HomeMy WebLinkAbout2B Public CommentAnthony Mejia
From: Charles Howland <cphowland@aol.com>
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 10:04 AM
To: Anthony Mejia
Subject: Canyon View, Item 2B
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
Mr. Mejia,
This email is in support of the Canyon View project on East Palm Canyon and Matthew Drive.
This property has been neglected too long, and Palm springs needs housing.
Charlie Howland
Ola Vista Studio
ITEM NO. 2 ` -
671z2(wZ
Anthony Mejia
From: Joe Milner <smoothiej@gmail.corn>
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2021 5:46 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: Canyon View/Matthew Drive project vs critical wildlife
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
Hello,
I am a fulltime resident of Palm Springs and am writing to voice my objection regarding
the developer of the canyon view/ Matthew Drive project being allowed to destroy the
setback area with bulldozers.
This is a totally unnecessary, brute force "easy way" method and will destroy critical
habitat of the Palm springs Roundtail Squirrel and the Casey's .June Beetle.
The squirrels are already being considered for endangered designation in our
state ... which means their population was and is already concerning.
This project, if allowed to proceed as proposed, will decimate them even further.
The squirrel is a covered species under the MSHCP. This designation alone should have
weight in preventing the developer from destroying their habitat.
This method simply doesn't make sense when the solution (preserving the setback) has
minimal effect on the developer's bottom line but maximal impact as to whether these
innocent creatures will be able to continue to exist in what has been their home for
thousands of years before we arrived.
Please, do the right thing for the animals and the environment and do not allow the
developer to destroy critical habitat.
Thank you.
Joe Milner
Palm Springs, CA
ITEM NO. I v
6� C -2 Za"Ll
1
SEAN LUUS
1700 S. Araby Dr., #69, Palm Springs, CA 92264 1 949.922.3311 1 seanluus@me.com
07/22/2021
City Clerk of Palm Springs
Palm Springs City Hall
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
RE. Public Hearing #B and New Business #5C on Thursday, July 22, 2021— Canyon View Development
Dear City Clerk of Palm Springs:
I with this respectfully request in symphony with Oswit Land Trust, that a reasonable parameter of the
Canyon View development be preserved in its naturally rich and mature state, to protect some of our rarest
species of animals and endangered species such as Casey's June Beetle (unique to Palm Springs) as well as
the Round -tailed Ground Squirrel (unique to Coachella Valley). We have a once -in -a -lifetime opportunity to
save these endangered animals. This particular project allows a compromise with the developer to preserve
perimeters for a protected habitat without impacting the number of units planned.
I am an avid wildlife advocate to preserve and save the gift of our incredible natural habitats with their
equally unique and fascinating inhabitants. The small steps we can take right now in working closely with
city leaders, the community, and developers allow us to save these natural treasures for ourselves and the
generations to follow.
I thank you for your consideration and time of this request.
Sincerely,
Sean Luus
1
ITEM NO.
d'l 2ZA 2Z2
F' .71
So14f~ertr 1'llllirts L"n.A Trwsf
GAINING GROUND FOR PRAIRIE WILDLIFE
July 22, 2021
Palm Springs City Council
Via Palm Springs City Clerk: cityclerk@palmspringsca.gov
Dear Palm Springs City Council:
P.O. Box 1016
Lamar, CO 81052
720-841-1757
www.southernplains.org
splt@southernplains.org
FEIN# 84-1470479
The Oswit Land Trust recently informed us of their effort to work with the developer of Canyon View to
preserve important wildlife habitat on the periphery of a proposed development. We are a partner land trust,
given our shared emphasis on protecting wildlife and their habitats through common-sense land and
species protection strategies. We urge you to consider the Oswit Land Trust's suggestions, given the
importance of preserving biodiversity in Palm Springs and the Coachella Valley more broadly.
It is our understanding that species such as the Casey's June Beetle and the Palm Springs Round-tailed
Ground Squirrel are at risk from the proposed development. The Casey's June Beetle is listed as
Endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act and is limited to Palm Springs. The Palm Springs
Round-tailed Ground Squirrel is ranked as T2 by NatureServe, which means that it is imperiled. It is
restricted to the floor of the Coachella Valley, and the primary driver of its imperilment is development.
Given the narrow range of both of these species, you have a special and important opportunity to take
action to protect these at-risk species. Creatures such as these are part of the rich tapestry of life on this
planet. The ground squirrel, for example, provides prey and burrow habitat for other wildlife. In the region
where our land trust works -in the southern Great Plains -we provide habitat for prairie dogs, which are
similarly important ecologically. All of these species depend on day to day, site specific choices, such as
the one before you.
And that's why I am writing you today: I think municipalities across the country would be well-served to link
arms with land trusts to ensure that biodiversity is preserved for future generations of humans and nature
alike. Scientists have been sounding the alarm for decades that imperiled species are like canaries in the
coal mine: they signal when humanity has overstepped nature's bounds. Sometimes measures that are
required to safeguard them mean putting the brakes on human economic activity. But what the Oswit Land
Trust is suggesting is much more modest: they are providing a pragmatic and reasonable path forward for
both the development and habitat protection.
Sincerely,
Nicole J. Rosmarino, Executive Director
iJzt/~t.-1
ITEMNO.o">e> 1c.tblit l',mm,nt
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jesse Archer <jesseonthebrink@gmail.com>
Thursday, July 22, 2021 4:06 PM
City Clerk
Canyon View/EHOF project
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
Dear Mr Mejia/City Clerk,
Would you please pass along my concerns (below) regarding the Canyon View/EHOF Project to the Palm Springs council members
and add to the public comment section?
As a citizen of Palm Springs, I want to add my voice to those advocating for protection of the wild vegetation and habitat at the
perimeter of the above-mentioned project.
As I understand it, the developers are resisting a simple request to allow even one side of their project's environmental perimeter to
remain wild and not graded/bulldozed. This very reasonable ask will protect native species, each of which are essential to our fragile
ecosystem. I hope I may count on your powerful voice as my mayor and council members to speak out in favor of preserving a small
sliver of native habitat from needless destruction.
I would appreciate hearing their thoughts on the above matter and what, if any, action they plan to take. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Jesse Archer
222 N. Jill Circle
Palm Springs, CA. 92262
(31 0) 920-0621
1
,1-zi/u,z,
ITEM NO. OS P~bi.c..
/)rmlhl1tt
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
gloria mendoza <glogirlgram@yahoo.com>
Thursday, July 22, 2021 4:19 PM
City Clerk
Subject: Please give my comment to all City Council Members for todays meeting thank you
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
I am a concerned resident of Palm Springs and am against the developer of CanyonNiew Matthew Drive project
it would destroy the setback with bulldozers. Im sure there must be a way to get the same number of units while
protecting the habitat for endangered animals and insects that have survived there.
Palm Springs round tailed squirrels are being considered on the endangers species list in our state. Their
population is already concerning. This project would destroy their habitat.
Please preserve the setback so that these little creatures will be able to exist in what has been their home
for hundreds of years before we started building here.
Please do not allow the developer to destroy the habitat of all the little creatures that live there
Thank you,
Gloria Ortiz Mendoza
1383 E. Caleta Way
Palm Springs, Ca 92262
, lz ,z, I -ia,'
1 ITEM NO. ::)!, ll,.,bUt. Q,,.,.,,,.,,.yj-
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
KB <pskev@icloud.com>
Thursday, July 22, 2021 3:42 PM
Anthony Mejia
Canyon View
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
PLEASE STOP THE BUILDING! Save our open spaces and land! No more new housing as we are in a major
drought, and our roads cannot handle any more people being here ... Building is not progress, dealing with what
we already have IS progress. It seems during Covid so last year and a half all the land is being scooped up and
developed, and it's not right, it's not good for the environment and it's not good for our roads, and especially
the police department which is running very thin ... No more building!
You can prevent animals from being crushed to death!
The City Council is reviewing the Canyon View/EHOF project (agenda item public hearing 2b) on the corner of
Matthew Drive and Palm Canyon (Across from Vons). The developer wants to destroy the native habitat (which
is located on the perimeter and within the required setback). This area is filled with birds, bunnies, squirrels,
lizards and our endangered Casey's June beetle ( only found in Palm Springs). It is not necessary to destroy that
habitat in building the 80 homes. These animals will not run when construction starts. Bunnies and squirrels
when frightened will go into their burrows only to be crushed to death. The endangered Casey's June beetle
can't run and will be crushed. Please ask the council to protect that perimeter and not allow any bulldozing and
grading. Let's protect and enhance that habitat...not destroy and kill. Now is the time to help. Once you see the
construction fence and trapped animals it's too late. We need to be good stewards of our wildlife. This is a very
reasonable request.
KB
KB
1
-,tz~/,uA,/
ITEMN~/3 JW,L;~~
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sophia Somers <sophia@oswitlandtrust.org>
Thursday, July 22, 2021 3:43 PM
City Clerk
Canyon View Development
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
To Whom It May Concern,
My name is Sophia Somers and I am a resident of Waverly Park located off S.Gene Autry Trail (an extension
of E. Matthew Drive) where the Canyon View Development is scheduled to take place. I am very concerned
for the wildlife that currently inhabits this parcel of land along with the mature natural shrubs running parallel to
E. Palm Canyon Drive.
It's understandable how at a first glance one might only notice trash and evidence of homelessness
here. However, that is only avail that unfortunately distracts from the true beauty right there underneath. This
is a problem, but if left in the care of Oswit Land Trust there would be solutions towards keeping this open
space free of garbage and then likely highlighted for its unique role as home to the federally endangered
Casey's June Beetle and other magnificent wildlife such as roadrunners, lizards, hawks, rabbits, and the
Coachella Valley Round-tailed Ground Squirrel. There is an opportunity here for us to build intrinsic and
extrinsic generational value, which is economically viable in the growing EcoTourism industry.
I know you all work tirelessly to do what you believe is in the best interest of the community, and I am only
asking you to think of how important animals are to the well-being of people as more and more of them are
disappearing because of our uninspiring economic agenda. At this point, you are all aware of what is at stake
for not only the wildlife here on this property, but for the image and moral consciousness of the Palm Springs
City Council. With that said, please consider these animals and their habitat in your decision-making process
tonight at the meeting.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sophia Somers
Development Assistant
Oswit Land Trust
www.oswitlandtrust.org
sophia@oswitlandtrust.com
1
-, I 1,., t1 ZIJ~<
ITEM No.&5 Py~Jc~
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
lala mendoza <artista_la@yahoo.com>
Thursday, July 22, 2021 2:46 PM
City Clerk
Please disseminate this comment to all City Council Members for today's meeting
thanks
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
I am a Palm sprin~s resident who is very much against the developer of canyon view/
Matthew Drive proJect being allowed to destroy the setback area with bulldozers. This
doesn't need to happen. They can get the same number of units out of their project while
also protecting critical habitat for endangered animals like Casey's June Beetle
and Palm · Springs round tailed squirrels.
The squirrels were being considered for endangered designation in our state ... which
frankly means their population was and is already concerning. This project certainly
won't help their plight. The squirrel is a covered species under the MSHCP. This
designation alone should have weight in preventing the developer from destroying their
habitat.
This situation simply doesn't make sense when the solution (preserving the setback) has
minimal effect to their bottom line but maximal determination as to whether these
innocent creatures will be able to continue to exist in what has been their home for
thousands of years before we arrived.
Please do the right thing and do not allow the developer to destroy critical habitat.
Thank you.
Laura A Mendoza
La Artista Design, Inc.
ph. 323.605.9276 / laartista.com
1
1 /1111/111v{
ITEMNo.dE:>~
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
James <wildgardener@gmail.com>
Thursday, July 22, 2021 2:44 PM
City Clerk
Canyon View Development
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
Dear City council members, Please ask the developer of the Canyon View proposed project to retain the mature habitat
along the wash on East Palm Canyon Drive and on Matthew Drive toward the bend. Preserving these perimeters would
have no impact on the number of units that the developer is proposing in the plan. Yet out of town and out of state
developers allowed to extirpate an endangered species is something our community needs to guard closely against.
Please have the developer work with Oswit land trust in order to ensure that this mature habitat hosting many species
including the endangered Casey's June beetle, the threatened round-tailed ground squirrel and many other species are
not bulldozed and destroyed.
James Schott
1
, 1/J'Z, I 2')4'(
ITEM NO. Jr; f'wJ,ue,
~
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tamara Hedges <tamara.hedges@gmail.com>
Thursday, July 22, 2021 1 :17 PM
City Clerk
Item 2B Canyon View Development
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
Dear Mayor Holstege, Mayor Pro Tern Middleton and Councilmembers,
We are writing to you today as Palm Springs residents and advocates for wildlife. The Canyon View development, as
currently proposed, completely destroys vital habitat for numerous species in that area, including the endangered
Casey's June Beetle (Dinacoma caseyi) and the imperiled Palm Springs Round-tailed Ground Squirrel (Xerospermophilus
tereticaudus chlorus). Cottontail, jack rabbits, roadrunners, a variety of lizards and other native desert dwellers also call
that small island of open space home. Preserving the perimeter of the housing development is one small way to give
these local species a chance to survive and thrive, serving as a mini-wildlife corridor.
For far too long there has been an either/or approach to development -either full development or open space. It is
time that we embrace and implement new and innovative ways to integrate and weave wild and quasi-wild spaces into
our suburban and urban development plans. We can look to the original and current caretakers of this land, the Cahuilla,
to protect and preserve the delicate desert ecosystems for generations to come.
Cities all over the world are starting to understand the importance of habitat preservation:
https://e360.yale.edu/features/habitat-on-the-edges-making-room-for-wildlife-in-an-urbanized-world
We moved to Palm Springs because of the natural beauty of this place. We support smart and strategic development
efforts that benefit the residents and businesses here. We know that there is a way to preserve and protect wildlife and
wildspaces and still grow our economy and community. It may not be the easiest path, but it is the right one.
Respectfully,
Tamara Hedges
Tony Thelemaque
415.596.4998
"The earth does not belong to us. We belong to the earth."
-Chief Seattle
1
i 1~1/(Zo21
ITEMNo.J1' PLibUv
(}JmlYlVlf
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Lisa Kaplowitz <lkaplowitz@gmail.com>
Thursday, July 22, 2021 12:41 PM
City Clerk
Items 2B and SC on Tonight's City Council Agenda -Please distribute to all City Council
Members
Baby Red-tailed Hawk-Bel Air Greens.JPG; Baby Great Horned Owl-Tahquitz Golf
Course.JPG
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing in regards to Items 2B and SC on tonight's City Council agenda, and asking (1) that the Whitewater property
and Bel Air Greens not be included in the proposed general plan changes; and (2) to save the perimeter around the
Canyon View Development, home of the endangered Casey's June Beetle, as well as numerous other species and mature
vegetation.
More and more, we are confronted with devastating habitat loss and decimation of species driven by out-of-control
development and climate change. The Washington Post recently wrote about a "hawkpocalypse" occurring in the West
in which young birds of prey are jumping from their nests before they have fledged, due to the extreme heat which is
increasingly becoming the norm. Attached are a couple of my images of baby birds of prey taken on or near Bel Air
Greens to show what is at stake.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/07 /17 /heat-wave-baby-hawks/
As a wildlife photographer, I have frequented these sites and have documented the diversity of both flora and fauna on
these vanishing tracts of land. Once the land is gone, so are the life forms which depend on it.
I propose that the City Council direct their resources to do something truly visionary and save these parcels from further
development, rather than be driven by the short-sighted agendas of less than scrupulous developers. I, for one, would
prefer to not be confronted with a dystopian, "Silent Spring"-like future.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Lisa Kaplowitz
1
-" f-z--£.-I u,2<
lTEM NOf}e,/5 e,,
Pt4bltivCi~
Anthony Mejia
Subject: RE: Canyon view.
From: Jane Fawke <laragna.web@gmail.com >
Date: July 22, 2021 at 12:25:16 PM PDT
To: Christy Holstege <Christy.Holstege@palmspringsca.gov>
Subject: Canyon view.
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Good afternoon, Madame Mayor,
I am a Climate studies graduate at UCR Palm Desert, and the plan to destroy native habitat at Canyon
View is a bad one.
I am relying on you not to allow this damage to a very fragile eco-system.
Thank you.
Jane "Spider" Fawke
1
-,/z ,i /202 (
~B f<Abl.a"-Corw~f ITEM NO. ____ _
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Bettina Rosmarino <bettina@oswitlandtrust.org>
Wednesday, July 21, 20211:15 PM
City Clerk
Oswit Land Trust packet re: Canyon View development
Attachments: Oswit Land Trust Packet Re_ Canyon View Development.docx; CJB Recovery
Outline_FINAL.pdf; 210628 Letter re CEQA issues.pdf;
Sustura.Haimann.Richard.Matthew.Drive.CanyonView.City.Council.Hearing.writeup.v2.pdf
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
Please distribute to city council. Thank you.
Bettina Rosmarino
Oswit Land Trust Board Member
323-333-9446
www .oswitlandtrust.org
1/zz/wtt
1 ITEM NO. ~B M4h~c. l1rnrn,,vT
1775 E Palm Canyon Dr #4020 Palm Springs CA 92263 www.oswitlandtrust.org 760-385-8255
PACKET FOR CITY COUNCIL
Canyon View/Matthew Drive Project
Public Hearing 8. EHOF
City Council meeting July 22, 2021
Prepared by Oswit Land Trust (OL T)
Photo from site looking North East along E Palm Canyon Drive
. ' ! -·-I
1775 E Palm Canyon Dr #4020 Palm Springs CA 92263 www.oswitlandtrust.org 760-385-8255
Contents:
Summary
Cover Letter from Oswit Land Trust
Map of parcel and requested habitat protection
Sustra Inc. Hydrology Engineer Analysis (separate document)
USFWS Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle (March, 2013) (separate document)
Coachella Valley Round-tailed Squirrel Info
Letter from OL T attorney (separate document)
FAQ/Responses to Developer's opposition for retaining habitat
Summary: Requesting that critical habitat for Endangered Casey's June Beetle, located within
the setbacks of this project, is protected and retained (not graded or bulldozed) during and after
construction so that it is preserved in perpetuity. Because of the Riverside County Flood
Control's construction of Line 41, the need to excavate the earthen channel along E Palm
Canyon Drive and destroy habitat is no longer necessary. In fact, 97% of off-site and on-site
water is being handled by line 41. The habitat along Matthew Drive from E Palm Canyon to the
bend is already slated for open space, but the proposed plan is to grade and remove existing
vegetation and habitat. OL T is asking that the existing vegetation and habitat remain intact with
solutions for beautification.
1775 E Palm Canyon Dr #4020 Palm Springs CA 92263 www.oswitlandtrust.org 760-385-8255
July 20, 2021
City Council
City of Palm Springs
Sent via email
Re: Canyon View Project/ Matthew Drive
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
We are writing regarding the final approval of the Canyon View project that is on the City
Council agenda July 22, 2021. We ask that the City Council add a condition to this project
requiring the applicant to protect and retain the natural habitat along E. Palm Canyon Drive and
Matthew Drive (from Palm Canyon to the bend west on Matthew). This area is known habitat for
the endangered Casey's June Beetle (CJB) as well as home to a large colony of Coachella
Valley round-tailed Ground Squirrels (a CA FWS species of special concern), rabbits, and many
species of birds and lizards.
In this project's original approvals, the developers needed to bulldoze this habitat and build
cement water retention basins. With the planned construction of Line 41 by Riverside County
Flood Control, there is no longer a need for retention basins on the parcel periphery. This opens
a path to limit construction impact to the CJB by preserving the habitat where they have been
found, which are the earthen channels that run the perimeter of the property along Palm Canyon
Drive and Matthew Drive.
This habitat is within the required setbacks and designated open space/ earthen channel
and would not change the density of this project. The developer will still be able to build
the 80 proposed homes.
We have unsuccessfully tried to work directly with the developer to preserve the habitat. In fact,
we first proposed the entire perimeter be preserved in its natural state, and have since reduced
it to the perimeter areas along E. Palm Canyon and part-way along Matthew Drive. We have
also offered to enhance the habitat with the help of ecological subject-matter experts at
University of California-Riverside (see below). The enhancements would both improve the
aesthetics of the new residential community, and enhance the quality of the habitat for the
existing wildlife.
We are highly motivated to form a collaborative partnership with the developer and members of
City Council to limit destruction of habitat on this particular parcel. Part of our motivation stems
" I
1775 E Palm Canyon Dr #4020 Palm Springs CA 92263 www.oswitlandtrust.org 760-385-8255
from our confidence that the collaboration can serve as a valuable blueprint for generating an
innovative set of standards, practices, and guidelines for new construction projects that the City
can incorporate into the General Plan and municipal building codes. The result would be new
developments with enhanced environmental sustainability qualities and enhanced aesthetic
qualities. Such qualities would benefit all denizens of our great city, human and wildlife alike.
We are hopeful the owners, developers and City Council are as motivated as we are to protect
vulnerable habitat and the species that are dependent on it. Ifs quite feasible that a full
Environmental Impact Report (El R) could be required if the developer is unwilling to look at
alternatives to limit impact to the CJB, an endangered species, but we are hopeful that a
workaround to an EIR could be achieved by our proposed collaboration.
The city's ability to require a full EIR is found in CEQA Guidelines section 15162, (applies to
both EIRs and Negative Declarations), as outlined below .
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be
feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the
project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in
the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment,
but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
In addition to the previous surveys that were completed for CJB, we had a site visit completed
by Colin Barrows, a Certified California Naturalist who is a well known site monitor for similar
projects. He confirmed that the channel is still a concern:
"The vegetation located along the flood control channels is significantly larger, more mature,
and provides greater habitat value to wildlife than anywhere on the property. Especially along
the northern boundary of the property, abutting Highway 111, a row of very large and healthy
creosote bushes (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/73155321) provide not only habitat,
but a natural visual and sound barrier from the highway to the interior of the property . Additional
mature plants were found along these channels are not disturbance-adapted, and would take
many years for landscaped plants to achieve equal size and habitat value, such as this desert
lavender: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/73155327 .
There is a very large native desert willow on the extreme southwest corner of the property. The
shade, nesting habitat, and food for native wildlife (nectar, pollen, and seeds) provided by a tree
of this size are essentially irreplaceable on a reasonable timescale, and it should be protected.
The location of the tree is very near edge of the property, and it should not interfere with existing
development plans: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/7315528411
I l
1775 E Palm Canyon Dr #4020 Palm Springs CA 92263 www.oswitlandtrust.org 760-385-8255
Oswit Land Trust {OLT) Proposal
Again, OL T sees this as an opportunity for a collaborative partnership to protect vulnerable
species while fulfilling the need for housing in Palm Springs.
OL T, with the help of UCR naturalists, biologists and master gardeners with whom we already
have robust relationships, will create and steward the natural perimeter. The open art area on
Matthew drive could offer educational opportunities about the endangered CJB and other
wildlife the perimeter has protected. All work would be overseen by a qualified biologist, as is
required in the mitigated negative declaration conditions. The future HOA would not need to be
responsible for this ecosystem.
In addition, according to city documents, OL T feels that final approval would be premature until
final construction of line 41 and purchase and recording of the mitigation property for the CJB is
complete, along with a letter by USFWS confirming that the mitigation requirements by the
developer are fulfilled.
In closing, OL T is convinced that this kind of collaborative and thoughtful approach to the
development of parcels containing critical habitat could usher in new sustainable development
methodologies that benefit all citizens of our great city, along with our wildlife. We recognize
how fortunate we are to live in a city that has forward thinking approaches to our area's natural
surroundings.
Thank you for your time and we look forward to hearing from you.
Jane Garrison, President
Board Members
Oswit Land Trust
' ,
1775 E Palm Canyon Dr #4020 Palm Springs CA 92263 www.oswitlandtrust.org 760-385-8255
Map Renderings: Comparing Applicant's design to the OL T requested changes. OL T's
requested changes would not change the design aesthetic, but only preserve intact
habitat.
Applicant's Rendering:
Proposed Landscape Plan
28-74
I • I 1•.••
1775 E Palm Canyon Dr#4020 Palm Springs CA 92263 www.oswitlandtrust.org 760-385-8255
OL T Requested Changes:
1775 E Palm Canyon Dr #4020 Palm Springs CA 92263 www.oswitlandtrust.org 760-385-8255
FAQs and Responses to Developer's Points
• CJB has survived at this parcel during droughts and without any flow from off site water.
They could still survive with the natural perimeter retained but would be crushed if
allowed to bulldoze.
• CJB historical habitat has been devastated. Possible extirpation in the future if stricter
measures aren't put in place for their number one threat: development and habitat loss.
See USFWS Recovery Outline (March, 2013).
Native Plants
• Native plants would survive without irrigation. The vegetation that is currently in this
habitat has survived without supplemental water and would flourish with some light
irrigation. Additionally native planting would also beautify the area.
• We would be willing to work with the developer and landscape architects to enhance the
native plants that are in the perimeter to make the habitat more appealing to both
humans and non-humans.
CA Roundtail Squirrels (CA covered species of special concern)
• There is an established family/colony of ground squirrels in the earthen perimeter and
throughout the parcel. These animals would be crushed to death during any excavation
or bulldozing.
• Burrowing animals run into their homes (burrows) when frightened. They will not just run
off the property. If the perimeters along E Palm Canyon and Matthew till the bend are
preserved, they have a chance to utilize their burrows in those areas and to survive.
• Trapping and relocating burrowing animals is very difficult as they are very territorial.
Hydrology Engineering
• The developer has not looked at any alternatives for destroying this habitat. They are
using the same calculations and plans from prior to line 41.
-,. 1
1775 E Palm Canyon Dr #4020 Palm Springs CA 92263 www.oswitlandtrust.org 760-385-8255
• Line 41 will handle 97% of the off and on site water flow. For the remaining percentile
and in the event of a hundred year flood, alternatives that would be minimally destructive
have been provided (Sustra Inc Findings document).
• The current channels have been handling E. Palm Canyon water flows without any
flooding issues.
Legal/CEQA Issues
• OL T feels this section was overlooked by the city's CEQA consultant and the applicant's
attorney.
CEQA Guidelines section 15162, (applies to both EIRs and Negative Declarations), as outlined
below.
((C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be
feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the
project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in
the previous El R would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment,
but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
Sidewalk to Nowhere
• The proposed sidewalk on East Palm Canyon Drive in front of this neighborhood creates
the "sidewalk to nowhere" and would be a dangerous situation.
• The continuous sidewalks on East Palm Canyon are located on the north side of the
street. Residents who bike or walk are very familiar with this and know to stay on the
north side for safety.
• Putting a sidewalk in front of Canyon View on East Palm Canyon would give unknown
walkers or bikers the message that it would be safe to enter the sidewalk on the corner
of Matthew Drive and East Palm Canyon when the sidewalk is not continuous.
• This sidewalk would end and people would then be forced to try and cross E. Palm
Canyon where there is no light or crosswalk or turn around and go back to Matthew
Drive.
• For public safety, the sidewalk should not be implemented as it is not a continuous run
and could cause vehicular injury to pedestrians.
Round-Tailed Ground Squirrel
1775 E Palm Canyon Dr #4020 Palm Springs CA 92263 www.oswitlandtrust.org 760-385-8255
Summary from:
CANYON VIEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
HABITAT MITIGATION AND MONITORING PLAN
Prepared by:
Ecological Conservation and Management, Inc.
Julie Simonsen, Principal Ecologist
January 2018
28-96
Palm Springs Round-Tailed Ground Squirrel
1775 E Palm Canyon Dr #4020 Palm Springs CA 92263 www.oswitlandtrust.org 760-385-8255
The Palm Springs round-tailed ground squirrel (Spermophilus tereticaudus chlorus) is a CA
Dept of Fish and Wildlife Species of Special Concern and was considered for candidate listing
under the CA Endangered Species Act, and is a covered species under the Coachella Valley
Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP).
Palm Springs round-tailed ground squirrel was historically found throughout the floor of the
Coachella Valley; however, the squirrel's current range is limited to small. fragmented portions
of its historical range. The species inhabits areas where hummocks of sand accumulate at the
base of large desert shrubs, which can provide adequate structure and cover for burrow sites.
The species can also occur in transition zones between dunes and creosote bush scrub,
especially in areas with mesquite (Dodero 1995). Adult ground squirrels feed on grains and
plant material, and may feed in cultivated fields and lawns when they occur in close proximity
(Williams 1986). Possible threats to the species include habitat destruction, habitat
fragmentation, groundwater depletion, off-road vehicle disturbance, and the presence of
domestic pets that may act as introduced predators. Habitat loss and fragmentation in particular
seem to have limited the ground squirrel's population growth, exposing ground squirrel
populations to increased probability of local extirpation, and reduced probability of
recolonization.
This species is endemic to Coachella Valley and not found elsewhere. Their population is in
extreme peril.
### end of document ###
.. , '·
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Recovery Outline
for
Casey's June Beetle
(Dinacoma caseyiJ
Common Name:
Scientific Name:
Listing Status:
Critical Habitat Designation:
Lead Agency/Region:
Lead Field Office:
Approved:
Casey's June beetle (Dinacoma casey1) habitat in Palm Canyon (Photo
credit: Alison Anderson, USFWS). Casey's June beetle female (small
upper photo) and male (small lower photo) (Photo credit: Felicia
Sirchia, USFWS).
Casey's June Beetle
Dinacoma caseyi
Endangered; September 22, 2011 (76 FR 58954)
September 22, 2011 (76 FR 58954)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Pacific Southwest Region
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office
6010 Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101
Carlsbad, CA 92011
760--431-9440
March 2013
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
Purpose of the Recovery Outline:
This document lays out a preliminary course of action for the survival and recovery of
Casey's June beetle (Dinacoma caseyi). It is meant to serve as interim guidance to direct
recovery efforts and inform consultation and permitting activities until a comprehensive
draft recovery plan has been completed. Recovery outlines are intended primarily for
internal use by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), and formal public
participation will be invited upon the release of the draft recovery plan. However, we
will consider any new information or comments that members of the public may wish to
offer in response to this outline during the recovery planning process. For more
information on Federal survival and recovery efforts for Casey's June beetle, or to
provide additional comments, interested parties may contact the lead field office,
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, for this species at 6010 Hidden Valley Road, Suite
101 Carlsbad, CA 92011, phone 760-431-9440.
Scope of Recovery and Available Information:
The scope of this recovery outline is a single species, Casey's June beetle; however,
many of the actions recommended in this outline that contribute to the conservation of
Casey's June beetle are ecosystem-based. This recovery outline is based on the best
available scientific information contained in the listing and critical habitat rule (USFWS
2011) and information in our files. Most of the major threats to the species are attributed
to development and associated habitat modifications. While some research has been
conducted on Casey's June beetle, little information is available beyond current status
and existing threats. Additional research is needed to fully understand what is required
for the recovery of this species, especially with regard to management actions that can be
implemented to ensure that habitat suitability is maintained and enhanced throughout the
species' range. Uncertainties associated with feasible management actions and biology
will be resolved to the extent possible through the course of the recovery process and
may result in modifications to the Service's recovery strategy over time.
2
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
I. Recovery Status Assessment
A. BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
It is our intent to discuss in this recovery outline only those topics directly relevant to
Casey's June beetle needs for persistence and recovery under the Endangered Species Act
(Act), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The genus Dinacoma and approximately 90
other genera constitute the New World members of the subfamily Melolonthinae (i.e.,
May beetles, June beetles, and chafers) of the scarab beetle family (Scarabaeidae) (Smith
and Evans 2005). Casey's June beetle (Dinacoma caseyi) and D. marginata are the only
two species currently known in the genus (Evans and Smith 2009, p. 44). For additional
information on the taxonomy, biology, and ecology of Casey's June beetle, refer to
previous documents published in the Federal Register (FR), including the 90-day
finding (71 FR 44960, August 8, 2006), 12-month finding (72 FR 36635, July 5, 2007),
proposed listing and critical habitat rule (74 FR 32857, July 9, 2009), and the final listing
and critical habitat rule (76 FR 58954, September 22, 2011). These documents are
available on the Internet at http://ecos.fws.gov/ecos/indexPublic.do.
1. Species Description and Life History
Limited information is available regarding Casey's June beetle life history. Based on
surveys conducted to assess the species' presence, both male and female Casey's June
beetles emerge from underground burrows between late March and early June, with
abundance peaks generally occurring in April and May (Duff 1990, p. 3; Barrows 1998,
p. 1 ). Male emergence holes and females have been observed in relatively disturbed,
sandy wash areas and semi-developed areas beneath nonnative vegetation (Hawks 2010,
pers. comm.; Anderson 2012, p. 1). Females are flightless (Duff 1990, p. 4; Hovore and
Associates 1995, p. 7; Hovore 2003, p. 3), emerging only briefly at dusk to mate and then
re-entering the ground, presumably to deposit eggs. Males flying in the area are attracted
to females by pheromones (Cornett 2004, p. 5), sometimes even prior to complete
emergence of the female (Duff 1990, p. 3; Anderson 2012, p. 1 ). Adults can be locally
abundant at high density sites during optimal environmental conditions, with over 100
individuals being attracted to a black light trap in a single evening (Powell 2003, p. 4;
Anderson 2012, p. 1 ), while in low density areas or under poor environmental conditions
they can be difficult to detect. The larval life-stage of Casey's June beetle has not been
well-studied. We believe that the larval cycle for the species is likely 1 year, based on
the absence of larvae (grubs) in burrows during the adult flight season (La Rue 2004, p.
1 ). We do not know what the subterranean larvae feed on; although data indicate they do
not feed on the roots of any particular species of host plant (D. Hawks 2010, Hawks
Biological Consulting, pers. comm.).
There have been no formal or published scientific studies of Casey's June beetle life
history, population size, population distribution, population dynamics, or individual
movement. It is not likely this species would display metapopulation dynamics, as the
flightless females cannot emigrate to isolated habitat areas where a new sub-population
could be established. Because they fly, it can be assumed males are primarily responsible
3
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
for genetic mixing within the one known extant population (and historically among
populations). Soils that are modified, compacted, or too isolated for females to
recolonize by crawling are not likely to support persistent occupancy. We do not know if
females disperse at all; reported observations of females are limited to presence, and
emergence to mate followed by re-entering the soil within minutes of mating (for
example, Anderson 2012, p. 1 ).
Casey's June beetle is prey for some species, especially birds. Nighthawks were
observed to be feeding in close proximity to where males were emerging en-mass from
Palm Canyon Wash (Anderson 2012, p. 2). A large flock of crows (approximately 50)
was also observed probing the sand with their beaks in the wash at dusk during mid-April
where females are common near the soil surface, (J. McBride 2012, USFWS, pers.
comm.).
2. Historical and Current Distribution and Abundance
The known historical distribution of Casey's June beetle included alluvial fan (a fan-
shaped deposit of sediment built up by stream and debris flow) and river wash areas
within Palm Springs, and similar habitats south to the City of Indian Wells (Figure 1 ).
Most locality information on Casey's June beetle specimens in collections specifies
"Palm Springs," or simply Riverside County (Duff 1990, p. 2; O'Brian 2007, p.1; Ratcliff
2007, p. 1; Wall 2007, p. l ). The majority of specimens ( 19 of 21) in the Los Angeles
County Natural History Museum (LACNHM; 1940 to 1989) were labeled as being from
Palm Springs. Other early collection records identify "Palm Desert" ("old record"; Duff
1990, p. 3), "Indian Wells" (two specimens in the LACNHM from 1953), and "Palm
Canyon" (Duff 1990, p. 3), all in the western Coachella Valley east of the San Jacinto
Mountains. Duff (1990, p. 2) described two primary areas where the beetle was extant in
Palm Springs, west of the city near Tahquitz Creek (Figure 1 ). Hovore and Associates
(1995, p. 4) described the possible extent of the species' historical range as "somewhere
around Chino Canyon floodplain ( or at most northwest to the Snow Creek drainage),
south to around Indian Wells." Within this general geographic area from north to south
of Palm Springs (Riverside County, California), the species is assumed to have occurred
on alluvial fan bases flowing from the San Jacinto Mountains, at or near the level contour
line, where finer silts and sand are deposited.
Casey's June beetle's current known range is limited to southern portions of Palm
Springs, generally associated with Palm Canyon Wash (Figure 2). Based on male
movement potential and occupied habitat distribution we have determined there is likely
only one remaining population located within Palm Springs.
4
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
D-----IIIICJ ====::::i•a.
c=] CiyBauulllly
c:::J C..-ra,t Distrbdian N
[!J Mapped Obsetwatians +
Qi] Hisbicsl Desaiplian
Figure 1. Casey's June beetle (Dinacoma caseyi) historical distribution. Historical sites included alluvial fan and river
wash areas within Palm Springs, and similar habitats south to Indian Wells.
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
U.t. Am .!. Wldl'II .!:en1oo
mB:.t'I.T8 -~---.. ,maac.t .... _ ..... _ ..... -~ ...... .a .....
---------------
1 -----=====:::JMIIS 0 115
------c::::=====:J•---0 2
N + C::J CJB Critical Habitat
CJB Clffl!l1l Ois'1buliDn
Ci] CJB MappedObsenatian 1995-2011
Figure 2. Casey's June beetle (Dinacoma caseyi) current distribution and critical habitat.
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
3. Habitat Description
Our knowledge of Casey's June beetle habitat characteristics is primarily based on
correlation of known, mapped environmental features with species occupancy.
Therefore, described habitat characteristics include soils type, slope aspect, elevation,
vegetation type, and hydrologic information. Historically, Casey's June beetle was
associated with native Sonoran (Coloradan) desert vegetation located on desert alluvial
fans and bajadas (compound alluvial fans) at the base of the San Jacinto Mountains.
These areas include sandy dry washes with ephemeral flow, and dry upland areas
associated with soil deposition from extreme flood events.
Casey's June beetle is most commonly associated with Carsitas series soil (CdC),
described by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (USDA on-line GIS database,
2000) as gravelly sand on O to 9 percent slopes. This soil series is associated with
alluvial fans, rather than areas of aeolian or windblown sand deposits. Hovore (2003, p.
2) described soils where Casey's June beetle occurs or occurred historically as, " ... almost
entirely Carsitas series, of a CdC type, typically gravelly sand, single grain, slightly
effervescent, moderately alkaline (pH 8.4), loose, non-sticky, non-plastic, deposited on 0
to 9 percent slopes. On alluvial terraces and where they occur within washes, these soils
show light braiding and some organic deposition, but [ most years] do not receive
scouring surface flows." Casey's June beetle has primarily been found on CdC and
Riverwash (RA) soils, and also some Carsitas cobbly sand (ChC) soils (Anderson and
Love 2007, p. 1 ). Its burrowing habit would suggest the Casey's June beetle needs soils
that are not too rocky or compacted and difficult to burrow in. Occupied habitats such as
unprotected vacant lots and wash areas are often characterized by an intermediate level of
disturbance, and may include a relatively high cover of nonnative plant species (Hawks
2011, pers. comm.).
Hovore (2003, p.11) and Cornett (2004, p. 14) hypothesized that upland habitats provide
core refugia from which the species recolonizes wash habitat after intense flood scouring
events (approximately every 10 years), and are required for long-term survival of the
species. The wash habitat east of State Route 111 that is isolated from upland refugia,
and isolated habitat patches, such as the Mathews Place location (Figure 2), are important
for recovery because they support a relatively large proportion of the remaining
population, and would be an important source population for future reintroduction and
augmentation activities.
Smoke Tree Ranch (Figure 2), a gated residential community adjacent to Palm Canyon
Wash, supports a large proportion of the known extant population. With respect to the
occupancy and current habitat conditions at Smoke Tree Ranch, Cornett (2004, p. 14)
hypothesized that Casey's June beetle had "survived primarily because of the unique
qualities of the ranch environment with its large open spaces and relatively undisturbed
vegetation ... The most viable habitat for the beetle is Smoke Tree Ranch where
environmental perturbations are minimal." We believe it is possible that irrigation at
Smoke Tree Ranch also mimics soil moisture levels found in the wash itself, and may
7
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
even enhance habitat conditions. Considering the potential effects of irrigation at Smoke
Tree Ranch, and the potential for high species density observed in Palm Canyon Wash,
we believe that irrigation may be used as a tool in the remaining habitat with appropriate
soil types (CdC or RA) in southern Palm Springs for conservation of the species. If
supported by future research, this could hold the key to effective management for Casey's
June beetle in remaining upland habitats where the species has been extirpated.
All known occupied habitats are within the jurisdiction of Palm Springs and the Agua
Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. Land ownership is primarily private and tribal,
although most wash areas are owned by the Riverside Flood Control and Water
Conservation District. The only protected occupied area for the species is an
approximately 126.8 acres (ac) (51.3 (ha) hectares) section of Smoke Tree Ranch where
there is a conservation easement and ongoing compliance monitoring.
4. Summary Biological Assessment
Casey's June beetle has a very limited distribution, an extremely limited ability to
disperse, and a limited number of unoccupied habitats suitable for reintroduction and
management. Expanding, and perhaps even maintaining, the current species' range will
require moving females into unoccupied habitat or augmenting declining areas. The
primary challenge for recovery of this species will be protection and management of
occupied and formerly occupied habitats that are not currently conserved. More
information regarding the biology of immature stages will also greatly assist management
of habitats for recovery.
B. THREATS ASSESSMENT
1. Listing Factors/Primary Threats to the Species
As identified in the final rule (76 FR 58954, September 22, 2011), the primary threats to
Casey's June beetle are: destruction, modification, and fragmentation of habitat;
increased intensity and frequency of catastrophic flood events; environmental effects
resulting from changing climatic patterns; loss of individuals due to soil disturbing
activities; and loss of individuals due to attraction to light sources. A summary of these
threats is presented below (please see the final rule for a complete threats analysis (76 FR
58954, September 22, 2011)); each is classified according to the five factors identified in
section 4 of the Act (16 USC 1531 et seq.).
a. The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment
of its habitat or range (Factor A)
Commercial and residential development are the greatest threats to habitat in the
upland CdC soils that are believed to support Casey's June beetle. LaRue (2006,
University of California at Riverside, pers. comm.) emphasized the magnitude of
development threats to Dinacoma spp. population survival: "Most Dinacoma
[ spp.] have experienced range reduction because of unprecedented habitat
destruction and modification for recreational, residential, and urban development
8
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
resulting in serious distributional fragmentation throughout [their] former already
naturally limited ranges. Consequently, several populations [of the genus
Dinacoma] have been extirpated; especially those that once existed in Los
Angeles County (for example, Glendale, Eaton Canyon)."
General location descriptions from early collection records were used to
determine the historical range of Casey's June beetle (see discussion in the 90-
day finding (71 FR 44962; August 8, 2006)). Soils data from this analysis were
used to estimate that 97 percent of the historical range of Casey's June beetle has
been converted to residential and commercial development. Although habitat
fragmentation and loss due to development has slowed since 2005 (likely due to
the economic downturn), the wash and associated occupied habitat areas are
subject to flood control activities such as sand removal and levy and detention
basin construction. Therefore, we anticipate additional upland habitat for the
beetle may be impacted or lost in the near future due to requirements for flood
control operations to maintain health and safety. These activities may impact
conservation of Casey's June beetle into the future.
b. Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D)
The listing rule stated that, absent listing under the Act, existing regulatory
protection was inadequate. Existing regulatory mechanisms that could provide
some protection for Casey's June beetle include: (1) Federal laws and regulations;
(2) State laws and regulations; and (3) local land use processes and ordinances
(for example, tribal environmental policies). However, these regulatory
mechanisms were not preventing continued habitat modification and
fragmentation prior to listing. There are no regulatory mechanisms that address
the management or conservation of habitat for Casey's June beetle. Occupied
areas are better protected under section 9 of the Act now that the species has been
listed, and areas designated as critical habitat (Figure 2) are better protected from
impacts due to actions authorized, funded, or carried out by Federal agencies.
However, other habitats important to recovery are still vulnerable to development
and habitat modification. As discussed above in the Summary Biological
Assessment section, the primary challenge for recovery of this species will be
protection and management of occupied and formerly occupied habitats that are
not currently conserved.
c. Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence
(Factor E)
Casey's June beetle continues to be impacted by threats to the individual
including increased intensity and frequency of catastrophic flood events;
environmental effects resulting from changing climatic patterns; loss of
individuals due to foot, vehicle, and horse traffic and other soil disturbing
activities; and loss of individuals due to attraction to pools and light sources.
Lights attract male beetles away from habitat and females resulting in wasted
energy, and they are frequently trapped and die in lights that have broken covers
(K. Osborne 2012, pers. comm.). Any additional development within or adjacent
9
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
to Casey's June beetle habitat will likely increase traffic into occupied areas and
include external lighting and swimming pools. Impacts from these threats may
result in additional losses and will continue to adversely affect the existing
population.
In addition to a restricted range and small population size, Casey's June beetle has
limited dispersal capabilities (Hovore 2003, p. 3). These conditions likely
increase the degree of threat due to chance events, such as extreme floods or
drought (Lande et al. 2003, pp. 34 and 35).
We concluded in the listing rule from available information that climate change is
likely to reduce Casey's June beetle population densities by increasing severe
scouring flood events and decreasing soil moisture levels. Increased winter runoff
and severe scouring flood events in Palm Canyon Wash are anticipated because
the increasing frequency and severity of extreme storm events (Cayan et al. 2005,
pp. 7-8; IPCC 2007, pp. 8-9; Dettinger 2009, pp. 514 and 518) causes more
concentrated rainfall (and consequently less moisture absorption by the soil).
Decreased total rainfall, increased evapotranspiration due to increased
temperatures (The Nature Conservancy, Climate Wizard:
www .climatewizard.org), and increased winter runoff ( discussed above) may all
decrease soil moisture levels.
2. Summary Threats Assessment
The threats posed by habitat loss and modification are the greatest impediments to
recovery. Development of formerly occupied habitats, impacts to occupied habitat from
adjacent developed areas, human activities and natural events (such as flood or drought)
with potential to cause adult mortality are threats of moderate magnitude but imminent
throughout the majority of the species' limited range. Smoke Tree Ranch affords
protection from existing threats to approximately 126.8 acres (ac) (51.3 (ha) hectares)
where there is a conservation easement and ongoing compliance monitoring. Additional
protection of occupied and undeveloped formerly occupied habitats is necessary for
recovery.
C. CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT
1. Conservation Efforts
Service-permitted research activities
Since listing, six individuals have been issued 1 0(a) 1 (A) recovery permits for presence-
absence surveys. Three permittees undertook surveys in 2012; Jim Cornett did
exploratory surveys outside the known range (see description below under Agua Caliente
Band of Cahuilla Indians), Michael Wilcox conducted a project-based survey, and
Ken Osborne demonstrated to Service staff the efficacy of different light trapping
techniques and documented natural history information (Anderson 2012, p 1 ).
10
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
Smoke Tree Ranch, Inc.
Prior to listing, the only protection afforded Casey's June beetle was an established
conservation easement and monitoring program at Smoke Tree Ranch. This conservation
easement with compliance monitoring will remain in place and continue to protect this
occupied habitat area in the future. The Palm Springs Fish and Wildlife Office approved
the Ranch's Habitat Conservation Plan and issued an incidental take permit to Smoke
Tree Ranch, Inc., on August 23, 2012, which further strengthens protection of the species
at this location by protecting in perpetuity an additional 13.26 ac (5.37 ha) of occupied,
suitable habitat for Casey's June beetle.
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
In 2012 the Service provided funding to the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians to
fund exploratory surveys outside of the recommended survey area map for IO(a)l(A)
permittees. The purpose of these surveys was to expand surveys beyond the current
known species range, to determine if any relict populations persist within the historical
range (south to Palm Desert) or even farther south. Results from this effort are not yet
available.
2. Summary Conservation Assessment
Casey's June beetle is dependent on habitat that has been, and continues to be, under
development pressures. Its habitat requires protection and active management to improve
and restore suitable habitat in order to prevent further decline and to enable recovery of
the species. The only occupied habitat area that is afforded permanent protection from
existing threats is within Smoke Tree Ranch (approximately 126.8 ac (51.3 ha)) where
there is a conservation easement and ongoing compliance monitoring. The Smoke Tree
Ranch Habitat Conservation Plan comprises approximately 22 percent of designated
critical habitat. Additionally, research, monitoring, and habitat restoration should be
initiated in patches of remaining habitat throughout the species' historical range. Key
challenges will be to develop a recovery strategy that can be implemented in a system
where there is continuing development pressure and requirements for flood control
operations to maintain human health and safety.
D. SUMMARY OF RECOVERY STATUS AND NEEDS
Historical Casey's June beetle habitat has been drastically degraded and fragmented,
resulting in the species' reduced geographic range and vulnerability to stochastic events.
Known life history traits and habitat requirements of the species are conducive to re-
colonization, but assisted movement of flightless females and continued management is
necessary for recovery of the species. Casey's June beetle is dependent on habitat that
has been, and continues to be, under developmental pressures. Its habitat requires active
management to improve and restore suitable habitat in order to prevent further decline of
the species. Additionally, research and monitoring should be initiated throughout the
11
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
species' range. Some of the information that is needed to better plan for recovery needs
includes better understanding of female and male movement potential, larval diet,
impacts of disturbance to sub-surface individuals, and viable population size. Key
challenges will be developing a recovery strategy that can be implemented in a system
where there is limited available habitat, continuing development pressure, and
requirements for flood control operation to maintain human health and safety.
12
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
II. Preliminary Recovery Strategy
A. RECOVERY PRIORITY NUMBER
Casey's June beetle is assigned a recovery priority number of 11 C on a scale of 1 C
(highest) to 18 (lowest), based on the moderate degree of threat, a low potential for
recovery as stated above, its status as a full species, and conflict with development
pressures (USFWS 1983a, b ).
Much of Casey's June beetle habitat has been lost and there is currently only one extant
population remaining. However, the degree of threat is considered moderate because the
species would not face immediate extinction if recovery was temporarily held off.
Habitat loss, fragmentation, and modification are considered manageable threats, but
difficult to alleviate at this time because of existing development and development
pressure. Continued management is needed to maintain currently occupied habitat.
Recovery potential is considered low because the biological and ecological limiting
factors are not well understood. Restoration of formerly occupied habitat patches and
reintroduction of beetles may also be labor-intensive. The "C" indicates conflict with
construction or other development projects that impacts habitat where Casey's June
beetle occurs.
B. RECOVERYVISON STATEMENT
We envision recovery for Casey's June beetle as stable populations, maintained within
managed and conserved suitable habitat, with few barriers to dispersal to ensure gene
flow and maximum dispersal of individuals. Where habitat connectivity is not possible,
management will include movement of females to recolonize any habitat patches where
the species is extirpated or to areas where they may become extirpated. Additional
populations ( discovered or reintroduced) within the species' historical range will be
monitored and maintained to provide sufficient representation, resiliency, and
redundancy across the species' range so that Casey's June beetle no longer requires the
protections of the Act. Threats impacting the species will be sufficiently understood and
abated to ensure long-term conservation of Casey's June beetle. A rangewide monitoring
and adaptive management approach will be in place to address unforeseen events and
threats.
C. INITIAL ACTION PLAN
We recognize that the conservation of Casey's June beetle will not be achieved without
extensive cooperation and coordination among many entities (primarily Smoke Tree
Ranch, Inc., Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Agua
Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, City of Palm Springs, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
and the Service). This action plan does not assign responsibility of any partner to
undertake the recommended actions. However, we believe that working with Federal and
local agencies and our other partners, while coordinating across the Service is essential to
effectively conserve Casey's June beetle.
13
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
Below, we outline the overall primary objectives of the recovery effort for Casey's June
beetle and include both immediate and longer-term actions. These actions may be used
to guide recovery planning, prioritize actions, minimize impacts from projects that may
affect the species or its critical habitat, and plan for future recovery actions.
1. Primary Objectives
The recovery effort should build upon conservation and monitoring efforts indicated in
detail above, and continue to build strong relationships with partners. The primary
objectives for recovery will be to:
a. Survey and monitor rangewide to accurately document the population
distribution, occupied habitat, and local threats;
b. Protect the existing population in Palm Springs through acquisition and protection
of existing occupied habitat;
c. Implement projects specifically designed to ameliorate threats and inform
management actions for recovery of Casey's June beetle;
d. Expand the current distribution through habitat restoration and species
reintroduction.
2. Immediate Actions
The goal of the initial phase of recovery is to arrest and reverse the general population
decline and protect the available suitable habitat and range occupied by Casey's June
beetle. These are recommended actions to occur in the interim between completion of
the recovery outline and the recovery plan. These immediate actions will inform future
research, restoration, threats abatement, and other conservation actions:
• Continue to coordinate with local partners and stakeholders to: (1) gather existing
historical hydro logic data (frequency and severity of flash floods); (2) identify
existing areas with suitable habitat for Casey's June beetle; and (3) identify future
information needs related to Casey's June beetle biology.
• Ensure persistence of individuals in occupied upland habitat designated as critical
habitat within 0.25 mile (0.4 kilometer) of and contiguous with Palm Canyon
Wash, and the designated critical habitat area ("Matthew Place") adjacent to State
Route 111 through conservation easements, management, and cooperative
planning with landowners, partners, and stakeholders.
• Design a rangewide monitoring scheme and begin its implementation throughout
the current population distribution.
• Coordinate with local partners and land managers to educate the public on the
impacts of recreational activities to active adult beetles during the mating season.
• Initiate activities to abate threats related to unauthorized off-highway vehicle use
in Palm Canyon Wash.
14
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
3. Long-term Comprehensive Actions
Although this list of actions will likely change during the recovery planning process as
we learn more about the species, we recommend the following actions as a more
comprehensive list using all available methods to lead to the conservation of Casey's
June beetle. Specific actions that should be undertaken to meet the primary objectives
are outlined below.
a. Survey and monitor rangewide to accurately document populations, occupied
habitat, and local threats
•
•
•
•
Develop a rangewide population monitoring or survey protocol that will lead
to a better understanding of life history strategies such as patterns of dispersal,
growth, reproduction, and recruitment.
Conduct rangewide population monitoring of currently occupied watersheds .
Conduct rangewide monitoring and assessment of potentially occupied habitat
within the historical range.
Monitor habitat to identify locations within or adjacent to currently occupied
areas where habitat suitability can be improved (for example, by decreasing
soil compaction and increasing summer soil moisture levels).
b. Protect all suitable habitats in Palm Springs within the current estimated
population distribution. Ensure persistence of existing population through
conservation easements, management in perpetuity, and cooperative planning
with landowners, partners, and stakeholders.
c. Conduct research designed to inform management actions that would ameliorate
or reduce current threats.
•
•
•
•
•
Develop a better understanding of the species' habitat requirements and
environmental tolerances by documenting habitat conditions in currently
occupied habitat, such as soil moisture, soil texture/compaction, water table
depth, ground cover types, percent root volume per unit volume of soil, spring
wind velocities correlated with adult mating activity, and the geographic
distribution and frequency of such winds during the beetle's flight season.
Monitor the amount and velocity (intensity) of water flow during peak flood
events, and the frequency of these events to determine if flood events result in
mortality of subterranean Casey's June beetles in Palm Canyon Wash.
Characterize habitat conditions that may provide suitable food resources (i.e .
investigating diet through examination of larval gut contents).
Investigate the impacts of suburban development on Casey's June beetle
occupancy and persistence at Smoke Tree Ranch. Investigative approaches
include determination of on-site environmental correlates, follow-up
experimentation, and comparison with other occupied sites.
Determine if predation by ravens or crows is a threat to Casey's June beetle .
Investigate whether Casey's June beetles are being consumed and if so,
quantify the number of individuals consumed through documentation of
15
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
foraging by flocks in occupied habitat during the flight season, and
examination of bird gut contents.
d. Expand the current distribution by restoring and maintaining historically occupied
habitat patches in Palm Springs (for example, restore former habitat in the
Tahquitz creek area).
• Determine if reintroduction and population augmentation are necessary and if
so, develop a comprehensive plan to facilitate this process.
• Develop a comprehensive plan for acquiring suitable sites and establishing
additional populations.
• Assess and prioritize areas that can be restored and made suitable for
reintroduction of Casey's June beetle.
• Develop habitat restoration and creation techniques.
• Investigate techniques to translocate Casey's June beetles.
16
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
Ill. Preplanning Decisions
A. RECOVERY PLAN DEVELOPMENT
The Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office will take the lead in the preparation of the draft
recovery plan for Casey's June beetle pursuant to section 4(t) of the Act anticipated to
begin in fiscal year 2014. It is not anticipated that a recovery team will be convened.
However, we will seek input from all persons interested, or potentially affected by,
recovery efforts for Casey's June beetle. Public comments received on this recovery
outline will be taken into consideration during the preparation of the draft recovery plan.
Public comment will be solicited on the draft recovery plan. The recovery plan will
include objective, measurable criteria which, when met, would result in a determination
that the species be removed from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened
Animals. Recovery criteria should address the five listing factors, including elimination
or management of threats. Preparation of the recovery plan will be under the leadership
of the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office.
B. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
All information relevant to recovery of Casey's June beetle will be housed in
administrative files found at the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office in Carlsbad,
California. The lead Fish and Wildlife Biologist will be responsible for maintaining the
official record for the recovery planning and implementation process. Copies of new
study findings, survey results, records of meetings, comments received, and other
relevant information should be forwarded to this office (see Lead Field Office contact
Information above).
Information needed for annual accomplishment reports, the Recovery Report to
Congress, expenditure reports, and implementation tracking should be forwarded to the
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see Lead Field Office contact information). Copies of
the completed reports can then be disseminated to all contributors upon request.
C. PROPOSED RECOVERY PLAN SCHEDULE
Regional Office Review Draft
Public Review Draft
Public Comment Period
Final Recovery Plan
D. STAKEHOLDERINVOLVEMENT
Anticipated Fiscal Year 2015
Anticipated Fiscal Year 2015
60 Days
Anticipated Fiscal Year 2016
We maintain active communications and coordination with all stakeholders and partners,
especially with regard to research, land access, and project development.
17
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
Key stakeholders and partners:
• Smoke Tree Ranch, Inc.
• Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
• Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
• University of California, Riverside
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
• Bureau of Land Management
• City of Palm Springs
• Coachella Valley Association of Governments
• Coachella Valley Conservation Commission
Landowners and land or resource managers who may contribute to or be affected by the
listing and recovery of Casey's June beetle will be invited to participate in the recovery
planning process. A mailing list will be maintained and the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife
Office, with the assistance of the Palm Springs Fish and Wildlife Office and will attempt
to foster open and ongoing communications with all interested parties. Early in the
recovery planning process, we will hold a meeting with interested stakeholders to
exchange status information, allow stakeholders to both identify possible recovery issues
and possible additional cooperators that could facilitate recovery efforts for this species.
The information gathered from this discussion will be used by the Service to provide the
initial platform to proceed with recovery planning. It will help identify private
landowners who could participate in recovery efforts, and interested stakeholders will be
asked to participate on an ongoing basis in the recovery planning and implementation
effort. We will take advantage of all opportunities to interact with stakeholders in a
productive and meaningful way.
Stakeholders will be afforded an opportunity to review and comment on a draft of the
recovery plan in conformance with the Act. Stakeholders may also be asked to contribute
directly by suggesting to the Service potential recovery implementation strategies for
planned actions. Strong working relationships with experts and stakeholders will be
maintained and developed over time with new stakeholders.
yY\CV\.~ 1 j 'L_O \ '3
Date I
Citation
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Recovery Outline for Casey's June beetle
(Dinacoma caseyi). Sacramento, California. 21 pp.
18
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
References
Anderson, A. 2012. Casey's June beetle trapping notes, April 24, 2012. Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office.
Anderson, A. and S. Love. 2007. Casey's June Beetle Habitat Loss Since 1991.
Barrows, C. 1998. Results of Searches for Casey's June Beetle, Spring 1998.
Unspecified submission recipient.
Cayan, D., M. Dettinger, I. Stewart, and N. Knowles. 2005. Recent changes towards
earlier springs: early signs of climate warming in western North America? U.S.
Geological Survey, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California.
Cornett, J.W. 2004. Analysis of the Distribution and Abundance of the Casey's June
Beetle (Dinacoma caseyi) in Palm Springs, California, prepared for Smoke Tree
Ranch, Inc., Palm Springs, California.
Dettinger. 2009. Cimate change, atmospheric rivers, and flood in california-a
multimodel analysis of storm frequency and magnitude changes. Journal of the
American Water Resources Association, 47:514-523.
Duff, R. 1990. Dinacoma caseyi: Current Status of Endangered Species. Unspecified
submission recipient.
Evans, A. V. and A. B. T. Smith. 2009. An Electronic Checklist of the New World
Chafers (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). Version 3. Electronically
published, Ottawa, Canada. 353 pp.
http://www.museum.unl.edu/research/entomology/SSSA/nwmelos.htm.
Glick P., B.A. Stein, and N.A. Edelson, editors. 2011. Scanning the Conservation
Horizon: A Guide to Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment. National
Wildlife Federation, Washington, D.C.
Hovore, F. 1995. Report of field surveys: Coachella Valley Multi-species HCP,
Invertebrates -Palm Springs June beetle (Dinacoma caseyi). Unspecified
submission recipient.
Hovore, F. 2003. Report of focused surveys for Casey's June beetle: Smoketree Ranch
and vicinity, prepared for Krieger & Stewart, Inc., Riverside, California.
[IPCC] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Working Group I. 2007. Climate
Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis: Summary for Policymakers. IPCC
Secretariat, Geneva, Switzerland.
19
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
Lande, R., S. Engen, and B. Sther. 2003. Stochastic Population Dynamics in Ecology
and Conservation. Oxford Univerity press, Oxford, New York.
Powell, D. 2003. Report of information about Casey's June beetle surveys, submitted to
Joan Taylor.
Smith, A.T.B and A.V. Evans. 2005. A supplement to the checklist ofNew World
chafers (Coleoptera: Scarabaiedae: Melolonthinae) with notes on their tribal
classification. Zootaxa 1032: 29-60.
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2000. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database for Riverside County,
California, Coachella Valley Area. http://www.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/ssur_data.html
[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983a. Endangered and threatened species
listing and recovery priority guidance. Federal Register 48:43098-43105.
[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983b. Endangered and threatened species
listing and recovery priority guidelines correction. Federal Register 48:51985.
[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Determination of Endangered Status
for Casey's June Beetle and Designation of Critical Habitat. Federal Register
76:58954-58998.
20
Recovery Outline for Casey's June Beetle-March 2013
Communications
Hawks, D. 2010. Email from David Hawks, University of California Riverside.
Electronic mail communication to Alison Anderson, Entomologist, Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, CA (June 15, 2010).
Hawks, D. 2011. Conversation with David Hawks, University of California, Riverside
(retired). Meeting notes taken by Alison Anderson, Entomologist, Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, CA (April 21,2011).
LaRue, D. 2004. Email from Delbert LaRue, University of California, Riverside
(retired). Electronic mail communication to David Wright, PhD, Sacramento,
CA. (January 18, 2004).
LaRue, D. 2006. Email from Delbert LaRue, University of California, Riverside
(retired). Electronic mail communication to Alison Anderson, Entomologist,
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, CA (June 13, 2006).
McBride, J. 2012. Email from Jenness McBride, Palm Springs Fish and Wildlife
Office, Palm Springs, CA. Electronic mail communication to Alison Anderson,
Entomologist, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, CA (October 4,
2012).
O'Brian, M. 2007. Email from Mark O'Brian, Collection Manager, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Ml. Electronic mail communication to Alison Anderson,
Entomologist, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, CA (January 8, 2007).
Osborne, K. 2012. Conversation with Alison Anderson, Entomologist, Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, CA (April 24, 2012).
Ratcliff, B. 2007. Email from Brett Ratcliff, Curator & Professor, University of
Nebraska, Lincoln, NE. Electronic mail communication to Alison Anderson,
Entomologist, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, CA (February 20,
2007).
Wall, M. 2007. Email from Mike Wall, Curator of Entomology, San Diego Natural
History Museum, San Diego, CA. Electronic mail communication to Alison
Anderson, Entomologist, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, CA
(January 10, 2007).
21
usbJra, inc.
July 20, 2021
Bettina Rosmarino
Jane Garrison
Oswit Land Trust
1610 Dunham Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92264-9629
RE: Sustura, inc. DRAFT Findings Canyon View Development, Matthew Drive.
Via: email
Dear Mss. Rosmarino & Garrison,
Sustura, inc. reviewed documents provided by the Oswit Land Trust (OLT) regarding hydrology studies,
environmental impacts, and proposed development designs for the Canyon View Development Vesting Tentative
Tract Number 36969 Matthew Drive and South Linden Way, and East Palm Canyon Drive in Palm Springs, CA.
Attached are written comments that I can read into the record at the City Council hearing scheduled for July 22.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Haimann at (714) 465-3157 or
richard@haimann.com .
Warmest regards,
Sustura, inc.
Richard A. Haimann, P.E.
CEO
Sustura, Inc.
16741 Westfield Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
0 +1 (714)465-3157
M +1 (562)217-2022
Oswit Land Trust 7/20/2021
Page Intentionally Blank
Oswit Land Trust 7/20/2021
Hello. My name is Richard Haimann. I have been practicing civil/environmental and water resources engineering
for over 30 years, the past 20 of which have been focused on stormwater management. I am a registered civil
engineer in California, Washington, and Texas. I have a B.S. in Civil Engineering and an M.S. in Civil/Environmental
Engineering.
I have been able to review the CanyonView development 2016 drainage study and 2019 drainage study. I have
seen some of the plans for the CanyonView development. I read the staff report prepared for this hearing on the
matter.
My client, the Oswit Land Trust, has requested that I evaluate if there are alternatives to the proposed plan to
construct a drainage channels along the sides of the property. They have noted that the Federally Protected
(Endangered) Species, the Casey's June Beetle, was documented to be onsite during surveys conducted in 2014
and 2015 with approximately 1.8 acres of habitat mapped. The site contains features identified as waters of the
U.S. and waters of the State. While mitigation of Casey's June Beetle habitat is proposed at a location north of the
site, my client would like to see the project move forward in a manner that preserves the existing Casey's June
Beetle habitat to the extent possible. Disruption of the soils in which the Beetle resides can result in a taking of
their larvae, which live beneath the soil until they reach maturity, estimated to be up to a year. The available
biological data for the June Beetle does not have studies of its full life cycle, so it is not known if adults mate and
lay eggs more than once in their lifetimes. Females do not fly, so disruption of the soils is also likely to eliminate
the females from the population at this location, thus eliminating the June Beetle from this location in its entirety
with little likelihood that larvae or females would be able to migrate to a new location with suitable habitat. At
least one generation of June Beetle will be destroyed and possibly all future generations resident at this location,
should the males not live past one mating cycle or be unable to migrate to another population and mate there.
So, to reduce the taking of Casey's June Beetle, modifying the development drainage plan to preserve the existing
habitat would be preferred, if it can be engineered as such.
It has been noted in the staff report that the Riverside County Line 41 project will remove the offsite water that
the drainage channels were originally designed to accommodate.
Upon reviewing the staff report, observing a screenshot of a slide presented at a June 9, 2021 Planning
Commission Meeting on the matter, which showed cross-sections of one of the channels -original project and
current project, and reviewing the 2016 and 2019 drainage studies, I have noted that the size of the channel in the
current project was originally designed to accommodate both offsite and onsite flows. A rough analysis suggests
that offsite flows represent approximately 97% of combined offsite and onsite flows.
In the slide presented at the prior presentation showing the cross sections of one of the channels, the size has not
changed. The lining has changed from concrete to earthen. Construction of the revised channel will still require
roughly the same amount of excavation as the concrete lined channel and, therefore, will disrupt the same amount
of habitat.
I was not able to review a drainage study that did not include the offsite flows that will soon be captured by the
Line 41 project. Both the 2016 and 2019 studies present onsite and offsite flows in the analysis. Therefore, I am
unable to determine why the channel sizes have not been reduced.
Given that 97% of the flows originally planned to be drained will no longer require drainage infrastructure, there
are a number of drainage alternatives that can be considered that can be constructed in a manner that could
1/2
Oswit Land Trust 7/20/2021
potentially protect the existing wash areas and June Beetle habitat. I have not seen any studies in which such
alternatives have been evaluated for their feasibility in the project. These can include:
• Preserving some of the wash areas. Connecting them to the outlet at the intersection of Matthew Drive
and E Palm Canyon Drive . Draining onsite water through a curb gutter, swale, and storm drain network to
the north and east, which follows the natural contours of the region, to the outlet. Install an offline
retention BMP to route the 85th percentile storm to the preserved wash areas. Install outlet erosion
control only where water enters the washes.
• Preserving some of the wash areas. Connecting them to the outlet at the intersection of Matthew Drive
and E Palm Canyon Drive. Constructing a series of small scale local subsurface collection and retention
systems that fit within the street-scape and route overflows through a curb gutter, swale, and storm drain
network to the northeast outlet. Route a portion of flows to the washes. Size the combination of small
subsurface retention systems and routing of water to the washes for the 85th percentile storm . Confine
erosion control to the outlets entering the washes.
• Preserving some of the wash areas. Connecting them to the outlet at the intersection of Matthew Drive
and E Palm Canyon Drive. Install a series of subsurface vertical tanks, such as "Water Silos"
(https://www.watersilo.us/l to collect onsite water. Route overflows north and east through a curb and
gutter, swale, and storm drain network to the outlet. Use the water collected in the subsurface vertical
tanks for irrigation of landscaped areas. When volume capacity is needed in the vertical subsurface
vertical tanks, pump the water to the washes. This can be part of the HOA maintenance plan. As an option,
homeowner landscape irrigation can be connected to the public irrigation system and managed by the
HOA.
• Preserving some of the wash areas. Connecting them to the outlet at the intersection of Matthew Drive
and E Palm Canyon Drive. Install a series of dry wells that collect surface drainage and infiltrate it to the
subsurface. Route overflows north and east through a curb and gutter, swale, and storm drain network to
the northeast outlet. Route a portion of flows to the washes. Confine erosion control to the outlets
entering the washes.
The systems described above can all be accommodated with less mass grading and allow preservation much of the
existing washes and June Beetle habitat, and not result in taking as many June Beetle larvae and females. I have
not seen any documents where these or similar alternatives were evaluated or studied as drainage alternatives
that could be more effective mitigation than purchasing and preserving habitat elsewhere. The subsurface vertical
tanks and dry wells can be installed with drilling technology. The local retention systems can be designed as
bottomless vertical tanks and also installed with drilling technology.
Note that this is not a full "back to the drawing board" list of drainage options. Considering these alternatives
should not require a new environmental review, other than the reviews required by City ordinances. These options
are expected to result in lower environmental impacts -both temporary and permanent.
Thank you for your time. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
2/2
STRUMW ASSER & WOOCHER LLP
MICHAEL J . STRUMWASSER
BRYCE A .GEE
BEVERLY GROSSMAN PALMER
DALE K. LARSON
CAROLINE C . CHIAPPETTI
JULIA G . MICHEL t
SALVADORE . PEREZ
t Also admitted to practice in Washington
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
I 0940 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 2000
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024
June 28, 2021
Jeffrey Ballinger
City Attorney
City of Palm Springs
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Via email to Jeff ballinger@bbklaw.com
Re: Council-initiated Appeal of Planning Commission Decision of June 9, 2021
EHOF Canyon View, LLC, Approval of Final Development Plan for Planned
Development District 381 (Case 5.1384-PD 381/3.3902 MAJ/VTTM 36969)
Dear Mr. Ballinger:
TELEPHONE: (3)0)576-1233
FACSIMILE: (310)319-0156
WWW.STRUMWOOCH.COM
FREDRIC D. WOOCHER
ANDREA SHERIDAN ORDIN
SENIOR COUNSEL
We write on behalf of Oswit Land Trust regarding the Council-initiated appeal of the
June 9, 2021 decision of the Planning Commission to approve Final Development Plans for
Planned Development District 381. The purpose of this letter is to provide additional
information and analysis regarding the application of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) to the decision to approve the Final Development Plans.
Oswit Land Trust (OL T) has a strong interest in resolving the concerns presented by the
June 9, 2021 decision to approve the Final Development Plans because these plans implicate
habitat corridors and designated critical habitat of the federally endangered Casey's June beetle.
Oswit Land Trust saves and preserves land, wildlife habitat and ecosystems located in Southern
California from impending destruction. The affected portions of the property serve as part of the
very limited existing habitat for the Casey's June beetle and also provide habitat for other
wildlife and native vegetation.
OL T does not object to the construction of the 80 single family homes that are part of this
project. OL T's concerns with this project are limited to the corridors along Matthew Drive and
East Palm Canyon Drive that presently contain habitat and native vegetation for a variety of
species, including the endangered Casey's June beetle.
Specifically, the Planning Commission's continued reliance on the 2017 Mitigated
Negative Declaration originally approved for this project is improper and inconsistent with the
Jeffrey Ballinger
June 28, 2021
Page 2
requirements of CEQA. Changed conditions subsequent to the original approval have affected
the ability to keep these native habitat corridors intact. Under the requirements of Public
Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines section 15162, additional environmental
review is required prior to the issuance of this discretionary approval.
Public Resources Code section 21166 explains that additional environmental review may
be required for a subsequent discretionary approval if substantial changes are proposed in the
project which will require major revisions of the environmental impact report, substantial
changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken
which will require major revisions in the environmental impact report, or new information not
known at the time of approval becomes available.
CEQA Guidelines section 15162 elaborates on the requirements of Public Resources
Code section 21166, clarifying that the same requirements apply to projects approved (like this
project) by negative declaration. The Guideline section also provides context as to what kind of
"new information" triggers the need for additional environmental review. Additional review is
required if "new information of substantial importance" shows either that mitigation measures
previously found to be infeasible would, in fact, be feasible and would substantially reduce one
or more significant effects of the project, or if mitigation measures that are considerably different
from those previously analyzed would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the
environment.
New information and new circumstances underlie the approval of the Final Development
Plan for this Planned Development District. Notably, as made clear in the June 9 presentation to
the Planning Commission, the imminent construction of the Line 41 drainage project by the
Riverside County Flood Control District has worked a significant change regarding the on-site
drainage needs of this project. At the time the project was initially approved in 2017, a concrete
drainage structure was required along the frontage on Matthew Drive, and a significant retention
basin was required along the East Palm Canyon Drive frontage. As both staff and the applicant
repeatedly acknowledged on June 9, now that Line 41 is fully funded and out to bid for
construction, those features are no longer required to address site drainage. Line 41 will divert
the existing drainage channels on the property by pulling water away from those courses into an
underground drainage system constructed at public expense. According to the applicant's
representative at the June 9 Planning Commission hearing, in 2019 the City specifically
instructed the applicant to stop work on Final Development Plans so that the project could
proceed without all of the drainage infrastructure, thanks to the construction of Line 41. It is
clear that the project's plans have been modified thanks to these changed circumstances. The
developer now proposes to grade and landscape these areas rather than construct the drainage
infrastructure that is no longer needed.
There is also no dispute that these portions of the property contain native vegetation that
has been designated by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as critical habitat
, , l
Jeffrey Ballinger
June 28, 2021
Page 3
for the Casey's June beetle. In 2017, the USFWS issued a biological opinion that concluded that
the project "will result in direct permanent impacts to approximately 5.78 hectares (14.28 acres)
of Casey's June beetle designated critical habitat. ... Approximately 0.11 hectare (0.28 acre) of
this area was considered occupied by the Casey's June beetle." The Casey's June beetle is found
only in Palm Springs, "adapted to specialized habitat and soil types found in the Palm Canyon
Wash area." The USFWS service reports that "the main threats" to the Casey's June beetle are
"habitat destruction, degradation, and fragmentation due to urban and recreational development
and flood damage reduction activities." Indeed, "[m]ost of the remaining lands depended upon
by Casey's June beetle are at risk of development or development related disturbance." The
Biological Opinion notes that as part of USFWS plan for recovery of the Casey's June beetle, the
agency recommends "protect[ion of] all suitable habitats in Palm Springs within the current
estimated population distribution." The agency has an objective of"ensur[ing] persistence of
individuals in occupied upland habitat designated as critical habitat within 0.25 mile of and
contiguous with Palm Canyon Wash, and the designated critical habitat area ("Matthew Place")
adjacent to State Route 111 through conservation easements, management, and cooperative
planning with landowners, partners, and stakeholders." These efforts have been unsuccessful,
USFWS reports. The USFWS unambiguously concluded that the Casey's June beetle would be
crushed and killed by clearing, grading, and other constructions activities performed at the
project. "This Project proposes activities that will damage habitat, remove existing vegetation,
and crush and kill Casey's June beetles. However, this Project does not propose any onsite
revegetation measures. Thus, we expect that the Casey's June beetle will be extirpated from the
Project site as a result of activities carried out during the course of the proposed Project."
All of this analysis was undertaken under the assumption at that time that significant
drainage work would be required along the boundaries of the project, particularly along Matthew
and East Palm Canyon. As set forth above, this work is no longer necessary due to the fully
funded Line 41 project.
While the USFWS and the MND have approved "mitigation" for the destruction of
Casey's June beetle habitat and the take of the species, that mitigation consists in major part of
the creation of conservation easements on portions of three parcels containing habitat for the
Casey's June beetle. These properties are shown on the below image:
Jeffrey Ballinger
June 28, 2021
Page 4
The conservation properties are located in the wash, not in areas that are reasonably
going to be developed. Thus, the mitigation does not actually increase the habitat that is
protected for Casey's June beetle, because it removes existing habitat and the habitat that is
conserved would not be developed even absent this mitigation measure. Accordingly, there
remains a net loss of habitat that is not offset by virtue of this conservation easement, which is
essentially an empty gesture that is entirely symbolic. The Endangered Species Act requires that
"to the maximum extent practicable," taking of a species must be "minimize[d] and mitigate[d]."
It is clear that while the Line 41 project was known in a conceptual manner at the time
the Planned Development District was approved, that the details and imminent nature of its
construction became known only after the original plans for the development were approved.
That is the precise reason why the site drainage is significantly revised in the Final Development
Plan, at a considerable savings to the applicant.
It is clear that one of the effects of the construction of the project is the impact on the
protected species Casey's June beetle, and its critical habitat. Now, because of new information
regarding the construction of Line 41 and the significantly reduced need for on-site drainage, it is
clear that these impacts might be mitigated by on-site habitat conservation. The Planning
Commission was clearly interested in this issue, and spent much of the June 9 meeting discussing
the imposition of conditions that would allow them to develop a greater understanding after the
approval of the Final Development Plan, of just how much of the existing on-site habitat could
be conserved through modifications that would not alter the project's ability to provide 80 single
family homes on the site. Yet because these issues were not fully studied, all of the conditions of
approval simply kick this can down the road. The purpose of CEQA is to require analysis of
potential mitigation measures before a project can be approved .
. . I
~ I
Jeffrey Ballinger
June 28, 2021
Page 5
This project was approved by mitigated negative declaration; no Environmental Impact
Report ("EIR") was ever prepared for this Planned Development District. "[U]nder CEQA,
when there is a change in plans, circumstances, or available information after a project has
received initial approval, the agency's environmental review obligations 'turn[] on the value of
the new information to the still pending decisionmaking process."' (Friends of College of San
Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College Dist. (2016) 1 Cal.5th 937, 951-952
[quoting Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council (1989) 490 U.S. 360, 374].) As the June 9
Planning Commission discussion revealed, the new information regarding the potential to
conserve on-site Casey's June beetle habitat due to the construction of Line 41 was central to the
debate and resulted in the imposition of numerous conditions that were aimed at determining
whether conservation of these portion of the project site was possible. Detailed analysis prior to
the decision, as required by CEQA, would allow for an informed decision to be made regarding
the fate of this endangered species.
The fact that the project was not approved by EIR as an initial matter means that there is
no deference to the decision not to require additional review, so long as there is "substantial
evidence in support of a fair argument" that the project may have unmitigated environmental
impacts. As the Supreme Court explained, "when a project is initially approved by negative
declaration, a 'major revision' to the initial negative declaration will necessarily be required if
the proposed modification may produce a significant environmental effect that had not
previously been studied. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15162.) Indeed, if the project modification
introduces previously unstudied and potentially significant environmental effects that cannot be
avoided or mitigated through further revisions to the project plans, then the appropriate
environmental document would no longer be a negative declaration at all, but an EIR." (Friends
of College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College Dist. (2016) 1
Cal.5th 937, 958 .) Even though the corridors along Matthew and East Palm Canyon Drive are a
small area of the overall project, "[t]he significance of an environmental impact is not based on
its size but is instead 'measured in light of the context where it occurs."' (Friends of College of
San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College Dist. (2017) 11 Cal.App.5th 596,
610.) Given the USFWS's conclusions regarding development threats to Casey's June beetle
habitat and the limited available upland (non-wash) habitat that remains undeveloped, these
habitat corridors do indeed constitute a significant impact.
Applying Guidelines section 15162, subdivision (a)(3), under the circumstances where an
EIR has not been prepared for this project, the new information regarding Line 41 satisfies the
requirement for subsequent review that there are "mitigation measures ... previously found not
to be feasible" that "would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects on the environment." As well, the record shows that there are "mitigation
measures ... which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR [that]
would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment." The ability to
conserve Casey's June beetle habitat on-site, and prevent entirely the taking of the endangered
species, is a fundamental change in the mitigation possibilities relating to the impacts of this
project on biological resources.
As courts have recognized when considering the need to mitigate the loss of agricultural
land, a mitigation measure that only preserves existing agricultural land does not mitigate for the
. l
Jeffrey Ballinger
June 28, 2021
Page 6
loss of agricultural land. (See, e.g., Citizens for Open Government v. City of Lodi (2012) 205
Cal.App.4th 296, 322 [ once agricultural land is converted, land loses its character as agricultural
land and is removed from stock of agricultural land, and acquisition of agricultural conservation
easement at 1: 1 ratio does not mitigate for loss of agricultural land].) "Entering into a binding
agricultural conservation easement does not create new agricultural land to replace the
agricultural land being converted to other uses. Instead, an agricultural conservation easement
merely prevents the future conversion of the agricultural land subject to the easement. Because
the easement does not offset the loss of agricultural land (in whole or in part), the easement does
not reduce a project's impact on agricultural land. The absence of any offset means a project's
significant impact on agricultural land would remain significant after the implementation of the
agricultural conservation easement." (King & Gardiner Farms, LLC v. County of Kern (2020) 45
Cal.App.5th 814, 875.)
These principles apply in full force here to this endangered species and its habitat. The
conservation of otherwise undevelopable land does not increase the amount of land protected for
the Casey's June beetle. The project's landscaping activities will result in a net loss of critical
habitat and the unnecessary and avoidable take of the Casey's June beetle. Because mitigation in
the form of protecting these corridors is now feasible, these mitigation measures should be
required and implemented, or the project should prepare an EIR.
OL T therefore requests that the Council require the preparation of an Environmental
Impact Report, or instead require the conservation of the areas proposed for landscaping along
Matthew Drive and East Palm Canyon Drive, including prohibition of grading in these areas. If
the applicant is willing to comply with these mitigation measures, further environmental review
is not necessary under Guidelines section 15162, which requires such review in the case that the
applicant declines to implement the new mitigation measure.
****
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. OLT is very pleased that the
Council has initiated an appeal of the Planning Commission decision and looks forward to the
Council's discussion of this issue.
?J[+f~
Beverly Palmer
' }
I , '. < 0 (/) I 0 <o--a O CD 0:::::,CDcy-~
,--t-3 0 -· ' CD -· ,--t-C
' c CD O o
., :::::, V, ,--t-,--t-
0 ,--t-)> O ~ "< ~ :::::,
CD ;o 0
CD ,--t-
CD ~ Q_
0 0 J> ~ 0
Q_o3 ia=r
-.., V,
0 :::::, CD ~
0-3 0 ' CD Q C ,--t--r,
' ~-< 0 ~ 8.-<~ ~ 2: o· c.o
:::::, 0
,--t-
C
:::::,
Q_
CD
' V,
,--t-
0 :::::,
Q_
:::::,
(0
• I • .• ,
Part 1: Understanding
• Destruction of Habitat
• Species Affected
• Community
Understanding,
habitat destruction
Where are the areas of
concern?
The channel that runs along E
Palm Canyon Drive is planned
to be excavated despite Line 41
handling 97% of water flow.
The perimeter along Matthew
Dr until the bend which is
already slated as open space
will be graded and all native
vegetation removed. ••ti t\.lQ\/~"'
~ _____ ...,.c.,...,....,
~ l!C,!IUIW.,· -----,.------:::-ac.:.•'lrltJf
-----LctLN
AIU CAlCUlATIONS: _,..,........,
~1111-l
-ao.-, -.....11r ... 11.1ac .... ~ ..... ~-
IOlM
~
IJ.:5Ar.
•!Olk
iim:c
IODu iuiiii: •• ,r:,,.._.
~
N ,-. ,i
~
-Part l:
Understanding,
species affected
' t
~"'~
~ .. •. ·• ... ,~,ly
I ,.,-
•
• Casey's June Beetle is a
Federal critically
endangered species.
• CJB is only found in Palm
Springs, CA .
• Matthew Drive parcel
has been site surveyed by
USFWS to have existing
CJB and is critical
I ~ habitat.
• We are looking at full
extirpation of this
spe_ci ~f we don't
.-,· .... ,: .. -. irpfilem~nt 9.rot,!:tction.
• . •' _-., _,_,. ;:;,._ ;. -"l • ,tf•~-~
~ ··.·-•:... -:~ ., . ~ ...
' --.s-~ ~ ;' -~. --~-. ---~··· .,.
"' .,I#
I , •. o_ o_ ' cu (D (D = ::::J = (D < n < n l/) = V, (D cu o_ (D cu c:: I i -a C --l/) ' 0 l/) rt l/) (D ::, 0 (D (D u (D rt 0 Q_ u '< l/) 3 '<_ ::::J 0 -· (D 3 l/) ... rt l/) 0--0 ' (D ' --0 l_ 0 (D l_ n V, V, 0 (D c:: ' ::::J c:: ::::J cu 0 r-t-' ::::J (D ~ 0 r-t-l/) ::::J rt ::::J rt c:: rt (D l/) (D ~ n ~::, -,I cu c:: u (D (D Q_ .. rt -' cu cu u CT rt (D CT l/) 0 -· (D cu (D l/) r-t-::, CT, l/) u (D (D (Q -(D (D CT l/) (D (D '<_ Q_' (D rt c:: rt l/) (D n l/)
~ l/) (D ' (D --l_
cu c:: ~ (D (D c:: C: 7 l/) cu l/) l/) l/) CT (D ::::J V,
rt l/) o_ CT o_ ' (D .,, rt cu (D rt l/) (D (D
CT ~ rt u cu ~--o o_
rt (D rt c:: (D V, ::::J l/) cu (D (D ::::J n -~ ::::J CT ::::J rt "' 0 cu o_ o_ (D m n 7 (D 0 rt (D o_
o_ CT ::::J ' cu ::::J 0--0 ~~
(D rt o_ rt cu m rt rt (D 7 cu (D ' CT rt rt 0 7 (D 0 0 ::a
0 7 ::::J rt _o ::::J 0--0 rt tD
(D rt 0 c:: ' cu n u _o ~ ~--o ~ cu rt 0 7 c:: cu ' cu u ~ < (D CT (D 7 (D CT ~ cu < 7 l/) (D l/) l/) tD
(D rt < rt n llllll (D cu u u cu
::::J l/) rt (D (D 7 rt ' CT~
rt cu rt n ::::J 0 rt cu (D 0 -+i n ~ --rt rt ~ ::::J (D (D c:: rt cu l/) -+i (D cu 0--0 ::::J C
' < rt c:: n rt (D ,...
rt = 7 rt o_ -~ (D ~ rt ~ cu 7 -· (D 3 cu ~ 0 cu ::::J cu :::::s
7 l/) (D ::::J l/) o_ l/) tD cu 7 rt o_ CT cu CT ~ (D ::::J (D o_ ::::J (D < n cu (D c:: OJ n (D o_ (D --Q =-=-aq ::::J n cu ::::J ::::J '< ~
::::J (D (D n
(D 3 cu ::::J n cu 7 o_ ::)-
(D rt cu (D ......
0 (D ::::J < ::::J CT aq "'-> -+i ::::J o_ cu (D o_ 7 C)
rt rt n ::::J 3 n cu --.:I. ~ rt o_ rt o_ 0 0 '< w (D 0 ::::J rt cu ::::J rt (D
l/) 3 rt 0 ::::J rt 0 o_
u ::::J (D cu ::::J l/) OJ (D u c:: ::::J 0-0 c:: rt ::::J n 7 (D cu (D
(D 0 o_ --0 3 n (D < l/) CT l/)
~ -+i l/) (D rt (D rt ' 0 (D ::::J 0 cu cu = l/) cu 7 rt rt 0-0
::::J CT (D rt CT 3 o_ (D n 0 (D n
0 (D (D
7 c:: < 3 c:: < ::::J (D ::::J (D ::::J (D rt
l/) o_ 7 u o_ ::::J (D rt '< o_ 0 (D 7 (D rt 0 l/) ...
7 7 0 7
(D -+i < = (D
I . '
JOg-3 u :J 0
C ~ o_ <
rua10:J
---+) rt-N Q-q ro O C :J (1)
(1) :J :J Q-q _o ru' l/1 o_ ru C
~:J:J--o
CYrt-no_3
(D ::::::TO~ (D n ru :J ru :J n rt-
c n :::::::r-CY V1
l/) 0 (1) (1) rt-
(1) ru ru o n ru q ~
---+) ::::::T < C l/1
o_ ro ru l/) o-q
(D :=]"" 1 < ru ro ro ru
(D<~o_o_
o ru
u (I) 3~
(D
:J
rt-
~,m < :J
(D Q_
1 QJ
C :J :J
:J C 0-0
:J :J cg
rt-Q_ (I)
0 (D Q_
CY aq l/1
C 1 u
1 0 (I)
7 C n 0 ~ :J (I)
l/) Q_ l/)
< CY)> < C n
:=J"" 1 rt-
(D 1
:J 0
(D ~ ru l/1
1 rt-
:]""
n • • 0
~ )> ~
ru l/1 :r
l/) u tD
n ro = o n QJ
:J (I) <
l/) l/) QJ
Q_ 0 -
(D ---+) -
1 l/1 v, tD m-o.c'<
o_ ro C :::0
0----+) n -· 0
1 ru ~ C
n tD :l ~ 0 :-:-9-
:J :J ,...
o-q n QJ
C (D =
1 tD
:J :J C.
Q_
(D C\
1 ~ n o
)> C
:l
C.
V, -0 C CD :::, 0 Q_ -· CD CD l --0 V, V, 0 0 r-+-' -+-, 0 r-t--+-, :::, __, I CD Q_ .. 0 -· r-+-:::, CD (Q
Q_ .....
I I I
rt ru 0 X (D u n ru ru '-< 7 ro ru 7 rt o-o C ::) 7 o_ ,.-.._ (D ~ ~ ~ (D Q_ (D < (D 0 u (D ::) z 7
a1 g ~
7 rt l/)
r o l/)
::J ~ ru
ro ru n3
~ rt o_
m X rt 7 u ru rt 0 ::) 0 ---h ru
l/)
u
(D
n
(D
l/)
l/)
~
0 C rt 0 ---h rt 0 ~ ::) -............ l/) rt ru
rt
(D
o_
(D
< (D
0 u
(D
Q 7
C rt ll)
S-r o
~rD::J~O
ru ::J m u ::J
l/) rt ~ '-< '-<
o_ 0
0-rt
(D ~
n rt
0 0
l/) ~ cru~n
7
(D ~ ~ ::) (D ::)
l/) --o ru o ru '-< o
OJ
0 n ru
:::0 ru
rt
0
::)
":;?"G.Jl/)0
:::::::.. ::) ---h l/)
-0-0 ---h
0 C u 77
~ ::) C ::J < ::) . '-< (;q
SJ ru ru
-(;q rt o_
----h ~ --
1 u ~ (D '-<.rt
~ ~ _) ru o_ o
l/) (D u
(D Q_ rt
7
rt rt
0-0 0 ru ---h
rt rt
0 ~
::) (D
0
::)
rt
(;q
ru
rt
(D
Q_
z
(D
(;q
ru
rt
<"
(D
(D
l/)
u
(D
n
ru
'-<
---h
rt
~
ru
rt
l/)
u
(D
n
(D
l/)
l/)
l/) u
(D
n
(D
l/)
l/)
(D
::)
o_
(D
3
n
0
::)
'-<
:c 0 :e C. 0
t1)
Ill
" ::r -· Ill
C.
t1)
< t1) -0
iC
3
t1)
:::,
" OJ
~
t1)
n
" 0
C: ...,
n
0
3
3
C:
:::,
C 0 ::::, Q_ 0 (1) -0 3 ~ 0 3 ,-+ --, C O r-t-::, ::::, ____. ,-+ Q_ .. ""< -· ::::,
(.Q
.....
, .. :, -.
Part 2: Solutions
• On-site Protection
• Water Flow Alternatives
• Community Collaboration
Recommended Areas to Protect and Not Excavate
1. The Earthen Channel
along E Palm Canyon
Drive. This is critical
habitat for the Casey's
June Beetle, has mature
vegetation and is being
utilized by other species.
2. The Open Space/Art Park
along Matthew Drive from
E Palm Canyon till the
Bend. Also critical habitat
with mature vegetation.
3. 50 year old Desert Willow
in SW corner (red arrow).
ARA CA1CULAIIONS:
----IU:IAo
_ .... _, .JA!bi --'"""" , ............ A.,1C-.. ,011114
•~ uiiAc
Mld()wdrqJl.h:a, tz.:: • l.50w"Ac
't en 0 r-e :::! ~ O=:J""" z 0 . . ~ \
(D
3
0
C
Q_
0 rt-< =:}"""
(D (D
\ ~
(D
_Q =:}"""
C OJ < (D
Vl Q_ 0 V) (D \ Q 0 < (\) m -h m < r OJ Q u \ --ru ~ m ~ ~ s-0 ~ (D < ~ Vl 0 ru o_ ~ ~ (D (\) 0 ~ ~ \ ru s-A -j
(D Vl =:J"""
rt-(D
m ru
Vl
rt-
Vl
Q_
(D
0
-I-)
0 Vl
~ Q_
0 (D
~ ~
=:J""" ru
(D A
Vl
rt-
=:}""" ru
(D \
\ (D
(D rt-
0
ru
=:j Vl Vl Vl
ru =:J""" ~ ~ nr ~ o
(D
Vl ~ q
o o_o_o
-h(DQVl
rt-~ C Vl
=:J""" OJ Vl ~ ru
u \ 0 rt-OJ ~ Q_ rt-Q_ ~ rt-0--0
0
~
Vl
0
-I-)
\ n
\ OJ
N (/) 0 C r+
I·:-ru s: o_ V, Q o_ 0 r-;-lf) s-rt r-u rt) 0 C ru < -u :::J -I n 0 ru (D t) ~ -r-t-0 ru ~ N u :z 7 " ru (D rt) :::J OJ 0 (/') ' 0 rt (D OJ "b :::J ru :::J rt) C ()"Q < o_ ~ r-t-OJ lf) (D :::J OJ ~ 0
OJ (D o_ 7 ::::,
:::J lf) rt Q V,
X o_ lf) n u n
rt OJ OJ rt)
:::J u 7
:::J ~ -l n OQ (D :y
0 rt -l (D
7 < :y 7 u (D OJ C u
0 OQ rt (D 7
7 (D 7 0 la o_ ru rt OJ 0 u rt ru N u
lf) (D rt (D (D 0
rt 0 lf)
C lf) lf) :::J (D iC
7 OQ :::J (D o_ 0 lf)
0-:::J ~ X u 0 "' ru ru lf) OJ tD
:::J OQ rt-rt u C. :y n n (D 0 :::J (D (D
(D rt-OQ :::J V,
C lf) 0 rt 0 rt-< :y lf) -0 lf) OQ (D ou C
ru :y 7 OQ C OJ rt
0 ru (D -n -· 3 ~ o_ rt o_ (D 0
OJ 0-0 ::::,
:::J rt :::J rt "' :y OQ 0 (D 0 ...--...
3 n
OJ :::J :::J :::J 0
C rt-OJ OJ OQ
3 n (D 0 rt :::J
ru :::J ~ rt-< OJ C '< (D ru o_ ...__..
rt rt-:y '< rt < rt-
ru 0 (D :y
IT 0-uOQ (D
rt-'< (D ~ ~ ru
rt-ru 7 OJ 0 o_ (D rt
~ 7
o_ u 0 < ru :::J
lf) :::J QJ -(D
OQ n :::J n u (D
7 o_ 0 0
(D OQ rt-:::J
L/) :y :y rt
(D OJ rt-0 --
7 :::J < 7 3 (D 7
lf)
o_ OQ 0 QJ
QJ OQ
lf)
7' rt (D
3 (D 0 :::J
(D :::J N QJ
u OJ
(D
L/) :::J
o_ 0
0 o_ u
(D
:::J
·J ~ 0 ) rt-~ (D OJ l/) rt-0 e rt-(D 0
:::0
0 e
rt-
(D
OJ
u
0
)
rt-
0 0 e ~
rt-
~ 0 l/) < rt-(D OJ ) --+, OJ 0 ~ l/) (D l/) ) ~ (D 0 l/) ) 0 rt-~ --+,
OJ
Q_
)
~ '<
Q_ ~
(D (D
OJ
l/) l/)
rt-
rt-rt-~ ~
) OJ
0 rt-
e n
(}Q 0
~ (D
OJ n rt-
l/)
e
OJ ~ n ~ -+)
0 Q_ rt-~ l/) aJ
-+) rt-rt-~ 0 (1)
(1) 3 rt-.
~ Q_ s
0 ) rt-
l/) OJ ~
0 ~ (D
~ ~ l/)
(D e
n rt-IT
0 ~ l/) ~ 0 e rt-)
0 T GT
rt-n
rt-0 (1)
0 rt-:::0
:::::T 0 s-(1) e
(1) rt-(1)
0
e
rt-
(1)
0
) 0 e rt-(1) 0 < (D 0 ' n -+-OJ 0
~
l/)
rt-
~
)
0
e
(}Q
~
l/)
e
IT
l/)
e
:::0 OJ o n n e e 0
rt-) (1)
(1) IT n
OJ (}Q rt-e o u ~ ~
0 (D ~ _, ~
0 l/) Q_
~ ~
0 OJ )
--+i _m ~
--+, OJ ~
0 ~ rt-~ o_ o·
l/) ~
rt-rt-0 0 lfl ) '<
3 ~ (D
Q_ 3
l/)
r-t-
rt-~
~ (D
(1) l/)
~ rt-
0 m
)
rt-
:::::T
(D
OJ
l/)
rt-
(D
rt-
I
l/) n
OJ u
(D
=e
SU ..
ID
1111 .,, -0 :e ,. -..
ID
1111 :::,
SU .. -· < ID
VI
N (/') 0 C r+
Part 2: Solutions
LIi. 1 mi i 1, m r ta 11. 1 i m ~ M i.n Mi,, 4'J n; 1 • 1®:.1 t. l; tm
• Work with UCR Naturalists and Oswit Land Trust to create points of
interest in relation to native species.
• Build community around the very unique circumstance of having an
endangered species in your neighborhood.
• Be a Leader in Development Implementation to incorporate
environmental practices that protect species and habitat.
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Barry & David <barrykdavidl@gmail.com>
Monday, July 19, 2021 3:51 PM
City Clerk
Lisa Middleton
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting Wednesday, July 21, 2021: Protect our Open Spaces!
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
To the Palm Springs City Clerk:
We are asking you to distribute the below letter to the members of the Palm Springs
Planning Commission and to all members of the Palm Springs City Council. Thank you:
To the Planning Commission and the City Council:
We are writing this letter to urge you to direct staff to NOT include Bel Air Greens and
Whitewater properties in the general plan changes, and to NOT allow destruction to the
Casey's June Beetle habitat at the Canyon View proposed development.
Specifically:
1. We are asking that you protect the Whitewater Desert Habitat near Interstate 10. The
owner of the property that was slated for the fulfillment center is asking to change the land
use designation of this important ecosystem. This area is home to the critically
endangered Fringe Toed Lizard, other lizards who require blowsand and other desert
wildlife. This needs to remain protected desert so that mass development doesn't destroy
it forever.
2. The Canyon View Development at Matthew Drive and East Palm Canyon has critically
endangered Casey's June Beetle on their parcel. We are asking that the city council ask
the developer to preserve just the perimeters of the parcel which will not affect the number
of units they want to build.
3. The tenants for Bel Air Greens are trying to change the designation of that property
from open space in the General Plan to non-open space so that large tract developments
can be built. We are asking that you preserve this incredible piece of property as open
space for the citizens of Palm Springs.
1 '1 /z z,,/ Zbti
ITEM NO. ~6 Pt.iteuc. ~NI
We appreciate your consideration of our requests.
Respectfully,
David L. Lundquist
Barry R. Kob
3140 Cody Court
Palm Springs, CA 92264
cc: Lisa Middleton, City Council Member
Barry Russel Kob
David Lundquist
760-464-0335 (Home phone)
760-485-2933 (Barry's Cell)
760-895-9994 (David's Cell)
2
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
juli Cavnar <julic574@gmail.com>
Monday, July 19, 2021 8:38 PM
City Clerk
Whitewater
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
City Council:
Please do not allow development in the Whitewater area. This area is too important to allow development. It
is the home to important tress and insects.
This is important to the future of our city!
Juli Cavnar
Sent from my iPhone
,/22/wzl
1 rrEMNO. o>/3 'PIA8UC ~f-
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Bonnie Ruttan <bonnieruttan@gmail.com>
Monday, July 19, 2021 9:26 PM
City Clerk
For distribution to all Council and Planning Commission members
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
We request that you NOT include the Whitewater area nor Bel Aire Greens in any changes to the general plan
We urge you to not allow the needless destruction of the endangered Casey's June Beetle habitat Please protect
the perimeter of the Canyon View property
Thank you for your consideration in preserving our open spaces Sincerely Bill Ruttan Bonnie Ruttan
1111 Abrigo Rd
PS
Sent from my iPhone
1
,/22--/zo2.1
ITEMNO. olPJ Publi(:tJ,mmmf
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Scott Connelly <scottdesert@gmail.com>
Monday, July 19, 2021 9:44 PM
City Clerk
Public comment: Whitewater property and Bel Air Greens
Bel Air Greens_Whitewater properties.pdf
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
Please distribute my attached letter to the Planning Commission and to
members of the Palm Springs City Council.
I am opposed to any changes in the land use designations regarding the
Whitewater property and Bel Air Greens. These matters are on the July 21,
2021 Planning Commission agenda.
Thank you
Scott Connelly
Palm Springs
scottdesert@gmail.com
1
7/:J.Z/~'2,/
ITEMNO.~
To: City Clerk Palm Springs, cityclerk@palmspringsca.gov
Palm Springs Planning Commission
Palm Springs City Council Members
July 19, 2021
Re: Bel Air Greens and Whitewater properties
I urge you to not change the designated land use on the Bel Air Greens and Whitewater
properties in the general management plan.
I urge you to preserve our open space, critical environmental resources and our quality
of life. Please consider the consequences of these locations and how it will adversely
affect the environment and the quality of life of the residents and visitors.
The newly created wildlife corridor between San Jacinto and Cabazon and the Sand to
Snow National Monument is critical to the wildlife ecosystems and irreparable harm
could be devastating to the wildlife in the area. The Coachella Valley Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan and Natural Community Conservation Plan 1 identifies areas
of critical habitat and wildlife corridors connecting the areas adjacent to and surrounding
this area of concern.
The tourism-based economy that has been the life-blood of the Coachella Valley for
decades could be adversely affected. The tourism draw of two thousand acres of
unspoiled desert beauty surrounded by the wildlife-friendly Sand to Snow National
Monument is a far greater asset to Palm Springs. The Palm Springs "brand" would be
adversely affected by the negative effects of this development.
Please consider the large number of residents who support preservation of open space
based on past land use issues that have come before the City Council recently. In 2011
Riverside County proposed building a large jail complex near Whitewater property and it
was overwhelmingly opposed by Coachella Valley leaders and residents.
I trust your careful consideration of the issues and the possible collateral consequences
will result in a decision to preserve our open space, critical environmental resources and
our quality of life.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Scott Connelly
2071 Marguerite St.
Palm Springs CA 92264
1 https://cvmshcp.orq!Plan Maps.htm
To: City Clerk Palm Springs, cityclerk@palmspringsca.gov
Palm Springs City Council Members
July 19, 2021
Re: Canyon View/EHOF project
I urge the City Council to require the developer to preserve a section of the land on the
perimeter to protect the rare and endangered Casey's June Beetle
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Scott Connelly
2071 Marguerite St.
Palm Springs CA 92264
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
warner graves <warnersf@yahoo.com>
Tuesday, July 20, 2021 7:05 AM
City Clerk
Whitewater fulfillment center
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
please share with all council members and city commissioner-
Dear Council Members and City Commissioner,
I am writing to oppose the proposed change in land use designation of the Whitewater fulfillment site. I would like to
remind the members and commissioner that this land is designated open space and should remain so. I acknowledge
that growth is inevitable but needs to be done smartly and in a way that enhances the community and protects the
environment. I would like to see the land north west of Palm Springs remain open space and developed as a place for
tourist and locals to enjoy. Please do not allow the natural beauty of our valley to be squandered and replaced with the
LA sprawl creeping in from the pass. I live in Snow Creek.
Thank you,
Warner Graves
Sent from my iPhone
7/zz/wzl
1 ,;{!J PU&l,IC bJwu,,e,J}
rmMNO-~---
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
pjwtx@att.net
Monday, July 19, 2021 6:49 PM
City Clerk
Upcoming planning and council meetings
NOTICE: This message originated outside ofThe City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
As a resident of Palm Springs and one who likes the wildlife we are blessed with, I strongly appose the development of
these important wildlife habitats:
1. Whitewater Desert Habitat (being considered for a fulfillment center and requiring a change in land use
designation).
2. The Canyon View Development at Matthew Drive & East Palm Canyon (the developer should be made to
preserve the perimeter of the parcel -which does not impact the units they plan to build).
3. Bel Air Greens -tenants are pressing get high density housing approved here (do not change the land use
designation from open space into general plan).
I am not necessarily against development in Palm Springs -just in areas where wildlife habitats and native plants are
being destroyed by a change of designation . It seems that there is plenty of areas that are already designated for
development. We don't need to be changing areas meant to be natural for all residents. Developers should not be able
to profit over our resources. Also, consider how much eco-tourism brings to the area. We need to maintain our wildlife
lands.
I understand that these issues are coming up at this week's planning and council meetings. Please share my opposition
to these projects.
Paul J Wilkinson
229 Toro Circle
Palm Springs, CA 92264
pjwtx@att.net
1
7/ 2. -z./,Zt>Z,f
.:,e 'Pl.4 ~'-• c.,.. ~1 ITEM NO. _________ _
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Terence Kissack <terencekissack@gmail.com>
Monday, July 19, 2021 8:04 PM
City Clerk
Letter for Planning Commission and City Council
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
Please distribute this letter to the Palm Springs Planning Commission and City Council. Thank you!
To Whom it May Concern:
I am writing to urge you to NOT include Bel Air Greens and Whitewater properties in the general plan
changes and to NOT allow destruction to the Casey's June Beetle habitat at the Canyon View proposed
development. I support Oswit Land Trust's approach to both matters.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
best,
Terence Kissack
360 E Avenida Olancha
Palm Springs, CA 92264
7/1.zJ20t.1
1 ~e, T'UEJI/I~ IOl'II~ ITEMNO. ______ _
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tracy Buyan <coyoteecee@yahoo.com>
Tuesday, July 20, 2021 7:10 AM
City Clerk
Bel Air Greens and Whitewater properties & Canyon View development
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
To the Planning Commission and City Council:
I urge you to direct staff to NOT include Bel Air Greens and Whitewater properties in the general plan
changes and to NOT allow destruction to the Casey's June Beetle habitat at the Canyon View proposed
development.
Please distribute this request to each City Council member and the Planning Commissioner.
Thank you!
Tracy Buyan
Palm Springs resident
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
1
7/~z/wz/
JI!!, PUB~ I~ t!ull'JAl6H'f ITEM NO. _______ _
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
warner graves <warnersf@yahoo.com>
Tuesday, July 20, 2021 7:12 AM
City Clerk
Bel Air Greens
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Please share with all council members and city commissioner,
Dear Council Members and City Commissioner,
I am writing to oppose the change in the General Plan designation by the tenants of Bel Air Greens. This land
is designated open space and should remain so.
Thank you,
Warner Graves
Sent from my iPhone
1
-,Ja,~/U>~I
Z/J PU8/.,I t ~~ ITEM NO. ______ _
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mark Littlewood <mblinps@gmail.com>
Tuesday, July 20, 2021 8:35 AM
City Clerk
PS Proposed Developments and Zoning Changes
PS Proposed Developments and Zoning Changes.pdf
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Please distribute my letter to each Palm Springs Planning Commission Member for their July 21, 2021 meeting.
Please distribute my letter to each Palm Springs City Council Member for their July 22, 2021 meeting.
Should the subject be delayed or postponed, please distribute for the new date. Thank you.
Mark Littlewood
715 Scenic View
Palm Springs CA 92264
209-843-4607
1 7/21,;,/'W-z,,/
ITEMNO.~B 'fuM1t /-,_,,,-
July 20, 2022
Dear Palm Springs City Council Members,
iT he owner of the property that was slated for the fulfillment center
which we all protected from that overdevelopment is asking to
change the land use designation of this important ecosystem.
iT his area is home to the critically endangered Fringe Toed Lizard,
other lizards who require blowsand and other desert wildlife. This
needs to remain protected desert so that mass develo~ment
c1oesn't destro~ it forever.
iT he Canyon View Development at Matthew Drive and East Palm
Canyon has critically endangered Casey's June Beetle on their
parcel. We are asking that the city council ask the developer to
preserve just the perimeters of the parcel which will not affect the
number of units they want to build. The Casey's June Beetle is
ONLY found in Palm Springs.
rr he tenants for Bel Air Greens have been trying for years to get
high density housing approved. Now they are trying to change the
c1esignation from open space in the General Plan to non open
space so that large tract developments can be built. We are
diligently trying to preserve this incredible piece of property.
Please call and write to OQ~ose any change in this Qro~enY's
c1esignation.
Respectfully,
Mark Littlewood
r7 15 Scenic View
Palm Springs CA 92264
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Rocklen DeHoog <rdehoog@gmail.com>
Monday, July 19, 2021 5:17 PM
City Clerk
General Plan Changes
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
My name is Rocklen DeHoog and I am a fulltime resident of Palm Springs. I am writing to urge the city to NOT include
the Bel Air Greens and Whitewater properties in the general plan changes. These areas were designated as
open space to maintain the quality of life that residents and tourists expect from Palm Springs. Allowing
development on these sites will increase traffic and reduce the quiet lifestyle that we currently enjoy in the city.
In addition, changing these properties from open space will have a negative impact on the wildlife residing in
these areas.
In addition, I want to urge you to NOT allow destruction to the Casey's June Beetle habitat at the Canyon View
proposed development. Minor changes to the plan will help preserve this habitat for the beetles.
Please distribute this message to each City Council member and the Planning Commissioner.
Rocklen DeHoog
1/22-/UJz/
1 .:,, e, Pqe,ue 4mm&>sr ITEMNO. _______ _
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Patty Shenker <pattyshenker@gmail.com>
Tuesday, July 20, 2021 10:31 AM
City Clerk
No Development @ Whitewater or Bel Aire Greens
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
Dear City Clerk,
I would so appreciate it if you would make sure all City Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners see this. Thank
you.
Patty Shenker
Dear City Council & Planning Commissioners,
We are again writing to urge all of you to NOT include Whitewater area and the Bel Aire Greens in the general plan
changes so that they can develop them.
The proposed Whitewater area's fulfillment center is right next to critical habitat & should not be changed to allow
development.
It is imperative that we protect the desert's biodiversity and these proposals threaten the Casey's June Beetle who is
only found n the Palm Springs area!
They may just be bugs but they are our bugs and we want them to be protected! They are an endangered species! Many
wildlife will be impacted by these developments.
Please keep your promise that "the desert designation is intended to identify areas to be retained to protect natural
scenic and wildlife resources unique to Palm Springs".
There are plans to buy both of these properties for conservation and that is what you should be advocating.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Patty Shenker & Doug & Julia Stoll
825 S. Riverside Dr. 92264
1
,Jzi/U>Z-f
ITEM NO. c9e, p1,12,vt e, ~~
Anthony Mejia
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
pa I mspri ngscondo@outlook.com
Tuesday, July 20, 2021 1 :15 PM
City Clerk
Protect Bel Air Greens from Being Developed Once and For all !...Stop the pollution ...
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs --DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.
Dear City Clerk,
Please distribute a copy of the below email-letter to all the Palm Springs' Planning Commission & City
Council members' prior to their July 21st and 22nd meetings:
Dear City of Palm Springs Planning Commission & City Council members,
Protect Bel Air Greens from Being Developed Once and For all ! Stop the pollution.
Why is Bel A ir Greens' again being brought up during the Hottest time of summer when we
have the fewes t residents' in town and many HOA 's are not in s ession and during a pandemic I
state of emergency?
And why is this being brought up every 6-12 months' ??? These land owners'/tenants' are now
wasting everyone's time and should be billed accordingly.
Besides, their open space is forever attached to our crucial Coachella Valley Aquifer and will never be
developed and they need to accept this and move on. No means No.
Please Re-schedule if at all needed to February or March 2022 when most residents' ( part time & full
time)and Hoa's are in town or in session.
Thank you,
David Brown
-, /zt,,/UJU
1
TTEM No. -'8 PU-6v1e ~
City Council Members
Re: EOHF Canyon View
To Whom It May Concern
I am writing to express the concerns of the Rimrock NOrg about the above referenced
project.
Attached is a letter that was previously sent to the Planning Commission in May 2021.
Sadly, we learned that the only issues the Commission would hear did not allow for our
concerns to be heard nor addressed.
Note:
The Developer reached out to us the day of the Planning Commission meeting and
expected us to drop everything to meet with them. We could not gather the Board nor
other neighbors on such short notice and asked for another date. No reply received!
After being ignored by the Develop for 6 weeks, this time the Developer reached out a
week before the City Council meeting. It is summer and many of our Board members
and residents are out of town. The Developer did not like our answer, so we are asking
for a few minutes of your time to hear our concerns.
Highlights:
• Pools in front yards -that is either an accident waiting to happen and an
invitation to anyone entering the property (children) to use these pools.
• The 'sidewalk to nowhere' -No one will use this south side of East Pam
Canyon sidewalk to go anywhere west or east. It will end at the dog park and
there is no connection west to the bus stop at Cherokee. Matthew Street is a
safer/shorter pedestrian option for Seminole Gardens and Safari MH Park
residents. There is no need to plant/water shade trees; just leave all current
natural vegetation here, as agreed to at the Planning Commission meeting in
May. This fits into the landscape of the south hills/mountains.
• No parking for 'community parks' -One of the parks is across from the gas
station at Von's and the other is inside the property. Where would community
residents safely park?
• Extra safety measures for the school bus stop at Matthew and Linden during
construction -please do this for the safety of the children.
• Entrance to Canyon View project -too close to Rimrock Shopping Center
entry. This entrance is located when traveling east on Matthew Street and using
the 1st east entrance/parking lot.
Again, we appreciate you for taking time to listen to our concerns.
Respectfully Submitted,
Carlene Hart, Chair, Rimrock NOrg
1
May 24, 2021
Planning Commission
Re: Canyon View Housing Project on Matthew Street
To Whom It May Concern:
This is written to express the concerns of the Rimrock NOrg regarding the proposed
Canyon View housing project on Matthew Street.
We are trying to understand the rush to move this project forward without the City
discussing the plans and walking the site with the neighborhood. A site visit with only
City staff involved, does not allow for those who live here to give valuable input and
provide support for the project.
The neighborhood is also sad to learn that this will not be a multi-family project as this
property is zoned. This area is well suited for affordable housing given proximity to
Rimrock Shopping center, its related services, and state road 111 junction.
The 80 upscale single family residential units, each with plunge pools, was another big
surprise.
• With another drought in sight, why are 80 pools needed?
• Pools in front yards seem like an accident waiting to happen.
How do you secure these pools, so children do not accidentally enter them?
Our Other Concerns:
Riverside County will be starting their flood control project in this area late summer or
early fall. Right now, they plan for this project to take 1.5 years to complete. They also
plan to repave Matthew and Seminole Way.
• How will this project respect the integrity of the repaving projects?
We also have concerns about those without transportation walking, biking, and using
golf carts to get to Von's during this construction project.
• How will they have safe access along Matthew Street during construction?
Then there is the school bus stop on S Linden Way. This intersection is currently hard to
see and it will be made even harder to see with construction fencing.
• What are the plans to protect the children?
• How about the cars entering Matthew Street, where the line of sight will be
obstructed?
Construction Site on Property:
• Where will the construction site vehicles enter and leave the property?
2
The revised plans include a Community Park within the property. Matthew Street is too
narrow for vehicles to park on either side of this project.
• Where would Community residents park their vehicles to use this facility?
• How comfortable would the residents of Canyon View be with non-residents
being on property?
• What about children entering the property on skateboards and bicycles?
• How tempting would front yard splash pools be to children and the homeless?
There is also a Public Statue Park proposed for Matthew Street across from the Von's
Gas Station and the Rim rock Shopping Center entry. This busy entry way has several
near misses daily. The intersection of EPC and Gene Autry/Matthew Street is already
dangerous, with 7 lanes of traffic running east and west, and vehicles turning right
without stopping.
• Again, where would the Community residents park vehicles to use this park?
Where the main entrance to this property is located is also a concern. Having the
entrance on a curve and close to the side entry of the Rimrock Shopping Center is not a
good idea. The curve area is where many cars speed, as Matthew Street has no posted
speed limit. This street is also used by the car dealerships to test drive vehicles that
have been repaired and is still being used for the occasional road racing event.
We ask for a chance for the City to 'see it through our eyes' and address our concerns .
We strongly request that a decision on this project be postponed until
September, when more residents return from their summer hiatus and have a chance
to review this project.
Respectfully Submitted
Carlene Hart
Rim rock Norg, Chair
3