2002 05 15 RDAT4'1t 4 4 Q"
Redevelopment Agency Agendas are now
Available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-quinta.org
Redevelopment Agency
Amended Agenda
LA QUINTA CIVIC CENTER
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
SPECIAL MEETING
Wednesday. May 15. 2002 - 7:00 P.M.
Beginning Res. No. RDA 2002-09
• •-•_i
A. Roll Call:
Board Members: Adolph, Pena, Perkins, Sniff, Chairperson Henderson
At this time, members of the public may address the Redevelopment Agency on any
matter not listed on the agenda. Please complete a "request to speak" form and limit
your comments to three minutes.
Please watch the timing device on the podium.
Leff@ 114•�
CONFERENCE WITH AGENCY'S REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR, MARK WEISS, PURSUANT
TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 CONCERNING POTENTIAL TERMS AND
CONDITIONS OF ACQUISITION AND/OR DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF JEFFERSON STREET, SOUTH OF AVENUE 52 (APNs 770-
200-009 THROUGH -010; 770-260-017; 772-150-001 THROUGH -005; 772-290-001
THROUGH -007, AND -009 THROUGH -013; 772-310-002 THROUGH -007, AND 009-
THROUGH -013). PROPERTY OWNER/NEGOTIATOR: KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC./CHEVIS
HOSEA.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. PUBLIC HEARING TO REVIEW AND TAKE TESTIMONY ON THE MID -YEAR SECOND FIVE-YEAR
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PROJECT AREAS
NOS. 1 AND 2 AND TO COMMIT ADDITIONAL PROGRAMS TO THE SECOND FIVE-YEAR
PLAN.
A.
A. RESOLUTION ACTION (S)
2. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
REGARDING PURCHASE OF PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS "THE RANCH" TO CONSIDER
THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS: 1) CERTIFICATION BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT 2002-435 (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 1999081020) REGARDING AN
AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE AND JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS; 2)
CONSIDERATION BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO EXERCISE THE OPTION CONTAINED
IN THE OPTION AGREEMENT, REVISION TO EXHIBIT "B" TO THE OPTION AGREEMENT, AND
TO ENTER INTO THE AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE AND JOINT ESCROW
INSTRUCTIONS BY AND BETWEEN THE LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND KSL
LAND HOLDINGS, INC., REGARDING PURCHASE OF THE 525-ACRE PROPERTY KNOWN AS
THE RANCH, LOCATED GENERALLY NORTH OF AVENUE 54, WEST OF JEFFERSON STREET,
SOUTH OF AVENUE 52, AND EAST OF THE CORAL REEF MOUNTAINS; AND 3)
CONSIDERATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD TO
ADOPT RESOLUTIONS MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
SECTION 33445, AND CONSENT/APPROPRIATION OF FUNDING.
A. RESOLUTION ACTION
ADJOURNMENT - Adjourn to the next regular meeting to be held on Tuesday, May 21, 2002, in the
City Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92553.
-2-
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of La Quinta, California, do hereby declare that the
foregoing Amended agenda for the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency Special meeting of May
15, 2002, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico
and on the bulletin boards at the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce and at Stater Bros., 78-630
Highway 111, on Friday, May 14, 2002 at 6:00 p.m..
DATED: May 14, 2002
Alqf SGREEK
Agency Secretary, City of La Quinta, California
PUBLIC NOTICE
The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed
for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's Office at 777-7025, 24 hours in advance
of the meeting and accommodations will be made.
-3-
T,itlt °F4Q"
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: May 15, 2002
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Public Hearing to Review and Take Testimony STUDY SESSION:
on the Mid -Year Second Five Year PUBLIC HEARING:
Implementation Plan for the La Quinta
Redevelopment Agency Project Areas Nos. 1
and 2 and to Commit Additional Programs to the
Second Five Year Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the Mid -Year Second Five Year Implementation Plan and approve the inclusion
of the Projects and Programs listed therein in the Mid -Year Second Five Year
Implementation Plan.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.
BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW:
Per the Community Redevelopment Law, the Redevelopment Agency must adopt a
five-year implementation plan that identifies:
• The housing and non -housing redevelopment projects that will be implemented
during a five year period;
• The financial resources the redevelopment agency will pledge to implement the
projects and programs;
• The blight the projects and programs will alleviate; and
• The affordable housing units the redevelopment agency will facilitate that
feature long-term affordability covenants.
The Agency adopted the Second Five -Year Implementation Plan for Redevelopment
Project Area No. 1 and No. 2 in July 1998. The Redevelopment Law requires the
Agency to publicly review the Implementation Plan no earlier than two years and no
later than three years after the Plan was adopted. Further, if the Agency desires to
G:\WPDOCS\CC Stf Rpts\5Yrmidyrrpt.doc
undertake new redevelopment projects and programs that were not listed in the
Implementation Plan, then these projects must be added to the Plan before they can
be implemented. A public hearing must be conducted for the mid-term review before
the Agency may add projects to the Implementation Plan. The public hearing notice
for this meeting was published for three consecutive weeks on April 1 Oth, 17th, and
24th. Further, the notice was posted in four areas within both Project Areas for three
consecutive weeks.
The attached report entitled Five -Year Implementation Plan Review details the projects
and their related costs that the Agency has implemented since July 1999. Further,
this document also identifies the projects that staff recommends be added to the
Second Five Year Implementation Plan. These projects were developed from prior
consultations with the Agency Board.
Following the Public Hearing,staff will incorporate the Agency Boards direction into the
Second Five Year Implementation Plan.
FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the Agency Board include:
1. Approve the Mid -Year Second Five Year Implementation Plan and approve the
inclusion of the Projects and Programs listed therein in the Mid -Year Second
Five Year Implementation Plan; or
2. Do not approve the Mid -Year Second Five Year Implementation Plan and
approve the inclusion of the Projects and Programs listed therein; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted,
rierrryran
munity Development Director
Approved for submission by:
Attachments: Thomas P. Genovese, Executive Director
1. Mid -Year and Second Five Year Implementation Plan
G:\WPDOCS\CC Stf Rpts\5Yrmidyrrpt.doc 002
ATTACHMENTS)
U
ATTACHMENT 1
FIVE-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVIEW
LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Project No. 1 and Project No. 2
May 3, 2002
In July of 1999 the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") adopted the
Second Five -Year Implementation Plan ("Implementation Plan") for La Quinta
Redevelopment Project No. 1 ("Project No. 1 ") and La Quinta Redevelopment
Project No. 2 ("Project No. 2"). Since 1999 the Agency has been actively
implementing the redevelopment, economic development and housing
initiatives outlined in the Implementation Plan.
The California Community Redevelopment Law provides that the Agency shall
conduct a public hearing at least once during the five-year term to receive
testimony regarding redevelopment and housing implementation activities.
Further, the Law provides that the Agency shall conduct a public hearing if it
intends to amend the Implementation Plan to add or delete projects during the
five-year term.
This document summarizes the Agency's progress towards implementing the
initiatives summarized in the Implementation Plan, and serves as the basis for
the mid -point public review and discussion. Further, it identifies new
redevelopment and housing projects the Agency proposes to add to the
Implementation Plan. If these projects are approved by the Agency after the
May 15, 2002 public hearing, the Implementation Plan will be revised
accordingly.
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN CONTENTS
The Law requires that the Agency prepare an implementation plan every 5
years that details the following:
The anticipated redevelopment, economic development and affordable
housing projects and programs that will be implemented during the
five year period;
The blight and the redevelopment purposes the project and program
proposals will address;
The anticipated revenues and expenditures for the five year period; and
The housing projects and programs that will preserve and increase the
supply of housing affordable to very low, low and moderate
households. _4
FIRSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 1 004
The Agency has two Redevelopment Project Areas and prepares a
consolidated implementation plan for these two project areas. The first
implementation plan was adopted in December 1994. This document was
subsequently replaced by the current Implementation Plan.
PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS IMPLEMENTED SINCE 1999
Project No. 1 and Project No. 2 were created to address physical and
economic blighting conditions in La Quinta. Project No. 1 was established in
1983 to redevelop and expand deficient public infrastructure and facilities, to
revitalize La Quinta's Cove and Village communities, and to address deficient
community recreation facilities. Project No. 2 was created in 1989 to provide
a mechanism to remove impediments to commercial and residential
redevelopment by addressing acute infrastructure and public facility
deficiencies. Both Projects also assist the City of La Quinta with achieving its
affordable housing mandates per State planning laws.
Redevelopment/Economic Development Projects Initiated or Completed
The Agency's redevelopment and economic development activities have been a
combination of developing/implementing new project/strategies, completing
projects initiated in prior fiscal years and expanding the Project Areas'
marketing program. These activities are designed to address physical and
economic blight, to encourage private sector investment by removing
impediments to development and redevelopment, and to provide for increased
sales, and economic activities within the Project Areas. The following
activities have been completed since the adoption of the Implementation Plan:
Project Area No. 1 - Redevelopment/Economic Development Improvements
Demonstration Streetscape
Approved. • June 2000
Expenditure: $500,000
This project was competed in December 2001. The improvements entail
creating a prototypical Village street theme on Calle Estado. New themed
streetlights, sidewalks, curbs, and gutters were constructed, the street was
reconstructed with center median on -street parking, and landscaped areas and
art features were installed.
Commercial Property Improvement Program
Approved.- May 2000
Expenditures to Date: $130, 740
FIRSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 2 0 0 5
The Agency instituted a commercial property rehabilitation loan program that
originates property improvement loans for Village commercial properties.
Assistance of up to $15,000 is offered to partially underwrite facade, building,
signage, parking and site landscaping improvement costs. In 2001-02, the
program was expanded to include assistance for new construction. To date,
15 properties have participated or are currently participating in this program.
La Quinta Historical Museum
Approved: June 2000
Expenditure: $115, 000
The Agency purchased the La Quinta Historical Museum, which is located in
the Village. Operated by the La Quinta Historical Society, the Museum houses
exhibits on La Quinta's cultural and historical heritage. Museum expansion is
currently in the design phase, with construction anticipated to begin in fiscal
year 2003-04.
Marketing "The Village"
Approved. July 1999
Expenditure: $50,000
The Agency continues to work with the Village property and business owners
to jointly pursue marketing opportunities. This includes sponsoring various
events in the Village, initiating a seasonal/special event banner program, and
working with property owners to address impediments to development.
Project Area No. 1 - Capital Improvements
Improvements to the Washington Street and 1-10 Interchange
Expenditure: $50, 000
This project included the widening of Washington Street, replacing the
Washington Street Bridges over the railroad tracks and Interstate 10, widening
and replacement of Varner Road, removing and replacing the westbound
ramps, widening the existing eastbound ramps, and signalizing the ramp
termini and the Varner Road/Washington Street Intersection.
Calle Rondo Channel Storm Drain Improvements
Expenditure: $ 60, 864
The improvements provide an alternative method of conveying nuisance water
by the installation of a subterranean conduit system at the Calle Rondo
Channel. The project included landscaping of the entire channel area.
City Wide Median Project - Ave 50/Sinaloa/Calle Tampico
Expenditure: $6,191.61
FIRSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 3 006
The project included the installation of the City's "desertscape" landscape
theme within the medians on Calle Sinaloa (Avenida Bermudas to Eisenhower
Drive); on Avenue 50 (Washington Street to Eisenhower Drive); and on Calle
Tampico (Washington Street to Eisenhower Drive).
18-Acre Park Site at Westward Ho
Expenditure: $50,000
Developed a master plan for the proposed park at the northeast corner of
Adams Street and Westward Ho Drive.
Cove/Mini Park Expansion
Expenditure: $46, 346.18
This project enlarged the mini park at Eisenhower Drive and Calle Colima.
Phase VI - A Village Commercial Capital Improvements
Expenditure: $Z 100,283.35
Infrastructure improvements in the Village commercial area (Avenida
Montezuma, Calle Estado, Avenida La Fonda, Avenida Bermudas) included
street, storm drain, and water/sewer enhancements.
Cove Oasis/Lake Cahuilla Trail Capital Improvements
Expenditure: $ 16, 362.28
Phase I of the Cove Oasis Trailhead improvements included the installation of
an interpretive sign, an emergency phone, irrigation, drinking fountain,
electricity, and landscaping.
CVAG/Jefferson Phase 1 Construction
Expenditure: $ 138,378.34
The project included widening Jefferson Street to its ultimate width from
Avenue 54 to Highway 1 1 1. Improvements included medians, signals, and a
roundabout at Avenue 52.
Phase II Fritz Burns Park Improvements
Expenditure: $5, 184.68
Improvements included the restoration of the lighting system for the southern
four courts, installation of dasherboards for roller hockey, and conversion of
one tennis court to a basketball court.
Citywide Street/Sidewalk Improvements
0 _k i)
F:/RSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 4
007
Expenditure: $35,925.13
This project combined several small projects including: Avenue 50 Low Water
Crossing Interim improvements; Sagebrush Drive sidewalk improvements;
Dune Palms Road street and sidewalk improvements; Washington Street
sidewalk and sound wall installation; Avenida La Fonda sidewalk installation;
Calle Tampico, Park Avenue, and Avenue 50 Bikeway improvements; and Calle
Durango/Avenida Juarez intersection improvements.
La Fonda Street Improvements
Expenditure: $12, 425. 00
Demonstration streetscape improvements on Avenida La Fonda will include
decorative streetlights, new sidewalk, curb and gutter, street reconstruction
and re -striping.
Project Area No. 2 - Redevelopment/Economic Development Improvements
Miles/Washington Property Specific Plan/Marketing
Approved.• February 2002
Expenditure: $120, 000
The Agency purchased this property in 1995 to reserve sites for affordable
housing. Subsequent to the purchase the City of Indian Wells facilitated the
development of the Tennis Gardens that spurred private sector interest in
developing a portion of the Agency's property with hospitality uses. In order
to accommodate the expedient processing of both hospitality and affordable
housing uses, the Agency prepared a specific plan that entitles this property
for hospitality, retail commercial, residential and park uses. The specific plan
was adopted by the City in February 2002. The Agency is now marketing a
portion of the property to hospitality developers and operators, and residential
developers.
Marketing Highway 1 1 1 Properties
Approved.• July 1999
Expenditure: $100, 000
The Agency continues to work with Highway 111 property owners to jointly
pursue marketing opportunities. This included promoting development
opportunities at the International Council of Shopping Centers' Palm Springs
Conference, working with property owners to address impediments to
development, and facilitating development proposal entitlement needs.
One Eleven La Quinta Centre
Initiated: March 2002
F:/RSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 5
008
Expenditure: N/A
The Agency is working with the property owner and retailers to facilitate the
reuse and expansion of the Centre's commercial uses. New retailers are
scheduled to include Staples and Ross Dress -for -Less.
Project Area No. 2 - Capital Improvements
Underground Utility Improvements
Expenditure: $1, 440.00
This project undergrounded the existing overhead utilities located adjacent to
Washington Street.
Highway 1 1 1 Traffic Signals and Street Lamps
Expenditure: $ 1, 807.94
This project included the installation of a signal and street lighting on Highway
1 1 1 at Plaza La Quinta.
Phase VI-C Westward Ho.
Expenditure: $ 1, 699, 849.60
The project provided for surface and subsurface improvements in the
residential area west of Jefferson Street, including the south side of Westward
Ho from Roadrunner Lane east. Improvements included undergrounding of
existing overhead utilities, and street, storm drain, water and sewer
enhancements.
Phase VI-D - Sagebrush, Bottlebrush, Saguaro
Expenditure: $928,184.15
The project provided street, storm drain and sewer improvements to the
residential area east of Washington Street at Sagebrush Avenue.
Citywide Street/Sidewalk Improvements
Expenditure: $ 183,276.08
This project combined several small projects including: Avenue 50 Low Water
Crossing Interim improvements; Sagebrush Drive sidewalk improvements;
Dune Palms Road street and sidewalk improvements; Washington Street
sidewalk and sound wall installation; Avenida La Fonda sidewalk installation;
Calle Tampico, Park Avenue, and Avenue 50 Bikeway improvements; and Calle
Durango/Avenida Juarez intersection improvements.
0.1
F:/RSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 6 009
Point Happy/Cliffhouse Sidewalk Improvements
Expenditure: $1 Z 421. 50
Project includes the installation of a sidewalk on the north side of Highway
1 1 1 from the Point Happy Center to the La Quinta Cliffhouse restaurant.
O
FIRSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 7 `' t `-'
Housing Projects - Both Project Areas
The Agency is pro -actively implementing a multi -faceted housing program to
meet both the Agency's and the City of La Quinta's state housing mandates.
Agency housing activities center around the following initiatives that afford
housing opportunities to very low, low and moderate -income households:
• Facilitate new housing development by working with developers tc
purchase property and underwriting new construction;
• Fund silent trust deed loans that afford home purchase opportunities;
and
• Fund residential rehabilitation loans that improve the affordable homes in
the community, or facilitate the conversion of dwelling sanitary systems
from aging septic tanks to the City's sewer system.
Specific programs and projects include the following:
La Quinta Housing Program
On -Going
Expenditures Since July 1999: $5, 0011530
Since the inception of the program in 1996, the Agency has funded more than
$6.9 million in silent second trust deeds for home purchases (158 loans
funded), and approximately $178,000 in residential rehabilitation loans (1 1
loans funded). During the past 30 months, the Agency has funded 106-
second trust deed mortgages for 78 low and 28 moderate -income households.
Spanos Apartments
Approved.• July 1999
Expenditure: $300,000
In an effort to increase the number of affordable family rental units, the
Agency provided assistance to this new 200-unit apartment complex to
reserve 20 units that are affordable to moderate -income households. This
transaction entailed trading property with the Spanos Corporation, and
providing financial assistance. The units will remain affordable to moderate -
income family households for 30 years.
Building Horizons
On -Going
Expenditures Since July 1999: $850,000
F:/RSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc $
011.
The Agency annually funds a new unit construction program with Building
Horizons that yields two to three single-family dwellings annually. This
program is unique in that local junior and senior high school students
participate in the design, construction and marketing of these units. To date,
17 new dwellings, 7 since the adoption of the Implementation Plan, have been
constructed that were sold to low-income households. All of the units feature
30-year affordability covenants.
La Quinta Rental Housing Program
On -Going
Expenditures Since July 1999: $267,131.94
In 1995 the Agency acquired 50 single-family dwellings in the Cove; the
Agency purchased these units in order to secure a prior investment and
preserve the community's supply of affordable rental housing. Six units were
subsequently sold (5 since the adoption of the Implementation Plan) to very
low and low-income households (with long-term affordability covenants), and
very low-income Section 8 households occupy the remaining 44 units. In
addition, one additional unit is pending a sale to the existing tenant. Property
management is through a local firm. The Agency is continuing to rent the
remaining units, using the resources of a local property management firm for
rent collection, maintenance, and tenant relations matters. Because of the age
of these units, the Agency is also substantially rehabilitating the units, funding
interior, exterior and site improvements and upgrades.
Assessment/Sewer Connection Subsidy Program
On -Going
Expenditures Since July 1999: $90, 740.40
The Agency continued to implement the assessment/sewer hook-up subsidy
program. Applications for assistance were approved for 12 very low, low and
moderate -income households during the current year and another 12 approved
applications are pending resolution of funding issues brought about by AB 67.
This program funds street improvement assessments and sewer connection
costs for very low, low and moderate -income households. Since the program
was established in 1989, approximately 533 households have been assisted
through this program.
Calle Tampico/Eisenhower Apartments
Approved: June 2001
Expenditure: $350, 000
Rehabilitation assistance was provided to facilitate the development of
FIRSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 9
019
additional off-street carports, and to fund exterior facade improvements. In
return, the owner is reserving 14 units that will be leased at rents affordable to
moderate -income family households. The units will remain affordable for 30
years. A fire subsequently destroyed 8 units in this complex, and the Agency
is currently renegotiating the rehabilitation loan agreement.
Mira Flores Family/Senior Neighborhood Development
Approved., September 2000
Expenditure: $14, 000, 000
Concluded an agreement that transferred Catellus Residential's interest in this
development to Desert Cities Development. Catellus elected to abandon this
project due to the pending sale of the residential development group. Desert
Cities Development is currently building the remaining single-family dwellings
and apartment units. This development will generate 46 moderate -income
affordable single-family dwellings, and 116 senior apartment units that will be
rented at affordable rents to very -low and low-income senior households. The
Agency involvement entailed site acquisition, on -and off -site improvement
funding, and serving as a conduit for 4% tax credit financing.
Avenue 48/Adams Street Housing
In Process
Expenditure: N/A
The Agency owns a 50-acre parcel located southeast of the Avenue 48 and
Adams Street intersection. Discussions are underway with the Recreation
Group of Companies (RGC) to develop approximately 150 moderate -income
affordable single-family court homes, and 36 market rate single-family units.
The agency anticipated concluding and affordable housing agreement by the
summer of 2002.
Avenue 47/Adams Street Senior Apartments
In Process
Expenditure: Anticipated to be $1,000,000
Southern California Presbyterian Housing has an option agreement to purchase
this Agency owned property and construct 80 apartment units that would be
affordable to very low and low-income senior households. Site planning
activities are underway which will determine the final amount of Agency
assistance. An affordable housing agreement should be concluded by Summer
2002.
Affordability Covenants
0 1 K
FIRSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 10 013
The Agency has recorded affordability covenants for a total of 172 dwelling
units since July 1999; 26 units house very low-income households, 77 house
low-income households, and 69 units house moderate -income households.
0i
FIRSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 11 014
Tax Allocation Bonds
Project No. 1 Tax Allocation Bond, Series 2001
Closed August 2001
The Agency issued $48,0O0,000 in tax allocation bonds to retire obligations
with the County of Riverside, and to underwrite infrastructure and public
facility improvements.
F:/RSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 12 0 1
PROJECTS/PROGRAMS PROPOSED TO BE ADDED TO THE
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The Agency desires to implement the following projects and proposes to add
these projects to the Implementation Plan. These projects are also the subject
of the mid-term public hearing.
The Ranch Land Acquisition and Development - Project Area No. 1
Anticipated Expenditure: $65,000,000
The Agency desires to acquire a 525-acre property located southwest of the
intersection of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street otherwise known as the
Ranch. The Agency desires to facilitate the development of two 18-hole golf
courses, a 9-hole executive golf course, a driving range, a 250-room hotel with
a 10,000 square foot conference center, 300 condo -hotel units, and up to
25,000 square feet of ancillary commercial uses in a village setting.
Additionally, the Agency would reserve portions of this property for passive
park space, trails, and view corridors.
Boys and Girls Club Addition and Improvements - Project No. 1
Anticipated Expenditure: $355,000
The Agency is considering funding a property rehabilitation loan to assist the
Boys and Girls Club with improvements to their gymnasium that would include
air conditioning system upgrades, additional office space, and adding a
separate entrance to the weight room.
Cove Dog Parks - Project Area No. 1
Anticipated Expenditure: $140,000
This project entails the design and construction of two dog parks at the top of
the Cove to serve Cove residents.
Complete La Quinta Park - Project No. 2
Anticipated Expenditure: $ZOOO,000
The Agency plans to use redevelopment funds to complete the La Quinta Park
improvements. Improvements will include sports fields, picnic areas, and
playground.
Sports Complex Restroom Addition - Project No. 2
Anticipated Expenditure: $95,000
The Agency would fund the addition of three new stalls to the restrooms and
expand the metal shade structure to better cover the bleachers. This park
serves residents in both Project Areas.
0�
FIRSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 13
016
Fritz Burns Park - Project No. 1
Anticipated Expenditure: $ 125,000
These park improvements would entail adding amenities to the skate park that
include shade structures, bleachers, and storage trailer improvements.
Cove Mini Park - Project No. 1
Anticipated Expenditure (without land costs): $100,000
This project would entail constructing a mini park on City property in the Cove.
The mini park would be located in the northwestern section of the Cove.
Cove Oasis Trailhead - Project No. 1
Anticipated Expenditure: $ 100,000
The City is developing a trailhead park. The Agency would fund additional
parking lot and trailhead improvements.
R/RSG/LaQuinta/Impl Plan 2002/5302imppinup.doc 14 017
Tiht 4 4 Q"
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: May 15, 2002
CONSENT CALENDAR:
ITEM TITLE:
STUDY SESSION:
Joint Public Hearing Between the City Council and
Board of the Redevelopment Agency Regarding the PUBLIC HEARING:
Purchase of Property Commonly Known as "The
Ranch" to Consider the Following Actions:
1. Certification by the Redevelopment Agency of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2002-435 (State Clearinghouse
No. 1999081020) Regarding an Agreement of Purchase and Sale and Joint Escrow
Instructions;
2. Consideration by the Redevelopment Agency to Exercise the Option Contained in
the Option Agreement, Revision to Exhibit "B" to the Option Agreement, and to Enter
into the Agreement of Purchase and Sale and Joint Escrow Instructions by and
Between the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency and KSL Land Holdings, Inc., Regarding
the Purchase of the 525-Acre Property Known as The Ranch, Located Generally North
of Avenue 54, West of Jefferson Street, South of Avenue 52, and East of the Coral
Reef Mountains;
3. Consideration of Resolutions by the City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board
Making Findings Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445, and Consent
to/Appropriation of Funding
RECOMMENDATION:
Agency Action:
1. Adopt a Resolution of the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency Certifying a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental
Assessment 2002-435 (State Clearinghouse No. 1999081020);
2. Adopt a Resolution of the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency making certain
findings pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445(a), authorizing
execution of the option contained in the Option Agreement, revision to Exhibit
"B" of the Option Agreement, and entering into the Agreement of Purchase and
Sale and Joint Escrow Instructions;
09- tix
SAcitymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchStfRpt.wpd
3. Appropriate $43.5 million from the Project Area No. 1 Bond fund to underwrite
the obligations the Agency will incur pursuant to the Option Agreement and the
Agreement of Purchase and Sale and Joint Escrow Instructions.
City Council Action
1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California
making certain findings pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445(a)
and consenting to the expenditure of funds to facilitate the purchase of The
Ranch property.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Exercising the option and entering into the Agreement of Purchase and Sale and Joint
Escrow Instructions ("Agreement") would result in the expenditure of $42,500,000
to purchase The Ranch property, if escrow closes by July 2, 2002. The Agreement
does provide for closing extensions until October 31, 2002. These extensions would
cost the Agency $212,500 per month for every month after July 2002. If escrow did
not close until October 31, 2002, then the total purchase price would be
$43,500,000. If, after entering into the Agreement the Agency chooses not to close
the escrow, it would forteit the deposit amount ($250,000).
The funds used to underwrite this purchase will be $20,000,000 from the Project Area
No. 1 Series 2001 Bond proceeds, and up to $23,500,000 derived from the Project
Area No. 1 Series 2002 Bonds.
BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW:
Open the City Council/Agency Board joint public hearing and receive testimony
regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration, regarding exercising the option contained
in the Option Agreement, and regarding entering into the Agreement of Purchase and
Sale and Joint Escrow Instructions.
Since 1996 the Agency has been working to implement the City's Economic
Development Plan that calls for:
• enhancing City General Fund revenue by attracting retail and hospitality uses
• increasing recreation opportunities for La Quinta residents by purchasing
properties for golf and other recreation uses, and
• preserving the natural resources and features that make La Quinta a unique
environment.
0
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchStfRpt.wpd 002
State Redevelopment Law limits the Agency to investing Project Area No. 1 tax
increment revenue in projects that: eliminate blight, improve public infrastructure and
facilities, generate economic development activity, and increase the supply of housing
affordable to low and moderate income households. The Redevelopment Law prohibits
the Agency from funding ongoing operating and maintenance costs associated with
infrastructure and facility improvements. Nor can the Agency fund public safety,
recreation or other ongoing municipal expenses.
Accordingly, one Agency endeavor is to ensure that its expenditures spawn and
sustain economic activity that generates revenue to support municipal improvements
and services. As the community matures, its facilities will age and municipal service
demands will increase. Without a large tax base the City cannot afford to maintain
these facilities and fund increasing service costs. History has shown that if
community facilities and service levels are not maintained, then private investment
declines and blight emerges.
The City of La Quinta is a low property tax City and receives less than 7 cents of every
dollar from property taxes paid by its citizens. Today, approximately 50% of the
City's revenues come from transient occupancy (generated by hotel and lodging
rooms) and sales taxes. Funds generated by one-time building fees will decrease as
the community is built -out.
The Ranch Property
By exercising the option and entering into the Agreement, the Agency would authorize
the acquisition of 525 acres of flat desert property adjacent to the Coral Reef
Mountains. This property is currently owned by KSL Land Holdings, Inc. The site is
generally bounded by Avenue 52 to the north, Jefferson Street to the east, Avenue
54 to the south and the Coral Reef Mountains to the west. Surrounding communities
are the Tradition, Citrus, Country Club of the Desert, and PGA West private golf
communities. A majority of The Ranch is vacant. Developed uses include the Pelz
Golf School, MDS Consulting and KSL Recreation's maintenance facilities, which
occupy the former Ahmanson Ranch structures. The All American Canal also traverses
this property. Agency staff has initiated discussions with KSL to obtain an additional
182 acres of contiguous mountainous land to preserve as permanent open space.
As part of the due diligence activities, the Agency commissioned an MAI appraiser
from Capital Realty to prepare a real property appraisal. The purpose was to determine
the fair market value of The Ranch. Capital Realty prepared a full appraisal that
employed both the comparable sales and residual land value approaches. Their opinion
is that The Ranch property is valued at $42,000,000 or $80,000 per acre.
The 525 acres can accommodate up to two 18-hole golf courses, a 9-hole executive
course, a driving range, a 250-room hotel and up to 300 condo -hotel units, a club- ti
house with community meeting space, and commercial uses. In addition, property
SAcitymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchStfRpt.wpd 003
improvements could include trails and other passive recreation uses. The potential
environmental impacts associated with these uses were evaluated in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
Public Golf, Resort/Commercial Development as Part of a Comprehensive Economic
Development Program
One Agency redevelopment initiative is to find property that can accommodate golf
courses, hotel and restaurant uses to stimulate economic activity in Project Area No.
1 . Addressing economic blight was one reason for forming Project Area No. 1 in
1983. In 1996, the Agency commissioned a market study as part of developing a
City-wide Economic Development Plan. The market study, updated in 1999, identified
resort, golf and hospitality uses as La Quinta's primary industries and indicated future
growth for recreation, resort and hospitality uses that featured golf course amenities.
In order to capture a portion of this demand, the Agency has been evaluating the
City's property located at the top of the Cove, properties located east of the City, and
properties located south of Lake Cahuilla for golf, resort and hospitality development.
The rationale was to develop golf and recreation uses to attract hotel, restaurant and
related uses that stimulated economic activity in Project Area No. 1 . The Ranch
property can accommodate development of these uses given its central location, and
proximity to PGA West, Country Club of the Desert, the Citrus and Tradition golf
communities.
Using conservative assumptions, the Agency's redevelopment and economic
consultant projects that two golf courses could annually generate $1.1 million in net
income upon stabilization (assuming 35,000 annual rounds per course with a per round
resident fee of $45.00 and an average per round non-resident fee of $80.00). Hotel
and condo -hotel uses could annually generate $2.0 million in Transient Occupancy Tax
revenue upon stabilization (this assumes a 250-room hotel and 300 condo -hotel units
with 500 keys at a 65% occupancy rate and an average daily room rate of $115.00).
These uses would help stimulate additional economic activity in Project Area No. 1 and
generate new revenue to the City's General Fund that support City services.
Public Golf, Resort/Commercial Development as Part of a Comprehensive Recreation
Program
One of the blighting conditions detailed in the 1983 Report to Council that supported
the formation of Project Area No. 1 was the lack of community recreation facilities.
To date, the Agency has funded community park, pocket park and trail improvements
that accommodate both active and passive recreation activities to address some of
these deficiencies. In addition, the Agency funded a community pool, located in
Project Area No. 1 that facilitates both youth and adult recreation and water sport
activities. Pursuing the development of golf courses on The Ranch would expand the
City's recreation opportunities by providing affordable golf for both Project Area No.1
and City residents. Further, the Agency envisions development of up to 10,000 r1
MM
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchStfRpt.wpd
square feet of community and meeting space facilities as part of future hotel and golf
club house development. This space will provide additional community and service
club meeting and recreation space amenities.
The Property Acquisition and Development Financing Strategy
As part of the annual strategic planning effort, the City Council and staff have been
implementing measures that judiciously allocate resources to maintain City service
levels and invest in community resources. Annually, the City reviews all revenues and
expenditures, and forecasts operations and capital improvement program cash flows
for a five-year period. These strategic planning efforts have paid off in that the City
is in a position that it can afford to make community -building investments in both
amenities for La Quinta residents, and in initiatives that generate additional General
Fund resources.
In order to fund the purchase and development activities the Agreement would initiate,
the Agency will use the Agency's Project Area No. 1 resources. This property is
located in Project Area No. 1, and when this redevelopment project area was amended
in 1994 to increase its financial capacity, the Agency contemplated investing some of
Project Area No. 1's redevelopment resources in public golf activities. It should be
noted that in allocating the non -housing revenue from Project Area No. 1, the Agency
first reserved funds to cover infrastructure and public facility improvements. At this
point, all programmed infrastructure and public facility improvements are funded. Only
after fully funding these improvements did the Agency reserve funds for golf and hotel
initiatives.
The Agency proposes to fund property acquisition and improvement activities through
a combination of existing and future Project Area No. 1 tax allocation bond proceeds.
To purchase the property, the Agency would use a combination of $20,000,000 of
2001 Project Area No. 1 tax allocation bond proceeds, and $22,500,000 of proceeds
from a tax allocation bond issue that the Agency would sell in May 2002. To build the
golf courses and other passive recreation and open space improvements, Project Area
No. 1 has the future capacity to issue an additional $37,500,000 in tax allocation
bonds during the next 48 months. These financings are not based upon property
assessments, nor are they an obligation of the City of La Quinta. Instead, these
financings are secured by the $2.5 billion of private improvements that comprise
Project Area No. 1's assessed value.
The Attached Summary Report and Agreement
Accompanying this staff report is a Summary Report (Attachment 1), the Additional
Agreement (Attachment 2), and a revision to Exhibit "B" of the Option Agreement
(Attachment 3). The Summary Report presents the details regarding The Ranch
purchase transaction, outlines the costs associated with this purchase, identifies the
redevelopment benefits, and why the Agency and not the City is undertaking this
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchStfRpt.wpd 005
transaction. The Agreement and the Option Agreement detail the specific provisions
of the purchase transaction. These documents have been available for public
inspection since May 1, 2002, when the public hearing notice was first published as
part of a two -week publication requirement.
When the Agency approved the Option Agreement, a period to conduct further due
diligence was initiated. These activities surfaced certain agreements between PGA
entities and Landmark Development Company, the former owner of The Ranch. KSL
has agreed to indemnify the Agency relating to the PGA agreement. The indemnity
provisions have been added as Section 36 to Exhibit B to the Option Agreement, which
is the form of the Purchase and Sale Agreement. The added indemnity language is
attached to this report. Part of the Agency actions this evening entails approving the
amendment to the Agreement.
The Environmental Assessment and Mitigated Negative Declaration
An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared collectively for:
(1) Acquisition of the approximately 707-acre site generally located north of Avenue
54, west of Jefferson Street, south of Avenue 52 and east of the Coral Reef
Mountains by the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency; and (2) the subsequent
development of the non -mountainous portion of the site with public golf courses and
resort uses.
The Mitigated Negative Declaration was mailed to landowners within 500 feet of the
Project Site and to all public entities entitled to notice under CEQA. The State
Clearinghouse submitted the Mitigated Negative Declaration to selected state agencies
for review. The review period closed on May 3, 2002, and no State agencies
submitted comments by the date (Attachment 4).
The final Mitigated Negative Declaration package attached hereto contains the
comment letters received and the written responses to those comments. A Resolution
with findings has been prepared for the certification of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the acquisition and development of the Ranch property.
FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the Agency Board and City Council include:
1 . Agency Action:
Adopt a Resolution of the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency certifying the
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental
Assessment 2002-435;
SAcitymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchStfRpt.wpd
Adopt a Resolution of the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency making certain
findings pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445(a), authorizing
execution of the option contained in the Option Agreement, revision to Exhibit
"B" of the Option Agreement, and entering into the Agreement of Purchase and
Sale and Joint Escrow Instructions;
Appropriate $43.5 million from the Project Area No. 1 Bond fund to underwrite
the obligations the Agency will incur pursuant to the Option Agreement and the
Agreement of Purchase and Sale and Joint Escrow Instructions; and
City Council Action
1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California
making certain findings pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445 (a)
and consenting to the expenditure of funds to facilitate the purchase of The
Ranch property; or
2. Do not adopt the Resolution approving the Option Agreement and the
Agreement of Purchase and Sale and Joint Escrow Instructions; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted,
-ry Herr an
mmunity Development Director
Approved for submission by:
Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager/
Executive Director
Attachments:
1. Summary Report
2. Additional Agreement 0 1)
3. Option Agreement
4. Letter from State Clearinghouse
007
SAcitymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchStfRpt.wpd
RESOLUTION RA 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA CERTIFYING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
FOR THE ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT RANCH
PROPERTY, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-453,
SCH #1999081020
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration has been
prepared collectively for: (1) Acquisition of the approximately 707-acre site generally
located north of Avenue 54, west of Jefferson Street, south of Avenue 52 and east
of the Coral Reef Mountains by the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency");
and (2) the subsequent development of the non -mountainous portion of the site with
public golf courses and resort uses (collectively "the Ranch Project");
WHEREAS, the Agency prepared the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code
of Regulations, Title 14, section 15000 et. seq., ("CEQA Guidelines"); and
WHEREAS, The Agency mailed notice of its intention to adopt the
Mitigated Negative Declaration in compliance with Pubic Resources Code Section
21092 on April 3rd, 2002 to landowners within 500 feet of the Project Site and to all
public entities entitled to notice under CEQA, which notice also included a notice of
the public hearing before the Agency Board on May 15th, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the Agency published a notice of its intention to adopt the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated Initial Study in the Desert Sun on April
24, 2002, which notice also included the date of the public hearing before the Agency
Board on May 15th, 2002, and further caused the notice to be filed with the Riverside
County Clerk in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, during the comment period, the Agency received comment
letters on the Mitigated Negative Declaration from the Southern California Association
of Governments, the Desert Sands Unified School District, the Riverside County Sheriff
Department, the Gas Company, Pope and Associates and Judith Schenkman. Staff
reviewed and considered these comments, and prepared written responses to these
comments which are contained in the staff report; and
WHEREAS, on the 23rd day of April, 2002, the La Quinta Planning
Commission considered the Project and determined that it was consistent with the
City's General Plan pursuant to Government Code Section 65402; and
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchRDA-MND.wpd O
008 [J
Resolution RA 2002-
The Ranch MND
Adopted: May 15, 2002
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency Board (the "Board")
held a duly noticed public hearing on May 15th, 2002, on the Initial Study and
Mitigated Negative Declaration, during which public hearing testimony and other
evidence was received.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the La Quinta Redevelopment
Agency, as follows:
SECTION 1: The above recitations are true and correct and are adopted
as the findings of the Agency.
SECTION 2 The Agency Board finds that the Mitigated Negative
Declaration has been prepared and processed in compliance with CEQA, the State
CEQA Guidelines and the City's implementation procedures. The Agency Board has
independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, and finds that it adequately describes and addresses the
environmental effects of the Ranch Project, and that, based upon the Initial Study, the
comments received thereon, and the entire administrative record for this Project, there
is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that there may be significant
adverse environmental effects as a result of the approval and development of the
Ranch Project. The mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration
have been incorporated into the Project and these measures mitigate any potential
significant effect to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects will
occur as a result of this Project.
SECTION 3: The Ranch Project will not be detrimental to the health,
safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no
significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2001-
418.
SECTION 4: The Ranch Project will not have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or
animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory.
SECTION 5: There is no evidence before the Agency that the Ranch
Project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat
on which the wildlife depends.
U;
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchRDA-MND.wpd 009
O9
Resolution RA 2002-_
The Ranch MND
Adopted: May 15, 2002
SECTION 6: The Ranch Project does not have the potential to achieve
short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals,
as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the
Environmental Assessment.
SECTION 7: The Ranch Project will not result in impacts which are
individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed
development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be
significantly affected by the proposed project.
SECTION 8: The Ranch Project will not have the environmental effects
that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no
significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk
potential or public services.
SECTION 9: The Agency Board has on the basis of substantial evidence,
rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations
753.5(d).
SECTION 10: The Agency Board has fully considered the proposed
Mitigated Negative Declaration and the comments received thereon.
SECTION 11: The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the
independent judgment and analysis of the Agency.
SECTION 12: The location of the documents which constitute the record
of proceedings upon which the Agency Board decision is based is the La Quinta City
Hall, Community Development Department, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta,
California 92253, and the custodian of those records in Jerry Herman, Community
Development Director.
SECTION 13: A Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP), a copy of which
is attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby adopted pursuant to Public Resources Code
§ 21081.6 in order to assure compliance with the mitigation measures during Project
implementation.
SECTION 14: Based upon the Initial Study and the entire record of
proceedings, the Project has no potential for adverse effects on wildlife as that term
is defined in Fish and Game Code § 711.2.
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchRDA-MND.wpd
Resolution RA 2002-
The Ranch MND
Adopted: May 15, 2002
SECTION 15: The Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby certified and
adopted.
SECTION 16: The Community Development Director shall cause to be
filed with the County Clerk a Notice of Determination pursuant to CEQA Guideline §
15075(a).
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the La
Quinta Redevelopment Agency held on this 15th of May 2002, by the vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TERRY HENDERSON, Chair
La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, Agency Secretary
City of La Quinta
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
M. KATHERINE JENSON, Agency Counsel
City of La Quinta, California
03'
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchRDA-MND.wpd
O 1.1
FINAL
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
SCH No. 1999081020
THE RANCH
Prepared for:
La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
Prepared By:
Impact Sciences, Inc.
30343 Canwood Street, Suite 210
Agoura Hills, California 91301
r �
May 2002 v ��
01;'
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 1.0-1
2.0 RESPONSE TO WRITTEN COMMENTS........................................................................... 2.0-1
Letter 1. Southern California Association of Governments, April 24, 2002
.......................... 2.0-2
Letter 2. Riverside County Sheriff Department, April 19, 2002..........................................
2.0-4
Letter 3. Desert Sands Unified School District, April 5, 2002.............................................
2.0-6
Letter 4. The Gas Company, April 23, 2002........................................................................
2.0-8
Letter 5. Pope & Associates, April 30, 2002......................................................................2.0-11
Letter 6.Judith Schenkman, April 28, 2002........................................................................2.0-17
3.0 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION..................................................I..................... 3.0-1
4.0 INITIAL STUDY.............................................................................................................. 4.0-1
0
013
The Rauch
Final — May 2002
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In compliance with Section 15074 of the State CEQA Gilidelines, this document has been prepared so
the lead agency may consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration along with any written comments
received on the Project during the public review period which began on April 3, 2002 and ended on May
3, 2002. CEQA § 15073.5 states that if any of the comments received contain substantial evidence
supporting a fair argument that the Project may actually produce a significant environmental impact,
the Lead Agency would be required to either:
1. Find a way to mitigate the impact(s) to a level of insignificance and then re -circulate the
revised document; or
2. Prepare an EIR
Based on the comments that were received on the Project, no substantial evidence supporting a fair
argument that the Project may actually produce a significant environmental impact was identified.
This document has been organized in a format that provides easy access for the reader to the most
important information related to the key issues associated with this Proposed Project. The format of
this document and the general contents of each section are provided below to assist the reader. Sections
following this introduction are organized as follows:
Section 2.0 Responses to Written Comments
Section 3.0 Mitigated Negative Declaration
Section 4.0 Initial Study
1.0-1
014
The Ranch
Final — May 2002
2.0 RESPONSES TO WRITTEN COMMENTS
INTRODUCTION
This section presents written comments received on the Mitigated Negative Declaration received by
the La Quints Redevelopment Agency. Responses for each comment are provided as discussed in Section
15074 of the CEQA Guidelines. Comments contained within each letter identified by sequential
numbers located in the right hand margin of each comment letter. A written response has been prepared
for each numbered comment.
Provided below is a list of all written correspondence received by the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
with respect to the Mitigated Negative Declaration:
Regional Agencies
1. Southern California Association of Governments, April 24, 2002
Local Agencies
2. Riverside County Sheriff Department, April 19, 2002
3. Desert Sands Unified School District, April 5, 2002
4. The Gas Company, April 23, 2002
5 Pope & Associates, April 30, 2002
6. Judith Schenkman, April 28, 2002
The comments received and responses to the comments are presented below.
2.0-1
035
015
The Ranch
Final — May 2002
05-02—UZ 1t2:WU Glty of Ldwulnta t✓OMM-Wev-Lept IW_ rots r r r 441:+1:1 r-vc
Letter No. 1
SOUTHERN CALIFORWA
ASSOCIATION of
GOVERNMENTS
Main Office
8%8 West Seventh Street
12th Floor
Los Angeles, California
g0027-3435
t (213) 236.1800
f (213) 236•1825
wwvr.Scas,car,sov
Osten Patbl Y: SuprrnMn )0a Mlteu, uvu ur
n: 6aa Itmadtw - P.m Wr• Ptesfd..I:
C1,a.etalember Hal ter. Lle Anjeks
ieco.d Vim rie.ldtr : mayv ho T..1 4v P_m-
area • Lr.1ed..0 Pea pf"idtm. wyw a.. Lv..
La Ala.n1U
ln*& l Ceun.y: hank lalpu, tap. W (n ty
US bRM CONW. Tvl.wp Ln,Lwl.e )1arts.
16. Aetal:a l�Mlat} , Zv YOro.ta.,1% far ",A,,
Colmty • Mury d.ldwln. Saa Sawki - be-,
narrows. Denims • lisle U.". Isla - Hal
0, u . tot A116.1. • Aub k 11—k. Itoatf atatl
- G." DanlrL, htaff4=l • It. AMW Dwy...re.
Clarlu • Faak G.:.arc, law AnteMs -111C G.—W,
lay Abcd.a • Far G.J..A,. 1-1 Pasch •:uc
HJln, I Angeles • Ian" Hat,., Im Anatlet
Dee Ha.d,—.Iwrwxt • Na. tiolu.n, r... Anprks
• Sulk. (arid., W &Inado • L.. trklry,
10$k rood - lk—, I.Wri sal, taut It..h
L.14i MkQrWy. r a.uty - a.dy Hulelkotiit, sari.
Aa6, :ea • Slaury MutpaP Iwh.ni - 7aa1
n'Goaaor, So,& Nua.a - Nick Pacaaco, :Ja
A.rtee • Ala Pia" U: Aryeke • Jan Pkvr). L.
AAkek. •ae I.eaxe Prop. Pluu L1 . Mak tidlq.
ihoeu, usAnitke • Ed Fero. J,. Aao . -
ta,ell Awntlul, :laremo,u - 04 Stankrd, Asu,.
• U. lyhea. vhlaa • Paw TJkr. Al..bca -
Hdoar rylrc, J.. P—Ana • Jod W iu, d., iAnrlrs
Nw . OrWatacv Calahaut • pct V•ki... Le
A. rk- - 1armis P. sale, L.a. Alfa.
oraur Cdualy: 1,W).1 saga" ce-S. CO.
Pica lu.a, U. Alamaol • Ralph U—. Hu.ufyton
Mach • Art Low., I,e.. Part • sou L,ee, Th
• 11-*i ch cowae, c -,. Mra. • ,_a,htya DtYuuul,
t-4— N1t1.e1 • Lk a d D:r,n. LAW Iorett • M.
DYa¢., L. P-1.1 • Shirley McG.sa.., An.Mar.
te• Pmry, lk— •TMI Aldpwan Nt.,.— w.ei
RYYttaid. Cww1y. ebb IYY.rtl, &r .'k C'nuoly
Foci La...:dl.. %vertlde • Cie, Pr... Cuhedrai
Cry - air Anbtm. Tuu..ula la. Aucanaa.
ON:= • Clurlea WhJ(.. I*W..0 VA,
Sae aertiPAfaa cae y, Ina Wlieb, Sul
tl.uu:d,e. t.l vvy • LU Ai.emArr. SaathO
CUcU%O,:6a . C 4 I.htemaa, Fona,w • 4, .Inn
Uama. ci d o— • I.11 lamps •'Ic,a.•Jk -
Cw n Nerm MY% 0... A.16 • 111fj1a Y"..
sAa 1{C,,.fdlnl{
Y�nara CotLtaY: )udy 4,414ch. vexmra Cou:uf .
Glen Ucena, SW Ulry • coma C.
R"weamra • TOwYuu,y, :Vas i 1 x .e
Umtldt Coatq Tlarpeodaka CpOpWiale:
A1.1.n I.twlt. kkOkl
ykelwa County TAMPOeLctu. C—,W,laal
aul a,,., m., wtl.y
April 24, 2002
Mr. Jerry Herman
Community Development director
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
78-496 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: SLAG Clearinghouse No. 120020188 Specific Plan 8S-M "The Rambo
Dear Mr. Herman;
Thank you for submitting the Specific Plan Plan 85-006 "The Ranch" to SCAG for
review and comment_ As areawide clearinghouse for regionally significant projects.
SCAG reviews the consistency of local plans, projects and pmgrarns with regional
plans. This activity is based on SCAG's responsibilities as a regional planning
organization pursuant to state and federal laws and regulations, Guidance provided
by these reviews is intended to assist local agencies and project sponsors to take
actions that contribute to the attainment of regional goals and policies.
We have reviewed the Specific Plan Plan $5.006 "The Ranch", and have
determined that the proposed Project is not regionally significant per SCAG
Intergovemmental Review (IGR) Criteria and California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15206). Therefore, the proposed Project does lot warrant
comments at this time. Should there be a change in the scope of the proposed Project
we would appreciate the opportunity to review and comment at that time -
A description of the proposed Project was published in SCAG`s April 1, 2002
Intergovemmental Review Clearinghouse Report for public review and comment..
The project title and SCAG Clearinghouse number should be used ir, al
correspondence with SCAG, concerning this Project. :arfespoinoe►ae sxluc oe sere
to the attention of the Clearinghouse Coordinator. If you have any quesWm pllease
contact meat (213) 236-1867. Thank you.
Sincerely, C,4
J M. , AICP
enror Plan ,
ntergovemmental Review
03
016
0 :nr.,rO" A-4.: rm. Stf lel:i9a
n.
2.0 Responses to Written Comments
1. Letter from the Southern California Association of Governments, October 17, 2001
Response 1
This comment states that the project was not determined as regionally significant, and for this reason,
SCAG, a regional planning agency, has no comments.
U?
017
2.0-3 The Ranch
Final — May 2002
D r \ r J T Letter No. 2
MIE J r- I
DATE: April 3, 2002
TO: Distribution nisi
FROM: Jerry Herman, City of La Quinta
SLB.IECT: NOTICE OF AVAILABILTY OF DRAFT INITIAL STUD'YAT 1MGATED N +GATIVE
DECLARATION FOR THE RANCH PROJECT
The City of La Quinta Redevelopment Agency, acting as Lead Agency, has filed a 'Na*ice L f co—oa" of
an Initial Stu.dYA4itigated Negative Declaration for The Ranch Project. This doc',=cnt hzis 'x�i:r prepared in
accordance Aith, and pursaaait to, the Califomia Environmental Quality ACT i; EQA), as amended; Public
Resources Code, Section21000 et seq.; and the "Guidelinesfor Impiementationc` the Cali[irma Environmental
Quality Act (State CI-QA Guidelines), California Code of Regulation, Title 14, Chapter 15000 et sea.
The 30-day panlic review period for this document opens on April 3, 2002 and closes on Liay 3, 2002.
PLEASE SUBMIT ANY WRITTEN COMMENTS BY May 3, 2002.
Please send your WRITTEN comments on this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration To :
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
Attn: Jerry Herman. Cormunity Development Director
If you have any questions, please contact Terry Ferman at (760) 777-7125 or}cil-,er�r.�� v .
Thank you foF your partieipati n in the environmental review of this project.
• Depart:ment has no comments regarding this plan- I I
n Indio Sheriff's Office
M WIV.Tfka
018
2.0 Responses to Written Coininents
2. Letter from Riverside County Sheriff Department, April 19, 2002
Response 1
This comment states that the document has been reviewed and the Riverside County Sheriff
Department does not have any comments.
019
')
2.0-5 The Ranch
Film! — May 2002
VJ if a V L a a • .-.0 v . .. J v• u...vu ..♦..0 v v....r .r .. . .r�s' •• . — • — -• • . - ----
Letter No. 3
� aEnru�o+oures �
itA1+CM0 YMIAOIi O
P" WMAT V
♦ lA OYIWA +,
'rQ or L7
April 5, 2002
Desert Sands Unified School District
47-950 Dune Palms Road • is Quinta. C41JfOrnia 92253 • (750) 777-4200
Mr. Jerry Herman
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Request for Comments: Ranch Project
Dear Mr. Herman
This is in response to your request for input on the above referenced project and its
effect on public schools.
All actions toward Commercial development will potentially result in an impact on our
school system. School overcrowding is a District -wide concern for Desert Sands
Unified School District. The Districfs ability to meet the educational needs of the public
with new schools has been seriously impaired in recent years by local, state and federal 1
budget cuts that have had a devastating impact on the financing of rww schools.
As you are aware, there is a school mitigation fee that is currently collected on all new
development at the time building permits are issued.
Please feel free to call me if you have further questions. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Peggy eyes, Director
Facilities Services
PR%cros
0 �i i7
020
2.0 Responses to Written Comments
3. Letter From Desert Sands Unified School District, April 5, 2002
Response 1
The conclusion that the payment of development impact fees mitigates the impact of the new students
generated directly or indirectly by the proposed project is based on currently applicable State law.
Government Code Section 65996 deems development fees to be "full and complete school facilities
mitigation." One of the reasons for this statement in the Government Code is that development fees are
only one of the sources of funding available to school districts for school facilities. The Desert Sands
Unified School District was correct in their comment that the project would be subject to school
development fees at the time building permits are issued.
(` 4
021
2.0-7 The Ranch
Final — May 2002
C/ .7 - lY L - V 1 G a J J � •� • �. � v • u ..a a u . • ... u v v ...... .r .. - .. � .. . .� •� - - - - -
Letter No. 4
sc:Arrr- ca.:!a�r.a
Gas C=I'Matr
_,,,;cr. a ...._t
The
Gas
Company,
A j�Sempra Energy -company
April 23, 2002 Gas Co. Ref. No. 02-173-OG
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Attention: Jerry Herman
Re: The Ranch Project
Jefferson St. and Ave. 52, La Quinta
Thank you for the opportunity to respond tc the above -referenced project. Please note
that Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the above name,,-
project is proposed. Gas service to the project could be provided without any sign.fcant
impact on the environment. The service would be in accordance with the Ccmpanys
policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at trio
time contractual arrangements are made.
You should be aware that this letter is not to be interpreted as a cone -actual
commitment to serve the proposed project, but only as an inforrnational service. The
availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present
conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, Ti^e StOu�,er
California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the Califomia Pubic
Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatcry agencies.
Should these agencies take any action, which affects gas supply, or the conditions
under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance .,-,~ revse,
conditions.
Typical demand use for:
a. Residential (System Area Average/Use Per Meter) Yeady
Single Family 799 therms/year dwelling unit
Multi -Family 4 or less units 482 therms/year dwelling unit
Multi -Family 5 or more units 483 therms/year dwelling unit
These averages are based on total gas consumption in residentiai units served oy
Southern California Gas Company, and it should not be implied that any par-j:;u;ar
home, apartment or tract of homes will use these amounts of energy.
04
022
w
r
95-02-e22 15:bd city Ot Lawu1T1t3 li0IOII1•LCV•LCYL 1L- IUW I I I +--- - `-
b. Commercial
Due to the fact that construction varies so widely (a glass building vs. a heavily
insulated building) and there is such a wide variation in types of materials and ,
a typical demand figure is not available for this type of construction.
Calculations would need to be made after the building has been designed.
We have Demand Side Management programs available to commerciallind us trial
customers to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy
of our energy conservation programs, please contact our Commercialllnaustrial Support
Center at 1-800-GAS-2000.
Sincerely,
4eVDu6nivin
Technical Supervisor
04.
023
2.0 Responses to Written Comsnents
4. Letter from the Gas Company, April 23, 2002
Response 1
This comment from the Gas Company states that they are in agreement with the conclusion made in the
Initial Study that gas service can be provided to the proposed project without any significant impact on
the environment.
04
024
2.0-10 The Ranch
Final - May 2002
l'fO-Uo-W is LG-,.+ 41Ly or L.'dwU1CILG L'QMM•Lev.UCPt
IV- (OW ( ( ! 1Z08.5
Letter No. 5
Y • O1 :3
POPE
& ASS0C:IATES
A I1ri$Lmulial A,rounrniCy t, nTffz-101,
C3Tah;m FZ. Pope, C'-RA.
April 30, 2002
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
78.495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Attn: Jerry Herman, Community Development Director
Re: Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Ranch Project
As noticed in your memo dated April 3, 2002 I wish to respond to several issues addressed in the
La Quinta Redevelopment Agency (Mitigated) Negative Declaration. I am a party of interest
since I have a residence at 79630 Citrus Street La Quinta, California.
In general terms I am not opposed to the development and particularly am pleased with the
concept of having the golf course area immediately adjacent to Avenue 52, Jefferson Streit. and I
Avenue 54. As a result of this overall plan it appears that the construction and occupancy related
to the project itself will be buffered from the neighborhood by the golf course.
Also in ecneral terms I am concerned that the intent to make the course a public course wild
exacerbate traffic congestion much more significantly than a private course development and I
assess that such differential has not been identified in this declaration.
There are two areas of the initial study that warrant review and further considerarion_ These
areas are as follows:
1 j Air Quality
tAy experience has been that the mitigation measures utilized on derelopme= of
this nature are inadequate to lessen the amount of dirt subject to disbursal by
winds around the adjacent areas. In particular, there should be a reporting
mechanism in place to insure that the entire area is watered dov%ii three tLrnes a
day. In addition the golf course should be developed and sodded, or seeded. prior
to the construction phase of the building complexes encircled by such golf course.
This would lessen the disbursal of dirt carried by the «winds to adjacent
community areas.
lia6i San viceBlvd, • Suite 700 os Angeles, - - -
Tclephonc, 310.442-9100 • Faysimile 310--=2-___
.c3
04J
025
95-03-02 1 2 : 55 u l: tY or Lawu i nta t;omm • uev . uept I U_ (Oct r (i r - W_
Jerry Herman
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
April 30, 2002
Page 2
2) Traffic/Circulation
1 challenge the daily trips calculation for the golf course given that it is 45 holes
and it is intended to be for public use. 1 note in the mitigation measures on page
15 a reference to a traffic signal installed at the project entrance and Avenue 52;
however, T see no evidence of the precise location of such entrance on the Figure
3 map of Existing General Plan Use Designations. Please advise as to where it is
intended that this road be -entranced, and also whether or not it is temporar�' in
nature.
1 am extremely concerned with regard to the traffic impact of tis project and
have the following comments and or suggestions with regard to trafthe in the
general area:
A) Signage on Washington should direct at Avenue 50 a left hand turn for people
driving south on Washington Avenue on their way to PGA NVest., and other
community areas that should be accessed off Jefferson and Avenue 511r. This
would reduce the amount of traffic -dead ending on Washington Avenue at
Avenue 52 thus lessening traffic congestion on Avenue 52, %vhich at the
present time is only two lanes in certain areas between Washington and
Jefferson.
B) A light should be place at the entrance to the Citrus development at Avenue
52 between Washington and Jefferson. This would have the effect of traffic 6
calming and reducing noise from Avenue 52.
Q No entrance way should be put in place on Avenue 52 since it is contemotated 7
that the golf course will complet.e?y cover the adjacent land on the Avenue 5_
side of the proposed development.
D) Four laneing of Avenue 52 should cotnrttenc;, immediately so that it is entirely I
8
four laved from Washington. to Jefferson.
E) There should be rethinking on the round -about at Jefferson and 51nd as with 1 9
increased traffic this intersection approach could become problematic.
F) More rigorous enforcement of speed limits should be done on Jefferson and
Avenue 52 in order to combat excessive speeding, particularly in the hours 10
from 5:4M to 3AM in the morning and 4PM to 7PM at night.
() 4 ,
026
U7-UU-OiY 14.Z)O %,, T.Y VZ a,arotu aiscn �,UUJIue•✓ev•✓era a✓- ,uv .. .�.�..,
Jcrry Herman
City of .La Quinta
Community Development Departmleiit
April 30, 2002
Page 3
1 would request that additional documents be provided to me as they become available so that i 11
might further track the issues associated with this development.
Thank you very much for allowing ine to give my comment with respect to the plan as
documented at this time.
Very truly yours,
)v'raham
CrR. Pope
0 4 -4�`
027
2.0 Responses to Written Comments
5. Letter from Pope & Associates, April 30, 2002
Response 1
This comment is in agreement with the buffering effects of the golf courses between the planned
structures and the surrounding uses described in the Initial Study. The comment has been incorporated
into the record so the lead agency may consider it.
Response 2
The trip generation calculations of the March 29, 2002 Supplemental Traffic Impact Evaluation
prepared by RKJK & Associates are based upon golf course facilities intended for public use. The project
entrance and Avenue 52 intersection has been evaluated at a location opposite the entrance to the Citrus
development. The project entrance and Avenue 52 intersection location is indicated on the traffic study
exhibits contained in the August 7, 2000 Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by RKJK & Associates for a
previous, more intense land use proposal for The Ranch property (as referenced in the March 29, 2002
evaluation prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc.). However, the exact location of this intersection could
change as detailed site plans are prepared for the project.
Response 3
As required by CEQA Guidelines § 15074, the lead agency is required to adopt, "a program for reporting
on or monitoring the changes, which it has either required in the project or made a condition of
approval to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects." Mitigation measures that
specifically address dust and particulate matter air quality emissions. generated from the project site
have been included in the Initial Study and have been incorporated into the Project. Furthermore,
these measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan that the Agency would be required to
adopt. These measures have been provided below for your convenience. Please refer to Section VI of the
Initial Study for a more detailed air quality discussion.
2.0-14
041
028
The Rauh
Final - May 2002
2.0 Responses to Written Comments
1. Air quality control measures identified in the Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation
Plan shall be implemented.
2. A PM10 Management Plan for construction operations shall be submitted prior to the issuance of
grading permits. The plan shall include dust management controls such as:
• Water site and equipment morning and evening
• Spread soil binders on site, unpaved roads, and parking areas
• Re-establish ground cover on construction site through seeding and watering
• Pave construction roads, where appropriate
• Operate street -sweepers on paved roads adjacent to site
Response 4
Please refer to response #2 for a discussion of the traffic study assumptions regarding trip generation
rates of the proposed golf courses.
Response 5
The suggested signage is not required, but the comment is part of the record and will be made available
to the decision -makers so that they may make an independent judgement and consider the whole of the
record.
Response 6
For evaluation purposes, the project entrance and Avenue 52 intersection has been assumed to be located
opposite the entrance to the Citrus development. The installation of a traffic signal will therefore
occur if the project entrance from Avenue 52 remains at the location opposite the Citrus development.
However, the exact location of this intersection could change as detailed site plans are prepared for
the project.
Response 7
Refer to responses #2 and #6 for a description of the traffic study assumptions regarding access to Avenue
52. Detailed site plans have not yet been prepared for the project land uses. 043
020
2.0-15 The Ranch
Finial — May 2002
2.0 Responses to Written Continents
Response 8
Avenues 52 and Jefferson Street adjacent to the project site are to be improved as needed to complete
General Plan half -section width requirements in conjunction with development.
Response 9
The roundabout has been designed to accommodate future traffic volumes. However, the City will
monitor traffic conditions as part of their routine maintenance and operational responsibilities.
Response 10
The Riverside County Sheriff currently patrols and monitors the circulation system throughout the
City of La Quinta. This comment will become part of the record. No further response is required given
that the comment does not question the content of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Response 11
This comment will become part of the record No further response is required given that the comment
does not question the content of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
0 5
030
2.0-16 The Ranch
Final — May 2002
UZ) -UI -W:e 1 1 ; J7 l• 1 Ly Qr ) 1Qwu l nza 1. 0[I]ill LC V • LCF'+
Judath Schenktman
IV- f 001 f f f 1 LJJ
Letter No. 6
r • W.�
53540 Avenids Vila
,----
la Quints, caloomia =53
Home phone 77"233
,' }
Email judittuxo@dc.tr.c=
AprU Z8, 2002
Honorable 'Mayor and Council Members
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
CITY '?TA
C, � r ..rr�iCt-
"RANCH PROJECT" IAIITIAL STUDy/MlT1GATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
i have read the information provided thus far and have several comments. Having not seen an economic report I
cannot comment or the costs involved regarding an acceptable rate of return for investment for the city. I feel that
this is Significant information which should be clearly stated for public review.
i 's t5 including Public
Of our c
I would hope that this is made available in a timely fashion. So many t5 �n
works at cuaantly strained. I would hope that any Wither needs, affecting them for exarnple, will be covered
should the project impinge upon their budgets-
1 suggest that the public golf courses which will be available to resort, hotel, and timeshwt users be made available
to La Quints residents in a fashion similar to at of the city of Indian Wells and the Esmeralda Rowl a Resort.
th
What ate the current facts in regards to "tuneshares"? Are they a viable sale and resale eotity in the &'� $o mw'
problems have emerged from them in the past? Are the units and the project being const ucred in such a as tlsat
total condominium conversion can be done? What information is available in regards to manages both mini
and long term ? What are the costs for the project maintenance?
I appreciate your attention to thecae questions, as tboy affect both current and future, residents of La Quints
Judith Schenl®an
copy to: Jerry Herman, Community Development Director
E
0
2
3
031
2.0 Responses to Written Contments
6. Letter from Judith Schenkman, April 28, 2002
Response 1
No further response is required given that the comment pertains to economic issues and does not question
the content of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Response 2
The public nature of the planned golf courses indicates that they would be made available to the
public. No further response is required.
Response 3
No further response is required given that the comment pertains to economic issues and does not question
the content of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
032
2.0-18 The Ranch
Final - May 2002
3.0 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
r-�
0
033
3.0-1 The Ranch
Final — May 2002
LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(MITIGATED) NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CASE NUMBER: Specific Plan 85-006 "The Ranch"
APPLICANT: La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
ADDRESS: La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The La Quinta Redevelopment Agency (Agency) is proposing to acquire the 707-acre site,
including 182-acres of mountainous land to be preserved as permanent open space, located at the
southwest comer of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52. The acquisition of the 525-acres of non -
mountainous property would be by purchase agreement while the acquisition of the 182-acres of
mountainous land would be by dedication or donation. The non -mountainous portion of the site
would be developed with public golf courses and resort uses consistent with the La Quinta
General Plan Land Use Map Designations for the site. The Project Site is designated under the
2002 General Plan Update for golf course uses with tourist commercial uses in the center of the
site. The golf course designation allows both public and private golf courses with their
associated ancillary uses, while the tourist commercial designation allows resort hotels,
recreational uses, conference centers and ancillary retail shops. The tourist commercial
designation also allows Timeshare units with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
The Proposed Project includes two 18-hole public golf courses with a 25,000 square foot clubhouse
as well as a 9-hole public golf course which would accommodate a junior golf program. The
proposed resort uses would include a 250-room hotel with a 10,000 square foot conference center,
300 Timeshare fractional or condo hotel traits (Timeshare) and 25,000 square feet of ancillary
commercial uses. The Agency is proposing to acquire the Project Site at this time. Subsequent
discretionary actions required to develop the site include adoption of a Specific Plan, a zone
change to make the zoning designations consistent with the General Plan land use designations,
a Conditional Use Permit for the 300 Timeshare units, a Site Development Permit and a
Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the site to accommodate the proposed uses. Additional
design features to be incorporated into the project include passive park space, trails, and view
corridors. The existing Pelz short game golf school may remain. No development is planned on
the 182 acres of the Coral Reef Mountains located on the western portion of the Project Site.
PROJECT LOCATION:
The City of La Quinta encompasses approximately 31 square miles of both mountainous and
desert terrain land area in the southwestern portion of the Coachella Valley. La Quinta is a
community of which nearly 13 square miles consist of protected mountain open space, parkland
or golf course open space designations. La Quinta is located within the Coachella Valley 0
portion of central Riverside County, in southern California. This area forms the northwest
1 034
extension of the Colorado Desert in southeastern California. It is characterized by arid,
sparsely vegetated desert land. The valley floor is composed generally of sandy soils that
were deposited through the effects of water and wind erosion. Westerly winds are persistent,
and contribute to extensive erosion and the formation of blowsand activity and sand dimes.
Vehicular access to the Coachella Valley is provided by the Interstate 10 Freeway, providing
an east -west linkage between the Los Angeles metropolitan area to the west, and the desert
areas to the east.
The proposed project is located in the southeastern area of the City. The site boundaries
include Jefferson Street to the east, Avenue 54 to the south, Avenue 52 to the north, and the
Coral Reef Mountains to the west. Land uses in the project vicinity include a custom home
residential subdivision to the north, undeveloped properties to the east approved for the
development of golf course and residential uses, the 1,650-acre PGA West golf and residential
community to the south and mountains to the west.
On the basis of the Initial Study prepared for the project, it has been determined that the
project would not have a potential for a significant effect on the environment; or the project has
been modified to incorporate the mitigation measures listed below so that it would not have a
potentially significant effect cal the environment. A copy of said Initial Study is attached.
Other materials which constitute the basis upon which the decision to adopt this (Mitigated)
Negative Declaration is to be based is available for review at the:
La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
760.777.7125
This document constitutes a (Mitigated) Negative Declaration.
1. SEE MITIGATION MEASURES SHEET ON PAGE 4
RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES: (any public agency which has discretionary approval power
over the project).
City of La Quinta
TRUSTEE AGENCIES: (could include California Department of Fish and Game, State Lands
Commission, State Department of Parks and Recreation, and University of California).
California Department of Fish and Game
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Vv•.i
2 035
Notice Pursuant to Section 21092.5 of the Public Resources Code:
A Public Hearing will be held in the City of La Quinta Council Chambers, 78-495
C'alle Tampico, La Quinta California, on (DATE) at May 15. 2002 p.m. to consider
this project. At that time, any interested person is welcome to attend and be heard on this
matter.
Prior to the Public Hearing, the public is invited to submit written comments on this
(Mitigated) Negative Declaration to:
La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
760.777.7125
Please refer to the Case Number listed above.
p{pffr�Ar,�orntnunity Development
Date: April 2, 2002
0 v f_)
036
3
Mitigation Measures
Prior to the design and construction of any structural improvements, a comprehensive design level
geotechnical evaluations shall be prepared that includes subsurface exploration and laboratory testing.
Recommendations for grading/earthwork, surface and subsurface drainage, foundations, pavement structural
sections, and other pertinent geotechnical design considerations shall be formulated and implemented based
on the findings of this evaluation.
Al buildinKs lanned as a result of the Proposed Project shall be constructed in conformance with the Uniform
Building Code, as adopted by the City of La Quinta.
At such time that non -potable water sources become available to the project site, the project shall be connected
to this resource and utilize the non -potable water for irrigation purposes.
During construction activities, water trucks are to acquire water from non -potable water sources, such as
reclaimed water and/or canal water.
A hydrology master plan shall be prepared for the Project Specific Plan. Further, a hydrology study shall be
prepared for the hydrology master plan and submitted to the City of La Quinta for approval prior to the
issuance of grading permits. This study shall demonstrate that the project would construct storm drainage
and hydrologic improvements, such as on -site stormwater retention basins, that conform to the City`s master
hydrology and storm drain improvement program as well as implement regional and local requirements,
policies and programs.
Drought tolerant landscaping shall be utilized as a means of reducing water consumption.
Prior to the initiation of any construction activity on the project site, a NPDES permit from the RWQCB shall
be filed for. A Notice of Intent (NOI), Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and Monitoring Plan
are requirements of the NPDES permit. The SWPPP shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) in
compliance with the NPDES program requirements.
Any existing groundwater wells located on the site that are no longer in use shall be abandoned in
accordance with Federal, State, and local laws and regulations prior to the issuance of building permits.
Prior to operation of the golf course, the golf course operator shall prepare a Golf Course Management Plan
that includes an irrigation plan, water usage plan, and chemical management plan in order to reduce, to the
extent feasible, golf course irrigation runoff and percolation into the groundwater basin.
Design of new roads, golf courses, man-made ponds, common landscape areas, storm water basins, and other
facilities shall incorporate proper engineering controls to channel storm and irrigation runoff into
detention/retention facilities that are sized to accommodate design year storms and that incorporate
filtration systems or other devices to reduce the potential for herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers, and other
contaminants to percolate to groundwater or surface water runoff.
Construction equipment shall be phased and operated in a manner to ensure the lowest construction -related
pollutant emission levels practical, and shall require the use of water trucks, temporary irrigation systems
and other measures which will limit fugitive dust emissions during site disturbance and construction.
Air quality control measures identified in the Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan shall be
implemented.
A PM10 Management Plan for construction operations shall be submitted prior to the issuance of grading
permits. The plan shall include dust management controls such as:
Water site and equipment morning and evening
• Spread soil binders on site, unpaved roads, and parking areas
• Re-establish ground cover on construction site through seeding and watering
• Pave construction roads, where appropriate
• Operate street -sweepers on paved roads adjacent to site
The following measures shall be implemented to reduce construction related traffic congestion:
• Configure construction parking to minimize traffic disturbance
Minimize obstruction of through -traffic lanes
• Provide flag person to ensure safety at construction sites, as necessary
• Schedule operations affecting roadways for off-peak traffic hours
• Provide rideshare incentives to construction personnel U r
V W
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall utilize solar or low emission water heaters to reduce natural
gas consumption and emissions.
037
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall utilize built-in energy -efficient appliances to reduce energy
consumption and emissions.
Shade trees shall be provided in close proximity to Timeshare, hotel and golf facility structures to reduce
building heating/cooling needs.
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall utilize energy -efficient and automated controls for air
conditioners to reduce energy consumption and emissions.
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall be constructed using special sunlight -filtering window coatings
or double -paned windows to reduce thermal gain or loss.
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall utilize automatic lighting on/off controls and energy -efficient
lighting (including parking areas) to reduce electricity consumption and associated emissions.
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall use light-colored roofing materials in residential construction
as opposed to dark roofing materials.
Bus stops shall be positioned at locations on and adjacent to the site to be determined in coordination with
the bus transit service from
that will serve the project area. Bus stops should be generally located 1 / 4
mile walking distance from Timeshare units.
The golf course shall design on -site circulation plans for clubhouse parking to reduce vehicle queuing.
A traffic signal shall be installed at the Project entrance and Avenue 52, the Project entrance and Jefferson
Street and at the intersection of Avenue 54 and Jefferson Street when and if they are warranted. The
developer of the site shall be responsible for payment of a fair share of the cost of installing these signals.
A mountain toe -of -slope buffer/mitigation concept plan has been prepared to protect peninsular big horn
sheep, and other wildlife, from entering the non -mountainous portion of the site proposed for develo ment.
This concept plan illustrates a continuos buffer to the toe -of -slope in areas where development couldpoccur
adjacent to the mountain edge. The concept plan delineates the location, acreage and native plant species
envisioned for the mitigation area. This plan shall be incorporated into the project design and shall be subject
to review by the City prior to the issuance of grading permits. A copy of this mountain toe -of -slope
buffer/mitigation concept plan is available for review at the City of La Quinta Community Development
Department.
If Bighorn Sheep enter onto the Project Site, an 8-foot fence (or the functional equivalent) between the
development and the hillside shall be constructed. The gaps should be 11 centimeters (4.3 inches) or less. If
determined necessary, the City shall construct temporary fencing while permanent fencing is constructed. The
fence shall not contain gaps in which Bihorn Sheep can be entangled. If the Agency transfer or disposes of
any of the property adjacent to the illside, the Agency sha reserve an easement sufficient for the
construction of fencing if needed in the future.
Dogs shall not be permitted to be loose within the project area, and shall be kept away from the hillside areas
through appropriate signage and fencing, where applicable.
Access into the hillside area from the site will be discouraged through the use of signs or barricades, if
necessary, unless the access is provided as part of a trail system that is approved by the USFWS and CDFG.
A construction plan shall be prepared and provide, to the extent practicable, construction activities that emit
excessive noise will be avoided adjacent to the hillside. In addition, during grading and construction
activities any blasting or pile -driving near the hillside will not occur during the period from Jan. 1 through
June 30th.
The final design of the project shall insure that road and driveways are designed to minirnize headlight shine
from vehicles onto the hillside.
In all areas adjacent to the hillsides, non -glare glass shall be used in new construction. Exterior building
lights shall not shine on the hillside. Exterior lighting shall be kept at the safest possible minimum intensity
and aimed away from the hillside.
Prior to any construction or site preparation activities that would impact the 3.4 acres of mesquite hummock,
the agency or project developer shall enter into a Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) with CDFG and an
appropriate non-profit organization whose purpose is to acquire and manage land for the purpose of
protecting special status plants and wildlife. This MOU shall provide the organization chosen the financial
resources necessary to purchase and manage 3.4 acres of mesquite hummock in the Willow Hole area or in
another area where the habitat is contiguous and large preserves already protect much of this habitat type.
The exact location and cost shall be determined through consultation with CDFG and the selected
�1 C
organization.
i
The landscape plan shall include only plants that are non -toxic to wildlife. All exotic plans such as tamarisk
and fountain grass are prohibited. Existing trees may remain.
All swimming pools located on the Project Site shall be fenced pursuant to City regulations.
Prior to the commencement of on -site grading, a 404 permit shall be obtained, if legally required, for alteration
of areas under the ACOE jurisdiction. In addition, if development activities are to take place within
streambeds or drainages under the jurisdiction of the CDFG, a streambed alteration agreement shall first be
obtained, if legally required.
Efforts shall be made to ensure that all pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and fertilizers used during the
construction and operation of the Project Site will not be harmful to wildlife.
Prior to the demolition or renovation of the on -site single family residence, asbestos containing materials
(ACM) shall be removed in accordance with current regulatory guidelines.
Between May 1 and September 30, all construction activities on the proJJ.ect site shall only occur between the
hours of 6:0 AM and 7:00 PM Monday through Friday, and from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Saturday, and
shall be prohibited on Sundays and public holidays. Between October 1 and April 30, all construction
activity on the project site shall only occur between the hours of 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through
Friday, and from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Saturday, and shall be prohibited on Sundays and public holidays.
All operational activities of the Project shall also be subject to the Noise Ordinance of the City as well.
All construction equipment operating in the planning area shall be fitted with well -maintained functional
mufflers to limit noise emissions.
To the greatest extent feasible, earth moving and hauling routes shall be located away from existing
residences.
The design, selection and placement of the mechanical equipment for various buildings shall include
consideration of the potential noise impact they may have on uses within the development site.
Silencers and/or barriers shall be provided where necessary at outdoor equipment, such as cooling towers,
air cooled condensers and refrigeration compressors/condenser units, and at the air intake and discharge
openings for building ventilation systems.
The Riverside County Fire Department, in its review of new development proposals, shall evaluate project
plans and the Department's ability to provide proper fire protection. This review shall include, but shall not
be limited to, internal circulation, project directories, street names, and numbering systems. New developments
shall comply with all City and Fire Department standards.
The Riverside County Sheriff's Department shall review new development proposals in order to evaluate
project plans and the Department's ability to provide adequate police protection. This review should include,
but not be limited to internal circulation, protect directories, street names, and numbering systems. New
developments shall comply with all established City and Sheriff standards.
The most efficient furnaces, water heaters, pool heaters and other equipment that use natural gas shall be used
in project construction. The use of kitchen appliances that use natural gas and alternative, renewable energy
sources, including solar and wind turbine technologies shall also be used to the greatest extent feasible.
Title 24 of the California Administrative Code, which addresses energy conservation in all proposed uses
shall be strictly enforced in project design and construction.
All planned uses shall be connected to the city-wide sewer system.
A recycling program shall be developed for all proposed uses. Recycling provisions for commercial and
business establishments should include separate recycling bins. Items to be recycled at commercial
establishments may include white paper, computer legal paper, cardboard, glass and aluminum cans.
Professional landscaping services from companies which compost green waste shall be utilized.
The Projects fair share of public utilities, infrastructure and improvements required to propperly service the
proposed uses shall be determined through consultation with the City Department of Public Works and paid
prior to the issuance of grading permits.
Any existing or historic septic systems located on the site shall be abandoned in accordance with Federal,
State, and local laws and regulations prior to the issuance of building permits.
Landscape designs and materials that complement the native desert environment shall be utilized in project
design and construction.
0 .�
039
Overhead utility lines shall be undergrounded to the greatest extent possible through the establishment of an
undergrounding program and guidelines subject to the review of the City Engineer and Public Works
Department.
Outdoor lighting shall be limited to the minunum height, niunber of fixtures, and intensity needed to provide
sufficient security and identification in each development, making every reasonable effort to protect the
community's night skies.
Signage shall be limited to the locations, sizes, and maintenance requirements necessary to provide functional
identification.
Safe, convenient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, screened outdoor storage/loading and other unsightly
areas, protected and enhanced outdoor seating areas, appropriate lighting levels, limited signage, and
landscaping designs that preserve and enhance visual resources shall be included in the design of any
commercial area on the Project Site.
Development proposed along designated scenic highways, roadways and corridors shall be reviewed for
compatibility with the natural and built environments to assure maximum viewshed protection and
pedestrian and vehicular activity.
All grading and development proposed within scenic viewsheds, shall be regulated to minimize adverse
impacts to these viewsheds. All grading, development and landscaping plans shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits.
During any ground altering activities associated with project grading or construction, including demolition of
existing modern structures and facilities, the project area shall be monitored by a qualified archaeological
monitor. The monitor shall have the authority to halt any activities impacting potentially significant cultural
resources until the resources can be evaluated for significance and cleared or mitigated. The monitoring
program shall also include consultation with the local Native American representatives (e.g., Torres-
p artinez and/or Morongo Reservations).
r
am
4.0 INITIAL STUDY
06 t.
041
4.0-1 The Ranch
Final — May 2002
LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
INITIAL STUDY
1. INTRODUCTION
The Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with relevant provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) of 1970 as amended, the Guidelines for Im m leentation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA
Guidelines), and the City of La Quinta Environmental Guidelines.
Section 15063(c) of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that the purposes of an Initial Study are to:
1. Provide the lead agency, in this case the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency, with information to use as the basis for
deciding whether to prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) or negative declaration;
2. Enable an applicant or lead agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared,
thereby enabling the project to qualify for a negative declaration;
3. Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by:
a. Focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant,
b. Identifying the effects determined not to be significant,
c. Explaining the reasons why potentially significant effects would not be significant, and
d. Identifying whether a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process can be used for analysis of a
project's environmental effects.
4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project;
5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a Negative Declaration that a project will not have a
significant effect on the environment;
6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs;
7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project.
According to Section 15063(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, if the lead agency determines that there is substantial
evidence that any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively, may cause a significant effect on the
environment, regardless of whether the overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial, the lead agency shall do one
of the following:
1. Prepare an EIR,
2. Use a previously prepared EIR which the lead agency determines would adequately analyze the project at hand,
or
3. Determine, pursuant to a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process, which of a project's effects were
adequately examined by an earlier EIR or negative declaration. The lead agency shall then ascertain which
effects, if any, should be analyzed in a later EIR or negative declaration.
V6
042
The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
2. PROJECT INFORMATION
Case No(s)./Project Title: The Ranch
General Plan Designation: Tourist Commercial (TC), Golf Course (G), Open Space (OS)
Existing Zoning: Low Density Residential (RL), Commercial Office (CO), Open Space (OS)
County Assessor's Information: Map Book No. 770
770-200-009 thru 010
770-260-017
772-150-001 thru 005
772-290-001 thru 007, and -009 thru 013
772-310-002 thru 007, and -009 thru 013
List of other agencies whose approval is required: City of La Quinta
(e.g., permits, financial approval, participating agreement)
Site Description: (Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil
stability, plants and animals, historical or scenic aspects.)
The Project Site consists of 707 acres of land, of which 182 acres is a portion of the Coral Reef Mountains with steep
terrain. The non -mountainous portion of the project site, located west of Jefferson Street and south of Avenue 52, has
historically been used for agricultural purposes, including citrus orchards. The majority of the site is now fallow
agricultural land. All agricultural plants have been removed from the site. Vegetation communities on the site include
a small amount of native vegetation, fallow agricultural land, and disturbed vegetation. The areas of native veggetation
on the site have been disturbed by a number of human activities including off -road vehicle (ORV) usage, trash dum ing,
and equestrian activity. Existing structures on site include 3 small office/maintenance buildings, 1 of which is
abandoned, an abandoned single-family home and two vacant trailers. A small area in the western part of the site
along the base of the Coral Reef Mountains is the home to the Dave Pelz Short Game School for Golf with its
associated administrative building. The Coachella Canal divides the Project Site into two separate areas. The canal
enters the site from the east and then turns south halfway through the site. As it reaches the Coral Reef Mountains, it
wraps around the toe of the slope and exits the Project Site when it crosses 54`h Street at the southern boundary.
Surrounding Properties: (Describe the surrounding properties and the effect the proposed project will have on the
area.)
The regional location of the City of La Quinta is illustrated in Figure 1. The City encompasses approximately 31
square miles of both mountainous and desert terrain land area in the southwestern portion of the Coachella Valley.
La Quinta is a community of which nearly 13 scjuare miles consist of protected mountain open space, parkland or golf
course open space designations. La Quinta is located within the Coachella Valley portion of central Riverside
County, in southern California. This area forms the northwest extension of the Colorado Desert in southeastern
California. It is characterized by arid, sparsely vegetated desert land. The valley floor is composed generally of sandy
soils that were deposited through the effects of water and wind erosion. Westerly winds are persistent, and contribute
to extensive erosion and the formation of blowsand activity and sand dunes. Vehicular access to the Coachella Valley
is provided by the Interstate 10 Freeway, providing an east -west linkage between the Los Angeles metropolitan area to
the west, and the desert areas to the east.
Figure 2 illustrates the local vicinity of the Project Site. The proposed project is located in the southeastern area of the
City. The site boundaries include Jefferson Street to the east, Avenue 54 to the south, Avenue 52 to the north, and the
Coral Reef Mountains to the west. Land uses in the project vicinity include a custom home residential subdivision to
the north, undeveloped properties to the east approved for the development of golf course and residential uses, the
1,650-acre PGA West golf and residential community to the south and mountains to the west.
Project Sponsor's Name and Address: La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
Project Description: (Describe the whole action involved, inchtding but not limited to later phases of the project, and any
secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation.
The La Quinta Redevelopment Agency (Agency) is proposing to acquire the 707-acre site, including 182-acres of
mountainous land to be preserved as permanent open space, located at the southwest corner of Jefferson Street and
Avenue 52. The acquisition of the 525-acres of non -mountainous property would be by purchase agreement while the
acquisition of the 182-acres of mountainous land would be b dedication or donation. The non -mountainous portion
of the site would be developed with public golf courses andyresort uses consistent with the La Quinta General Plan
Land Use Map Designations for the site. As shown in Figure 3, the Project Site is designated under the 2002 General 06
Plan Update for golf course uses with tourist commercial uses in the center of the site. The golf course designation
2 The Ranch
April 2, 2002 0
43
Bernardino
National
s
5 mi. 2.5 mi. 0 mi. 5 mi.
FIGUREI
Regional Locat
223-09.Oa/02
044
Country Club Dr.
iB, uda Dunes >z,
Airport
0 ' `ornt
Bermuda Dunes It? 5.� -
Country Club a
t �a
Y
" ' Fred Waring Dr/M.NO
t Indian Springs tee/
Country Club
i � �� zap t� �_.�/ ?� g•
=r
.'
Indian Wells
Country Club
x �
&Tersnlige.t�# w.� fs �.�- SOth Ave.
52nd Ave.
r ��.� � �,� �f' rr��` �� �: �•� � � � � � Res�d�tt�cal�(�`�1� r
LEGEND
Project Site10
,:..-
6000' 3000' 0' 6000'
_�
tn�
FIGUREZ
_ Projec �te Vicinity
223-09.03/02
045
SOURCE: l {,-- (:r -- E—I 2.1 Dly of Le OuNM G-1.1 P- IRecomm -U. Ml- 20. 2002.
�� a -_-
` NOT TO SCALE
3
FIpURE
a _ Existing General Plan Land Use Designations
Initial Study
allows both public and private golf courses with their associated ancillary uses, while the tourist commercial
designation allows resort hotels, recreational uses, conference centers and ancillary retail shops. The tourist
commercial designation also allows Timeshare units with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
The Proposed Project includes two 18-hole public golf courses with a 25,000 square foot clubhouse as well as a 9-hole
public golf course which would accommodate a junior golf program. The proposed resort uses would include a 250-
room hotel with a 10,000 square foot conference center, 300 Timeshare fractional or condo hotel units (Timeshare) and
25,000 square feet of ancillary commercial uses. The Agency is proposing to acquire the Project Site at this time.
Subsequent discretionary actions required to develop the site include adoption of a Specific Plan, a zone change to
make the zoning designations consistent with the General Plan land use designations, a Conditional Use Permit for the
300 Timeshare units, a Site Development Permit and a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the site to accommodate the
proposed uses. Additional design features to be incorporated into the pproject include passive park space, trails, and
view corridors. The existing Pe�z short game golf school may remain. No development is planned on the 182 acres of
the Coral Reef Mountains located on the western portion of the Project Site.
Site History:
The Original Specific Plan was adopted in March 1985 with a Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH#: 85050112) and
was called the Oak Tree West Specific Plan (Specific Plan 85-006). This plan called for a 200 unit Hotel (18 Hole
Public Golf Course), 45 Holes of Golf (Including 18 Hole Public Course), 2,245 Dwelling Units on 1,020 acres, a 25,000
square -foot golf club house, a 200,000 square -foot office/commercial center on 3.5 acres, and 115 acres of open space.
Since the adoption of the on final specific plan, three amendments to the specific plan have occurred. The first
amendment (resolution 98-11 , a negative declaration was approved in October 1989, the second amendment
(resolution 98-13) was categorical exempt from CEQA and adopted in February 1998, while the third and most recent
amendment (resolution 98-85), a Mitigated Negative Declaration, was adopted in July 1998. This amendment added
two new development sites to the Specific Plan area. One 2-acre site (formerly CVWD reservoir site) in the northwest
corner of the plan area, with one 3-acre site on Avenue 54, 1,500 feet from Jefferson Street. As a result of this
amendment, the Specific Plan allowed for the development of 588 acres of Low Density Residential uses, 400 acres of
golf courses, 3.5 acres as office commercial uses and 175.5 acres of open space for a total developable area of 1,167
acres. This acreage total included land that was named 'The Citrus.' It should be noted that The Citrus was originally
a part of the Oak Tree West Specific Plan. All land within The Citrus has been developed consistent with the
approvals for Specific Plan 85-006 - Oak Tree West and is no longer included as part of the Project Site.
047
The Raech
April 2, 2002
Initial Shady
3. DETERMINATION
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact
that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the analysis
on the following pages.
1-1
Land Use and Planning
®
Transportation/Circulation
® Public Services
❑
Population and Housing
®
Biological Resources
® Utilities and Service Systems
®
Geophysical
Energy and Mineral Resources
® Aesthetics
®
Water
®
Hazards
® Cultural Resources
Air Quality
®
Noise
❑ Recreation
❑
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Environmental Determination.
The basis of this initial evaluation:
The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described have been added to the project. A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
The project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ❑
REPORT is required.
The proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has
been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on the following pages, if the
effect is a "potentially significant impact" or potentially significant unless mitigated." An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be
addressed.
Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a ❑
significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated ursuat to that
earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the propose dpproject.
COMMENTS:
Director
Date: April 2, 2002
The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Explanation of Evaluations:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported
if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved
(e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A 'No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based
on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to
pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole of the action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, ctunulative
as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there
are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less than
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: Significant Unless Significant
Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact
a. Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ❑
b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over
the project?
c. Be incompatible with existing land use in the Elvicinity?
d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.,
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses)?
e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an El established community (including a loco income or u
El X
minority community)?
Documentation:
a-c) As shown on Figure 3, the Project Site is designated on the 2002 General Plan Update as Golf Course (G),
Tourist Commercial (TC) and Open Space (OS) with a Hillside Overlay that exists over the portion of the site
containing the Coral Reef Mountains. Although the non -mountainous portions of the site are currently zoned as
Low Density Residential (RL) and Commercial Office (CO), the Project includes a zone Change that would
change the zoning classifications to Tourist Commercial (TC) and Golf Course (G). This would result in the
zoning of the site being consistent with the General Plan land use designations. The Golf Course area exists on
the northern, northeastern and eastern portions of the site, while the Tourist Commercial area is situated in the
interior of the site. A small portion of the site is also designated as Tourist Commercial along Jefferson Street,
just north of where the Coachella Canal enters the site from the east. All uses would be planned in a manner
that is consistent with the land use designations established in the General Plan. The planned golf courses,
clubhouse, hotel with conference center, and ancillary commercial uses are all consistent with the two land use
designations. It should be noted that Timeshare units are permitted in the Tourist Commercial land use category
with the approval of a Conditional Use Pemut. The nearest surrounding uses are a residential subdivision to
the north and -PGA West located to the south. The Proposed Project would develop land uses that are similar to
those in PGA West to the south and recently approved for the property to the east of the site. The proposed golf
courses would be developed along the site boundaries and would act as a buffer to all surrounding uses. No
significant impacts associated with land use conflicts would occur.
d) As documented in the 2002 General Plan, the Project Site is designated as Golf Course and Tourist Commercial.
No portion of the site is designated with an agricultural overlay. Additionally, no portion of the site has been
identified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance on the State Department of
Conservation Important Farmland Maps.' Therefore, although small portions of the site are used for growing
sod for golf courses, development of the Proposed Project would not result in a significant impact to agricultural
resources.
1 Taken from the Department of Conservation Website, http://loww.consrv.ca.gov/. 061
040
8 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
e) The Project Site is primarily undeveloped aside from a few scattered structures. There is no existing established
commLuuty within the project boundaries. Furthermore, the Project Site is presently in an undeveloped state,
bordered to the north, east and south by residential and golf course uses with limited commercial land use
designations. Development of the Proposed Project would not disrupt or divide an existing community or low
income housing. Development of the Project Site, as proposed, would implement the City of La Quinta General
Plan. No significant impacts would occur.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
proposal:
a. Cumulatively exceed official or local population
projections?
b. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly
or indirectly (e.g., through proJ'ects in an undeveloped
area or extension of major infrastructure)?
C. Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing?
Documentation:
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Less than
Significant
Unless
Significant
Impact
Mitigated
Impact No Impact
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑ ❑ ❑
a-c) The Proposed Project would introduce land uses consistent with the General Plan Land Use designations for the
site adopted in March 2002. No portion of the site is designated for residential use under the Project. Timeshare
units, planned as part of the Project, would not be permanent residences. The Timeshare units would attract
visitors to the city as opposed to adding permanent residents to the City. As the planned uses would be
consistent with the land use designations for the site, growth attributable to the proposed project has already
been accounted for in the most recent General Plan and Certified EIR. Public infrastructure required to serve the
project exists in the local vicinity. No infrastructure extensions would be required as a result of Project
implementation. Given that the Timeshare units would not increase the permanent population of the City and
that there are no existing residences on the Project Site, the project would not induce substantial growth in the
area or displace existing housing. No impacts to population and housing would occur.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
05�
The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in
or expose people to potential impacts involving:
a. Fault rupture?
b. Seismic ground shaking?
C. Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
d. Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
e. Landslides or mudflows?
f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading or fill?
g Subsidence of the land?
h. Expansive soils?
i. Unique geologic or physical features?
Documentation:
Potentially
Significant
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Less than
Significant
Impact
❑
Mitigated
❑
Impact
❑
No Impact
❑
®
❑
❑
❑
❑
®
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
®
❑
❑
❑
❑
VIX,
❑
❑
®
❑
❑
❑
®
❑
❑
❑
❑
a-i) A City-wide geotechnical analysis was recently conducted for the 2002 General Plan and Certified EIR. As
documented in the General Plan, the site is underlain by Quaternary Terrace Deposits. This soil type is
predominately found along the basin floor and does not provide any major engineering concerns. As with any
area in the southern California region, the Project Site would be subject to ground shaking during a seismic
event. No evidence of an Alquist-Priolo zone, or active or potential active faulting was encountered anywhere
within the General Plan boundaries. The Maximum Probable Earthquake (MPE) for the City of La Quinta is a
7.2 while the Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE) is an 8.0 when measured on the Richter Scale. Given the
probability of ground shaking, there is also a potential for liquefaction and associated dynamic settlement, as
the soils at the site have the potential for hydroconsolidation with the addition of water. Furthermore, as the
Coachella Canal bisects the property, the General Plan indicates that the canal is a levee with a potential
liquefaction and lateral spreading hazard. As determined through a geotechnical investigation conducted on the
Project Site, groundwater is expected to be deeper than 60 feet as soil borings to depths of 50 feet did not
encounter any trace of groundwater? The absence of shallow groundwater indicates that the potential for
liquefaction and seismically -induced settlement at the Project Site is low. As there are no bodies of water or
active volcanoes in the vicinity, the potential for seiches, tsunamis and volcanoes is minimal. Loose soils
observed on the site have a potential for settlement if subjected to structural loads if left in their present
condition. These loose surficial soils are also subject to wind erosion and transport. Ground subsidence due to
the lowering of the existing groundwater table is considered unlikely as no such subsidence has occurred
anywhere near the City of La Quinta. The presence of expansive soils in the City of La Quinta is common As
the project would comply with site specific engineering recommendations and modem construction techniques,
geotechnical impacts would be less than significant with the implementation of the following mitigation
measures.
Mitigation Measures
Prior to the design and construction of any structural improvements, a comprehensive design level geotechnical
evaluations shall be prepared that includes subsurface exploration and laboratory testing. Recommendations
for grading/earthwork, surface and subsurface drainage, foundations, pavement structural sections, and other
pertinent geotechnical design considerations shall be formulated and implemented based on the findings of this
evaluation.
Al buildings planned as a result of the Proposed Project shall be constructed in conformance with the Uniform
Building Code, as adopted by the City of La Quinta.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Corporation, Limited Geotechnical Investigation, r, ,., ,-
November 1999. 0 i
051
10 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Less than
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
Significant
Unless
Significant
Impact
Mitigated
Impact
No Impact
a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface runoff?
b. Exposure of people or property to water -related
El
1:1
hazards such as flooding?
C. Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved
❑
®
❑
El
oxygen, or turbidity)?
d. �Chaan es in the amount of surface water in any water
❑
❑
❑
e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of
movements?
❑
❑
Elwater
f. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
❑
❑
Xi
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
g Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
h. Impacts to groundwater quality?
®
❑
i. Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies?
❑
❑
❑
Documentation:
a-d) The proposed proJ'ect would convert primarily vacant land into a developed urbanized setting. A site specific
water cjuality evaluation was prepared to analyze potential water quality issues associated with development
of the site. As pervious soils would be developed as a result of project implementation, there would be a slight
change in the absorption rate, and drainage pattern of the site. Additionally, there would be an increase in the
amount of storm runoff from the site. Through site -specific mitigation measures, the increase in the amount of
water runoff from the site would be less than significant. The report further determined that as the Project Site
is outside the 500-year flood area and would develop on -site water detention basins, there would not be any
significant flood -related impacts.' As no surface water bodies existing within the Project Site, no impacts to
surface water bodies would occur. However, the project would introduce small man-made water ponds and
lakes that introduces a potential for landscaping products to impact the water quality. Mitigation measures
would reduce this potential impact to less than sigruhcant. Finally, as no surface waters exist on the site, no
rivers, streams or dry washes would be significantly impacted as a result of project development.
e-i) Domestic and irrigation water is provided throughout La Quinta and the eastern Coachella Valley by the
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The CVWD serves an area of approximately 1,000 square miles
within the Counties of Riverside, Imperial and San Diego. The main source of potable water provided to La
Quinta is from an underground aquifer beneath the valley. Irrigation water is supplied from this same aquifer
and from the Colorado River via the Coachella Canal, and is consumed generallyy in the area from Indio and La
Quinta south to the Salton Sea. The CVWD was contacted in March 2002' in order to determine the
availability of water service for the Project Site and whether or not it could supply the proposed uses.
According to the CVWD, there is ample water supply to serve the proposed project without substantially or
adversely changing the quantity, quality or flow of groundwater resources. This is consistent with the findings
of the water quality evaluation completed for the Project Site.' Potable water would be provided to the project
byy the CVWD through the existing 12-inch water main located in Jefferson Street and 18-inch lines in Avenue
52. When possible, non -potable water supplies would be utilized for construction purposes. This reduces the
overall demand for potable water. During the construction phases of development, non -potable water would be
used to suppress dust generated by eart-hmoving activities, the operation of vehicles on dirt surfaces, and
exposed dirt surfaces. This water would be obtained from the Coachella Canal. Water for irrigation of the golf
course and landscape setbacks would be obtained from the Coachella Canal. In a continued effort to reduce the
total amount of water either used or wasted, specific water conservation measures for both landscaping and
Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Corporation, Water Quality Evaluation, June 2000.
Jan Zimmerman, Development Service Supervisor, Coaclella Valley Water District, Marcli 2002.
Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Corporation, Water Quality Evaluation, June 2000. 0 1 ;y
052
i l Tlie Rn,tdi
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
irrigation, and plumbing controls may be identified and placed as conditions on the connection of the project to
the CVWD's facilities. In addition to these CVWD conditions, with the implementation of the following
mitigation measures, no significant water related impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
At such time that non -potable water sources become available to the project site, the project shall be connected
to this resource and utilize the non -potable water for irrigation purposes.
During construction activities, water trucks are to acquire water from non -potable water sources, such as
reclaimed water and/or canal water.
A h drolog master plan shall be prepared for the Project Specific Plan. Further, a hydrology study shall be
prepared for the hydrology, master plan and submitted to the City of La Quinta for approval prior to the
issuance of grading permits. This study shall demonstrate that the project would construct storm drainage and
hydrologic improvements, such as on -site stormwater retention basins, that conform to the City's master
hydrology and storm drain improvement program as well as implement regional and local requirements, policies
and programs.
Drought tolerant landscaping shall be utilized as a means of reducing water consumption.
Prior to the initiation of any construction activity on the project site, a NPDES permit from the RWQCB shall be
filed for. A Notice of Intent (NOI), Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWI'PP), and Monitoring Plan are
requirements of the NPDES permit. The SWPPP shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) in compliance
with the NPDES program requirements.
Any existing groundwater wells located on the site that are no longer in use shall be abandoned in accordance
with Federal, State, and local laws and regulations prior to the issuance of building permits.
Prior to operation of the golf course, the golf course operator shall prepare a Golf Course Management Plan that
includes an irrigation plan, water usage plan, and chemical management plan in order to reduce, to the extent
feasible, golf course irrigation runoff and percolation into the groundwater basin.
Design of new roads, golf courses, man-made ponds, common landscape areas, storm water basins, and other
facilities shall incorporate proper engineering controls to channel storm and irrigation runoff into
detention/retention facilities that are sized to accommodate design year storms and that incorporate filtration
systems or other devices to reduce the potential for herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers, and other contaminants to
percolate to groundwater or surface water runoff.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Less than
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
Significant
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
c. Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or
VN
cause any change in climate?
d. Create objectionable odors?
El
El
El
X
Documentation:
a-d) Construction and operational air quality modeling was conducted based on the size of the Project Site, types of
uses planned for development and their corresponding trip rates. Based on these, as well as other variables, air
quality emissions forecasted for the Proposed Project would not exceed any air quality emission thresholds
after mitigation." Additionally, the project would not introduce any permanent residents within the Project Site.
There is no potential to expose sensitive receptors to harmful pollutants. All the planned uses for the Proposed
Project are fairly typical land uses found throughout the City. None of the uses pose any special concern with
Air quality model results are provided in Appendix A.
A J, A
12
The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
regards to harmful or odorous pollutants that could negatively affect sensitive receptors located outside the
Project Site boundaries. Given the size and scale of the Project, which consists largely of open space golf course
uses, the project will not have any noticeable effect on local climate and atmospheric conditions. With the
implementation of the following mitigation measures, no significant impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
Construction equipment shall be phased and operated in a manner to ensure the lowest construction -related
pollutant emission levels practical, and shall require the use of water trucks, temporary irrigation systems and
other measures which will limit fugitive dust emissions during site disturbance and construction.
Air quality control measures identified in the Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan shall be
implemented.
A PM10 Management Plan for construction operations shall be submitted prior to the issuance of grading
permits. The plan shall include dust management controls such as:
Water site and equipment morning and evening
• Spread soil binders on site, unpaved roads, and parking areas
• Re-establish ground cover on construction site through seeding and watering
• Pave construction roads, where appropriate
• Operate street -sweepers on paved roads adjacent to site
The following measures shall be implemented to reduce construction related traffic congestion:
• Configure construction parking to minimize traffic disturbance
• Minimize obstruction of through -traffic lanes
• Provide flag person to ensure safety at construction sites, as necessary
• Schedule operations affecting roadways for off-peak traffic hours
Provide rideshare incentives to construction personnel
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall utilize solar or low emission water heaters to reduce natural gas
consumption and emissions.
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall utilize built-in energy -efficient appliances to reduce energy
consumption and emissions.
Shade trees shall be provided in close proximity to Timeshare, hotel and golf facility structures to reduce
building heating/cooling needs.
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall utilize energy -efficient and automated controls for air
conditioners to reduce energy consumption and emissions.
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall be constructed using special sunlight -filtering window coatings
or double -paned windows to reduce thermal gain or loss.
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall utilize automatic lighting on/off controls and energy -efficient
lighting (including parking areas) to reduce electricity consumption and associated emissions.
Timeshare and golf facility construction shall use light-colored roofing materials in residential construction as
opposed to dark roofing materials.
Bus stops shall be positioned at locations on and adjacent to the site to be determined in coordination with the
bus transit service provider that will serve the project area. Bus stops should be generally located 1 /4 mile
walking distance from Timeshare units.
The golf course shall design on -site circulation plans for clubhouse parking to reduce vehicle queuing.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
w+ �a
`t
054
13 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
Potentially
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Potentially Significant Less than
Would the proposal result in: Significant Unless Significant
Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact
a. Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
b. Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp ❑
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible VN
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
c. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby ❑ ❑17
uses? VN
d. Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site?
e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? 17
f. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)?
g, Rail, waterborne, or air traffic impacts?
Documentation:
a) The Proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan. All planned land uses have been selected, planned
and configured according to the land use designations illustrated on the City's Land Use map.' Additionally,
the type and amount of land uses included in the project is consistent with the land uses assumed on the site in
the General Plan EIR traffic model. As concluded in the 2002 General Plan EIR, no significant impacts would
result. A traffic analysis was prepared for a similar project planned on the proposed site. In order to further
analyze project -specific transportation related issues of the project, an update traffic analysis was prepared
that compared the Proposed Project to that which was formerly proposed. The daily trip generation for the
formerly proposed project was 25,596 trips. Based on trip rates for the planned uses, the Proposed Project
would generate a total of 6,383 trip, as shown in Table 1, a reduction of over 19,000 daily trips when
compared to the former project. When compared to the former project, his represents approximately a 75 percent
reduction in the total number of trips. As concluded in the updated traffic analysis, all of the study roadway
intersections would operate at LOS D or better during peak hours. Implementation of the following mitigation
measures would ensure that no significant impacts would occur.
Table 1.
Proposed Land Uses
Daily
Land Use Quantity Trips
Golf Course 45 holes 1,608
Resort Hotel 250 rooms 2,000
Timeshare Units 300 units 1,758
cialt Re ail 25,000 s,.q, ft. 1 017
Total 6,383
Source: RKIK & Associates, Inc., The Ranch Project Change, Supplemental
Traffic Evaluation, March 2002.
b-g) No project specific design plans have been prepared for the Proposed Project which layout and define access
points, internal circulation, parking provisions or alternative transportation routes and programs. The Project
would be designed and developed in a manner consistent with the General Plan and City's Municipal Code.
These regulatory documents dictate and govern guidelines and standards for the design of proposed
developments. Specifically, requirements for site access, parking and circulation as well as alternative modes of
transportation are contained in these resources. Project level site plans would be developed in accordance with
these regulatory documents and would be subject to approval by the City and the City's Traffic Engineer to
ensure compliance and implementation of all requirements. The Project would not impact rail, water or air
traffic as it is not located in an area that is adjacent to any of these travel facilities. No significant impacts
would occur.
La Quinta General Plan, Exhibit 2.1, p. 16.
055
14 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
Mitigation Measures:
A traffic signal shall be installed at the Project entrance and Avenue 52, the Project entrance and Jefferson Street
and at the intersection of Avenue 54 and Jefferson Street when and if they are warranted. The developer of the
site shall be responsible for payment of a fair share of the cost of installing these signals.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
Potentially
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Potentially Significant Less than
Would the proposal result in impacts to: Significant Unless Significant
Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact
a. Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their ❑ ® El El
(including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals, and birds)?
b. Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? 171
c. Locally -designated natural communities (e.g., oak ❑ El ® Elforest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
d Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal
pool)?
e. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ❑ ❑
Documentation:
a-c) The 707 acre Project Site has historically been used for agricultural purposes and the majority of the non -
mountainous portion of site consists of disturbed non-native vegetation. Five vegetation communities occur on
the 525 acre non -mountainous portion of the Project Site. These five vegetation communities consist of disturbed
vegetation, agricultural lands, tamarisk groves, desert saltbush scrub and mesquite hummocks. The majority of
the site, approximately, 440 acres, are disturbed areas consisting of abandoned citrus groves, sod fields, and
areas containing the few existing buildings on the site. Approximately 40 acres of the site is presently used to
grow turf for golf course use. Tamarisk groves occupy approximately 8 acres of the site. Native plant
communities on the site are limited to approximately 8 acres of desert saltbush scrub and 3.4 acres of mesquite
hummocks. The Coachella Valley Canal occupies approximately 26 acres of the site.
A series of biological surveys have been conducted on the site since 1999. General biological surveys were
conducted in March and April of 1999. Thirty-one special -status wildlife species are known to occur in the
general project vicinity. Focused surveys for five of these wildlife species and wetlands were conducted in July
and August of 2000. Focused surveys for Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard, flat -tailed homed lizard,
Coachella Valley round -tailed ground squirrel, Palm Springs pocket mouse, Coachella Valley grasshopper and
peninsular bighorn sheep were conducted based on the recommendation of the USFWS and CDFG at a meeting
on the site in 1999. All other sensitive species were surveyed for in conjunction with these surve s or the
previous surveys. None of these five species were observed during focused surveys. One species or special -
concern, a Loggerhead shrike, was observed on the site during the 1999 surveys. A second special -status
species, the black -tailed gnatcatchers, was observed on an ad' cent site during surveys 1999 and, for this
reason, is considered to have a high potential to be present on the site. Suitable habitat for these two species
comprises very few acres and as the site is not likely to sustain a large population of either species, the removal
of suitable habitat within the project boundaries is not a significant impact.
The Santa Rosa Mountains have historically provided habitat for peninsular bighorn sheep, a state and
federally listed endangered species. Additional focused surveys performed in 1999 found no evidence of
bighorn sheep in the vicinity of the Proposed Project. The USFWS has defined the "essential habitat" of the
peninsular bighorn sheep. Essential habitat covers the entire portion of the Coral Reef Mountains within the
Project boundaries down to the toe -of -slope. As no development would infringe above the toe -of -slope, no
portion of the project would be developed in the essential peninsular bighorn sheep habitat. Nonetheless,
standard measures are included for the project should peninsular bighorn sheep come on site. Through the
implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, no significant impacts would occur.
Seven special -status plant species are known to occur in the general project vicinity. A special -status plant
survey was completed on the site in April 2000. No individuals or populations of Coachella Valley milk -vetch
were found dunngg these focused surveys. In addition, no other special -status plant species were observed
during surveys. No significant impacts to special status plant species, therefore, will occur.
V i li
056
15 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
One special -status vegetation community occurs within the project boundaries. Mesquite hummocks, classified
by CDFG as "partially stabilized desert sand fields," are considered a sensitive habitat type. This vegetation
com iw-dty is ranked "threatened" by the CDFG. Two mesquite hummocks occupy approximately 3.5 acres of
the Project Site. These two hummocks have been degraded by trash dumping and OR activity. However, the
loss of 3.5 acres of this habitat is adverse and is considered a potentially significant impact. With the
implementation of the mitigation measures outlined below, this impact would be less than significant.
d) A wetland delineation, completed in August of 2000, identified four potential jurisdictional areas on the Project
Site including a system of channels, a swale, and two excavated retention basins. All of these features, except
one of the excavated basins, were dry on the surface at the time of the survey.
Two converging channels run from the base of the Coral Reef Mountains to the Coachella Valley Canal levee.
The main channel is 250 feet long, 4 feet deep, and varies from 30 to 50 feet wide. Vegetation along the channels
is dominated by saltbush (Atriplex spp). The total ACOE and CDFG jurisdictional acreages of this feature are
0.1 acres and 0.18 acres, respectively.
The swale occurs in the vicinity of the channels and was created by the canal levee preventing surface water
run-off to the east. As a result, the swale extends 2,200 feet along the western edge of the canal, varying from 10
to 30 feet in width. No anaerobic soil indicators or hydrophytic lants were present at this feature. Because
this wet area is the result of human activity and lacks two ofpthe three characteristics used to determine
jurisdiction, it is unlikely that this feature is jurisdictional. However, the jurisdictional determination was
deferred to the regulatory agencies.
The first of the two retention basins is located in the northern portion of the proposed project area, south of the
Citrus Golf Course Community. This site was inundated at the time of the delineation and is expected to be so
for most of the year, given the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. The surface of the 2.2 acre basin, used to
collect runoff from the community to the north, had collected water several inches deep across almost the entire
basin. Despite the fact that the basin meets the physical criteria of a wetland, it may not be jurisdictional
because it was artificially created. In cases such as this, jurisdiction is determined by the regulatory agencies.
The other retention basin, apparently used as water storage for orange grove irrigation occupies the northeast
corner of the site and was not inundated at the time the delineation was performed. However, the soil was
damp below the surface and faint evidence of anaerobic soil conditions was present. This basin occupies 1.8
acres and harbors an assemblage of plants that narrowly meets the hydrophytic plant criterion. Because this
basin was artificially created and has since been abandoned and because the delineation was conducted during
and extremely dry time of year, determining wetland hydrology was difficult. However, the soil dampness and
basin topography contributed to the determination that wetland hydrology was present. The jurisdictional
status could not be determined for this artificial feature and requires a regulatory agency determination.
A total of 5.29 acres of potential wetlands that occur on the site may be subject to ACOE/CDFG jurisdiction.'
As no specific project level site and landscape plans have been prepared, it cannot be determined at this time if
any of these resources would be impacted by the proposed development. Given the limited coverage of the site
by these resources compared to the size of the planned golf courses, the resources could easily be planned into
the golf course or other portions of the site where they would not be disturbed. Should the site and landscape
plan not include these features, any development, temporary or permanent, within areas under ACOE
jurisdiction would be regulated by this agency and would potentiall require a Section 404 individual or
nationwide permit before this development could proceed. In adYdition, development activities within
streambeds, lakes, and drainages are also subject to regulatory action by the CDFG under Section 1600 of the
California Fish and Game Code. CDFG jurisdiction extends to all riparian vegetation in the streambed and
banks of these areas. Approval of a CDFG Streambed Alteration Agreement would be required prior to the
initiation of actions under this agency's jurisdiction. Because development of the Project Site could remove all
or some of the potential wetlands on -site and because these areas are regulated by state and federal resource
agencies, this loss would be considered a significant impact without the implementation of the following
mitigation measures.
The proposed Project Site is surrounded on two sides by mostly developed land, consisting of residences,
agricultural crops, and fallow or abandoned cropland. The Coral Reef Mountains border the western edge of
the site and constitute a large, natural open space. There is one area adjacent to and east of the proposed project
that contains native scrub habitat. This area is not directly connected to any large open spaces and native
habitat adjacent to it is patchy and disjunct. Therefore, the Project Site does not serve as a movement corridor
between large open spaces.
Mitigation Measures
A mountain toe -of -slope buffer/mitigation concept plan has been prepared to protect peninsular big horn sheep,
and other wildlife, from entering the non -mountainous portion of the site proposed for development. This
Jurisdictional Delineation Report, The Ranch at La Quinta, Impact Sciences, September 2000.
� 6
057
16
The Raiwit
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
concept plan illustrates a continuos buffer to the toe -of -slope in areas where development could occur adjacent
to the mountain edge. The concept plan delineates the location, acreage and native plant species envisioned for
the mitigation area. This plan shallbeincorporated into the project design and shall be subject to review by the
City prior to the issuance of t acting permits. A copy of this mountain toe -of -slope buffer/mitigation concept
plan is available for review at the City of La Quinta Community Development Department.
If Bighorn Sheep enter onto the Project Site, an 8-foot fence (or the functional equivalent) between the
development and the hillside shall be constructed. The gaps should be 11 centimeters (4.3 inches) or less. If
determined necessary, the City shall construct temporary fencing while permanent fencing is constructed. The
fence shall not contain gaps in which Bighorn Sheep can be entangled. If the Agency transfer or disposes of any
of the property adjacent to the hillside, the Agency shall reserve an easement sufficient for the construction of
fencing if needed in the future.
Dogs shall not be permitted to be loose within the project area, and shall be kept away from the hillside areas
through appropriate signage and fencing, where applicable.
Access into the hillside area from the site will be discouraged through the use of signs or barricades, if
necessary, unless the access is provided as part of a trail system that is approved by the USFWS and CDFG.
A construction plan shall be prepared and provide, to the extent practicable, construction activities that emit
excessive noise will be avoided adjacent to the hillside. In addition, during grading and construction activities
any blasting or pile -driving near the hillside will not occur during the period from Jan. 1 through June 30th.
The final design of the project shall insure that road and driveways are designed to minimize headlight shine
from vehicles onto the hillside.
In all areas adjacent to the hillsides, non -glare glass shall be used in new construction. Exterior building. lights
shall not shine on the hillside. Exterior lighting shall be kept at the safest possible minimum intensity and aimed
away from the hillside.
Prior to any construction or site preparation activities that would impact the 3.4 acres of mesquite hummock, the
agency or project developer shall enter into a Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) with CDFG and an
appropriate non-profit organization whose purpose is to acquire and manage land for the purpose of protecting
special status plants and wildlife. This MOU shall provide the organization chosen the financial resources
necessary to purchase and manage 3.4 acres of mesquite hummock in the Willow Hole area or in another area
where the habitat is contiguous and large preserves already protect much of this habitat type. The exact
location and cost shall be determined through consultation with DFG and the selected organization.
The landscape plan shall include only plants that are non -toxic to wildlife. All exotic plans such as tamarisk
and fountain grass are prohibited. Existing trees may remain.
All swimming pools located on the Project Site shall be fenced pursuant to City regulations.
Prior to the commencement of on -site grading, a 404 permit shall be obtained, if legally required, for alteration of
areas under the ACOE jurisdiction. In addition, if development activities are to take place within streambeds or
drainages under the jurisdiction of the CDFG, a streambed alteration agreement shall first be obtained, if legally
required.
Efforts shall be made to ensure that all pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and fertilizers used during the
construction and operation of the Project Site will not be harmful to wildlife.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
b. Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner?
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Significant
Unless
Less than
Significant
Impact
Mitigated
Impact
No Impact
Documentation:
a) Energy services are provided to the City of La Quinta from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID). The IID
operates six substations which serve the City. As stated in the Certified General Plan EIR, the IID has stated
that they would be able to supply electricity to future developments. All buildings constructed as a result of the
458
17
The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
project would be required to conform to Title 24 of the Uniform Building Code, which requires energy efficient
envelop construction, equipment and fixtures. Landscaping and irrigation plans will be reviewed to ensure
implementation of water efficient measures and drought tolerant plants. Furthermore, development of the
Proposed Pro]'ect would be consistent with the General Plan. Impacts associated with the increased demand on
electricity and energy resources have been addressed in the General Plan EIR. As the Proposed Project would
conform to all standard energy efficient building codes, no significant impacts to energy consumption would
occur.
b) Most of the developable areas in the City are located in areas with a minimal presence of significant mineral
deposits. The sole mineral production site within the City is currently non -operative and is not located on the
Project Site. Development of the proposed Project Site would not occur on, or inhibit the production of, any
mineral deposits.'
Non-renewable resources, such as natural gas, petroleum products, petrochemical construction materials, steel,
copper and other metals, sand and gravel are considered to be commodities which are available in a finite
supply. The processes that created these resources occur over a long period of time. Therefore, the replacement
of these resources would not occur over the life of the Project. To varying degrees, these materials are all
readily available and some materials, such as sand and gravel, are abundant. Other commodities, such as
metals, natural gas, and petroleum products, are also readily available, but are finite in supply. If not consumed
by this Project, these resources would likely be committed to other projects in the region intended to meet the
anticipated growth outlined in the General Plan. Furthermore, the investment of resources in the Project would
be typical of the level of investment normally required for a project of similar scale. Provided that all standard
building codes, including energy conservation standards, are followed, no wasteful use of non-renewable
resources is anticipated.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Less than
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
Significant
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. A risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not limited to:
oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)?
b. Possible interference with an emergency response
El
u
U
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
c. The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
d. Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
Elhealth
hazards?
e. Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
171
grass, or trees?
Documentation:
a-e) The Proposed Project would involve development of golf courses, a hotel, Timeshare units and associated
commercial uses. None of the planned uses represent uses that pose a substantial risk of explosion or release of
hazardous materials. Furthermore, the planned uses do not pose any health hazard or potential health hazard.
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was prepared for the entire Project site to determine if any on or off
site locations presented any specific hazard related impacts to the planned development of the Ranch property.
As concluded in the reports, no off -site locations were identified that could environmentally impact the site. The
abandoned single-family residence located on -site was investigated. It was determined that asbestos was
present in some of the building materials. With the proper demolition techniques, no impacts would result from
demolition.' ` Additionally, very low concentrations of benzene, toluene and lead were detected at the former
9 La Quinta General Plan EIR, July 2001, Certified March 20, 2002.
10 The Phase I site investigation was prepared for the entire site through two separate reports. One for the portion of
the site north of the Coachella Canal, while the second report zoas prepared on the portion of the site south of the
Coachella Canal. Both reports were prepared in February 2001. P" ,-)
11 Ninyo & Moore Geoteclinical and Environmental Sciences Corporation, Environmental Site Assessment South v r
Ranch Property, February 2001.
050
18 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
location of 2 underground storage tanks. However, as these concentrations were very low and the underground
tanks were removed and closed by the appropriate regulatory agency at that time, no further study or
investigation was warranted." Re Project would not interfere with any adopted emergency response or
evacuation plans as the project would not obstruct the existing or planned circulation network. Additionally,
the site plan would be subject to review by the county fire department to ensure all fire code regulations,
including brush clearance and fuel modification zones, are adequate. This would in turn guarantee that there
would not be an increased fire hazard within the project boundaries, nor in the local vicinity. Impacts
associated with hazards would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Prior to the demolition or renovation of the on -site single family residence, asbestos containing materials (ACM)
shall be removed in accordance with current regulatory guidelines.
Further Stud3� Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Less than
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: Significant
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Increases in existing noise levels? ❑
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
Documentation:
a-b) A citywide roadway noise analysis was recently completed for the General Plan EIR. Noise monitoring was
conducted adjacent to the Project Site at the intersection of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street. The calculated
CNEL level was 67.4dB(A) measured 100 feet from the centerline. Additionally roadway volumes were
modeled to calculate noise contours for both existing and future build -out conditions on roadways throughout
the pplanning area and adjacent to the Project Site. Currently, Jefferson Street, south of Avenue 48 experiences a
65dB(A) noise contour 84 feet from the centerline. Future build -out roadway noise levels were also calculated
along the same segments. The future build -out noise environment along this roadway segment was identical to
the existing conditions. Although the specific design has not been prepared for the Project, it would be planned
and developed consistent with the General Plan. As currently provided in the General Plan, the golf course uses
are located along the project boundaries with the Tourist Commercial uses, and consequently any use that
would generate any noticeable noise is located in the interior of the site. The planned golf courses would
effectively serve as a buffer between the outside noise environment and the planned uses such as the hotel and
Timeshare units. All project development would be constructed as to incorporate modem noise attenuation
construction methods for the planned structures. Through consistent planning and development with the
General Plan and the implementation of the following mitigation measures, noise impacts would be less than
significant.
Construction noise would occur throughout site development with a majority of the noise intensive activities
occurring at the beginning of the Project. These activities would require demolition of some of the existing on -
site structures; site preparation (e.g., excavation of the proposed ponds and grading); construction of internal
roadways, other infrastructure, buildings; and cleanup. These activities typically involve the use of heavy
equipment, such as scrapers, tractors, loaders, and concrete mixers. Trucks would be used to deliver equipment
and building materials, and to haul away waste materials. Smaller equipment, such as jack hammers, pneumatic
tools, saws, and hammers would also be used throughout the site during its development. This equipment would
generate both steady state and episodic noise that would be heard both on and off the project site. Noise levels
generated during the construction phase typically affect the occupants of nearby residential uses. Given the
existing surrounding uses, a residential subdivision and the PGA West golf course residential community exist
to the north and south of the site, respectively. A majority of the development would occur at the interior of the
site, as the project edges would be built with the planned golf courses. Therefore, the closest homes to the
construction area would only be subject to golf course construction, as opposed to heavy infrastructure and
structural construction. Additionally, the residential subdivision to the north is shielded from the Project Site
by a solid masonry wall that would substantially reduce construction noise levels at the existing residences. A
person who is home during the day and noise sensitive may find the short-term noise conditions annoying,
however, given that construction activities are short term and in this case, construction noise wouldy not
introduce adjacent uses to sever noise levels and consequently, no significant construction noise impacts.
12 Ninpo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Corporation, Environmental Site Assessment North (�
Ranch Property, February 2001. v n
19 The Rarrch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
As stated earlier, surrounding uses include a residential subdivision to the north, vacant land to the east, the
PGA West golf course residential community to the south and mountains to the west. None of these adjacent
properties represent a use that would generate severe noise levels. Additionally, given that the proposed golf
uses would be developed on the project edges, this would serve as a substantial buffer from adjacent noise
sources. Further, this edge treatment would serve to attenuate noise levels from the use proposed at the interior
of the site to uses off -site. The Proposed Project would not introduce land uses that would generate severe noise
levels. No significant impacts associated with exposing people to severe noise levels would occur as a result of
the project.
Mitigation Measures
Between May 1 and September 30, all construction activities on the project site shall only occur between the
hours of 6:00 AM and 7:00 PM Monday through Friday, and from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Saturday, and shall
be prohibited on Sundays and public holidays. Between October 1 and April 30, all construction activity on
the project site shall only occur between the hours of 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday, and from
8:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Saturday, and shall be prohibited on Sundays and public holidays. All operational
activities of the Project shall also be subject to the Noise Ordinance of the City as well.
All construction equipment operating in the planning area shall be fitted with well -maintained functional
mufflers to limit noise emissions.
To the greatest extent feasible, earth moving and hauling routes shall be located away from existing residences.
The design, selection and placement of the mechanical equipment for various buildings shall include
consideration of the potential noise impact they may have on uses within the development site.
Silencers and/or barriers shall be provided where necessary at outdoor equipment, such as cooling towers, air
cooled condensers and refrigeration compressors/condenser units, and at the air intake and discharge openings
for building ventilation systems.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect Potentially
upon, or restilt in a need for nezu or altered government Potentially Significant Less than
services in any of the following areas: Significant Unless Significant
Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact
a. Fire protection? ® ❑ 1-1
b. Police protection? ® 7
C. Schools? 0
d. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? 0 E
® ❑
e. Other governmental services?
Documentation:
a) The Certified EIR for the General Plan has analyzed fire service and the potential demand on fire service
through build -out of the General Plan area. Fire service is provided to the City of La Quinta through the
Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) The RCFD currently is rated a 4 in terms of the Insurance Service
Office (ISO) Ratings, of which a 1 is the highest score and a 10 is the lowest score. These ratings are based on
response times, safety standards, staffing levels and building code standards. The average response time for the
City's station is approximately 5 minutes. Currently there are 7 stations serving the planing area, each with at
least two paid firefighters per station. This staffing level fulfills the County Board of Supervisors staffing
requirement. Station 70, located within the City of La Quinta is egluipped with one fire engine, one brush engine,
one rescue squad, two paid firefighters and 5 volunteers. As bui d-out continues throughout the General Plan
area, increased demand would be placed on the existing fire services. Although fire service would ultimately
serve the entire build -out planning area, each individual project is subject to review by the RCFD to ensure that
adequate fire services would be provided to the project at the time of development. Therefore, with the
implementation of the following mitigation measures, impacts to fire service would be less than significant.
b) The Certified EIR for the General Plan analyzed police protection and the potential demand on police protection
through build -out of the General Plan area. Police protection is provided to the City of La Quinta through the
Riverside County Sheriff Department (RCSD). The RCSD is located in the neighboring City of Indio. As with
the RCFD, the RCSD currently maintains an average response time of 5 minutes. There are currently 3 sheriff
units assigned to the City of La Quinta, each with 1 or 2 deputies depending on the time of day. As build -out of v V c
061
20 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
the planning area continues, the demand on sheriff services in the City of La Quinta will continue to increase.
Eventually, without increased staffing and equipment, the police protection provided by the RCSD would no
longer be adequate. However, with the implementation of the following mitigation measures, impacts to police
protection would be less than significant.
c) Currently, two public school districts serve the City of La Quinta which are the Desert Sands Unified School
District (DSUSD) and the Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD). As no part of the Proposed
Project would introduce permanent residents, no additional students would be added to the DSUSD. Although
the payment of applicable school fees would be required, no significant impacts to schools would occur.
d-e) The La Quinta Public Library is a branch of the Riverside County Library System. This library is
approximately 4,100 square feet in size with 28,000± volumes of materials and public computers. As discussed
above, the Proposed Project would not introduce any permanent residences at build -out. Consequently, there
would not be any additional demand on public library services as library services are typically required and
provided to the residents of that particular jurisdiction. Any applicable developer fees would be paid prior to
the issuance of building permits. No significant library service impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
The Riverside County Fire Department, in its review of new development proposals, shall evaluate project plans
and the Departments ability to provide proper fire protection. This review shall include, but shall not be
limited to, internal circulation, project directories, street names, and numbering systems. New developments
shall comply with all City and Fire Department standards.
The Riverside County Sheriff's Department shall review new development proposals in order to evaluate
project plans and the Department's ability to provide adequate police protection. This review should include,
but not be limited to internal circulation, project directories, street names, and numbering systems. New
developments shall comply with all established City and Sheriff standards.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial
Potentially
Significant
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Less than
Significant
alterations to the following utilities::
Impact
Mitigated
Impact
No Impact
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Local or regional water treatment?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste disposal?
Documentation:
a) Energy services are provided to the City of La Quinta from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), while The Gas
Company provides natural gas service. The IID operates six substations that serve the City. As stated in the
Certified General Plan EIR, the IID will be able to supply electricity to future developments. All buildings
constructed as a result of the project would be requiredtoconform to Title 24 of the Uniform Building Code,
which requires energy efficient envelop construction, equipment and fixtures. Please refer to Section VIII for
more discussion on energy service.
b) Gas is transmitted to the planning area through 36-inch pipelines north of Interstate 10. These transmission
lines are split up into various supply lines, which in turn are split again into distribution lines that provide gas
to individual structures throughout the City. The Gas Company has indicated that they can accommodate new
service to planned developments within the Planning Area through continued interaction with developers."
The City requires that all new development shall finance its share of public utilities infrastructure and
improvements required to properly service the proposed development. With implementation of the mitigation
13 La Quinta General Plan EIR, Certified March 20, 2001.
0
062
21 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
measures identified below, impacts would be less than significant with regards to electrical and natural gas
service.
Telephone service in the it of La Quinta is provided by Verizon California while cable service is provided
by ime Warner. Based on the Certified General Plan EIR Verizon has indicated that it is capable of providing
telephone services to the City through build -out as it is planing to expand the existing facilities. Time Warner
renegotiates the franchise agreement with the City every fifteen years, the most recent of which was approved in
1996. Time Warner has indicated that it will be able to service the entire Inning area through build -out. The
City requires that all new development shall finance its share of public utilities infrastructure and
improvements required to properly service the proposed development. With implementation of the mitigation
measures identified below, impacts would be less than significant with regards to communication systems.
d) The CVWD's responsible for both water and wastewater treatment in the City of La Quinta. With regards to
water, please refer to Section IV for a more detailed discussion. The CVWD currently maintains a network of
sewer trunk lines throughout the City ranging in size from 4 to 24 inches in diameter. An 18-force main is
located adjacent to the Project Site in the Jefferson Street right-of-way. Wastewater is transported to one of two
treatment facilities operated by the CVWD. One facility, located at Madison Street and Avenue 38, treats
approximately 2 million gallons per day, while the second facility, the Mid -Valley Reclamation Plant located on
Avenue 63, currently treats approximately 4 million gallons per day. These facilities have the capacity to treat
approximately 2.5 million and 5.8 million gallons per day, respectively. The Mid -Valley Reclamation Plant
would treat wastewater generated from the Project Site, as all wastewater in the City of La Quinta generated
south of Miles Avenue is transported to this facility. With a current capacity of approximately 1.8 million
gallons per day, and an expected 20 percent increase in capacity over the next year, the Mid -Valley Reclamation
Plant could adequately serve the Proposed Project.14 The City requires that all new development finance its
share of public utilities infrastructure and improvements required to properly service the proposed
development. With implementation of the mitigation measures identified below, impacts would be less than
significant with regards to wastewater service.
e) The City of La Quinta is situated in a low desert basin with a subtropical desert climate averaging 4 to 6 inches
of rainfall per year. The 'wet' season is typically between December and March. Although average rainfall is
minimal in the entire basin, occasional rain and thunder storms have been known to occur which result in flash -
flooding situations. These flash -floods are typically contained within washes extending from higher elevations
and floodplains adjacent to river courses. Of particular importance to safety during flash -floods are when the
floods inundate the alluvial fans extending from the local mountains. Developments adjacent to the alluvial fans
are susceptible to storm water runoff that contains a high dirt and rock content. These flooding situations have
proven to be significant hazards. Another cause for flooding is when local snow-capped mountains experience
drastic temperature changes which in turn result in an increased rate of snow melting. The CVWD is the
regional authority responsible for the management of storm waters within the Coachella Valley, while the City
is responsible for storm water management within the City boundaries. Although never officially adopted, the
City has prepared a storm water management plan that has been used to direct future management plans and
policies. The City's network of storm water drainage pipes range in size from 18 to 60 inches in diameter. In
addition to maintaining the existing storm water drainage network, the City requires that all new developments
construct on -site retention basins with a 100-year storm capacity. As documented in the Certified General Plan
EIR, the Project Site is not located within a 100-year floodplain, nor is it within a 500-year floodplain.15 As the
site is primarily vacant and undeveloped, project implementation would result in the increase in impervious
surfaces. However, as the project would introduce two golf courses, there is ample opportunity to design the
site so that it could effectively manage anticipated storm events. With the implementation of the mitigation
measures identified below, impacts related drainage would reduced to a less than significant level.
The City of La Quinta and the County of Riverside have a contract with Waste Management of the Desert for
the collection and transport of solid waste to landfill sites. The service agreement between the City of La
Quinta and Waste Management of the Desert is ne otiated every 5 years. At the time the Certified General Plan
EIR was prepared, Waste Management Services of the Desert transported solid waste generated in the City to
the Edom Hill Landfill in the City of Indio. The Edom Hill Landfill is permitted to accept up to 2,651 tons per
day, with a remaining ca acity of apppproximately 1.5 million cubic yards. The Edom Hell Landfill site has an
ex ected closure date of Famtary 1, 2020.'fi The primary method in extending the life of landfill sites is through
effective waste diversion and recycling techniques. Currently the City of La Quinta achieves a 54 percent waste
diversion rate." It should be noted that since the Certified General Plan EIR was prepared, additional landfill
sites have been identified as available to accept solid waste from the City. Specifically, Azusa Land
Reclamation Co, Lamb Canyon Disposal Site and the Spadra Sanitary Landfill are all available for waste
14 La Quinta General Plan EIR, Certified March 20, 2002.
15 Lit Quinta General Plan EIR, July 2001 and Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Corporation,
Water Quality Evaluation, June 2000.
16 California Integrated Waste Management Website, February, 2002 littp://zvww.ciwiiib.ca.gov/.
17 Most recent board approved data, 1998 California Integrated Waste Management Website, February, 2002 ��
llttp://www.ciwinb.ca.gov/. 063
22 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
disposal from the Project site." With the development of the proposed uses, total solid waste generated from the
City would be expected to increase, however, given that additional landfill sites are available for solid waste
acceptance, and with continued waste diversion programs, solid waste impacts associated with the Proposed
Project would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
The most efficient furnaces, water heaters, pool heaters and other equipment that use natural gas shall be used
in project constriction. The use of kitchen appliances that use natural gas and alternative, renewable energy
sources, including solar and wind turbine technologies shall also be used to the greatest extent feasible.
Title 24 of the California Administrative Code, which addresses energy conservation in all proposed uses shall
be strictly enforced in project design and construction.
All planned uses shall be connected to the city-wide sewer system.
A recycling program shall be developed for all proposed uses. Recycling provisions for commercial and
business establishments should include separate recycling bins. Items to be recycled at commercial
establishments may include white paper, computer legal paper, cardboard, glass and aluminum cans.
Professional landscaping services from companies which compost green waste shall be utilized.
The Projects fair share of public utilities, infrastructure and improvements required to properly service the
proposed uses shall be determined through consultation with the City Department of Public Works and paid
prior to the issuance of grading permits.
Any existing or historic septic systems located on the site shall be abandoned in accordance with Federal, State,
and local laws and regulations prior to the issuance of building permits.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Less than
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
Significant
Unless
Significant
Impact
Mitigated
Impact
No Impact
a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
❑
M
I❑I
b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
❑
®
c. Create light or glare?
❑
®
❑
Documentation:
a-c) As documented in the Certified General Plan EIR, the City's most valuable visual resources are the local
mountains against the contrasting expansive valleyfloor. Local peaks range in upper elevations from 8,000 to
11,000 feet above sea level. The Coral Reef Mounains, which exist on the western property boundary, rise up
to about 1,600 feet above sea level. Of other visual importance directly related to the project vicinity are image
corridors and how they relate to the surrounding circulation network. Specifically, Jefferson Street is
identified as a primary image corridor, while Avenue 52 is a secondary image corridor and Avenue 54 is an
agrarian image corridor. Roadways with these classifications are required to be improved and maintained
according to the City's Municipal Code. Specifically, setbacks, landscaping materials and signage are all
treatments that are regulated through the municipal code. The Project would be required to improve and
maintain portions of these roadways. Additionally, developments adjacent to the steep Coral Reef Mountains
are required to maintain views from adjacent locations off -site. These design standards specifically deal with
building height, setbacks, scale and architectural treatments. Although no site -specific plans have been
developed, the project would be designed and developed consistent with the General Plan and City Municipal
Code. Again, these guidelines deterrrune appropriate size, scale, treatment, heights and setbacks required for
projects with specific land use designations and zoning classifications. Through the implementation of the
mitigation measures identified below and approval of the Site Development Pen -nit by the Community
Development Department, impacts associated with visual resources would be less than significant.
IS California Integrated Waste Management Website, February, 2002 littp://zvzow.cizvmb.ca.gov/.
08
M
23 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
Mitigation Measures
Landscape designs and materials that complement the native desert environment shall be utilized in project
design and construction.
Overhead utility lines shall be tindergrounded to the greatest extent; possible through the establishment of an
undergrounding program and guidelines subject to the review of the City Engineer and Public Works
Department.
Outdoor lighting shall be limited to the minimum height, number of fixtures, and intensity needed to provide
sufficient security and identification in each development, making every reasonable effort to protect the
community's night skies.
Signage shall be limited to the locations, sizes, and maintenance requirements necessary to provide functional
identification.
Safe, convenient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, screened outdoor storage/loading and other unsightly
areas, protected and enhanced outdoor seating areas, appropriate lighting levels, limited signage, and
landscaping designs that preserve and enhance visual resources shall be included in the design of any
m comercial area on the Project Site.
Development proposed along designated scenic highways, roadways and corridors shall be reviewed for
compatibility with the natural and built environments to assure maximum viewshed protection and pedestrian
and vehicular activity.
All grading and development proposed within scenic viewsheds, shall be regulated to minimize adverse impacts
to these viewsheds. All grading, development and landscaping plans shall be submitted to the City for review
and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits.
Further Stuff Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Less than
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
Significant
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Disturb paleontological resources?
❑
®
( 1
u❑
b. Disturb archaeological resources?
❑
®
c.. Affect historical resources?
El
0
❑
d Have the potential to cause a physical change which
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
❑
Elwould
El
Z
e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
❑
❑
a
potential impact area?
Documentation:
a-e) A recent citywide cultural investigation was conducted for the preparation of the Certified General Plan EIR in
August 2000. Due to the location of the City on an ancient lake shoreline, the City of La Quints contains some
of the densest concentrations of archeological sites in California.
In order to address site -specific historic and cultural issues, a historic and cultural study was prepared for the
site in September 1999.19 During the preparation of the Phase I cultural resource investigation, eight isolated
finds (isolates) were identified within the study area. By definition, isolates are not necessarily significant.
However, six of the isolates that were recovered were associated with an archaeological site (CA-RIV-2842)
located outside the project area. The finding of these six isolates indicates that deposits associated with this
untested site may still be present. The area associated with these six isolates should be considered
archaeologically sensitive. A seventh isolate was found in the northern end of the project area. This isolate
may have been brought to the surface by root action or the removal of trees, indicating a potential for buried
deposits. The eighth isolate was found within the flood zone of the Coachella Canal. No other items were
found in association with this isolate. Given the sensitive nature of the Project Site, impacts to other
19 A Phase 1 Cultural Resource Investigation of "The Ranch" Project Area Located in the Community of La Quinta
County of Riverside, California, McKenna et al., September 1999.
24 The Rmrch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
undiscovered isolates could occur during earth disturbing construction work. With the implementation of the
following mitigation measures, impacts would be less than significant.
Two sets of structures are present on the Project Site. The first is the Kennedy residential complex, which was
built after 1950 by previous owners of the property. The second set is the existing "Ranch" complex, all of
which were built after 1970. Neither set, according to the site -specific study, is of historic landmark status.
Build -out of uses would require earthwork for creation of development pads, land contouring to establish
drainage patterns, and trenching to install utilities. Based on the results of the site -specific Phase I survey, the
project will not significantly impact known resources on -site. However, given the general sensitivity of the
surrounding area, and that the eight isolates found are located in proximity to a recorded site (CA-RIV-2842),
the project has the potential to impact previously unidentified subsurface resources. Mitigation has been
identified to reduce this potential impact below a level considered significant.
Mitigation Measures
During any ground altering activities associated with project grading or construction, including demolition of
existing modem structures and facilities, the project area shall be monitored by a qualified archaeological
monitor. The monitor shall have the authority to halt any activities impacting potentially significant cultural
resources until the resources can be evaluated for significance and cleared or mitigated. The monitoring
program shall also include consultation with the local Native American representatives (e.g., Torres -Martinez
and/or Morongo Reservations).
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Less than
XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
Significant
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
El
El
parks of other facilities?
b. Affect existing recreational opportunities?
Documentation:
a-b) With the exception of Lake Cahuilla County Park, the City of La Quinta is responsible for providing and
maintaininublic parks within the City. Existing public parks within the City include the Fritz Burns Park,
the FranC-S g pack park, Seasons Park, Adams Park, the Eisenhower Park in the Cove, the Desert Pride Park, the
Community Park and the Avenue 50 Sports Complex.
The State of California passed legislation (Section 66477 of the Government Code) which allows a city to pass
an ordinance to require, as a condition of approval of a subdivision, the dedication of land or the payment of a
fee in lieu of dedication, or a combination ofpboth, for ark or recreational purposes. This legislation, commonly
called the "Quimby Act," establishes a standard ofp3.0 acres per 1,000 population as the amount of land
necessary to meet the requirement for the provision of Neighborhood and Community Park land. The City of L a
Quinta requires 3.0 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents of new development pursuant to the Quimby Act.
Given the nature of the proposed uses, the project would not generate any permanent residents for which
additional park acreage is required. Additionally, the project would introduce 2 public golf courses, as well as
a 9 hole public course offering a junior golf rogram. Therefore, the project would provide additional public
recreational services without increasing the City's population, which could be considered a beneficial impact of
the project. The Proposed Project would not increase the demand for neighborhood or regional park facilities,
nor would it affect existing recreational opportunities. Therefore, no significant impacts to recreational
facilities would occur.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
25 The Rmich
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Less than
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Significant
Impact
Unless
Mitigated
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Does the project have the potential to significantly
degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause
a fish or wildlife population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-tem1, environmental
goals?
C. Does the project have impacts which are individually El 1-1limited but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
d Does the project have environmental effects which Elwill cause significant adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Documentation:
a) Based on the analysis provided in Section I through XV, the Proposed Project does not have the potential to
significantly degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. All biological impacts would be
less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.
b-c) Based on the analysis provided in Section I through XV, the project would not achieve short-term City and
environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. As stated, the project has been
planned consistent with the City's General Plan. Development of the Proposed Project would implement build -
out of the General Plan. Additionally, the project would not generate impacts that are individually limited but
cumulatively considerable. No significant impacts would occur with the implementation of the proposed
mitigation measures.
d) Based on the analysis provided in Section I through XV, the project would not generate environmental effects
which will cause significant adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Further Study Required:
No further analysis is required regarding this topic.
067
26 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
Initial Study
REFERENCES
The following materials/resources were utilized in the preparation of this Initial Study. Any documents listed below
are available for review at the City of La Quinta Community Development Department located at:
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
1. A Phase I Cultural Resource Investigation of "The Ranch" Project Area Located in the Community of La Quinta
County of Riverside, California, McKenna et al., September 1999.
2. California Integrated Waste Management Board, California Integrated Waste Management Board Website,
February, 2002, http://www.ciwmg.ca.gov/.
3. City of La Quinta Draft Comprehensive General Plan, Certified March 2002.
4. City of La Quinta Draft Comprehensive General Plan, Draft Environmental Impact Report, July 2001, Certified
March 20, 2002.
5. Department of Conservation, Department of Conservation Website, http://www.consrv.ca.gov/.
6. Jurisdictional Delineation Report, The Ranch at La Quinta, Impact Sciences, September 2000.
7. Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Corporation, Limited Geotechnical Investigation,
November 1999.
8. Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Corporation, Water Quality Evaluation, June 2000.
9. Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Corporation, Environmental Site Assessment South
Ranch Property, February 2001.
10. Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Corporation, Environmental Site Assessment North
Ranch Property, February 2001.
11. Telephone communication, Jim Zimmerman, Development Service Supervisor, Coachella Valley Water District,
March 2002.
Vsv
068
27 The Ranch
April 2, 2002
APPENDIX A
Air Quality Data
()S.1
Table: AQ-1
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED DAILY OPERATION -RELATED EMISSIONS
Project Name: The Ranch
Emissions in Pounds
per Day
CO
VOC
Land Use
Resort Hotel Vehicular Sources
32.6
4.8
9.0
0.6
37.0
Stationary Area Sources
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Subtotals
32.7
4.9
9.0
0.6
37.1
Commercial Retai Vehicular Sources
7.9
1.2
2.2
0.1
8.9
Stationary Area Sources
0.1
0_0
0.3
0_0
0.0.0
Subtotals
8.0
1.2
2.5
0.1
8.9
Golf Course Vehicular Sources
17.7
2.7
4.6
0.3
20.4
Stationary Area Sources
Q 1
0_1
0_2
0U
�.0
Subtotals
17.8
2.8
4.9
0.3
20.4
Residential Condc Vehicular Sources
57.8
14.7
14.9
1.0
66.6
Stationary Area Sources
2.5
5L. �
3.1
0_0
Q_Q
Subtotals
60.3
20.2
18.1
1.0
66.6
Golf Course Club] Vehicular Sources
10.5
1.4
2.6
0.2
12.2
Stationary Area Sources
0.1
U
0.2
0_0
0.0
Subtotals
10.6
1.5
2.8
0.2
12.2
Project Totals Vehicular Sources
126.5
24.9
33.5
2.3
145.2
Stationary Area Sources
2.8
5.7
3.9
0.0
0.0
TOTALS
129.3
30.6
37.3
2.3
145.3
SCAQMD Thresholds (lbs/day)
550.0
55.0
55.0
150.0
150.0
Project's Significance (Yes or No)
NO
NO
NOI
NO
NO
O ,),
070
Table: AQ-2
EMISSIONS FROM ON -ROAD VEHICLE TRAVEL
Project Name: The Ranch
Analysis Year:
2005
EMFAC7 Model:
EMFAC7G
Project County Location:
Los An
Orange:
Riverside
X
San Bernardino
Temperature:
Winter (CO):
Summer (VOC):Summer
P0q
(NO,):
URBEMIS Analysis Methodology:
Updated:
l -J
Entrained Roadway Dust:
Calculate:
�X
Ref
No.
I Land Use
Resl
Non -Res
Units/
1000 SF
ADT
Rates
NOV
Rates
Trips
per
ADT
%
Pass -By
%
Diverted
%
Internal
New
Trips
Res.
NOV
% Work
Trips
% Truck
Tri s
66
Resort Hotel
N
250
8
9.20
Room
2,000
0%
090
50%
1,000
2,300
9.0%
1.8%
197
Commercial Retail
N
25
53.22
0.00
1000 SF
1,331
0%
0%
80%
266
0
2.0%
2.1%
91
Golf Course
N
36
35.72
0.00
Holes
1,286
0%
0%
50%
643
0
3.0%
0.4%
46
Residential Condo
R
300
5.86
1.71
Unit
1,758
0%
0%
50%
879
512
0.0%
0.5%
152
Golf Course Clubhouse
N
25
16.4
0.00
1000 SF
410
0%
0%
50%
205
0
35.0%
0.5%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Trip Types
Residential
Non -Residential _
Home to Work Home to Shop ! Home to Other
Work
Non -Work Pass -By
Diverted
Trip Length (miles)
10.00 ! 4.00 4.00
10.00
4.00 I 0.01
0.50
Trip Speeds
35.0 35.0 35.0
J
35.0
35.0 i 10.0
35.0
Percent Trip
20.0% 50.0% 30.0%
Vehicle Fleetmix
%Tye
Catalyst
Non -Cat
Diesel
Passenger Vehicles
Automobiles
83.3%
98.7%
1.0%
0.3%
Light -Duty Trucks
11.1%
99.7%
0.0%
0.4%
Urban Buses
2.2%
-
-
100.0%
Motorcycles
3.3%
-
100.0%
-
Trucks
Medium -Duty Trucks
30.0%
100.0%
0.1%
-
Light Heavy -Duty Trucks
20.0%
44.3%
5.8%
50.0%
Medium Heavy -Duty Trucks
10.0%
40.9%
9.2%
50.0%
Heavy Heavy -Duty Trucks
30.0%
1 100.0%
Project Vehicular Emissions in Pounds per Day
Motor Vehicle Emissions
Entrained
Roadway
Vehicle Miles
PM,,,
CO
VOC
NO, I
SO, t PM,„
Resort Hotel
5,080
32.6
4.8
9.0
0.6'i
0.3
36.8
Commercial Retail
1,224
7.9
1.2
2.2
0.1,
0.1
8.9
Golf Course
2,803
17.7
2.71
4.6
0.31
0.1
20.3
Residential Condo
9,142
57.8
14.7
14.9
1.01
0.4
66.2
Golf Course Clubhouse
1,681
10.5
1.4
2.6
0.2
I
I
0.1
i
12.2
TOTALS
19,930
126.51
24.91
33.51
2.31
1.0
071
Table: AQ-3
EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY AREA SOURCES
(SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook Tables A9.11 and A9.12)
Project Name: The Ranch
Ref
Code
Units/
Units/
I Water/Space
Heating Emissions in Pounds/Day
Landscape Maint. Emissions in Pounds/Day
Consumer Prod.
CO
VOC
CO
VOC
NO,
SO
No.
SF
Bld s.
cf/Month
VOC
66
Resort Hotel
12
250
1
l
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
197
Commercial Retail
7
25,000
1
72,500
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
91
Golf Course
5
20,000
2
58,000
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
46
Residential Condo
3
300
300
1,175,400
0.8
0.2
3.1
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.1
152
Golf Course Clubhouse
11
25,000
1
50,000
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTALS
1,357,100
0.91
1
0.0
0.0
5.1
Land Use Type
Code
Natural Gas Consumption Conversion Factors
Usea a Factor
Residential
Single Family
I
Cubic Feet/Unit/Month
6,665.0
Multi -Family (<5)
2
Cubic Feet/Unit/Month
4,105.0
Muld-Family (5+)
3
Cubic Feet/Unit/Month
3,918.0
Food Store
4
Cubic Feet/Square Foot/Month
2.9
Restaurant
5
Cubic Feet/Square Foot/Month
2.9
Hospitals
6
Cubic Feet/Square Foot/Month
4.8
Retail
7
Cubic Feet/Square Foot/Month
2.9
College/University
8
Cubic Feet/Square Foot/Month
2.0
High School
9
Cubic Feet/Square Foot/Month
2.0
Elementary School
10
Cubic Feet/Square Foot/Month
2.0
Office
11
Cubic Feet/Square Foot/Month
2.0
Hotel/Motel
12
Cubic Feet/Square Foot/Month
4.8
Warehouse
13
Cubic Feet/Square Foot/Month
2.0
Miscellaneous
14
1 Cubic Feet/Customer/Month
241,611.0
Emission Factors for Each Criteria Pollutant from Space and Water Heating, Landscape Maintenance, and Consumer Products
Emission Factors
Water/Space Heatin Emission Factors
Landscape Maint. Emission Factors
Consumer Prod.
VOC
CO
VOC
CO
I VOC
Residential Uses
Nonresidential Uses
20.0
20.0
5.3
5.3
80.0
120.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.00576
0.0276
0.00054
0.0315
0.00014
0.005
0.0
0.0
0.00001
0.00037
0.0171.
0.0
072
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY EMISSIONS
GRADING PHASE.
EQUIPMENT EMISSIONS
Nu. of
Hours
F wion Fu
in Ibs4mur(au
. Diesel Engines)
Emisskons in Poundx
mi, Day
Fyui(msent Type
Vehicles
jr Day
CO
VOC
N()x
SO.
I PMIO
CO
V(3C
NOx
sox
P1410
Uft-50 Hp
Fork Life-175 Hp
'0
$
0.520
.t
0.170
1.540
--0.031
--
0.09.1
O.000
0.000
Q.
0.0W
0.0W
Truck.:Off Hwy
Q
8
1.800
0.190
4.170
0.450
0.260
0."
O.OIX)
0.000
0.000
0.0W
Tracked Loader
0.201
0.095
0.830
0.076
0.059
0.001)
0.(=
0.000
0.000
O.pB)
Tracked Tmx
0
H }
0.350
0.1.10
1.260
0.140
0.112
0.000
0XW
0.000
0.000
0.(XK)
Scnpm
2
S ,;,
1.!50
0.270
3.940
0.460
0.410
20.p10
4.320
61.440
7.360
6.5fif1
WIIe k D,-r
E
8
--
--
-
0.350
0.165
2.8m
1.320
Wh.wlcd Looter
fl
& -
0.572
0.230
1.900
0.182
0.170
0.000
0.A(q
0.0(Ifl
O.OW
0(I(I(1
Whcel.J Tractor
4)
,� '�
3.58(1
0.180
1.2711
O.cm
0.140
0.(R70
O.IXM
O.OIXI
0.0(111
0.000
Rolls
0.300
0.065
0.970
0.067
0.050
0.000
0.O00
0.000
0.000
0.0W
Grmkr
8
0.151
0.039
0.713
0.086
0.061
2.416
0.624
11.408
1.376
0.976
Miscel ancous
�
0.675
0.150
L600
0.143
0.140
IO.R
2.4(10
ZS.fA10
2.ZR8
'_.v_40
Taal Fmissiona:
33.21IIII6
7.341
99.448
13.tl24
I I.Wfi
an front TabI+AY-&A dXAQMD CEQA AtrQ-1ty ti-di m. (Aprn 1-il
ON -AND OFF -ROAD VEHICLE EMISSIONS
Fmis +m Faelarx
in aramslmile
Fmi in Pounds
per Duy
No.of
Mk.
Elgin.
6tgim
Vehicle Type
V.W6.,,
per Day
CO
VtIr
NOs
SOx
PMIO
CO
VOC
NOx
-)
SOx
PMIO
slur ruu
_ .11
_. >
...
._
:
Haul Trucks
25.015
2.85
5.3.15
0
0.2575
0.00
0.00
00)
0.00
0.0(1
C,n Worker Vchicics
15
:.23
8.63
1.25,5
0.63
0
O.pK
6.57
0.95
O.47
O.IX)
O.W
Total Emiuions:
7.141
1.01
IL62
0.00
0.01
Fomula m (ram T+bH AYdj & K a(XAQMD CEQA Ab 0u+ltty Ha�Wbwk APO IW3).
EmtWm. Fumn an fa XAQMD Aw 2, amum.l0 MPH.and nlH.n 4n.vnag. far lYH and 2m1.
FUGITIVE DUST EMISSIONS
Wind
SuiI Daily
Fugitive
"
Speed
Mei.wrc Suil
Soil
PMIO
Dust Source
(;Pit)
% (CY)
Demity
avau ng c
CEQA Air Q..Iny H+mboab4A1. tYwl.
Sih
Soil
Pugitivc
Rule 40,1
Nct
Contont
Moisture
No. of
Uaity
PMIO
Rednmitw
PMIO
Dust Source (%)
%
Equip. i
Noun
(Ib.)
% Ibs
(Ibs)
Eardtmoving 4
J
`V ,fir,
+�'3 ,: ""w'
S435
70%
78.19
16.37
Total Emissions:
95.47
66.33
28.M
Formula&front T.M.A4YFdXAQMDCEQAAllk2.1.i naiwuon IAprn tYY.rr.
RuI.aN 14dunim rmtratmer an fnm Table Al1AA dXAQMD CEQA Ak Qually HaMbonk (APrt119931
(htSite
Fugitivo
Fugitive
Rule 403
Net
No. of
Mlle.
PMIO
PMIO
Reduclimr
PMIO
Vehicle TyPe
Vchicics
P.r Day
(,w,.h/.i)
(IM)
% Ibs
(Ibs)
HaulTm.k. (m-we)
4
��e Illt�
23.0
0.(81
70%
0.00
0.00
Cont. Worker Vehicle.
.b,ir '. i3 F'
5.56
16.hR
70%
11.68
Tool E mions:
292.6tl
204.88
87.80
Emlmimf Fwmr& hmn P.e.Y-2adXAQMDCEQA Air Qu+Inv KiiMi .b(AM11 ,t).
RW.am R.dunim nnmtm.n an hom Tab& AIIAA dXAQMD CEQA Air Quality Nmdbmk (APHI 1"31
Silt
Rain
Wid>
Arta
Pugitivc
Rut. 403
Nct
Comm
20.01 in.
12 mph
Ex. xpod
PMIO
Rduni-
PMIO
Dust Scarce
1%)
(d.5
(%)
laaex)
(IN)
% Ibs
(Ibs)
pnc swage t •.
N';
.
Fiposed GrcJ.J Surfau
4
3S
50
,
163 -
17.29
70%
12.11
5.19
Twat Fink-
17.29
t2.11
5.19
Farmul. Yfrom Ta.l. AY-9EdXAQMD CEQA An ii.uw namww+lAPrn nral
Rul. am RdurHm prcwman an f. Tabl. At -A dXAQMD CEQA All Qu+11M H+rdbo,E IAprit 1A3)
TOTAL EMISSIONS
Emirs
(Pound. per Duy)
Emi.xiurl. Stwrce
CO
VOC
NOx
SO.
PMR)
uqm
0.. atWcOff-Road Vehicle.
.
7.24
1.03
062
(1.00
0.01
Fueilive Dmt
E__i_rrmwhing
-
-
-
0.07
Grding and Earthmovhrg
Vehicl.s
-
-
-
-
-
-
95.47
29 .69
Expwd Piles & Surface.
-
17.21)
Mitiemkx_ union
0.0(1
O.pl
0.00
O.f81
2tlJ.tl1
Nct Emissim Twals:
40.45
8.37
99.0fi
13.82
132.81
SMAQMD TdlruhuW;
SSO.IXI
73.fi0
10f1.110
ISODO
150.(8)
k-,,d. ThrcalwW'!
No
No
No
No
No
073
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY EMISSIONS
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PHASE
EQUIPMENT EMISSIONS
No. n(
Hours
Emission Fw- in IbxN.mrlasxumex Dic.+d F mines)
Emixxa,nx in Pwndx per Day
Equipment Tyla:
Vehides
per Day
CO
VOC
NOx
SO.
PMIO
CO
VOC
NO,,
SOx
PMIO
It t- p
..n.w.1
Fork Life-175 Hp
vi
8
0.520
0.170
1.340
-
0.1)93
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Tmcks:ORHuy
0
8
1.800
0.190
4.170
0.450
0.260
0.000
0010
0.000
0.0110
0.000
Trackcsi 1-dcr
2
8
0.101
0.095
0.8.W
0.076
0.059
3.216
1.520
13.280
1.216
0.944
TrackW Tractor
0
A
O.m
0.120
1.260
O.Wo
0.112
0.000
0.000
0.(m
0.000
0.000
Scraper
' x 0
8
1.250
0.270
3.A40
0.460
0.410
0.000
oboo
0,000
0.000
0.000
Wheeled Dour
C
8
-
••
-
0.350
O.IIiS
2.800
1.320
Whcckd loader
1
8
0.572
0.23(1
I.90(1
0.182
0.170
4.576
LA4D
15.200
I.456
I.3/A
Wlleekd Tmcrur
�: 0
B
3.Sso
O.IRO
I.'_70
0.090
0.140
0.000
O.OM
0.,
0.000
O.00D
Roller
it
%
0.'Rq
0.063
O.A70
0.067
0.050
2.400
0.520
h.960
0.536
0.400
0.151
O.OM
0.713
0.086
0.061
0.000
0.000
a.000
0.01g1
0.00D
0.615
11.150
I.7fp
11.14}
0.140
10.%00
'_.400
27.200
2.289
2.'_40
Toml Emi+sions:
20.992
1 6.280
62.640
1 8.296
6.264
bran Tanta -A --QA Alrvuallry nanalwau(Apnt I—
ON. AND OFF -ROAD VEHICLE EMISSIONS
- mi.. F-,-
in grams/mik
Emission- in Pounds
per Day
Falgilw
Engilw
N . of
Miles
Vehick Typc
Vehicicx
per Day
CO
VOC
NOx
SOx
PMIO
CO
VOC
NOx
sox
PMIO
nlcr luc
3.
x
_ IJ
..
._
.U.
"
Haul Tracks
Cunst. Wacker Vehkks
B
. `�� 15
3R
, Q}
25.015
A.65
2.A5
1.255
5.375
0.615
0
0
0.2575
O.IXIS
0.00
6.57
0.00
0.95
0.47
0.00
O.W
0.00
0 W
Tuml Emiuinn,:
7.01
I.011
0.57
O.W
0.01
Formula Y lrum T+bk AY-S)& XAQN1111QA All Q 111y nanauooxlApnl-j.
FUGITIVEEDUST
FUGITIVE
Farer EXAQMD Am J,vrume tU MPH.and ralka+tlwaanaga fw 1999W 7U01.
Eh1i551ON-S
Wind
Soil UailY
Fugiuve
Speed
Muixture Snil
Suil
PMIO
Dust Sourm
(mph)
% (CY)
Denxiy
(Ibs)
vsu mg Acl+vnms
formula k Imm Table A9-9-G (SCAQ--WA All Qua- naMnlvra(Apnl F-1.
Silt
Soil
Fugitiva
Rule 407
Net
Comm�t
Moisum
Nu. of
Wily
PMIO
Rcduelwn
PMl0
Duet S-
(%)
%
Equip.
Hours
(lb.)
% Ibs
(Ibs)
cmdi
-,
'�F
Eanhmuvig
IS
A.5
"�' 9
t :{`i
0.00
7.
0.00
0.00
T-1 Fmixiolu:
110)
OAII
0.00
On - Site
Fugitive
Fugiuve
Rule 40J
No
Nu.of
Mika
PM10
PM 10
Reduction
PMIO
Vehick Type
Vehicles
Per Dry
(lb.1-Wmi)
(Ilu)
% Ibx
(lb.)
alcr
_.
_ )
Haul Trucks (un-xtu)
IO
23.0
O.IIU
70%
0.00
O.OfI
C.wst. Wakcr V<hid.
- -- iBY .
- h d2-. ? "
li 56
I1.12
70%
7.7R
3.34
Tmal Fniaiotu:
IU3.12
72.1%
30.94
Ruk Ina NNuanim g- afmT,llW All 9nUXQAQMD CEQAAknQpundi
ly HaNbmk (AMII IwJ)
Silt
Rxin
Wind>
Area
Fugiuv
Rule 403
Net
C.mmm
20.01 in.
12 mph
Expored
PMIOe
Reductim
PMIO
Du+t Sour¢
(%)
(day-)
(%)
(ocTcq
(lb.)
% IW
(Ibx)
os
pe orage I
1.
E.1-d GrJved Surface
IS
14
50
(SO
259A0
70%
Igi.58
77.92
Taal E mions
259A0
191.59
77.32
seta uxwVm annamwxxlnpn -eaa.
Rulel0) RNuenm xwrcalYgaa arefrum Tabk All-YA NXArrQMD CEQA Ak Qually Nardbrx4<(Afeil IVAJ)
TOTAL EMISSIONS
Emus
(Pounds per My)
CO
VDC
NOx
SOx
PMIU
F ie -Source
-ympmem
_
._
_.
._
On• and Olf-Ruad Vehick-
7.01
1.00
0.57
0.00
0.01
Fugitive D-
Exe W."'Ctenching
-
-
-
-
001
Grading and Earthmoving
-
-
-
-
0.00
Vehick,
-
-
-
-
103.12
Ez d Pile, & Surfamx
259AO
Mitigatiol✓Reduui.m
O.OU
0.00
0.00
0.00
257.76
Nor Emis-ion Tdal+:
28.01
7.2A
fiJ.21
8.30
I IS.(13
SMAQMU Trineshold:
S30.W
75.00
1110.0(1
150.0ll
I50.(10
Exceeds Thre-h
No
Nu
Nu
No
. Nu
09 41
074
RESOLUTION RA 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS
PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION
33445(a), EXERCISING THE OPTION CONTAINED IN THE
OPTION AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING ENTERING INTO
THE AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF JOINT
ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS, AS AMENDED
WHEREAS, on the 15th day of May, 2001 the La Quinta City Council (the
"City Council") approved the 2001-02 Economic Development Plan which includes
implementation policies supporting economic diversification, business expansion,
economic protection and preservation, and recreational opportunities; and
WHEREAS, KSL Land Holdings, Inc. owns 525 acres of property (the
"The Ranch") located in La Quinta Redevelopment Project Area No. 1 (the "Project
Area") which is suitable to attain the aforementioned objectives; and
WHEREAS, on the 16th day of April, 2002 the City Council made findings
pursuant to Health and Safety Code 33345 to approve use of funds from
Redevelopment Project Area No. 1 for an Option Agreement to allow the La Quinta
Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") an opportunity to complete due diligence
activities related to acquiring The Ranch; and
WHEREAS, on 16th day of April, 2002 the Agency approved an Option
Agreement to allow the Agency an opportunity to complete due diligence activities
related to acquiring The Ranch; and
WHEREAS, the lack of recreational facilities and the prevalence of
economic maladjustment were documented as some of the conditions of blight that
justified the formation of the Project Area, as cited in the October 1983 Report to the
La Quinta City Council on the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for La Quinta
Redevelopment No. 1; and
WHEREAS, Section 518 of the Redevelopment Plan for La Quinta
Redevelopment Project No. 1, as amended by Amendment No. 1, authorizes the
Agency to purchase and improve property for park, recreation, cultural and community
facilities; and
WHEREAS, purchasing The Ranch would afford the Agency the
opportunity to address some of the aforementioned conditions of blight; and
o
� t.~
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchRDAFind.wpd 075
Resolution RA 2002-
The Ranch
Adopted: May 15, 2002
WHEREAS, there is inadequate funding within the City's General Fund or
from other sources to acquire The Ranch; and
WHEREAS, it would be in the best interest of the public to pursue
acquisition of The Ranch.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the La Quinta Redevelopment
Agency as follows:
SECTION 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are adopted
as the findings of the Agency Governing Board.
SECTION 2. The Governing Board of the Agency hereby authorizes
exercising the option contained in the Option Agreement and approves the Agreement
of Purchase and Sale and joint escrow Instructions (the "Agreement") for the
acquisition of The Ranch.
SECTION 3. The Governing Board of the Agency further approves the
amendment of Agreement relating to the PGA Agreements.
SECTION 4. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445(a), the
Agency finds and determines that:
A. Exercising the option contained in the Option Agreement and entering into the
Agreement for the acquisition of The Ranch are of benefit to the Project Area
and to the immediate neighborhood in which The Ranch is located.
B. No other reasonable means of financing the Agreement are available to the
community.
C. The payment of funds pursuant to the Agreement and purchase of The Ranch
will assist in the elimination of one or more blighting conditions inside the
Project Area, including the lack of recreational facilities and opportunities, and
is consistent with the Agency's implementation plan adopted pursuant to
Section 33490.
D. The Governing Board of the Agency hereby authorizes the Executive Director to
exercise the option and execute the Agreement and appropriates the funds
necessary to facilitate the acquisition of The Ranch.
00
SAcitymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchRDAFind.wpd 076
Resolution RA 2002-
The Ranch
Adopted: May 15, 2002
E. This resolution shall take effect from and after its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Redevelopment Agency held on this 15th of May, 2002, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TERRY HENDERSON, Chair
La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
ATTEST:
JUNE S. GREEK, CMC, Agency Secretary
La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
M. KATHERINE JENSON, Agency Counsel
La Quinta Redevelopment Agency, California
U�
0'7'7
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchRDAFind.wpd
RESOLUTION 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS
PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION
33445(a) AND CONSENTING TO THE EXPENDITURE OF
FUNDS TO FACILITATE THE PURCHASE OF THE RANCH
PROPERTY
WHEREAS, on the 15th day of May, 2001, the La Quinta City Council
(the "City Council") approved the 2001-02 Economic Development Plan which includes
implementation policies supporting economic diversification, business expansion,
economic protection and preservation, and recreational opportunities; and
WHEREAS, KSL Land Holdings, Inc. owns 525 acres of property (the
"The Ranch") located in La Quinta Redevelopment Project Area No. 1 (the "Project
Area") which is suitable to attain the aforementioned objectives; and
WHEREAS, on 16th day of April, 2002, the City Council made findings
pursuant to Health and Safety Code 33345 to approve use of funds from
Redevelopment Project Area No. 1 for an Option Agreement to allow the La Quinta
Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") an opportunity to complete due diligence
activities related to acquiring The Ranch; and
WHEREAS, on 16th day of April, 2002 the Agency approved an Option
Agreement to allow the Agency an opportunity to complete due diligence activities
related to acquiring The Ranch; and
WHEREAS, the Agency has approved an Agreement of Purchase and Sale
and Joint Escrow Instructions (the "Agreement") that facilitates Agency purchase of
The Ranch; and
WHEREAS, the lack of recreational facilities and the prevalence of
economic maladjustment were documented as conditions of blight that justified the
formation of the Project Area, as cited in the October 1983 Report to the La Quinta
City Council on the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for La Quinta Redevelopment No.
1; and
WHEREAS, Section 518 of the Redevelopment Plan for La Quinta
Redevelopment Project No. 1, as amended by Amendment No. 1, authorizes the
Agency to purchase and improve property for park, recreation, cultural and community
facilities; and
WHEREAS, purchasing The Ranch would afford the Agency the
opportunity to address some of the aforementioned conditions of blight; and
03;
078
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchCCFind.wpd
City Council Resolution 2002-
"The Ranch"
Adopted: May 15, 2002
WHEREAS, there is inadequate funding within the City's General Fund or
from other sources to acquire The Ranch; and
WHEREAS, it would be in the best interest of the public to pursue
acquisition of The Ranch.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
La Quinta, California as follows:
SECTION 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are adopted as the
findings of the City Council.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445(a), the City
Council finds and determines that:
A. Exercising the option contained in the Option Agreement and entering into
the Agreement for the acquisition of The Ranch are of benefit to the Project Area and
to the immediate neighborhood in which The Ranch is located.
B. No other reasonable means of financing the Agreement are available to
the community.
C. The payment of funds for the Agreement and purchase of The Ranch will
assist in the elimination of one or more blighting conditions inside the Project Area,
including the lack of recreational facilities and opportunities, and is consistent with the
Agency's implementation plan adopted pursuant to Section 33490.
D. The City Council consents to the Agency appropriating and expending
funds to implement the terms of the Agreement and facilitate the acquisition of The
Ranch.
E. This Resolution shall take effect from and after its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of La Quinta, California held on this 15th of May, 2002, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
0 9
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchCCFind.wpd
07a
City Council Resolution 2002-
"The Ranch"
Adopted: May 15, 2002
JOHN L. PENA, Mayor
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JUNE S. GREEK, CMC, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
I- ( !.,
030
S:\citymgr\Kim Fischer\RanchCCFind.wpd
ATTACHMENT(S)
1 G
081
ATTACHMENT #1
• SUMMARY REPORT
' FOR THE
AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE
AND JOINT ESCROW INTRUCTIONS
' BETWEEN THE
LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AND
' KSL LAND HOLDINGS
FOR
THE RANCH PROPERTY
April 30, 2002
' INTRODUCTION
' This document is the Summary Report ("Report") for the proposed Agreement of
Purchase and Sale and Joint Escrow Instructions ("Agreement") involving the La
Quinta Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") and the KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
t ("Seller"). The Agreement facilitates the purchase of the Seller's 525-acre
property known as The Ranch ("Property"). The Agency proposes to purchase
the Property to facilitate the development of municipal/public golf course(s),
' • passive recreation, and commercial/hospitality uses. The Property is located in
La Quinta Redevelopment Project No.1 ("Project No. 1"). These uses will
address some of the blighting conditions cited when Project No. 1 was
' established in 1983, which included the lack of recreation facilities and economic
maladjustment.
' This Report has been prepared pursuant to Section 33445 and 33679 of the
California Health Safety Code ("Law") and presents the following:
' . A summary of the Agreement.
The estimate of the amount of taxes proposed to be used for the land and the
' construction of any publicly owned building, including interest payments.
' • That the buildings, facilities, structures, or other improvements will benefit the
project area or the immediate neighborhood in which the project is located.
' . That no other reasonable means of financing the buildings, facilities,
structures or other improvements are available to the community.
' • That the payment of funds for the acquisition of the land and the cost of the
buildings, structures, or other improvements will assist in the elimination of
082
smp51502t.doc 1 5/3/02
' one or more blighting conditions within the project area, and is consistent with
• the implementation adopted pursuant to Section 33490 of the Law.
THE AGREEMENT
' The Agreement provides that the Agency will purchase the 525-acre Property for
a cost of $42,500,000 or $80,952 per acre, provided that escrow closes by July
2, 2002. Closing may be extended to October 31, 2002, however the Agency
' must pay an additional $212,500 per month for every additional month that
escrow does not close after July 2, 2002. These additional payments add to the
purchase price. If escrow did not close until the end of October 2002, the total
' purchase price would be $43,500,000. The Agency commissioned an MAI
appraiser from Capital Reality to prepare an appraisal that verifies the Property's
value based upon public golf and private resort uses. Using comparable sales
' analysis, this appraisal generated a per acre value range of $75,000 to $83,000,
and thus the purchase price is fair market value consistent with a blended value
per acre.
' An initial deposit of $100,000 was made when the Agency executed the Option
Agreement and opened escrow. Upon exercising the Option to purchase and
' thus approving the purchase as provided in the Agreement, an additional
$150,000 deposit is required. Both deposits and accrued interest on these
• deposits are credited towards the purchase price and are non-refundable. Prior
' to the Agency executing the Option Agreement, Agency staff conducted, and
presented to the Agency Board the staffs analysis of, an extensive due diligence
investigation that included commissioning and receiving the property appraisal, a
' title report and a hazardous materials survey, confirming the Property's
boundaries, processing a mitigated negative declaration to analyze
' environmental impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"),
and evaluating materials submitted by the Seller and others, a majority of which
are listed on Exhibit B of the Agreement. To date all of the aforementioned
items, except for mitigated negative declaration, have been completed and have
not surfaced outstanding issues. The mitigated negative declaration will be
presented for consideration as part of the consideration of the Agreement at a
' public hearing scheduled for May 15, 2002.
The Agreement includes covenants that restrict certain uses on the Property
' during the first seven years of Agency ownership. Regarding the use restrictions,
during the first seven years of Agency ownership only the following would apply:
' The maximum number of hotel rooms that can be constructed on -site
during the first 7 years following Agency acquisition is 250;
'• The maximum number of condo -hotel units that can be constructed
• during the first 7 years following Agency acquisition is 300 with a
maximum of 500 keys;
MM
I
smp51502t.doc 2 5/3/02
I*
• The maximum number of hotel -associated conference space that can be
constructed during the first 7 years following Agency acquisition is
10,000 square feet; and
• The maximum room rate that may be charged for the hotel and condo -
hotel units during the first 7 years following Agency acquisition is 70% of
the advertised rate of the La Quinta Resort and Club for rooms of like
kind (but the rate, in no event, is required to be less than $125 per night).
The Seller currently owns the La Quinta Resort and Club.
Regarding the Seller's access the following would apply:
• Through a separate agreement that does not encumber the Property, the
Seller will have an equal opportunity to purchase golf packages that are
offered to other La Quinta hotels and resorts, and the Seller will also have
equal opportunity to submit proposals to manage and rent the condo -
hotel units as may be provided to other condo -hotel management firms,
as provided by and subject to applicable laws.
All of the above use restrictions and access requirements would terminate
prior to the expiration of the 7 year period following Agency acquisition if the
Seller sells its interest in the La Quinta Resort and Club.
Agency staff has evaluated these restrictions and do not believe that they
unduly restrict the development of this property. First, the hotel, condo -
hotel, and conference space restrictions expire 7 years after the close of
escrow or by 2009. Review of current market studies the City has
commissioned and discussions with hotel market consultants indicates that
the La Quinta resort and hospitality market will not have sufficient demand
to support hotel and condo -hotel development on this site larger than 250
rooms and 300 rooms, respectively, without severely impacting the La
Quinta Resort and Club. In essence, instead of generating additional
occupied rooms, if a hotel or resort larger than 250 rooms, and more than
300 condo -hotel rooms, were built on this site within the next seven years,
it would reduce occupancy at the La Quinta Resort and Club rather than
increasing the number of occupied rooms in La Quinta. The City therefore
would not benefit from this build -out during this initial 7-year period.
Further, after the restrictions expire, additional hotel, condo -hotel and
conference facility development may be built, if the market can support the
additional space.
• Finally, the Agreement does not commit the Agency to fund the construction C4 r_t
of publicly owned improvements or building. The Agency is purchasing the 084
smp51502t.doc 3 5/3/02
' Property to facilitate the development of up to two 18-hole public golf
courses, a 9-hole executive course, a clubhouse with public meeting space,
' and commercial, hotel, and condo -hotel space. However, no timetable or
development plans are in place at this time. Once escrow closes the Agency
will undertake site, golf course and facility planning activities that will
' identify the location, cost, structure, funding mechanism and anticipated
implementation timeframe for each use.
' THE ESTIMATE OF THE AMOUNT OF TAXES PROPOSED TO BE USED FOR
THE LAND AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF ANY PUBLICLY OWNED
BUILDING, INCLUDING INTEREST PAYMENTS
' will a 42 500 000 for the Property. The
Per the Agreement the Agency pay $
Agency could incur an additional $1,000,000 of acquisition costs if the sales
' transaction does not close by July 2, 2002, but instead is delayed until as late as
October 31, 2002. However, barring the unforeseen, the Agency, if the Agency
' Board approves exercising the Option to purchase, anticipates being able to
close escrow on the purchase by July 2, 2002. The purchase will be funded from
bond proceeds derived from the Agency's Project No. 1 Series 2001 Bonds, and
' the Project No. 1 Series 2002 Bonds. The funding amounts are $20,000,000 and
$22,500,000, respectively. These bonds are funded only through tax increment
revenue derived from Project No. 1. Bond payments are not an obligation of the
' • City of La Quinta or the properties that comprise Project No. 1. Further, Project
No. 1 tax increment revenue can only be used to fund projects and programs that
eliminate blight within the Project Area by improving and/or developing public
' facilities and improvements or by assisting private projects that eliminate
blighting conditions, or used to fund the development of affordable housing. This
money cannot be used to fund the City service costs, such as police, fire, and
' general government staffing costs. The projected interest expense the Agency
will incur to use this bond financing for the 30-year term of the respective bond
issues is $50,000,000. No costs will be incurred related to the construction of
tpublicly owned buildings as a result of the Agreement.
THE BUILDINGS, FACILITIES, STRUCTURES, OR IMPROVEMENTS THAT
' WILL BENEFIT THE PROJECT AREA OR THE IMMEDIATE
NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH THE PROJECT IS LOCATED
' The Agreement does not initiate the construction of public buildings,
improvements or structures. Any construction would occur at a later date, after
extensive planning activities on the Property and compliance with all applicable
' law. The Property is located in Project No. 1 which was established in December
1983. Two of the blighting conditions cited for establishing Project No. 1 were
the lack of recreation facilities and the lack of enterprises that stimulate business
' activity. Purchasing the Property will afford the opportunity for the Agency to
• develop municipal/public golf and other passive recreation uses. Further, the
Agency will have additional means to attract resort, hospitality, and related uses
' smp51502t.doc 4 5/3/02
1 C�
085
' that will attract patrons to Project No. 1 generating additional demand for Project
• No. 1 businesses.
NO OTHER REASONABLE MEANS OF FINANCING THE BUILDINGS,
FACILITIES, STRUCTURES, OR OTHER IMPROVEMENTS ARE AVAILABLE
' TO THE COMMUNITY
Other means of financing this acquisition would include the City's General Fund,
' potential grants, and additional property assessments. The City's February 2002
cash -flow forecast indicates that the General Fund will experience modest
surpluses for the coming four years. After that point the General Fund is
' projected to incur deficits because a majority of General Fund revenue is derived
from one-time development fee income. One reason for pursuing the Property is
to obtain land that can support the development of revenue generating uses that
' produce transient occupancy and sales tax income to the General Fund to
support City services. Grant funds are available for park and open space
acquisition. However, grant funds are not of sufficient amounts to fund this
' purchase. Finally, property assessments could be used. However, the uses
envisioned for this site would be both a Project Area and Citywide amenity.
Securing the necessary majority to support an increased assessment to fund this
' acquisition would be difficult given the recent failure to secure the necessary
majorities to pass City-wide assessments.
lie THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE LAND AND THE
' COST OF THE BUILDSINGS, STRUCTURES, OR OTHER IMPROVEMETNS
WILL ASSIST IN THE ELIMINATION OF ONE OR MORE BLIGHTING
CONDITIONS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA, AND IS CONSISTENT WITH
' THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 33490
OF THE LAW
' As stated above, the Property is located in Project No. 1 which was established
in December 1983. Two of the blighting conditions cited for establishing Project
No. 1 were the lack of recreation facilities and the lack of enterprises that
' stimulate business activity. Purchasing the Property will afford the opportunity for
the Agency to develop municipal/public golf and other passive recreation uses.
Further, the Agency will have additional means to attract resort, hospitality, and
' related uses that will attract patrons to Project No. 1 that will generate additional
demand for local businesses.
' Prior to the Agency's consideration of the Agreement and exercise of the Option
to purchase, the Agency is scheduled to hold a noticed public hearing concerning
a proposed amendment to the Agency's Second Five Year Implementation Plan
'to include this project. If so amended by the Agency after closing of the public
• hearing, the project described herein will be consistent with the Agency's Second
Five Year Implementation Plan.
1 C' u
1••
I
smp51502t.doc 5 5/3/02
ATTACHMENT #2
ADDITIONAL AGREEMENT
This ADDITIONAL AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into as of April
29, 2002 ("Reference Date"), by and among (1) LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, a
public body, corporate and politic ("Agency"), (2) KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC., a Delaware
corporation ("KSL"), and (3) KSL DESERT RESORTS, INC., a Delaware corporation ("Desert
Resorts").
RECITAL
' A. Desert Resorts, an affiliate of KSL, owns and operates the La Quinta Resort & Club,
a resort hotel in the City of La Quinta ("La Quinta Resort"). KSL and Desert Resorts are sometimes
referred to herein collectively as the "Benefited Parties."
B. Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, Agency and KSL have also
entered into that certain Option Agreement ("Option Agreement') pertaining to Agency's potential
' acquisition from KSL of approximately 525 acres of land and improvements thereon (the "Site").
The Site is legally described in Exhibit "A" hereto.
' C. If the Agency exercises the option pursuant to the Option Agreement, the parties
thereafter intend to enter into the Agreement of Purchase and Sale Agreement and Joint Escrow
Instructions attached as Exhibit "B" to the Option Agreement (the "Purchase Agreement").
D. Agency acknowledges that if it acquires the Site pursuant to the Purchase Agreement,
it contemplates as of the Reference Date that it may, but is not obligated to, undertake, participate in,
' financially assist, cause, or facilitate the development on the Site with uses that may include, but not
be limited to, one or more publicly owned golf courses (the "Public Golf Course(s)"), hotel(s),
motel(s), or other commercial uses which may include one or more "condo -hotels" (as that term is
' defined in Section 1.2 hereinbelow), and/or Agency- or City -owned meeting spaces or conference
facilities (as described in Section 1.3 hereinbelow).
' E. The parties desire in this Agreement to set forth their mutual understanding
concerning Desert Resort's equal opportunity to (i) have access to "golf packages" offered by the
Public Golf Course(s) for, the guests of the La Quinta Resort, and (ii) to have the ability to compete
' to be the initial manager of the Condo-Hotel(s), and (iii) have access to use the public meeting
spaces or conference facilities, all of the foregoing in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
' AGREEMENT
In consideration of the foregoing Recitals and the covenants and promises hereinafter
I contained, and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency is hereby
acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:
107
' 394/015610-0048 1
268916.10 a0426/02 Q 7
QV
I
Golf Packages: Condo -Hotel Management; Civic Meeting Facilities
1.1 If the Public Golf Course(s) is/are developed on the Site, Agency agrees that it shall
cause, subject to applicable law and any restrictions or limitations reasonably required for bond or
other financing for acquisition and development of the Public Golf Courses, the manager of the Golf
Course(s) to offer to Desert Resorts for the guests of the La Quinta Resort "golf packages" that are
similar to golf packages that are offered to any other hotel, motel, travel lodge, or resort. As used
herein the term "golf packages" means a program or programs of discounted rates and/or preferred
tee times, but shall specifically exclude any special or discounted rates or services or preferred tee
times made available to individuals who are residents of the City of La Quinta, for their personal use
and consumption in accordance with the rules and regulations of such program or programs.
1.2 Agency agrees to cause the owner(s) of any Condo-Hotel(s) (as that term is defined
below) that is/are developed on the Site to provide to Desert Resort an opportunity to compete, along
with any other firms or entities which may be under consideration, to become the initial manager of
such Condo -Hotel, only if such owner(s), including by or through a condominium association or
timeshare association, engage outside management to manage their Condo -Hotel, and only if and to
the extent such requirement placed by Agency on such owner(s), or the implementation of that
requirement, is permitted by applicable law or regulation or by any or rule or opinion from an
applicable regulatory body with jurisdiction, including but not limited to the California Department
of Real Estate or California Department of Corporations. As used in this Section 1.2, the term
"Condo-Hotel(s)" means one or more developments that is/are a fractional or. time-share
condominium project in which owners of units are limited to occupancy for a specified number of
days per year and which may but is not required to contain units with multiple "lock -offs" or "keys"
(i.e., units with two or more dwelling areas that can be used as bedrooms which may be separately
accessed by key and which are rented on a "per night" basis).
1.3 If Agency -owned or City -owned meeting spaces or conference facilities are
developed on the Site which are generally available for public use, Agency agrees that it shall cause,
subject to applicable law and any restrictions or limitations reasonably required for bond or other
financing for acquisition and development of the meeting spaces or conference facilities, the
operator of such spaces/facilities to permit the La Quinta Resort to have access to use such
spaces/facilities on the same basis and subject to the same rules, regulations, and pricing as any other
private commercial user in the City.
2. Condition Precedent. This Agreement shall not be effective unless and until the escrow
described in the Purchase Agreement has closed with fee title to the Property having been conveyed
to the Agency in accordance with the terms of the Purchase Agreement by recordation, in the official
records of Riverside County, of the grant deed in the form attached as an exhibit to the Purchase
Agreement ("Grant Deed"). If the Grant Deed is recorded, (i) the date of recordation of the Grant
Deed shall be the "Effective Date" of this Agreement, and (ii) any party hereto shall be permitted to
prepare and sign, and require the other parties to sign, an Addendum to this Agreement in the form
of Exhibit `B" hereto and incorporated herein, that confirms the date of recordation of the Grant
Deed.
' 394/015610-0048
268916.10 a04/26/02
2
a
3. Expiration of Agreement.
3.1 Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement, the Option Agreement, the Purchase
Agreement, or any other agreement, to the contrary, should this Agreement become effective
pursuant to Section 2 above, this Agreement and all of its terms, provisions, rights, and obligations
shall automatically expire without notice, and shall be of no force or effect, as of the earlier of (i) the
"Automatic Outside Expiration Date" (as defined below) or (ii) the "Automatic Earlier Expiration
Date" (as defined below). As used herein:
(1) the term Automatic Outside Expiration Date means the date that is seven (7) years
from the Effective Date, and
1 (2) the term Automatic Earlier Expiration Date means the date prior to the Automatic
Outside Expiration Date that any of the events set forth in the following clauses (a) or (b) first
occurs: (a) either Benefited Party sells, transfers, or assigns, one or more times and from time to
time, in the aggregate, a controlling interest in said Benefited Party to an unrelated third party; or (b)
either Benefited Party sells, transfers, or assigns fee title to the real property upon which the La
Quinta Resort is situated to an unrelated third party. Additionally, as used in this clause (2), the term
(A) an "unrelated third party" means a person, firm, or entity, including but not limited to a sole
proprietorship, general or limited partnership, limited liability company, or corporation, whose
controlling or managing general partner(s), managing member, or majority shareholder(s) are not the
principals who own the majority of shares of that Benefited Party as of the Reference Date of this
Agreement, and (B) a "controlling interest" shall mean an ownership (or other equitable interest) in
an entity which, in the aggregate, gives the owner (or holder of the equitable interest) thereof the
right to control the management or policies of that entity.
3.2 If either Benefited Party makes a sale, transfer, or assignment as set forth in Section
3.1(2) above, that Benefited Party shall immediately provide written notice to Agency of that
transfer or assignment.
3.3 Upon the expiration or termination of this Agreement, KSL and Desert Resorts, at the
written request of Agency, shall sign and deliver a quitclaim deed in a form reasonably required by a
reputable title company, releasing all rights and interests in and to this Agreement.
' 4. Representation and Warranty Concerning No Recordation. Each party hereto represents and
warrants to the other that it shall not record this Agreement.
' 5. No Reliance on Other Agreements. No party hereto nor any agents nor any related entities
have made any statement or representation to any other party regarding any fact relied upon in
entering into this Agreement, and each party expressly states it does not rely upon any statement,
' representation or promise of any other party or any party's agent or related entities in executing this
Agreement, except as is expressly stated in this Agreement. Each party to this Agreement has made
such investigation of the facts and law pertaining to this Agreement, and of all other matters
pertaining thereto, as it deems necessary, and has consulted with legal counsel concerning these
' matters and all of the terms of this Agreement, or has knowingly and voluntarily waived its right
consult legal counsel of its choice concerning this Agreement of the terms hereof.
' 394/015610-0048
3
268916.10 a04/26/02 QQ
0 89
6. Severability. In the event any term, covenant, condition, or provision of this Agreement shall
be held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the remaining provisions shall continue in
full force and effect.
7. Amendment; Waiver. This Agreement may be amended, only by written instrument
approved and signed by all of the parties hereto. The waiver by one party of the performance by any
other party of any provision of this Agreement shall not invalidate this Agreement, nor shall it be
considered as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or other provisions of this Agreement.
Any waiver provided by KSL or Desert Resorts shall be deemed a waiver provided by both KSL and
Desert Resorts.
8. 1 Default; Remedies. If any party hereto fails to timely perform any term or provision of this
Agreement which it is obligated to perform, such party shall be in default of this Agreement;
provided, however, the party shall not be deemed to be in default if (i) such party cures, corrects, or
remedies such default within thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice from either of the other
parties specifying such failure, or (ii) for such defaults that cannot reasonably be cured, corrected, or
remedied within thirty (30) days, if such party commences to cure, correct, or remedy such failure
within thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice specifying such failure and thereafter diligently
prosecutes such cure, correction, or remedy to completion. If a default of a party or its respective
successors or assigns, if applicable, is not timely cured, corrected, or remedied, the remedy for an
uncured default by the defaulting party or its respective successors or assigns, if applicable,
notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, shall be limited to equitable remedies
subject to, and to the extent permitted by, California law. In no event shall there be any entitlement,
under this Agreement, to recover damages from any defaulting party and its respective successors or
assigns for a default of this Agreement, and such limitation shall specifically preclude all the parties
to this Agreement or their respective successors or assigns, if applicable, from recovering from one
another or their successors or assigns any monetary, consequential, or economic damages of any
kind or nature for a defaulting party's default of this Agreement.
9. Attorney's Fees; Litigation Matters. In any action between or among the parties hereto
concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party in the action shall be entitled to recover its costs and
expenses including without limitation, litigation costs, expert witness fees, court costs, and
attorney's fees as specified by the court, in addition to whatever other relief the court may grant.
Any litigation between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement shall be filed and maintained in
the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Riverside or in such other
appropriate court in said county. Service of process on KSL and Desert Resorts shall be made in any
manner permitted by California law and shall be effective whether served inside or outside
California. Service of process on Agency shall be made in accordance with California law.
' 10. Governing Law. The rights and obligations of the parties hereto shall be construed and
enforced in accordance with, and governed by, the internal laws of the State of California without
regard to any applicable conflicts of law principles.
' 11. No Third Party Beneficiaries. No person or entity shall be a third party beneficiary, express
or implied, of the terms of this Agreement. a
' 394/015610-0048 4
268916.10 a04/26/02
090
12. Notices. All notices and communications between the parties hereto required under this
IAgreement or by law shall be (i) personally delivered, (ii) delivered by reputable same -day or
overnight courier service, by facsimile transmission, provided the original is delivered by one of the
other means approved herein, or (iii) sent by United States mail, prepaid, certified, return receipt
' requested. All notices personally delivered, delivered by courier, or by fax (in accordance with the
terms hereof) shall be deemed effective upon receipt; mailed notices shall be deemed effective at
Noon on the third business day following dispatch. A "business day" as used herein shall mean any
' day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or any other day that La Quinta City Hall is closed to. the public.
Notices delivered by Agency to KSL or Desert Resorts shall be deemed notice delivered to both
' KSL and Desert Resorts. Notice shall be directed as follows (a party hereto may change the
addresses by notice to the other party in accordance herewith):
' If to KSL and/or Desert Resorts: KSL Land Holdings
50-905 Avenida Bermudas
La Quinta, CA 92253
Attn: Mr. Chevis Hosea
' Fax: (760) 564-8190
' With copy to: KSL Land Holdings
50-905 Avenida Bermudas
La Quinta, CA 92253
' Attn: Legal Dept.
Fax: (760) 564-8003
' If to the Agency: La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
' Attn: Executive Director
Fax: (760) 777- 7101
' With copy to: Rutan & Tucker, LLP
611 Anton Blvd., Suite 1400
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
' Attn: M. Katherine Jenson, Esq.
Fax: (714) 546-9035
' 13. Nonliability of A.ency Officers. The officers, officials, members, employees, agents, and
representatives of the Agency shall not be personally liable for any default or damages arising out of
this Agreement.
' 14. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties with
respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all previous negotiations, agreements, and
understandings, oral or written, between the parties, and no party has relied upon any warranty or
representation not contained in this Agreement.
' 3941015610-0048 5
268916.10 a04/26/02 y
091
15. Successors and Assigns. During the term of this Agreement, the terms and conditions of this
Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the Agency. During the term of this
Agreement, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding on the successors and
assigns of KSL and Desert Resorts, provided that any such assignment has not triggered the
Automatic Earlier Expiration Date as set forth in Section 3.1(2) above.
16. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be
deemed an original, and, when taken together with other signed counterparts, shall constitute one
Agreement, which shall be binding upon and effective as to all the parties hereto.
[end — signature page follows]
394/015610-0048 6
268916.10 a04/26/02
1 j C)
092
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the
Reference Date set forth hereinabove.
ATTEST:"
Agency Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP
Agency Counsel
' 394/015610-0048
268916.10 a04/26/02
7
"KSL
KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC.
By:
Printed Name:
Its:
`DESERT RESORTS"
By:
Printed Name:
Its:
"AGENCY"
LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
By:
Thomas Genovese
Executive Director
110
093
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
[SEE FOLLOWING PAGES]
' 394/015610-0048
268916.10 a04/26/02
imi
I
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE REAL PROPERTY
THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF
RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
PARCEL A
THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 5, THE EAST
HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 6.,
AND THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 6
SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 6 WITH THE
CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 52; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, NORTH 89°55'34"
EAST, 633.19 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE, SOUTH 0°06' 19" WEST, 55.00
FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 55.00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF SAID CENTERLINE THE
FOLLOWING FOUR (4) COURSES:
NORTH 89055'34" EAST, 1075.47 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE
CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1945.00 FEET; THENCE
SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 46043'49"
AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1586.34 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2055.00 FEET, A RADIAL
LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 46039'23" EAST; THENCE
SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 46047'58"
AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1678.53 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 55.00 FEET
SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8, ALSO BEING THE CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 52, NORTH
89051'25" EAST, 859.04 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 0008'35" WEST, 3.00 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 52.00 FEET
SOUTH OF SAID NORTH LINE, NORTH 89051'25" EAST, 155.06 FEET TO THE BEGINNING
OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF
291.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 15009'25" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 76.98 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO
AND 60.00 FEET SOUTH OF SAID CENTERLINE THE FOLLOWING FOUR (4) COURSES:
SOUTH 89051'25" WEST, 1081.86 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE
' CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2060.00 FEET; THENCE
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 46047'58"
' AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1682.62 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE
CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1940.00 FEET, A RADIAL
LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 46039'23" WEST; THENCE
' 394/015610-0048
268916.10 a04/26/02 2
095
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 46043'49"
AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1582.26 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°55'34" WEST, 1708.65
FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 6; THENCE ALONG SAID
WEST LINE, NORTH 0°04' 16" EAST, 60.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL A CONTAINS 1.506 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
' PARCEL B
THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 8,
' TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 8; THENCE ALONG
THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 8, ALSO BEING THE CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 52,
SOUTH 89051'25" WEST, 60.04 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE
PARALLEL TO AND 60.00 FEET WESTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF JEFFERSON
STREET, SOUTH 2°12'44" EAST, 235.55 FEET TO A POINT OF CUSP WITH A TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 171.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
72046'26" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 217.20 FEET; THENCE NORTH 74°59' 10" WEST,
55.07 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY
AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 291.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID
CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15009'25" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 76.98
FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 52.00 FEET SOUTH OF THE CENTERLINE OF
AVENUE 52, SOUTH 89°51'25" WEST, 155.06 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0°08'35" EAST, 3.00
FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 55.00 FEET SOUTH OF THE CENTERLINE OF
AVENUE 52, SOUTH 89051'25" WEST, 859.04 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2055.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
13017'09" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 476.51 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF
SAID SECTION 8, ALSO BEING THE CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 52; THENCE ALONG
SAID NORTH LINE, NORTH 89051'25" EAST, 1733.26 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
PARCEL B CONTAINS 2.173 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
�1
394/015610-0048 3 1 '
268916.10 a04/26/02
096
PARCEL C
' THAT PORTION OF THE.EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 8,
AND THE WEST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE
7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
' FOLLOWS:
' BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 8; THENCE ALONG THE
CENTERLINE OF JEFFERSON STREET, SOUTH 2012'44" EAST, 5267.69 - FEET TO THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN
' BERNARDINO MERIDIAN; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 9,
ALSO BEING THE CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 54, SOUTH 89050'56" WEST, 65.04 FEET;
THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 65.00 FEET WESTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF
' JEFFERSON STREET, NORTH 2°12'44" WEST, 297.88 FEET; THENCE NORTH 1°23'37"
WEST, 350.04 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 60.00 FEET WESTERLY OF THE
CENTERLINE OF JEFFERSON STREET, NORTH 2°12'44" WEST, 3166.69 FEET TO A POINT
' ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF THE ALL AMERICAN CANAL; THENCE
ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY, NORTH 89053' 14" EAST, 30.02 FEET;
THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 30.00 FEET WESTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF
' JEFFERSON STREET, NORTH 2°12'44" WEST, 130.09 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT
OF WAY OF THE ALL AMERICAN CANAL; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT
OF WAY, SOUTH 89°53' 14" WEST, 30.02 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 60.00 FEET
' WESTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF JEFFERSON STREET, NORTH 2012'44" WEST,
1322.87 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 8, ALSO BEING THE
CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 52; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, NORTH 89°51'25"
' EAST, 60.04 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL C CONTAINS 7.220 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
' PARCEL D
' THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 8, AND THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 6
SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, MORE PARTICULARLY
' DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH,
' RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF
SAID SECTION 9, . SOUTH 89°50'56" WEST, 65.04 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 89°50'56" WEST, 132.94 FEET TO THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8, ALSO BEING THE CENTERLINE OF
AVENUE 54, SOUTH 89°59'23" WEST, 2647.64 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF SAID SECTION, SOUTH 89°33'59" WEST, 48.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING
OF A NON -TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF
' 394/015610-0048 y
268916.10 a04/26/02 4 1
1 097
I
I
48.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 89°33'59" WEST;
THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE, AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 105027'16" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 88.35 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 74058'44" EAST, 50.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET; THENCE
SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15000'38"
AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.20 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 30.00 FEET
NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8, ALSO
BEING THE CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 54, SOUTH 89059'23" EAST, 2514.64 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 83002'52" EAST, 151.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44058'49" EAST, 36.66
FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 65.00 FEET WEST OF THE CENTERLINE OF
JEFFERSON STREET, SOUTH 2012'44" EAST, 74.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL D CONTAINS 2.024 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
PARCEL 2
THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 5, THE EAST
HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 6,
THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
SECTION 7, AND SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO
MERIDIAN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
' COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 6 WITH THE
CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 52; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE, SOUTH 0°04' 16"
' WEST, 60.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND
60.00 FEET SOUTH OF THE CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 52 THE FOLLOWING FOUR (4)
COURSES:
d
d
I
NORTH 89055'34" EAST, 1708.65 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE
CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1940.00 FEET; THENCE
SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 46043'49"
AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1582.26 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2060.00 FEET, A RADIAL
LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 46039'23" EAST; THENCE
SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 46047'58"
AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1682.62 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°51'25" EAST, 767.06
FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 41015'00" EAST, 787.18 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 60.00 FEET
WESTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF JEFFERSON STREET, SOUTH 2012'44" EAST, 669.32
FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF THE ALL AMERICAN CANCEL; THENCE
ALONG THE NORTHERLY AND WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF THE ALL AMERICAN
CANAL THE FOLLOWING SEVEN (7) COURSES:
' 394/01,610-0048
26891:10 a04/26/02
SOUTH 89053' 14" WEST, 2633.43 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0°00'06" EAST, 1320.62 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 89055'03" WEST, 20.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0000'06" EAST, 420.29
' FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND
HAVING A RADIUS OF 796.20 FEET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 28030'00" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 396.05 FEET;
' THENCE SOUTH 28030'06" EAST, 74.10 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 636.20 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
' 11002'55" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 122.68 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY, NORTH 60°30'00" WEST, 59.57
' FEET- THENCE NORTH 74000'00" WEST, 188.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 35°10'00" WEST,
68.0WFEET; THENCE NORTH 40°35'00" WEST, 111.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 40°50'00"
West, 115.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 75035'00" WEST, 93.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH
' 36040'00" WEST, 162.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 19035'00" EAST, 61.50 FEET; THENCE
NORTH 36000'00" WEST, 172.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45015'00" WEST, 214.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 43010'00" WEST, 173.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45025'00" WEST, 146.00
' FEET; THENCE NORTH 13°55'00" WEST, 198.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 82000'00" WEST,
182.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 58015'00" WEST, 187.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 46°00'00"
WEST, 180.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 31050'00" WEST, 108.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH
' 5055'00" WEST, 209.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 10020'00" EAST, 180.50 FEET; THENCE
NORTH 4040'00" EAST, 111.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2040'00" WEST, 88.50 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 14000'00" WEST, 202.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 64040'00" WEST, 186.00
FEET; THENCE NORTH 67050'00" WEST, 187.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 76°55'00" WEST,
124.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 37010'00" WEST, 122.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88020'00"
WEST, 75.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88020'00" WEST, 75.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF
' A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 70.00
FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 72025'00" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 88.47 FEET; THENCE NORTH 63°25'00" WEST,
' 59.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY
AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 135.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID
CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 77030'00" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 182.61
' FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND
HAVING A RADIUS OF 47.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS
NORTH 75050'00" WEST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
' CENTRAL ANGLE OF 105045'00" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 86.75 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 88020'00" WEST, 75.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 72020'00" WEST, 64.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 89050'00" WEST, 88.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 48010'00" WEST, 89.50
' FEET; THENCE NORTH 38035'00" WEST, 230.50 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A
TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 90.00
FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
' OF 97045'00" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 153.55 FEET; THENCE NORTH 8°05'00" EAST,
116.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 7005'00" WEST, 293.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45°45'00"
WEST, 143.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 53°25'00" WEST, 284.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
' WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST
' 394/015610-0048 6
268916.10 a04/26/02
11��099
QUARTER SAID SECTION 6; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE, NORTH 0°04' 16" EAST,
1068.43 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL 2 CONTAINS 292.135 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
PARCEL 3
THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER, AND THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER, OF SECTION 8; AND THE WEST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 9;
TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH,
I RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF
SAID SECTION 9, SOUTH 89°50'56" WEST, 65.04 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND
65.00 FEET WESTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF JEFFERSON STREET, NORTH 2012'44"
' WEST, 74.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 44°58'49"
WEST, 36.66 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 83°02'52" WEST, 151.65 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL
TO AND 30.00 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF
' SAID SECTION 8, ALSO BEING THE CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 54, SOUTH 89059'23"
WEST, 2514.64 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET; THENCE
' NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15000'38"
AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.20 FEET; THENCE NORTH 74058'44" WEST, 50.00 FEET
TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND
I HAVING A RADIUS OF 48.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 105027' 16" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 88.35 FEET
TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8;
' THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, SOUTH 89°33'59" WEST, 414.84 FEET TO A POINT
ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE ALL AMERICAN CANCEL, SAID
POINT ALSO BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON -TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
' SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1372.40 FEET, A RADIAL LINE
THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 56056'06" WEST; THENCE ALONG THE
EASTERLY AND SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF THE ALL AMERICAN CANAL, THE
' FOLLOWING TWELVE (12) COURSES:
NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1 °34'00"
' AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 37.53 FEET; THENCE NORTH 34037'54" EAST, 814.10 FEET
TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND
HAVING A RADIUS OF 1492.40 FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE
' THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6024'00" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 166.70 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 28013'54" EAST, 272.60 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 776.20 FEET; THENCE
' NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 56044'00" AND
AN ARC DISTANCE OF 768.58 FEET; THENCE NORTH 28°30'06" WEST, 74.10 FEET TO
THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A
t 394/015610-0048
268916.10 a04/26/02
7
I
too
RADIUS OF 656.20 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 28030'00" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 326.41 FEET; THENCE
NORTH 0000'06" WEST, 420.48 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°55'03" WEST, 10.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 0000'06" WEST, 954.66 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 236.48 FEET; THENCE
NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89053'20"
AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 371.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89053' 14" EAST, 2292.43
FEET;
THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 60.00 FEET WESTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE- OF
JEFFERSON STREET, SOUTH 2012'44" EAST, 3166.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 1023'37"
EASLFFERSON
350.04 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 65.00 FEET WEST OF THE CENTERLINE
OF STREET, SOUTH 2°12'44" EAST, 223.88 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
PARCEL 3 CONTAINS 226.610 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
PARCEL4
THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 8; THENCE ALONG
THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 8, ALSO BEING THE CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 52,
SOUTH 89051'25" WEST, 60.04 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 60.00 FEET
WESTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF JEFFERSON STREET, SOUTH 2012'44" EAST, 235.55
FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 2°12'44"
EAST, 418.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 41 ° 15'00" WEST, 787.18 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL
TO AND 60.00 FEET SOUTH OF THE CENTERLINE OF AVENUE 52, NORTH 89051'25"
EAST, 314.80 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON -TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 291.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH
SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 13°19'22" EAST; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID
CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1 °41'28" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 8.59
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74059' 10" EAST, 55.07 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 171.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
72046'26" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 217.20 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL 4 CONTAINS 3.207 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
' 394/015610-0048
268916.10 a04/26/02
d
H.
394/015610-0048
268916.10 a04/26/02
EXHIBIT "B"
FORM OF ADDENDUM
[SEE FOLLOWING PAGES]
1
102
ADDENDUM TO ADDITIONAL AGREEMENT
' THIS ADDENDUM TO ADDITIONAL AGREEMENT ("Addendum") is made and entered
into this day of , 2002, by and among LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY, a public body, corporate and politic ("Agency"), KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC., a
' Delaware corporation ("KSL"), and KSL DESERT RESORTS, INC., a Delaware corporation
("Desert Resorts").
IA. Agency, KSL, and Desert Resorts entered into that certain Additional Agreement,
with the Reference Date of 12002.
B. Pursuant to Section 2 of the Additional Agreement, any of the parties may cause the
execution of this Addendum to confirm the date of recordation of the Grant Deed as referred to
therein.
C. The parties hereby confirm that the date of recordation of the Grant Deed as referred
to in Section 2 of the Additional Agreement is 92002.
D. This Addendum may be executed in counterparts, each of which, when all parties
hereto have signed this Addendum, shall constitute an original.
' 3941015610-0048
268916.10 a04/26/02
[end — signature page follows]
1
103
ATTACHMENT 3
34. Confidentiality.
Buyer and Seller agree and acknowledge that some of the information, documents
and materials (collectively, "Information") provided to or made available to Buyer by Seller or to
Buyer's agents is proprietary and confidential in nature and will be delivered to or made
available to Buyer solely in connection with Buyer's purchase of the Property. Buyer agrees not
to disclose any of such confidential Information or any of the provisions, terms or conditions
thereof, to any person; provided that Buyer shall have the right to disclose such Information with
respect to the Property and this Agreement to Buyer's consultants, attorneys or accountants
employed by Buyer to review such Information, provided that prior to any disclosure of such
Information to any of Buyer's consultants, attorneys, accountants, Buyer shall advise such
parties, to keep any such Information confidential and to otherwise comply with the terms and
conditions of this Section 34. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Seller hereby acknowledges and
agrees that, Buyer is subject to, among others, the California Public Records Act (California
Government Code Section 6250 et seq.) (the "Public Records Act") and, in order to facilitate
Buyer's compliance with this Section 34, to the extent that Seller contemplates that any
Information is confidential, Seller shall clearly mark the confidential document(s) with a
"confidential" mark. All Information, whether marked confidential or not, may also be disclosed
as required by applicable law, including, without limitation, the Public Records Act, or as is
reasonably necessary in the event of litigation between Buyer and Seller, or as reasonably
necessary for either party to pursue necessary governmental permits and approvals. Buyer shall
immediately return all of the Information, including copies thereof which were provided to or
made by Buyer, and without any representation or warranty, all copies of any studies, reports or
test results obtained by Buyer in connection with its inspection of the Property, on the first to
occur of (a) such time as Buyer determines that it shall not acquire the Property, or (b) such time
as this Agreement shall terminate for any reason.
35. Event of Force Maieure.
As used in this Agreement and, if applicable, the Purchase Agreement, an "Event
of Force Majeure" shall mean and refer to any cause that is beyond the control and without the
fault of Seller, Seller Parties, Buyer, Buyer Parties, and/or the City of La Quinta, including, without
limitation, acts of God, inclement weather, earthquakes, fires, casualties, labor or materials
shortages, civil commotion, strike, war, acts of civil or military authorities or the public enemy,
governmental delays or moratoria.
36. Seller's and KSL Desert Resort's Indemnity Concerning the PGA Agreements.
This Section 36 is made in reference to (i) that certain Agreement dated March 5,
1984, by and between The Professional Golfers' Association of America ("PGA") and LML
Development Corp. of California ("LML"), as amended by that certain letter agreement dated
May 28, 1993 (together, the "1984 Agreement"), and (ii) that certain Agreement dated January
10, 1985, by and between PGA Tour, Inc., a Maryland corporation ("Tour") and Landmark Land
Company of California, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Landmark"), as amended by that certain
letter agreement dated May 28, 1993 (together, the "1985 Agreement"). The 1984 Agreement
and the 1985 Agreement may hereinafter be referred to together as the "PGA Agreements". KSL
Desert Resorts, an affiliate of Seller, is successor in interest by assignment to LML (under the
615/015610-0048 270736.12 PM02 _ 1 8 1' n e 4
1984 Agreement) and Landmark (under the 1985 Agreement). With respect to the PGA
Agreements, Seller, Buyer and KSL Desert Resorts hereby agree as follows:
(a) No Assignment or Assumption. The parties do not intend that any of the
rights or obligations set forth in the PGA Agreements be assigned to or assumed by Buyer.
Nothing set forth in this Purchase Agreement, or in any of the closing documents relating to the
transaction contemplated hereby, shall be construed to constitute an assignment to or assumption
by Buyer of any of the rights or obligations of either of the PGA Agreements.
(b) Inapplicability of the PGA Agreements. Seller and KSL Desert Resorts
hereby represent and warrant to Buyer that the 1984 Agreement, which is missing Exhibit "A"
thereto, has no application or effect on the Property inasmuch as the 1984 Agreement never
encompassed the Property. Seller and KSL Desert Resorts further represent and warrant that
neither the 1984 Agreement nor the 1985 Agreement will apply to the Property once it
transferred to Buyer, since Buyer has no authorization to utilize the trademark or service mark
rights covered by the PGA Agreements.
(c) Indemnity. Seller and KSL Desert Resorts hereby irrevocably and
unconditionally agree to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Buyer, the Buyer Parties (as
defined in Section 6 above), subsequent purchasers, successors in interest, lenders, bond holders,
underwriters, attorneys, bond counsel, tax counsel, bond insurers, and golf course operators
(collectively, the "Indemnified Parties") from any and all claims, demands, actions, judgment
liens, costs, bond redemption costs, expenses, liabilities, encumbrances, damages, or legal
proceedings (with counsel selected by the Indemnified Parties), which arise out of, relate to, or in
any way involve either or both of the PGA Agreements. This obligation extends not only to third
party claims against the Indemnified Parties, but also to injuries and losses suffered by the
Indemnified Parties which arise out of, relate to, or in any way involve either or both of the PGA
Agreements.
(d) Bonds. Upon the Close of Escrow, Seller and KSL Desert Resorts shall
deliver to Buyer a bond or letter of credit (the "Security") in a form and from an institution
reasonably acceptable to Buyer, in the amount of $ , which Security shall not
terminate before January 1, 2008, and shall evidence (to Buyer's satisfaction) that sufficient
funds are available to pay the cost of complying with the provisions of this Section 36.
Notwithstanding the provision for the amount of the Security, the obligations set forth in Section
36(c) shall be unlimited in amount.
(e) Joint and Several Liability. The indemnity obligations of Seller and KSL
Desert Resorts set forth in this Section 36 are joint and several.
(f) Survival. The terms, conditions, and obligations set forth in this Section
36 shall expressly survive the Closing and shall not merge therein.
[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
SIGNATURES FOLLOW.]
r�
615/015610-0048 -19- v 10
270736.12 PM02
ATTACHMENT #4
STATE OF CALIFORNIA i
Governor's Office of Planning anResearch
h
L
State ClearinghouseGray
Tal Finney
GOVERNOR May 6, 2002 INTERIM DIRECTOR
Jerry Herman �O ""£G
City of La Quinta r10
PO Box 1504 78-495 Calle Tampico G
La Quinta, CA 92253
Subject: The Ranch
SCH#: 1999081020
Dear Jerry Herman: _
The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for
review. The review period closed on May 3, 2002, and no state agencies submitted comments by that date.
This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft
environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the
environmental review process. If you have a question about the above -named project, please refer to the
ten -digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office.
Sincerely, IE"��"`
Terry Roberts
Director, State Clearinghouse
1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812-3044
916-445-0613 FAX 916-323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov
M
10A
Document Details Report
State Clearinghouse Data Base
SCH# 1999081020
Project Title The Ranch
Lead Agency La Quinta, City of
Type Neg Negative Declaration
Description Inclues two 18-hole public golf courses with a 25,000 square foot clubhouse as well as a 9-hole public
golf course providing a junior golf program. The proposed resort uses would include a 250-room hotel
with a 10,000 square foot conference center, 300 Timeshare units, fractional or condo hotel units
(Timeshare) and 25,000 square feet of ancillary commercial uses. The City of La Quinta
Redevelopment Agency is proposing to acquire the Project Site at this time. Subsequent discretionary
actions required to develop the site include adoption of a Specific Plan as required for development of
an area designated for Tourist Commerical uses by the General Plan, a zone change to make the
zoning designations consistent with the land use designations, a Conditional Use Permit for the 300
Timeshare units, a Site Development Permit and a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide,the site to
accommodate the proposed uses. Additional design features to be incorporated into the project
include passive park space, trails, and view corridors. The existing Pelz short game golf school may
remain. No development would occur on the 182 acres of the Coral Reef. Mountains on the western
portion of the Project Site.
Lead Agency Contact
Name Jerry Herman
Agency City of La Quanta
Phone 619.777-7125 Fax
email
Address PO Box 1504 78-495 Calle Tampico
City La Quinta State CA Zip 92253
Project Location
County Riverside
City La Quinta
Region
Cross Streets Jefferson Avenue/ Avenue 52
Parcel No.
Township Range Section Base
Proximity to:
Highways 111
Airports.
Railways
Waterways Whitewater River, Coachella Canal
Schools La Quinta H.S.
Land Use The La Quinta General Plan Land Use designations for the site are Tourist Commercial (TC), Golf
course (G) and open Space with a Hillside Overlay (OS). The Zoning Code designations for the site
are Low Density Residential (RL), and Commercial Office (CO).
Project Issues Aesthetic/Visual; Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Archaeologic -Historic; Drainage/Absorption; Flood
Plain/Flooding; Geologic/Seismic; Minerals; Noise; Population/Housing Balance; Public Services;
Recreation/Parks; Schools/Universities; Sewer Capacity; Solid Waste; Traffic/Circulation; Vegetation;
Water Quality; Water Supply; Wetiand/Riparian; Wildlife; Landuse; Cumulative Effects
Reviewing Resources Agency; Department of Conservation; Department of Fish and Game, Region 6; Office of
Agencies Historic Preservation; Department of Parks and Recreation; Department of Water Resources;
California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 8; State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water
Quality; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 7; Native American Heritage Commission;
State Lands Commission
107
Document Details Report
State Clearinghouse Data Base
Date Received 04/03/2002 Start of Review 04/03/2002 End of Review 05/03/2002
n
C13
AVENUE 50
D
Cn
2
z
O
z m
m
M DO
mi O
z
cn
M
m
I
- I
------ - AVENUE 52
GIt I
TC
Coachella
TIC r i
TIC
"e-,+
is
1 !
y i �
---------------
/
' I''`— -" "" ""—"" AVENUE 54
iUi i!� •.t i L �
rsr
LEGEND`
.- �..i t • r � l � t
Area Proposed for Development ?v
T� Tourist Commercial
D—, Golf Course
�GSJ Open Space
VIII-IA-
Hillside Overlay
j•• Project Boundary
SOURCE: C'iry• t f L<t Quinta Grnrrn! Plan, Exhibit 2.1 City of La Quinla General Plan (Recommended), March 20, 2002.
NOT TO SCALE
L •'
FIGURES
36. PGA Agreements.
This Section 36 is made in reference to (i) that certain Agreement dated March 5,
1984, by and between The Professional Golfers' Association of America ("PGA") and LML
Development Corp. of California ("LML"), as amended by that certain letter agreement dated
May 28, 1993 (together, the "1984 Agreement"), and (ii) that certain Agreement dated January
10, 1985, by and between PGA Tour, Inc., a Maryland corporation ("Tour") and Landmark Land
Company of California, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Landmark"), as amended by that certain
letter agreement dated May 28, 1993 (together, the "1985 Agreement"). The 1984 Agreement
and the 1985 Agreement may hereinafter be referred to together as the "PGA Agreements". KSL
Desert Resorts, an affiliate of Seller, is successor in interest by assignment to LML (under the
1984 Agreement) and Landmark (under the 1985 Agreement). With respect to the PGA
Agreements, Seller, Buyer and KSL Desert Resorts hereby agree as follows:
(a) No Assignment or Assumption. The parties do not intend that any of the
rights or obligations set forth in the PGA Agreements be assigned to or assumed by Buyer.
Nothing set forth in this Purchase Agreement, or in any of the closing documents relating to the
transaction contemplated hereby, shall be construed to constitute an assignment to or assumption
by Buyer of any of the rights or obligations of either of the PGA Agreements. Buyer expressly
acknowledges that it and its successors and assigns have no authorization to utilize the trademark
or service mark rights pursuant to the PGA Agreement and any and all rights and obligations
under the PGA Agreements shall remain with KSL Desert Resorts.
(b) Indemnity. Seller and KSL Desert Resorts hereby irrevocably and
unconditionally agree to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Buyer, the Buyer Parties (as
defined in Section 6 above), subsequent purchasers, successors in interest, lenders, (provided any
such subsequent purchasers, successors in interest and/or lenders obtain the PGA Agreements
Endorsement subject to the Title Company honoring its agreement to issue such Endorsement to
such subsequent purchasers, successors in interest and/or lenders, as described in Section 36(c)
below) bond holders, underwriters, attorneys, bond counsel, tax counsel, bond insurers, and golf
course operators (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties") from any and all claims, demands,
actions, judgment liens, costs, bond redemption costs, expenses, liabilities, encumbrances,
damages, or legal proceedings (with counsel reasonably acceptable to the Indemnified Parties),
which arise out of the enforcement or the attempted enforcement of either or both of the PGA
Agreements by the PGA and/or the Tour. This obligation extends not only to third party claims
against the Indemnified Parties, but also to injuries and losses suffered by the Indemnified
Parties which arise out of the enforcement or attempted enforcement of either or both of the PGA
Agreements by the PGA and/or the Tour.
(c) Title Policy Endorsement. In connection with the Title Company's
commitment to issue to Buyer, Buyer's Title Policy, the Title Company has agreed to issue an
endorsement, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "H" and by this reference made a part
hereof (the "PGA Agreements Endorsement"). In the event of an enforcement or an attempted
enforcement of either or both of the PGA Agreements by the PGA and/or the Tour which is
covered by the PGA Agreements Endorsement, Buyer agrees to promptly tender the matter to the
KSLRanchCitylnde=ity3 5/15/02 13 0
Title Company and to pursue Buyer's rights against the Title Company, with all reasonable non -
litigation diligence, prior to pursuing the rights contained in Section 36(b) against Seller and/or
KSL Desert Resorts. Buyer shall not be required under this provision to pursue litigation against
the Title Company prior to enforcing its rights under Section 36(b) against Seller and/or KSL
Desert Resorts. Buyer shall promptly notify Seller and KSL Desert Resorts of (i) any attempt by
the PGA and/or the Tour to enforce either or both of the PGA Agreements and (ii) Buyer's
tender to the Title Company of any such attempted enforcement by the PGA and/or the Tour.
(d) Bonds. Upon the Close of Escrow, Seller and KSL Desert Resorts shall
deliver to Buyer a bond (the "Security") in a form and from an institution reasonably acceptable
to Buyer, in the amount of $500,000, which Security Seller and KSL Desert Resorts shall cause
to remain in effect until January 1, 2008, and shall evidence (to Buyer's reasonable satisfaction)
that in the event Seller and KSL Desert Resorts fail to comply with Seller's and KSL Desert
Resort's financial obligations under the provisions of this Section 36 that the Surety under such
Security shall endeavor to comply with Seller's and KSL Desert Resort's financial obligations
under the provisions of this Section 36. Notwithstanding the provision for the amount of the
Security, the obligations set forth in Section 36(b) shall not be limited.
(e) Joint and Several Liability. The indemnity obligations of Seller and KSL
Desert Resorts set forth in this Section 36 are joint and several.
(f) Survival. The terms, conditions, and obligations set forth in this Section
36 shall expressly survive the Closing and shall not merge therein.
KSLRanchCitylndemnity3 5/15/02 ` "
ENDORSEMENT
ATTACHED TO POLICY NO. SAMPLE
ISSUED BY
FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
THE COMPANY HEREBY INSURES THE INSURED AGAINST LOSS, DAMAGES, AND
CLAIMS INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, COSTS, ATTORNEYS' FEES AND
EXPENSES, WHICH SAID INSURED SHALL SUSTAIN AS A RESULT OF THE
ENFORCEMENT OR ATTEMPTED ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF (1) THAT
CERTAIN UNRECORDED AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE PROFESSIONAL
GOLFERS' ASSOCIATION (PGA) AND LML DEVELOPMENT CORP. OF CALIFORNIA,
PREDECESSOR IN INTEREST TO KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC., A DELAWARE
CORPORATION (KSL), AND (2) THAT CERTAIN UNRECORDED AGREEMENT BY AND
BETWEEN PGA TOUR, INC. (PGA TOUR) AND LANDMARK LAND COMPNAY OF
CALIFORNIA, INC., PREDECESSOR IN INTEREST TO KSL, AS DESCRIBED IN
SCHEDULE ONE ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF, INCLUDING BUT
NOT LIMITED TO ANY RIGHTS OF FIRST REFUSAL, SUCCESSOR LIABILITY FOR
RESIDENTIAL SALES FEES DUE TO PGA AND/OR PGA TOUR, RIGHTS OF USE,
MEMBERSHIP AND PLAY DISCOUNTS, AND/OR RIGHTS IN AND TO GOLF FACILITES
CONSTRUCTED OR TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER SAID POLICY AND ANY
ENDORSEMENTS THEREIN SHALL NOT EXCEED, IN THE AGGREGATE, THE FACE
AMOUNT OF SAID POLICY AND COSTS WHICH THE COMPANY IS OBLIGATED
UNDER THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS THEREOF TO PAY.
THIS ENDORSEMENT IS MADE A PART OF SAID POLICY AND IS SUBJECT TO THE
SCHEDULES, CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS THEREIN, EXCEPT AS MODIFIED BY
THE PROVISIONS HEREOF.
DATED: SAMPLE
FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
Im
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE
ALTA OR CLTA - SPECIAL
SCHEDULE ONE
1. Agreement dated March 5, 1984 by and between The Professional Golfers'
Association of America and LML Development Corp. of California, as modified by that certain
letter agreement dated May 28, 1993 by and among Landmark Land Company of California, Inc.
(successor in interest to LML Development Corp. of California), Resolution Trust Corporation,
as conservator for Oak Tree Federal Savings Bank, and The PGA Professional Golfers'
Association of America.
2. Agreement dated January 10, 1985 by and between PGA Tour, Inc. and Landmark
Land Company of California, Inc., as modified by that certain letter agreement dated May 28,
1993 by and among Landmark Land Company of California, Inc., Resolution Trust Corporation,
as conservator for Oak Tree Federal Savings Bank, and PGA Tour, Inc.
13
c�
0
0
0'0
(D
p
C' 0.
m
m
Q'
o C n
r
`O
CD
E-
° 7r q° c< �.
a
Z o 0
an �'
t7eD
CD
M n
o
O X Lf
G O 7 O
p»
ocn
G C
a' (D o
G
�' .•: ID
.,
�' O OG py n 0 o tD OQ O
� O A M
n
�. CD
rt Z n m
CD Mrt
n
M o,
p
«n.
n rt
OM
O
CDOOQ n
rt �c
�• �c
0
0
r
r
d
m
cr
O.
dOG (D
00 eD
rt
� rt
a O
�S°
a
o 0 0
Zr" 0 0
$ a
co x
O
A
�+ y T
OrQ
_a'
:y M
5
� .�. m
On •�'
s ^'
� fD
y -t m
M
CD
cep
� .O Ci
O
rt a �'
p �•
o S
o
Oy o
P) o O o
nO
W M
a o w o
0
A A
o°�
G07Q
oD
o
SD
CD
CD
�A
S
o
l o
eb
'�
�. •'� .7•
`° a
o
o
*0 m o
O
n o m
Mtn
a
o
a00
IDrl
�o
�o
C
ID
o
cn
w
o
x
rt O
tj
c
Fr
e o
y fD q
(D
�e
A
° r rt
a
0
Y
yzz�
a
O M
� 'k
qa�
a
�p a
z
C)a
b
0
a
O
p
� coro
Irj
rD
O n O
O C
n_ rn
p
�n O. v' O N•
O
0�
O CD
„�,,• fD O O
° y
Oi
^�~+
ti
g
O O<
O
tD OQ
fD
r O m n Cf) O
° '° o o
rD ]
w
cn
� o
°
cr
0 w w rD rt rD oo
.,
r9
�L(DCA
n
0
CL z
m v
5' O
rJ�
� � n .l• O � � p •ti
� G.
�• � O rt
� � O
° CL 7 n7 m
io n
Z
O '�
n Lf
°
C zi
p
n 00
p
CL a
O y.
I+ O .O, n
oo O CD y
M O
°i
\
00 CS'
O O M CDO
�'
O Q. R,
•� M �<
,^rt„',
rD rD
A> .may
�i m CL
.0
N
rD 7C'
~ n
_ O_ O
it
rD T3 p
ff+
O
°" v w O �• p
O
a'
7 O
O n
n eD
O `<
°
O 7
":•J
rD G+
Gi rD
rp
O
rQ'
.- f�
° l7
cn
m CL
Cf n
rt p
rt
�,
°ti•,
`< rD
.n. m
O
K rD
O O fD
O .n. rD .°�•,
�
O
O
r"jvj' Ai O
O
M
CD
On
EL
O
C
D)
fll
�"•�r O7
eD°
ate°
oa
c
o
Mrn°
- o
o
5'
rt, rD
.,, rD
Qo .», CD
QO
_
O
•t
n
n
O
�
� �
�
�
y
rt
C
O �
7 y
� � O.
O
� y
�EL .
�•�
�
O O.
D,
p
�.
w O
N
�.
O
fD
y
°
ro
v p
° C�
Oi
A>
v 0' �7
m'
^'
0. L3 O
�•
p
O N'
Q °
vO cnD
O
O
f~D
Gl �J
O
O
w O
O
p- y p
w
O
G-
E
O.
't7 °
n
O-t
O
O
M�n
M
rt
v
p n
n O O
O
C
0
O
O
p
=
C
Zr m
O T.
M
rND
tno n
7
m
ti
CL
O Ay
C
y
CL
n
o
E
3
ry
O 7 O
n
O
m "�
.'ul
rt y
C
y
O 7'
p
w
wy
m p
x v ti
G
n
T
tD
T ° (D
O
ytn
n
v, ;D
w
C
p
r) G.
(D
n
pp
w o
y:
p v
g
:n
0
°
Q
rt
m
e �0o.
7'0
9
=ZS
o
zs
7
SD fi rp
C
21
a O't N
.�
c
0
.p.
z p�
O
b O
O
O
O p
.-
m
rD
rp
n
'D
rpi, O..ri
.O•�
w o
c
a
���
°'
LD
��•
'
rt
n
00
eD
On
(D M
��o
•f
rt
CC z
G ~O•
QA
r�
�'
rt
0
0
o
n
r
r
r
+
°q
00 7'
ro
p)
p A O
rp
O
fD
O�
O
p O
O
O
`t
.T .., fD
fD
m
`C fD
1
A
A nio `
21 p a-
< W r
V
rt p
'OZ,
,. CDz
(D 7
�. OQ fD �p
X
ID
0
m
xrl
v
O
ti
O C to T O
En
ID
n
00
_ c _
co
CD
w
w
�cn
w O
ti
0 a
cn!
g o o y
a ve
r,
�_. is n p n
2
m rD
0Oo m m
7 00 �
a(
ID
O. n w
(D C
= w :'
on
O n w rt
rt ^�
rp
L�
rt
0 0
0 0
ti
n
n
Op
n w
O
n
(D � 00m tD w
0(D
O
o.
O
� cn .(D
n
a�
< cn M. p CDD O
m rt
�p C
w
�r
.; CD m
O O..ET Ln
'(
cn
= ° o
n eD
p
O
O O CD �D
� w CD
Ln
:�
rt.
rp �D 7 f0 rwn
n
(D
.� (21
O
U�Q ( m T G.
TS
nO
y G co
CD
y C�
ai
w
'D
m w n
w
w rt
w
w
w
w
O
O
O
O
r
r
r
r
w
w
w
w
O
o
O'Q
0
't7 p 0
�•
T OO
OO
CD
QO (DD
00 m
M
00 (DD
D
o 0
rt art
(Do
o f o Q
G a
o
f-D' p •�
°i
p �1
cn
C
C �3
w'�
7
=
a5'�
a
a�
a
a.E•
-4 rD � a v
^y n �/
.��. fl 0a (DD �
n O :t W
� nO
eDD m
n W to
n N CD
A N rD
Z
C C W -,O
O
O C,
- p
O
x
O
O O
(D
0
rnD
m
Q.
O
�' O'Un
? C O O
o'
p a
,m,�",
ro n M
(DD
mC
cn
S
oo
0 �=',
� � a.
0 0 �
`<
p
0
w
_
n
a
00
:�
n 0' p
z
m n a
rD
O `O ? b
O O
L3
O
n.00' 0Q
G= O
w p O
O O Oq
O
n OG
rp' O
tD Q
a' w tD
z
n O O
n'
a
R.
�
¢ �'
00
a
w
°� °e
CD
.�. c 0
m
o o
oo
w
d
O
"
y O
tn
p N
p
p
rD
7
W n
C
K
m p
w cn
rpD
a C
<
ai
•* cn
(DD p
rD <
m
p
a w m
7c �< �.'
p
O a n"
T
n
a ti
a m (D
'O
2
1p
cn
m N OeD
w O w
y rt
w w
to ti C
n n
�n
cn cj L'
n rp 7
rD a S a
y
rp O
a
Z
O
O
p Ali
O
Doi
a�i
.,
rD
a C
00 rD
7
•ti
O
O
O
rD O
O
CD
fD
10
,g n
0
0
w
w
CD°�
O
�
O.
M
a
n
`o
0
`•< rnD
r) .�
G
�t
�
O•
p
C o °
n n O api
n �
(D rt <
O
, p'
tD 7
7• O•
� 00 p
m �.
p •-
�G
ao
n. i
m
(DQp0
O
n
y C O C
rD w
C n
O m Cn m
oq
~ n
� O
�
'
a
aoa
as ¢: N
$ n
N �
O T y w
a pQ
O rD A
rD
(D G
CL
rrDD
�' W tD
m
..�
(D
y]
n
rD r�D :D O..
CDOpq .n
O D m CD Q-
'any
n;o
cn
�s�n
CArp
M
n
p
p 0
v
m
m
y
m
ao �' ~o
00 -'• ~�
p
o o �
rp
ova °' �
ono " �
�•
o
rD o
n o
y.
O (D
O O
o n
rD
rD
aG CD
V
O M
b
K y
(D 0
ti
��.� M.m o m o
o v
x x
CD
i
O
ID .. n y O n
O
7 7
O O
O�
G
0
G. �
m•
(D
� 7, � � ..d � � ti
0 n0
�'
�
�• � Doi
�j CLoM�°�,
(o
was
= n
G M O
O `O
ID
x S]
O m y_ rD y
d
�
'O
7 O Y
O
OQ0
(D
ID
C O
y
p
COD
rt
r0^p
O Oti iO
n
O
C�
(o
�'
A.
la.
(nD
fD'
O
C O :1. 7
(D
T
O✓
D OQ �rt
¢ m :F
((DD 00 (
tnD Q
Q z 'O
.-.
O
'l7
fy 'CS �o
o° o x°
:�
rt � 7• � o � O �. rp
o �
io
� n �
m
n � n sv O
n
O
n
0
T
0
T
r
r
�o O
^o o I-Ij
~� O
O
rK
O n
O n
00 (D
00 (D
14 0
00
o
T
•s
p a G o `0 r)
n
O(D
rD w
p nn
n<
w 00
(D n O
ID y
T O 'Ty1 O
rD
..O n. '�. '-j 7 rt rD
O IUD' O
m
0
'n ID ft
�. C n
00
ro
QID
A)
7
`O n vO
'l7
¢
(wn fD O O
m m
p cn ,O,� ,,
p p
.t y
a. 9 ,Oh G7 n O c rD
y to O
a 'b
rt � M O. .0 (D
CL `li
y rD
O rD On fl C tD �mr O. '7
Q ^p
rD
y
TT O O�
x 0.
w (n
CJ0 - `C
I Cn fD Z "..,la. CD'
a n n
p ro
y
O T m n m 7
G
..
`O b O 00
w
.1 CA O n tD m
c�l� ro
Q ro
° S m
ro ro r�D : v ro 00
7 o p np
O
n
ro C n
OQ n rD
n
M. m O
fD rD n n O(D(D a�i rd rDD y ¢
O " 4
CD
¢: M�. `C O to
rt rl CD ID
� �
� `C
0
o
Q
C7
ITI
Q T
O•
O
r• Q
n
Q
�.
O
�
� d
�
n
CD
O �3 w O✓ `O
n
t7 'O w
C.
O
w
G
¢
l7
x G
�.
M S
O.
O
. d0 ••� �
]
O
O O
.0
� �
O. �• �
Nw' n xCUD)
m
m
w
O O w
•� O
n' ¢
O
G
pq' CP
m
w
y
G
cn G
Q
CD
O
0 n
G rt
m O_
C
°r �'
w 0
T
O w
:y
O
O ?�
f1 M
G
w
O
A
0 Oq
`
rt
7 O
O w
7C
n
o
O
O
�. O
m O
(?
m o
rD
(D
CD
� w
CD
a '* (D ti a
w .-. �' G y m
7
w OQ N
n n
fD
G
w t
O
LL ro G O
O
, G
m
M y
0
-r7
CD
x
nF'
O 6• O
w O
a w
v O
O
O
W
w G
'° O
w w w=
7 7
O
w S3
w b
,� OQ
m m
" y n w
G m
w
+
N W
O
Q.
n
rp
O M � t7l
O- X CD
cD O p
C
y
,n,
io
a(D��:;oo
C)�°a
a�ew
CDr�D0 Ln
w
m
O C
n
'O n �O
.O ncn 7J
n
rD
CA
O O
G G 7
m n
y (D
CD
m
w
w
w
w
C7 O
O
O
O
T
T
T
T
'T1
w
w
w
w
..
...
c -
oo •o
o
ac o
¢ r- o
n c o
00
n
G _
O
7 _
M"CD O
OQ O
rt
m O
rt
O
„„'. CD
N�*
o
m
�'
N
a.
y
�.
t7l
(7 m O .
'D m '6
d Q m
-A it
o
zr. m
CL> w.
(D
x oxo
' o
v m o a n, a (D
f D g
n o= o
~O CD ¢ ] WOO -tIL G m`C
., n
M OT n y n
O
I
Q p �r C 0. m =• �
00 4 �
CD
'C3
6 CD
ET a,
rt (D O n ��+ b n
O G n m¢
�' ccnn :
O
Q C 0
+ n O O O
rD
rD
A-
2.
rt
O
� rt O
O=a,
•-ti,
)
: w O
0 CD
w
yCD 2)i N
a(D ooO
Crfzy-
(D ti
N w
rt �s
(D
In (D
cm
CD
flD —►KrD
CDO
O
(p. �
np C�
n nF
G
n
aq:e
O o
y rp
cn n T
w Z. M.
OQ LS - 7
a rD
rD n« n CL . — rp .S o O
(D 00 rD
G rD (D o+
v
n 7J
0
CT * a..Q
y (D
O O
O p
((DD A) O
¢
n�
O
O
O
O
d
y
KIn
QrQ
M O rA
p O
y
0 O
O
.. rb rD O
O
O
(gyp O
O 0Q
O?
.., (D
O
(D
O 7
(D
< a'
n'
CD
CD
] w
p
(D
n
w( O
`�J tD A-
ADQ.
COD T
rD
`C
CL
n m
to n rnD eDzr
y
O O
p m
w < rt' i 7y
n fD
°i
rDeD
w
(D
CD
0 CD
rt
¢
cneb
y
rrDD eDD
¢.
O
n
C O
rD CDG v
w
(�
O rp
CD
p rp <
OrD n
Im
cnty-
y p rD
- CD
•,
rD
m
p, �'
'O
v
rD
O• "�
p' CD
w
n T rD Ly
p
m n
m C.
rt
OC
Ci
O tD n `C p
00
_
O rD O-
LL p
rD
p,
q� rD
rD
rD �,
w rD
0. 7
rD y �• '*
a C
CL z
ti ¢, ,� a cn O
w
.�•. w O
T
K
rD
w
O
... w
p rt
y
0
0
O
su
¢• fD•
�D'
�
�
rrty
.y �D•
ti �•
w
nO
rD
yy
nm
,Qn
,gam
,gam
0
w '' rt(D
`<
w
w
w
O
w GL rD rD
w
w
w
n c c
a o o.
c o.
a
c o.
w"
�' w "
w "
O
Oq O
00 7
7
rip n
fD 0
�% n
0 rp rD
n 0
rD rD
r�D
"
n 0
rD
O ?
O
O
O ?
T rD
T rD
T rD
T rD
14
KY
v
a
m_
0
M A
b ID 'O_ M
n m
rD n n O p 0
CD
O n' O
O Y n a' y
m ti O
p, �. (DD fD !p
:3
] (D Z o
(D `G
(D `C (D
tv'n
O
y tD �A
O ��' = (D O
O 'b .� ,.r
ep
:3 :D w �
v' �
T
� ��T..,
CD W
E O O m .�y fD C
CD
'
O
n
y Oq
`C n
`<OOq
O cT
n
rp
CD
OC o
Ll
y m
m
eD CD Zr
v
o w
w
ET (o
O
rl o,
x
y a' C -t
m
Q o
CS O
n
O O O
O. `D
�t �• 7
C :D
OQ �.
:�• O
CD m
G. cn flhJ� O
n
m
O
m � m
Li 0�
CDC
CD
.
7
7 0
0 0
0 0
n O
(D O. T
A m
n
d o
o;t
D) 1 J
3� T `C
a
SU
Su
C7 CL T :D
o
T M
Csaq
G M
O
`0
Q.
O.
� .,
ac c•
o.c c
ao o.
Q
t' 0
�• y M
n'1
�' d M
M
t
Oq `z
Oq `J
y
_
'O n
n
'O n
Qq
mO
?
O 7
O O'
T (D
w
a
rt
n'
m
v m
� �
ai'
�• �
tP
'�
�_ °
Cn
G. (D
� • f D .� ti to
�' `O w rD
'�
w O G.
K
O. rD rD
o R.
w ^O
�,•'G
�
�• �.
n
w
„�, w
.w•. M
O
CD
O 4 O
c
w
c
rn
D
7'
K
�• a a) rD
p
ro
G
p fD
0
a G
C 'G -M,7
?
rD'
,nr
7
a0i
n
a✓
0 n
w
ip
rt G rn G (D
w
°
C
zi
O
n w ro
7 x
n
oC
Q Oq S1 n
n
7 w
n 0
n
o
n
Co
,w�
n
tD Uq p C
n
w
j
c p p fD
rp
M
O `C
.yQfl
ti rD rD
O
O
.O,• ••�
y'
w tv 0
rt In
�• <
O
rp rt �• Q'
�
�" v,
�'
"+'
�
�
"O O � "o
.,
w ,�,��•
�' � rD
rD
rt 0°�Q C C
O
`O G n"
n0
y
(D (D �.
`O
v
tYND
a
N'
lD eD
<iw
Karoo
0,S
57
ro�roo�
`�°
(�r(a°�
�. <
a
O
K n 0, n
m< 0 0
O n n
ID
7
M
rD
to rp n ".eD
.n-
O p
00
'li O
w° O
(DD y 7
O
O p
OQ
" o
0
0
0
0
c
n• w
w
w
w
w
do cn 0
Ory
oM
0
0 'C1
•,
.,
cD
.,
rD .,
QG O
00
O
QQ O
,�
O
`l7 O
fro n 0
,.s rD
,y
n 0
CD
n 0
,* rD
w
n 0
M
n 0
w rD
O X
T
O
O
n
0?
n 0 O"
14
o x.s%
rtoa¢�
'Cf
0?
""OI m a.0 O w m y^+
,
O G. < 00
^O ^-: O O V)
n ro 'M' O n '
cn
w OQ
O
O •� a °o rt'
o' ro oa
�•.,
(D rD
w Q. T CDZ$
O
w M 2) �
rD'O Y ?
y. 0: t7a
Es 7 �,
(D
Ll. rnD .r
n
n
w n
� T "
0 M
N Z— w a.
m= n. O
CL O `� O
f D CL
w
m rt
2)t
aw
m w o
w O w rD
'+ .
7r c CD Q
CD
rD
2, w e p,
2)'
ezi a
w
c CL
CL o °o cCL
o
3 O
O
'O (D
Oq' r�ti
rt CL
QOO Oq
k o
y m
$ tf y' o
tOD
o
(D �
CL
O. w
(D
ID
O
C rD O 000
Oq
C.
to
O O
w
'+ y w
n R o0 O
n rD rD 0
m
rl"
CL
_
aq
5'0
v m�
w aa�
CL CL
rya
w
w
w
.c
o a.Z c
a.o c
Zs a� c
c
O
�
CD n
rp n
ID n
`C i
w
M. w
W. w
m w
On �o 10 r)
C' � �•
b9i
OG� �•
G7 �•
G� �.
� �.
.O•.
.q rD ..
a'
a'
w
a'
CD w
w
w
w
w
m
on m .�,
oK m
a✓
UQ ^�
tiJ
o'
a. o
n
FL
�• w "
w "
�• w ^
00
oo
oo
r�ryD rD
rD
rD
rD rD
_
rD �
�
�
�
r
T rD
T rD
T rD
T rD
T rD
/
//
§
�
$ �
`
7
CD
�
2=§/ID
(D §
;
f
c)q
f
k
§
cyq
k
»7�\/
»
-tcm.
�R/
�
q
§ o
»
o
/ \
/
}
\ 0 a \ \
•
t » E
m #
§ � = E
e $
j
(
\§s
eD ,
¢ y
I
�3
,« QE
/
§ /
/ k
,
; m
m i »
R
, IP c
, J _
m , ; m E
?/
/*
�
0
r
�
7\�
§
�\E
\ �
)
�
14\
EXHIBIT "F"
SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEETS
co
N
CE AVENUE
w
Q
o�
+
U
w ca?
N
Uj
? N X
V1
w
N
m r LOT 6 Ln C-4
TRACT NO. 24317-1
ME 207/29-33
LOT 5
VACANT
SCALE 1" =300'
J 3
J �
3 w
+
a0
x Z
W
"1Q'
LOT3N?
LOT 2
TRACT O.24317-3
ME 228/47-48
LOT 1
/ LOT lE —�
TRACT NO. 21640
ME 172/64-44
EXISTING MAINTENANCE FACILITY
'\- RESIDENTIAL LOTS
-ko� NORTHERLY
oOO
UUU
��� LIST OFCEXISTI G\\\\
O R s E
79-799 Old Avenue S2
la Quirda, CA92253
a
as
Voice:760-771-4013
N U L T i
FAX: 760-771-4073
PLANNERS
ENGINEERS
SURVEYORS
P` LAND S
J. eF GPG
ct
c _ 70
L.S. 6588
* Exp. 12-31-03 '�` PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
��qTF OF CAQFO��\P
14
—Nw-,o � " S l Y al
CHRIS J. BER , L.S. 88 A
I:\41378\MAPPING\PAR—D\WALL—EXH.dwa 5-1F
ferry herman - May 15 own Meeting age 1
s.
tQ G, +n
From: "Mike Echelbarger" <mike@echelbarger.com>
To: LQCity.lgcc(JDHerman)
Date: Fri, May 10, 2002 2:36 PM
Subject: May 15 Town Meeting
Dear Mr. Herman,
As we were leaving town from our home in the Citrus, we noticed the front
page article on the potential of a golf course, hotel, park etc between Ave
52 and Ave 54 on Jefferson.
My wife and I are wholeheartly in favor of the concept of such a plan.
While this appears to be a part of a wise focus on an over-all economic
development plan for the city, we would hope that some consideration is
given in the planning to an interconnect of the Citrus and other adjacent
communities by means of electic cart paths. We just upgraded to a cart that
is "street legal", more for the future than today. Transportation
connections utilizing non -internal combustion engines currently seems to be
a deficiency in La Quinta. We would very much appreciate the opportunity to
not drive our car, but yet still be able to "circulate" from the Citrus to
the old section of town ... and to the future hotel that may be build in
conjunction with this project.
I will pass this letter on to our neighbors in the Citrus who currently
reside part-time in other portions of the country.
Michael D & Kathleen A Echelbarger
79-205 Manderina
LaQuinta, CA
Summer address:
16207 larch Way
Lynnwood, WA 98037
ferry Kerman 5 15/ 2 town meeting Page 1
From: "Sid J. Starr" <sid@sidstarrcpa.com>
To: LQCity.lgcc(JDHerman)
Date: Tue, May 14, 2002 9:56 AM
Subject: 5/15/02 town meeting
Re: proposed development between 52ave/54ave on Jefferson.
We have a home at 79-205 Mandarina in the Citrus. We ask that you
consider interconnectivity between developments and all future
developments for golf carts and in particular we have a Ford "Think"
which is a licensed street legal electric golf cart. We believe
encouraging the use of electric golf carts and interconnectivity will
encourage engergy conservation and quality of life style in La Quinta.
Sidney J. Starr
CC: LQCity.GWIA("mike@echelbarger.com")
5 .F