HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 91-089��SCL'JTIOti �C. �'_-89
RESOI iON OF THE CITY COUNCIL �R THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT CERTIFYING FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPGRT {FEIR) FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF THE ALTAMIRA CO�.INT�Y CLUB.
WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was prepared
for the Altamira Country Club project tc, address the environmental
effects, mitigation measures and project a.lternatives associated with
proposed Altamira Country Club; and
WHEREAS, the DEIR for the Altam�ra Country Club was prepared
pursuant to the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act
( hereinafter "CEQA" Public Fesources �:oc3e Section 21000 et seq ), the
State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 1�000 et
seq hereinafter "Guidelines"); and
WHEREAS, written comments on the Hotice of Preparation were
received and incorporated into the DEIR for the Altamira Country Club;
and
WHEREAS, written comments on the DEIR for the Altamira Country Club
were received from the public during and after the public review period;
and
WHEREAS, such comments were responded to through a response to
comments document and submitted to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed all environmental
documentation comprising the DEIR for the Altamira Country Club and has
found that the DEIR considers all environmental effects of the proposed
project and is complete and adequate and fully complies with all
requirements of CEQA and the Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, Section 21081 of CEQA and Section 15090 of the Guidelines
require that the City Council make one or more of the following findings
prior to approval of a project for which an BIR has been completed
identifying one or more significant effects of the project, along with
statements of facts supporting each finding:
FINDING 1- Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the
significant environmental effects thereof as identified in the
EIR.
FINDING 2- Such changes or alterations are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and
not ths agency making the finding. Such changes have been
adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by
such other agency.
RESOLUTION Np. 91-8"
0
FINDZNG 3- Specific economic, social or other considerations
make infeasible the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the EIR; and
WHEREAS, the mitigation measures included in this Resolution are
designed to reduce or eliminate the environmental impacts described
herein. Mitigation measures are structured according to the criteria
in Section 15370 of the CEQA Guidelines. This section provides
generally that "mitigation" includes: a) avoidance of an impact; b)
minimization of an impact; c) rectifying an impact by restoration; d)
reducing or eliminating an impact over time by preservation and
maintenance operations; and e) compensating for the impact by replacing
or providing substitute resources or environments.
Additionally, mitigation measures have been drafted to meet the
requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 as monitoring
program. In most cases herein, the drafting approach defines the
following for each mitigation measure:
1. A time for performance - In each case, a time for performance
of the mitigation, or review of evidence.that mitigation has
taken place, is provided. The performance points selected are
designed to ensure that impact related components of project
implementation do not proceed without establishing that the
mitigation is assured.
2. A responsible party supervising performance - In each case,
a public official is named in the mitigation measure as
responsible for ensuring that the mitigation is carried out.
To guarantee that the mitigation measure will not be
inadvertently overlooked in connection with the issuance of
a later permit, the supervising public official is the
official who grants the permit called for in the performance.
3. Definition of mitigation. In each case (except where a
mitigation, such as a geotechnical report, is a well-known
procedure or term of art), the mitigation measure contains the
criteria for mitigation, either in the form of adherence to
certain adopted regulations, or identification of the steps
to be taken in mitigation.
To further facilitate the monitoring of these measures during project
implementation, each measure has been drafted in a manner suitable for
use as a condition of approval. It is anticipated that the mitigation
measures herein may be used without additional monitoring report
requirements, as each measure is designed to be self-executing. The
City of Palm Desert is implementing a monitoring program in accordance
with state mandate Section 2108.6 of the Public Resources Code.
2
�
?='��' T��ti :�0. 91-89
_.:��U .,.
WHEREAS, Section 15093(a) of the Guidelines require the City
Council to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve rne
project; and
WHEREAS, Section 15093(a) requires that, where the decision of the
City Council allows the occurrence of significant effects which are
identified in the EIR but are not mitigated, the City Council must state
in writing the reasons to support its action based on the EIR or other
information in the record; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
1. The City Council hereby certifies EIR for the Altamira Country
Club project as adequate and complete in that it addresses all
environmental effects of the proposed Altamira Country Club
and fully complies with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act and the Guidelines. Said EIR is
composed of the following elements:
a. Draft EIR for the Altamira Country Club
b. Appendices to Draft EIR
c. Comments received on DEIR and responses to those comments
d. Resolution of Certification and Findings
e. • All attachments, incorporations and references delineated
in items a. through d. above
All of the above information has been, and will be, on file with the
City of Palm Desert, Community Development Department, 73-510 Fred
waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, 92260.
2. This City Council adopts the Findings with respect to each
environmental effect identified in the EIR and the explanation
of its rationale with respect to each such finding set forth
in the document entitled "Environmental Effects and Mitigation
Measures" attached hereto and marked as Exhibit A and made a
part hereof.
3. This City Council adopts the Findings with respect to
alternatives set forth in the document entitled "Alternatives
to the Proposed Project", attached hereto and marked as
Exhibit B and made a part hereof.
3
RESOLUTION NO. 91-P
�
. 4. This City Council adopts the Findings with respect to
overriding considerations set forth in the document entitled
"Statement of Overriding Considerations" attached hereto and
marked as Exhibit C and made a part hereof.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at an adjourned meeting of the Palm
Desert City Council, held on this 5th �day of Au ust, 1991, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: KELLY, WILSON, SI�IYDER
NOES: BENSON, CRITES
ABSENT: NONE
AHSTAIN: NONE
�
WALTER H. SNYDE , M or
ATTEST:
, - ��
; ,�
�".
- SHEILA R. IGAN, C Clerk
City of Pal Desert, lifornia
PJ�db�tm
4
Ezhibit A
CEQA
FI'YDIIYGS
I ti"I'RO D UCTION
The City of Palm Dcsert has considcred the proposcd project, as submitted by A1taWest, and has c5osen to
adopt the plan, subject to the imposition of a�300 to 600 yard buffer measured ia a north/northeasttrtv direction.
The proposed project consists of �i50 dwelling units, a go(f course/couatry club, and ancillary facilities on a 35'_
acre site. This project includes a condition (mitigation measure) which reserves aa area of s00 to 600 vards for
buffer purposes. This buffer results in the loss of approximately 11 dwelling units and two golf holes to be
relocated.
EWIRO�1vIEI�"Ta►L EFFEC'TS �iD NITIG�ITION :�IE�SL'RES
These findings summarize the data and conciusions contained in the Draft EIR, the Response to Comments, sad
the administrative record. The Draft EIR, Response to Comments, and the administrative record �re
incorporaied into chese Findings as if set forch in full.
Consisient with the requiremen[s of CEQA and the Guidelines, the Altamira Country Club EIR, hereinafter
'EIR', d'ucusses eavironmentaJ effects in proportion to their severiry aad probability of occurreace. To that end,
the EIR recogaizes that certain areas of impact from the project are unlikely to occur, or if potendally occurring
caa be micigated to a level of insigaificance by imposition of conditioas to the subdivision map and grading
permits. It is not reasonably aaticipated that additional impacts will be discovered as a result of these fucure
scudies (i.e., 100% coverage survey for Des�rt Tortoise) because of the substantial evidence ia che adminiscrari�e
record (includiag the EIR) presently. Therefore, these studies are imposed as mitigation measures to further
assure protection and recogaize responsible a¢cncy involvement occurring in the normal course of affairs f r
�he lead agenry accs.
The City Council thercfore finds, b�sed upon all data current(y available, [hat whiie no signiFcant adverse impacts
are expected to be discovered as a result of anv of these subsequent studies, the requirements for suc5 stuciies
as a condition to the Altamira Country Club Project (hereinafter "Project"), and the reservation of the power
to incorporate any mitigation mcasures at the grading permit required to mitigate any previouslv unknown
imp�cts to insi�ificant levels, is itself adequate mitigation for any impacts disclosed bv such subsequent survcvs
and studies, however unlikely.
The EIR identifies a aumber of potentially significant adverse environmental effects of the Projcct. The EIR
also identifies mitigation measwes which would reduce or eliminate potential adverse effects. These :ffeccs :ind
the mitigation measures are summariud below as is this Couacil's determination w6ethcr or aot to incorpora�e
such mitigation enswres and its ratioaale for such determination.
As is more fully set forth in the Findings herein, pursuant to Public Resources Code §21089(b) and F'�sh aad
Game Code §711.4, this project shall pay the required fee for impacts on fish and wildlife resources.
Additionally, mitigation measures were revised or added to the Project aher the distribution of the Drah EIR
as a result of the normal planning process, and the comments of the public.
Certaia micigation measures appearing in the EIR are not incorporated into this Projed. 'These are discu.sud
in the approQriate seaion of this resolution, togetber with the reasons for their rejeaion.
All mitigaaon measures have been written as monitoring programs pursuant to PubGc Resources Code §21081.6.
The drahing of these measures have been designed to ensure compGaace during project implementaaon, as
explained further in the EIR.
These findings merely summariu data in the EIR administrative record for purposes of identifying the sigai6cant
impacts and mitigation measures for the Projeu. The EIR is incorporated by reference into theu findings as
substantial evidence therefor as if set forth fully in the fmdings.
EARTH RESOURCES
�i¢niffcant ERects
Gradiag antidpated to occur as a part of the construction process will cause Gttie impact, as the subject properry
is relatively flat and on-site soils exhibit the necessary characteristics for developmeat of the Project. 'The
properry is not in agricultural productioa and demonstrates relatively poor soil potential for aop growch.
Seumic parameters for the site are similar to chose of other sites in the City of Palm Desert and potential for
liquefaction is not considered si�iFcant. The Project site is located in Seismic Response Zone IVC, which
desi�ates residential developmeat at being appropriace for the azea in tenas of land use sensidviry.
Therefore, ao sign�caat impacts to eartb resources are anticipated follo�wing as a result of implementatioe of
the Projeu. Noaetbeless, mitigation measures as indicated below, ue appropriate to insure that all conswaion
tnd grading is carried out in a manaer that insures that uapads will remaia iasi�iiicaa�
►L V� � 1 Y� \r
1. Prio� ro tht i,uuance oj gr�adin8 pr�nits. the applicant shal! obtain approvd by the �ry Engin��r of a
grading oper�ations plan including watenng procedunes to mininsiu dur� and equiprnent proceduns ro
minirniu vehicle unissions fin.n �rrding equipment. The plan shal! provide that grading opu�ations be
suspend�d dun�g sccondt (or worse) stagr smog alc�rs by th� AQMD.
2 Prior to che is.suanee oj a g�rcding pami� the applicant shall subneit a fiRal g�eotahnical rrpon to the Ciry
Engine�r. 77�t rrpat will be bosed oR IOQscale maps and wiJl prirnarrlj� involve assusnient of poceruial
soil rolarid consoaints and hazards. such as londslidu. sett/emas� liqutfaction or nloted seismic i�npacu
wh�n daermined to 6e approp�iete by che �ty of Palrn Dat� 77u npon shall a/so includt eva/uarion
oj patntial apansiv�t sorls ond ncomrnended consaucdae proctdLneJ and/o► Qesign cnteria ro rninimiu
the ejj�tct of thest sofls on the proposed developrnen� as weU as an analysis of soil propeniu co deumeine
arry eristtnet oj solubk .rulfau in the soil. This npon shall naomrretnd appropriate miagruion rnearuru
for rhe �nding purnit and shel! 6e corrrplered in a mannu sptcified in the �ry oj Palm Desen Groding
ared Faravatior� Ondinance.
►I 'r � i Y . • - ' �' ,
NOnC.
'f
�titi¢ation �teasures Vot Incorvorated
'vone.
ERects tiot �titi�ted to a L.evel of Insi�nificance
There will be no impacts to earth resources not mitigated to a level of iasignificance.
AIR QUAI.I'IY
Sianiticant ERects
Significant effects to air quality fall into two areas: temQorary impacts from Project constructioa activities and
long term impacts from the addition of motor vehicles geaerated by the site and combusdon of aatural gas for
space heating aad geaerating of electriciry.
With respect to construction activities, a chree-month gading cycle and a two-year total project buildout result
in an estimated 317 tons per year (0.87 tons per day) oF particulate emissions. The Southeast Desert �ir Basin
currently rtleases 2b tons per day of particulates, and therefore the construction effect on particulates of this
Project is insi�iFcant and highly localized.
The heavy-duty coastruction emissions have been based on eight hours of operatioa per day, and will contributc
�30 pounds per day of carbon-monoxide, 110 pounds per day of nitrogea-oxides, 8 pounds per day of
hydrocarbons, 13 pounds per day of sulfur-oxides, and approximately 10 pounds per day of particulates. Thesc
emissions generated by eonstruction equipment are �ery minor individually and cumulatively with respect to the
Southeast Desert Air Basin.
Lon¢ Term Imnacts
Thc primary source of emissions generated by the Project will be from motor vehicics. The traffic report for
the Project forecasts �9,900 vehicle miles travelled per day due to the Project. Vehicular emissions per day will
be �32 pounds of carboa-monoxide, &i pounds of nitrogen-o�ddes, 16 pounds of sulfur-oxides, 19 pounds of
particulates and 47 pounds of hydrocarbons. Offsite emissions for combustion of natural gas and electrical usage
are nominal and arc reported in the EIR at pages �0 and 41.
Thc Project was compared to the Southeast Desert Air Basin emissions. As Table 8 of the EIR shows, the
emissioas projected for the Projed are a very small fractioa of re�onal emissioas. Even with these addcd
emissions, the project will not ca�ue any state or federal air quality standard to be excecded. The Air Qualiry
�tanagtment P1an fas the SoutStast Desert Air Basin is based on the general plan for various jurisdictions, and
sincc the Project proposes 65+% fewer dwellingt than allowed by the Cit}�s Land Use Elcment, implementation
of the Project will not adversely affect the attainment of regional air quality standards as articulated in thc
AQMP and the plans for the Southeast Desert ,�►ir Basin.
Further, the cumulative air quality impacts of the project have been coasidered bv the South Coast �.ir Qualitv
�iaaagement District (SCr�QMD) ia its Final EIR for the 1991 Air Quality Maaagement Plan. Specif"ically, chac
EIR staces at page 3.1-8:
SC.AG's GMP EIR ideatified poteatial adverse impacts that may result from the GMP forecast.
In addition. SCAG also ideatified a set of rerional policies which may mitigate adverse aspects
of growth chat were ideatified ia the EIR and provide a structure for local governmcnts
implementation of these policies. The GMP forecasts of populatio0. housing aad employment,
0
which are iacorporated iato the AQMP, serve as the basis for tbe Regioaal Mobility Plaa
(R:�iP), tl�e Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and the Re�onal Housing Needs
Assestment (RHNA).
In addiaog the Final EIR for the 1991 AQMP states at page 1-3:
The AQMP Program EIR focuses subsequeat environmental -A•�ew on relevant controi
measure implementation issues. This coacept of coveriag gener.� �-rs ia the Program EIR
with subsequent narrower EIRs for spe�c projects and with �ration by reference of
general discussion is known as '[iering" (CEQA Seaion 15385 j. 3ased on the texi ia the
program EIR or its appendices, many issues can be elimiaated (and) will provide the basis for
staff's use ia future environmeatal assessmeats, for identifying relevant issues and determining
sigaificance and will allow the project-specific EIRs to be focused solely oa the new effeas or
detailed environmental issues nor previously considered (CEQA Guide(ines 15168 (d)).
Pursuant to Section ISISU of the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulatioas $15000 et seq.), the Final
EIR for the 194i Air Qualiry Management P1an is hereby incorporaied by refereace into tbest findings and tbe
EIR for cumulaave impacts as described in the above passages.
u •.: s � .�.
3. Prior co rhe iss�ance oj a grading permit for each phase of development, a grading plan sha!! be sub�nitred
for ch� �rtw and approval oj the Ciry Engineer. Said pla,e shall inco�porat� tht foilowing �neasuns:
a. SG-!QAlD Rult 403 .rha!! be adhend to which nqui�r wateri„g or opplication of soi! 6ind�rs to
limit dust grnerorion.
b. Grading shall not occur when wind speed rxceedr 20 �niles per hour.
c. A smeet swe�ping progrorn shal! be undtnaken to �rduce fugitive dust fro,n traf�c.
d �ll consaucaon vehiclts shall bi washed off befoi+e leaving th� site.
e. Panlring anat fo� cvnsaucaon p�nonnel shall be placed in such a rnannu that trajj4c /Iows are
not interfered witit.
f. Consaucdon aetividu which afftct roodways shal! 6e undenaken ciuring oJj`p�ak hours only and
in such a rnannar that Qt least one lane remoins open in each dincrion.
4. To rcduce potlutant ernissions fro�n co�rsaucaon equipnan4 said equip�nant shall be prnperly twred and
maintained Cornpliareet shal! 6t dernonsrroted to th� satisfactivri of tht City Fngine�r.
�titi�etioa �1ea�ur�e� Added
rlone.
Mitl�atio4 titea�urea Kot (ncorflorated
None.
4
�lTects Not �titi¢ated to a L.evef of insi¢nificance
No significant impacis have beea ideat�ed to short or long-term air quality which have not beea mieigated to
a level of insigruficance. The Project emissions are equal to or less than what was coatemptated for �his area
ia the AQMP aad the plans for the Southeast Desert �.ir Basin.
DRAINAGE/HYDROLOGY
Si¢nificant ERect�
The Project as currently designed will result in small overall inaease in the quantity of peak expccted runoff
exiting the Project site (139cfs or about a 2"o increase). The largest percentage of additional runoff will be
generated in the northern watershed areas of the Project. P+lthough che increase in quaatiry of runoff from these
areas is relatively minor (93cfs) the perceatage incre3se is about 100%.
.�rea runoff control as a result of Project design will be sigaificantly improved over what curren[ly exiscs.
LJacontrolled runoff from the alluvial coae area inco che Indiaa Hills and Summit ateas will be compictely
elimiaated. The proposed Project will detain aad delay runoff to these areas, chea discharge it into rwo control
points. The implementation of the planned drainage imProvements will also significantly reduce the sedimeat
transport poteatial of the expected quaacities of debris from this water shed downstream of the Project.
A flood water zone shown in Exhibit 11 of the EIR u an area of undetermined possible flood hazard. The Elood
hazard of this area is to be adjusted with the Project development, including the golf course.
Nitrates the ground water supply has been a problem in the Coachella Valley since the 1930s. The primary
source of tbese nitrates is runoff from septic tanks. A minor component of chis problem u ruaoff from golf
courses. In che opiaion of the Coachella Valley Wacer District. t6e agenry responsible for ground wacer
management in the area, the potential impacts of the projecs on the qualiry of ground water u coasidered
insignificant. •
The City of Palm Desert does not possess complete jurisdiction over stormwater control activities for ttus Project.
A responsible agency, the Coachella Valley Water District, is respoasible for decermiaing appropriace flood
control measures. It is believed based on the letter of commeat by the Coachella Valley Water Discrict oa ehe
EIR, that the mitigation measures imposed will be dcceptable to the Coachella Valley Water District. However,
subject to the Public Resources Code Sectioa :1081(b) such mitigation measwes are the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency and should be adopted by said other ageacy. These mcasures are identif'ied
with (•).
�litieation yieasut�
S. P,ior to issuanct of the gnrding permir, rhe applicant sha!! sub�nit a p/an for the rrview and appro�al oj
the Ciry Enginter and the Coachella Valley Water District indicating that all txctss �susoJj`generated bv cne
project shaU b� retained on-sire.(')
6. Prior tv is.ruanct of tht gr+ading permi� the applicant shd! submit an trosion conmol plan jor the revrew
and approve! of the Ciry Enginetr ond the Coache!!a va!!ey Water Disaict. Said plan shall indicate
tempor�ry erosion conm�J measwes that shal! bt implemented undl the proposed �irainage conrrol
improvement measuns an complered(')
7. Prior to issuar�ce of any grading ptnnits. rhe jo!lowing droinag�t seudiu shell be subrnined co ared approved
by rhe Ciry Enginetr and rhe Coachclla Vd/ey Water Disaicr
o. A drainvgit study of tht subdivisian, including dlvtrsions. ojj�site anas that drain onro and/or
through the rubdivision, and justifrrativn of any divpsior�; and
b. A drainagt study �videncing that proposed drainag�t pattuns will not overload txisang stonn
dnai�es: and
c. Derailed d�ainag�e studies indicating how rhe rracr map g�adin� in conjunrrion wirh tha dr�ainage
convryance rystems. including applicablt soiJs, chwvetLs, stnd flows, cauh basins. stonn droins
and flood warcr,rtardin� wil! allow building pads to 6e saft firo�n inundation fnwrs rainfall ntnofj`'
which may be apected for all sromu up to and including the [heorcticvl IOQy�ar flood.
d A plan for stonnwater protecdve wonirs.(')
� Prior ro rhe issuanct oj any grading pe�rnits, rhe applicant shall duign rhe foUowing improvemmts and
provide necusary dedications in a mannc� meering the approva! oj the City Engin�a and th� Coach�Ua
Vo!!ry Wcta Distric�
a. All provisions for surface drainagr; and
b. All nectssary storm drain facilities e�ending ro a sarisjattory point of disposa! for the proper
contro! and disposa! oj sto�m warer ,unojf,• ond
c. Whae derumined necessary by the City Engineer, tht auocioted �atenrueu sha!! bt dedicated ro
rhe Ciry oj Palm Dae� tha Counry oj Riversid� or the Coachella I�a!!ry Wotu Disnrct Prior to
recor�darion oj arty fina! mzu map or prior to rssuance oj cerrifrcatu of use and occupanry,
whiehevrr conru fr� said improvementr shol! bt eorr,muutd iir o m�ntr raeedng the approvol
of the �ry Engirseer and the Coache!!a t�allry Wcter Dist�ex (•)
9. Prior to rrcordotion of e frnd map, the applicanr shall eonsauet or post seeuritv guaranreeing rhe
con.rnuction oj rhe follawing public and/or pnvote improvements in confonnonce with applicable Ciry
standardr.
• All stner improvemenu
� Stonn drain facilitits
� Subdrain facilities
• Landreaping i�rigntion conan! rystera (streecs, parks, and publie anas)
10. Prio� to issuance oj a grading permi� rhe applicant shall install facilidu to prohibit accus ro the Dead
Indian Crtak Scomswottr Qeannel righr-of-way in a manner meering the cpproval oj the Qiief Engineer,
Coochella T�dlry Woru Disaict. ( •)
11. Prior to tht issuanct oj any building permi� rhe applicant shal/ arr�ng�t for the reloeation of any Coache/la
T�all�y Wotu Disuia faciliaes ajfected by the projec� in a manner meering rlie approvel oj the Chief
Enginetr. Coochella i�alley Woter Disaicr. (•)
jl�itiaation Hasures Added
Noae.
�(lttaatton Neasu� Not (ncluded
None.
6
EfTects �1ot �1itiQated to a Lev ! of [nsiQnificance
With application of the above mitigation measures, the poteatial impacts of the Project will be reduced to a level
of insigniiicaace.
B{OLOGIC�I. RESOURCES
Si¢nific3nt ERects
Wich respect to biolo�cal resources studied onsice, there was signilicant disagrcement among the experts as to
impacts and feasibiliry/appropriateness of mitigation and the scoQe of i.mpact. To comply with thc requirements
of CEQA, che majar thrust of the differences in opiaion have been summarized, including chc opiaion of �he
consulting biolo�st.
Since the decision-maker is not obligated to select the most coaservative, environmentally protective, or liberal
viewpoint, the City Council in aaing has studicd all of the opinioas carefully, and the suppo�ting documcntacion
therefor, and has arrived at a coaclusion that [he opiaion of the experts who hold that a 400 to 600 yara buffer,
measured in a north/northeasterly direction is necessary is cntitled to greater weight than the other opinioas.
tn fact, the Department of Fub and Game has iadicated that si�nificant impacts would not occur at s00 yazds
or more as measured from the pea (DFG letter, 7-31-91). The Ciry Council bases this coaclusioa oa the fact
that these experts indicated that habituation to �umans, to the extent it would occw wich a�00 to 600 vard
separation, was not necessarily aa adverse effect on the sheep. Furthermore, habituation has tbe attendant
beaefit of reducing the stress leve! of the sheep which are held captive at the Bighom [nstitute as thev becomc
accustomed to the sights aad sounds of urbanization. It is noted that wbanization occurs within a mile or less
of the Bighorn Institute pen in the cunent deve[opment state of the property. .ldoreover, the Institute's sheep
see and are handled by humans at the Iastitute ia pursuit of cheir research and bretding objectives. Flnally,
maay of the experts responding (includiag those who recomm�nded a larger buffer thaa the experts relied upoa
in this action) noted that the sheep are less stressed when they aze above a disturbance than when they are �ade
or below it. Their excellent eyesight enables them to perceive the signiFicance of the threat to them.
Because the development of a propem+ with homes and use �s a golf course is a relativcly benign tand use whca
compared with other laad uses (i.e., the pens are ia the view shed of Highway 7� where headlights are present
at night and traffic, including trucks. is present during the day and night), the sounds that cmanatc from t6e
development will already be familiar to the sheep. The mitigatioo measures thac are proposed will further
protect the sheep from disturbances that might occur, however unintentional.
A buf'fer condition is added to the project to provide for a 400 to 600 yazd buffer measured in a
north/northeasterly direction. While the City bases this on the scientific evidence in the record, the City has
explained in the Statement of Overriding Considerations that this represeats, ia the Cit}�s view, the best balancc
between mitigatioa of impacts and recogaition of the land use history and new uapaccs imposed by the voluncary
location of BHI.
With sespect to the Desert Dry Wash Woodland. there is a significant effect from the loss of this wash due to
the rcmoval of Smoke Trees and the attendant nestiag bencfits to local birds. Ivone of the birds or othcr spccics
iahabiting this Dry Wash Woodland are endangered, threatened, or rare. Notwithscanding thc adjudg�d
significance of the Desert Dry V�%as6 Woodland, the woodland known as Dead Indian Creek is not unique ia the
re�on. Opinions are included in the EIR whicli indicate that this woodland may be reproduced or replic��cd
ia other areas of the Coachella Valley, and the appiicaac's bio[ogist has testiFied tfiat it can be repiicaced on sice.
7
Total authority for determining this issue does not rest with the City of Palm Desert. The U.S. Army Corps of
Eagineers aad tbe State of California Departmeat of Fuh and Game have substaatial aad complete permaaent
authoriry over the removal of Dead Indian Creek Desert Dry Wath Woodlaad, If these agencies are convinced
that mitigation is possible, aad no practicable alternatives e�ast for the wash to remain oasite. these agendes may
grant the authority to City of Palm Desert to remove this resource and repiace it elsewhere. The comments from
the agendes at the time of this action do not give indication of their poteatial reaction to this removal, evea
though they have been coasulted with repeatedly throughout the process. If these agendes do not permit the
remova! of Dead Indian Creek in conversion to golf course or other use� then there wiU be ao sigaificant impacts
in this area whacsoever. If they do permit the removal of Dead Indiaa Creek, repiacemeat aad replication
elsewhere as is dictated by State and Federal law will remove the sigaificant impacts. To tbe e�eat there are
aay remaining sigaificant impacts, a statement of oveniding coasiderations is provided.
The impacts to free ranging peninsular Bighorn sheep are minimal. There are no free ranging peninsular
Bighorn sheep oa the site. and as reported in the EIR, che site does aot possess the charaueristics of aitical
habitat.
There is authority for the proposition that this area may be mar�nal free ranging Bighorn habitat. To the exteat
this is the case, and the sheep utiIiang this area historically are utiliang this area as a habitat as opposed to mere
"pass-through" or transient eveat, there would be a signiiicant adverse impact. However, in view of the fact that
ao si� the Bivhorn sheep have been seen on this property, and it has low resource vaiue for the Bighorns,
indicate that this impact is not significant.
No impacts to the Desert Tortoise are found as a result of this Projea. The site has been repeatedly surnyed
for Desert Torto�e and it has beea determined that Desert Tortoise is not present. In an abuadance of caudon,
the prescribed U.S. F'uh aad Wildlife Service protocol fo� the 100°6 coverage survey for Desert Tortoise u
propoud with respeu to the properry prior to the grading permit being issued.
A Burrowing Owt was located on the site. aad its activity suggested a fideGty to the area for nesting. Although
Bunowiag Owls are aot coasidered rare or chreatened, t5ey are rare ia t�e Cosc�ella Valley. Under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Aa of 1974, the animals are protected during the breediag season when they are nestiag.
The impacts to the species are not considered sigaiiicant, but the protection of tbe aest, if preseat, is provided
for in mitigation ia aay event.
�t�. � �r
12. Prior ro tha issuanc� oj any gradin� clearing or other landform �nodificaaon permi� the dev�loper shall
submit written evrdtnct to the Dircctor of Community Dtvtlopnrent that appropriate f�de� state and
counry peimits have bten obtained for the biological resowrts on-site ro bt nmovtd by daveloprnenG Said
permits shall speeijy tht dmin� natun arrd �rview aurhoriry jor r/�e mirigation rneasuns. if any, which an
requind in connection with thest nmovals. No rcmovals shall be cuthonized unti! dl necessary nsou,+ce
agenry pennits havt bea� obtaintd
13. Prior co the issuance of a grcding pemsi4 the developer shall dtposit with th� Ciry oj PaGn Des�n an
amount equal to the cast of a stcond fence sunvunding the 34�acn pue on BHI propeny. 77ie cost of said
fence .shall bt ettabli.rhed by consulration witie BHI or, ij BXI has no inpu� by a sratanent of cosr by a
fencing co+�anetor. 7he fuiee shall ba oj the same siu and �nettrial as that which cumaetly �ncloses rhe
p�n. 7Tet cash dtposit sha/l b� availab/e for one year froni rhe dots of tht deposit and shd! be n/eased
to BXI upon BHI's submittal of evidinu to rhe Dinctor of Canmuniry Developniuet rhat the junds wiA
be used [o consduet tlea ftnce wirhin 9�0 day.r of �rceipt oj fundr.
14. Prior to rhe issuancs o/ any �ding p��rni� the developer shall submu evidtnct to rht Direcror oj
Comrneu�ity Developrnuet that no standing woru for consus�cdo+e pwposu (e.g., dust cona+ol) is niointained
on-sirt. �e Director, through posted wamings and grading inspecrion, sha!! ensure that no workers or
equipm�nt arc pem�itted outside consvuction areas.
IS. Prior to the rtmova! of any smoke tree, the d�veloper shall sub�nir evidence :o rhe Direcror oj Co�nrnunrry
Development that the necessary permct�s) have been obrained fror►r the Counry Agricultural Commusioner.
`titi¢ation �fe�sure� Added
16. ,Vo disrupdon oj migratory bi�d nesring habita� inctuding but not limiced ro aclive nests, trees with nua
ond colony nests, or the unauthonzed taJdng of anY migratory bird nests or eggs by any means, shall bt
permined durirtg the nesring and breeding season. Said nesting and bretding searon, and rhe nest areas,
sha/l be idena�ed prior to the issuance of any gradin� cltaring or landjorrn modifecatior� permit. Tne
miagation measure shown as �Y 12 on page 24�t calling for fedrral, statt and counry permics fo� �iolo�ica!
resouxes aJj`ected on site sha!! be tendercd ar evidenct prior ro issuance of any pe»nit.
Based on the comments received on the Drah EIR, c�e foUowing mitigation measure has been edited from �hac
contaiaed in the Drah EIR. Editing is shown in uaderline/strike-out.
17. Prior to the issuance oj any grading p�rmit or anv �ermit for the modiRcario►r of land on rht Altamira sire.
N+e-de+�eleper�l+elf a bioloQist �etained bv the Dincror of Cornr►sunitv D�velo�ment for the Ciry o� P�im
Desen shQ!! nreDare and submit co the �(y and rhe U.S. Fish and
�Idlife Service a Desen Tonoise 100°fo coverage survey in accordvnce with the proroco! esrabiished jor
such survev by the b�S�S L'.S. Fish and �ld1i(e Senrice. Adjustrnents to the project if any, shal! be in
accordance with the bS+�� U.S. Frsh and �ldlrfe SeNrce dtremrination. Th� applicant shall pav for
such a studv.
1� Prior to the issuancc oj any grading permi� the developer sha!! submit ro rhe Director oj Cornmunrry
Deve/opmtnt for review and approva! a deve/opmtnt conanl plan evidtncing the following.�
a. . Roads and driveways shall be designed in a manner so that they rtduce headlight shine on :he
bigho�n pens.
b. Structure designs shal! incorporate non-glan maeerials, including windows and any o�her exrersor
fcrruns. Use ojaxe�ior lighting should be kept to an absolutt minimurr� wirh absolutelv no iignu
pointta upwords towerds che shtep ptn. 77ttst �rsnicrions should bt included in rh� develop►nenr
CCRr.
c. Use of ateRor smeet lights shal! be k�ep to o minimum. lhose that ai+e required should be
directed in a rnanner so that thev do not shint upwords or towards tht pen, nor should ehev be
a high glart rypt of light.
d No outdoor do&s shall be allowed in rh� southern po�rion oj the development rhac borders :he
bujj`er zone. furthennore. a ltash !aw shall 6e esrablished and stnctiv enforeed in che CCRr.
e. Additeona! CCRs shall bt developed that implement noise rtsaicaons in the development and
especia!!y in tJ�e soutJum porrion. 73�ae would includt r�estricdoru on futi►vorks, gas powered
blowas, racing of motonycles o� other loud vehicles through the developmen� and ercessivelv loud
celebrations or music.
f. Use oj the gr�lj course sho!! be �rstricred to daylight hours only.
`
0
g. Pond banks shall be created with a 45' or gnattr slope with an absolute minimum deprh of 1
foor.
h. Pond banks shall be concrete co eliminate insect b�rtding hobirat.
i. Mosquitojuh (Gombusia a�nis} shal! be released into ponds to provide a biologica! cona+ol of
insect larvat.
j. Wotering sysums for oncs not includin� rurf shal! be a subsurface drip
irrigation rystem to eliminart surface wartr which rnay providt br+eeding habitat for Culicoide gnatr
and orhtr instct vtctors.
k Xeric odapred plonu that an nucive ro the Coachilla T�a!!ry shall be utiliud in rhe grnero!
landscaping designs. Planc lisu shall emphasize native veg�etation such ar s�noke rrees, occodllq
yucca, succulenu, gravelly ground covers and rhe like.
19. Pnor to the issuance of anv grading pemsi� the developer shaU submit to tht Director of Co►nmuniry
Development a rcpon by a quali�ed biologist on rhe status of the bwrowing owl nest.
20. A Buffer in the shape of a,e a� of �t00 yardr rx�anding to 6U0 yards a.t �►rt�sund fiY�m the 30-acn p�R oj
the Big Xorn lnstineu in a nanh/northeasterly direcdon as reconrn:end�d by tht Deparnnent oj Fish and
Gwnt and sho►vn on ixhibir A shall bt provided by rht applican�
21. ,'Vo building or grading permits sha/l bt issutd on tht proptrty shown as "Ruuvation Anea" on the tentativ�
cract map. 7itt Ciry nserves, howtver, th� abiliry to ntvitw and pottneia!!y gnnrt any applicatioR for
deve/opmcnt approva! of propeny within the Buffer Aaa" othu nc�n applicant's propeny. Sucf� nvi�v
shal! be in accvrd with the Califo�ia Envrronneenral Qualiry Act and arty othtr applicable rnunicipa� srate,
or federal law. The Ciry will consider d�nsiry amrsfers, aansfers oj development right� or similar relief ro
ease any financial burd�n on anv non-applicant properry owrttr ajj`tcted by che Buf�erAxa 7hc applicant
shal! n�g�otiate in gr�od faith co pu�rhast the De! Gagnon proptny.
?.2. .-ts a condition of approval of Resol�rion :Vo. 91-90 approving Ten[ative Tract 25.296 and co rhe errenr
pemricted by law, os e condicion of approval oj Ordinance 617 approving Cheng�e of Zone 89�-14 and ro
the ezrent provided by !aw as a condidon oj approvol of Rao[urion No. 91-84 containirtg findings and
cemfving the Environmente! Impact Repon wirh nspect to thi,r px�jec� Alta,rrira Ve�tuns he�rby agrees ro
defend at iu sole cost and etp�nse, indernnify and hold han�sless tht Ciry oj Palm Duer� iu agrnu,
officen and employees firom any claim, action or proce�di»g fikd a�ainst che Ciry of Palm Dese� ier
agencs, ojficers and emplaytes as a nsulr ojrh� loca! agtnry's approve! of Rtsoluaon No. 91-90, Ordinance
617 and Resoluaon 91-89 including bur not limited [o: 1) acrions ar proctediRgJ to atracA4 s�t asidG void
or w�su! such approvals; o� 2) action.t or pnxetding.r thoJ sttk dornag�ts as a nsult of th� �ndin�
rtquinment or condiaon that a reservaaon area be established including any action fo� inverse
condemnation.
The Ciry of Palm Desert sfiall pro►nprfy norijy Altamira Ventun.s of any such claine, action or proctrdin�
Fwrher, Altanei� Vintu�r.t shall conduct the defense ond conmv! the defense. ?he City oj Pal,n Desen
sha11 cooperott fu!!y in rht dtfense oj any such acao►e.
•:: � ir � l 'f ' �
Micigaaon me3sure �13 on page 117 is not considered feasible, and is hereby not adopted. Becauu t�e 30-acre
Bighorn Iastitute pea is doubio-feaced through these mitigation measures, and the cost of that is advanced by
the appGcant, the safeguard against free ran�ng dogs approaching the pea is achieved. 'Ihe &foot cement wail
10
will interfere with proper drainage of the properry, as iadicated in the substantial evidence presentcd bv �hc
app(icaat, aad is uanecessary to achieve the stated objective of protecting the shecp in the peas from intrusion
by animaLs from the Project.
.Liicigation measure �14 has been eliminated because the City does not believe that there is sufficient evidcacc
to support a compiete prohibition of gradiag for six montl�s of the year. Further, the Ciry beGevcs that
�titigation measure +1k35, limiting grading within 1,000 feet of the lambing pen during the lambing scason is
sufficient to reduce potential consiruction noise impacts to a level of insi�cance.
�litigation measure �16j has been altered and that portion of the mitigation measure calling for subsurface drip
irrigatioa system for the golf course is technologically infeasible and 'u hereby omitted. Because go(f courses are
composed of turf artas, the tec�nology does not exist for drip irsigation to �ve approQriate coverage. The
impact sprinklers for the golf course are the most common strategy used, aad because turf area is e�aremcly
porous, no standing water will occur as a rtsult of this watering. Therefore, this mitigacion measure is not
adoptcd.
'�iitigation measure #18 on page 1:A requiring the report on the status of the burrowing owl nest on che site
has been modified to eliminate the limitation on construction activities in the viciniry of the acst between April
1 and July 31. It is beGeved that the mitigation me3sure added above related to activiti�s in compliance with
the �tigratory Bird Treary Act will provide thc same level of protectioa to the burrowing owl if it does have a
nest onsite.
FRects Yot �titig�t�d to a Level ot Insi¢nificance
To the extent that there will be any impacts to che captive Bighorn sheep at the Bighorn Institute even aher
adoption of the mitigation as proposed harein, thou impacts are coasidered si�ificant and unavoidablc. The
statement of overriding considerations indicates why the City Council finds these impacts nonetheless acceptable.
There will be ao si�iticant effects to the free ranging Bighora habitat or Desert Tortoise.
Impacts to Dead Indian Cre�k are significant only ia the localized context of the removal of the crcek in chis
area. Replacement as authorized by the appropriate State and federal agencies will achieve subscancially sll of
the environmental benefits of the e�dsting wash. To the e�ent that this objective may noc be achicved fully, the
statement of ovetriding considerations identifies why the Ciry Council finds these impacts otherwise ac:cptable.
CULTL'R,�1L RESOURCES
Sienitic�nt ERects
The sitc has been surveyed and arc5aeolo�cal site G1-Riv-Sb� was located on the site in accordance with records
on this site. CA-Riv-564 wiU not be impacted by development of the study area. The site has becn properiy
documeated and studied and its research potential has been exhausted. The site 6az also undergonc some
destruccioa, in all likelihood as a result of the coastruction of the e�osting water taaks. Therefore, subject to che
mitigation measure recited below, there will be no adverse effects upoe cultural resources in the study area.
tititieation Neasurea
23. Prior to tJu issuonce oj a grading ptrmit, the applicant shal! providt w�itren evidence to che Citv Engineer
that a ce�tifitd arhaeologist hes been �rtained shall be pr+es�nt at tRe prc-gnading confinnce, sha!! esrablish
p,r�ciduns for anhaeoJogca! ►rsoux� rurniliartce. and sha!! establish. in cooperatiar wirR rhe projecr
d�veloptr, Proceduirs for tunpor�arily halNrg o► redincting work to p�rnsit the sa►nplin� identi�cation. and
11
cvaluation of arrifoctr os appropriat�. If addiaona! or u�cYpecred ancha�ological featuns an discovued
rhe ar+cieacologist shall �+epon such findingt to the projecr dcveloper and to tht Dinctor of Con�muniry
D�velopme�u. Ijthe a�+cha�ological nesources an jowsd ro bc signif:can� the anchatologicd obsernr shaU
derennine appropRate acrions. in coope�tion with the proj�ct develop�r, for erplorotion and/or salvag�e.
Excavated finds shall b� ojj`end ry the Ciry of PaGn Duen on a first rrfusal basis. Applicant may ntain
said finds i� wriaen as.�u�ece is provided that th�y will bt prvperty prrserv�d in Riversidt Counry, unlus
said finds an of specia! significanc� or a museuns in Rlversidt County indicates a desin to scudy and/or
display rhem at this timG fn which case iterns shdl bt donated to tht �ty or duignet. ?hest actions, as
wel! as final mitigation and disposidon of tf�i nsouxes, sholl be subjecr to the approva! of the Dirncor oj
Conemuniry D�vtlopm��t
�1ltiQatton Measures Added
vOne.
`titiQatloo !1�teasure� Tlot [ncornorated
None.
ERects Yot :�titiQated to a[.erel of insi�iQcance
�1one.
AESTHETICS/VISUAL IMPACTS
Si¢nili nt ERccts
The structures proposed in the Altamira Country Club projoa will be vi�ible from adjacent homes to somewhat
widely varying degrees, and will ia worst cases. completoly obswct southeriy views of the Sanca Rosa Mountains.
The homes whose views are obstructed in this maaner were for the most part cobswcted at a time whea the
property was zoncd far resideatial use and therefore this impact couid be anticipated.
The Highway 74 viewshed will be cliaaged Erom the curreat coaditioa to include homes aad the golf course
behind a heavily landscaped buffer area. Exhibits preseated at the Plarming Commission hearing of :Nay 21, 1991
by the laadscape archited, wcorporated in these findings by refereace, depict a laadscape b�cffer with native aad
naturaliud trees representative of the area.
The sitc ia gencral is on� that is visibie from maay parts of Palm Desert aad Iatentate 10, as the bajada from
the Saata Rosa Mouatains slopes gendy downward into Palm Desert.
Overall, althoug,h the construaion of the proposed project will permaaently alter the e�dsting natwal appearance
of the site, visual impacts are coasidered minimal. The project is in keeping with the visua! character of the
direcdy adjacent or neighboriag development and subject to the mitigation measures described below. Impaccs
are, therefore, not considered signifcanc.
�titi�atioa �1ee�urea
24. Prror to the issuanet oj a gmding pemri� [he applicant sha!! submit a grading plan jw the rrview and
approvel oj the Cuy Fnginea. Said plan shal! dtrnonsa�te thct ri�e following rn�asuns have been
incorpornted•
1�
a. 7he privote stnet propostd adjacent to Thc Summit sha!! not aceed in elevation chree �3) jeer
from the top of curb to concrere swa/e located within tht perimeter of liic Summi� or five i S� ; eet
below the rop oj the wa11.
b. Pad elevations in the ana adjacent to The Summit sha!! not crceed �.S feet in e[evaaon �rom :op
of cur6 on tht directty adjaceRr pnvate saeec.
?S. Prior to the issuance of building pe�rniu for vny uniu on the norrhtrn site edge or in hillside areas, rhe
applicant/develop�r shall submit arrhirectura! plans for tht rtvie►v and approvc! oj the Direcror o�
Comrnunitv Development. Said plans for the norrherly site edge only shal! demonstrace the;ollowing:
a. Building heighu in the a�ea adjacenr to 7ire Summit shall not exceed 18 feet.
b. Xorizortta/ arrhitectural elemenu shall be ernphasiud forsnuctuns adjacent ro or directiv ea�osed
to vi�,vs fro►n The Summit. Primarrly verrical �earunes such as lvrge, unbroken wa!! faces shal! be
avoidtd
c. Shaliow rooj prtches shall be encouraged for srrucrures adjacent to or dirtcrly aposed co +�iews
fr�om 77z� Summit. Scruccures wirh fiat roof.r at o� close to the maadmum pennusrble building
heighr shall bt avoided
d 77ee orientation of all e�terior lighr sources shall be dincted awav fro►n residences wzrhin Tne
Summit. Erterior lighang near the northern edgrs of the prope�ty shal! be !ow leve! and !ow
wanage. Floodlighting of structures, rrees, or plancings fo� purely display purposes in this arev shail
be avoided
e. Landscaping berwten rhe proposed prrvatt drrve anQ the block woll along the boundary with The
Sumrnit shall employ a plant palette the rnarun height oj which does not aceed che wa[!.
Interrnirtent fomia! ciusrers of palm crees an p�rmissible in this area
�titi¢ation �teasures .�dded
Thc following mitigation measure has been cditcd from that contained in the Draft EIR. Editing is shown �
underline/strike-out.
26. Prior to the issuance oj a grading permi4 the applicant sha!! subrriit a grading plan jor rhe review and
app�val of tht Ciry Engi»eer. Said plan sha!! demonsuate rhe following:
a Grading or ground distur�unce on areas cur*ently ezpostd os bedrock along the far sourhem edge
oj the propaty shal! b� avoided most signijcantiv on th� hillside at the southeastern edqe of rhe
site.
b. Grading techniquts used jor rhe area nereJ�sourh oj Dead Indian Creek/Carrizo Creek wash shvil
e�nphasize slope contouring and v�iable slopes. Nard edgts and angles a�+e co be a�•oided� rops
anQ tots of slopts shal/ be blended wirh rtmvining o�eQs of the �rtgged a�rd wteven surrouR�iing
nvtur�al surfact.
7he foJlowing �itigarion rrrearuns werc added by the Ci1y Counti! in theiu action on rhe project.
�
27. 'li:t app/icant shall 6e purnitted 58 hillsidt pancels providing thot the applicant diinonsoares rhar they
confonn to th� gt�aLs and purposu of r/ee Ciry's hi!lside dtve[opniera ngu/atiorts. Said detemiinarion shall
be rnade by the CounciL
28. 7ite applicanr sha!! provid� view openings along the wa!! facing Nighway 74 os approved by che Ciry's
,4nchitecrival Comrnission.
.
'C•. � �r � 1 �� � � tc �
�OII�..
! : i ��: � � . i � •� � t: � t
NO�C.
E:�IERGY RESOURCES
Si�i�c3nt ERects
While energy demand is nonrenewable, the demands of the project of this type are individually insignificant.
Cumulatively, it must be taken into consideration that the project has been contempiated for sometime, and
eaergy resourets have been plarined for. The coasideration of energy coaservation and solar access is dictated
by the Public Utilities Commission through State eaergy conservatioa standards. A mitigatioa me�.sure is
inciuded for this purpose.
�titiQation Neasures
29. Tise proposed project shdl cornply with a!! opplicable Public Utilitiu Conirnrssion rrgulations. Builders
will be rrquind to comp/y wirh adopred srare ene� conservation standasds per S�caons 1451-1542 of Title
30 oj che Cali�'ornia ,�idminuaarive Code and Secaons P-20-1451 rhrough P-20�IS42 oj Tirle .3d of rhe
Codt. This miagaaon measure shall bt monirorcd through the CiN's building code enfo►rement process.
�titiQ�tion �teasures Added
None.
�titieation �teasure� �fot Incorflorated
:vone.
ERects vnt �titi�ted to a i.erel of (nsi�titicance
vonc.
14
L.,�►.�D [;SE/RELEVA�YT PL�INNING
,�ignificant ERect�
The project site has been zoned for residential land use since 1955, and its development 6as been contemplated
in Counry of Riverside aad Ciry of Palm Desert planning documents for years. T'he priacipal issue concerning
the cifects of the project with respect to land use deals with the effecu of the project on the operaaoas of che
Bi�orn Institute. 't'his pazt of the fmdings is limited to land use issues alone; it does aot speak to the biological
issues which are of importance in examining che relationship betweea the two land uses. as this is discuued in
a prcvious section.
The EIR, at pages 146 through 150, discusses in detail the history of Bighorn Iastitute's location adjacent to this
property. It is noteworthy that the properry, both the BHI site and the subject properry, were zoned for
residential land uses prior to BHI's esiablishment of its faciliry. The Cit}�s General Plan Amendmeat Pre-
Annexation Zoning, and annexation to the City of portions of this property were approved prior to che Institute
acquiring the lease from the Bureau of Land :�ianagement to its current site. Documents referenced in the
Environsnental Impact Report indicate that, at the tune that the Bighorn Iastitute decided to locate to this site,
therc was no coatemplation of a buffer by County of Riverside, Ciry of Paim Desert, or even the Bi¢6orn
Institute. in fact, BHI's fence line for the sheep pea closest to this project u only 300 feet (100 yards) from che
boundary of the Altamira properry. This is thought to be thc result of BHIs original objective of research and
disease control, which objective has �own over the years to include breeding aad releases, as indicated in
comments on the Draft EIR.
The City concludes that, in view of the information stated in the EIR, it cannot be concluded that the
development of the Altamira site to its own boundary was considered incompatibfe with the operation aad
success of the Bighorn Institute as a laad use matter. It was reasonably foreseeable that resideatial uscs would
locatc adjacent to the Institute at its border, and the proximiry of that use must be concluded to have been taken
into consideration in site selection. However, the City has incorporated a 400 to 600 yard buffer.
One of the considered land use effects that could be significant if the project proposed were not to be adopted
would bc that a larger buffer on the .�ltamira property will have a signi6cant adverse effect on another ownership
known as the Del Gagnon property which is curreatly zoned P.R.-5 and has aceess. Development is compietely
precluded on this property with a buffer over -100 yards, aad the Del Ga�on property would have no uscs
w hatsoever, possibly coastituting the basis for an unconstitutional taking by regulation. However, the City has
added, and the applicant has accepted, a mitigati�n mcasure as a condition of approval which guarantces that
if the Del Gagnon property suffers damages as a result of the 400 to 600 yard buffer, the City will noc suffer
economic loss as a result.
The irrigatioa water line to be located in an easemcnt ia lronwood Country Club will pose temporary
construction isnpacts to the existing area. !t will take 90 days to complete the pipeline; therefore, this is a s6orc
term and temporary itnpaci. [t is determined to be insignificant. The right of way for the irrigatioa pipeline
e�dsts. The use of aoa-potable water for golf course irrigation is considered aa environmeatal benefit w�hich
reduces dcmand on domestic water supply.
The project provides its own recreational facilities for its residents. Nonetheless, the project is required to
comply with the local park eoda, ia chis case most likely throug,h the payment of in lieu fees. �+ mitigacion
measure is included for this purpose.
Thc Cit�s General Plan identifies a bicycle [rail along SR '� fronting on the property. In addition, thc CitWs
Zoning Code designates the area of [he property ad}acent to SR 74 as "Scenic Preurvation', for which specific
zoning consideratioas are provided. Mitigation measures for each of these planning coasiderations are provided.
15
�titi¢atioa yteasure�
30. P�ior ro th� issuance of grading perrniu, the applicant shall subncit �vi,s�d plans indicaring th� bike v�ai!
on rht tast side oj Kighway 74 for che �vicw and approvo! oj tht Dir+ector oj Co►�nsuniry Development.
7he applicant shall bond for or ocherx+ise guaranut consaucrion of tht bilu trai! prior to tht issuance of
building perrniu in a manner rneeting the approvol of tht City Enginetr.
31. Prior ro rtcordation oj a�nal subdivision map, rhe apPlicant sholl canply with the Loeal Par1c Code either
through the dtdication of land and improv�menu or the payment ojin-litu feu as approvtd by the Dinctor
oj Community D�velopment.
32. Prior to rhe issuance oja building permic for any ana of the project locattd in the SP, "Scenic Pneservation"
Overlav Zoning Disaict (Chaprer 25.�4, Cvdi�ed Ordinmeca of rhe Ciry of Polm Desen), proj�ct plans
shall be submined for the neview and approval oj rhe duign �iew board or Planning Commission. 7he
purpost of such m�inv rs to aclo�owled�e locarion of the project in a scenic conidor and to �rview and
mdce ncommendations on preservarsore oj scenic visras, serbaeks, londscapin� building h�ighu. signs and
miagaaon oj excessivt noist.
�titf¢atlon �teasure� Added
The jollowing mitigation mtasurt was added by the Ciry CouRcil in its action on tht projec�
�3. Shou/d the Bighom Insarute nlocate, che applicant sha!! submit an applicatiort for aRy devtlop�n�nt withiR
rhe bufj`er ana; said application shal! be processed as str fonh in the Palnt Duen Municipal Code. The
undeveloped hillside !ou identijied in other condiaons herrin sha/l be parr of this applicarion.
�titiQation �teasuRa Not incornorated
Vone.
�Rects �ot �titi�ated to a Level of insi¢niticance
It is determined by the City of Pslm Desert thac no significant impacts to land use will result from
implementation of the proposed project.
To the extent ihat a land use, as opposed to a biolo�cal, impact u considered to occur to the Bighorn Institute
operation as a result of the Altamua project, this impact must be viewed ia the coetaa of the chronology of
zoning and land use activities. Land use coatlicu which are created with actual or coastructive knowledge of the
future uses of surrounding laad cannot be coasidered a land use impau when the adjacent lands deveiop.
Therefore, t5e City of Palm Desert coacludes that t5ere are ao signiiicaat 1and use interface impacts bctween
the projeci as proposed and Bighorn Institute.
There are no sigaificant unmitigable impacts to the Del Gagaoa properry since the project as proposed will not
creace any impacu to this property.
16
TRANSPORT,�TiOiY AIYD CIRCL'UTION
�'s-�T�r��x� �y
The project will generate a total of 4,.'.$0 vekude trips per day. Ninety-eight pereent (98%) of the daily traffic
generated by the project (4,190 trips) will head north on SR74 upon leaviag the projeci site, and chose trips arc
estimated to spGt generally evealy to the nonh, east aad west when reaching El Paseo, SR111, and titoatercy
,avenue. All intersections affected by the project are estimated to operate at Level of Service E or better for
the c�dsting u�c plus growth traffic condition in the midday Peak period traffic conditions ia 1995. Phvsical
improvements to reach Level of Service C(Coachella Valley Association of Governments Policy) are required
at two intersectioas, even when one does not coasider project-related tr�c. These improvemeats are reated
at page 159 of the EIR. With the addition of chc project tr�c, the following additional improvements are
necessary: At State Route 111 and State Route 74 double left tura lanes on northbound State Route 7.s; at State
Route 74 and EI Paseo right turn lanes on northbound aad southbound State Route 74 as well as a right turn
laac on westbound El Paseo.
SunLine Transit does not currently operate in this area but has indicated aa intention to do so. Ia che commenu
on the EIR, Sunline Transit requests that the City provide a bus turnout and stop north of the project eatry.
The City has included a mitigation measure to address this. SuaLine Transit has also requestcd that a bus turn-
around by provided in the area of Silver Spur. It is the Cit}rs opinion in this case t6at it is noc the sole
responsiti+lity of this applicant to provide a bus turn-around that will benefit the eatire City and re�on.
'�titiQation 4teasur�
34. Prior to the rssuance of ce�rif cates oj use and occupancy, the following ir,�prov�mencr shai! be i,uralled in
a manne� nreedng the approva! of the Ciry Tra�c Engineer.
a A lefe rum pocke� 260 feer long with a 90 foor tronsidon, shall be srrip�d for aafj5c on sourhbound
SR 74 cnt�Rng rhe projcct.
b. Landscapt plantings and signs shall be limired to 36 inches in height withiR ?S feer of projecr
d�ivewQys to ensure good visibiliry.
c. tnsta/l a"STOP" sign on site egress �oadwQy to SR 74.
d Install a second project access for ense�g�nry vehiclts only at the end of Ponola Avenue.
35. Pnor to rht issuanct of cenifcares of use and occupanry the app/icant sha!! enter into an agreement w�erh
rhe Citv to pa�ticipate in a pr+ogram to provide ojf-site improvtmtnts to rtgiona! roadways and intersecaons
thac shall be consrructed pRor to Year 2000. Final desig►� and phasing shal! be based on decailed annua!
rnonitoring and onalysis of acrual trvj�c demands at tht critica! impacted intersecaons idenafied in c�e
EIR Funding oj ineprovun�ntt sha!! bt derrved from the Unifomt Transportation ,tliaganorc Fee and
,tileasun A when applicablt, with the balance from RDA.
36. The ope�tors of [ht gr�lf club house shal! neserve and designate at least IS% of rhe emplovee paiking
spaces jw caipool vthiclts by marldng such spaces "GtRPOOL ONLY". Carpoo! spaces shd! be used onty
by carpool vehiclu in which at ltast two oj che p�rsons wil! bt unploytes. Such spaces shal! be locared
wirhin nvenry feet of the club house employee envonce(s) or other pnfennriQ! locorions ar approved by rhe
Ciry Tra�t Enginttr.
17
37. The op�nrtors ojthe g�aljclub house shal! provida one bicycli pon►a'ng feciliry (c.g., bicycle racks) jor each
%rve ernplq+tes per shi�t witJ�in nvenry fert of the ernployte entranct(s) or other p�j'ennaa! location as
approved by the City T�c Fngineer.
38 P�ior to tht issuance oj a g�ding pennit, the applicant sha!! submit plons for rhe provision of a bus nunout
and passengrr wairing sh�lter nonh oj che projecr ent�ance far the rcview ond app„ovo! oj thi Dincror of
Consn�uniry D�velopnrera and the Di�rcto� of Planning oj tlu Sunline Tinresit Ag�tnry.
39. Prior to th� issuance of a grading pemti4 the applicant sha!! subnsit evidtnu to rhe Dinctor of Con�muniry
Developm�nt rhot arr encnwch�nent perrnit has been obtained fran tht State D�pan�ntnt of Tiansponation
prior ro commencing cny work within the ulti�nete right-of-way of State Routt 74.
��� � � ti �-r . • � y�
-t0. Prio� to the issuance of cemficatts of use and occuponcy, the following improvrments shall eirhu be
uutalled or bondtd for in a r,tarsner mecting the approval of tht �ry Tiafjic Engineer.
• An additional left tum lane on noKirbound SR74.
• Con.rauct a right tum Jan� on westbound E/ Pos�o.
• Partictpate on a pro rata basis in the consauction oj right rum lanes on nonhbound and
southbound SR74 and if decermined jointty by che Ciry and Caltrons, in a signal at che projecr
entrontt.
• Prior to the issuance of cerrifrcatu in use a�d a�eeupo�cy, the appliea�t shall ��rtu into an
agrremenr wirh the Ciry of Palm DeseK in a n�anner nreeti,eg the approvo! of tha Ciry Ti�ffic
Engirreer to participate in a pro rara basis in tht fo!lowing improv�nicnts:
• �den SR i 11 to thrrt lanes in tach dinctio�.
• Const�uct a Rghr tum lane on westbound SR111.
• Consaucc double lefr turn lanes on easrbound SR111.
• Consauct a right tum lane ort SR74.
• Corutruct doublt left ;um la,res on southbound SR74.
• Cortsaucr double n'ghr rum lanu on eastbaund El Pas�o.
liie joilowing mitigiotiov� m�asiurs wen added by the Ciry Council in itr actinn on rhe proj�cr.
41. Applicant shall provide a parking plan provrding su�cient porking fw employeu and consaucaon workers
on tht sire. Said plan shall be approved by tire Ciry of Palm Duut
41. Applicant shall provide a parking and ride sharing plan to be neviewrd and approved by the Ciry af Palrn
Dest�
43. Applitant and the Ciry shaU approach tht Calijomia Statt Deparv�ent of Tr�anspoKation and s�ek to
coordinatt the n�oin tntnanct of the .-iltamina project wirh sturounding dtvelopments. The goa! is to
minimiu che nu,nber of signaLr and acccss poincs along XighwQy 74.
18 '
�titi¢ation `ieasure� Voc IncorpQrated
:voae.
ERects �ot `titlQated to a Level of (nsiQni[ic�nce
Subject to the mitigation measures recited above, it is found that all potential impacts of the project on traff'ic
and circulation have been reduced to a level of insignificance.
vOtSE
�• x`�'i�d�Ll��i�i
Three effects were considered with respect to noise; constructioa effects, impacts an surrounding laad uses, and
highway noise.
Construction noise represents a short term impact. Construction activities, particWarly grading. can have a high
potential for significant noise impacts. Because some of the grading will occur ia areas next to residential areas
and adjacent to the Bighorn Institute, mitigation measures have beea added to restrict construction activities ia
appropriate ways.
With respect to noise level increases as a result of the project on surrounding noise levels, the Ciry Council
hercby determines that aoise leveLs will not increase perceptively over e�asting or future noisc levels. The targest
increase is aloag Highway 74 from Mesa View Drive to Cahuilla Way at 2.1 dBA.
Residential lots on site are expoud to noise levels just below 65 Db CNEL., and staadard building construction
practices will achieve outdoor to indoor noise level reductions of at least :A dBA. Because of the truck use on
Highway 74, however, impacis may be significant on a periodic basis. Therefore a mitigation measure for a
sound wail is included.
The EIR documents the acute hearing of the captive Bighorn sheep at the Bighom Iastitute. Noise from �ading
operations will exceed 70 dBA ia the peaned areas. Coastructioa activities are much louder than posc
construction activities, and therefore construction activities including grading operatioas are considered a
si�ificant impact. Post construciion auivities (suc4� as will occur on the site aher development) are in t6e mid
:�0 dBA range aad are aot considered significaat. Lawnmowers and other mechaaical devices induding golf cazts
could have si�ificaat effects absent the mitigation adopted above.
`iitia�tion �leasure�
�s-s. Prior co [he issuanet ojgrading permitr, the project proponent shal! product evidence acceptable ro the Ciry
Engineer tltat
a. A!! construcdon vthicles or equipmenG faed or n�obile, operated wirhin I,P00 feet o� a dwelling
unit or rhe southerrs prop�ny boundary sha/1 b� equipptd wrth 'rrsidenaa!" or "hosprra!" grade
►nufj?trt.
b. A/l oper+uions shal! complv with the Noise Elenrent and ,Voise Ordinance of the Ciry oj Palm
Dese�t.
c. Stockpiling and/or vehicle stagiirg areas shall be located ar jar as prr�cricable fro►n dwellings and
tht Bighom Insritute.
19
'(• �� �r .�� �
Based on comments received on the Draft EIR, the foUowing mitigatioa measuru have beea edited from that
shown in che EIR. Editiag is shown in uaderiine/strike-out.
45. P�io� ro the rssuanee oj a groding permi� the applicant shal! subneie a groding phasing p/an for rht r�rview
and approval of rhe City Enginur. Said plan sholl indicatt phasing oj g�ding such that no grading or
related acaviaes wil! occur within I,P00 feet of the Bighom Instituti propeny during lambing season
(Jaauary lst to June 3[_l1.
�6. G�ading activitits shall be lirnited to �eR«er►�r�r„
the followin� hours:
/ •. �. /
l/ i i/1 • q
.� ,�
/.l.y l�•
� /J • /�/�•
�� . . /
v � � .� . .�
• L �-�f
• /./ •.0 G/i•
: l�/ � :/�•
No grading shall be allowed on weeke«�e• federal holidays. Such limirarion shall bt placed as
condition on rhe gnading pennit in a manner meering the approva! of the �ry Engineer.
[u-�ii •i� . � .� ,r `�%i� . , ., , �: .
�one.
�Rects Vot '�titiaated to a Levei of insi¢eiticance
Grading and construction activities assoeiated with the projeci development will result in short term increases
ia aoise levels which could be potendally signiiicant without mitigation. However, in view of the proposed
mitigation measures, any such impacts will be reduced to a level of insigsuficance.
LIGHT AIVD GI.ARE
$i�nittcant ERects
The project will provide aew sources of light and glar� to the area absent adequate mitigapon. The project site
is atready partially surrounded by existing or proposed developmeat, and will not in itself con[ribute to a large
change in the area. The golf course is not to be lighted and this would allow less lighting intnuion thaa would
ordinarily occur.
�. � , �. .,.
47. Prior to the issuance o/ a�y building pemrir for habilable sauctuns. the applicant shal! subrnit a lighcing
plan for tht rtview cnd approva! oj tht Dvtctor of Communiry Dtvtlopntent a�td the Ciry Engineu. Said
plan shall indicate the locarion and pwpose oj all ligdrt sowtes on tht sitt. Lig/e�ng o�ri the pmject site
shalt be tlsat minirnalty necrssary for secu,iry and public health ond safiry purposu. O�namentat lightin�
:0
lighting jor the driving range and tennis couns, and lighted signs sha!! be allow�d only wne�e �t can be
demonsaated to the satisfaction of che Di�ector of Comnsuniry Dtve/op�nent that all light r¢�.s a�e dlrecred
downward and are confined to the premises.
-18. Prior to the issuonce of any building permir �or habirable sducturos, arrhitecrrual plans shal! be subrnrned
for rhe mitw ond approve! of the Citv Engineer and tht Di�ector of Co�srmuniry Dtv�loprnent. Said n��ew
is to ensun that all snuctuns ualiu non-glanc, non-rcf lectivt building materials including roojing .natenals,
pavin& pain� and axerio� �naterials.
�titiQation Neasures Added
None.
�titi¢ation hteasures Not incornorated
None.
ERects Y�t �titieated to a[.evel of Insieni�cance
voae.
PUBL[C SERVICES A,YD UT[L(TIES
SiQniticant ERects
No significant effects to any public services and utilities will occur as a result of the projea, nominal incresses
in manpower and service provision will be necessary however; all serviee demands can be accommodaced bv che
proposcd developm�nt, as d'ucussed in the EIR.
Additioaal elevated water storage is necessary to serve the project, as reported by the Coachella Vallev W'acer
Dis�rict, and these facilities may be located on or offsite. Their location is not now known, nor can it be known
un[il such time as the District reviews and approves the water storage and delivery faalities pian to be presented
by the applicaat aher approval of a project by the City of Palm Desert. The signiiicant effects, if any, will be
d'ucussed ia future envirocunental documentatioa to be provided in connection with this plaa.
The City of Palm Desert does aot possess complete jurisdiction over public scrvice and facility provision For this
Project. Szveral responsible agencies have jurisdiction over the project. It u believed, based on the lettcrs of
comment by the various service providers on the EIR, that the mitigation measures imposed will be acceptabic
to these purveyors. However, subject to the Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) such micigation mca.sures
are the respoasibility and jurisdiction of aaother public agenry and s�ould be adopted by said othcr agcncv.
These measures are identified with (').
�iitieation tiieasures
49. Prior to tht issuanct of any building penrtiu. projcct plans sha!! be rrviewed with the Rivcrside Counry
Sh�,i�j` Depanment Said mitw shall focus o�s security measurts or other design featuns ro ensure public
safery within the projett arra(')
S0. Prior to rhe i.ssuonce ojcertiftcatu of use and oceupanry, tht applicant shall pamicipate on a pro rara basu
in che fu,rding oj position.t and/or equiprnenr necusary for the Riverside Counry Shaiff Deparvn�nr ro
conrinut to operots at its cwnnt level of service in thrs poition of the City. Detemsinaaon oj neusswy
21
rneasures sha!! be mcdt by the Counry Shen� in co,uultation with the Ciry Manag+er and Direcmr of
CominuniN Deve/op�ent. (')
S1. .-1 fin flow oj 1,500 gallons per ►ninure (gpm) for a 1 hour duration at 20 psi rosidual operaang pressun
rnust be available beforr any con�busti6/e rnare,ia! rs plaeed on the job site.(•)
52. Pmvid�, or show rhen uisu a wcter sysrem capable ojproviding a potentia! go!!on ptr minute flow of 1,500
for single family, �500 for rriultifomily, and 3,000 fo� cornrnu+ciaL Tht actuc! fin flow evoilable fibm any
one hvdsant connected tv any given wnte� rn�in sha/l be 1,SOD gpm for nvo hours duration et 20 psi rrsidual
operating p�essure. (')
53. lhe required firt flow shall be available frorn a Sup�r hydrant(s) (6" x 4" x 2:�" x 2:4"), located not less
than ZS' nor rrror� than Z0�0' ringle farnih, 16S' mulaj¢nrily, and ISO' commarial fmrn arcy porrioR of tht
building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. Hydranu in,rtalltd below 3,000' elevation
shal! be oj che '`wec ban+el" rype•(')
S4. A combinanon of on-site and off-sire Super fve hydranrs (6"x 4"x 2:i"x 2 �i ) wil! be rrquind �aared not
less rhan 25' or more than 200' single family, 16S' multi jamity, ond 1S0' eommu+eia! from any portions
of che building(s) as measccred along approved vehicular travelways. 77te requi�rd �re flow shall be
available frnm any adjacent hydrant(s) in che system.!•)
S�. Comply with Title 19 of the Califomia Adnsinistraave Codt in a!1 A, E: I occupancia (cl�bhouse).(')
56. Instal! a complett f:r� sprinkler systern per .�IFPA 13. 7he post indicato� vdvt and fin depa�nnent
connecdon shal! be locattd ro the finnc, nor Icss than 2S' frorrt tht building cnd within 50' of an approved
hydranG 7his applits to all 6uilding wrth 5,000 squa�+e fut or morr building cna as r,seasurcd by rhe
building footprin4 including overhangs which an sprtnkln+ed per NFPA 13. 7he 6uilding ana ojaddiaonal
,floors is added in�or a cumu/aciv� rotaL Exempad arr one ored tw�o family dwe!lings,(•)
56. lnsta!! a jn alarm ( water flowl ¢s nquired 6y the Unifomi Building Codt 3803 jor sprinkler system. lnsra!!
tamper alamu on a!! suppty and concro! v�ves for spnnkier rysterns.(•)
57. Cenain designaced anas wi11 be required co be maintained as ftne lanu and shall be clearlv marked by
paineing and/or signs approved 6y the Fire .'Karshal.(•)
S� lnsra!! a�n a/arm as rrquii+�d by che L'n�fomr Building Codt and/oi Unifonrc Fiir Cod�. .�lfnimum
requinment is UL cenma! starion moniroring oj sprinkltr rysrtm ptr NFPA 71 and 72. Alarm plons an
required jor al! UL cenaol staaon rnonitorrd sys[ems when any intuior davius an nqui�ed or c;red (•)
59. tnsral! ponable �re exiinguishers per .YFPA, Pamphlet �10, but not less than ZAIOBC rn rating. Fiie
aringuishers must not bt over 75' walldng disranct. In addition to tht above, a 40BC fine erninguisher is
requind for commercia! kirchens. (')
60, lnsrall a hood/duct automaac fon ertingcishing sysc�n� if operaring a canmurial kitchen incluQin� but
not limited to, deep jryers. g�ills, charbroilers or ocher oppliances which produce grres� laden vQpors or
srnoke. ( •)
61. Install a dust co!lecting rystem cs per tht Unijoms Building Cod� Seetion 91Ua and Uni/'onri Firr Code
Secaon %6. lOz i/ conducting an operaaon chat produces airfiom� pamiclts. A carp�nt�r or woodworking
shop rs considend ont oj several indusaia! processts requiring dust collection. (•)
„
62 All buildingt shal! be accessible by an all-wearher roadway arending to within !SO' oj a!! po�tions oj che
e�rarior walLs of the fvst story. 77te ,nc�dway sha11 not b� !us than 24' of wobsaucted width and 13'6' oj
v�nical clearance. When pora!!e! parking is allowed the roodwey shall be 36' wid� with paiking on borh
sidu� 3�' wede witlt parking oR one sidt. Dead-end roads in rxetss oj ISO' shal! bt provrded with a
minimunr 4S' radius tum-oround (SS' in indusr�ia! developrnents). Fountains or garden islands placed in
the rniddJe of thest u�m-ara�nds shal! not erceed a S' radius or !0' diar»eter. Ciry star�dords may be mon
resnictive. (')
63. Whcntvt� acuss into prrvott proptny is conaoll�d through use o/gates, baniers, guard houses or si,nilm
rneans, p�vrsion shall be madt to facilitate accus by ernergrnry vthicl�s in a manner approved by the Fin
Deparvreent. All conanikd access davices thar an power op�mted sha11 hav� a radio-cona�vlled over-,id�
rystem capable of opening tht gate when acavated by a sptcial transmitrer locvted in ernergencv vehicles.
Devices shal! 6t tquipptd with backup pow�i facilitits to operate in rhe �vent of power failun. All
controlled occess devica that an not power operru�d shal! a[ro be approved by the Finr Dcparvnent
.bfinimum opening width shall be 16' with a niininium vurica! clearonct of 13'6". One "F" frequency
vansmiaer shol! be provided ro Fin Marsho/ for cach gate installed (•)
64. A dtad end singlt otcess over .i00' iR ltngth wrll requiir a secondary access, sprinklets or otht� mitigative
measuns approved 6y tht Fin �tifarshal. Under no ci�rumsrances sholl a single dead end aceess over 1,300
feer be accepted(•)
6S. A new nsidences/dwellings an required to have illuminated rrsidentia! addrtsses ►ntuing both Ciry and
Fire Depon�nent approvo� Shake shingle roo�s are not p�irnined rn the Ciry oj Palm Desen.
66. Comrnurial buildi�egs sho!! have illuminared addnsses of a size opproved by the Ciry.
67. All /'tn sprinklt� rystmis, futd fire suppnssion ryste»u ond clams plans n�ust be .subrnitted separately �o�
approvd prio�r to constnccaon. Subconcaccors should contacr the Fix Marshal's ofjSce for submina!
rcqui�menu. ( •)
6� Prior to th� issuanct of building pen►rits for eny nsidentia! saucruns, tfre applicarrt sha/l pay appropriare
school �niagaaon fees as nequired by rhe Desur Sands Unifred School Disrrict (')
64. Prio� ro the issuance of any buildi»g p�nnit for combusrible consaucrion. rhe develope� shal! subm�r
evidence to the Dinctor oj Communicy Dcvelopment that o water srorege ond delivery faciliti�s ptan has
been approved by tht C'VWD and any oth�r agrncies with jurisdicdon, cogether wich al! approp►iate permiu
and tnvironmtnta! docuntentation thertjor.(•)
70. Prior to the rteo�detian of a frna! map, the applicant shall construct or post securiry guaranteeing the
consnuction of the following pub/ic and/or prrvate imprr�vemena in conforrnance with applicable Ciry
standards:
• AU m�eet impro►+�mants
• Stam d�in facililiu
• Subdrain jacilidu
• Lmedseape rnigiotiore conaol jacilid�s (rrees, parks and public onas)
71. Prior to th� issttance oj building pennits, tht applicant shal! sstb►nit and havt approvcd by the Dirrctor oj
Co,nmuniry Developmae� a water corutrvation sratemtnt which demonsanru co►npliance with the
following.
0
72.
73.
7�.
• A landreapt plant pa/ecte compatible with identi�ed conditions utilizi�rg drnught nsistant vegttation
wh�rr appropriate.
� Reclain�ed wate� h�r bten used for lundscape inigarion to the attnt ftasible.
• Warer consuving ftatuns such as !ow volume woter clvseu and /avatory fauceu with limiud flow
valves an incorporated into rhe projecG .
Sewer improvement plons shall 6e submintd for tht r�vrew and approval of tke City Enginecr and tl�t
Coachella iiallry WQter Distnct prior to the issuanu oj building p�mrits. (•)
Prior to the issuance oj any building permiu, che applicant shall subniit a pharing plan to GTE Califania
for r�vitw ond app�val. ( •)
Prior to the issuanca of any building perrniu, rhe applicant shall subr�it a phasing plan to Palmer
Cable irrsion for r�view vnd approval. (•)
75. The proposed project shall confonn to applicable Publie Utilides Commission regularions. Builders wi!!
be required to complv with adopted Srate ene� conservation standards ptr Sectiorrs 14S1-IS42 of Tirle 20
oj the California Administrative Code and Sections P 20-1451 through P 2a1S42 of Titlt 24 of the Code.
7his rnitigation measun shall be moniror�d through the Ciry's building code enfo�r�rnent process.
76. Prior co tht issuanct of any grading permi4 rhe applicant shal! enrer inro an agrcemenr with cRe Coach�lla
t�a!!cy Mosquiro �ibatemen[ Disaict for rhe applicatinn of am actant bait for rye gnau to rhe g�olf course and
other oneps ojrhe p�jecr as detemrined nccusary/appropriatt by rhe Drsdict. Evidence of aecudon of said
agrcement shall bt submiaed to tht City Engine�r.(•)
T,. Prior ro th� issuance oj any grrrding pemsi� rhe applicanr sholl submit a nrosquito �nancgement plan jor
rht mzew and approval of tha Disoict ,Nanaga, Coachella I�allry MosquitoAbatunent Disrrict. Said p1Q,s
shall intlude:
rr�
f�
c.
A rnainttnance progra�n that involves vegetation managemen� 7i�is imponont issut can be
addressed in such a way os ro prevent weeds and aquatic v�g�tatio�r. which provide idea! baeding
arear for mosquito�s.
Insune accusibiliry for mosquiro cantrol personne! and equipmenr ro rhe site for inspecrion und
bratmtnG
Specifrc development plons sha!! incorporate vecror prevendon guidelines, scandards, and
checklists, as provid�d by che Stare oj Califomia D�pamnent of N�alch Services.
Evidenct that said plan has been approved by rhe Disuict sha!! be subrnirt�d to th� Ciry Engineer. (•)
:4
�titiQatiou Measure� Added
Based on comments received on the Draft EIR, the following mitigation measures have been edited from thosc
contained in the Draft EIR. Editing is shown in underlineJstrike-out.
78. Providt writrtn cenifrcation fibm the ' desiQrr �n �nee� that
hydrant(s) will 6t uucelled and wi!! pr�ce the rrqui�+cd /'v+e flow, or arscn�t f:ltd inspecaon by rhe Fin
Depan�nent p�ior to roquest for fcna! inspecrion. .
79. P�ror to the appJicarion for a building parnic, rhe daveloptr shal! fumish the original and nvo copies of rh�
wattr rystem plan to the Counry Fire Depw�vnenr jor „evit►v. No building pumit sha11 be rssued unal rhe
wattr rystern plan has bun approved by the Counry Fin Q�ie•f, (lpvn app,nva�, rhe ongina/ wrll be
r�tum�d One copy wil! be s�nt co th� �rspo�.tiblt inspecting aurhoriry.
Plan sha!! confor»� to �� hydrant rypes, location ond spacin� and tJu rystem shol! nucr hx /Iow
nqui,r„unts. Plans sho!! be signad by a Registend Cn�c EnBineer
earr+p�rr�with the following cenifrcarlori: 1 cenify that the design af the wata rystem is in ocro�dance wirh
the rcquirtrnents pnscribtd by tht Riverside Counry Fu�e Dtpmsmtr�" "System has becn designed to
provide a minineurn ga!!on pe� rniRure jlow of IS00, 2SUa 3UQ0."
The jollowing mitigation ►neasur� wcs added by the Ciry Council in iu action oR the project
80. Applicant shall providt a ncycling progra�n for,rview ond approve! by the Ciry of Palm Desen Co�n�uniry
Developrnent Deponment and Environm�ntd Co�rservarion Managrr.
tititi¢ation Messures Not incoroorated
None.
ERects :Yot tilitiQated to a Level ot insianifican�
None.
POPUU►TTOlY, HOUSiNG AND EMPLOl'�lENT
SiQnificant ERecb
SCAG defines a balanced regioual area as one w6en employment to population ratio 'ss between 038 and OS�
cmpioyees per resident. A ratio over OSS is coasidered 'job rich' aad uadec U38 is considered "job poos'. The
City of Palm Desert is currendy slightly job rich with a 1987 ratio of emQloyees to poQulation of 0.66. Bv the
year'A10, the ratio is expected to remain the same. The proposed projeci will help to ameliorate this condition
by providing housiag.
'�titi¢3tion Neasnres
None necessary.
i'�,jiti¢�tion rteasure�_ Added
�Ione.
25
ytiti�}tioa i�teasures �at tn�g��r��
Naac.
�Rect9 Vot ,V(lti�tsd to a Lrve! ot tasianif(ran�
�onc.
=b
Exhibit B
EXPLANATION FOR REJECTION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Twelve project alternatives were preseated in the EIR. The City Cound fus revicwed and considered such
alternatives ia lig6t of the adverse environmental effects which may result from tbe project in the reduction or
elimination of such effects which might be acwmplished by selection of one of the alternativu.
Each alternuive is summariud below aad spedfic economic, social. or other coasiderations that rendered such
alternaaves infe�.sible are set forth. T3e discussions below are intended to summariu, aad not fully restate che
evidence contaiaed in the Drah EIR, Respoase to Commeats, and tbe adminisuative record as a whole.
To the extent that the Ciry relies on economic justification for the rejeuion of alternatives, tbat justification has
been provided by the applicant and is contained in the Drah EIR (Appeadix D) and the Response to Comments
(DeLoitte & Touche study� Paaaell Kcrr Forster study).
PRQlEGT ALTERNATIVF.�
The NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE assumes that, in the near term. the project site remaias vacant. However,
the geaera! plan aad zoning districts appGcable to the majoriry of the properry contemplate ultimate deveiopment
of a planaed residential commuaity for five to sevea dwelling uaits per aae. 13e Af0 PROJECf
AI.TERNA'I'IVE does not puticularly guuaatee that t6ere is no developmeat� bat rat5er that a diffaent
dcvelopmeat would be proposed. Therefore. although implementatioa of the NO PR0IECT ALTERNATIYE
would elimiaate all impacts of the proposed projea in the shoct tam, in the tong term it has che potencial to
produce impacts equal to or greater thaa described ia the proposed projecx. Thereforc, thia alternaave is
rejected as haviag ao capability to reduce �caat eaviroameatal ai%cts.
The NO DEV�LOPMEIV'T ALT'ERNATIVE would indicate that the site will remain in its present undeveloped
state for t!u foreseeable future. 'The general plan and zoning would need to be reduced to a designacion tbat
would prohibit devetopmen� Whik the NO DEVELOPMENT ALT'ERNAT'IVE would eliminate all ideaaficd
urban-related impacts of the project, and is the environmentally superior alternadve in this sease, che Ciry would
be subjected to a challenge for depriviag the owner of all economic ase of tbe properry. Furthermore, the Ciry
would aot be able to reduce its job ricb 6ousing to employment ratio to a more balanced communiry as proposcd
by SCAG. Additionally, this alteraative does aa achieve the long-rauge planaing goals o: the Ciry as articulatcd
in the General Plan. For these reasons, tbis alternaave has been rejected.
The ALL RFSIDENTIAL PROJECT (lot and block configuration) would assume that the site would be
developed as a eonv�eatiooal reaidential project, eliminating the golf course aad aacillary club fadlities.
Approximateiy 896 resideatial lots with some common opea spacx areas could be developed uader such a
scenario. This akernative wouid have tbe satae impacts in terms of land form modiiicatioa but would have
greater impads ia tbe areit of air qusliry aad draiaage aad bydrology. The projeu would aLto have grcater
impacts in the arq p( biobgical resoutces, aesthetics and land uses sinco thc dwelling unit proportion u more
intense thaa what n wrreatly proposed aad there would be no opportuniry for iacorporating environmental
restoration pro�rams for Dead Iadisn Creek withia the golf co�use. Traffic geaeration is also more than twice
that projected foc tbe proposed proje,ct- Beeause ef the increised impacts, md the abseace of any reduction in
impacts over that of those anticipated from the project itset� this alternative has been rejected.
The BIGHORN INSTR'LJTE BUFFER ALTERNA'1'IVES include a pallet of three projed alteraaaves which
incorporate bui%rs of vuying exteat based oa previous and current biobgical resource surveys on the site.
n
Because there was a sigaificaat diversiry of expert opinion on the ezteat of any open space buffer necessary to
separate urbaa development from the operatioas of the Bighorn Iastitute, these buffers have been organized into
a s00 YARD BUFFER, a BIGHOR.v INSTITUTE RECOMMENDED BUFFER, and a CONSULTTNG
BIOLOGIST RECOMME:�IDED BL,'FFER. Al! b�'fers are measured from fence at the bottom of che Bighorn
tnstitute pcn.
The �00 YARD BUFFER would create an open space area of approximately 24 aaes with no uses withia it and
is environmcntally superior to the project. This alteraaave would force the relocation or eliminaaon of
approximately 11 residential lots and all or part of two golf couru holes. The impact difference of the project
with the 400 Y.4RD BUFFER as compazed to the propoud project is minimal in topical areas outside Biolo�cal
Resources, Noist, and Light and Glare. This alternative's impacu are so similar to the proposed project that
it is vircually the same. For this reason the alternative has been accepted subject to an inerease to 600 yards ia
a nor[heast�r[v directioa.
Thc BIGHORN INSTITUTE PROPOSED BL,'FPER calLs for the preservation of approximately L35 aaes (800
to 1.500 yard buffer) in a northeasterly direction from the Bighorn Institute pen. The BIGHORN ADVIS�RY
COyt;�fI1'TEE BUFFER (December 9, 1989) is slightly smaller, being 400 to 600 yards with an extension to
1,000 yarc3s. Either the BIGHORN INSTITLTE BiJFFER or the BIGHORN ADVISORY COMMTITEE
BUF�R will reduce the impacrs in the area of earth resources, draiaage and hydrology, biolo�cal resourcts
l inciudiag the preservation of Dead Indiaa Creek and rociry hillside slopes in the eastern portion of the properry)
and traffic. Construction noise impacts will also be reduced since coastruction will not occur as ciose to ehe
Bighocn Institute facility as will under the proposed project. However, overall the unpacts as a result of this
alternative are either equal or incremeatally tess in ma�itude from those of the project. The appGcant has
presented cvidence that this alternative i� economically infeasible since it produces only a 3% internal rate of
return before fmaacing and this amouat is not sufficient to attraci potential lenders. This is primarily beca�ue
the goif course canaot be built under this alternative, as the BIGHORN INSTITUTE PROPOSED BUFFER
prohibits golf course uses in the buffer area. The City Couacil coacurs ia this analysis and rejects this alternative
as infeasible for the economic reasons reated above. These economic reasons are tantamount to not proceeding
with the projeU at all, similar to the NO DEVELOPME:v"i' Ai.TERNATIVFS.
The COIvSliLTING BIOLOGIST RECOMME:vDED BIGHORN INSTITUTE BUFFER is discussed in the
biolo�cal resources sectioa as well as the project alternative section. This buffer would be 600 to 1,125 yards.
The impacts would be quit� similar to those of the BIGHORN INSTITUTE and BIGHORN ADVISORY
CO�t`'ITTEE BUFFERS. The applicaat has presented information conceraiag the ecoaomic infeasibiliry of
tfus similar to the B[GHORN IN5TITU'TE BUFFER and the City Council rejects this alternative for the re�sons
stated in the NO DEVELOPMENt ALTERNATIVE and the BIGHORN INSTIT'UTE BUFFER
A1.TER �1ATIVE.
SITE D£SIGN ALTERN.�?7VES
Two site desiga alteraatives are presented. AL.TERNATIVE SITE DESIGN/GOLF COURSE IN BUFFER
�.RE.� AL,TERNATIVE would provide a buffer. The size of the buffer as drawn in the BIGHORL
1�STITUTE RECOMMENDED BUFFER (135 acres) is assumed, but six go(f courx fsoles woutd be abie to
be placed within the Qroposed buffer. The same number of units woufd be developed. This altemative has the
samc impacts to traffic. biological resources (Dead Indian Creek) and similar impacts in the area of earth
resources, Zir qualiry, drainage and hydrology, and aesthetics. This alternative mitigates partially any effecu on
the Bighorn Iastitute by separating structura! development from tbe Insiitute pen by a considerable margin.
Since the golf course is not used at night, the aight time activity would be similar to that ex{xcted under the
natural condition. This alternative also results ia reduced impacts on the Desen Wazh. The applicant has
presented evidenco thac the alternative is economically infeasible because at least six golf holes would aot have
residential frontage, which would make the project less a[tractive and less competicive with simiIar projecu in
?3
the area. The iateraal rate of retura before Finaacing i� 11%, which is not sufticieat to attract potential leaden.
The iatecnsl rate of roturn to attrau poteatial leaders in this uea musi be a miaimum of 2Q-ZS%. Therefore,
the Ciry Couacil rejew this alternative u economicalty infeasibie aad, because lenders will not fmance such a
project, taatamouat to the NO DEVELOPMEN't ALTERNA'TIVE.
The alternativ�e SiTE DESIGN/HIGH DENSt'i'Y RESIDENTIAL ALTERNATIVE was req�sested by
representatives of the Bighora Inatitute and would conaist of a combination of traditional single-family and higher
densiry multifamily development witb a Bighorn Iauitute b�ftr (13S acres). No golf course would be included
in the buffer. 140 acres would be devoted to golf course in the development area and 77 acres would remain
for residensia! dev�lopmenG
This alteraative wouSd require thu many of the uaits be located in mid-rise strurnues (4 stocies). While tbil
might be feasibk developmeat ia anotber locatioa, aone of the uses currently ia the uea have buildings this tall
'The impacts in moat of the topical areas other than biological resourets would be the same ar similar. The
applicant has presented evidena rejecting this alternative beca�se tlu high densiry developmeat is iacoasistent
with aad objectionabie to surrouadiag residendal developmen� It aLso does not provide suffideat rosidenaal golf
course frontage to make it competiave with other similar projects. This is a direct effea on iu ecoaomic
feasibility. This is more of a projea for a ctatral urbanized area of tbe CoacbeUa Valley, rather than aa area
at the fringes of the City. For these reasons che City has rejecied tbis alteraative.
ALTERNA7TVE S1TFS
Thcre were four alternative sites considered ia tbe EIR. The alternative site of nor[hera Palm Desert is located
east of Monterey Avenue between Frank Sinatra Drive and Gerald Ford Drive. Tbis site is not owaed by the
appGcaat. The site is in an Adive Blow Site Area and there are greater potential for sigaificaac impacxs to earth
resources and air qualiry thaa under the pcoposed prosect. Impacts to drainage aad hydrology, cultural �esources,
aesthetics and energy are considend comparable to che propoaed project. Impacts co biolo�cal resources are
more severe as tbe siie is located within che habitat ase� of the Coachella Vatley fringe-toed Lizard, a species
designued cadaagered by che State of C.1lifornia and tlsreatened by the US. Fisb and Wildlife Service. Thit
aiteraative ba's been rejeaed for its impact on che Fringe-toed Lizard 6abitat and since tho applicaac does nat
own the site.
Aaother alternative site, PROJEGT [N COMBINA'i'iON WITH ADlACBM' WES'TINGHOUSE 'E.4S'I"
(SUNCREEK) PROPERTY assumes that the Altamira Coantry Club site is developed in combinacion with
Westinghouse Easc. The WFSTINGHOUSE FAST PROPERTY w►ould be combiaed in the development plaa
for Altamira, Presumabiy'luosenitt�' th� Plaa S° tha� the buffer couid be more feasibly attaiaed Impacu would
be similar to the proQosed project ie most of the topical areat. The WESTINGHOUSE EAST PROPERTY
is privately owaed, however, aad the applicaat is not ia aay present ncgotiations to purchase it. The
WESTINGHOUSE EAST PROPERTY was recently the subject of a developmeat application of iu own, and
therefore actualty lesa uaits vNould be available uader a combiaed sanuio tbaa if the properties were developed
separatety. 'Tbe apQlicatu cs�ot obcu° � ProP�rtY �� u�e to add to their project and therefore this
alternaave is ooa�ideted iat'e�bk bY the Ciry Council.
The SHIRI.EY PROPER'TY ALTERNAT'IVE is located immediately south of tbe BHI site. 'The site lies
outside of the cihr in Riverside Caunc'Y, �O� COQ1muniq' pla° desi�ua appr°�°mately 150 acres of the
nortbwest portion ot the proQerty at tw�o to five dwelliag uaits an acre aad tbe remai.nder of the 38S acre
propemr � permaaent opea spaRx. This site does aot pravide s�iiideat buildable uea for the project as
proposed aad reqnires purauic through aaothe� J��sd��ion other thaa the C'ity of Palm Desert- 'T'be developmenc
of this alteraativp a►ould ako result ia the disco°tiguous pauera of devebpmcnt whic5 would necessitate
extension of iahastruccure ficilities aad Posu�bh' °P�n other previou:ly uade�eloped aad undesigaated pucels
for development. For these reasoas che Ciry Couacit has rejected this atcernwcive.
29
A IAND EXCi-IANGE with the Bureau of Land Maaagement (BLM) was coasidered 73e available BL�i
ownerships were examined in the nearby area. Each of the parcels would require a General PSan Amendment
to devetop because the jurisdictioas in w+hich tbey are located have designated them for permanent opea space.
Gradiag aad access for chese parctls is also more difficult than under the proposed project, since theu open
space characterizaaon has minimiud the amount of infrastruciure that has beea extended to them. One BL.Li
parce! located ia the Ciry of Indian Wells is potentially developable. This property is 480 aaes in siu aad is
located at the mouth of Deep Caayon. It is outside of the City of Palm Desert. However, an agreemeat exists
betwcen the Bureau of Land Management and the University of California (the owner of the adjacent Deep
Canyon Research Facility) granting access to the properry by UC personnel and students for research purposes.
Therefore, development of this property would incerfere wich that agreement. Based on this constraiat, the Ciry
Council has rejected this alternative as iafeasible.
0
Eacbibit C
STATEME�IT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Ciry Council of the Ciry of Palm Desert fmds that the mitig,stion mexsures diaciused ia Fxhi'bit A will, whea
implemented, mitigate or subsiantially reduce most of the si�aficant effects identified in the EIR. Nonoiheless,
certain siignif'caat eavironmental impacts of the project ue uaawidabk even after iacorporation of all featible
mitigaaoa measures. For such effects, the Ciry Couacil has balaaced the benefits of tbe project against such
unavoidable adverse enviroamental risks ia apQroviag it. In this regard, the City Council hereby fmds tbat all
feasible mitig,ation measures identified ia the EIR, as well as the aew measures added in F�chi'bit A, have been
and will be impkmeated with the project ia that aay �csat uaavoidabk effects remaiaing ue acceptabk due
to the foUowing speci&c economic. social, and otber coatiderations, including but not limited to project beaefits,
bued upon the fads set forth above, in the final EIR, and ia the public record of the consideration of this
projeu. i'he unavoidable adverse impacts are ideatified ia ExSu'bit A.
Equitablt Caaddeivdonr
The EIR and the record for this project document that the Bighorn Institute located its pen fadlities ia full
knowledge, or with the potential of full knowledge, of the planning activides of the Counry of Riverside and che
Ciry of Palm Desert. This includes a recognition. auual or coastructive, that the site was zoned and plaaned for
residential uses. The evideace available in the pubGc records of the Bureau of Land Maaagemeat even aote that
this consideration was takea into account, paraculsrly in tbe appraisal report as value for tbe laad was se� It
must be as.sumed that tbe Bighorn Institute knew of this issue aad co�idered the location of their 30-acre pen
so close to the bouadary with future development ia Palm Desert to be acceptable.
To the extent that tbe Bigborn Iauitute may have coasidered this pro�cmity acceptable at one time, buc now no
longer considers it acceptable, is a factor of internal concern to the Bighorn Institute operations. The C;ry of
Palm Desert is not consideriag a geaeral plan amendmeat a zoae change on this properry from open space to
residential, but rather an implemeatation of its oan general plaa If problems have arisea that were aot expeded
by the Bighora Institute at the time that Bighorn Insatute established so close to residential properry, the Ciry
Council of the City of Palm Desert beli�ves that it is incumbeat upoa the Bighorn Iauitute to iook to their own
site or aaother site to mitigate impacts to their faciliaa as they may aaw e�ost or as they may e�dst in tbe future.
The establishment of aa opea spaa buffer with no u�es in it imposes a burden on the City of Palm Desert of
Gtigation, inequity, and loss of revenues for a problem tbat the City of Palm Desert not only did not create, but
made completely pubGc through its records aad pre-annexation utivities. 'I'ture wu ampfe opportuairy througb
the pre-zoning process for the Big�orn Institute to make ti�e Ciry of Palm Desert aware of any conflicts witl�
their faciliry. HoNvever, Bighorn Inuitute located its 30 acre pen oniy 300 feet from tbe boundary of the Altamira
property, which is also tbe municipal boundary. For the Bigborn Iauitute to assume tbat Palm Desert would
essentially change its geaeral plaaaiag program to accommodate an adjaceat land use wtuch had willingly moved
so ciose to tbe ciry it aa uareasoaable expecia[ioa lt also deprives the Ciry of Palm Desert of the substantial
revenue from this project, as w�ell as the contribudon to the City's jobs/housing balance.
These overriding coatiderations are ody stated in an abundaace of cautioa provided there j,z any impacx co the
Bighorn Iastitute faality at a1L As documented ia the fmdings, the City of Palm Desert is penuaded by those
experts who believe tbat ao but%r, or ody a small buffer, is necestary to mitigate all cffects. Thercfore, tbcre
are no significaat effects to biologipl resources that need to be overridden ia this sense. However, to the cxteat
tbat unanticipated impacts will occur, and reco�izing the permanence of the Altamira devetopmeat ona ic is
31
cstablishcd, the City Council of Palm Desert hercby sets forth the above rationale for proceedin� with the projca
in view of the slight poteatial for these impacu.
The applicant has also offered to relocate the lambing pen at his expease as a means of mitigating the impacts
of thc project. While this offer u being considered, a� resolution has been achieved.
Ov�e�ol! Plmveing Consider�otiavts
The Ciry Council of the City of Palm Dcsert has for sometime had an adopted geaeral plaa which has beea
harmoniud with the Cit}�s poGdes for overall growth of both housing aad jobs. The City has chosen in its
general plaaning scheme to conceatrate the job produci.aQ uus ia the center of the Ciry prinapally along
Highway 111, while using as residential areas portioas of the City away from Hig,hway 111. To the extent this
project is not developed or not developed as propose�, this would preveat the City from achieving its full
expeaatioa In adopang these polides, it �s important to note that the Ciry Couacil strove for balance between
environmental quality objectives, fisca! responsibility, and laad use patterns. Al[hough this projeci individually
will not defeat the Cit3is goals entirely in cheu areas, it is a significant siep towards compromising the goals that
thc Ciry had for general planning.
32