HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-07-26 STAFF REPORTS 3B WDRDEN WILLIAMS APC
Representing PY6lioAJeedel,PriMe fnddtl ,and lntlividYals
July 26, 2006
Land Delivered AREAS W PRACTICE
PUISUC AGENrY
' lnNO USE AND
I ENVIRONMFNTA4
City Council I REAL ESTATF
City of Palm Springs
3200 East Tahquitx Canyon Way PERSbNAL INIURY
Palm Springs, California 922622 ESTATE FLAiINING
AND ADMINISTRATION
Re: Agenda Item 3.3. CIVIL UnOATION
Shad4wrock referendum Petition BUSINESS.
Dear Hon. Mayor and Members of the Council-
ATTORNEYS
This office prepared the ShadQmock Referendum Petition that has qualified for I TRACY R.RICHMON0
placement on the ballot The purpose of this letter is to briefly respond to the � D.wAYNcmcmyu
claims of financial ruin that were made by Vic Gainer during your last Council i KEN A.CAMFFE
meeting. Mr. Gainer asserts that a Referendum vote that rejected the Shadowrock rERRT M.class
Development Agreement extension would start the City down a path of financial
ruin. Mr. Gainer's assertions were based upon references to legal opinions he did ; MALIN DA R.DICKENSON
not provide and a claim that passage of Proposition 90 would result in a judgment i xRls rN M`eRIOE
against the City. There is absolutely no credibility to Mr. Gainer's assertions, D.DWIGHT WORSEN
I Dreoa�se+
First, if Proposition 90 (also knows as the "Anderson Initiative") qualifies for the W.SCOTTWILLIAMS
state ballot and passes, It would have absolutely no impact on the Shadowrock
Referendum, The principal purpose of Proposition 90 is to undo the results of a
recent Supreme Court decision that upheld the use of eminent domain to take the ! oPFICE
private property of one owner and transfer it to another private owner for
A62 STEVFNSAVENIJE
redevelopment, f£eio v. Ctty of New London (20O5) 125&Ct.2655. SUITE 102
SOLANA BEACH
CALIFORNIA
The Shadowrock Referendum vote will not result in the tald ng
of property for use 9F11
by another private developer, The vote would not result in the taking of property 1 I556i 759•0604 TEUT.ONG
for public use. The vote will not result in the taking of any constitutionally (65a)TS5.519e FKC51M0
protected property right whatsoever. The vote will be limited to the sole question
I ww�',waMenwilhams.c0m
of whether the Development Agreement contract between Shadowrock and the i
City of Palm Springs should be extended, nothing more. Shadowrock has no
City Council
July 26, 2006
Page 2
constitutional right to the extension at issue. The Development Agreement expressly
provided for its automatic expiration after ten years, and it does not contain any language
entitling Shadowrock to an extension. Thus, Proposition 90 is completely irrelevant to the
Shadowrock Referendum.
Mn Gainer's unwillingness to provide any legal authority in support of his assertions is
understandable. A search of legal archives throughout the land would not uncover a single
case in which a court found a referendum setting aside a development agreement extension
to be an unconstitutional taking of private property. There is, on the other hand, a strong
body of California law upholding the right of referendum against a multitude of attacks,
including claims of unconstitutional taking. See, e.g. Chandis Securities Co. v City of Dana
Point (1997) 52 Cal.4th 475 [Referendum setting aside approval of specific plan did not
result in a regulatory taking.] Courts have described the initiative and referendum process as
"one of the most precious rights of our democratic process" Mervynne a Acker (1961) 189
Cal.App.2d 558.
However, a legal treatise is not necessary to address Mr. Gainer's claims. All that is needed
is a bit of common sense. When the City Council voted to approve an extension of the
Shadowrock Development Agreement, it had authority at that time to deny the request. The
voters, through their right of referendum, will have the same right to approve'or disapprove
the Shadowrock Development Agreement extension. The right of referendum is guaranteed
by article 11, section 11 of the California Constitution and is coextensive with the legislative
power of the local governing body. See, Devita v. County of Napa (1995) 9 Cal.4th763,
776. Put another way, what the Palm Springs Council can approve by way of ordinance,
the electorate can undo by way of referendum.
Please be assured that if the voters exercise their right of referendum in a manner that results
in disapproval of the Shadowrock Development Agreement extension, a slippery slope
leading to financial ruin will not result. The City of Palm Springs and its citizens will be on
solid constitiutional ground, notwithstanding the protestations of Mr. Gainer.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding this opinion_
Very holy yours,
WOR DEN WILLIAMS, APC
D. Wayne Brechtel
dwb@wardenwMa=.mm
DW&Ig
cc; Client
n
A PARTIAL LIST OF PROBLEMS WITH THE 1993
SHADOWROCK DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
1. There is no provision for any kind of a performance bond.
The developer could begin massive grading, run out of money and leave us
with a total mess that City would be unable to restore without a place to turn for
financial assistance.
2. There is no provision requiring the developer to prove to the City that he has
sufficient and ongoing access to capital necessary to complete the project.
Given the record of this developer in obtaining fmancial backing,it is
imperative that the City require this.
3. The final Environmental Impact Report dated April, 1993 is woefully out of date.
While there have been some minor revisions, conditions have changed so
significantly since 1993 that many of the findings are no longer relevant.
4. On page 7, it provides for allowed alternatives to the 60 unit hotel and spa
component of the project to be: (a) a 490 unit hotel, or; (b) an additional 211
homes.
The question then becomes, does anyone know what this project is?
5. On page 9, it states that the Development Agreement supersedes "any initiative,
measure, moratorium, statute, ordinance, or other limitation enacted after the
Effective Date."
At the very least,this would certainly allow Shadowrock to avoid any of the
design and development standards that are so carefully being drafted for the
Chino Cone Ordinance.
6. On page 10, it states that the developer will submit completed applications for
Phase I within 5 years of the effective date.
The citizens certainly haven't seen any such completed applications. We are
aware of a map for a 9-hole golf course that was given to the City this year, more
than twelve years after the effective date, but this map hardly constitutes a
completed application.
7. Again on page 10, it states that, "Developer shall commence construction of the
residential phases within the term of this Agreement."
The residential phases are in Phase 2 and later. He hasn't even started Phase
1. Once again, the developer has failed to live up to the terms of the Agreement.
S. Also on page 10, "City will not unreasonably withhold consent to allow
Developer to develop above ground transmission/utility lines..."
The citizens of this City find this to be unconscionable. This means the City
would be required to allow Shadowrock to erect utility poles up the face of the
`fond f�iG-aN'�
Cone and allow water, sewer and gas lines exposed on the surface,thus defacing
everything up to the development.
9. On page 14 there is a limitation on the application of future land use regulations
on the development.
Again,this provides a means for the developer to avoid best practices or the
standards currently being considered for Chino Cone development.
10. On page 16,there is a requirement that the City and the Developer review the
performance of the agreement and of the development of the project at least once
every 12 months.
The entire documentation in the file for these 13 years of reviews consists of
exactly two pieces of paper. One, a fax from the City to Mark Bragg, dated 1996
asking for a status report,and the other,a return fax from Mark Bragg saying
they are within 30 days of completing the technical work for the golf course.
1996!
These are but a few of the minor issues the citizens of this City have with this
agreement. It is abundantly clear that neither the developer nor the City have
complied with this poorly written document. Times, conditions and values have
changed a lot in 13 years. Mr. Bragg needs to propose a project that reflects those
changed conditions and values_
JUL-10-2006 MON 09: 18 AM FAX NO, P. 02
�aF qjv,
BARBARA DUNMORE y � nt1� 2724 Gateway Drive
Registrar of Votersm Riverside, CA 92507-0918
(951)486-7200 a Fax(951)488-7272
REGISTRAR OF VOTERS www.voteinfo.net
County of Riverside
CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRAR OF VOTERS
State of California )
) ss.
County of Riverside )
1, BARBARA DUNMORE, Registrar of Voters of the County of Riverside, State of California, do
hereby certify that on June 20, 2006, the petition for the Referendum of Ordinance No. 1689 was
delivered to my office by the City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs for the purpose of verifying that
the signatures thereon were registered within the defined area.
I further certify that the signatures on said petition were counted and examined by means of a 100%
verification process or until Lhe sufficient number of required signatures are checked, and that the
results of said examination are as follows:
That the total number of signatures submitted for said petition was..., 2,957
The total number of signatures checked was... ........................ 2,673
- The total number of sufficient signatures on said petition is............ 2,357
- The total number of insufficient signatures on said petition is...,...,. 316
1 further certify that the number of valid signatures required to qualify said petition is 2,286 and that,
because the number of valid signatures on said petition was 2,357, the petition is hereby declared
sufficient.
_ o
_ L _
Dated: July 10, 2006
BARBARA DUNMORE -
Registrar of Voters
— C�7
:• n
Deputy
1UL-10-2006 MOH 09: 18 All FAX NO. P. 01
N:H
2724 Gateway br.
tti�1/ Riverside, CA 92507-0918
Barbara Dunmore � 'n � (951)486-720D
Registrar of Voters ="
FAX(951)486-7272
REGISTRAR OF VOTERS www,yoteinfo net
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
FAX COVER SHEET
TO: .James Thompson FAX #: (760)322-8332
Palm Springs City Clerk
DATE: July 10, 2006 NO, OF PAGES: 2 including cover
SUBJECT: Signature Verification Certificate
Following is the signature verification certificate for the Referendum of Ordinance No. 1689.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
-
n�
tiv
w
From the desk of, . .
Marsha Stokes
Registrar of Voters Office
County of Riverside
2724 Gateway Drive
Riverside, CA 92507-
0918 ;
Phone: (951) 486-7277
Fax: (951) 486-7272 d
°gyp AMS
� c
o`'
°q<,F°R11 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
I
DATE: JULY 26, 2006 LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: PROPOSED ACTIONS REGARDING A REFERENDUM PETITION
FILED FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1689, RECONSIDERATION OF THE
ORDINANCE OR CALLING AN ELECTION AND OTHER MATTERS AS
REQUIRED BY LAW REGARDING THE EXTENSION OF A
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH SHADOWROCK REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager
BY: James Thompson, City Clerk
Douglas Holland, City Attorney
SUMMARY
The City Council will receive and file the Certificate of Sufficiency as prepared by the
City Clerk for a Referendum Petition filed for Ordinance No. 1689. With the
determination that a sufficient number of registered voters have signed the Referendum
Petition, the Council is required to take one of three actions: (1) Rescind Ordinance No.
1689, extending the Shadowrock Development Agreement; (2) Submit the Ordinance to
the voters at the next municipal election (November 6, 2007); or (3) Submit the
Ordinance to the voters at a special election.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Receive and File the Certificate of Sufficiency as prepared and executed by the
City Clerk,
2, Adopt Resolution No. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2006-07 FOR SIGNATURE VERIFICATION SERVICES
RELATING TO A FILED REFERENDUM PETITION."
3. Adopt Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING AND DIRECTING
THE CITY CLERK TO PREPARE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO SUBMIT
TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN EXTENSION
i
I
ITEM NO.S
City Council Staff Report
July 26, 2006--Page 2
Referendum Petition
OF THE TERM OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
AND SHADOWROCK REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT, LLC., AT THE
MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2007."
STAFF ANALYSIS:
On May 17, 2006, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1689 extending the term of
the Development Agreement with Shadowrock Real Estate Development, LLC.
On June 16, 2006, Jonathan Hildner, a qualified registered voter of the City of Palm
Springs filed a petition for the Referendum of Ordinance No. 1689, pursuant to
California Elections Code (E.C.) Section 9239.
The City Clerk issued a Certificate of Sufficiency declaring the petition for the
Referendum of Ordinance No. 1689 as sufficient. Pursuant to E.C. Section 9237 the
ordinance is suspended. This means that the extension of the agreement is currently
not in effect and can only become effective if it is approved by the voters.
E.C. Section 9241 requires the City Council to take one of three actions. The Council's
first option is to repeal the ordinance, thereby rescinding the agreement extension. The
repeal of the ordinance would eliminate the need to call for an election. The Council's
second option is to submit the ordinance to the voters at the next regular municipal
election, scheduled for November 6, 2007. The Council's third option is to submit the
ordinance to the voters at a special election, which could be November 7, 2006, March
6, 2007, or June 5, 2007- The cost of submitting the matter to the voters at the next
municipal election is $7,500; the cost of a special election is estimated to be at least
$20,000 if it is consolidated with a statewide election, including the election in
November of 2006. A March, 2007 or a June, 2007 special election, which would be a
stand alone election, would likely cost at least $55,000, as well as additional potential
cost and impact as outlined in the fiscal impact section of this report.
The ordinance, and its concomitant extension of the Shadowrock development
agreement, will not become effective until a majority of the voters vote in favor of it.
Additionally, if the City Council repeals the ordinance or the voters do not vote in favor
of the ordinance, the City Council will be prohibited from adopting the same ordinance
for a period of one year after the date the City Council repeals the ordinance or the
ordinance is disapproved by the voters.
It should also be noted that a lawsuit challenging the Council's approval of the extension
of the Shadowrock development agreement was served on the City July 13, 2006. this
lawsuit was filed by the Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity, and
challenges several aspects of the development agreement extension, including the
adequacy of the environmental assessment, and the applicability of the administrative
approval of "force majeure" extensions of the original development agreement. It is
City Council Staff Report
July 26, 2006 -- Page 3
Referendum Petition
anticipated that most if not all of the causes of action in this lawsuit will continue
regardless of the outcome of any election. This is especially true regarding the force
majeure applicability issues. There are outstanding requests of the property owner to
extend the initial development agreement due to force majeure claims. If these claims
are ultimately validated, the initial development agreement may remain in effect for
additional periods of time. Thus, the results of the election on the agreement extension
will not resolve the lawsuit. Nevertheless, the lawsuit may resolve issues that would
affect the election. For example, if the court concurs with the Sierra Club and the
Center for Biological Diversity that the environmental assessment is inadequate, then
the City will be required to rescind its action to approve the extension of the agreement
and complete whatever additional environmental work the court may require. Under
such circumstances, the election would not be required.
Since the Elections Code allows the Council to submit the matter to the voters at the
next regular municipal election and the pending lawsuit may produce results that would
negate the need for an election, staff recommends that the Council pursue Option No. 2
and submit the ordinance approving the extension of the development agreement to
November 6, 2007.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS (MOTIONS):
Option No. 1: Move the City Council to rescind the ordinance in its entirety:
1. Receive and File the Certificate of Sufficiency as prepared and executed by the
City Clerk.
2. Adopt Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2006-07 FOR SIGNATURE VERIFICATION SERVICES
RELATING TO A FILED REFERENDUM PETITION."
3. Waive the reading of the Ordinance text in its entirety and introduce by title only
Ordinance No. "AN OR OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA REPEALING IN ITS ENTIRETY ORDINANCE NO. 1689
PERTAINING TO AN EXTENSION OF THE TERM OF THE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND SHADOWROCK REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPMENT, LLC."
Option No. 2: (RECOMMENDED ACTION) Move the City Council to submit the
ordinance to the voters at the next regular municipal election of November 6, 2007:
1. Receive and File the Certificate of Sufficiency as prepared and executed by the
City Clerk.
City Council Staff Report
July 26, 2006-- Page 4
Referendum Petition
2. Adopt Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2006-07 FOR SIGNATURE VERIFICATION SERVICES
RELATING TO A FILED REFERENDUM PETITION."
3. Adopt Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING AND DIRECTING
THE CITY CLERK TO PREPARE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO SUBMIT
TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN EXTENSION
OF THE TERM OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
AND SHADOWROCK REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT, LLC. AT THE
MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2007. "
Option No. 3: Move the City Council to call a Special Election (November 7. 2006,
March 6. 200, or June 5, 2007) and submit the ordinance to the voters at such special
election and for the November 7. 2006 election adopt the Resolutions listed below:
1. Receive and File the Certificate of Sufficiency as prepared and executed by the
City Clerk.
2. Adopt Resolution No. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2006-07 FOR SIGNATURE VERIFICATION SERVICES
RELATING TO A FILED REFERENDUM PETITION."
3, Adopt Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2006-07 FOR THE PURPOSE OF A SPECIAL ELECTION."
4. Adapt Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE
OF THE HOLDING OF A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION ON TUESDAY,
FOR THE SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED
VOTERS AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF THE TERM OF
THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND
SHADOWROCK REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT, LLC."
5. Adopt Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, SETTING PRIORITIES FOR
FILING WRITTEN ARGUMENTS REGARDING A CITY MEASURE AT THE
SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION AND
DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS."
6. Adopt Resolution No. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR THE FILING
City Council Staff Report
July 26, 2006 -- Page 5
Referendum Petition
OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS FOR A CITY MEASURE SUBMITTED AT THE
SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION,
7. Adopt Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO RENDER SPECIFIED
SERVICES TO THE CITY RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF A SPECIAL
MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, "
8. Adopt Resolution No. , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA ORDERING THE CANVASS OF
THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD BE
MADE BY THE CITY CLERK."
FISCAL IMPACT: Finance Director Rev'
The City Clerk is requesting a budget transfer from Gen Fund Balance to City Clerk
Elections in the amount of $1,800 to pay for requisite signature verification services
provided by the County of Riverside, Registrar of Voters.
If the City Council calls a special municipal election to be consolidated with the
November 7, 2006, statewide general election, the City Clerk is requesting a budget
transfer from General Fund Balance to City Clerk Elections in the amount of$20,000, to
conduct the special municipal election.
If the City Council directs the City Clerk to prepare documents to hold a special stand-
alone municipal election, the estimated cost of conducting such election is $55,000.
The cost is not budgeted and the City Clerk would prepare a resolution to amend the
budget if a special election is called.
If the City Council directs the City Clerk to prepare documents to add the measure to
the November, 2007 Regular Municipal Election, the estimated cost of printing and
postage to add the measure is $7,500. The City Clerk would incorporate this cost when
preparing the 2007-08 budget.
Additionally, the above appropriation requests and information are to pay the estimated
costs incurred by the County of Riverside for services, and do not include the cost nor
any impact to the City and the City Clerk's Department. If the City Council chooses to
conduct an election in fiscal year 2006-07, the City Clerk's Department is committed to
conduct the election without an additional appropriation for staff overtime or temporary
employees.
i
City Council Staff Report
July 26, 2006-- Page 6
Referendum Petition
However, the City Clerk, upon further analysis of the full impact to the Department may
need to return to the City Council for an additional appropriation.
/T es Thompson, City Clerk David H. Ready, City Madaage�
(/ Douglas olland, City Attorney
Attachments:
A. Certificate of Sufficiency
B. Resolution Amending the Budget for Signature Verification
C Ordinance No. 1689 (as adapted)
D. Ordinance Rescinding Ordinance No. 1689
E. Resolution Ordering the City Clerk to prepare Documents for Election
F. Resolution Amending Budget for a Special Election
G. Resolution Calling a Special Election
H. Resolution for Arguments
I. Resolution for Rebuttal Arguments
J. Resolution for County Services
K. Resolution for Canvass
"VIM -�:111 5
0
101 %�I'
Pill
IV
gg"
�yQii
............
CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY
State of California
County of Riverside ss.
City of Palm Springs
".W
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Elections Code Section 9239, on June 16,
2006, Jonathan D. Hildne a qualified registered voter of the City of Palm
? Springs submitted a petition for the Referendum of Ordinance No. 1689
entitled:
�011
g
REFERENDUM AGAINST AN ORDINANCE PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN
2A,
EXTENSION OF THE TERM OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
AND SHADOWROCK REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG TRAMWAY ROAD,
APPROXIMATELY 15 MILES WEST OF HIGHWAY111, PDD224, SECTIONS 5, 6, AND S. ---
4,
WHEREAS, Election Code Section 9240 requires the election official t
examine the petition and certify the results.
Fri:-
WHEREAS, the City of Palm Springs Charler Section 501(g)
designates the City Clerk as the election official for the City of Palm Springs.
M
WHEREAS, I examined and/or caused the counting and examination
by means of a 100% verification process of the signatures on said petition or
srs until the sufficient number of requisite signatures are checked.
-0"
WHEREAS, the number of valid signatures required to qualify said
petition is 2,286 and the number of valid signatures on said petition was
2,357.
NOW THEREFORE, I James Thompson, City Clerk of the City of Palm
Springs, California, do hereby certify the petition for the Referendum of 2
q-11
Ordinance No. 1689 is declared sufficient.
Dated this 121h day of July, 2006.
C'
Thompson, City Clerk
ty of Palm Springs, California
I: 4WU�121;
%F
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE BUDGET
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006-07 FOR SIGNATURE
VERIFICATION SERVICES RELATING TO A FILED
REFERENDUM PETITION.
WHEREAS Resolution 21611 approving the budget for the fiscal year 2006-07 was
adopted on June 7, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended, and the City Council desires to
approve, certain amendments to said budget;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Director of Finance is authorized to
record inter-fund cash transfers as required in accordance with this Resolution, and that
Resolution 21611, adopting the budget for the 2006-07 fiscal year is hereby amended as
Follows:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE:
Signature Verification to the County of Riverside, Referendum Ordinance No. 1689.
SECTION 2. ADDITIONS.
Fund Activity Account Amount
001 General Fund 1150 City Clerk 43860 Elections $ 1,800.
SECTION 3. SOURCE.
Fund Activity Account Amount
001 General Fund Fund Balance Fund Balance $ 1,800
ADOPTED this 26"' day of July, 2006.
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTEST:
James Thompson, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 8
i
i
i
Resolution No.
Page 2
I
CERTIFICATION
' STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
Resolution No. is a Full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular
i meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on July 26, 2006, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
I
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
!
�
i ORDINANCE NO. 1689
' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF THE TERM
OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
AND SHADOWROCK REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT, LLC, A
❑ELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED ALONG TRAMWAY ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1.5
MILES WEST OF HIGHWAY 111, PDD 224, SECTIONS 5, 5,
and 8.
I The City Council of the City of Palm Spring finds:
' A. Shadowrock Real Estate Development LLC, (the "Applicant") filed an application
(PIDD 224-CASE 5.0609) for a ten-year time extension to the term of a Development
Agreement to construct an 18-hole golf course with clubhouse, 270 unit lodge (composed
of 200 condominiums, 10 bungalows, 60 hotel rooms), a spa/fitness/tennis facility and 135
single family estate lots. A total of 405 dwelling units was proposed with the original project
with the City pursuant to Section 9402.00 of the Zoning Ordinance and the Palm Springs
Municipal Code Section 9.60. A Final Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the
' project and was certified and adopted by the City Council on May 5, 1993, in compliance
with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The project is located on Tramway Road
approximately 1.5 miles west of Highway 111, PDD 224 Zone, Sections 5, 6, and 8.
i
B. A Development Agreement was approved by the City Council on November 17,
1993, and the Original Term of the Development Agreement is a period of ten (10) years,
From December 17, 1993 to December 17, 2003. In addition to the period of the Original
Term, the Term of the Agreement has been extended to June 29, 2006, per Section 172
of said Agreement.
j C. The Development Agreement provides for vested rights of development for the
project and provides for conditions and requirements that will govern future discretionary
approvals.
D. Notice of the public hearing was provided in accordance with the Palm Springs
Municipal Code to consider the time extension of the Development Agreement for the
Shadowrock development project.
E. The development proposed by Shadowrock Real Estate Development, LLC was
fully analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Report and is consistent with the Final
EIIR that was prepared for the project and which was previously distributed for public
comment in accordance with CEQA.
F. An Addendum was prepared to the previously certified Environmental Impact
Report which discusses minor technical changes and concludes that the conditions
described in Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act, calling for the
preparation of a subsequent EIR have not occurred.
ATTACHMENT C
i
Ordinance No. 1689
Page 2
G. A recent biological survey dated April 7, 2006, of the project site substantiate the
biological conditions described in the Final EIR and no additional surveys are required. '
i H. The addendum is not required to be circulated for public review but shall be
attached to the Final EIR as required per Section 15164 of the California Environmental
i Quality Act.
I. The Applicant has proposed to provide the City with the sum of Five Hundred
Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) for general government purposes as an additional public
benefit of the project to be paid upon issuance of the first building permit for the project.
i
j J. On April 26, 2006, after conducting a public hearing, with notice provided in
accordance with established procedures, and reviewing and considering all of the
evidence presented in connection with project including, but not limited to, the staff report,
the Addendum, the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Shadowrock
project, and all written and oral testimony presented, the Planning Commission adopted a
resolution recommending denial of the request.
THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN, AS
FOLLOWS:
i
SECTION 1. Pursuant to CEQA, the City Council determines that the Development
Agreement is in compliance with the Final Environmental Impact Report that was prepared
for the Shadowrock project and was certified and adopted on May 5, 1993 and is in
compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines; the EIR adequately addresses the
general environmental setting of the proposed Project, its significant environmental
impacts, and the alternatives and mitigation measures related to each significant
environmental effect for the proposed Project. The City Council has independently
reviewed and considered the Agreement is in conformance with the information contained
j in the certified Final Environmental Impact Report.
i
SECTION 2. There is no new substantiaV evidence with respect to environmental effects
that has been submitted to the City and there are no substantial changes with respect to
the project that would require revisions to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report.
Originally, the approved project included a destination resort that included an 18-hole golf
course, a spa/fitness/tennis facility, 135 single-family and luxury estate homes, 270-unit
lodge facility consisting of a 60-unit hotel building 10 luxury bungalows and 200 luxury
condominiums. The subject project continues to entail construction of an 18-hole golf
course, clubhouse, hotel/resort, future residential use, and a reservoir site on 347.67
acres. In the first phase the extent of the golf course has been reduced to comply with the
conditions of approval, mitigation measures, and a settlement agreement derived from a
previous lawsuit (California Department of Fish and Game v. City of Palm Springs,
Riverside Superior Court, Case No. 1-69777) on the project. Since the scope of the golf
course has been reduced from 158 acres to 142 acres and avoids the "No Development ,
Zone per the settlement agreement, the potential for impacts has even been lessened
than what the certified Final Environmental Impact Report analyzed. Thus, no further
environmental review is necessary.
Ordinance No. 1689
Page 3
SECTION 3. A mitigation monitoring program was previously adopted pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21081.6 in order to assure compliance with the above-referenced
mitigation measures during Project implementation. This mitigation monitoring program
was included as a condition of approval of the Project_ In addition, pursuant to the
settlement agreement referenced above, the Applicant agreed to additional mitigation
measures to be incorporated into the project. The potential for an impact is even less as
noted in the Addendum than what was analyzed in the certified Final Environmental
Impact Report. Thus, no further mitigation is necessary.
SECTION 4. The City Council finds that the plans for the Development are in compliance
with the settlement agreement discussed above.
SECTION 5. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473,5, the City Council finds that
extension of the Development Agreement is compatible with the objectives, policies, and
general land uses and programs provided in the City's General Plan and the Preliminary
Planned Development District approved by the City Council on May 5, 1993.
SECTION 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474 and Section 94.08.00.A.14,
the. City Council finds that:
a. The extension of the Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives,
policies, general land uses and programs of the General Plan and Preliminary Planned
Development District (PDD) 224, and is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the
regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the property is located. The
project site is located within the Tramway Aroa Plan and is designated as LSR (Large-
Scale Resort) in the General Plan which emphasizes recreational and resort living. The
project at this time entails construction of an 18-hole golf course, clubhouse,
hotelfresort, future residential use, and a reservoir site on 347.67 acres. The approved
project, PDD-224 included a destination resort that included an 18-hole golf course, a
spalfitnessltennis facility, 135 single-family and luxury estate homes, 270-unit lodge
facility consisting of a 60-unit hotel building, 10 luxury bungalows and 200 luxury
condominiums, Thus, even though the project has been adjusted to comply with the
conditions of approval, mitigation monitoring program, and Settlement Agreement from
what was approved, extension of the Development Agreement is still consistent with
the General Plan and PDD-224.
b. That the extension is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare and
good land use practice, and further with no be detrimental to the health, safety and
general welfare. All street, drainage, and utilities improvements are required subject to
the General Plan and PDD-224. A hydrology study is required to analyze on- and off-
site drainage patterns. The applicant will need to improve Tramway Road so there are
no circulation problems. The applicant is required to obtain the necessary approvals
from all utility companies.
c. That the extension of the development Agreement will not adversely affect the
orderly development of property or the preservation of property values. The site is
Ordinance No, 1689
Page 4
physically suitable for the type of development contemplated by the proposed
subdivision. The proposed golf course is generally located on 8% to 10% slope. The
developer donated 565 acres of hillside to the Parks, Open Space and Trails
Foundation to be maintained as open space. Thus, the project is suitable for the
subject site with the mitigation measures proposed.
d, There is no new substantial evidence that was identified in the Addendum with
respect to environmental effects that has been submitted to the City and there are no
substantial changes with respect to the project that would require revisions to the
certified Final Environmental Impact Report. The Final Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) that was certified on May 5, 1993, by the City Council adequately addressed all
potential impacts and incorporated mitigation measures associated with the subject
property. In additional, the applicant and the State of California Department of Fish &
Game entered into a Settlement Agreement on October 20, 1993, in which additional
mitigation measures were incorporated into the project. As noted in the Addendum,
there is no new substantial evidence with respect to environmental effects that has
been submitted to the City and there are no substantial changes with respect to the
project that would require revisions to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report.
Since the scope of the project has been reduced, the potential for impacts has even
been lessened that what the certified EIR analyzed. Thus, no further environmental
review is necessary. If significant changes are in later phases, additional environmental
review will be undertaken at that time.
e. The project alterations are due to the State of California Department of Fish &
Game Settlement Agreement and the conditions. Thus, the potential for impacts
associated with the project have been reduced from what was originally analyzed in the
EIR. The scope of the project has been downsized from was originally approved. The
project alterations are due to the Settlement Agreement, The proposed fencing of the
golf course is to retain domestic animals within residential areas (Bighorn Sheep
Mitigation No. 11). The State of California Department of Fish & Game removed the
fence requirement so Bighorn Sheep could traverse the golf course. The City Council
did not defer to delete conditions with respect to sewer, retention of storm water onsite.
A hydrology study is required to analyze on- and off-site drainage. The applicant is
required to submit final landscape plans as a part of the conditions of approval. The
applicant has donated 565 acres to Parks, Open Space and Trails Foundation to be
held as permanent open space. A Fugitive Dust and Erosion Control Plan has been
submitted for approval as a part of the grading plan. The mitigation measures regarding
hazardous materials were not modified by the City Council. Thus, no further mitigation
is necessary_
f. The EIR that was adopted and certified in 1993 fully analyzed the Peninsular
Bighorn Sheep with respect to potential impacts and mitigation measures. An
Addendum to the EIR dated April 20, 2006 has been prepared for the project and did
not identify any additional impacts. A letter from John Wehausen, Ph.D. finds that the ,
biological conditions at the site are not significantly changed since the EIR was
adopted. The certified EIR fully analyzed the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep with respect to
potential impacts and mitigation measures. In addition, the settlement agreement, a
Ordinance No. 1689
Page 5
legal and binding contract, required additional measures regarding the bighorn sheep.
These measures included a "No Development Zone"; acquisition of 340 acres in
Blasedell Canyon to replace the 331 acres of bighorn sheep habitat disturbed by the
project; payment of $50,000 to the State Fish & Game Department for a study of the
bighorn sheep in the San Jacinto Mountains. Thus, no further mitigation is necessary.
g. The application entails construction of an 18-hale golf course, clubhouse,
hotelfresort, future residential use, and a reservoir site on 347.67 acres. The application
does not include development of the Indian land along the northwestern portion of the
site. Since the application at this time does not include the Indian land along the
northwestern portion of the site, this will ensure that this property will not be developed
as a part of this project. If development is ever proposed on this property, separate
environmental review may be required al that time.
h. The certified EIR adequately addressed and reviewed five alternative sites for the
subject property. Based on the criteria used, many of the alternative sites contain
constraints that would not meet the Citys and Developers objectives. There is also an
approved Planned Development District that allows the developer the right to pursue
development of the subject property.
i. The grading proposed at this time has been reduced from what the certified EIR
originally analyzed. The size of the golf course has been reduced from 158 acres to
142 acres. The certified EIR indicated that there will be 122,234 cubic yards of earth
cut, about 609,491 cubic yards of earth fill, and approximately 490,000 cubic yards of
earth imported as fill; however, because of the reduced scope of the project, the
amount of grading has also been reduced. It is estimated that there will be 370,000
cubic yards of earth cut, about 350,000 cubic yards of earth fill, and about 280,000
cubic yards of import fill, Thus, the potential for an impact related to grading has been
reduced from what was previously analyzed in the EIR.
j. A nexus and rough proportionality have been established for requirement of
dedication of the additional right-of-way to the City and the off-site improvements as
related to the Preliminary Planned Development District and tentative tract map_ The
right-of-way off-site improvements, which are required by the Preliminary Planned
Development District and the Final Environmental Impact Report, are related to the
project since the property owners must use Tramway to access the site. Currently, the
subject property is vacant and therefore little or no usage of the roads, sidewalks and
utilities is due to the subject property at this time. However, the future property owners
will benefit from any improvements made to Tramway such as dedication of
easements, sidewalks/bikepaths and future widening. Modifications are required to
meet City engineering standards. The required widening and vertical/horizontal street
improvements will provide safety benefits to the property owners and will aesthetically
enhance the subject area.
SECTION 7. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.6, the City Council has
determined that the discharge of waste from the proposed project into the existing sewer
system will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Regional
Ordinance No. 1689
Page 6
Water Quality Control Board. On an interim basis septic tanks may be approved For the
clubhouse only.
SECTION S. Based on the forgoing, the City Council approves a ten-year time extension
of the term of the Development Agreement originally approved by Resolution No. 1462
between the City and Shadowrack Real Estate Development, LLC, ending June 29, 2016,
and accepts the offer of $500,000,00 From Shadowrock Real Estate Development, LLC for
general government purposes.
SECTION 9. The City Manager is hereby directed to execute an amendment to the
Development Agreement as described in this Ordinance and as approved as to form by
the City Attomey.
ADOPTED this 17°i day of May, 2006.
1 r'7
MAYeR
ATTEST:
i Clerk
CERTIFICATION:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify
that Ordinance No. 1689 is a full, true, and correct copy, and was introduced at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on May 3, 2006 and adopted at a
regular meeting of the City Council held on May 17, 2006 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember McCulloch, Councilmember Mills and Mayor Oden
NOES: Councilmember Pougnet
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tern Foat
ABSTAIN: None
,,dames Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, REPEALING IN ITS ENTIRETY ORDINANCE
NO. 1689 PERTAINING TO AN EXTENSION OF THE
TERM OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY AND SHADOWROCK REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
WHEREAS, the City Council on May 17, 2006, duly adopted Ordinance No. 1689
pertaining to and extending the term of the Development Agreement with Shadowrock
Real Estate Development LLC; and
WHEREAS, on June 16, 2006, a qualified registered voter of the City of Palm
Springs filed a petition for the Referendum of Ordinance No. 1689, pursuant to
California Elections Code Section 9239; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk examined or caused the examination of registration
and declared the filed referendum petition as sufficient and executed a Certificate of
Sufficiency; and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2006, the City Council, pursuant to California Elections
Code Section 9237, reconsidered Ordinance No. 1689.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Ordinance No. 1689 is hereby repealed in its entirety.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 9421 the ordinance shall
not again be enacted by the City Council for a period of one year.
ADOPTED this day of , 2006.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT D
Ordinance No.
Page 2
CERTIFICATION:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby
certify that Ordinance No. is a full, true, and correct copy, and was introduced at a
regular meeting of the Palm Springs City Council on and adopted at a
regular meeting of the City Council held on by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA ORDERING AND
DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PREPARE ALL
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO SUBMIT TO THE
QUALIFIED VOTERS AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN
EXTENSION OF THE TERM OF THE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND SHADOWROCK
REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT, LLC. AT AN ELECTION
TO BE HELD TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2007.
WHEREAS, the City Council on May 17, 2006, duly adopted Ordinance No. 1689
pertaining to and extending the term of the Development Agreement with Shadowrock
Real Estate Development LLC; and
WHEREAS, on June 16, 2006, a qualified registered voter of the City of Palm
Springs filed a petition for the Referendum of Ordinance No. 1689, pursuant to
California Elections Code Section 9239; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk examined or caused the examination of registration
and declared the filed referendum petition as sufficient and executed a Certificate of
Sufficiency; and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2006, the City Council, pursuant to California Elections
Code Section 9237 reconsidered Ordinance No, 1689.
WHEREAS, the City Council has not voted in favor of the repeal of the
Ordinance.
WHEREAS, the City Council is required by California Elections Code Section
9241 to submit the ordinance to the voters.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to prepare all
necessary documents to submit to the qualified voters an ordinance approving an
extension of the term of the development agreement between the City and Shadowrock
Real Estate Development, LLC. at an election to be held Tuesday, November 6, 2007.
ADOPTED THIS 26T" day of July, 2006.
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTACHMENT E
Resolution No.
Page 2
I
,ATTEST:
i
James Thompson, City Clerk
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
Resolution No. _ is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on July 26, 2006, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
RESOLUTION N0.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE BUDGET
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006-07 FOR THE PURPOSE OF A
SPECIAL ELECTION.
WHEREAS Resolution 21611 approving the budget for the fiscal year 2006-07 was
adopted on June 7, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended, and the City Council desires to
approve, certain amendments to said budget;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Director of Finance is authorized to
record inter-fund cash transfers as required in accordance with this Resolution, and that
Resolution 21611, adopting the budget for the 2006-07 fiscal year is hereby amended as
follows:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE:
Conduct a Special Election November 7, 2006,
SECTION 2. ADDITIONS.
Fund Activity Account Amount
001 General Fund 1150 City Clerk 43860 Elections $ 20,000.
SECTION 3. SOURCE.
Fund Activity Account Amount
001 General Fund Fund Balance Fund Balance $ 20,000.
ADOPTED this 26" day of July, 2006.
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTEST:
James Thompson, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT
Resolution No.
Page 2
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
Resolution No, is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on July 26, 2006, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA CALLING AND GIVING
NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2006, FOR THE
SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS AN
ORDINANCE APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF THE
TERM OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY AND SHADOWROCK REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
WHEREAS, the City Council on May 17, 2006, duly adopted Ordinance No. 1689
pertaining to and extending the term of the Development Agreement with Shadowrock
Real Estate Development LLC; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 1689 was published as required by law; and
WHEREAS, on June 16, 2006, a qualified registered voter of the City of Palm
Springs filed a petition for the Referendum of Ordinance No. 1689, pursuant to
California Elections Code Section 9239; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk examined or caused the examination of registration
and declared the filed referendum petition as sufficient and executed a Certificate of
Sufficiency; and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2006, the City Council, pursuant to California Elections
Code Section 9237 reconsidered Ordinance No. 1689; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has not voted in favor of the repeal of the
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is required by California Elections Code Section
9241 to submit the ordinance to the voters.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of the Charter of the City of Palm
Springs and the laws of the State California pertaining to the conduct of elections, there
is called and ordered to be held in the City of Palm Springs, California, on Tuesday,
November 7, 2006, a Special Municipal Election for the purpose of submitting the
following ordinance:
ATTACHMENT G
Resolution No.
Page 2
Shall Ordinance No. 1689, extending the term of the YES
Development Agreement between the City of Palm Springs and
Shadowrock Real Estate Development, LLC., be approved? NO
SECTION 2. That the text of the ordinance submitted to the voters is attached as
Exhibit A.
SECTION 3. That the ballots to be used at the election shall be in form and content as
required by law.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to procure and furnish
any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter, supplies, and equipment that may be
necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election.
SECTION 5. The Polls for the election shall be open at seven o'clock a.m. (7:00 AM) of
the day of the election and shall remain open continuously from that time until eight
o'clock p.m. (8:00 PM) of the same day when the polls shall be closed, except as
provided in Section 14401 of the California Elections Code.
SECTION 6. In all matters not recited in this resolution, the election shall be held and
conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections.
SECTION 7. Notice of the time and place of holding the election is given and the City
Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of the
election, in time, form and manner as required by law.
ADOPTED THIS 26TH day of July, 2006.
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTEST:
James Thompson, City Clerk
Resolution No._
Page 3
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
Resolution No. is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on July 26, 2006, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
EXHIBIT A
ORDINANCE NO. 1689
AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF PALM
i SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF
j THE TERM OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY AND SHADOWROCK REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPMENT, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG TRAMWAY
ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1.5 MILES WEST OF HIGHWAY
111, PDD 224, SECTIONS 5, 6, and 8.
I
i The People of the City of Palm Spring finds:
I
A. Shadowrock Real Estate Development LLC, (the "Applicant") filed an application
(PDD-224-CASE 5.0609) for a ten-year time extension to the term of a Development
' Agreement to construct an 18-hole golf course with clubhouse, 270 unit lodge (composed
of 200 condominiums, 10 bungalows, 60 hotel rooms), a spa/fitness/tennis facility and 135
single family estate lots. A total of 405 dwelling units was proposed with the original project
i with the City pursuant to Section 9402.00 of the Zoning Ordinance and the Palm Springs
Municipal Code Section 9.60. A Final Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the
project and was certified and adopted by the City Council on May 5, 1993, in compliance
with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The project is located on Tramway Road
i
approximately 1.5 miles west of Highway 111, PDD 224 Zone, Sections 5, 6, and 8.
i
B. A Development Agreement was approved by the City Council on November 17,
1993, and the "Original Term of the Development Agreement is a period of ten (10) years,
from December 17, 1993 to December 17, 2003. In addition to the period of the Original
Term, the Term of the Agreement has been extended to June 29, 2006, per Section 17.2
of said Agreement.
C. The Development Agreement provides for vested rights of development for the
project and provides for conditions and requirements that will govern future discretionary
approvals.
D. Notice of the public hearing was provided in accordance with the Palm Springs
Municipal Code to consider the time extension of the Development Agreement for the
Shadowrock development project.
E. The development proposed by Shadowrock Real Estate Development, LLC was
fully analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Report and is consistent with the Final
EIR that was prepared for the project and which was previously distributed for public
comment in accordance with CEQA.
F. An Addendum was prepared to the previously certified Environmental Impact
Report which discusses minor technical changes and concludes that the conditions
described in Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act, calling for the
preparation of a subsequent EIR have not occurred.
Ordinance No. 1689
Page 2
G. A recent biological survey dated April 7, 2006, of the project site substantiate the
biological conditions described in the Final EIR and no additional surveys are required.
H. The addendum is not required to be circulated for public review but shall be
attached to the Final EIR as required per Section 15164 of the California Environmental
Quality Act.
I. The Applicant has proposed to provide the City with the sum of Five Hundred
Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) for general government purposes as an additional public
benefit of the project to be paid upon issuance of the first building permit for the project.
J. On April 26, 2006, after conducting a public hearing, with notice provided in
accordance with established procedures, and reviewing and considering all of the
evidence presented in connection with project including, but not limited to, the staff report,
the Addendum, the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Shadowrock
project, and all written and oral testimony presented, the Planning Commission adopted a
resolution recommending denial of the request.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DO HEREBY ORDAIN, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to CEQA, the City Council determines that the Development
Agreement is in compliance with the Final Environmental Impact Report that was prepared
for the Shadowrock project and was certified and adopted on May 5, 1993 and is in
compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines; the EIR adequately addresses the
general environmental setting of the proposed Project, its significant environmental
impacts, and the alternatives and mitigation measures related to each significant
environmental effect for the proposed Project. The City Council has independently
reviewed and considered the Agreement is in conformance with the information contained
in the certified Final Environmental Impact Report.
SECTION 2. There is no new substantial evidence with respect to environmental effects
that has been submitted to the City and there are no substantial changes with respect to
the project that would require revisions to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report.
Originally, the approved project included a destination resort that included an 18-hole golf
course, a spa/fitness/tennis facility, 135 single-family and luxury estate homes, 270-unit
lodge facility consisting of a 60-unit hotel building 10 luxury bungalows and 200 luxury
condominiums. The subject project continues to entail construction of an 18-hole golf
course, clubhouse, hotel/resort, future residential use, and a reservoir site on 347.67
acres. In the first phase the extent of the golf course has been reduced to comply with the
conditions of approval, mitigation measures, and a settlement agreement derived from a
previous lawsuit (California Department of Fish and Game v. City of Palm Springs,
Riverside Superior Court, Case No. 1-69777) on the project. Since the scope of the golf
course has been reduced from 158 acres to 142 acres and avoids the No Development
Zone per the settlement agreement, the potential for impacts has even been lessened
than what the certified Final Environmental Impact Report analyzed. Thus, no further
environmental review is necessary.
i
Ordinance No. 1689
Page 3
SECTION 3. A mitigation monitoring program was previously adopted pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21081.6 in order to assure compliance with the above-referenced
mitigation measures during Project implementation. This mitigation monitoring program
was included as a condition of approval of the Project. In addition, pursuant to the
settlement agreement referenced above, the Applicant agreed to additional mitigation
measures to be incorporated into the project. The potential for an impact is even less as
noted in the Addendum than what was analyzed in the certified Final Environmental
Impact Report. Thus, no further mitigation is necessary.
SECTION 4. The People of the City of Palm Springs finds that the plans for the
Development are in compliance with the settlement agreement discussed above.
SECTION 5. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5, the People of the City of
Palm Springs finds that extension of the Development Agreement is compatible with the
objectives, policies, and general land uses and programs provided in the City's General
Plan and the Preliminary Planned Development District approved by the City Council on
May 5, 1993.
SECTION 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474 and Section 94.08.00-A.14,
the City Council finds that:
a. The extension of the Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives,
policies, general land uses and programs of the General Plan and Preliminary Planned
Development District (PDD) 224, and is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the
regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the property is located. The
project site is located within the Tramway Area Plan and is designated as LSR (Large-
Scale Resort) in the General Plan which emphasizes recreational and resort living. The
project at this time entails construction of an 18-hole golf course, clubhouse,
hotel/resort, future residential use, and a reservoir site on 347.67 acres. The approved
project, PDD-224 included a destination resort that included an 18-hole golf course, a
spa/fitness/tennis facility, 135 single-family and luxury estate homes, 270-unit lodge
facility consisting of a 60-unit hotel building, 10 luxury bungalows and 200 luxury
condominiums, Thus, even though the project has been adjusted to comply with the
conditions of approval, mitigation monitoring program, and Settlement Agreement from
what was approved, extension of the Development Agreement is still consistent with
the General Plan and PDD-224.
b. That the extension is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare and
good land use practice, and further with no be detrimental to the health, safety and
general welfare. All street, drainage, and utilities improvements are required subject to
the General Plan and PDD-224. A hydrology study is required to analyze on- and off-
site drainage patterns. The applicant will need to improve Tramway Road so there are
no circulation problems. The applicant is required to obtain the necessary approvals
from all utility companies.
c. That the extension of the development Agreement will not adversely affect the
orderly development of property or the preservation of property values. The site is
i
Ordinance No. 1689
Page 4
physically suitable for the type of development contemplated by the proposed
subdivision. The proposed golf course is generally located on 8% to 10% slope. The
developer donated 565 acres of hillside to the Parks, Open Space and Trails
Foundation to be maintained as open space. Thus, the project is suitable for the
subject site with the mitigation measures proposed.
d. There is no new substantial evidence that was identified in the Addendum with
respect to environmental effects that has been submitted to the City and there are no
substantial changes with respect to the project that would require revisions to the
certified Final Environmental Impact Report. The Final Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) that was certified on May 5, 1993, by the City Council adequately addressed all
potential impacts and incorporated mitigation measures associated with the subject
property. In additional, the applicant and the State of California Department of Fish &
Game entered into a Settlement Agreement on October 20, 1993, in which additional
mitigation measures were incorporated into the project. As noted in the Addendum,
there is no new substantial evidence with respect to environmental effects that has
been submitted to the City and there are no substantial changes with respect to the
project that would require revisions to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report.
Since the scope of the project has been reduced, the potential for impacts has even
been lessened that what the certified EIR analyzed. Thus, no further environmental
review is necessary. If significant changes are in later phases, additional environmental
review will be undertaken at that time.
e. The project alterations are due to the State of California Department of Fish &
Game Settlement Agreement and the conditions. Thus, the potential for impacts
associated with the project have been reduced from what was originally analyzed in the
EIR. The scope of the project has been downsized from was originally approved. The
project alterations are due to the Settlement Agreement. The proposed fencing of the
golf course is to retain domestic animals within residential areas (Bighorn Sheep
Mitigation No. 11). The State of California Department of Fish & Game removed the
fence requirement so Bighorn Sheep could traverse the golf course. The City Council
did not defer to delete conditions with respect to sewer, retention of storm water onsite.
A hydrology study is required to analyze on- and off-site drainage. The applicant is
required to submit final landscape plans as a part of the conditions of approval. The
applicant has donated 565 acres to Parks, Open Space and Trails Foundation to be
held as permanent open space. A Fugitive Dust and Erosion Control Plan has been
submitted for approval as a part of the grading plan. The mitigation measures regarding
hazardous materials were not modified by the City Council. Thus, no further mitigation
is necessary.
f. The EIR that was adopted and certified in 1993 fully analyzed the Peninsular
Bighorn Sheep with respect to potential impacts and mitigation measures. An
Addendum to the EIR dated April 20, 2006 has been prepared for the project and did
not identify any additional impacts. A letter from John Wehausen, Ph.D. finds that the
biological conditions at the site are not significantly changed since the EIR was
adopted. The certified EIR fully analyzed the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep with respect to
potential impacts and mitigation measures. In addition, the settlement agreement, a
Ordinance No. 1689
' Page 5
legal and binding contract, required additional measures regarding the bighorn sheep.
These measures included a "No Development Zone"; acquisition of 340 acres in
Blasedell Canyon to replace the 331 acres of bighorn sheep habitat disturbed by the
project; payment of $50,000 to the State Fish & Game Department for a study of the
bighorn sheep in the San Jacinto Mountains. Thus, no further mitigation is necessary.
i g. The application entails construction of an 18-hale golf course, clubhouse,
hotel/resort, future residential use, and a reservoir site on 347.67 acres. The application
does not include development of the Indian land along the northwestern portion of the
site. Since the application at this time does not include the Indian land along the
northwestern portion of the site, this will ensure that this property will not be developed
as a part of this project. If development is ever proposed on this property, separate
environmental review may be required at that time.
i
h. The certified EIR adequately addressed and reviewed five alternative sites for the
subject property. Based on the criteria used, many of the alternative sites contain
constraints that would not meet the Citys and Developers objectives. There is also an
! approved Planned Development District that allows the developer the right to pursue
development of the subject property.
i. The grading proposed at this time has been reduced from what the certified EIR
originally analyzed. The size of the golf course has been reduced from 158 acres to
142 acres. The certified EIR indicated that there will be 122,234 cubic yards of earth
cut, about 609,491 cubic yards of earth fill, and approximately 490,000 cubic yards of
earth imported as fill; however, because of the reduced scope of the project, the
amount of grading has also been reduced. It is estimated that there will be 370,000
cubic yards of earth cut, about 350,000 cubic yards of earth fill, and about 280,000
cubic yards of import fill. Thus, the potential for an impact related to grading has been
reduced from what was previously analyzed in the EIR.
j. A nexus and rough proportionality have been established for requirement of
dedication of the additional right-of-way to the City and the off-site improvements as
related to the Preliminary Planned Development District and tentative tract map. The
right-of-way off-site improvements, which are required by the Preliminary Planned
Development District and the Final Environmental Impact Report, are related to the
project since the property owners must use Tramway to access the site. Currently, the
subject property is vacant and therefore little or no usage of the roads, sidewalks and
utilities is due to the subject property at this time. However, the future property owners
will benefit from any improvements made to Tramway such as dedication of
easements, sidewalks/bikepaths and future widening. Modifications are required to
meet City engineering standards. The required widening and vertical/horizontal street
improvements will provide safety benefits to the property owners and will aesthetically
enhance the subject area.
SECTION 7. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.6, the People of the City of
Palm Springs have determined that the discharge of waste from the proposed project into
the existing sewer system will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed
I
Ordinance No. 1689
Page 6
by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. On an interim basis septic tanks may be
approved for the clubhouse only.
SECTION 8. Based on the forgoing, the People of the City of Palm Springs approves a
ten-year time extension of the term of the Development Agreement originally approved by
Resolution No. 1462 between the City and Shadowrock Real Estate Development, LLC,
ending June 29, 2016, and accepts the offer of $500,000.00 from Shadowrock Real Estate
Development, LLC for general government purposes.
SECTION 9, The Mayor is hereby directed to execute an amendment to the Development
Agreement as described in this Ordinance and as approved as to form by the City
Attorney.
i
I RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, SETTING
i PRIORITIES FOR FILING WRITTEN ARGUMENTS
' REGARDING A CITY MEASURE AT THE
NOVEMBER 7, 2006 SPECIAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY
TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California called
a Special Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7, 2006, at which
there will be submitted to the voters the following measure:
Shall Ordinance No. 1689, extending the term of the Development
Agreement between the City of Palm Springs and Shadowrock
Real Estate Development, LLC, be approved?
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM
SPRINGS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the City Council authorizes any and all members of the City
Council to file a written argument in Favor OR Against the City Measure,
accompanied by the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the person(s) submitting
it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization, the name of the organization, and
the printed name and signature of at least one of its principal officers, in
accordance with Article 4, Chapter 3, Division 9 of the Elections Code of the
State of California, and to change the argument until and including the date fixed
by the City Clerk, after which no arguments for or against the City measure may
be submitted to the City Clerk.
SECTION 2. Any written argument filed with the City Clerk shall be accompanied
by the Statement of the Author Form required by Section 9600 of the California
Election Code. The City Clerk shall provide such form upon request.
SECTION 3. That the City Council directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of the
measure to the City Attorney. The City Attorney shall prepare an impartial
analysis of the measure showing the effect of the measure on the existing law
and the operation of the measure. The impartial analysis shall be filed by the
date set by the City Clerk for the filing of primary arguments,
ADOPTED THIS 26th day of June, 2006.
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTACHMENT H
Resolution No.
Page 2
ATTEST:
I
' James Thompson, City Clerk
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
Resolution No. _ is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on June 26, 2006,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN;
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF REBUTTAL
ARGUMENTS FOR A CITY MEASURE SUBMITTED
AT THE NOVEMBER 7, 2006 SPECIAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION.
I
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California called
a Special Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7, 2006; and
WHEREAS, Section 9220 and Section 9285 of the Elections Code of the
State of California, authorizes the City Council, by majority vote, to adopt
provisions to provide for the filing of rebuttal arguments for City measures
submitted at municipal elections.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM
SPRINGS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to Sections 9220 and 9285 of the Elections Code of
the State of California, when the City Clerk has selected the arguments for and
against the measure which will be printed and distributed to the voters, the City
Clerk shall send copies of the argument in favor of the measure to the authors of
the argument against, and copies of the argument against to the authors in favor.
The authors may prepare and submit rebuttal arguments not exceeding 250
words. The rebuttal arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk, accompanied by
the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the person(s) submitting it, or if submitted
on behalf of an organization, the name of the organization, and the printed name
and signature of at least one of its principal officers, not more than 10-days after
the final date for filing direct arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall
immediately follow the direct argument which it seeks to rebut.
SECTION 2. Any written rebuttal argument filed with the City Clerk shall be
accompanied by the Statement of the Author Form required by Section 9600 of
the California Election Code. The City Clerk shall provide such form upon
request.
SECTION 3. That all previous resolutions providing for the filing of rebuttal
arguments for City measures are repealed.
SECTION 4. That the provisions of Section 1 of this Resolution apply only to the
Special Municipal Election to be held on November 7, 2006, and shall then be
repealed.
ATTACHMENT
Resolution No
Page 2
I
ADOPTED THIS 26th day of June, 2006.
i
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTEST:
James Thompson, City Clerk
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
Resolution No. _ is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on June 26, 2006,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES;
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
i
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA
REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO RENDER
SPECIFIED SERVICES TO THE CITY RELATING
TO THE CONDUCT OF A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY,
NOVEMBER 7, 2006.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California called
a Special Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7, 2006; and
WHEREAS, in the course of conducting the election it is necessary for the
City to request services of the County of Riverside; and
WHEREAS, all necessary expenses in performing these services shall be
paid by the City of Palm Springs.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 10002 of the California
Elections Code, the Palm Springs City Council requests that the Riverside
County Board of Supervisors permit the County Registrar of Voters to prepare
and furnish any and all supplies and services in order to properly and lawfully
conduct the election.
SECTION 2. The City of Palm Springs shall reimburse the County of Riverside
for all services performed when the work is completed and upon presentation to
the City a properly approved bill.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk is directed to forward a certified copy of this
resolution to the Registrar of Voters for the County of Riverside.
ADOPTED THIS 26th day of June, 2006.
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTEST:
James Thompson, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT
' Resolution No.
Page 2
i CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
i CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
i Resolution No. _ is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on June 26, 2006,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
t
i
j RESOLUTION NO.
j A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
ORDERING THE CANVASS OF THE SPECIAL
MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD TUESDAY,
NOVEMBER 7, 2006 BE MADE BY THE CITY
CLERK.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California called
a Special Municipal Election to be held on November 7, 2006; and
WHEREAS, in the course of conducting the election it is the desire of the
City Council that the canvass of the election be made by the City Clerk.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 10263 of the California Elections Code, the
canvass of the General Municipal Election is ordered to be made by the City
Clerk. The City Clerk may designate that the Registrar of Voters of the County of
Riverside conduct and complete the canvass.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk or designee shall cause the canvass to be
completed for the Special Municipal Election and shall certify the results to the
City Council by December 13, 2006.
ADOPTED THIS 26th day of June, 2006.
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTEST:
James Thompson, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT K
Resolution No.
Page 2
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
Resolution No. _ is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on June 26, 2006,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California