La Quinta. The geographical location supports the alignment from a service-delivery perspective. ANNEXATION ANALYSIS• LAND USE• The site of the proposed annexation to La Quinta is currently vacant with the exception of a medical office building on 2.8 acres along Washington Street. County zoning designations on the vacant portions of the site are R-3-2000 along Washington and R-1-12000 on the remainder. The designations allow for multiple-family and single-family residential uses, respectively. The City has prezoned the property general commercial on the corner of Washington and Fred Waring, R-2 (multi-family residential) along Washington, and R-1 (single-family residential) along Fred Waring. The City's prezoning designations are generally consistent with current County zoning. The community of Bermuda Dunes is immediately to the north of the proposal. Bermuda Dunes has a mix of single- and multiple-family residential and commercial uses. RNERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 3403 TENTH STREET• SUITE 620 • RIVERSIDE• CA 92501-3676 I PHONE 17141 369 0631 FAX (714! 359 8479 LAFCO 90-115-4, Page 9 October 24 , 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4, LAFCO 91-19-4 PLAN OF SERVICES: In support of the application the City has submitted a Plan of Services which is attached to this report. The following summarizes that plan: Fire Protection and Law Enforcement: Fire, paramedic, and police services are provided through contract with Riverside County. These agreements will be amended to include this area. These services are funded in the General Fund. According to Sheriff's representatives, the current contract with the County for sheriff services provides for approximately 1. 2 deputies for 1, 000 population. The existing level of service in Bermuda Dunes is approximately .9 deputies per 1, 000. Public Roads: The City maintains public streets, which includes street sweeping. This would include Fred Waring Drive and part of Washington Street. The owner/developer has the option of developing the property with public or private streets. Flood Control: The Coachella Valley Water District has overall responsibility for flood control. Code Enforcement: Code enforcement is the responsibility of the Building and Safety Department. The City of La Quinta has made code enforcement/animal control a high priority. The City has adopted and enforced strong public nuisance codes, which include regulations pertaining to lot cleaning, debris and junk removal, animal control, abandoned vehicles and illegal dumping. There is strong community support and commitment for these regulations which apply to all areas of the City. In La Quinta, aesthetics are of major importance. COMMENTS FROM AFFECTED AGENCIES/INTERESTED PARTIES: County Transportation Department: As proposed, the annexation area includes approximately 1300 feet of Darby Road from Washington Street east through the annexation area. A 3500- foot segment of Darby would remain isolated within unincorporated territory. The Department has suggested that all of Darby Road be included within the annexation. Alternatively, it may be appropriate for the Commission to place a condition on the annexation requiring the City of La Quinta to maintain the full length of Darby until such time as future annexations occur. Bermuda Dunes: Approximately 900 residents and property owners within Bermuda Dunes have submitted form letters in opposition to this annexation. The primary argument is that RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION - 3403 TENTH STREET, SUITE 620 - RIVERSIDE. CA 92501-3676 PHONE (714) 369 0631 FAX (714) 369-8479 C LAFCO 90-115-4, Page 10 October 24, 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4, LAFCO 91-19-4 the property should be left unincorporated until Bermuda Dunes has had an opportunity to incorporate. The property is seen by residents as a future source of tax revenues for the approximate 3. 5 square-mile future city. BUMMARYs - The City of La Quinta proposes an amendment to its existing sphere of influence to include 5, 104 acres both north and south of Interstate 10. - Most of the affected territory south of I-10 is presently a non-sphere area generally known as Bermuda Dunes; however, approximately one-third, located northerly of Interstate 10, is presently designated as the City of Indio's sphere of influence. - The Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee proposes to amend the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert by 2,205 acres- entirely south of I-10. - The City of La Quinta seeks logical growth patterns and efficient service delivery to the Bermuda Dunes community and territory north of I-10. - The City of Palm Desert essentially supports the desires of the community of Bermuda Dunes. - The City of Indio is opposed to any changes to its sphere of influence established in 1974; however, an inter-agency agreement, voluntarily entered into by the Cities of Indio and La Quinta in 1986, indicates that within territory north of I- 10, their recognized demarcation line is Jefferson Street. - The affected territory proposed for annexation is largely undeveloped and legally uninhabited. - The annexation site is contiguous to the City of La Quinta along two sides and, upon approval of a sphere of influence amendment, will be consistent with the sphere of influence of the City and all other affected local agencies. - A large number of Bermuda Dunes property owners oppose the annexation on the grounds that annexation of the area would inhibit future incorporation attempts. RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION - 3403 TEN M STREET. SUITE 620 • RIVERSIDE. CA 92501-3676 ::,qV r'141 ?rn nf?I F.'_X f7'.41 1r9.k479 } LAFCO 90-115-4, Page 11 October 24, 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4, LAFCO 91-19-4 CONCLUSIONS: As defined by State law, a sphere of influence serves as a planning tool only and does not transfer legislative or regulatory responsibilities or rights from the County until such time as a separate application for annexation is approved by the Commission. The affected registered voters and landowners within proposed annexation boundaries will have the opportunity to determine whether territory is ultimately annexed to a neighboring municipality. At this time, due to the geographic location of the Bermuda Dunes community and other factors as outlined above, the City of La Quinta is the most logical provider of municipal services to the residents and landowners because of critical service-related concerns. The greatest impacts created by land use decisions in the area both north and south of I-10 will undoubtedly surround Washington Avenue's intersection with I-lO--primarily identified with La Quinta to the south as it guides traffic into the nucleus of that City. Although all surrounding cities will be impacted, the City of Indio's primary identification along I-10 exists at Monroe, Jackson and Auto Center interchanges; and, the City of Palm Desert's primary identification along I-10 exists at the Monterey Avenue intersection. Either by direct contiguity with its corporate territory or potential access via its sphere of influence, every city in the Coachella Valley is afforded the opportunity of freeway frontage along I-10 with the exceptions of Indian Wells and La Quinta. Indian Wells has not expressed recent interest in gaining access to I-10. That City currently has approximately 3.5 miles of frontage along Highway Ill. La Quinta has approximately two miles of frontage along that commercial corridor, less than any other city in Coachella Valley (excluding Desert Hot Springs) . In order to achieve an equitable distribution of economic opportunities among the desert cities, La Quinta should be allowed access to I-10 frontage. Staff acknowledges that many residents currently oppose inclusion within the Sphere of Influence of La Quinta and annexation. It should also be recognized, however, that annexation north to I-10 cannot and will not occur without the support of the community of Bermuda Dunes. Inclusion of Bermuda Dunes within La Quintals sphere of influence will afford the City the opportunity to plan for facilities, services and land uses in the area. More importantly, it provides the City an opportunity to demonstrate to residents whether or not it can meet the needs of the community. If the Commission grants La Quinta's sphere request, the City is encouraged to support the Bermuda Dunes community by providing RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 3403 TENTH STREET. SUITE 620 • RIVERSIDE. CA 92501-3676 PHONE (714) 369 0631 FAX (714) 369 8479 LAFCO 90-115-4, Page 12 October 24, 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4, LAFCO 91-19-4 regular and systematic information as has been done by other municipalities facing similar circumstances. As noted earlier in this report, most of the opposition to La Quinta's proposals submitted to date is based on the argument that Bermuda Dunes should be left intact until it can successfully incorporate. Community residents have acknowledged that a preliminary incorporation feasibility study was performed. The finding of that study, according to one former incorporation proponent, was that incorporation would not be feasible now or in the near future. Additionally, as a general statement of policy, staff cannot see any advantage in creating an additional city in the area given the proximity of existing municipalities capable of providing services to the relatively small area. Decisions regarding spheres of influence or changes of organization should not be adversely impacted solely to preserve the uncertain prospect of future incorporation. Staff recommends the Commission support the City of La Quinta's sphere amendment proposal including consolidation of the Del Webb Sun City Palm Springs Specific Plan, within Section 30, with the proviso that the Commission initiate a special SOI review within three to five years if significant steps toward a community supported annexation have not occurred. This stipulation would encourage the City to demonstrate its leadership, become pro-active in its efforts to establish dialogue and an objective working relationship with the community of Bermuda Dunes. However, it should be clarified that this condition would not preclude landowners or registered voters from processing an application for either annexation or incorporation in any way. Staff also recommends the Commission support the proposed annexation. RECOMMENDATIONS: Based upon the factors outlined above, IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Commission: 1. Find that the Cities of La Quinta and Palm Desert, as lead agencies, have adopted Negative Declarations for the spheres of influence amendments and the annexation and have complied with CEQA and all appropriate State guidelines; 2. Adopt the Statement of Determinations concerning the sphere of influence criteria outlined above pursuant to Section 56425; 3. Deny LAFCO 9 0-12 0-4--SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT-CITY OF PALM DESERT; RNERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 3403 TEN7H STREET, SUITE 620 • RIVERSIDE. CA 92501-3676 r:•.i_...;. 1.1 .1 ^11' r:, rev •�._, .�::.a_—: A LAFCO 90-115-4 , Page 13 October 24, 1991 LAFCO 90-120-4 , LAFCO 91-19-4 4 . Approve LAFCO 90-115-4--SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT-CITY OF LA QUINTA AND CITY OF INDIO as shown on the attached Exhibit labelled Staff Recommendation; 5. Find the annexation is legally uninhabited; 6. Find the annexation is consistent with the sphere of influence of the City of La Quinta and the spheres of influence of all other affected local agencies; 7 . Approve LAFCO 91-19-4—ANNEXATION 6 TO CITY OF LA QUINTA; 8. Find the proposed annexation has written consent from 100 percent of the property owners; and, 9 . Designate the City of La Quinta as conducting authority and authorize the City to proceed without notice, hearing or election. Respectfu3iliotiits ted, w ` 9�CA4�� Geo g Pat Bowler Exe i e Officer Assistant Executive Officer RIVERSIDE_ LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION • 3403 TENTH STREET. SUITE 620 • RIVERSIDE. CA 92501-3676 PHONE (714) 369 0631 • FAX (714) 369-E479 MAPS 1 z � u 0 u t a a. pp eo v� v� �aow oN C4 � 0 0)NI SVM 001 OOP ,- 4) ti tn N O V sCf• .� .J T . t r. Qk1ytsIX T.�ty r .i •.�. �. r+i f I r I 5 _ _ + • n� i ' n i • iw it f PROPOSED SPHERES OF INFLUENCE LAFCO 90-115-4 Sphere of Influence Amendments Cities of La Quinta & Indio LAFCO 90-120-4 Sphere of Influence Amendment City of Palm Desert LAFCO 91-19-4 Annexation 6 to the City of La Quinta Legend , FRO ci LA Quinta ty sed Amendment to La Quinta's SOI — ®I City of Palm Desert' (� •�•� Existing Palm Desert SOI a i - "'�; Proposed Amendment to Palm Deseds SOI / . City of Indio 216 ® Existing Indio S6I sinus —ed r - I — r r y _ i L �:k U .r - 1. i i 7/IP //// :y�. i, ///,/ ,//,///�//,///// //////////l�,l�,���/ /�,�,�1/l�,f/i //�/�f/R! �••<•\':'::':': ,. .•.':':': .• ` `I i\i1.a i�InC.�(_/1�'�,��• STAFF RECOMMENDATION LAFCO 90-115-4 Sphere of Influence Amendments Cities of La Quinta & Indio LAFCO 90-120-4 Sphere of Influence Amendment City of Palm Desert LAFCO 91-19-4 Annexation 6 to the City of La Quints Legend \ ® City of Palm Desert , EWEN Palm Desert Sphere of Influence N City of La QuintaI- - =1 10. La Quinta Sphere of Influence -y City of Indio • • Indio Sphere of Influence i ( Specific Plan 281 Del Webb >''>'S :>'«":racue ' ® Annexation 6 to La Quints —� = LAFCO 9 1-19-4 I - "J 1 I t i i I FIT gib= L I JE MW i I` �1� - 1 'r'i l' r• r 9 r, r r''l''r y l r/'i'l it r'/'r+1111/ �'iyr r',r /',r+r irir4r',r'irir'iri'r'i'ri r { { 4:•'r}{ r: , :'-' , -i'=r,i ir j%+ji�i�j i/jrii�i'i'i�i i��i'/'i/i'r i/'i'i�'i it ii+j il�i�i�'i�r�r�d .�t•:•:•:•:1:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:�` •r :.i' :i is,�;_.- i�•',:'-�. . :� : t 1•:: �:i�:`i� ::,.rj%�,�i:•;�=:" LAFCO 91-19-4--ANNEXATION NO. 6 TO CITY OF LA QUINTA PLAN FOR THE PROVISION OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES 1 LAF`OJ 91-19-4 RESPONSES TO SERVICES IDENTIFIED IN COLUMN 2 Plan for the Provision of Municipal Services (Government Code Section 56653 The City of La Quinta will provide City management; Planning and Community Development; Building and Safety; Public Works including engineering, and street and park maintenance; Public Safety including Code Enforcement and supplemental public safety programs; library; and Senior Center. 1. Fire, paramedic, and police services are provided through contract with Riverside County. These agreements will be amended to include this area. The above noted services are funded in the General Budget (refer to Fiscal Impact Analysis). 2. Public Roads - The City maintains public streets, which includes street sweeping. This would include Fred Waring Drive and part of Washington Street. The owner/developer has the option of developing the property with public or private streets. 3. Flood Control - The Coachella Valley Water District has overall responsibility for flood control. The City currently requires developments to retain storm water on site. In the future, the City will have a City storm water system to deal with storm water. Future cost is unknown at this time. The water district has indicated that they have the capacity and willingness to provide water service to the site. 4. Code Enforcement - Code Enforcement is the responsibility of the Building and Safety Department. The City of La Quinta has made Code Enforcement/Animal Control a high priority. We have adopted and enforced strong public nuisance codes, which include regulations pertaining to lot cleaning, debris and junk removal, animal control, abandoned vehicles and illegal dumping. We have strong community support and commitment for these regulations which apply to all areas of our City. In La quinta aesthetics are of major importance (refer to Fiscal Impact Analysis). 5. Water - Water service will be provided by the Coachella Valley Water District. This will require the extension of the water main to the property at time of development. The water district has indicated that they have the capacity and willingness to provide water service to the site. The owner/developer will be responsible for financing this extension. 6. Gas - Gas service can be provided to the site by Southern California Gas Company. The owner/developer would finance the extension. 7. Telephone - Phone service is available from General Telephone. The owner/developer would finance any extension charges. 8. Waste Disposal - Waste Management of the Desert can provide trash pick-up to the site. Future residences would pay for the service which will be assessed on their tax bill. DOCJH.016 a 9. Sewer - Sewer services will be provided by the Coachella Valley Water District. This will require the extension of the sewer main to the property at time of development. The water district has indicated that they have the capacity and willingness to provide sewer service to the site. The owner/developer will be responsible for financing this extension. 10. Electric - Electrical service will be provided by Imperial Irrigation District and financed by the owner/developer at time of property development. 12. In summary, City services can be to the property. The owner/developer will be required to finance public improvements at the time of development (refer to Fiscal Impact Analysis). The owner/developer has the financial responsibility of improving Fred Waring Drive and Washington Street along the property frontage to City standards (which includes street lights) as identified in the General Plan and any interior streets. DOCJH.016 i COMMENTS FROM AFFECTED AGENCIES 1 2. k CITY OF CALIFORNIA : c �. 100 CIVIC CENTER MALL • P.O. DRAWER 1798 INDIO, CALIFORNIA IW Q 22 j��� ^• ? April 19, 1991 Local Agency Formation Commission 3403 Tenth St. , Ste. 620 Riverside, CA 92501-3676 Re: LAFCO 90-115-4 Ladies & Gentlemen of the Commission: On behalf of the City Council of the City of Indio, I wish to strongly protest the application by the City of La Quinta to amend the sphere of influence of Indio. Our protest is that La Quinta's sphere should not go north of Interstate 10 between Jefferson Street and Washington Street. The City of Indio's sphere of influence as presently adopted by LAFCO is the basis for our current active efforts to annex in the area west of Jefferson Street. In addition, our general plan update which we are preparing, includes the area between Jefferson Street and Washington Street, north of Interstate 10. These actions by the City of Indio, within the LAFCO adopted "sphere of influence", are consistent with the reason to have "spheres". The sphere is our opportunity to plan for the probable ultimate physical boundaries and service area of the City of Indio. Sincerely, I es H. FitzHenry M yor JHF:WMN:dt 1 CI �J o� G°��0� o 0 0 49 �� 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 April 1, 1991 Ms. Barbara Beegle Local Agency Formation Commission 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, California 92501-3676 Re: LAFCO NO. 90-115-4 Dear Ms. Beegle: A significant number of residents and property owners in a major portion of the area under consideration have expressed a desire to be placed in the City of Palm Desert's Sphere of Influence. They have felt strongly enough on the issue to submit an application and pay the appropriate filing fee. We believe that the area commonly referred to as Bermuda Dunes should be allowed to determine into whose sphere of influence they wish to be a part. We are also under the impression that the hearings to determine the Bermuda Dunes sphere question of Palm Desert or La Quinta would be heard simultaneously. If we are wrong, please let us know. Very truly BRUCE A. ALTMAN CITY MANAGER BAA/RAD/tm _ LAPCO 90-115-9 AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND THE CITY OF INDIO REGARDING FUTURE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND ANNEXATION BOUNDARIES WHEREAS, this agreement is made between the City of La Quinta (La Quinta) and the City of Indio (Indio) ; and WHEREAS, La Quinta and Indio desire to establish a reasonable and logical boundary for future sphere of influence and annexation considerations between the two cities; and WHEREAS, La Quinta and Indio intend to use such a line as a basis for requesting any new sphere of influence, modified sphere of influence, or annexation; IT IS HEREBY AGREED, AS FOLLOWS: 1 . A line is established, beginning at the intersection of Jefferson Street and Avenue 38 and ending at the intersection of Monroe Street and Avenue 56, as shown on the attached Exhibit "A" . 2 . La Quinta will neither initiate nor accept a sphere of influence or annexation east of the line described on Exhibit "A" . 3. Indio will neither initiate nor accept a sphere of influence or annexation west of the line described on Exhibit "A" . CITY OF LA QUINTA CITY OF INDIO i MAY Aj MAYOR DATE May 8 , 1986 DATE May 8 . 1986 ATTEST: ATTE CITY CLERK CITY CLERK AYES a 1 ` t a 1 Z O 1 ao Lu 'hT�RST�TP IL 1 H�QM n 1104 �0 z o. �1 Q, �1 W MILES AVENUE NI J w WESTWARD HO DR. STATE HIGHWAY III EXHIBIT "A" wl cc F • � 1 $ 1 cc LL ul W• AVENUE 50 r- W W Q F N z O rA O AVENUE 62 W cc NORTH W W O Q Z O 7 AVENUE 66 C.y. ._-LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION CDt4IISSICN 3403 TENTH SIFT, SUITE 620 a i r,� 1 Z P '' 1 01 RIVERSIDE, CA 92501-3676 TO: ❑ Assessor's Office LAFM No. 90-115-4 ❑ Planning Department PRDPOSAL SPHERE-0F II�'I Ah1EiNISITIFS 4F ❑ survey Department LA QUINTA AND INDIO County Counsel Flood Control FOEMMIED CN 3/20/91 ❑ Auditor-Controller RETURN TO LAFCD NO LATER 7W _/17/91 ❑ Environmental Health Registrar of Voters For IAFOO Use Carly J1 Palm Springs Unified Received Back on School District PIEASE PROVIDE YOUR COMMERM CN THE ABCNE PRDPOML CN THIS PACE. Number your comments to correspond to the paragraphs on the attached application form. April 8, 1991 Palm Springs Unified School District includes only a small portion of the expanded sphere of influence; that being the southeast corner of Section 36 (see attached map) . It is anticipated, however, that future development RECEIVED SUPERTNTFNDENT'S OFFICE M',22619:t Palm Snrin9s Unified Sch001 Olstrict activities which occur within the sphere as a whole will have a "spill-over" effect on District student population growth. In particular, future development in the sphere will create new employment and a ,subsequent increase in population, including school-age children, that extends outside the sphere of influence boundaries. Palm Springs Unified School District therefore needs to be kept apprised of proposed development activities within the expanded sphere of influence to plan for and mitigate any impacts these activities may have on schools within the District. David B. MacE an Director Facilities Planning & Development DBM:dd FROM INDIO SHERIFF R, 15. 1991 10101 NO, 1 P. 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY �� efiff COLS I11'RD, S1iERIFF S 1 � 82-695 DR. CARREON BLVD. • INDIO, CA 92201 • (619) 342 8990 October 15, 1991 Ms . Pat Bowler Local Agency Formation Commission 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 620 Riverside CA 92501-3676 Re : Sphere of Influence - La Quinta Dear Ms . Bowler: The Bermuda Dunes area currently receives police services from the Sheriff' s Department's Indio Station at an approximate ratio of between . 86 and .95 per 1 ,000 residents. The City of La Quinta contracts with the Sheriff for police services at a ratio of approximately 1 . 2 per 1 ,000 residents. Should the Bermuda Dunes area be annexed to the City of La Quinta it would become necessary to increase staffing to raise the level of service to the standard being held in La Quinta. Preliminary discussions with city officials indicate that this would not pose a problem for the city. My opinion is that this area, if it is annexed, should become a part of the City of La Quinta. Police services are currently provided by the Indio Station for both Bermuda Dunes and La Quinta. Additionally, the Del Webb pro5ect will also be served by the Indio Station. The geographical location of this community logically supports such an alignment to minimize police response times and for the general convenience of the citizenry. If I may be of further assistance , please do not hesitate to contact me . Sincerly, COIS BYRD, SHERIFF i ���~' . ROnald F. Aye, Lieutenant Indio Station CB : RD : ct J /T RIVERSIDE COUNTY t FIRE DEPARTMENT RIVERSIDE 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE • PERRIS. CALIFORNIA 92370 _ (714) 657-3183 GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF July 31, 1991 John Johnson N County Administrative Center _ 4080 Lemon, 12th Fl. Riverside, CA 92501 _ O Re: LAFCO 90-120-4 Sphere of Influence Amendment-City of Palm Desert. The Riverside County Fire Department has no objection to the proposal, but must note: A. "Myoma Dunes" water infrastructure is insufficient for planned high density fire defense needs. B. Annexation will reduce revenue available for on-going county fire services by over $500,000 annually. Glen J. Newman Count Fire Chief hief Fi D part Planner RHR:sk cc: LAFCO ATEq ESTABLISHED IN IV IB AS A PUBLIC AGENCY J%T I ��STRICt COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT:_ POST OFFICE BOX TO58• COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE(619)398261Y DIRECTORS OFFICERS TELUSCODEMAS,PRESIDENT THOMASE.LEVY,GENERAL MANAGER CHIEF ENGINEER RAYMOND R.RUMMONDS.VICE PRESIDENT BERNARDINE SUTTON,SECRETARY JOHN W.M[FADOEN OWEN McCODK ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER DOROTHY M.NICHOLS REDWINE AND SHERRILL.ATTORNEYS THEODORE J.FISH August 2, 1991 File: 1150.06 Local Agency A Formation Commission y 3403 loth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, California 92501 Gentlemen: Subject: Sphere of Influence Amendment, City of Palm Desert, LAFCO No. 90-120-4 We have reviewed sphere of influence amendment to City of Palm Desert and it is acceptable subject to the following provision: 1. New development within this area is subject to the hydrology mitigation measurements of the Mid-Valley Stormwater Project. These measures shall include on-site retention of the 100-year storm and payment of drainage fees or other participation in the financing of regional flood control facilities. If you have any questions please contact Joseph Cook, planning engineer, extension 292. Yours very truly, � Tom Levy General Manager-Chief Engineer JEC:gh/e82 cc: Stephen Smith 'City of Palm Desert 73-501 Fred Waring Drive Palm-Desert, California 92260 Robert Byron Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee 79-050 Avenue 42 Bermuda Dunes, California 92201 TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY RIVERSIDE COUNTY REDEVELOPM ENT AGENCY DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES PALM DESERT COUNTRY CLUB VICINITY Area Development Factors Redevelopment Programs Major Development Parcels-commercial, Business Incentives Program residential Public improvements Program Major Arterial Street-Washington Boulevard Housing Program Easy access to La Quints,Palm Desert, Indian Wells and Indio Close proximity to 1.10 Good residential neighborhood The Setting The redevelopment area in the Palm Desert Country Club vicinity consists of approximately 86 acres. The Project area generally encompasses the northeast,southeast and southwesterly quadrants of the Washington Street/42nd Avenue intersection. Portions of the Project are are included in the spheres of influence of La Quints, Palm Desert and Indian Wells. Representatives of Palm Desert and La Quints agree with the County of Riverside that the shopping center located in the Project area should be substantially rehabilitated and should continue as a shopping center. Representatives of La Quinta have voiced concerns regarding development standards for properties being developed along Washington Street, since this is a major entry into the City of La Quints. La Quinta officials would like future development to include ample landscaping and set back amenities. Development Opportunities Because of its location,the Project area offers two primary development opportunities. The first is the rehabilitation of the shopping center at the southwest corner of Washington Avenue and 42nd Avenue. Revitalization here would include expansion onto presently unused pads within the center. The second development opportunity lies on sites located easterly of Washington Avenue on both sides of 42nd Avenue. There is a total of about 25 acres of vacant and underutilized land in this area that is suitable for residential development. Redevelopment Agency Programs Business Incentives Program: The Redevelopment Agency will make agreements with individual businesses or developers to refund a portion of their property tax in order to promote new construction and revitalization efforts within the Project area. Public Improvements Program: Agency objectives specifically include revitalization of the existing shopping center and additional commercial development in the area. Specific objectives include expansion of the library facility in the Project area; construction of a recreational center; traffic signals;school facilities;flood control and drainage facilities;as well as water and sewer systems. Housing Program: In addition,the Agency will be taking part in programs to upgrade and increase the number of housing units for low and moderate income families in the vicinity. May 1988 y 0 �p U L � 42nd St i i i 0� Z ichi an r i 1 Avenue of the States ---_ Calif mia Dr Project Area Map PALM DESERT - - COUNTRY CLUB VICINITY aD 0 200' 600' 1000, 2000' or .,� o i V I Gary N. Cottrell Chief Administrative Officer Mischelle Zimmennan County Administrative Office Assistant CAO October S, 1991 Mr. George J. Spiliotis, Executive Officer Local Agency Formation Commission 3403 10th Street, Suite 620 Riverside, Ca 92501-3676 RE: LAFCO 91-19-4 Annexation 6 to City of La Quinta Dear Mr. Spiliotis: County of Riverside departments have reviewed the above referenced project and responding departments have stated no objections to the proposed annexation. This area of approximately 156 acres is primarily vacant with no residential population. For this reason the primary County services currently provided are Sheriff and Fire. Departmental comments are as follows: The Office of the Sheriff reports "minimal demand for services" in the annexation area. The Sheriff currently provides contract services to the City of La Quinta from the Sheriffs Indio sub-station. New development in this area will eventually require an increased level of law enforcement services which would be negotiated between the City and the Sheriff. County Fire receives structural fire tax in this area and the City of La Quinta and provides fire services to the City from two stations. A third fire station is being proposed near Washington Street and Highway 111. The annexation area is within a five minute fire response time from existing stations. The Transportation Department requests that any potential impacts that require traffic signalization and/or road improvements to roads remaining under County jurisdiction have adequate mitigation measures implemented by the City. Robert T. Anderson Administrative Center 4080 lemon Street • 12th Floor 0 Riverside, California 92501 • (714) 275-1100 0 FAX (714) 275-1105 The methodology and general fiscal assumptions used in the February 1991 Fiscal Impact Analysis appear to be generally sound. If annexation is approved, the County would still be required to continue provision of various county-wide public services, including court and support services, health and welfare services, and general County administration. The primary sources of revenue for funding these services are real property and sales taxes. Whether or not there will be sufficient revenue to cover projected County costs is dependent upon the fiscal assumptions applied to the City's development scenario described in the proposal. Based on the development proposal and application of current County expenditure multipliers, the development of the project area would result in an estimated net fiscal benefit to the County of approximately $24,000 per year at project buildout. In summary, the proposed annexation to the City and development of the project area would not have an adverse impact on the County. If you require additional information, contact me at 275-1144. Respectfully submitted, arty Wl Phipps Administrative Manager cc: Supervisor Corky Larson Richard Lashbrook Brad Hudson Robert T. Anderson Administrative Center 4W Lemon Street 0 12th Floor 0 Riverside. California 92501 0 (714) 275-1100 0 FAX (714) 275-1105 e OF wyE9�� COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE * TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, FRANKLIN E SHERKOW DiR w of Tnntpomtion - �7 'J LAFCO June 14, 1991 3403 loth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, Ca. 92501-3676 Attn: George Spiliotis Dear George; The Transportation Department's Operations office has raised concern over the proposed configuration of annexation no. 6 to the city of La Quinta (LAFCO 91-19-4) . Their concern centers around Darby Road. (County Maintained) . The current proposal only includes approximately 1300 feet of Darby Road, leaving approximately 3500 feet of the roads length to be maintained by the County. The Operations office has suggested that all of Darby Road be included within the City's annexation. Should you have any questions regarding this, or any other comment, please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely Markowles Survey Technician COL-N Y ADMPI-IIR.4TTT'E CENTER• PO bOX IODO• *C�'O LEMON 7.REFF•TT}i ROOF•RIVERSIDE.CALIFORN11 9230! 1INO °�-- RIVERSIDE COUNTY y ' FIRE DEPARTMENT c'ocxrr RIVERSIDE .a 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE • PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370 (714) 657-3183 GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF July 23, 1991 TO: John Johnson Administrative Manager RE: LAFCO 91-19-14--Sphere of Influence Amendment and Concurrent Annexation 6 to City of La Quinta Riverside County Fire Department has no objection to this proposal. Glen J. Newman County Fire Chi By: is hief Fire epart en Planner cc: LAFCO File RHR:sk I ANNEXATION INFORMATION Immediately afte. annexation we wil. The people of La Quints in establish a "Bermuda Dune: order to preserve their Committee" to advise ou: territorial integrity, to Planning Commission it provide local control, to reviewing the current ! preserve and enhance their County General Plan anc "quality of life" voted zoning designations. Q• overwhelmingly to i incorporate in 1982. The If deemed desirable a government of La Quint& has "Bermuda Dunes Special v worked diligently to Residential Zone" could be y' i achieve all these established goals. containing As a consequence, La Quinta specific development is a dynamic and standards such as Progressive desert city - dwelling/lot size, Cat. �S one of the fastest growing construction detailing and or fhlE� in California, setbacks. 1. PLANNING & ZONING 2• CODE ENFORCEMENT Y � � La pinta has made The City of La Quanta has commitment to its residentss made Code ^y� to be a well planned Enforcement/Animal Control community with strong a high priority. We have environmental, planning and adopted and enforce strong zoning regulations. We Public nuisance codes, ANNEXATION have adopted a hillside which include regulations conservation zone, a Dark Pertaining to lot cleaning, INFORMATION Sky Ordinance, and a debris and junk removal, Special Residential zone in animal control, abandoned the "old cove area" that vehicles and illegal requires tile roofs, dumping. we have strong minimum home size community support and attractive landscaping, commitment for these fencing and 2 car garages. regulations which apply to Quality and aesthetics are all areas of our City. In high among our priorities. La Quinta, aesthetics are We want La Quinta to be a of major importance. City that all will be proud ra w.uw of. 1{I{I{Nt}Y /� 4 I 3. STREETS/LANDSCAPING separate identities, including PGA West, Santa In 1985 La Quints adopted Rosa Cove and Indian an infrastructure program Springs, etc. If to provide funding for requested, the City would streets and other public consider renaming Avenue 42 improvements. The to Bermuda Dunes infrastructure program Boulevard/Drive. provides the funding (developer fee) to upgrade S. TRASH COLLECTION existing streets and other Public improvements. When La Quinta has a mandatory development takes place the trash collection program. funds are collected. The This has helped clean up allocation of these funds the City and also reduces are reviewed yearly (at illegal dumping. Our trash budget time) by the City collection program is Council as part of the provided by Waste capital improvements Management of the Desert. program. Improvements to Payment is assessed streets in this area will annually and collected on be reviewed as part of this the Property Tax Bill. budget process. Residential rates within La Quinta are less than In addition to street current rates in Bermuda maintenance, street Dunes. A special rate for sweeping along public back yard pick-up could be streets having curb and established. This special gutters is provided. We do rate could also be not maintain private collected on the tax bill. streets, that is the responsibility of the 6. PUBLIC SAFETY homeowner's associations. Police/Fire Protection 4. COMMUNITY IDENTITY The City contracts with La Quinta recognizes and Riverside County for law supports community area enforcement and fire names such as "Bermuda services. Comprehensive Junes" and "Bermuda Dunes 24-hour Police services are :ountry Club". As an provided with a combination example, our City currently of sworn personnel and has various areas that use community Service L Officers. Fire prevention B. BERMUDA DUNES and fire suppression HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION services are provided by paid employees L volunteer The City staff has, fron. personnel. date of incorporation of La Quinta, cooperated with the The City of La Quinta has various homeowner in wish reacchout to yo achieved a much higher associations. we will friendship Plrit aco of level of police i fire welcome input from the Aeration and, yes, mutual service, than was provided Bermuda Dunes associations advantage. Together, lets . by the County. as we have from other work to carefully plan our active associations in La destiny.future and to fulfill our 7. PUBLIC UTILITIES Quinta, such as the La Quinta Country Club, PGA sincerely, The City of La Quinta does West, Santa Rosa Cove and not provide the placement Indian Springs. mayor John Pena of these services, and is Mayor Pro-Tem not directly involved. 9. EDUCATION Dale Bohnenberger However, the City does Joyce BosworthDr. William Rushworth require undergrounding of The City has actively Stanley Sniff utilities through the supported schools in La zoning 6 subdivision review Quinta. We have process. Utility services joint-funded the $2,000.000 are provided by the La Quinta Sports Complex at following: the La Quinta Middle School and are currently a. Water/Sewer-Coachella supporting the purchase of Valley Water District 6 land for a high school. we in a portion of Bermuda believe that our active Dunes, water is participation with Desert provided by The Myoma Sands Unified School Dunes Mutual Water District has accelerated Company. our local school development. b. Gas-Southern California Gas Company Hopefully, the information contained in this document c. Telephone-General answered your questions. Telephone Should you need more information, please contact d. Electricity-Imperial Ron Riedrowski, City Irrigation District Manager or Jerry Herman, Planning and Development Director at 56I-2246. C �I AT Eq ESTABLISHED IN IOIB AS A PUBLIC AGENCY �lSTRICS COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1o5B•COACHELLA,CALIFORNIA 92236•TELEPHONE(619)3962651 DIRECTORS OFFICERS TELLISCODEKAS.PRESIDENT THOMASE LEVY,GENERAL MANAGER CHIEF ENGINEER RAYMOND R.RUMMONDS.VICE PRESIDENT BERNARDINE SUTTON.SECRETARY JOHN W.MCFADDEN OWEN MCCOOK ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER DOROTHY M.NICHOLS REDWINE AND SHERRILL,ATTORNEYS THEODORE J.FISH August 2, 1991 File: 1150.06 c: 1 . . Local Agency Formation Commission 3403 loth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, California 92501 Gentlemen: =° Subject: Sphere of Influence Amendment No. 7 and Concurrent Annexation 6 to City of La Quinta, LAFCO No. 91-19-4 We have reviewed the proposed annexation 6 to the City of La Quinta and have no comment. If you have any questions please contact Joseph Cook, planning engineer, extension 292. Yours very truly,/ o y Tom Levy ((( General Manager-Chief Engineer JEC:gh/e82 cc: Ronald Kiedrowski City Manager 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY w CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING SPHERES OF INFLUENCE WE TILE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, RESIDENTS, REGISTERED VOTERS OR MEMBERS OF BERMUDA DUNES COUNTRY CLUB, AND ARE THERE- FORE CONCERNED WITH THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE STREET BORDERS OF WASHINGTON, JEFFERSON, FRED WARING AND COUNTRY CLUB, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE of CALIFORNIA. WE HEREBY REQUEST OF LAFCO THAT THE ABOVE AREA BE PLACED WITHIN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. w 3 LAFOO 90-120-4 NAME. (PRINT) ADDRESS SIGNATURE '_- $Alu3/E,�� N WE THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, RESIDENTS, REGISTERED VOTERS OR MEMBERS OF BERMUDA DUNES COUNTRY CLUB, AND ARE THERE- FORE CONCERNED WITH THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE STREET BORDERS OF WASHINGTON, JEFFERSON, FRED WARING AND COUNTRY CLUB, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. WE HEREBY REQUEST OF LAFCO THAT THE ABOVE AREA BE PLACED WITHIN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT LAFCO 90-120-4 NAME (PRINT) ADDRESS SIGNA RE � i I v WE THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, RESIDENTS, REGISTERED VOTERS OR MEMBERS OF BERMUDA DUNES COUNTRY CLUB, AND ARE THERE- FORE CONCERNED WITH THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE STREET BORDERS OF WASHINGTON, JEFFERSON, FRED WARING AND COUNTRY CLUB, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. WE HEREBY REQUEST OF LAFCO THAT THE ABOVE AREA BE PLACED WITHIN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. LAFCU 90-120-4 NAME (PRINT) ADDRESS SIGNATURE WE THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, RESIDENTS, REGISTERED VOTERS OR MEMBERS OF BERMUDA DUNES COUNTRY CLUB, AND ARE THERE- FORE CONCERNED WITH THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE STREET BORDERS OF WASHINGTON, JEFFERSON, FRED WARING AND COUNTRY CLUB, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. WE HEREBY REQUEST OF LAFCO THAT THE ABOVE AREA BE PLACED WITHIN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. LAM) 90-120-4 NAME (PRINT) ADDRESS /^/ SIGNATU/-pyy�g� �C rrJ 7 /,J iJ t G f Z", d� Tjt'� A /0 4, � 21- Ok -14 /oa /,t- Aaj 4p_r ;74- I -7 va . 4zzbo Re: Pahc� No. 616- 2 Sd. 006 lig,00 Qv,.crek h o 616 - 2 Bo,ov7 ,,�; 66 D."A. P , A-v �ie, C ) V AFCo . (�/" I /s <S��l�.ice,—,� t'c'tL '6�76000 /7- 61oco0/- 3 I 9•244U c:�y oLlaQw,ra� / a l�cuwv Z- +.br� • s r h a ao0Q V 4 0 ~ .O _Z J 6 � C n. I ^�o PETITION FOR ANNEXATION / The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quinta as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 605-160-016, to the City of La Quints. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires ar. amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quints. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners ISON PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE n ADDRESS 1. 7`i2. 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Z4 REM' A to ate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 APR 1 c CITY OF t-n yuiNVTA PEBNNIN", t V.Ey-,rrour$JT DEPI PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quint& as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, at seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 607-080-016 to the City of La Quint&. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of Influence of the City of La Quint&. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. S. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, at seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners Pichler PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. 2. 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 f�rvr/l�it�'Q �tib Try �/nOO•/ zzr''iFiT/one jj 1 fJIZo 0 f i� � !/C Jc '✓ CS j�Ji '�/� �.Jf�i rivCN Uvi. I K � PETITION FOR ANNEXATION / The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of L& Quint& as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) (0o9'3�vo3/ it to the City of La Quints. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quinta. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, at seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners AD,19im $• PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. 2. 3, _.. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERN TE 2 ING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 PETITION FOR ANNEXATION / The undersigns he e�b� p�titions the Local Agency Formation Conisslon of Riverside �t '1Si approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quints as—fy�lows: 1. Th proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section -56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed fs to annex your pr perty, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) to the Ci of La Quinta. 3. The boundaries�pf the Territory included in the proposal are as described in F,xhibits A, attdched hereto and by this reference incorporated hereip 4. The Territory included 1,n the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the Citf of La Quinta. i 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and w}th property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8/e persons signing this Petition have signed as own$rs of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq, of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners W604 PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. 2. 3, PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 t�1' e® 00.t. Ct CO i-lH- Ct ! CX T J Ke Iv yin-P.& 1.% rE W e Q (cs y o 1 C v o wl cl U �p a- A k k K <J-t o h a It Q r _I b s PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission ` of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quints as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 609-235-005, to the City of La Quints. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quints. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits •B" and "C' , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners KIBBEE PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 2. 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 6/u —r�L- J PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quint& as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) ��fzulm� to the City of La Quinta. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quinta. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. B. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners 6�ON PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. 79 ' Iko .9. 2. 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 cl o n o� `to ZM uv�5� VQ �zU�kh- ^ V PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quinta as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization pro osed is to annex your operty, described as Assessorts Parce - er(s) -215-026 607-215-02 ,607-223-014 607-22 , 609-103-02'l, 609-103-02W,609-103-�, 609-116-0�609-122-0,16,609-171-bye! 609-273-0011 to the City of La Quinta. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4 . The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quinta. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "c", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners BERMUDA DUNES CUSTO PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. 2. 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 r � / ?t PETITION FOR ANNEXATION J The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quanta as follows: 1. This proposal is.made pursuant to Covernment Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) bog-ZiZ-ol� to the City of Le Quints. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4• The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quints. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. S. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq, of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners 6P l&Cpy� PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE,.. ADDRESS- 2. 3. R` L PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation HARCH 30, 1990 PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission I of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quinta as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) - (pO9o20/ O/�f to the City of La Quints. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of Influence of the City of La Quints. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq, of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners &-,e ex PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. 2. nip 3. P1ANNIN.-6 nr a U1 TA DEPl. riVT PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED, Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 N �• PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of River de County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of 1A Qui to as follows: 1. is proposal is made pursuant t overnment Code Section 5 00, et seq. 2. The pecific change of organi ation proposed is to annex your prop ty, described as Asse or's Parcel Number(s) 609-1 -012, to the C y of La Quinta 3. The boundar s of the rritory included in the proposal are as described n Exhib s A, attached hereto and by this reference into ora d herein. 4. The Territory inc uded in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal r qui s an amendment to the sphere of influence of t e City of La Quints. 6. The reason f r the prop ed annexation is for municipal services an with proper owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is quested to be made subject to the property being zoned per a County General Plan designation and Zoning Distric as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and/ "C", attached hereto an by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition h ve signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, at seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners GIPSON PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 2. A/ 3. y� PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 �� of l� Q��,•��� . z- `�o .v�aT 5e < e nve,.c 57x yp', v uvP.0 PETITION FOR ANNEXATION / The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quint& as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. �� � 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) Go9-040-0l6 CI7`r ur LH Qul\TA to the City of La Quinta. F Aryvu,; R D-VEL0P61W PEF 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quinta. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners RINTED NAME PLEASE INDICAT BELOW F ALT ATE DESIGN A IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 �� n //V//� GtJP Q W t �6 i�Y7 CCD� Ai r PETITION FOR ANNEXATION / The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quint& as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, at seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 607-392-008,609-234-003. to the City of La Quint&. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of Influence of the City of La Quinta. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, at seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners SPEED PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS RECE �, APR ' A 2. 3• PUPOVT 3 VEYMP112r JLFI. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 llC PETITION FOR ANNEXATION undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quinta as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 607-332-008, to the City of La Quinta. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quinta. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and licit, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8 . The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the {provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners BELL PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. A 2T 0- 24,GL r 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. fieee,o /r 2o7u,DR Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 /)� y ,sl4vE tid D--ar,.e< TO A,eT 0 F /�9 Qu writ 611,7` &se eT p,e /-u e,d 1/,J11y 174'-C `fh,S 4o7 tr !/dTYd a u gy 7AA J2os.De.�Ts aF 1;r v PETITION FOR ANNEXATION 01 The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quinta as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessorts Parcel Number(s) 607-294-005, to the City of La Quinta. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4 . The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quinta. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. S. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners CHACON PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. 2 . 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation /�� MARCH 300 1990 I PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) lo G aCo I - o1? . per, insert to the be 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La-(Qaiutp. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "CO . attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners f wofii7elsotJ PRINTED REC;L� NAME NAME SIGNA ADDRESS 1. 2. CIn i,= Lr, keulidTA NHIM� S grndrpyEMT DEFT 3. PLEASE INDICATE W IF AN ALTERNATE ZONIN IGNATION IS REQUESTED. : Alternate oning Designation MARCR 1990 � y PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quints, as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 607-061-010, to the City of La Quint&. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quints. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. B. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners FRIEDENTAG/V em PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS -7 2. C _ 3. PLEASE INDIC BELAW IF AN ALTERNATE ZO IN DESIGN I UESTE N� A Hate Zoning Designation TMRCH 30, 1990 Y n C t jd ,n Oub h 1,� � � o APO P 'PETITION FOR ANNEXATION i The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of R vets de ounty far approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quint& as follows: C AN S;9A1 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) &05— 110—O/6P to the City of La Quinta. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quints. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. 2. 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 L AFCo SWoc,l a f/AVE IV e V6/L Le m LQ QuSN>la V0R7��/ �cf��oF ptl� 78.105 CALLE ESTADO — LA OUINTA. CAUFORNIA 92253 - t619) 564-2246 FAX (619) 564.5617 March 30, 1990 HAUSER WAYNE HAUSER NANCY 72855 DEERGRASS PALM DESERT, CA 000092260 SUBJECT: CITY OF LA QUINTA ANNEXATION NO. 6 PETITION Dear Sir/Madam: Property owners within your area have expressed a desire to annex to the City of La Quinta. Based upon this interest, the City concluded that the current County Land Use and Zoning designations would remain. The attached General Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps illustrate the designations. In order to continue the process, a petition signed by the property owner(s) is required. If you support the annexation, please complete the attached petition and return it by April 16, 1990, using the enclosed self-addressed, stamped envelope. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Should you have any questions regarding the annexation plans, contact me at 564-2246. ;,ry truly yo rs, J2r erman , lann' g 8 Development Director JH/GP/vb:Planning:AQ4 609252009 enclosures Dear Mr. Herman: Thank you for your letter. We would prefer to be annexed to the city of Palm Desert, "AILING ADDRESS P.O. BOX ViN . LA. OU!NTA, CALIFORNIA 92252 Ay O Jerry Herman, Director C�ly�F 1 01990 Planning and Development City of Le Quints Nh/Nc6on'?J/N Le Quinta, Calif. 92253 DIAZ Dear Mr. Herman: My wife and I are Bermuda Dunes property owners who wish to build a house soon. Recently we received a questionnaire asking if we were interested in incorporating into the City of La Quinte. We are re Interested so we tossed the questionnaire away. We would like to go on record as being opposed to any such incorporation move. Our preference is to be included into the City of Palm Desert. S cer IV, /Joaqu nd Sh ron godo 40- 0 Starlight One Be muda Dunes 78.105 CALLE ESTADO — LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - t6191 564-2246 FAX (619) 564-5617 March 30, 1990 MILLER LL0YO MILLER SARI 0418700 YUCCA LN INDIO, CA 000092201 SUBJECT: CITY OF LA QUINTA ANNEXATION NO. 6 PETITION TO e K Dear Sir/Madam: ro erty owners within your area have ex ressed a desire to annex to the City of La Quin a. Based upon this nteres�;�Tie City conc u e e current County Land Use and Zoning designations would remain. The attached General Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps illustrate the, designations. In order to continue the process, a petition signed by the property owner(s) is required. If you support the annexation, please complete the attached petition and return it by April 16, 1990, using the enclosed self-addressed, stamped envelope. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Should you have any questions regarding the annexation plans, contact me at 564-2246. Very truly p Je 7erm a _ R J G�`� ry n Planning i Development Director XALC Y6T To Vfw< JH/GP/vb:Planning:AQ4 (jf{D WOUI-/) ttiJh^J—t TO W_ ANII� 607141022 't C-)ry op ow,am Bajo.^ os o"J enclosures rItE SOUTH 5106 of NWY I'll *J6 H4!5 Na twx To on-&R §U i If! 6r TAXES tJ0 SSESSAIEi� s . . .. ,..� . .. .-mac c � _�. .. .—c r •. _ - ./_ ^ . PETITION FOR ANN N / The undersigned hereby petitions the Lo gency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a pr osed Annexation to the City of La Quinta as follows: 1. This proposal is made rs ant to Cove ent ode Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific ha a of rganization p p d is nnex your property, de ibe as ssessor's Parce ber(s 607-122-007, to the City of inta. 3. The bo daries of the Territory 1 d in a proposal are as desc d in Exhibits att here nd by this refere incorporated at* 4. The erri ory inclu d in the propos is inhabited. 5. This proposal requi a ae t ent to t spit@re of m influence of th y f inta �� 6. The reason f t pr os annexation � fo,munibipalll services and th prope t owner upport.\ 7. The pro ose annexation s es d to be made subject to the prop r being ned per Co ty General Plan ni designatio and Zo Distric s as i lustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C", attac hereto d by t reference incorporated her 8. The persons si ng this tition a signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petition req at proc ding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Sect 3 n 000, et eq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signature ollows: Chief Petitioners FIRST ASSEMBLY OF G PRINTED (jAHE NAME SIGNA/TTURE ADDRESS 1. 2. .a � 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation HARCH 30, 1990 h s v d _i ' NNeatheFs CA 922DA Begmuda ,� w�'-���� as � �•� �I a � n F r t � a - x � PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quints as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000. et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) Go937/o07 to the City of La Quint&. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quints. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, at seq, of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners Ae-Arl /Wae PRINTED NAME NAME SIC TITRE ADDRESS 1. &2 Jej 3. 4 PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quint& as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed Is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 609-372-004. to the City of La Quinta. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quinta. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners DETARR PRINTED 07 AME NAME_ �ICNATURE ADDRESS TR 2. a / Dl� � � 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 PETITION FOR ANNEXATION / The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quinta as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 607-371-011, to the City of La Quints. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quints. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and 'C', attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners WOLLGAST PRINTED SIG ADDRESS 'p-A, 2. 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quints as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 607-230-018, to the City of La Quints. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quints. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. ti y 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to - -•the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits 117'' 7 •B• and •C•, attached hereto and by this reference Incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners QUILL PRINTED 1 r�N n SIGNATURE ADDRESS 0&2 - (, Q LK L �4 Prl ��0?,2 3 CYO 2. Poi , o� Nw af s c..s 7 S-5 rep ' 3. �C� +(L� Z , (t U= �� PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 �o�k.-; �o�ra"l �j`csen d� �� Zo� cX p, • fie. w�s�.. 4D Lin r, tie PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quint& as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed 1s to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 609-181-006, to the City of La Quint&. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quint&. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners STAPLES PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. 2. 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH �30. 1990 �� PETITION FOR ANNEXATION / The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quinta as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et q. 2. The specs change of organizat on proposed is to annex your property, d scribed as Assessor' Parcel Number 605-101-0 9 to the Ci y f La Quint&. 3. The boun arie of the Territ ry incl ed in the proposal re as descr bed n Exhibits A, ttache hereto and by this referen inco porated here n. 4. The Ter itory cluded in he pro osal is inhabited. 5. This pr posal r uires a amen nt to the sphere of influe ce of the City of La Qui ta. 6. The re son for th prop sed an xation is for municipal servic s and with rop ty owne support. 7. The pr posed annex do is requ sted to be made subje to the pr perty being o d per th County General Plan design tion and Zon n District as illustrated on hibits "B" an "C", attach hereto and y this reference inco orated herei 8. The pe sons signing his Petition hav as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, at seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners FITZHENRY PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. 2. 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 IV 0 �,,i-ta r0 y Gretoi_ l"lig f-e 6e vo"c e PETITION FOR ANNEXATION The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of La Quints as follows: 1. This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 609-103-008, to the City of La Quints. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of La Quints. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, at seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners NEYER PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1. Eoar- g 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30,r1990 1 Why S — S CL lt4 ca._ 04,N (A- W f IS RECEIVE^ BERMUDA DUNES COMMUNITY CoU4,�. LAURAALCORN 79.733 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE . SUITE B . BERMUDA E 1610A 92201 ROBERT CARIAN FRANK GOODMAN MAURINE HAMMOND TRISM STEWART TO: Residents of Bermuda Ames OATS: September 15, 1991 SUBJECT: Council Request for Directim Dear Resident, The purpose of your Advisory Council is to reagent the residents of Bermuda Dunes to Riverside County through the Board of Supervisors. Patricia "Gorky" Lu--m is our representative; she can convey our preferences to the full Board of Supervisors and be active in their passage. Co m unity Council meetings are held at 7 P.M., the first Tuesday of each month at the Riverside County Offices at 79-733 Country Club Drive in the hearing room; we encourage each of you to attend and participate. Of particular interest at this time are two applications before the Local Agency Formation Orami ion (IAFM); one (Application No. 90-115) by the City of la Quinta requesting the Cmmi ion place the Bermuda Dunes area in the la Quinta sphere of influence, the other (Application No. 90-120) by a graW of Bermuda Ames private residents requesting the Cotmuission place the area in the Palm Desert sphere of influence. Currently, IAFCO plans to consider these applications at their next meeting, October 24. Their decision will have a serious, permanent affect on the area; it is well worth all of us taking a few minutes to make our preferences known. ism' of IAFCU are scheduled to be at yaw Cous•_,il's mmting of October 01, 1991. Please complete and return the attached community interest questionnaire so your Council can determine not only how you feel about sphere of influence and annexation, but what your concerns are for the community and where you would like to have your Couuncil's emphasis placed. Please take a few minutes to respond and return by October 11. This will allow the Council to tabulate the responses related to Sphere of Influx/Anrmmtion prior to the IAFM meeting October 24. You may, of course, write directly to IAFCD with your concerns: Mr. George Spilictis IAF00 Ewcutive officer 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, CA 92501-3676 �� —�'�1QA/t.L� /LL`�iN ��iN �/L�G(�-C��.e-i � ��•� y,ht'`�{G>ri.Qi� r � , i�L /�i,1 u, ?..C<, / `,_r am / /�'LZ�'✓ /-<!� qxxx-✓.c,:` RECEIVE". 26 September 1991 rlIY:R$��. I(��' „•, 91 OCT -1 PH 1: 01 Mr. George Spiliotis LAFCO Executive Office 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, CA 92501-3676 Dear Mr. Spiliotis: I recently acquired property (79810 Trinidad) in Bermuda Dunes. One of my primary reasons for the purchase was its location in the county. I am concerned about recent annexation movements. There appears to be a number of self appointed annexation committees, one for La Quinta, one for Palm Desert and probably one for Indio. In addition there is the Bermuda Dunes Community Council elected by the property owners of Bermuda Dunes who should represent the people of the community. I am for remaining in the county. However, before making a far reaching decision on the future of Bermuda Dunes, I would urge you to put the issue on a ballot and give each property owner a chance to express their individual preference without the influence of various pressure groups. Sincerely, Ili' Y Gerald ?erschet 52015 Ave. Martinez La Quinta, CA 92253 CP: Bermuda Dunes Community Council GP/mp I 9f hn(i 19 fiil2 e�vt;Y �P� �Y1 . �./ ) j �zcj-, /99AZ L�h,�ctLf t.Q C' c 7c-2r�zor� C.�rninc.aQc.�� 77 - 93C ap-. Ae IDJO rx, pa m 3 71 SoCl�to S� -ioe CLAD, ��2•� 1.��.e� . � ' 0 °� it 1 - Mr. &Mrs. Frank P. Lopez 77-825 Delaware Place S+ stir —� F't 12: 53 Palm Desert, CA 92260 February 28, 1991 Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 620 Riverside,CA 92501-3676 Re: Case No.C!Z 91-1 and GPA91-1 Dear Sirs: This letter is to inform you that we,as properly owners of 77-825 Delaware Place,Palm Desert, are opposed to the proposed annexation by the City of Palm Desert of our area. We enjoy the rural atmosphere of our unique neighborhood and wish to remain within the present jurisdiction of the County of Riverside. We purchased our one acre plus parcel because of the size of the lots and the room to build a home and workshop plus storage where we could park our motorhome,boat, pick-ups,etc. Further,we found in our business a reed for a small office to have a business telephone and do job estimating. We have worked very hard and planned a lifetime to have this land and we wish to carry on as we have been. Also,we need to mention that we five on a dirt road that's not maintained by the County. If the city were to be successful in the annexation of our area there would be the cost of paving, curbs, gutters,city sewer hook-ups and fire hydrants that we are not prepared to foot the bill for. Sincerely, 1�t Frank P.�t� t Pat A. Lopez 76 Cam-, . h GZ�ova / I mar. 5 +�► Ai vaq,u tucat A4 aq Format ion Camnwooiort Rws,& C4• 4 a50►-3b'ib Oka/ $1& 01s letter 11i, wrltfen in re9arda to fht proposed at)wahon of our cunt into &L Ct�j of Palm aRit. uc ha a liow at 016 ogles for 4 yrs. W-C 0" a scrrue buslnes6 lnwhich we haoe Z frucK6 , bA of Wh1C11 a* Ru"A at ttv, wa of ourproperty , We W IAxstand, that if -this area of acre puc& 16,ann#,W lnta ttu eery , at WouWd not Ole to par,; ouf saruice tf"hue , we W15h to lunaw 1n khc eoumty area. J* beau it 00M bL cvstfy is rent sorrw Jgpc of atoragl, yard kr our Z SWU pu,A" . Ow home. Is at the -ftortt ct & prop anal ova truccc are, raraJ at U bacac {;n aPXWoCCL alto rvhul► cannel be seen firm .ate Street• rifest, consider Kup1m9 thai anal lnty to" $oh 4 Oeninc. �u#eheson ��-s2o (lnounta�x�V1c� Pawn Me.►t. (a yzzbo (ba)9u5 63.E �CUCet # 637.310 .0 2.3 i March 4 , 1991 Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission 3403 Tenth St. Suite 620 Riverside , Ca. 92501 -3676 Re : Case No. C/Z 91 -1 & GPA 91 -1 Gentleman : In reguards to annexation of Robin Rd, Mountain View, Delaware Pl, and Latisha Ln . I Carl J. Bujan Jr. and my wife Karen are totally against annexation by the City of Palm Desert. We prefer to stay within the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside. The majority of property owners are in agreement with us. We will take any legal means neccesary to stop annexation. Sincerely , Carl J. Bujan Jr. 77-645 Mountain View Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 Parcel # 637300032-0 r ' • • • • f�SHl3Y CONSTRUCTION CO., Inc. P O BOX £86£ PAt M DESERT. ER v££61. (610) 346 1018. LK NO 8 50£043 April 27 , 1990 L.A.F.C .O. County Administration Center 4080 Lemon St . 12th Floor Riverside , Ca 92501-3651 Dear Sirs , As Both a local developer and resident of Bermuda Dunes , it is my intent to express interest for future annexation of our community into the Palm Desert sphere of influence. I feel the annexation to Palm Desert would be a truly positive enhancement for our com- munity. We represent approximately 118 seperate properties in the immediate area . Many of these are single family detached lots of a new subdivision on a 30 acre site immediately southwest of Bermuda Dunes Airport . If you need to contact me directly, please don' t hesitate to call at: 619-346-1018 . Sincerely, - ems ' Perry Ashby President PLL WORN GURPRNTEED QESiCEtvT:F.;•COT.„E.'O4L HUGH AND MARIAN HARMON 42-900 Warner Trail Palm Desert, CA 92260 March 8, 1991 LAFCO 3403 10th Street Suite 620 Riverside,CA 92502 Dear Sirs: As a concerned homeowner, I am writing a protest to the annexation of my property at 42-900 Warner Trail, (which is located in the Southeast corner section of Warner trail and Delaware place)to the City of Palm Desert. My property lies within the area bound by Warner Trail, Delaware Place, Robin Road and Washington Street. Over 80 residents live in this area and the major express a desire to remain under Riverside County'urisdiction, objecting to their property being annexed by the City of Palm Ksert. I and my wife Marian Harmon, are props owners,tax payers and registered voters. Our parcel number is 6 7160028-5, a .49 acre in portion of parcel 17R's 023/038. We are sending copies of this letter to LAFCO as well as the City of Palm Desert. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please notify me if I may need further communication. Sincerely Yours, Hugh Harftn, Ph.D. Bermuda Dunes Community Association 42.360 Adams Street O Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 (619) 345.3451 March 26 , 1991 Ms . Pat Bowler Riverside Local Agency Assistant Executive Officer Formation Commission 3403 Tenth St . , Ste . 620 Riverside , CA 92501-3676 c Dear Ms . Bowler: o Please let it be known by the Directors of LAFCO that the Board of Directors of the Bermuda Dunes Community Assn . is in support of application #90-120-4 , "sphere of influence ammendment City of Palm Desert" , and vote against application #90-115-4 , "sphere of influence ammendments to the Cities of La Quinta and Indio" . This determination is made after the mandate made by the Bermuda Dunes Community Assn . members in the petition submitted ( with over 700 signatures ) previously to LAFCO, supporting ammendment application #90-120-4 . Thanking you in advance for your backing . Sincerely , Robert H . Phillips President LAFCO 90-120-4 c RIT E' X E =FNEF= OF IAFLUENCE OF F4 -M LESEF;T r'ETI L 1C,4 o' ",*tl r . __.-•-.i `_=s =•T rc=. -.. _a ,e = =err =_ ri :i __r= r,=a deer. wo:-kinc or EE• Er=i ftu=r,th_= t= ❑b a;. i =1C-id tl'Be frO:L r=-. __: it =.'iC i ? - �fl _ 1 _::C:= r " o _n F-_ 6=-_. _ _ = 4DLrF = crBa. ..h-: =.-e irC=_r-= __d ir, beir -_ , -ty '-`` :'.-.. .:� - ..Un�lti IrC` �'•"L`: _.r..p ._r+1 ,� , _ : rt E cl C: �_ , _ _ hE _- ._- __c t" FCC 7H'AT _-L: _ _TJTN_ T:=:E SF'H_F:E nc . ,F'__-NCE C- T'JE til _ Tay = __ _ _ __ _ __ _ L `. 4�,'_ ♦ _ __ _ _ _ __ ,- c.- ti = 3 a `_:y I • Y LAF100 90-120-4 MONTEGO WEST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION *********************************** THE UNDERSIGNED ARE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY SITUATED WITHIN THE STREET BORDERS OF WASHINGTON, JEFFERSON, FRED WARING, AND COUNTRY CLUB, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AS OWNERS, WE HEREBY REQUEST OF LAFOC THAT THE ABOVE AREA BE PLACED WITHIN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. TeMay �Q.6, NAME (PRINT) ADDRESS 111411 SIGNATURE I YP.M ION FOR ANNEXATI0N LAFCO 90-120-4 The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City Of .palm Desert ' asfollows : 1 . This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2 . The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number (s) 609-235-005, 609-460-029 , to the City of Palm Desert. 3 . The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4 . The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. S. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of Palm, Desert. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7 . The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8 . The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and herewith affix signatures as follows: Chief Petitioners CASTLE HARBOUR ASSN PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 2 . 3 . PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 i'E, I! iON FIT,, A';YE?:AT ION LAFCD 90-120-4 The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of Palir. u:asert as follows : 1 . This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2. The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) 607-420-002, to the City of Palm Desert. 3. The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4. The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. S. The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore, petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Government Code and w' .herewith affix signatures g ures as follows. Chief Petitioners JAMAICA SANDS PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS A YA r>5 71co-c ✓t `1Y 2. 3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCH 30, 1990 ;,': F'IR IAI` 1M 90-120-4 The undersigned hereby petitions the Local Agency Formation Comission of Riverside County for approval of a proposed Annexation to the City of tali. Desert as follows : 1 . This proposal is made pursuant to Government Code Section 56000, et seq. 2 . The specific change of organization proposed is to annex your property, described as Assessor's Parcel Number(s) to the City of Palm Desert. 3 . The boundaries of the Territory included in the proposal are as described in Exhibits A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 4 . The Territory included in the proposal is inhabited. 5. This proposal requires an amendment to the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert . 6. The reason for the proposed annexation is for municipal services and with property owner support. 7. The proposed annexation is requested to be made subject to the property being zoned per the County General Plan designation and Zoning Districts as illustrated on Exhibits "B" and "C" , attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 8 . The persons signing this Petition have signed as owners of land. Wherefore , petitioners request that proceeding be taken in accordance with the provisions of Section 56000, et seq. of the Goverment Code and herewith affix signatures as follows : Chief Petitioners PRINTED NAME NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1.i �c?[Lr /%['Srsva�k I�Pc' c� el (-C 2.3. PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF AN ALTERNATE ZONING DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED. Alternate Zoning Designation MARCM 30, 1990 I CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING ANNEXATION TO LA QUINTA - IN FAVOR - TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. s I ish to voice my strong opposition to the r e annexation of the 145 acres o developed property in the u ' rporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, ted on the no P corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by o La Quinta. Ther a no benefits to be ined by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result is unwelcome and unwanted oachment on our area. When we are r y to incorporate as a city, this area will be nificant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote.&@�t this proposal of annexation by the 'ty of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: J`,4m6s Ca-�oat��fd. /V Street: t�4c,,o e City: 15.E/L. 'tVd4 Ao^'j Ii Gv jf,p-r vow S 7 7�, t�w � , TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: Street: Al City: Ile 6)e PTO. Members of Lo PLE:ASE AAJAJ n ormatio mm Sv�po1A 2T I wish to voice m strong o e proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this 1 Welcome and wanted encroachment on our area. (+-i FAZOYL !G I urge you to voted this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: Ca lit Cet 6' ! - Street: —IS -�tV7 I),446 ; ko CA 8� rut�d� s DvPs ,IC1 AOWII - bc��cvitC a e 7",�� I�s� �jece�ssav� � o -� ,mac/Ctet- /Zta «- -1 te! e0 d4 CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING ANNEXATION TO LA QUINTA - OPPOSED - DONALD L. DOUGHTY 42-605 Byron Place Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 (619) 345-8780 September 6 . 1991 Local Agency Formation Commission 3403 Tenth St . , Suite 620 Riverside , CA 92501 -3676 Attn : Mr . F . Gillar , Chairman Re : Proposed City of La Quinta Annexation 145 acres in Bermuda Dunes Area Gentlemen ; I am the owner of Assessor ' s Pcl s609-040-016 located at the address given above and on which my wife and I are full time residents . This parcel contains 4 . 03 acres and is located within the Bermuda Dunes area just North of the proposed annexation . My wife and I are very much opposed to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated area of Bermuda Dunes . The proposed annexation parcel is located on the Northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive . As you are no doubt aware , the Board of Supervisors set up an areawide study committee to determine the best way to handle the integration of the Bermuda Dunes area into an adjoining City . This committee has voted against the proposed annexation as being premature and without benefit to the area as a whole and possibly prejudicial to the logical development of the Bermuda Dunes into a viable entity in and of itself . Local Agency Formation Commissions were established to provide oversight to the annexation process and to prevent the piecemeal type of annexation the present proposal proposes . I urge you to deny this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta . Sinc��yours . -e- V"?4 Donald L . Doughty N n , 2 &44) 1 i I \r/ i f lea .� l_s� ,�.� ��-mac. c:t:l t /Pj !lC� i C t �t .Av vat; September 26, 1991 91 SEP 27 PM 3: 31 Mr. George Spiliotis LAFCO Executive Office 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, CA 92501-3676 Dear Mr. Spiliotis : We are residents and property owners of Bermuda Dunes. We are concerned about the proposed annexation. We wish to remain in the county. There is a self appointed committee for the annexation of Bermuda Dunes by Palm Desert. These individuals have been misinforming the residents of Bermuda Dunes, and appear to have personal interests. Again, we wish to remain in the county and sincerely hope your committee will respect the wishes of the majority of Bermuda Dunes residents. T .C. Resler 79825 Camelback Dr. Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 TCR: rmh 26 September 1991 91 SEP 27 PH 3: 31 Mr. George Spiliotis LAFCO Executive Office 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, CA 92501-3676 Dear Mr. Spiliotis: I recently acquired property (79810 Trinidad) in Bermuda Dunes. One of my primary reasons for the purchase was its location in the county. I am concerned about recent annexation movements. There appears to be a number of self appointed annexation committees, one for La Quinta, one for Palm Desert and probably one for Indio. In addition there is the Bermuda Dunes Community Council elected by the property owners of Bermuda Dunes who should represent the people of the community. I am for remaining in the county. However, before making a far reaching decision on the future of Bermuda Dunes, I would urge you to put the issue on a ballot and give each property owner a chance to express their individual preference without the influence of various pressure groups. Sincerely, Gerald Perschet 52015 Ave. Martinez La Quinta, CA 92253 CF: Bermuda Dunes Community Council GP/mp F.E:LIB 24 September 1991 91 SEP 25 PF�12= 14 Mr. George Spiliotis LAFCO Executive Office 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, CA 92501-3676 Dear Mr. Spiliotis: We are long time residents and property owners (17 yrs) of Bermuda Dunes. My wife and I are concerned regarding the proposed annexation movement. We definitely wish to remain in the County as we presently are. We sincerely hope your committee will respect the wishes of the majority of Bermuda Dunes residents and not be misled by some self appointed committee. As you may know, there is a self appointed committee for the annexation of Bermuda Dunes to Palm Desert. Please be informed that these individuals have been disseminating considerable misinformation while pretending to be speaking for the majority of Bermuda Dunes residents, but they may have personal axes to grind. Sincerely yours,, P. L. DeLuca 43-500 Old Harbour Dr. Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 fT�T/f�I AIM ® RITA PESCADOR TERAN I MfYI�MCI^ T - F - A - M AN S1 - 40-100 WASHINGTON, SUITE Ill R ER OF WASHINGTON 8 COUNTRY CLUB) BERMUDA DUNES, CA. 92201 TELEPH�QfflE- 1?)• 34.5 i'y68 FAX 345-6597 September 5, 1991 Local Agency Formation Comm. 3403 Tenth St., Suite 620 Riverside, CA 9 2501-3676 Attn: F. Gillar, Chairman TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my recommendation in favor of the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Guinta. I live in Bermuda Dunes and also have my State Farm agency in Bermuda Dunes and feel that the City of La Guinta has much to offer our area. 1 urge a "YES" vote for the annexation by the City of La Guinta. S' cerely, it P. Teran Residence: 79-581 Butler Bay, Bermuda Dunes, Ca. 92201 BERMUDA DUNES COMMUNITY QOUNGL LAURAALCORN 79-733 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE . SUITE B '7=;M.1� N;s-.l.ALIFORNIA92201 ROBERT CARIAN FRANK GOODMAN MAURINE HAMMOND August 25, 1991 TRISH STEWART , George Spiliotis, Executive Officer C/o LAFC'0 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, CA 92501-3676 RE: LAFC'O 91-19-4 Sphere of Influence Amendment and Concurrent Annexation 6 to City of La Quinta Dear Mr. Spiliotis: The Bermuda Dunes Commity Council would like to go on record in opposition to the above application before IAFCO. We are opposed to any Sphere of Influence or Concurrent Annexation applications where only sections of Bermuda Dunes are involved. We were elected to represent the interests of the people of Bermuda Dunes. We feel that the above application does not represent the best interests of the people of Bermuda Dunes. Also, the Council requests notification when the above application will be heard by LAFCO. Sincerely Laura Alcorn, Secretary Bermuda Dunes Community Council Oct. 9, 1991 Joan A. Swanson 79-505 Camelback Drive Bermuda Dunes,CA 92201 Mr. George Spiliuti3 LAFCO Executive Officer 3403 Tenth St. Riverside, CA 92501-3676. n t y Dear Mr. Spiliotis: --� c A M I wish to express my opposition to the proposed annexation of the unincorporated Riverside County CA ro m geographical area of Bermuda Dunes. -0 ± m I believe that there are now two applications before the Local Agency Formation Commission,Application H No. 90-115 by the City of La Quinta and Application 90-120 involving eventual annexation by the City of _ Palm Desert. I r,m opposed to both applications. rs j N I prefer that Bermuda Dunes remain unincorporated at this time. There are no benefits to be gained by incorporation by either Palm Desert or La Quinta. The Bermuda Dunes area has a strong sense of community and i feel that in the future, the area will incorporate as its own city. Sincerely, Joan A. Swanson Y RErEIYr. Oct. 9, 1991 f. Y-MV.IE IrIt Stephen P. Swanson 91 OCT 10 PM 2: 59 Bermuda Dunes`CA 92201 Mr. George Spillotis LAFCO Executive Officer 3403 Tenth St. Riverside, CA 92501.3676. Dear Mr. Spiliotis: I wish to express my opposition to the proposed annexation of the unincorporated Riverside County area of Bermuda Dunes by the City of La Quinta or the City of Palm Desert. I prefer that Bermuda Dunes remain unincorporated at this time.Inclusion of the area within either the City of Palm Desert or the City of La Quinta will destroy the sense of community cow existing in Bermuda Dunes. Sincerely, Q , Stephen P. Swanson 1 1 _ TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sinceiely, j Name: Street: c- , City: 8 -"4-z 4-W,-: /)I At_-S e-'t Z z j /y• >lu C� TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: � Street: City: TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: � Q' Street: —7q a Lceez,K: (f gzzoi �� �n�-� �� cam- ��---� .�-�'� �.���•o �(�-e-- 5 12 TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast comer of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, �� Name: F,ev rneit✓A Street: 51Z-JZ S City: dE�eiuo4 24JA1C�r G.� 92zo/ o - i v% 12 TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quints. Sincerely, Name: _ NORBERT HERTEL Street: 79s20 PORT ROYAL AVE. City: BERMUDA DUNES,CA.92201 may. We call it progress. I have other words for it. I look at Bermuda Dunes and I feel the unwelcome encroachment of society. I came for peace and quiet and now it seems more and more that is being taken from us. Look at the Full Stop signs along Ave 42. Yelligg kids walk across people' s lawns etc. No one stops them. Deliver me from crass indifference. TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: .Street: - /3 k"¢ city: (r a> TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: c,; 'cc•, Street: 73 - 5-4i City: n �� Z-z' / 4r)r? P-Act7' 0 h /"h7� Lc �l.l ,�•G, ;o c�4 act—i'JvoJ� lea. �Wr-+ice G •f' %`^L'- t�IYQ_ o� •'�a� [� LJ r.'/S'Ii�� �..t��P� ��� , /"'�; "i L, � �-ELc — �:�/+ /"3,0 �c.nr�S -•S a r>o�� O�G �� Xz art �(�il U /> `ptcnTc�% i r) %)'tis" 7 TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: Street: v sus L.. KAu Road City: CA Izze, Please may I add that although it may seem presumptuous for non-owners of a property who reside severat miles away from the property irVquestion,to undermine a proposed action, there is some justification. If residents of the general are don ' t voice objections, by piecemeal, bits and pieces of real estate will have been annexed away to the point that eventual incorporation of an independent city is impossible. The real estate available to support a tax base will have long since been usurped. /�* t� TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: t ;?l� ti;� - '� 14/ . r l;v - Street: 'I t lj' City: • II c��: i ! � LL TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, 1 Name: Street: o 4 ec' cL P"E 5 City: �n.'•0� ; i �f .�Ci ►� � Jl,6uQ:i... ��(��- �� �(�16G l�.'�-tom f�f�;� I;�' 11�:r l�Cc;r�1 CL� Cry - tl{�� ( I v TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely— Name: l G�p? Aj -e-)^J Street: 14 3- .rZ-1 CYWr°cL iovu fit'_ City: (36r` 11ty4 11)QnlI:F-5 elti `%1- YO( TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: �rj� J Street: �pQ City: " ?� �� ;Cz- -/6L TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name. /� G Street: City: r2�1/sl.j� �i.✓ ems- � � �' cOs t -T, b.a ro ��2oPfZL y �� ✓E l 4 t 'Or-t To yTS k OC4T7 von TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred WaringDrive b the City o uinta. Y h' fLaQ There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name -cl Street: -c --5e ` I Zge vr� City: 4L4 TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice m strop pposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name:- Street: S City: �, e . ; TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: Street: S"55 / City: TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La ui Q nta. Sincerely, Name - ��an� Street: City: a.�— 1 TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast comer of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: �. Street: �� fS�1 �orrcic�L City: y�OY,rmfa c c TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. this proposal of annexation b the City of I urge you to vote against h p p y ty g Y g La Quinta. Sincerely, Name. ,!✓ Street: /— City: f TO: Members of Local Agency Formation Committee. I wish to voice my strong opposition to the proposed annexation of the 145 acres of undeveloped property in the unincorporated geographical area of Bermuda Dunes, located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive by the City of La Quinta. There are no benefits to be gained by the residents of Bermuda Dunes as a result of this unwelcome and unwanted encroachment on our area. When we are ready to incorporate as a city, this area will be of significant value to us and our future development and progress as a city. I urge you to vote against this proposal of annexation by the City of La Quinta. Sincerely, Name: Street: 7y-Go� Cccv ,o�'6�, r i�,✓ City: P PAM(da DL)Nt3 (4 22W ckt)4 .VC>rMj/4t� Sv-t/ S� k1 +l�cr at4wF� :f o C�Un1-Et (L l4KS mi .$ ffECIGfJy � �i�(Y21 iE U'Vt Ck-'v I,v 'TZ!rac. 6y tit s, Gcnts , Wif cc 2 cis G �.y J 0 C4 ✓ vN /c� c( C- + bc, {)a V�l/y,� ic,Q. �fJr;v fLfr� . � � �� pe � ��L �' o ctc�'c xfk� i LAFCO 91-19-4--ANNEXATION 6 TO CITY OF LA QUINTA LIST OF LANDOWNERS OPPOSING ANNEXATION FORM LETTERS ONLY LAFCO 91-19-4 List of Landowners Opposing Annexation Form Letters Only Gene Perry 79760 Camelback Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Sylivia Brandt 78-751 Runaway Bay, B.D, CA Jay Brown 41600 Jamaica Sands Dr. B.D, CA 92201 G.B High Tawes 40-405 Starlight Ln, B. D, CA 92201 Karen Mounce 79-329 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Jim Arend 78-909 Savanna La Mar, B.D, CA Michael Dan Rogers 79-695 Calle Grant, B.D, CA Mrs. Jack Hoohn 79-980 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B. D,CA 92201 Marcia Howard 78-780 Savanna La Mar, B.D, CA Tim Zivker 41601 Maroon Town Dr. B.D, CA 92201 James & Diana Sanderson Runaway Bay, B.D, CA Peggy DeBartolo 4435 East 3rd St.Long Beach,CA 90814 Eli Hernandez Camelback Dr(lot 26) B.D, CA John Megay 78661 Ave 42 B, B. D, CA 92201 Tim Nelson 79920 Camelback Dr. B.D, CA Matt Hauss 79083 Delta St. B. D, CA 92201 Robert A. Byrn 79765 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B. D, CA 92201 Ryan Oil Co. 173 So. Civic Dr. Palm Springs, CA 92262 Colleen Gaskey 79404 Montego Bay Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Lawrence B. Gomez 78-700 Starlight Ln, B.D, CA 92201 Ron Brown 17990 Bogreron, B.D, CA Opera H. Neumann 42-271 May pen rd. B.D, CA 92201 Don Roberts 79440 Tobago, B.D, CA R.H Wilshire 78-930 Starlight Ln, B.D, CA 92201 Barbara Camel 78-576 Darby rd. B.D, CA 92201 Henery Rihlet Montego Dr. B.D, CA Dan Edgar 40825 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Rudolph Rust 41626 Porus Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Robert Gonzales 40-874 Cecine Way, B.D, CA 92201 Gerald Johnson 78-880 Darby rd. B. D, CA Jacquiline Wagner 78-695 Martinique, B.D, CA Shirley R. Shilling Castle Harbor (lot 32) B.D, CA 92201 Muriel L. Rottenburg 43-501 Harbour Dr. B.D, CA 92201 G. DeBuono 43-221 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA 92201 J.L Lorich 1514 Carver, Redondo Beach, CA 90278 David Berg 78-831 Runaway Bay, B.D, CA 92201 Betty M Johnston 1414 Carmelita P1. Arcadia, Ca 91006 David Bly 242 Beacon St. Boston, MA 02116 Tillie E. Lynn 1992 E. Oakwood St. Pasadena, CA 91104 Mare S. Allor 78381 Runaway Bay rd. B.D, CA Charles M. Lagin Jammica Sands rd. B.D, CA R. Eskridge 79349 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA J. Khard Tobago Ct. B.D, CA Losie Derbyshire 78730 Darrell Dr. B.D, CA J.H Thompson 79420 Granada Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Kenneth Mertz 79529 Camelback Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Nancy R. Nicholas L. 136 Starlight Ln. .D, CA Adrian R. Cauceglia 1231 12th St. Santa Monica, CA 90401 Steve Hosac 42405 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 l - Robert E. Lee 43-415 Lacovia Dr. B. D, CA 92201 Arthur E.-Momas 42685 Caballeros Dr. B.D, CA Robert Mason 79-645 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA 92201 John & Catharine Reid 79-337 Montego Bay Dr. B.D,CA 92201 Penny L. Querus 79825 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA 92201 42725 Glass Dr. B.D, CA 92201 James Bal 41 Ave B.D, CA 44-710 Round Table Indio, CA 92201 John & Jo Ann Soisson P.0 ox 1324 La Mirada, CA 90638 Harry L. Fahnestock 78-851 Montego Bay B.D, CA 92201 Roger Lenharot Trinity Cir. B.D, CA Virginia F. Sanborn 79029 Bayside Ct. B.D, CA 92201 G.0 Sanhoms Betty B. Heitmeyer Falmouth, B.D, CA John L Crounse 41440 Iuanna B.D,CA 92201 Diane Jubelier-Light 1226 S. Beverly Green Dr. L.A, CA 90035 Janet Pagkin 14144 Dickens St. S219, Sherman Oaks,CA Jane Feitelson 42-410 Adams B.D, CA 92101 Victor E. Rennix 79-181 Ave 42 B. D, CA J. David Hunton 42710 Sandy Bay rd. B.D, CA 92201 Michael C. Hagen Lot 146 Bermuda Golf Club, B.D, CA Renee M. Smith 41-625 St.Annes Bay B.D, CA 92201 Jack R. Davis 42-445 Adams B. D, CA Forrest Lloyd 78-421 Ave.42 B.D, CA 92201 Ann M Hayes 42-740 Somerset Way B.D, CA 92201 Peter Hartwig 79-985 Trinidad B. , CA 92201 David & Leature Nage 1620 Chicago St. Green Bay, Win 54302 79-120 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Joe Eoff 79-444 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Jim Parkinson 79-391 Four Path Ln. B.D, CA John Hammond 79-015 Cliff B.D, CA 92201 Donald & Evelyn Thefeld 41931 Brownstown B.D, CA Joseph Cordova 78680 Martinique Dr. B.D, CA John J. Swearingen 43-040 Port Maria Rd. B.D, CA 92201 Rose Swearing 79-111 Falsmouth B.D, CA 92201 43-040 Port Maria B.D, CA 92201 Carolyn C. Clark 79-600 Mandeville Rd. B.D, CA 92201 Odette Poterss 43-379 Lacoria Dr. #80 B.D, CA 92201 Don & Wendy Skarin 41-700 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Don Spiker 40810 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 John & Carol Steel 41-661 Nevis P1. B.D, CA 92201 John Shahinian 79-945 Trinidad Dr. B.D, CA Mike Gregoria 42-471 Sandy Say B.D, CA Robert L. Ray 79-248 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Howard B. Benner Jr. 42-790 Sandy Bay rd. B.D, CA etty L. Gregory 79-130 Cliff St. B.D, CA Fred G. Nardi Jr. 19433 Tomlee Ave. Torrance, Ca 90503 Ron Gregory 79-950 Nassao P1. B.D, CA House Haldeo Culebca Ln. B.D, CA John Brittarri 78-920 Starlight B.D, CA David Sullins Port Royal B.D, CA Tom Doyglas 79-041 Delta St. B.D, CA 92201 Helen S . Harrer 42-530 Baracoa Dr. B.D, CA Sydney K. Cassaday 40-540 Carter Ln. B. D, CA 92201 Merrit Chassie 41371 Balaclava B.D, CA Tom Spates 79-380 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B. D, CA Linda George 42-705 St. George Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Linda King 79775 Ryan Way B. D, CA Mike & Kathleen Felci 41401 Cambridge B.D, CA 92201 I.K & G. L Hazell 79-400 Port Royal B.D, CA 92201 George Mitchell 79-940 Trinidad Dr. B.D, CA 92201 James H. Shoemake 79961 Boqueron B.D, CA A. L. Jackson 79-271 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Susan Pierse 41-501 Nevin P1. B.D. CA 92201 B.0 Johnson 78790 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Albert Furinyth 78-755 Daily rd. Studio CA Robert O. Bell 79-202 Locovia Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Jack Swanson 43229 Lavovin B.D, CA Jeff Tompson 78900 Martinique B.D, CA Carol Baldwin 4561 Cape May Ave. San Diego CA Walter E. Goodwin 79294 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Jen J. Anderson 79-100 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Chauncey J. Hipps 79430 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Glen Feigum 78-900 Runaway Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Hal W. Brown 43-081 Port Maria B.D, CA 92201 Cornelis M. Agoot 79201 Falmouth Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Michelle Murray Brownstown B.D, CA Mary Burch 1384 Elmcreek Cir. , N. Canton, Ohio 44720 Veloma B. Waldrou 79780 Ryan Way B.D, CA 92201 Joe & Karen Cox 40791 Cienega P1 . B.D, CA John & May Montgomery 43960 Chapelton rd. B.D, CA 92201 Gary Fugderland 78-494 Ewarton rd. B.D, CA Christian & Lorraine Diede 78751 Montego Cir. B.D, CA Doris S. Hayes 79-310 Bowden Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Margaret S. McAbee Patricia Cuttman 79-108 Delta St. B.D, CA 92201 L. Whalg Bowden B.D, CA Patricia Caldwell 6414 Del Cerro Blvd. San Diego, CA 92120 Donna & Bill Hathaway 78885 Martinique Dr. B.D, CA Jerome L. Marie 79-260 F. King Dr. B.D, CA Becky Brewer 41-695 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA Louis E. Mohran 42-715 Glass Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. Paul Arco 43-397 Lacovea Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Shirla Ingram 79485 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Wendee Therson 79-470 Granada Dr. B.D, CA L.R. Lenarz 78-931 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Mark Ducan 78-770 Martinique B.D, CA Dennis Wourms 78791 Runaway Bay B.D, CA 92201 Minnie H. Swalling 2601 Marston Dr. Anchorage, Ak 99517 Joe brewer 41-695 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA John Frederick Wendler 79-921 42nd Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Beverly Glade 78-320 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Leticia Contieras 78-691 Runaway Bay B.D, CA 92201 Charles Powell 78-955 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA Ed Rodrigues 79433 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Conoll 680 Palmer rd. Labanon, TN 37087 Kenny Dinger 42785 Cerritos B. D, CA Catherine J. Hart 78600 Montego Bay B.D, CA 92201 l Bill Colemann 79-888 Boqueron Way B.D, CA 92201 Lawrence L. Rebschke 78-300 Csiner B.D, CA 92201 E. Stoltenberg Lot 21 Castle Harbor B.D, CA Arlene Goed Lot 61B Yucca Ln. B.D, CA Tanya Jaridly 21325 Hidden Pines, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Albert R. Puntureri Vacant Lots on Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 43234 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Elisa R. Manna 79-280 Spalding B.D, CA Louis E. Mohrar 42-715 Glass Dr. B.D, CA Linda Speaks 41-860 F. Hall rd. B.D, CA 92201 Maureen W. Robertson 79-340 Four Ports Ln. B.D, CA Robert C. Wedell 78-732 St. Thomas B.D, CA John Davis Murphy 43284 Lacovia Dr. B.D,CA S.P Development t1 P.O Box 837 Hawthorne, CA 90251-0837 MaryAnn & Gene Ahlgren 79137 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Marilyn Lafaro 43-200 Port Maria B.D, CA Walter Baker 4591 California B1vd.Santa Maria CA 93455 Carl A. Nilsen 79305 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Barry Sainseyain 78481 Ave 42nd #B B.D, CA 92201 Alex Tong 79-340 Eisenhower Way B.D, CA 92201 Jerry Lugo 79-860 Boqueron Way B.D, CA Kenneth L. Mueller 380 Panama Ave. Long Beach, CA 90814 Thomas J.Dorsey 9611 James Cir. Villa Park, CA 92667 Ave Channing 78-931 Savanna B.D, CA 92201 Vera B. Deeburg 17420 Candia St. Granada Hills, CA 91344 A.S Crest Richard David Kieffer 41-501 Trinity Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Stan & Carol Hertz 42-190 Tranquillo Pl. B.D, CA 92201 Kathleen A. Engle 79-571 Port Royal Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Leslie A. Kurtz 42511 May Pen B.D, CA Robert Magana 41381 Balauava Dr. B.D, CA Oscar & Patti Travland 79920 Trinidad Dr. B.D, CA Jose B. Lopez 79-745 Ave.40 B.D, CA 92201 Marilyn Wall 79967 Camelback Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Roslyn Deway Kingston St. B.D, CA William T. Bertl Chapleton Dr. B.D, Ca 43-300 Illinois Ave. Palm Desert, Ca 92260 Bruce V. Mallcenhorst 79002 Bayside Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Robert G. McCorkle 79418 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Robert Golding St. Lucia Ct. B. D, CA W. Clark 79344 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Francine R. Schirsteff 3030 Emmons Ave. 12C, Brooklyn, NY 11235 Norman Whichello 79-925 Boqueron Way B.D, CA 92201 Irvin & Badana Patterson 79-320 Eisenhower Way. B.D, CA 92201 Beth E. Aggerheck 42-440 Aruba Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Frank A. Corrao 79439 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, Ca 92201 Pauline Anthony 79015 Cliff St. B.D, CA R.H Smith 79120 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Carlos & Garciela Rodriguez 79590 Butter Bay P1. B.D, CA 92201 Bob & Janne Powell 79-304 Aruba Ct. B.D, CA 92201 M. Garcia 41-685 St. Anns Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 William E. Connell 78-580 Runaway Bay B.D, CA 92201 Mannuel Esperoza 81288 N. Palo Verde Dr. Indio Susan C. Durand 21810 Anza Ave. Torrance, CA 90503 Y Timothy L. Durnrond 78860 Runaway Bay B.D, CA Sandra R. Sanchez 47-036 Via Sorrento, Indio, CA 92201 A.S Davis 79-350 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Jeff Skorman 79974 Trinidad B.D, CA Bene J. Cerrito 79065 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Terry Basquin 79-441 Port Royal B.D, CA Fred Caterina 42-725 Caballeros Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Jannette Miller Spur Pl . B.D, CA Thomas W. Carter 41-260 Carter Ln. B.D, CA 92201 James K. Johnson 78-531 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Ralph L. Parke 43-420 Chapelton Dr. B. D, A 92201 A.A Ameday 78713 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Harold M. Hart 79437 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA H.K Marvin 78-400 Ave.41 B.D, CA Kathleen C. Poe 78-660 Runaway Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Walter& Yvonne Von Stockhausen 79108 Cliff St. B.D, CA Ann L. Grayson 79-130 Fred Waring B.D, CA Dave Evans 78-440 Runaway Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 D.W Tomely 78-530 Montego Cir. B.D, CA Jean L. Harris 43-391 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA Michael R. Gatto 40900 Yucca Ln. B. D, CA Howard & Laurie French 41730 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA Wallace & Elise Walker 41650 Yucca Ln. B. , CA 92201 Don Williams 78381 Orcabessa Dr. B.D, CA E. Dunlove 79850 Ave.42 B. D, CA Sander Salkind 78-440 Darby rd. B.D, CA 92201 Paula K. Salkind Carolyn McDermott 79-991 Boqueron B.D, CA Jim A. Powell 78-880 Runaway Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Michael W. Mangar 42-150 May Pen rd. B.D, CA 92201 William Bligh 78841 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA Louis Relral 41-745 Lima Hall rd. B.D, CA 92201 James R. Loomis 43271 Lacovia B.D, CA 92201 Ruth E. Cutrona 79-297 Eisenhower Way B.D, CA 92201 Frank Moser 43421 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Turany MacPherson 42-239 Adams B.D, CA Jesse Bailey 41805 Moneaque B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. Dan Cleal 41-740 Jamaica Sands B.D, CA Dmall Lee 43-640 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Glen D. Smith 78-461 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 John Pusano 40790 Cienga P1. B.D, CA Gary J. Hewson 11948 Chaparal St. L.A, CA 90049 S. Bogel 79-681 Calle Grant B.D, CA Bill & Suzie Waggoner 42-650 Honduras P1. B.D, CA 92201 Tim Unrntt 78-620 Darrell B.D, CA 92201 Mary & Arthur Seth 41-480 Trinity Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Pamela J. Kitchens 79960 Nassau P1. B.D, CA 92201 Virgina Blair 79-401 Bowden Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Sacey Maggie 78-950 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 1310 5th St. Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Fred Hailkarn 78570 Montego Bay Cir. Indio, CA 92201 T. McPhail Koslow Ct. B.D, CA Lloyd & Kristine Porter 207 Akiokala St. Kailua, Hawaii 96734 79-291 Port Royal B.D, CA Betty Herlag 79-540 Camelback Dr. B. D, CA 92201 Montego West Assn. Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Kitty R. Owens 9235 White Oak, Northridge, CA 91325 Donald W. Bitney 79-501 Ave. 42 B. D, CA Oistao 79-901 Camelback B. D, CA Wm. Wayne Nid 79450 Granada Dr. B.D, CA Theresa & Jon Talley 41-865 Front Hall rd. B.D, CA Elias Tranillo 79-491,79-493, 79-495 Ave. 40 B.D, CA Daniel B. Fiddler 41643 Brownstown B.D, CA Margaret R. Chacon P.0 Box 385 Indio, CA 92201 Michael & Rita Silverstein 42593 May Pen rd. B.D, CA 92201 Nedra L. Wagner 79-110 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. William Fowks 78499 Arcabessa rd. B.D, CA Robert W. Kazy 19248 Pebble Beach P1. Northridge,CA 91326 Josanne Beckman 78-745 Starlight Ln. B. D, CA Marvin Koslow 78391 Koslow Ct. B.D, CA C. & Patricia Ryan 41-610 Jamaica Sands Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Myoma Water Co. Adams B.D, CA John Reise 79340 Bowden Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Malcolm Burch 42711 Sandy Bay rd. B.D, CA 92201 Castle Harbour Assn. Castle Harbour Dr. B.D, CA Donald R. Fosten 79-016 Bayside Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Verne E. Adams 79-420 Four Paths Ln. B.D, CA 92201-1623 Carol E. Allardt 78640 Martinique B.D, CA 92201 James & Christy Powell 42-391 May Pen rd. B.D, CA C.E. Gregory 78-850 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Frank J. Verginia 79-345 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Jessie L. Schriedt 79-345 Country Club B.D, CA 92201 Harry G. Schmidt 79-100 Barwick P1. B.D, CA 92201 Leo A. Moyuren 1902 N.Broadway Santa Ana, CA Mr. & Mrs. Ron Walden 11013 Ocean Dr. Culver City, CA Locovia Ct. B.D, CA Barry J. Aronoff 79621 Port Royal B.D, CA Henery L. Ross Jr. 78-431 Koslow Ct. B.D, CA Art Celearez 78970 Montego Cir. B.D, CA Robert & Karen Darras 78-580 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA Sonra Hyde 78883 Archovy rd. B.D, CA 92201 Charles C. Wood 78471 Koslow Ct. B.D, CA Richard G. Ginest 41-360 Pedro Buff B.D, CA Von Patten 43-223 LaCovia B.D, CA Gale Harbour 79-321 Four Paths Ln. B.D, CA 92201 W. Geo Baker Darien Dr. B.D, CA Lehen McTodder 43-860 Culebra Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Harold E. Singerson 42416 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 John D. Buys 42-975 Darien Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Syd Granberg 79-370 Varner rd. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs Donald Kay 79440 Four Paths Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Joe N. Koretoff 8524 7th St. Downey, CA 90241 James W. Halloway 79820 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Andy Columbre 7873 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Donald R. DesCombras 78980 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA Joanne L. Salvatore 42-400 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 Kenneth H. Ruhel 78404 Ewarton rd. B.D, CA Frank E. McLane 79665 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA t •t �P:�k Luann Sorenson 41-805 St. Ann's Bay B.D, CA 92201 R. Elton Leith 79441 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Bill & April Sihester 42-325 St. George Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Robert L. Ratuff 79-190 Bog Walk B.D, CA 92201 Thomas White 42-665 Delhi P1. B.D, CA Barry L. Geheit 79-900 Camelback B.D, CA David C. Spates 79-840 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA Mr. & Mrs. Wiles M.Jones 4306 Wilkenson Ave. Studio City,CA 91604 Harold & Dorthy Knapp 3538 Arbor rd. Lakewood, CA 90712 Louis Bedford 41611 Jamaica Sands Dr. B.D, CA Harold Bedford Allen & Ingrid Howard Darien B.D, CA Bermuda Dunes Airport Corp. Ave. 42 B.D, CA Allan Howard Savannah La Mar B.D, CA Mrs. Mary Helen Dublin 43-349 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Anthony Sapien 79-985 Camelback Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. Roy Woehrnan 43321 Port Marie B.D, CA 92201 Norma R. Fiddler 79310 Port Royal B.D, CA E. Dunlevie 42555 Stardust Pl. B.D, CA 79555 St. Margarets B.D, CA Clare Stewart 79-645 Camelback B.D, CA George Walker 78451 Darby rd. B.D, CA 92201 Hartman 43-460 Old Harbour Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Jack Chesbrg 42-325 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 Jay & Margaret Hamelton 41-800 Brownstown Dr. B.D, CA Boyce Walker Runaway Dr. B.D, CA Jewel Tomlinson 42-529 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 Robert Froilsetif 42-700 St. George Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Thomas W. Fuidlgren 78490 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA Jamaica Sands Ave. 42 B.D, CA Jan D. Clarke 79-050 Ave 42 B.D, CA 92201 Glen Reike 42-420 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 J.M. Millan Jr. 79461 Bermuda Dunes B.D, CA Joe Sklar 7714 Varna St. North Hollywood,CA 91605 William A. Monaghan 79-465 Camelback B.D, CA 79-545 Camelback B.D, CA Mary Ann Bergqueist 42580 Stardust P1. B.D, CA 92201 Gordon R. Calvert 79-374 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, Ca 92201 Donna J. Lochelle 31 Seabrook Cove, Newport Beach 92660 Lot 104 Chappelton Dr. B.D, CA Hailey Nielson 41380 Alligator Pond rd. B.D, CA N. McFadden 42750 Darien Dr. B.D, CA 92201 G.J Arroyo 41-490 Pedro Buff B.D, CA 92201 Pamela Lang 78-845 Starlight B.D, CA Thomas W. & Helen B. Oliver 78-815 St. Thomas Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Chris Saloger 78941 Darby rd. B.D, CA 92201 Rocky Forry 40961 Cecina Way B.D, CA 92201 J.H Thompson Lot #46 Tr. #2681 B.D, CA Lot #48 tr. #2681 B.D, CA Lot #51 Tr.#2681 B.D, CA Lot #52 Tr. #2681 B.D, CA 79420 Granada Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Lot #66 MB 036/071 Golf Club Estates 3 Lot #54 Tr. #2681 B. D, CA L _ _ James W. Tarvee 79-345 Eisenhower Way B.D, CA 92201 Karen Dostal 41590 St. Ann's Bay B.D, CA 92201 John Winters 79-891 Ave. 42 B.D, CA 92201 William B. Hawkins Jr. 7974 Ave. 42 #3 B.D, CA 92201 Lyndse Rank Cabrillo B.D, CA Olga O. Gomez Bowden D. Cambridge B.D, CA Glen Tronblfrelif 79-940 Kingston B.D, CA 92201 R. Bruce Hagen 79-876 Boqueron Way B.D, CA Frank Gonzolas 1789 EL Dorado Ave. San Jose, CA 95126 D.G Aorten 79350 Four Paths Ln. B.D, CA Mannual Greda 40265 Galindo Ct. B.D, CA Jon Richardson 79370 St. Lucia Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Pete Sanchez 39-779 Desert Arroyo Dr.Palm Desert,CA David Cewantes Tabago Ct. B. D, CA Jeanne D. Baldwin 79-890 Ryan Way B.D, CA 92201 Robert E. Davis Sr. 79-461 Port Royal Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Sam Potts 79-142 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Gordon Quiel 79080 Barwick P1. B. D, CA 92201 Barry Mayer D.D.S 41-485 Adams St. #3 B. D, CA William C. Hannon 40-919 Cecina Way B.D, CA Maehan Adlerstein 79-192 Falmouth Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Joesph E. Roalison 43-420 Old Harbour Dr. B.D, CA Corey Putman 79180 Port Royal B.D, CA Ralph Conque Lot Mandeville Lot 193 B.D, CA 92201 Felix C. Stovall Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA Janis Laiacona May Pen P1 . B.D, CA Russ Marks 79-100 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA Michael & MaryAnn Ottmann 78-700 Montegon Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Kim Bowlin 40-345 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Judy Bowlin Mary C. Koearevic 41-880 Front Hall rd. B.D, CA 92201 Tom Gorman Starlight Ln. B.D, CA Helen Moretti 1247 40 Ave. San Francisco, Ca 94122 Frances & George Darling 78621 Runaway Bay B.D, CA 92201 Lillian Braviroff 2471 Brentwood, Palm Springs, Ca 92204 William A. Wolf 78-260 Darby rd. B.D, CA Lucy E. Benson 15525 Mountain View #9, Desert Hot Springs Elizabeth Solloway 78887 Sovanna Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Ed Stacy 79-979 Boqueron B.D, CA 92201 Duane Nishikuibo 79291 Spalding Dr. B.D, CA Debra Newgen 79-270 Bowden B.D, CA Barbara Carrasco 41860 Moneaque rd. B.D, CA Martin & Patty Bonafede 41591 Pedro Boff B.D, CA Robert C. Odell 43-705 Old Harbor B.D, CA 92201 Dale Csray Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Dale Wegne 79040 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Marshall L. McBride 79126 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Eric & Judith Redd 78783 Savanna La Mar B.D, CA Kathy Brown 41-411 Maroon Town B.D, CA Joseph W. Caley 79-580 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA Perry Ashby Kingston Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Joseph Runya Fred Waring Dr. #118 B.D, CA T. Knight 79-281 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Esther & Robert Robles 79840 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Rich Nabozny 42-671 Sandy Bay B.D, CA Leo Meyer 42510 Sandy Bay B.D, CA 92201 Alexander Mark 42-730 Somerset Way B.D, CA 92201 Janell & Jeff Percy 42631 May Pen rd. B.D, CA 92201 A. Dalskov 78381 Hope Bay rd. Indio, CA 92201 John R. Pefferle 42950 Darien B.D, CA 92201 William E. Thomas 79352 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Anthony V. Bartolotta 79231 Port Royal B.D, CA 92201 Hossein Modarressi 42750 Baracoa DR. B.D, CA 92201 Richard P. Garcia 79-381 Bowden Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Irving R. Cohen 43340 Chapelton DR. B. D, CA 92201 William Brown 42-205 Adams B.D, CA John Richards 79330 Spalding B.D, CA J.M Wormley, M.D 78741 Montego Bay Cir Dr. B. D, CA Keith Ortega 41-721 Nevis P1. B.D, CA 92201 David W. Perdens 79-855 Ryan Way B.D, CA 92201 Ray Rand 78900 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA Tobby Truay 41-461 Trinity Cr. B.D, CA Ronald Anderson 79638 Ave. 42 B.D, CA Helen E. Megeis 79-154 Buff Bay Ct. B.D, CA Charles Fairchild 79410 Montego Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Gregory & Susan Wells 79-380 Port Royal B.D, CA R. Coleman Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA E.P Heorodt 43-396 LaCovia B.D, CA Arthur & Judy Garcia 79-625 Ave. 40 B.D, CA 92201 P. Howell 42 Avenue B.D, CA Joyce Scott 79-271 Port Royal B.D, CA Carl & Joan Moister Starlight B.D, CA Cory Foy Santiago Lots 11 & 12 B.D, CA Clifford M. Sutter Nevis Pl. B.D, CA Dorothy W. Ricks 74955 San Ysidro, Palm Desert 41711 Brownstown B.D, CA Bill McMeans 41-100 Yucca In. B.D, CA 92201 Frank Garcia Sr. 79922 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Frank Garcia Jr. Steve Morale M.D 43-480 Chapelton B.D, CA 92201 Michael Bucmo 79-390 Port Royal B.D, CA Teri West 41775 Moneaque B.D, CA Alda & Arnold Jimenez 79820 Trinidad Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Claud & Edith Doolen 79-280 Port Royal B.D, CA Michael J. Bruey 42-830 May Pen rd. B.D,CA Jack Chesbro 42-325 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 Del Heil 79149 Starlight B.D, CA R.H Donaldson 43301 Chapelton Dr. B. D, CA 92201 Jerry L. Lee 79 580 Port Royal B.D, CA Todd Caddell 43541 Old Harbour Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Mrs. Kimberly J. Cira 41560 Cambridge Ave B.D, CA John A. Cira Ann Leswick 79200 Montego Bay Dr. B. D, CA 92202 Robert Hilton 79945 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Joseph Picthford 79-124 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Phyllis Engle Granada Dr. B.D, CA Rubin Zarlengo 79-380 Four Paths Ln. B. D, CA Pat Otis 79880 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Lasquale Zariengo Four Path Ln. B. D, CA Clair Murphy 42-550 Caballeros Dr. B.D, CA Frank Donna 79422 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Phyllis R. Park 78563 Arcabesa Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Dolores R. Riegh 78-711 Montego Bay Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Robert Riegh Gary Peterson 41800 St. Ann's Bay B.D, CA 92201 Rip Barter 79311 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 David Prus 43301 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Ted H. Zimmerman 78675 Darrell Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Byron K. Boettcher 43-400 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 D.W Logan 78-979 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Mrs. Paul 0. Wierk 78-540 Montego Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Charles Kramer 79858 Ryan Way B.D, Ca 92201 Michael Groat 41-321 Jamaica Sands Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Joanne Barajas Lima Hall rd. B.D, CA Michelle Green Cliff ST. B.D, CA Bruce Walter Montego Cir. B.D, CA Patricia Regar 41-651 trinity Cir B.D, CA Flora Ruje Teresa & Robert Devoe 79785 Trinidad Dr. B.D, CA Lauriane B. King 23607 Mongta Ave. Carson CA 90745 Bill Rennie 41-360 Jamaica Sands Dr. B.D, CA R.L Hagard 42-429 Adams St. #24 B.D, CA 92201 Larry Kraner 14 King Way Arcadia, Ca 94025 Michael Boyd 41590 Luanna P1. B.D, CA 92201 Lynne Minto 42-190 May Pen rd. B.D, CA 92201 L.J Clow Gregory & Laurie Gurrola 79560 Butler Bay B.D, CA Tom Meany 79-370 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Beaverly Shanna 79805 Trinidad B.D, CA 92201 G. Shanna LaVerna Tracy 42605 Castle Harbour Ct. B.D, CA H. Zano 79-361 42nd Ave. B.D, CA James J. Mohan 42-715 Glass Dr. B.D, CA Louie S. Patrani Runaway Bay B.D, CA Barbara Curie-Grans 78823 Saranna La Mar B.D, CA Mrs. R. Gustin 79-398 Montego Bay Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Hollis & Rosemary Shobe 78-656 Cascadia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Rose Short 125E Haven Ave. Arcadia, CA 91006 41780 Jamaica Sands B.D, CA 92201 Bernard J. Korr M.D 211 Spalding Dr. Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Clarence & Marion Carlson 500 W. 10th sp.84 Gilroy, CA 95020 Robert Knauf 79400 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Ricci Knauf Matt J. Zarch 10135 Wyston Northridge, CA 91324 Stanley E. Steinke Adams St. B.D, CA Marian Rawlins- Steinke Bermuda Colonies #25 B.D, CA Dale E. Va Berch 42-750 Caballeros Dr. B.D, CA Dorothy Mayes 78-831 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. Jon Fitzhenry 79-487 Camelback B.D, CA 92201 Jamie Reulman 78481 Hope Bay rd. B.D, CA A.0 Russell 78720 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA John W. Harvey Jamacia B.D, CA I, Robert & Sama Maksoudian 79580 Camelback B.D, CA 92201 W.R Hagen 79-200 Falmouth Dr. B. D, CA R. Magnacca 43-760 Chappelton B.D, CA Louise Cask 78-333 Darby rd. Indio, CA 92201 Thomas S. Ortiz 40-485 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Eugene C. Mason 79350 Bowden Dr. B.D, CA 92201-1215 George Martinson 79428 Montego Bay Dr. B. D, CA 92201 Richard C. Young 78-698 41 Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Paul Handlery 43-355 Lacovia B.D, CA Robert Tobbella Sr. 79-390 Bowden Dr. B.D, CA 92201 M. & A. Bonderman 20212 Village 20 Camarillo, CA 93012 D. Altenbern 126 Adams B. D, CA Gary & Julie McDonald 79445 Bermuda Dunes B.D, CA 92201 James F. Wright 79-040 Starlight Ln. B. D, CA 92201 Molly Turley 78731 Martinique B.D, CA Dolores V. Price 79540 Port Royal B.D, CA Kathryn Y. Musash Peterfield B.D, CA Robert H. Eulie 43480 Bath Point Ct. B.D, CA 92201 John M. Hayes 43-901 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Allen Howard Lot Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA R.W Anderson 148 E Valencia St. Rialto, CA 92376 Lot 124 Front Hall rd. B.D, CA Bernice & Vincent Westberg 43720 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Viva Steubin 78-480 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 M. Majidi May Pen Dr. Lot 120 B. D, CA Robert Long 42980 Cerritos Dr. B.D, CA Peter & Anne Browne 42755 Darien Dr. B.D, CA Jerry Punks Kingston B.D, CA Gail A. Dieterich 79205 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Thomas Swest 79-311 Port Royal B.D, CA Dorothy S. Kolls 79-714 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 John & June Wagner 2711 Calle Aventure, Rancho Palos Verdes Lots 140 and 1/2 of 141 B.D, CA Jarron-Andean Assoc. 78404 Ave. 42 B.D, CA Stuart Compton 42580 Maracay P1. B.D, CA 92201 Mary J. Brooks 79391 Bowden B.D, CA Mr. & Mrs. Frank Capp 78-740 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA Robert &JoEllen Jones 79-170 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Bill Magsom 79591 Port Royal B.D, CA Norman & Sally Anne Diego 40853 Cienega P1. B. D, CA 92201 Herman G. Cabrora 41-521 Trinity Cir. B.D, CA Melody S. Cabrora Constance Currie Chase 79332 Montego Bay B.D, CA 92201 Bruce & Linda Roberson 43320 Port Maria rd. B.D, CA 92201 David & Veronica Enter 79-716 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Frank R. Goodman 78-200 Hidden River rd. B.D, CA Carol L. Trierweiler 79845 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA Lloyd & Sari Miller 41-870 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Deloras J. Olson 42650 Dariem Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Cefrieda Redfield 78820 Runaway Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Bonafede's 41-830 St. Annes B.D, CA Arel Warner Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA Gary S. Eachel 43841 Port Maria B.D, CA Benjamin Briskovich 1684 Laraine Cir. San Pedro, CA 90732 Stanley W. Gerlach 42-470 Buccaneer Ct. B.D, CA Gene Bokemeier 41679 Maroon Town rd. B.D, CA 92201 Doug Bowles 41-381 Jamaica Sands Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Ralph Dutro 78561 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Lois B. Dutro Suzanne Jakel 41-106 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Reiner K. Jakel Karel Novak 78-960 Martinique Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Robert & Emid Ferrand Starlight Ln. B.D, CA Kathrine & Charles Woode 42-433 May Pen rd. B.D, CA 92201 Bill Taylor 79090 Barwick B.D, CA S. Carlsen 42-830 Sandy Bay B.D, CA Irving W. Kramer M.D 42-495 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 Lura Mcee 78716 Cascadia Dr. B.D, CA Helen Mustarn 317 N. 7th Montebello, CA 90640 Randy Hewitson 79251 Ave. 42 B.D, CA Joyce C. Pistulka 5172 Galamo Camarillo, A 93012 Frank Teraz 41-560 Alligator rd. B.D, CA James O. Anderson 79281 Port Royal B. D, CA Rennie Tejida Bermuda Dunes Dr. B. D, CA Kathleen H. Tejida Allen Howard Lot-Starlight Ln. B.D, CA Sharon L. Howard 43866 Adams Dr. Palm Desert, CA 92260 Darby rd. B.D, CA Kerby & Linda McGraw 79-930 Nassau P1 . B.D, CA Harry & Janet Grant 42480 Buccaneer Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Jean G. Mullenax 79-521 Country Club Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Joe Mullenax 78-676 Cascadia B.D, CA Jeanie Dreier 42-270 May Pen rd. B.D, CA Lenore Magbee 43-259 LaCovia B.D, CA Dorothy King 78-570 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA Todd & Martha Sommons 40960 Cecina Way B.D, CA Linda Embrey 79161 Falmouth B.D, CA 92201 Gary L. Embery Brian Baggett 79-109 Dine Lake B.D, CA Opal W. Temple 15755 Vose St. Van Nuys, CA 91406 Bryan Case 43-900 Culebra Ln. B.D, CA Mary J. Barta 10720 Riverside Dr. North Hollywood, CA 42018 Washington St. Indio, CA Shari Spencer 78400 Orcabessa Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Gladys Chesnut 78-380 Ewarton rd. B.D, CA 92201 Charles Bames 5097 Berryhill P1. Riverside, CA 92507 A.0 Patel 41865 Lima Hall B.D, CA 92201 Arthur Wollgast 9462 San Carlos Spring Valley, CA 92077 Donald McCormick 78925 Martinique Dr. B.D, CA 92201 David J. Gleason 41825 Trinity Cir. B.D, CA 92201 B.J Gasser 43260 Chapelton B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. Jay Kepoch 41-761 Cambridge Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Diane Marsden 79351 Bowden B.D, CA 92201 Carolyn Burns 8405 Wanatchee Ave. E1 Cajon, CA 92021 Robert Burns Roberto DeAztlan 79-905 Ciego Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Fabian 78-790 Martinique Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Tamy Boter 79-220 Terry Way B.D, CA 92201 Floyd & Mildred Cash 78341 Darby rd. B.D, CA 92201 Bruce A. Powers 41691 Jamacia Sands Dr. B.D, CA 92201 L.A. Wooden 41-555 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Lee D. & Lila J. Miller 41601 Jamaica Sands Dr. B. D, CA 92201 D. Edwards 78625 Orcabessa B.D, CA Robert Leon 42710 Somerset Way B.D, CA Lillian Leon Mr. & Mrs. Frank Dyer III 42-750 May Pen rd. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. L.R O'Neil 78-675 St Thomas B.D, CA 92201 Dean L. Gaudy 42720 Caballeros rd. B.D, CA Fernando Garcia 78655 St. Thomas Dr. B.D, CA Dr. & Mrs. Art Davis 40525 Yucca In. B.D, CA 92201 Jeff P. Roberts 79-410 Spalding B.D, CA 92201 Joseph Serwatka 79-250 Spalding Dr B.D, CA 92201 Linda Nevins 41-830 Front Hall rd. B.D, CA 92201 Kathryn M. Dorman 42520 Baracoa Dr. B.D, CA 92201 David Abel 40601 Starlight Ln. B. D, CA 92201 Richard & Judy Johnson 41-893 Brownstown Dr. B.D, CA 92201 U. Singer 78-441 42nd Ave. B.D, CA 79-360 42nd Ave. B.D, CA Terry Ayers 78-680 Runaway Bay Dr. B.D, CA Eugene Smith 78-790 Darby rd. B.D, CA 92201 Kenneth Thompson 78-710 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA Mr. & Mrs. Milton Staples79301 Ave 42 B.D, CA Mr. & Mrs Olinto Cinami 42300 Barbados Way B.D, CA 92201 Cynthia Tauferner 41680 St. Anns Bay B.D, CA 92201 Marie Uribe P.0 Box 995 E1 Toro, CA 92630 79-141 Ave 42 B.D, CA Vivian & Jack Hans 41660 Trinity Cir. B.D, CA 92201 O.E Hollrig 42-475 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 M.0 Shubin 78-480 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Hester Port Royal B.D, CA John J. Marenteae 42350 Sandy Bay B.D, CA 92201 P.N Collins 1246 N. Siesta St. Anaheim, Ca 92801 Anna E. Collins Charles & Mary Ellen Byrne 2260 Verbena Ave. Upland, CA 91786 Mary L. Baum 416 Jeffries Ave.sp61 Monrovia, CA 91016 Kelly Yamada 79-880 Camelback Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Marie M. Keolick 41-471 Maron Town B.D, CA 92201 Robert M. Zachmann 41720 Cambridge Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Richard L. Miller Darby rd. B.D, Indio, CA David Patino 41-321 Pedro Buff B.D, CA 92201 Doris C. Rigdon 22372 Cam Moscalero Laguna Hills, CA Mace Magbee 43-259 Lacovia B.D, CA Michelle Byer-McLaughlin Port Royal B.D, CA Roshan L. Sharma Lot #255 Balaclavia Dr. Bermuda City Robert Minder 79021 Bayside Ct. B.D, CA Sandi Minder Robert Littell 79382 Montego Ct. B.D, CA 92201 J.R Callahan 79-372 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Vivian H. De Bais 24701 Raymond Way #191 E1 Toro, CA 92630 W.R Hammond 79331 Eisenhower Way B.D, CA 92201 H.A Ashley 79330 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Rod Olson 79-110 Barwick P1 . B.D, CA 92201 Steve Isen 79260 Spalding Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Joan E. Bowen 78676 Ave 41 B.D, A 92201 Willy Crawford 79560 Port Royal B.D, CA 92201 Kathy Crawford Shawn Crawford William C. Wood 225 1/2 Whiting St. E1 Segundo, CA 90245 Jerry Gordon 79460 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Robert & Shirley Harrington 42575 St. George Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Marilyn& Earl Blankenship 79085 Dune Lake St. B.D, CA 92201 Patricia H. Leacoch 77225 Michigan Dr. Palm Desert, Ca 92260 Robert H. Phillips 78805 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA Jean L. Phillips Richard M. Frederick 41-451 Cambridge B.D, CA Cid & Susan Noma 79-420 40th P1. B.D, CA 92201 Deborah Stabele 41785 Trinity Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Charles Lester 78-765 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Hildebrand 79-990 Camelback B.D, CA 92201 Suzanne B. Miller 42565 Glass Dr. B.D, CA 92201 G.H Lorenzo 79105 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA David B. Breadly 79-030 Bayside Ct. B.D, CA Paul A. Dearden 41-401 Pedro Bluff B.D, CA 92201 Mellie Ruth Dearden Anthony & Kathy Berket 79535 St. Margarets Bay B.D, CA Hal LeDuc 72770 Somerset B.D, CA Peter Salkind 79-282 Eisenhower Way B.D, CA 92201 H.F Dachenhouser 41450 Cambridge Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Dennis R. Jones 41561 Nevis Pl. B.D, CA Elaine D. Freers 43611 Old Harbour Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. Michael Prescott 41800 Lima Hall B.D, CA Michael Kushner 12204 Wixom St. North Hollywood, CA Margaret & Jack Ewing 78710 St. Thomas B.D, CA 345-8508 Daniel R. Metz 78715 Martinique Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Gwen F. Randall 79-990 Boqueron Way B.D, CA 92201 Richard E. Fauseldo 42-311 May Pen rd. B.D, CA 92201 Richard G. Nill 79-341 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Ted E. Christiansen 79665 Bermuda Dunes DR. B.D, CA Jean Maguin 10623 Horley Ave. Downey, CA 90241 Pete Olfeson 42-510 Caracus Pl. Palm Desert, CA 92260 John Dunbabin 79575 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA Betty S. Summers 42670 Hondoras Pl. B.D, CA Manuel & Marcie M. Rivera 79015 Dune Lake B.D, CA 92201 Lesley Getz 40-791 Cecina Way B.D, CA 92201 Christine Bolish 79620 Butler Bay Pl . B.D, CA 92201 G. Neyer 78-985 Runaway Bay B.D, CA Joseph R. Quasarano 43361 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Gene McCauliff III 43761 Port Maria B.D, CA 92201 Roy Odle 79-109 Cliff B.D, CA 92201 J.H Meidl 79-140 Montego Bay B.D, CA 92201 David L. Gipson 42-391 Sandy Bay rd. B.D, CA Paula Hatrak 43830 Warner Trail P.D, CA 92260 Mr. & Mrs. L.A Applegate 78-315 Darby rd. Indio, CA 92201 Luis Morena May Pen rd. B.D, CA Patricia J. Moose Kingstion Dr. B.D, CA Tom Sullivan 42631 Sandy Bay B.D, CA 92201 Edward M. Fernandez 43-246 LaCovia B.D, CA 92201 Donna Schuler 79280 Bowden B.D, CA 92201 Mercy G. Vasquez 78790 St. Homas B.D, CA Roger D. Boyer 41775 Lima Hall rd. B.D, CA Shandon A. Carter In. B.D, CA Leon Timms 78-930 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 J.0 Lane 79-687 CountryClub Dr. B.D, CA 92201 John Sewter 79445 Camelback B.D, CA 92201 Doris N. Hedreen 42-485 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 Robert & Edith Willard 79845 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Marge Werbra 79040 Bermuda Dunes B.D, CA Robert E. Peterson 42-520 Caracas Pl. B.D, CA 92201 John Dermcan 41541 Jamaica Sands B.D, CA 92201 Joe Lovely 42414 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 Rubin Zarlengo 79-380 Four Paths Ln. B.D, CA 92201 James B. Edwards 27361-206 N. Sierra Hwy Canyon Country,CA Lot #95 B.G.C.E unit 2 Lucille Trulson 79400 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Donna Nagel Durgin 24324 SE 473rd ST Enumclaw, WA 98022 Jack W. Hooper 79-301 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Don & Reta Singer Jamaica Sands Lot #120 Tr. 2508 B.D, CA Harrold M. Young 81-910 Arus St. Indio, CA 92201 Dale E. Young 82-849 lexington Indio, CA Duane L. Young Jefferson St. B.D, CA James K. 40575 Carter In. B.D, CA Mrs. R.D Green Montego Bay Cir. B. D, CA Barbara Hughes 400 Jasmine Ave. Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 Lot On Runaway Bay B.D, CA Thomas P. Conniff 79-162 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Eliseo Tinanjo 528 La Mont DR. Monterey Park, PA 91754 Claudie Hickman 43-211 LaCovia B.D, CA Chasia Leho Yucca Ln. B.D, CA Ken Herddy 41500 Trinity Cir. B.D, CA Joe H. Ellis 43-411 Old Harbour Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Mannuel Riez 79-440 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Katherine M. Peterson 79-396 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Stephen W. Briggs Jr. 42-450 Adams St. B.D, CA 92201 Mary C. Briggs Peter C. Muszynsky Lot 28 Castle Harbour B.D, CA A.A Kuri 79080 Montego Bay B.D, CA Robert C. & Ellen Housker 41701 Nevis P1. B.D, CA 92201 Emmett Ghenihan 43403 Lacovia B.D, CA Tom Gomez 43381 Chapelton B.D, CA 92201 Stanford L. Holragren 79325 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA F.A Del Giorgio 78660 Montego Bay Cir. Dr. B.D, CA Rebbecca R. Tlrk 1339 Hacienda St. Anaheim, CA 92804 Opal & Earl W. Prunes 79-705 Calle Grant B.D, CA Janet E. Newcomb 42750 Sandy Bay rd. B.D, CA 92201 Steve Kelly 127 Starcrest Irvine, CA 92715 Lots #118 & 119 B.D, CA Mark V. Hanset 41865 Peterfield rd. B.D, CA 92201 Carl B. Bennett 43-205 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Tom Ruggieri 325 Montego Bay B.D, CA Antonia Girard 78-790 Darby rd. B.D, CA 92201 Carol LeDuc Montego Bay B.D, CA William & Mary Piggott 41720 Jamaica Sands Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Mike & Linda Teagire 79-990 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA Louis A. Cavagnaro 41-621 Nevis Pl. B.D, CA 92201 Michael & Donna McInerney41401 Jamaica Sands Dr. B.D, CA 92201-3509 John Peck 46385 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA G. Kerwood 42580 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Frank & Lucy Hube 79-580 Butler Bay Pl. B.D, CA 92201 S. Howard Bartley 78670 St. Thomas Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. Terry Lackey 41-820 Jamaica Sands B.D, CA 92201 Norman Seto 79-600 Butler Bay P1. B.D, CA 92201 Theresa & Glenn Millan 79940 Nassau Pl . B.D, CA 92201 T. Majid 42190 Lima Hall B.D, CA Brad Russbawn 79-810 Ryan Way B.D, CA 92201 William H. Fitch 78-641 Runaway Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Thomas & Socarro Sheehan 78-931 Darby rd. B.D, CA 92201 Virgina M. Kasey 42-345 St. George Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Kenneth M. Barbier 41301 Jamaica Sands B.D, CA Arthur J. Murphy 41780 Trinity Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Albert E. Lingreen 1300 La Loma rd. Pasadena, CA 91105 Terry Fox 41-155 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Clyde R. Brigance 79-420 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Larry Shgain 41-500 Jamaica Sands B.D, CA John & Wilda Hickey 79-439 Ave. 40 B. D, CA Dennis D. Campbell Sandy Bay rd. B.D, CA Geraldine Campbell Fred H. Koch 78-755 St. Thomas B.D, CA Will March Port Maria rd. B.D, CA M.G Smith 76-854 Castle Ct. Palm Desert, CA 92260 Lot 36 MB 054/062 Tr 3216 B.D, CA Dennis Rowe 42-190 Sandy Bay rd. B.D, CA 92201-1363 Stephen J. Uesh 79991 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, 92201 Edwina L. Hodges 42-555 St. George Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Jack Gibilisco 43820 Culebra Ln. B.D, CA Sharon Thompson 78698 Cascadia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Laurie Johnson 78422 Darby rd Indio, CA 92201 Noah P. Williams 78550 Darby rd. Indio, CA 92201 Joseph Mudry 43187 Chapelton B.D, CA Raul A. Perison 78-761 Savana La Mar Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Arron R. Jordan 41-561 Luanna pt. Dr. B.D, CA George S. Hiddleston 43313 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Ray W. Morden 77662 Nessaica Dr. Palm Desert, Ca William M. Weathers 42-875 Darien Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Semone & Jack Jaffe 78-301 True Country Dt. B.D, CA 92201 Jack Gregg 79-705 Bermuda Dunes B.D, CA Paula S. Singer 79661 Port Royal B.D, CA Don Short 41-440 Trinity Cir. B.D, CA Deanna J. Short Frank T. McIntosh 43-721 Port Maria rd. B.D, CA 92201 Mardlee S. Bury 79165 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Mitchell P. Pries M.D 42-560 Maracay B.D, CA Terry Derbigny 41-631 Jamaica Sands B.D, CA Jean Blanchard 79265 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 August R. Schange 78-624 Darby rd. Indio, CA 92201 Mike & Laura Alcorn 78841 Savanna La Mar Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Robert C. Halloway 79-235 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Donna Vilalta 79-290 Port Royal Ave. B.D, CA 92201 John F. Lalusle 79-134 Starlight Ln. B-D, CA Kenneth E. Lutzow, Trinity Cir. B.D, CA Paul J. Codekar 79530 Port Royal B.D, CA 92201 Pam Leja-Romjue Cambridge B.D, CA K.R. Welsh 43-520 Port Maria B.D, CA 92201 A.J Messina 79-590 Port Royal Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Colleen Butridas 79-561 Port Royal B.D, CA David Carmer 79275 Bermuda Dunes Dr. CA 92201 Donald J. Newey 78350 Ave. 41 B.D, CA 92201 Eve D. Newey Emer & Rose DeSory 79-341 Spalding Dr. B.D, CA 92201 M.G Smith 76-854 Castle Ct. Palm Desert, CA 92260 St. Thomas B. D, CA Joseph Topolski 41200 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Francis Markley 42-655 Dec-Hi P1. B.D, CA 92201 Arthur B. McMurray 169 Franklin Ave. San Gabriel, CA 91775 Emma McMurray John H. Thompson Jr 78698 Cascadia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Leonard E. Hickman 42-540 Caraens P1. B.D, CA 92201 John P. Stevens 79210 Port Royal B.D, CA Laura S. Stevens Antonio D. Holgrun Port Royal B.D, CA Candace Collins St. Annes Bay B.D, CA John Shorter 78731 Runaway Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 June Swain Alligatior Pond rd. B.D, CA Al & Lori Reshaw 79571 Butler Bay B.D, CA Rod A. Farud 79-465 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA M.G Euglise 79080 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Pauline Euglise Roy Farina 79945 Boqueron Way B.D, CA 92201 Dorothy J. Miller 786470 Orcabessa Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Tom Ruggieri 7958 Ryan Way B.D, CA Ralph Thorson 79595 Bremuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Navat L. Lonles 78620 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA Carl McManis 79920 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA 92270 Santo Bringmond 3942 Ravenwood Dr. Yorba Linda, CA 92686 Marvin A. Larson 43120 Port Maria rd. B.D, CA Norman Stuff 79-875 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA . C. Lyons 43-380 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA Fred Cinimo 43460 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA Wiley J. House 78-541 Montego Bay Cir. B.D, CA 92201 Patricia A. Rodgers 43611 Port Maria B.D, CA 92201 Lewis Ratinoff 41-800 Front Hall rd. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs William Bower 41805 Front Hall rd. B.D, CA 92201 Pauline Carian 79158 Buff Bay Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Stewart Case 79-021 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 George E. Sharp 874 Tomopa Dr. Pacific Palisades, CA 90272 Mary E. Sharp Marion Tingley Fahrenkamp Star Route Box 977E Tytle Creek, CA 92358 Douglas Anderson 42590 Maraon P1 . B.D, CA 92201 James & Janet Moore 41761 Hopewell Ave. B.D, CA 92201 l - Valerie Garcia 41685 Lima Hall B.D, CA Jim W. Noble 42675 St. George Dr. B. D, CA 92201 Robert Wilmeth Jr. 79-191 Port Royal Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Kennard Webster 79346 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 E.A White M.D 79-446 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Robert M. Halverson 43-220 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Lurie Bonds 40520 Myoma rd. Indio, CA 92201 Frank & Carol Goddard 79575 Mandeville rd. B.D, CA 92201 Shiow Laiw Port Maria rd. B.D, CA Dale Pence 79-860 Ryanway B.D, CA 92201 Jan Satterfield 79-166 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA George M.Crasier 79-134 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 C. Stephen Booth 42753 Sandy Bay rd. B.D, CA 92201 Mrs. C. Freduccia Camelback Dr. B.D, CA Trinidad B.D, CA Wesley R. Smith 79331 Spalding Dr. B.D, CA B. Pichler 78-305 Ave. 41 B.D, CA Mr. & Mrs. L.E Rieu 43-337 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA Wm. E. Talley 42519 Adams #46 B. D, CA 92201 Robert & Darlene Blake 41530 Alligator Pond B.D, CA Elizabeth Swinklemar 79-194 Locovia Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Gene R. Hunt 79-361 owden Dr. B. D, CA 92201 Maria Y. Hunt L.W Dayton 79-860 Camelback B.D, CA Jean Sentry 4606 Tweedy Pl. So. Gate, CA 90280 Bill Piersy 79-090 Bermuda Dunes B.D, CA 92201 Carl & Tammy 79-381 Prot Royal B.D, CA 92201 Hugh S. Beck 79421 Port Royal Ave. B.D, CA 92201 A. & Charlotte Belasco 79-281 Bowden Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. John L Hagy 79320 Port Royal Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Lynda A. Schwayekept 79-585 Kingston B.D, CA 92201 L.A Drazin 42660 Honduras Pl. B.D, CA 92201 Jack N. Rodgers 43-611 Port Maria B.D, CA 92201 Louis B. Souza 79-328 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Aurelio & Carmen E. Leon 1741 W. Sallie Ln. Anaheim, CA 92804 Jeff Hayden 79-310 Spalding Dr. B.D, CA Mary Campbell 78-801 Savanna La Mar B.D, CA 92201 Roger A. Richards 40700 Carter Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Yvonne Furnari Darby rd. B.D, CA Peter L. DeLuca 43-500 Old Harbour Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Jeffery McCool 41-565 Balaclavia Dr. B.D, Ca 92201 Thomas Wolter 41-325 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. Ray Rodriguez 79-895 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA Jerry F. Brandt 42-945 Cerritos Dr. B.D, CA 92201 O.H & Ella Washam 79700 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Donald Hauser 42680 Caballros B.D, CA 92201 Arthur D. Axeleod 79-152 Buff Bay Ct. B.D, CA 92201 Vance H.Riddle Jr. 43680 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA 92201 B. Mayberry 43-801 Port Maria rd. B.D, CA 92201 Perry D. Koon 43-217 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Rose Marie Leskter 79-084 Delta St. B.D, CA Jerry Larson Lot 10 Fred Waring B.D, CA T.0 Meeks 43-331 Lacovia DR. B.D, CA 92201-8016 Howard & June Peever Corner of Adams & 41 Ave. B.D, CA Allen & Barbara Hogan 79-955 Bogueron Way B.D, CA 92201 Don Baurman 79063 Dune Lake St. B.D, CA 92201 Carl & Vivian Hodges P.0 Box 997 Indio, CA 92202 Kurt & E. Beller 43-651 Old Harbour Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Donna Gioia 79-340 Fred Waring B.D, CA 92201 Mary G. Reggau 42-499 Adams B.D, CA 92201 J.H Butch 41-830 Petersfield rd. B.D, CA 92201 Robert D. Housker 79-331 Port Royal B.D, CA 92201 C. Alvin Glass 43433 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA Dan Donati 79-840 Trinidad Dr. B.D, CA Elden Evenson 79-320 Four Path Ln. B.D, CA May M. Mayer 79-348 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Don & Jerry Haggard 79580 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA Elmer Wicks 40536 Myoma Indio, CA Walter & Connie Gorsuch 41-800 Moneaque rd. B.D, CA Greg Tonkinson 41-901 Brownstown B.D, CA Becky Tonkinson James E. Pokeet 43-501 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA 92201 R.A Bender 79-330 Bowden Dr. B.D, CA Penny Bender John W. Mitchell 43421 Lacovia Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Daniel L. Riter 79-016 Cliff St. B.D, CA 92201 Kent Norby Port Royal B.D, CA Mark Pick 41-731 Cambridge B.D, CA Mr. & Mrs. R.W Magers 41-155 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA Lester Erickson Country Club Dr. B.D, CA Wylen & Lynoure Won 79170 Prot Royal B.D, CA 92201 Herman E. Smith 42-850 Cerritos B.D, CA 92201 Pedro L. Alatorre 79-361 Spalding Dr. B. D, CA 92201 Tom & Debbi Preston 41-619 Balaclava Dr. B.D, CA Elmer C. Schick Jr. 43751 Old Harbour Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Larry Homer Spalding Dr. B.D, CA Lucille N. Lyle 422711 May Pen rd. B.D, CA 92201 Francine L. Ruben Roberts Don Eisenacher 78-171 Prot Royal B.D, CA Billy R. Messen 40486 Myoma Indio, CA 92201 Philip R. Furnari Darby rd. B.D, CA Chris & Lori Mathewson 41715 St. Annes Bay Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Rose B. Carriker 1237 E. Monroe Ave. Orange, CA 92667 Pete Lussier 41-655 Lima Hall St. B.D, CA 92260 Ray C. Jones 41710 Brownstown Dr. B.D, CA Beverly G.Hachten 79-320 Spalding Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Dorothy A. Zienba 12211 Wilken Way Garden Grove, CA Haggo R. Jauch 17251 Wild Rose Ln. Huntington Beach, CA Joseph L. Linn 79-120 Barwick rd. B.D, CA 92201 Anthony Poshka 78-465 Granada Dr. B.D, CA 92201 John & Diane Burton 40-955 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA Allen Willard 43-641 Chapelton B.D, CA 92201 Perry J. Paston 40-955 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Theresa Purchase 78441 Orcabessa B.D, CA Ronald E. Hugher 79-860 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Steven S. Gralla 79311 Spalding B.D, CA 92201 Mr. & Mrs. Charles Sandoval 79-062 Cliff St. B.D, CA 92201 Murial R. Collup 31-800 Via Las Palmas Thousand Palms, Ca Mr. & Mrs. James Grenski 79-016 Dune Lake St. B.D, CA Mae Sterling 79805 Kingston Dr. B.D, CA 92201 James Douglas 42-175 Adams B.D, CA Frank Clapinski Jr. 41-861 Brownstown Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Walt Criner 79-820 Camelback B.D, CA 92201 Jay Visser 78-871 Savanna La Mar B.D, CA 71-250 Cholla Palm Desert, Ca Kenneth Brown 41701 Cambridge Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Joseph J. Mroczka 42593 Sandy Bay rd. B. D, CA 92201 Abigail L. Ray 41-455 Pedro Bluff B.D, CA 92201 Tommy Mozzella Yucca Ln. B.D, CA Mary Jane McGill 41710 St. Anns Bay B.D, CA 92201 Scott Attay 41-650 Luanna Point Dr. B.D, CA Susan & Bill Urdrian 79-451 Port Royal B.D, CA 92201 Brian Curley 79-816 Spur Pl. B.D, CA Nancy R. Killiawe 78500 Ave 42 B.D, CA 92201 Chris & Patty Thompson Ave. 41 B. D, CA Ave. 42 B.D, CA Corey Angniano 41-530 Balaclava B.D, CA Steve & Diane Nielsen 41-801 Hopewell B.D, CA Billy Jean Brown 41-701 Cambridge Ave. B.D, CA Tony Pescador 41-471 Balaclava B.D, CA 92201 Toby Rein 43-240 Port Maria rd. B.D, CA 92201 J. Queucer 79640 Bermuda Dunes Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Bier Garrison 43-300 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Karin Rosenstrom 41411 Balaclava Dr. B.D, CA John H. Preston 79780 Camelback Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Bill Chu Port Maria B.D, CA Mike & Vicki Moore 78-716 41st Ave. B.D, CA 92201 Rudolph & Alice Pfief 41-270 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Steven C. Welty 77665 Barons Cir. B.D, CA 15 Acres on Ave 41 B.D, CA C. Keuern 78545 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA 92201 Miyeko Miosashi 41-805 Petersfield rd. B.D, CA 92201 Mikio Takamatsu 79442 Montego Bay B.D, CA Frank H. Maas 79-626 Ave 42 B.D, CA Robert L. Green 2 Minose Cir. Lafayett Hill, CA 19444 Ronald B. Bryce 79-971 Boqueron Way B.D, CA 92201 Pam K. Thurston 41500 Luanna P1. B.D, CA. M. Younger 42-785 Cerritos Dr. B.D, CA 92201 George C. Cseolalo 14540 Brownstown Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Earl & Marilyn Boettcher 42-780 Cerritos Indio, Ca 92201 Chen Hung-Yu Wu Adams St. B.D, CA H.K Maroiu 78-400 41st Ave B.D, CA Robert L. Jodi 42-915 Cerritos Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Order & Harrita Maris 41735 Yucca Ln. B.D, CA 92201 J. Greenup 41-750 Adams B.D, CA Donald Kay 79440 Four Path Ln. B.D, CA 92201 William A. Monaghan 40-395 Starlight Ln. B.D, CA John Daran 50-021 Kenmore Coachella, CA 92236 William Devine 72-647 Somera rd. Palm Desert, CA 92260 L. Peterson 79-840 Camelback Dr. B.D, CA 92201 Tayler Soper 34-774 Sage Dr. Thousand Palms, CA Jim Gilbert 78695 Danner B.D, CA Lara Burge 42-200 Tranquillo P1. B.D, CA 92201 William DeYoung 81-900 Aries St. Indio, CA 92201 William Watson 79-733 Country Club Dr. B.D, CA I. Erley 43-481 Old Harbour Dr. B.D, CA MEA Foundation 43-076 Washington B.D, CA 92201 C. Pratt 42-588 Standust P1 . B.D, CA 92201 J. Cavlan 78900 Savanna La Mar B.D, CA 92201 John Scelsa 78-920 B.D, CA Dr. George Daniel 14016 S.E 251st Kent, WA 98042 Glenda E. Nordmeyer 79-815 Trinidad Dr. B.D, CA Lura & Paul Ryden 4525 Corona Dr. 'San Jose, CA 95129 Wilard L. Cummings Jr. 79-188 Bog Walk B.D, CA 92201 Michael Joyce 78690 Montego Bay Dr. B.D, CA Huge Swanson 43801 Chapelton Dr. B.D, CA Kenneth C Younger 42785 Cerritos Dr. B.D, CA R. Null 5638 S. Keeler Ave. Chicago, Ill 60629 Gerald & Gloria Capps 42-551 May Pen B.D, CA 92201 Jonathan Landan 78680 Starlight B.D, CA Susan Huff 42-855 Caballeros Dr. B.D, CA 92201 William F. Grgurich 387 Granada Way Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Sara Price 42495 Kansas Palm Desert, CA 92260 Adda Jay Rodarte 42673 May Pen B. D, CA 92201 LAFCO 91-19-4--ANNEXATION 6 TO CITY OF LA QUINTA LIST OF LANDOWNERS' ADDRESSES OPPOSING ANNEXATION (NAMES ILLEGIBLE) FORM LETTERS ONLY LAFCO 91-19-4 List of Landowners Opposing Annexation Form Letters with Illegible Names 78-900 Anchor Rd. , Bermuda Dunes, CA 43-801 Chapelton Dr. , Bermuda Dunes, CA 78-180 Ave 41, Bermuda Dunes, CA 79357 Montego Bay Dr. , Bermuda Dunes, CA 42-825 Caballaros, Bermuda Dunes, CA 41-640 Porus Ct. , Bermuda Dunes, CA 79-386 Montego Ct. , Bermuda Dunes, CA 78670 Montego Bay Circle, Bermuda Dunes, CA 79895 Oryan Way, Bermuda Dunes, CA 43445 Lacovia Dr. , Bermuda Dunes, CA Chapelton Dr. , Bermuda Dunes, CA Lot 69 Bermuda Dunes, CA 79-530 St. Margaret's Bay, Bermuda Dunes, CA 78565 Darby Rd. , Indio, CA 79-560 Ave 42 , Bermuda Dunes, CA 434480 Port Maria, Bermuda Dunes, CA 79-733 Country Club Dr. , Bermuda Dunes, CA 42-825 Dakin Dr. , Bermuda Dunes, CA 41-477 Pedro Buff, Bermuda Dunes, CA Santrey, Bermuda Dunes, CA 42-421 Adams #23 , Bermuda Dunes, CA 9420 Nor, Pico Rivera, CA ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS . . . .... ... . . .. 90-115-4 1400 Tenth Street•Room 121 To: Office Prating and Research From: (Public Agency) CITY OF LA QUINPA Sacramento,CA 95811 P. 0. Box 1-594 �C County Clem La Quints CA 92253�) - Countyof Biyersidp P. 0. Box 431 Riverside, CA 92502 Subject Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code ENVIROWWrAL ASSESST1FNr 90-180, Bermuda Dunes Sphere of Influence An t and Project TIIIe cnnc-'urrent City of Indio Sphere of Influence Ame.^dr.��t N/A State Clearinghouse Number Lead Agency Area Codellek A Of submined to Ckringhotsa) Contact person P one/Eztens. Area bounded by Washirgton StreetE Jefferson Street Fred War' Project Location (uclude county) u1Q Drive and 36th Aven a= in Riverside County Project Description: Approval of a Negative Declaration of environmental impact to allot,, ATendrlent of City of La Quinta and Indio's Sphere of Influence. the This is to advise that the �O of r Quints has approved the above desmbed project oc t�,e A p 4gwlk k� November ) 1990 and has made the following detumiiu60ns regarding the above de.scnbed project 1. The project Uwip Qwifl ntxj have a significant effect on the environment 2. Q An Environmental impact Report was prepamd for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. $A Negative Decluuion was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3.Mitigation nv-u es lowere:owere na] made a consdtoo of the approval of the projeeL 4. A statement of overriding Corsidera6ors [[Qwas owu cot)adopted for this projecL 5.Findingsl wem Cwere notj made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is b cenify that the final EIR with C'Mmens and rtsponsa and record of project approval is available to the General Pubtc a City of La Quinta, 781-105 Calle Estado la ouinta CA 9225 Dr tuber 19 1990 p S' e e Agency) Dote Me Date received for filing at OPR: RniudOctoto1 i v Environmental Assessment No. 0^Ad ` ' Case No. ofTt� ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I . Background SYn"' t ,, -�� 1 . Name of Proponent 2 . Address i Phone Number of Proponent � 1 G , 7b'/y Y 3 . Date Checklist Submitted 4 . Agency Requiring Checklist k. 5 . Name of Proposal, if applicable II . Environmental Impacts (Explanation of "yes" i "maybe" answers are required on attached sheet., YES MAYBE NO is Earth. Will the proposal result In: _ a . Unstable earth conditions or in changes ✓ in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or ✓ over covering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface .� relief features? d. The destruction, covering or modification ✓ of any unique geologic or physical features. e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of _ soils, either on or off the site? f . Changes in deposition or erosion of beach ✓ sands or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards? YES KAYBE NO 2 . Air. Will the proposal result in: a . Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? / c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3 . Water. Will the proposal result in: a . Changes in currents or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? c . Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water .� in any water body? e . Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f . Alteration of the directio n or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawls, or through interception of an aquifers by cuts or excavations? h. Substantial- reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? / 1 . Exposure of people or property to water ✓ related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? YES MAYBE NO 4 . Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a . Change in the diversity of species, or r number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, i aquatic plants) ? / b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, y rare or endangered species of plants? c. introduction of new species of plants Into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of agricultural crops? 5 . Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a . Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish i shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area,- or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ✓ 7 . Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9 . Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a . Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? YES MAYBE NO 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: / a . A risk of an explosion or the release of _ hazardous substances ( including but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemical or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11 . population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12 . Housing. Will the proposal affect existing ✓ housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13 . Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities ✓ or demand for new parking? c . Substantial impact upon existing ✓ transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of ✓ circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f . Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14 . Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result .in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? —� c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? ✓ e . Maintenance of public facilities 6 roads? f . other governmental services? YES MAYBE NO 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amount of fuel / or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16 . Utilities . Will the proposal result in a / need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a . Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? .� 17 . Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health) . 18 . Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Cultural Resources / a. Will the proposal result in the alter- ✓ ation of or the destruction of a pre- historic or historic archaeological site? / b. Will the proposal result in adverse ✓ physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? n. DCI�1 D, :l1 i i ur rHui i Vc D¢n . 0-10-oa 1W.DUH11 . ,Oae»a ,uvJ� � ., , , U3,.• c NOTICE OF DETERMINATION Nagative Declaration :1'0523 TO: (X) Riverside Co. Clark/Recorder ( ) Secretary for Resources 3470 12th Street 1416 Ninth St. , RnItUILIV E D Riverside, CA 92501 Sacramento, CA 95 FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT MAY 17 1991 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 "mIM0,Oon .nra SUBJECT: Filing of Notice Of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Project Title/Common Name: Bermuda Duna• Sphere of Influence Designation Date of Project ARproval: February 29, 1991 See Clearinghouse Number (i! eubmitta�; N/A Contact Person; Ramon A. Dias Project Location: The unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes. Project Description; Placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes nt'�o the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. This is to advise that the City of Palm Desert has made the following determinations regarding the above described project; 1. The project ( ) will, (X) will not, have a significant effect on the environment. 2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared in connection w E this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. X A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant T-o TKe provisions of CEQA. A copy of the Negative Declaration may be examined at the above city hall address. 3: Mitigat±orr messuxes IRt-van; ( ) were riot-, -I o-9 cond2L' ff Of tlyd approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding considerations ( ) was, (X) wed not; pted for this project. � ignature TiAt -4 Date Received for Filing Please retuWko,~mped copy in the enclosed enviel 0 4 p g=aA �«+ MAR 2 5 1991 MAR 2 9 IJ911 coyMU ti: �a Q Couny tb%'Qr0 .skkwv ulftNv 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I . BACKGROUND A. Name of Proponent: Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: c/o Mr. Robert A. Byron 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 C. Date of Checklist Submitted: D. Agency Requiring Checklist: E. Name of Proposal , if applicable: Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application II . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ( Explanation of all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. ) YES MAYBE NO 1 . Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? X C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth- YES MAYBE NO c . Does the proposal have the potential to ✓ cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 21 . Mandatory Findings of Significance. a . Does the project have the potential o degrade the quality of the t 9 Y 9 call reduce the environment, y en , substantially habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one in which occurs in a relatively brief definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well in the future) . c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those Impacts on the environment is significant) . d. Does the project have environmental / effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? III . Discussion of Environmental Evaluation (Narrative description of environmental impacts. ) 1 IV. Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency) . On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Da tfe I gna a of Preparer ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKI -:T FORM CONTINUED quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards? X 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a: Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X d. Emission of hazardous air pollutants within one-fourth of a mile of a school? X e. Burning of municipal wastes, hazardous waste or refuse- derived fuel and consists of either the construction of a new facility or the expansion of an existing facility by more than 10 percent? X 3 . Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water run- off? X C. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? X d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL- T FORM CONTINUED limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X f . Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? X g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X J . Significant changes in the tem- perature, flow or chemical content of surface thermal springs? g 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species or number of any species of plants ( including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants )? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X . C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment of existing species? X d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of ENVIRONMENTAL CIIECKL? ^ FORM CONTINUED d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X e . Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X f. Other governmental services? X 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a . Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? X b. Communications systems? X C. Water? X d. Sewer or septic tanks? X e. Storm water drainage? X f . Solid waste and disposal? X 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard ( excluding mental health )? X b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL7 ' FORM CONTINUED 19 . Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X 20 . Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historical archeo- logical site? X b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? X C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? X 21 . Mandatory Finding of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the en- vironment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal com- munity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate im- portant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI' ' FORM CONTINUED animals ( birds, land animals in- cluding reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects )? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species? X C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? X b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light and glare? X B. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X 9 . Natural Resources . Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? X 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances ( including but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset condition? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI FORM CONTINUED b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? X 11 . Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? X 12 . Housing . Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? X 13 . transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? X C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? X d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X e. Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic? X f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians? X 14 . Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas? a. Fire protection? X b. Police protection? X C. Schools? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKI -,T FORM CONTINUED environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future. ) X C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumu- latively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small , but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant. ) X d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse .effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X 22. EIR Tiering Determination. a. Is this project consistent with a program, plan, policy or ordinance for which an EIR has been prepared and certified? X b. Is this project consistent with applicable local land use plans and zoning of the city and county in which it is located? X C. May this project cause significant effects on the environment that were not examined in the prior EIR? X III . DISCUSSION On attached sheets, discuss: 1 . The environmental evaluation. 2 . Ways, if any, to mitigate any significant effects identified. 3 . Compatibility with existing zoning and plans. .♦ J ENVIRONMENTAL CHECHI ,T FORM CONTINUED IV. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. _ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project by the applicant. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, but that this project is consistent with the previously prepared TIERED EIR on the overall program, plan, policy or ordinance, and that such TIERED EIR adequately examines the possible environmental effects this project. • I Date: January 15, 1991 ( Sign to For: Ramon A. Diaz ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI' � FORM CONTINUED EXPLANATION The placing of any unincorporated territory into a city' s sphere of influence does not result in any physical, socio-economic, or environmental changes to either community. The action merely identifies theinto which an unincorporated area may be annexed. city p Y Subsequent required actions for annexation such as preplanning and preannexation zoning are required by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission as part of an annexation application and will require CEQA processing. ' rtouce of Determination Appenclix H To: Office of PlannLAI V4ltcsea,cl 51 From: (public Agency) CITY CF LA QUIIdI7' 1400 Tenth Stroee Roars 12P P. 0 Box 1504 Sacramento,CA 9541 C, , .6 ( 53�)W `' La Quinta, CA 92253 xx County Clerk C, ' yJ Countyof Riverside P. O. Box 431 Riverside, CA 92502 Subject. Filing of Notice of Determination In comptlance with Section 21108 of 21152 of the Public Resources Code. SPFF'M OF LNPLt7FNC E RkEM4EM #7 ATM A1yR EXATICt; #6 Project Tate Jerry Herman, City of La Quinta 619-564-2246 State Ckwinghouse Number Lead Agency Area Code/%kphonc/Extensior (If submlaed to Cleuinthoue) Contact Person Project location(include county) Northeast of the intersection of Washington Street and Fred Waring hive. Project Description: 1�tyi� Sphere of influence Amendment and Annexation of 156 acres from Riverside ut§ to La Quinta. J U N 10 MY 27Y OFLA VUINTA This is to advise that the City of La Quints her approved IN&WA WYMO (7 Lad Nmoy 0RLsVwatragaL7 April 2, 1991 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described PojO= (Dos) 1.71te project)OwM Jayill not] have a significant effect on the environment 2. Q M Environmental Impact Repon was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. U A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Ktigadon treasures(pwem Z3wtm not)made a condition of the approval of the project. 4.A statement of Overriding Consideratiors towns C�wwu not)adopted for this project. S.Findings Owest [3wee na] made purstiam to the provision of CEQA. This is to certify that the final EIR with commens and responses and record of project approval is available 10 the t erwral Pubtic s 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, CA 92253 r)((TTyy�� �UNN C�K ,tbrJN-�w4 Ap 15, 1991r�g Deceits DeveloFruent Dire (7nwv blie Agency) Date pp�p T[tls APR 1 ? 1991 APR 19 1C.91 Date received for filing at OPIL• 'w ONNpE�RCLY ReMT JU � rqy*d Ptvenldt,Sate al Caoornla i CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME CERTIFICATE OF FEE EXEMPTION De Minimis Impact Finding Count Project Title/Location (include y): Sphere of Influence Amendment M7 and Annexation N6 for the City of La Quinta, Riverside County. Project Description: Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation of 156 acres. Findings of Exemption (attach as necessary) 1. The initial study has concluded that no potential adverse environmental inpact will be created by this project. 2. The Annexation and Sphere Amer&ent will not generate any potential adverse effect on the wildlife resources. 3. The Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation are logical and contiguous expansion of the orderly growth of the City of La Quinta. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the public agency has made the above finding and that the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711 .2 of the Fish and Game Code. of P nning Official f, itle: l�C�� Lead Agency: Date: 9 �0 q Section 711.4, Fish and Game Code DFG:12/90 CEQA3(a/91) FORM.007 it STATE OF CALIFORNIA•111E RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT'OF FISH AND GAME No 5357 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT APPLICATION/FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT Lead Agency Dat f 9 County/St:oo ftewf. Documen No. �o LQg Project Title: Project Applicant: CHECK APPLICABLE FEES: ( ) Environmental Impact Report S850.00 $ ( ) Negative Declaration S1,250.00 S ( ) Application Fee Water Diversion(Water Resources Control Board Only) S850.00 $ ( ) Projects Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs(DF'C d CDF'Onty) $850.00 S County Administrative Fee W.00 $ j ( ) Project that requires fee, not paid(enter amount due) S Jw^!S Project that is exempt from fee e RECEIVED S _ Signature ojperson receiving FIRST COPY-PROJECT APPUCANT SECONDCOPY.DFG/ 7HIRDCOMFADAGENCY FOURTH corvcoU?M LAFCO 91-19-4 Environmental Assessment No. 06 Case No. OF j'tO� ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1 . Background 1 . Name of Proponent 2 . Address i Phone Number of Proponent 3. Date Checklist Submitted 3 9/ 4 . Agency Requiring Checklist CL- S . Name of Proposal, if applicable II . Environmental Impacts (Explanation of "yes" 6 "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. ) YES MAYBE NO 1 . Earth. - Will the proposal result in:_ a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or over covering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features. / e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of ✓ soils, either on or off the site? / f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic / hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards? YES MAYBE NO 2 . Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration ✓ of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? ✓ c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or ✓ temperature or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents or the course of ✓ direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water In any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? / g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawls, or through interception of an aquifers by cuts or excavations? h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? I . Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? YES MAYBE NO 4 . Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: / a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, 6 aquatic plants) ? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? / d. Reduction in acreage of agricultural crops? — _✓ 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a . Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish i shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? / c. Introduction of new species of animals into- an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? / d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6 . Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7 . Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? / S. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? YES MAYBE NO 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: / a. A risk of an explosion or the release of _ hazardous substances (including but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemical or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the _ location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12 . Housing. Will the proposal affect existing _ housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: / a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? / c. Substantial impact upon existing ✓^ transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f . Increase in traffic hazards to motor _ vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14 . Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: / a. Fire protection? ✓/ b. Police protection? c. Schools? / d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities i roads? / f . Other governmental services? _✓/ YES MAYBE NO 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: / a. Use of substantial amount of fuel or energy? / b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16 . Utilities. Will the. proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or .natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17 . Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding i g mental health) . 18 . Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 10. Cultural Resources a. Will the proposal result in the alter- ation of or the destruction of a pre- historic or historic archaeological site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? YES MAYBE NO c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 21 . Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one in which occurs in a relatively brief _ definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well in the future) . / c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those / impacts on the environment is significant) . d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? III . Discussion of Environmental Evaluation (Narrative description of environmental impacts.) IV. Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency) . On the basis of this initial evaluation: I Ind that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. .3 Date ?na7t1df6PAr—eparer RESPONSES TO ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST EA 91-195 Sphere of Influence Amendment #7 Annexation #6 EARTH Because no development is presently proposed, and because the proposed land use and zoning designation for the area to be annexed is less intense, or equal to, Riverside County land use and zoning designations, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have the potential to result in any impacts identified in this category. AIR Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. WATER Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. PLANT LIFE Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. ANIMAL LIFE Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. NOISE Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. DOCJH.019 1 LIGHT AND GLARE Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. LAND USE The property will be designated General Commercial, Single Family and High Density Residential and zoned General Commercial R-1 and R-2, and are similar in character to the densities and intensities identified under the County zoning and General Plan designations. The approval of the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have the potential to result in any impacts identified in this category. NATURAL RESOURCES Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. RISK OF UPSET Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. POPULATION Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. HOUSING Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. DOCJH.019 2 PUBLIC SERVICES The City of La Quinta currently contracts for fire and police services from Riverside County. The City police services will be responsible for this annexed area. To accommodate this additional need, the City may need to increase its contract for man power. However, this impact is not significant. Park and recreation facilities will be provided by the Coachella Valley Parks and Recreation Board and as appropriate by the City of La Quints. However, approval of the annexation will not have an adverse affect on, or result in, the need for new park and recreation facilities. ENERGY Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. UTILITIES Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. HUMAN HEALTH Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. AESTHETICS Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. RECREATION Because no development is presently proposed and because proposed land use and zoning designation for the area is less intensive than, or equal to, the County land use and zoning designation, the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation do not have to result in any impacts identified in this category. ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY The area to be annexed contains no known archaeological or historical sites, however pursuant to standard City procedures, archaeological studies will be required as necessary when particular sites are proposed for development. DOCJH.019 3 w , RECEIVED /�y�//-M N y/ //�//�///� gooalman /�N/�/ ///�//J�-,(,( t OCT 17 1991 V ran • ?• ana ✓ `/JJodateJ COMMUNUN OEYELOPMEW 0EPARTKNi CNY OE PALM OfSERI October 16, 1991 Mr. Raymond Diaz CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring. Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Dear Mr. Diaz: Thought the results of our Bermuda Dunes poll would be of interest to all. These figures will be presented to LAFCO at their October 24, 1991 meeting. Should there be any questions, please call me. Thank ou, 4?0�� Fpa R. Goodman , Chairman BE_RMUDA DUNES COMMUNITY COUNCIL FRG:paw EXECUTIVE OFFICES: 77-900 AVENUE OF THE STATES PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 PHONE: (714) 345-2626 '1 I NERIIRDA DUNES NXNMNITT COMCIL As of COMMUNITY INTEREST aEST10NNA1RE, FALL 1991 10/15/91 RESPONDENT PROFILE NAME: RESIDENT? _ YES _ 110 ADDRESS: PROPERTY OWNER? . _ YES _ NO 1. AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) BY THE CITY OF LA QUINTA TO INCLUDE THE BERMUDA DUNES AREA IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA "SPHERE OF INFLUENCE"; CONCURRENTLY, A GROUP OF BERMUDA DUNES RESIDENTS HAS FILED AN APPLICATION T%gICLUDE THE AREA THE PALM DESERT "SPHERE OF INFLUENCE". DO YOU HAVE A PREFERENCE? LA QUINTA 77(_f PALM DESERT 2. OF THE OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO US, WHICH DO YOU PREFER? 404 ANNEXATION 359 REMAIN UNINCORPORATED PORTION OF THE COUNTY 3. WOULD YOU VOTE IN FAVOR OF ANNEXATION? 468 YES 305 ND A. IF YES, WHICH CITY? 35 LA QUINTA 512 PALM DESERT 5. PLEASE INDICATE THE FIVE (5) MOST 114PORTANT AREAS YOU FEEL NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE COUNCIL ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY? 582 STREET REPAIR i MAINTENANCE LOCATION: 252 TRAFFIC CONTROL LOCATION: 311 STREET LIGHTING CODE ENFORCEMENT 1Q3 HOME BUSINESSES 2_U ANIMAL CONTROL 2_42 LITTER AND (WISE CONTROL 8Q LIGHTING CONTROL (EXTERIOR AND LANDSCAPE) 362 BUILDING RESTRICTIONS 344 BERMUDA DINES AIRPORT - EXPANSION OF COMMERCIAL AIR TRAFFIC 33U COMMERCIAL VEHICLES PARED d AREA STREETS EALTH/SAFETT/CULTURAL 394 POLICE PROTECTION 247 FIRE PROTECTION 1% PARKS 8 RECREATION IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN SERVING ON A CITIZENS COMMITTEE PLEASE PROVIDE PHONE KIMBER(S): IF YOU RAVE ADDITIONAL CONENTS/IDEAS PLEASE MAKE THEIR d TE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS QUESTIOBAIRE. PLEASE RETURN YOUR COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE BY OCTOBER 11, 1991 70: BERMUDA DUNES ADVISORY COUNCIL 79.733 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, SUITE B BERMUDA DUNES, CA 92201 YOUR RESPONSE TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE WILL DETERMINE THE DIRECTION YOUR COMMUNITY COUNCIL WILL TAKE IN MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO YOUR COUNTY SUPERVISOR AS ISSUES CONCERNING BERMUDA DUNES ARISE. RECEIVED YIATEq ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY AUG 61991 BE COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT""RfE�LMRR1MiARiMF.M POST OFFICE BOX 1058• COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236•TELEPHONE(619)398-2651 DIRECTORS OFFICERS TELLIS CODENAS,PRESIDENT THOMAS E.LEVY,GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER RAYMOND R.RUMMONDS,VICE PRESIDENT BERNARDINE SUTTON,SECRETARY JOHN W.McFADDEN OWEN MCCOOK ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER DOROTHY M.NICHOLS REDWINE AND SHERRILL,ATTORNEYS THEODORE J.FISH August 2, 1991 File: 1150.06 Local Agency Formation Commission 3403 loth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, California 92501 Gentlemen: Subject: Sphere of Influence Amendment, City of Palm Desert, LAFCO No. 90-120-4 We have reviewed sphere of influence amendment to City of Palm Desert and it is acceptable subject to the following provision: 1. New development within this area is subject to the hydrology mitigation measurements of the Mid-Valley Stormwater Project. These measures shall include 0 on-site retention of the 100-year storm and payment of drainage fees or other participation in the financing of regional flood control facilities. If you have any questions please contact Joseph Cook, planning engineer, extension 292. Yours very truly, DTom Levy General Manager-Chief Engineer JEC:gh/e82 Jcc: Stephen Smith � City of Palm Desert 73-501 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Robert Byron Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee 79-050 Avenue 42 Bermuda Dunes, California 92201 TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY F RECEIVED LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION JUL 2 41991 RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPAN7MEM 0 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE LAFCO NO. 90-120-4 CITY OF PALM DESERT ❑ TRANSPORTATION DEPT. —SURVEY PROPOSAL SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ❑ PLANNING (CEQA ONLY) AMENDMENT--CITY OF PALM DESERT ❑ REGISTRAR OF VOTERS 0 CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL (CHP) ❑ CALTRANS 0 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD—SANTA ANA REGION FORWARDED ON 7/15/91 0 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SCAQMD) *********RETURN TO LAFCO********* ❑ RIV'ERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION NO LATER THAN 8/12/91 COMMISSION (RCTC) 0 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION ❑ SPECIAL DISTRICT(S) OF GOVERNMENTS (SCAG) 0 COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (CVAG) . ❑ WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (WRCOG) 0 BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS (BIA) 0 CITY(IES) Cat SCHOOL DISTRICT(S) DESERT COMMUNITY COLLEGE DIST ❑ OTHER PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR COMMENTS ON THIS FORM OR A SEPARATE FORM IF NECESSARY. NUMBER YOUR COMMENTS TO CORRESPOND TO THE PARAGRAPHS ON THE ATTACHED APPLICATION FORM. PLEASE SIGN AND DATE. IF APPROPRIATE, INCLUDE SUGGESTED TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND/OR RECOMMENDATIONS. PLEASE .COORDINATE YOUR RESPONSE WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE IF YOU ARE A COUNTY DEPARTMENT/AGENCY. JUG f 8 1991 Svcs. RECEIVED JUL 2 4 199PECEIVED LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMI9'9Y 0FELORM "MVESERTRn� 11 2 1991 nr RgL RIVERSIDE 'ALM 'IT' NCI;.:, 0 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE LAFCO NO. 90-120-4 ❑ TRANSPORTATION DEPT. —SURVEY PROPOSAL SPHERE OF INFLUENCE 0 PLANNING (CEQA ONLY) AMENDMENT--CITY OF PAIM DESERT ❑ REGISTRAR OF VOTERS 0 CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL (CHP) ❑ CALTRANS 0 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD—SANTA ANA REGION FORWARDED ON 7/15/91 ❑ SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SCAQMD) *********RETURN TO LAFCO********* ❑ RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION NO LATER THAN 8/12/91 COMMISSION (ROTC) 0 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION 0 SPECIAL DISTRICTS) OF GOVERNMENTS (SCAG) ❑ COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (CVAG) ❑ WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (WRCOG) 0 BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS (BIA) $1 CITY(IES) CITY MANAGER--PALM DESERT ❑ SCHOOL DISTRICTS) ❑ OTHER PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR COMMENTS ON THIS FORM OR A SEPARATE FORM IF NECESSARY. NUMBER YOUR COMMENTS TO CORRESPOND TO THE PARAGRAPHS ON THE ATTACHED APPLICATION FORM. PLEASE SIGN AND DATE. IF APPROPRIATE, INCLUDE SUGGESTED TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND/OR RECOMMENDATIONS. PLEASE COORDINATE YOUR RESPONSE WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE IF YOU ARE A COUNTY DEPARTMENT/AGENCY. CE APPLICATION TO THE RIVERS100 r� uu;�s 64 LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMO 0 �7�NH 3 55 LAFOJ 90-120-4--SPHERE OF INFZ. ICE M.tall Or daltvsr to: _ AMENDMM--CI'PY OF PALM DF_SFW Local Agency Formation Commission 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, CA 92501-3676 fOR LAFW USE ONLY 00 NOT STIPLI APPLICATION M jK)0LCT*N. The ouetlorw on thw form and deigned to ObWn safflower data abOvt the WOPO sa XQ?w t s+a a allow C+s w1f and LAFf� to rases mtmw pr�Opasal. Addbonal beck�ound hfornmasfon w w'4wfspso whOO r- be Pon wri 10 tfms PM00 1. UM rda+ric" It wears M01011". 04 not anv Elarrm41 n an Ilsm to appMloabw, so Indicate• Subft thl@ W Qinal arm and 15 ooplw.(NM: No olhat appac26M torte wmtl bs 6=wee . APPLJCANlT: Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee Tsfspfmons: 619-345-2694 79050 Avenue 42 Bermuda Dunes, California 92201 ADDRESS: NVM and fhlw Of Demon l0 OOntatt rsgardng thta &Ole form: Robert Byron Addrea: 79765 Bermuda Dunes Dr., Bermuda Dunes, Ca. 92201 TsNpfans: 619-345-8110 APPLICATION M HEREBY MADE TO: Place Bermuda Dunes area under the sphere of influence (p000fte proposal or atluorm tspuarsa? of Palm Desert. LOCATION OF PROJECT: Country Club Dr (N): Washington St. (W): Fred Waring (S) : Jefferson St. (E) : County of Riverside (Bermuda Dunes) (Describe bOundarmes epeciM1oaMlb and refer to mapr highway, fad&, tMn. and topograpww %cur") North Boundry - Country Club Dr. South Boundry - Fred Waring- Dr. East Boundry - Indio City Limits West Boundry A. OWNERSHIP: 1. left a001"M o vowly ownw In fM area of ft aoOMA Yoe C No 2. IS a» applicant aow owner Of few props W a Yas)4 NO B. AREA INFORMATION: t. F4Ow many WwM mile, or acres, d tartttory are Inducted h tnu DroPav Approx. 10.72 sq.mi. 2. NumbK o1 ettdicturN Or dwdilrtge in tp» ptrogoeed eras at the preeant tInM9 Approx. 700 apts. : 1 ,200 single family: 300 condos: 200,000 sq. ft. commercial: airport: 27 hole golf court • 41 unit hotel. (9pcdf dosccribo hoar the property It irrrprovoM 2. E lnasasa h the number d Qa ertdra struettxes srsa which wits result troy d +dF',cmlgr ft and " d sftcard irpmvwr4fft a p., WrV* m, ff4bj offsed, W,) Future structures will be homes condos, i o anrd l i aht industrial agaru��ens, - — - By whet date? No 1 day-, stabl i sherd 4 h d" W" Id ft l d8f101 Approximately 6,000 S. Expected dssnpe In " POpt�a W which w4A r"A hom t!f'a ProPMM None By WWI a. Numbw Of ro9ewed VOW$ wishln ti►e bdW46fies at the pntWd tare? 1 ,957 YWw: = 950,000,000 ti Included in above l�lpfpMefTlentf ti -Exauclect In ve I. WAtt y ft numbw Of penOeie withh t OG WX4aem by Aseeasor'e number (M . + p%M" Ads Ptmet num $) end larWmnw(s) C. LAND USE: - 1, C Varies - Residential Commercial Industrial 2. CUMCM Q.eR.*.rd pan d8 N/A 5 1 fsOpy d MY ► +a v 9ne ! �y�gd Mal d by OZY( 4. why 6— hoer ih9 Mete y h pre y u�(e g, vco�ttt � etc 'r+eea, . Single faruly hones condosnar course multiplex dwellings, 41 unit S. De_cr4» haw edjw*M lands ere ust: Monh: Interstate'10 and - �. Single family. condos and golf cour E Vacant land Kk Sin le famil condos f c D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: t. oesenbe tow propow project in as much 0"I at poealble. Ho a subdN-cvw or lot soft beer azo,cve_ by ttw County a a eny9) M Yea 3 No. Mao,wl tat agency hr apprtired tow map. and what a ro rehren;e numbee? N/A 2. stale raaaorw wfVeh wWfy this Drtapo",, (Far a:ar►Ola, M/v1a nMOR heam nwfdab, acrono+tyt Deno' OD1 Switch from county to City of Palm Desert for better cerv;rec mnra response to community needs. and desire of majority of residents. E. PLAN FOR THE PROVISION OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES Mrm n em cosw sector sow: In ad*Wn to raamodlnp to the queeb" MW below, 020 a dststfed narrat)ve plan which thoroughly 0011-,e. tow tW mrgs a munc" Wyxm~wN be amended to the property,VOW ava11011Ry, and tow Cost or sxtsnc,• I thew servim to nw landowner andlor haum raaldertta. Warar will be supplied W Myoma Dunes Water Company and Coachella Valley Water Distric VVW Is t" &Bar" to ffw 0 Mat wear Ilrw and where IS ft boated? Service in place 1s the agenry prepared so Wwnediat* kM 11 A On naoMaory sar00e7 Yes M no, exam' o c ange Whoa fhe anborpalad watts danand for VW prq)cCl'1 2 Sowo Serve wd be P1 Septic systems and Coachella Valley Water District Whrt Y tlN dfstana la Vw dower a war Yrw and wham Is R 10=411 Existing at Fred Waring - Washington - 42nd Avenue b Vw SQWVY Dry b rnMWXU0Vty htrnkhfo=@Wy WNbe7 In some areas. If not, uptaln. Wh t! i0 Ow 6=&-4 br <hS PAW No change 3 Fro & pol`a'o. Whys Iurfedicbm wW pttvido fks and PORN at rvfoCs7 Riverside County Vows is V* rwvgGt Are samon IO—� Station on location Ave. of Washington peaonse ur" 7 minutes re Where to the alest law enforoemertt fcaftY bet�cd7 a m Desert and Indio q4:pon4g 0" 10 minutes � a. TranapoRatlon. a. pesignete the names and types of roads whim the project will use for pnmary and wwnaary accez di vet aCOM Streets hem the pro/CCI Sib to nO nearest hNway) Paved, secondary y streets enter area from every direction - Fred Waring Dr. , Washington Street 42nd Avenue Jefferson Country Club Drive b. Is widening of an a, ON m street neeeswiy) No e. is U* project served by County-maintainod roach? es d. IS CWWW6Oban a new aDoas sh Cta nOCDOattyl No S. Spedw Revenues: Dion ten annexing 8WCY hen Curtest plane 10 aatadlsh any new AW&SMan: ols^ or teen whim would in*d* Oft area, in ardor 10 pay fat new ar exta f0ed ISrvl=? N PltiM detail Unknown 6. W111 ten projeel be aubjW to exi dng bonded Indebt041MO t7 No change F. PROPERTY OWNER'S POSITION: 1. Mow W40WMM make up total ownership of Ute pn*jM arn9 (k%*A a WIM Oft application coDrt many Approximately 2,000 a at you �+ re�et>*+p to OW v►ovoe.c) 2. Mow many property owners have beetl 00tttaGted tpfednp ten 95% 3 Mow many POWIy o "We are in favor 01 ten pfojeot9 See xhibit B ` Mow many properly owners am not In tC*W of the projeCY4 See—Exhibit B 0. LIGKTINO & ROAD WNTENANCS DISTRICTS ONLY: 1. ff area Ngf+ta are fa b Ylesalkd. Ikt how merry,wire type and Intenc8y(e•a, S22,ta0D LPSv one 249.G: Existin 2. 11 thegpp,A mdk=M a rod rfauttenanoo di-"!ft' how mwy mini of rood are to bs maintaine: No effort 3. b N your U Mfld0 t t*btN g Eny coeds t0 Cax 'r a crndr�ftr hburo t=Cptt:noe into ft County Ma,ntal-c fAad ctc Sym9 H. comMUNITY UhtFIT: In your Own wOros' hpw woultl your propo" benefit the community? Our immediate aim is: to be placed in 'the sphere of influence of Palm Desert City, and eventually be annexed to said City. Reason: To assure the future direction of our communities, as well as to improve services. NOTICES AND COMMUNICATIONS: Litt below tM names and addresses of peopla to whom notices anc CC-.- . tans should be directed, (3 maximum) Name Robert Byron TNepnone 619-345-8110 Address 79765 Bermuda Dunes Dr. CRY & ZIPBermuda Dunes, Ca. 92201 Name Charles J. Kramer ToWph" 619-345-1771 AMMO 42620 Caballeros Clty & ap Bermuda Dunes, Ca. 92201 Name Stuart Case T"ptx" 619-345-4245 Address 79021 Starlight Lane Cfty 3 Zp Bermuda Dunes, Ca. 92201 CJ Signature of appbcant or iuthwizec representative Robert Byron Typed or punted name rro. Date LAFO0 90-120-4 ROBERT A. BYRON 79765 BERMUDA DUNES DRIVE PERMUDA DUNES, CA. 92201 619-345-8110 October 16 , 1990 :=•tiBJECT: Applicatio-: to the Riverside Local Agency\ Fvrmati:-_ Commission to place the BERMUDA DUNES area within the SPHERE OF INFLUENCE of the City of Palm Desert. A l cal Citi_Zens cc=:::ittee petitioned , in writing, approximately 2000 residents of the Bermuda Dunes area in the Spring of 1990 to Place the area within the SPHERE OF INFLUENCE of the City of Palm Desert . EXHIBIT B In the application is a summary of the petition results and the actual signed petitions are in my possession . The petition effort resulted in 723 residents -noting for the petition as written and 4 residents rejecting the proposition. In addition the Bermuda Dunes Country Club Directors and the largest landowner in the area voted in favor of the petitio: . `;n that basis the encic3ed Application is submitted for Commission review and hopefully approval . The following is a commentary on the four factors identified in the Application Instructions that must be considered by the com- mission . 1 . The Unincorporated area of Riverside County called Berm::da Dunes began to be developed in 1958 . The area now contains : a . Bermuda Dunes Country Club, with 505 members has a 27 hc 'le golf course, a club house and attendant facilities . b . e Bermuda Dunea Airport which is primarily for the us_ of private airplanes bat does presently serve LA Air, C . a 41 unit hotel , d . approximately 1 , 200 single family dwellings , e . approximately 300 condominiums , f . approximately 700 apartments and g. approximately 2C0 , 000 square feet of commercial development . The area c>f Bermuda Dunes is approximately 10 . 72 square miles . The planned land use will be based upon current Riverside County Zoning which is not likely to change much as the result of being within the SPHERE OF INFLUENCE of the City of Palm Desert . This means the construction of more single family homes , condom- iniums , apartments and commercial buildings on the land whi_:n, is presently vacant. . 2 . A very large tart of the area includ,'d in this application is in the process of becoming a private fenced and gated community. _ t __ .;:e area surroundl:Lg the Bermuda Dunes Country Club and the boundari:s are one lot south of 42nd Street , Glass , Kingston, Port Marla, Fred Waring Starlight and Lima Hall . The roads in the gated area have already become community property. Potable water for the total area is provided by Myoma Dunes Water Company and Coachella Valley Water District . The area is served partially by sewers and the balance are septic systems . The need for public facilities and services should not be great except as required to meet the growth and safety needs of the area in the future . 3 . There are few public facilities in the area. There is a Riverside County Office on Country Club Drive, a County Fire Station on 42nd street and a plan to build a Riverside County Library on Washington . There is a Desert Sands Elementary School being build within the area south of 42nd Street. The existing and planned public facilities presently appear to be adequate . Riverside County presently provides fire and police protection for the area as well as very limited road services . Fire and police protection for Palm Desert is provided through the same Riverside County Organizations so this would represent no change for the area- The Committee il:c._ing this application has had several discussions cnncernir:g public facilities and services with Officials from the City of Faim Desert . One of the suggestions made by the City is the formation of a Council of Citizens to represent the area with the City and identify needs that can be considered in City Plan- ning. This appears to be a satisfactory approach. 4 . The Bermuda Dunes area is similar to a great many other areas of the Coachella Valley and is made up of permanent and part time residents . Most of the residents of the area obtain the majority of their required goods and services in Palm Desert . This includes shopping at the Town Center Mall and along E1 Paseo and Highway 111 in Palm Desert . Movies , the theater and many of the restaurants frequented are in Palm Desert. The only reason Bermuda Dunes residents frequent La Quinta is to play golf or to visit a restaurant occasionally. There are no other goods or services available in La Quinta that are not more readily available in Palm Desert . Bermuda Dunes currently has the same ZIP CODE as Indio which dates back many years . There' are also some goods and services that our residents partake of in Indio, however, the tendency is to go west more often to Palm Desert. In fact many who approved the petition want to take whatever action is required to change our ZIF CODE as soon as possible . 2 a As I have tried to indicate in the above statements the residents of B_rmuda Dunes want to be a part of the City of Palm Desert . In fact there are many very strong feelings against becoming a part of either Indio or La Ruinta for a variety of reasons . That was the reason the Committee began the petitioning effort and the results bore out the feelings . On this basis we respectfully request that the Local Area Formation Commission consider our application and find in favor of our request . Sincerely , Robert A. Byron 3 • EXHIBIT "A" SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT--CITY OF PALM DESERT LAFCO 90-120-4 IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, BEING A PORTION OF SECTIONS 7 , 8 , 9 , 16 , 17 AND 18 ALL IN TSS, R7E, SBM: BEGINNING AT THE NW CORNER OF SECTION 18 , TSS, R7E, SBM, AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN RECORD OF SURVEY BOOK 11 AT PAGE 27, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF WASHINGTON ST. AND 42ND AVE. ; THENCE 5000 11 ' 40"W, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 18 AND SAID CENTERLINE OF WASHINGTON ST. , A DISTANCE OF 5307. 80 FT . TO THE SW CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF FRED WARING DR. AND WASHINGTON ST. THENCE N890 35 ' 10"E, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 18, AND SAID CENTERLINE OF FRED WARING DR. , A DISTANCE OF 5384 . 87 FT. TO THE CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 17 AND 18, TSS, R7E, SBM AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TRACT 23773-1 RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 204 AT PAGES 39-43, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE N890 29 ' 09"E, A DISTANCE OF 5306 . 32 FT. ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 17 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TRACT 2606 RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 45 AT PAGES 91-97, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS TO THE SE CORNER OF SAID SECTION 17 AND THE CENTERLINE OF JEFFERSON STREET AS SHOWN ON DEED PLAT OF JEFFERSON STREET FILED UNDER RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT FILE NO. 780 EE; THENCE N00° 16 ' 49"W, A DISTANCE OF 77 . 32 FT .ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 3000 .00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 130 06 ' 30" ; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 686. 35 FT. ; THENCE N120 43 ' 41"E, A DISTANCE OF 2278 . 77 FT. TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 3000 .00 FT AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 60 53 ' 09" ; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 360 . 54 FT. TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE S 1/2 OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 16, TSS, R7E, SBM; THENCE S890 27 ' 38"W, A DISTANCE OF 462 .48 FT. TO THE EAST TRACT LINE OF TRACT NAMED BERMUDA DUNES ESTATES UNIT 3 , RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 36 AT PAGES 19-21, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE N00° 20 ' 44"W, ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 551 . 80 FT TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 174 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF .SAID TRACT; THENCE N90 08 ' 59"W, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 174 , A DISTANCE OF 135 . 43 FT TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BERMUDA DUNES DRIVE AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; PAGE 1 THENCE N190 21 ' 03"W, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 460 . 00 FT . TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 169 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N70 30 ' 28"W, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 169 , A DISTANCE OF 76 . 68 FT. TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 168 A SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N80 19 ' 42"E, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 500 . 00 FT. TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 163 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N80 10 ' . 36"E, A DISTANCE OF 109 . 27 FT. ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 163 TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 162 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N00° 49 ' 38"W, A DISTANCE OF 180 . 00 FT . TO THE CENTERLINE OF 42D AVE. AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT AND ON DEED PLAT OF 42D AVE FILED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT UNDER FILE NO. 636-C; THENCE N890 14 ' 56"E, A DISTANCE OF 748 . 52 FT. ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF 42D AVE. TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 500. 00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 330 59 ' 15" ; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 296 . 60 FT. ; THENCE N550 15 ' 41"E, A DISTANCE OF 39 . 43 FT . TO THE CENTERLINE OF COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AS SHOWN ON SAID DEED PLAT, SAID CENTERLINE POINT BEING CENTERLINE STATION 76+00.00, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE CUSP OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 2715 . 00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 60 21 ' 25" AND HAVING AT SAID POINT A RADIAL LINE WHICH BEARS S550 15 ' 41"W; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AND THE CENTERLINE OF COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 301 .23 FT . TO CENTERLINE STATION 72+98. 11 , BC AS SHOWN ON DEED PLAT OF 40TH AVE. (NOW KNOWN AS COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE) FILED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT UNDER FILE NO. 727-0; THENCE N280 22 ' 54"W, A DISTANCE OF 203 .21 FT. ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF 40TH AVE TO CENTERLINE STATION 70+94 .90, EC, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 750. 00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 300 44 ' 00" ; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AND THE CENTERLINE OF 40TH AVE, A DISTANCE OF 402 . 30 FT. TO CENTERLINE STATION 66+92 . 60, BC; THENCE N590 06 ' 54"W, A DISTANCE OF 777 .08 FT. TO CENTERLINE STATION 59+15. 52 EC, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 11 , 323. 47 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 50 01 ' 56" ; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 994 . 52 FT. TO CENTERLINE STATION 49+21 .00 BC; THENCE N640 08 ' 50"W, A DISTANCE OF 4421 . 00 FT. ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO CENTERLINE STATION 5+00. 00 EC, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 11, 293. 50 FT . AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 50 57 ' 40" ; PAGE 2 J THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 1174 .99 FT. ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO CENTERLINE STATION 193+37 . 06 EC BACK = 193+34 . 81 P.O.T. "E" AHD AS SHOWN ON DEED PLAT OF 40TH AVE (NOW KNOWN AS COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE) AS FILED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT UNDER FILE NO. 727-Q-1; THENCE N700 06 ' 30"W, A DISTANCE OF 3192 . 21 FT ALONG SAID CENTERLINE; THENCE N190 53 ' 30"E, A DISTANCE OF 40 . 00 FT . TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY .RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD PROPERTY; THENCE N700 06 ' 30"W, A DISTANCE OF 1230. 58 FT. TO THE EXTENSION OF THE CENTERLINE OF WASHINGTON STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID DEED PLAT FILED UNDER FILE NO. 727-Q-1 ; THENCE S190 06 ' 50"W, A DISTANCE OF 1328 . 86 FT . ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF WASHINGTON ST. TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1500 .00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 180 50 ' 30" ; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 493 . 27 FT. TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 7, T5S, R7E, SBM; THENCE S00° 16 ' 20"W, A DISTANCE OF 1297 . 55 FT. ALONG SAID SECTION LINE TO THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7 AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN RECORD OF SURVEY BOOK 11 AT PAGE 27, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE S00° 05 " 30"W, A DISTANCE OF 2693 .44 FT ALONG SAID SECTION LINE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 5361 RECORDED IN BOOK 11 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGE 79, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS. CONTAINING 2205.26 ACRES MORE OR LESS TNI LEGAL DESCRIPTION APPROV'O I /8 /99 _ BY ; SIDE OUN SURVEYO. LAND SG9 BYI R 1AMES CHAR ES o J FIVASH 0 L.S. '#.4420 Q 9�F OF [✓AL\FOB P. 9/30/n PAGE 3 i a U w0 i" �r OD P CL W i 0LL. r f r Ir N ¢owtzCO Q N �� Q C = Z �N�wuww mo o m y 0 t 3 rno).co . U W tjzar¢¢ X<CL 4 � `� cOn<ON W J V) G.(A F- .N �N N ° s0. N0l'➢NlI S ! •H NN N•F, • N J`Z W o 0. ZOw i8 •`'� a wzm.w �yJ 2 q'NJ in O'0/V y L7 15 0ov •• ,rN .8'N� . 3^ '; Gig • x^ aR b LQ �a 2, N•N a n` /N (�j ' CD NVV cv , C r� N •NOD W ww VuC •ONN �°n' � x � Z � � ' pMx — O 4 W N N d tA �N • � L •• � t,( d ^ t• sal' .1�• Q.'Y abkJ 4U O O Z 0LLI I p +o �o7 � N 4�� �m "p a 1 •}I- „' Z• .r . N Q � 0 a o• f l - v r l 4 L !6 �1 tA 44 i �S V•I Z R U tD ul N w. Z y n� W Q \ n^ < 0 e d 1 F- d r> > w e SS, � Js b. m— W M Ot jo of oil 'LOfS M,K ,tl •OS .LL > U w . OL w u w w LO ¢ y J - N aw mF w< z Q — Z1voif•s� CI eV a72'�NdS�C7- W 8 (L v O a 0 _� Q N o r� m .90 tOM: oDII([N MD11171E . ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY TO: 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE 346-0611 PALM DESERT,CA 92M EXT. 484 RECEIVED:k `� 1e LOCAL AMiCS FUTON COMrESSION 3403 TEM STREET, SUITE 620 MAR 2 7 1991 R1VERSnE, CA 92501-3676 COMMUDOY DEYELoPMENT nEPARTMENT CRY OF PALM DESERT TO: El Assessor's Office LAM NO. 40-115�4 ❑ Planning Department PImPOSAL Spherebf dtflueiiSsP ors=i"egf ❑ Survey Department Ta Quinfa and Tnr9in ❑ County Cmnsel ❑ Flood Control bUFdPOM) ON Af9nioi ❑ Auditor-Controller RMU N TO IAFOO ND LATER THAN -4/17/g i ❑ awiromental Health ❑ Registrar of Voters Fbr IAFt7D Use Only ❑X City of Palm Desert Faceived Back on PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR ODI-MTPS ON THE ABOVE PROPOSAL ON THIS PAGE. NEmiberyouur_oannents_to correspond to the paragraphs on the attached application form. APPLICATION TO THE RIVERSIDE UP LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSIOW'f 01 C 26 f,;j 9: 43 Mail or deliver to: LAFCO 90-115-4--SPHERE OF INFLU1210E A1494DM[27 F Local Agency Formation Commission CTTIFS OF LA OUINIA & INDIO Robert T. Andersen Administrative Center 4OW Lemon Street, 12th Floor Riverside, CA 92501-Mi FOR LAFCO USE ONLY DO NOT STAPLE APPLICATION INTRODUCTION: The questions on this form are designed to obtain sufficient data about the proposed project and site to allow the staff and LAFCO to assess this proposal. Additional background information is encouraged which may be pertinent to the proposal. Use additional sheets where necessary. Do not leave any blanks. If an item is not applicable, so indicate. Submit this original form and 15 copies.(Note: No other application form will be accepted.) APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA Telephone: (619) 564-2246 ADDRESS: 78-105 Calle Estado, Ia Quinta, CA 92253 Name and title of person to contact regarding this application: Ronald L. Kiedrowski, City Manager Address: 78-105 tal.le Estado, La Quinta, CA 92253 Telephone: (619) 564-2246 APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE TO: Amend Sphere of Influence and concurrent City of Indio Sphere of Influence Amendment (Describe proposal or action requested) LOCATION OF PROJECT: Between Fred Waring Drive, 36th Avenue, Washington Street and Jefferson Street (Describe boundaries specifically, and refer to major highway, roads, rivers, and topographical features) A. OWNERSHIP: 1. Is the applicant a property owner in the area of the proposed project? ❑ Yes KXNo 2. Is the applicant sole owner of this property? ❑ Yes XX No B. AREA INFORMATION: I. How marry square mike, or acres, of territory are Included in thb proposal? 5104 a r s 2. Number of structures or dwell? more or less dwellings In the Proposed area at the WNW time? APproximately 1500 plus (SPecifically describe how ft property is impvv" 3. Expected increase In the number of dwellings andlor structures in the proposed area which win reads from this Proposal iea ( Ste.)c mbef torerrcas, mobbW)st oomrrrerCial. andof etfucsraat lrnproverneMs By what date? 4. Population In the area at the present time? _3000 Approximately S. Expected change In the population which will result from this proposal? ne By when? 6. Number of registered voters within the boundaries at the present time? 2,107 7. Assessed value: $ 386,102,854 Land S 139,625,806 improvements S 7,673,720 8. Identify the number of parcels within the boundaries by Assessor's number. 2811 See attached exhibit Of necessary, attach printout showing Assessor's Parcel numbers) and landowner(s) C. LAND USE: I. Current toning See attached Exhibit " 2. Current General Plan designation See attached Exh it. fIRIP 3. Prazning and N/A Plan designayon assigned bl prezoning) City,( certifiedcertifiedcopy of City ordinance wdth assigned 4. Specifically desalbe how the territory Is presently used(e.g., vacant uigle family residences, a gee'sl+?W 'residerrce'R sic.) �) shopping mall, partment �m Psho ^i gal f as h A 1 cilld Other Small OOnV n,ant hens r 6. Describe how adjacent lands are used: iyoryr, Vacant Souyr; Single family residPnrps Qp7 f �,,r� Eas[ Vacant Sca red rPSidanro West: COUntry Club, residncro¢ ao7f m,ir - s D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: 1. Describe the proposed project in as much detail as possible. Has a subdivision or lot spin been approved by the County or a city!) 0 Yes 024o. If so,what agency has approved the map,and what is its reference number? City of La Quinta sphere of influence amendment and concurrent city of radio sphere of influence amendment 2. State reasons which justify this proposal: (For example, service needs, health mandate, economic benefit, etc.) Provide for future orderly growth of La Ouinta E. PLAN FO^ THE PROVIGION OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES (Government code Sect;on 56653): In addition to responding to the questions fisted below, attach a detailed narrative plan which thoroughly outlines the full range of municipal services which will be extended to the property,their availability,and the cost of extending these services to the landowner and/or future residents. 1. Water will be supplied by? Coachella Valley Water ni atri rt r, M L=a r.,, g mutival ..._ r What is the distance to the closest water line and where is it located? scattered throughout the area Is the agency prepared to immediately furnish the necessary service? yes If not, explain. What is the anticipated water demand for this project? Unknown 2. Sewer service will bar provided by? Coachella Valley Water District What is the distance to the closest sewer line and where is it located? Existing throughout the area Is the agency prepared to immediately fumish the necessary service? Yes If not, explain. What is the anticipated demand for this project? 3. Fire 6 Police: What jurisdiction will provide fire and police services? City Of La ant through contract with County agencies Where is the nearest fire station located? 42 Av n„P at Lima Hall rnm Response time 5 minutes Where is the nearest taw enforcement facility located? ra alinta Response time 5 minutes 4. Transportation: a. Designate the names and types of roads which the Project will use for primary and secondary access Oncluding direct access streets from the project site to the nearest freeway) Washington Street 42nd Avenue FYed Waring Drive, Country Club Drive, Jefferson Street b. Is widening of an existing street necessary? Yes c. Is the project served by County-maintained roads? Yes d. is construction of new access streets necessary? No S. Special Revenues: Does the annexing agency have current plans to establish any new assessment district or tees which would Include this area, In order to pay for new or extended services? No Please detail. 6. Will the project be subject to existing bonded indebtedness? No F. PROPERTY OWNER'S POSITION: t. How many landowners make up total ownership of the project area? (include with this appfication copies of all tetteWconaspondence you have re/atl to this a! ro ' 2. How man r - � proposal.) - �' 'cunately 2811 y P ope owners have nY been contacted regarding the project? _pA proxirnately 2811 3. How many Property owners are in favor of the project? 192 4. How many property owners are not In favor of the project? 65 G. LIGHTING & ROAD MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS ONLY: I. If street lights are to be installed, list how many, what" and Intensity(e.g., 5-22,000 LPSV and 20.9,0o0 HPSV) 2. If the application affects a road maintenance district, how many miles of road are to be maintained? 3. Is It your intention to bring any roads to County standards for future acceptance into the County Maintained Road System? H. COMMUNITY BENEFIT: In your own words how would your proposal benefit the community? Eventuall provide better services to the area whm annexed, be more responsive to the o area and provide for a planned expans ion of the City ORE Quanta. NOTICES AND COMMUNICATIONS: List below the names and addresses of people to whom notices and communica- tions should be directed, (3 m"mum) Name ROAD L. =ROWSX1' CITY KWAGM Telephone (619) 564-2246 Address P. O.• Box 1504 City & Zip La Quinta, CA 92253 Name JERKY H' ' PLANNJW, & DEVELOPMT DIRE�Pgphone (619) 564-2246 Address P. O. Box 1504 City & Zip La quinta' CA 92253 Name Telephone Address City & ZV/%/J Signature of applicant or authorized representative RONALD L. KIMROWSIU Typed or printed name CITY MANAGER Title Date I LAFCO 90-115-4 PLANNED FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICES (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 56653) The City of La Quinta will provide City Management; Planning and Community Development; Building and Safety, including Code Enforcement and supplemental safety programs; Public Works, including Engineering and Street and Park Maintenance; Library; and Senior Center Fire and Police services are provided through contract with the Riverside County. These agreements will be amended to include this area when annexed in the future. The above noted services are funded within the General Budget of the City of La Quinta. WATER: Water service will be provided by the Coachella Valley Water District for a major portion of the area. This will require the extension of water mains to the property at the time of development. The Water District has indicated that they have the capacity and their willingness to provide water services to the site. The owner/developer will be responsible to provide the financing for this expansion. In addition, a portion of the Bermuda Dunes area is, provided by MYOMA Dunes Mutual Water Company. This water company will be allowed to function within their district boundaries. DOCJH.008 5 GAS: Gas service can be provided to the site by Southern California Gas Company. The owner/developer will finance these extensions. TELEPHONE: Phone service is available from General Telephone. The owner/developer will finance these extensions. WASTE DISPOSAL: The City of La Quinta has a mandatory trash collection program. This has helped clean up the City and also reduce illegal dumping. Our trash collection program is provided by Waste Management of the Desert. Payment is assessed annually and is collected on the tax bill. Residential rates within the City of La Quinta are less than current rates in Bermuda Dunes. A special rate for backyard pickup could be established. This special rate could also be collected on the tax bill. SCHOOLS: Schools are available in the City of La Quinta at the Adams Elementary, the Truman Intermediate, and the 'La Quinta Middle School on 50th Avenue. Currently an elementary school is being constructed on Yucca Lane within the Bermuda Dunes area. High School is provided at Indio High School. However, Desert Sands Unified School District is currently purchasing a 50+ acre parcel between Adams and Dune DOCJH.008 6 Palms south of Westward Ho Drive, which will be the future site of the La Quinta High School. Measure "O" and Development Impact Fees provide for future school construction. This sphere will not have an impact of the District. FLOOD CONTROL: The Coachella Valley Water District has overall responsibility for flood control. The City currently requires developers to retain storm water on site. In the future, the City will have a City storm water system to deal with the storm water. SEWER: Sewer service will be provided by the Coachella Valley Water District. This will require the ultimate extension in front of the property at the time of development. The Water District has indicated that they have the capacity and willingness to provide sewer services to the area. The owner/developer of a particular project will be responsible for financing future extension. ELECTRICAL: Electrical service will be provided by Imperial Irrigation District and financed by owner/developer at the time of development. STREETS AND LANDSCAPING: In 1985, La Quinta adopted an infrastructure program to provide funding for streets DOCJH.008 7 and other public improvements. This infrastructure program provides a funding (developer fees) to upgrade existing streets and other public improvements. When development takes place, the funds are collected. The allocation of these funds are reviewed yearly (at budget time) by the City Council as part of the Capital Improvement program. Improvements to the streets in this area will be reviewed as part of this budgetary process. The City of La Quinta will be responsible for maintenance of public streets and street sweeping on those public streets having curb and gutter. Private streets are not maintained by the City and are the responsibility of the homeowners associations. COMMUNITY IDENTIFY: The City of La Quinta recognizes and supports community area names such as Bermuda Dunes and Bermuda Dunes Country Club. As an example, our City currently has various areas that use separate identities including PGA West, Santa Rosa Cove, and Indian Springs. CODE ENFORCEMENT: The City of La Quinta has made code enforcement/animal control a high priority. We have adopted and enforced strong public nuisance codes, which include regulations pertaining to lot cleaning;debris, junk removal, animal control, abandoned vehicles, and illegal dumping. We have strong community support and commitment for these regulations, which applies to all areas of the City. In the City of La Quinta aesthetics are of major importance. DOCJH.008 8 �i PLANNING AND ZONING: La Quinta has made a commitment to its residents to be a well planned community with strong environmental planning and zoning regulations. We have adopted a Hillside Conservation Zone, a Dark Sky Ordinance, and special residential zones in the old Cove area that require, at a minimum, a tile roof, certain house size, and attractive landscaping. Quality and aesthetics are high among our priorities and we want La Quinta to be a city that all will be proud of. POLICE AND FIRE: The City contracts with the County for law enforcement and fire services. Comprehensive 24-hour police services are provided with a combination of sworn and community service. Offices. Fire protection and fire suppression services are ` provided by paid employees and volunteer personnel. Upon future annexation of this area, our contracts will be amended to serve the area. The City of La Quinta has achieved a much higher level of police and fire service than currently provided by the County. DOCJH.008 9 LUM 90-125-4 CITY OF IA QUINTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT AND CONCURRENT CITY OF INDIO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT Narrative response to criteria outlined in Government Code Section 56425. SECTION 56425(a): "The present and planned uses in the area, include agricultural and open spaces planned." The property is located north of the current city limits of the City of La Quinta and generally between Washington Street, Jefferson Street, south of 36th Avenue, and north of Fred Waring Drive. The area specifically encompasses Section 31 and 32 in Township 4 South, Range 7 East, S.B.B.M., and a portion of Section 36, Township - 4 South, Range 6 East, S.B.B.M., and Section 5, 6, 7, 8, and 17 and a portion of Section 16 & 18, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, S.B.B.M., Riverside County, California, and contains 5,104 acres, more or less. The property south of Interstate 10 is developed and commonly referred to as the Bermuda Dunes area. The area north of Interstate 10 has scatted development with some agricultural uses, with the majority being dunes and desert scrub. In addition, a major portion of the area north of Interstate 10 is part of the Del Webb-Sun City Palm Springs, under review by the County. EXISTING COUNTY ZONING: The County has various zoning designations in the area ranging from light agricultural, commercial to residential. The attached Exhibit "C" is a portion of the DOCJH.008 1 County Zoning Map. EXISTING COUNTY LAND USE DESIGNATION: The County has the property designated residential, commercial, and industrial. The attached Exhibit "D" illustrates the County Land Use designation. PROPOSED CITY ZONING & LAND USE DESIGNATION: Currently the City of La Quints.does not propose to change the Land Use and Zoning designations. Future annexation(s) would be subject to the prezoning and land use designations as required by law. The City of La Quinta has, however, indicated to the property owners in the area, that a committee would be formed to advise the City on zoning and General Plan Land Use designation for the area after annexation. It is anticipated that very little of the property would remain in agricultural use and would be converted to some urban land use. SECTION 56425(a)(2): "The present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area." Currently the area is serviced by either a service district, private water company, Coachella Valley Water District, Riverside County Airport Authority, and Riverside County. The area can be serviced by extension of the various service districts. In the future, upon annexation, to the City of La Quinta will provide road DOCJH.008 2 I'' maintenance, Code Enforcement, Animal Control and other municipal services. Trash collection would be as provided by Waste Management. Police and Fire would be provided by Riverside County Sheriff's and Fire Department. SECTION 56425(a)(3): "Present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services which the agency provides or is authorized to provide." Based upon the present service capabilities of the City of La Quints, we would be able to provide services to the residences of the proposed sphere at the same level, or higher, currently enjoyed within the area. As the City grows, the City's capacity to provide additional services will also increase. The City of La Quints currently would provide the following municipal services: City Management Planning & Community Development Building & Safety (including Code Enforcement and public safety programs) Public Works (including Engineering and street maintenance) Senior Center Flre and Police are provided through contract with Riverside County Local agencies providing services: Water - Coachella Valley Water District with a portion of Bermuda Dunes water provided by MYOMA Dunes Mutual Water DOCJH.008 3 Company Sewer - Coachella Valley Water District Electric - Imperial Irrigation District Gas - Southern California Gas Company Telephone - General Telephone Waste Disposal - Waste Management of the Desert Schools - Desert Sands Unified School District Flood Control - Coachella Valley Water District - SECTION 56425(a)(4): "The existence of any social or economic communities of Interest in the areas if the Commission determines that they are relevant to the agency. The area currently incompasses Bermuda Dunes Country Club and in the future, Del Webb's Sun City Palm Springs. These areas do/will have their own distinct identity. It is the intent of the City of La Quints,to maintain the area identities. The City has other, such as La Quinta Country Club, PGA West, Santa Rosa Cove and the Indian Springs area which maintain their identity. This sphere of influence amendment is the logical expansion of the City of La Quints. The majority of the other communities in the Valley enjoy Interstate 10 access and the City of La Quinta also requests this privilege. Therefore the City of La Quints, Is looking forward to having this, in the future, becoming part of our community. Attached is a copy of the annexation information that was distributed within the Bermuda Dunes area when the City of La Quinta conducted a mailout. DOc,H.00s 4 Av 7E ✓i; 2B 3A 38 TH o� Legend C' N En c _ 3 B .�. 2A MF 0 "OWI%C CB v ® w�sanMsua 3 A G Mow�c a C 620W C ST AVE. 2.0WAC Q 0 L*Q 2B 2B (� CQTWWCW R H 2A 2A i 2A ' 2B 3 .j nee are F nee ar.* Existing and Proposed Annexation No. 6 General Plan Land Use.Designations Tay (4 4Qaw 05— .Im JS � INSIDE BOUNDARY MEMORANDUM DATE: March 13,1991 TO: 1030 LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION _ COMMISSION - RIVERSIDE COUNTY FROM: 1100 ASSESSORS OFFICE.. Mary Ellen Schaeffer Deputy County Assessor Riverside County RE: LAFCO 90-11s-4 SPHERES OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENTS TO THE CITIES OF INDIO AND LA QUINTA - -- THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF TRA'S AND SERVICE DISTRICTS LOCATED WITHIN THE SERVICE AREA. TRA'S: 061-013 075-004, 075-005, 075-010, 075-037, 075-047 075-049, 075-054, 075-059, 075-060, 075-062, 075-066 075-068, 075-069, 075-071, 075-075, 075-077, 075-086 075-087, 075-090, 075-95-, 075-100, 075=107-,--075-107 --- -- --- 075-110 thru 075-112. 075-114 thru 075-118 ILO a SPECIAL DISTRICTS: �^,�, PALM SPRINGS UNIF SCH DIST OUT ---- rn SUPVR ROAD DIST No.4 COACHELLA VAL COM C PALM SPRINGS CEM DESERT HOSP ti- COACHELLA VAL WATER m3 {s COACHELLA VAL MOS ABAT COACHELLA VAL RCD CITROUS PEST CNOTROL f 2 COACHELLA VAL REC 6 PARR - - - COACHELLA VAL PUB CEM C.S.A. 53, 121, 26 6 131 RIVERSIDE COUNTY RDV PLAN 6 PROJECT AREA f 4- PALM DESERT COUNTRY CLUB 1 3 MILE RADIUS MEMORANDUM DATE: MARCH 13,1991 TO: 1030 LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION-RIVERSIDE COUNTY . - FROM'- 1100 ASSESSORS OFFICE Mary Ellen Schaeffer Deputy County Assessor Riverside County RE: LAFCO 90-119-4 SPHERES OF INFLUENCES AMENDMENTS -TO THE CITIES OF INDIO AND LA QUINTA THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF TRA'S AND SPECIAL DISTRICTS LOCATED WITHIN A . THREE MILE,RADIUS OF THE SUBJECT AREA. TRA'S: 702, 703, 705 thru 714, 716 thru 718, 720, 722, 723, 725, 727 thru 733, 735 thru 738,740, 741, 744 thru 747, 750 thru 752 754, 755, 757 thru 760, 762, 765 thru 769, 772 thru 776, 778 780, 782 thru 792 1600, 1602, 1605 thru 1607, 1609 1612, 1614, 1619 thru 1634, 1639 thru 1643, 1646 thru 1648 1650, 1653, 1654 1848, 1860, 1862 thru 1864, 1873 1885, 1886, 1895, 18105, 18108, 18115, 18126, 18134, 18138 18139, 18144, 18165, 18174 thru 18182 2002 thru 2013 2016, 2017, 2022, 2026 thru 2029, 2031, 2034, 2035, 2041 thru 2045 5804 6113, 6114, 61104 7500 7503, 7503, 7507, 7509 thru 7518, 7522 thru 7526, 7532, 7537 thru 7541, 7545, 7547 thru 7549, 7552, 7554 thru 7556, 7559 thru 7562, 7566 thru 7582, 7584, 7586 thru 7596, 7598 thru 75118 SPECIAL DISTIRCTS: PALM SPRINGS UNIF SCH DIST OUT SUPVR ROAD DIST No.4 COACHELLA VAL COX C PALM SPRINGS CEM DESERT HOSP COACHELLA VAL WATER COACHELLA VAL MOS ABAT COACHELLA VAL RCD CITROUS PEST CONTROL No.2 COACHELLA VAL -PUB CEM COACHELLA VAL REC 6 PARR RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN 6 PROJECT AREA No.4 - PALM DESERT COUNTRY CLUB C.S.A. No. 53, 121, 26 6 131 VALLEY SAN DESERT SANDS-INDIO COMP UNIF SCH CITY OF INDIO CITY OF INDIO PARKING No.1 CITY OF INDIO CENTRE URBAN RENEWELL CITY OF INDIO LANDSCAPE 6 LIGHT f 1,3,5 6 6 CITY OF INDIO DQTE CAPITOL RDV COM FAC No.88-1 (Royal Dunes) w 3 MILE RADIUS MEMORANDUM 7_-,- DATE: . ..- .- . TO: 1030 LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION-RIVERSIDE COUNTY_ FROM: 1100 ASSESSORS OFFICE ' -• - .- - .. •,:r.: •gib . , . Deputy County Assessor Riverside County THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF TRA'S AND SPECIAL DISTRICTS LOCATED WITHIN A _ THREE MILE,RADIUS OF THE SUBJECT AREA. SPECIAL DISTRICTS CONTINUED: CITY OF LA QUINTA CITY OF LA QUINTA RDV PROJECT RIVERSIDE COUNTY RDV PROJECT No.2- LA QUINTA CITY -OF INDIAN WELLS . CITY OF INDIAN WELLS FIRE SERVICE UPGRADE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS SOLID WASTE COLLECTION CITY OF INDIAN WELLS CONSOLIDATED WHITEWATER RDV CITY OF INDIAN WELLS FIRE ACCESS MAM 6 1 6 2 CITY OF INDIAN WELLS FRED WARING 6 CIELETO DR ASSESSMENT CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY OF INDIAN WELLS LANDSCAPE 6 LIGHT No.1,2,3,4 6 6 CITY OF PALM DESERT RDV No.1-82 AN% + ► 2 IN } LF ALD11PT UPOO June 8, 1990 BY R R PN 9011954 yo Revised October 3, 1990 BY EXHIBIT "A" REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE DETACHMENT FROM CITY OF INDIO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND CONCURRENT ANNEXATION TO CITY OF LA QUINTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO CITY OF LA QUINTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE LAFCO NO. 90-115-4 Section 31 and 32 in Township 4 South, Range 7 East, S.B.M. , a portion of Section 36, Township 4 South, Range 6 East, S.B.M. , and Sections 5, 6, 7, 8 and 17, and a portion of Sections 16 and 18, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, S.B.M. , Riverside . County,California, more particularly described as follows: f said Section 31 as shown b Beginning at the Northwest corner o Y map of Record of Survey on file in Book 31 of Records of Survey, Page 38 thereof, Records of Riverside County, also being the centerline intersection of 36th Avenue and Washington Street; Thence N.89°23'00"E. along the Northerly line of said Section 31, as shown by said map of Record of Survey, also being along said centerline of 36th Avenue, a distance of 2771.30 feet to the North one-quarter corner of said Section 31; Thence N.89°34'30"E. along said Northerly line as shown by map of Record of Survey on file in Book 18 of Records of Survey, Page 24 thereof, Records of Riverside County, also being along said centerline of 36th Avenue, a distance of 2640.00 feet to the Northeast corner of said Section 31, also being the Northwest corner of said Section 32; Thence 5.8901610011E. along the Northerly line of said Section 32, as shown by Licensed Land Surveyor's Map on file in Book 5 of Records of Survey, Page 9 thereof, Records of Riverside County, also being along said centerline of 36th Avenue, a distance of 2647.30 feet to the North one-quarter corner of said Section 32; -2- Thence continuing S.89°16100"E. along last said Northerly line as shown by said Licensed Land Surveyor' s Map, also being along said centerline of 36th Avenue, a distance of 2647 . 30 feet to the Northeast corner of said Section 32; Thence S .00°02100"E. along the Easterly line of said section 32, as shown by said Licensed Land Surveyor' s Map, a distance of 2664 .40 feet to the East one-quarter corner of said Section 32; Thence continuing S.0000210011E. along said Easterly line as shown by said Licensed Land Surveyor' s Map, a distance of 2664 .40 feet to the Southeast corner of said Section 32, said corner being a point in the Southerly line of said Township 4 South, Range 7 East, also being a point in the centerline of 38th Avenue; Thence Westerly along said Southerly line and along said centerline of 38th Avenue, a distance of 894 . 35 feet to the Northeast corner of said Section 5, as shown by map of Record of Survey on file in Book 11 of Record of Surveys, Page 10 thereof, Records of Riverside County, also being a point in the centerline of Jefferson Street; Thence S . 00°24146"W. along the Easterly line of said Section 5, also being along said centerline of Jefferson Street as shown by Parcel Map No. 20240 on file in Book 132 of Parcel Maps, Pages 91 through 92 thereof, Records of Riverside County, a distance of 2645.57 feet to the East one-quarter corner of said Section 5; Thence S.00°19110"W. along last said Easterly line and along said centerline of Jefferson Street, as shown by Parcel Map No. 11795 on file in Book 54 of Parcel Maps, Pages 12 through 13 thereof, Records of Riverside County, a distance of 2669 . 74 feet to the Southeast corner of said Section 5, also being the Northeast corner of said Section 8, and also being a point in the centerline of 40th Avenue; -3- Thence S . 00°34104"E. along the Easterly li.ne of said Section 81 also being along said centerline of Jefferson Street as shown by map of Record of Survey on file in Book 69 of Records of Survey, page 12 thereof, Records of Riverside County, a distance of 2664 .76 feet to East one-quarter of said Section 8; Thence S . 00°38130"E. along last said Easterly line, also along said centerline of Jefferson Street as shown by map of Tract No. 2642 on file in Book 49 of Maps, Pages 98 through 99 thereof, Records of Riverside County, a distance of 2663 . 08 feet to the Southeast corner of said Section 8, also being the Northwest corner of said Section 16, also being a point on the Northerly line of the Bermuda Golf Club Estates No . 2 as shown by map on file in Book 36 of Maps, Pages 19 through 21 thereof, Records of Riverside County and also being a point in the centerline of 42nd Avenue; Thence N . 89°10122"E . along said Northerly line, a distance of 140 . 00 feet to the Northeast corner of said Bermuda Golf Club Estates No. 2; Thence S.00049138"E. , a distance of 180 .00 feet; Thence S.08°10136"W., a distance of 109 .27 feet; Thence S.08°19142"W., a distance of 500 .00 feet; Thence S.07*30128"E.; a distance of 76. 68 feet; Thence S.19°21103"E. , a distance of 460 .00 feet; Thence S.09°08159"E. , a distance of 135.53 feet; Thence S.00°20144"E. , a distance of 530 . 00 feet to a point on the centerline of Toreado Drive as shown on said Map of Bermuda Golf Club Estates No. 2; -4- Thence continuing S. 00°20' 44"E. , a distance of 130 .00 feet to the Southeast corner of said Bermuda Golf Club Estates No. 2, also being the Northeast corner of the Bermuda Golf Club Estates No. 3 as shown by map on file in Book 36 of Maps, Pages 71 through 73 thereof, Records of Riverside County; (the previous eight courses being along the Easterly line of said Bermuda Golf Club Estates No. 2) ; Thence continuing S . 0002014411E. along the Easterly line of said Bermuda Golf Club Estates No. 3, a distance of 100 .00 feet; Thence S . 0201710311E. along the last mentioned Easterly line, a distance of 291.82 feet; Thence S . 00035124"E. along..the last mentioned Easterly line, a distance of 160 . 00 feet, to the Southeast corner of said Bermuda Golf Club Estates unit No. 3, also being a point in the Northerly line of the Southwest one-quarter of said Section 16; Thence N. 89030158"E . along said Northerly line, a distance of 516. 81 feet to a point in the centerline of Jefferson Street as shown on Map 780-EE, on file in the Office of the County Surveyor, Riverside County; Thence S.1204914111W. along said centerline, a distance of 1934 .09 feet; Thence Southerly along said centerline, on a curve concave Easterly, having a radius of 3, 000 . 00 feet, through an angle of 13*0613011, an arc length of 686 .35 feet; Thence S .0001614911E. along said centerline, a distance of 77 .32 feet to the Southeast corner of said Section 17 also being a point in the centerline of Fred Waring Drive (formerly knows as 44th Avenue) shown on Map of Tract No. 2606 on file in Book 45 of Maps, Pages 91 through 97 thereof, Records of Riverside County; -5- Thence S. 89°29109"W. along the Southerly line of said Section 17, also being along said centerline of Fred Waring Drive, a distance of 2651 . 61 feet to the South one-quarter corner of said Section 17; Thence continuing S . 89°29109"W. along said Southerly line, a distance of 2654 .71 feet to the Southwest corner of said Section 17 also being the Southeast corner of said Section 18, also being a point in the centerline of Adams Street as shown by map of Parcel Map No . 5361 on file in Book 11 of Parcel Maps, Page 79 thereof, Records of Riverside County; Thence N.00000120"E. along the Easterly line of said Section 18, also being along said centerline of Adams Street a distance of 1344 .08 feet to a point in the Easterly produced Northerly line of Parcel 4 as shown on said map of Parcel Map No. 5361; Thence S .89028140"E. along said Easterly produced Northerly line of Parcel 4, and along said Northerly line, a distance of 1578 . 64 feet to the Northwest corner thereof; Thence S.00°24150"E. along the Westerly line of said Parcel 4, and along the Southerly produced Westerly line of said Parcel 4, a distance of 1341.07 feet to a point in the Southerly line of said Section 18 as shown by said map of Parcel Map No. 5361, also being a point in the said centerline of Fred Waring Drive; Thence S.89°35110"W. along said Southerly line and said centerline of Fred Waring Drive, a distance of 3818 . 69 feet to the Southwest corner of said Section 18, also being a point in the centerline of Washington Street as shown by' said map of Parcel Map No. 5361; Thence N.0001114011E. along the Westerly line of said Section 18 as shown by said map of Parcel -Map No . 5361, and along said centerline of Washington Street, a distance of 2654.03 feet to the West one-quarter corner of said Section 18; -6- Thence N.00008134"E. along said Westerly line as shown by map of Parcel Map No. 6810 on file in Book 35 of Parcel Maps, Page 100 thereof, Records of Riverside County, also being along said centerline of Washington Street, a distance of 2655.81 feet to the Northwest corner of said Section 18, also being the Southwest corner of said Section 7, also being a point on the centerline of 42nd Avenue; Thence N.00011130"E. along the Westerly line of said Section 7 as shown by map of Record of Survey on file in Book 20 of Records of Survey, Page 81 thereof, Records of Riverside County, also being along said centerline of Washington Street, a distance of 2656 .70 feet to the West one-quarter corner of said Section 7, also being a point in the centerline of 41st Avenue; Thence N. 00012130"E . along last said Westerly line and said centerline as shown by said map of Record of Survey, a distance of 1328 . 21 feet' to a point of curvature on said centerline of Washington Street as shown by Deed Plat filed as 722-QQ in the office of the County Surveyor,- Thence along said centerline of Washington Street on a curve concave goutheasterly, having a radius of 1500. 00 feet, through an angle of .18*50130", an arc length of 493.27 feet; Thence continuing along said centerline N. 19°06150"E and the Northeasterly prolongation thereof a distance of 1918 . 91 feet point in the Northerly right-of-way line of Interstate Highway No. 10 as shown` by right-of-way map filed as 200-DD in the Office of the County Surveyor; Thence N.70°06130"W along said Northerly right-of-way as shown by said Right-of-Way Map a distance of 20 .00 feet, more or less to an angle point therein; Thence continuing along said Northerly right-of-way as shown by said right-of-way map N. 68°30139"W, a distance of 708 . 67 feet; -7- Thence continuing along said Northerly right-of-way as shsown by said right-of-way map N. 90°00100"w, a distance of 36 .71 feet to a point in the Westerly of Section 6, also being the centerline of said Washington Street; Thence N.00°16140!'E. along the westerly line of said Section 6 and said centerline of Washington Street as shown by map of Record of Survey on file in Book 31 of Records of Survey, Page 44 thereof, Records of Riverside County, a distance of 1460 . 75 feet to the West one-quarter corner of said Section 6, also being a point in the centerline of 39th Avenue; Thence N. 00016100" along last said Westerly line and said centerline as shown by said Record of Survey, a distance of 2667 .84 feet to the Northwest corner of said Section 6, also being a point in the centerline of 38th Avenue, also being a point in the Southerly line of Section 36, Township 4 South, Range 6 East, S.B.M. ; Thence Northeasterly on a tangent curve concave Southeasterly, having a radius of 500 .00 feet, through an angle of 45*0010011, an arc length of 392.70 feet; Thence N.45°00100"E. , a distance of 699.58 feet; Thence Northeasterly on a tangent curve concave Northwesterly, having a radius of 500 .00 feet, through an angle of 44*39, 3011, an are length of 389.72 feet to a point in the Westerly line of said Section 31; (the previous three courses being along the centerline of Washington Street as shown on Map 702-CC on file in the Office of the County Surveyor, Riverside County) ; -8- Thence N.00°20'30"E. along said westerly line and said centerline of Washington Street as shown by said Map 702-CC, a distance of 4092.28 feet to the Point of Beginning. The above described parcel of land contains 5104 acres, more or less. J.F. DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Prepared under the supervision of: 00 Marissa Crowther, PLS No. 6152 My License Expires 3-31-99No. 6152 i cxr 3'�I °14 Date: �T 5 199� �`� CAL�U• MC/vb/mll:Legal:AQ8 SUBJECT: SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ADM' NDMENT PAGE 1 OF 5 PROJECT: CITY OF LA QUINTA JOB NO. 90-11954 THIS MAT It SMnY AN AID IN LOCATING THE PARCCLM DE=MED IN 711E - BY: MG GMD ATTAOED DDf7AE117, IT IS NDT A PART R THE WITTEN DESCRIPIIW TLEREOA DATE: JUNE 1990 Lj r- INDEX & VICINITY MAP (NOT TO SCALE) i. N - 0 . 36TFN . :;...rat•, :%:,:'. <</�'� .N •' Imo''- :•1 i • '! T.4S.' !%' i; / T.SS. ELI EU 5 L •'. O SPHERE OF INFLUENCE O U DOUMDARY ._ •. �1' ' O . �.:ll• .Ix N 1=XI5TIMG CITY LIMITS / 0 •\ •.(? Q' ` /aOj�T' 5,104 ACRES,MOPe OR L EG-z O � '�Z'-',_�`�. •. •+ TV M/Ip APPROVED '?-- • COUN \ ' —I t I � _.�i—'�,fi:;.1•':� I�•�. ..I�'" �� BY RIV IDE SU EY �' P.� I. ,ar\.,.i Y., v.•. . .. r� 8Y •: �Illy- "• \ ' ''� �' PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: MARISSA CROWTHER PLS NO. 6152 :I"l.. II•:..•1'•: J.F. DAMOSON ASSOCIATES. Inc. .. .n' PoA .i'1 . Iot'10 • DATE. DOCUMENT NO. 90-11954(P) REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE DETACHMENT FROM CITY OF INDIO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE SEC. 31832.T.4S..R.7E.: POR. SEC.36,T.4S.,R.6E.: AND CONCURR4NT ANNEXATION TO CITY OF SEC' CDUNTY70FOFL 16,10 CA INCLUDE LA QUINTA SP ERE OF INFLUENCE AND TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO CITY OF LA QUINTA J.F. DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE Attn. MARISSA CROYMAER P.O. BOX 12817, PALM DESERT. CA L A F C O NO. 90-115-4 . Ph. (619)346-5691 92255 SUBJECT: SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ADMENDMENT PAGE Z OF 5 PROJECT: CITY OF LA QUINTA HEJOB N0. 9o-t 1954 THIS RAT IS S UELY AN AID IN UDE/ATING THE PARMCS') DESCRIBED IN THE 15 BY: MC GMD ATTACHED DDCMMT, IT IS NDT A PART DP THE %MITTEN DESCRIPTION THOWN, DATE: JUNE 1990 FaMC9 Ct;T. 1990 w III NOTE: SEE SHEET 5 FOR COURSE DATA 55 > PO.B. LL W 36TH VENUE w z. a 31 4-7 32I 3 � 46 7 36TH AVENUE , � 8 ail II 5 w LU 6' w w w 44 a ui 40 w� � > E N� n. _ 1140THAVENUE I 0 z o z tcc z � � ®III II II� �i',9yr ICI II® II \ice LavQAVENU15 _ � F SEE SHEET 4 SEE SHEET 3 DOCUMENT NO. 90-11954(P) REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE DETACHMENT FROM CITY OF INDIO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE SEC. 31h32.T.4S.,R.7E.: POR. SEC.36,T.4S..R.6E.: AND CONCURRENT ANNEXATION TO CITY OF SEC. COUNTY CA 'E' LA QUINTA SPHERE OF-INFLUENCE AND TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO CITY OF LA QUINTA J.F. DAVIDSON.ASSOCIATES. Inc. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE Attn. MARISSA CROWTHER P.O (SOX 146 15691� DESERT. 0 L A FCO NO. 90- 115-4 SUBJECT: SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ADMENDMENT PAGE 3 OF 5 PROJECT: CITY OF LA QUINTA JOB NO. 90-11954 THIS PUT IS SOLELY AN AID OH LOCATING THE PARCEL(S) DESCMI)ED IN THE BY: MC GMD ATTACHED DOCINENT, IT IS MDT A PART OF THE VIIITTEN DESMPTION TIEAEIN. DATE: JUNE 1990 NOTE: SEE SHEET 5 FOR COURSE DATA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE (,I SEE SHE II L T IA 1 15 II N 16 I7 I 2I �' O z 17 - p luj / 4+ I to NI j � FRED WARING DRIVE _ i �i T/7Yy/ r C'9 ICITY OF LA QUINTA DOCUMENT NO. 90-11954(P) REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE DETACHMENT FROM CITY OF INDIO SPHERE OF' INFLUENCE SEC. 31&32.T.4S.,R.7E.: POR. SEC.36,T.4SJL6E.: AND CONCURRENT ANNEXATION TO CITY OF SEC C UNTY7,OFDRIVERSIDE, �R.7E. LA QUINTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO CITY OF LA QUINTA J.F. OAVIDSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE Attn. MARISSA CROWTHER LAFCO N0. 90-115-4 AL P.O. BOX 12817. PM DESERT, CA Ph. (619)346-5691 92255 SUBJECT: SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ADMENDMENT PAGE 4 OF 5 PROJECT: CITY OF LA QUINTA JOB NO. 90-11954 TMS PLAT IS Son Y AN AID IN LUTING THE PARCELSS) DESCRIBED IN THE BY: MC GMD ATTACHED DDCIM NT. IT IS NOT A PART DP THE VRITTEN WMMPnW THEREIK DATE: JUNE 1990 NOTE: SEE SHEET 5 FOR COURSE DATA SEE SHEET 2 � I 7 36 - `- 11 � III z 18 0 o II IQ II3 � II w' o� II u. FRED WAR/ki DRIVE W O w �i II W w W CITY OF LA QUINTA DOCUMENT NO. 90-11954(P) REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE DETACHMENT FROM CITY OF INDIO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE SEC. 31h32,T.4S..R.7E: POR. SEC.36JAS..R.6E: AND CONCURRENT ANNEXATION TO CITY OF SEc 5,67.617 R. `ERSI TSS.R.7E LA QUINTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND TO CDUHTY OF DF RrvERSIDE, CA INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO CITY OF LAQUINIA J.F. DAADSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE Attn. MARISSA CROWTHER P.O. BOX 12817. PALM DESERT, CA LAFCO Na 90-115-4 Ph. (619)346-5691 92255 I I SUBJECT: SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ADMENDMENT PAGE 5 OF 5 PROJECT: CITY OF LA QUINTA IF JOB NO. 90-11954 BY: MC/GMD 7D UED D IS NIM.maym IS M ltan"c TIE PNta1(s)o6cnlaED III TIE . auauavoauQrt. RISNtlfAPHrtOF1NE11A(nFN06CItIPIIOMTff1tIN. DATE: JULY 1990 COURSE DATA.TABLE al N. 09023100" E. 2771.03' 25 S. 12*49141" W. 1934.09' ❑2 N. 89034130" E. 2640.00' 26 R-3000.00' Z� -13'06'30" L-686.35' 7 S. 89016'00" E. 2647.30' 27 S. 00016149" E. 77.32' 74 S. 89*16100" E. 2647.30' 28. S. 89029109" W. 2651.61' ❑5 S. 0.0002'00" E. 2664.40' 29 S. 09029'09" W. 2654.71' ❑6 S. 00002100" E. 2664.40' 30 N. 00°00'20" E. 1394.08' ❑7 WESTERLY $94.35' 31 S.' 89*28'40" E. . 1578.64' E8 S. 00*24146" W. 2645.57' 32 S. 00024'50" E. 1341.07' �9 S. 00°19'10" W. 2669.74' 33 S. 89035110" W. 3818.69' FIE S. 00034104" E. 2664.76' 34 N. 00011'40" E. 2654.03' 11 S. 00038130" E. 2663.08' 35 N. 00008,34" E. 2655.61' 12 N. 89010122" W. 140.00' 36 N. 00011'30" E. 2656.70' 13 S. 00049130" E. 180.00' 37 N. 00°12'30" E. 1328.21' 14 S. 08010136' W. 109.27' 38 R-1500.00' 0 -18°50'30" L-493.27 15 S. 00°19'42" W. 500.00' 39 N. 19*06150" E. 1918.91' 16 S. 07030128" E. 76.68' 40 N. 70°06'30" W. 20.00' ± 17 S. 19021103" E. 460.00' 41 N. 68*30,39" W. 708.67' FIES. 09008'59" E. 135.53' 42 N. 90°00'00" w. 36.71' FIE 19 S. 00020'44" E. 530.00' 43 N. 00016'40" W. 1460.75' 20 S. 00020144" E. 130.00' 44' N. 00°16'00" E. 2667.05' 21 S. 00020144" E. 100.00, 45 R-500.00' Z�-45000'00" L-392.70.' 22 S. 02°17'03" E. 291.02' 46 N. 45600'00" E. 699.58, 23 S. 00°35'24" E. 160.00, 47 R-500.00' -44°39'30" L-389.72' 24 N. 89630'58" E. 516.81' 48 N00020130" E. 4092.28' DOCUMENT N0. 9o-11ssa(P) REORGANIZATIN TO INCLUDE DETACHMENT FROM CITY OFOIN 10 SPHERE OF INFLUENCE SEC 31&32,T.4S.,R.7E; POR. SEC. 36,T.4S.,R.6E; AND CONCURRENT ANNEXATION TO CITY OF SEC. 5,6,7,8,17 do POR. 16,18 T.5S.,R.7E. LA QUINTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND TO COUNTY of RIVERSIDE, CA INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO CITY OF LA QUINTA J.F. DAMOSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE Attn. MARISSA CROWTHER 90-115-4 P.Q. BOX 12817. PALM.DESERT, CA LAFCO NO. Ph. 619 346-5691 92255 i 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 April 1, 1991 Ms. Barbara Beegle Local Agency Formation Commission 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 620 Riverside, California 92501-3676 Re: LAFCO NO. 90-115-4 Dear Ms. Beegle: A significant number of residents and property owners in a major portion of the area under consideration have expressed a desire to be placed in the City of Palm Desert ' s Sphere of Influence. They have felt strongly enough on the issue to submit an application and pay the appropriate filing fee. We believe that the area commonly referred to as Bermuda Dunes should be allowed to determine into whose sphere of influence they wish to be a part. We are also under the impression that the hearings to determine the Bermuda Dunes sphere question of Palm Desert or La guinta would be heard simultaneously. If we are wrong, please let us know. Very truly yours, BRUCE A. ALTMAN CITY MANAGER BAA/RAD/tm STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY ` DE➢'^TMENT OF FISH AND GAME V° 5254 d RONMEN?R -)CUMENT APPLICATION/FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT (� Lead Agency: PDate: pSI lQQ County/State Agency ` C LrY>! /li� Document No. 400 ri;, 3 Project Title: Project Applicant: tt t CHECK APPLICABLE FEES: ( ) Environmental Impact Report $850.00 $ ( ) Negative Declaration $1,250.00 $ ( ) Application Fee Water Diversion(Water Resounes Control Board Orl) $850.00 $ ( ) Projects Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs(DFG&CDFOnly) $850.00 $ County Administrative Fee $25.00 $ �( X) Project that requires fee,not paid(enter amotau due) $ n Project that is exempt from fee h TOTAL RECEIVED $ Signature of person receiving p ment FIRST COPY.PRO]ECTAPP SECONDCOPY-DFGICFAB 7-LEAD AGENCY FOURTH COPY-COUNTY NOTICE OF DETERMINATION Negative Declaration )00523 TO: (X) Riverside Co. Clerk/Recorder ( ) Secretary for Resources 3470 12th Street 1416 Ninth St. , Rg�E3EIVED Riverside, CA 92501 Sacramento, CA 95814 FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT MAY 171991 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 [OMMUX BIEY OF PUMTY EDESERNT TAp EM SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Project Title/Common Name: Bermuda Dunes Sphere of Influence Designation Date of Project Approval: February 28, 1991 State Clearinghouse Number ( if submitted) : N/A Contact Person: Ramon A. Diaz Project Location: The unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes. Project Description: Placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes into the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. This is to advise that the City of Palm Desert has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1. The project ( ) will, (X) will not, have a significant effect on the environment. 2 . An Environmental Impact Report was prepared in connection with this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. X A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. A copy of the Negative Declaration may be examined at the above city hall address. 3. Mitigation measures (X) were, ( ) were not, made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations ( ) was, (X) was not, pte,[d� for this project. ignature Title Date Received for Filing Please re u�k,slat stamped copy in the enclosed envaggDkk twdfta � �VVUUIIVVa�Y ttii�RRKK© RWpw POSWO2„Sj MAR 25 1991 MAR 2 9 IJ91 rillAlAM CCNERLY4 ttsmovw� HA CQU CLER BY Dopt Lowfgr Ide State of County of Mwmwc S ofCaGtomia y r . - Attachment 1 California Department of Fish and Game CERTIFICATE OF FEE EXEMPTION De Minimis Impact Finding Project Title/Location (include county) : Bermuda Dunes Sphere of Influence Designation Riverside County Project Description: Placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes into the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. Findings of Exemption (attach as necessary) : The placing of an area in a city' s sphere of influence does not alter the physical status of said community and, therefore, has no potential significant adverse impact on the environment. Certification: I hereby certify that the public agency has made the above finding and that the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711 . 2 of the Fish and Game Code. RAMON A. DIAZ (Chief Planning Officia ) Title: Assistant City Manager/ Director of Community Dev. Lead Agency: City of Palm Desert Date: March 13, 1991 Section 711 .4, Fish and Game Code DFG: 12/90 TO DATE i TIME AM� P i m FROM AREA CODE I IF OF NO. iN i EXT. Eim � M ;s 7 IE ; A IMIG � 0IE SIGNED CLL�PNONED� BACK 01 CALL RNED❑I SEE OU WANTSO �I AGAIN WILLC AID ❑ I WASM LLURGENT� SEND CONFIRMATION DATE/TIME 6-18-91 10:51AM i LOCAL I.D. 119541709H 4 LOCAL NRPiE CITY OF F'RLI°i GESER SEND a s n NO F.EMOTE STRT I ON I. D _ _ STPRT TIME DURAT I Of. COMMENT 1 CCITT G3 0=18-91 10:49AM I i'S3" �I TOTAL PAGES : 3 xEROx TELECOF'IER 7010 73.510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 FAX (619) 340-0574 TRANSMITTAL FORM TO: �k� DATE: FROM. NUMBER OF PAGES (Including Transmittal Form) 3 MESSAGE: e CITY OF PALM DESERT tea/ ✓ DEPiieTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Assistant City Manager/Director of Community Development DATE: March 1 , 1991 SUBJECT: Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application LAFCO Process It is LAFCO' s responsibility, of course, to assign unincorporated areas to a city' s sphere of influence . The designation is the first step to annexation and is required to occur--note both actions can occur simultaneously. In the case of Bermuda Dunes a group of homeowners have applied to LAFCO to be placed in our sphere of influence . The City of. La Quinta has also applied to LAFCO to have Bermuda Dunes placed in its sphere of influence. LAFCO will decide at a public hearing which city will have this area placed in its sphere of influence. Prior to conducting the hearing, however, LAFCO has requested that both cities process the requests through the CEQA process. I questioned this since in this matter LAFCO is the lead agency, but I have been assured by LAFCO staff that we are the agency to process the environmental documents. Because I felt that the action of placing an area in a city ' s sphere of influence results in no political or physical changes to that area, a negative declaration of environmental impact should be certified. While separate hearings could be held to judge the residents and La Quinta ' s applications, I have been assured that both applications will be considered at one hearing. LAFCO controls the setting of the hearing; as of today no hearing date has been set. We normally receive more than adequate notice of the hearing date and staff recommendation . I am sure, however, that no date will be set until the negative declaration is certified and recorded with the Riverside County Clerk. Also, annexations have priority over pure sphere applications . Once Bermuda Dunes is placed in one city ' s sphere of influence it can be annexed only by that ci. t:y unless il:s sphere is changed. In order to change an area ' s sphere once established the entire hearing process must be done again. In terms of city staff involvement a sphere application requires relatively little work. There is no need for prezoning or general plan CITY MANAGER 6ERMUDA DUNES SPHERE APPLICATION MARCH 1, 1991 amendment at this stage . However, annexation involves both these activities in addition to an economic impact analysis. I trust this answers the concerns over the Bermuda Dunes application. AMON . DIA ASSISTANT CIT ANAGER, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING /tm 2 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION 0 Negative Declaration TO:, (X) Riverside Co. Clerk/Recorder ( ) Secretary for Resources 3470 12th Street 1416 Ninth St. , Rm 1311 Riverside, CA 92501 Sacramento, CA 95814 FROM: CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Project Title/Common Name: Bermuda Dunes Sphere of Influence Designation Date of Project Approval : February 28, 1991 State Clearinghouse Number ( if submitted) : N/A Contact Person: Ramon A. Diaz Project Location: The unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes. Project Description: Placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes into the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. This is to advise that the City of Palm Desert has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1 . The project ( ) will, (X) will not, have a significant effect on the environment. 2 . An Environmental Impact Report was prepared in connection with this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. X__ A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. A copy of the Negative Declaration may be examined at the above city hall address. 3 . Mitigation measures ( X) were, ( ) were not, made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations ( ) was, ( X) was not, pted for this project. eat ignature Title Date Received for Filing Please return date-stamped copy in the enclosed envelope. Attachment 1 California Department of Fish and Game CERTIFICATE OF FEE EXEMPTION De Minimis Impact Finding Project Title/Location (include county) : Bermuda Dunes Sphere of Influence Designation Riverside County Project Description: Placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes into the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. Findings of Exemption (attach as necessary) : The placing of an area in a city' s .sphere of influence does not alter the physical status of said community and, therefore, has no potential significant adverse impact on the environment. Certification: I hereby certify that the public agency has made the above finding and that the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711 . 2 of the Fish and Game Code. RAMON A. DIAZJ� �1 ( Chief Planning Officia ) Title: Assistant City Manager/ Director of Community Dev. Lead Agency: City of Palm Desert Date: March 13, 1991 Section 711 .4, Fish and Game Code DFG: 12/90 ziCL / O 0 n p' m O m O m o N c a 3 » � � N �' ?' ❑ ii w mmm y ;aw ;a r t-' O tD "' (D x O A -- 3 o ' CD O N N -' a -� Q m o m a N (o '0 m (D -s -s rl O_ 0 3 C t0 j N to U w -n -0 < r+ 0 O C D_ C+ d n V a (D m o. 3 -t, m = m oar toC� r - O O (l r+ 0 c ❑ m N 3 D rD =5 0 LD (D r+ (D rl) rFG 0 0 O C) m O m �-+ d` (D 5 3 'S C O rD (D N m OC O Z]1 O 3 O 0 o n J n J D \ < 3 rD 3 CD -s \ o� oo n o 0 ? D M m O ❑. Z = N J p N zy N N N n Q O (O m C D O h ❑ w -s 3 � rD tD .�' 3 ❑ Dl (D C Sv = C m m a Cr U N ❑ (D 0CD0 � 3 J D tD tD 3 3 < 7 C O (mn m CD , < a = C� v (D (D < 3 m (D j c Q ❑ O A m m oz =r m ; m O x 3 ^ D c O (D N OO CD 3 -h C- CD rD O rtt O_ -n m D Z N C O 3 3 (D O D O 0m m Za D (7 Z fn o ,7 z O 7: C DO z n D m C) o v W m OI N C z C T CD INVENTORY NO. 2930") CITY.O� PALM DESERT D E S C R I P T I O N AMOUNT Filing fee 110-4111-3640 25. 00 25. 00 County Of RALVAU5410H BEFORE DEPOSITING 25. 00 25. 00 3 r*,, 1 i"c'_{:"I i, - i '�'r , SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BANK—, 16-4 z.PALM DESERT OFFICE#0338 T �]Q 1 .rh + TI:�E�B'FI�ASVER OF THE' T _ 45-245 PORTOLA AVE . '- 1?20 •.k, 2930 I,_ PALM DESERT, CA 92260 ' € CITY OF PALM DESERT 1 j..73.516 FRED WARING DRIVE — - PALM DESEi1T 922812578619346061141 r_1 AM-O.0 N.L• WILL PAY TO THE ORDERDF i' 'A`Ir�+ ! DATEI CHECK NO. I t 1+3.� _ p� � ,� <.'rt k 03/15�/91�i ---0000029301 - s� -, 's :, ####iF25. 00 t County of . Riv e erside 1 e County Rcard � PO Box 751 ir a i* "I Riv fiSidg 3'f, 7' CA 92502, " , IL 'TRE/�S 44 --- - — --- 1140 29 30 ps 1: L 2 20000z.-31: 9 28 -24i 29n' - I i RESOLUTION NO. 91-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR THE PLACING OF THE UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY OF BERMUDA DUNES IN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT AS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970 AS AMENDED. WHEREAS, a group of residents have applied to the Riverside County Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO) to be placed in the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert; and WHEREAS, LAFCO has requested that the City of Palm Desert act as the lead agency for CEQA purposes; and WHEREAS, the placing of an area in a city' s sphere of influence does not alter the physical or political status or situation of said community and, therefore, has no potential significant adverse impact on the environment; and WHEREAS, an initial study completed for this application has determined that the placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes in Palm Desert' s sphere of influence could not have a potential significant adverse impact on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, certifying a negative declaration of environmental impact for the placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes in the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert as meeting the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 28th, day of February, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : BENSON, CRITES, KELLY, WILSON, SNYDER NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE -1 Gc.c WALTER H. SNYDER, Maffbr A'fT S �" SHEILA R. GILLI AN, Cit Jerk City of Palm Desert, C fornia RAD/tm 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083, of the California Administrative Code. NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NO/TITLE: BERMUDA DUNES SPHERE OF INFLUENCE DESIGNATION APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: Bermuda Dunes Residents c/o City of Palm Desert Ramon A. Diaz 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: Placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes into the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. The Director of the Department of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, California, has found that the described project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the Initial Study has been attached to document the reasons in support of this finding. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects, may also be found attached. • ' NJ February 28, 1991 RAM ON A. DIAZ DATE DIRECTOR OF COMMU y DEVELOPMENT /tm CITY OF PALM DESERT DEi _ _<TMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELL-.BENT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager and City Council FROM: Assistant City Manager/Director of Community Development DATE: February 21, 1991 SUBJECT: Certification of Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Bermuda Dunes Sphere Designation A group within the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes has petitioned the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission to be placed in Palm Desert's sphere of influence. Lafco has requested that we act as the lead agency for CEQA processing of this application. An initial study has been prepared along with a negative declaration of environmental impact. The act of placing an area in a city' s sphere of influence does not alter that area' s physical or political status and, therefore, has no impact on the environment. Staff recommends the adoption of the attached resolution certifying the negative declaration of environmental impact. ee A. DIAZ ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING /tm - - ---------- RESOLUTION NO. 91-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR THE PLACING OF THE UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY OF BERMUDA DUNES IN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT AS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970 AS AMENDED. WHEREAS, a group of residents have applied to the Riverside County Local Area Formation Commission LAFCO to be laced in( ) the sphere of P P influence of the City of Palm Desert; and WHEREAS, LAFCO has requested that the City of Palm Desert act as the lead agency for CEQA purposes; and WHEREAS, the placing of an area in a city's sphere of influence does not alter the physical or political status or situation of said community and, therefore, has no potential significant adverse impact on the environment; and WHEREAS, an initial study completed for this application has determined that the placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes in Palm Desert ' s sphere of influence could not have a potential significant adverse impact on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, certifying a negative declaration of environmental impact for the placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes in the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert as meeting the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this day of 1991 , by the following vote, to wit: AYES : NOES : ABSENT: ABSTAIN: WALTER H. SNYDER, Mayor ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California RAD/tm 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083, of the California Administrative Code. NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NO/TITLE: BERMUDA DUNES SPHERE OF INFLUENCE DESIGNATION APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: Bermuda Dunes Residents c/o City of Palm Desert Ramon A. Diaz 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: Placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes into the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. The Director of the Department of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, California, has found that the described project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the Initial Study has been attached to document the reasons in support of this finding. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects, may also be found attached. RAMON A. DIAZ DATE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /tm NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice is hereby given that the City of Palm Desert has completed an initial Study of the Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application project in accordance with the city' s guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act. This Initial Study was undertaken for the purpose of deciding whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of such Initial Study, the city' s staff has concluded that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and has therefore prepared a Draft Negative Declaration. Copies of the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration are on file at City Hall, in the Department of Community Development or City Clerk ' s Office, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive and are available for public review. At its meeting on February 28, 1991 at 4:00 p.m. , the city council will consider the project and the Draft Negative Declaration. If the city council finds that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, it may adopt the Negative Declaration. This means that the city council may proceed to consider the project without the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. Any person wishing to comment on this matter must submit such comments, in writing, to the city prior to the start of the meeting. Comments of all responsible agencies are also requested. Dated: January 15, 1991 Ramon A. Diaz Staff (At least 21 days before the scheduled meeting, post and file at city hall together with attached copy of the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration; also publish only this notice once in newspaper of general circulation, or post, or mail . ) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 1 . Name or description of project: Application of Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee to the Local Agency Formation Commission of Riverside County to have the unincorporated area commonly referred to as Bermuda Dunes placed in the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert, California. 2. Location: See attached Exhibit A. 3. Entity or Person undertaking project: X A. Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Other (Private ) ( 1 ) Name:_ Robert A. Byron ( 2 ) Address: 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 4. Staff Determination: The city' s staff, having undertaken and completed an Initial Study of this project in accordance with the City' s "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) " for the purpose of ascertaining whether the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, has reached the following conclusion: ( a) X The project would not have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, a Negative Declaration should be adopted. (b) The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects on the environment but revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects, or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, a Negative Declaration should be adopted. (c ) The project may have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Report will be required. Date: January 15, 1991 Ramon A. Diaz Staff STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Palm Desert City Council and all appropriate agencies, required by the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, to review and act on this Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, certify it as complete and meeting the requirements of CEQA. NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1 . Name, if any, and a brief description of project: Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application - an application made of the Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee to the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission to have the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes placed in Palm Desert' s sphere of influence. 2. Location: See Exhibit A. 3. Entity or Person undertaking project: X A. Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Other ( Private ) ( 1 ) Name: Robert A. Byron ( 2 ) Address: 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 The city council, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the city council, including the recommendation of the city' s staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a 'significant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the city council ' s findings are as follows: While facilitating future annexation the placing of area in a city' s sphere of influence does not effect either the area of city physically, economically, or politically. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at: City of Palm Desert Department of Community Development 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 ( 619 ) 346-0611 ext. 484 RAMON A. DIAZ Staff January 15, 1991 Date ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I . BACKGROUND A. Name of Proponent: Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: c/o Mr. Robert A. Byron 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 C. Date of Checklist Submitted: D. Agency Requiring Checklist: E. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application II . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. ) YES MAYBE NO 1 . Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? X C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECK? `T FORM CONTINUED quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards? X 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X C. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X d. Emission of hazardous air pollutants within one-fourth of a mile of a school? X e. Burning of municipal wastes, hazardous waste or refuse- derived fuel and consists of either the construction of a new facility or the expansion of an existing facility by more than 10 percent? X 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water run- off? X C. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? X d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not cNVIRONMENTAL CHECKL' T FORM CONTINUED limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? X g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X j . Significant changes in the tem- perature, flow or chemical content of surface thermal springs? X 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species or number of any species of plants ( including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants )? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment of existing species? X d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X 5 . Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI FORM CONTINUED animals (birds, land animals in- cluding reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species? X C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? X b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light and glare? X S. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X 9 . Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? X 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances ( including but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset condition? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI FORM CONTINUED b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? X 11 . Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? X 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? X 13 . transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? X C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? X d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X e. Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic? X f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians? X 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas? a. Fire protection? X b. Police protection? X C. Schools? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL.- FORM CONTINUED d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X £. Other governmental services? X 15 . Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? X b. Communications systems? X C. Water? X d. Sewer or septic tanks? X e. Storm water drainage? X f. Solid waste and disposal? X 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X 18 . Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL7 ' FORM CONTINUED 19 . Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historical archeo- logical site? X b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? X C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? X 21 . Mandatory Finding of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the en- vironment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal com- munity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate im- portant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the ENVIRONMENTAL CHECK' 'T FORM CONTINUED environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future. ) X C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumu- latively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant. ) X d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse .effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X 22. EIR Tiering Determination. a. Is this project consistent with a program, plan, policy or ordinance for which an EIR has been prepared and certified? X b. Is this project consistent with applicable local land use plans and zoning of the city and county in which it is located? X C. May this project cause significant effects on the environment that were not examined in the prior EIR? X III . DISCUSSION On attached sheets, discuss: 1. The environmental evaluation. 2. Ways, if any, to mitigate any significant effects identified. 3 . Compatibility with existing zoning and plans. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKI -T FORM CONTINUED IV. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project by the applicant. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, but that this project is consistent with the previously prepared TIERED EIR on the overall program, plan, policy or ordinance, and that such TIERED EIR adequately examines the possible environmental effects this project. • Date: January 15, 1991 (Sign to For: Ramon A. Diaz •ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL7 ' FORM CONTINUED EXPLANATION The placing of any unincorporated territory into a city' s sphere of influence does not result in any physical, socio-economic, or environmental changes to either community. The action merely identifies the city into which an unincorporated area may be annexed. Subsequent required actions for annexation such as preplanning and preannexation zoning are required by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission as part of an annexation application and will require CEQA processing. ,- CITY OF PALM DESERT tom' DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager and City Council FROM: Assistant City Manager/Director of Community Development DATE: February 21, 1991 SUBJECT: Certification of Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Bermuda Dunes Sphere Designation A group within the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes has petitioned the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission to be placed in Palm Desert ' s sphere of influence. La£co has requested that we act as the lead agency for CEQA processing of this application. An initial study has been prepared along with a negative declaration of environmental impact. The act of placing an area in a city' s sphere of influence does not alter that area' s physical or political status and, therefore, has no impact on the environment. Staff recommends the adoption of the attached resolution certifying the negative declaration of environmental impact. �AZ RAMON A. DIAZ ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING /tm RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR THE PLACING OF THE UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY OF BERMUDA DUNES IN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT AS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970 AS AMENDED. WHEREAS, a group of residents have applied to the Riverside County Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO) to be placed in the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert; and WHEREAS, LAFCO has requested that the City of Palm Desert act as the lead agency for CEQA purposes; and WHEREAS, the placing of an area in a city' s sphere of influence does not alter the physical or political status or situation of said community and, therefore, has no potential significant adverse impact on the environment; and WHEREAS, an initial study completed for this application has determined that the placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes in Palm Desert' s sphere of influence could not have a potential significant adverse impact on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, certifying a negative declaration of environmental impact for the placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes in the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert as meeting the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this , day of 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: WALTER H. SNYDER, Mayor ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California RAD/tm I } ( oMv 0 Wu Dann 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083, of the California Administrative Code. NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NO/TITLE: BERMUDA DUNES SPHERE OF INFLUENCE DESIGNATION APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: Bermuda Dunes Residents c/o City of Palm Desert Ramon A. Diaz 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: Placing of the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes into the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert. The Director of the Department of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, California, has found that the described project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the Initial Study has been attached to document the reasons in support of this finding. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects, may also be found attached. RAMON A. DIAZ DATE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /tm NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice is hereby given that the City of Palm Desert has completed an initial Study of the Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application project in accordance with the city' s guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act. This Initial Study was undertaken for the purpose of deciding whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of such Initial Study, the city' s staff has concluded that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and has therefore prepared a Draft Negative Declaration. Copies of the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration are on file at City Hall, in the Department of Community Development or City Clerk' s Office, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive and are available for public review. At its meeting on February 28, 1991 at 4:00 p.m. , the city council will consider the project and the Draft Negative Declaration. If the city council finds that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, it may adopt the Negative Declaration. This means that the city council may proceed to consider the project without the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. Any person wishing to comment on this matter must submit such comments, in writing, to the city prior to the start of the meeting. Comments of all responsible agencies are also requested. Dated: January 15, 1991 Ramon A. Diaz Staff (At least 21 days before the scheduled meeting, post and file at city hall together with attached copy of the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration; also publish only this notice once in newspaper of general circulation, or post, or mail . ) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 1. Name or description of project: Application of Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee to the Local Agency Formation Commission of Riverside County to have the unincorporated area commonly referred to as Bermuda Dunes placed in the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert, California. 2. Location: See attached Exhibit A. 3. Entity or Person undertaking project: X A. Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Other ( Private) ( 1 ) Name: Robert A. Byron (2 ) Address: 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 4. Staff Determination: The city' s staff, having undertaken and completed an Initial Study of this project in accordance with the City' s "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) " for the purpose of ascertaining whether the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, has reached the following conclusion: (a) X The project would not have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, a Negative Declaration should be adopted. (b) The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects on the environment but revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects, or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, a Negative Declaration should be adopted. (c) The project may have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Report will be required. Date: January 15, 1991 Ramon A. Diaz Staff STAFF RECOMMEN➢ATION: That the Palm Desert City Council and all appropriate agencies, required by the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, to review and act on this Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, certify it as complete and meeting the requirements of CEQA. NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1 . Name, if any, and a brief description of project: Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application - an application made of the Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee to the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission to have the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes placed in Palm Desert' s Sphere of influence. 2. Location: See Exhibit A. 3. Entity or Person undertaking project: X A. Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Other (Private) ( 1 ) Name: Robert A. Byron ( 2 ) Address: 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 The city council, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the city council, including the recommendation of the city' s staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the city council ' s findings are as follows: While facilitating future annexation the placing of area in a city' s sphere of influence does not effect either the area of city physically, economically, or politically. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at: City of Palm Desert Department of Community Development 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 ( 619 ) 346-0611 ext. 484 RAMON A. DIAZ Staff January 15, 1991 Date ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND A. Name of Proponent: Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: c/o Mr. Robert A. Byron 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 C, Date of Checklist Submitted: D. Agency Requiring Checklist: E. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application II . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. ) YES MAYBE NO 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? X C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL: FORM CONTINUED quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards? X 2 . Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X C. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X d. Emission of hazardous air pollutants within one-fourth of a mile of a school? X e. Burning of municipal wastes, hazardous waste or refuse- derived fuel and consists of either the construction of a new facility or the expansion of an existing facility by more than 10 percent? X 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water run- off? X C. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? X d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI FORM CONTINUED limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? X g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X j . Significant changes in the tem- perature, flow or chemical content of surface thermal springs? X 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species or number of any species of plants ( including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment of existing species? X d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI FORM CONTINUED animals (birds, land animals in- cluding reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species? X C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? X b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light and glare? X S. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? X 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset condition? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI FORM CONTINUED b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? X 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? X 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? X 13. transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? X C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? X d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X e. Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic? X f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians? X 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas? a. Fire protection? X b. Police protection? X C. Schools? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI FORM CONTINUED d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X f. Other governmental services? X 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? X b. Communications systems? X C. Water? X d. Sewer or septic tanks? X e. Storm water drainage? X f. Solid waste and disposal? X 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard ( excluding mental health)? X b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI FORM CONTINUED 19 . Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historical archeo- logical site? X b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? X C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? X 21. Mandatory Finding of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the en- vironment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal com- munity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate im- portant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the I ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI FORM CONTINUED environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future. ) X C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumu- latively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant. ) X d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X 22. EIR Tiering Determination. a. Is this project consistent with a program, plan, policy or ordinance for which an EIR has been prepared and certified? X b. Is this project consistent with applicable local land use plans and zoning of the city and county in which it is located? X C. May this project cause significant effects on the environment that were not examined in the prior EIR? X III . DISCUSSION On attached sheets, discuss: 1 . The environmental evaluation. 2 . Ways, if any, to mitigate any significant effects identified. 3. Compatibility with existing zoning and plans. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL' FORM CONTINUED IV. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project by the applicant. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, but that this project is consistent with the previously prepared TIERED EIR on the overall program, plan, policy or ordinance, and that such TIERED EIR adequately examines the possible environmental effects of this project. Date: January 15, 1991 (Signature) For: Ramon A. Diaz 1 _ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL.- FORM CONTINUED EXPLANATION The placing of any unincorporated territory into a city' s sphere of influence does not result in any physical, socio-economic, or environmental changes to either community. The action merely identifies the city into which an unincorporated area may be annexed. Subsequent required actions for annexation such as preplanning and preannexation zoning are required by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission as part of an annexation application and will require CEQA processing. C I I f Of PALM ULSLRI COUNCIL AGENDA REQU' ` MEETING OF February 28, 1991 Consent Calendar Item I . TO BE CONSIDERED AS : Public Hearing Item Regular Item 2 . REQUEST : ( Agenda item Wording ) Certification of Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Bermuda Dunes Sphere Designation. 3 . FINANCIAL : (Complete if Necessary) (a ) Acct/Proj . # (b) Amount Requested (c ) Current Budget? (d) Appropriation? Apprvd : Finance Director 4 . SUBMITTED BY : Ramon A. Diaz APPROVAL��i� �\ Department Head City Manager 6/ 13/88 NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF ➢RAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice is hereby given that the City of Palm Desert has completed an initial Study of the Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application project in accordance with the city' s guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act. This Initial Study was undertaken for the purpose of deciding whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of such Initial Study, the city' s staff has concluded that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and has therefore prepared a Draft Negative Declaration. Copies of the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration are on file at City Hall, in the Department of Community Development or City Clerk' s Office, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive and are available for public review. At its meeting on February 28, 1991 at 4:00 p.m. , the city council will consider the project and the Draft Negative Declaration. If the city council finds that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, it may adopt the Negative Declaration. This means that the city council may proceed to consider the project without the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. Any person wishing to comment on this matter must submit such comments, in writing, to the city prior to the start of the meeting. Comments of all responsible agencies are also requested. Dated: January 15, 1991 Ramon A. Diaz Staff (At least 21 days before the scheduled meeting, post and file at city hall together with attached copy of the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration; also publish only this notice once in newspaper of general circulation, or post, or mail . ) I _ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 1 . Name or description of project: Application of Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee to the Local Agency Formation Commission of Riverside County to have the unincorporated area commonly referred to as Bermuda Dunes placed in the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert, California. 2 . Location: See attached Exhibit A. 3 . Entity or Person undertaking project: X A. Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Other (Private) ( 1 ) Name: Robert A. Byron ( 2 ) Address: 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 4. Staff Determination: The city' s staff, having undertaken and completed an Initial Study of this project in accordance with the City' s "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) " for the purpose of ascertaining whether the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, has reached the following conclusion: ( a) X The project would not have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, a Negative Declaration should be adopted. (b ) The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects on the environment but revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects, or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, a Negative Declaration should be adopted. (c) The project may have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Report will be required. Date: January 15, 1991 Ramon A. Diaz Staff STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Palm Desert City Council and all appropriate agencies, required by the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, to review and act on this Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, certify it as complete and meeting the requirements of CEQA. NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1 . Name, if any, and a brief description of project: Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application - an application made of the Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee to the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission to have the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes placed in Palm Desert ' s sphere of influence. 2 . Location: See Exhibit A. 3. Entity or Person undertaking project: X A. Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Other ( Private) ( 1 ) Name: Robert A. Byron ( 2 ) Address: 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 The city council, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the city council, including the recommendation of the city' s staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the city council ' s findings are as follows: While facilitating future annexation the placing of area in a city' s sphere of influence does not effect either the area of city physically, economically, or politically. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at: City of Palm Desert Department of Community Development 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 ( 619 ) 346-0611 ext. 484 RAMON A. DIAZ Staff January 15, 1991 Date cNVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I . BACKGROUND A. Name of Proponent: Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: c/o Mr. Robert A. Byron 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 C. Date of Checklist Submitted: D. Agency Requiring Checklist: E. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application II . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ( Explanation of all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. ) YES MAYBE NO 1 . Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? X C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CONTINUED quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards? X 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X C. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X d. Emission of hazardous air pollutants within one-fourth of a mile of a school? X e. Burning of municipal wastes, hazardous waste or refuse- derived fuel and consists of either the construction of a new facility or the expansion of an existing facility by more than 10 percent? X 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water run- off? X C. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? X d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CONTINUED limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? X g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X j . Significant changes in the tem- perature, flow or chemical content of surface thermal springs? X 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species or number of any species of plants ( including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants )? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment of existing species? X d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X 5 . Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CONTINUED animals (birds, land animals in- cluding reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects )? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species? X C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? X b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light and glare? X 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X 9 . Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? X 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances ( including but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset condition? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CONTINUED b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? X 11 . Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? X 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? g 13 . transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? X C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? X d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X e. Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic? X f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians? X 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas? a. Fire protection? X b. Police protection? X C. Schools? X I ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CONTINUED d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X f. Other governmental services? X 15 . Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X 16 . Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? X b. Communications systems? X C. Water? X d. Sewer or septic tanks? X e. Storm water drainage? X f. Solid waste and disposal? X 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard ( excluding mental health)? X b. Exposure of people to potential . health hazards? X 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLISm FORM CONTINUED 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historical archeo- logical site? X b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? X C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? X 21 . Mandatory Finding of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the en- vironment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal com- munity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate im- portant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CONTINUED environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future. ) X C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumu- latively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant. ) X d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X 22. EIR Tiering Determination. a. Is this project consistent with a program, plan, policy or ordinance for which an EIR has been prepared and certified? X b. Is this project consistent with applicable local land use plans and zoning of the city and county in which it is located? X C. May this project cause significant effects on the environment that were not examined in the prior EIR? X III . DISCUSSION On attached sheets, discuss: 1 . The environmental evaluation. 2. Ways, if any, to mitigate any significant effects identified. 3. Compatibility with existing zoning and plans. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CONTINUED IV. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project by the applicant. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, but that this project is consistent with the previously prepared TIERED EIR on the overall program, plan, policy or ordinance, and that such TIERED EIR adequately examines the possible environmental effects of this project. Date: January 15, 1991 ( Signature) For: Ramon A. Diaz ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLTST FORM CONTINUED EXPLANATION The placing of any unincorporated territory into a city' s sphere of influence does not result in any physical, socio-economic, or environmental changes to either community. The action merely identifies the city into which an unincorporated area may be annexed. Subsequent required actions for annexation such as preplanning and preannexation zoning are required by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission as part of an annexation application and will require CEQA processing. 1mNMAn-r1Un 6X)'i'3rra IN THE STATE CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF R_ VERSIDE: BEGINNING AT THE NW CORNER OF SECTION 18, T5S, R7E, SBM, AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN RECORD OF SURVEY BOOK 11 AT PAGE 27 , RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE S00° 11 ' 40 "W, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 5307. 80 FT. TO THE SW CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE N890 35 ' 10"E, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 5384 . 87 FT. TO THE CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 17 AND 18 , T5S, R7E, SBM AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TRACT 23773-1 RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 204 AT PAGES 39-43 , RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE N890 29 ' 09 "E, A DISTANCE OF 5306 . 32 FT ., ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 17 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TRACT 2606 RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 45 AT PAGES 91-97, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS TO THE SE CORNER OF SAID SECTION 17 AND THE CENTERI.,INE OF JEFFERSON STREET AS SHOWN ON DEED PLAT OF JEFFERSON STREET FILED UNDER RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT FILE NO. 780 EE; THENCE N00° 16 ' 49"W, A DISTANCE OF 77 . 32 FT.ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 3000 . 00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 130 06 ' 30" ; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 686 . 35 FT. ; THENCE N120 43 ' 41 "E, A DISTANCE OF 2278 . 77 FT. TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 3000 .00 FT AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 60 53 ' 09" ; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 360. 54 FT. TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE S 1/2 OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T5S, R7E, SBM; THENCE S890 27 ' 38"W, A DISTANCE OF 462 . 48 FT. TO THE EAST TRACT LINE OF TRACT NAMED BERMUDA DUNES ESTATES UNIT 3, RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 36 AT PAGES 19-21 , RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE N000 20 ' 44 "W, ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 551 . 80 FT TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 174 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N90 08 ' 59"W, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 174 , A DISTANCE OF 135 . 43 FT TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BERMUDA DUNES DRIVE AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N190 21 ' 03"W, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 460 . 00 FT. TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 169 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N70 30 ' 28"W, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 169, A DISTANCE OF 76 . 68 FT. TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 168 A SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N80 19 ' 42"E, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 500. 00 FT . TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 163 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; PAGE 1 THENCE N80 10 ' 36"E, A DISTANCE OF 109 . 27 FT. ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 163 TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 1FI AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N000 49 ' J8"W, A DISTANCE OF 180 . 00 FT. TO THE CENTERLINE OF 42D AVE. AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT AND ON DEED PLAT OF 42D AVE FILED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT UNDER FILE NO. 636-C; THENCE N890 14 ' 56"E, A DISTANCE OF 748 . 52 FT. ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF 42D AVE. TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 500.00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 330 59 ' 15" ; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 296 . 60 FT . ; , THENCE N550 15 ' 41 "E, A DISTANCE OF 39 . 43 FT. TO THE CENTERLINE OF COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AS SHOWN ON SAID DEED PLAT, SAID CENTERLINE POINT BEING CENTERLINE STATION 76+00. 00, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE CUSP OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 2715 . 00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 60 21 ' 25" AND HAVING AT SAID POINT A RADIAL LINE WHICH BEARS S550 15 ' 41 "W; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AND THE CENTERLINE OF COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 301 . 23 FT . TO CENTERLINE STATION 72+98 . 11 , BC AS SHOWN ON DEED PLAT OF 40TH AVE. (NOW KNOWN AS COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE) FILED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT UNDER FILE NO. 727-0; THENCE N280 22 ' 54"W, A DISTANCE OF 203 . 21 FT. ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF 40TH AVE TO CENTERLINE STATION 70+94 . 90, EC, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 750.00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 300 44 ' 00" ; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AND THE CENTERLINE OF 40TH AVE, A DISTANCE OF 402 . 30 FT. TO CENTERLINE STATION 66+92 . 60, BC; THENCE N590 06 ' 54 "W, A DISTANCE OF 777. 08 FT. TO CENTERLINE STATION 59+15. 52 EC, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING. OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 11 , 323 . 47 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 50 01 ' 56" ; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 994 . 52 FT. TO CENTERLINE STATION 49+21 .00 BC; THENCE N640 08 ' 50"W, A DISTANCE OF 4421 .00 FT. ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO CENTERLINE STATION 5+00.00 EC, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 11, 293 . 50 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 50 57 ' 40" ; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 1174 .99 FT. ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO CENTERLINE STATION _ 193+37.06 EC BACK = 193+34 . 81 P.O.T. "E" AHD AS SHOWN ON DEED PLAT OF 40TH AVE (NOW KNOWN AS COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE) AS FILED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT UNDER FILE NO. 727-Q-1; THENCE N700 06 ' 30"W, A DISTANCE OF 3192 . 21 FT ALONG SAID CENTERLINE; PAGE 2 THENCE N190 . 53 ' 30"E, A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FT. TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD PROPERTY; THENCE N700 06 ' 30"W, A DISTANCE OF 1230 . 58 FT. TO THE EXTENSION OF THE CENTERLINE OF WASHINGTON STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID DEED PLAT FILED UNDER FILE NO. 727-Q-1 ; THENCE S190 06 ' 50"W, A DISTANCE OF 1328 . 86 FT . ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF WASHINGTON ST. TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1500 . 00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 180 50 ' 300 ; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 493.27 FT. TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 7, T5S, R7E, SBM; THENCE S00° 16 ' 20"W, A DISTANCE OF 1297. 55 FT. ALONG SAID SECTION LINE TO THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7 AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN RECORD OF SURVEY BOOK 11 AT PAGE 27, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE S00O 05 ' 30"W, A DISTANCE OF 2693 . 44 FT ALONG SAID SECTION LINE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 5361 RECORDED IN BOOK 11 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGE 79, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS . CONTAINING 2205.26 ACRES MORE OR LESS LAND SG�L Q JAMES CHARLES 0 FIVASH J'J L.S. #4420 �Q PAGE 3 r. > o � v A r c p !►1 LnD - D D � o W 3NO U) D A OUuI A mmm nr+f W m La r '�� so' it' w s10Z ea' Se'a 'F 'W tHi 1W re11•a.iv A n'< « lt WASN/NSTDN sT f297.55• N O D Dn 2 "ru D (n u Nm On • �� O 1 W • H V 0 NI"ztG/"W q,. l a a Re%. �,h,,a•1 `b•E• M D n b � O 0��• rn p 1 Na'eo'zo'E m 1 IADANS or ll � °• _ U) °h LICFN R M 144 o SF W s P �Y a 0 v O m ^Ww i a� c LID ➢ :i R$g• u nv o Z O a h Z 7C O_ N 71 N$ ♦ N JOO Z7e.�)F 0 `�9. F•J� Y?g NJ 2 gad � '•�� m�IDm D + rem h mtczm ay W � WNh w O 2 H�• t .��w °Nh. NO DOn A , NDD -1DD ooOo0 mAZ fNNOy n 333 D m m NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice is hereby given that the City of Palm Desert has completed an initial Study of the Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application project in accordance with the city' s guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act. This Initial Study was undertaken for the purpose of deciding whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of such Initial Study, the city' s staff has concluded that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and has therefore prepared a Draft Negative Declaration. Copies of the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration are on file at City Hall, in the Department of Community Development or City Clerk' s Office, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive and are available for public review. At its meeting on February 28, 1991 at 4:00 p.m. , the city council will consider the project and the Draft Negative Declaration. If the city council finds that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, it may adopt the Negative Declaration. This means that the city council may proceed to consider the project without the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. Any person wishing to comment on this matter must submit such comments, in writing, to the city prior to the start of the meeting. Comments of all responsible agencies are also requested. Dated: January 15, 1991 Ramon A. Diaz Staff (At least 21 days before the scheduled meeting, post and file at city hall together with attached copy of the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration; also publish only this notice once in newspaper of general circulation, or post, or mail. ) I ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 1. Name or description of project: Application of Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee to the Local Agency Formation Commission of Riverside County to have the unincorporated area commonly referred to as Bermuda Dunes placed in the sphere of influence of the City of Palm Desert, California. 2. Location: See attached Exhibit A. 3. Entity or Person undertaking project: X A. Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Other (Private) ( 1 ) Name: Robert A. Byron (2) Address: 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 4. Staff Determination: The city' s' sta£f, having undertaken and completed an Initial Study of this project in accordance with the City' s "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) " for the purpose of ascertaining whether the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, has reached the following conclusion: ( a) X The project would not have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, a Negative Declaration should be adopted. (b) The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects on the environment but revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects, or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, a Negative Declaration should be adopted. (c) The project may have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Report will be required. Date: January 15, 1991 Ramon A. Diaz Staff STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Palm Desert City Council and all appropriate agencies, required by the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, to review and act on this Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, certify it as complete and meeting the requirements of CEQA. NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1 . Name, if any, and a brief description of project: Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application - an application made of the Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee to the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission to have the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes placed in Palm Desert's sphere of influence. 2 . Location: See Exhibit A. 3. Entity or Person undertaking project: X A. Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Other (Private) ( 1 ) Name: Robert A. Byron ( 2 ) Address: 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 The city council, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the city council, including the recommendation of the city' s staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the city council ' s findings are as follows: While facilitating future annexation the placing of area in a city' s sphere of influence does not effect either the area of city physically, economically, or politically. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at: City of Palm Desert Department of Community Development 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 ( 619 ) 346-0611 ext. 484 RAMON A. DIAZ ' Staff January 15, 1991 Date ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND A. Name of Proponent: Bermuda Dunes Annexation Committee B. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: c/o Mr. Robert A. Byron 79-765 Bermuda Dunes Drive Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 C. Date of Checklist Submitted: D. Agency. Requiring Checklist: E. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Bermuda Dunes Sphere Application II . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. ) YES MAYBE NO 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? X C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. • The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth- I ' _ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL: FORM CONTINUED quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards? X 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X C. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X d. Emission of hazardous air pollutants within one-fourth of a mile of a school? X e. Burning of municipal wastes, hazardous waste or refuse- derived fuel and consists of either the construction of a new facility or the expansion of an existing facility by more than 10 percent? X 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water run- off? X C. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? X d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI FORM CONTINUED limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? X g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X j . Significant changes in the tem- perature, flow or chemical content of surface thermal springs? X 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants )? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment of existing species? X d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, ! or numbers of any species of ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLT FORM CONTINUED animals (birds, land animals in- cluding reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species? X C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? X b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light and glare? X 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? X 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances ( including but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset condition? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI FORM CONTINUED b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? X 11 . Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? X 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? X 13 . transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? X C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? X d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X e. Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic? X f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians? X 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas? a. Fire protection? X b. Police protection? X C. Schools? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL] FORM CONTINUED d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X f. Other governmental services? X 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? X b. Communications systems? X C. Water? X d. Sewer or septic tanks? X e. Storm water drainage? X f. Solid waste and disposal? X 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL: FORM CONTINUED 19 . Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historical archeo- logical site? X b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? X C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? X 21. Mandatory Finding of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the en- vironment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal com- munity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate im- portant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL. FORM CONTINUED environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future. ) X C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumu- latively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant. ) X d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X 22. EIR Tiering Determination. a. Is this project consistent with a program, plan, policy or ordinance for which an EIR has been prepared and certified? X b. Is this project consistent with applicable local land use plans and zoning of the city and county in which it is located? X C. May this project cause significant effects on the environment that were not examined in the prior EIR? X III . DISCUSSION On attached sheets, discuss: 1 . The environmental evaluation. 2. Ways, if any, to mitigate any significant effects identified. 3. Compatibility with existing zoning and plans. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL" FORM CONTINUED IV. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project by the applicant. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, but that this project is consistent with the previously prepared TIERED EIR on the overall program, plan, policy or ordinance, and that such TIERED EIR adequately examines the possible environmental effects of this project. Date: January 15, 1991 ( Signature) For: Ramon A. Diaz ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL7 FORM CONTINUED EXPLANATION The placing of any unincorporated territory into a city' s sphere of influence does not result in any physical, socio-economic, or environmental changes to either community. The action merely identifies the city into which an unincorporated area may be annexed. Subsequent required actions for annexation such as preplanning and preannexation zoning are required by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission as part of an annexation application and will require CEQA processing. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION FOR BERMUDA DUNES ANNEXATION IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE: BEGINNING AT THE NW CORNER OF SECTION 18, T5S, R7E, SBM, AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN RECORD OF SURVEY BOOK 11 AT PAGE 27, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE S00° 11 ' 40"W, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 5307. 80 FT. TO THE SW CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE N890 35 ' 10"E, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 5384 . 87 FT. TO THE CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 17 AND 18, T5S, R7E, SBM AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TRACT 23773-1 RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 204 AT PAGES 39-43, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE N890 29 ' 09"E, A DISTANCE OF 5306 . 32 FT. ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 17 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TRACT 2606 RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 45 AT PAGES 91-97, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS TO THE SE CORNER OF SAID SECTION 17 AND THE CENTERLINE OF JEFFERSON STREET AS SHOWN ON DEED PLAT OF JEFFERSON STREET FILED UNDER RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT FILE NO. 780 EE; THENCE N00° 16 ' 49"W, A DISTANCE OF 77. 32 FT.ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 3000 . 00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 130 06 ' 30" ; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 686. 35 FT. ; THENCE N120 43 ' 41"E, A DISTANCE OF 2278. 77 FT. TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 3000 .00 FT AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 60 53 ' 09" ; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 360. 54 FT. TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE S 1/2 OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T5S, R7E, SBM; THENCE S890 27 ' 38"W, A DISTANCE OF 462.48 FT. TO THE EAST TRACT LINE OF TRACT NAMED BERMUDA DUNES ESTATES UNIT 3, RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 36 AT PAGES 19-21 , RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE N00° 20 ' 44"W, ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 551 .80 FT TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 174 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N90 08 ' 59"W, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 174 , A DISTANCE OF 135 .43 FT TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BERMUDA DUNES DRIVE AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N190 21 ' 03"W, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 460 . 00 FT. TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 169 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N70 30 ' 28"W, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 169, A DISTANCE OF 76. 68 FT. TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 168 A SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE N80 19 ' 42"E, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 500 . 00 FT. TO THE SE CORNER OF LOT 163 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; PAGE 1 THENCE N80 10 ' 36"E, A DISTANCE OF 109 . 27 FT. ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 16 '0 THE SE CORNER OF LOT 1 AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT; THENCE NO00 49 ' 38"W, A DISTANCE OF 180. 00 FT. TO THE CENTERLINE OF 42D AVE. AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT AND ON DEED PLAT OF 42D AVE FILED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT UNDER FILE NO. 636-C; THENCE N890 14 ' 56"E, A DISTANCE OF 748. 52 FT. ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF 42D AVE. TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 500.00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 330 59 ' 15" ; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 296 . 60 FT. ; . THENCE N550 15 ' 41"E, A DISTANCE OF 39. 43 FT. TO THE CENTERLINE OF COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AS SHOWN ON SAID DEED PLAT, SAID CENTERLINE POINT BEING CENTERLINE STATION 76+00.00, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE CUSP OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 2715.00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 60 21 ' 25" AND HAVING AT SAID POINT A RADIAL LINE WHICH BEARS S550 15 ' 41 "W; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AND THE CENTERLINE OF COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 301 . 23 FT. TO CENTERLINE STATION 72+98 . 11, BC AS SHOWN ON DEED PLAT OF 40TH AVE. (NOW KNOWN AS COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE) FILED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT UNDER FILE NO. 727-0; THENCE N280 22 ' 54"W, A DISTANCE OF 203. 21 FT. ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF 40TH AVE TO CENTERLINE STATION 70+94. 90, EC, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 750. 00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 300 44 ' 00" ; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AND THE CENTERLINE OF 40TH AVE, A DISTANCE OF 402 .30 FT. TO CENTERLINE STATION 66+92. 60, BC; THENCE N590 06 ' 54"W, A DISTANCE OF 777 . 08 FT. TO CENTERLINE STATION 59+15.52 EC, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING. OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 11, 323 .47 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 50 01 ' 56" ; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 994 . 52 FT. TO CENTERLINE STATION 49+21 .00 BC; THENCE N640 08 ' 50"W, A DISTANCE OF 4421 .00 FT. ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO CENTERLINE STATION 5+00.00 EC, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 11, 293. 50 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 50 57 ' 40" ; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 1174 . 99 FT. ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO CENTERLINE STATION 193+37.06 EC BACK = 193+34 .81 P.O.T. "E" AHD AS SHOWN ON DEED PLAT OF 40TH AVE (NOW KNOWN AS COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE) AS FILED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT UNDER FILE NO. 727-Q-1; THENCE N700 06 ' 30"W, A DISTANCE OF 3192 .21 FT ALONG SAID CENTERLINE; PAGE 2 THENCE N190 ' 53' 30"E, A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FT. TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD PROPERTY; THENCE N700 06 ' 30"W, A DISTANCE OF 1230 . 58 FT. TO THE EXTENSION OF THE CENTERLINE OF WASHINGTON STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID DEED PLAT FILED UNDER FILE NO. 727-Q-1; THENCE S190 06 ' 50"W, A DISTANCE OF 1328. 86 FT. ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF WASHINGTON ST. TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1500.00 FT. AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18' 50 ' 30" ; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 493.27 FT. TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 7, T5S, R7E, SBM; THENCE S00° 16 ' 20"W, A DISTANCE OF 1297. 55 FT. ALONG SAID SECTION LINE TO THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7 AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN RECORD OF SURVEY BOOK 11 AT PAGE 27, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOO° 05 ' 30"W, A DISTANCE OF 2693 .44 FT ALONG SAID SECTION LINE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 5361 RECORDED IN BOOK 11 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGE 79, RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS. CONTAINING 2205.26 ACRES MORE OR LESS i. LAND SG9 J JAMES CHARLES 0 FIVASH L.S. #4420 Q 9�F OF CAL\F EXP. 9/30/93 PAGE 3 W W 4 U 1 (n 0 N w U� !- c0�o0 ZQ a 0 im Oj U070Ni i N as Z O w VNIi MP. Vrni �4 W Z U)W N .r •; �G�ppN OQ W-V;k, qn� 2. y,N / .wti fY.t/H Ul 1 N Q� •-n NN t`0 O� MO t1N `�-{{y N, O. X �' z () 6 # U A L v it J y! u. �n t+ ew• X . g _i O kj C N 1° 0 Q i"J �u a•� a •°� ; J •W a7,O r,00,ON N W •4�N4 ` or-g /;A3,i7,0/✓ .V � h N i0 '� • U to f r �•°`oN � � WN k �� 'o 'P 2 N0) Qp ��� Ud d�J U N �F Iss x6x/ is No1fNiMf CM 3 N� T W K r) MR H•Os ,I{1(Ns�M���, o,or ,op 'LOGS M/� ,•� .Of 0 E, > J U N ro W CJ W W to a N op W� 2(D -j � 41 .6 L � JCa � f N CIs V) a-.o.. J*^�"'.'�`"ass �•. .� `\ r! . yr .•:,vim''`' ..•. voi 16 3X. 6�•_•�5 vn l 4'1 - a•� ^41c.1' c,c _ Dofi d, 5 w 5 N ' zt. .:m.� moo\ ; l2 ' ''e�'•x ii:•:4 i v,?Ss. �y �lu0u P3 - nw �v::}*<��:??S'v:{:•[:!!�fF�'i:C�'j'y�yr: (S D uEn✓'l uli W ' h. tb �' 1' :::+:,q I Ly::S::j[ j};:}SI7�:%�i: ` ., •7q...:. .o I .wooamwn 5 f•t� fY:.. :ay �m:. Y.Y. : •:p;��...::•f;f�:�:•:4::•%:.•�:�1:•:S�ti:::l:;::. • ;• xxxxxxxx ` I GFTf J p S: 1 4 I VD fwm 1/Y:E e N PrvvefB IW p q n II woaox.v�i( .ur Cur- 4 ¢ _ \' 9. Sdn. i LI ••'Av••':'P - -•r.`_1 ( 'Er[CWS: __DB.... •.•......... fM}.:. i`.:yw'.,M,.,fMW�A,.,.:� : •ry '• *.i.r..., t. 6vJMWPv r ti'.,.Y... • H\Y•: ,�y ,! ' J{:�••::>''•� OJESERT—rIl TRY CEEIB'I " ::::::Ai:•: .•'::}.i:::i:::$>ii:{{.}}%:;-0i>.• f:>:•: ' ii p.� :r t7FDgr!I!v`mE e)- r:•i>:•>Y�: :ii:•}j;f.:•:}i:•}{:•j .........v'i::... �;'� _ DR. Jii}>X%'+:>i::•:::fa':•::J \.. ....:: ...\'.'.•:•::•:Y•:•:•::: YJ: ` :. .T?Ys?�-^ - YwA Du :%:ih�ti::,:;::::.vw:.vi:>:+f%{;:{:}::v:}r^ :• r\ i - FIVE^ -13 :K .wwwvw..vN Desert. :q "•L i� ::•�•••••�.:4iii>l»;ryu•:fwti6Yt+�i+a:,:Gi:•:: •:�;.>: • _ n� n�i,.F �) ers;m,Y,f:nn»;ff!v>•:.rw+v.>}•: �'• . I� fr na - pg + l • 4. uR4 I a I ux s I�Iu^ P I y . f�z .s >r �lo h a . ,1 [c,eN:n E IIY lll.•.•1] D �' L� T 1L`D CII',lr DESERT BREEZES iR l]1} eL pet)clbRSLul Maen Rsew fr DR 3 lwav -2MMMI . .1 OR Ei.EF.ED a f DP =jl NNP' L OR �\ RCfLCCTIONS V, AVE WAY -- ly tx 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 ITELEPHONE(619)346-0611 ID January 24, 1991 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE EXPANSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider a request by CITY OF PALM DESERT to adopt a negative declaration as it pertains to the expansion of the city's eastern sphere of influence to include the Bermuda Dunes area (show below) . .r.'4T.. ,/¢'�..\` - — -•--. _�—_, III „ LJ� L40.. 55 \,010 — 's - it i_i Z f.�-I�xo lei[• $ s. it d I',p, 1 ntue C �D NTRY C CLUB:I.._ r I °+ a'r >' .f, :sp ^,.. ;np m5 �aw�t 2 y (: 1 �� sT IJ �3 i. 1 � " IFirs2s�- rb't„ mein S .e r aw m �'?�z eaaea �Q p � P o. F\ xn Is �tp:Lly�n..gic+:-�e�"�•'; b.✓���f: ;(GPI e It unn:_s�sCti4 °w" 8ti �M e SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, February 28, 1991 , at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the department of community development/planning at the above address between the hours of 8:00 a.m, and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission (or city council ) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Post SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk January 30, 1991 City of Palm Desert, California