The URL can be used to link to this page

SP 121-E La Quinta Resort (1981) - Riverside County RecordsR I V E R S I D E C 0 U N T Y r a A� 1t i 1' �.• rI :1 1 111:' y'y. i i{r.., 1 .. SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT NAME L11t��r� k P L A N N IN G 0 E P A R T M E 1; T W Case No. li EA No. Total Fee Paid Gen. Plan Area a CD APPLICANT INFORMATION Ernie Vossler APPLICANT c/o Landnlaric Land CoMpany _ PHONE: (114 345-2`a6�+ MAILING ADDRESS P.O. Box 1000 No. Street/P. 0. Doxp�i.�No./Suite No. La 4uinta., CA 92253 _ City State Zip Ccde 011NER NAME , Sa.rne as above PHONE: FAILING ADDRESS No. Street/P- O. Box Apt.. No./Suite No City State Up Code REPRESENTATIVE J.F. Davidson Associates PHONE: (714) 686--11844 MAILING ADDRESS P.O. Box 493 No. Street/P. 0. Box -� pt.' No. /Suite No. Riversides CA 92501 _ Ci tY State ._._.._._._.—_._ 7 i p Code NOTE: I. if more than one person is involved in the ownership of the property, a separate page must beattached to this application which lists .the names and addresses of all persons having an interest in the ownership of the'propert.y, 2. The Planning Department will only mail correspondence regarding Specific Plan opplication.to the person identified above as the applicant's ."representative." The "representative maybe the land owner, an engineer or consultant. A name, address and phone number must be provided above for the specific Plan application to be accepted. _�', a ; GENERAL PLAN OF LAND USE DESIGNATION Open Space & Planned Development/Water Course & Equc trian/Medium Density-Residential/Low Density Residential./High-Density Residential OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT DESIGNATION Urban Areas CG :ml 10-7-80 A. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 1. Location in the Community of La uinta 2. Parcel Size see exhibits X Acres _635.0 ^Ac ± T 631-390-007,014,019,631-370-001,002'003,008,009,010,011 3. Assessor's Parcel NUmber(s) 773-021- (complete) , 631-360 1(com��t ee . 631--300-00i,Q�- oo2fl, 773-022-017,018 4. Legal Description of Property (Give exact legal description as recor-ded'-in the' office of the County Recorder - may be attached) see attached __16 South 6 East _ 5. Section I Township 6 South Range 6 East 6. Existing Property Use recreation Usaee/Multi-Family/Hotel Upaegp B. UTILITIES A14D SERVICE (if none write "none") 1. Power Company Southern California Edison Com any 2. Gas Company Southern California Gas Company 3: Telephone Company General Telephone Company _ 4. Water Company Coachella Valley Water District 5. School District Desert Sands Unified School District NOTE- An 8►" X 11" legible reduction of the proposal should accompany application. The reductiun may accompany the staff's report to the Planning Commission and will aid in thg review of the proposal. IMPORTANT: ANY.FALSE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION SHALL BE GROUNDS FOR DENYING THIS APPLICATION. SIGNATURES AND ADDRESSES OF ALL OWNERS MUST BE INCLUDED. SIGNATURE OF AIT TE -/- " AUTHORITY FOR THIS APPLICATION IS HEREBY GIVEN: l SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER(S) X ,-7"` r;`r DATE --� ptzP Written authority may be attached ADDRESS P.O. Box 1000 DATE La Quinta, CA 92253 s.ae Ito. EA No. STs" U51 ONIZ R.OlED4TAL l!NFOR'i.STION FORS Please complete Parts I and II of this form and provide all of the add.itlannl materials ,reque9ced in Part III. Failure co do so may delav the review aril rocessine of your project. If you are unable,to provide the information, or you need assistance, please feel iree to contact the Environmental Quality Section of chs PlaxMin g Department ;LC (714) 787-2331. PART I: General laformation 1. Waixc 19 the total acreage involved? 635.03Ae 2. Is there a previous applicaciou filed for the same site? Yes X No If '"Yes," provide Case Number. Also provide the eaviroamcntal 1►"e440auG Nuuabe:r, if lcuuwn and Environmental Impact deport Number, if opp].icablo. Specific Plan 121 E Case Na. (Parcel hap. Zone Change, etc.) U No, (Lt K4QVU) "EIZ tfa. 41 (11 Applicably.) 3. Additional comments you may wish to supply regarding your project, (*.rt"rh mai additional `beet if necessary) )tevised Specific Plan ?ART II: PnvirovM=tal Questionaira, L. Is the project within am Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zonal TOS lio X_ 2. To determine if your project is located in a Special Studies Zona, contact the Envtroumeutal Quality SecCion, or refer to the Special Study Zopep Naps ayailt4bla at the Public Information Counter of the Planning Department. If the project U vithi.n a zone, -refer to Ordinance 547.1, or discuss the situacioa with rha j'launing Depart- ment Geologist. If a fault hazard report is necessary, complete the investigation prior to submitting our an licst3on and provide 6 copies of the report with this, fo M. I# a ualye; of the requiremenU3 is gtantod, submit a copy of the waiver with this foto. Is the project located within a hazard management zone or li,quifecrUrp a e4 as fhown on maps of the "Seismic Sa;ecy Zlement Technical Report?„ Yes No To determine if your project is subject to the geologic hazards voted above you phould consult Che "Seiszuic Safety. S Safety Element Technical Report?" Wh:Lch is available at the Public Information Co-,-4icer of the Planning Department. If the answer to question 02 is "ye9," contact the Environmeatal Qual-UT Section to discuss appropriate measures to minimize the hazard.. InaorporsGe any mitigation, measures into the project design prior to submitting the application or indicate in the spam provided below the results of your discussions vIL4 the Fuviro=oUcal. Quality Section. 3. If you- project is in the desert area, is it within a blow& and bazard. area? Tee The Planning Offices In Indio and Riverside will provide you With informotiop eoacsx-AiD$ blwaand hazards. You may also Wish to coptact the U.S. Soil Goauervatioo Service. If your project is subject to blo•reand hazards, submit 4 blowsaud c=rrol plan with the application. (Also refer to Section 14.1 of Ordinance 460, if your project is a p4rcel map or subdivision). 4. Is water service available at the project sites Yes X Na _ If "No," how far must the Water line(s) be extended to provide sere ice? N =bar of feet or wiles Purther explanacion: 5. Is sever servirce available at the project site? Yea X No If "30," hos far must the sewer line(s)-be exreaded'tQ prov1de'*erv�ce3 Nux,ber of feet or tailes further explanation: 6. Additional Comments: PART III: Additional Materials The following items must be submitted with this form: 1. At least three (3) panoramic photographs (color prints) of th4 praject sitar or an aerial photo of the site. ' 2. A clear photocopy (14�rox or similar copy) of the appropriate porz1on of, the U.$, Geological Survey quadrangle map, delineating the bouudarieq of the project site. Also note the title of the map. I certify that I have investigated the quercioas in Parts 16 II and the mowers are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. J.F. Davidson Associates Name and Title of Person G-amplecing Forza fiy Si�ature �� • Wry, _ H+:PPY ' LL • 1r ` A. foo 25 30 d Cw'an�rygt •�1. I 11` • f • a'��._ 1�CQC li1•. .. . � 1'•• 1�e+1. ' 1. \:• ,LI � ii:" � � Well • 46 31 r 1 , 1 ,: • Ci •r i� I. +• ti � G Q L • 4 I� g •� S T E � . ,_ k.., so 01ti 1 { C a • i 1 � 15 1 I ° is 14 QJ tz T r, I Al PR7x. 7A I. MEAN Q'.,AtCAF U L 2. 3,�s 0 1 i� • `• i iS �I.� ��[ SOURCE: USGS MAC MAP RSSOCRIES IA [STA QUAD December 4, 1980 Revised January 7, 1981 LANDMA-RK LAI\TD COMPANY ASSOCIATES REVISED SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E Those portionsof Section 1, Township 6 South, Range 6 East, and Section 36, Township 5 South, Range 6 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Section 1; Thence S.00°00'40"E., along the East line of said Section 1, a distance of 1184.86 feet to the Southeast corner of Government Lot 1 in said Section 1; Thence N.89°51'07"W., along the South line of said Government Lot 1, a distance of 1321.69 feet to the centerline of Eisenhower Drive, 80.00 feet wide, (formerly Morgan Road) as conveyed to the County of Riverside by Deed recorded February 18, 1936 in Book 265, page 521, Official Records of Riverside County, California; Thence S.00°11'20"W., along said centerline, a distance of 1318.76 feet to the South line of the North one-half of said Section 1, said South line also being the centerline of Calle Tampico; Thence N.$9°57'00"W., along said South line, a distance of 1450.33 feet to the center one-quarter corner of said Section 1; Thence continuing along said South line N.89°55'06"1%., a distance of 2644.22 feet to the West one-quarter corner of said Section 1; Thence N.00°03'45"W., along the West line of said North one-half of Section 1, a distance of 2506.51 feet to the Northwest corner of said Section 1; Thence S.89°52'02"E., along the North line of said Section 1, a distance of 137.28 feet to the Southwest corner of said Section 36; Thence N.00°06'16"W., along the West line of said Section•36, a distance of 5289.08 feet to the Northwest corner of said Section 36; Thence N.89°39'20"E., along the North line of said Section 36, a distance of 2628.25 feet to the Northeast corner of the Northwest ane -quarter of said Section 36; F. DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES IVIL ENGINEERING • FLANNING • SURVEYING • ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 126 TLNTH Sl REEL - P 0 EOY 4s3 • RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92502 (710 5FG Ob: e December 4, 1980 (Revised 1/7/81) Landmark Land Company - Specific Plan 121-E Page 2 • Thence S.00°39'07"E., along the East line of said Northwest one-quarter, a distance of 2671.70 feet to the center one-quarter corner of said Section 36; Thence S.00°07'02"W., along the East line of the Southwest one-quarter of said Section 36, a distance of 867.79 feet to the Northeast corner of the Record of Survey on file in Book 8 of Records of Survey, page 90 thereof, Records of Riverside County, California; Thence S.89°52'32"E., a distance of 619.72 feet; Thence Southeasterly along a curve concave Southwesterly, having a radius of 178.37 feet, through an angle of 38°16120", an arc length of 119.15 feet to a point of reverse curvature; Thence. Easterly along a curve concave Northeasterly, having a radius of 161.99 feet through an angle of 61°17'40", an arc length of 173.30 feet (the initial radial line bears S.38°23'48"W.); Thence N.67°06'08"E., a distance of 181.76 feet; Thence Northeasterly along a curve concave Southeasterly, having a radius of 300.00 feet, through an angle of 2301100", an arc -length of 120.52 feet; Thence S.89°52'52"E., a distance of 103.05 feet to the Westerly line of Lot "T" (Eisenhower Drive as shown by map of LA QUINTA GOLF ESTATES N0, 1) on file in Book 37, pages 96 through 98 of Maps, Records of Riverside County, California; Thence S.00°05'03"L;. , along said Westerly line, a distance of 15Q.03 feet to the Southerly line of said Lot "T"; Thence S.89°54'57"E., along said Southerly line, a distance of 6.71 feet to the Westerly line of said Eisenhower Drive (80.00 feet wide); Thence S.00°14'34"W., along said Westerly line, a distance. of 1655.93 feet to an angle point in said Westerly line, said point bears N.00°11'20"E, a distance of 0.08 feet from the South line of said Section 36; Thence S.00°11'20"W., continuing along said Westerly line, a distance of. 50.08 feet; Thence 5.89'53'38"E., along a line which is parallel with and 50.00 feet Southerly, measured at right angles from the centerline of 50th Avenue and its Westerly prolongation thereof, also being the Southerly line of Parcel 3 December 4, 1980 (Revised 1/7/81) Landmark Land Company - Specific Plan 121-E Page 3 of the parcel of land conveyed to the County of Riverside by deed recorded August 13, 1979 as Instrument No. 170510, and re-recopded_August 30, 1979_1 as Instrument No. 184054, Official Records of Riverside County, California, a distance of 654.93 feet; Thence Northeasterly, continuing along said Southerly line on a curve concave Northerly, having a radius of 2050.00 feet, through an angle of 12°17'30", an arc length of 439.79 feet; Thence N.77°48'52"E., continuing along said Southerly line, a distance of 272.40 feet to a point on the East line of the Southeast one -quarte; of said Section 36; Thence S.00°01'08"E., along said East line, a distance of 54.98 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion lying within Eisenhower Drive, 80.00 feet wide, as conveyed to the County of Riverside by Deed recorded February 18, 1936 in Book 265, page 521, Official Records of Riverside County, Cali- fornia. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion conveyed to the County of Riverside by Deed recorded August 13, 1979 as Instrument No. 170510 and re-recorded August 30, 1979 as Instrument No. 184054, all of Official Records of River- side County, California. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of the East one-half of the Southwest. one-quarter of Section 36, Township 5 South, Range 6 East, San Bernardinc Meridian; described as follows: Beginning at a point on the East line of said Southwest one-quarter, being N.00°07'38"E., a distance of 1394.98 feet from the South one-quarter corner of said Section 36; said point being the Northeast corner of that certain parcel of land conveyed to DESERT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY by deed recorded May 12, 1928 in Book 766, page 117 of Deeds, Records of River- side County, California; December 4, 1980 (Revised 1/7/81) 1 Landmark Land Company - Specific Plan 121-E Page 4 Thence N.89°52'02'%'., along the Northerly line of said parcel conveyed to DESERT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, a distance of 270.00 feet; Thence S.00°07'38"W., parallel with the East line of said Southwest one-quarter, a distance of 657.77 feet; Thence N.89*52'02"W., a distance of 67.00 feet; Thence S.00°07'38"W., a distance of 57.20 feet; Thence N.89°53'02"W., a distance of 317.99 feet; Thence,S.00°07'38"W., a distance of 429.90 feet; Thence S.89°52'02"E., parallel with the South line of said Southwest one-quarter, a distance of 425.00 feet; Thence N.00°07'38''E., parallel with the East line of said Southwest one-quarter, a distance of 390.00 feet; 1 Thence N.89°50'00"W., a distance of 20.00 feet; Thence N.00°07'38"E., a distance of 25.00 feet; Thence S. 89*50'00"E. , a distance of 250.00 feet to a point on the East line of said Southwest one-quarter; Thence N.00°07'38"E., along said East line, a distance of 15.00 feet; Thence N.89°50'001.1W., a distance of 230.00 feet; Thence N.00°07138"E., parallel with the East line of said Southwest one-quarter, a distance of 228.58 feet; Thence N.89°50'00"W., a distance of 20.00 feet; Thence N,00°07'38"E•, parallel with the East line of said Southwest one- quarter, a distance of 370.00 feet; Thence S.89°50'00"E., a distance of 250.00 feet to a point on the East line of said Southwest one-quarter; Thence.N.00°07'38"E., along said East line, a distance of 116.53 feet to the point of beginning. December 4, 1980 (Revised 1/7/81) Landmark Land Company - Revised Specific Plan 121-E Page 5 ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of the East one-half of the Southwest one-quarter of Section 36, Township S South, Range 6 East, San Bernardino Meridian; described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East line of said Southwest one-quarter, said point being the Northeast corner of that certain parcel of land conveyed to Lyman C. Hisey by deed recorded February 19, 1931 in Book 10, page 360, Official Records of Riverside County, CalifQrnia; Thence N,89 -°52`32"W „ along the North line of said parcel conveyed to Lyman C. Hisey, a distance of 250.00 feet; Thence N.89°52'12"W., continuing along said Northerly line, a distance of 444.00 feet to the true point of beginning; Thence S.00°07'38"W., a distance of 93.00 feet; Thence N.89°52'12"W., a distance of 44.00 feet; Thence N.00°07'38"E., a distance of 93.00 feet; Thence S.89°52'12"E., a distance of 44.00 feet to the true point of beginning. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion conveyed to the Coachella Valley Water District by deed recorded December 31, 1980, as Instrument No, 245205, Records of Riverside County, California, z c 0 z J- J W 3 co 0 to N z a 0 z LS CITY 2658.76 A CZ 3045 635.03 AC± EI 11 II a N.A.i CALLE MAZATLAN �. 1I I 1 zll CII xI1 0 I I 1 0'1 I ZII ;1l 2644.22 a I 1450.33 I� I I S P 121 E 50th a` W 0 z W U) W I CALLE r 11 App. LANDMARK LAND CO. Use SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE Dist. LA QUINTA Sup. Dist. 4 Sec.36 T.6 S.,R.6E Assessors Bk63X733P9- Circulation EISEHOWER DR. MAJOR 100' Element 50th AVE. MAJOR 100' Rd. Bk. pg. 121 Date 8— 24 —79 Drawn By Dick I" = 1200' RIVERSIDE COUNTY aANN/NG DEPARTMENT PD- 78-1-J1W - r SITE AVE.. TAMPICO ATIONAL MAP na W 131: DATE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ZONING DESIGNATION: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: BACKGROUND: STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 22, 1987 LANDMARK ,Y14 SIDE FERNANDO LAND COMPANY OF EISENHOWER DRIVE, BETWEEN AVENIDA AND THE HOTEL ENTRANCE EXPAND THE HOTEL PER SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, WHICH INCLUDES DEMOLITION OF FIVE EXISTING STRUCTURES TO MAKE ROOM FOR 342 HOTEL UNITS, ANCILLARY HOTEL USES, AND ASSOCIATED PARKING. R-3* (GENERAL RESIDENTIAL - 1,200 -SQUARE -FOOT MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE) TOURIST COMMERCIAL AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, INCLUDING A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, HAS BEEN PREPARED AS REQUIRED BY CEQA. THE PROJECT WILL NOT PRESENT A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT AN A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED. The original Specific Plan No. 121-E (La Quinta Cove Golf Club) was approved by Riverside County in 1975. The Plan authorized construction of 637 condominiums, 496 hotel rooms, golf course with clubhouse, and service facilities. The Plan was subsequently amended in 1982. The City Council authorized the addition of 279 condominiums and 146 hotel rooms (Council Resolution No. 82-54 - Specific Plan 121-E, Revised). The revised specific plan was submitted to increase project acreage and to add additional dwelling units and hotel rooms. The current approved unit counts are 916 condominiums and 642 hotel units. ANALYSIS: The request before the Commission is to construct 336 new v hotel rooms, a 15,000 -square -foot ballroom, 47,402 square feet of ancillary hotel use (hotel offices, storage, small speciality shops, two restaurants, and a cocktail lounge), MR/STAFFRPT.022 1 PLOT PLAN 87-387 LA QUINTA HOTEL EXPANSION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DECEMBER 22, 1987 1. The development of the site shall generally be in conformance with the Exhibit A and B contained in the file for Plot Plan 87-387, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. The approved Plot Plan shall be used within one (1) year of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading, which is begun within the one-year period and is thereafter diligently pursued to completion. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall: a. Submit, for Planning Director approval, a final landscape plan showing location, size and type of all landscape.material to be used. b. Provide written verification from the Public Works Department, Coachella Valley Water District, and Fire Department that their concerns/requirements have been satisfied. 4. Outside lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 5. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any new facility contemplated by this approval, a six-foot solid wall shall be constructed along the southern edge of Avenida Fernando, behind (south of) the existing oleander hedge or provide a new oleander hedge, to screen the parking area. The hedge and wall shall be illustrated on the landscape plan. MR/CONAPRVL.017 1 and a 17,100 -square -foot auxiliary building. Upon completion of this expansion, 39 hotel units remain for future construction. In order to accommodate this proposal,- five existing buildings used for laundry, housekeeping, grounds maintenance, storage, purchasing, general sales and administration, and one hotel unit will be demolished. 2. The architectural style of the new construction will be "Period 192611, with the goal of creating a village ambience. The focal point of the expansion is a pedestrian plaza area. 3. Environmental Impact Report No. 41 was filed and certified in April 1975 for the original specific plan. An environmental assessment was prepared for the 1982 revision, which resulted in the adoption of a Negative Declaration. A condition of the 1982 specific plan required preparation of environmental review documents for all future discretionary permits (plot plans). Therefore, additional environmental information was submitted and reviewed, including a traffic report. Based upon the existing and additional information, a negative declaration has been prepared. 4� A parking space analysis has been submitted -by the Applicant. The analysis is based upon the Urban Land Institute Shared Parking Program. The program identifies parking needs by use by time. Currently 486 parking spaces exist. The proposed construction will eliminate 255 spaces. The remainder will be supplemented by 719 new parking spaces, for a total of 950 parking spaces. Review of the Urban Land Institute (ULI) program would indicate that the proposed 950 parking spaces will satisfy the needs of the project. The Applicant's proposal is to substitute the ULI format for the individual use requirements of the City's parking schedule. 5. The traffic analysis prepared for the project has been reviewed by the City Engineer. Specific mitigation measures have not been identified at this time. 6. The Applicant has provided further definition of the areas (Mr. William L. Puget). The concerns expressed are for noise and visual impact of the proposed parking area across Avenida Fernando to the south from his home. The property owner requests the construction of a six-foot wall and landscaping as a mitigation measure. MR/STAFFRPT.022 indicated as "shops" and "nightclub" (see attached). �. A letter has been received from an adjacent property owner (Mr. William L. Puget). The concerns expressed are for noise and visual impact of the proposed parking area across Avenida Fernando to the south from his home. The property owner requests the construction of a six-foot wall and landscaping as a mitigation measure. MR/STAFFRPT.022 8. Agency Comments - Comments have been received from Riverside County Fire Department, Ci'.y Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District. 9. Additional permits and/or_ clearances are required from the Public Works Department, Fire Marshal, Coachella Valley Water District, Imperial Irrigation District, Riverside County Environmental Health Department, and Desert Sands Unified School District, as applicable. 10. A survey conducted in conjunction with the original specific plan indicated that no significant archaeological site would be effected by the project. FINDINGS: 1. Plot Plan No. 87-387, as conditioned, is generally consistent with the Specific Plan No. 121-E, Revised, 'the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan, and the standards of the Municipal Land Use Ordinance. 2. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed development. 3. The design substantial wildlife or problems. 4. The proposed existing re, Water Distri, of Plot Plan No. 87-387 is not likely to cause environmental damage or injury to fish or their habitat, or cause serious public health development will not result in violation of 3uirements prescribed by the Coachella Valley ::t and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 5. An environmental assessment has been prepared and reviewed for this project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and it has been determined that the project will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment, and, therefore, a Negative Declaration shall be filed in connection with this project. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above Analysis and Findings, it is recommended that Plot Plan No. 87-387 be approved by minute motion, subject to the attached conditions, and that a Negative Declaration be filed in conjunction with this project. ` MR/STAFFRPT.022 3 For over 60 years La Quinta Hotel has aerved the community of La Quint&. California. During that time the resort has continually evolved and expanded to meet the needs of changing times and markets. The current proposal to expand the hotel is an extension of that pattern. Landmark Land Company, Inc., has strived over these years to maintain the integrity of the original concept and vision of La Quinta Hotel. Each expansion has retained or enhanced the original buildings, and new construction has mirrored the original bungalow plan. The design concept of the current expansion proposal continues that commitment to continuity. The proposed expansion is a product of changes in the market demographics and the increased competition in the Coachella Valley. For all of its charm and uniqueness, La Quinta Hotel must grow in order to compete effectively. Conferences have become a more predominant segment of the marketplace and our existing meeting space is inadequate. Guests today require a variety of facilities and services in a luxury destination resort. La Quinta Hotel Golf b Tennis Resort offers none of the supportive shops and services that other properties offer, and it has only one restaurant. The expansion plan has been carefully designed to provide the facilities and services that are needed to maintain the hotel's market share. Three distinct areas have been addressed: The first is the need for support services, shops, and conference facilities. A ballroom of 15,000 sq. ft. will provide a main facility for social events as well as 12 separate meeting rooms to serve the group market. Adjoining this facility will be 47,402 sq. ft. of support shops, services, two restaurants, an entertainment lounge, and a hotel gift shop. In addition, hotel staff offices. currently housed in trailers and numerous small structures. will be consolidated in this area. The architectural style of these facilities will be period 1926. with the goal of creating a village ambience that could have been constructed with the original hotel. The center of this area and focal point of the expansion will be a pedestrian plaza with a prominent fountain. citrus trees, rock and waterscapes providing a space to stroll, seating clusters for relaxation and meetings and refreshments. This plaza will become. in essence, the lobby of the resort. NOV 04 W7 CITY OF LA QUINTA PCAs Aid i KVEWMENI DEPT. The second mayor area is the addition of new guest rooms. In addition, we see V future units to be added on the existing Hotel property. Conferences in the desert have become larger in size, and additional guest rooms will provide new business opportunities. Paramount to the success of the expansion. however. is that the additional rooms maintain the character and feel of the existing bungalows. The rooms have been separated into two areas for two reasons: first, to continue the feeling of a small resort. and secondly to provide separate areas designed with amenities to attract groups in one and individual guests in the other. When guests move from their respective residential areas to the plaza in the center of the resort, the ambience and character of the facility will remain intimate. The final phase is the renovation of the existing facilities. The lobby and registration area will retain its present character, as it always has. The gift shop will be moved to the plaza to allow for increased registration needs. and the back office will be increased to consolidate the staff. The entertainment lounge will be moved to the plaza' and the present area will be converted to a parlor/lounge as was originally conceived. The dining room will be renovated along with the balance of the older guest rooms, bringing the entire resort to an improved, uniform standard. The La Quinta Hotel has long been a truly precious and unique resort. The proposal of expansion and renovation will continue that tradition. 0 December 16, 1987 City of La Quinta Jerry Herman Assistant Planner RE: La Quinta Hotel Expansion CITY Ur LA QUiNTA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPT. It has been my understanding the City has requested clarification to the areas identified in our project called: A) Shops B) Night Club Item (A) Shops Within the Hotel facility complex the drawings indentify four areas _called shops. It has been our intention to address the needs of current and future Hotel Auxilary Service. Gift Shop, Tour Guide Service, Rental Car, Ground Transportation, Men & Women Beauty Care Service would be examples of such areas that would be essential to the success of Hotel operations. In addition other speciality shops where merchandise is part of the project is important to the ambience and character to support good business of a destination Hotel. A good example of this type is the Marriott Desert Springs where they have 16 shops essential to the spirit and financial success to their Hotel. Item B) Night Club To clarify what the name Night Club is misleading. Currently the Santa Rosa Room, a Lounge Bar, will be relocated to the area called Night Club. The Lobby Lounge will be expanded therefore requiring the Hotel to find a new location for this type of use. We hope to carry over the simular character, theme and use, all contained in a convient location for all Hotel guests. In conclusion I hope I have helped identify the uses and our intentions. It is not our position to conflict with general plan nor its uses but to promote good business to the Community of La Quinta. Sinc *cIdItIonsl imadscaping-- TIT, KIM M p GUM 44 rd 74 so Ma r4I'{ °"` «.� B ��i��r. 6_ I tl;ta ��; ��'-F � � � r IT t 11 F Mf G. I WE 'M 1111 rr I DIM 111.1iffill Ili I lifflol 1.1111 ILIIIIIIIIII REVISION TO AREA TABULATION: total now parking provided: Tie total required: 950 c ILL) 110V 2-4 1987 11-23-97 CITY OF LA QUINTA PNt4:— _ -V71 , -f. LA & DL ..-',I- N L..,ff DE; EXPANSION TOTAL KEYS BLDG I = 149 TOTAL KEYS BLDG II = 187 NEW KEYS 336 EXISTING 267 TOTAL PROJECT = 603 PIA -/ur,-c 3 q ECEN to DEC 31987 CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPT, �(/,5e-,k BUILDING I BUILDING II Building No. of Building No, of QTY __ TyPe Keys QTY TYPe Keys 16 1 128 11 5 132 2 2A 12 5 6 30 1 3 4 2 7 8, 1 4 5 1 4 5 2 2A 12 20 149 21 187 6 SUITES 21 SUITES 16 PARLORS 16 PARLORS TOTAL KEYS BLDG I = 149 TOTAL KEYS BLDG II = 187 NEW KEYS 336 EXISTING 267 TOTAL PROJECT = 603 PIA -/ur,-c 3 q ECEN to DEC 31987 CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPT, �(/,5e-,k - r Corioll idyls OF APPROVAL REVISL.D SPECIFIC PLAN #121-E PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 1982 ' siLNE RAL Corr I T I ONS 1. Prier to issuance of a builcdi�i fshalllltfi for tcobtain cclearance tion of nfrom e key this approval, the of p County Plaiinilig DeparUr►ent to verify that all pertinent conditions have been satisfied inti accordance with titre specific plan. 2. The sflecific plan approval shall consist of the following: a. Exhibit "A" Revised Specific Plan Text b, Exhibit "b" Specific Plan Conditions of Approval c, Revised specific plan of land use (development plan) d. Revised specific plan onsite circulation plan contemplated the Riverside of approval tment 3. If any of the following condisirp1anrtext ordiffer map exhibit5�o�heiconditions made by the developer in the specific enumerated herein shall take prece�4nce roadunless improvementsscondition5 shall the belsub,ie�t Director' Any ciianges pertaining to the approval of the Riverside County Road Commissioner. 4. The development of the property shall be in accordance with the mandatory require- ments of all Riverside County ordinances and state laws; and shall conform sub- stantially with the approved Specific Plan #121-•€ Revised as filed in the office of the Riverside County Planning Department, unless otherWlSR Omonded. 5. No portion of the specific plan which purports, or proposes to change, waive or modify any ordinance or other legal requirement for the development, or to set special time commitments for the development, shall aO con$Jd@red to be a part of the adopted specific plan. 6. Water and sewage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the requirements and specifications of the Riverside County Health Department. 7. Road improvements shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the implementing subdivision(s) for this project and/or as recommended by the Road Conwnissioner. B. Drainage and flood control facilities and improvements shall be provided in accordance with the Coachella Valley Water District requirements. 9. An Environmental Assessment shall be conducted for each tract, change of zone, plot plan, or any other discretionary permit within the specific plan. 10. Prior to recordation of any final subdivision map for a phase of development requiring a homeowners association, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Department the following documents which shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the County that the homeowners association will be established and will operate in accordance with the Intent and purpose of the specific plan. Py. 1 ,tic Flan H121 -E Revised ,litiuns of Ai►pruvdl a) The ducun►ent to cai►vey title. b) Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions to be recorded. The approved Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall be recorded at the sante time and listed on the final subdivision map when recorded. A homeowners association, with the unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance cost and management costs shall be established and continuously maintained. The associatiop shall have the right to lien the property of any owners who default in the payment of this assessment. Such lien shall not be subordinate to any encumbrance other than a first deed of trust. provided such deed of trust is made in good faith and for value and is of record prior to the lien of the homeowners association. 11. All coi►ditiuns listed herein apply only to those parcels changed or added .Mince the original specific plan was approved. These parcels includ@ the following; 1) A 19.23± acre parcel proposed for 200 condominiums, pwrchased since approval of the original specific; plan. 2) A 3.5261 acre parcel at the base of the mountains whish is► now proposed for 15 condominium units, 3) A 6,3t acre parcel located edst of Eisenhower Drives which was ori- ginally proposed for use as a temporary sewage treatment plot and horse stables is now proposed as part of the condominium and golf course facilities. Conditions in the original Specific Plan #121-E remain applicable to all portions of the subject project with the exception of the three parcels noted above, 12. Prior to recordation of final tract maps for the 19.23;1, 6.4t and 3.5261 acre parcels, water, sewer, and circulation systems must be adequately providedo,' LAND USE CONDITIONS 13. Lots created pursuant to this specific plan shall pe in conformance with the development standards of the zone($) ultimately appligd to the property, 14. Each Planned Residential Development (PRD) shall comply With the requirements of Ordinance 348 and 460. 15. Prior to the issuance of building permits, co►►u►►on open space area improvement plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. 16. The total specific plan shall be developed with a maximum of 916 condominium and 64,""hutel units. ;.uv 15c�d i 'Jelltial Develuplllent5 (pw)'s) 511d11 incorporated a new or be e-Xistinq homeowners association for maintenance and management If spaecareas, Private street systerlls, landscaped areas$ signing -1 ()dler dl•fined I•esl)ulls ibi 1 i ties as r►ecessary. II sP.11=l' ar•CdS including developed landscaped areas shall incivae lrril►ution system. Landscaping dnd irrigation plans shall be sub- 1-11111iny Department approval prior to un -site installatiQp. I 1 1 ONS �aiail" dAdcen tvtoent theosite9whillQbewaY for requiredeinrol Plan accordancedwitihltc rorov - tit +.Ird i Ilar►ce 46q and 461. he P i 1 `u• Ille dNplicdnt shdll provide all road improvements as dated April 8$ 1882 Specifi�� in the letter by the Riverside County Road Gonlmi4sioner, 21. The basic circulation system shall be developed substantially in'accordance with the specific plan text. 22. Construction of the development pen0 tted hereby may be done progressively in phases, provided adequate vehicular access is constructeq for all dwelling units in each phase and further provided that such phase development conforms substantiallY with the intent and purposes of the specific plan, 23. Phasing $hall be done in o manner which wil'i not cause newly completed structures to be impacted by dust generated by grading from subsequent phases, 24. Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with ol1 applicaple roquirpments of Ordinance 460 and Ordinance 546, 25. The deyeloper $hall irlitigate any public in accordance with notices of impaction tentative map approval and, or requests 26. The developer sk►all comply with the fol a. Security Police Protection facilities and/or school dist.ric,t impacts which may be dppliC40 0 qt the time of .' for extensions Qf tiny lowing specific plan Development standards: Walkway and parking preo$ will be adequately lighted. b. Circulation Gates at entrances will be at least 80 feet from the public street to allow for stacking and turd around. C. Grading All grading will be Fompleted under the direction of a soils engineer and in con- formance with applicable County ordinances. Grading perulits will be obtained for all grading and shall be submitted to the County Planninq Department for environ mental review where a1pplicahle. ;,f i „I.'I-L Devised L. 1.andscal)ifly Lor,unun areas, parks, entry gates and streets shill be Idndscaped with plant species compa-, title with the desert environment. e. Urainaye Through cuurdindtion with the Coachella Valley Water District, all development shall be designeO to protect all dwellings from storm flow. «� /M�VIMa r,rrrstcs,r Y, tI�1 _.._..�.._.._..�.._.._........ I SPECIFIC PLAN OF ,ANC USE 1aj-E . a.i. DAVIDSON A•EOCIATAY INy[[Yq,GµlrpwNy y I Ci.11 1n.4_... • N«u... G—W. 1 1 �.• � r / i ;wl� ��t r I s I -i -✓e I I J�.�L�1...I': I.WVNMM mpwc4pgc MLAN ROVOLOPMENT PLAN LIGFNO or - 0 Ili -My or UND UJILIX 140 12i -L Foarth S uvL-rvi-urial Distr=i_,,!v CaNWIMUS OF APPROVAL Bourb of Supervi w s April, IS, 1975 1, '1hd develcipmet4t of thu prc purt.y gib. tl be in accordance witli the Mwndvtory requireawnte of all Rivayside C:asatiraiy Cude- and uhail.l a:onform bubstentially with that as uhLAm on plot plaid marked Eubi.bitt; A-1, Ay -2, si:d A-3, on filo with Spec ific Plan Cose No 1.21_b laz the off Lee of the Riverside Cocusity Pluru lx4 Depart t, uatleri.rs other4ji�ss asesi�led by thefol.loc�riiAg couditlons, 2. Elvior to the is:�juaace of a building parreit for emstruction of uny use ca nt€ ispl+ated by this approval, tha applicant ohdll first obtato permits and/or cloarttnces from agenciea raquired by Cmwty Ordivance, unless to"cificelly amad*d hwrvin. Evidence of aa+id peralts or clearanaes shell be pr"mted to the rand Use DivLelon of the Department of Bui].dlug and seftyt j at the tim of the iasuanow of ■ b�uitdi* permit for thw use +Meow pl a 11■rsw+ith. 3, Construction of the d evelopuwant permitted htareby any be doiAe progreasivvIX in augte, provided sdsgoater vehicular socess is constructed for axl dwelling units and facilitivs, •sem furtheer provided that such stage develojiMea conform substantially with the Intent end purposes of thle appmv+ml for the provision of opal meas, recrestionst faacilitius, off- street autvatubile pairkUiz and a$equsta circulation avid access. The phases *ball be in tmusecuti.ve order and no grading ohal,l take place out of conowcutive order. 4. Prior to recreation of aiey final subdivision crap,, the applicant shall submit to the Comiaaiou the folLawiag doccwwnto which shall- demanstrate to the satlefection of the Cada-sioa that the total projeet will he developed and wiatalued is accox-dance: with the intent and purposes of the s pp�°ova 1: (aj The documat to cowvtey title,. (b) Covouants and restrictions to be recorded. . (c) Marogeaaent and wai;itrenance agmament to be ,entered into with they overs of the wits of the project. The approved cyovenr« nta t-nd rebtric-rions shall be recordvd al: the saido tiuw that the subdivision trap is recorded, 5. A maxis%ement company with the unquc ltfied vight to assaas thE- awric-r:-� �Uf th4 individual units for rea6owable kwinter;aitee costs stall be e-stabl_it,fr.ed and cuntinuousLy sututainicd. Th& mainteyr�atice responsibility shall, Melude landscape waintenauce, biow`iand aW wind La,Qt-ection contval. The covdnunts, cu"itions, and reairi.cicions dial] providLi, for a pea:•pQtaxal Pr -ug -rarer by the wakw2omaat ccsparry to reduce the trazaerds of ac:ca.tteuil.a ted --Laid rind soil, Specif Lc Pl aa of, Land Use Vu. 121-E Conditi us of Approval V"rd of Supervisors Page 2, to remove salad ✓arid soil; urad to euit,4bliah and swintain nese or additional, wiiidhreaks as required for thu Vroper control of bloweand. The ate+nagsa�'. ment company [shun have the: rigt►at to lien the units of the owners who default in the payri*a t of tofu are aessweata. Such lien shall not be subordinate tv any eacusubYunces other than a first deed of trust, prow `elided Bitch deed of trust is mDdea in good Ysith slid for value, and to of rezord prior to the lien of thena*emai t company. 6. As part of hese submittal of an tentative subdivision nwp. the paraaittees shall submit b prelirttlliury g=" plan to the Director of Planning. Vho shall in turn rof*r it to the Subdivision Comittee for review and approval. The plan shah dellnesxte pail elevations, slops, street ceuterline elevations, drainage and other information neoessary to evalq- ate the is"at caused by the proposed grading sial compliance with the wridatory requirements of the County Cosies„ The plan shall tyr: drawn to scale in accoWencee with the CoLwity sLvqutrements, but not sse»ller than me inch per one hundred feet (1" a 100,01). The elevations on the final grading plan shall be within four feeet. plus'or minus (* 41) of the approved preliminary grading plan. SPEC LL COMITIONS A. Prior to the: issuance of a building permit., a Iran -d scapee plan, prepared by a ]Licensed Yandsctaps architect, shall be subtuitte d to the County Pla,rating Department for approval, delineating genus and species and sizes of all Plant material. Said plan shall include ;a sprinkler plan. All slope planting (out and fill) shall be of a variety that will preclude errsion. This plan shall Include: (1) Grading Plan (2) V ikeway Plan (yrs Per Exhibit A_3) (3) Equestrian Trail (as per Exhibit A-1) Said plan shall also include a methud of noise attenuation for the areae adjacent to Eisenhower Drive and ulong the 50th Avenue portion of the projects; and shall be equivalent to but not less 141 vffe ct thun a six (6) foot solid Rtuouniry wall atop a four (4) foot earthen berm. The method of noise ettaaustion employed may be deleted or toodifted by the Planning Director. B. ienaittee shall provide a bicycle circulation uystem throughout the eentive project as per Exhibit A-3. Said ureas Shall bre clearly delineated by a painted yellow line and the swords,, "Bi KE PATH" and a dlreetional arrow painted on they bikeway surface its not leus than 24" letters at 300 -foot inteyrva3lea. The location of, the bike paths skull conform subatanstiaxl.ly to Exhibit A-3. SPOvifit-' Plin of Laod Use va, 1.21-E C011ditiolug of Appruval page 3.. Cy All bilketays Shall _-;s. .jv1 IU 1dz � t i L D. All eqaestrjan L With 31 Le martzed t2ith jiutta indicatina ?Tcoci�. STP' AN CR A - M 0:3 S jj,, �t 111.3_ eq%jes blleyelem and P*dUSItXIi&iI t:uF1IIeIu:, tI'd%!�-'4Pz:sLch; Cs c- b;.-I,o -eight feet ra wi�tic iullce frolli bot -tom to any eqjcjtie'Lj we 'al clear-, tile briftv to allao ff-or adc-quLILe E. Serrafttee 61'jjjj Prevfn:,4�, and autj.jtjt the iollovijr-,g to t"IL, Rivet. Departu*nt of pir4g pr6tQctjQI,, . b I , - (JL) Deve"Ver 13,11all vx4;vide,,." wateto bYstc111 for e0eh pijazja' as eLitqk is devcloped, capaj)jt, of jj*e-tiIjg t;l, , future fire PrO4�eetloa (2) prior to PhduL' 111, the devckop�j, q,Daj,j. S. Master plan to th e Riverside Comity Departlijelit of pirue., I lo r� Z, for OPPVOVOI, Th4�, awater water plan fjI1811 Inp . hL P4 OTOIL'Itiou . q tde �.. � wItev suurce 01"d st"'age and distvibu-ciun laaficj looativa a�A%d Prior to final buiMijag of ally pha6e, tile ill the peecediticr pili se 611all hove been MuSORbly and jU'bjLjj LDI atially the approved SpuclZic Mail of Lund t*jtJj alolIg LisetAhower rand TasflPico 8,hall be c�o.silge -C�d t Phase L a Lr of Y. -As a -part of each L)haEje" the applivant GlIall ziubmit fox' Lipipkk�val a 00,� i"8, 1.1 Alan to the D'VectOr Of Buildiu& end Safi ty rcir t1j,. the %L-khode tj,43t tj-IL4 fiL�LijijUee uhall uti-Ii"o Por!,�Gsie oafSand, dust and debvis. !3L: h by =,watI6. of wiiw b4,0,41(s. Walla, fencea. plewting6, t-nd M111taining V-" landw BPI"Lyik)9 w4t*w0v i . i t 1.l'A. z:, Glli t1w u. materitil, or Other effc--ctiwL, mQL11-106, Or COW)iI:ition of we$_jl0r]j j.)f 1j0ldLIw, tj_ 6,Wa6e disposal 6ytjt,t,q,.j S1. ,Ull be p;,ovideCi fc,)r viae CItire �jr J'e,u and Ulall be in np,!j,atjojj f�,:L, )f that of ujc�t pe ea�h -Yh.c.vemunt pliov to 1-, ,vt of L, base ujvured t,_L i- -c,--jj '.4"', -3 L, 4 L-jZjL The -hall be d#=sjajkjLjtL_d I,, to tkw- Z,_ the U".PlIvUlmiAt of Five Pets of Appi,lovol bysu b tje Coat uy umd of a -L Z.:I --alit UV 1L E1i13..i the be to t:'U'l-coval of the Couki:y III-CIAL-010gist than 11fa 1975. a Y f Survey tshall be borne Liy the uppXjx- ar, j: ex La Quinta District SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE NO.. 121-E Fourth Supervisorial District- P.C. Hearing Date: 2/13/75 Related File: Change of Zone #1847 Agenda Item: RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAI. ANALYSIS AND FINAL EIR RECOMMENDATION: CONTINUANCE, to March 5, 1975 or ADOPTION of Environmental Impact Report No. 41 and analysis thereof: APPROVAL of Specific Plan 121-E in accordance with Exhibits A-1, A-2, and A-3 subject to the attached conditions. Based on the following findings that the project: 1) Would be consistent with the General Plan and would tend to implement the goals and objectives of the General Plan. 2) Would be compatible with the surrounding zoning and land use. 3) Represents a logical progression of development of the area, 4' That the significant environmental impacts can be substantially mitigated by adopting the recommended conditions. FACTS: 1) Applicant: Elkee Corporation & Harry H. Schmitz 2) Engineer: J. F. Davidson 3) Type of Request: La Quinta Cove Golf & Tennis Club Specific Plan 420 unit hotel expansion, 637 condominiums, and 27 hole golf course 4) Location: Northern portion of Community of La Quinta, traversed by Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50, surrounding the existing La Quinta Hotel, 5) Parce 1 Size: 622 total acres 6) Existing Roads: Avenue 50, Eisenhower Drive, Calle Tampico, Avenida Fernando 7) Existing Land Use: 759/6 open space - mountains, agriculture, recreation 25% La Quinta Hotel, existing residences 8' Surrounding Land Use: Community of La Quinta to south; steep mountains on 3 sides, and golf course 9) Existing Zoning: N -A, R-1, C -P -S, R-3, R-2-4000 10) Surrounding Zoning: R-5, R--1, R -A, R-2-8000, N -A, C -P -S, R-2-4000 Specific Plan Staff Report Page 2. of Land Use No. 121-E Ll) General Plan Elements: Land Use: Predominately low-density residential, open space, high density residential, and water- course & equestrian Circulation: Eisenhower Drive and 50th Avenue are 100 -foot major highways Open Space & Conservation: Light urban, rural .2) Agency Recommendations: Fire Protection: (1) Increase the width of the road loop connecting Avenue 50 with Avenida Fernando to 4 lane capability. (2) Increase width of the road fronting the clubhouse to at least 32 feet of paving. (3) The "emergency access road" should be paved. Access to this road may be restricted from use by normal traffic but should be made immediately available to emergency apparatus. (4) Prior to construction of Phase III the developer shall submit a master water plan to the Riverside County Department of Fire Protection for approval. The master water plan shall include the water source and storage capability and distribution main location and sizes. Road Department: Public roads affected by this project which are not planned for extension and do not appear on the Circulation Element of the General Plan shall be terminated as approved by the Road Commissioner. Coachella Valley County Water District: A portion of this land westerly of and adjacent to Eisenhower Drive between Avenue 50 and Tampico will be used for the construction of a stormwater detention reservoir. This reservoir is a part of the Coachella Valley County Water District's La Quinta Stormwater Project, The reservoir will be constructed by others Indian Wells: No comment .3) Letters: One letter supporting from La Quinta Chamber of Commerce _4) Environmental Assessment: Environmental Assessment No. 1603, Positive finding filed on October 29, 1974. Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 41 was received and accepted on November 21, 1974. The Notice of Completion was filed on December 3, 1974 and published in the Daily Enterprise on December 11, 1974. Specific Plan of Land Use No. 12L.E Staff Report Page 3. ANALYSIS: 1) Compatibility and Potential Effect: The proposal is in many ways similar to the existing golf course and country club to the East "W 4- �l will probably be of better design since the one to the East was developed in a fragmentary manner. Additional usages and enlargement of present usages are included with the proposal,A'—OL dome of these may be objectionable to present and future residents. The sewage plant & stables may be objectionable to owners within the immediate area. In addition the noise from the proposed helicopter pad could be a nuisance if not properly mitigated. The sewage treatment plant and helicopter pad will require public use permits at a later time. The project is in conjunction with the La Quinta Cove Stormwater project,_: Oleander Reservoir 4x."one one of the major elements of this project, The Specific Plan proposes to utilize the basin for a golf course and related facilities. The reservoir will enable development of areas that have been subject to flooding in the past. 'The reserving of the mountains as open space is appropriate due to the�Fscenic nature and unstable conditions. 2) Consistency with the General Plan: The project consists of approximately 113.3 units on 621 acres of which approximately 350 acres are within areas delineated on the General Plan as Open Space and Watercourse. This leaves a net density of about 4,5 units per acre. The residential densities of the General Plan are Low Density (3.5 D.U./A) and Specific Plan of Land Use No. 121-E Staff Report Page 4. and High Density (10-20 D.U./A). The project as recommended is consistent with the General Plan. Exhibit A-1 reflects the equestrian trails within the watercourse as delineated on the Cove Communities General Plan. The General Plan of Circulation includes a Class II bikepath along Calle Tampico and Eisenhower Drive. This is included with the amended conditions and exhibit. With these conditions the project will be consistent with the General Plan. GWD:KDD:nlw Date of Staff Report: 2/6/75 SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE NO. 121-E La Quinta Cove Golf Club Fourth Supervisorial District CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (PROPOSED) February 13, 1975 1. The development of the property shall be in accordance with the mandatory requirements of all Riverside County Codes and shall conform substantially with that as shown on plot plan marked Exhibits A-1, A-2, and A-3 on file with Specific Plan Case No. 121-E in the office of the Riverside County Planning Commission, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearances from agencies required by County Ordinance, unless specifically amended herein. Evidence of said permits or clearances shall be presented to the Land Use Division of the Department of Building and Safety at the time of the issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 3. Construction of the development permitted hereby may be done progress- ively in stages provided adequate vehicular access is constructed for all dwelling units and facilities and further provided that such stage development conforms substantially with the intents and purposes of this approval for the provision of open areas, recreational facilities, off-street automobile parking and adequate circulation and access. The phases shall be in consecutive order and no grading shall take place out of consecutive order. 4. Prior to recordation of any final subdivision map, the applicant shall Submit to the Commission the following documents which shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Commission that the total project will be developed and maintained in accordance with the intents and purposes of the approval: (a) The document to convey title. (b) Covenants and restrictions to be recorded. (c) Management and maintenance agreement to be entered into with the owners of the units of the project. The approved covenants and restrictions shall be recorded at the same time that the subdivision map is recorded. S. A management company with the unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance costs shall be established and continuously maintained. The maintainance responsibility shall include landscape maintenance, blowsand and wind protection control. The covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall provide ti Specific Plan of Land Use No. 1.21-E Conditions of Approval Pa ge 2, r ; I for a perpetual 1program by the management,company to reduce the hazards of blew,:3and, to remove b+vwsand and to establish and maintain new or additional windbreaks as required for the proper control of blowsand. The management company shall have the,right to lien the units of the owners who default in the payment of their assessments. Such lien shall not be subordinate to any encumbrances other than a first deed of trust provided such deed of trust is made in good faith and for value and is of record prior to the lien of the management company. 6. Prior to recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of a building or grading permit, the permittee shall submit a preliminary grading plan to the Director of Planning, who shall in turn refer it to the Subdivision Committee for review and approval. The plan shall delineate pad elevations, slopes, street centerline elevations, drainage and other information necessary to evaluate the impact caused by the proposed grading and compliance with the mandatory requirements of the County Codes. The plan shall be drawn to scale in accordance with the County requirements, but not smaller than one inch per one hundred feet (111 = 100.0'). The elevations on the final grading plan shall be within four feet, plus or minus (+ 4') of the approved preliminary grading plan. SPECIAL CONDITIONS: A. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape plan, prepared by a registered landscape architect, shall be submitted to the County Planning Department for approval, delineating genus and species L f all,,,, - plant material. Said plan shall include a sprinkler plan. All slope planting (cut and fill) shall be of a variety that will preclude erosion. This plan shall include: (1) Grading Plan (2) Bikeway Plan (3) Equestrian Trail Said plan shall also include a method for noise attenuation for the areas adjacent to Eisenhower Drive and along the 50th Avenue portion of the project, and shall be equivalent to but not less in effect than a six (6) foot solid masonry wall atop a four (4) foot earthen berm. The method of noise attenuation employed may be deleted or modified by the Planning Director, Specific Plan of Land Use No. 121--E Conditions of Approval Page 3. B. Permittee shall provide a bicycle circulation system throughout the entire project as per Exhibit A-3. Said areas shall be clearly delineated by a painted yellow line and the words "BIKE PATH" and a directional arrow painted on the bikeway surface in not less than 24" letters at 300 foot intervals. The location of the bike paths shall conform substantially to Exhibit A-3. C. All bikeways shall include metal signs designating bike trails, located at intersections and appropriate intervals. D. All equestrian trails shall be constructed in substantial conformance with Exhibit A-1. All grade crossings shall be marked with metal signs indicating "EQUESTRIAN CROSSING". All equestrian, bicycle and pedestrian tunnels, underpasses or bridges shall have eight feet of vertical clearance from bottom to any exposed member of the bridge to allow for adequate equestrian clearance. E. Permittee shall prepare and submit the following to the Riverside County Department of Fire Protection: (1) Developer shall provide a water system for each phase as each phase is developed, capable of meeting the future fire protection demands. (2) Prior to construction of Phase III the developer shall submit a master water plan to the Riverside County Department of Fire Protection for approval. The master water plan shall include the water source and storage capability and distribution main location anfd� sizes. k. F. Prior to/\t4ating,, any -use in any phase, the recreational amenities in the preceding phase shall have been reasonably and substantially completed. G. Applicant shall apply for a zone change and have approval to comply with the approved Specific Plan of Land Use. H. The bikepath along Eisenhower and Tampico shall be completed as part of Phase II. I. As a part of each phase the applicant shall submit for approval a detailed plan to the Director of Building and Safety for the purpose of detailing the methods that the permittee shall utilize for the control of blowing sand, dust and debris. Such protection shall be provided by means of windbreaks, walls, fences, plantings and maintaining vegetation covering the land, applying water or other material, or other effective method or combination of methods of holding the soil in place. Specific Plan of Land Use No. 121-E Conditions of Approval Page 4. J. A sewage disposal system shall be provided for the entire Specific Plan area. P'.1 c GWD : KDD : nlw 2/6/75 SPECIFIC rl' it 0i Y AliD il'Si? No. 11 1. La Quintaa Cavo golf & `1'c:teuis d'jlu7u .'ourtla Supe-�'viGorial. Di6tzict CONDITIONS OF A-PPROW1, FeLrua.ry 33, 1975 1?'laa ninS Ccxmiauiou Feb. 25, 1975 I. The davtr,? op,.tant of tla� y`sSi+ i �:ti f �T i;Yt �.3. .. %11 ...'.c:¢: :�V.<ir1ti:L' with the T.d3aadatory require - mento of all r+iVa1%;1.c1; lrt;�L.1!'["�' ,,.:OrY;;r i.:,.. L;`;;:1ll njr,fork subatantia311y with that as Shown 0,1 px;t plait u:.r:''��il F_:.,.::.1 '.:'s fs: :'.., �> .;", t:;:ilei �:-r3, on file with Specific Plan Cass; No. 121-i izc diff :i off-4-21(Cclurtty Plauning Cr=Agaion, unless othi ,i ' f, Ytl :!ided Ei LYT.L `s_ C7 �...t w".� � Li i riA9t; Ji"nu . 2. rrie�; tE7 41;; iJfcL' aiiC '. cs.t I:i.a:r.,s.V; lr.keilJ_T. '0 cR:o';i: a:rUcti011 of any use contemplated Ly this approval, tlt : ar.'sspllc:uz:.@.: ue,:::.:i.:l fz:1:tlt: olrta l.t1 per=mits arid/or clearaaicas from agencieL; tequ3 red by C Burt': �T i+�'cl ,:i t�ec'v, ua a d os specifically amended r,.t ein. Evidence of said permit a r); :4. <�::i:4Tc`+:: <;lr<:.:l;�. be 1presented to the Laced Use Division, of the lky ar:'m1catt oi 11tei.].ci_k_1ig �yatcp S€;,Cal:y at the t:.:ua�a of the 3.ssuaac:t of a building permit for the use couteraplate:ltit. 3. Construction of the. c�eb��e;�yrlr.tl� p,er_mi,F.U_d bcx(�I)y way be done progressively in stage s provided adegt,ate 1.8 c.o astructed for all duyelling unito and facilities, and further_- lr>•oe::l.ded w',uh �A:ase development vor-.furaie3 t3ub-- stantialAy with the int:ent'3 saidd purpose6 ox ':.1iiii approval for the 'provision of opera arias, rec;reaticnal. facil:itiea, E3=f- SQ_2` Gt automobile Barking and adequate, circulat:i.on and access. TALia pliases shah l.e in cut"secutive order and no grading sh!A1 tags: place otit of crAL:l.ve z+sees r. 4.. T'rlcer to rzcur lit:te3ra o3 rYr.;y a irtal. 8v..l:,eliv'isi_urt tr37, C1Ae sapplicar-iti: aplral.l subait to the commission the fa ll��:r3.}l; �_1��crE�2:�t�s x.Aii::h sh.aill demonstrate to the satisfaction of the: Coi&aission tE'ia t tlae' tt: i:al project W .11! ], lzf: developed and maintained ill accordralice with the s.ittrnts t3;:a:3 pcjrposes;, of tha approval; a) The document to coriveay ti -tie. {,,j Covs::as.tr'ts and rcatrictja-iia t:o be )u,2c0rded. H atitage,.iiu at and rrailatc2:11L,`We Live uMit i:i9 :7e entered into with the Donk rs of the sinu=s of the pro eci- The approved covenants and reiitrictiorto ah all be re -corded at the game time that ti=e subdivision wap :is 5. A a§ Ia9nEi;eiL'eat. coilg)::i'l w .'e:la t:l3d; 1s ?1 .Y-? :i_ :.d :.E' 'r." �.;� TSC to a6sess the ainie:rs of the Jud!i-" vidual units for reasonable ea:� �' '4: ,.a.:a,c,r CCOjt;;, sa_ail be eataa171isl:iad and continuously raainta,ine(l. Tire mairlo, °?i,ziizc~ : .c: c�_'z sits a_11 t L11',al.l in(Auda lands;3capemaintena3nca, b.loweand ,read wind protecti,o icol_; reel . 'LE. cc,veria.aats, conditions, and restrictionsa 81,all pro�;�Ide far a l; erpettia; �.�' p)iror;x rite company to reduc=e the h_:','FQ'I:ds of accuntulated saF:'s:l cai izt"Al, ';-,j aa7ad and soil, wul to est:"si3lis'a WA 1taaliLL:AI. new or E�ddiii� a;_al 4rsP adbze:ris.:3 W3 r:e qui.red. for the. proper control. of 17liiweand. The mlatiFi;y�Yt%.[d$ t'C`:fir;„'.i?y iAie`Ill l:a1 ,'L, t`_ua ri.Gl'lt to lien the ';units of the ouft yrs zvho Oefault ii.:, ti=ke of t.se `�,r �a ysa^ s ass* 1ats. Such lien shall not lin subordif%Ete to a'taY c 0".eY �_.1._ n f ,s rs'c. deed of trust provided such dee;..d of t:: U-E'rt is DNIR.. in Lroc d ria3.tt h ; uad for v a,=e, gaud is of record prior to the Sprvuifl e PInn n-)&'' Land Uae. 114 . 121-.14' Conditions of Approval Pag,: 3 (2) Prior to const;rs:-ci:iun o-6 � ia::� :� +:"��:, is ac: ..�.��].ok,a~tt shall submit a mastar plasia to the Five:r8:;.deL Of t:':w�E Protection for approval. • lay': Mar ter :uJ`iCL.e` rr.;.,�1i3 .l''.0 i:.�. J..i?..';I;'s;'_ Lae -v;, 7:er ooUrca and stasrage capability and distributiu}a uliiAr2 N. Prior to Ybx,.al buildl aay ix. phi,,.ne>, €.he recreatioual amen tics in the prec--r di"S p�ia,s .. a hall. S3 .�r�c ,�c:�.x _... �J,zr,,ib y = rLd siabs3taantiaally coiapleted. G. Applicatki: shall apl:,ly kor : -o-.-4a haw,e tail Itulve approval to comply with the a1ppS:oi-- ad Specific Una s:af 'U' ad Uu '.e. H. The bike: path cdong, f;�.��.w..,iaoa.=;�.�c aasard T'-iuC;ico ahal . be: completed as part of Phase 11. I. As a part of each phaza, the aap-I)J. C&AL ahall :a'dbl--ait fent approval a detailed plain to the Director of Building, arad Safety foi 0Le purpose of detailing. the utethods that tha permittee shall u::Alize fcz- co tral of blowing sand, Must aad debris. Such pa,aa eciciaaa shall be p:.eyvi<i(: n3 's.y of wk a-dlb eaksa, walls, fences, plantings and maiaataiuing vegetution cove.ria-ag idle land., zip• ')1 ia�; Crater or ether materisaal, or other effective mo.thod ar ca :,ab ivaaticnaa of iaiaL ods of holding the soil in place. J. A aevage disposal Sy:3a:= be p ovi,led for the entire Specific Plan area and shall be operation for each 3racres iaiit prier to final inspection of any part of Phase M. K. That the esALrgency access a;hall Le , idll as base covered with turf Need capable of supporting Vehicles- iile one gency access and gate shall be desigimted by signs and markings subject to the approval of the Department of Fire Protection. lL. 'Mat an archeological aurvey be conducted by a qualified archeologist subject to the approval of the County Arch, o' ogi:3 . p► _i,rk to _issuance of a grading or building parmit or coimnenceiaeut of cfana;'tre�ci i,oicy The reau.:_ts and conclusions, including the survey and e.ecava tion, ciacall be subject to the approval of the County Archeo- logist not later tGhaaa May 1, 1975. The cost of the archeological survey shall be borne by the applicant. r� yr v T�:• .'r � I aac.cept and aag,.ee, pr +or to u,�a os tjda pr;;:,aid Or azpp):0vaal, to comply with all of the conditions scat forth, and understand th;'s6 the Office of Building and Safety will not issue a building Permit: or &114,)w cccuparic;y7 ()a @..Ile use pear- tted until this signed co-afiraaa.tion, In quadruplicate, haj b:a,a!n raceived by the Plaaianing Comisbion. Bate sigiaz✓i:eire:� DE -i to --.,-.-��._..�__.-..----".-.-.—_-•.... _.....___,.....-_•_� __.._ {C�.wFS��:: SFS Sit "niatilre) ,._._....,. SUMARY OF WEARM COUNTY PLANNING CONMSSION 13, 1975 2, SPECIFIC PL" 121-9 Ratl 401 -Side 1 (714 - *ad) Side 2 ( 01 — 300) 3,L ",y a'fvlvc lq `.hat La tici.' ry I I . ' Lk I", "U 'pL:X.t vx�;""�'� Z 0 4-2 -unit Lot. U, -;.-;.;dyIi,.r.�,. fl.vwd, co.utro.1 the" azhi V :UX0 44il':� Jl te'! t 6.1 ..4,P-4�4z z 'P �L A. J, 1.11 12; .�C) I bet udopuQgl , and al cy'a. Plall 123.--E in Lxc""r ._Al iyui8vaj:t14,,urly duleted t-�7t ch T"':: -A LD 'y of ta�'l pz f"oz ;llw. fij I: LO', 2, iL�� tl,:Y,, f tk. al�'! i:;'oulfl wit 1.11L'�.'.y all d "'AA kA, 1.11L'�.'.y all N A C'0 U -A a C" ZLJryi t L 0, "Ju 1. v a. ,, r,`.9.1 j .' I , I. 1 1! - " , E�i. , . Ll 1"U'vezuLl-j ly J -m ma&l that he fal'!X thi's cw.A.d with 4115 its Duh X. ba ita Order 10 and no Shall tak'.-3 pLaen ant &f No po't'A�mI out t4W; a Yl"'ad.""I p-ee�-'4'-ably occur Q'Ver a 5-10 yea x Period, arld au�j.'aaadl tha rali Them 'zvf,AUi% ba Unz lar tvlo in th"uy In"'UPOGe to coaforw wl tL th-ij o'!A;r or COLPIC aar, to he *tl",'iilt;"O,-". %'i»- plaaa fty. "ngbdtwlaii�nl fov, Thav-0 C, jx.' iZnd I'm ret%alaott4 -AL thQ 1'. -1 1 . �A " -., . . k' , '1 1 - - IL -If", t fr'4.-� t-b".U ILU 11:1me fu 'a (11, -Az 'vi� u a t 6 t t Iux lea q,,t; . 0 E�A?',nLain diedr higii ma&l that he fal'!X thi's cw.A.d with 4115 its Duh X. ba ita Order 10 and no Shall tak'.-3 pLaen ant &f No po't'A�mI out t4W; a Yl"'ad.""I p-ee�-'4'-ably occur Q'Ver a 5-10 yea x Period, arld au�j.'aaadl tha rali Them 'zvf,AUi% ba Unz lar tvlo in th"uy In"'UPOGe to coaforw wl tL th-ij o'!A;r or COLPIC aar, to he *tl",'iilt;"O,-". %'i»- plaaa fty. "ngbdtwlaii�nl fov, Thav-0 C, jx.' iZnd I'm ret%alaott4 -AL thQ 1'. -1 1 . �A " -., . . k' , '1 1 - - IL -If", t fr'4.-� t-b".U ILU 11:1me fu 'a %W1041 Wayin" tow conlicia" V40 SC Ufzace WIN Me. DUPYSQ's aratanwat, aa',i WWSLJ,1 to rcad thav the asaale PIALZ too th& whole plan would have to be avoc- ations! by tho We spoon III in OIMP3�a&. He uWad U t , I'aUtat Tw'4 dt��z"�t '11h"xSah_' Y ana 11 LOUIA bU COW.WCUS WilhaUt L42 UpatwU Wag OperaZ%nal, haC by tha qupntructe6 1C WOU, be or. Empree 0a1d th, U that le� =,ptoh& Cc W Steve WaCur QUAILI 4;,:I1•:U11 WIN 40 other approVing agehaieos W QWUL U'An to allou thd prijoct to "natlaue. Alrequout Wao thon reauhad oil conditin" j to rundl A dfbpooal uYstan thall to provided for the 6pacif la plan area. Ile Wtaa shall be 4ponational for a%ch Increment prior to final Inspection. Nk. Schnitz Man addvassed the PeWys W We aCchaZ01091cul Lspuct. The Le QuInga draft FIR uas auhaittod to the Planning Wpartacat approximmealy § mouths hafvrq'; the hearing W agVltcant had havu lufanaw3 that the archmeologloal atatement, au well as the eaciro OR, Wau adoqyawe and aneeptable to the StaU. The Utaff U&S had aCCUOU tO O=Val PraViCUAY PCeparLd i1ROU W thin area, TWA flxat' done by J. V. DavAson ou an 4rna juot tLiodijivoly to t hortheast of the sobject property, stated acs sltw'7 Ware .YGuald o"a E2').at: Tii4a r't-purc Of calwern here wadoves by Qviransoatal Aab&jannut EngiaoeriNq !a 1973 for the Coachalla Valley County Wats r Wltrtct fol the& flood control prolact. ThLi cuut of this Ult tri2s approy.1- nately $14.001 OnA qqtle a bit A "Qu 040 spen jaiag Into the arahnsologic Qp4ct Of twO OWA cqal101 00JOct, TAVC PCOYCO to al !"Wgral part of tAn La QuQUI devalWout. u%ca 01sw4i.dar 0100WON In W he coustructad an It, am well so same of the twalaig; dikes. Wit unman ta.]. Engineering of saermuento hired a. cospateat (Ana Peak) to spend smie ae ill Coachella vallay an Cho We. Kit zlndln�a Q 15-18) Upodkiag to thU partioUNT ilia POW aut that Sim A0. 9 1" me ro"UN scaLaw "Udge of cultivatol fidIds vem. A 01wakdar R(:z=Vr1W Qu La Quina proSovq) CC WL1tZ8.n edge of the ptopovad allguu,lc - 1i BAWn - one SeN ha%e? 10. Schmitz oald thia Is a typographIcal nwr ani 010A halo rcal War." Wo W WW: kuhatantlated by tha fact Aw on WyA W the ingart gcomw "T"o ncus Wcd of tht cultivated fields W, olea&", Pact% I all a: j -.� L -:Cii"-.:'.Zol , 1061 ONO. Tb"Ea hive Own locatedOlta wn� ata W U bn vaco&"d in WV wallet honz to he cone tj the U"a Nuxaerdlao County %n W� We .R )• in k"Ov ps".wo; at cpi! apt 1 hL Lai v 1 Ur to obw wunwoK , A ev za, Z �vs ; g to Ract 1ju anut of rha pru?eWry, CLUT at or HOMO, Z all Ana G1 i Go Pc"Sow"? all !4: 1.W J . : LAO pavarry InA niz- "Wad 1 40 00A "CL&C"Mt Q rho pyapert". plannI, oe in So ar"Sy.. Von 0: fe �i Unt W '>X111 Na U, , n;4 AW. )W" Od"01 of hoxons. Alto, Wo localfwa of the i1ah!"s an PTOYS:00 by - .i , ' - T, U010 Lhat LOby Would 012h av AA sinc 01 UNOW .0 ". h , . 0 A, with the 3PYIICUU"� Che Vawp±Wn Y of I&Wjn�j di, A njda ijne;-, t1wYW&LXa, Qr ua"u oLhaZ jaaLUrcr on top of via hw4w whfv� : ly W 'a awn Q .!A Erez the UnuatANS. Mr. uapreu MO - Wad W fast th, ntnfi co all ) 1 .. t A A Y , aclaw with the gpplicdut at such hzaf'y so C00101"PO Ono j1:WQ ZYPY—SASKS le ;%Kwyed' Qeu .11 001ULON j, C2�nljj.s b"!'" , A. no SYS101. Mr. SAWS uvkad It Wt.; We= V4AL W;' 0"S, to QtAVIAM 44"%;u a . i al lynna In MR! &w Nvoc snoxi A,u% Q 0 twill n�. 353 uaivo as noid a oyana would not Laland to handle a ;so IMMI L'ONS, ; PILO unn to buUd iii T Daptau a0 -R" Lhat any rkae a Mi Nnn�& to .= al.: :i,G aA- Mittel, W thO VOrM WSL&Cl Ot U.Wwl OILWOZY UNU a latteX WIN Cho wtaEf UZAN CWYOM QuWa A it 15 GC6YkQ OPIUM thaL tAt SiYl iaaai: DiatuWun nn�icl an to Cho Von the w"waga dispasol oystwa, with Xr. %W1041 Wayin" tow conlicia" V40 SC Ufzace WIN Me. DUPYSQ's aratanwat, aa',i WWSLJ,1 to rcad thav the asaale PIALZ too th& whole plan would have to be avoc- ations! by tho We spoon III in OIMP3�a&. He uWad U t , I'aUtat Tw'4 dt��z"�t '11h"xSah_' Y ana 11 LOUIA bU COW.WCUS WilhaUt L42 UpatwU Wag OperaZ%nal, haC by tha qupntructe6 1C WOU, be or. Empree 0a1d th, U that le� =,ptoh& Cc W Steve WaCur QUAILI 4;,:I1•:U11 WIN 40 other approVing agehaieos W QWUL U'An to allou thd prijoct to "natlaue. Alrequout Wao thon reauhad oil conditin" j to rundl A dfbpooal uYstan thall to provided for the 6pacif la plan area. Ile Wtaa shall be 4ponational for a%ch Increment prior to final Inspection. Nk. Schnitz Man addvassed the PeWys W We aCchaZ01091cul Lspuct. The Le QuInga draft FIR uas auhaittod to the Planning Wpartacat approximmealy § mouths hafvrq'; the hearing W agVltcant had havu lufanaw3 that the archmeologloal atatement, au well as the eaciro OR, Wau adoqyawe and aneeptable to the StaU. The Utaff U&S had aCCUOU tO O=Val PraViCUAY PCeparLd i1ROU W thin area, TWA flxat' done by J. V. DavAson ou an 4rna juot tLiodijivoly to t hortheast of the sobject property, stated acs sltw'7 Ware .YGuald o"a E2').at: Tii4a r't-purc Of calwern here wadoves by Qviransoatal Aab&jannut EngiaoeriNq !a 1973 for the Coachalla Valley County Wats r Wltrtct fol the& flood control prolact. ThLi cuut of this Ult tri2s approy.1- nately $14.001 OnA qqtle a bit A "Qu 040 spen jaiag Into the arahnsologic Qp4ct Of twO OWA cqal101 00JOct, TAVC PCOYCO to al !"Wgral part of tAn La QuQUI devalWout. u%ca 01sw4i.dar 0100WON In W he coustructad an It, am well so same of the twalaig; dikes. Wit unman ta.]. Engineering of saermuento hired a. cospateat (Ana Peak) to spend smie ae ill Coachella vallay an Cho We. Kit zlndln�a Q 15-18) Upodkiag to thU partioUNT ilia POW aut that Sim A0. 9 1" me ro"UN scaLaw "Udge of cultivatol fidIds vem. A 01wakdar R(:z=Vr1W Qu La Quina proSovq) CC WL1tZ8.n edge of the ptopovad allguu,lc - 1i BAWn - one SeN ha%e? 10. Schmitz oald thia Is a typographIcal nwr ani 010A halo rcal War." Wo W WW: kuhatantlated by tha fact Aw on WyA W the ingart gcomw "T"o ncus Wcd of tht cultivated fields W, olea&", Pact% I all a: j -.� L -:Cii"-.:'.Zol , 1061 ONO. Tb"Ea hive Own locatedOlta wn� ata W U bn vaco&"d in WV wallet honz to he cone tj the U"a Nuxaerdlao County %n W� We .R )• in k"Ov ps".wo; at cpi! apt 1 hL Lai v 1 Ur to obw wunwoK , A ev za, Z �vs ; g to Ract 1ju anut of rha pru?eWry, CLUT at or HOMO, Z all Ana G1 i Go Pc"Sow"? all !4: 1.W J . : LAO pavarry InA niz- "Wad 1 40 00A "CL&C"Mt Q rho pyapert". plannI, oe in So ar"Sy.. Von 0: fe �i and c,,a af;L)Ilt CiIa--CdV •A -not dUay �,eufk &pent wi�.'% -C had a vAlAA svrudillq ThO 1,0i.f CAXITL:.l Clae firfaz of thia yaur awl San Par- t(j. Ilia LIX, In th�,i cc�m',,Y Ov�K'a ata tL-'i:A t'litez htvo�.,-- In au arua I'mrC"le &Je '.4 1 'Y, i2..td, rtat-lvxit by Aiut he 1. k, ii ,aUd a,� 1ateTw-ledge 09 the Picelt-latury 61t L-itclellt P.A,,and ai Laka Y.42 Canta 1a thta pxoj(,-ct area an the're alra no lei LZk,-.a told thw". the antilc,* "Ce Sh44 um ta y.J'.'--It mm4 ci�LLlrely Oft,-". P- 6, eS, 5 a a 21") �,Q 25 p-z,-spJ,:; °..1d :'t1 k: ha. douo 1.4 a da, &M4 a ILUIX b f1ii".1 1.1'0' `l. d 111 the rccLqc�,azon O.-att �'ile iS "e ..cet.li�:I, LkLYL4,"d ,;C} "t.av L,*ral-%b Waid that Mco Saiwtitz did YnA ouv,vey and Wildr. veare ti'a fl-i'diug's CIR tlm q6'J.t 'W%g.a !Ac!a tha cgvi�-, px�;blrff,a of th%� E.A.E. z.4uvi�"ay lj'A.gilt be ill that 04a persov., -Aho did tLa uux:vci,y did v,-b.qv.j aa �A t1vilo was ilcot f;mAlly.ar aaod,,,h with tlu-, arra to yLa t13 -- his field ti' t-,haxak 11 -aa in t4a Q�-athulla vall ay. 14U he.-,* dlmo4t his JjA aQ,-.SY at Cal St&t(j, .I �T'VIC. Long Bo&cN. vad toll of his flk,1<1 Ima been in Southurn Califormia. cral,�') told, thUL 1IG falt tha Mzy lat deadline would be a -r,&jawiab!:* date for arei.�.ty k3f ti ,°; Glv%.%,.) ;did not feal'o in his position, the.t he vould undartrAlka th.-, urxivzy- or Ot'y tLoqcsv.,a6ma btatuoe it could poasibly lead to a ma--fliet of lntarc,;t. 111-a a 4.1o:mLruct vith A.R.U. or a:jathar -m.ad z. -Ad tiv,, vauld hava to be tv.!uan u%,kvitix !JW individud-41 grQnp. koh-mn A-Au),'A by 1,4r,k"'vea"iL Why lho galt WIL9 would b* as confligt ofiiAtfare..--Ft, 1, C.wj'6UTI 0,4d. 6-iLt If thu:z to furvlhig ha waislA row waiat to 'M� UCCASet'i Of vzvk IMI'vc."alf. Alju, h,.� felt Chat ae the POAW-run of up" tr.; il:�;Ad vla 4L,aamrii tits work that would bc.� df,ala, 66 1ACz voald be i'l tha Of Me ovu work. Af; U0 the fact tg".at e. L-mOwt4t- �At ICIIL.� W;'Oa 11430 bielatL OT ZU bllt.4'j f ti a Hr. Cralb 5::-4j.4 la" OU '064111 t.,;� cka aurvby, but lu b�t,6v.A -4,0'.Uld im ra"-mlaud. A -a arag emlwot L -a it for a WAIC, Maltz area Ila& L" -'au in CtvaVO sz6Sd tllat t -5n rc V1 1110. Dc. 82f;ciy Cita site" H& '1, It Zu Ciy 084) Mr. ,4:4aiad of I)-.. Wotory oe Lh;ara waa O� 1�at 11r. crzib UU14,34 what V,-.) tiatez L "ar. TA-. c. 'itJ, uL ku,At it should be t.ij t"'va cv�)3,aswmzut for thru CIT0,M" Drs Peak a gem-";. 'CO, Re"50wch U�At that vh& had apalit OiAy 1-1/2 J,'Ay_j ou lv'x� why tier vutrAi did t -w'. cuLer Into,, tho raport. Me, P7m15,P1 JUIL,,e v�! V,"A I& cltisd. Hr. Wilki hzd aukiad tluvt' hio uwA_ Lij frwl,l tha ratn);iMWJ r aic.,zmufC4,) to him or hia ty"Iatox-La b a it aag He wont to a ho-2rLng &vtd �iom- PUIXWid. "Ut vu!,m wit d. T�e 1a,,u added in the car Port Is iti %.)ta,� c;i` the, th43 f.2,ct Lhut�lr. L�0ulgit.0 EIR, iAutlists 111% PW.1 MJ 'd au a m2levance. P", had no this EM. Hr. r'ortillc pv& 6:u.ed a lettur. (14,1amanted 1 ou hia upi��,Jzk�,s 0�1 Llie a, az,= lso cOntad 6n th.." that it w!'! h+'of - p! e -Ur4lav 1w,ra bcav "j JU used ix the La Quixtv., Golf %1S ',FuuA.�A i.`2� 13 imi"k, 119 comAd-Ts this W baa %riclation CC at 11U3 UU1-WALf`6u1 Z P;ardr that ute Of 10QW;:L oi�k 1"o1jo A tf "Z1,21 L'Im"ta :J!'TJ a Tv,40, th'i U"* of lWaxy err Schiu.- muqp to the & Lu Ao quot3tiGO. MIX. Porlttillo kl6ij he hetc a ct',)Y r�V *C,�'qavt dated Octobar 1973 that hai--; We Sema wav It; It. Thay &ad the Dmrun Scelic vany &'VO,4 which It wwj redw�,ed I MX- POVtMO 4.19 00 & 1�r* B-vAjUnnt, writing IU4 chairvula of tha Sall Gorgonio �'^2apti ia, tA uLa CIuL-, ;3-t.atia3 UWZ; vha tho Dm,:, &a Kv. Wilk-a'a artyin the ua49,'rrnima4aat Ur. PoTeillo x&lkg U-bo.,,m'411vz. to Zee the Xe�,iavt zcnfca Oy u4 -to did tha U_,�.,A a'.1"'A Li;: v If'U'LLY Lava bde.0 havL�� & lot i�1 o Vol., 3%.-vie-wo fmd FLUOR Uai: a lu 1Y 2A. Um A.VIX. as a ®r,ti: 0"pp t1w;u p,,40„Ap ",,uva ri,hr..,vuz .:...4A, ,zizce i liu, "'1'US 41 a. OaUarcl od-ituvrisl tk tc. ba vauld like to saa tha ralQc All 'h"_r 'U1,10 Uald that uAw.n aa LOM h4c 'a !"t wY'Yq!' D" , by ,IdUAA, mua LXIO;.7w lwux.�.S V"tchgd, is U 4WI-1.1 Li cv thwra is A.Aq,I.� a 1�y it Az a way -4 OIL �e- ia th,� kl-iL� ou U)"a hd rol 1Ls IALe.. 'Y 4�. '."Atk:`, L poinh,,,J, 9AIV 01,1.1 0,At 'L',ra'a, tht�t it thoro at the praaaa� ( j f ) Tv. Yortillo appearad at.,&.Ja wid s;IuAd 'aa itw, hava taa."i uIatake.11 and, th'sA. Mza MxmA I(r. ti3ld thin' -C unaw-, 1'1a:ate aLything to tic wlt4 the %i Lr'114 I a ii la v, fwnitrCk t0 L Cj V L, T� ia to tim Lea, Kite wima's preme-ati tita wl,GIuL-ttaMtjibla at 'LeaII,WL;. LI to th'a Confidentiality Of t'rvb repart, t4e r4kvart to vu,.-�ry Its :,)f zardhaaaloUlcal ra�,Ixea. Ga In remapwisu to Phili-g1,171ILe, Lhey a&,,/ eA' sPe'Afle 100stiona have bai;tf P-ar',K,'ialy ).{C -A out 0'f 'pl%'Aact t,461 vite'a frcm vW41dalism. A I.davit-A&I repirt giviag datal.W etJ, wi,,ibb init Led to the diet'rict." That io tim rapox-L lir. P,-;mUlIa olkid th&y hava rvc;t w0c.,'KI. PIv. Wilke said he ii6twj for Copica bur haa not rwAvad tha,:2*, '&r. did have a V-4-ppy. (43) L'� thz� La Quinta EM lohleh at:At'k.0 i'�, t 110 'mi-11knice v44", fou-il-I vgh-il OU,3 located at the most 691J.Utlarly pae.'Ll�ta of them alta Ciiflord ,.:, slav-A owld dune exiiats . Several ftzgpaallvi C6f Zt'uttarywe-irra vLilbl(,.., Lut n(v r-"xeav43.tIoi,.x waa atteapted. She wai'd Sha. -�Q, -�atxa add"U011al but Hre Po�IUIIU J.1vxIld hava L m ,- 4 A, a L, v"L:y varaly &ana. The .witire proju-at arc.�. i lia3 o_,"Y"t.-j" "..5i:.1["2A.mI%w1jJY ,Irefas ,ware,, ',xlkwd and 09 aftew 4 i I. y1 ovza uwe-q az clooaly w" Pat :.Cr17o. Iri left for a latt,�-,r dato. ViLitt VM 8,7110,1.ft�, om", COLS.Id b., 3 Will j,".14 C,20 IS iJ. O."o. iz Ott;'. O;laq I, but; a Ile a(l,:Ld o, Ode 3. i.i F-rv-t ('b t`i i:xnll to z:b: ti'Wxth or �'xay ,aa worlu�, -wj 10, A -Z -ng duFin Ow aoil oJ, W'.i chs, tawlo up ai:l 4 or .5 playat.v, aud o a 14 t�a :1 d I a 1�� I - lu 'v." i -.."le VXI.. c U I v U. wil -nl. ,I rl I , i911 ; ivaid Ota Lott Lau a C-lq�ot ttact t%,:s at elle: Board uz �Mlxt�O-tura Ocllc-ro writh vh(;L-1 Ila i"::) lie V- -y Ilk !. UAI Of c" $:: Ula proj (az L taiallt be Ovid u c tic s". :3 Ono Vl o:�, i�ytd a a Ono wt.; Onsut ua- r a- &a all examyle, au Z)tnteel., �24 W43 x ma Thary coo AdIcAr"! Wounah . ci sw t LL. naLvAnnot 11wough CA "Wo ". An :, Awnswoo a sapiro! VOK zAb n �. nu lad Ath Ito vtrAnocn"a w . A ha accz;MN. Voy WA. th, v� Arx�xr* 0"It to the condollutume to ifid IVA4 ty".IutPZLV�tk:!Q'Vdt'o • twow"Y" !Llc' lreq)rc:e Sia!d Chia uaa aal Wit Waa t0ld IL would nN Lowacu Rahlbir A-1. V:114: to 0 Ve auception could ho arantn" SU0,1 I,al of univo would have, Q, 110"1C:IN 14'r ny;g"Wei nQW; COO ayw� 10V4LOUSaL to appro=-'. f�uppixt Ilf"tdier- UAL Qh C48 hnown in obts gvw" It waa then a that N"Aftion L MQuid vcn& WAgn of emors"ney AW OWL nuvan" Shan... an IshlbIt A-3 Wall bo Vubjuct to Chu apprywal OR the hyparVant of Ara prutecrian' i.:Aea agraod to all othor candislauE •ulth tLe of tl-le (4a aza, f;;Urvay. (21a) 011smason CNUVInaud U21h COW1:YZ10n4n Wyea ocling ha felt that at this lace data Lo ;old up a project of thia a0z and aVx'I UVLe-V Of Lhe WPLfflo�hy frm, yegarta of the Watur WOLVICL and Al Unt that thsiz Projoet to In caqjunctlaa WIN this SPOC121a plan. chic the v'tati%lizat '"Te's (22 1) nized ona of tyn njAgetion monsurue Propused an Page 117 aff k*.Iu� EP'l 'iwhlch Pravidas for of Sensitive Are'�-U"' If dlaoavarA doulng 0ASUnWen, uALT pzatconloual arahsonloglats have Mau noWled an given a <,',:s; i'; cc tine to Stndy the find." she felt th$s uuqld revolt A anich Inara of a Way ha cans tro,Wo-a aae, burdeu to iAia dt)�-�valajmvc than It Chu WIVey were Code Wora%aad. Mr. Dealer agrge;,"i uitl'i hor und said thoy would be w1111ng to help, but did, not want to Ws , 'k4aA up the.,,r alraizdy ka&'vu a gradIng permit mud could begin conatruntion hamadistely. he QAJ they would t.0 aillcuilvA 1146 F.Jw4vey 12 guaraama could ba g14!an th;t, it would he Cvw0Jkt,d by 1..sxy I.,st, ur&d was fAt Ira CO&L to ("oulze-ros aiiiLed hovo mvicaa Ir. x4vuld coat IS up tMla Mr. VoUeler Said he waa WITIng to ggmbla oa that. (2 4) Mr. GaerlkgD wuggastad Ant Lx;'I'C�.'Lf 1"ROe be too difficuk to ask thu corner w:LtL- Chu meaquite trew. that is could be b"M ria%r laco the Plau, but Ater furphar dial"Won It 0an datarmkr"i 4 2 to 3 acra5;, and 1M. vat�'?31'ax WeAd not �L'.-kyutg Wy had PAd *15.000na =0 fa this lead. A100. ane't or too duplesna .:5'1;: planned Aux tNat arn", (2 61) AdWO&w ,.AW D�" prqpaxQ facto au."z fi%qruy an to what roaza ;a �L'-L:rvwy Lf uadereakan, and a coatinuami 4, ta WkT A too T V :020R rg�W. The quaorloa of the Squo8trina tra!:L L ONG ha Clan.. Nal TWIMNO via NoWly An oantinaw& (I. -W. VDon-le-z' UINg C0 7010avoz, S� A nW� OKI winc A Tqy ea�! Ue aW , COLO 1 AL CLOY 0"Ald 04:av:' '44,L: -A t.ut' hat klrc� 051 ;=. to V's SqCny&VS &PH VIA - 0 0ASW law uKablan.) D) JAN 2 9 1975 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - Ft.1; January 20, 1975 ROAD DEPARTMENT - PLAN14ING it 17- U L J A N PLATI;?IING M:11bi GtrIlt S1jAJk'f'C. SPECIFIC PLAID OF LAND USE NO. 121-E LA QUINTA DISTRICT Property generally bounded by Calla Tampico on the East and West sides of Eisenhower Drive La QuiaLa Cove Golf & Tamiis Club c/o H. Schmitz, 43-900 Primrose Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Your ralma&DLa a4d 9C'*C())'qaiea6?.0'6' '00 JANUARY 27, 1975 so tn�' t -hat 0iay way be :UwAud,,ld Li oul' Siaff UT.", I 11ILLA"I'Ld) FS LSS : E. A. #1603 January 28, 1975 Public roads affected by this project which are not planned for extension and do not appear on the Circulation Element of the General Plan shall be terminated as approved by the Road Commissioner. Tlv� pab�lr. On 11,A'j, 6- i.tald r. -a FEBRUARY 13, 1975 yol"L�Q to Ylrujeat' A COPY sent to desert offlob L , 5 L_ ASSESS IJA.L-J, v >u tit �l"-r 05•,R be 99, 7n -o2 — N, Bi �a ". DATE I liZ,6 CK'D 8Y S .. Et LAN HWY5: Ci5EMHOWER OR -1UJ'RINNI1,w: 56 rN_Avr - loo' (?Iw MAJorz C 5 , . 121 E E)tiSTE'lG Z 0 lil DIG ter. 0 'IQI a:W W4 I } V211 I 7r t rr L. n ;e 'R4* :-`EMIL ItCho �. Fr, µIM . aweu�tM iDw* s.j" Sol +j jYD-08000 ry 4VIR "T a.� w ylyy'Mr y...ry,��giy _ . .., �' � i• '.� Y o� �.I� � +. "'4! _ � .. � VAN,,,.:r-. rrSt_twv awl l7PEr-IPIC PIAN Of (. AHo N► 41'_.-r'li'_ v�'E ( % , Y.Y i .' 11• rrI ry EIV PIAN wwrs: iC 100' 1AND_ ,� -.� :ltd �'`��-�• TA 1 L �EE �r i t. fir. �"� • � d� ,,rti. 5v w • s a • � •: � �)'1 '. ,.gni ..:<, �i � - ..- d � • � � 4:d... ar, 3'�Mkir.'wn _CrrNAK.a !�� CauNsnY CLuo �r � • �. Loa AIT a do it c PLA, �.,......•�..•-.+r-,-w•.+..,+w.s�..,�.rs,.�w�-a�+w ••4 r��l ii_ j Ji'llr i.L 5PeuF-,,c 0 L A N �] � 4 U�._.- , I , .::'': ) m u F J i a Y'1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM RIVERSIDE COUNTY "LANNING DEPARTMENT c-. 11� / Staff Only :Receipt e No. No. eived by TO ACCOMPANY APPLICATION FOR SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE �/L 1-6: Type of Permit & No. LOCATION 50th & Eisenhower, La Quinta ADDRESS La Quinta Cove Golf and Tennis Club APPLICANT c/o H. Schmitz & Associates, 43900 Primrose Dr., Palm Desert 92260 346-2022 (Please Print)' NAME ADDRESS ZIP TELE. NO. I. Background Information 1. Briefly describe the nature of the project or activity. A planned residential community with hotel and golf course. 2. General Location. La Quinta 3. Legal description of project site. Portion of Sec. 1, T.6 S., R. 6 E., and Portion of Sec. 36, T. 5 S., R. 6 E. 4. Describe the project area, including distinguishing natural and manmade characteristics Existing hotel, cottages, residences, field crops and vacant land. 5. Is the project a phase or a portion of a larger project? IE so, identify larger project. No 6. Has an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Report previously been prepared that includes the project? If so give date submitted and title of project, No 7. List every other public agency from whom a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use is necessary before completion of the project? Board of Supervisors - 1 - II. Assessment of Environmental Impact. Please answer the following questions by placing a check in the appropriate space. (The applicant should be able to explain or substantiate his response to every question.) A. Characteristics of the Natural Environment. Yes No County Use 1. Land (Topography, Soils, Geology) a. Does the project site involve a unique landform or biological area, such as beaches, sand clunes, marshes, etc.? X b. Will the project involve construction on slopes of 25% or greater? X c. Is the project to be located in an area of soil instability (subsidence, landslide or severe erosion)? X d. Is the project site located on, or adjacent to a known earthquake fault? X 2. Water a. Is the project located within a flood plain? X b. Does the project involve a natural drainage channel or stream bed? X 3. Flora and Fauna a. Are there any rare or endangered species of plant life in the project area? X b. Will any mature trees be removed or relocated? X c. Is the project site adjacent to, or does it include, a habitat, flood source, water source, nesting place or breeding place for a rare or endangered wildlife species? X d. Could the project affect fish, wildlife, reptiles, or plant life? X e. Is the project located inside or within 200 feet of a fish or wildlife refuge or reserve? X 4. Potential Alteration to Natural Features a. Will the project result in the removal of natural resources for commercial purposes (including rock, sand, gravel, oil, trees, or minerals)? X b. Will the project involve grading in excess of 300 cu. yds.? X - 2 - Potential Direct Impact of Project. I. Impact on Existin Yes No g_�sical surroundings. a. Pollution (Air, water, noise, land) (1) Will the project create -dust, fumes, smoke or odors? (2) Will the project involve the burning of any material, including, brush, trees or construction materials? (3) Is the project expected to result in the generation of noise levels in excess of those currently existing in the area? (4) Will the project involve the application, use, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, including pesticides, herbicides, other toxic substances or radioactive material? b. AR licable Pollution Controls and Standards. (1) Will the project require a permit or other approval from any of the following agencies? State or Regional Water Resources Control Board County Health Officer Air Pollution Control District City or County Planning Commission U. S. Environmental Protection Agency County Airport Land Use Commission (2) Does the project require variance from established environmental standards (e.g., air quality, noise, water quality)? 2. Im act on existin facilities and services. a. Circulation. (1) Is the project expected to cause noticeable increase in pedestrian traffic or a change in pedestrian patterns? (2) Will the project result in noticeable changes in vehicular traffic patterns or volumes (including bicycles)? (3) Will the project involve the use of off -the -road vehicles of any kind (such as trail bikes)? b. Water Supply and Sewage Disposal. (1) Will the project entail the acquisition of water from wells or surface sources for commercial and/or non-domestic use? (2) Will septic tanks be utilized for sewage disposal? - 3 - County C Yes No Coµnty Us c. Demand for Service from Special Districts and/or Municipalities or Coucity. (1) Will the project require the extension of existing public utility lines? (2) Will,the project require public services, from an agency, district or public utility which is currently operating at or near capacity? 3. Miscellaneous a. Will the project employ equipment which could interefere with existing communication and/or defense systems? b. Is the project located within the flight path or noise impact area of an airport? C. Potential Indirect Impact of Project. 1. Land Use a. Is the proposed project expected to result in other changes in land use either on or off the project site? b. Could the project serve to encourage development of presently undeveloped areas, or increase in development intensity of already developed areas (examples include the introduction of new or expanded public utilities, new industry, commercial facilites or recreation activities)? X C. Is the project adjacent to or within 500 ft. of an existing public facility or site for same? d. Is the project inconsistent with any adopted general plan, specific plan or present zoning? e. Does the project involve lands currently protected under the Williamson Act or an Open Space Easement? 2. Visual_Impact a. Is the site for the proposed project adjacent to a designated Scenic Highway or within a Scenic Corridor? b. Will the project obstruct.any scenic view from existing residential areas, public lands, or public roads? 3. Social/Cultural Impact a. Will the project require the relocation of housing or business in order to clear the project site? b. Dees the project site include or affect a known historical or archeological site? - 4 - III. Statement as to Significant Environmental Effect. If you haye answered yes to one or more of the questions in Section II, but believe the project will have no significant adverse environmental effect, indicate your reasons below. To the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. La Quints 1:1 d Tennis Club lte: October 15, 1974 Signed (Project sp sor) TFB: pmp 10-4-73 PD 73-52* - 5 -- By Steen Weinold Title w } ACK14OWLEDQEMEMT • ft4es}eet Notification and' iievierr 8p�� Offla of te Go ernw f Yt ��fi g✓ p I'i ei pk'J PROJECT.- La Quinta Cove GoXf Tennia Club: ' , • ' r State Clearinghw�a Number tS[Fj 74121652- The 4121652•The + I ' above State Clow inghouse Alum rrnrtt be urge# on $utwe acwrtit vrih$Fr $Ma office and must be brought to the attention of the icy taking ectioq aft Vput' 11;iII1o11100; Data Received: 12-'9-74 Project review begins { The State feview of your project will require___J:�__w.days, phis c,ar4 DOES No T vwlfv aDmpliance with preapplication and/or environrhental document review requirNnertts. A letter containing the State's comments or a letter Confirming that no co.rrwie to ywrs' ' ' generated will be forwarded as soon after the review is completed as fib#►• If submittal is under preapplication review requirements, you may not submit the fi tt f application until the lett er is re ive '�/ For Cl;aringhpuse by. q i Roy. 6174 44ata of Cahfprnla Oil . x, G., :-r• Ti). ❑$ffaa 0!*4GiF►rlfClai Office of PlanrwnQ art<f f e>�rerdt t ' State Clovir►gho4 i : t I" 10th Street } " �s#G<arnertp, California li5$1�1 71 77� Ct/ Y V Rsi/ . + a'wrT4pFtf71x DEC 2 0 1974 'RIVERSIDE COUNTY I + l]N(A&QM1W6ty .VlaLning rimuiasion, 4UBU Lc;man S t�Fl:Xr R?lvrr yirx C�'�el.+. k .! T 7y g ot ection AgencX_ �. Trengmtcs:ad. `�+ 3!! J9 Date Ra. urn Rcqueate4.3ap. 3f. A�_I.aa t!inta Cove Golf & Tennis Club CAS � • i f'{ iF�> g -_ ... S9N �Mint g. LES kVP1-<}CAAL? TO; I J'nvir0nU1VnLaJ 7Trpa�t. Amporr: (Use faragr4ph I' �einwj Un,c vwx'+riCe GUadcti[ 1-,;11al Use. permit C'enerd+j Plan Amendment Utlaei• Specific Plan ) i. £rgvi res:,menta 1' !r p a C r V r rr t: ..,_ 7't+e tittatt:ars dz7t-a a.,Ts pri: rrd toy the ifxc°? C ,ppazior, end '3 t'e trs� atJc.R to yr•, for 11'j LrE',F,CC?� :� Cliy` r,.i)� •S`F=: 1"'ta1:�Y fl,i t�f A. NFir.w-Gj riTV'.l'C)i�Y(,;-RT :fir �!!�! i,Ldt:l,�ly1� �i.Y,'r� �'dihw;lrRj'i r.i F r•; .-_•__- _-•...-..-A�..-.,__ .. iL..GWc1tF.t'" ,a�C± i.a+: �Tt pt' c►at1,>.tl 3aabit:;fit.:, ieduc-4t n of ;sr 1+1i�i1 Ct�,�CKiYr'I ntc,,.) and *S. ldf?..:1M i'E'::C',iI'C:;d,"i 4r;.�d. clf4l%T14� fPr �- -- -- , , dIItHT pCcoo l« IUi ctrp.tl-tFQ.ct•I,i f.JitJe�re 0r1, [rr>>:�S �Ti� �tr•:l+rU �� Kquire inr,?iiL for J,t?'«er �,w.j.Ftt�; i()Tl b111t' � L3i,1'illal.+.arT; Lapact, Wt 61CW1 gC tX0Mr.tlror1C 4r,r1 F�>1.lc�ctiaa t'{�ci.�leit�:; :t•,t,ltr.r. c'n uthf�d utilJrCLFa:, .ynd public s�erWirt:a,). , i.a a re R rCs ltUdl.;d (a=;r iC?x17;a,'+. t:S� r{ I;aLdle?sd: a tfdf: da;,, return ro.gw4ticed, IL Tr!%dy !,veep enc.ln6u4 ;s t:ak your rM' J R,0; !),: '., A.L 1T•TM'r REi,QR'I : We agree with the nepott .that no 6 i.gni6icarrt witdeand jive d4azanda ex„44 on tete Aub fect p�.ope�t-ty, of in the immediate area. . We que&Uon the second paAag4aph in the 4ectc.on en t tied "FIRE"page 63• Any 4t4urtu&at cons tatuetion .hincarre.aa e.b 6 ite hazoAd when compated .to .that whx� 4.7 i4 t.s ori naw des eJt t taytd, bowveh, 4t4uetunaC bite haza�id when pnopetty pno#ecte.d can and mub.t be -to.tevtatea 4A OUA even ging boeie-ty• Tke xe.potrt attudea to the fact that deve&pmen.t min , the aubje.ct 00A weW cause adequate water jo-k 6i.ne p4oteWon puhpoae4 .to OAV .in .thet confit a ation d•i-te. We feet that any p'to1ea;C od thi.6 magnitude 4haut.d provide att iaoWti.e,6 nec,64aAy bon public h¢atth, wet4au and za6e tV, inc,L44ng adequate gu 6t4 w, Ri'CG3`4MN)Si.0 Ctjt' ITI#SNS FOR AFE110VU OF VROJEfrr; AAY 4ecomme.nde.d c ondi Uona joy, appu vat a uch ae 6peci6io, k1te 6tow quc(ntc-ti" and V;4j6iC cu Gzf'atton uitC be addhea.sed to 6utr,+ne eaae4 u , fiin .the bpecige 4-tudy area, hu ' as Coh"o+tat We Cases and Txa:c to . tl �e °,'T°.. i. fir-• � ''r �, ' y%• f/� b.v GfORGE J. SCHULTEJANN Fi4e Pfia ect, on Hann ng axEn ine�nin� c��ices 1)jtci UeeembeA i.,-_jyi4 you WJ0i tr7 l:.n rirititled �,{ t.",i ,i a.� of. 11COTI-i1r, p1cahTw In ll.�r� is Wt )•r',.,,-r ;+Cl'('l;i V I. .-iiiir,tilala 9.'5trl� e. � C ! .i 1 � r:a , t .r,•h E t ".�.{ .r � t ,1 �,j �r ,Wf 1• , 1 fey ! rJf% i//1J_ J DEC 111974 A -4, j."I "P P14;�ning commissica, 4080 �efmnzl St T�Wty � I t*)"S . .1 PLANNING Calif T9. Southern California Edison company al Data: Hate Return Requesc*d:J 1914 j SUBJECT PROJXCT.- quint;a Cove Golf b Tennis Club CA .31 ARF A; APPLICAALF TQj A F*nv1roiuw.nt4j impact Report 068 Faragra. ph VotWftioaal use Permit Wat parag'apo it tetle►►r) Centl 'al Plan Amendment r Gther Specific Plan mpact 1: f.p r t : The attached data w4a prepared by the project sponsor snd is being fOtw3rded to you for recounends�ions al,4 he C04aty if4 intar0steti to the probable jtnptv,.tr, 0,1 the: A. Natural on ir3nment (e.g, -.r aiT Pullutt0n; fire hazards; debtruction of natural hal)j.csts; rejuction If pwat�roant ductive.. agriculture, etc.) and B. (e.g. dema_qd fQV water prodUCLioh 44, distriburion faci).ities; reation, parks! .'and ncree,s; requir*ment fOr ptwer gene tarj(71, tend distr1buEjf.),,; iWacUL% S�Wflge tre4f.-j!j'jjt 041cl Collection facilit1ts; impact on other utilities Itnd public anrVicto LaLe r )10 !!2_LtE2La should be forwanJcd regardle,as Of tile date racurn requested. y" may keep *'zlclosuraa for yjur COMINT1 REGARDING ENVIRf""tWNTAL IMPACT REPORT: IL. RECOtMENDED C014L)IT10m.,j FOR APPROVAL' OF PROJECT t TkIN PrOJOat In not within the Southern California Z41acu Company service area. We suggest that the Utility which could respond to tke report would be tbko Imperial Irrigation 1)jmtriat. Their Coachella tailing address jol XWerial Irrigation pletrict Power Dlvtgtoq 1319 Ninth Street Coachella, Calif. $2236 :Submit tad 6 Phpn� Nq,.- 346-3710 Date11-9-74 ;au Heti 4edl ef rho once of public hearing, 111 e � r, 4" 1 s I C t f -,q 0. t Y t I 4QX484131 to P14jining Depnrtmun,t, 4080 1,alljon Stroutt I+ vcrml3ar C•alixornira 9.501) I _ I I I .1 P, )Py Sant W r. mr [ }� l F{: �Y ffm ixy S 7 1 d "kir 2e `f J - .i `f "'4".q} "�'..e �% ( t rq t 1 � IAL ow i �Y ffm ixy S 7 1 d "kir 2e `f J - .i `f "'4".q} "�'..e �% ( t rq t 1 � • �� a F a r�.f f �' � . I rr"+ ti , Y• s 's i , r •. � ,.. � r. 5 Trp 1.4 JET �` m �T :AI r i _ , ..�"' 1 •7.f f CL r;,.,; ,' j►I►71►U wR41. a. Lv1► 0I-rA R ► rr t-, c A0k '�- 1 �vs�:r'xa-ter ff•1 , ..� �_ .. b � u y y3 we7l� r7 v� } sV 74 *41 01, , gar skdt WCL `s `+ !r:, s! • V�� r{t 2•-fd Fr�ti■r,l+ J77'a7w s, �►� L0i8 If wUi � sa0td'''.i� 40— !♦ !r}I ,� rfti7R►.! SMt #'/rY�iA/ F�7rAr .�►! • rrrd-S A,M* , ► a~w*►q V )� earl[* t Ah rtcH4r-► caRW ; a.0 I'M, �• Ndiia/ai#F14,. d, .� r*�a��. � � Q fiJ!-f�� s f 1�' 1, 41t WE 49 i i !or r L hCE6- -40 j J �f '�ee1+A�.y -�� ..� � :+� �• ..�' -OI ►9 �4 i r tri R r , .r .29 N C Q. P' ra ►� 13 0 f Q i ' °� �" � - � ' :� � �'�"�� . LT'S• " . '� ,. �. 11��; ' � � . A', 71 jf-,� +r�rr+7wa. 10vOl. LLQ 1c N1*Wnwn�r„+, ryr�.ulp,r�a.r,.�, MCMI►-,. *iiM, •' � •1•�,_: �` � • .i .' ; � � „r � 9S .:� +.Mrfnil•w +�Nlsa..Yl.rx MF„ .m., . y, +or r. r,_r.w- �- _ � � � 1 • ..,Aw�.�• t1 O L. •.mss.-w..r i' ti 'Y 1 �. i I ,.q...,,1,,, yw „' , . - �• weM. ws . i,_. ... -. wr r�ry �.mr A i;,,..,1�,,,... h.. �...i.�-wn .rors4 •�,��,+yws-.*t.`.+r +� y� .. w... bw �N �P T'.f .I�,�. ...aur. R+M r>M:orv.��v�,..u•rw• .ia�.1, �Ir.-rr.r....... e. . ��M�Y�h�. lta��1��'r. .i �r.~M ,'-� ?JW!E7;4 %+LES. AIY iJtG ♦ _ JGAl: i v V Lo 15 E. JEFFrEy WILLIAM Iv. WR. ;I-"- •REr Cu:,• _ - SUZANNE ATKINS L 'MEMBER CALIF. AND COLO. BARS August g, 1983 Mr. Frank usher City Manager City of La Quinta P. O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Usher: Please find enclosed the Declaration Of Frank Usher, the purpose of which is to authenticate the oricin various documents received from the files in youroffi- of The enclosed final. Declaration includes the revisions requested by Ms. Sandy Bonner of your office. . is a self -stamped, envelope to facilitate the earliest Possible return of your Declaration upon execution. re and to We appreciate your courtesy and cooperation in g the authentication documents. any further questions in regard to thisatteru should have not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Please do SA: fw Enclosure 0 Very truly yours, ALEXANDER BOWIE A Law Corporation BY Suzanne Atkins 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8� a to 11 $ 12 N T <= 13 �Zwz� x, m6Am aoar�g 14 W 15 aaeryY,Fa 16 3 z 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24: 25 26 27 28 DECLARATION OF FRANK USHER I, Frank Usher, declare as follows: - 1. I am personally familiar with the following facts and if called as a witness, I would testify as follows: 2. I am the City Manager for the City of La Quinta, California, and have custody of the City records. 3. My duties include the accumulation and maintenance of the City's records and documents: 4. A La Quinta ity Council Transmittal from the Riverside County Plannin rtment, dated June 4, 1382, is represented in the dotma ed hereto as Exhibit "A"and incorporated he es reference. Y have examined Exhibit "A" and er e that it is a true an y e d correct copy of the n aained in the files of the City of La Quinta. \ \ 5. Rei erside County Planning Department Staff Report, (5 pages), is represented in the document attached hereto as Exhibit "B" incorporated herein by this reference. I have examined Exhibit "B" and hereby certify that, it is a true and correct copy of the document maintained in the files of the City of La Quinta. 6. A Riverside County Planning Commission Staff Report, (1 page), is represented in the document attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and is incorporated herein by this reference. I have examined Exhibit "C" and hereby certify that it is a true and correct copy of the document maintained in the files of the City of La Quinta. -l_ 1 7. A Riverside County Planning Department Staff 2 Report, (3 pages) is attached hereto as Exhibit "D" and 3 incorporated herein by this reference. I have examined 4 Exhibit "D" and hereby certify that it a true and correct 5 copy of the document maintained in the files of the City of 6 La Quinta. 7 8.- A Riverside County Planning Department Staff 8 Report, (2 pages), is attached hereto as Exhibit "E" and 9 incorporated herein by this ref ce. I have examined 10 Exhibit "E" and hereby certif h t it is a true and correct 11 copy of the document maint in h files of the City of 12 La Quinta. -z zg 13 9. A le e r e Riverside County Planning o2>o p°zQaa 14 Department to va o Ri e County agencies and departments, Waa.<= )I6o 15 dated December, 19 , a egarding Change of Zone Case No. Wx `'` 16 3491, is attached he et as Exhibit "F" and is incorporated 3 z 17 herein by this reference. I have examined Exhibit "F" and 18hereby certify that it is a true and correct copy of the 19 document maintained in the files of the City of La Quinta. 20 10. A letter from the Coachella Valley Water 21 District to the Riverside County Planning Commission, dated 22 January 12, 1982, is attached hereto as Exhibit "G" and 23 incorporated herein by this reference. I have examined 24 Exhibit "G" and hereby certify that it is a true and correct 25 copy of the document maintained in the files of the City of 26 La Quinta. _ 27 11. A letter from the Riverside County Planning 28 Department to various Riverside County agencies and departments, -26 1 dated December, 1981, is attached hereto as Exhibit "H" and 2 incorporated herein by this reference. I have examined 3 Exhibit "H" and hereby certify that it is a true and correct 4 copy of the document maintained in the files of the City of 5 La Quinta. ® 6 12. The Roll Call Vote Results memorandum, dated 7 May 13, 1982, is attached hereto as Exhibit "I" and incorporated 8 herein by this reference. I have examined. Exhibit "I" and g hereby certify that it is a true and correct copy of the 10 document maintained in the f' es of the City of La Quinta. 11 13. Resoluta o. 4 of the City Council of 12 the City of La Quinta, C if rnia, is attached hereto as 6$ 13 Exhibit "J" and incoe rein by this reference. I zWz� F maAa� 14 have examined Lx i d hereby certify that it is a W�ac6i� cao 15 true and cors c he document maintained in the files x 6 pWq W Sao 16 of the City of a i ta. a 3 z 17 14. The iverside County Planning Department 18 memorandum to the La Quinta City Council, dated June 10, 19 1982, is attached hereto as Exhibit "K" and incorporated 20 herein by this reference. I have examined Exhibit "K" and 21 hereby certify that it is a true and correct copy of the 22 document maintained in the files of the City of La Quinta. 23 15. The Resolution Recommending Approving Specific 24 Plan Of Land Use No. 121-E Revised, is attached hereto as 25 Exhibit "L" and incorporated herein by this reference. I 26 have examined Exhibit "L" and hereby certify that it is a 27 true and correct copy maintained in the files of the City 28 of La Quinta. -3- y 1 16. The Riverside County Planning Department 2 Staff Report (9 pages), is attached hereto as Exhibit "M" 3 and incorporated herein by this reference. I have examined 4 Exhibit "M" and hereby certify that it is a true and correct 5 copy of the document maintained in the files of the City of 6 La Quinta. 7 17. The Conditions Of Approval Revised Specific 8 Plan # 121-E, dated May 13,1982, is attached hereto as 9 Exhibit "N" and incorporated herein by this reference. I 10 have examined Exhibit "N" n hereby certify that it is a 11 true and correct copy of e d u nt maintained in the 12 files of the City of Q n ao 13 18. The Rie unty Planning Department � ZZz 0:2 = -7 ASE. `Q�m 14 Staff Report, (1 tached hereto as Exhibit "O" wa::)U C'aa -w dx 15 and incorpirate h this reference. I have examined aa�''Ha e 16 Exhibit "O" and"-ke b ertify that it is a true and correct a 3 z 17 copy of the document intained in the files of the City of 18 La Quinta. 19 19. The letter from Lloyd W. Watson of the 20 Landmark Land Company to Chairman Sullivan .of the Riverside 21 County Planning Commission, dated February 11, 1982, is 22 attached hereto as Exhibit "P" and incorporated herein by 23 this reference. I have examined Exhibit."P" and hereby 24 certify that it is a true and correct copy of the document 25 maintained in the files of the City of La Quinta. 26 20. The Inter -Departmental letter from the County 27 of Riverside, Road and Survey Department, to Patricia Nemeth, 28 Planning Director, dated December 14, 1981, is attached -4- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 $ 12 N 13 �Z"Z 3o>x flFzw w<Q.. 14 aa5�� X60 15 Dlgo� w edpoF 16 a 3 z 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 hereto as Exhibit "Q" and incorporated herein by this reference. I have examined Exhibit "Q" and hereby certify that it is�a true and correct copy of the document maintained in the files of the City of La Quinta. 21. The Inter -Departmental letter from the County of Riverside, Road and Survey Department, to Patricia Nemeth, Planning Director, dated January 26, 1982, is attached hereto as Exhibit "R" and incorporated herein by this reference. I have examined Exhibit "R" andAereby certify that it is a true and correct copy of the files of the City of La Qu4 22. The Noti4t Department to vain fl - March ]T, 1982, is t maintained in the Riverside County Planning es dated eto as Exhibit "S" and incorpor- ated herein by th'see. I have examined Exhibit "S" and hereby certify that a a true and correct copy of the document maintained in the files of the City of La Quinta. 23. The Notice from the Riverside County Planning Department to various county agencies and departments, ,dated March 15, 1982, is attached hereto as Exhibit "T" and incor- poratedherein by this reference. I have examined Exhibit `"T" and hereby certify that it is a true and correct copy of the document maintained in the files of the City of La Quinta. 0 The Notice from the Riverside County Planning Department to various county agencies and departments, dated December 1981, is attached hereto as Exhibit "U" and incor- porated herein by this reference. I have examined Exh i l -hi f "TT" and hereby certify that it is a true and correct copy of the -5- I document maintained in the files of the City of La Quinta. 2 25. The., NQUce.:_ from th'e: Riverside -County, Pl-4nning 3 Department to various county agencies and departments-, dated 4 March 15, 1982, is attached hereto as Exhibit "V" and incor- 5 porated herein by this reference. I have examined Exhibit "V" 6 and hereby certify that it is a true and correct copy of the 7 document maintained in the files of the City of La Quinta. 8 26. The Notice from he Riverside County East 9 Area Planning Council -to va s county agencies and departments, 10 dated November 20, 1981, `s to e hereto as Exhibit "W" 11 and incorporated herei t reference. I have examined 12 Exhibit "W" and h c that it is a true and correct �z x$ 13 copy of the do e i ned in the files of the City of ppdq.. 1.4 La Quinta. Wx 15 27. The tter from the Coachella Valley Water e` 16 District to the Riverside County East Area Planning Council, 3 z 17 dated December 2, 1981, is attached hereto as Exhibit "X" is and incorporated herein by this reference. I have examined 19 Exhibit "X" and hereby certify that it is a true and correct 20 copy of the document maintained in the files of the City of 21 La Quinta. 22 28. The Notice from the Riverside County Planning 23 Department to various county agencies and departments dated 24 December, 1981, is attached hereto as Exhibit "Y" and incor- 25 porated herein by this reference. I have examined Exhibit "Y" �26 and hereby certify that it is a true and correct copy of the 27 document maintained in the files of the City of La Quinta. 28 29. The Inter -Departmental letter from the County -6- 1 of Riverside, Road and Survey Department, to Patricia Nemeth, 2 Planning Department Director, dated April 8, 1982 is attached. 3 hereto as Exhibit "Z" and incorporated herein by this reference. 4 1 have examined Exhibit "Z" n hereby certify that it is a 5 true and correct copy of t e do u nt maintained in the 6 files of the City of a u 7 DATED: 8 9 Frank Usher 10 11 12 N O 6 �zWzg 13 3�>0.: 0°aaa 14 W dx 15 � ' W Q`o 16 a a z 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -7- QUINTA CITY COUNCIL TPANSMI T f'L T V t'A QU INTA CITY COUNCIL IM: RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLA14NING DEPARTMENT DATE: June 4, 1982 SUBJECT: Change of Zone Case No. -3491 La Quinta District J. F. -Davidson Associates Fourth Supervisorial District R-5 to R-2 and W-1, R-2 to R-5, Negative Declaration = EA#15145 W-1 to R-2,, R-1 to R-3 BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Ordinance 348 -and Riverside County Rules to implement the California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning Commission on May 13, 1982 conducted a public hearing on the subject change of zone application and environmental assessment. En- vironmental Assessment #15145 was submitted by the applicant. An initial study was prepared by the Planning staff. Written comments were not received during the 21 day comment period. Public notification and advertisement for the application and environ- mental 'negative declaration hearing were performed pursuant to effective county rules. Several zone changes are requested by the applicant in order to pursue the development. of the property around the La-Quinta Hotel in accordance with Revised Specific Plan #121-E. The resolution for Revised Specific Plan #121-E was adopted by the Planning Commission :at the May 13, 1982 hearing. -�vised Specific Plan #121--E along with the associated Change of Zone Case #3491 would isult in an increase of 279 condominium units and 146 hotel units to the existing La Quinta Hotel and resort community. Change of Zone Case No. 3491 would be consistent with the Coachella -Thermal -Indio General Plan and the development plans as proposed and approved Revised Specific Plan #121-E. RECOMMEINDATION: The Planning Commission and staff recommend ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for EA#15145; and APPROVAL of Change of Zone Case No. 3491 from,R--5 to R-2 and W-1, R-2 to R-5, W-1 to R-2, R-1 to R-3 as shown on Exhibit 2. [ ti Jeffrey D. ManA pervising Planner a red b.v: Is 0 BIB T A lcla Nem n0,. dr • La Quinta District Fourth Supervisorial tlf!sx:L-rict Related Files: SP#121--E devised 1. Applicant: 2. Type of Request: 3. Location: - Change of Zone Case No. 3491 EA#15145 PC Hearing Date: 5/13/82 (Contd.' from 1/27/, 2/17 &,4/ Agenda Item: IMVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING -DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT 4. Parcel Size: - 5. Existing Roads: 6. Existing Land Use: 7. Surrounding Land Usen 8. Existing Zoning: 9. Surrounding Zoning.- 10. oning:10. General Plan Element: Cove Communities 11. Sphere of Influence: 12. Letters: J. F. Davidson.Associates :Change of Zone R-5 to R-2 and W-1, R-2 toR-5, W-1 to R-2, R-1 to R-3 Southeast, corner of Eisenhower Drive and 50th Avenue and west of Eisenhower Drive, northerly of Avenida Fernando adjacent to the Santa Rosa Mountains. Total of 36,971 Acres Eisenhower Drive and 50th Avenue Vacant Golf Course and Vacant R-5 and R -2,,.W-1, R=1 . R-12 R-2-8000, W-1 Land Use: See Specific Plan #121-E Revised Open Space & Conservation: Urban Area - Circulation: 50th and Eisenhower Dr. - Major 100' R None None in support/opposition: ANALYSIS: )Change of Zone Case #3491 was continued from the April 14, 1982 Planning Commission hearing to revise the original zone change request. An additional 19.24± acres with a requested change from (Single Family Residential) to R-3 (General. Residential) zoning being added to the request. Change of Zone Case #3491 is proposed as an implementation of Specific Plan #121-E Revised, tentatively approved by the Planning Commission on April 14, 1982. Specific Plan #121-E Revised proposed an expansion of the La Quinta Hotel and related recreationa and condominium facilities. A total of 36.97± acres is involved in the subject zone change. The property easterly of Eisenhower Drive and southerly of 50th Avenue is being changed for three basic reasons. .:.The.0.72±acre parcel where a change of zone from R-5 to W-1: is being requested reflects the conveyance of this property to the Coachella Valley Flood Control District for flood control prarposes. The property is still being pro- posed for golf course usage. The two parcels of 1.76±,and 1.59± acres respectively where a change of zone from R-2 to R-5 is requested were formerly proposed for use as horse stables and a temporary sewage treatment plant. These uses are no longer proposed, and this acreage would be a portion of the golf course. The other parcels of 4.58± and 5.09± acres respectively where a change of zone from R-5 to R-2 is re quested reflect ,the changes necessary to implement the proposed pattern of golf course and condominium :land uses. This area is anticipated..for.development of 110 condominium units. 0 Pg. 1 � � s Immediately west of Eisenhower Drive, the parcel of 0.51+ -,,net acres has a change of zone from W-1 to R-2 being -requested. This request is to allow for space for the expansion of the condominiums already approved under Tentative Tract #14496 Phase 1. No changes in the number of condominium units are proposed. The _3.31± acre 'parcel west of Eisenhower Drive and at the base of the mountains has a change of zone -from R-5 .to R-2 being requested. This request is to allow for a more flexible design in terms of siting for the 55 condominiums already approved under the original Specific Plan #121-E Revised and Tentative Tract #14496 (Phase 7). No addi- tional units over those previously approved are being proposed. Also, a five to six foot high block wall is proposed along the northern boundary of the 3:31± acre parcel. for flood control purposes per the request of .the Coachella Valley Water District. A 19.24± -acre parcel located immediately to the west of the existing La Quinta Hotel has been added to the change of zone request. Existing zoning on the parcel.is R-1 (Single Family Residential), and the requested zoning is R-3 (General Residential). The proposed R-3 zoning would be appropriate for the proposed complex of tennis courts and a maximum of 200 condominiums. FINDINGS: 1. Implementation of previously adopted Specific Plan #121-E as amended by Specific Plan #121=E Revised requires the adoption of the requested zone changes.. �. Environmental impacts -,of .the proposed developments will be adequately mitigated per the provisions of Specific_ Plan #121-E, the related EIR #41, and Specific Plan #121-E Revised. 3. Devel-opment pursuant to the proposed zone changes is similar in scale and nature to surrounding developments. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The :proposed zone changes would be in conformance with Specific Plan #121-E and Specific Plan #121-E Revised. 2. Environmental impacts resulting from the subject zone changes and pursuant de- velopment will not adversely affect the immediate or nearby environment.: ,3. Developments associated with the proposed zone changes would be compatible with existing neighborhood land uses. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment #15145 and APPROVAL of Change of Zone Case No. 3491, as shown on Exhibit 2. DM;ajp 4/27/82 I' 31 CIIANGE OF ZONE N 3491 R -5 to N-1 0.72 acres reflect the conveyance of land to CVWQ R-2 to R--5 1.76 acres change in, land use from horse stables ,and d temporary sewage. plant to golf course R-2 to- R-5 1.59 acres •,:same as above - R -5 to., R-2 4.58 acres reflect planned pattern -of condo/golf development R-5 to R-2 5.09 acres same as above W-1 to R-2 0.51 acres more space for 7R 14496 -m -Phase IJ NO additional pn R-5 to R-2 3.31 acres more space for TR -14496 -Phase 7 (NO additional un I' :AND.- �I A CU 2286 3. ri �s CZ 34 ._..� A ♦` I • � 1 t � I 1 a I I VAC. i C2 3045 Y \� i •'� I . LA t r �`�' i" ' QUI NTA J tt I 19.24ACi j� . ►` HOTEL. it �` ►! I^.,.� `'-�� _- �_IfAlRWAY 1--- .,'HOMES GOLF COURSE .. I" = k0001 App. J.F. DAVI'DSON ASSOC. -Use R-2 a. R-5 TO R- 2, R-5, a W=1 AVENICA KRNANDO ' �4100axf;-1 SINGL E- — - 9 } VAC 36.51 AC ± r- --- I- - IRE5, ISFR AVE - Dist. LA' QUINTA' '4 th Sup. Dist. Sec773 . 36 T. 5. 631 E Assessors Bk. 631 �'q 39 02 Circulation 5 0 th AVE. MAJ. 1001 Element ' EISENHOWER DR. MAJ. 1001 Rd. 'Bk. Pg. r-' Date 1/8 / 82 Drawn By ''R. RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPAR rNENT a 610 I'L_.� ENO wn crel c MAP A I 01 .31A 1 1 R_ F3-2-10,000 1 � R—. R` {- CZ 3045 R-2-10,000_ R-5 R-1 1 R-3 A 19.24 AC± . CU 2286 (R-1)- R-3 R-2 R-2- '000 R-1 I AVENIDA FERNANPO -� 1 I t'�a la I R' R 15- r2 R-2 (W -I ) W—I 1" R [Poo, to- ?A-i-JII R"I R- 2-Q,00 0 AVL a M ... App: J.F. DAVIDSON ASSOC. Use R-2& R -5 -TO R -21 R -5,.a W-1 Dist. LA QUINTA 4th - Sup. Dist. Sec.36 T-, S•,R :6 E Assessors Bk.6 P9 - Circulation -5'0 th AVE. MAJ. 100_' Element ' EISENHOWER DR- MAJ. 100' Rd. Bk. Pq.l 21 , Dotal/8/82 Drawn By RIVERSIDE COUNTY PL AMING DEPARrunvr C --P-@ A ! NAL MAP rr€ � C-11 a, FURTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS - February 17, 1982 This case was conti-n.ued from the January 27th hearing at"the applicant's request. The: applicant and staff request an additional continuance in order to further resolve planning issues involved with this project. /sr wv k_W J C� La Quinta District Change of Zone #34>91 Fourth Supervisorial District Planning Commission: February 17, 1982 Related Files: SP #121-E Revised Agenda Item: 4 EIR #41 . RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 1. Applicant: J.F. Davidson Associates 2. Type of Request. Chanae of Zone R-5 to R-2 and W.I R-2 to R-5 3. Location: Southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive to. 50th Avenue 4. Parcel Size: Total of 17.05 acres 5. Existing Roads: Eisenhower Drive and 50th -Avenue 6. Existing Land Use:- Vacant 7. Surrounding .Land.Use: Golf Course and Vacant 8. Existing Zoning: R-5 and R-2 9. Surrounding Zoning: R-1, R-2-80002 Wl 10. General Plan Elements: Land Use: See Sp Ki-fic Plan #121-E Revised (Cove Communities) Open Space and Conservation: Urban Area ,.Circulati•on: 5th and Eisenhower Drive Major 100' R/W 11. Sphere of Influence: None 12. Letters: None in support/opposition FURTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS - February 17, 1982 This case was conti-n.ued from the January 27th hearing at"the applicant's request. The: applicant and staff request an additional continuance in order to further resolve planning issues involved with this project. /sr wv k_W J C� L 9La. Qu i &P District CNA,. '.;E,OF ZONE CASE NO. 3491 Tourth §upervisorial District EA#15145 Related files: SP#121-E Revised PC. Nearing Date: 4/14/82 (Contd. from 1/27/82 & 2/17/82) Agenda Item:, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT • 1. Applicant: 2._ Type of Request: 3. Location: 4. Parcel Size: 5. Existing Roads: 6. Existing Land Use: 7. Surrounding Land Use: 8. Existing Zoning: 9. Surrounding Zoning: - 10. General Plan Elements: Cove Communities - 11. Sphere of Influence: 12. Letters: J. F. Davidson Associates Change of Zone R-5 to R-2 and W- I, R-2.to.R-5, W-1 to R-2. Southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and 50th- Avenue., and west of Eisenhower Drive, northerly of Avenida Fernando adjacent to the Santa Rosa Mountains. Total of 17.56" Acres Eisenhower Drive and 50th Avenue Vacant Golf Course and Vacant R-5 and R-2 R-1, R-2-8000, W-1 Land Use: See Specific Plan #121-E Revised Open Space & Conservation: Urban Area Circulation: 50th and Eisenhower_ Dr. - Major 100' R/ None None in support/opposition ANALYSIS: This case was continued from the January and February hearings at the: applicant's request to. resolve details with the associated Specific Plan .#121-E Revised.. Change of Zone Case #3491 is .proposed as an implementation of Specific Plan #121-E Revised, an expansion of the La Qui'nta Hotel and related facilities. A total of 17.561 acres is involved in the subject zone change. The property .easterly of Eisenhower Drive and southerly of 50th Avenue. is being changed for three basic reasons. The 0.72± acre parcel where a change of zone from R-5 to W-1 is being requested reflects the conveyance of this property to the Coachella Valley Flood Control District for flood control purposes. The property is still being proposed for golf course usage.' The two parcels of 1.76# and 1.59± acres respectively where a change of zone front R-2 to R-5.is requested were formerly proposed for use as horse stables and a temporary sewage treatment plant. These uses are no longer pro- posed, and this acreage would be a portion of the golf course. .The other parcels of 4.58± and 5.09± acres respectively where a change of zone from R=5 to R-2 is requested reflect the changes necessary to implement the proposed pattern of golf course and condominium land uses. This area is anticipated for development of 110 condominium units. Immediately ;nest of Eisenhower Drive, the parcel of 0.51+ net acres has a change of zone from W-1 to R-2 being requested. This request is to allow for space for the expansion of the condominiums already approved under Tentative Tract #14496 Phase 1. No changes in the number of condominium units are proposed. Pg. 1 of 2. Change of Zone .Case Staff Report 2. l NbD- 3491 The 3.31± acre parcel ,west of Eisenhower Drive and at the base of the mountains has a change of zone from R b to R-2 being requested. This request is to allow for a more flexible design in terms of siting for the 65 condominiums already approved underr the original Specific Plan. #121-E Revised and Tentative Tract #1449.6 (Phase 7). No additional units over those previously approved are being proposed. Also, a fiwe to six foot high black wall is proposed along the northern boundary of tfne 3.-31± acre parcel for flood control purposes per the request of the Coachella ':Palley Water District. FINDINGS: 1. Implementation of Treviously adopted Specific Plan #121-E:as amended by Specific Plan #121-f Revised (Scheduled at this same Planning Commission hearing) requires the adoption of the requested zone changes. 2. Environmental imp.=cts of the proposed developments will be adequately mitigated per. _the. provisions of Specific _Plan #121-E, the related EIR #41, and Specific Plan #121.-E Revise -d. 3. Development pursuant to the.proposed zone change is similar in scale and nature to surrounding developments. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposed zone changes would be in conformance. with Specific Plan #121-E and Specific Plan _#127-E Revised. 2. Environmental impacts resulting from. the subject zone changes and pursuant- de- velopment will not adversely affect the immediate or nearby environment. 3. Developments associated with the proposed zone changes would be compatible with existing neighborhood land uses. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment #15145 and APPROVAL of Change of Zone Case No. 3491, as shown on Exhibit 2. DM: ajp 3/16/82 71� 6*,9 N District: La Qt,'- ira. Inge of Zone n34'91 Isupervisorial Districts fourth Hearing Date: :1-27-82 iteitjod Files: SP MI --E Revised Agenda Item: 12 E I R ir7 RIVERSIDE COUi4TY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT 1) Applicant: 2) Type of Request 3) Location: 4) Parcel --Size:' 5) Existing Roads: 6) Existing Land Use: 7) Surrounding Land Use: 8) Existing Zoning: 9) Surrounding Zoning:. 10) :General Plan. Elements: Cove Communities 11) Sphere of Influence: 12) Letters: AiiALYS,IS: J.F. Davidson Associates Change of Zone R--5 to R=2, R-5 and R-2. R-2 to R-5 Southeast corner of Eisenhower -to 50th Ave. Total of 17.05 ± Acres Eisenhower Drive and 50th Avenue Vacant Golf course and vacant R-5 and R-2 R-1, R-2-8000, W 1 Land Use: see Specific Plan #121-E Revised Open.Space & Conservation: Urban Area Circulation: 50th and Eisenhower Major IDO' R./W, None None in support or opposition Change of Zone ;3491 is proposed as an implementation of Specific Plan Vu121-E Revised, expansion of the La Quinta Hotel and related facilities. A total of 17.05 ±:acres is involved in the subject zone change. The property easterly of Eisenhower and southerly of. 50th Avenue is being changed X or three basic reasons. The 0.72 ± parcel where a change of zone from R-5 to W-1 is being requested reflects the conveyance of this property to the Coachella Valley Flood Control District for flood control purposes. The property is still being proposed for golf course usage. The two parcels of 1.76 ± and 1.59 - acres respectively where a change of zone from R-2 to R--5 is requested were formerly proposed for use as horse stables and a temporary sewage treatment plant. These uses are no loner propose, and this acreage would he a portion of the golf course. The other parcels of 4.58 -- and 5.09 a acres respectively where a change of zone from R-5 to R-2 is requested reflect the changes necessary to implement the desired pattern of golf course and condominium land uses. This area is anticipated for development of'110 condominium units.. The 3.31 ± acre parcel west of Eisenhower and at the base of the mountains has a.change of zone drom R-5 to R-2 being requested. This parcel would be used primarily for an access road to the 3.52 }acre parcel proposed for the development of 15 condominiums via Specific Plan ,121-E Revised. In addition to the access road, a five to six foot block wall is proposed along the northern boundary of the 3.31 - acre parcel for flood control purposes per the request of the. Coachella Valley tzater District. HIW Char -,j6 cif 9-gr(ee 03491 Pg. 2 Either The; R--5 or R-2 zone would alloy both the access road and the flood control t -:all uses-- A:s no other uses are proposed in this 3.3.1-�_±J acre parcel, the requested zene c!nange ii:s not necessary and would serve no valu-61be purpose. STAFF recommends DENIAL ,of Wh.i;s portion of the subject zone change r4uest. FINDINGS: 1� Imrleme-n-Cation of previously adopted Specific. Plan #121-E as amended by Specific Plan -,121-E Revised (scheduled at this same Planning Commission Nearing) requires the adop'u'-.ion of -the requested zone changes (with the exception of the 3.31 acre paircel< west of Eisenhower) . 2. En vi rc-nmental impacts of the proposed developments will be adequately mitigated per the provisions of Specific Plan 7121-E, the related EIR 741, and Specific Pl an ,;:121-E Revised. 3. Dvelepa-gent pursuant to the proposed zone change is similar in scale and nature to su^rcundi ng developments. F CONCLUSIG S: 1 , T.;e -proposed zone changes would be in conformance with Specific Plan 4#121=E Gr,d Sz)eci fi c Plan ;121-E Revised. . 2. Environrental impacts resulting from the subject zone changes and pursuant develop:ent viill not adversely affect the immediate or near environr,,ent. 3. C_veloprzents associated with the proposed zone changes would be compatible with existing neighborhood land uses. RECO. ,1. ;Eh1DATIONS : STAFF recommends ADOPTION of the Negative declaration for Environmental Assessment T15I and APPROVAL of Change of Zone B"3491 as shown'on Exhibit "A" with the exception of the 3.31 ± acre parcel west of Eisenhower Drive, which is recommended for -DENIAL on the basis of being unnecessary. JAN P. 0 982 16 RI4080I DLEMON tSTREETt, TY N9th ING F1 : RTt7EtIT VtIF3�� RIVERSIDE, CALIF. 92501 CjjTy C®Mml";�Slolq REGIONAL TEAM: $ 4 --=- - DEC. 1981 RE: CHAN , Of ZONE CASE N0. 3491 9" �- �: DG & SAFETY J.F.-Davidson Assoc ;D DEPT 74-133 E1 Paseo Suite 10 �AITH DEPT .. .. " ei � , �•.,r. rir r w.r r, P ,palm Desert a 25¢w• •+-r. f }'.{,l i ry r r• s r r i= kif i T:1= PROTECT IOiV r ,. .:� , �, ' ,' ;1 t...,,.�;y? �•Y = 6y�C i -fi.' r]DOD •CONTROL COACHELL L � �T:mac �r * �; ti tN: tfsif�lri3+ l� f7�ia:�°`'�TP�'ia�WO' 11 r r. a _ r• t r1.9' . ; *ri Z' r 1 "T$ '? ,4 r'. ' ti'ri,;3erE�:.l i i } +fi11 `t f ` .14 } .ti Yr-X+i Yi ..• irE ti+r �j'_. r� d .� 1, .i't.i.' 13 '111 t11Y: . rFdd%N,tA.Y ,..Y•3,:Irif!.I✓4rfv {4,� +!.•yK:+Niv1%l +7�a i.� pL4e11M!k se review the case described above and the attached map. A public hearing has Lentatively scheduled for Jan. 27, 1982. Your comments and recommendations requested prior to Jan. 17, 1982 in order to include them in the staff report for item. you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact r� .t tlanni ng at 342-82-77. :--ted Case Files: SP 121; CU 2286,; TR 14496, r 4 A;_ Signature 7ci i� f _ F" -'se print name and title: F, ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUB, ZENCY 9>1 'r Ft COACHELLA VALLEY VATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (714).398-2651 XXRE=ORS iiAY1MONGAt RUMMONDS.PRESIDENT OFFICERS TELl:!!5 CODEKAS, VICE PRESIDENT LOWELL O. WEEKS, GENERAL MANAGER -CHIEF ENGINEER JOH1M P. POWELL BERNARD.INE SUTTON, SECRETARY ':PAU1L- W. N ICIHOLS VICTORS. HARDY, AUDITOR' sTE1VED.BUXTON January 12, 1982 REDWINEAND SHERRILL,ATTORNEYS Riverside County Planning Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 9th :Floor Riverside, California 92501 Gentlemen: File: 0163.11 j LL JAN18 1982 RIVERSIDE COUNTY. FLANir-IIN G+�IUI ;15537N Re: Change: of Zone 3491 Sec. 36, T5S, R6E, S.B.:M. Sec. 1, T6S, R6E, S.B.M. This area is designated Zone A3 on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. This area will be protected from stormwater flows except in rare instances when the construction of Oleander. Reservoir. and La..Quinta Evacuation channel are, completed. The District will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this District Yours ver► truly Lowell. Weeks Ceneral Manager -Chief Engineer CS:ra cc: Riverside County Department of Public health 46-209 Oasis Street Indio, California 92201 Attention: Don Park TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY DATE: DEC. 1981 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 4080 LEMON STREET 9th Fl . RIVERSIDE, CALIF. 92501 REGIONAL TEAM $ 4 RE: CHANGE OF ZONE CASE NO. 3491 TO: BLDG &,-SAFETY J.F. Davidson Assoc ROAD DEPT 74-133 E1 Paseo Suite 10 iEALTH`DEPT a m Desert Qa 2260 4 ' FIRE PROTECTION "'`. '.:: i.'.±,...,,,:.':.t•`':n.,, [�,.,,.ry`f �....." ....t y,t�, �,r.■, zr �.:N. 14r-�:PLOOD. kuO Please`review the case described above and the attached map. A public hearing has been tentatively scheduied for Jan. 27, 1982. Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to. Jan. 17, 1982 in order to include them in the staff report for this =item. Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact Kevin Banning at 342-8277. Related Case Files: COMMENTS: SP 121; CU 2286,; TR 14496. The Health Department has no objection to the proposal. Dur records indicate the site will be served water and sewer service by the Coachella Valley Water District'. EET:cg DATE____ 1-4--82 Signature Please print name and title: �LBIT H t14 Larl L. Iuntiano, K.�)., M.F.A. Administrative Supervisor MAY 13, 1982 rxCLL raiL VOTE RESULTED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: Commissioners Bresson, Steffey, Katzenstein, Campbell, Olesen and Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Purviance (REEL 723 - SIDE 1 - 1969-2010) 1:50 p.m: PUBLIC HEARING (Cont. from 2/17/82) CHANGE OF ZONE CASE NO. 3491 (36:51±:acres, southeast corner Adopt .Negative Declaration for EA 15145 Eisenhower and Avenue 50) Landmark Land R-5, W-1 and R-2 to -.R-2, W-1 and R-5, etc. La Ciuinta District - Fourth Supervisorial District The hearing was opened at 2:35 p.m. and closed at 2:40.p.m. STAFF. RECU*IENDATIOh: Adoption of the negative declaration for EA 15145 and approval of Change of Zone Case No. 3491 from R-5, W-1 and R-2 to W-1, R-2 and R-5 in accordance .with Exhibit 2. The zone change had been submitted in order to implement Specific, Plan No. 121-E Revised,, which had previously been recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. The zoning changes reflected changes` proposed for the different areas as reflected on the revised specific plan.- Staff felt that development in accordance with these proposed zone changes would be similar in scale and compatible with existing neighborhood land uses. Bob Kipper, representing the applicant, concurred with staff's analysis and recommendations. There being no further testimony, the hearing was closed at 2:40 p.0 Upon motion.by Commissioner Olesen, seconded by Commissioner Campbell`and unanimously carried,. the Commission recommended to the City Council, City.of La Quinta, adoption f the negative declaration for EA 15145 based .on the: finding the :proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment. BINDINGS: Theproposed zone changes would be in conformance with Specific Plan.No. 1.21-E and Specific Plan No. 121-E Revised; environmental impacts resulting from the subject zone changes and pursuant development would not adversely affect the immediate or riBIT 1 1 RESOLUTION NO. 82-54 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY'COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA; ADOPTING SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE NO. 121-E, REVISED., WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65450 et. seq., public hearings were held before the La Quinta City Council on September 21, 1982, in the City of La Quinta, California, on proposed Specific Plan. of Land Use No. 121-E, Revised; and WHEREAS, all the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Riverside County rules to implement the Act have been met and negative declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 15626 has been recommended for adoption by the Planning Director; and WHEREAS, the revised Specific Plan No. 121-E will allow an additional 2.79 condominiums and 146 hotel units, the following issues,were 'identified and resolved: A. GENERAL FLAN CONSISTENCY The units proposed in conjunction with the revised Specific Plan, when added to the original Specific Plan, will not exceed the overall density allowed by the Riverside County General Plan_ B. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION As proposed, -the revised Specific Plan would increase trip generation by about 300 over the levels anticipated with the original Specific Plan. This additional impact was mitigated through the requirement for additional road improvements and contributions to traffic signals at three intersections along Eisenhower Drive. C. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES. As a vacation and retirement home development, many of the impacts on public services and facilities generated from the revised Specific Plan are minimized. These include impacts and demands on schools, air quality, water, sewer, police :protection and fire protection. D. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Expanding on the existing resort hotel complex, the pro- posed project closely compliments the existing development. in the immediate area. Significant open space areas are provided; including the maintenance of the mountainous areas and in many areas are adjacent open space acreage (golf course) at the foot of the mountains. The open space, natural mountain backdrop, and recreational facilities further enhance the existing resort atmosphere of the La Quinta Hotel and La:Quinta Country Club area. WHEREAS, the matter was discussed fully with testimony and documentation presented by .the public, and various.county,.loca.1 "IS IT. rth state agenciesNow, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED by e City Council .of the City of La Quinta, California, in regular session assembled on October 5, 1982, that it makes the following findings and conclusions:. J. The original Specific Plan 121-E was approved and the associated Final Environmental Impact Report No..41 was _certified in April, 1975, by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors. The revised Specific Plan 121-E would result in a development similar in nature and scale to the original Specific Plan No. 121-E. 2. A large majority of the residents would utilize their dwellings as a second or retirement home,.which would result in minimal impacts on the schools.and.the lack of a heavy_concentration of "peak" hour traffic to and - from work. 3.. Revised Specific Plan No. 121-E represents an expansion of existing facilities and developments associated with the existing La Quinta Hotel. 4. Environmental impacts and urban service demands: of this project would be minimized by the nature of the development (second and retirement homes). These impacts can be mitigated -=and services provided by incorporating the measures outlined by the Riverside County Planning staff in their report dated April 14, 1982, and in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 41. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the La Quinta City Council, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and the Riverside County Rules to implement the Act, have reviewed and considered Environmental Assessment No. 15626 in its evaluation of the specific plan -and find that no significant impacts:to environment will result from the project, and therefore, adopts the negative. 'deb laration for Environmental Assessment No.. 15626. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the Specific Plan on file with the City Clerk entitled Specific Plan of Land Use No. 121-E, Revised, including the final approved conditions and exhibits, is hereby adopted as the Specific Plan of -Land Use for the real property shown in the Plan and:said real property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the Specific Plan unless the Plan is repealed or amended by the La Quinta City Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED that copies of the Specific Plan of Land Use shall be filed in the Office of the t. Clerk of this Council, in the Office of the Planning Director and in the Office of the Director of Building and Safety, and that na applications for conditional use permits, or the :like, shall ,be accepted for the real property shown on the Plan unless such. application(s) are substantially in accordance with the adopted Revised Specific Plan of Land Use. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 5th_ day of October ,.1982. ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ITY ATTORNEY MAYOR APPROVED- AS TO CONTENT: MA GER S LA'QUINTA CITY COUti FROh1: RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT DAA: dune 10, 1982 SUBJECT: Revised Specific Plan #121-E Landmark Land Company " 641.23+ Acres BACKGROUND: La Quinta District Fourth Supervisorial District Negative Declaration - EA#15626 The original Specific Plan #121-E in conjunction with EIR #41 for the La Quinta Hotel and related condominium developments was approved by the Board of Supervisors in April, 1975. A revised Specific Plan was submitted because of the addition of 19.23± Acres and a desire to make changes in the land use plan previously approved.. A total of 279 additional condominium units and 146 additional hotel rooms would be permitted by the revised specific plan as proposed. The following is a summary and comparison of the changes proposed by the Revised Specific Plan #121-E. Original Revised, Net- Original Revised Net Land Use Acreage. Acreage Change Units Unitsn2e Condominiums 132.8 Ac. 161.86 Ac. Hotel Complex 43.2 Ac. 43.2 Ac. Mountains . 211.4 Ac. 211.4 Ac. Golf Course 1.91.-5, Ac. 185.2 Ac. Open Area �lub 30:8 -8 Ac. 27.27 Ac. House 5 -Ac. 5.8 Ac. Service Facilities 3.5 Ac. 3:5"Ac Totals 619:0 Ac. 638.23 Ac. +29.06 637 916 +279 0 496 642 +146 0 Not applicable. -6.3 (Twenty-seven.holes) -3.53 Not applicable 0 Not applicable 0 Not applicable +19.23 Ac. 1,133 1,558 +425 RECOMMENDATION: The Riverside County Planning Commission recommends to the City of La Quinta City Council ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for EA4,15626; and ADOPTION of the Planning Commission Resolution recommending APPROVAL of the Revised Specific Plan #121-E. ajp ff- rey_. D. Manri sspr ' S i na rrepa"red by: . ricia riemev.,h, 1.C.Y. arming i -re c �IiIBIT K L A. 3 4 5 6' 7 3 9 10 1,1 12 1.3 14 15 16 147 18 19 20. 21' 22 23 24 25 --26 27 28 f lanninn Corn�is ❑nCount of y Riverside RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING 9MIMIZI-07 SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE NO. 121-E REVISED WHEREAS, public hearings were held before the Riverside County Planning Commission pursuant to Government Code Section 65450 et. seq.,; regarding proposed Specific Plan of Land Use No. 121-E Revised; and WHEREAS, all the procedures of the California Environmental QuAlity Act and the Riverside County rules to impiement the act have been met and negative declaration for Environmental Assessment No 15626 has been recommended for adoption by the Planning Director; and WHEREAS, the revised Specific Plan 121-E will allow an additional 279 condominiums and 146 hotel units, the following issues were identified and resolved: A. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY The units proposed in conjunction with the revised Specific Pian when added to the original Specific Plan, will not exceed the overall density allowed by the Riverside County General Plan. B. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION As proposed the revised Specific Plan would increase trip genera- tion by about 30% over the levels anticipated with the original. Specific. . Plan. This additional impact was miticgated through the requirement for additional road improvements and contributions to traffic signals at three intersections alone Eisenhower Drive. C. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES As a vacation and retirement home development many of the impacts on public services and facilities generated from the revised Specific Plan are minimized. These include impacts and demands on schools,: air duality, - 1 -- �IBI_T �.� r � � 2 3 4 5 6' 7 3 9 10 1,1 12 1.3 14 15 16 147 18 19 20. 21' 22 23 24 25 --26 27 28 f lanninn Corn�is ❑nCount of y Riverside RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING 9MIMIZI-07 SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE NO. 121-E REVISED WHEREAS, public hearings were held before the Riverside County Planning Commission pursuant to Government Code Section 65450 et. seq.,; regarding proposed Specific Plan of Land Use No. 121-E Revised; and WHEREAS, all the procedures of the California Environmental QuAlity Act and the Riverside County rules to impiement the act have been met and negative declaration for Environmental Assessment No 15626 has been recommended for adoption by the Planning Director; and WHEREAS, the revised Specific Plan 121-E will allow an additional 279 condominiums and 146 hotel units, the following issues were identified and resolved: A. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY The units proposed in conjunction with the revised Specific Pian when added to the original Specific Plan, will not exceed the overall density allowed by the Riverside County General Plan. B. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION As proposed the revised Specific Plan would increase trip genera- tion by about 30% over the levels anticipated with the original. Specific. . Plan. This additional impact was miticgated through the requirement for additional road improvements and contributions to traffic signals at three intersections alone Eisenhower Drive. C. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES As a vacation and retirement home development many of the impacts on public services and facilities generated from the revised Specific Plan are minimized. These include impacts and demands on schools,: air duality, - 1 -- �IBI_T �.� WY I , .' f waster, serer, police prtitection, and fire protection. 2 D. C.01"I iUNITY DEVELO^:TENT 3 Expandinrl on the existing resort hotel complex, the pr000sed 4 project closely compliments the existing- development in the immediate area, 5 Significant open space areas are provided; including the maintenance of the 6 mountainous areas and in many areas are adJacent open space acreage (golf• 7 course) at the foot of the mountains. The ones space, natural mountain 8 backdrop, and recreational facilities further enhance the existing resort .9 atmosphere of the La Quinta Hotel and La Quinta Country Club area. 1.0 WHEREAS, the matter was discussed fully with testimony and 13 documentation presented by the public, and various county, local and 12 state agencies; -now therefore, " 13 BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED by the Planning Corunissicn 14 of the County of Riverside, State of California, in regular session assembled 15 on May 13, 19,82 that it makes the following findings and conclusions: 16 1, The original Specific Plan 121-E was approved and the asso- 17 ciated Final Environmental Imnact Report No. 41 was certified 18 in -April 1975 by the Board of Supervisors. The revised 3.9 Specific Plan 121-E would result in a development similar in 20 nature and scale to the original Specific Flan No, 121-E, 21 2.',A:large majority of the residents would utilize their divell-ings 22 as a second or retirement home, which would result in minimal 23 impacts on the schools and the lack of a heavy concentration 24 of "peak".hour traffic to and from work..' 25 3. Revised Specific Plan No. 121-E represents an exoansion of 28 existing facilities and developments associated with the 27 existing La Quinta Hotel: 28 2 - 2 3 41 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4. Environmental impacts and urban service demands of this project would be minimized by the nature of the development (second and retirement homes). These impacts can be mitigated and services provided by incorporating the measures outlined by the Planning staff in their report dated April 14, 1932 and -in Final Environ -- mental- Impact Report No. 41. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the Planning. Commission, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and the - Riverside County Rules to implement the Art, has reviewed and considered Environmental Assessment No. 15626 in its evaluation of the specific plane. .and. finds that no significant impacts to environment will result from the project, and therefore, recommends adoption of the negative declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 15626. -BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND DETERMINED that the Riverside County Planning Commission at its regular meeting held -on May 13, 1982 approves the specific plan and recommends to the City Council of the City of La Quinta that it hold a public hearing and adopt the negative declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 15626 and adopt Revised Specific Plan of Land Use 121-E Revised, based upon the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission. -3 -.41 Quiiota 0#ftCt� Fourth Supervisorial Dist, ict Related Files: SP #121--E, EIR #41 PM #14273, TR #14496, C/Z #3045, PP #5829 1. Applicant: 2. Type of Request: 3. Location.- 4. ocation: µ SP;FIC PLAN #121-E Revised EIk 441 - EA#15626 PC Hearing Date: 4/14/82 Agenda.Item: .8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT 4. Parcel Size: 5. Existing Roads: 6.Existing Land Use. 7. Surrounding Land Use: 8. Existing Zoning: 9. Surround.ing Zoning: 10. General Plan Elements: Cove Communities Landmark Land Company - Specific Plan of Land Use Mostly westerly of intersection of Eisenhower Drive and 50th Avenue 641.23± Acres Eisenhower Drive, 50th Avenue, Avenida Mazatlan Hotel, condominiums, golf course, vacant Residential, Vacant (including mountainous terrain) R--1, R-2, R-2-4000, R-2-7000, R--2-8000, R-2-10000, R-3, R--51 W-1 R-1, R-5, W-2, R--2-8000, W-1, R-2-4000, C -P -S, R-3, N -A Land Use: See SP #121-E, NAP portion is Low [tensity Residential (3-5 DU/Acre) Open Space and Conservation: Urban Area Circulation: Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50 Major 100' R/W ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT_ Environmental analysis of the revised specific plan resulted in a determination that. no major adverse environmental impacts would occur as a result of implementation of jthe proposed project. A negative declaration for. Environmental Assessment #15626 has. been prepared. SUMMARY The subject application was continued from the January and February hearings at the request of the applicant in order to clarify details of the project with staff. A previous case, Specific Plan #121-E, in conjunction with the associated ETR #41, was approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in April, 1975. Specific Plan #121-E encompassed a 619 acre project adjacent to the La Quinta Hotel. Components of the development plan approved under Specific -Plan #121-E include the following: 637 condominiums on 132.8 acres, 496 unit additions to the La Quinta Hotel on 42.3 acres, and a 27 hole golf course on 191.5 acres. Upon completion, the 916 condo- miniums would have a population of approximately 1,292 and the 642 hotel rooms would have.a transient population of approximately 1,250 people at full occupancy. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A revision of the original Specific Plan is required because of changes in the proposed land uses for the development. These changes include the following: (1) The addition of a 19.23 acre parcel labeled "not a part" on the original Specific Plan% This parcel was recently purchased by the Landmark Land Company. A complex of tennis courts and a maximum of 200 condominiums is planned for this acreage. (2) A total of 6.3 acres located east of Eisenhower Drive and south of 50th Avenue, originally intended for other uses, is now proposed for develop- ment of 64 condominium units. The 6.3,acres was originally ,proposed for use as 'Pg. -1 MBI r z r s` Spe 4fle-Plan #121-E Reviseu Staff Report ,horse stables and a temporary sewage treatment plant. Change of Zone Case #3491 was filed concurrently with SP #121-E Revised to reflect the proposed land use. changes. (3) A 3.5 acre parcel located at the northern portion.of the La Quinta development originally proposed for open space uses is now proposed for the develop- ment of 15 condominium units. Change of Zone Case #3045,, which reflects the proposed land use changes for this area, has already received county approval. During the interim.period between adoption of the original Specific Plan and the submission of the Revised Specific Plan, several facilities have actually been constructed, including the following.. 1. Drainage facilities 2. Hotel expansion 3. Golf course improvements 4. Tennis complex on the 19.23 acre site. Drainage facilities constructed include Oleander Reservoir, which utilizes a portion of the acreage of the 27 hole golf course for flood control purposes. Other facili- ties include an excavation channel being constructed by Landmark Land Company, from Eisenhower Drive northeasterly to a point north of Avenue 50. The remainder of the excavation channel will be constructed to the Whitewater River by the Coachella Valley Water District. Coachella Valley Water District has already completed construction of bridges at Washington Street and Eisenhower Drive. total of eleven "bungalows" containing. 88 units have been added to the existing La Quinta Hotel. in the area designated as "Hotel Expansion" on the original Specific Plan. The remaining 478 hotel expansion units are slated for completion by spring 1984. Construction of the golf course is now complete, with a total of 27 holes. Thirteen of the proposed tennis courts on the 19.23 acre parcel have already been completed after receiving county approval (Plot #5829) in January, 1981. Construc- tion of the 200 condominium units proposed for the 19.23 acre parcel is dependent on the prerequisite approval of the subject Specific Plan revision. RELATIONSHIP TO THE GENERAL PLAN In.accordance with the.previously adopted Specific Plan #121-E, the function of Re- vised Specific. Plan #121-E is to serve as an implementation device for the Cove. Communities General Plan. The Land Use"Element of the General plan designates the .19.23 .acre site as Low Density Residential, (3-5 DU/Acre). The property included in the previously adopted specific plan is also designated Low Density Residential, which is refined by the adopted Specific Plan. Urban land uses are planned for the subject property in the Open Space and Conservation elements of the General Plan. Through the mechanism of a Specific Plan, a transfer of densities can be accomplished so that clustered types of dwelling units with associated common recreation areas can. be developed. This mechanism permits higher densities on the development site itself than would be allowed by the General Plan. However, when including the open space*, end recreational areas, the overall density is within the range.allowed by the ,3eneral Plan. LAND USE COMPARISON ` Original Specific Flan # 121-E and Revised Specific Plan # 121-E Land Use Original Acreage- Revised Acreage Net Change Original Revised Units Net :Units Change Condominiums 132,8 ac 161.$6 ac +29.06 637 916 +279 Hotel Complex 43.2 ac 43.2 ac -0- 496 642 +146 Mountains -211.4 ac 211.4 ac -0- Not applicable Golf Course . 5 191.ac 185.2 ac -6.3 (Twentyseven hales Open Area 30.8 ac 27.27 ac -3.53 Not applicable Club Horse 5.8 ac 5.8 ac -0- Not -applicable Service Facilities 3.5 ac 3.5 ac -0- Not applicable Totals 61980 ac 638.23 ac +19.23 ac 11133 1,558 +425 ` LAND Utt COWARiS{ Golf Course 191.5 ac 185.2 ac -4.3 (Twentyseven Moles) Open Area 30,8 ac 27.27 ac -3.63 Not applicable`: ` Club House 5.8 ac Original Specific Plan 121-€ ,and ReAsed Specific Plan 1 121-•E 3.5 ac -0- Not applicable + Totals 619.0 ac 638.23 ac }riginal Revised liet Original Revised Net Land Use Acreage Acreage Change: Units Lints Change i Condominium 132.8 ac 161.86 ac +Z9.06 b37� 916 +279 Hotel Complex 43.2 ac 43.2 ac �' -i-. 496 642 +145 , Mountains 211.4 at 211.4 ac -0- Not acglicable Golf Course 191.5 ac 185.2 ac -4.3 (Twentyseven Moles) Open Area 30,8 ac 27.27 ac -3.63 Not applicable`: ` Club House 5.8 ac 5.8 ac -0- not applficable Service Facilities 3.5Ic 3.5 ac -0- Not applicable + Totals 619.0 ac 638.23 ac +19.23 'ac 1,133 1,558 +425 k 'Platt #121_E Revr� y ' Su f -Report ft- 3_ t#his specific instance, the transfer of densities permits a character of develop -- anent which is ideally suited to the vacation, retirement home, and resort type mmrkie,t. Homeowners are provided the advantages of a large array of recreational aporrtunities, community social events, minimal maintenance, responsibilities, and security provided by the clustered community of neighbors. Privacy is somewhat compromised in a clustered development, but the other advantages are -of critical importance in the resort market place. ANALYSIS: ARCHAEOLOGY An archaeological survey was conducted in April, 1 75 by S. R. McWilliams in con- junction with the original specific Plan. Findings.of,the survey were that no significant sites would be destroyed by the proposed project. Further surveys were not required. However, the archaeologist did request that a site east of. Eisenhower Drive with minor concentrations of artifacts associated with the sand dune and mesquite vegetation be investigated during excavation by the author fpr academic interest only. SCHOOLS As a vacation and retirement.home type development, the proposed project would have no significant impacts on the Desert Sands unified School District which serves the area. However, should the school district file a notice of impaction, with the county, the.developer shall be required to adequately mitigate school impacts prior o the issuance of building permits. AIR QUALITY Short term air quality impacts of -exhaust from construction equipment and dust from grading and construction would be experienced during the temporary construction period. These impacts would be minor in nature and can be adequately mitigated by watering of dust prone areas and confinement of construction activities to normal working hours. • From a longer term prospective, the emissions from automobile traffic would consti- tute the major air quality impact for the life of the project. As computed in the table below, the entire (original and revised) project would result in approximately 21,115 pounds or 1.057 tons per day of additional pollutants being emitted into the atmosphere. These calculations are premised on a project trip generation of 11,550 trip ends, or one way trips on the average week day. From a regional perspective, the additional air pollution would be relatively insignificant. Also, the nature of the project would lead to the greatest levels of traffic and pollution on week- ends when ,permanent residents would be driving less. "Peak" traffic volumes would be minimal because traffic would tend to be very spread out rather than concentrated in a to and from work pattern inherent in a development of permanent residents. • 1 N - Specific Plan #121-E Revi i Staff Report Pg. 4 'AIR POLLUTION ASSUME: 916 Permanent Dwelling Units X 1.5 cars/unit X 365 days X 30 miles/car/day = 15,045,300 miles/year Carbon Monoxide Emission factors for CO = 0.075 lbs./VMT Correction Factor of 0.5 CO emission/year = 15,045,300 X 0.075- x 0.5 - 564,198 lbs. _Daily Rate = 412,500 - 1545 lbs. 365 Oxides of Nitrogen Emission Factors for NO = 0.0077 lbs./VMT Correction Factor of 1.i NOx emission/year = 15,045,300 x 0.0077 x 1.3 = 150,603 lbs. Daily Rate =-150,603 412 lbs. 365 Hydrocarbons Emission Factors for NC 0.0064 lbs./VMT Correction Factor of 0.6 HC emission/year = 153,045,300 x 0.0064 x 0.6 57,773 158 lbs. 365 Daily Rate = 57,773 158 lbs. 365 MAJOR VEHICLE TOTAL EMISSIONS = 772,574 lbs. or 386.3 tons/year MAJOR VEHICLE TOTAL DAILY = 2,115 lbs, or 1.057 tans/day WATER plater service to the original hotel units and the previously existing portions of the golf course -is -provided by an on-site well owned and operated by Landmark Land Company. New construction will be serviced by the domestic water services of the Coachella Valley Water District. SEWER Existing development in the project area is connected via "wet" sewer lines to a septic tank and seepage pit system located east of Eisenhower Drive in the area pro- posed for 110 condominiums. This system is operated and maintained by Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD); and is considered a "temporary" facility. CVWD is .now .planning a.sewage treatment plant to serve the entire La Quinta area, but this project is presently embroiled ,in controversy regarding its location. #121-E Revis. '- �qtafft 'atepcn-t ,aew-, Mng units will have to be connected to a sanitary sewer system of Coachella ValTe!�w Water District. This system may be either the proposed sewage treatment plant dw ttiaL. existing "temporary" system, depending on the progress of the Coachella Valley Matter- 1]istrict in finding a location acceptable to the community for the treatment 131 In either event, adequate treatment capacity must be available before any buxiuing and/or occupancy permits can be issued. pol-5r:!e protection is provided to the La Quinta area by the Riverside County -Sheriff Depaarzzment Indio Office. The Sheriff Department has indicated that a request is wodEe bar their department to the Board of Supervisors for additional manpower and/ or „ ing, as required by the demands of additional population and development. The subject project will result in increased -crime as would any other project whichr incl—mases the population of the area.. However, a need for specific increases in Shy, -;=f personnel or equipment is not anticipated by the Sheriff Department. Mini. - any additional :Crime in the project vicinity will be the on-site private sec::--ity force provided by the La Quinta Cove Golf Club. F I r.::� F;re protection is provided to -the site by the Riverside County Fire Department. The pearest station is located at 78135 Avenue 52 in La Quinta. al-r,� ugh some additional services will inevitably be required by the subject project, o specific additional manpower or equipment requirements have been mandated by the Fire Department. FLOOD Sh=11ow flooding could occur on the project property. However, no significant flood dangers will exist for the proposed development following construction of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel which is now in progress. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION Primary access. to the. site is provided from Interstate. 10 and Highway 111 via Washing- ton Street, and then Eisenhower Drive and 50th Avenue. As proposed, the revised specific plan would increase trip generation by almost 30% over the levels anticipated with the original Specific Plan. Because of these Sig- nificant impacts, the Riverside County Road Department proposes the mitigation measures outlined below. (1) A General Plan Amendment shall be initiated to restore Eisenhower Drive as a major highway between 50th Avenue and Washington Street. (2) Prior to the issuance of any building or development permits for any 7. dwelling units exceeding'750 including hotel units, the.project proponent. shall contribute toward the installation of the following signals in,the proportion indicated: a. Eisenhower Drive at 50th Avenue (75%) b. Eisenhower Drive at Avenida Fernando .(25%) c. Eisenhower Drive at Washington :Street (25%) Specific Pian #121-E Mevii Staff Report. Pg. 6 (s) To offset iinitial maintenance -and energy costs incurred by the County due to signal A nstallations, fees shall be payable at the same time as the signal contributions. These fees total.$31,250. based on a 100% contri- bution rates of $25,000. per signal. The developer will be required to contribute a t the percentage rates outlined in.#2 above. (4) Prior to tfhe issuance of any building or development permits for any dwelling umits exceeding 1,000 including hotel units, the project pro- ponent shalil contribute 15% toward the total cost of the following off- road --improvements: a. (Widen Eisenhower Drive to ultimate width from Avenida Fernando to Washington Street J b. Aiden Washington Street to ultimate width from 50th Avenue to ;Highway 111. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Expanding on the.existing resort hotel complex, the proposed project closely compli- ments the existing development in the Immediate area. Significant open space areas are provided; including the maintenance of the mountainous areas and in many areas are adjacent open space acreage (golf course) at the foot of the mountains. The - open space, natural rnountain backdrop, and recreational facilities further enhance the exis-t_i.ng resort atmosphere of the La Quinta Hotel and La Quinta Country Club area, 'In --a: larger scale., this project is a continuation of the recent trend in La.quinta owards a more urbanized character. The unique setting of. the La Quinta area established by the geographical features of the Santa Rosa Mountains will result in a -continued demand for additional housing in the community; thereby continuing the trend towards a rrore urban character in La Quinta. 'In the past, many people were.attracted to La Quinta by its rural character, which will inevitably gradually diminish -as further growth occurs in the area. Although the project unquestionably lessens the rural characters of the area which is cherished by many local residents, substantial acreage of open space is provided. Offsetting the. disadvantage of urbanizing the area are the economic benefits (parti- cularly in light of the potential incorporation of La Quinta) and the enhancement of the resort image of La Quinta', ..In any event, further development in one form or another can be anticipated with certainty because of the area's unique assets and desirability which were previously discussed., A resort type development such as that proposed versus a conventional residential ,development clearly has some advantages in terms of preservation of the rural atmos- phere. Resort developments not only provide much greater open space and recreational :facilities, but they also have much. smaller. permanent residential populations. Urban services required by resort residents and visitors also tend to be minimal. µ_ Speci fi c Plan #1127!H Mev 1 Staff Report Pg. 7. i r INDINGS AND COm1CULIS aNS: Specific Plan W -12-1--E was approved and the associated Final Environmental Impact, Report #41 was; mortified in April, 1975 by the Board of Supervisors. 2. The revised SPalc-afic Plan #121-E will result in a development similar in nature and scale to trhe original Specific Plan #121-E. 3. A large ma3ory of the residents would utilize their dwellings as a second or retirement-1homre_ This would result in minimal impacts on the schools and the lack of a. heawy concentration of "'peak" hour traffic to and from work. 4. Revised- Specif1 c Plan #121-E represents an expansion of existing facilities and developmemi s .associated with.the existing La Quinta Hotel. . 5. Environmental ir�acts and urban service demands of this project will be minimized by the nature of the development. (second and retirement home). These impacts can, be mitigated aind Services can be provided by incorporating the measures outlined in previous sections of this report and in Final Environmental Impact Report #41.' RECOMMENDATION Therefore, staff recommends ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment #15626; and APPROVAL of Specific Plan #121-E Revised, in accordance with Exhibit ''A" and subject to the attached conditions. DM: ajp 3/30/82 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL REVISED SPECIFIC PLAN #121-E GENERAL C;DNDITIONS PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 1982 1, Prior- to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated b.p tthis approval, the applicant shall first obtain clearance from the Riverside CaurLdy Planning Department to verify that all pertinent conditions of approval have been satisfied in accordance with the specific plan. 2. The specific plan approval shall consist of the. following: a. Exhibit "A" Revised Specific Plan Text b_ Exhibit "8 specific Plan Conditions of Approval c_..`:.�Revised specific plan of land use (development plan) - '.':Revised specific plan onsite circulation plan 3. If any of the following conditions for approval differ from the commitment :made by the developer in the specific plan text or map exhibits, the conditions enumerated herein shall take precedence unless otherwise approved by the Planning 'Director: Any changes pertaining to road improvements conditions shall be subject to the approval of the. Riverside County Road Commissioner. 4. The development of the property shall be in accordance with the mandatory require- ments of all Riverside County' ordinances and state laws and shall conform sub- stantially with the approved Specific Plan #121-E Revised as filed in the office of the --Riverside County Planning Department, unless otherwise amended. 5. No portion of the specific plan which purports or proposes to change, waive or Modify any ordinance cr other legal requirement for the development, or to set special time commitments for the development., shall be considered to be a part of the adopted specific plan, b. Water and sewage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the requirements and specifications of.the'Riverside County Health. Depa rtment. T. Road improvements shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the implementing subdivisions) for this project and/or as recommended by the Road Cownissioner. 8. Drainage and flood control facilities and improvements shall be provided in accordance with the Coachella Valley Water District requirements. 9. Aw Environmental Assessment shall be conducted for each tract, change of zone,, plot plan, or any other discretionary permit within the specific plan., Prior to recordation of any final subdivision map for a phase of development requiring a homeowners association, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Department the following documents which shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of .the County that the homeowners association will be established and will operate in accordance with the :intent and purpose of the specific plan. Pg. l aa 5pecifiC plan X121-£ 41-_vistcl ll Conditions of Approval Pg..2. a) The document to convey title. b) Covena`n ts,.Conditions and Restrictions to be recorded. The approved Covenants. Conditions and Restrictions shall be recorded at the same time and listed on the final subdivision map when recorded. A homeowners association, with the unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance cost and management costs.shall be established and continuously maintained. The association shall have the right to Tien the, property of any owners who default in the payment of this assessment. Such. lien shall not be subordinate to any encumbrance other than a first deed of trust, provided such deed of trust is made: in good faith and for value and is of record:prior to the lien of the homeowners association. 11. `All conditions listed herein apply only to those parcels changed or adder( since the original specific plan was approved. These parcels include the following: 1) A 19.23± acre parcel proposed for 200 condominiums, purchased since approval of the original specific. plan. 2:) A 3.526± acre parcel at the base of the mountains which is now proposed for 15 condominium units. 3) A 6.3} acre parcel located east of Eisenhower Drive, which was ori- ginally proposed for use as a temporary sewage treatment plot and horse stables is now proposed as part of the condominium and golf course facilities. Conditions in the original Specific Plan #121-C remain applicable to all portions of the subject project with the exception of the three parcels noted above. 12. Prior to recordation of final tract maps for the 19.23±, 6.3+- and 3.526± acre parcels, water, sewer, and circulation systems must be adequately provided. - LAND USE CONDITIONS 13. Lots created pursuant to this specific plan shall be in conformance with the development standards of the zone(s) ultimately applied to the property. 14. Each Planned Residential Development (PRD) shall comply with the requirements of.Ordinance 348 and 460. 15. Prior to the issuance of building permits, conmion open space area improvement -plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. 16. The total specific plan shall be developed with a maximum of 916 condominium and 642*'hotel units. ��ecific. Plan #121-E Revised Condi tions of A,Pproval ?(� . 3 17. All Planned Residential Developments (PRD's) shall incorporated a new or be annexed to an exis ting homeowners association for maintenance and management of conmon open space areas, private street systems, landscaped areas; signing and lighting or, other -defined responsibilities as necessary. 18. All comnon o0en space areas including developed landscaped areas snail inctuoe an autOlnatic irrigation system. Landscaping and irrigation plans shall be sub- mitted for Planning Department approval prior to on-site installation. CIRCULATION CONDITIONS 19. Dedication and -improvement of rights--of-way for general plan and public roads and streets adjacent to the :site will be required in accordance with 'the provi- Bions of`Ordinance 460 and 461. 20. The applicant shall provide all road improvementsas specified in the letter dated April 8, 1982, by the Riverside County Road Commissioner. 21. The basic circulation system shall be developed substantially in accordance with the specific plan text. 22. Construction of the development permitted hereby may be done progressively in_ phases, provided adequate vehicular access is constructed for all dwelling units in each phase a-rrd further provided that such phase development conforms substantially with -the intent and purposes of the specific plan. 23. Phasing shall be done in a manner which will not cause newly completed structures to be impacted by dust generated by grading from subsequent phases. 24. Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with all applicable requirements of Ordinance 460 and Ordinance 546. 25. The deVeloper shall mitigate any publicfacilities and/or school district impacts in accordance with notices- of impaction which may be applicable at the time. of. ' tentative map approval and/or requests for extensions of time. 26. The developer shall comply with the following specific: plan development standards: -a. Security Police Protection b. Circulation Walkway and parking areas will be adequately lighted. Gates at entrances will be at least 80 feet from the public street to allow for stacking and turn around. c. Grading All grading will be completed under the direction of a soils engineer and in con- formance with applicable County ordinances. Grading permits will be obtained for`all grading and shall be submitted to the County Planning Department for environ mental review. where applicable. t, gpeCfic flan i/121 -E Revised Conditions of Approval 4 d. Landscaping C01111ion areas, darks, entry. gates and streets shall be landscaped with'Plant species comps-. tible with the desert environment. e. Drainage Through coordination with -the Coachella Valley Water District, all development shall be designed to protect all dwellings from storm flow, .La Quinta District Specific P -;.n #121-E Revised Tourth Supervisorial DistrictEIR #41 EA 15626 Related Files: SP #121-E, EIR #41 Planning Commission::February 17, 1982 PN1 #14273, Tr. #14496 Agenda Item: 3 -CZ #3045 & PP #5829 RIV€RSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT -1 - ` Apel icant: .2. Type of Request: 3. Location: 4. Parcel Size: 3. Existing Roads: 6. Existing Land Use: 7. Surrounding Land Use: 8. Existing Zoning: 9. Surrounding Zoning: 10. General Plan Elements: (Cove Communities) Landmark Land Company Specific Plan of Land Use Mostly westerly of intersection of Eisenhower Drive and 50th Avenue. 641.23+ acres Eisenhower Drive, 50th Avenue, Avenida Mazatlan Hotel,.Condominiums, Golf Course, Vacant Residential, Vacant (including mountainous terrain) R-11- R-2, R-2-4,0100, R-2-7,000, R-2-$,000, R--2-10,000, R-3, R-5, W-1 ,R-1, R-5., W-2, R-2-8,000, 1,1--1, R-2-4,000, C -P -S R-3, N -A Land Use: See SP #121-E, NAP portion is LDR (3-5 du7 ac) Open Space and Conservation: Urban Circulation: Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50 Ma,7 or 0 R/W. FURTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS - February 17, 1982 This.case was continued from the January 27, 1982 hearing at the applicant's request. The applicant and staff have concurred to an additional continuance in order to further resolve planning issues involved with this project. Conditions will be presented at the next Planning Commission meeting. /sr February 11, 1982 Chairman Sullivan. Riverside County Planning Commission 46-209 Oasis Street, Room 304 Indio, Ca: 922.01 Reference:. SP121-E--Revised, change of Zone 3491 Dear Chairman Sullivan: As a result of meeting with the.In.dio Planning Staff, we request a`further continuance to. the March.' 10,, 1982 Planning Commission Meeting. This continuance is requested to.allow us to further. -review our project in detail with staff. We would. like to clarify the issues detailed in the staff reports pre- ''pared for theo0anuary 27, 1982 hearing and subsequent revisions to these conditions. Thank you for your consideration of this matter,. Sinc rely, Loyd W. Watson LWW:Iw Ernes1,0. Vossler, Dueclor and :S:eniorAce President LANDMARK LAND COMPANY. INC_ P.O. Box 1000. Lo Quinto. California 92253 [ 7141345.2888 1R!T6 DEPARTMENTAL LETTER s r C® d..11 N" TY OP tRIVERSIME Road and Survey Department Plemo To: Patricia Nemeth, .Planning Director December 14, 1931 Attn: Kevin Manning-, Regional Team rlo. 4 From: A. E. Newcomb, Road Commissioner and County Sur eyo r j (;�; By: Edwin Studor, Supervising Planner -. -� ' V P uLV15 Re: Proposed Revision to Specific Plan No. 121-E )-�$ (La Quinta Cove Golf Club) RIVERSIDE Cry+_tt�ii We have ---reviewed the above referenced proposal and are deeply concerned regarding the traffic impacts. Our analysis indicates that four lane improve- ments will be warranted along Eisenhower Drive from 50th Avenue to Washington Street and along Washington Street from 50th Avenue to Highway M. In addi- tion, -several new traffic signals will be warranted. General Plan Amendment 154-7$9-C-24 adopted September 11, 1979 deleted Eisenhower. Drive -as a major highway between 50th Avenue and Washington Street based on the premise that proposed -low density development in the area would not,warrant such a facility. The proposed revision to Specific Plan 121 sub- stantially increases densities and increases .anticipated trip generation by nearly 30 percent. The impacts of the proposal Will be significant and for - this.-reason we propose the following conditions for approval: (1) A General Plan Amendment shall be initiated to restore Eisenhower Drive as a major highway between -50th Avenue and Washington Street. (2) Prior to the issuance of any building or development permits for any dwelling units exceeding 500 including hotel units, the project pro- ponent shall provide signalization at the intersections of: a. Eisenhower Drive at 50th Avenue and; b. Eisenhower Drive at Washington Street. . (3) Prior to the issuance of any building or development permits for any dwelIirng units exceeding 750 including.hotel units, the project pro— ponent roponent shall provide signalization at the -intersections of:; a. Eisenhower Drive at Avenida Fernando and; b. 50th Avenue at.Washington Street. (4) To offset initial- maintenance. and energy costs incurred by the County due to signal installations, a fee of $25,000 per signal shall be pay- able upon the completion of each installation. (5) Prior to the issuance of any building or development permits for any dwelling units exceeding 1,000 including. hotel. units, the project.. �- proponent shall provide the, following off-site road improvements: a. Eisenhower Drive from Avenida Fernando to Washington Street, widen to provide at least 52 feet of pavement throughout and; b. Washington Street from 50th Avenue to Highway 111, widen to provide at least 52 feet of pavement throughout. ES: jn &Ji161T a } INT131 pLPARTiI ENYAL LETT-r=.= .C®U IMTY : O F R IVERS IDE Road and Survey Department - Memo To: Patricia Nemeth, Planning Director January 26, 1982 Frog: A. E. Newcomb, Road Commissioner and County Surveyor By: Edwin Studor, Transportation Planne Re: Proposed Revision to. Specific Plan No._ -121-E (La Quint. Cove Golf Club) Our staff recently had. an opportunity to r:PPt with representativPS: for the .proponents ofthe above referenced proposal tirith regard to traf :fic.impacts and mitigation measures. Based upon these discussions and our own analysis,,we recommend that the special conditions for appro al of the specific plan revision as stated in our letter of.December:14,' 1981 be revised to read as follows: 1) A General Plan Amendment shall be initiated to restore Eisen' hover Drive as a major highway between 50th Avenue and Washington Street. 2) Prier to the issuance of any building or development permits for any dwelling units exceeding 750 including hotel units, the. project proponent shall contribute toward the installation of the following signals in the proportion indicated: a. Eisenhower Drive at 50th Avenue (75%) b. Eisenhower Drive at Avenida Fernando (25%) c. Eisenhower Drive at Washington Street (25%) 3) To offset initial maintenance and energy costs incurred by the.:. County due to signal installations, a fee based on $25,000 per sinnal. and totaling :831,250 shall hP payable at the came time as the signal contributions. 4) Prior to the issuance of any building or development permits for any dwelling units exceeding 1,000 including hotel units, the project proponent shall contribute 15% toward the total cost of the following off-road improvements: a. Widen Eisenhower Drive to ultimate width from Avenida Fernando to Washington Street; and . b. Widen Washington Street to ultimate width from 50th Avenue to Highway 111. IS: j cc: Warren Stallard IN HIBIT R - RIVE.0 IDE COUMY PL04ING DEPARRE 46-209 OAS S ST. , RM. 34A INDIO, CALIFORNIA M01 TO: Assessor Building & Safety Surveyor- -Road Dept. Health Department Fire Protection._ CVWD - Flood CVWD, =Water Imperial Irrigation District $0, Calif. Gas Company (711#-342-8277) DATE: March 15, 1,982 General Telephone Co. Desert Sands School District La Quinta Property Owners Assoc.- 7LWater Quality Control Board V. La Quinta Chamber.of Commerce. MECT: SPECIFIC PLAN #121-E, Landmark Land Co., P. 0. Box 1000, La Quinta, CA. 92253 To add 19t acres and Change 3.5 t Acres to Residential Use; Increase of 279 condominium:: Units and 146 -Hotel units. YOUR CCiVENTS AND REC"UMTIONS ARE REQUESTED PRIOR TO March 30 1982 SO THAT THEY MAY BE INCLUDED IN OUR STAFF REPORT REGARDING THIS ITEM] - C LAMENTS The Regional Board -staff has approved waste discharge requirements, contained in Board Order No: 81-92, for a maximum.discharge.of 15-0,000 gallons per day from 100 condominium units and 165 hotel un-ts. Since -this new proposal consists of an additional 279 condominiums and 146 hotel units, which would add 115,000 gallons per day to the total discharge, then it is necessary to update requirements.. We -are requesting that CVWD submit a Report of Waste Discharge. DATE: March 18, 1982 SIGNED: _ Charles Sp yg`g , Environmental Special THE PUBLIC FEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HELD ON 'F&LD YOU WISH TO BE PRESENT. RETURN THIS COPY TO PUNNING DEPARTMENT, 46=209•OASIS ST., Ph 3M,INDI0, CA„ X2201) FX141RIT.t R R'L_ " l tt U U J (Y PLIVIN ING 11PA10 I -L, , , 1167209 OAS I S ST . , Rpi, 30q I=01 CALIFORwA 92201 (71y-342-8277) DATE: March 15, 1932 TO:. Assessor General Telephone Co. Building b Safety Desert Sands School District. Surveyor, -Road Dept. La Quinta Property Owners Assoc: Health Department Water Quality Control Board #7. Fi`re.Protection La Quinta Chamber of Commerce CVWD Flood CVWD , -Water ImperlaI .I.rrigation District *So. Cal if:. Gas Company SILBJEM SPECIFIC. PLAPI #121-E, Landmark Land:Co., P. 0. Box 1000, La Quinta, CA. 92253 To add 19t acres and Chan.; -e_.3.5 t Acres to Residential Use; Increase of 279 condominium Uni ts. znd 1.46 Hotel units YOUR C(.1+VENTS AND RECOkVENDATIONS ARE REQUESTED PRIOR TO March 30, 1982 SO THAT THY MAY BE I:NCLUD.ED...IN OUR STAFF REPORT REGARDING THIS ITEM, CrOwENTs No objections, recommendations -or comments at this time. DATE; `1a-rrh 10 — -- - 51`GNED: V. C erg Fiald I��t7c1 THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS HATTER WILL BE HELD ON OWULD YOU WISH TO BE PRESENT. RETURI l THIS COPY TO Pll;�'�'� I'�EoART1.IENT, 46 209 OASIS ''$T . , f1, 30�{, INDtO, CA,, -92201) MOT �. t _IDE COU11I1 Y PLAN111 "DEI,,IRI TIN T 4080 LEIION STREET 901 Fl RIVERSIDE,:CALIF. 92501 '1 REGIONAL TEAM $ 4 DEC. 1981 RE: SPECIFIC PLAIT I z'l 10: BLDG &- SAFETY Landmark- Land Co `ROAD DEPT PO Box 1000 `HEALTH DEP T!.a f u�nta_Ca. 92253 FIRE PROTECTION .. . ...,.: ......_ .... . FLOOD CONTROL--COACHELLl[1�A}} VIALCLVY WATER DI ST. ....,,_LA QUINTA iIISY ' IIUL. rDIS l .:w E,:1-.^"".4 _• uC.;h?iSC �? rJ,Y ,....r s..S 7 f ldif }NLi r.'.4R^1 'DESERT" SAND', UNI F,..SCH i �, .w•. ,•,`^' 1 4-R�•.WC! HV#-Y;`-t:,��.....�-�^....��;�... LA QUINTA PROP' OWNERS ASSN , .._F.. ,..... . ............:.._ .. _. l'lATER. QUALITY CO'ITROL BD 7 Piease review the ca_se:described above and the attached map. A public hearing has been tentatively scheduled for Jan. 27, 1982. Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to Jan. 17, 1,982 in order to include them in the staff report for ti.i s item-. . Should you have any qu.estions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact Kevin Mannibg at 342-8277. Related Case Files: PM 14273; TR 14496; CZ 3045 M-1;riENTS; The Health Department has no objection to the proposal. Our records indicate the site will be served water and sewer service by the Coachella Valley Water District. EET:cg --, IBIT% D; i E 1-4-82f f' ________Signature-.- -��CL � - ` l /``,r Earl �.E. Tu'ntland, R.S., 14.P.A, Please print Haute ,and title: __ - -Administrative _Supervisor __ _ LIJ la "11., Alt W11111Y PUVVI NG DEPA10111 46--109 OASIS. ST., RM. 3011 1111)10, CALIFORNIA 92201 (714-342-82TI)L.�`� U1CT . lr, DATE:: March 15, -19$`2115TF2 TQ; Assessor General Telephone Co. Eiuilding b Safety Desert Sands School District Surveyor- -Road Dept. La Quinta Property Owners Assoc. %flea]th Department Water Quality Control Board #7. Fire Protection La Quinta Chamber of Commerce .`CVWD - Flood CVWD , -Water Imperial Irrigation District So. Calif"..°Gas Company SMECT:: SPECIFIC PLAN #121-E, Landmark To add -19± acres and Change 3.5-1 Acres Units and 146 Hotel units. Land Co., P_0_ Box 1000, La Quinta, CA. 92253 to Residential Use; Increase of 279 condominium YOUR CCt^iIEUTS AND REM-T1ENDAT10NS ARE REQUESTED PRIOR TO March 30_,__1982__ SO THAT THEY MAY BE INCLUDED IN OUR STAFF REPORT REGARDING THIS ITEM, C:NTS: The .Riverside County Department of Public Health has reviewed the specific plan proposal, Pmitted by the applicant, Landmark Land CompbLny, requesting approval to add approximately 1.9+ acres to 'the original project plain and change approximately 3� acres of the original project plan for residential usage in order that development of approximately 279 additional condominium units and.146 hotel units cnn be made in phases. With respect to the Conditions of Approval for the above referenced plan, or any use allowed under this plan, this Department has the following additional recommendations: 1. -All new construction within, each phase of the project shall be connected to the domestic water system of the Coachella Valley Water District, in accordance with . Ahe current regulations of the District. 2. All new construction°within each phase of the project shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system of the Coachella Valley Water District, in accordance with the current. regulations of the District. Before any permits are approved, the sewage disposal treatment facilities will have to be of adequate capacity to receive any additional sewage effluent from each phase of the project development. March 29, 1982 t' DATE: SIGNED:. , '4 Z L'11 -t'1 THE PUBLIC HtAR1NG ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HELD ON q-Y7iJLD YOU WISH TO BE PRESENT. _ [ t FTU[44 I HI S COPY TO PLANN 1 N DEPARTMENT, 46.-209 JAS I S ST. , fel, 304, IND 1 O, CA., X2201) E.MiBIT V 9 n I: LE RIVERSIDE COUNTY EAST ARLA PLANNING COUNCIL �,i 46-209 OdSiS Street, Room 304 NOV 19 19,. - Indio, Cdliforuia 92201 Assessor's DESERT DISTRICT - NDIC TO: Building Dept. DATE. November 2f}�Uj� C.V. Water Distr. Floud Control Div. of Forestry - FIRE pept, Health Dept. C.V.Cable Road Dept. Sheriff's Dept. Water Quality Control Brd, 07 General Tel. Co. Imperial Irrigation District Ri.v. Co. Flood Control Desert Water Agency So. Calif. Gas Co. Desert Sands School Distr. La. Quinta Prop.Owners Assn. La Quinta Chamber of Commerce Case_No.. Specific Plan of Land Use #1121-E Rev. APN: 0142019. 3 0-001;0020 ,00810101811, AonlicAnt: Landmark Land-Company/Ernie Vossler Related Files . ET -3.G1. I?M34 Tr.14496; CZ#3045 Protect Descriptio : Revise SP,1121 to add 19+ Acres and change 3.51 acres to Residential use; increase of 279 condo units and 146 hotel units. Project Location: At Eisenhower Street and Ave. 50, surrounding existing La Quinta Hotel Please review -the attached as it pertains to your area of expertise. Your co=oents and r endations are requested prior to the date of as soon aspos§ible. COKNENTS OR RECOHMENDATIONS: The Riverside County Department of Public Health has reviewed the revised specific plan proposal; submitted by the applicant, Landmark Land Company, requesting approval to add approximately 19+ acres to the original project plan and change approximately 31z acres of the original project plan for residential usage in order that development of approxi:atel 279 additional condominium units and -14 6 hotel units can be made in phases. With respect to the Conditions of Approval for the above referenced plan, or any use allowed under this plan, this Department has the following additional recommendations: 1. All new construction Within each phase of the project shall be connected to the domestic water system of the Coachella Valley Water District, in accordance with the current regulations of the District. 2. All new construction within each phase of the project shall be connected -to the sanitary sewer system of the Coachella Valley Water District, in accordance with the. current regulations of the District. Before any permits are approved, the sewage disposal treatment facilities will have to be of adequate capacity to receive any additional sewage effluent from each phase of the project. development. DATE: January 12, 19�,._ SIGNED:, / Please return original to Planning Depar uient. 46-209 Oasis St, Room 3040 Indira. CA 927( PH; K1. 4:1 rd :Livurside County East At-u:i March 18, 1982 Planning; Council :dere may be conflicts with existinb.District facilities. We request the appropriate public agency to withhold the issuance of a building permit : until arrangements: have been made with the District for the relocation of these facilities. Yours very truly Lowell 0. Weeks General Manager -Chief Engineer CS.ra cc: Riverside County Department of Public Health #6-209 Oasis Street lndio, California 92201 Attention: Don Park RIVERSluk_ COUNTY PLANNING .COMMISSION RESER' OFFICE 44ATER ESTABLI:.141.D IN IYIB AS A PUL'LIC AGENCY COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE Lok 1058 COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 TEtEP.HONE (714) 39a-2651 DIRECTORS RAYMOND R. HUMMUNDS, FRESIDEFIT. OFFICERS TELLISCODEKAS,VICEPRESIDENT 1 LOWELLO WEEKS, GENERALMANAGER-CHIEFENGINEEA E LLULL'tlNber .�, 1981 BERNARDINE SUTTON. SECRETARY 1AUL ,NICOL VICTOR 8.HARDY.AUDITQFJ: PAUL YV. NIUXTON REDININE AND SHERRI". ATTORNEY$. STEYE D. BUXTON ' File: 0163.11 Riverside County East Area Planning Cuusicil 46-209.0asis Street, Room 304 Indio, California 92201 nClel:�n Re : Parcel Map SpecificPlan of Land Use # 121-E Rev.' N04 Sec. 36, T5,:R&E, S. B:.' M. NEI -t, Sec. 1, T6, R6E, S.B.M. This area is shown to be subject to shallow flooding and is designated Zone -A3 .on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at t#Tis.time. llowever, when the construction _ of the La (;uinta Evacuation Channel is completed, the area outside of the channel and Oleander Reservoir will be considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances; Plains Lor housing pads, shall be submitted to Coachella Valley ,Water District for review of their location in respect to the stormwater facilities. The District will furnish domestic water and satlitalion service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this District. This 'area shall be annexed to Improvement District No. 55 of Coachella Valley water District: for sanitation service. There may be conflicts with existing District facilities. We request Elie appropriate public agency to withhold the issuance of a building permit until arrangements have been made with the District for the relocation of these facilities. Yours Very truly, Lowell 0. Weeks zeneral Manager -Chief Engineer CS:dlb cc: lliverside County Department of Public Health -46-209 Oasis Street jlELMIIBIT X Indio, California y220] TRUE CONSERVATION A t L en t iou : Don Nark USE WATER WISELY f RIVERS -1011. COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTf ;ENT 4080 t-LMON STREET 9th Fl RIVERSIDE, CALIF.- 92501 REGIONAL TEAM 3 4 •P 121 1JATf=. DEC.DEC1981 RE: ECIFIC PLAN . TO:'1BLDG SAFETY Landmark Land Co ROAD DEPT PO Box 1000 HEALTH DEPT La QUinta Ca .:;92253 F I RE 1�rtG; ECTIOx " .: • . • _ FLOOD CONTROL-COACHELLA"VALLRY'11ATER DIST: ► `LA QUINTA DIST - �•.- '� - :�•=-,--,. DESERT SA�VD''[1fliy SCHOOL' D•FST= ;:, . '}.,- ,w.,.:--.�> .• .�.,..�.'.:,;..•-,,, .i'{:"Y �`• .if�4'i r� ..1:• .v•sYl •y.. 4- Yr",..•,.+,i aweW .=��rr..`.•N. i•}.�;?:- e'rL`r. r,re-n{.;-�.a:...••..: x LA Q1UINTA PROP OW11ERS ASS14 •}...4_ Y......_ .......-.z. r•x �...: l... .` ..•.•.. W-ATER (QUALITY CONTROL BD 7 V, Please review the case described above and the attached inap. A public hearing has been tentatively scheduled for Jan. 27, 1982.• Your comments and recommerjdations ).are requested prior to Jan. 17, 1982 in order to include them in the staff report for this ite:,,: Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact Kevin 14anning at 342-8277. Related Case Files: PM 14273; TR 14496; CZ 3045 COP11"IL"JiTS: r DATE Signature FINIRIT d• _ &ija-OEPARTMIENTAL LETT@R d... COUNTY OF RIVERSIOU xl� 6S Road and Survey Departuwnt t, k. kh�rUt CUUN i'Y kA►'�NJfry {`.ommis,,y``iUN Memo To: Patricia. Nemeth , 'Pl anni ng Director. April 8, 1982 Attn: . #ff .Mann, Regional Team No. 4 F -on: A. E. Newcomb, Road, Commissioner' -and County Surveyor By: Edwin .Studor, Transportation. Planner Specific Plan No. 121-E Amendment (La Quinta Cove Golf Club) We have again been. contacted by the proponents of the La Quinta Cove ,.:;If Club project regarding Road Department conditions for approval of their a-nended speci-fic plan. While our concerns remain the same as those stated n our memorandum of January 26, 1982, we do rec:njnsend that the conditions _=-jr approval be revised to clarify the intent of these requirements. The .)nditions for approval should be revised to read as follows: AGeneral .Plan Amendment shall be initiated to restore Eisenhower Drive as a major highway between 50th,Avenue and Washington Street. 2) :Prior to -the issuance of any building permits for any dwelling units exceeding 750, including hotel units, the project proponent shall con- tribute a sum of $125,000 toward the signalixatior) of the following intersections: a) Eisenhower Drive 'at 50th Avenue b) Eisenhower Drive at Avenida, Fernando c) Eisenhower Drive at Washington Street The implementation and phasing of signal improvements shall be deter- mined by the Road Department. Said contribution shall be adjust;d annu- ally.until paid, based. upon the Consumer Price Index. 3) A sum of $31,250 shall be-paya.ble•concurrently .with the above signal. contribution tb offset initial maintenance acrd energy costs incurred by the County. Again,, this sum shall be adjusted- annually until paid, based upon the Consumer Price Index. 4) Prior. to the issuance of any building permits ..for. any dwr<17ing. .units er- ceeding.1,000, including hotel units,'the project proponent shall contri- bute a -sum equal to 15 percent of the total cost -of widening} the following roads to ultimate design width, or shall construct these roads to provide at least 52 feet of pavement throughout.. The._sub.ject-.roads are as follows. i S: III a) Eisenhovier Drive from Avenida rernnndo to Washington Street h) Was Street from ";Oth 1lverme to Highwey 111 HIBIT 4 If Z of t { - k 2 � ( t •. i r t 1? %` : •f � 1 R•2.10 ]00'— R-5 r c` ' R•2.6000 C7� R- 8000 ~Ft 2 H-5 R-2 --R.5 - r R-5 R`5 r.. R-2 d- R-5 R- 14000 C c e - S.. ti L, 0 k bi I j N `d J L r. !<Y C t IF a l• 1 s. a �1 J w �� a, y � t• r t Uff) inti • V. i .F4 1!• 1 vs 0 Aft r4h tj Td cm Ln �j � �� V� + ��r � •♦ yam, 4 ui U U to �o tjrd q CO +�► N " - • .� • M A %r. u) � ti tt�.. f*1 to l . _ a fp Aid, r .." c. .. to R! Gf e7 va - *3 I= KJ sy IV [3. � b bo - t�1 ' . � "M 60 t!f- C! id s ch ' d r Y 0 + � yy11 v v .a V Yf +4 J V S T C7 j J s x_ ,.. .. ... .• ./ •:=fix .,�,'�..a£•- rtea. .� PLAN is LAND Uall Unag " � J. •, au►v1o�aN A�/OGATei wngroa, �-••–.—. {{�� _ CMI a.�r_... • ►..�� . `�� \ 1 1 1313 E) j CY f �� 1 biviti j low • f m7 .. _....�. �.� J=" 9iI�..Tl.VLV.:SR Cr:.� . LZ7A��•r�• i�1MM1Ft-2w Ar.ri . sr:i+: i•i e APRIL 14, 1982 kers. Nemeth advised staff had no problems with what the developer wastrying to accomplish; the problem was trying to find the correct procedure. She felt they needed the 9-2 zone. Mr. Natase advised he had explained his proposal to the homeowners .association, and there had been no objection. He was only trying to .do what the homeowners wanted. Mr. Natase advised that timing was a problem, as they had already been delayed for two months trying td^find the best way to proceed. In answer to a question by Commissioner Sullivan, he advised the tract map should be ready for consideration by the East Area Planning Council at its meeting in May. He repeated his earlier statement that the homeowners association had no objection to his project as currently designed; but did not want any separate open space area. Mrs. Nemeth again stated she did not feel the planned residential development concept under an R-1 zone would work because of the open space requirements, and therefore the R-2 zoning would be required. She. suggested a continuance for further study; since the tract map.was not ready. as yet, she.did not think continuing the zone change would be a problem. Commissioner Olesen .referred to the concerns expressed at the last hearing regarding -•parking and was .informed by Mr. Natase that., as currently designed, there would be four off --street parking - places for each unit. Mrs. Nemeth felt the redesigned project resolved all. the, problems. Mr. Natase thought that none of the residents were present because they thought: :the zone change request was being withdrawn, Mrs. Nemeth advised that staff.:would send out a letter, explaining the problem and why the zone change .. was needed. The letter would stress that the project would be compatible with the development across the street. Upon.`motion by Commissioner Olesen, seconded by Commissioner Campbell and, unanimously carried, Change of Zone Case No. 3665 was continued to 1:40 p.m. May; 13; 1982. 2:30 m.' PUBLIC HEARING (Cont. from 2/17/82) SPECIFIC.. PLAN NO. 121-E Revised No.. 1 (southeast corner of Eisenhower Landmark Land and Avenue 50) Revise- Specif ic. Plan to add 19± acres and change.3.5±,acres to Residential, Use;.Inorease of...279 Condominium Units and 146 Hotel Units La.Quinta District - Fourth Supervisorial District 2:30 p.m, 'PUBLIC HEARING (`Cont. from 2/17/82) CHANGE OFZONE CASE N0. 3491 (36.51* acres, southeast corner Adopt Negative. Declaration for EA 15145.. Eisenhower and Avenue 50) Landmark Land..'. R-5:, W-1 and R=2 to R-2, W-1 and R-5, etc. La Quinta District - Fourth Supervisorial District The hearings were opened at 2:55 p.m.; the hearing for Specific Plan No. 121-E Revised No. 1 was closed at 3:07 p.m. The hearing. for Change of Zone Case Na. 3.491 was continued to 1:50 p.m. May 13, 1982. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recertification of.EIR No. 41 and approval of.Specific Flan..No.".121-E subject to the proposed conditions. The applicant had requested- that:Change of Zone Case No. 3491 be continued for readvertisino, as they wanted to :add another area. The revision to the originally approved specific plan was necessary because,' of changes in the proposed land uses. These changes included the addition of a 19..23 acre parcel recently purchased by the applicant. A•complex of tennis courts and a maximum of 200 condominiums was planned for this acreage. iuiother change was the use of 6.3 acres east of Eisenhower Drive and south of 50th Avenue for the development of 64 condoiiiinium units; this property had originally been proposed for horse stables and a temporary sewage treatment plant. Change of Zone .Case No. 3491, filed concurrently with Specific Plan No. 121-E 1'evised No. 1, reflected these proposed land use changes. A 3.5 acre parcel at the northern portion of the development, originally proposed for open space uses, was now proposed for the development of. 15 condominium units. I Change of Zone Case No. 3045, reflectilig this proposed change, hod already received County approval. 113 Kt�'�.�#�aar-.'�--='�rrr�. r: - _' _� ....�,...�-=^r.»�-..:�"+� ^� -...� - ati� �:�• �-•':, .�.... .' T:•�. _._;x .s:` " ..A r.�:'�•.. ,r-- .uw a'�wn. �� ^�j, - RIL 14, 1982 Staff felt the revised. specific plan would result in a development similar in nature and scale to the originally approved specific pian, and that the project would be a continuation of the recent trend in the La Quinta area towards a more urbanized character. The -proposed resort development would not only provide much greater open space and recreational facilities than a conventional residential, development, but it would also have a much smaller permanent residential population. Urban services required by resort residents and visitors also tend to be minimal. Staff recommended. that Condition 12 be amended by deleting the following from the .end of the sentence "to the two parcels in question, provided to the.. three above described parcels". 'Condition 20 should. be amended to refer to the Road Department letter dated April 8, 1982. John Canty, representing the applicant, agreed with all the conditions except Condition 26(f) regardin` energy and resource conservation. He felt that this issue was satisfactorily covered by the Uniform Building Code and therefore the -condition. could either be.deleted entirety �-r amended to only require compliance to the Uniform Building Code. this. condition. required the use of solar. heat for pools; Mr. Canty advised no heating was necessary in the summer time, and there was no. way solar heat could be used in the winter. He advised there were methods under the Uniform Building Code to preserve energy other than those specified under Condition 26(f). Mrs. Nemeth advised she would have no problem with the deletion of this condition. Mr...Canty then requested that Change.of Zone Case No. 3491 be continued, advising the rea.dvertising was necessary because of their error, not staff's. There was no .further testimony, and the hearing for Specific Plan No. 121-E Revised No. l was:closed at 3:07 p.m. FINIDINGS: Specific Plan No. 121-E was approved and the associated Final Environmental Impact Report No. 41 was certified in April,- 1975 by the. Board of Supervisors. 1 'The revised Specific Plan No. 121-E would resultin a development similar -_in nature and scale to the original Specific Plan No. 121-E. A large majority of the residents would utilize their dwellings as a second or retirement home, which would result in minimal impacts on the schools and the lack of a heavy concentration of "Peak" hour traffic to and from work.. `Revised Specific Plan No. 121-E represents an expansion of existing facilities and developments associated with the existing La Quinta Hotel. Environmental impacts and urban service demands of this project would be. minimized. by the nature of the development (second and retirement homes)., These impacts can be mitigated and services provided by incorporating the . measures outlined by staff in their report dated April 14, 1982 and in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 41.' MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner.Olesen, seconded;,.by,C6mmissioner Campbell and unanimously carried, the Commission deferred'.`.the final decision,and directed staff to prepare the necessary: resolution recommending approval of Specific Plan No. 121 Revised No. l subject to the proposed conditions, ..amended as follows, based on the above•findings: 12. Prior to recordation of the final tract maps for the 19.23}, 6.3t and 3.526* acre parcels,,water,sewer and circulation systems must be adequately provided. .20. `The applicant shall provide all road improvements as specified in the letter:da.te4 April 8, 1982 by the Riverside .County Road Commissioner. 26.('f),• Delete Entirely. Upon motion by Commissioner Olesen, seconded by Commissioner Campbell and unanimously carried, the Commission continued Change of Zone Case No 3491 to: 1:50,P.M. May 13, 1982. 1 14 Thea :a tivaa� : Buard of supe rvlt3orm Cour: II I ae R11ve.•�ide; i 1�f�srtiiea cen t lameual : PuMuint Co Strati: Plaur"lina Lama, , Frac rvu ary 13, 1975, to coaai.der tiau a February 26, 1975, at rAla h chae t.ir Board hold a public hearing axial ce . SUBJECT, , Specif Le Plan of T1a W Use 121-L (La C�•uinta �e Gulf & Te is Club) Ila Qu a Diatrict 1P a:h Supsrviv ria l District Pi.anxai.: Comaisslon held a public hearing ort cauc. The h erasixq, was continued to e ,"suiion uaaN+uLaoualy recowifiaded that your ify Lss nxv,.sent.al Likpact Report No. 430 and, fut:ttior, approve the satbjact SIVI- .. fsic MAIL Of ed Use. in accordance with ftudtibits A-1, i�-2 and A-3, sul)ject to :..' a c:aoiadiLiona iupaathereon. The Counivalau found that the projact: would be . �i.a�Lk."at with tit: caneral n and would tend to itaplc;Aeut the goals Sind je etive,y of hiss Ge:-ber:xl flan, d be compatible vI th the surrounding laved , repr:eseuts a loalcal program an o alopment of the area,, and that the o nifi.cant cnvivor"aatcal impacts cats be subs tially 14itisated by a doptia g the re lauded ca:arediLlow. Property102tt'&I'8;I a is the, northo-i-a pott:ioxb of the community of Lia Quinta, traaveraa:d by Eiseriv¢e and Ave nus_, 50, sur�:oaalEdi-a`; the existing 14 Quinta Hotels 1a QiLt:ttDish t �•i.i: t . A sau iaaxi;aut,� ins R;:-Udeetfully submitted, It:FVYMSxi7 C C+UMITYMI NG CCr 118SION N Clu 01) Das;Vc 0i).,ticu: �: lJ Lu�� -.,;.",'•wand:,:�ale'-:,:•a.,l'.+W1"r'J�r';!•:�'YII'?if41'914s',p.°!r ` 1 . F1 WPP:60369 Harch 5, 1975 :ee Corporation c/o La Quirita Country Club G50 Eisenhower Drive Desert, California 92260 I�. f Olen tlemen RECHVED MAP 1: I975 RIVtk;,s, 4 -0tj(-(Ty PLANNING COMMISSION DESEiR1 OFFICE STMJLICT: Specific Plan of Land Use 121-E La Quinta Cove Golf & Tennis Club I Er closed is a copy of our letter to t1W :,oard of Supervisors recaumending approval iSpecific Plan of Land Use 121-E. ffAn appeal uray be filed in writing to the Board of Supervisors within five days the date this report first appears on the Board's agenda. A #o enclosed are copies of the cond,itioue as amended. Please.sign the agreement indicated, and return tothis office in quadruplicate. Very truly your a, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING CO?QjISSI0N AEI: b c Zncloaures ce: Desert Office H. Schmitz A. E. Newcomb, Planning Director Nor! a� sox pill from SAW A"A W2, "nd A0 tM W!"WA3 1 jod"o jw � hat V pwft a!; Lt woularnaz now in. lwycw� Fl -h Ad 0=16 tend lit the ,Oslo &.1 Ajaculls: A He GwVrA Pit,, Would b6 1,L �,-: .' the area; 1hat rho by MIMU the vawatwLdad wcnjj;;0,j, NAM Appllcaa E %Kaer� 2) Type A Q!Inca kvir GAP Club 3PAIM Plaa WOU Kn P"?nn"Ojr 21 holn aalk WWI= Wictivalm of LU Quinta. 'i, tomato lar Drive UU# Xpaue SOD aurywa do A, I t 4) Parcol Sizet 622 jolt (:l, ..;L metal Ly w lay wMV MOW a 1, aud War- 1. E. \: . . . . .'i! .. ' :! y.•. . .. v,., «4A 1'�7 i, FM.ti. S-iii. .. f \ :.1 +S'.t1 t' C.�LI .i or, - ..5. i3:i.•1 .FJ.;,i F.. ,5d:.!1. C �..a—ad iSdjF:ca.:t SLC):.-.`3�.t',il'r.rWa.iY 7'fy3£ICiI''\''1.11:Y:. ' a�1 �. `.� �. '01. :he {,. i)cli,:.i}�':.��[LL Ma ley QllJf_ut.f.#`. oSi'tlruf :.:er Pvt'.jr C,t.4 ' Quiuta 13) C k'.-.51. L... r.4_ i.�3< � �i�. : C1f34 "+::'slr .• ��L' 1i�i%#i�r�G7�! ��+a6� �J�.'..' 2� 1974s. }} �r On .,�-}�.YV{Pyi]j�,•�'Fr'd..i. .A.:., � J, iy,;1 )•k. ..-,-..!i r ':"d � 6 Y..� ! 'i NAZI j)''idb .iii�.G�, °^i III � f:�e r.Jet3 -ta x1C;':Zt11'WE8te;CII portio�2 . 'If La `13iata, ald j Uia iig sn.'e�i:��tw. vj and for.;a't tillsL t ,�`..ir,1..J.:° r. ', level Jwil'�7 .1 �.,:1L'Ya 4:ditF.:_:.�, 4�ikii.'3ii.a.�.I: ��"�,iC2C1� ��:U�:fc`C:�.�.L►di' .. . flianuel and dike glystf.4L.)' ;*;:'C.-t 3 Average be.twegpq 5u ckx7d ot`('� %+.•` aL w w',.}: }. ;U:Unute,.vi"th a%AILY.CaT :G:linfkAll' ' o _• s,1,�. ": 4 '�:. i:..... :�.y1w:,p�ihCiY%:ty likc3'(,:�:iE::t3.:�, ill�ci:3 a i'laL .Jitg •'; r ,..'i,i -1,. v:i C'1 •.� d;,��'4.:�i Y S}1 �aw�� wY ti?';•tf4 +lit Vii' S"� Dri:d 1iL�otc„ '6cy'Q.-la u.'1e' at .:,4Lasi.�. 11 6'tnl.1.9 R k ... .,r'. ✓'� ., .,,...'a: i.I�.�,).C.'.L; ,-�'+�Y �. �:,. L�i,�'G.di, �. ¢i:. 4;; i:.d,`-i (w i;1+1; �..' t�. , ..%F�Y C: eS'dSe::L•s1 a. .F CI".'6 ...., ';2 i' 1 'IF L .f y-.;e.m bra" t LIV. Q ILJ LA i LU."i lov 2.t 01 "i b Ac,! quality of tha :A -y j7 i 'mize k'efaleiaLiOIL avAl LW j A",. I il lu k 1 & r Ya o -,t-ej�uc. rewourc.a unavoiclabl, e Dc"Lerifmation of aJ r ;L"MAty nwaaures�. f) 'R';::S. coa I d k vi L 1,v" k. I Ot i -,f ;Th a, c�. L p',CC:t:; a cVa t-j'a r. ro f ja mle. If collatn:."t,1011 tp-, 0 k: u, w e 14 J u �6 -i- III a.? P. lop, is t a'A 3;tormvatev c.owlui�� SY 10 F-I:ct! fire fighting System. i) kf�':.kO za'd Including wiadrowa; ac,'L arr.�-s%a for cov.l&s �vmty beccifile dislodged from tv D Le axgy Mm'-, 1-i1.lsidt.'s `wallw, dikes, vegetation Za.d "lianuala) o J) Cl bitace - 1: of ci�nstruction in buildin6s r1j I katd qv,! 4: ty 2) 11-1m, wati dLitrlbut�-:d Lo ,.J. -,e ta.� lo-vil'e, v.i: 1, StateW. j I I.. Drr, W. Mayhew, Uie 2. Coacliella V,,aley CoiwaLy 1.4iater scierce Dept., UCR 3. She'riff A2 , S'.-)-�JLhern Califor-ftia Gas 4v Sandy UnalAfted 11 chool Diad: 14atex Quality Coutral Board #7 5, i,.,- ric u:1 turd]. Cowncis'sioaa-r" 111dio FroLeCioxi Ajr�Mcy. PL-oll1rall Uat; L', C,a:rwzty Parks Deptt, bdiaort D'A &U1 (30".'ervaticip% Service 1� �,S� k;O�-Xty RWA4 1741)0ki 3) i'gauc� to <.., t Y. - " - 11 ' wi*a' hava Lo clear InT D-rLt-c.r Qua,j-it*y C trul I a rcL an BO C,18 c co k (AtJa in a norual oxs-ensioil L k 2" ZJJ .;r Ur A.T1 !;o,-.ndLsta l. 3,1(431 Wb,.i�'Q �_'�",kj) .rL!d L :v i—k 4 41 J f 1� S, 0 h. i L ca Oadl; rive) ait U-, Aay Blot ze [w dau f"r y] if k 4owevaro Stat -e .:r '::;t de t WiLh soo,,a, Pro 1 e z t 6 is i ZA'S Vould egul.vaIxat ot, potelz , J 'a.j. CiL.. L" I.WU ZWi 1 d ef,. LS c. o rJ i': Z U I ft 0. waay brlu& more Will Tamult la Will be. ii.:41(' le d utiII-1), 1]'6: ;YJ ou roads, V.a ",i r QUTAIJ,i: j- C')VI rO I iY4. the Upper Coachella Valley grou 4ACIft./yr'.. hitt igatiou OWUS(I.Cea ixcladv- Ox.� ,A),-ot"(14. RJ_,we,:: vater 'Whicil is of l"er quallity thall tl`C! With �v-tiuupd devA,opia-eitt is tjas vt,,,1,;n, (sou.,.ci of groundwater quality Will'. occuL* DewirtmaUL of a;v:i it Draft EIR does UGt ,-�`..SCUUS JAIIl OU J),,Lirj iA t e .;Ivara J, a refi&retnce to a9lCiCUiLure.', but. the aeriaL p1'i,,;,tugva1'bo Ciz�.',.2 7.71ze Citly 1p&Lc.atirsu of thv extelit iald type of CrGPS b_,A11:.g jx?,cwz1 ��a tti'e a .) , gricultural ecoa�wy of the Coachell.0 Valicy is dc_--szijbed, but tb.ti it"Pact of t4v project Oi. that econowy to okt itced_ Ali, PollutlQti Control llt:W•Srkt tho: LOP5 of the 1)r,ujiact wil.]. remain as open wilA%Ai will pro,. e4ct agi$InBt fut%4re. poliatlati., M L% project woijld ad ayA aij . b. OU'At Of alliitted PQ11ULUx1t.S! hoveveyd coutiauing of jlr(;Jacts , oJ: thie sizra wouI4 colle-tivaly produc,L- a 1*.ej,�_-ri oration 1r, air I quali:y, kPA ,4L11Qtin No. :ixidicates a tocal daily euisalon frout .I.LLo-mob of -1.41,6 va,, 1-'r:e , 774 Lorw cizioted lu the L I.R. coatractor yau.:A; cowplly vith :J1. appl-kcable A1)CD rules duriu6 cora; true Lico,, State iLir ?.ei�oute.ua adeqtiatalv.? Uscus-set; 'air cipality, elec..%ear. —oi-Project. CQ11C1-U,A0.,�,, Eo ba e-ilwilasizL-4'; 1,; Coaclvalla Valley qvialiLy i. -as been cLiaterirat la& Ouring the past few ve,ill:&, '-ape-lal.-ky is regal.d to duiit and o-� I Lidents., Local vehiculix $our. c.es,-: conLrfbu're 0 the 6atakiorating air clualtty. 3. Desert I:4mwiitlas iuu62;, cojaL%-_Lra th4ivqfilver, With reducing local emission autput" 4. bevulopwent.of'Lhw conqvuaity will Incteaue aucpxotAle trips., This r:oald resistt 1,4 a sigaiflcat.kt degradation of 'air quality �41thin th,�_ Ynlle.y the Jk�.M.-r,rib "'Ait of liviuka :i, T'Aid type of pro"CL w1_11elopr4ait,,i 4L ia the area. Coachella Valley RL:.!s bee', -t az au air quality L"Axiteuaace (A(A_16,) and a Cr 1 J�.i L.'_ _ . , -e tr Ci P-voject apprza4 to have a tie t ria.:al t':1 ep"t"(41CL :M tITA,6 TWIUtakaiug ht,.-UJ,x,hf III 1w J�i:!, that a a4mber of visoul%�ea prcb.-bly d, JWXJ,-,4L4 1.)rOJVC'Z CO!Wt-;'Uctioillt, C iv i; y Ar ch a e)1.`3i`}' LUtlgaucl:; 1,11;3 s') A4. to wvoi4l W%'Ae a u/ e'J� -_Vdlu&Llo� �xu 0.11 JU 4f.: L L A ix.. 60• E" i I 7:Os ources fin C$ f thl 0 L'Arl, E EIR vY7 t,S CL, LU C T 0 r o r edi J_U the T1, v, 4 L v-1 and '?dequataly, ldalicltj.ez d J) Y: IlaI I C'. 2 vq)" »4 1. ae,.vera..), Gutdalinas: rr+Iqu C' -.'y be 1'ac.)vtded is an LIL� a. A. �Ulpact o'p. Ole aavl 1: "Punde4t ul:baxili;aU, 4'A and t!I.- CC 0> d proposed project. 11 t-ihe, 10 ioL icajYact ari�, ", requir,;,t ud,tigatnioa� p p g i' t: ta t ILI e (I rOft L I 1*G11 of, ad(?,icional v.(.advlw6 should a liiazard prcject is depaxear. upon the cow4t3:iictloo a of the (4uiuta F1jod coutt.-ol !reject "d oa-Gice d. Sewn.oe - pro,acf- lo'vva 4LEJ t'--V'Lj tV(-'1itWa1t fa 111t; Lf f I Ukkr t wiisr, be so aa no!" to L!a-radativa of aild rewie f)L)» or--sllia to rcAittze ovexall water deiiarjj. 4a. Valley grcuadwacs-,�v btwin is— —eB- 4- 1. -k ia ta d b ti 0 U 0 a. c! t' y -. : . Ree,1-1'ay.--4 tn S the baSiat CC?10r;'dO Alva -z llacLx re&,,ult 171, d,--j;xadation of groua&datax- qu�lllty. czowtll illd".C?vtni-t from Lido prc.-Ject 'would C;�)Ixtlllue 1Uc;:v'a4Aa" da'.alaJ141 1. Fire liaLar(I e-,L1L6tii i --i! Water K -r pv,,rpo,,3aa ta providp,4. -qlali�y - lht'� AM) viiUavicsd a tonal &ijy emission fro* a °1 t 0 a wj b ap of 1.48 tam' .Ajaoa� 0,.,aAble-thaa ccs rimazad,in J;ha Draft 911. 41r R-esourcea Sojr4 Q-,acha'Ux Vall.ey A;aa,,.fm A. Critica), Aii Area (CAt. iYA dir.,attaJ4 th-at. till, 'Valtrj cul.rently c xpeada aud cOUUQt mat tile 1977 Naicv'al O." ,lx f;Aturia public -�;all ea tV.*;04 Gervica Should oliooil lie Yk. G 11-.-V'kiz'."'L.'a zad acrvivk� to a 4-41) =Lt vw:fV. req -Are of cud wauE.a 4e conul&!Xad siguificaut: Da -,13e 0± 03 n J bt, C! VL1 I ey L", 11. o.. 2. J, Spi.cific of the ijroj,�:Cr that W11.1 Et)LL-Tw JZ-'_ ;nad 116,e Pel:11LtS, �_IaCL DUP4;, the, L11, IC , C.'_ T. 4� Jx,.C:reafAI%, aI.u-.-rnaLI,VeS IL -Y Isut th 6'. IaL the lonp, rvua k;:Oots Ilat'Ur.01 f"as Will -IM651bl lkc,waver 'rhe Clilaii-a "d very high pevce�tUge 4 u_LaLt.ac. La the La quiltta Co -'ie area appear,to Vmwidvt:^for solar ener6y. :Px:v-,;aaUL Solar taC111101.0gy Could y for faallitiipm zelatea oauergy _,-Q! .F AE -4r 613APX`0j#!Ct,, vLUiUU4G 1014.YSIS: 1) Cam-patIblAtI.-y =4 Pv�Cunl-AaI The proposal to Iu ma -,,,y vvqzi tc a"Asting golf courso and cauuti,-y club to the Bar;t, L lli:.I eJY.VbaIA_,yr bo de aivu gince tho me to the Ifaat IWjS devc...Iazed Add.;Lti4mlal wagco and eulari.,arotut of prcaaat wit2l the Preposel aad some of these may be object!OUA�11151 reuideuts. The aevagki I -J -a to cm_a�,:,o wli;hin the immkdiaLo Urea. plaut axid ato les b�� 1. in addiTAGa. tho. ;,Jroij;.ud pad could. be -a atAsence if riot: pruparly iA.Li&ate.d.. 1.6?. plant UUd hej;LQCjp'Cfzr I)ad will require p%A).'.' ic ut�u A,_'J.'sar ThL P_r0JQCt IS 1,11 with tba La QoL. ItIa (,v%Ta w:'.�•A-a Oleander fLeaexvui., beirg Qua of L110. majo#;. vt zlLia :,iIf.p.ACifIC prt.pu4as to utilize tha f1. iiia k0x" 4--1 afid '11i'a reservoir will evabta I:),- $l -.at "ilave be= oubject to floodiul, is t1a Th.(;. "A.. IZI,14L: u-junu'Am, .9;i opom. space is approprizte due 'Lo thell eeevic nz�,tur CoL5J.Lt.,; Gt1113;1 v;uj.?:j oxi 621 am -a of vxhic% ly 3�0 oil tile G=e1c'a Vlau azte. sp,!.Ce a.11C lcavi:gid fs oct; &usity of abow: 4.5 unl,8.k; 1Iper T'he 11mi arn Loto lertsity imd pvoj. Ct as WIC.P, tilt..- Gen : -al 1116n;i_ A:.,I veflects the otqueutriaa ��hr: i.;ate;i�aOU4.'ak� '2Z on the Cove CotUU3xW,.,.!E; Genela). Pla.a. A.i! vl,�Ui of E� (J.aas 11 blkap�fitvh ac, -I Ad'iJve. TtIis ii�,; 11�Uvderl vith tile -=.ai2odad. T i'44� IL ILO 11W Of V4V It"Part-0 with t-jO4 CQ41foem A-1 -rI AM A-3 114i�401*�'u elan fm -4-w %afflue Ulf ti62 Aivvrelikv 2. use C-"'%t*wPkbraj t 'whim dt;Pw;."AI' the OiPpIladnt Ajj'A'"" fivot r"%Jtejn 14rmitis and/or CG=ay 4PVCIftvA1XY irt;;&.444 twwrolm. j.4r ;;xjtu or CIVV4�=CSA OhAkI be th* - + Di a of tko of lkl""US � aa'%kty aft t've rtfu O -f ViWOURLWO builMug Pavult for tLa "a "kj'a"kAtcal hwa4wifri"k, 3. Ca"Grewtiub of, tL.-I dILwftIOVuuu1V Pw4 tt%d ha-taby W -Y he do" PZOSM06- AVOLY11% iitil adf%-;�at* IS OOAwtr'wted "' 011 &OOMA4 UuLto &M, favelliti** VrwldW t, Z'U2� '44velovowat with tjV& jatumt4 QW, ztqp vurvc -m*w of app"Vel fkw th* pm�viwgi'-&A '4f 004* 414ma" k�-.�uganal Off -"'""t &Uttagob"O 0z'"44 trJ WdwiOAte 01muldtlov. azd the &4*060 bholl b�g Im pram out 4:f Oz a-mli tQ "-a Ci;mmiQ4Iqn U� f*II%'Vkq 6001*090 *dCh QIV4u *f Tho C4MW'C=1*" tit tl-.W fttl�l V&Ojt�-.t Will be t* the "tILS"at'" dwvelaped mW mQjatjgtu*j ics 0�rd4M* with the of the V 1imMuto i9nd the qhmumm'k to (b) COVOCAnte'trA -ractricawaw to bw 4f"'"&#Mnt tu Sw QYIt*x*d into with". the bra of tim kmito of t&A Tho app"vej eov*nuutu CdyA wdwd at tt;b 926u. ttkw that Ow 'MWAIJyjaia., W'Ot$ S. A mrogrAwlit OubCany tth tLIt un44WILfI*d rigkt to casvat tin bwr,�g" of tie IndIVUL41 Units foo recBmIable mQtnt*u*rw-'q W@ -k.10 Sho-11 h't; 8:wt*Ib"4hed O"d coat 'nL"v' 'a& ly wAi'-3t6!,iwd- U4 aOintainame rtspensibility i 11 i"ClUdS 1S0d*V.QPe blawgand U. -O wind protection TM "rAItL%n:a& and rostrictiom Wall provide Specific Plarr of l,arul USB No. .�.. it#orra. of App-n4yAl Psi* 2. for 4 perpetu&I W*Ut ,y tj-so ��rr�y��i e;ouprny to reduce the h4zards of a:"a:a�c►}ailgi.�$ sand and soil, to and sell. ,end tc estahlish and maintain raw or Addltfu:41 as r;�quired for the proper control of blowiam— Iho 41halg(Mu:i& co a �y Pi,.;l'� mve the right U1 lien the units of Ow "r+ci"s who def ul t irk Che p0="14 Of thair asses5mt"., Such lien shall. not'ba o suborrdirrtd to any tnCtiwbf4fces 000-r than a first died of trust provided such demi of trust is made. Ill good faith and for yaiun and is of record prior to tilers licca of Liza cM,UrY, 6. Prior to recordation of the fi wa subdivision rip ur i suartce c`f a lusilding or grading permit, tht p4mittee shall subvit a preliwinary gr-Ading plan to. tha Director of Planning, shall in tuna refer it to the Subdivision Comittee for revitw aM approval. The plan shall delint4te pad clev$tions, s 1 i pes. street cearterl,i rre elevations, drainage and other i nforw tion necessary to evaluate the iWact caused by the proposed grading and cor.Vliarace with the mandatory �r�nts of the County CWts. The plan s�tM l lc Lr'a�: to scale in acco nce with the +countyrequirmants, but not saw1lor than one inch per pane hundred feet'(]" 100.D°). .Che aievation on tilt final grading plan shall bat within four feet. plus or sloes ( 4') of thg approved preliminary grading plan. SPECIAL, C[3iiDITIORS. A. Prior to the issuN Ke of a building perrei t, a landscape plan. prepared by a registered landscape architect, shall be submitted to the County Planning Departmeat for approval, delintitir`.g genas and species and size of all plant material. Said plan shall include a sprinkler plan. All slope plantIN (cut end fill) shall be of a variety that will preclude +eresir n. This plan shall include: (1) Grading Plan (2) eikeimW Plan (As per Exhibit A-3) (3) Ealuestrian Trail (As per Exhibit A-]) Said plan shall also inclu& a method for noise attenuation for the az s adjacent to Eise*iower Drive and along the 50th Avenue portion of the proJeet, and shall be equivalent to but not less in effect than a six (h) foot solid masonry well atop a four)foot r~th +ea -n bear. The aethod of noise attemation wloyed ins de eted or wdified by th;v� 91anning Director. lz71 fir•.. @s.._ iovy;'.{. b. Fal—&Ittief $*A l MruVI40 0 #.ftP41 rIMU tib 8y&tV4 t'lWae**AMt tW ontirs pvject as per Cy hiu t A-3. gni araae th*11 bo clairrly 44el Lna4 t*d tt► It 04 tti'?44 y4 l& i�Aw : # n* S"d th& *"-4$ "111U FhTft" +end & dircetfortl terrao v x'kw bikoway a urfttco in mt 1ems tbain . 24, ittt4ro nit W Gz b lhni e vdim. r* koatien of t•he bi.ie paths "WSJ Cani'crM 04rAL-&AtiQ8ly to EA61:6it A-$. C, All bikewaya m',zj , tsj,4:!A.ua;v wig t"riaaiguating bier trails,, located at and D. All equtstrt&n trails g1jull he eo.,iotruct4W La .subat(Antial conformance with Exhibit Ad I. All grade, crcg;ai";gs ahall bo mori%ed with vetal *too *,,tQucaj:AjmA to WSIX0. k11 urst+rion. biryclu and 6w.;daetrrian tursnela, wakcps"to OT irr143-36 tr%sll hUV* *fight f+tet of yzr•tictl cl�es,--anet jjw bottcAtu to soy jrxpu&43 aamior of do bridge tvll:;w fay +ad+uat rey��sti�sr� �r+e's+ae. ` E. Permittim *hall p"pard arnfi�,�6;a��it tl fn�.l.antin,g to the 1ir�lt°side Cxrt my papartwilt of rl" ftVt*CttfgAg (1) 1Dev*1*1wr dhall provide a eater aystfs fQV t8ch ptsiser sal each phase to deverloped, Eepable of owtims the future fire protection (2) gt,ior to Conatt,getica of moo III the G*velaper 4hall su"ba tt a easter watt r plan to the liv erai.de County 8tvarts"t of Ferre Protection for opprovel. 21w avatar wafer pian Shall LMIA de tlw rater source and atom%& Cape bUlty ane# dl*trfhutlaa► Swain location ark, state. r , W Y F. Prior to final building imp 00f, lei law puss, tm 1whotlsetsl 1t11ti In the p> edi*g phase shall, have hems mianably aced substantial if .� coeaplated a. lipplicent ShBil +apply fOr s soft +4hUV sod 1Msu 9FVr0VG1 to aMP1y with the approved 8poaifiC Plan of LAM 986. W. the bikoloth sidag 4iss�r .sad T"UM 81014 be "40"tod as part of ?Mae 11. i, Aa a part of each phate the appi(c4at *halt *dolt for approvol s detailed %Lan to Ow Director of building sad Sefety for the pure o of datai.ltng tiw wethoda t�At the peraeittso shall utilize for the control of blawlag *and, dust mud dvbris. Such prsrt9Cti0u shiell be provided by mann of wizidb eakag via1Las f*nftM, r3MAelt9i shd interintag vaptation covaring the lend. opplrip4 rater or other tawteria1, ter othor vffective wsthod or cambirAtion of-mtlwd* of holding Cher soil in pl.arr., . I,. PiAge 4. 1 44 piwided for the antim Soacific Plar, At -03 Atli 66411 �4t prior W Flul 10PULI4A Of Sri Port of Phase Ili, GWD:KDD:nlw 2/6/75 SUMMARY OF HEARING RIVSRS IDE CUU.'M PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 26. 1975 SPECIFIC PLAN Of LAND USB 121-1 R"l 402 - Bid* 2 (309-369) pLAt4NING 402 2 9-, 5 2 --,,a,,thowcr DAve , IV 1.:: '.. , , j thv� wak4th,, oil '01 1" 1 �,C- vg� bi� - go tL4 Qqu"itviau- Oral. . cm 1. 'G I i e!th VILA The Po::��-�,-� Th,L rwl i,P6 i't, and tho 13" Cs•z io 4: aa 4-� r i -I TlI,- w7.-, 6- 1 --'; 1, � ;.rn Wonq no hakohmn WvCQ;:v, 11 ' 1. v. 1 a 01mm! at 3:23 U.n, >01 1 sit I, OWWWWWass Wllholdu�' My totaled, too WmAy 1, 1 vLmWn:.nKadlutka A wIt in! not No. A! Cal snAINIQ 10: so, Ohs syllaval of SP1,10, ellm 31N]"Z, mamblou s ArA .0 AVA, 0030"t ng ,..ha Plugivaj Q004060'.! ewwa.wj, sound 0a fho MINIS ti- i m Pz"jo x t nvnW U.1, maid is 4 C0,100bla Won cn my1moWnt Und van. 1 �Pvouonm 10,1011 vs"glaWas A davn!Qpmw� v .40 Own, ...;?fid Bat the afgavvil.at enNown L MY Tujm:.�L; Co.'nact ally 0 :..,.IMM 41 adopting 0u thm, POIL CALL VOTE HESUIXED Pm FOLUM. AYES; Coat Ammiamys 16 33 Mv 17 ;e, WAMIQn. Gloman zoo y"11"mID" W", 1. twit 0A, 1010 m wind, .0 L lose 10. W two Pkapony. now Walm"t z1V..-..uins 0 : - 11 w to it MA a ,a m. W. 1, Z Q :040 �Ald chat only t 4, at TO mf Lilt dm; Q Go this yZapavy 3 tun dAzAny Oil... 1031 yonj coull tcm" cV�vjkju a clan, tc uoa x%,A� 2wMina n Vasil No 1110, av:a of bY Lh— C.AOKQW'z an a k ny. M 012� Ad ant lost My candfu2no uall Qj�m'�. Co W W 0 ; A—F QNIWQ� 1b;-;! AMMU &SKyn ROIL. 1 0"11 " AZO Kv win W 6A too W 3 LOWNDLI An PMUf L":jt 14005247, L.1 0610410 any Aj.c 1" saW 00v 11 alto POP ZAMA a "Lin ox W PLEPW&Y.- � ;.rn Wonq no hakohmn WvCQ;:v, 11 ' 1. v. 1 a 01mm! at 3:23 U.n, >01 1 sit I, OWWWWWass Wllholdu�' My totaled, too WmAy 1, 1 vLmWn:.nKadlutka A wIt in! not No. A! Cal snAINIQ 10: so, Ohs syllaval of SP1,10, ellm 31N]"Z, mamblou s ArA .0 AVA, 0030"t ng ,..ha Plugivaj Q004060'.! ewwa.wj, sound 0a fho MINIS ti- i m Pz"jo x t nvnW U.1, maid is 4 C0,100bla Won cn my1moWnt Und van. 1 �Pvouonm 10,1011 vs"glaWas A davn!Qpmw� v .40 Own, ...;?fid Bat the afgavvil.at enNown L MY Tujm:.�L; Co.'nact ally 0 :..,.IMM 41 adopting 0u thm, POIL CALL VOTE HESUIXED Pm FOLUM. AYES; Coat Ammiamys 16 33 Mv 17 ;e, WAMIQn. Gloman zoo y"11"mID" HM 59516 f�kdtViSkLt �.i.+�sd! f PW4[411,4 CoMwl yA{JN DESERT UJ Fl( -'- J vacember 6, 1974 ' 5 Daily Snt•rpriss Legal Ad Deportm*nt SUMUC?t Notice of Completion Under .P�c�rteenth WW Orange Crave California fanriro�tal i �yorside, California 92501 Act (UQA) Quality �C�rlea�enr " claaed please find Notice -)f Coapletion in conaaction wtth.,th■ subject natter to appear one time only In the Riveraide Interprine, not later than Wedneadry, ' . cembar 11, 1974, in order to comply with County procedures adopted to implwaeut Plaaaa furnish this office with affidavit of publication " duplicate anal bill In triplicate. very truly yvusa„ iuvXULDE COUXW n COMMSION A. E. 110woomb-PI —smS. Director 1_l Baa�el I. Erenssin�pscretaty BIS/poi+ knclosurs County of Riverside NOTICE OF COMPLETION gide County rules under the California Environmental Quality Act, tiiat Notices of Completion of a draft environmental impact report the. County Clerk for each of the projects listed below. Written comments ;'m'l ! :;iy be filed with the Riverside County Planning Deportment, 4080 Lemon SLA'CUt, Kivarside, California. 92501, until the date indicated, 1. EIR No. 41, Specific Plan 121-E, proposed project consists of 420 unit hotel expansion, 637 condominiums and a 27 -hole golf course development on 622 acres, La Quinta Area, January 3, 1974 6 �Tjj �. .,� fCf. :.c �•rsy� .+.. ,, t• r t •; �.M s r "t }� I' y[ 4 $ Il+t aE iH: "Volroldo pquaty i'1*usiing Co aaa►iou, 488:0 Geavm ��t eta weXaioa� rDi tlasn ��3ti. or ;.8 .6191 Comraauy TTOnsloitla t Date Return Uquestod=Jan. 3 191 SUBJECT PIKOJI ; ...U,-QuWa..oTennis Club C99 NO.S. V. 121-9 OTHER RELATED AxEJ►:_.....tom. ��$ _�.�.�. ____�_.__. . �� APIPLYCAIA TO: ��- Laviroiwrntal Impact Report ('Use Paragraph t belowl'' i ono Changs r. Variaaica ), Conditional Vac Permit ) Mire Paragraph,, �T bylaw) General plan Amendment ) Other Specific Plan 1,'Environmental :act Lepart: The attached dar,a was prepared by the prQJect aponsor and ii being fot-war4eci to you for r(-:co:mnendstlons and cocrient.O.,: The Cot ty ij interested iq the pcotrahte. i:c:par_ts oo tt.e: A. Natureenv(roon&nt (k.i;: water and air polluticn; Eire laz477ds; destruction of n..t:ural l:dbitat:ti; redt}Gt_on`.0 prudycci•ve agriculture, etc.) aro B. plblAc reylautces ((O,g. demand for water produccl.on and distribution focilltit;9y impact on sc:!iools, hospitals, recreation, pai; ,4 and ar.ree;:a; tequirement for pcmar ge:iexation and distribution-, impact on sewage treatment and collection facilities; impact on othryr utilities -:nd public services). Late reports phould be Fccwacded regardless of the date return requasted. You may keep enclosures for yo►►r Me. . POMMENTS RPCARDitifs ENWRQt#Mk NTAL IMPACT REFORT. Cas service will be provided to this project from a 4" main located in 11senhower Drive without any significant impact on the environment. This will be a normal ext6nsign of gas service under Rules 20 and 21 on file with the Publ�c Util,ities3 Commission, HEONVE 0 DEC 181974 RIVERSIDE COUNTY 14. REPOWNDM cPNDTTYONS 14R A."PR.OVAL OF PROJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION P. R. Schallert xit Baa.,., DiMisi,2n 5_uperintendent _�.._ Late. 12-ij i4 _. 61koe474 you s4i4ili t.o 1)aa notiflic4 of thiA date ui pulalic heutlug, plups4 inti;atv. „ (114t.11'A ti. a•riginal. to Pldn4illg Departmer.t., 4080 Ler,on St.'uct, R: vprsidn, (a�.i►iu;tact 9 �C.:l) yq, 7'I� SS ' y, ��t copy sont #o dimd alke J 1 P'' �. '�Yi [F,4/PiOI1, Y!,, T FROH; Riverstdo County Planning Comirtission, 40,80 Lenon Street, TO' Tronamittal Date. -Dec, 3. 1974 &0 2AJ1,X Date Returp 1uq6&sted-.J an. 3, 1975 : & Tennis Club CASE NO.S. F! 1�1-E S"JECT p8.{3 Z C T L a AQW10, t 0. KRIVI-e—P-0 if— OTHEK RELATED AREA:__J,a APPLICABLE TO'. X Knv.4rotwntal lwpact Revort (Use llarasrapb I i-elov) :Qni 'I'AaLe w. CL Variaoce CandlLiolhal UOV POrmit (use faragravh IX oelow), (;eZeia L Plan Amendment Other Specific Plan t. Environmentalm _L_FAc t 1±p3-K,G. 'lite str_Licked data u7i,.i prepared 1}y the p 0 1 V., 0: t f;ponsor and ij bein's i*orwardect to you for reco;mnendal:fc11-s ai,d comments. The Ci;vnry is intere$L,6 is the is(-.pecrs oo Ltie: A. N,R+ural, 'PrivIcop'ne-rIX WACC!t- ..Rd air pollutio. i; fire hazi:d,,; dear.ruction Of rl..-LUVaL Labitat.tj: jck4duct-Wti.oj jj:()duetiv%� agriculture, etc.} are S. publf.c rf,;11--jJces (e.g. 4eciand for water productl9r, and distribution facil-Ue3; impact on scl iools, licspitale, recrearion, pnzi,e; untl -,irr(tot. tequirem&nt for pov,4r ge.-.vra-zion and distribLtion-, i.mpact on sewage treLqtvt4n.f, and collection facilitiev,, impact -�n oth-?r utilJv-iks :MLJ pubis service.;). bate reports should be f-;xwardvd regardless of btv late rqtk1rtk To-qul,�.Qt'ed, You spay �.eep enclosures for your C0:041?,NTS RECAP"WJJG ENVTR0!1MF.N'TAL WACT R120RI Gas service will be provided to this project from a 4" main located in'Eisen4bower Drive without apy significant impact on the environment. This will be a normal extension of gaq service under Rules 20 and 21 on file with thellublic Utilities Commission. HUEHEU � DEC 181914 RIVERSIDE COUNTY, 11.' RF(7,01-1�0�, NWCD CONDTTInN,7`R XTVJ,:OVAL (4 PROJECI: PLANNING COMMISSION "DEC 1374 Y F, R. Schall{-rt Divis ion_9iq}e.lrttend(.tnt Pik 7`1 vppy zcnt W deurt offico .C": 0. 110 t lie, (f:F1 IOU Im r r. i 11cr.y1X I Pik 7`1 vppy zcnt W deurt offico 1974 -C i` X974:. 2lVF jr COUNTY 1FK* 111.04V6Vaxd0:1WMty Planning ccl mnissl.os,, 1080 Lr,rron Street, Rivitrolde, Cal ifornli 0; ,•: QtWI&X Control Board -(i7 --- - - Trsns:aittal Date: ec. 3, 1974 Data Roturn Reyueatad;jan. 3, 1975 SUBJECT PROJECIi_L Quintc�Cove Golf & Tennis Club CAST Kp.S. P. 121-E - _ TtiER R1: ATED _ AREA:. La Quince APPLICABLE TOs _� X Env>l,:onmental Impact Report i;flse fa rsagraph I below) Zone Change ) .�. — Conl1}.tiwral Use Permit } (lj$e. Paragraph 'T.l helot+) Gen4•rsl Plan AmendmenL ) nt:her Specific Plan I. EnvLror_mental ImparThe atta.hed data r;d:s prepared by the project sponsor and Fis bni.nS. forwarded tV. you for recovamAn ations an,i cotrrienta. The Couns.y f_A ' intereste4 in the pro'able impact4 ou tli(ra A. Natorfa.l en.✓irosizent ke.g. water ane air po?l.lt:ior; fire h&zazds; destruction of naLur.a:'' habitats; reductla7n of producLive agriculture, etc.) Inc B. EubLL c e!;csurc e s (e. -g, 4e,,;iand for tater production .un(i dis>t,ribu':f*.on facilities; impar t on r�r'iools, tics�� .l.a: �s rt:crcatlo;.z, rar'k.s ind streets; requiremi:r t for pow,i:r ;eneration and clist.rlbto iota; impact on sewage tr. - raLvient, and c:ollectiost faeilttiets; impn.ci on other utilities nad public services), ,ASE tP raa is should tie. forwarded ;regar.iles:f; of t:hc. daze rt.117 M ;requf::rt:L , you tkay keep enclosures for yc,'ur file, COMMENTS REGAPJITNG -EMIHf.)(v ENTF;, IMPACT REPORT; - The statements on pp, 101 and 102 concerning groundwater are not entirely correct. Overdraft in the Upper Coachella Valley ground- water basic; is currently esti,*hated to be 30, 00Q ac/ft/yr. The current plan is to mitigate the overdraft by 'echgrging with Colorado River water, This recharge water is of lower mineral qu4l3tY thin the existing groundwater and it should be recognized that,, with continued development in the upper Coachella Valley, some degradation of the groundwater quality will. occur, 11. RECOW;1'1414D (:OIJDITI(`hS FOR APPROVAL OF 1'ROJEC'T: RI vLN.P},a- p�APvZ INE COMMISaiON DES-;z't OFFICE Submitt-ed by. _ (">�r•� ., "t�r:nc; MG- Dennis Heiman rlti�":_Fn�rixnnme��,al.�&e�ialit��___. 511atsld you wish t,o be 111+tic fed ut the. date of pul,ltc ;st,i isig, pl.:.%Ise fnclieate•__..._._—__— (ltwLt+''n t:o Plunni og Depoai nrjcnt . 46c'0 Lotion :>tuvot , I.ivcr:vide, Cali Crt�+i.n �?: �l 'l ) PI) 'r1 -35k Dr, ellll. ce r 12 , 191,1 c COPY rent to desalt office .l(. W; T 11) f),11 11 i Lig te D E C 12 1974 _._. Mary 1- -- Mike ke turn ee I Ohl". TO: State of California Der t;er �. iS►74 The Resources Agency Secretary for Resources 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311 Sacramento, California 95814 NOTICE OF COMPLETION Project Title La Qu -Lata Covrr Uol.t 4 i'taata talub S. P. 121-8 Project Location - Specific P rVEL ��SE111iu',•rt:x ,:T lC ut �� VC.11li3Y ;urrowu-IL4, ti+e ""k3tjar. La :{iliFltlfl JGLCil 'roject Location - City I Project LocationCounty )escription of Nature, Purpose, and Beneficiaries of Projec i;�;i HrH1 - a�iriC��C 1'idu ��), a,, Ox`t7,lil: 4,4 NrV.iCCL C-uawi::L:a O� 42y wA i:u;�:tusiu�iv G"i7 u.;ruv,.:J.:�1�.t,.:a uu, �: �i 1u:�l.c: Y�i� C:tuL"!i�' u.c:ve:��,t�nt r� . �+�i'...�ti•7'� .. . ead Agency vision Cuuar.y of Riveral4a I e,'JanninG Address Where Copy of EIR is Available i iveroUA C#Amty PLnninf Leparterat, 4Udu Le a Street, Rom 101, Riverside, cA 92501 Review Period 30 -- 90 Days Contact Person Todd F. seei er CC! Clerk of the Hoard Pfesert Office PD -74-19 TFB:pmp 5-29-74 e I Phone 714 J 787-618L xtension November 279 1674 -nwns26lXD0 a Sdrsrd G. Hill, Attorney 44L west Second Street .Sao berwNrdina, Califoraia Indio Administrative Center 46-208 Oasis street, Room 304 Indio, Caiifornia 222QI (714) 347-4$110 Ext. 278 Ae: Specific Plan Of Lind Use NO 121 g*or lir. Ml.11: �.An per our conversation of Yoves"r 22, 1/749 ro@ardLM the Specific for tics La Quin"Ccv* Qolf i Tennis Club, plan tt is oirlr Pleasure w aountr Club P'Psi *xklbit for the La QuInta ,Motel Golf Couesg title 1 r Droject. if we can be of further 'Desistance please fool frog to Coll. aw:nlr coal. CC: Riverside office YOUN's very tribe RMASIDE COUNN MANNUM DEHAR A. E. lid - Planning D I rectoe Ara p"m - noreer sponsible Agency: EA N0. RELATED FILE: ASSESSMENT EVALUATION REPORT epartment: PLANNING, _ COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY: Date: 10-29-74 Todd ;f, Beeler ect Sponsor: La Quint& Cove Golf & Tennis Club c/o H. Schmitz roject Title and Description: Specific Plan of Land Use 121-E, a planned residential community with hotel and golf course, North of Calls Tampico, on East and West aides of Usenhower Drive, La Quint* The following is the evaluation of the Planning Department of the abMM p ct; 1. Thath e i t f t e project s exempt from the provisions of CEQA beta .. NOV RIVtKSiu4 L7 SLi.1 GFFI(I 2. That the provisions of CEQA have previously been complied with, with respect to the project, and there has been no substantial change in either the project as. originally reviewed or the circumstances under which the project is to be under- taken. A Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report was filed in connection with: 3. That a "lead agency" situation exists with respect to the project and additional time is needed to consult with the other agency or agencies involved in order to complete the evaluation. Other agencies involved include. F 4. That the project will not have a significant effect on the environment and that a Negative Declaration has been filed. F5. That the project may have a significant effect on the environment and that on S environmental impact report is required,. 6. That the following additional information is needed from the project sponsor'in order to complete the evaluation. CC: APP. EA An Environmental Impact Report is voluntarily being submitted by CASE the applicant. TF$/pmp CC: Indio Office - Appeal period ends 11-12-74. Until. EIR is processed cannot 5-14-74 be set for hearing. pmp PD 74-16* WfICE OF PUBLIC HEAPUNG BEFORE `SHE RVERSIDE COtWY PLANNIXU COMISSION TO CONSIDER SPECIFIC PIAN Of LAND USE A ECTING LA _QUINTA DISTRICT y 4=ZM6 OF RIVERSIDE C0l`Wff NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that a meeting at which all interested parties will be heard, will be hallus before the Riverside County Planning Commiasion in the on 19 at _ .�� - - — �jAoA�o , P,,M.) to consider adoption of Specific Flan of Lanai Use No. 121-E affecting the La Quinta District area for the property generallybounded by Calle Tam ico on the South, on the Fast and West sides of Eisenhower Drive and more particularly described as follows: A portion of Section 1L_ T.6S, R.6E and a portion of Section 36, T.SS, R.6E, S.B.B.&M. For further information reference is node to the proposed plan on file with the office of the Riverside County Planning Department. RIVERSIDE COWY PLANNIM COMMISSION 4080 Lemon Street o Room 101 Riverside, California 92501 Wm, R. Livingstone - Plear nIng Director By: Hazel 1. Evernsen r Secretary SPECIFIC LAND USE PLAN # 121-E PUBLISH ONE Tli X ONLY - THE DAILY EN'TERPRIISE NOT LATER THAN _ AND EARLUERr, ILS POSSIBLE DATE.- NaME OF PUBLIC 1"Ri:W 1JEFORE THE RIVERSIDE CalW PLAX' JINC CN.iNOX.5;1. 0,4 n CONSIDER _PPECAIFIC PLAN OF 1:..MiU) OSE MTECTITAS NOVXCE IS HEREBY GIVEN, , that a meeting at which all interested parties will be heard,, will be held before the Riverside County Plawtirng Commission in the 19 of (A�M. A P.M,) to to nsider adoption of Specific Plain of Land Use N6 � a ffect f g the �L� �t �/ �74� � J area for the pruperty &L-nerally bounded by �- .,�,..,pA, tF and murk particularlydescribed au follows:a j7 /i vii 1, For further :Wformation reference is made to the proposed plan on file with the office of the Riverside County Planning Department. RIVERSIDE COLUff PLANNING COMMISSION 4080 Lemon Street - Room 101 Riverside, Califoxmia 92501 Wray., R. Livirngastoxne - Planning Director By: Hazel 1. Ewernsen - Secretary SPE( 1171fL LAND USE KL4 # PEBLISH ONE TIM ONLY THE DAILY ENTET3MI(SE NOV LATER 7t'WAN AND EARLIER, 1(1°-POSSLIiLE T DATE F] La Quinta Cove Golf & Tennis Club f Orn' •t' rogFicr r'aNs�cr, I Specific Plan of Land Use _j L r: J C/o H. Schmitz 44-900 Primrose Drive - of Calle-Tampico, on East and West sides of Eisenhower Drive - La Quinta District -6f the dboyc o!,.j,ftCt, 5 Lie edbiV0001" of the Jvl.,�Aninq bep'trout, I ''liot the projj.-rt fr" J;)'rovisioia, c c a c,, E2. UaL did prouvisiL)a--i 0 CCQA 4iive &edtOU�-!y -.0111p"I i Cd Wit"li W° 'I to the projcict,, afid, w.,era "ias bietO -40 St:6030t,3l.,JtAylt a in ii m`;:` t�4, ;,t A � 0 r -i 4q 1 nal y rev,, tFe C, ar4ce�irdc r JI i ctl' the pt -o j j k C, un4ert4ken. �'m.pLjve DeplaraTAul'or EnOrolic"O.', Imp COL �JjjeCt�,.)n 4 W1 th 3. 'Oi�A e "IeW ziaclrv,v` 51,tuet,.-,rl P -All, 1,5 W'sU., Owe is, rie�—eq to ciirssul y,. wAll 0- cx,1e;'._YV, to colilplkA& the eveluatiqn. .2 T i, L t OA Vle 4. TO t the rro, :e -(A o,A t".,Ive 6 hd t ii NeqaV ie, Or,� 11��is L)4-;E�V� f4i ie"J _Nj lu, t t t, h t I ovi ii j fj o T"i s 1 in Y'. to cctltj:'i to 01,ev 4'� 1;4"d La Quinta Cove Golf & Tennis Club C/o H. Schmitz, t137')00 Primrose 'Driv.e-,, Pame6grt, X X x x x * x LaQ X7 . . * x IwIndx x Bob Baier, Chairman of Incorporation Committee, 51485 Calle Guatemala /I r Z LaQuinta, CA 92253 Cove cumillullitie"i LDR, MDR, HDR, Gen. Comm. La (Ju illtd R_l$R-2,R- 3, C --F S H. Schmitz 43-900 Primrose Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 10/17/74 Specific Plan of Land Use C/Z GWD '7- r 1603 rVV x $15 x 631-30,37 38,39i 773-�02' 5r) S.P. 121-E X X x x x * x LaQ X7 . . * x IwIndx x Bob Baier, Chairman of Incorporation Committee, 51485 Calle Guatemala /I r Z LaQuinta, CA 92253 Cove cumillullitie"i LDR, MDR, HDR, Gen. Comm. La (Ju illtd R_l$R-2,R- 3, C --F S R li4xsir8cs :' Uti:�' "xAN`ti�il�G Lt> YI y;)1d1N A14-) 3, lilJ 'T 33 : Vlti,Ll� i�ojl' Ai'YLIC'1 NT) , A01;Rr.. i. NAhi 01 OWNER (if diilec�fu f roj9 t;iuJ4� AUbiiI-SS OF OWNER _ 3, Nil MF, uF REPRESENTA'i'm ADDRESS FOR OFFICE USE ONLY SUBJECT �. �`. � I LHS, �� .�'- 'C.. RELATED FILE G Z-'- _ --- - RECEIVED BY C_.7 RELATED FILES: EA NU MER _ } I_, Q. FEE INFORMATION End Appeal Period FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT EA Receipt Tract or Parcel Map MOBILENOHE PARKS, TRAVEL TRAI'.ER PARKS, RECREATIONAL General P1@n Amendment VEHICLE PARKS Flood Control Fees: (Amount) Number of lots 1; $1.00 $ 4. Application Complete Base Flood Fee 50.00 S. Filing Fee Attached -./-tr;E5 2 TOTAL FLOOD FEE b. Plot Plan Checked Assessor's Book No. _%-3�. , 33'y Filing Fee: Base $ .160.00 Legal Description 7 2S Number of Lore K $2.50 Complete and Checked TOTAL FILING FEE. `M 9. Tentative Hearing bate --_---_,_--_..__- - - -_ _ 10. Agency Deadline Date ALL OTHER CASES FILING FEE 11. Assign Case No. Z- 12. 12. Receipt for Check 13. Assign place on agenda (date and hour) 14. Newspaper 15. To be published not later than 16. Notice to applicant mailed 17. Notice mailed 18. Notice posted on property by Date SENT TO: EX j CM EX EX 1 A 11 � A CM A � C.V.C.W.D. ' Air Poll.Cont.Dist. . P . Chamber of Commerce Platt. Dir. ofI -THealth Dept. NDesert Office nd Use Dept. Road Dtpt. Permits Road D,apt. Planning S-t.Div.of Forestry Mater Qual.Cont.Bd.No 7 Dept.ut Development Building Dept. Commissioners_ ---- Other Notification:—�C l.. `� �'4;t !� �'`> o. fA., 1- wry <i �f•.:� Tc..lt. 1Vl—Jiff 3 cd ,:,�i.•� ft! :., ,le: .i ti .. i� ... ..`".` _ _.._—�.•.. .;J%? •......—.._� �J�l. ......._._.. �,;.••.1. .f. ,. .., . ... .. �r . 3., I. L� 14) Existing environment: A. 1'liysicaI Site lies in northwestern portion of: the community of La Quinta, adjoining the eastern city limits of Indian Wells. The westerly portion of project site is composed of steep mountains and foothills; easterly portion consists of a level alluvial plan. Small amount of ,Flood protection to the south via a channel and dike system. Water well levels average between 50 and 80 feet. Arid climate with annual rainfall of approximately 5.2 inches. B. Liiolo i.cal: Site includes natural areas (mountains, rocky slopes, bahadas), existing agriculture, and grassy areas. Some areas show evidence of horse and motorcycle use. These diverse habitats support at least 29 species of mammals, reptiles, and birdlife. The bighorn sheep, which may frequent areas near or on the site, is currently on the International list of vulnerable species and on the California Fish and Game rare species list. C. Cultural - Socio -Economic: Area is largely agricultural, with notable exception being the existing La Quinta Resort Ilotel and a Country club/residential development adjoining the western boundary. Principal access to project site via Eisenhower Drive and Washington Street (connecting with Highway 11); no direct public transportation to the site. Residential demand for area aimed at second -home, retirement home, and vacation use. Nearest fire station located in La Quinta, 1/2 mile southeasterly of project. Police service provided by Riverside County Sheriff's Office. Economic base of area is tourism, 1 recreation and agriculture.' r ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: 1) Adverse impacts and mitigation measures summarized from Draft EIR: a) Dust from construction - use of County blowsand control and grading ordinances to minimize sand blown during construction. b) Elimination of some of the natural open space quality of the community - use of cluster development concept to maximize recreation and open space areas. c) Elimination of some natural desert area as a scenic resource - unavoidable. d) Increased traffic - widening all major rputes. e) Deterioration of air quality - no i' `nrn- mitigation.measures. f) Reduction/destruction of archaeological sites - preservation of some sensitive archaeological areas, if discovered during construction until site can be studied by qualified archaeologist. g) Flooding - installation of curbs, gutters, and storm water conduit system. h) Fire hazard - implementation of an adequate fire fighting system. i) Wind and water erosion - complete landscaping including windrows; adequate energy barriers for rocks which may become dislodged from the hillsides (combinaLions of distance, walls, dikes, vegetation and channels) J) Climate - Encouragement of energy -conserving construction in buildings (full insulation and quality throughout). 2)' The EIR was distributed to the following agencies: 1. State Cle.aringhouse(25 copies) 11. Dr. W. W. Mayhew, Life 2. Coachella Valley County Water Dist. Science Dept., UCR 3. County Sheriff 12. Southern California Gas 4. Desert Sands Unified School Dist. 13. Water Quality Control Board 0l7 5. Archaeological Research Unit 14. Agricultural Conunissioner, Indio 6. Department of Devel.opmenl. 15. Fire Protection Agency 7. Desert Peoples United 16. County Parks Dept. 8. County Health Dept. 17. Southern California Edison 9. Air Pollution Control District 18. USDA Soil Conservation Service 10. Building & Safety 19. County Road Dept. 3) Agency Responses to EIR: t �`1 a. Health: Any sewage treatment system contemplated will have to clear with the Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department. b. Southern California Gas Company: Gas service will be provided to this project from a 4" main located in Eisenhower Drive without any significant impact on the environment. (This is a normal extension of gas service.) C. Fire Protection A encyr:+ Agrees with Draft EIR that no significant wildland fire hazards exist on the subject property, or in immediate area. However, any construction increases fire hazard when compared to that which exists on raw desert land. Report alludes to the fact that project will administer adequate water for construction site fire protection. Agency feels that "any project of this magnitude should provide all facilities necessary for public health, welfare and safety, including adequate fire flow." d. Road Department - Indio: Draft EIR suggests that an inevitable alternative to development is high density residential; elsewhere, EIR states that the Cove Area General 11l.an calls for low density residential. Nature of project (high-income, vacation) Letter than other possible alternatives; reduces impact on schools and other public facilities, tends to equalize loads on electric and water utilities, and helps to reduce summer peak loadings. Local roads (Washington Street and Eisenhower Drive) not in any short-term danger of reaching traffic capacity; however, State Highway 111is in danger and problem must be dealth with soon. Project �S- part-time residents would not increase the population base upon which gasoline tax allocations are made as would equivalent numbers of potential vehicles belong to full-time residents. Probability exists that "The more affluent families may bring more cars per household into the area. Whether this will result in generation of more trips is problematical." Drainage run-off will be handled within project instead of discharged on roads. e. Water Quality Control Board: Overdraft in the Upper Coachella Valley groundwater basin estimated to be 30,000 ac/ft./yr. Mitigation measures include recharge with Colorado River water which is of lower quality than the existing groundwater. With continued development in this region, some degradation. of groundwater quality will occur.. f. State Department of Food and Agriculture: Draft EIR does not discuss present land use on project site. There is a reference to agriculture, but the aerial photographs are the only indication of the extent and type of crops being grown on the site. The agricultural economy of the Coachella Valley is described, but the impact of the project on that economy is omitted. Present zoning of the site is unclear. g. Air Pollution Control District: Plans are that 2/3 of the project will remain as open space, which will protect against future pollution. This project would add an insignificant amount of emitted pollutants; howc-ver, cont.illuing construction of projects of this size w0ldd colle(Aively produce a :ie.ri-ous deterioration in ui.r quality. 1JA btil let hi No. l:I'A-450/2-73--003 indicate:; a tota .l daily emi.ssiorl from ;All Willobi l.eti of 1.48 tons Vs. the, .174 tons quoted in Lhe LIK. contracLor muni comply with all ilplilicable APCD rules duriut; construction. h. :ilnlc Air kw:;(urces 1ward: Elk tidoclnato.ly d1,scu:3:e:3 air quality elemc_rrt ll 1)1,C)it, cL.-(enclu, iocl!, to l� cni�lra;,iGi l: f. Co,rc.lte11;3 Vtrllc'y dil. granlity lin:, I)coi) doL(criorrlting durii)g the pa:;l lcti•� yirrrt;, ittlrcr`itrll iii r ;,.�r41 lu (1(1_31 illd oxident;. '_. l•oc:tl vc:Iricul,rr ;,ctr�c t:()ntr'il,uto to filer deter-ior<alinr, air quality. 3. Desert communities must concern themselves with reducing local emission output. 4. Development of the community will increase automobile trips. This could result in a significant degradation of air quality within the Valley and reduce the desirability of living in the desert. 5. This type of project will encourage other similar developments in the area. Coachella Valley area has been designated as an air quality maintenance area (AQMA) and a critical air area (CAA). This project appears to have a detrimental effect on achieving and maintaining healthful air. i. County Parks Department:_ Draft EIR indicates that a number of archaeological resources probably will be destroyed during project construction. County Archaeologist should survey and recommend adequate mitigation measures. Survey should be completed soon so as to avoid undue expense or dealy to developer as well as proper evaluation and/or excavation of the threatened archaeological resources. 4) Environmental Quality Section Draft EIR evaluation, Impact Analysis, and Section Recommendations: Rpni nnnl Sattino of thg In Qiii nta Hotel Pro ar.t The Coachella Valley in general is a region of abundantrchaeolgical remains of Indian cultures. In part thiAdue to the fact that artifactual material is well preserved in the extremely arid environment, Such material is also commonly exposed at the surface of the ground by the generally strong wind erosion in the desert. Finally, the activity of early man 1n the desert was rather widespread and, in some situations, apparently quite intense and, thus, a considerable amount of debris was left from their activities. Two major kinds of environments were inhabited by early man in the Coachella Valleys (1) those areas of food and water re- sources which existed during times of normal arid conditions, and (2) those areas of food and water resources which existed during those unusual times when ancient Lake Cahuilla partially' filled the Salton Trough, It is generally accepted that the Indians who occupied the Coachella Valley were technologically rather primitive in that they did not practice farming, but depended rather directly upon the natural productivity of the physical environment for their food and water. The productivity of the desert generally supported a small total human population, despite the fact that probably a very wide range of plants were classified as food sources. However, when the Colorado River overflowed its channel and altered its course so as to inundate the Salton Trough (essentially the lower portions of the Coachella and Imperial Valleys), a radically different desert environment resulted and one that was potentially quite productive for simple food -collecting cultures, The community of La Quinta occupies a relatively unique position in this setting for both kinds of environments described above were found in its vicinity. In fact, the La Quinta Hotel project itself may have encompassed both the normal desert -type of !7 environment and the more unusual'lakeshore environment. Studies have been undertaken to describe and interpret the Indian occupation of the Coachella Valley, but truly thorough archaeological studies have yet to be completed. Potentially a great deal of knowledge concerning early human occupation of the Coachella Valley and its environs can be obtained from known archaeological sites, sand the importance of identifying new localities of such data immense. The rapidity with which the Coachella Valley has been urbanized within the last ten to fifteen years is impressive. The result of this growth has affectedthe preservation of local archaeological sites significantly, and generally in an adverse way. From the standpoint of understanding both the prehistory of the Coachella Valley, and the nature of human behavior among ancestral populations of this continent, it is vital to carry out archaeological investigations now before still more data is lost. _y PC 2-13-75 Page ,, SUMMARY ON TESTIMONY - (800) Stein Weinhold, Vice President of the Elkee Corporation, thanked the staff for their cooperation in preparation of their presentation, and said that the La Quinta Hotel had been in operation since 1926 and the La Quinta �'omplex since 1958. He assured high the Commission that they intended to maintain their/standards. (803) Harry H. Schmitz, Planning Consultant on the project, said that he felt this could be the finest golf course in the valley. He said the applicants agree in general with.the conditions, however, clarification was requested as follows: Condition No. 3 which states in part."...The phases shall be in consecutive order and no grading shall take place out of consecutive order...." He pointed out that this is a phased development which will probably occur over a 5-10 year period, and said he assumed the condition meant in general. There might be one or two phases 'hich might be shifted in order, but in general they propose to conform with the order presented. He therefore requested the words "in general" or some clarification be inserted which would allow some changes in phases et the approval of the Planning Director. Condition No. 6, which requires the final grading plan for the final subdivision map to be submitted to the Planning Director. and SubdivisionCommitteefor review. They presently have a grading permit for the golf course and requested clarification 17 as to whether or not this would be affected. Mr. Dupree said this would not be affected. Only grading permits connected with the subdivision map -will be required. Special Condition A. requiring a "registered landscape architect." Some of the dtVelop.ers are connected with out of state interests and from time to time have employed landscaped architects Wits-- are not registered in the state - there is no registering provision in the states where they are employed. He requested that the word "registered" be deleted, and assured the Commission that "y will re a landscape architect and will do an excellent job. Special Condition A(3) regarding equestrian trails. Clarification was requested specifically as to1alternative," Mr. Schmitz indicated general agreement with the equestrian trail indicated to the southeast, however, the private equestrian trail through the project would not be acceptable. Mr. Dupree explained that the Cove Communities General Plan shows the arta surrounding the project as a water course and equestrian trail, and to be consi.stcnnt wit.lc that plan, an equestrian trail. sliould lac., provid0d, 'i 4-,e-c:onsistc-nt with -Plait and in i.;ubstantial conforuuince lu tl)(a 8'r)c!C_U'1C-pltul, ME. IluprCe. sAd Clio :,t iLl: wou.lcl Lc:. willing to rc.v�ow tin 2-13-75 Page 2S plan when submitted, and would seek advice of experts. He indicated that it could very likely be that for purposes of riding horsesJtli:at it may not be necessary to -cumvent the entire project, that a whole new equestrian trail is being created by the creation of the channel which would connect with the Whitewater River Channel, and therefore connect the community of La Quinta to all of the other riding courses in the Coachella Valley. Mr. Dupree said this course was shown because it appeared to the staff the drain sites would have multiple use features and would be acceptable for the riding of horses. Also the location of the stables as proposed by the applicant, indicated to staff that they would wish some sort of circulation for with the applicant the horses. They discussed/the possibility of placing some sort of hedgerow, oleanders, or some other feature on top of the berm which separates the drain from the mountains. Mr. Dupree indicated he felt the staff could reasonably negotiate with the applicant at such time as conditional use permit applications are submitted,.. Special /Condition J, regarding sewage disposal system. Mr. Schmitz asked if this meant they were to provide sewage disposal system in progressive'inerements. He eited the first increment which would be 150 units and said a system would got be needed to handle a thousand units. Their plan was to build in increments. Mr. Dupree said that any time a subdivision tract or conditional use permit is submitted, and the water district or sewer authority files'a letter with the staff saying that the current system is adequate, it is staff's opinion that would meet the condition, Discussion ensued as to the requirement for the sewage disposal system, with Mr. Geerlings saying the condition was as variance with Mr.. Dupree's statement, and would seem to read that the sewage plant for the whole plan would have to be operational by the time Phase III is completed. He asked if the intent was that Phases I and II could be constructed without the system being operational, but by the time Phase III is constructed it must be operational. Mr. Dupree said that if that is acceptable to the State Water Quality Control Board and other approving agencies, -that was the intent - allow the project to continue. Agreement was then reached on Condition J to read: J. A sewage disposal system shall be provided for the specific plan area. The system shall be operational for each increment prior to final inspection. Mr. Schmitz then addressed the problem of the archaeological impact. The LaQuinta draft EIR was submitted to the Planning Department approximately 6 months 3efore the hearing and applicant had been informed that the archaeological statement, is well as the entire EIR was adequate and acceptable to the staff. The staff has iad access to Severin previously prepared L111's in this area. The first, done by D ivid:;ort on an area just. :J.uniuediately to tlic [rorl:heasr of subject property, >t [ted nosite;., lVtlrk! found Orl Lh.it property. 1'11(� repos t of eouceru hertz Was dollo ly 1: A I i , 2, Water District for their flood control project. 2-13-75 Page 2 J The cost of this EIR was approximately $14,000 and quite a bit of time was spent going into the archaeologic impact of the .lood control project. That project is an integral part of the LaQuinta development, since Oleander Reservoir is to be constructed on it, as well as some of the training dikes. Environmental Assessment Engineering of Sacramento hired a competent California - registered archaeologist (Ann Peak) to spend some time in Coachella Valley on the site. Her findings (pp 15-18) speaking to this particular site point out, that Site No., 9, which in report states "edge of cultivated fields west of Oleander Reservoir (on LaQuinta property) to western edge of the proposed alignment - 13 sites - one very large." , Mr. Schmitz said this is a typographical error, and should have read "east." This is further substantiated by the fact that on Page 18, the report states "The area 'east' of the cultivated fields of Oleander Reservoir contains 15 archaeological sites. These have been,located on a map and will be recorded in site survey forms to be sent to the San Bernardino County Museum for placement in their permanent system f numbering." Mr. Schmitz said he had visited the museum and these sites do in fact lie east of the property. Mr. Schmitz said that their archaeologist looked at the property and also stated there are no sites on it - they all lie to the east and northeast of the property. Most of the property is cultivated and has been farmed, Blowed,�n.orange proves, etc. He continued that at least three archaeologists have looked at this site and he felt the archaeological survey had in fact been conducted and feat no further investigation is necessary. (848) ,in the Flood Control EIR, Commissioner Ceniceros questioned Mr. Schmitz as to whether Ar. Peak/had specifically stated that there is no archaeological site within this property, and whether or not her data has been made available to the County Archaeologist. Mr. Schmitz said that the Planning Department staff had reviewed the EAE report and the one prepared He did not know y/ J. F. Davidson. /whEr-_ � r the County Archaeologist had a chance to do field work or check the history of this. As to- rie condition proposed by Mr. Dupree, which would not delay development, Mr. Schmitz said he felt a lot of time and money had been spent with three archaeologists looking at this property over a period of two and also asked who would be responsibl years and he questioned the necessity for a fourth survey,/ He also pointed out fcr the I - cost. that the developer had a valid grading permit and can begin grading immediately on - the golf course. The golf course covers about 1/3 of the project. PC 2-13-75 Page r3() (856) John Craib, CoL]Uty rArr i 7vl:ug#st said he has been County Archaeologist since the first of this year and only since the middle of January has he had access to the EIR. In the San Bernardino County Museum Site Files of Riverside County there are two sites - Riverside 150 and Riverside 151, which are rather large sites in an area directly northeast of the subject property. Regarding the undertaking by Ann Peak, he said that she is from the Sacramento Area and has no knowledge of the prehistory of the Coachella Valley, was not aware of the ancient stand of Lake Le Conte in that area, and therefore was not disposed to check the topographic map to find the remnants of the shore line which do run through the project area, on approximately the 40-42 ft. contour line. He also pointed out that there are no registered archaeologists in California. He had been told that the entire time she was in that area (which was only one and one-half days) was entirely inadequate for one person. With a crew of 20 to 25 people it might be done in a day and a half, but one person could not adequately assess all the archaeological sites, or even locate all the sites. a the final ETR it is mentioned in the responses that the report is confidential and he had not attempted to have any access to adequately assess the EIR for this area. Finally, Mr. Craib said that Mr. Schmitz did not mention who their archaeologist was, how long the survey took )and what were the findings of the survey. lie felt these were important questions because the same problem of the EAE survey might be encountered in that the person who did the survey did not spend an adequate amount of time and was not familiar enough, With the area to essentially look in the right places. Commissioner Olesen questioned Mr. Craib as to his experience and he said some of his previous field work had been surveying along the shore line in the Coachella Valley. He has almost completed his masters degree in anthropology at Cal State, Long Beach, and all of his field experience has been in Southern California. Mr. Craib told Commissioner Lillibridge that he felt the May lst deadline luld be a reasonable date for review of the site. He did not feel,in his position, that he would undertake the survey or the excavations because it could possibly lead to a conflict of interest, Ile suggested a contract with ARU or other archaeological corporation, and said the funding would have to be taken up with the individual group. When asked by Mr. Newcomb as to why he felt this would be a conflict of interest, Mr. Craib said that if there is funding, he would not want to be accused of making work for himself. Also, he felt that as the position of County Archaeologist has been set up, he would also assess the work that would be done, so he would be in the position of assessing his own work. 2-13-75 Page 3 As to the fact that a considerable amount of the area has been or is being farmed, Mr. Craib said this would somewhat complicate the archaeological survey, aut in other areas some very desirable sites have been found in farmland. An area cannot be dismissed because agriculture has been in it for a while. (This area has been in alfalfa and citrus for some 20 years.) Mr. Craib said that he had walked the; area very briefly - in a matter of an hour or two. In the western portion of the project area, near the base of the mountains he noticed cultural remains shards, bits of burned bone - in an open area. (876) Jim Davidson of J. F. Davidson Assoc., said they had filed an EIR on Tract 4966 and the archaeological wurvey was done by Ernest R. Tinkham, PhD, College of the Desert. report indicated"that two hours were devoted to ground survey of 38 acres of flat desert land in the study, area and during that time only one small shard was noted. In contrast, areas to the north, just over the mountain ridge and centering around Indian Wells showed great numbers of shards lying on the ground. The inference is _ovious. Since there was little or no water available at the La Quinta site, few if any Indians dwelt there and consequently there are very few shards to be found. At Indian Wells there was a walk -down -into well dug by the Desert Cahuillas. As noted before, the evidence of bulldozers into the area years ago may have also covered a few shards, but itis our opinion that there is nothing or archaeological nature to be preserved or saved irk the acres under investigation." This report was dated 1972. (This 38 acres is not within the project site - it's located contiguous and to the north.) (881) Mr. Schmitz advised the Commission that their archaeological survey was done by Dr. Tinkham who spent approximately two months going over the site. He felt the state- ment that Mrs. Peak had conducted her survey in 1-1/2 days was hearsay, and that the CVCWD did not spend $14,000 for that amount of work. (884) Mr. Craib replied that it's important to understand the qualifications of _nybody to successfully undertake an archaeolggical survey. From' the cowents that were read of Dr. Tinkham's survey, he does not seem to be knowledgeable of the pre- , history of that area (clarified by the Commissioners). that there was no water there and there was a rather large body of water. Re asked what hts qualifications are and the Commissioners also clarified this. (887) Garth Portillo said he had not been on the site but felt it should be surveyed and that the May lst deadline is adequate. As to the EAE assessment for the CUIM, Miss Pe,alc told a gentleman in the. UCR A1:chk1L!Ologiea.l RUsearch Unit that she had spent only 1--1/2 days on lic:r. survey. lle quest.ioned as Lo sahy liar name did not enter into tlw reporL. Ln;:tcad Tlr. 1'11:il.ih Wille of UCR is c,ited. Mr, Vlilke had asked that his PC 2-13-75 Page, 1Z name be removed from the report and all reference to him or his material be removed when it was preliminary - a draft report. He went to a hearing and complained. It g' was not removed. The only thing that has been added in the final report is a comment 0 in one of the appendices stating the fact that Mr. Phil Wilke was ungratefully uncooperative. The LaQuinta EIR also lists Mr. Phil Wilke as a reference. He had no contact with Harry Schmitz concerning this EIR. Mr. Portillo presented a letter from Mr. Wilke so stating this. Mr. Wilke, in his letter, commented on his opinions of the archaeology in the area, and also commented on the fact that it seems some of his material and one of his maps in particular have been used in the LaQuinta Golf & Tennis Club EIR. He considers this to be a violation of at least commonlaw copyright regulations. He has submitted a paper that the material has come from for publication and that makes it a violation of local copyright laws. On Page 76 of the EIR there is a map with the name of Harry Schmitz & Assoc., Copyright 1974. This particular map is the one in question. Mr. Portillo said he has a copy of Mr. Wilke's report dated October 1973 that has the same map in it. They have the original, the negatives, and the large scale map from which it was reduced for publication. Mr. Portillo also presented a letter from Dr. Sylvia Broadbent, who is writing as Chairman of the San Gorgonio Chapter of the Sierra Club, stating that she recognizes the map as Mr. Wilke's and that she further recommends that the archaeological assessment in the assessment is inadequate. i when archaeology is done Mr. Portillo said/he would like to see the report state who did the work, how conclusions were reached. They have been having a lot of tvouble getting EIR's submitted to their agency for review, and EIR's list a member of the ARU as a reference or as a source for the archaeological material and these people have never been contacted. He offered this as a general editorial comment, but said if EIR's are going to be required, he would like to see the rules followed. In reply to Commissioner Aldridge as to determination whether an archaeologist i,;; on an approved list when there is no registry, Mr. Portillo waid that when an EIR has a name on it saying archaeology was performed by an individual, and then a description of how the work was done and how conclusions were reached, there is more of a basis for evaluation. If there is some question, then there is the name of a person who can be contacted directly by the reviewing agency or others. Some names stand out as people who are competent and some as less - by word of mouth or familiarity with thaL person's work. Gunerally, it is a way of providing some accuuuiLabi 1.i_t:y for the stritctments t_h<it are made in an EIR. lie told Commissioner PC 2-13-75 Page, 4 ,i Aldridge that lie had never heard of Dr. Tinkham, but obviously Dr. Tinkhaia did not know about the large fresh water lake that stood in the area until about 500 years ago. The La Quinta area was a very marshy area at that time, which would give much .core opportunity for occupation of the area. (Commissioner Olesen told Mr. Portillo that Dr. T'_nkham had spent his entire life in this work and is a professor at the College of the Desert, and has done work for many developers in the area.) (Begin Side 2) Mr. Ole J. Nordland, Secretary of the CVCWD said that the Water District went outside the area to have the EIR prepared so that they would get an unbiased report. They did pay $14,000 for it and the EAE people employed what they considered to be a qualified archaeologist. If the same principle was used that a Northern Californian could riot look at a Southern California archaeological site and know what they are looking at, then archaeologists should not be sent out of the United States to other countries. He said their EIR was not confidential and a public bearing was held on it in December 1973. It was well advertised and comments were sent to everybody, including UCR, They received comments from Sylvia Broadbent and Phil Wilke was _resent and at no time did he say he wished his name withdrawn from the report. That is on tape. Mr. Nordland said he felt sure Miss Peak knew something about the shore line because he met her, and being Chairman of the County Historical Commission, they discussed some of the early days. She had a copy of the history that was written about the valley aH that discussed the shore lines, As to names not being mentioned in the EIR, he said he had looked at a number of EIR's and they do not mention who made the studies. Regarding comments of Dr. Broadbent and Mr. Wilke, Mr. Nordland said their comments were included in the final EIR, and verified that a mistake had been made on the initial draft, using east instead of west on Page 17. There are archaeological sites in this project area, but not in this particular reservoir site. (23) Alfred J. Gergely, attorney speaking on behalf of David Altman and Francis Hack -.o are property owners to the east of the proposed development, approved of the plans, but questioned the location of the stables at the corner near his clients' property, and away from the La Quinta housing. Mr. Weiuhold pointed out the location of housing units near the stables. Mr. Gergely also objected to the temporary location of the sewage disposal facility in that area, feeling that it might become permanent. his clients do not have a development there at the present time, (35) Mr. Portillo appeared again and said he may have been mistaken and that perhaps it i,r,i0 . was Nass Peak 1,(+ told lie didn't want to have MlyLhing to do with the report when slit tal))(' t:0 c;ff!.fl( to him, Accorclinl; to this EIR, MI_ lJillcc's prc:c.ntation uni.ntulli};iI I at, Llie hearing. !;i ;-c i c1 t tliu rniiCicl iil _i i l i Ly of the rupOrt:, the rcp )rt is vc,ry PC 2-13-75 Page, P general in location of archaeological sites. On Page 1 in response to Philip Wilke, they say "maps of specific locations have been purposely left out of this EIR to protect the sites from vandalism. A confidential report giving details and locations has been submitted to the district." That's the report Mr. Portillo said they have not seen. Mr. Wilke said he asked for copies but has not received them, however, Mr. Portillo did have a copy. (43) Commissioner Ceniceros referred to a statement in the La Quinta EIR which states that no significant evidence was found with one exception located at the most easterly portion of the site where a medium sized sand dune exists. Several fragments of pottery were visible, but no excavation was attempted. She said she wondered if there should have been some additional excavation, but Mr. Portillo advised that during a survey, excavation is very rarely done. The axp entire project area is walked, and occasionally additional areas are walked and location of sites is plotted on maps as closely as possible. Excavation is left for a later date. Commissioner Ceniceros said that it appears this evidence was discovered in conjunction with the sand dune and not in conjunction with the alfalfa, perhaps limiting those areas in which there might be expected archaeological sites, and those areas that have not been considerably altered by farming could still be explored. Mr. Portillo explained that there have been several studies which would indicate that plowing of fields up to several hundred times will not significantly change the arrangement of certain surface and near surface archaeological remains. They do not get moved around that much by discing and plowing, but when the fields are plowed, the wind blows and shifts remains. Often plowing will cause artifacts to be brought up that otherwise would not have been seen. (61) Larry LaPre, Biologist doing graduate research on the ancient shore line of Lake Cahuilla, commented on the biological aspects of the EIR, with specific reference o the sand dune? He pointed out that thematter of plagiarism is not limited to the map , but pages 72 thru 82 are virtually verbatim from Mr. Wilke's report. As to the sand dune, the photo on Page 19 of the EIR shows the boundary going more or less through the middle of the dune. He said this is one of the few remaining mesquite that that were growing along the ancient shoreline, and is more than 400 years old. His research project is to date the lake by tree rings on the mesquite bushes along the shore line, and everything underneath the old shore line will be less than 400 yf:ars old, and c!veryt Ili nl; ;'x.c)R above :i.t• will be more than that. Ili.s PC 2-13-75 Page survey of the entire northern part of the shore line shows about S to 10 of these mesquite dunes left. He explained that they are not really dunes, but a bush that is covered with sand. Mr. LePre presented a letter dated February 11, 1975 citing certain endangered in the EIB. species for which no mitigation measures were offered/ Ile also said two species of lizards were not located, but which should be on this site, and he felt a survey should be made to look for these lizards, because of the gradual disappearance of the sand dunes. He felt rerouting the evacuation channel to the north or away from the old shore line would save archaeological sites as well as biological ones. Also, grading of sand dunes might make the blowsand problem in the area worse as mesquite bushes are much more effective than tamarisk in holding down the soil. up This bush is 100 yards long and about 50 feet wide, made/of 4 or 5 plants and is a nesting area for all kinds of birds. After additional discussion on the lizards, Mr. La Pre said he felt if the avelopers agreed to leave the mesquite tree, that would satisfy his requirements. He did not feel the biological survey was very well done and said he felt mitigation measures ought to be taken for the barred collared lizard, with some evaluation of what is going to happen. (127) Jack S47ay4e, a Vice President of the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce, said his organization was given the opportunity to review this plan and the Commission has received a letter telling them that those present at the Board of Directors meeting were unanimous in their approval of the project. Others with whom he talked in La Quinta seemed to be Very enthusiastic. (134) Mr. Dupree then discussed the various conditions as questioned by Mr. Schmitz. He felt Condition 3 is a basically a standard condition and there are certain regardeas within the subdivision ordinance which make ittmandatory/o Withrnate regardctosany specific plan or any project such as this with a span of 5, 10 or 20 years, there is concern that portions of the project might be sold to others and completed out of phase. This condition would be a commitment to the developer as to what the county will allow trim to do, and a commitment to the county on what the developer is going to do. Staff's opinion whas that more than one phase could be started at one time, but that it would be improper tm as an example, to begin Phase 7 before Phase 5. Ite recomniunded that Condition 3 remain as stated. Special Coad!tiorl A; hc! Sllilge�st:ed that tlW word "1 cursed" be nsad in place of architect. It waS stalf'S 01)i11"un tlltlt lfllld.,ic-lping in the Coachol.la Va1:1 cy sllo�l I �] r� u] 1 y llu dolic by 11 nout:hcrn C,I I i I oru Ia 7 anc1;;Ci1pe r11 -Chi Leet . 2-13-75 Pabe J� Additional Condition K should be as proposed earlier in the hearing. Mr. Geerlings questioned whether or not Condition 6 regarding grading plans ,as in variance with what is required by the subdivision ordinance? That is, that a preliminary grading plan has to be submitted with a tentative subdivision map. The condition as proposed requires a preliminary grading plan prior to recordation of the final subdivision map. Mr. Dupree said that the words "or issuance of a building or grading permit," were a condition of the Building Department, and Mr. Geerlings said that if not needed, they should be eliminated. It was then agreed that Condition 6 should read: 6. As part of submittal of any tentative subdivision map, the permittee shall submit a preliminary grading plan to the Director of Planning... Condition J shall be changed to read: J. A sewage disposal system shall be provided for the specific plan area. The system shall be operational for each increment prior to final inspection. (Someone from the audience asked if this would interfere with the grading permit already issued for the golf course, and Mr. Geerlings said he saw no problem there.) (180) There was additional discussion as to the alternate exit to the condominiums to the northwest through the golf course. The developers did not want pavement, and suggested a prepared road with a grass overlay. Mr. Dupree said this was discussed with the Department of Fire Protection and staff was told it would not be acceptable. They wish the street designed to reflect Exhibit A-3. Mr. Ernie Vossler said it was his understanding that an exception could�be &Nxmixxxnx granted by the Commission, and further objected to the paved road in a driving area He pointed out on the map the access these units would have. Mr. Weinhold then suggested asking the Fire Department to approve support under- neath the grass in this area. It was then agreed that Condition L should read: L. Design of emergency alternate access shown on Exhibit A-3 shall be subject to the approval of the Department of Fire Protection. Mr. Schmitz then agreed to all other conditions with the exception of that one on the archaeological survey. (218) Discussion continued with Commissioner Olesen saying he felt that at this late date Lo hold up a project of this size and magnitude, and in view of the testimony from reports of the Water- District and the fact that their project is in conjunction with this specii i_c plan, lit' -felt. the statement was Eia adequate. PC 2-13-75 Page , ?� (221) Commissioner Ceniceros cited one of the mitigation measures proposed on Page 117 provides for f the EIR which i "Preservation of some sensitive archaeological areas, if discovered during construction, until professional archaeologists have been notified and given a reasonable period of time to study the find." She felt this could result in much more of a delay in construction and burden to the developer, than if the archaeological survey were made beforehand. Mr. Vossler agreed with her continent and said they would be willing to help, but did not want to be held up when they already have a grading permit and could begin construction immediately. He said they would agree to allowing the survey if guarantee could be given that it would be completed by May lst, and was at no cost to the developer. When Commissioner Ceniceros asked how much it would cost if he something was turned up and they had to stop construction, Mr. Vossler said/was willing to gamble on that. (244) .. Geerlings suggested that it would not be too difficult to save the corner with. the mesquite trees, that it could be built right into the plan, but after further discussion and it was determined this was approximately 2 to 3 acres, and Mr. Vossler would not agree, saying they had paid $15,000 an acre for this land. Also, one or two duplexes are planned for that area. (268) Commissioner Aldridge asked if the County Archaeologist would prepare facts and figures as to what would be involved in the survey if undertaken, and a continuance was suggested, to which the developer agreed. • The question of the equestrian trail will also be discussed before the hearing is continued (Mr. Vossler suggested using the waterway, and along the edge of the dike on Eisenhower and Tampico. He also said that they could eliminate the stables if they had to, but they are obligated to the equestrian trail with or without the stables.) TION: Upon motion by Commissioner Olesen, seconded by Commissioner Campbell and unanimously carried, SP 121-E was continued to 2:20 p.m., February 26, 1975. 548,.ka to .permit swap n:��is, auctions, outdoor sales a,_ storage opegatkons by conditional use permit, as submitted by the staff, and amended by the Commiss;,Qn, be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation that it be set for public hearing, ROLL CALL VOTE RESULTED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: Commissioners Lillibridge, Aldridge, Ashley, Ceniceros, Campbell, Olesen and Katzenstein. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. (775) The Chairman declared a short recess, after which the meeting reconvened with all Commissioners noted present. (Reel 401 - Side 1, 776 -end) Side 2, 01- ) 2:40 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE NO. 121-E La Quinta Golf & Tennis Club La Quinta District Fourth Supervisorial District Property generally bounded by Calle Tampico on the south, on the east and west sides of Eisenhower Drive (Hearing opened at 3:12 p.m. and was subsequently continued to 2:20 p.m. February 26, 1975.) Mr. Dupree presented Specific Plan of Lan Use No. 121-E, submitted by the LaQuinta Corporation, together with the Elkee Corporation and Harry H. Schmitz. The plan covers a 27 hole golf course, golf and tennis club, 420 unit hotel expansion, and 637 condominiums. Pertinent maps and a detailed review of the staff report were presented. The existing zoning is R-3 at the location of the present hotel site, with the remainder in R-1*and some R-2*. Exhibit A-1, indicates the layout of the proposed golf course around the foothills, and the the flood control facility. Exhibit A-3 indicates the circulation plan throughout the project, as well as the supplementary pedestria4} and bicycle paths. An additional/exhibit indicates the equestrian trails, together with the 1,icycle paths. The various agencies had responded to the environmental impact report submitted by the applicant, and these comments have been incorporated into the conditions on the specific plan. Staff recommended that EIR No. 41 and its analysis be adopted, and recommendation be made to the Board of Supervisors for approval of SP 121-E in accordance with Exhibits A-1, A-2 and A-3, subject to the proposed conditions. Mr. Dupree offered the following amppiLgeestaxy condition which was inadvertently deleted from the proposed conditions: �A PC 2-13-75 Page Zl t' K. No construction shall begin until after a qualified archaeologist, with field experience in Southern California, and knowledge of the Coachella Valley be contracted to undertake an extensive survey of the project area prior to construction, direct test excavations of the more representative sites, and then direct further excavations of the more significant sites of the area. The survey and excavations shall be concluded by May 1, 1975. This condition would allow an archaeological survey to be conducted within what the staff feels would be a reasonable period of time, and would not delay the project. Approval was recommended based on the findings that the project would be consistent with the general plan; implement the goals and objectives of the Cove Communities General Plan; would be compatible with the surrounding zoning and land use; represents a logical progression of development of the area; and that the significant environmental impacts can be substantially mitigated by adopting the recommended conditions. (793) Commissioner Ceniceros questioned as^ compliance with the Fire Protection Agency's recommendations, and Mr. Dupree said that certain -od ications are being recommended which would provide a loop system to avoid deadend and long cul-de-sacs. With this condition, the Fire Protection Agency would have no objections. Mr. Dupree said the developer had indicated this would be acceptable. Mr. Dupree advised that the staff has created an equestrian trail system consistent with the Cove Communities General Plan, which shows water courses also to be utilized for equestrian trails. The equestrian trail system would utilize the storm water flow area, which is a depression and would go to the furtherest point on the east side of the project, and connect to the White Water River Channel. The staff exhibit also showed the equestrian trail at the base of the mountains surrounding the property. In Applicant had discussed with staff the possible conflict or near between horses being ridden on/the golf course. Staff is cognizant of that potential and therefore invited the applicant to submit an alternate equestrian trail to be considered at a future time. Staff felt that an alternate that would be in substantial conformance with the specific plan would be acceptable. PERSONS GIVING TESTIMONY: Stein Weinhold, 49645 Eisenhower Drive, LaQuinta Hotel; Vice President of the Elkee Corporation. Harry H. Schmitz, Planning Consultant, Palm Desert John Craib, County Archaeologist Jim Davidson, J. F. Davidson Assoc., 3426 10th St., Riverside Garth Portillo, Acting Chief Archaeologist, Archaeological Research Unit, UCR Ole J. Nordland, Secretary, Coachella Valley County grater District Alfred J. Gergely, Attorney, 465 N. Palm Canyon Drive, Palm Springs Larry La Pre, Biologist, UCR Jack Svtyne, 53-601 Villa, La Quinta Ernie Vossler, Project Director, LaQuinta Golf & Tennis Club PC 2-13-75 Page ,,2 1 SUMMARY OF TESTIMONY - (800) Stein Weinhold, Vice President of the Elkee Corporation, thanked the staff for their cooperation in preparation of their presentation, and said that the La Quinta Hotel had been in operation since 1926 and the La Quinta o(mplex since 1958. He assured high the Commission that they intended to maintain their/standards. (803) Harry H. Schmitz, Planning Consultant on the project, said that he felt this could be the finest golf course in the valley. He said the applicants agree in general with -the conditions, however, clarification was requested as follows: Condition No. 3 which states in part."...The phases shall be in consecutive order and no grading shall take place out of consecutive order...." He pointed out that this is a phased development which will probably occur over a 5-10 year period, and said he assumed the condition meant in general. There might be one or two phases which might be shifted in order, but in general they propose to conform with the order presented. He therefore requested the words "in general" or some clarification be inserted which would allow some changes in phases" the approval of the Planning Director. Condition No. 6, which requires the final grading plan for the final subdivision map to be submitted to the Planning Director, and Subdivision Committee for review. nC They presently have a grading permit for the golf course and requested clarification as to whether or not this would be affected. Mr. Dupree said this would not be affected. Only grading permits connected with the subdivision map will be required. Special Condition A, requiring a "registered landscape architect." Some of the &�velop.ers are connected with out of state interests and from time to time have employed landscaped architects iwiu' are not registered in the state - there is no registering provision in the states where they are employed. He requested that the word "registered" be deleted, and assured the Commission that y will hire a landscape architect and will do an excellent job. Special Condition A(3) regarding equestrian trails. Clarification was requested specifically as to"alternative." Mr. Schmitz indicated general agreement with the equestrian trail indicated to the southeast, however, the private equestrian trail through the project would not be acceptable. Mr. Dupree explained that the Cove Communities General Plan shows the area surrounding the project as a water course and equestrian trail, and to be consistent with.that plan, an equestrian trail should be provided. T_= 4_==ea=ist0nt=with -theme ai Flan -..and in substantial conformance -tom rttte-specifi flan, Mr. Dupree said the staff would be willing to review an alternate _ PC 2-13-75 Page plan when submitted, and would seek advice of experts. He indicated that it could very likely be that for purposes of riding horses�tfiat it may not be necessary to circumvent the entire project, that a whole new equestrian trail is being created by the creation of the channel which would connect with the Whitewater River Channel, and therefore connect the community of La Quinta to all of the other riding courses in the Coachella Valley. Mr. Dupree said this course was shown because it appeared to the staff the drain sites would have multiple use features and would be acceptable for the riding of horses. Also the location of the stables as proposed by the applicant, indicated to staff that they would wish some sort of circulation for with the applicant the horses. They discussed/the possibility of placing some sort of hedgerow,- oleanders, edgerow,oleanders, or some other feature on top of the berm which separates the drain from the mountains. Mr. Dupree indicated he felt the staff could reasonably negotiate with the applicant at such time as conditional use permit applications are submitted. Special /Condition J, regarding sewage disposal system. Mr. Schmitz asked if this meant `hat they were to provide sewage disposal system in progressive increments. He cited the first increment which would be 150 units and said a system would not be needed to handle a thousand units. Their plan was to build in increments. Mr. Dupree said that any time a subdivision tract or conditional use permit is submitted, and the water district or sewer authority files a letter with the staff saying that the current system is adequate, it is staff's opinion that would meet the condition. Discussion ensued as to the requirement for the sewage disposal system, with Mr. Geerlings saying the condition was as variance with Mr. Dupree's statement, and would seem to read that the sewage plant for the whole plan would have to be operational by the time Phase III is completed. He asked if the intent was that Phases I and II could be constructed without the system being operational, but by the time Phase III is constructed it must be operational. Mr. Dupree said that if that is acceptable to the State Water Quality Control Board and other approving agencies, that was the intent - to allow the project to continue. Agreement was then reached on Condition J to read: J. A sewage disposal system shall be provided for the specific plan .area. The system shall be operational for each increment prior to final inspection. Mr. Schmitz then addressed the problem of the archaeological impact. The LaQuiuta draft EIR was submitted to the Planning Department approximately 6 months before the hearing and applicant had been informed that the archaeological statement, as well as the entire EIR was adequate and acceptable to the staff. The staff has had access to several previously prepared EIR's in this area. The first, done by J. F. Davidson on an area just immediately to the northeast of subject property, stated no sites were found on that property. The report of concern here was done by Environlneiital Assessment En,inc-orhiiy in 147"4 f, rh, - L Water'District for their flood control project. 2-13-75 Page The cost of this EIR was approximately $14,000 and quite a bit of time was spent going into the archaeologic impact of the `.lood control project. That project is an integral part of the LaQuinta development, since Oleander Reservoir is to be constructed on it, as well as some of the training dikes. Environmental Assessment Engineering of Sacramento hired a competent California - registered archaeologist (Ann Peak) to spend some time in Coachella Valley on the site. Her findings (pp 15-18) speaking to this particular site point out that Site No. 9, which in report states "edge of cultivated fields west of Oleander Reservoir (on LaQuinta property) to western edge of the proposed alignment - 13 sites - one very large." Mr. Schmitz said this is a typographical error, and should have read "east." This is further substantiated by the fact that on Page 18, the report states "The area 'east' of the cultivated fields of Oleander Reservoir contains 15 archaeological sites. These have been located on a map and will be recorded in site survey forms to be sent to the San Bernardino County Museum for placement in their permanent system -if numbering." Mr. Schmitz said he had visited the museum and these sites do in fact lie east of the property. Mr. Schmitz said that their archaeologist looked at the property and also stated there are no sites on it - they all lie to the east and northeast of the property. Most of the property is cultivated and has been farmed, plowed, in orange groves, etc. He continued that at least three archaeologists have looked at this site and he felt the archaeological survey had in fact been conducted and felt no further investigation is necessary. (848) ,in the Flood Control EIR, Commissioner Ceniceros questioned Mr. Schmitz as to whether Dr. Peak/had specifically stated that there is no archaeological site within this property, and whether or not her data has been made available to the County Archaeologist. Mr. Schmitz said that the Planning Department staff had reviewed the EAE report and the one prepared He did not know J. F. Davidson. /wh Z - the County Archaeologist had a chance to do field work or check the history of this. As to -the condition proposed by Mr. Dupree, which would not delay development, Mr. Schmitz said he felt a lot of time and money had been spent with three archaeologists looking at this property over a period of two P and also as ed who would be responsibl years and he questioned the necessity for a fourth survey,/ He also pointed out for the j that the developer had a validradin cast. g g Permit and can begin grading immediately on . the golf course. The,golf course covers , about 1/3 of the project. VU 1-13-75 PageJ() (856). John Craib, Co t said he has been County Archaeologist since the first of this year and only since the middle of January has he had access to the EIR. In the San Bernardino County Museum Site Files of Riverside County there are two sites - Riverside 150 and Riverside 151,.which are rather large sites in an area directly northeast of the subject property. Regarding the undertaking by Ann Peak, he said that she is from the Sacramento Area and has no knowledge of the prehistory of the Coachella Valley, was not aware of the ancient stand of Lake Le Conte in that area, and therefore was not disposed to check the topographic map to find the remnants of the shore line which do run through the project area, on approximately the 40-42 ft. contour line. He also pointed out that there are no registered archaeologists in California. He had been told that the entire time she was in that area (which was only one and one-half days) was entirely inadequate for one person. With a crew of 20 to 25 people it might be done in a day and a half, but one person could not adequately assess all the archaeological sites, or even locate all the sites. )n the final EIR it is mentioned in the responses that the report is confidential and he had not attempted to have any access to adequately assess the EIR for this area. Finally, Mr. Craib said that Mr. Schmitz did not mention who their archaeologist was, how long the survey took )and what were the findings of the survey. He felt these were important questions because the same problem of the EAE survey might be encountered in that the person who did the survey did not spend an adequate amount of time and was not familiar enough with the area to essentially look in the right places. Commissioner Olesen questioned Mr. Craib as to his experience and he said some of his previous field work had been surveying along the shore line in the Coachella Valley. He has almost completed his masters degree in anthropology at Cal State, Long Beach, and all of his field experience has been in Southern California. Mr. Craib told Commissioner Lillibridge that he felt the May 1st deadline -gould be a reasonable date for review of the site. He did not feel in his position, that he would undertake the survey or the excavations because it could possibly lead to a conflict of interest. He suggested a contract with ARU or other archaeological corporation, and said the funding would have to be taken up with the individual group. When asked by Mr: Newcomb as to why he felt this would be a conflict of interest, Mr. Craib said that if there is funding, he would not want to be accused of making work for himself. Also, he felt that as the position of County Archaeologist has been set up, he would also assess the work that would be done, so he would be in the position of assessing his own work. 'C 2-13-75 Page ? / As to the fact that a considerable amount of the area has been or is being farmed, Mr. Craib said this would somewhat complicate the archaeological survey, ,ut in other areas some very desirable sites have been found in farmland. An area cannot be dismissed because agriculture has been in it for a while. (This area has been in alfalfa and citrus for some 20 years.) Mr. Craib said that he had walked the area very briefly - in a matter of an hour or two. In the western portion of the project area, near the base of the mountains he noticed cultural remains - shards, bits of burned bone - in an open area. (876) Jim Davidson of J. F. Davidson Assoc., said they had filed an EIR on Tract 4966 and the archaeological survey was done by Ernest R. Tinkham, PhD, College of the Desert. report indicated"that two hours were devoted to ground survey of 38 acres of flat desert land in the study area and during that time only one small shard was noted. In contrast, areas to the north, just over the mountain ridge and centering around Indian Wells showed great numbers of shards lying on the ground. The inference is ibvious. Since there was little or no water available at the La Quinta site, few if any Indians dwelt there and consequently there are very few shards to be found. At Indian Wells there was a walk -down -into well dug by the Desert Cahuillas. As noted before, the evidence of bulldozers into the area years ago may have also covered a few shards, but it is our opinion that there is nothing or archaeological nature to be preserved or saved in the acres under investigation." This report was dated 1972. (This 38 acres is not within the project site - it's located contiguous and to the north.) (881) Mr. Schmitz advised the Commission that their archaeological survey was done by Dr. Tinkham who spent approximately two months going over the site. He felt the state- mentthat Mrs. Peak had conducted her survey in 1-1/2 days was hearsay, and that the CVCWD did not spend $14,000 for that amount of work. (884) Mr. Craib replied that it's important to understand the qualifications of Anybody to successfully undertake an archaeological survey. From the comments that were read of Dr. Tinkham's survey, he does not seem to be knowledgeable of the pre- history of that area (clarified by the Commissioners). 7.c,; -{ � there was no water there and there was a rather large body of water. He asked whathisqualifications are and the Commissioners also clarified this. (887) Garth Portillo said he had not been on the site but felt it should be surveyed and that the May 1st deadline is adequate. As to the EAE assessment for the CVCWD, Miss Peak told a gentleman in the UCR Archaeological Research Unit that she had spent only 1-1/2 days on her survey. He questioned as to why her name did not enter into the report. Instead Mr. Philip Wilke of UCR is cited. Mr. Wilke had asked that his PC 2-13-75 Page I:- name'be removed from the report and all reference to him or his material be removed when it was preliminary - a draft report. He went to a hearing and complained. It was not removed. The only thing that has been added in the final report is a comment in one of the appendices stating the fact that Mr. Phil Wilke was ungratefully uncooperative. The LaQuinta EIR also lists Mr. Phil Wilke as a reference. He had no contact with Harry Schmitz concerning this EIR. Mr. Portillo presented a letter from Mr. Wilke so stating this. Mr. Wilke, in his letter, commented on his opinions of the archaeology in the area, and also commented on the fact that it seems some of his material and one of his maps in particular have been used in the LaQuinta Golf & Tennis Club EIR. He considers this to be a violation of at least commonlaw copyright regulations. He has submitted a paper that the material has come from for publication and that makes it a violation of local copyright laws. On Page 76 of the EIR there is a map with the name of Harry Schmitz & Assoc., Copyright 1974. This particular map is the one in question. Mr. Portillo said he has a copy of Mr. Wilke's report dated October 1973 that has the same map in it. They have the original, the negatives, and the large scale map from which it was reduced for publication. Mr. Portillo also presented a letter from Dr. Sylvia Broadbent, who is writing as Chairman of the San Gorgonio Chapter of the Sierra Club, stating that she recognizes the map as Mr. Wilke's and that she further recommends that the archaeological assessment in the assessment is inadequate. when archaeology is done Mr. Portillo said/he would like to see the report state who did the work, how conclusions were reached. They have been having a lot of trouble getting EIR's submitted to their agency for review, and EIR's list a member of the ARU as a reference or as a source for the archaeological material and these people have never been contacted. He offered this as a general editorial comment, but said if EIR's are going to be required, he would like to see the rules followed. In reply to Commissioner Aldridge as to determination whether an archaeologist is on an approved list when there is no registry, Mr. Portillo said that when an EIR has a name on it saying archaeology was performed by an individual, and then a description of how the work was done and how conclusions were reached, there is more of a basis for evaluation. If there is some question, then there is the name of a person who can be contacted directly by the reviewing agency or others. Some names stand out as people who are competent and some as less - by word of mouth or familiarity with that person's work. Generally, it is a way of providing some accountability for the statements that are made in an EIR. He told Commissioner rte -13-I� Page, i Aldridge that he had nevtl heard of Dr. Tinkham, but obviously Dr. Tinkham did not know about the large fresh water lake that stood in the area until about 500 years ago. The La Quinta area was a very marshy area at that time, which would give much more opportunity for occupation of the area. (Commissioner Olesen told Mr. Portillo that Dr. T-inkham had spent his entire life in this work and is a professor at the College of the Desert, and has done work for many developers in the area.) (Begin Side 2) Mr. Ole J. Nordland, Secretary of the CVCWD said that the Water District went outside the area to have the EIR prepared so that they would get an unbiased report. They did pay $14,000 for it and the EAE people employed what they considered to be a qualified archaeologist. If the same principle was used that a Northern Californian could not look at a Southern California archaeological site and know what they are looking at, then archaeologists should not be sent out of the United States to other countries. He said their EIR was not confidential and a public hearing was held on it in December 1973. It was well advertised and comments were sent to everybody, including UCR. They received comments from Sylvia Broadbent and Phil Wilke was present and at no time did he say he wished his name withdrawn from the report. That is on tape. Mr. Nordland said he felt sure Miss Peak knew something about the shore line because he met her, and being Chairman of the County Historical Commission, they discussed some of the early days. She had a copy of the history that was written about the valley an that discussed the shore lines. As to names not being mentioned in the EIR, he said he had looked at a number of EIR's and they do not mention who made the studies. Regarding comments of Dr. Broadbent and Mr. Wilke, Mr. Nordland said their comments were included in the final EIR, and verified that a mistake had been made on the initial draft, using east instead of west on Page 17. There are archaeological sites in this project area, but not in this particular reservoir site. (23) Alfred J. Gergely, attorney speaking on behalf of David Altman and Francis Hack who are property owners to the east of the proposed development, approved of the plans, but questioned the location of the stables at the corner near his clients' property, and away from the La Quinta housing. Mr. Weinhold pointed out the location of housing units near the stables. Mr. Gergely also objected to the temporary location of the sewage disposal facility in that area, feeling that it might become permanent. His clients do not have a development there at the present time. (35) Mr. Portillo appeared again and said he may have been mistaken and that perhaps it was Miss Peak tre told he didn't want to have anything to do with the report when she came to speak to him. According to the EIR, Mr. Wilke's presentation was unintelligible at the hearing. irr Te-crd to the confidentiality of the report, the report is very PC 2-13-75 Page general in location of archaeological sites. On Page 1 in response to Philip Wilke, they say "maps of specific locations have been purposely left out of this EIR to protect the sites from vandalism. A confidential report giving details and locations has been submitted to the district." That's the report Mr. Portillo said they have not seen. Mr. Wilke said he asked for copies but has not received them, however, Mr. Portillo did have a copy. (43) Commissioner Ceniceros referred to a statement in the La Quinta EIR which states that no significant evidence was found with one exception located at the most easterly portion of the site where a medium sized sand dune exists. Several fragments of pottery were visible, but no excavation was attempted. She said she wondered if there should have been some additional excavation, but Mr. Portillo advised that during a survey, excavation is very rarely done. The Kx-X entire project area is walked, and occasionally additional areas are walked and location of sites is plotted on maps as closely as possible. Excavation is left for a later date. Commissioner Ceniceros said that it appears this evidence was discovered in conjunction with the sand dune and not in conjunction with the alfalfa, perhaps limiting those areas in which there might be expected archaeological sites, and those areas that have not been considerably altered by farming could still be explored. Mr. Portillo explained that there have been several studies which would indicate that plowing of fields up to several hundred times will not significantly change the arrangement of certain surface and near surface archaeological remains. They do not get moved around that much by discing and plowing, but when the fields are plowed, the wind blows and shifts remains. Often plowing will cause artifacts to be brought up that otherwise would not have been seen. (61) Larry LaPre, Biologist doing graduate research on the ancient shore line of Lake Cahuilla, commented on the biological aspects of the EIR, with specific reference co the sand dune) He pointed out that the matter of plagiarism is not limited to the map • , but pages 72 thru 82 are virtually verbatim from Mr. Wilke's report. As to the sand dune, the photo on Page 19 of the EIR shows the boundary going more or less through the middle of the dune. He said this is one of the few remaining mesquite;�c5 that were growing along the ancient shoreline, and is more than 400 years old. His research project is to date the lake by tree rings on the mesquite bushes along the shore line, and everything underneath the old shore line will be less than 400 years old, and everything xxoR above it will be more than that. His PC 2-13-75 Page survey of the entire northern part of the shore line shows about 5 to 10 of these mesquite dunes left. He explained that they are not really dunes, but a bush that is covered with sand. Mr. LzPre presented a lettex dated February 11, 1975 citing certain endangered in the Elk. species for which no mitigation measures were offered/ He also said two species of lizards were not located, but which should be on this site, and he felt a survey should be made to look for these lizards, because of the gradual disappearance of the sand dunes. He felt rerouting the evacuation channel to the north or away from the old shore line would save archaeological sites as well as biological ones. Also, grading of sand dunes might make the blowsand problem in the area worse as mesquite bushes are much more effective than tamarisk in holding down the soil. up This bush is 100 yards long and about 50 feet wide, made/of 4 or 5 plants and is a nesting area for all kinds of birds. After additional discussion on the lizards, Mr. La Pre said he felt if the 'evelopers agreed to leave the tesquite tree, that would satisfy his requirements. He did not feel the biological survey was very well done and said he felt mitigation measures ought to be taken for the barred collared lizard, with some evaluation of what is going to happen. (127) Jack Sfiayne, a Vice President of the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce, said his organization was given the opportunity to review this plan and the Commission has received a letter telling them that those present at the Board of Directors meeting were unanimous in their approval of the project. Others with whom he talked in La Quinta seemed to be Very enthusiastic. (134) Mr. Dupree then discussed the various conditions as questioned by Mr. Schmitz. He felt Condition 3 is a basically a standard condition and there are certain eas within the subdivision ordinance which make ittmandatoregard to alternate access. mandatory/ With regard to any specific plan or any project such as this with a span of 5, 10 or 20 years, there is concern that portions of the project might be sold to others and completed out of phase. This condition would be a commitment to the developer as to what the county will allow him to do, and a commitment to the county on what the developer is going to do. Staff's opinion whas that more than one phase could be started at one time, but that it would be improper to as an example, to begin Phase 7 before Phase 5. He recommended that Condition 3 remain as stated. Special Condition A; he suggested that the word "licensed" be used in place of "registered" architect. It was staff's opinion that landscaping in the Coachella Valley should really be done by a southern California landscape architect. 4-1J-iJ rage Jk 'Additional Condition K should be as proposed earlier in the hearing. Mr. Geerlings questioned whether or not Condition 6 regarding grading plans -vas in variance with what is required by the subdivision ordinance? That is, that a preliminary grading plan has to be submitted with a tentative subdivision map. The condition as proposed requires a preliminary grading plan prior to recordation of the final subdivision map. Mr. Dupree said that the words "or issuance of a building or grading permit," were a condition of the Building Department, and Mr. Geerlings said that if not needed, they should be eliminated. It was then agreed that Condition 6 should read: 6. As part of submittal of any tentative subdivision map, the permittee shall submit a preliminary grading plan to the Director of Planning... ' Condition J shall be changed to read: J. A sewage disposal system shall be provided for the specific plan area. The system shall be operational for each increment prior to final inspection. (Someone from the audience asked if this would interfere with the grading permit \^lready issued for the golf course, and Mr. Geerlings said he saw no problem there.) (180) There was additional discussion as to the alternate exit to the condominiums to the northwest through the golf course. The developers did not want pavement, and suggested a prepared road with a grass overlay. Mr. Dupree said this was discussed with the Department of Fire Protection and staff was told it would not be acceptable. They wish the street designed to reflect Exhibit A-3. Mr. Ernie Vossler said it was his understanding that an exception .could.,be Ram- xxzux granted by the Commission, and further objected to the paved road in a driving area He pointed out on the map the access these units would have. Mr. Weinhold then suggested asking the Fire Department to approve support under - heath the grass in this area. It was then agreed that Condition L should read: L. Design of emergency alternate access shown on Exhibit A-3 shall be subject to the approval of the Department of Fire Protection. Mr.. Schmitz then agreed to all other conditions with the exception of that one on the archaeological survey. (218) Discussion continued with Commissioner Olesen saying he felt that at this late date to hold up a project of this size and magnitude, and in view of the testimony from reports of the Water District and the fact that their project is in conjunction with this specific plan, -b�t;f*--C the archaeological statement was 4a adequate. , PC 2-13-75 Page ' (22i)o Commissioner Ceniceros cited one of the mitigation measures proposed on Page 117 provides for of the EIR which i "Preservation of some sensitive archaeological areas, if discovered during construction, until professional archaeologists have been notified and given a reasonable period of time to study the find." She felt this could result in much more of a delay in construction and burden to the developer, than if the archaeological survey were made beforehand. Mr. Vossler agreed with her comment and said they would be willing to help, but did not want to be held up when they already have a grading permit and could begin construction immediately. He said they would agree to allowing the survey if guarantee could be given that it would be completed by May 1st, and was at no cost to the developer. When Commissioner Ceniceros asked how much it would cost if he something was turned up and they had to stop construction, Mr. Vossler said/was willing to gamble on that. (244) Mr. Geerlings suggested that it would not be too difficult to save the corner with uhe mesquite trees, that it could be built right into the plan, but after further discussion aad it was determined this was approximately 2 to 3 acres, and Mr. Vossler would not agree, saying they had paid $15,000 an acre for this land. Also, one or two duplexes are planned for that area. (268) Commissioner Aldridge asked if the County Archaeologist would prepare facts and figures as to what would be involved in the survey if undertaken, and a continuance was suggested, to which the developer agreed. . The question of the equestrian trail will also be discussed before the hearing is continued (Mr. Vossler suggested using the waterway, and along the edge of the dike on Eisenhower and Tampico. He also said that they could eliminate the stables if they had to, but they are obligated to the equestrian trail with or without the stables.) MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Olesen, seconded by Commissioner Campbell and unanimously carried, SP 121-E was continued to 2:20 p.m., February 26, 1975. RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND NOTICE OF DETERMINATION' Case No. (Mod) /Z/;7 ,,?eilI EA No. NEGATIVE DECLARATION Based on the Initial Study, it has been determined that the proposed project will not have a significant environmental effect. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION: See attached Initial Study Patricia Nemeth, AICP, Planning Director COMPLETED Tit] e Da to 2 2 % Case No.(Mod) Land Div Sch ,R *; Appl/Rep Developable lots Dev. Ac Date Subm7tte Open Space Lots O -Sp. Ac Existing Zones *- Changes of Proposed Zones Only Zoning Acreage ADOPTED El -Board of Supervisors C] Planning Commission 7 Area Planning Council O PTanning Director 0 ---- HEARING --- HEARING BODY OR OFFICER O Board of Supervisors O Planning Commission O Area Planning Council O PTanning Director Person verifying adoption Date (Other) NOTICE OF DETERMINATION ACTION ON PROJECT O Approval O Disapproval Da to Q (Other) Developable Lots Dev.Ac _ Open Space Lots Changes of Approved Zones Only Zones Acreage O.Sp. Ac The project will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been adopted and may be examined at the Planning Department at the address below. Person verifying action Title RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT "90 LEMON STREET, 9TH FLOOR �. IERSIDE, CA 92501 Mite - Original (Case file with Original Initial Study) ioldenrod - Development Information Ilue - County Clerk files irePn - Developt,en: Infnmation i H RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY SECTION INITIAL STUDY: COMPREHENSIVE (Gene -all for large or complex projects / 1 CASE NO(s) '5� _�.� I1'SC[i�S L Y2T--- L. ,0(5) BACKGROUND Applicant/Representative: Address: Project Description: Project Location: ADDITIONAL INFO REQUESTED - DATE INITIAL$ DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration: Positive Declaration: Other: (See Determination 6 Findings) 01 s tri c tlAoear- Environmentel Setting: EVALUATION 4 C'%// 0 VIV If +0 1. Is the site subject to any of the following hazards? Yes No N* Surface fault rupture ,It)Z Ground subsidence Fire r Liquefaction LinTlood or drainage *43, j C % _Expanxivs Soil ATO Significant Groundshaking+yX�Ground cracking %QNoise (over 60 dBA) *,Landslide or mudslide /10 [ Pr+.fAtr'.iw y4 4 �I. ♦ `+S �I1 sErfosion }^ �Other i f/ �/!a[54.4 e wqe 2�Ines the sfte encompass or is�rrn j cent toga y Mialog#callysse sitiv area? f Yes Nome ixlr+ AI *� i5rle In li% e'i w/lirCr•. S/.+ f/rj•�I I�jJ r� r I � f]/ r' ��1r�'''rr a t- hf rlwxf • ww ►+CrJ .. M s . rf r7 Ci C►/ifle . ' Jr+s i �t L�,e- 3 Does the or is itdjacent to any archaealogit�aily se//nsitiTre/aredS or hi rica site? Yes/ lio 1,4e�I 1^- C / r R 0J A Q _),A I � �t rirt w eD e r�/ I� f /H'G ✓ f J(/�G j 4. Will the site be modified to prepare it for development? Yes No If so, will t e mo ification create an hazards or impact any sensitive areas? e4o <or �i� Jho A.01/mss'AA t 5. What is the agricultural) potential of the site? / L✓r f'1 !nu 7N I�j� r✓ �✓ C/ ki�f� �" �3r-. Y'� j�'1 j CCF' �,� ec. t 4 �+�j �:1►t ' • 6. Is the site within or adjacent to an Agricultural Pre+Ierve? Yes NO -4Z 7. Is the project consistent with the General Plan Elements? Land Use YCJOpen space �fSSM Scenic Highways Circulation 4/,Yp �r5 seismic Safetyt Public Services 8 Facilities _Housing Vr-r 5afety _Recreation ev-LConservation )L<noise Other i �w �4 d r a� { v �rt•� ! lc.G r. / rJ, r<c e-4 etc or 1v? r►, rr f 8. ou d the project encour ge he d elopment of surrounding properties? Yes No � A!J rG ca kC-i h1113 KA7 (/'a" 6r' h Gt 1 " f ! Sr. II "ell elctle- /�,) 4 i i - I I ' a i,. r, n,+ 5, . � f th f it is hinjms,vd consistent t ith surrnunciino t, pa n facilities and services: The scope of the project is such that it will not have a significant effect on facilities or services. Uetailed analysis of maximum development potential (if applicable). Type of Facility/Service Demand/Generation (Max) ter 6 y2 cn"FAS-s r.- rrr der y1 X U fr�lt Ilij 3Ov ;hoots q0 What are the response times of `the following cervices? pr- .e: Ae*,-,( A6 y tet, F1 re; �//1 S O J� - � /►"' - L, EC J Service of Facilities Capability/Capacity F / 0 10 [•t/ � � Gly ✓ � /p �"'�'"j� !"" d die .v✓ ._ ♦ ..� 1 sal' Y i Other:� <.d%[ j �re�c.. i sso What willl be the maximum traffic generationL figure? // e Capacities of the rserving th site? Whdt are th s P h D �! f ti. �O.✓ G� f �l✓ SU V . . Could the project have a significant impact on groundwater resources in /terms o�fjover�aft and/or 12. C c-/ S .,.-xorting the use? Yes No 13• If Septic tanks are proposed, are the soils capable of vuPP f ZvO fvrrdv�-•�•, 1•o�ili», ✓ �✓/ L drr ,Cr• � � �(} l,•fto cvI %/ J< /Z -i- d✓ 1 ,� 14. will the project create any hazardous or annoying conditions? 44# r-tf gel Traffic then �IDust �`�'J`Noise hilJG (r.-... f,7 demand of the project? Negligible 15. What will be the energy El rtricity: / �d/� �G 4 fIdus•/�( B. Community Issues:�4"j J �,�. h✓ �� or ' r e 01 o 121 19. Other design considerations: 20. Projector area controversy:CXR r� r� �� J'" G�, 1�/ F �c iO ¢ �'� !<<Jlilu I ✓ �/ / 46- .� a�/ /Is41f� 411A %Z�i 21. Other issues or further explanations: /1/ {�'a�` 't kf 7j� vw tI- CGr dirt/+ / �i/�t r✓/�Ji�i/r'f7CC/hLll / Q�i� I ✓�1<G [ICJ' 'N MEASURES71 - GiV,-, /a� / 10 Jr f'`y vi is� r SY f� / 2/ f , e 4- 1,4 rl /t'�• c l rac �c� �r J/ /2f -- vh J /c fr- fia �( r� l a�✓C INDINGS �,S't.,/.. G G.., 6r ✓ /.1c.� r//Cs� wk f�(rr./4 7GHf- d1C h., lo. v1Z es. q t Idr•�/�c/fd�, t) is ecil I PR0110�.Al! XL- 5,4) Oe e We Iress _Pf'I CASI I Nf oPMA T I )nk w s 2 A rea D i s t r i c t pelz 71a ILICANT: e -SUS. Dist. Modular Z" I e Iress 1 Location Za Oel,,�vr�� lz 3 i T,5- 5.10 P, 6 E Sec. T' R ine e r- IRESENTATIVE: I A/P Number(s) ie w J)e- /J /?:- 21 R- 2- yav,--A Zri Z on i n g Acteage I re s s Idel) Y!Z General Plan Q 2SO-11 Land Use - 4* me C71<1,26F S*�� .y____________________..____..__________.._______ r Open Space Etse,,4-0,j-C-P- f, Ad 5 Circulation iTRjLvdTION: ;essor Ilding IS Safety -veyor ilth ,e Protection )od Control: Noise -- Scenic Highways / L� ZA Selsmic/Safety Other: Alquist/Priolo lVdl- CVWI)I Fed Flood Map &-,�- ter Com r \/7I any: I I I I 1 I I I _7 CASES FILED CONCURRENTLY: qer Company. - C 70 -m-1p—n I �( I I T I y• r L S I I I I I I I I RELATED CASES: ,S? (,21_; Eig 51 :eM IY2:Z 31 lephone Company: TK L_�y q 3215-- A-Tr—an s po r Ea-T-Fo n I I I I I V8 #11 I I I I I I I I FEES: Total Fee Amount: ty TSpKere) Receipt Number(s) iool District( Combined E.A. Fee? YES NO LAND DIVISION/CONDITIONAL USE INFORMATION: uni-Joner Acreage No. of Lots T-1 I I F Min. Lot Size Density Dp. OwneF's-7Ks—sn. Schedule WAIVER? YES NO hers: �ClllfDtll ING INVORMATION: fent. cut off/Hearing Date: (.aso "ont to Graphics OPLRIY OWNERS 10H S ? Re(A,1vv(l by: H001- AGREEMENTS ? I ((vw (hok v d hy; RIMAP.J', til lC MAI HIES Lo tj --e CA, 74121f La Quinta Golf & Tennis EN r� F', I V-01 NOV? Cove Club RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING C01MMISSION July 1974 N HHIS rAL H�RRY H.:- SCHMITZ &' ASSOCIATES Urban & Environmental Planning Palm Desert, California LA OUINTA COVE GOLF AND TENNIS CLUB DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT JULY 1974 Harry H. Schmitz $ Associates Urban & Environmental Planning Consultants Palm Desert, California 92260 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION................................................ 1 f E I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT ................... A. Objective of the Project ............................ 2 B. Location ............................................ 2 1. Regional ........................................ 2 2. Local ........................................... 5 � C. Description ......................................... 5 I. Land Use ........................................ 5 2. Population. ................................... 11 : 3. Access and Circulation .......................... 11 4. Amenities ....................................... 12 S. Phasing.. 14 6. Value ........................................... 15 II. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND DEFINITION OF IMPACT AREA..... 17 A. Description of the Environment ...................... 17 1. Physical ........................................ 17 r' a. Earth Resources ............................. 17 1) Land Form.. ............................. 17 2) Space as a Resource ..................... 17 3) Soil Characteristics.......... ........ 18 4) Mineral Resources and Construction Materials.. 18 b. Water Resources ............................. 18 1) Regional Flow ........................... 18 2) Regional GroundwaterStorage............ 34 3) Groundwater Quality • 38 4) Local Conditions.......... ............ 38 c. Atmospheric Resources ....................... 42 1) Quality..............,.................. 42 2) Climate............ 4 .................... 46 C1. Processes ................................... 51 1) Drainage.... 51 2) Wind Erosion ............................ 56 3) Earthquake and Faulting................. 57 4) Fire .................................... 63 iv 2. Biological ...................................... 63 a. Regional Flora .............................. 63 1) Sand Dunes and Creosote Habitat......... 65 2) Creosote - Palo Verde Habitat........... 65 3) Cholla - Palo Verde Habitat ............. 65 4) Rocky Slopes Habitat .................... 66 b. Regional Fauna .............................. 66 1) Mammals ................................. 66 2) Amphibians and Reptiles ................. 67 3) Birds ..... ......... ................... 67 4) Insects and Arthropods .................. 67 C. Local Wildlife .............................. 68 1) Flora of the Project Site ............... 70 2) Reptilian Fauna of the Project Site..... 71 3) Avian Fauna of the Project Site......... 72 4) Mammalian Fauna of the Project Site..... 72 5) Insect Fauna of the Project Site........ 73 3. Man Made ........................................ 74 a. History and Archaeology........... ........ 74 1) Salton Basin :........................... 74 2) Cultural Adjustments .................... 79 3) Local Aspects ........................... 81 b. Population .................................. 82 C. Land Use .................................... 84 d. Zoning and Proposed Land Use ................ 85 e. Economics ................................... 86 1) Regional ................................. 86 2) Local ................................... 94 f. Transportation Systems ...................... 96 III. PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .......................... 100 A. Impact on the Physical Environment.................. 100 I. Land Form and Open Space ................,....... 100 2. Groundwater ..................................... 101 3. Air Quality ..................................... 102 4- Climate ......................................... 10S S. Flooding ....................................... 105 6. Wind Erosion .................................... 106 7. Seismic..... .................................... 106 v )e B. Impact on the Biological Environment ................ 107 1. Flora ........................................... 107 2. Fauna ........................................... 107 C. Impact on the Man Made Environment .................. 108 1. Archaeology ..................................... 108 2. Population ...................................... 109 3. Land Use, Compatibility .......................... 109 4. Recreation and Open Space ....................... 110 5. Visual 6. ......................................... Transportation and Noise 110 7. ........................ Public Facilities ill 8. ................................ Utilities 112 ....................................... 113 a. Electric .................................... b. 113 Gas ......................................... 113 C. Water ....................................... 113 d. Sewage ...................................... 114 9. Economic ........................................ 114 IV. SUMMARY OF UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS .................. 115 V. MITIGATION MEASURES PROPOSED TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACTS.... 116 VI. A.WERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION .................:... 118 VII. COMPARISON OF SHORT AND LONG TERM EFFECTS ............... 119 VIII. IRREVERSIBLE CHANGES AND COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES........ 119 IX. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT.......... 120 X. ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED ..................... 121 XI. BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................ 122 APPENDIX 1 (Flora & Fauna of the Project Site).......... 125 APPENDIX 2 (Project & Site Description) ................. 130 LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT TITLE PAGE A..... General Location Map ......................4........ 3 B ..... Regional Map (Coachella Valley) .................... 4 Cl..... Local Map (U.S.G.S. -- 15" Series) ................. 6 C2..... Local Map (U.S.G.S. -- 7 1/2" Series) .............. 7 D ..... Local Map (Cadastral -- 1" = 20001) ................ 8 E1. .. Specific Plan -- Land Use .......................... 10 E2..... Specific Plan -- Phasing ........................... 16 Fl..... Generalized Soil Map ............................... 19 F2..... Soil $ Capability Map Summary ...................... 20 F3..... Soil Survey Interpretations ........................ 71 F4..... Soil &-Capability Map Summary ...................... 22 FS..... Soil Survey Interpretations ........................ 23 F6..... Soil & Capability Map Summary ...................... 24 F7..... Soil Survey Interpretations ........................ 25 FB..... Soil Limitation Rating & Vegetative Groups......... 26 F9..... Allowable Soil Pressures Chart ..................... 27 F10.... Hydrologic Soil Classification........... ........ 28 G1..... Groundwater Sub -basins Map ......................... 30 G2..... Groundwater Flow Lines Map ......................... 31 G3..... Water Movement in Upper Valley ..................... 32 G4,.... Changes in Water Levels Map ........................ 35 GS..... Water Level Contours Map ........................... 36 G6..... California Aqueduct Annual Entitlements Table..... 37 vii „Aga g• 0 ?ISO 0 vl'i la T L At Los Vegas —7- sewlej Lalf 0 Bakersfield E R N 3 S, A N S'l E R N A R D I TIENT U �A LOS A N G E LES Venpra c -- z San Be ldin-6 3 LOS ANGELES I .I ---A Riverside �L/., V Point Fermin Sant a\ RANG SAAF p 40 19CT P-0190 c Santa Cata ,lin:i� Is an, 0 —Z W —b—I E G 0 1 A L 0 Q1 San Clemente I land El I Point Lam Sa cam. -A I AL1 a .5 C% e Y, Laguna, �i j�n Islas Los Coronades, 0 0 320 o Ensenada Cabo Pun it Banda Isis Montag 40 80 0 �--�°� m i. nS MARC” 1974 PALM orseRT rl I JARRY fl- SCHMITZ &- ASS�)CIATES CO—RIG.T (.) 19— All R,9.1. R.. -- GENERAL LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT A _�•;,�E► �. �ti' �y l R E C W�rv�`w6.nn fl Nd, �M►•N' ^ npr 7 s`r r �.�' \�J II `�-- - r - .A: r j' 1 . ♦ � 'V_ " r. t+- cl • � � rte, ..r r: r6Efvr..rs • ` s � I n p. . c 5 r ,�� \ t �� \ �� fes. r .. �- _' -- _ Nf� A• '�AttL.ak"r� �s.'ly'?_1 i. fE-. r�.,.tr !%..,�. • 5�., ,aa.l !,/ ~ *"~ S'� •0 I 411 �Il: u CA i't'T+It I. {F,,r',.1 i •r `t. ,.I'•^\ �� ARcd_ T "'YILvk1, +r t_ + yy rrwa �e. er ` �:7�•�y.,,}.. L.-.. � �Qlr Ell �w.ca-. �'r � a1rtAe / F . -•�4`^. •L�- YI. r -��.�-L jn.,# �." r a.�l.. � '�'�� a. 1..rQ ... f�r1 �� ^,•-•� "' �`. 75 1' _'r_' � t UMMC+W.,.r1� L _�-., 's3+� ` c " �� ,"..',i�,Y =y } 1 � • R]i.CpU • 1 �` �.r r '7( 7' q 1 _ �: }_ rd" -V..Wi r '1.;� � s• RN"T� ti V P Y 1 5 I �> 1 - I.w+n wpin 1,'' i . vs R.j � �} rAr✓ �' �AARL t 5-1+a1pJ,'1if 1 - ~• •�' C ch Ilo • ° r J' RrnN k"4•-I � r 8 E RNA SI rb a F d R X-8 7 1,S' t{• T 5�1 . A" . c.. S = - y{ `` '..� e y n.�! • .' f _ , e[rfl %f� � ~� `T N 1 t' � � �� Cr ■ �1 ��y'"� f * a \ I tlf to Ito .YY,Rdt..WU•\` i"T.ZERYFIIL�IAN ` Rr MR1.BW x'f'll ^ L._1rrwt' _ LIRLf.+._ 4 _ .R k'�1 r-`sti`.�. ''�� I � I •� .4 L- c.lRrno �.,R A"��; I,..VglArt.M I — - ;✓: . t ' ' MPIir7. Z i, - Gw TpAS rA t 1 1 �. „I -PH rA" It, °.�f116 8105A �� tI'"-� l\i2 - 1+ 1 Mrt[• .�.+• s w..lrTfpi r e'• ., 11j •. ys P�NIPIA .arr.. Y'_.`i ii ( ai•�f j LA 7F/AIIL$ _. YI�hLS[kYa110N �1 T's - I I l~-•'°T`'� Lrw RESESERW Y6N ,>7 1 . l - I I f,_ l_ _ _. _IArA .xu 4 ' 1 R• -7L L5 S, AHUII LA INDIAH►1j,I6RYAf11F1r I i •q �a+.�,. � �• ,1 1�•. _... Rra,r �• .aYn. (�.. �•u4�l�ei+� y i+—� !.' 4 — � I �...� �.r TORAES Ig"V&T F, Ik _.. l.rN1 a .? • t` Ifs nF 9� �. "� :.� �T . 1", ftH RE+�IVAT OL �a,N 1 1- fC RrVERSIDS COu.f Y L -YY . I.R., '; •1 IAH q,F6aONly _ .i �.An�4 T 1 ?}� .? _ � �\..� , `yam °bl G�'�pl;/H9TT R T%•` \ J "•`« I r d6RRES APART YN{2' -� RAT y .. •`� I - � 1 1 � F+f JiJJ �i :IRIJ i-'_ �: t.'. r[./ J • _ __ Ir jc - Y . - •Gr I - .J 1 t°JI r.► ` H� r a r ::ILVELAND NATIONAL I J' y•prt•. 1 I n 1 t*• -1II01ESrY_'__=�1Nf.�_-_ _.f .1 _I--s `-•a`� R�'tT. CL7f �'� �" Ate`'_�._112 SL a I !tr a LOS EOYO IES iHD� •-- x.-.� I" +L.I I t J .. flL�'r f5 l ' .r RE $(R VATrON Wryer- �`....... I - r I � s � ` � • : a R.ncR. - r Fa ':� •.�.. .�r-F f ..rtr. l� ,,.I 12 • �' •fit = _I�. Y ..+ASV' f1 Idp •: ' w rn,N eea CO m*y to. OALM Op sET+T I 111 HARRY I I. til Hl\11T-7 &-A';SO IATEti >z COPYRIGHT () 197.- All R�pnl. Reser veJ. - Id�tl I I T _IL •x 1 • 1 0I0 REGIONAL MAP (COACHELLA VALLEY) 4 EXHIBIT B 1 However, on the basis of land uses the Valley is divided into two portions. The northern half (Upper Coachella Valley) consists of a tourist/ recreation oriented economic base, while the sou- thern half from Indio to the Salton Sea is pre- dominately agricultural in nature. The Valley is bordered on the northeast by the Little San Bernardino Mountains, obtaining eleva- tions from 3,000 feet to 6,000 feet. It is -bordered on the southwestern side by the higher and more rugged Santa Rosa - San Jacinto Mountains. These mountains range in elevation from 6,000 feet to the 10,831 foot summit of Mt. San Jacinto. Much of the scenic beauty of the area is provided by the mountains, foothills, and deep canyons found along e this southwestern side of the Valley. 2. Local The site is situated in the northwestern portion of the community of La Quinta and is surrounded on three sides by steep foothills. (See EXHIBITS Cl, C2, and D). C. Description 1. Land Use The study area encompasses a total of 622,0 acres. The proposal is to develop 129.8 acres, 20.9 percent of the study area, with condominiums focused on a * See APPENDIX 2 also. 5 � 1 • rrKe•! r•p ewnM•�nr Gq.Y 9..wr LOCAL MAP (USGS QUAD 15" SERIES) 6 0o awvrury 'i'.T iwwuw hr �lV.r U OUIN CAUF•- EXHIBIT Cl • 7 LOCAL MAP (USGS QUAD 15" SERIES) 6 0o awvrury 'i'.T iwwuw hr �lV.r U OUIN CAUF•- EXHIBIT Cl • Wei! Point — LL :i HaPPY • j �{ i." ;� BM 4 CNANEL 0 Ile, ryP l r RM 72 30 25, ui F' I• � r a WOO + _ _ i J III ,� � �p � � ,.y ,�, -��,, •. • � 32 C 1 +EA lyC, -Bor•'�G 1 �I p SITE I� ill $ �•, • � i l � _ {� -1 oi to well a o+ Ln N�1� M 'i, �1..3 �• til �. 1. water* �CllGlf ~��'-� I I , �r .I R'I III�� 'I � so r:.. ;��\• �TF WEP.N .'. 4^Gar:uL; LG:,p'. - ; L L `�L L ��" • �� r `� CLINFTIGN,l9C8Or CGC.;TU; R INTERVAL 40 FEET •� { II": J U. - ".'LA QUINTA QUADRANGLE C.TG a IS MEAN S_A LEVEL .31= LOCAL MAP (USGS QUAD 7 1/2" SERIES) 7 EXHIBIT C,) new eighteen hole golf course and clubhouse. The La Quinta Hotel now occupies 17.8 acres and will be expanded to a total of 43.9 acres, 7.1 percent of the study area. the new golf course (193.6 acres), and open areas 30.8 acres m ( ,) will make e up the open space, . 7 0.1. percent of the study area. There will be two ser- vice facilities comprising 6.4 acres, one for the golf course and one for a package sewage treatment L . (See Table 1 and EXH. El). If the mountains xcluded from the calculations, open space remai sr fifty percent of the developable area. The condominiums surrounding the golf course will be developed at densities of 4-6 du/gac (dwelling units per gross acre), a total of 637 units. The 76 unit hotel when expanded will include a total of 420 new units at a density of 20 du/gac. Excluding the mountains t e o TABLE 1 LAND USE ACRES PERCENT RESIDENTIAL 129.8 20.9 I -O E1. 43. 9 7.1 CLUBHpiIS L-. 5. 6 0.9 TOTP.1'. S 1'.;i:L 435.8 70.1 Open Space 30.8 Go1.f co":rsc. 193.6 untai^_ 2i1.:1 SFRV ICIf IPI.A�; 6.4 1.0 9 A7 621.5 100.0 A mat Sim gm".Nm. I it; • w+N ^ �-.-• .— MS VICINITY MAP .KK 1't41 i LANG [AE �.•.. .'- . .�... r.w Gr: S�' ,_ a ' µu •-[�.n. 44wNoo.ww.n .......-7 ,,.._ Ai Golf ..ow,lr c w.f4 G/ - -•- x .. _ - LI[OENO 1 �•' � .ham � i � �t.h � Y%'. �a,�T :. �^_ ®o[rrar..r ■ Nuwac .... . Y .' ■ "'� `V a—,w [w[e [nr[e�rrlow cNwe\ 0119; c –L awagalprNgot MOUNTAINS • ff � s i fv SPECIFIC PLAN -- LAND USE 10 EXHIBIT El SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE mVw bU J.F. OAVIOSON AN SOCIATli Nrv[NPO[, C[IIPONMIII } MOUNTAINS _ : n�lNlNc on[ ' �\ ILo1Y\MH CN11MN[L L ` ` � T :Isf e A mat Sim gm".Nm. I it; • w+N ^ �-.-• .— MS VICINITY MAP .KK 1't41 i LANG [AE �.•.. .'- . .�... r.w Gr: S�' ,_ a ' µu •-[�.n. 44wNoo.ww.n .......-7 ,,.._ Ai Golf ..ow,lr c w.f4 G/ - -•- x .. _ - LI[OENO 1 �•' � .ham � i � �t.h � Y%'. �a,�T :. �^_ ®o[rrar..r ■ Nuwac .... . Y .' ■ "'� `V a—,w [w[e [nr[e�rrlow cNwe\ 0119; c –L awagalprNgot MOUNTAINS • ff � s i fv SPECIFIC PLAN -- LAND USE 10 EXHIBIT El 2. Population The La Quinta Cove area will attract residents similar in demographic character to those in the existing country club development. For many people La Quinta is a second home and eventual retirement home, or weekend and vacation retreat. Consequently, the number of persons per dwelling will be lower than the usual residential development. These char- acteristics drastically reduce the need for elementary schools in the area. According to the 1970 Census there were 2.26 pop/du (population per dwelling unit) in Palm Springs. This figure gives an indication of the expected household size of La Quinta residents. Recent studies by the County of Riverside reveal actual population per dwelling unit figures lower than this, about 2.08 pop/du. Therefore, e C persons. The trap -S would % be about 76 Pers 3. Access -and Circulation For most of the project, the internal circulation system consists of a collector street fed by a number of cul-de-sacs. This collector street empties onto Eisenhower Drive at 50th _venue and at a point 1/4 rile northerly of 50t.. :1venue. "Ihese exterior roads 11 link the project to other parts of the Coachella Valley. Eisenhower Drive is shown on the Riverside County Master Plan of Highways with a 100 -foot right- of-way. It is the major link to Washington Street and Highway 111. Interstate 10 is approximately 5 miles north of the project area. The major loop street in the project area will have a 66 -foot right-of-way. The feeder streets will be 60 feet wide and cul-de-sacs are 50 feet in width. All streets will be privately maintained by the homeowners association. The streets will be devel- oped according to Riverside County standards. 4. AmenitiPc Complete urban amenities will be provided. Two Water systems will be constructed --one for domestic and fire protection use, and the other for golf course irrigation. Water for domestic use and fire protec- tion will be obtained from .the La Quinta Water Company. Water for the irrigation system will be obtained from from the proposed sewage treatment plant. Sewage will be transported to temporary treatment facilities east of Eisenhower Drive and north of the proposed outlet channel from proposed Oleander Basin. Effluent will be recycled by pumping it back to the golf course for irrigation use. A training dike along the north 12 and west side of the development will collect and transport storm runoff from the surrounding mountains to the proposed Oleander Basin. On-site stormwater will be handled in streets and drains and discharged into the proposed Oleander Basin. Bear Creek will also discharge into Oleander Basin. The design of Bear Creek and the outlet channel from Oleander Basin to Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel will be de- signed by Coachella Valley County Water District. The design of the basin, Bear Creek, and.outlet channel are discussed in an Engineering Report by Bechtel Engineers for the flood control district. Solid waste collection will be contracted for and controlled by the homeowners association. The entire La Quinta development lies in an unin- corporated portion of Riverside County and is there- fore served, by the Riverside_ County. -Sheriff I s, Office. Fire protection service also falls under the juris- diction of Riverside County. The California State Division of Forestry provides fire protection service under contract with the County. The nearest station is located in La"Quinta, approx. 1/2 mile southeast- erly of the project. Additional equipment is sta- tioned in Bermuda Dunes, Indio, and Palm Desert. Natural gas is provided by the Southern California Gas Company and power is furnished by the Imperial 13 Irrigation District. A11 of the utility companies predict adequate supplies of resources available for total development of the project. S. Phasing The total development of this portion of La Quinta is expected to occur over a seven to eight year period. EXHIBIT E2 and Table 2 present the proposed phasing. TABLE 2 DEVELOPMENT PHASING ACRES DENSITY UNITS EXISTING HOTEL 17.8 76 PHASE I Golf Course Open Space Mountains TOTAL PHASE I PHASE II Condominium Helicopter Pad Tennis Courts Health Spa' Sewage Treatment Plant Maintenance Yard Clubhouse TOTAL PHASE II PHASE III Condominium Hotel TOTAL PHASE III PHASE IV Condominium Condominium Hotel Tennis Courts TOTAL PHASE IV 14 193.6 30.8 211.4 435.8 28.4 5 142 1.0 0.5 2.0 5.4 1.0 5.6 43.9 9.5 6 57 2.1 20 42 11.6 9g 6.3 4 25 13.6 5 68 9.6 20 192 1.6 31. 1 2-9-5 PHASE V ACRES DENSITY UNITS Condominium 9.3 5 47 PHASE VI Condominium 9.9 6 59 PHASE VII Condominium 6.7 4 27 Hotel 9.3 20 186 TOTAL PHASE VII 16.0 71-3 PHASE VIII Condominium 6.8 4 27 PHASE IX Condominium 12.5 5 63 PHASE X Condominium 12.0 4 48 PHASE XI Condominium 9.0 5 45 PHASE XII Condominium 5.8 5 29 TOTAL 621.4 1133 Project Overall Density 1.82 du/ac 6. Value Total market value. of the project, upon completion, has been estimated in excess of $60 million. Esti- mates of the value of the Oleander Reservoir to the community, as well as the flood control facilities accompanying the project, are beyond the scope of this report. 15 SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE padrn Wrigs. caUc— J.F. DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES wDlualOa, CALNpIMe 1 — l [ A Mv.nlda Fv.n.ndo - -TEL l..Ya1011 ZT w1.•c..,. 'M1O7 A Pali, •••c w 4'- • # twe...o rww itMN"•. ((( � SP[YXl[ PLM aDuan it couan TaLtTtSMT Rawl it .. ... atADD [vaF1MTgM CNaMuI ,,,•: i I i 7 aouartMall To— - A ` � �� 'i OEVEIOPMENT pl-IASING IINMTIeawCf TaaD . ` 1� - -- - MOUNTAINS - 1 A:— — • Celle Telwpice , � t SECTION -S-li SECTION -C=C SPECIFIC PLAN -- PHASING 16 V EXHIBIT E, MOUNTAINS = Te�MMc oM[ SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE padrn Wrigs. caUc— J.F. DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES wDlualOa, CALNpIMe 1 — l [ A Mv.nlda Fv.n.ndo - -TEL l..Ya1011 ZT w1.•c..,. 'M1O7 A Pali, •••c w 4'- • # twe...o rww itMN"•. ((( � SP[YXl[ PLM aDuan it couan TaLtTtSMT Rawl it .. ... atADD [vaF1MTgM CNaMuI ,,,•: i I i 7 aouartMall To— - A ` � �� 'i OEVEIOPMENT pl-IASING IINMTIeawCf TaaD . ` 1� - -- - MOUNTAINS - 1 A:— — • Celle Telwpice , � t SECTION -S-li SECTION -C=C SPECIFIC PLAN -- PHASING 16 V EXHIBIT E, II. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND DEFINITION OF IMPACT AREA A. Description of the Environment 1. Physical a. Earth Resources 1) e The balance (easterly portion) consists of a rather level plain protected to some degree from flooding by a system of dikes and channels lying southerly. The overall elevations on this plain range from approximately 50 feet above sea level at the northerly por- tion of it to 40 feet above sea level at its southeast corner. 2) Space -as a Resource - Over 3/4 of the site is presently devoted to some form of open space (i.e., steep mountains, agriculture, outdoor recreation). It is anticipated that the foothill portions will be permanently kept as open space. In addition, the de- velopment plan dictates that in excess of 500 of the developable land will remain as additional open space. Thus, a total of 2/3 of the project site is proposed in open space. 17 3) Soil Characteristics - Various soils are found within the total project having capa- bilities, classifications, and characteris- tics as further described and shown (See EXHIBITS F1 thru F10)• 4) Mineral Resources and Construction Materials The only known deposits of construction materials on the site are those which are located in the northwestern portion near the mouth of a small canyon. This very limited quantity of material consists of rock, sand and gravel; however, the develop- ment plan contemplates non -removal of this resource due to the problems associated with such removal 40MMMMUNOM, al A1111111111111111111ft Further, other known deposits and existing facilities in the Coachella Valley are ample to supply the Valley's needs beyond the year 2000 A.D. b. Water Resources 1) Regional Flow - The primary source of sur- face flow into the Upper Coachella Valley is the Whitewater River and several tributaries, such as Snowcreek and Palm Canyon. A U.S.G.S. Analog Model Study of the groundwater basin was conducted for the Upper Coachella Valley. 18 to NK) NNIMIA4 AV C Project: La Quinta Cove Land SOIL AND CAPABILITY MAP SUMMARY Date: November 1973 Capa- Symbol Effec- Soil Profile Aver- bility Unit on Soil Name Live Texture age ** Map Depth Surface Subsoil Inches inose Erosion status UsesSuitaoreCrons P VIs4 Az Carrizo 60"+ gravelly very 2.5 to 0 to 2 slight 'specialized coarse rapidly 3.0 (slight) crops sand permeable only IIIe4 Ca$ Rositas 60"+ sand rapidly 7.5 or 0 permeable to 5 slight deep rooting textures more (severe) or cool season IIIe4 CaD Rositas 6011 fine crops.+ sand rapidly permeable 7.5 or 5 to 15 slight deep rooting textures more (severe) or cool season IIIe4 CoA Coachella 60"+ fine rapidly 7.5 crops sand permeable or more 0 to 2 slight (severe) deep rooting with thin or cool season fine tex- crops tured layers IVs4 CzU Carsitas 60"+ gravelly very 3 to 0 to 5 slight deep rooting sand rapidly 3.75 (mod.) Or cool season permeable textures crops *AWC - Available Water Holding Capacity for the entire soil profile **Wind Erosion hazard in parenthesis Limiting Factors or Remarks very coarse tex- ture, very rapid Permeability, may have flood hazard. N SOIL SURVEY INTERPRETATIONS' Soil Limitation, Suitability Rating, Soil Symbol** Soil Groupings and Single Factors: Az CaB CaD CoA CZB Vegetative Group G B B B B Hydrological Group A A A B B Soil Limitation Ratings for: Dwellings with basements Severe Slight Moderate Slight Moderate without basements Severe Slight Moderate Slight Moderate Shallow Excavations Moderate Slight Moderate Moderate Severe Local Roads & Streets Moderate Slight Moderate Slight Moderate Lawns $ Golf Fairways Severe Severe Severe Severe Severe Shrink -Swell Behavior Low Low Low Low Low Corrositivity Low Low Low Low Low * These interpretations do not eliminate the need for on-site investigations of specific areas selected for development or use. ** Soil symbols correspond with symbols on SOIL and CAPABILITY MAP SUMMARY. Degree of limitation expressed by comparative adjectives as slight, moderate, severe, very severe; suitability ratings expressed by good, fair, poor, unsuitable. N N M X T SOIL AND CAPABILITY MAP SUMMARY Project: La Quinta Cove Date: November 1973 Land Capa- Symbol Effec- Soil Profile Aver- bility on Soil Name tive Texture AWC* age Slope ** Erosion Suitable Land Limiting Factors Unit Map Depth Surface Subsoil Inches in % Status Uses or Crops or Remarks IIel MdA Mecca 6011+ fine moderately 7.S or 0 to 2 slight any climati- sandy rapid per- more (mod.), cally adapted loam meability crops IIel MfA Mecca 60"+ fine mod. rapid 7.5 or 2 or slight any climati- sandy permea- more less (mod.) cally adapted loam bility crops I M1A Mecca 6011+ !silt mod. slow 7.5 or 2 or slight any climati- Surface has ten - loam permea- more less (none) cally adapted dency to compact bility crops with tillage or traffic. VIIIsl RL Rockland 0" to rock or rock less steep slight not suitable 10" variable than or mod. for crops 2 (slight) VIIIs7 RU Rubbleland 4011+ stony stony 2 to 8 to 1 slight not suitable outwash outwash 3.75 or mod. for crops (slight) VIIIe4 RW Riverwash 6011+ variable variable 2 to 0 to 5 variablc not suitable coarse coarse 3.75 for crops textures textures *AWC - Available Water Holding Capacity for the entire soil profile **Wind Erosion hazard in parenthesis N w T k Jn SOIL SURVEY INTERPRETATIONS' Soil Limitation, Suitability Rating, Soil Groupings and Single Factors: MdA MfA Soil Symbol** M1A RL RU RW Vegetative Group A A A G G J Hydrological Group B C C D C/D C Soil Limitation Ratings for: Dwellings with basements without basements Shallow Excavations Local Roads $ Streets Lawns & Golf Fairways Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Severe Slight Severe Slight Severe Slight Severe Slight Severe Severe Moderate Severe Severe Severe Severe Severe Severe Severe Severe Shrink -Swell Behavior Low Low Low Low Low Low Corrositivity High High High Low Low Low * These interpretations do not eliminate the need for on—site investigations of selected for development or use. ** Soil symbols correspond with symbols on SOIL and CAPABILITY MAP SUMMARY. specific areas Degree of limitation expressed by comparative severe; suitability ratings expressed by adjectives good, fair, as slight, moderate, poor, unsuitable. severe, very SOIL AND CAPABILITY MAP SUMMARY Project: La Uinta Cove Land Capa- Symbol Date: November 1973 bility Effec- Soil Profile Aver- Unit on Soil Name Map tive Texture age ** Depth Surface AWC* Subsoil Inches Slope Erosion Suitable Land Limiting Factors IIIel IaA Indio in % Status or Uses or Crops Remarks 60"+ fine sandy rapid 7.5 or permea- more 0 to 2 slight any climati- Coarse surface loam bility (severe) Cally adapted textures & rapid crops permeability cause difficulty in ob- taining efficient irrigation F fer- tilization. Severe IIel IfA Indio 60"+ fine wind erosion. sandy mod. slow 7 t .5 or 0 to 2 slight permea.- any climati- a loam more bility (mod.) . Cally adapted textures crops I IJA Indio 6011+ very mod. slow 7.5 or 0 fine permea- to 2 slight any climati- sandy more bility (slight Cally adapted loam textures crops IIsi IlA Indio 6011+ silt loam slow 7.5 or 0 permea- more to 2 slight (slight any climati- Slowly permeable bility Cally adapted sub -soil makes crops salinity control somewhat difficult. Surface has ten- y to port = with tillage traffic. T *AWC - Available Water "Wind Erosion hazard in Holding Capacity for the entire soilrof ile parenthesis p SOIL SURVEY INTERPRETATIONS` v Degree of limitation expressed by comparative adjectives as slight, moderate, severe, very severe; suitability ratings expressed by good, fair, poor, unsuitable. Soil Symbol** Soil Limitation, Suitability Rating, Soil Groupings and Single Factors: IaA IfA IjA I1A Vegetative Group A A A A Hydrological Group B B B C Soil Limitation Ratings for: Dwellings with basements Slight Slight Slight Moderate without basements Slight Slight Slight Slight Shallow Excavations Slight Slight Slight Moderate Local Roads $ Streets Slight Slight Slight Slight Lawns & Golf Fairways Slight Moderate Moderate Slight Shrink -Swell Behavior Low Low Low Low Corrositivity High High High High * These interpretations do not eliminate the need for on-site investigations of specific areas selected for development or use. ** Soil symbols correspond with symbols on SOIL and CAPABILITY MAP SUMMARY. v Degree of limitation expressed by comparative adjectives as slight, moderate, severe, very severe; suitability ratings expressed by good, fair, poor, unsuitable. SOIL LIMITATION RATING FOR ALLOWABLE SOIL PRESSURE Definition and Scope: Soils are classified by their ability to withstand pressure imposed on them by foundations, as defined in Table 28--B of the Uniform Building Code. For the purpose of showing limitations in allowable soil pressure, the Soil Conservation Service divides the allowable loads into three groups, as follows: Soil Property Degree of Soil Limitation or Quality Sli ht Moderate Severe Allowable soil pressure More than 1000 - 2000 Less than (lb./sq. ft.) 2000 1000 It should be noted that allowable soil pressure is.only one factor in rating foundation suitability. There are other important factors which affect total foundation capacity; for example: shrink -swell, frost, and water table. Assumptions: In all cases, except for rock, allowable soil pressure is for a foundation one foot in width at a minimum depth of one foot below adjacent virgin ground. The surface foot of soil is not considered in rating the soil. Criteria: Ratings based on Table 28-B, Uniform Building Code, 1967 ed., Vol. 1, Sec. 2804. VEGETATIVE SOIL GROUPS Group Description: A CHOICE OF PLANTS NOT LIMITED BY SOILS. Soils are deep through very deep, moderately coarse through medium textured, moderately well through well drained, moderately rapidly through moderately slowly permeable. (Soils in this group can have slight wetness and slight salinity or alkalinity.) B CHOICE OF PLANTS LIMITED BY DROUTHINESS AND LOW FERTILITY LEVEL. Soils are coarse through gravelly medium textured, excessively drained, with less than 5 inches of available water -holding capacity in the root zone. G CHOICE OF PLANTS LIMITED BY DEPTH. Soils are shallow through moderately deep, well drained over bedrock or other unfractured dense materials. J CHOICE OF PLANTS DEPENDS UPON ON-SITE INVESTIGATION. Soils include those in the miscellaneous nonarable category, such as riverwash, stony or rocky upland, etc. 26 EXHIBIT F8 v 0 00 27 EXHIBIT Fg x O a) 41 ticco +� W .H 41 Q 000 O O 00 O O C7 41' H U r4-1 o R. a) 00 00 �O 000 �0 N O W O .0 c 14 cxd .�I O U a) U F+ iJ rl al cd g w e ca a 4J a� W b ai ca N 0. w A aJ r 0 O 0) ,H cn. r -r O CO44 � v 6 toOcn � 0 0000 coo 0 0 o a)> U 0) 44 NOC> C) ti) O O U O O rl rl N O HCO 4-1 O -H �-4-4 " p, O OJ( cd cd w W j .ate U �4 4-4 N 4-1 OO G w )+ K r1 00 A .� 0 00 G ol cn 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O b� 0 w H 0 000 0 000 o0c 0 o 0 crn -H-ri y a) O°v 0LnocnCD 3 u G W G 1] O '- cid m -rl 7 >� o v W O� 0 W �0 10 oG m N a) A M 0 w O 0 W U 0 0 G n G N - O - - -4-1N -irl N r-� r-1 N 0 w cd 41 •rl 1J Q., to 'rl iJ ti -1 G O w w > G w° -rf Nr. a.i 4) p O O O W W N N U a) a) 4-J cd cd cd b a) 10 G cd 41 0) U O D U ca 0 Cd r p 0 W 00 cd G >1 P.,p xcdxv Cd a°v, a� cd G r♦ r= 6 cd co cd 41 u +' a� w W U of ca `� 0 -H m cd +1 •H a� cn ani p u awo -H tv -H p 3 'b a� P w ,--i 0) ,� cd G O W O 0 to 0 q O 0)) 4) O U w p p, " 't7 b ,Gi 0 b nbo x 41 � �°�, ul co H 1 m cd 0� 0 4J 4j u cd -H -H do 0 U U U rz CO U .K r-qcd x cd a) G a) cd () (1) 41 L) U aA Eav•rl up a 0 0-1 U 6@ O p b W O E O O •rl O O O O cd a) O b O O O 0 U a a 27 EXHIBIT Fg HYDROLOGIC CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL SERIES A - LOW RUNOFF POTENTIAL Soils having high infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted and consisting of deep well to excessively drained sands or gravels. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. (Includes Psamments except those in Lithic, Aquic, or Aquodic subgroups; soils other than those in Groups C or D in fragmental, sandy -skeletal, or sandy families; soils in Grossarenic subgroups of Udults and Udalfs; and soils in Arenic subgroups of Udults and Udalfs except those in clayey or fine families.) B - MODERATELY LOW RUNOFF POTENTIAL Soils having moderate in- filtration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of moderately deep and deep, moderately well and well -drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures with moderately slow to moderately rapid permeability. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. (Soils other than those in Groups A, C, or D.) C - MODERATELY HIGH RUNOFF POTENTIAL Soils having slow infiltra- tion rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of well -drained and moderately well -drained soils, with slowly and very slowly permeable layers, with fragipans, hardpans, hard bedrock, and the like, and moderate depth -- 20" to 40", soils with moderately fine to fine texture or soils with moderate water tables. These soils may be somewhat poorly drained and have a slow rate of water transmission. They include soils in the Albic and Aquic subgroups; soils are in the Aeric subgroups and Aquents, Aquepts, Aquolls, Aqualfs, and Aquults in loamy families. Soils other than those in Group D that are in fine, very fine, or clayey families, except those with kaolinitic, oxidic, or halloysitic mineralogy; humods and orthods; soils with fragipans or petrocalvic horizons; soils in shallow families that have permeable sub- strata; soils in Lithic subgroups that have rock that is pervious or cracked enough to allow water to penetrate. D - HIGH RUNOFF POTENTIAL Soils having very slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of clay soils with a high swelling potential, soils with a permanent high water table, soils with a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shallow soils over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission (Includes all Vertisols; all Histosols; all Aquods; soils in Aquents, Aquepts Aquolls, Aqualfs, and Aquults except for Aeric subgroups in loamy families; soils with natric horizons; soils in Lithic subgroups that have impermeable substrata; and soils in shallow families that have impermeable substrata). 28 EXHIBIT Fin in 1971. (See EXHIBITS Gl, G2, and G3). It has been estimated that the long term average annual stream flow from drainages was approximately 33,000 acre feet. The sub -surface inflow to the Upper Coachella Valley is primarily from the San Gorgonio Pass and Whitewater River channel areas. The latter flows mentioned are, of course, variable, dependent upon the amount of pre- cipitation. The Lower Coachella Valley receives imported water from the Colorado River and is primarily used for agricultural purposes. This water has little importance to the Upper Valley, with the noted exception of La Quinta. In La Quinta this flow moves into the area from the north and northeast, and no groundwater barriers have been identified in this locality. Groundwater recharge comes from these sub- surface,inflows enhanced by seepage of applied irrigation water from the Coachella Canal. Additional waters inflowing into the Upper Coachella Valley are by means of reclaimed water from sewage treatment plants and golf course lakes where some percolation takes place. 29 3 1 4 4 E. j log Sen �oigoriqo Sp I i r, Psii Area 's, S, ,NO HL 1 11 >1.1 I I ftliripl Whit. Mat" rvint GARNET Wind F Itt Y/ N V f 2 S. 0 1 2 3 4, MILES 6 E. 8-1 E 4 EXPLANATION FA jjt y .... V. sprin', e �p �0 doposits r:_ N 1%.1 Tial,1n1.1ticant :11.er Thoueon Palo lu III., 1p o"':16"i tir elo "liedtad th I Y1 a C.lhedral Cit) I laled that rack v f no n-- water 44, Coseft Pclnl -Film opp Ground—water subbasins and generalized geology.* * USGS, 1971. GROUNDWATER SUB -BASINS MAP 30 .1 Indio ST- . EXHIBIT G1 x] E a J[ P 5 f Generalized ground -water flow linea, 1967.* *USGS, 1971. GROUNDWATER FLOW LINES MAP 31 EXHIBIT G2 r C SURFACE USE AND DISPOSAL SURFACE SUPPLY CONSUMPTIVE USE PRECIPITATION a GE- 5UpQT;~O •'? pW OUT yam_ : �'••'• :- 1NF�- SURFR�ED ►NATER NO SURFACE:..:::' EXPO GROU •• • • '�..w;.:;±^:"''..• • .'.`r."..i- y'"" ••."'�••� Cy{ls N E 9h S"�ORAG't �� SUBSURFACE _ OUTFLOW X'�. ZONE OF .SA' URATION fl1lj 11�1�` 4µ 94 Se OF 4aulFER THE GROUND WATER BASIN AS A FREE BODY Water Movement in the Upper Coachella Valley (in acre-feet) Inf low Outflow Surface 33,000 1,000 Subsurface 25,000 30,000 Imported water 2,480 Reclaimed water 2,805 Consumptive use 64,600 TOTAL 63,285 95,600 This table contains recent figures for some areas of water flow. As a result, the hydraulic equation is no longer balanced and the table should only be considered as a general tabulation. However, a general overdraft of about 34,000 acre-feet seems reasonable. WATER MOVEMENT IN UPPER VALLEY 32 r........_ r__ Outflow from the Upper Coachella Valley is primarily from surface and subsurface water movement and from consumptive use. The, sur- face outflow of water is either -natural run- off or irrigation runoff, which flows down the Whitewater River into the Salton Sea. It is generally stormwater which exceeds the percolation capacity of the spreading grounds And Whitewater channel. The frequency is highly variable; however, it is generally considered to average 1,000 acre feet per year in the Upper Coachella Valley and 125,000 acre feet of irrigation drainage in the Lower Valley. Groundwater outflow is water which flows out of the upper basin into the lower basin. This outflow is variable depending upon the recharge pressure gradient. It has been estimated that 50,000 acre feet once flowed yearly from the upper basin into the lower basin. In 1967 the rate of subsurface out- flow from the Upper Valley was approximately 30,000 acre feet per year. Consumptive uses of water consist of both net pumpage and evapotranspiration loss. Net pumpage consists of groundwater extraction 33 2) less the amount of reclaimed water percolated into the basin. In 1967 net pumpage amounted to 50,500 acre feet in the Upper Valley. It has been estimated that net pumping since 1967 -has increased 2b% - amounting to a total of 60,600 acre feet pumpage at present. Fur- ther, it is estimated that about 4,000 acre feet are consumed annually by native vege- tation and evaporation from land surface. The total consumptive use is, therefore,- estimated herefore,estimated at 64,600 acre feet for the Upper Valley. Regional Groundwater Storage - Usable ground - in the Upper Coachella Valley is being aster than it is being replenished. ;HIBITS G4 and G5). In order to off- s overdraft, during the early 1960s .C.W.D. and the Desert Water Agency ontracted with the State of California annual supply of 61,200 acre feet from en proposed, California Aqueduct. IIBIT G6). The cost of this project sated to be in excess of $75 million. •e, in 1963 both agencies began nego- with the Metropolitan. Water District r an .exchange of .state water forpart 34 a J f o A E 0 S F Change in water -level elevation, 1936-67 *USGS, 1971. CHANGES IN WATER LEVELS MAP 35 EXHIBIT Gq Water -level contours, autumn 1967.* * Source U.S.G.S., 1971. WATER LEVEL CONTOURS MAP 36 EXHIBIT Gc CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT ANNUAL ENTITLEMENTS Although the maximwn amount of Colorado River water available to the Districts is 61,200 acre-feet, this amount will not be obtained for some time. The estimated amounts of Colorado River water to be delivered through 1990 are given below: ANNUAL ENTITLEMENTS TO WATER FROM STATE WATER PROJECT THROUGH 1990* Year CVCWD DWA Total Aggregate total (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 1972 5,200 8,000 13,200 13,200 1973 5,800 9,000 14,800 28,000 1974 6,400 10,000 16,400 44,400 1975 7,000 11,000 18,000 62,400 1976 7,600 12,000 19,600 82,000 1977 8,420 13,000 21,400 103,000. 1978 9,240 14,000 23,200 127,000 1979 10,100 15,000 25,100 152,000 1980 10,900 17,000 27,900 180,000 1981 12,100 19,000 31,100 211,000 1982 13,300 21,000 34,300 245,000 1983 14,500 23,000 37,500 283,000 1984 15,800 25,000 40,800 323,000 1985 17,000 27,000 44,000 367,000 1986 18,200 29,000 47,200 414,000 1987 19,400 31,500 50,900 465,000 1988 20,600 34,000 54,600 520,000 1989 21,900 36,500 58,400 578,000 1990 23,100 38,100 61,200 640,000 and after *U.S.G.S. 1971. "Analog Model Study of the Groundwater Basin". 37 EXHIBIT GA Of MWD's Colorado River Water from their aqueduct passing through the Upper Coachella Valley. This exchange negotiation has facil- itated the deferment of construction of the costly water transport facilities by means of the California Aqueduct. The following is a summary of groundwater in storagel: Subbasin Depth2 Storage -------� .feet (acrt Desert Hot Springs 300 Mission Creek 779,000 Garnet Hill 500 2,630,000 500 1,520,000 Source: USGS, 1971 Whitewater River 700 10,200,000 Total 15,129,000 1Ground water in storage is the area times the depth times the storage coefficient. 2Depth is an arbitrary choice that represents most reasonable thickness of saturated deposits that can be economically and hydrologically utilized. 3) Groundwater Quality - Groundwater in the Upper Coachella Valley is generally good with low TDS (total dissolved solids) con- centrations. EXHIBITS G7 and G8 indicate the typical groundwater quality for TDS in the Coachella Valley. EXHIBIT G9 indicates fluoride concentrations. 4) Local Conditions - Practically all water used within the cominunity of La Quinta is obtained 38 I 4 Desert Hot Springs Subbasin Mission Creek Subbasin •Y �+�.+`.`..ArY..—...r-,r-. .�n..s�.W w—_-� n.... +v..w4sw TYPICAL GROUNDWATER QUALITY, FALL 1966 Hardness Total Dissolved Solids (as CaCO3) Fluorides <500 -good p.2m <500 -poor TAF(a) Tons(b) ppm Degree p22 Remarks Soft -mod Unuseable for 995 poor 1.3 2,567,000 80 - 180 hard 4-22 continuous human consumption. - 470 good 0.64 mod NW -1/2 <0.8 761,000 100 - 200 hard SE -1/2:1.4-8.0 ----- Whitewater mod Subbasin 257 good 0.34 544,300 170 - 180 hard <0.8 ----- Palm Springs sub -area (a) Tons per acre-foot. (b) In water contained within 500 feet of ground surface. � M R N AO,NO Ir ..� T 2S F F �r T4 fe l-- �.' '�r��• CIl soh T -1S .r.l� I. 1 ' •,`-'+r,,� r ., - - '`� �-i'—� - f� Vii• � nln TSS C. 4 �. •.. .I TJS .SS Nw YDS . ,I Sii A F T SS 7 65 SIf@ _irJr . tifcr' \�e _ T 75 ZY TDSi s • EYpILANATION LESS TM.N I-,,. ® Soo ro Soo or. ea �T es •, � � 1'� f a 300 TO 700 ►w� .. a€';,:::::,.:.. I 700 TO I..,. �.�, •. , Y ® AS MOT[0 �� • GROUNDWATER DUALITY "IAP 40 r-...., - -- r I I .I. � � I ` � I I w � I �L �•a �. ' `'�••,., ;b� - `- .. �;7 ••., '`'shy I'L ��. ; a.rl-c 1-3 I�` I ••y 1 r mea e • t 4-9 I � � i t 4� • 14a� •# I • I • e•4 .I 8-5 5,6 a t.r ,. .. .. •.1 6-0 a -c ■-w ._It t • I 7-T r tr t•a fl° : z s'allll t to w -n I. y [ I .r a 4 • e t •; ,'� e e EI(PL AtiATION I " (� Less t un O.e ppm ao-I 4 ppm s1.4 ppm c As noted Sami-waler-Dearing rock Non-wolw-Dearing rock. W FLUORIDE CONCENTRATIONS MAP 41 EXHIBIT G9 from wells located within the community. The domestic water system which serves the older part of the community is operated by the Santa Carmelita Water Company. The newer golf club and condominium development is served by the La Quinta Water Company. There are also a few large private wells used for irrigation and agriculture within the community. Groundwater levels declined with large in- creases in well use beginning about 1945. However, declines were reversed in this area some time after introduction of canal water in adjacent areas in 1948. Current static water levels in wells range on the average between about 50 and 80 feet. There is no significant long-term upward or downward trend .reported in local levels and ground- water supplies appear essentially in balance. Basin supplies are indicated to have been benefited from the canal irrigation to the northeast as previously noted_ c. Atmospheric Resources 1)!alit- - The Coachella Dalley is located in the Southeast Desert. Airbasin (See EXHIBIT HI) . The air quality of this Val lel 42 ell '. 1. a3 • C r, teres' `;_J► :`� CALIFORNIA AIR BASINS _ r Orth oast� gyp`.".yarj! tilt State of California The Resources Agency �C 6 ■•C .. ci� {.w ♦ _ i. n " AIR RESOURCES BOARD • u er co*ioa ` San Franciscow,... Bay Area.,,T 4,,� n+.a, r�• ,,. :.'� w��a Ord L .wi n . Sri Joaq in *,\ fw \ p,� ►�, . w great \\ North ■9r 1 fC.wt. ;� ....... Basin f Central °-= I VarlIey"s \� Coast South .,S'—_., � s a N s[ e N a n o I +I o _ Central _--•-•---,Southeast Desert Coast LwwlA fr,r Rw •{ J'X, I ~' South Coast 60ANGE w , �` Scfndw I r� an C Sia r •� v VL w N Q a 0 X ti► E rX r a L .� ) •v `a Diego 1 wuc.w; CALIFORNIA AIR BASINS 43 EXHIBIT H1 has been steadily deteriorating during the Past few years. (See EXHIBIT H2). The re- source is influenced in Part by the quality of air in the Southcoast Airbasin, and in part by local conditions. The problem is twofold: Dust and oxidants. The dust problem t is most acute in the Lower Valley and results from human activity such as burning, vehicu- lar movement on unpaved roads, sand and gravel operations and so forth. In the Upper Valley, and particularly after periods of heavy run- off, at certain times of the year the seasonal winds pass over spreading grounds and open areas, picking up silt and dust and carrying it high into the atmosphere; however, these dust storms are relatively infrequent and as more and more open space lands are con- verted to urban uses, there is less natural f area from which the winds can accumulate silt. f The oxidant problem is quite different. Most of the high oxidant levels are believed to be the result of pollution from the South - coast Airbasin, which have been carried through the San Gorgonio Pass. Local vehicu- lar sources undoubtedly contribute to the pi-ohlem, �ut to vi -tat exact de};7 ee is unknown. 1'1ie ,'.Cl lut i eT1 P ruh J rr i _ accent twat ed by the 44 AIR POLLUTION INVENTORY TABLE 45 EXHIBIT H2 region's physiography. During the summer months marine air also innundates the Valley from the south and because of the mountains to t�e north, east and west, air commonly becomes trapped in the Valley. As can be seen by Exhibits H3 through H6, the motor vehicle is the primary cause of high pol- lution readings. Z) Climate - The climate of the area is influenced by the low mid -latitude position (340 North), by. location inland from the Pacific Ocean, and by the arrangement of land forms in the area consisting chiefly of the mountains of the trans- verse range and peninsularrange geomorphic prov- inces Which tend to produce a rain shadow effect in the desert area. The peninsularrange (San Jacinto -Santa Rosa mountain range) forms the most imi,ortant barrier due to its high elevation and also because it trends parallel to the coast- line. 'Phis range provides an orographic barrier along the western portion of the Coachella Valley and as a result rainfall ranges from 40+ inches on the windward side of the MOUntains to Less than 5 inches oli thc_• lee side. The ,Mountainous arez's !`" cool tce,711lcral rues and snow occurs in th'c h-j71ter month. iile t"Csel-t. MILI Vallev areas I F 46 A,4 C CiLLUTIOI, LU;: i RU'_(11 1 %11LT RIVERSIDE NTY 588S',Usston b�ulcvord Riversidc, California 92509 AIR POLLUTION SOURCES EMISSIONS -TONS PER DAY STATIONARY SOURCES 55.1 TONS AS OF JANUARY 1, 1973 a r TRANSPORTATION SOURCES 1240.7 TONS AS OF JANUARY 1, 1973 m � X PIE SLICES show breakdown of air pollution sources. TOTAL Stationary and Transportation sources daily average 1295,$ Tons per day .N AIR POLLUTION C01 - ,.OL DISTRICT RIVERSIDE COUNTY 5888 Mission Boulevard Riverside, California 92509 AIR POLLUTION SOURCES EMISSIONS -TONS PER DAY AS OF JANUARY 1, 1973 A co 12% +] { FUEL COMBUSTION - 6.3 TONS INCINEiRATIO 19.2 TONS tT x PIE SLICES show breakdown of current air pollution Gt emissions. Stationary source daily average 55,1 Tons per day. Xr RAILROA 4;3 TO TRANSPORTATION SOURCES PIE SLICES show breakdown of current air Pollution emissions. Transportation sources daily average 1240,1 Tons per day. New test procedure used by both A.R.B. & E.P.A. AIR PCLLUTIC,4 CO"'TR01_ DISTRICT RIVERSID )UNTY 5808 Mission .ricuIcvcrd Riverside, California 92509 AIR POLLUTION SOURCES EMISSIONS -TONS PER DAY STATIONAR SOURCES — 93.2 TONS RAILROADS 7.8 TONS i—` AIRCRAFT 51.4 TONS 2 % JANUARY 1, 1971 x STATIONARY SOURCES 93,2 TPU x TRANSPORTATION SOURCES 826,4 TPD STATIM SOURCES 5 5.1 TOf RAILROADS 4 3 TONS JANUARY 1, 1973 STATIONARY SOURCES 55.1 TPD TRANSPORTATION SOURCES 1240.7 TPD is t New Test Procedure used by both ARB & EPA. PALM SPRINGS SOURCE: U.S. Weather Bureau TYPICAL METEOROLOGICAL TABLE 52 r.,...., . r T .. AVERAGE TEMPERATURE RAIN HUMIDITY Period Min.° Mean° . Max. ° Inches 4 A.M. Noon 4 P.M. January 39.1 53.7 68.3 1.22 57 32 32 April 52.6 69.9 86.9 .25 55 22 19 July 73.2 90.6 107.8 .29 60 28 25 October 56.5 74.0 91.4 1.33 58 27 28 Year 54.7 70.9 87.5 7.07 58 27 26 INDIO AVERAGE TEMPERATURE RAIN HUMIDITY Period Min.' Mean* Max.° Inches 4 A.M. Noon 4 P.M. January 37.8 54.1 70.4 .50 57 32 32 April 57.0 72.3 87.5 .10 55 22 19 July 76.9 92.1 107.2 .12 60 28 25 October 58.7 75.5 92.2 .23 58 27 28 Year 57.2 73.1 89.0 3.38 58 27 26 SOURCE: U.S. Weather Bureau TYPICAL METEOROLOGICAL TABLE 52 r.,...., . r T .. _f may. ev .' ;= l • ^ t r ii .�Srr �•-j,jo }^ata ^ T •s L � �9 ..--.i1�rr � � 'r� .: •'1 , `1 -�9 � � Y a V • I 1[ N lit L 3t. t f .�•t� r. A rr. \ r• e{il4 4+X ••e, j✓ - X If a`\- [,4yy r ..... i. .•• •...aa R[Lil6!{! . •r„iw4 —e C�a [1+[4L - ' �• ! 1 �.[ .ter .t �. � ,. �•yl �1 � [•Ctr{[ 4� rk JJ � f {reUU ■tee 11e tete'{ \ , r{Lr Irr� I ••[ � , Me 1 _z� L.,• -� FLY 7 0 `.. � e•r a. l s \ a°•a aj� V N t � y Aki �, ,,,. ti's-, .r`- �._, • ;� �r�/.._._, f i • r /"� f / � • • r� � �a ` per. � } 1:�: �r( 47A"•t �rJ EXPLANATION e— ■ Boundary of District • Precipitation Station, active Boundary of area investigated by Station relocation indicated by letters A, B, C, etc. Letter A Department of Water Resources. denotes first IOtal.On �w✓t� Boundary of highland fealu,ee, dashed where poorly defined, a Precipitotion Station, inaclive. —lei- Lines of equal overage seasonal A Stream Gaging Station, active. preclptiolion 1930-1960 p Stream Goto SI - Gaging aJion, inactive. o t � t r1Les ------ Lines of estimalsd equal Overage . C e L E $410.04101 precipitation. EQUAL RAINFALL CONTOURS MAP 53 flood plain, but it is now well channeled. In addition, well defined tributaries drain from all the canyons, draining the San Jacinto range. In 1967 and 1969 major Whitewater River floods washed out channel crossings from Palm Springs to Indio. Subsequently a bridge was constructed on Bob Hope Dr., and currently a Whitewater River Channel bridge construction program is underway throughout the Upper Coachella Valley. The next bridge expected to be constructed during the 1974-1975 fiscal year is planned on Washington Street. The local drainage pattern in the community of La Quinta consists primarily of the west and east La Quinta Storm Channels and its associated tributaries. A channel and dike system provides some flood protection for the community. It should be noted, however, that virtually no adequate protection exists from periodic thunderstorms producing large surface runoff within the community. This potential flow could cause major damage and constitutes a significant problem. The pro- posed project and accompanying flood control works will reduce this problem substantially. (See EXHIBIT J). 54 ou■.vo, Q. &al` • r ..0 3 LTY P'A •" . [r,p ., N( TE . For details see "ENGINEERING REPORT ON PRELIMINARY � •. _ _ �__ 4 ( - DESIGN & COST ESTIMATE FOR FLOOD CONTROL WORKS FOR THE LA QUIN'TA AREA" by Bechtel, Inc,, September 1970. I 23 .2A V 1 R+t MVdJ� 20� - � I .a!1. 22 1,• �� < 22 2 ^ ^ . �� .� sn • r � '� 1 MMrF'I�e11s� fir' � I _ `` +: yl•• •, •L 60*app ' t ce, • wr■+le : fM 24 1.4 27 -� ' r• - -r y • .F a 31 32 F .'sem - 33 ry . 3K d* 1 y , 1 ;� a. S v • O .., s 4 31: A%...10 :.. st. ' r H 1 14 Ir f • �r[�v[ y , n •v[+erA[ Cal 22 i , O :2A i 3 21 M1 26 1 25 " I -20 29 27 SCALE 1:62500 a MILES 3000 0 3000 6000 9W0 17000 1S000 18000 21000 FEET - — J LA OUINTA FLOOD CONTROL (RECOMMENDED PLAN) 55 EXHIBIT moderate wind erosion hazard exists in the community of La Quinta due primarily to the exposed nature of the soils on the vacant lands and the nature of the soil itself. Some areas in the community have been de- veloped to some extent with urbanization, agriculture, wind breaks, etc., thereby alleviating much of the potential problem. EXHIBIT K indicates the wind erosion status for a portion of the Coachella Valley. 3) Earth uake and Faulting - The Coachella Valley is bounded by two major fault zones: (1) The San Andreas Fault zone on the northeast side and (2) the San Jacinto Fault zone along the southwest side. (See EXHIBIT Ll). The San Andreas Fault zone lies approximately six miles northeast of La Quinta. The San Jacinto Fault zone lies approximately 15 miles southwest of the community, across the San Jacinto - Santa Rosa mountain range. A few smaller faults lie between the San Jacinto Fault zone and the community. One such fault runs through the southwesterly portion of the City of Indian Wells for a short distance. The entire regional area is seismically active. In spite of the frequency of tremors, earthquake 57 LEGEND Slight Moderate Severe ■ • r i •�. • ■ Very Severe LOCATION MAP MAP WIND EROSION STATUS MAP PORTION OF COACHELLA VALLEY WIND EROSION STUDY AREA RIVERSIDE R SAN BERNARDINO COUNTIES, iNFRO1N wwMy".."Area CALIFORNIA )E COUNTY JULY 1967 1 O I 2 3 SCALE IN MILES t 1 ... i ■ 40 • ' ` mss' i. .......... s'. rife ' .r` .. .! i � • ■ ! -f / '`! •�' ■' ■) • ■ 91 I c u • r • ■ • • • ! r r • c 'o • • • w ■ • • ' r , - � - I" ... .. :�,�,14�-- Eta• R � � �r� �;` .�� V-.�'t'-• • ��5 .. ..mow t - �C Vfi t6 ILO .. ✓) , � 1 sir �� •off � � ��, .. .. [t '/ 'ry \ WIND EROSION STATUS 58 EXHIBIT K GEOLOGIC MAP -- SANTA ANA QUAD 59 FXN?RTT I -, activity in the La Quinta area has been slight, as shown by the epicenter map, which indicates no major earthquakes in the area for the recorded period 1934 through 1961. (See EXHIBIT L2). The majority of the earth- quakes shown are of an intensity of less than 5.0 on the Richter scale, which does not constitute an earthquake of destructive nature. The nearest epicenter of an earth- quake magnitude 4.5 - 4.9 on the Richter scale, was approximately eight miles north- east of the community. The epicenter of any significant intensity (6.5) was registered southeast of Desert Hot Springs on December 4, 1948, approximately 15 miles north of the project site. Based upon the most recent data presented, earthquake activity has been light and the area can be considered relatively remote from major active sheer zones which could present a real potential danger. Future maximum shaking at the project site should be based upon observations of past earthquakes in the area. The most severe shaking within the lifetime of most structures to be built on the site is expected to occur as the result of an earthquake associated 60 r o a W d 10 ° °l ° a o 001) 0 UJ V a F.L LLJm� O N � O 0 r ° O Y 0 �N ° Iq :-. o 0 0 a ° V/° 0 c� ° 1 w o o loo o o b6 o o uQ um N ° 00 0 0° N 2 c0 1 or 0 itiL Q b 0(a (b b ° � �° a cb m w 0 0- u Io 0) 0n 0 O y I r W � I to o vo ti od fr IW M °c N d I n1 6 O ,ry 00 �� ° � 0 r Z0 o 0Lfi 0 0 N vi i OO 00 M Al F- 4 M10 M 1 t i a ° O '80 ° 1° 60 (? ' °too O ° Z 'a '0 'C .p T7 'D Q O o�0 °o I 0- b ° c c c c o d v+ v+ v► m rn v+ (Do w 0 0 0 l0 to � I v r o a W d 10 ° °l ° a o 001) 0 UJ V a F.L LLJm� O N � O 0 r ° O Y 0 �N ° Iq :-. o 0 0 a ° V/° 0 c� ° 1 w o o loo o o b6 o o uQ um N ° 00 0 0° N 2 c0 1 or 0 itiL Q b 0(a (b b ° � �° a cb m w 0 0- u NI M 1 O cv ° If } O ° °04 01 r1 000woo I ° O ° os ° o°® - ---C-li o �O� EPICENTER MAP 61 Io � I I o vo fr IW °Y C] � ,� N o °c N d I n1 6 O ,ry 00 �� ° � 0 r ° 0 ° o M $ o v ° OO 00 M 4 M10 M 1 t i ° O '80 ° 1° 60 (? ' °too O ° O - ( O rji 0 b If 0- od , 0 �O o W o� 0 o�0 °o 0 I O Z b ° Q NI M 1 O cv ° If } O ° °04 01 r1 000woo I ° O ° os ° o°® - ---C-li o �O� EPICENTER MAP 61 with the San Andreas Fault system. This system has experienced approximately two dozen occurrences of intensities of VI, VII, and VIII during the past 160 years. Of course, this does not imply that an earthquake of greater intensity has not occured, nor could one not occur. It appears reasonable that a seismic regionalization factor of the study area of a minimum VIII on the modified Mercali scale would be in order. This Mercali scale measures intensity of an earthquake, or how an earthquake is felt in a particular place; as compared with the Richter scale which mea- sures magnitude, or the actual amount of energy released. Intensity, which is determined by magnitude, distance from the epicenter, and degree of saturation, structure, compo- sition and consolidation of underlying geo- logic materials and other variables, is par- ticularly important in engineering design. A factor of VIII, produces some moderate build- ing damage (severe for some masonry buildings) and some disruption of water in wells and ruptured pipes. No general panic situation (with surface ruptures) is expected in the developed area; however, it is probable that loose boulders, rocks, and material lying on 62 the steep foothills will be dislodged and possibly moved off the slopes and onto the edges of the proposed golf course or drainage channels affording ample protection to the residents. No major landslides are anticipated. 4) Fire - Since in its natural state the desert supports very sparse vegetation, most of the Valley's fire hazard has been produced by man. The primary dangers include various structures and some poorly maintained agri- cultural operations, such as unkempt date gardens. No hazards of any significant magnitude were observed on the site. Due to proposed Government policies and future implementation, fire hazards in the Valley are expected to be reduced substan- tially. As the area develops it is expected that adequate water flow for fire protection purposes will be installed and that more super- ior fire fighting forces will become stationed in La Quinta and throughout the Valley. 2. Biological a. Regional Flora - a unique feature of the Coachella Valley is its variety of life forms, primarily s due to each species adaptation to a particular 63 type of habitat. Some natural species such as creosote bush and mesquite have taproots which descend 30' or more to utilize moisture at lower depths. Other plants, such as cacti, develop a spreading network of surface roots so as to quickly absorb scant rainfall which occasionally falls in the desert. Some plants develop funnel shaped leaves to aid in delivering rainfall to their root system. Intense summer heat and a prolonged growing season have also contributed to rather unique vegetation possibilities in the Valley. The date palm flour- ishes because o'f this very reason, and over 95% of the dates produced in the United States are grown in the Coachella Valley. Typical of the Valley and foothills is the des- cription expounded by R. Mark Ryan's book "Mammals of Deep Canyon, Colorado Desert." The life zones described are applicable to the general area and represent the successive nature of the habitats for this region. Three distinct life - zones are recognized: The Lower Sonoran, from sea level to 3500'; Upper Sonoran, 3500' to 63001; and Transition Life zone, from 6300' to 8000'. It should be noted that the "boundaries" between T life zones and habitats are not distinct and that overlapping zones of change, commonly called "ecotones," exist and merge one zone with another. The La Quinta biotic communities fall within the lower Sonoran Life zone, although they are influenced by the other two zones as well. The lower Sonoran Life Zone is further divided into four habitats: 1) Sand dunes and Creosote, 2) Creosote - Palo Verde, 3) Cholla - Palo Verde, and 4) Rocky Slopes. 1) Sand Dunes and Creosote Habitat - Constantly subjected to wind movement, the dunes habitat maintains, at best, - a sparse vegetative cover, primarily of widely spaced creosote bushes. Occasional thickets of mesquite are found primarily where water is near the surface. 2) Creosote - Palo Verde Habitat - Indigo bush, smoke trees, and burro bush, to- gether with the creosote bush and palo verde trees are common species to this harsh habitat. 3) Cholla - Palo Verde Habitat - This sand and gravel area supports cholla and darn- ing needle cacti. Water supply is limited 65 to occasional cloudbursts with much runoff, therefore very little vegeta- tion flourishes. 4) Rocky Slopes Habitat - Occasional barrel cactus or creosote bush is found here, however, a good deal of the mammal popu- lation is present, primarily attributable to natural shelter from intense heat pro- vided by numerous rocks and crevices. b. Regional Fauna - The numerous desert animals have i adapted themselves in many ways to cope with the desert environment. Animal species found and known to exist in the Valley are widely diversi- fied in both populations and number of species, some of which are listed below. 1) Mammals - About three dozen species of mammals are found in the region. Many of these .animals will utilize several or all of the different habitats described above. Some are important to the system of checks and balances. They f include bats, rabbits, rodents, coyotes, foxes, skunks,.and bobcats. Perhaps the most out- standing animal of this region is the Penin- sular Bighorn Sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsoni), currently on California's rare wildlife list. 66 They inhabit the Santa Rosa Range and foot- hills lying to the southwest of the Coachella Valley. Tracks and occasional sightings of these animals occur in the Indian Wells - Palm Desert - La Quinta area. 2) Amphibians and Reptiles - Numerous species live in all habitats of the Lower.Sonoran Life Zone. They include the toads, tortoises, lizards and snakes. one species of unique lizards was observed in the northern canyon portion of the site. This was the Barred Collared Lizard (Crotaphytus insularis ves- tigium). The endangered Desert Slender Salamander (Batrachoseps aridus) was recently discovered within a few miles west of La Quinta in Deep Canyon, Palm Desert. 3) Birds - Countless numbers and species of birds have been frequenting the Coachella Valley during seasonal migrations for centuries. In addition, numerous species of permanent residents are present. The more noticeable ones include quail, hawks, doves, roadrunners, hummingbirds, wrens, mockingbirds,'warblers, finches and sparrows. 4) Insects and Arthrop-d- - Typical desert 67 dwellers include scorpions, crickets, grass- hoppers, spiders, beetles, butterflies, bees and a host of others which have adapted to the desert environment. These form an im- portant link in the food chain. C. Local Wildlife - Field surveys were conducted during August and September 1973 and the results, together with known data, are described on the following pages and listed in APPENDIX I. (See EXHIBIT M also). 68 SUMMARY OF FIELD NOTES 1) Flora of the Ero'ect Site - The natural Flora or Plant Life is mainly of three types: that of the canyon and mountain slopes, that of the playa, and that of the arroyo -- dissected mesa at the northern end of the basin area. The Flora of the canyons and mountain slopes portrays the typical plant life of the COLORADO DESERT, the hottest of seven deserts comprising the GREAT SONORAN DESERT. Dominant shrubs include the Creosote (Larrea divaricata), Burrobush (Franseria dumosa), Desert Sweet (Babbia 'uncea), CatcZaw (Acacia Gre ii), Small -leaved Bird -of Paradise (Ho frrctnnseggia micro h� ylla), Cheesebush (kymenoclea salsola), Desert Lavender (Hrgptis Dnortli and Hummingbird Bush {Belo crone califarnica) also known as Chupa- rosa. Spring annuals or ephemera Zs that appear when there has been suffi- cient hinter rains include a great variety of plants that must, in summer, be identified by their dried skeletons. These show the presence of the following: Brown -eyed Primrose (Oenothera ctayaeLormis), Skeleton Weed (Chroizanthe rigida), Forget-me-nots (Crjyptantha maritima and costata), Ground Cherry ( tysaZis crassifolia), PZaintain (PZantago Purshii), large flowered Blazing Star (Mentzelia involucrata), Pebble Fincushion (Chaenac tis carphoclinia), Colorado Desert Milkweed (Asclepias subulata) and Honey Sweet (Tidestroemia ob lon i olia). Other shrubs include Encelia (Encelia arinosa ) With silvery white leaves, Indigo Bush (Dalea Schottii), Anderson Thornbush (L cium andersoni), and the Stix -weeks Grass (Aristida adscencionis). Cacti are not frequent and include BeavertaiZ (Opuntia basiliaris), Darning Needle Cactus (opuntia ramosissima), and the Colorado Desert Barrel Cactus (Ferocactus acanthodes). The Flora at theast base of the Santa Rosas on the flats show little diversity. The uth half of the flat portrays the bare, white, hard -packed playa surrounded by looser alkaline soils supporting a dominant community of Cattle Spinach with occasional plants of Ink Weed (Suaeda TorreUana) and scattered clumps of Mesquite out on the playa of small size. -A much larger green c•Zump-of Mesquite was found quite close to the ,junction of Obregon and Tampico. Close to the base of the mountains, scattered clumps of Creo- sote were found. Scattered Salt Cedar clumps and perhaps a few plants of Alkali GoZdenbush (Flapplepadapus _acradenius) are also on the playa. At the east end of a dump, the Coyote Melon (Curcurbita Palmeri) is flourishing with vines loaded with baseball -sized gourds. Just north of the dump is a very dense impenetrable growth of luxuriant Cattle Spinach which is apparently supported by artificially induced seepage. In the center of this dense clump of Cattle Spinach tall plants of Wild Tobacco (Nicotiana glauca) provide nectar in their long yellowish flowers for Hummingbirds. At the north end of the long (almost a mile) flat. the mesa is dissected by arroyos running from other canyons. Here, along the arroyos grows`Catclaw, Mesquite, and Alkali Goldenbush. Above the arroyos, on the mesa, grows Creosote, Burrobush, Indigo Bush, scattered clumps of Desert Sweet, and Cattle Spinach. The site also supports a variety of agricultural plants and trees, among which are citrus, dates, and fields of alfalfa. 70 2) Reptilian Fauna -of the Project Site — Perhaps the most interesting of the various faunae of the surveyed area is that of the Reptile Life. The discovery of the Barred Collared Lizard, in 1971, -in -Chino Canyon.was very exciting. It was Later described in the March 31, 1972 issue of the GREAT BASIN NATURALIST. The Barred Collared Lizard was already rare and endangered when discovered. Its late discovery was due to this great rarity, as well as its elusive habits. The Barred Collared Lizard, along with the Fringe -footed Lizard (Uma inornata), is among the most interesting reptile in the Coachella Valley. , Considerable effort was expended to determine whether the Barred Collared Lizard inhabited the rocky canyons of the area to be surveyed, particularly since.this species was found as recently as April 1973 in a canyon south of La Quinta. On the very hot morning of August 4, 1973, three (3) Barred Collared Lizards were observed in the Large rocky canyon at the north end of the site, between the hours of 8:30 and 11:00 A.M. Later, at 11:30 A.M. a maZe of unusual reddish tinge was spotted about forty feet up on the steep rocky face of the cliff, just west of the junction of Tampico and Obregon. Other interesting saurians (lizards) observed in canyons were the Santa Rosa Chuckawalla, which too may prove to be -a new variety, and the Zebra - tail or Gridirion Lizard (Callissurus d. draconoides) dwelling in the sands and gravels of the lower canyons. On the flatter ground are found the Flat -nosed Horned Lizard (Phrynosoma platyrhinos calidarum) identified by oval_ droppings of ant remains, the Tiger Whip-taiZ (Cnemidodophorus tig! s) and Stansbury's Uta (Uta stansburiona) the smallest and most common lizard. The Desert Iguana (Dipsosaurus d. dorsalis) was not seen, but would be present around the playa in late April when the desert annuals provide green food for this plant -eating lizard. Two other lizards of less fre- quent occurrence were the Long-tailed Uta (Uta grac-iosus) and the Giant Sc-aley Lizard (Scaloporus magister), seen along shaded roadways of the farmed area at�the north end of the site. Other lizards not observed, but certainty present on the rocky slopes and cliffs of .the Santa Rosas are: Mearn's Cliff Uta (Petrosaurus mearnsi), Henshaw's Spotted Night Lizard (Xantusia henshawi) both present in the Santa Rosas at 2,000 feet elevation; the Tuberculate Gecko (Phyllodactylus tuberculatus), and the Banded Gecko which is quite common in the Valley and nocturnal on the floor of the desert. The only snake evidence found was a double cup -like depression dug by a sidewinder on two particular nights, ,just outside a small rodent burrow. Snakes of the canyons undoubtedly include: the Desert Mountain Speckled Rattler (taken in a nearby canyon, just west of Palm Desert, in mid-July), Van Denburgh's Night Snake (Trimorphodonyandenburghi), and perhaps the Red Diamond Rattler (CrotaZus ruber) found -at SiZver Spur and Deep Canyon in Palm Desert. The' Red Racer and Bull Snake undoubtedly occur on the farmed areas in La Quinta, but were not encountered in the survey. 71 3) Avian Fauna of the Pre' Cite - The most interesting member of -the local bird life is the Californian Ground Cuckoo (Geococcyx caZi ornianus), also known as the Roadrunner, Paisano, or Chaparral Cock, as well laasmany other pseudonyms. Although not uncommon in the Coachella Valley, it -is relatively infrequent throughout the many deserts of its range. Eight Roadrunners were seen during the survey of the property. A pair came out of the fine Mes- quite clump near the junction of Obregon and Tampico; one going out onto the playa; another was observed hopping from rock pinnacle to pinnacle up the steep face of the cliff, and when it was up about 100 feet elevation it snatched a lizard from the sheer face of the rock. One Roadrunner Was found in a Salt Cedar tree out on the Saltbush covered playa. Others were seen near the mater tomer on the mountain side where there is consi- derable vegetation such as Date Palm, Palo Verdes, Mesquite and Creosote. Still others were seen in the farming section between Eisenhower and Obregon. Gumbel or Desert Quail were common and several large coveys were observed. . The most versatile bird seems to be the House Finch or Linnet, which was found in every ecological niche of the area. Three members of the Dove Family (Columbidare) were seen and heard: the White -winged Dove trumpeting from orchards at the north end of the farmed property (two pairs), Mourning Doves and Mexican Ground Doves feeding out on the flats. Other birds in- clude the Mocker, Starling, English, Sparrow, White-rumped Shrike,. and the Grasshopper Falcon. Although the birds that tolerate the hot temperatures of summer on the Colorado Desert are few, a bird survey made in the baZmy days of spring, during the spring migration days, would certain reveal a much greater variety. Such would include a number of Swallows: Free, Violet -Green, Cliff, Rough -winged, and Barn. It would include Swifts such as White - throated, Black and Vaux's; Warblers such as Audubon, Townsend, PaZm and Pileolated; Thrushes such as S'wainson and Gray Cheeked; Flycatchers such as Ash -throated, Western, Coues and Cassin's; Hummingbirds such as Anna, Costa and B46k-chinned and Rufous; Orioles such as Scott's and Hooded; and others Ach as the Texas Night Hawk and the beautiful Western Tanager. These birds all follow the Coachella Valley Flyway northwestwardZy out of the Valley'for more northern climes. 4) Mau maZian Fauna of the project Site - On the first day of the survey, a very hot August morning, a coyote was observed lying down and panting hard at the base of the mountains and just west of the hard -packed playa.' It subsequently got on its feet and trotted away. Other mammals seen were the Round -tailed Ground Squirrel, Antelope Ground Squirrel, and the Pocket Gopher (a variety of Thomontys bottae). The Round -tailed Ground Squirrel and the Pocket Gopher frequent the fZats, while the Antelope Ground Squirrel inhabits the rocks and canyons. A few Jack Rabbits were observed during the survey; and it was noted that skunks inhabit the date gardens between Obre- gon and Eisenhower. The nocturnal ma=als of the area and canyons would undoubtedly reveal animals never seen in the day. These include the Desert Prick Rat (Neotoma 2epida , Canyon Mouse, Cactus Mouse, Spiny Pocket Mouse, and Long -tai Zed Pocket Mouse. Late evening out an the flats and in the canyons revealed the presence of many bats of large and small species. 72 :F. I On the second morning of the survey (August 3rd), a long slender, long -toed track was observed in the mud of a drying pool which appeared to be that of the very rare Ring-tailed Cat (Bassarisc-us astutus) or CacomistZe. There is also a possibility that the Desert Bighorn Sheep may visit the ridges of the Santa Rosa foothills west of La Quinta and western limits of the project site. S) Insect Fauna of the £Yoject Site - During the very hot summer days, the dominant insect life appears to be the large, pollen -dusted Wood Boring Beetles that zoom out of -the Creosote bushes. These Wood -borers belong to the family Buprestidae, and in particular to the genus Hippemelas. There are several species on Creosote from large to smaller size, and one beautiful irridescent species on the Mesquite. Around the horses in a horse corral a Sand Wasp (Epibembix melanoaspis) was captured which is usually only found on the sand dunes. Also on this particular day of the survey (after a shower the day before) the Coachella Valley Eye Gnats (Hippelates c-ollusor Townsend) were quite numerous. The Desert Grasshopper (Trimerotropis pallidipennis) was seen nearly everywhere. The SaZtbush Grasshopper (Antonia integra) was occasionaZly found on the playa near its food plant, Cattle Spinach. The fairly rare grasshopper known as Ate lop loides elegans was observed in dense, tall Cattle Spinach. on the edge of the hard -packed playa, one very rare Robber or Assassin FZy was taken on an Ink Weed. It was short and stout, with a broad red tail and belonged to the genus Caratotainiops. On the whole, insects were rare because of the torrid days and desiccated desert. 73 3. Man Made a. History and Archaeology Archaeological studies in Western North America have placed much emphasis on probable cultural adjustments to changing environmental conditions. Studies are made difficult by an inadequate un- derstanding of the magnitude of climatic changes affecting natural food resources. It is there- fore desirable for purposes of observing cultural adjustments in changing environments to control the setting in significantly non -climatically induced environmental change. The Salton Basin of southeastern California experienced a rapid change from lacustrine to desert conditions in the absence of significant climatic change late in prehistoric times. Cultural adjustments made by resident populations at that time in response to gross environmental deterioration appear to have involved economic innovation and the drastic re -structuring of settlement patterns. Effects of these adjustments have been wide spread in interior Southern California. 1) Salton Basin - The Salton Basin comprises the northern portion of the Salton trough, and is separated from the Gulf of California '14 on the south by the delta of the Colorado River. (See EXHIBIT N.) Prior to innun- dation by the Salton Sea (1905 - 1907), the floor of the Basin was a playa in excess of 260' below sea level and is one of the driest regions in North America. It lies within the distributary system of the Colorado River, and throughout at least the late quarternary the river has, from time to time, discharged its waters into the Basin. Whenever the en- tire discharge of the Colorado was emptied into the Basin, the surface elevation of the resultant lake rose to a maximum of about 40' above sea level, at which point overflow occured across the Colorado Delta into the Gulf of California by way of the Hardy River. This factor is very significant in thatthe areas of Bermuda Dunes, Indian Wells and La Quinta were then within walking distance of this ancient lake. The lake, generally known as Lake LeConte, was in excess of 110 miles long and had a maximum depth of about 328'. Since Lake LeConte was fed by the Colorado River and had an outlet to the sea its biota was essentially similar to that of the river. 75 SALTON BASIN AND THE COLORADO DELTA He o e a .e HS.......� HARRY H, SCHMITZ to ASSOCIATES •...I.e It.n YYYf Y............ 1.. C.Iw.N D.e....r..h.l.. It...+YIH.....1 1..1 Y.t. SALTON BASIN MAP 76 t t These resources included fishes of several } species and a variety of mollusks, including the fresh water mussel, Anodonta californiensis, which occured in great abundance. The present Salton Sea, a highly saline body, comprises one of the major focal points of the Pacific flyway; which suggests that the aquatic avi- fauna of Lake LeConte was also a significant natural food resource. To this list can be added a large number of aquatic plants, in- sects and terrestial vertebrates. Access to nearby montane plant communities with groves of pinion and oak was also readily available from much of the western shore. The region around the northwest end of the lake is marked by extensive shoreline dunes, with ' abundant evidence of occupation. Survey data t suggests that the western shore of the lake was much more intensively occupied that the eastern shore, a factor apparently due to the distribution of food resources in adjacent mountains. Fish remains occur in abundance in the shoreline middens and attests to the importance of fishing in the subsistence economy. Shallow shell middens, consisting !tiQ almost exclusively of Anodonta cal-iforniensis, occur locally and aquatic avifauna is well 77 2 represented in the occupational refuse. Only minor excavations have been conducted to date, but survey data indicates a heavy reliance on water resources. The duration of occupation and size of the populations cannot now be estimated, but available evi- dence suggests both very dense and sedentary occupation categorized the most recent lake stand. An evaluation of radio carbon evidence weighed against early historic documentation suggests that Lake LeConte receded from the Salton Basin around 400 to 500 years ago. Succession occured when the Colorado River ceased its flow into the Basin and resumed its historic pattern of direct discharge into the Gulf of California. Historic records indicate that the river was subject to flow- ing in any of several channels across its delta, and thus the conditions which initiated the formation of the lake brought abouts its recession. With no steady flow of water entering the basin, the extreme evaporation of the Colorado desert would have immediately started a reduction of the lake. Records on the early recessional trend of the Salton Sea from 1907 through 1912 indicate that the actual elevation loss of that Sea by evaporation 78 alone was about five feet per year. If:the entire recession of Lake LeConte. occured in an interrupted sequence, a nearly complete erasure of the lake -oriented resource complex would have occured within about 50 years. If the fish populations of Salton Basin died off in a similar manner as Lake LeConte was receding, and there is reason to believe they did, the effect on an already severely stressed human population must have been catastrophic. By early historic time the ancient lake bed in the northern portion of Salton Basin, now known as Coachella Valley, was populated by the desert branch of the Shoshonean -speaking Cahuilla Indians who pursued a broad pattern of exploitation of desert resources with par- ticular emphasis on Mesquite, and cultivated a variety of crops. They occupied about a dozen permanent villages on the lake bed near springs, or at hand -excavated walk-in wells. Such a hand -excavated walk-in well existed at the site of Indian Wells. 2) Cultural Adjustments - It seems almost certain that the settlement patterns in Salton Basin occured at least in part as a response to a severe stress situation, which accompanied 79 the desiccation of Lake LeConte. It seems also reasonable to suggest that parallels may exist between the cultural adjustments to gross environmental change in Salton Basin and adjustments to other examples of deteriorating environments, notably those resulting from climatic changes over long periods of time. Available evidence suggests that resident human populations who had adapted to the abundant water resource com- plexe's were compelled to totally restructure the settlement and subsistence patterns, probably within the span of no more than two generations. Probable cultural adjust- ments exercised by the aboriginal popula- tions in the Salton Basin include the following: 1) A pronounced broadening of the subsistence base and evolution of a pattern of diversified plant collecting, with a change from a sedentary pattern to one involving both sedentary and seasonally nomadic; 2) out -migration from Salton Basin to adjacent riverine, deltaic, and montane environments which did not undergo resource decimation; 3) environmental manipulation in the form of plant cultivation; and 4) participation in far-reaching economic 80 interaction systems. 3) Local Aspects - La Quinta, Bermuda Dunes, and the City of Indian Wells, just north- westerly of the project site and over the mountain ridge from it, provided a natural setting for the desert Cahuilla for several reasons: 1) Its proximity to the shoreline of Lake LeConte (0 - 3 miles); 2) Geology combined with the hydraulic gradient of the Upper Valley produced water near the surface and allowed shallow hand -excavated wells to be dug; 3) the rock projection of "Point Happy" at the eastern boundary of Indian Wells provided an excellent look -out of the Coachella Valley for many miles; and -4) its proximity to the nearby mountains and vege- tative resources. Indian Wells is an old and well documented name on the earliest maps of California. In 1856, Blake, in his geological report (made in connection with the railroad survey of R. S. Williamson), recorded a well at Indian Wells called Pozo Hondo (Deep Well), which was 25' deep excavated in clay at the base of a high sand dune. In 1823, the Estudillo- Romero expedition to the Colorado River 81 (unsuccessful) noted a well which they called "Gauloma" at Indian Wells. This well was six veras (16 feet) deep. The U. S. Govern- ment survey in 1856 recorded an Indian village at Indian Wells. The well was called "Palma Seca" (dry palm). La Quinta was even closer to the lake than Indian Wells, but probably lacked an abun- dant quantity of drinking water as compared with the Indian Wells site. Shells of fresh- water mussels were noted in the area to the southeast of the project site, and cultural remains form a rather continuous expanse of artifacts from La Quinta, in general north- easterly, to the Whitewater River. With specific reference to the project site, it should be noted that no significant evi- dence was found despite a constant vigil. One exception is located at the most easterly portion of the site where a medium sized sand dune exists. Several fragments of pot- tery were visible. No excavation was attempted. b. Population - Until recent times, the climate and scarcity of water in the Coachella Valley has severely limited economic and population 82 growth. It was not until shortly after the turn of the century that economical well drilling methods and pumping machinery made possible cheap water and permitted the first surge of population growth. Population again accelerated when Colo- rado River water was introduced into the Lower Coachella Valley by means of the Coachella branch of the All-American Canal in 1949. The comple- tion of the canal resulted in rapid increases in irrigated farming and a commensurate rapid increase in population. While the population growth in the Lower Coachella Valley was largely due to agricultural develop- ment, the growth in the Upper Valley has been the result of resort activities. In 1940 the population of the Upper Valley was about 4,000. After World War II rapid growth occured, with population nearly doubling each decade. The entire Coachella Valley experienced a population growth from 12,000 in 1940 to over 100,000 in 1972. Several population forecasts have been projected by various consultants throughout the last two decades. The most recent by Riverside County indicates a 1990 population ranging from 139,500 to 164,400. Projections which were made in 1971 have already been proven to be too low. 83 However, it must be remembered that these are projections for permanent population. In the Upper Coachella Valley there is a large seasonal population which is not counted in the permanent census figures. In 1971 in the Cove Communities area alone, the seasonal population represented 40% of the total. Recent indicators have shown that the percentage of second and third home owners has increased significantly in the upper portion of the Valley. New technology, mobility and affluence is increasing and one can only speculate as to the total population projection in 1990 and 2000 A.D. It is evident, however, that growth is continuing to occur in the Upper Valley despite some slow -downs in other portions of Southern California. The present permanent population of the community has been estimated at 1400 persons. The projec- tion of trends would indicate that total develop- ment in the community would probably not occur until after 1990. This project could produce 1381 residents (Average age of 45), including less than 100 school age children, plus 76S tourists using the hotel during peak periods. (Jan. -Mar.) C. Land Use - Land uses in the Upper Coachella Valley exhibit much diversity. However, the primary 84 land use is tourist - recreation oriented for those lands which have been developed. A major portion of this development has occured and is continuing to occur in a continuous belt of de- velopment hugging the foothills from La Quinta to Palm Springs. Except for the Desert Hot Springs and Thousand Palms area, most land lying in the center of the Upper Coachella Valley is vacant. Within the project area lies approximately 619 acres of which 408 acres are petentiall,y develop- able. The development plan contemplates building on 185 acres only, with primarily residential uses. 434 acres are devoted to open space land uses, such as mountains, golf course and outdoor recreation. d. Zoning and Proposed Land Use - Several General Plans have been adopted in the Coachella Valley during the last two decades. These include the Desert Hot Springs General Plan, the Palm Springs General Plan, the Cove Communities General Plan, the Indio City Genera] Plan, the Coachella - Thermal - Indio General Plan, and the County's General Plan (1965). In addition, valleywide, the County has adopted an Open Space Element, a J General Plan of Streets and Highways, and a J_ 1 85 Recreation Element. The County, as well as various cities, are currently engaged in--bring ing their zoning into consistency with these adopted General Plans. Further, the recently formed'cities of Rancho Mirage and Palm Desert are currently studying and up-dating their General Plans and zoning. The proposed project is con- sistent with the Cove Communities General Plan and zoning. (See EXHIBJT 0). e. Economics 1) Regional - The mainstay of the Coachella Valley is dependent upon agriculture and tourist/recreation. Both benefit from the arid climate and the mild winter tempera- tures. The Valley from Indio southeast is heavily farmed with irrigated acreage rapidly expanding following the extension of the Coachella Canal into the Lower Valley in 1948. The Upper Coachella Valley including Desert Hot Springs, Palm Springs, La Quinta, and the other Cove Communities contains many recreation and/or retirement oriented resort, areas with steadily increasing growth rates since World War II. Agricultural production in the Upper Valley, although significant, is not near as large as that of the Lower Valley. 96 Excerpts from General Plan I j VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (3�Ess1 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (3-5) -+#• MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (5-10) HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (10-20, GENERAL COMMERCIAL WATERCOURSE & EQUESTRIAN ROUTES OPEN SPACE & PLANNED DEVELOPMENT GC?LF CC]URSE +yam,:e I ., ;aA.•..,; 3 os ::7�: • r r t y. y } i! • r � al,t • 1 o AIR AY i ..!"yrs J� F W ��1 Ft : ,- •t ; Q �;_ -- L?i+ae�.w. wtitiAM�wwiiiiiii�M �r+�rrrrWr ?a�..�rw *wr -Hi wMc ---: ,'. RtKu...._.w.wn....,. _ yy 1.. . Y •r 1 1f d .................... ..::�.: t�kt�,.' ix r� `tiles- ..°.... k .Pett°Sid-::........ ....� t.•4l� ,r -ti .- ._......: :1 ,!�,.S'! 5�.^1•� 51t M1.;,. .�. »,�,.r yS �Y!'j. ..: �r�� . .........°.. c ... ........ a +4' .t T A` tii� �•Y y/^# t tL "rsrt,. '^ l �i*5 (3 °" t t t i .°x4t��x ,.5 •t > _. �••�e1t 1:iY sf li tt.iiai•'.�' x ♦ L . r : 7 1 - f .. y . I s ) 1. . ' .. ... ... .:. ... ..:..:...: ¢I + r•irfr{etr „� � i 7 R � . � `l A ........ ........... .. rtt ti� x �..at. r1 x+. t �, �. ,1.1, a•. 1{:•�'a.M. .., �4�+Y!' ,r { �ti •� {t, ti rt t r :~ �.I� a�'. x � +.� } � s ► }� ., ., _ `a ?`I . » ..::.. .tf rt'+'� �,S }''� S~� ; `. �• . 1 �11 itr Oto L I��iY °a ' .T�'_� r X 1 4 ,i�`tS, i:��k{iI .:::::::::..:::: �yy�� f �` �� 1 t''� r'' 4 i, �\�"Y'•'n. � tii'4ti+''Lrkr � �r . tit - f�..? it T:1 � � ��, R;' .1. ......»..'... .� y a5,�'n \i.i f'r � {..i',w F e� S .`ti;'f ��'�� ,! �. .1 's�� r. a ■S}' ori. r {a./ 1�. y��T A .^•,r r x Ali it a J y 1*4,, {ti �"T4'yr l i,'4i; i'��'a� h.,r;l �,1 5'..stit't 4 ,7' .t r. •} 1�'4-r"� 4tii',.1r•{''� t,t'�i lid '17'1 ,i1 •� 'C y `x�l 1y w1 x -int �. .�•.. 1 +.11 �(�.� �.� t, 5 S ,x� �3 } 4. S f `� `'t, �.'Y. xr >! 'lw 41,41,L1= �� ((y►��'Y,-r " e .. `. Y1 i.y'4L. >ATiL .��4 !.. k • 5 :,��, ,, }EL 5 4 ti k � 1 �-..'++71',� '� . �� J ,, , (c a''3. f t itl ✓ ti7`f �` . S e,'` '•i ��. ., a ' t tl �+ i 4, r + ! x..' rx , . .� �1"t4�s ! 4�,.t�x�r y ! �, fr � . °1i . E. e i� �F,t ► �� .'�, 5s. ;� �t l�st� 1 iSriri.lS`rt ', , a L 7� r.'�ys,sw� e r } ' 7 •'ta � �s,S�G�.rr*,,1♦;11' �j'�\'1�i:yr 1 s44'�* �,;} t-�l t.�ti , ?,�t,4iw�ikrti •. -` { ; '�/'��l rLhti�:r� � ±:-1',..� y'C4� 4-i4r�''•h<� „7>nx��:�� 1 � r i`...-ay*''4,:•. .rl'S S �1 ^`i '�tSi ;.i�S �w 'Y7'.: L� r fr \1� 'ti �'rt•y a S `{: y Y 7 S i ti !4 7\ ., t L• c '� .� ++`. � a 1j, •, t.''•` S +. '� t 1 �.� x, i 'S}13x� 3 J� •.�[ 11!� ti Z i ► tiLi ti r �l' t 7�,r .irirY .x, x x Sr -1 L' ,♦ 4{.S S' 11 11 y,.w� �1L ,r t!! y..1�ri�t xr f4 �'T +tom ..�; y, 5 fir• ,f y,i �'-RF N xl. �. ��t•.'`�jti.�1�'�+t'1x ��. r� 7ti` �x �.'� � .I� ■f E L L S� 7 rli x'\ '.�} �.� ,. l -.1�� w F '. ] ti .a i �' r' _ 1 K 4(•, {� �'1(! �ii'tt l,"5'y'tyr t ;1, ` 1 1 r, 4>- ' t In I H 1.•L 1+��i�h •l� 1 i5 ��\fir A�}ri•.a' 1f ••Iktt�l'ii�+S Y,y i{ a1L{� H. x L'.' • x tt. r t3 }it 1y tiir' 1�+;x 1 t 4A1(Ls.i. .l '3 6 a 3x; t y l •!t r 0 1000 2000, 4000' 6000' + , ADOPTED 6Y BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON a '. "•�,– DEC. 19 1974 (RESOLUTION NO. 77-444) PURSUANT TO GOVT. CODE S&C, 65300 •t ttq. ARTERIAL` SP'�^t�11 l.rl{ t` ° fi xt ' 4 l s '50 1 H.-*" r *AV MAJOR t r SECONDARYr �~ a ; t,.ys i.1 i.� ) 1',:`_ r rt•tttyti fir,/ ,,`✓4 E Yt• t x. r COLLECTOR - -- -- ...• • a � s � SCENIC 87� ------ ---- �.� Fru T u the Lower Valley alone, agricultural pro - tion for 1972 totaled $83 million. Of s total, fruits, including citrus, grapes dates amounted to $46.4 million; live- ck $15.9 million; and vegetables $17.1 lion (See EXHIBIT P). Over 95% of the ion's date production comes from the chella Valley. Indicative of the economy the Upper Valley are the 32 golf courses ve more under construction), and 354 hotels verside County Department of Development, Z). [BIT Q presents Coachella Valley employ- [ as of July 1969 and shows a comparison types of employment in the two portions the Valley. All these figures increased roximately loo since that time. Date and iuce packing and shipping are primary Loyers in the Lower Valley; while hotel, restaurant and related services are the pri- mary employers in the Upper Valley. Selected economic indicators for Palm Springs and Indio reveal the growth which the area is experiencing. (See EXHIBITS R1 and R2). Between 1963 and 1972 assessed valuation increased 68% in Palm Springs and 101% in 88 Farm, Livestock Totals (1972 calendar year figures for Coachella Valley lands irrigated with Coachella Canal water) Croe Value of year's farm production ............ Total livestock value__________________________________$15,895,391 Total for 1972 __________________________________________$82,911,379 Acreage Yield $67,015,988 per acre value (') Total Fruits 28,142 $",385,651 Dates -__-___-._- 3,384 _ - 16, 378 tons __..________:_________ $2,754 _-_-_._.- r__ 9.319,082 Grapes 7,568 _ 3, 980,768 lugs...--. .... ............. __ 2,957 ---- 22,376,928 (kapdmit 7.750 -_ __ 5,231,250 cartons ___-______._-__ 1,307 _..__-_._.______ 110.127,002 Lemons and Limes _. - ------------ 1.941 _.__ - 355,203 cartons _._........... 566 __. _..___..__._.. 1.098,101 Misc. Citrus ._._.._.. 92 .________--__ 27,692 cartons --._ _.- _ __ 703 --__ _ 64.642 Oranges, Valencia -__._-_-__ 2.216 ________�522,976 carton _._ .,. „.. _ 225 _____.__.___.__ 498.359 Tangelos _�.______--_-.____-__ 878 ______. _.-_ 329,000 cartons --______.___ 625 546,761 Tangerines -._ _ _ .. 3,116 __ - _ 1,018,932 cartons --_--__ 561 _-__.___.__.._ 1,747,636 Temples .._.... _ 1,200 _--_._______-__-_.-____ 553,200 cartons ____._.._....__ __ 506 _ _ 607.140 Vegetables--_�------ 15,106 .. ._._ _ ------ 17,092,126 Asparagus ..__........... _.--_.___.. 1,165 78,055 crates 739 860,912 Beans -____-____-_. 218 -. - .._ 45,344 crates __ ___ 1,659 361.745 Broccoli ---- -__- ------ -__--------- 31 - - __. 2,728 cartons - --._ 871 __-_ _:____._ 27.011 Cabbage .._ - 80 _ __..___ 76,400 cartons .-_.-_____-. - 2,544 __._._ 203,520 Cantaloupes -__ 143 crates _ __ ........ _ .. ____... 45 585 Carrots ___----------------_--- --.-- 5,360 ---_-_-__-- 2,213,680 sacks ..-.__.._.._._...._. 1.544 ._ w ...- r_.. 8,277.019 Corn -------.-----.- - -----__..-_ 4,941 _-------,------•_---- 839,970 crates ---------_----_-.--- 507 -.-. 2,504,790 Cucumbers 24 ------- _-_---___ 5,794 lugs ----- .. ...........-_--_-. 600 _---. . • --- 14,394 Eggplant ---_-,-_._-. . _ __. 226 - ------ 203,626 cartons -----_-.-.--•-.---- 2,246 ... _.................. 507,628 Endive ____-___.__ _.-_. 58 _-____- 25,752 crates _. -__ _ __ 1.726 _-____--._._ 73,988 Lettuce __ �..__...__ _ _ 187-._.._-.__�_� 110,143 crates ... 2,247 __ _-. _-.__ 420.226 Okra 120 __._____-__._..._._ 130,560 lugs __---__..__._-.___-__- 3,489 _ .. 418,752 Onions, dry _--_- ----------- _----------- 110 ........... _.-....... 74,250 sacks --------- 1,995-.___.__W__W.. 219.454 Onion, green ..__.___-__ _-_ 212 _______._ 342,380 crates 4,802 , __ _ .-.. -__.. 1,017,918 Parsnips __....,_ 301 » . _ ___ - __ 90,300 crates -___.._ 510 _. ___....._.. 153,510 Peas, green . --------- -•------------------- 28 ------------------------ 5.600 lugs .---_.-_.._.: --- 2,200 _-_ --- 61.600 Peppers, Bell __._ ____ ____ _____ 378 .._.-.._._- ----•- -- 50,250 cartons _ ____.--- _ _ -,. 700 _________________ 262,500 Peppers, Chile _ ._....... .... 42 ----,-____. 17,640 lugs ------------------ -----___ 1,935 ........... 81,275 Radishes ..-•--- - -_--- 462 _------ -- 106,722 bags - ----- 602 - ----- 278,045 Squash __.-__.... _ _ 652 _ _ .- 239,936 lugs _- _-_ - 1,272 ___-__-___ 829,839 Tomatoes 28 , 6,608 trays ___.____..-._....... 586 .._.._. ._ - .. 16,450 Turnips .......... 421 _..___ 250,074 lugs -...._--_._--._............. 892 _.__--___...._...... 375,742 Vegetables, misc. __--____ 52 _--.... 25,584 crates ------ 2,408 - 125,022 Misc. Field Crops -____-- 2,887 -----._. .__ - _ ._____-__- -. --- _-- _ .___ 669,069 Cotton Lint ____. _ _ 2,887 .._ --._ 4,330.5 bales 210 606,270 Cotton Seed ___--- ----------------- - 2,887 ._ _ - _ - 1,210 tons 22 62,799 Forage -__- 7,607 . --------- --------------- _ 1,393,051 - Alfalfa Hay _ __._ __-- ___.. 3,364 22,404 tons ._, e 266 _ __ 896,160 Sudan Oats ._ _____ ___m.. 1,046 ....... ,.__._____ 4,184 tons ..___-_.-.._.__.___ 160 _- ____..._...... 167,360 Irrigated Pasture -____-___-___ 3,197 _:_-_____-__ 9,910.7 aum _ -___ _ 103 .__.._. 329,531 Cereals _-. - 543 _ _._ __. __-------_- _ 53,135 Barley __. _®_ ..» 119 11.6 tons . 74 8,854 Milo 46 ----- ____ 55.2 tons ___ - 61 __. -_- 2.809 Safflower ____ 108 162 tons _-----.-._ _ 169 ___.__._- 18,306 Wheat - -_..-_ 270_____ 540 tons -.._ 86 - 23.116 Total Nursery 1,343,899 - -_----___-----_--___--- --_-_--_ Seeds 184- ----••----.._ __----T_�-� _ _ 18,400 Alfalfa _.._ _ - _ _ 184 ___-_---_____ 3,800 lbs. _ _�-_�._ 100 _ 18,400 Nuts -- _--- 34-_�- _ _--------_- _ „ _._ 10,657 Pecans _-_-_-_-__ -..___- 34 -__--__ 173 cwt. ___ - 313 10,657 l*l Certs were omitted from these totals 111 the irlteroa of space. FARM & LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION TABLE 89 VVurorr D coACHELEA VpjZEy EMPIAYME NT - JULY 1969 Labor Market Area Total Palm Springs- Indio- Coachella Emplqt Ca"ory Desert Hot S rin s Coachella Valle Agriculture, forestry, fishing 100 300 400 Mining ---- 200 200 Construction 1,300 450 1,750 Manufacturing 300 750 1,050 Transportation, ccmmunications, utilities 1,000 850 1,850 Trade 3,500 3,200 6,700 Finance, real estate, insurance 700 450 1,150 Services 5,800 2,250 8,050 Government 2,300 2,450 4,750 TOTAL 15,000 10,900 25,900 ESTIMATED POPULATION 48,089 38,924 87,013 Source: California Department of Human Development as cited iri Riverside County Department of Development, 1972a, 1972b, 1972c, and 1972d. COACHELLA VALLEY EMPLOYMENT 90 COACHELLA. VALLEY - SELECTED ECONOMIC INDICATORS Indicator Assessed valuation Taxable sales Year 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971- 1972 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 * Palm Springs School District Palm_ Springs $140,557,145 150,642,110 167,027,148 178,886,321 184,350,000 190,458,830 192,171,262 203,1711786 216,836,639 236,028,729 $ 59,884,000 62,777,000 67,728,000 71,314,000 74,946,000 83,686,000 89,688,000 92,761,000 103,272,000 122,650,000 SELECTED ECONOMIC INDICATORS TABLE 91 Indio $16,135,960 17,881,225 19,845,139 21,563,470 23,269,600 26,486,760 27,60.51040 31,250,948 33,500,000 32,470,185 $ 35-556-j,000 40o-8142 ,900 42,136,000 49,163,000 56,687,000 61,476,000 68,885,000 76,672,000 FxutD1T R, SELECTED INDICATORS (continued) Indicator Year Palm Springs Building permits 1963 $ 13,798,636 1964 22,835,590 1965 19,075,224 1966 14,359,746 1967 9,622,958 1968 8,882,863 1969 13,464,364 1970 12,330,629 1971 20,959,860 1972 55,233,883 Telephones 1963 18,459 1964 25,989 1965 27,059 1966 27,413 1967 28,993 1968 32,268 1969 36,465 1970 38,439 1971 40,713 1972 42,500 Indio $ 6,433,215 5,557,794 5,191,609 8,341,162 2,290,832 3,712,910 6,423,678 6,205,871 1,793,902 14,050,342 7,186 7,977 8,691 9,464 10,178 10,635 11,118 11,417 11,767 12,290 Source: Palm Springs Life - Annual Desert Progress Issue: 1972-73, September 1972. SELECTED ECONOMIC INDICATORS TABLE 92 FXHIRTT R,) Indio; taxable sales increased 1051 in Palm Springs and 127% in Indio; building permits increased 300% in Palm Springs and 118% in Indio; and telephone services in- creased 130% in Palm Springs and 71% in Indio (Palm Springs Life, 1972). The entire Coachella Valley has undergone an extended period of growth spurred both by increased agricultural water supply and by demand for resort activities. Since 1971 the rate of growth has acceler- ated substantially above that experienced during the 1960's. Over 10,000 building permits were granted in the Upper Coachella Valley during 1972. Whether this accelera- tion is indicative of a new trend or just a temporary surge is open to conjecture. Residents of Upper Valley communities, par- ticularly Palm Springs, are beginning to question the value of the building boom, primarily because it is bringing some unde- sirable metropolitan manifestations (Palm Springs Life, 1972). This concern plus a possible oversupply of dwelling units in Palm Springs may reduce the magnitude of this°recent boom. Nonetheless, the potential 93 for continued acceleration of growth remains. 2) `Local - The La Quinta Golf Course and partial development of La Quinta has already had an effect on the market value of the land in the area. The fact that the ba Quinta Cove and some other areas of the community are being developed will further increase the market value of surrounding properties; and, as the value increases, the pressure for conversion to more intensive urban use will also increase. This is in effect a growth -inducing potential for the entire area. Full development of the project, including total construction of all units, is expected to produce a market value of over $60 million. The assessed value should be about $15 million. Based on an average prevailing Riverside County tax rate of approximately $11 per $100 of assessed valuation, the revenue to ' the County from the project in this proposed development is expected to be over $1,650,000 per year. (See EXHIBIT S ). Due to the ex- pected lower level of public services required by the second -home and winter -home residents, there should be a net increase in monies 94 TYPICAL PROPERTY TAX RATES (LA QUINTA) TAX RATE PER $100 ASSESSED VALUE AGENCY 2.657 County General .016 Debt Service .139 County Free Library .198 County Structure Fire Protection ,100 Supervisorial Road District 4 3.110 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Citrus Pest Control 2 (Per 100 Acres) 6.273 .436 Coachella Valley County Water Storm Water Unit TOTAL TAX RATE 10.175 TYPICAL PROPERTY TAX RATES (LA QUINTA) 95 EXHIBIT S .072 Coachella Unified School B $ I B 4.391 Desert Sands Unified School B & I .270 Desert Sands Unified School College .633 Coachella Valley Community Coachella Valley Community College B $ I .085 .10.5 School Equalization Aid Pose Superintendent of Schools - General Purp .080 County Institutional Children .027 .046 physically Handicapped Program - County .040 Regional Occupation Program - County .006 Juvenile Hall Program - County Superintendent of Schools - Capital Outlay A B .016 County County Superintendent of Schools - Capital Outlay .015 .018 Severe Mentally Retarded Program - County School Building Aid Program - County .002 013 County County School Development Center 5. .012 Coachella Valley Public Cemetery Mosquito Abatement .085 Coachella Valley Coachella Valley Recreation and Parks .097 .194 Coachella Valley County Water District .616 AREA TAX RATE 9.739 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Citrus Pest Control 2 (Per 100 Acres) 6.273 .436 Coachella Valley County Water Storm Water Unit TOTAL TAX RATE 10.175 TYPICAL PROPERTY TAX RATES (LA QUINTA) 95 EXHIBIT S ♦ cf.kdt available to the County, and particularly the school district should benefit. It should be noted that construction will occur over a 6 - 8 year period, with respective revenues increasing accordingly. C The residents of this proposed addition to La Quinta, at ultimate development, are ex- pected to generate approximately $4,000,000 a year in local retail sales. This generated sales could support up to 60,000 square feet of retail space. f. Transportation Systems Eisenhower Drive and Washington Street provide the principal access to and from the project site. Interstate 10 and Highway 111 lie northerly and at present both Avenue 50 and Avenue 52 afford additional access from the east. Passenger service via AMTRAK and freight rail service is available in Indio through the main- line of the Southern Pacific Railway. Air transportation is available at Palm Springs Municipal Airport, Thermal Airport and Bermuda Dunes Airport. Bermuda Dunes and Thermal are general aviation facilities, while the Palm Springs 96 airport serves commercial traffic of both the interregional and intercontinental levels. 'A helicopter pad will be available at the hotel. 97 Public transportation is not currently avail- able on a valley -wide basis; however, under the auspices of SB 32S a study is being conducted on a regional and subregional basis. A prelim- inary draft of this study is expected to -be completed later this year, and it is anticipated 1 that the study will indicate a system of local bus routes between communities. Implementation of the local bus route system should take place in 1975. A local bus route system between c•om- munities on a valley -wide basis will have some economic impact on La Quinta as it will facili- tate shopping access from and to outlying areas. At present, Greyhound Bus lines serves the traffic in and out of the Valley, with some routes along Highway 111; however, other public transportation is limited to taxi service. (See EXHIBITS T1 r and T2 for traffic flows). Unfortunately, La Quinta is not served by Greyhound Bus lines, nor is it expected to be served directly by the local } bus route system contemplated above. The nearest route is projected along Hwy 111 between Palm Desert and Indio. (Approx. 2 miles north of the site) 97 COVE lrMr~M•l.rRw wf •N Ncl�l� R �! CwrK�llw �,t�i•l�Y�rtl.�ry�l, llslt Y COMMUNITIES GENERAL TRAFFIC FLOW MAP 1970 TRAFFIC VOLUMES SOURCE: RIVERSIDE COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT 1970 TRAFFIC FLOW MAP 98 PLAN RIVERSIOE COUNTY ►TANNING OE►ARTMENT FvuTnTT T, i COVE COMMUNITIES, GENERAL PLAN . R TRAFFIC FLOW MAP 1990 TRAFFIC VOLUMES r-0pr SOURCE - RIVERSIDE COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT CATNEAA'AL c+r r YlAAGE 1990 TRAFFIC FLOW MAP 99 rA 1 _N RIVERSIDE COUNT• PLANNING DEPIRTYENT IL C/rr 9• t or T /NO/AM WE -LLS III. PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The Upper Coachella Valley is a rapidly developing and ur- banizing area. Large portions of the Palm Springs and Cove Communities areas hardly resemble the pure desert environ- ment. Major transportation routes traverse the Valley and much of it has been placed under tivation. Air quality has deteriorated considerably as a result of soil and vege- tation conditions and the "funnel effect" of regional air pollution movements. In summary, the Community of La Quinta will not be developed in a purely natural environment, but one which has undergone many radical changes in the last two decades and one which is presently undergoing many radical changes. Environmental impacts are not limited to the effects on plants and animals but include the effects that a project may have on a wide range of physical, -biological; Wiz.-ami-c--,--c-rzl-Lural, and social issues. In addition; the assessment of the im- portance of environmental impact must include a comparison to the environment as it now exists. A. Impact on the Physical Environment 1. Land Form and Open Space The development of the project will necessarily alter the topography of the vacant lands. Grading will be required to create the reservoirs, dikes, channels 100 and to flatten out the sand dunes and create a ter- rain suitable for golf courses, dwelling units, streets, etc. Most of the existing topography of the developable portion of the site is of little intrinsic value to man. The mountainous, rocky slopes and bahadas are not proposed to be developed, therefore, the only impact anticipated should be if development encroaches too close to the "toe of the slope." The design of the golf course fairways as well as the training dike, next to the foothills should alleviate this aspect. Probably the greatest visual impact will occur when the agricultural lands are converted to urban uses and when the dike, which retains water in the Oleander reservoir, is constructed. This dike, at one point, will be about 15' higher than the adjacent properties. 2. Groundwater The project will be relying heavily on groundwater resources for irrigating the golf courses and the supply of domestic water for dwellings. There is no evidence that this usage will have any adverse effect, to any great degree, on the quantity or qual- ity of the groundwater supply. The amount of ground- water available will remain about the same In future 101 years due to the CVCWD and Desert Water Agency's recharge program and continued agricultural seepage. It has been estimated by the CVCWD that no serious overdraft will occur in the Upper Coachella Valley groundwater basin to the year 1990. Water useage of the project (250 Ac.Ft./Yr.) will not present an overdraft problem; however, the cumulative effect of all development within the Upper Coachella Valley may require that additional sources are necessary after the ,year 1990. With the installation of the wastewater collection systems, reuse of project effluent (125,000 gpd)and projected water quality control policies, no serious water quality or quantity problems are expected for the community. 3. Air Quality The Air Quality of the Coachella Valley is a critical issue. It is particularly critical to the resort communities. The problem of pollutant inflow from the Los Angeles Basin and suspended particles are accentuated by the terrain and air flows of the Coachella Valley. Although it is not known to what degree Valley- sources contribute to the oxidant levels, the desert communities must address themselves to reducing local emission output. �utemobi.les are the prime producers of pollutants and development is 102 is going to create increased automobile trips. Total development of the community, together with the cumu- lative effect of development in the Upper Valley, is expected to generate substantial vehicle miles per year; which could result in a significant degrada- tion of air quality within the Valley and reduce the desirability of living in the desert. Consider the following pollutant calculations based upon re- cent E.P.A. data and considering permanent dwellings only. Assume 670 dwelling units X 1.5 cars/unit X 365 days X 30 mi/car/day = 11,000,000 mi/yr. Carbon Monoxide Consider 1971 model year Chart 3.1:2-2 Emission Factors gives CO = .075 lb:/VMT Chart 33.1.1-1 gives correction factor of 0.5 CO emission./yr. = 11,000,000 X .075 X .05 - 412,500 lbs. Daily rate = 412,500 = 1130 lbs. 365 103 Oxides of Nitrogen Consider 1971 nodel year Chart -3.1.2-2 Emission Factors gives NOX = .0077 Tb./VMT Chart 3.1.1.-1 gives correction factor of 1.3 NOx emission/yr. = 11,000,000 X .0077 X 1.3 = 110,110 lbs. Daily rate = 110,110 = 302 lbs. 365 t!ydrocarbons Consider 1971 model year Chart 3.1.2-2 Emission Factors gives HC - .0064 lb./VMT Chart 3.1.1.-1 gives correction factor of 0.6 HC emission/yr = 11,000,000 X .0064 X 0.6 = 42',240 lbs. Daily rate = 422 400 = 116 lbs. 3— MAJOR VEHICLE TOTAL EMISSIONS = 564,850 lbs. or 282.4 tons/yr. MAJOR VEHICLE TOTAL DAILY = 1,548 lbs. or 0.774 tons/day Although within the project these pollutants may represent only 0.0005 of the totai transportation 104 emissions for the County, the cumulative effect of all transportation sources would ultimately be dis- astrous -if left unchecked. It should be noted that the above calculations are for a 1971 model vehicle. Further substantial re- ductions in vehicle emissions are being constantly mandated by EPA and new technology will undoubtedly continue to improve the quality of emissions. The degree of improvement and the time necessary for achievement of better quality air is highly specu- lative. 4. Climate The effect of the development of the project on the climate of Coachella Valley, if even measurable, would be trivial. The change of ground cover will affect ground temperatures and some of the water used for irrigating the golf courses, swimming pools, and standing in lakes will evaporate into the local atmosphere. The addition of one or several more urban develop- ments to the Valley will not result in a noticeable change in climate. S. Flooding The soils in the study area are highly permeable 105 and have moderately low runoff potential. ;Major flooding will be controlled by the CVCIVD's system of dikes, channels and reservoirs. The project will significantly contribute to greater flood protection for the community and adjacent areas. 6. Wind Erosion The project will have a positive effect on the Valley wind erosion problem. The soils in the area are moderately susceptible to wind erosion, but the crea- tion of golf courses and residential developments will eliminate on-site erosion. The chances for sand blow are highest during construc- tion after vegetation has been removed. The County's ordinances will have to be strictly adhered to in order to minimize this hazard. Seismic The probability of a severe earthquake being experi- enced in the area is not high, but the possibility always exists in a region as seismically active as Southern California. The project will have several multi -story structures; however, the east majority of buildings throughout. the project will be premium qualit,. one-story buildings. All buildings will he built to cede and is-ith c.onsiderat ]oil given the 106 maximum quake expected during their lifet_..:. Due to the nature of the soils, a severe earthquake could cause significant settling and perhaps struc- tural damage. The possible shifting of boulders at the foothills, referred to earlier, could also present a hazard. Both of these- potentialities will have to be considered when approving building and use permits. B. Impact on the Biological Environment I. Flora To a great extent, development of the site will add diversity° and quantity to the vegetation currently existing in the area. A significant impact will occur by removal of natural desert -type vegetation' and substitution of other species requiring more water. This u. -ill result in an enlarged habitat for many- species of fauna and a decrease in habitat for the nat.ui•al desert dwelling kind. The preservation or replanting of date and citrus trees are proposed :within much of the project site. 2. Fauna 1?eve-lopment of. the site s�i.11 ?.ave; some cletrimer.tal effect on the habitat of fauna, T�zIrtic.u:larl;- the 107 4 iZ i :Z sand habitat species. Jack rabbits and most rodents, as well as birds, will have improved environments after development with extensive landscaping. i x. The open space nature of the project and preserva- tion of the mountains in their natural state provides a measure of protection, probably sufficient to avoid extinction of most any species found within the area if proper implementation is followed. The develop- ment will not in itself greatly- affect Coachella wildlife as a whole. It is evident that urban growth throughout the Valley is encroaching upon the limited desert habitat. Steps need to be taken to preserve this special environment if some form of the unique indigenous desert life is to be preserved. Impact on the ;Ian -blade Environment 1. Archaeolo The construction of the project, the western dikes, and the Oleander Reservo.i.r would not affect archaeo- logical sites. Indirectly, the alignment of the channel east of the cultivated fields at Oleander Reservoir along; Avenue 50 will disturb several sites. Any channel construction nornh, of Avenue 50 to the Whitevater 'aver tvill have a profound effect on extant %J]tlll'i3] 1'011'Mins, since ci;itural remains form a con- tinuous strip. 108 2. Population The growth of the community will occur simultaneously with growth in the Upper Coachella Valley. The "life style" and character of the population is not expected to change very much due to the nature and high stand- ards of the area. The Cove Communities General Plan, together with low density residential zoning ensure that a very low density of population will prevail. If current trends continue,the percentage of perman- ent residents versus seasonal residents will decrease and remain below 600. 3. Land Use Compatibility The site is surrounded by mountains, vacant lands, and tourist/recreation development (also golf course oriented). The Oleander Reservoir and Channel pro- vide a buffer for possible incompatible uses to the south; however, the Cove Communities General Plan calls for low density residential development in that area as well. In short, all surrounding prop- erties are in uses compatible with the proposed pro- ject. In addition, high standards and open space will assure quality and homogenity within the project itself. 01- 109 4. Recreation and Open Space The question to be considered in this section is whether or not development of this project will have a negative or positive impact on the recreation or open space attributes of the area and community. The standards of the project provide for maintenance and enhancement of recreational and open space re- sources. The private recreation value or properties will. be enhanced, as recreation is one of the pri- mary functions of the project. The types of recrea- tion (e.g. golf courses), will retain the open space quality of the project area. However, it is important to note that the character of the open space (presently agriculture, sand dunes and open desert), will incur significant changes as it is developed to landscaped environments. S. Visual Development will change the present open desert and agricultural image lvhicli presently exists in much of the community. While this change certainly- does not blight the environment, whether or not it is a positive or a negative impact is a personal and aesthetic judgment, not a technical assessment. Also, construct ion and landscaping may InI*,c c. vice --I., S 110 of the mountains. These views, west of the project area, are one of the more important assets of the community. The design and low density profile of the development tend to reduce the severity of this impact. 6. Transportation and Noise Since the majority of the grading for most of the project is connected with Phase I, it is expected that a short term earthmoving associated noise im- pact will occur soon after the approval of the. pro- ject. Thereafter, some building construction related noise will occur until the total development has been completed. The project could generate about 6000 trips per day. Approx. 50% would be north on Eisenhower; 25% south on Eisenhower; & 25% east on 50th Ave. Assuming 10% of traffic occurs during peak hour, 300 trips will be generated on Eisenhower north, 150 trips on Eisenhower south, & ISO trips on 50th Ave. east. In all cases, the ultimate route capacities will not be exceeded due to traffic generated by the project. The primar)' transportation impact will occur on the surface roads, particularly Highway 111. and Washing- ton Street, which will experier:c:e a increase in t:-afi.ic vol -limes as the tipper Val J c; ;=TlJ the communit' 111 develop. The congestion and noise levels adjacent to major routes and at intersections will increase respectively. Noise in excess of 60 dba is not expected to occur due to traffic within the project. A very small percentage of the total dwelling units lie near Eisenhower Dr., the most significant noise generator. i. Public Facilities Use of public facilities by the tourist population and seasonal population of the project will be sig- nificantly lower than use by a permanent resident population. There will be little use of public educational or public recreation facilities, little use of library facilities, and virtually no persons requiring public assistance funding. Additional fire protection services will be required. Local facilities are relatively inadequate to handle the increased levels of protection being desired by the public. Total development will require additional water storage reservoirs and adequate sizing and flows in main lines. Police protection requirements `F will be minimal due to the many private security guards operating within the community, and partic- ularly since the project will have a guarded gate - Ar house and a private security patrol. Requirements for medical services and use of local hospitals will 1 112 be increased proportionately with the population increase. 8. Utilities Most all urban developments place further demands upon utility systems. a. Electric - Imperial Irrigation District provides electrical power to the area. Working with their own projections they are anticipating future community requirements. The development of the project in itself will not have any deleterious effects on the supply of electrical service to the desert region; however, the cumulative effect of concurrent development dictates that additional sources and means of generation must become avail- able for growth to continue. In the past, this has not been a great obstacle and it is assumed that new sources and technology- will continue to become available. The project will use 9000+ ti9W-hr/Yr. b. Gas - The Southern California Gas Company- has adequate capacity to supply gas to the growing Southern California c-omrlunities. The project, at 900,000 therms/Yr, will have little impact on supplies. C . Kater " Develohme;it c�; the cOMP.-tillitv and contil - 1101i5 areas eas noses TIO sel-i ous 1 mj'f:l t I::l the "ant It -v 113 or quality of domestic water for the foreseeable future. At some point beyond 1990 additional sources of supply may become necessary. The Coachella Valley County Water District has in- dicated that no serious overdraft will occur within the foreseeable future, particularly none in the La Quinta area. d. Sewage - Most all sewage will be conveyed by sewers to a proposed new plant at the southeast corner of the project for secondary treatment. This plant will be making available reclaimed water suitable for irrigating. If it is econom- ically feasible for the developer or a private golf club to use this water, it would obviate the necessity of tapping groundwater resources for golf course watering. 9. Economic Economic impact includes the effect of'the project on the nature and distribution of economic activity. This development will not substantially change the nature of the labor force not the business types now within the region, but it will expand the demand for the types of goods and services now available. The goods and services required will include normal consumer services and goods, maintenance supplies, 114 construction materials, restaurant equipment and supplies, golf course equipment and supplies, etc. The improvements in the community will generate a very significant increase in the assessed valuation of the community. This should approximate 20 times its present value or about $15 million, based on today's costs and current assessed value. This es- timated valuation would produce yearly property taxes to the County of approximately $1,650,000. Both the County's revenues and expenses would increase with increased population and associated economic activity; however, due to the character of the pro- ject a significant disproportion will occur in that revenues received would be far greater than expenses incurred as compared to a median or low income occu- pancy type of project. IV. SUMMARY OF UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS. Development of the project will have certain effects which cannot be avoided. Those which'are particular to the devel- opment of the project are as follows: 1. Noise and dust from construction cannot be totally elim- inated; nor can traffic disruption and street repairs be avoided altogether. 2. Changing of the visual appearance of the site cannot be 115 avoided; nor can all scenic vistas be protected. 3. Elimination of some of the natural open space quality of the community. 4. Elimination of some natural desert areas as a scenic resource. S. Increased traffic and added deterioration of air quality. 6. Indirectly --reduction and some destruction of archaeo- logical sites. V. MITIGATION MEASURES PROPOSED TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACTS 1. Most all existing County ordinances relating to develop- ment shall be applied where necessary. 2. The design of the project incorporates: a. Use of a cluster development concept to maximize recreation and open space areas. b. Redistribution of existing cultivated palms and citrus for golf course and other, landscaping. C. Retention of existing windrows and planting of additional ones. d. Use of the County blowsand control and grading or- dinances to minimize sand blow during construction. 116 e. Complete landscaping of the project to minimize wind and water erosion effects, provide additional wildlife habitat, and add to the aesthetic quality. f. Installation of curbs, gutters and a storm water conduit system in those areas where appropriate. g. Widening and landscaping all major routes. h. Implementation of an adequate fire fighting system. i. Encouragement of energy -conserving construction in buildings. (Full insulation & duality throughout) j. Preservation of some sensitive archaeological areas, if discovered during construction, until professional archaeologists have been notified and given a reason- able period of time to study the find. k. Covenants, conditions and restrictions of record, together with a property management corporation will be established. 1. Provisions for adequate energy barriers for rocks which may become dislodged from the hillsides are provided. These are combinations of distance, walls, dikes, vegetation and channels. M. Preservation (in their natural' state) of the moun- tains, foothills, and bahadas together with strict observance of the State Came Refuge regulations. 117 Impact Alternative VI. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION Impact on the Physical Environment The Proposed Comparatively moderate Project physical changes; wind erosion situation would be improved after construction. Major flood control program for the com- munity is implemented. Impact on the Biologic Environment A change in type of vegeta- tion; elimination of some natural habitat for existing wildlife; introduction of new plant species and new expanded wildlife habitat Impact on the Human Environment Minimum impact of a development on public facilities; high tax revenuc potential; more reason- able ecological balance than high density. The 'Status Quo' Sand'and dust would continue to No further impact. Least public facilities (Ranching Operations, be an occasional problem to usage. -'with some develop - Vacant Land and surrounding properties. The meats existing, non - some Development) community would lessen its development of the balance a ability to solve its flood con- will cause inefficiency it) trol problem. provision of public facil- ities; loss of potential tax revenue; development occurs elsewhere sub- sequently. High Density More extensive grading, con - Development struction of roads, structures, utilities would make the physi- cal environmental impact the worse in this alternative. Same impact as in proposed project except that more vegetation would be replaced with possibility of much greater human access in foothill areas thereby degradation probable. Greater demand for a wider range of commercial and public facilities; recrea- tion and open space aspect of the project would be lost; thereby decreasing quality of environment. Present character and -"life-style" of community would be lost. I'll. COMPARISON OF SHORT AND LONG TERM EFFECTS The principal short term impacts a r e expected to occur as construction takes place. Short term impacts are generally limited to the noise and dust of construction. Long term impacts are those effects which will continue after the pro- ject has reached completion. These include the effective elimination of the site for other uses in the foreseeable future, and the continuing of a trend of resort developments in the Upper Valley. The establishment of this quality low density atmosphere and the continuation of the recreation communities philosophy will set a strong trend for future development throughout the entire area. VIII. IRREVERSIBLE CHANGES AND COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES A substantial investment in improvements will be made on the site and in the community and a return to the natural desert environment is not probable. The introduction of foreign plant species and surface water will do much to alter the natural environment of.th e developed portion of the site for a long time. Other effects of the project that fall into this category are utilization of raw build- ing materials such as wood, oil and metals, some of which are short in supply. Energy requirements of the proposed project, although anticipated by the utility companies, will add to the strains on our depleting supply of existing ene; g}- sources. 119 IX. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The prime generator of growth in the project vicinity is its attraction as a quality resort community. It would seem, in effect, that the existing resort facilities have provided the image and the impetus to develop new resort facilities. This type of project, and resort projects in surrounding areas, will have the future effect of encourag- ing other similar developments in the area. Commercial and other support facilities for the residential develop- ments will come mainly from the existing and expanding stock of establishments in nearby communities. Completion of the project will stimulate the need for convenience, commercial goods and services in the community itself. 120 { X. ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED California State Water Quality Control Board, Messrs. Arthur Swajian and Art Courtwright, Indio. Coachella Valley County Water District, Messrs. Lowell Weeks and Les Chaudoin, Coachella. College of the Desert, Dr. Ernest Tinkham, Eremologist, Palm Desert. Imperial Irrigation District, Mr. Ray Rinderhagen, Coachella. Living Desert Reserve, Ms. Karen Fowler, Palm Desert. Riverside County Air Pollution Control District, Mr. M. J. Kenneally, Riverside. Riverside County Assessor, Mr. Robert Baier, Indio. Riverside County Department of Fire Protection, Mr. George Schultejann, Perris, California. Riverside County Health Department, Mr. Lloyd Rogers, Indio. Riverside County Planning Department, Mr. Todd Bealer, River- side and Mr. Gerald Dupree, Indio. Riverside County Road Department, Mr. Ben Dobbins, Riverside. Riverside County Sheriff's Department, Captain Del Fountain, Indio. Southern California Edison Company, Mr. Kermit Martin, Palm Desert. Southern California Gas Company, Mr. Sidney Branson, Indio. tl.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, Mr. Norman Elam, Indio. University of California at Riverside, Archaeological Research Unit, Mr. Philip Wilke, Riverside. 121 XI. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bechtel Corporation, Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan, 1967. -- Bechtel Corporation, Route Studies of the California Aqueduct, 1964. California, State of, Environmental Quality Act, 1970. California Air Resources Board, California Air Basins, December 1972. 3 California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Map of California Santa Ana Sheet, 1965. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Preliminary uak Earth e Epicenter Ma of California 1934 - 19 1, July 197 . California Department of Water Resources Coachella Valle Investigation, Bulletin No. 108, 1964. California Department of Water Resources, Feasibilityof Serving the Desert Water A enc Service Area From the State ater Facilities, ul etin No. 119- 19 2. A , California Department of 3 Water Resources, Feasibility of Serving the Desert Water Agency Service Area From the State Water F Facilities, Bulletin No. 119-3, 1953. California Department of Water Resources, Mo"ave Groundwater Basins Investigated, 3 Bulletin No. 84, 1967. California Department of Water Resources, The State of California Water Pro'ect in 1972, Bulletin No. 132-72, 1972. s California Department of Water Resources, Water for California, the California Water Plan Outlook in lEq, Bulletin -No. 1 , December California Water Resources Control Board, Water,Quality Control { Plan (Interim) West Colorado River Basan 7-A, une 11. Coachella Valley County Water District, Annual Review, 1972-73. Coachella .Valley County Water District, Report on Preliminar Design and Cost Estimate for Flood Control Wor s or t e La Quanta Area, September -f970.-- 122 70.122 Coachella Valley County Water District, Whitewater Rivet Basi n, Valley ValleCalifornia, April 1 67. Davidson, J. F. & Associates, La Quinta Environmental impact Input, December 1972. Detwyler, Thomas R., et al, Urbanization & Environment, 1972. Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc., utilizing Colorado River Water to Rechar e Upper. Coachella Valle ;:iii�1,31iini water Basins Frnal Environmental Im act a ort, une 73. Palm Springs, City of, Department of Planning and Development, General Plan Economic Data, 1973. Palm Springs Desert Museum, Birds Mammals and Reptiles of the Living Desert Reserve, 1971. Palm Springs Life, Annual Desert Progress Edition, 1972 73, September 1972. Riverside, County of, Average Dail Traffic, 1973. Riverside, County of, Cove Communities General Plan, December 1972. Riverside, County of, General Plan of Highways for Riverside County,California, amen ed 1973. Riverside, County of, Ordinance #348 Zoning, latest revision. Riverside, County of, Ordinance #460 Regulating Subdivisions, latest revision. - Riverside County, 1969 Special Census, 1969. Riverside County Air Pollution Control District, Stationary Sources Transportation Sources. January 1973. Riverside County Department of Development, Communit Economic Profile, 1972., Riverside County Planning Department, Cove Communities General Plan Reports, May 1971. Ryan, R. Mark, Mammals of Deep Canyon, Colorado Desert, 1968. Schmitz, Harry H. $ Associates, General Plan, City of Indian Wells Draft Environmental Im act Report . January 1974. 123 United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Climatological Data, 1972, 1972. — - - - United States. Geological Survey, A Procedure for Evaluating Environmental Impact, 1971. U. S. Bureau of the Census, 1970 Census of Population, 1970. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Coachella Valley Wind Erosion Problem, December 1967. U. S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, Analog Model Study of the Groundwater Basin of the U er Coac ells Valle Calan ornia, 1971. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors, April 1973. Webb Engineering, Inc., Environmental Impact Stud for Gerald Moss Properties, Palm Desert, beptember 1973. ^� Wilke, Philip J., Archaeological Research Group, University of California at Riverside, Recent Large -Scale Environmental Change in Salton Basin, California., October 1973. Wilsey & Ham, Chaparral Club Draft Environmental Impact Re ort, June 173. 124 APPENDIX I NATURAL FLORA $ FAUNA OF THE PROJECT SITE FLORA: Ajamete Asclepias subulata Alkali Goldenbush Haplopappus acradenius Anderson Thornbush Lycium Andersonii Barrel Cactus Echinocactus ac-anthodes Beavertail Cactus Opuntia basilaris Border Palo Verde Cercidium floridum Brittle -Bush Encelia farinosa Brown -Eyed Primrose Oenothera c-lavaeformis Burrobush Franserid dumosa Cattle Spinach Atriplex polycarpa Cats -claw Acacia Greggii Cheese -bush HymenocZea Salsola Chuparosa BeZoperone caZifornica Creosote Larrea divaricata Darning -Needle Cactus Opuntia ramosiss=na Desert lavender Hyptis,Emoryi Desert Tobacco Nic-otiana trigonophylla Honey -Sweet Tidestromia obZongifoZia Indigo -Bush Parosela Sc-hottii Inkweed Suaeda Torreyana ramosissima Mesquite Prosopis ,juliflora gZandulosa Palmate -Leaved Gourd Curcurbita Palmata Pebble Pincushion Chaenactis c-arphoclinia Rigid Spiny -Herb Chorizanthe rigida Sand Blazing Star Mentzelia involuarata 125 126 APPENDIX I (Con't) Salt Cedar Tamarix gallica Small -leaved hoffmannseggia Hoffhumnseggia microphylla Smoke Tree ParoseZa spinosa _ Sweetbush Bebbia juncea aspera Tamarisk Tamarix pentandra Thick -Leaved Ground -Cherry Physalis erassifolia White -Haired Forget-me-not Cryptantha maritima MAMMALIAN FAUNA: Antelope Ground Squirrel CitelZus Zeucurus Beechey Ground Squirrel Citellus beecheyi Cactus Mouse Peromyseus eremieus Canyon Mouse Peromyscus crinitus Coyote Canis latrans Desert Bighorn Sheep Ovis canadensis neZsoni Desert Pack Rat Neotoma lepida Jack Rabbit Lepus caZifornicus Long-tailed Pocket Mouse Pero thus 9na formosus Pipistrelle (Canyon Bat) Pipistrellus hesperus Pocket Gopher Thomomys bottae Ring-tailed Cat Bassariscus astutus Round -tailed Ground Squirrel CiteZlus tereticaudus Spiny Pocket Mouse Perognathus spinatus Striped Skunk Mephitis mephitis REPTILIAN FAUNA: Abbott's Night Gecko Coteonyx abbotti Banded Night Gecko Coleonyx variegatus Barred Collared Lizard Crotaphytus insularis vestigium 126 APPENDIX I (Con't Bull Snake Pituophis catenifer Colorado Desert Sidewinder Crotalus cerastes laterorepens Desert Iguana (Crested Lizard) Dipsosaurus d. dorsalis Desert/Mountain Speckled Rattler Crotalus mitchelli pyrrhus Flat -nosed Horned Lizard Phrynosoma platyrhinos caZidarwn Giant Scaley Lizard Sceloporus magister Henshaw's Spotted Night Lizard Xantusia henshawi Mearn's Cliff Lizard Petrosaurus mearnsi Red Diamond Rattler Crotalus ruber Red Racer Masticophis flagellum pieea Santa Rosa Chuckawalla Sauromelas obesus Stansbury's Uta Uta stansburiana Tiger Whip -tailed Lizard Cnemidophorus t. tigris Tuberculate Gecko Phyllodactylus tuberculatus Van Denburgh's Night Snake Trimorphodon vandenburghi Zebra -tailed Lizard Callisaurus d. draconoides AVIAN FAUNA: Anna Hummingbird Calypte costae Ash -throated Flycatcher Myiarchus cinerascens Audubon Warbler Dendroica auduboni Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica Black -chinned Hummer Archilochus alxandri Black Swift Cypseloides niger Cactus Wren Campylorhynehus brunneicapillum Cassin's Kingbird Tyrannus voc-iferans Cliff Swallow Petroc-helidon pyrrhonota Costa Hummingbird Calypte costae Coue's Flycatcher Contopus pertinax 127 APPENDIX I (Con't) English Sparrow Passer domesticus Gambel, Desert Quail Lophortyx gambeli Grasshopper Falcon Falco sparverius Gray-cheeked Thrush Hylocichla minima Hooded Oriole Icterus eucullatue House Finch or Linnet Carpodacus mexicanus Mexican Ground Dove ColumbigaZlina paseerina Mockingbird Mimus poZyg.Zottis Mourning Dove Zenaidura macrourla Palm Warbler Dendroica paZmarwn Pileolated or Wilson Warbler Wilsonia pusilla Roadrunner, Paisano Geococcyx californianus Rock Wren Salpinetus obsoletus Rough-winged Swallow Stelgidopteryz ruficollis Rufous Hummingbird Selasphorus rufus Scott Oriole Icterus parisorwn Starling Sturnus vulgaris Swainson Thrush Hylocichla ustulata Texas Nighthawk ChordeiZes texensis Townsend Warbler Dendroica tomsendi Tree Swallow Iridoprocne bicolor Vaux Swift Chaetura vauxi Violet-Green Swallow Tachycineta thaZassina Western Flycatcher Empidonax difficilis Western Kingbird or Arkansas Tyrannus verticalis Western Tanager Piranga ludovicina White-rumped.Shrike Lanius Zodovicianus 128 0 0 aa��sw��ra�r.�rr.�•r�rrrasrars�.rrwrr iw.r ' }.: � �' www : C2 a b ©0 0 o q O L7` � a wa mai► .r r �r a� •r 1 i M�S a - • ti _ � wdh stn 1:3 4wnihpormft M 90wdNwem arra+a�ar�aa�wraa warr�a��aa� ra r _ Demsfty n T _- ,. Pdrh*" odkll, PROJECT & SITE DESCRIPTION 131 (rni,iT) Anncpir%TV 7 PROJECT & SITE DESCRIPTION 133 or f,.." 0 April 11, 1975 • LA OUINTA COVE 4 . G"AND TEMNS CM J APR 1E1'9175 Mr. Jerry DuPree, Sr. Planner 46-209 Oasis Street, Suite 304 Indio, California 92201 Dear Mr. DuPree: Ri r i_ ..ii'': • i i pLANIMNG COMN;ISSION DESEil l OFFICE S /,�, - .z /- Enclosed please find a copy of the report entitled "Archaeological Survey of the La Quinta Hotel Project", as conducted by S.R. McWilliams. I thought that you would like to have a copy of this for your files as it pertains to our project. Also, I had a call from John Craib, County Archaeologist, and he was quite impressed with the report and felt that it would be more than sufficient to meet the re- quirements which were originally set forth. Mr. Vossler plans to contact you on Monday, to discuss the upcoming April 15th meeting with the Board of Supervisors.. If we can be of any.further assistance in any way, please do not hesitate to contact us. Si rely, athl Long A,- Secretary to Ernest O. Vossler /cl Encl: POST OFFICE BOX 519. LA OUINTA. (-7A1.TF01 'VTA 499.51 171A) QAr, oaaD 00 _ 1• V-�.r.. - '• ter~-�. ._-. - ... v•CH/I .VNI:L�'�. .. . �'� _ . -.. .. ...- +.. •� �` ..- .. ._ _ .... _ BM 721,uj� 25 � 4 41 Irl h� Ir Well 117 so f1 �1 , I tCf . r V 31 ?j 5- - .-Wale I F-zq U14 m \ • r r'f it I�a K C, _ ater AVENUE •50 - Wale ell , F �""z"`�r�., � + w� - ice•- f"C�- �� - Well. v k fey . Opt I •• fA�)..7 - � .. i M1 G 5 '�;• , I r �. �33i I � �_ LO °= ' �' 'ice-`��;` ;r ��t`' ' �� • I•:i �' � -��--� r �� :—,�-�f__i l; ��{� �L•—.l � . � ' ., - • I '��LLJ�I N v,11RA��l..._.� �.I��l�� s u » ,jI . �—•,�s *.-m }rp\o II •� •II8d' I "V La Quinta r—. r �-t: � � • 1 -- t —. N a i �i.: �� i i'• �ur�e; 2 '+ -iia �'"• 1, h1 f Ai }��.. i�;- it •i� y '' � ' �M• "r �' •�' 1 � � • ii•r�'4 ��+.. - .. ` 1 E '� + '� '� t i 1' i I�I o; fi i i ►i ,I 'i I� �I. ii I �'°.•.��...- -. . i r'- r�.'� n �ti`r�i+ •11 U. �I 14' -.I� .•!I! iL it. _i.._ I Reoional Settin4 of the LaQuinta Hotel Project The Coachella Valley in general is a region of abundant rchaeolgical remains of Indian cultures. In part thisidue to the fact that artifactual material is well preserved in the extremely and environment. Such material is also commonly exposed at the surface of the ground by the generally strong wind erosion in the desert. Finally, the activity of early man in the desert was rather widespread and, in some situations, apparently quite intense and, thus, a considerable amount of debris was left from their activities. Two major kinds of environments were inhabited by early man in the Coachella Valleys (1) those areas of food and water re- sources which existed during times of normal arid conditions, and (2) those areas of food and water resources which existed during those unusual times when ancient Lake Cahuilla partially' filled the Salton Trough. It is generally accepted that the Indians who occupied the Coachella Valley mere technologically rather primitive in that they did not practice farming, but depended rather directly upon the natural productivity of the physical environment for their food and water. The productivity of the desert generally supported a small total human population, despite the fact that probably a very wide range of plants were classified as food sources. However, when the Colorado River overflowed its channel and altered its course so as to inundate the Salton Trough (essentially the lower portions of the Coachella and Imperial Valleys), a radically different desert environment resulted and one that was potentially quite productive for simple food -collecting cultures. The community of La Quinta occupies a relatively unique position in this setting for both kinds of environments described above were found in its vicinity. In fact, the La Quinta Hotel project itself may have encompassed bath the normal desert -type of environment and the more unusual lakeshore environment. Studies have been undertaken to describe and interpret,the Indian occupation of the Coachella Valley, but truly thorough archaeological studies have yet to be completed. Potentially a great deal of knowledge concerning early human occupation of the Coachella. Valley and its environs can be obtained from known archaeological sites. anti the importance of identifying new localities of such datanimmense. The rapidity with which the Coachella Valley has been urbanized within the last ten to fifteen years is impressive. The result of this growth has affected the preservation of local archaeological sites significantly, and generally in an adverse way. From the standpoint of understanding both the prehistory of the Coachella Valley, -and the nature of human behavior among ancestral populations of this continent, it is vital to carry out archaeological investigations now before still more data is lost. boundaries of the project area. It can be assumed that artifact -hunters or relic -collectors have visited such potentially productive lands and may have removed the more obvious remains :of Indian cultures. The relatively undisturbed land within the project boundaries was intensively examined. The area was walked across throughout its north -south extent and was subdivided into nine easily identified field units for purposes of recording observations. As with the modified land mentioned previously, orientation was maintained in the field and on the working map by closely following an aerial photograph (whose approximate scale was 1,12.000). The undisturbed land outside the boundaries of the proposed project area was examined with much less intensity. That area to the west and north of the proposed project area consist primarily of steep rocky slopes and short, dry canyons with a few well established alluvial fans. These canyons and their alluvial fans received the most attention (in terms of the surveyor's observations) in this marginal area. The undisturbed land to the east consists of sand dunes and possible former Lake Cahuilla sediments. This area is a well-known archaeological area, but did not specifically fall with.in'the confines of this study and, thus, was not emphasized. In summary, the goal of the survey was to identify surface remains that would suggest former aboriginal occupation of an extensive nature or in fact more intensively used specific sites. The project area consists of about a square mile which is relatively small in terms of the range of archaeological surveys in general. Consequently, the area could be examined in some detail, and this examination was facilitated by distinguishing between the "developed" versus the "raw" land within the project boundaries. Survey Findings Archaeological material does occur within the proposed boundaries of the La Quinta Hotle project area. However, based on this survey the material present does not represent any significant concentration. The finds located within the project boundaries appear to this author to be of minimal importance. 1. material Found on the modified Land Curiously the most frequently encountered artifacts came from the portion of the project classified as agricultural and residential land. Two localities yielded this material, and both are plotted on.m_ap A. where they are designated by the letters a and b. In neither case was the material so plentiful as to suggest any depth to the deposit at all. Locality -a is situated immediately south of Avenue 50 and along the eastern -most boundary of the project. The site is marked by the existence of an exceedingly large mesquite -hill sand dune. It is quite likely the mesquite which currently exists at the site was alive during the 19th century and probably constituted a food source for the Indian inhabitants of the valley at that time; its shape is typical of very ancient growth in that a very large central core area is quite barren of vegetation at this time. A few potsherds (nine fragments were collected which represented all those seen) littered the dune surface and nearby southern shoulder of Avenue 50. This material is typical of other sites in the Coachella Valley and is often described as simply plain brown ware. The material was best exposed along the northern face of the sand dune where the road -cut and subsequent wind erosion have combined to expose the material at the surface. Occasionally rocks are found in this vicinity, which naturally would not occur on a sand dune, but they may represent recently intruded items; in any case their occurrence is rare and significance is minimal. The western portion of locales -a is greatly modified in that it has been quarried for sand, and currently has been used as a place to dump soil. The quarrying has exposed the dune to a depth of ten feet or more, and yet no archaeological material protrudes from this cut. This may support the belief that the site lacks any significant artifact concentration. However, the mesquite seems to have been growing most actively towards the irrigated field immediately to the west and, thus, the accumulated sand where the quarry exists may be only a recent addition to the otherwise large dune. No artifacts would be expected from the quarry cut if the sand accumulation there is itself of recent age. This mesquite dune may possess buried archaeological material fifty yards or so to the east of the irrigated field. Such a location would place the site outside the boundaries of project area as described to this author. Based on previous 1 experience it is my opinion that this site is not worthy of further investigation. It might also be noted that.none of the typical indicators of a shoreline location (freshwater shellfish remains, fish, turtle or.aquatic bird skeletons) were present. It is difficult to believe that such material is totally buried by accumulated sand, but rather it seems the former shoreline of Lake Cahuilla exists farther to the east and that location -a is beyond its borders. Consequently, the site at best is a food -collecting location perhaps visited during the intervals when Lake Cahuilla did not exist, and such sites are rather common in the Coachella Valley. Locant -b is situated immediately south of a small floodwater channel on what appears to be abandoned farmland. The land seems to be used recently as a rubbish dump and is heavily overgrown by brush. Two fragments of plain brown ,is (again that.type common to archaeological sites in the Coachella Valley): were observed and collected here. The two finds came from an area perhaps the size of a city block. The site warrants no further investigation, but may be important as an indicator of how prevalent artifacts might be expected on the rest of the farm and residential land were it feasible to locate them. Curiously, fra ments of modern Mexican ceramic ware (polychrome and glazed is found within this rubbish area, but it is certainly unrelated to the aboriginal Indian occupation of the land. 2. Material found on the Unmodified Land In contrast to what was expected by this researcher, the land surfaces in relatively natural states of preservation yielded totally insignificant quantities and types of artifactual material. One small fragment of plain brown ware was collected towards the extreme western end of Avenue 50, but within the boundaries of the project area. The interpretation of this situation suggests the aboriginal use of the desert environment (at least in a way that would leave a material remain) was restricted in this area to those sites away from the base of the western and northern mountain ranges. Certainly today this mountain -base location is quite arid and supports little in the way of plant growth= no surface water would be present in this location in aboriginal times and the elevation appears to be above that of the former lake by a few feet (assuming the lake stood at approximately 40 feet above sea level). The rocky slopes of the mountain ridge and the alluvial fan surfaces at the mouths of the small canyons yielded no evidence of archaeological material. It must be assumed the land of this nature was simply an unuseable food -collecting area. In contrast, the sandy area to the east of the project boundaries (although well outside the study area) possesses a significant concentration of archaeological material. This is indicated on map -A as location -c, many fragments of plain brown ware litter the surface here, as well as numerous rocks from an aboriginal hearth, and skeletal fragments of a local fauna. Interestingly, the remains of the freshwater mollusc typical of lakeshore sites occurs in abundance at this Iodation. The site seems to be associated with the western -most shoreline of ancient Lake Cahuilla. Fortunately the site is not*on property slated for development in the La quinta Hotel project and, therefore, may be preserved for a while longer permitting interested archaeologists to examine its contents. To my knowledge, this the closest site of any importance to the proposed project area. It should be carefully avoided by any construction vehicles or activities associated with the hotel project. Summary and Recommendations The archaeological survey at the La puinte Hotel project yielded little in the way of important sites that would be lost by the proposed construction activity. No further investigation seems to be requited within the boundaries of the project area. The major archaeological finding within the project is negative in nature, it seems significant that material was not encountered. This fact has implications relative to the nature of the aboriginal occupation of. the Coachella Valley environment. The minor concentration of artifacts associated with the sand dune and mesquite vegetation (location a) may warrant further attention if in the course of the construction work it is leveled. In that case the developer is requested to advise the author of this report in order that the excavation be briefly examined. most likely this examination would be of academic interest only and would not entail any interruption of the construction schedule. Finally, it is hoped that construction activity will avoid the sand dune area to the east of the project area. It is in this vicinity that potentially important archaeological sites occur which should not be damaged before they have been - properly examined and excavated if necessary. Hopefully this will not present a problem for such sites are beyond the boundaries of the -project by considerable distance. LARRY H. SCHMITZ & ASSOCIATES July 1974 Planning Commission / Board of Supervisors County of Riverside 4080 Lemon Street, Room 101 Riverside, California 92501 Re: La Quinta Cove Golf & Tennis Club Attention: Environmental Impact Section Gentlemen: Enclosed is the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed LA QUINTA COVE Golf f Tennis Club project in La Quinta. The Specific Plan of Land Use is conceptual in nature and exact building and site details may be subject to some minor revision; however, the concepts _ will remain un- changed. Since EIR's, by law, are intended to be used as informational documents in evaluating environmental aspects of a project, this report is submitted at the preliminary stage, enabling adequate consideration to be given these factors. Further "an EIR may not be used as an instrument to rationalize app proval of a project, nor do indications of adverse. impact, as enunciated in an EIR, require that a project be disapproved. While CEQA requires that major consideration be given to pre- venting environmental damage, it is recognized that public agencies have obligation to balance other public objectives, including economic and social factors in determining whether and how a project should be approved."l Please feel free to contact us should you have any questions concerning information found in the report. IiHS/ j s E;nc 1 osure 1Scction 15012, California Division 6 (Implementation URBAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING CONSULTANTS* 43-900 Sincerely, Harr H. Schmitz AIP Administrative Code, Title 14, of CEQA) TELEPHONE (7 14) 346-2022 PRIMROSE DRIVE • PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260