Agenda — Indian Wells City Council, October 15, 2024 (part 1 of 2)

SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL
Meeting Agenda

Tuesday, October 15, 2024
11:30 AM
City Hall Council Chamber
44950 Eldorado Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210
Teleconference Location for Council Member Reed: San Diego Association of Governments, 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, CA 92101

Welcome to a meeting of the Indian Wells City Council.

Live Stream: Regular meetings held in the City Hall Council Chamber are streamed live.

You can watch the meeting on any device or computer. Members of the public who wish to listen or watch the meeting may access the livestream during the regular meetings.

LIVE STREAM CLICK HERE.

Public Comments: Members of the Public who wish to speak should fill out a blue slip and submit it to the City Clerk, comments are limited to 3 minutes. In accordance with State Law, remarks during public comment are to be limited to subjects within the City's jurisdiction. If you are unable to provide comments during meeting, written comments on agenda or non-agenda items or both, may be submitted at [email protected] an hour prior to the start of the meeting.

Notification: If you are an individual with a disability and need a reasonable modification or accommodation pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) please contact the City Clerk at 760-346-2489, 48 hours prior to the meeting.

Please turn off all communication devices (phones) or put them on non-audible mode (vibrate) during Council proceedings. All documents for public review are available for public inspection at City Hall reception, 44-950 Eldorado Drive, Indian Wells during normal business hours.

Pages

A. CONVENE THE INDIAN WELLS CITY COUNCIL, PLEDGE OF

ALLEGIANCE AND ROLL CALL

MAYOR GREG SANDERS

MAYOR PRO TEM BRUCE WHITMAN

COUNCIL MEMBER TY PEABODY

COUNCIL MEMBER DANA REED

COUNCIL MEMBER DONNA GRIFFITH
B. APPROVAL OF THE FINAL AGENDA
C. GENERAL BUSINESS
Public Comments: The Mayor will call upon members of the public to address the Council regarding the agenda item being considered.

After the public has provided comments, the item is closed and brought to the Council for discussion and action. Public comments are limited to 3 minutes. Speakers will be alerted when their time is up and no further comments will be permitted.

C.1 Award of Bid for Redesign of the Players Course at the Indian Wells Golf Resort
4 RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Council AUTHORIZES the supplemental appropriation of
$12,000,000 to Troon to complete the redesign of the Player’s Course; and
AUTHORIZES the supplemental appropriation of $1,500,000 to Troon to complete a Fire Access Road, utilizing County Structural Fire Tax Credits; and
AUTHORIZES the City Attorney to prepare an addendum to the Troon Management Agreement permitting Troon to serve as project manager for this capital improvement project; and
ADOPTS Resolution approving an Addendum to the City’s General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report per Section 15164(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and directing staff to file the Notice of Determination.

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 2 of 193 ends

D. ADJOURNMENT
To a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council to be held at 1:30 p.m. on October 24, 2024 in the City Hall Council Chamber.

Affidavit of Posting,
I, Angelica Avila, certify that on October 12, 2024 I caused to be posted a notice of a Special Council Meeting to be held on October 15, 2024 at 11:30 a.m. in the City Hall Council Chamber.

Notices were posted at Indian Wells Civic Center and City's Website [ www.cityofindianwells.org]
________________________
Angelica Avila, MMC
City Clerk
Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 3 of 193 ends

1 Angelica Avila
From:vern byggdin
Sent:Monday, October 14, 2024 12:28 PM
To:City Clerk
Subject:Haste makes waste -- special council meeting 10-15-24 CAUTION: This email originated outside our organization. Be cautious with any links or attachments.

Dear Mayor, City Councillors and City Manager
[ Please read into the minutes of the Special Council Meeting, Oct 15, 2024 ] As property owners in IW and golfers that very much enjoy the experience offered by both of the IWGR courses, we are concerned that the City is moving too quickly in its efforts to undertake massive modifications to the Players course.

We are unable to participate in tomorrow’s Special Council Meeting due to the abbreviated advance notice provided to citizens, however we have taken time today to read the relevant documents attached to the meeting agenda, reflect upon the recent history of this large capital project, and note the following. Yes, these may come across as simply ‘armchair quarterback’ complaints, but the fact that these points exist are strong indicators that this project plan has too many rough edges.

Initial construction bids were solicited by the City and responses were significantly over budget. This is cause for concern, as it implies a disconnect between the design and the original budget. Design drift and scope creep are common when project controls are not strong.

A subsequent round of bidding was led by Troon, a current City contractor. Ostensibly, this was because bidders might not want to contract directly with the City. A cynic would suggest that with the City paying all the bills, there exists no motivation for Troon to stringently manage scope creep. It was also suggested that by releasing the bid package, Troon could use its industry contacts to ensure multiple bids. Surely Troon, as a good business partner of the City, could help us attract bidders withou t having to be inserted into the structure of the bid arrangement.

Why would we anoint Troon as project manager while all cost over-runs are payable by the City.. This is a major structural issue with the proposed contractual arrangement. We also note that the recommended bid includes ratchet clauses for price increases and overruns, but no corresponding decreases for potential economization or in-flight scope reduction.

Water is a precious resource; especially in a desert. Apparently, we do not inspect our irrigation systems regularly. There was a troubling sentence contained in the Staff Report that would alone give a reasonable person pause to proceed at this time.
"Upon closer inspection it was also discovered that many irrigation valves were leaking or malfunctioning necessitating their replacement.”
Public Comments: October 15, 2024Special Council Meeting

2 We don’t have a good sense of the status of our existing capital assets and begs the question of what other information are we missing by moving too fast. Who is responsible for these inspections — Troon or city staff? What else are we not inspecting regularly?

What contingency plans exist if tribal monitoring uncovers something of tribal import? Who decides what is important? Could this not imperil the entire golf course?

Having witnessed the soil erosion on both courses caused by heavy rainfalls in recent years, special attention to erosion control should have been part of the original design. This is another indication that the project team is moving too quickly.

We very much appreciate that the City wants to maintain the high level of player satisfaction associated with IWGR and the tax dollars the associated hotel stays bring in. As a high level objective — we agree entirely. We should continue to move this golf course project forward as capital assets certainly require on-going maintenance and upgrades, but not necessarily towards a full re-construction of the Players course, and certainly not by pushing construction to commence in March of 2025.

Haste makes waste, and we believe the City needs to do more homework and demand better from Troon (and itself) before proceeding with major capital upgrades at IWGR. Let’s see if the new restaurant lives up to its billing before accepting at face value another questionable project financial impact forecast.

Sincerely,
Sandra and Vern Byggdin

Indian Wells, 92210

1 Angelica Avila
From:Angelica Avila
Sent:Monday, October 14, 2024 1:33 PM
To:City Clerk
Subject:FW: Rush to Judgement

From: James Crawford >
Date: October 14, 2024 at 12:17:46 PM PDT
To: Chris Freeland
Subject: Rush to Judgement

CAUTION: This email originated outside our organization. Be cautious with any links or attachments.

I don’t frankly understand why the City of Indian Wells and the City Manager are in such a hurry to push through an expenditure of $13 to $15 million during a period when many residents are not yet in the desert. The price seems outrageous for what little dirt will be moved – if reconfiguring the Players Course is the primary goal.

Sent from Mail for Windows

1 Angelica Avila
From:Angelica Avila
Sent:Tuesday, October 15, 2024 8:09 AM
To:City Clerk
Subject:FW: Special Session

From: Ruth A <>
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 7:37 AM
To: Greg Sanders ; Dana Reed ; Donna Griffith
; Bruce Whitman ; Ty Peabody
; Chris Freeland ; Peter Castro
Subject: Special Session

CAUTION: This email originated outside our organization. Be cautious with any links or attachments.

To Whom It May Concern,

Ron and I wish to postpone approving the changes for the golf course project. We feel it is too soon to approve such a large expenditure of funds without further research, information and alternatives provided to residents.

We vote to delay approval.

Thank you,
Ron & Ruth Agresti
Ruth Agresti

1 Angelica Avila
From:Angelica Avila
Sent:Tuesday, October 15, 2024 8:10 AM
To:City Clerk
Subject:FW: Delay - please reply.

From: maureen smith <>
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 4:26 PM
To: Donna Griffith ; Ty Peabody ; Bruce Whitman
; Greg Sanders (home) ; Dana Reed
; Chris Freeland
Subject: Delay - please reply.

CAUTION: This email originated outside our organization. Be cautious with any links or attachments. ________________________________

Hello,
Kindly delay meeting re golf expenditures till more residents viewpoints can be garnered.

As well, why was the issue re home grade levels /hedge height just dropped before hearing more residents concerns as was discussed would be the case in the September meeting?? A reply to residents emails is expected- and appreciated, but for some reason seems rare. Comments?? Thank you, M and B Emswiller

Sent from my iPad

1 Angelica Avila
From:Donna Griffith
Sent:Monday, October 14, 2024 4:45 PM
To:Angelica Avila
Subject:Fwd: Stone creek
CAUTION: This email originated outside our organization. Be cautious with any links or attachments.

Get Outlook for iOS
From: Marc Lilly ; Ty Peabody <
Subject: Re: Stone creek

#. Please feel free to share my response with the whole council & submit it into the minute tomorrow.

Thank you Donna. My point isn’t how long or how many meetings etc from inception. The point is the counsel decided in April to move forward after most residents had left (which I can understand in that the city’s business planning must move forward) but now rushing a decision through before residents are back? Thank you for listing the meetings though.

# Major change now: 4-5 million increase from any past presentations and the scope of the project is now much bigger, hence past meetings are a moot point.

In addition, the financials and background have just been released a few days before city’s plan to vote. A few days to review by the public and the whole counsel? Doesn’t something of this magnitude deserve the counsels deep dive and then a presentation to the public on what you plan to vote on? When we are all here?

THAT is what we object to. Where’s the transparency and process the people can trust? It’s not this shotgun vote.

You must know that this is being rushed to a vote before the citizens are back in residence. They are learning about it and they are not happy. This is a pattern by the people who are supposed to work for us.

We’ve had surveys and presentations for safe streets, presentations on other projects that allow for public debate and vetting. This doesn’t meet that standard.

Frankly the city manager made more of the Peabody legal decision in a newsletter, than this project has seen in that newsletter.

2 This project might be the best thing the city has ever done. I hope it is. I don’t know, I’m very open minded and like progress, but as a business man I do know that something of this magnitude needs careful consideration and review. Not a ‘rush it through fast’ without wide exposure and discussion of the residents presented by the folks that have been doing the work to bring it forward. No harm in that right? If it’s a great well thought out project, sell it.

I don’t believe anyone thinks this feels right. What’s the rush?

Respectfully,

Marc Lilly

On Oct 14, 2024, at 10:13 AM, Donna Griffith wrote:

 2017/2018 approx. Troon presented the concept of course redesign and bunker rehab to the IWGR Advisory committee.
 January 25 2019 (before I was on council, Ty was on the council at the time - agree it is good to have someone on council who is a golf advocate) The City Council made a decision to begin looking in to the Player's course reconfiguration and a short Par 3 course This session was an open to the public and noticed meeting.  January 29, 2020 (again before I was on council) an open to the pubic and noticed Strategic planning session.
 November 18 2020 (before I was on council) at an open to the public and noticed meeting the council determined that an RFP would be issued to choose consulting team  May 20, 2021 at an open to the public and noticed meeting an approval of Stonecreek for consulting
 October to December 2021 Stonecreek held three in person open to the public town hall meetings open to the public and noticed to solicit resident feedback. Additionally a virtual meeting for any resident who could not attend any of the three in person meetings were held.
 From October 2021 to June 2022 Stonecreek opened their consultation up to individual meetings. I do not have the dates of those meetings, however, Stonecreek reported that they met with over 50 individual stakeholders during that time.  May 2022 Open to the public meeting and noticed to disseminate the Indian Wells Golf Resort Strategic Asset plan to the public for feedback.  June 2, 2022 City Council at an open to the public and noticed meeting formed the IWGR Ad Hoc committee to review all aspects of the Stonecreek report to receive public input.
 February 2023 the City of Indian Wells IWGR Advisory committee met with Stonecreek  February 16 2023 Open to the public meeting and noticed dissemination of updated Indian Wells Golf Resort Strategic Asset plan - final report - to receive public input  From 2023 to 2024 Indian Wells City staff met with the IWGR Advisory committee multiple times to update them and to receive input

3  March 23, 2023, IWGR Strategic Planning session, noticed and open to the public to receive public input This was a meeting that was specifically about the golf resort and the redesign - attended by many residents was held in the ballroom and all seats were full.
 April 2, 2024 IWGR Strategic Planning session, noticed and open to the public to receive public input This was a meeting that was specifically about the golf resort and the redesign - attended by many residents was held in the ballroom and all seats were full.

From: Marc Lilly
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2024 7:33 AM
To: Donna Griffith
wrote:

There will be many, many community meetings - not just one. Hopefully we will have the first this month as it has been planned - and then October, November, December, January, February ... etc. - plenty of time for us all to weigh in.

Donna
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Marc Lilly
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2022 5:25:12 PM
To: Donna Griffith
Cc: Bruce Whitman Ty Peabody
Subject: Re: Stone creek

#adding Ty back at least as he’s more informed than the rest of us residents anyway.

That’s unacceptable right? The residents were told January. Did we inform them that it might be 4 months, or after the seasonal residents left that we would see what was recommended? That would be an expected action.

The city has a reputation now of not being transparent with the residents and feels empowered to make decisions as a small group. This doesn’t feel right Donna.

4 Most seasonal residents an overwhelming number that enjoys the golf are now gone. Seems like one of us shouldn’t have to ask at this late date. Transparency is not a strong suit with the city at the moment. Sadly.

Marc Lilly

On May 14, 2022, at 4:00 PM, Donna Griffith
<> wrote:

Hi Mark -
Donna Griffith here - feel free to reach out to me anytime you have a question re: the city - I'm happy to give to current and accurate information.

The report from Stone Creek was scheduled to be provided in January. The company's owner contracted Covid and was in the hospital for many months. Apparently, the small company did not have an appropriate member in leader ship to take up the mantle to finish the report. We have been told weekly since the beginning of April that we would be receiving the report. To date, we have not received the report, however, we are told that we should receive the report next week on Wednesday or Thursday. I'll let you know what we find out next week!

Donna Griffith

Get Outlook for iOS

Special Council Meeting: 10/15/2024
Summited at the Dais-Council Member Griffith

October 2, 2020 IWGR advisory committee met at an open to the public and noticed meeting where public comment is available to discuss the golf resort master plan RFP November 18 2020 at an open to the public and noticed meeting where public comment is available the council determined that an RFP would be issued to choose a consulting team 2021 I'
February 23, 2021 at an open to the public noticed }neeting where public comment is available the IWGR advisory committee met to appoiint rep sentative to the master plan interview panel March 23, 2021 at an open to the public noticed meting where public comment is available the IWGR advisory committee met and discussed tie Amster plan update May 20, 2021 at an open to the public and noticed ouncil meeting where public comment is available an approval of Stonecreek for consultin
June 22, 2021 at an open to the public noticed meeting where public comment is available the IWGR advisory committee met for a master plan update
September 28, 2021 at an open to the public noticed meeting where public comment is available the IWGR advisory committee met
October to December 2021 Stonecreek held three in person open to the public town hall meetings open to the public and noticed where public co dent is available to solicit resident feedback.

Additionally a virtual meeting for any resident wh o could not attend any of the three in person meetings were held.
2021-2022
From October 2021 to June 2022 Stonecreek opened their consultation up to individual meetings.

I do not have the dates of those meetings, how I vei, Stonecreek reported that they met with over 50 individual stakeholders during that time.
2022
May 2022 Open to the public meeting and noticed where public comment is available to disseminate the Indian Wells Golf Resort Strategi Asset plan to the public for feedback.

June 2, 2022 City Council at an open to the public and noticed meeting where public comment is available formed the IWGR Ad Hoc committee to review all aspects of the Stonecreek report to receive public input.
2023
February 6 2023 the City of Indian Wells IWGR
open noticed meeting where public comment is available
dvisory committee met with Stonecreek at an

Page 2 of 3 ends

February 16 2023 Open to the public meeting and noticed where public comment is available dissemination of updated Indian Wells Golf Resort Strategic Asset plan - final report - to receive public input
From 2023 to 2024 Indian Wells City Staff met with the IWGR Advisory committee multiple times to update them and to receive input
March 23, 2023, IWGR Strategic Planning session, noticed and open to the public to receive public input This was a meeting that was specifically about the golf resort and the redesign - attended by many residents was held in the ballroom and all seats were full.

March 28, 2023 at an open to the public noticed meeting where public comment is available the IWGR advisory committee met to discuss the strategic planning goals regarding the golf course. 2024
April 2, 2024 IWGR Strategic Planning session, noticed and open to the public to receive public input This was a meeting that was specifically about the golf resort and the redesign - attended by many residents was held in the ballroom and all seats were full.

Page 3 of 3 ends

Special Council Meeting: 10/15/2024
Summited at the Dais-Council
Member Peabody

- Banquets (Pavilion) net operating income $931,549;
original investment just over $1.0M.
- Shots in the Night net operating income $409,775;
original investment under $2.0M.
- Food Truck net operating income $84,167; original
investment approximately $200,000.

Now the Council within one week of receiving the rebids on the Player's Course (actually received bids on Saturday, October 12) is being asked to vote on moving forward on D
spending between $14.0M and $16.0M on the Player's
Course without the following:
- Resident input and feedback (LAST TIME DISCUSSED
WITH RESIDENTS WAS APRIL 2, 2024).
- Golf Committee input and feedback (LAST

DISCUSSION WITH GOLF COMMITTEE IITTEE ABOUT
THIS ISSUE MARCH 26, 2024).
- Until 3 years ago, major decisions were not made in the month before an election out of respect for new Council members voted into office having an opportunity to
voice their thoughts and opinions. This shows a lack of respect to voters and candidates (see attachment
regarding previous actions 3 years ago).
- Donna Griffith and Ty Peabody leaving office and Donna to move out of City. Is it appropriate for them to vote on such an important issue? I think not.
- Most residents are still out of town — no chance to voice their opinion.
- This is a rush decision without real consideration of cost of project, General Fund effects, need for this
expenditure.

- No opportunity or time to properly evaluate bids — large discrepancies from original estimates.
- No analysis or discussion of actual cost to complete
project — present staff report lacking pertinent fmancial information.
- Some Council members ran on being transparent and
promising resident input on major issues like this, not happening.
- Discrepancies still exist regarding contingency factors and loses incurred by closing Player's Course for 8
months.
- No clear understanding of how City is going to fund
$14.0M - $18.0M without touching General Fund. What
is being proposed leaves gaps and appears to take funds from other designated projects or funding accounts.
- Seems to forget whose money this is — residents.
- Why have a Golf Committee if not going to allow them to ask questions and make recommendations?
Projected Costs Associated with Player's Course
Renovation
City Jstimate Variables
* John Fought $597,500
Preconstruction Costs
Hard Cost - Construction $12,150,000
**Contingency $700,000 $1,860,000
(5.6%)
***Project Fees $350,000
Tribal Monitoring $100,000
Other Departments $150,000
8 Month Operating Loss $900,000 $2,400,000

i****TOTAL COST $14,947,500$16,447,500
In the Strategic Plan April 2, 2024, City projected loss for closing Player's Course for 8 months at a range between $880,000 and $2.4M (page 37 of Plan).
*Not included in Staff Report 10/15.
**No developer today in CA would have a contingency of
only 5.6%.
* * * Who gets this fee? Troon?
****Not including additional parking.

Estimate Loss (closing for 8 months Player's Course)
Golf Revenue
Merchandise Revenue
Restaurant
Beverage Carts
*Banquets
Shots in the Night
Food Trucks
Maintenance Costs —
Player's Course Savings for
8 Months
Net Loss From Operations
Loss
$3.2M
$0.6M
$1.4M
$0.2M
$1.8M
$0.5M
$0.2M
$7.9M
Loss of
Profit
$2.5M
$0.2M
$0.2M
$0.1M
$0.6M
$0.3M
$0M
$3.9M
($1.5M)
$2.4M
% of Profit
for Yrs.
2023-2024
(73.5%)
(32.3%)
(48.0%)
(34.0%)
(51.0%)
(21.0%)
*City anticipating stopping banquets March 1 even though heaviest business March — May; should stay open until end of May.

Return on Investment
In the Strategic Plan of April 2, 2024, Troon projected a revenue increase of $700,000 in year one with a minimal increase in the years thereafter (page 37 of Plan). Based on that projection of $700,000 revenue increase and based on

golfs net operating income profit in 2024 of 73.5%, it is not unrealistic to expect to get additional cash flow from this improvement of $514,500 in the first year.

ROI
Investment $14.9M — ROI = 29.4 years
Investment $16.4M — ROI = 31.9 years
Maintenance Savings
Cost per Year Player's Course $2,250,000
Cost per Month Player's Course $187,500
8 Months Closing of Player's Course
Savings Hypothetically -$1,500,000
Financial Consideration
- Until 3 years ago the City had no debt.
- 2 V2 years ago City incurred $15.0M of debt plus interest partly due to solar installations at IWGR and City Hall — still not working.
- Over next 5-6 years (until and if Genton project gets completed) there is no appreciable revenue increases
projected for the City.
- During that 5-6 year period estimated costs will continue to increase, particularly in:
o Employee wages and budgets
o Police and fire services
o Contract services
o Senior living facility

- Any cash loss incurred from operations at IWGR during 8 month closure is paid from the General Fund.
- Housing Authority Fund is being depleted and there will be possibly a need for funding by City's General Fund in the near future.
- Affordable Housing could require a significant amount of funds from the General Fund based on project at Warner
Trail.

Bottom line, there is a need to continue the City's financial conservative philosophy well into the future. Presently there is approximately $24.0M in the General Fund. That could quickly dissipate if the City does not continue to be prudent.

There is no room for pet projects unless it has a total benefit to all residents.

Bi
- Fought original estimates off significantly.
o Fought original estimate $7,922,500 (see attached)
- Fought second estimate $8.7M (question whether
prevailing wage and contingency included).
- First set of bids (2 companies) - $11.0M and $17.0M
($11.0M bid withdrawn).
- Second set of bids - $12.15M; $12.4M; $16.9M
- These bids did not include:
o Contingencies
o Project Fees
o Loss of Operations

o Tribal Fees
o Improvements Outside Scope of Project
- City put contingency of $700,000 (5.6%); no contractor in CA today would agree to a contingency of less than 10%
- 15%.
- The bids were given to Council members on Saturday
October 12, three days before Council meeting.
- New bids are at minimum are 42.5% vs. Fought's
projections.
- No opportunity or time to ask pertinent questions
regarding differences in bids and Fought's estimates. For instance:
o Why did irrigation costs increase by $1.4M?
o Why did shaping increase by $1.2M? d'oci
0 Why Not Just Complete the Following Improvements?
- Course rated:
o Premiere golf destination
o One of best public golf courses
o Along with Celebrity, Player's recognized a
"Beauty and the Beast"
- Just completed Women's Sony Golf Tournament — course
praised for layout and condition.
- 18th hole considered one of best golf holes — CEO Troon.

- Troon admits financially no return investment.
- Robin continuously tells Golf Committee that the Player's Course is rated extremely high with golfers.
- Acknowledge that a 3 year plan should be put together to complete necessary improvements:
o Tees
o Greens
o Traps
o Irrigation
- Total cost to complete these projects vary by who is
giving estimates:
o Fought $4.5M
o Strategic Plan (April 2) $5.0M (page 37)
o Troon $6.3M
o Difference in quotes 40.0%
- According to expected Life Cycle Report (see attached), based on course opening November 2007, the life cycle
for each item is as follows:
o Tees — have 3 years left
o Bunkers — should get priority, Quary and Traditions
just completed bunkers — kept course partially open
o Greens up to 10 years left
o Irrigation — should be priority

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024
INDIAN WELLS CITY :COUNCIL
October 15, 2024
To: City Council
From: City Manager Department
Prepared by: Christopher Freeland, City Manager
Subject: Award of Bid for Redesign of the Players Course at the Indian Wells Golf Resort
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:

Council AUTHORIZES the supplemental appropriation of $12,000,000 to Troon to complete the redesign of the Player's,Course; and
AUTHORIZES the supplemental appropriation of $1,500,000 to Troon to complete a Fire Access Road, utilizing County Structural Fire Tax Credits; and AUTHORIZES the City Attorney to prepare an addendum to the Troon Management Agreement permitting Troon to serve as project manager for this capital improvement project; and
ADOPTS Resolution approving an Addendum to the City's General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report per Seftion 15164(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and directing staff to file the Notice of Determination.

BACKGROUND:

At the April 2, 2024, Golf Resort Strategic Planning Session, the City Council selected John Fought, the original designer of the Players Course, to complete the construction and bidding documents for its redesign, and to seek construction bids. Troon worked closely with City staff and Troon to review bid documents before going out to bid.

The Indian Wells Golf Resort (IWGR) is home to two 18 -hole golf courses: the Clive Clark - designed Celebrity Course (opened in November 2006) and the John Fought -designed Players Course (opened in November 2007). Commonly known as "Beauty and the Beast" in golf magazines, the Celebrity and Players courses have received numerous accolades as a premier golf destination and as one of the best municipal golf courses.

The Player's Course is 17 years old and is in need of significant rehabilitation in the next couple of years. Already, there have been issues with the current irrigation system,

Page 4 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024
bunkers need to be redone, and tees and greens need to be renovated. The American Society of Golf Course Architects (ASGCA), with assistance from the United .States Golf Association (USDA) Green Section, the Golf Course Builders Association of America (GCBAA), and the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America (GCSAA), analyzed the life expectancy of various components of golf courses and prepared a document of their findings entitled Golf Course Items Expected Life Cycle. A copy of that document is attached (Attachment #1). In that document, the life expectancy of most golf course components is less than 20 years.

Troop has noticed the Players Course is experiencing increased maintenance needs due to the age and wear -and -tear of the course. In addition, the desert conditions place a greater strain on irrigation systems and golf course maintenance technology has improved over the past 20 years. As such, Troon recommends that the Players Course undergo complete rehabilitation to the Players Course in the next couple of years. Over time, greens can become uneven, impacting ball roll, while tee boxes may experience compaction, inhibiting proper turf,growth. Sand traps may lose their shape and drainage, rendering them unplayable. These issues not only detract from the overall golfing experience but also reduce the course's appeal to players.

In a competitive market such as the'Coachella Valley, players expect well -maintained courses that provide both challenge and enjoyment. Rehabilitating these areas will improve playability, attract more golfers, and keep the course competitive with newer and better -maintained facilities.

For the last several years, the City of Indian Wells and Troon held multiple public community discussions (e.g., strategic planning sessions, Indian Wells Golf Advisory Committee meetings, and golf resort 'master plan outreach) to discuss the goals and ''� objectives of a potential redesign, including: et)
• Addresses needed rehabilitation (e.g., irrigation system, bunkers, leveling Of tee +� boxes, and reconstruction of greens).
• The course has been subject to deferred maintenance in past years. J ,,� • Address parking deficiency. �J
• Protect golf course economics.
• Remain a top golf destination and maintain the IWGR market share in a highly competitive golf market.
• The golf resort's main competitors (e.g., Desert Willow and PGA West) have undergone similar course improvements.
• Preserve and enhance the pavilion area for special events. # Improve golf course economics.
• Revenues (e.g., greens fees, food and beverage, and merchandise) are expected to increase. R
$ Provide returning nine holes for food and beverage revenue opportunities and attract major tournaments (e.g. LPGA event).

Page 5 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024
'improve public safety with the addition of a fire access road to the pavilion.

The pavilion was added after the golf courses- were installed. With the success of the pavilion to host large gatherings, the City, Troon, and Fire Department all support improving fire and emergency medical services jj�� access to the pavilion.
�,rW Improving public safety access to the Pavilion has been a lb -rig -Standing priority for the Council. Currently, there is no convenient route for emergency vehicles to safely reach the pavilion in case of a medical emergency or fire. The existing bridge does not meet the load capacity for emergency vehicles. For the last several years, the City has analyzed ways to get emergency vehicles to the pavilion (e.g., new bridge, travel through the Whitewater Channel, new road off Fred Waring). Staff has met with the Fire Marshall who supports a Fire Access Road to the pavilion from Fred Waring. This will improve response times to the pavilion in case of an emergency.
t Improve golfer experience.
• Elimination of the IoW -flow golf cart path between Hole #16 and Hole #17. • Reduction and adjustment of sand traps to make them more player - friendly, improve the pace of play, and reduce maintenance time and cost. • Expand the short -game practice area. This includes areas to practice putting, chipping, and bunker play.
- Provide an opportunity to reduce common areas between holes that are more difficult to maintain and unsightly.

City Committee Reviews
•
Resident members of the Golf Resort Advisory Committee met with John Fought about the potential redesign of the Players Course. On March 22, 2023, they expressed support for the redesign. _.

At the January 10, 2024, Finance Committee meeting, the Committee reviewed a comprehensive Sources and Trends analysis to fund various city projects, including the Players Course redesign. The Finance Director shared with the Committee that sufficient funds are available to meet this project's financial needs and maintain healthy fund balances for several other city priorities (e.g., whitewater channel armoring, re --imagining of the Vue, traffic improvement projects, etc.).

At the March 26, 2024, Golf Resort Advisory Committee meeting, the Committee was updated on the Players Course redesign, including the proposals from Rees Jones and Pascuzzo & Pate. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Committee unanimously approved IV a recommendation to the City Council to move forward on redesigning the Players Course. St

Page 6 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024
DISCUSSION:

Per the City Council's direction, City staff, Troon, and John Fought completed the construction drawings and bid documents to redesign the Players Course. The City conducted an initial bid process, resulting in only one bid being received. After consulting with Troon on the City's bid process, it was determined to rebid the project with Troon conducting the bid process. They believe certain golf course construc ion,companies may have been hesitant to contract with the City rather than a golf management company, plus Troon has contacts in the industry that they could encourage to submit construction bids.

Troon publicly solicited bids on September 9, 2024, and held a interested contractors on September 17, 2024. Bidding dosed on with Troon receiving three bids: Landscapes Unlimited at $12.1 at $12.4 million, and Sperber Landscape Companies at $16. attached (Attachment #6—#8). Troon reviewed the bids a
Landscapes Unlimited is the preferred vendor at $12.15 million. pre -bid meeting with
September 27, 2024,
million,, Heritage Links
. All three bids are
etermined that
1 In addition to the construction bids, additional funds are needed to complete the project.

While much of the costs for amenities are built into the bids (e.g., improved landscaping, new trees, upgraded sand in bunkers, grading to enhance player views), unexpected costs or additional funds are needed for other improvements or services related to the project. Therefore, staff is requesting an additional $1.3 million, which includes $700,000 as contingency, $350,000 in additional project fees (e.g., project management and engineering), $100,000 for tribal monitoring', and $150,000 for improvements outside the scope of the project (e.g., improved landscaping around the pavilion area, course clock, etc.). Troon and the City do not intend to utilize the entire $1.3 million; however, staff is requesting these funds be authorized as needed for the project, subject to approval by Troon and the City Manager. The total construction cost is $13.5 million.

Preliminary Cost Estimates Compared to Final Bids:
's •
This construction bid for the final plan is higher than the original estimate based on the preliminary plan. Once the detailed final plans were developed (e.g., grading and irrigation), estimated quantities for earthwork and disturbed turf increased from the original estimate of 25 acres to an area of 42 acres. This additional work was incorporated into the final design to provide a greater separation between holes and reduce the compactness of the course. These improvements are also designed to improve safety on the course. In addition, the number of greens requiring complete reconstruction increased from 8 to 9.

The Indian Wells Golf Resort is the location of a former Cahuilla Indian village. As such, there is the possibility of Native American artifacts on the property. City has been working closely with the Aqua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, who will provide tribal monitoring during construction of the project. �'\9•
4

Page 7 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024
This increase in disturbed turf affects all renovation quantities, including a significant rise in irrigation system replacement needs. Upon closer inspection, it was also discovered that many irrigation valves were leaking or malfunctioning, ° necessitating their replacement. Other cost increases are due to inflation and' overhead.: Construction is subject to prevailing wages since this is a project to improve a ,city facility. As costs increased for the project, prevailing wage requirements made the increases even more significant than if not subject to prevailing wage. The estimated changes to the project cost (in the table below) are a result of the expanded work as discussed.above:

Project Cost Changes from the Preliminary / 1
Estimate `1, /
*Bonding 77,000.

Cart Path 200,000.

Demolition 37,000
Drainage 351,000
*Erosion Control 150,000
Features 300,000
Finishing • 575,000
Grassing 207,000
irrigation 1,400,000
Mobilization 300,000
Shaping 1,205,000
Total 4,802,000. Q1
* Additional cost mandated by the City , . 7
increase in costs above the*preliminary design was expected, the additional While some to fund the
scope of work and associated costs were nott However, the City's strategy remodel of the Players Course, if approved by the City Council, does'norchange and can fully fund these additional costs.

If approved, construction on the redesign would begin in early o Holarch e25 with s 17 and an18
opening date in November 2025. Project would include the re locato the northside of the Whitewater Channel, rehabilitation of all greens and tee boxes, replacement of irrigation system, new cart paths and fire access road, landscape.. improvements, and rerouting of the entire PAtta (Attachment No.per 2} and oveFought
ra 1,s design.
redesign
Attached are renderings of the work area
(Attachment No. 3).

Page 8 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 202. C..
the General Fund for the City's financial obligations, this strategy proposes using external sources to cover the City's portion. 'of loan repayments associated with the former Re eve o i n, the City Council authorized a General Fund Reserve Policy at its last City Council meeting that requires a 50% General Fund cash reserve of the City's operating budget. This project is consistent with 'this.. new'fiscal policy (Attachment #5).

Fire Access Road:
4 Funding for the fire access road is not a General Fund expenditure. Instea , the City will `l use Riverside County's Structural Fire Tax Credit to pay for the expenditur The County's Structural Fire Tax Credit is a form of County property tax paid allocated for Fire Related Services or Capital Improvements within Indian Wells. The City's Fire Fund has reserved $1.5 million in Structural Fire Tax Credit should the Council decide to move forward with the fire access road. There are sufficient funds in the Fire Tax Credit account to pay for the fire access road and maintain.a healthy reserve for future projects.

This section outlines three potential toptions .and funding strategies for the Council's consideration:
# Option #1 - Do Nothing:
z
The Council might consider this strategy if it believes that future construction costs will be less than they are today and that the ongoing maintenance issues experienced by guests (greens, tees, irrigation, and bunkers) have not had a noticeable impact or loss of market share.

The Do -Nothing strategy still has a cost While maintenance and repair costs will continue to rise, the real burden is the economic future of the 'Golf Resort as other golf courses in its competitive market have completed renovations of their own.

While the City can delay the rehabilitation to a future date, it is not a long-term strategy.
# Option #2 -Rehabilitate the Player's Golf Course (only}:

Based on the bids received
Course to be approxima
using Successor Agency lo
on estimates the cost to rehabilitate the Players
illion, which the City's General Fund would fund
ents described below.

Page 10 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024
Option #2 -Rehabilitate the
. Player's Golf Course
Project Title
Rehabilitation
Costs
Total
6,300,000
6,300,000
Project Funding by Source
General Fund 6,300,000
Total 6,300,000
$ Option #3 -Rehabilitate the Planer's Golf Course and Install a Fire Access Road:

Based on the bids received, Troon estimates the cost to rehabilitate the Players Course with the addition of the fire access road to be approximately $7.8 million, with $6.3 million in General Find Successor Agency loan repayments and $1.5 million in County Fire Tax Credits.

Option #3 -Rehabilitate the
Player's Golf Course and install a
Fire Access Road
Project Title
Rehabilitation
- Costs •-•
Fire Access
Road
Total
1,500,000
7,800,000
Project Funding by Source
General Fund 6,300,000
Fire Fund 1,500,000
Total 7,800,000
# Option #4 -Remodel the Planer's Golf Course and Install a Fire Access Road: (Recommended Option)
Based on the bids received, the City will spend $12.0 million to remodel the golf course as proposed, which includes a contingency as outlined above. In addition, the Fire Access Road is $1.5 million with a contingency. Relocating Holes 17 and 18 to the north side of the Channel will generate an estimated $4.3 million in land

Page 11 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024
sales from outside revenues, which will be introduced as:new funding sources for the project
Option 114 -Remodel the Player's Golf Course and
Install a Fire Access Road
Project Title
Remodel Costs 12,000,000
Fire Access Road 1,500,E
Total 13,500,000
Project Funding by source
General Fund 7,700,000
Land Sales 4,300,000
Fire Fund 1,500,000
Total 13,500,000
Recommendation to fond the City's Share:

To further lessen the impact on the City's General Fund, staff recommends against using existing General Fund cash reserves or a future portion of the General Fund's ngoing $3.5 million annual surplus to fund the Golf Resort remodel/rehabilitation.

Instead, it is recommended that the Council consider using a portion of the remaining $11.6 million in loan repayments the Successor Agency owes to the City. The City paid these loans to the former redevelopment agency to improve the golf resort. nese loans are being paid back to the City through a County of Riverside property tax rebate, not from any City source. Staff recommends setting aside loan repayments in the Capital Improvement Fund for this expense, as follows:

Loan Repayments Reserved in the Capital
Improvement Fund
Fiscal Year
2025
2026
2027
Total
City's Share
Player's
Re habilitation
2,480,000
3,000,000
820,000
6,300,000
City's Share
Player's
Remodel
2,4-80,000
3,000,000
2,220,000
7,700,000

Page 12 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024
By reserving the funds this way, the City will not use any part pf the General Funds annual $3.5 million surplus in Fiscal Years 2024-25, 2025-26, or 2026-27.

Financial Impact of Player's Course Closure on Indian Wells Goff Resort The closure of the Player's Course wiii have a measurable and unavoidable financial impact on the Indian Wells Golf Resort. The Finance Committee and the City Council -+oroughfy reviewed this matter during the formulation of the fiscal year 2024-25 budget.

As detailed below, the key metrics of the closure were factored into the fiscal year 2024- 25 budget adopted by the City Council. Despite the closure of the Player's Course, Troon consistently met or exceeded all critical performance metrics established in the Council's Goals and Deliverables.

The financial impact is driven :by two primary factors: (1) the closure of the Player's Course from March 1, 2025, to November 1, 2025, and (2) an anticipated loss of 22,400 rounds of golf. Importantly, no assum tions were made regarding transferring lost rounds to the Celebrity Course, ensuring a conservative and realistic financial projection.

The foss of 22,400 rounds will
(1) Golf, (2) Merchandise, (3)
projected top -line revenue loss
ctly reduce revenues across five key profit centers:

Cart. (4) Tournaments, and (5) Banquets. The
billion during the closure period.

However, dais loss will be significantly offset by cost reductions. The Resort anticipates a milljnn rectuc jon in the cost of sales, which correlates with the decline in customer volume. Additionally, operating expenes are expected to decrease by $2.0 million as maintenance staff assigned to the Player's Course and operational costs associated with the Player's Course —such as utilities, seed, fertilizer, and equipment —are re -assigned into the construction budget. ?
0 In summary,the net financial impact of the Player's Course clos re, accoun e loss of 22,400 rounds, will result in an estimated operational shortfa ll .all of $0.95 million.

These figures have been rigorously calculated and represent a compr=ehensive projected of the closure's financial consequences.

Page 13 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024
Golf Resort Impacts Due to the
Players Golf Course Closure
Key Metrics
Finanaals
Closure Dates:

Loss of Golf Rounds:

Loss of Top -Line
Revenue
Cost of Sales Savings
Operating Cost Savings
Net Operating (Loss)
ATTACHMENTS:
•
March 1, 2025, through
November 1, 2025
22,400

1. Attachment No. 1— Golf Course Items Exp ected Life

2. Attachment No. 2 — Work Area Rendering Circle

3. Attachment No. 3 - Players Course Redesign Rendering

4. Attachment No. 4 — Resolution Adopting an Addendum to the General Plan

5. Attachment No. 5 — City of Indian Wells General Fund Reserve Policy

6. Attachment No. 6 -- Construction Bid from Heritage Links

7. Attachment No. 7 — Construction Bid from Landscapes Unlimited

8. Attachment No. 8 — Construction Bid from Sperber Landscape Pao 1 a nF "-+

- Spread work and cost over 3 years
Staff Report April 11,104

Page 2 ends

Page 5 ends

March 26. Last meeting with residents regarding golf
redo April 2.

Page 6 ends

Page 7 ends

bids?

Page 7 ends

- Missing Fought design fee
- Missing correct contingency
- Missing 8 month closure (costs)

Page 9 ends

contract one year ago without RFP.

Page 9 ends

Page 10 ends

cover fire services increases — paid from property tax — project increase in property tax?

Page 10 ends

$5.0M, and $6.3M.

Page 11 ends

Page 13 ends

*2-6'
Based on similar projects we have provided an allowance of 220,000 square feet of sod or a total costwestimate of $175,000...

Therefore, the total cost for grassing is estimated to be $430,000:

Tree Planting
There will be a need to add 40 to 50 new trees once the golf holes are reconfigured. This will complete the redesign work and will make the golf course meld together properly. The allowance for trees is $50,000.

SUMMARY HARD -CONSTRUCTION: COSTS
MOBILIZATION $ 300:000 _
DEMOLITION ' $ 450,000
SHAPING i.,,rr r°' $ 255,000
DRAINAGE. - `�''
$ : 100,000
IRRIGATION ::'''?':C
$2,060;000.

FEATURE'CONSTRUCTION' . $2,050.000,
CARTLPATH 8&:ROAD CONSTRUCTION $1,460,000
FINISHING .. $ 290,000
GRASSING ; ' e $ 430,000
TREE PLANTING $ . 50,000
Hard Construction TotaF A : $7,325,000
TOTAL. GOLF. CONSTRUCTION COST
Pre -Construction Total $ 597,500
Hard -Construction Total $7,325,000
Total an costs $7,922,500
41

Page 87 of 192 ends

ATTACHMENT #1
Agenda- April 2, 2024
HOW LONG SHOULD PARTS OF THE GOLF COURSE LAST?.

Greens (1)
15— 30 years Cart Paths — concrete
15 — 30 years
Bunker Sand 5 — 7 years
Practice Range Tees 5 —10 years
Irrigation System
10 — 30 years Tees
Irrigation Control System 10 - 15 years
PVC Pipe (under pressure) 10 - 30 years
Pump Station 15 - 20 years
15 — 20 years
Corrugated Metal Pipes 15 — 30 years
Bunker Drainage Pipes (3) 5 —10 years
Mulch
1 — 3 years
Cart Paths — asphalt (2) 5 — 10 years-- . Grass (4) Varies (or longer)
NOTES: (1) Several factors can weigh into the decision to replace greens: accumulation of layers on the surface of the originl construction, the desire to convert to new grasses and response to changes in the game from an architectural standpoint (like the interaction between green speed and hole locations). (2) Assumes on -going maintenance beginning 1-2 years after installation. (3) Typically replaced because the sand is being changed — while the machinery is there to change sand, it's often a good time to replace the drainage pipes as we.iL (4)As new grasses enter the marketplace — for example, those that are more drought and disease tolerant — replanting may be appropriate, depending upon the site.

Component life spans can vary depending upon location of the golf course, quality of materials, original installation and past maintenance practices. We encourage gaff course leaders to work with their golf course architect, superintendents and others to assess the longevity of their particular course's components.

ASGCA thanks those at the USGA Green Section,
Golf Course Builders Association of America, Golf Course Superintendents Association of America and various
suppliers for their assistance in compiling this information.

The materials presented on this chart have been
reviewed by the following Allied Associations of Golf:

G CBAA
I
tee.® a=
B 1907 :tea :3
DATA COMPILED BY ASGCA, 725 NORTH EXECUTIVE DRIVE, SUITE 706, 8ROOKM-k9' QJG 192

To: Chris Freeland
From: Ty Peabody
Date: 8/16/2024
RE: Player's Course Bid
r.

I received your email today regarding the two bids submitted related to the Player's Course. As you know, .I am not surprised by these high bids and it is unfortunate that only two companies submitted bids. Since the first bidder ($11.0M) pulled out, it would appear we are back to square one. These high bids did not even include adding a new parking lot and the loss to be incurred by closing the Player's Course for eight months (est. to be between $2.0M -$3.0M). 2,.

Your last paragraph talks about two things -
1) Opportunity to review bidding documents.
2) Give Troon the chance to further value engineering this project.

Under number 1, who will do this review and what do you expect to accomplish by this review? Number 2, what do you mean by value engineering and what is to be accomplished? With this very high bid, with no alternative at this point, I believe the following needs to happen sooner than later:
- Is it responsible for the City to spend somewhere between $15.0M and $20.0M+ on.axedo,of a golf course including
adding a parking lot and losses incurred by closing the Player's Course for eight months?
present needs to be ready to a loss estimate as
previously requested by September for any loss to be
t months.
incurred for closing of Player's Co�i>~a1f vvi11 come
- Kevin needs to present where the cap funding
from for this project ($1'5:0M - $20.0M) since the General Fund has only $22.0M in the fund.
- Finally, the question needs to be asked should we move ahead on any further consideration of a completeb redo of the
the Player's Course or just come up with a et
for needed upgrades (traps, tees, greens, and irrigation)?

bid
Based on your memo and the unacceptable� Councils,I would meeting
e
agendized a discussion at the September
regarding this project.

IWGR Financial Results for 2023-2024
Ty Peabody
714-742-3945
76471 Pala Palms Dr.

Indian Wells, CA 92210
IW Views
July 29, 2024
Subjects: 2023-2024 IWGR Financial Results, Celebrity Chef Update, Proposed Player's Course Redesign.

IWGR Financial Results 2023-2024
Overall, the Golf Resort had an outstanding year vs. previous years.

Except for the Vue, each department's performance was excellent:

Net Income
2024
2023
Variance
Golf Operations
Merchandise
Beverage Carts
Banquets
$7,915,891
571,938
'321,515
$6,871,826
547,454
142,772
+$1,044,065
+$24,484
+178,743
931,549
397,372
+$534,177
Shots in Night
409,775
162,369
+$247,406
Overall, the cash flow after capital expenses are vastly improved and have reached the City Council's goal of being cash flow positive after capital expenses:
2024
2023
Net Operating Income
$1,660,438
$845,948
Capital Expenses
695,563
714,486
Net Cash Plan
964,875
131,462
A special thanks and congratulations on these outstanding performances goes to the following and their staffs:

Joe Williams — Head of Golf Operations
Pam Vincent — Head of Retail Operations
Robert -- Head of Banquet Operations
Nick Leitner— Head of Golf Course Maintenance
The one department that continues to underperform is the VUE restaurant (customer counts continues to decline (over 60,000 less customers over the last eight years):

VUE Restaurant
2023-2024
2022-2023
Variance
Revenue
$2,111,306
$2,764,621
($653,315)
Net Operating Income55,766*
392,624
(336,858)
*The Net Operating Income shown above does not take into consideration a charge for Richard Blais's fee of $210,000 which, if it did, then the VUE would show a loss of ($154,234).

What is most disappointing regarding the VUE's lack of performance results from the following:
• A failure to clearly define what the VUE restaurant stood for as a brand
• Continuous food and menu issues
• Inconsistent service
• Failure to promote the restaurant locally and regionally, including to IW residents
This failure of the VUE restaurant can also be blamed on TROON's and the City's failure to provide oversight and accountability. If this failure to provide accountability and oversight is allowed to continue, the new Celebrity Chef concept will fail.

On July 1, 2024, Troon put out their budget for the new Blais restaurant. TROON estimates a restaurant net operating income of $231,319. This number does not include a portion of Blais's initial fee (approximately $140,000) or other expenses related to Blais. The

return on investment based on a net income of $231,319 would be approximately eleven years, and if you deduct Blais's balance of fee $140,000, the return on investment would be over 30 years. The restaurant industry typically looks for a 3 -4 -year return on investment.

The Pavilion banquet facility, food truck, and Shots in Night all achieved a return on investment of 18 months to three years.

Finally, in June, the City prematurely put out financial numbers that did not match the actual final numbers for the years 2023-2024 and 2022-2023. The problem relates to a failure to include yearly capital expenses to achieve the City's goal of the IWGR being cash flow positive. Numbers regarding cash flow in the years 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 put out by the City in June were significantly different from the actual final numbers released by the City Finance Director in July for the last year. 2022-2023 numbers released in June: cash flow stated as "$660,000, actual correct final cash flow was $131,462." 2023-2024 numbers released in June cash flow "over $2.0M", actual correct cash flow number was $964,875, after capital.

Some of the operating expenses are buried in the financials under F&B Administration and Maintenance Accounts. These expenses should be allocated to the various food service departments including the VUE. The items excluded from each restaurant department expense are certain payroll, utilities, and janitorial services, etc., and total $687,324. These expenses should be allocated to each restaurant department, particularly the VUE and not in a separate Admin. Account. The restaurant department's profitability or losses are directly affected by the F&B expenses and should be allocated by department to show the true performance of the VUE. If these charges were properly allocated to the various restaurant departments, the profitability by department would be less. Ask yourself since when doesn't a restaurant have any utility charges in its P&L?
Richard Blais Celebrity Chef Update
As you are aware by now, the City Council voted 4-1 to covert the VUE restaurant to a Celebrity Chef concept (Richard Blais). Presently, the VUE restaurant is closed, and the renovation is underway with an

anticipated opening in October. The estimated cost for the conceptual change is $2.6M including Chef Blais's upfront fee of $350,000 paid in two payments. Approximately $210,000 of his fee has been paid.

TROON is "loaning" $1.2M for this project with the city paying the balance. One of the concerns related to this project and expressed by Council members is with the past failures to operate this restaurant successfully by TROON. Can they pull off a successful opening of this new restaurant? Time will tell.

On June 27, 2024, IW Views outlined the terms of the contract between Richard Blais and TROON (the city was not a signature to the contract but has obligations under the contract). Most of the people who have reviewed the contract have found it very rich and slanted in favor of Chef Blais.

Listed below are the key portions of the contract between TROON and Richard Blais:
o Under terms of the contract Blais will receive more than $450,000 in the first year of operation.
o $350,000 (initially paid in two payments).
o Based on the 2024 — 2025 budget, Blais will also receive $114,000 of gross sales in the first year.
o In year one, Blais is only committed to be on -site five days — anything over that requires additional compensation (Section

2.2A).
o IWGR also pays for Blais's sous chef services as required. o IWGR also pays all Blais's required travel expenses
including airfare, hotel, and other ground transportation. o Blais's consulting contract term is nine years — right to cancel after five years (Section 1 Services).
o In years 2 — 9 Blais is only obligated to perform eight days of service per year to work on anything related to the Blais concept (Section 2.23) at the IWGR.
o Blais also receives additional compensation if he does anything related to banquets, Fairway Grill, beverage cart and food truck (Section 2.4).
o Only TROON has authorization rights regarding Section A -H. o Blais may sell merchandise at IWGR — Blais "shall retain

revenue" regarding merchandise (Section 4.5).
o Assignment of Rights — TROON has ownership rights regarding copyrights, patents, etc. (Section 4.2) — the City does not have any rights under this contract.
o TROON has non-exclusive license right and privilege (Section

4.4) — not City.
o TROON has the right to "open similar restaurants based on the intellectual properties incorporated in "the restaurant" — City has no rights under contract (Section 4.6).

I had intended to send the residents a copy of Chef Blais's proposed menu for the new restaurant, however, as of this week the menu is not ready for presentation. It is disappointing to hear that his menu is not complete. First, Chef Blais has been paid $210,000. Second, the first thing that needs to be completed before or in conjunction with the conceptual design is the need to know what the proposed menu will be. By now it would not be unreasonable for Chef Blais to have not only presented his proposed menu and all that goes with it including:
• Recipe
• Food Manual
• Cost Analysis
• Training Materials
Player's Course
In August the City will receive bids to redesign the Player's Course which includes the relocation of holes 17 and 18. to the north side of the wash. Also, by the end of August, the IWGR (TROON) in conjunction with the Finance Director of the City will calculate and present financial projections on the estimated loss the IWGR will incur due to the closing of the Player's Course from March to October to complete the proposed changes to the Player's Course. Preliminary estimated costs have run between $11.0M and $13.0M including projected losses during the period it is closed. More accurate cost projections should be completed by September.

Approximately 20% of Indian Wells residents take advantage of the City's resident golf program, therefore it will be important for all

residents to have a say on whether this is the best use of City funds or are there other priorities the residents feel is more important. This decision is not something five Council members should make alone.

Resident input and opinions need to be taken into consideration when making this important decision. A number of our playing residents have suggested that rather than do an complete redesign of the Players Course the city should explore making some small basic improvements, such as:
• Replacing the Tees
• Replacing the Sand Traps
• Replacing the Greens
• Renovate the Irrigation System
The estimated cost for these improvernents is approximately $4.5 to $5.6 million.

Once the City receives the bids for the proposed golf course redesign and the estimated loss during the shutdown period is determined, the next critical decision is to determine where the funds will come from to pay for the redesign and what financial impact that will have on other projects that are anticipated.

Every project of this type must have a sound ROI return on investment. TROON's opinion is that this .project is not about a return on investment (over 20 years), rather it is about improving the player's experience and enticing other potential golfers to play this course versus other public courses in the desert, including Desert Willows. i disagree with TROON's opinion; however, I would agree that we should always consider enticing others to play our golf courses. Our golf courses are rated in the top twenty public golf courses in the USA.

As soon as we get the updated cost estimates, I will provide you with that information. Stay tuned and let me know what thoughts or ideas you have regarding this issue.

Please share 1W Views with your friends and neighbors. If anyone wishes to receive 1W Views, please give them our IW Views email address.

Some of the calculations shown in this report, including the ROI analysis were determined by me alone and not the City of Indian Wells.

Have a wonderful summer!
Ty Peabody
Paid for by Edward Ty Peabody, a City Council member of Indian Wells. Per FPPC, these are my thoughts alone and do not involve any input from other Council members. If any resident chooses not to receive the l W Views, please let me know.

You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website.

Our mailing address is:
1W VIEWS
76471 Pala Palms Dr.

Indian Wells, Ca 92210
Add us to your address book
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.

Best Wishes, Chase
On Aug 30, 2CYL-1'; at .00PM, Ty Peabody <host i iews.co! 1 11' wrote:

Players Course Redesign Bid Comes in
Higher than Expected
Ty Peabody
76471' Pala Palms Drive
Indian Wells, CA 92210
714742-3945
1W Views
J
Player's Course Re sign Bid Comes in
Higher Than Expected
Two weeks ago, the City received bids for the redesign of the Player's Course. Mr. Clive Clark, the Golf Course designer, originally estimated it would cost approximately $9.0M, not including the projected loss of revenue during eight months construction period. TROON suggested it would cost between Eleven and Thirteen million. Also not included was the cost to construct a new parking lot. The city received two bids, $11 M and $17+M. Shortly after submitting the $11.M bid, that bidder immediately withdrew their bid. We do not know the reason for

that company withdrawing its bid. The City is now left with one bidder and a cost of over $17+M if they are to go forward. The City Manager stated that the City will value engineer the project with TROON. It is unclear what the City Manager means when he says " they will value engineer the project.

If the City decides to rebid the project, bids will need to come back to the City by mid -September. My concern is: What happens if the bids come back at the same price or higher? I think the Council needs to reassess this project as illustrated below:
• 1. Is it responsiblo4Qr the city to spend between $17.0 plus million on the redesign of a golf course that is rated in the top 20 public golf courses in the nation.
• 2. Close the Players Course for eight months. 3. Add a parking lot at an undetermined cost.
• The City Finance Director, Kevin McCarthy, as previously requested should present a revenue loss estimate at the September council meeting showing the project loss to be incurred during the closing of Player's Course.
• Mr. McCarthy also needs to inform the residents where the funds will come from to take on this project estimated to be between ($15.0M - $20.0M). At present the General Fund
has only $22.0M in the fund.
• The council should have a study session to receive additional input from all residents on the viability and need to take on this very expensive project or are there better alternatives such a upgrade (traps, tees, greens, and irrigation) at a much lower cost.

Additional Golf Resort and Restaurant
Information:
• The menu for the new Celebrity Chef restaurant has not yet been presented to the City. The City has already paid over $200,000 to the Chef.
• The Solar project at the IWGR is still not operating two years plus later.
• Golf rounds are down significantly, mostly due to extreme heat.
• For a limited time, the Golf Resort is offering a.50% off rate for prime tee times.
• As of July, the Go.Ift Resort reported a deficit of $935,301 after capital expenses, compared to a deficit of $624,325 in the previous year. The VUE was the only profit center that
outperformed last year's results. The increased deficit from golf is primarily attributed to a decrease in golf rounds, events and the purchase of golf maintenance equipment,
including a new Turf Star sprayer and a new Turf Star
Fairway unit.

Golf:
• Year-to-date net operating income is a deficit of $366,872 compared to a deficit of $309,647 in the prior year. The additional loss of $57,225 is due to a loss of 570 golf rounds compared to the preceding year.

Indian Wells Golf Resort
Financial Performance Summary

Consolidated Financial Report
Year-to-date through July 2024
2024-25
Consolidated YTD
Actuals
/o of 2023-24
Revenue YTD
Actuals
ariance
/o of
in evenue
Rounds 2,047
2,617
(570)
Covers 4,094
8,167
(4,073)
otal Revenue 232,149
384,828
(152,679)
-
otal COS 25,876

11.1%
66,969
(41,099)

17.4%
otal 541,194
Payments
+ 33.1 %
548,650
(7,456)
142.6%
Operating - ,-
345,661
Costs
o
148.9 /a
353,031 -
(7,370)
.. o
e 1.7 /n
otal Costs 912,731
{ 93.2%
988,650
(55, 919)

51.7%
Net Operating (680,582)
Income
293.2%
(583,822)
(96,760)
151.7%
Capital Assets 254,719
109.7%
10,503
' 14,216

0.55%
otal Net
Operating
Including (935,301)
Capital
i 2,921
(614,325)
3199,926)
162.2%
IWGR financials provided by Kevin McCarthy — CFO of City Ty Peabody
This letter is solely paid for by Edward Ty Peabody, City Council Member of Indian Wells 2024, per FPPC. These are my thoughts, which do not involve any input from other Council members. If any resident chooses not to receive the IW Views, please let me know.

Kevin McCarthy
Player's Golf Course Redesign -
Operations Analysis
Oct 14, 2024 at 1:10:32 PM
Chris Freeland
Peter Castro
Angelica Avila Kevin
McCarthy Ken
Seumalo
Dear Mayor and Council-
BCCC
Council Member Peabody met with Chris and me on Friday, October 11, to discuss the Player's course redesign.

During the discussion, Council Member Peabody asked for additional analysis of the operational loss analysis caused by the closure of the player's golf course. This analysis has already been incorporated into the FY 2024-25 Golf Resort Budget adopted by the City Council on May 16, 2024. The operations Budget is attached.

Troon's closure analysis incorporates large amounts of data collection in several workbooks. It focuses primarily on two key metrics:
• Players' closure from March 1 through November 1.
• The loss of 22,400 rounds between March 1 and November

1. The Toss of rounds affects four profit centers:
• Golf — Greens Fee Revenue/ Range Rental
• Merchandise
• Beverage Cart sales.
• Summer Banquet sales — due to construction.

To assist Council, Troon Staff developed the attached summary of the Closure of the Player's Course to simplify the assumptions developed in the workbooks. It is attached for your review. After the Net Loss in each category, the NOI (Loss) was compared to the projections of the City Council's Goals and Deliverables for comparative purposes.

Closure Dates:

The Summary breaks down as follows:
• Loss of top -line revenue: $3,776,776
• COS savings: $802,611
• Operational savings $2,020,877
• Net Loss from Closure $953,288
(see the table below)
Golf Resort Impacts Due to the
Player's Golf Course Closure
Key Metrics
March 1, 2025, through
Loss of Golf
Rounds:

Financials
Loss of Top -Line
Revenue
Cost of Sales
Savings
Operating Cost
Savings
Net Operating
(Loss)
November 1, 2025
22,400
3,776, 776
802,611
2,020,877
953,288
Thanks, and please let me know if you have any questions.

Special Council Meeting: 10/15/2024
Summited at the Dais-Staff Presentation

Why are We Here!
• For several years, this redesign
has been discussed
• Early 2019 Golf Advisory
Committee Meetings
• Bunkers and move Hole #17 &
Hole #18.
• City Council/Golf Resort Strategic
Planning Sessions
• Rehabilitation vs. Redesign
• Golf Advisory Committees
• Finance Committee Meetings
• IWGR Strategic Planning Session
(April 2, 2024)

•Address needed rehabilitation of course
(tees, greens, bunkers and irrigation)
•Deferred Maintenance
•More efficient irrigation
•Protect Golf Course Economics
•Maintain Market Share
•Address Parking Deficiency
•Protect Pavilion area for special events
•Improve Course Economics
•Increased Revenues
•Have returning 9s
•Expand F&B and TOT revenues
•Better for tournament play
•Improve Fire Safety
•Improve Golfer Experience
•Eliminate low-flow golf path
between Hole #16 and #17
•Pace of Play and Experience
•Have Hole #18 return at bridge
•Reduction of sand traps
•Add a short game area
•Reduce common areas and
improve sightlines
•Potential for a LPGA or other Tour
event
Players Course Redesign Objectives

Fought Redesign Rendering

• Rehabilitation Costs
• Estimated Costs for Bunkers, Tees, Greens (April 2024) $5 million • Estimated Costs for Bunkers, Tees, Greens (October 2024) $6.3 million • Fire Access Road $1.5 million
• Remodel Costs (Fought Design-Construction Only with Fire Road) • Estimated Cost to Redesign Players Course (April 2024) $7.3 million • Estimated Cost to Redesign Players Course (October 2024) $12.2 million • Additional $1.3 million (contingency, project management, design work, pavilion area Improvements, tribal monitoring)
• Total Cost $13.5 million
April 2024 Strategic Planning Session

INDIAN WELLS
Troon Discussion

INDIAN \\,, WELLS
Fiscal Impact

Option #1 – Do Nothing
Considerations:
• Future construction costs
• Deferred Maintenance Issues

Option #2 – Rehabilitate the Player’s Golf Course
Project Title
Rehabilitation
Costs 6,300,000
Total 6,300,000
Project Funding by Source
General Fund 6,300,000
Total 6,300,000
Option #2-Rehabilitate the Player’s Golf Course

Option #3 – Rehabilitate the Player’s Golf Course
and Install a Fire Access Road:

Project Title
Rehabilitation
Costs 6,300,000
Fire Access Road 1,500,000 Total 7,800,000
Project Funding by Source
General Fund 6,300,000
Fire Fund 1,500,000
Total 7,800,000
Option #3-Rehabilitate the Player’s Golf Course
and Install a Fire Access Road

Option #4 – Remodel the Player’s Golf Course and
Install a Fire Access Road:

INDIAN N WELLS
Funding Sources

Fire Access Road:

Funding Source
• County Structural Fire Tax Credit
• Form of property tax paid allocated for fire-
related services and improvements

Recommendation to fund the City’s Share:

Staff recommends against using:
• Existing General Fund Cash Reserves, or
• Ongoing $3.5 million annual surplus

Recommendation to fund the City’s Share:

Loan Balance: $11,600,000
Fiscal Year
City's Share
Player's
Rehabilitation
City's Share
Player's
Remodel
2025 2,480,000 2,480,000
2026 3,000,000 3,000,000
2027 820,000 2,220,000
Total 6,300,000 7,700,000
Loan Repayments Reserved in the Capital
Improvement Fund

Financial Impact of Player’s Course Closure on
Indian Wells Golf Resort:

Key Metrics
Closure Dates: March 1, 2025, through
November 1, 2025
Loss of Golf
Rounds: 22,400
Financials
Loss of Top-Line
Revenue 3,776,776
Cost of Sales
Savings 802,611
Operating Cost
Savings 2,020,877
Net Operating
(Loss) 953,288
Golf Resort Impacts Due to the
Player’s Golf Course Closure

GOLF COURSE. ITEMS
r
HOW LONG SHOULD PARTS OF THE GOLF COURSE LAST?

ITEM YEARS

ITEM YEARS
Cart Paths - concrete 15 - 30 years
Greens (1) 15 - 30 years
Bunker Sand 5 - 7 years
Practice Range Tees 5 -10 years
Irrigation System 10 - 30 years
Irrigation Control Systern 10 - 15 years
PVC Pipe (under pressure) 10 - 30 years
Pump Station 15 - 20 years
Tees 15 - 20 years
Corrugated Metal Pipes 15 - 30 years
Bunker Drainage Pipes (3) 5 - 10 years
Mulch 1 - 3 years
Cart Paths - asphalt (2) 5 - 10 years
(or longer)
NOTES: (1) Several factors can weigh into the decision to replace greens desire to convert to new grasses and response to changes in the game from and hole locations). (2) Assumes on -going maintenance beginning 1-2 changed —while the machinery is there to change sand, it's often a good marketplace — for example, those that are more drought and disease tolerant— Grass (4) Varies
accumulation of layers on the surface of the original cons ruction, the an architectural standpoint (Re the interaction between green speed years after installation. (3) Typically replaced because the sand is being time to replace the drainage pipes as we/I. (4) As new grasses enter the replanting may be appropriate, depending upon the site.

Component life spans can vary depending upon location of the golf course, quality of materials, original installation and past maintenance practices. We encourage golf course leaders to work with their golf course architect, superintendents and others to assess the longevity of their particular course's components.

INDIAN WELLS CITY COUNCIL
October 15, 2024

To: City Council
From: City Manager Department
Prepared by: Christopher Freeland, City Manager
Subject: Award of Bid for Redesign of the Players Course at the Indian Wells Golf Resort

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:

Council AUTHORIZES the supplemental appropriation of $12,000,000 to Troon to complete the redesign of the Player’s Course; and

AUTHORIZES the supplemental appropriation of $1,500,000 to Troon to complete a Fire Access Road, utilizing County Structural Fire Tax Credits; and

AUTHORIZES the City Attorney to prepare an addendum to the Troon Management Agreement permitting Troon to serve as project manager for this capital improvement project; and

ADOPTS Resolution approving an Addendum to the City’s General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report per Section 15164(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and directing staff to file the Notice of Determination.

BACKGROUND:

The Indian Wells Golf Resort (IWGR) is home to two 18-hole golf courses: the Clive Clark- designed Celebrity Course (opened in November 2006) and the John Fought -designed Players Course (opened in November 2007). Commonly known as “Beauty and the Beast” in golf magazines, the Celebrity and Players courses have received numerous accolades as a premier golf destination and as one of the best municipal golf courses.

The Player’s Course is 17 years old and is in need of significant rehabilitation in the next couple of years. Already, there have been issues with the current irrigation system,

Page 4 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

bunkers need to be redone, and tees and greens need to be renovated. The American Society of Golf Course Architects (ASGCA), with assistance from the United States Golf Association (USGA) Green Section, the Golf Course Builders Association of America (GCBAA), and the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America (GCSAA), analyzed the life expectancy of various components of golf courses and prepared a document of their findings entitled Golf Course Items Expected Life Cycle. A copy of that document is attached (Attachment #1). In that document, the life expectancy of most golf course components is less than 20 years.

Troon has noticed the Players Course is experiencing increased maintenance needs due to the age and wear-and-tear of the course. In addition, the desert conditions place a greater strain on irrigation systems and golf course maintenance technology has improved over the past 20 years. As such, Troon recommends that the Players Course undergo complete rehabilitation to the Players Course in the next couple of years. Over time, greens can become uneven, impacting ball roll, while tee boxes may experience compaction, inhibiting proper turf growth. Sand traps may lose their shape and drainage, rendering them unplayable. These issues not only detract from the overall golfing experience but also reduce the course's appeal to players.

In a competitive market such as the Coachella Valley, players expect well-maintained courses that provide both challenge and enjoyment. Rehabilitating these areas will improve playability, attract more golfers, and keep the course competitive with newer and better-maintained facilities.

 Addresses needed rehabilitation (e.g., irrigation system, bunkers, leveling of tee boxes, and reconstruction of greens).
 The course has been subject to deferred maintenance in past years.  Address parking deficiency.
 Protect golf course economics.
 Remain a top golf destination and maintain the IWGR market share in a highly competitive golf market.
 The golf resort’s main competitors (e.g., Desert Willow and PGA West) have undergone similar course improvements.
 Preserve and enhance the pavilion area for special events.  Improve golf course economics.
 Revenues (e.g., greens fees, food and beverage, and merchandise) are expected to increase.
 Provide returning nine holes for food and beverage revenue opportunities and attract major tournaments (e.g. LPGA event).

Page 5 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

 Improve public safety with the addition of a fire access road to the pavilion.  The pavilion was added after the golf courses were installed. With the success of the pavilion to host large gatherings, the City, Troon, and Fire Department all support improving fire and emergency medical services access to the pavilion.
 Improving public safety access to the Pavilion has been a longstanding priority for the Council. Currently, there is no convenient route for emergency vehicles to safely reach the pavilion in case of a medical emergency or fire. The existing bridge does not meet the load capacity for emergency vehicles. For the last several years, the City has analyzed ways to get emergency vehicles to the pavilion (e.g., new bridge, travel through the Whitewater Channel, new road off Fred Waring). Staff has met with the Fire Marshall who supports a Fire Access Road to the pavilion from Fred Waring. This will improve response times to the pavilion in case of an emergency.
 Improve golfer experience.
 Elimination of the low-flow golf cart path between Hole #16 and Hole #17.  Reduction and adjustment of sand traps to make them more player- friendly, improve the pace of play, and reduce maintenance time and cost.  Expand the short-game practice area. This includes areas to practice putting, chipping, and bunker play.
 Provide an opportunity to reduce common areas between holes that are more difficult to maintain and unsightly.

City Committee Reviews

Resident members of the Golf Resort Advisory Committee met with John Fought about the potential redesign of the Players Course. On March 22, 2023, they expressed support for the redesign.

At the January 10, 2024, Finance Committee meeting, the Committee reviewed a comprehensive Sources and Trends analysis to fund various city projects, including the Players Course redesign. The Finance Director shared with the Committee that sufficient funds are available to meet this project’s financial needs and maintain healthy fund balances for several other city priorities (e.g., whitewater channel armoring, re-imagining of the Vue, traffic improvement projects, etc.).

At the March 26, 2024, Golf Resort Advisory Committee meeting, the Committee was updated on the Players Course redesign, including the proposals from Rees Jones and Pascuzzo & Pate. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Committee unanimously approved a recommendation to the City Council to move forward on redesigning the Players Course.

Page 6 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

DISCUSSION:

Per the City Council’s direction, City staff, Troon, and John Fought completed the construction drawings and bid documents to redesign the Players Course. The City conducted an initial bid process, resulting in only one bid being received. After consulting with Troon on the City’s bid process, it was determined to rebid the project with Troon conducting the bid process. They believe certain golf course construction companies may have been hesitant to contract with the City rather than a golf management company, plus Troon has contacts in the industry that they could encourage to submit construction bids.

Troon publicly solicited bids on September 9, 2024, and held a pre-bid meeting with interested contractors on September 17, 2024. Bidding closed on September 27, 2024, with Troon receiving three bids: Landscapes Unlimited at $12.15 million, Heritage Links at $12.4 million, and Sperber Landscape Companies at $16.9 million. All three bids are attached (Attachment #6–#8). Troon reviewed the bids and has determined that Landscapes Unlimited is the preferred vendor at $12.15 million.

In addition to the construction bids, additional funds are needed to complete the project.

While much of the costs for amenities are built into the bids (e.g., improved landscaping, new trees, upgraded sand in bunkers, grading to enhance player views), unexpected costs or additional funds are needed for other improvements or services related to the project. Therefore, staff is requesting an additional $1.3 million, which includes $700,000 as contingency, $350,000 in additional project fees (e.g., project management and engineering), $100,000 for tribal monitoring 1, and $150,000 for improvements outside the scope of the project (e.g., improved landscaping around the pavilion area, course clock, etc.). Troon and the City do not intend to utilize the entire $1.3 million; however, staff is requesting these funds be authorized as needed for the project, subject to approval by Troon and the City Manager. The total construction cost is $13.5 million.

Preliminary Cost Estimates Compared to Final Bids:

This construction bid for the final plan is higher than the original estimate based on the preliminary plan. Once the detailed final plans were developed (e.g., grading and irrigation), estimated quantities for earthwork and disturbed turf increased from the original estimate of 25 acres to an area of 42 acres. This additional work was incorporated into the final design to provide a greater separation between holes and reduce the compactness of the course. These improvements are also designed to improve safety on the course. In addition, the number of greens requiring complete reconstruction increased from 8 to 9.

1 The Indian Wells Golf Resort is the location of a former Cahuilla Indian village. As such, there is the possibility of Native American artifacts on the property. City has been working closely with the Aqua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, who will provide tribal monitoring during construction of the project.

Page 7 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

This increase in disturbed turf affects all renovation quantities, including a significant rise in irrigation system replacement needs. Upon closer inspection, it was also discovered that many irrigation valves were leaking or malfunctioning, necessitating their replacement. Other cost increases are due to inflation and overhead. Construction is subject to prevailing wages since this is a project to improve a city facility. As costs increased for the project, prevailing wage requirements made the increases even more significant than if not subject to prevailing wage. The estimated changes to the project cost (in the table below) are a result of the expanded work as discussed above:

While some increase in costs above the preliminary design was expected, the additional scope of work and associated costs were not. However, the City’s strategy to fund the remodel of the Players Course, if approved by the City Council, does not change and can fully fund these additional costs.

If approved, construction on the redesign would begin in early March 2025 with an opening date in November 2025. Project would include the relocation of Holes 17 and 18 to the northside of the Whitewater Channel, rehabilitation of all greens and tee boxes, replacement of irrigation system, new cart paths and fire access road, landscape improvements, and rerouting of the entire Players Course per John Fought’s design.

Attached are renderings of the work area (Attachment No. 2) and overall redesign (Attachment No. 3).

In addition, the project scope includes enhancements to the area on the north side of the bridge between the golf courses and around the pavilion area. This will include a short- game practice area, new putting greens, and improvements around the pavilion and Fairway Grill.
*Bonding 77,000
Cart Path 200,000
Demolition 37,000
Drainage 351,000
*Erosion Control 150,000 Features 300,000
Finishing 575,000
Grassing 207,000
Irrigation 1,400,000
Mobilization 300,000
Shaping 1,205,000
Total 4,802,000
* Additional cost mandated by the City
Project Cost Changes from the Preliminary
Estimate

Page 8 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Troon and the City Attorney also want to add an addendum to the existing City–Troon management agreement to clearly authorize Troon to server as project manager for large-scale capital projects approved by the City Council. If authorized, the City Attorney will develop an addendum to the existing City-Troon management agreement for approval at a subsequent Council meeting.

Staff is seeking Council approval to secure a contractor and order the necessary equipment by October 20, 2024, in order to meet the March to November 2025 timeline.

A decision after this date would likely delay the project until 2026, requiring new bidding to be completed. Based on rising construction costs, the City would estimate an additional $1.0 million to wait until 2026.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA):

This project has been reviewed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State and local CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. The City, acting as Lead Agency, has determined the project is properly analyzed with an Addendum to the City of Indian Wells General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 94092037)(General Plan FEIR).

On February 1, 1996, the City Council adopted the 1996 Update to the City of Indian Wells General Plan, inclusive of the associated Land Use Map (Figure IIA-3). At the same time, the City Council certified by Resolution No. 96-9 the General Plan FEIR in compliance the CEQA Guidelines. The Addendum (Attachment #4) to the General Plan FEIR demonstrates that, pursuant to the standards contained in CEQA Guidelines section 15162, the City does not need to prepare a supplemental EIR, as the General Plan FEIR fully analyzed the potential impacts associated with the proposed redesign of the Players Course at the Indian Wells Golf Resort and the mitigation measures called for by the FEIR adequately address the potential impacts of the proposed project. The City has determined that none of the conditions calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR have occurred, thus, preparation of an Addendum is the appropriate CEQA documentation for the project.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The recommended fiscal strategy primarily focuses on addressing critical rehabilitation needs while preserving the integrity of the General Fund. This approach avoids utilizing either the General Fund’s current cash reserves or the ongoing $3.5 million annual surplus.

The optimal strategy leverages external financing sources, specifically through the sale of land to developers and the application of County structural fire tax credits. This approach aims to minimize direct taxpayer burden. Additionally, rather than drawing on

Page 9 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

the General Fund for the City's financial obligations, this strategy proposes using external sources to cover the City's portion of loan repayments associated with the former Redevelopment Agency. In addition, the City Council authorized a General Fund Reserve Policy at its last City Council meeting that requires a 50% General Fund cash reserve of the City’s operating budget. This project is consistent with this new fiscal policy (Attachment #5).

Fire Access Road:

Funding for the fire access road is not a General Fund expenditure. Instead, the City will use Riverside County’s Structural Fire Tax Credit to pay for the expenditure. The County’s Structural Fire Tax Credit is a form of County property tax paid allocated for Fire Related Services or Capital Improvements within Indian Wells. The City’s Fire Fund has reserved $1.5 million in Structural Fire Tax Credit should the Council decide to move forward with the fire access road. There are sufficient funds in the Fire Tax Credit account to pay for the fire access road and maintain a healthy reserve for future projects.

This section outlines three potential options and funding strategies for the Council's consideration:

 Option #1 - Do Nothing:

The Council might consider this strategy if it believes that future construction costs will be less than they are today and that the ongoing maintenance issues experienced by guests (greens, tees, irrigation, and bunkers) have not had a noticeable impact or loss of market share.

The Do-Nothing strategy still has a cost. While maintenance and repair costs will continue to rise, the real burden is the economic future of the Golf Resort as other golf courses in its competitive market have completed renovations of their own.

While the City can delay the rehabilitation to a future date, it is not a long-term strategy.

 Option #2-Rehabilitate the Player’s Golf Course (only):

Based on the bids received, Troon estimates the cost to rehabilitate the Players Course to be approximately $6.3 million, which the City’s General Fund would fund using Successor Agency loan repayments described below.

Page 10 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

 Option #3-Rehabilitate the Player’s Golf Course and Install a Fire Access Road:

Based on the bids received, Troon estimates the cost to rehabilitate the Players Course with the addition of the fire access road to be approximately $7.8 million, with $6.3 million in General Fund Successor Agency loan repayments and $1.5 million in County Fire Tax Credits.

 Option #4-Remodel the Player’s Golf Course and Install a Fire Access Road: (Recommended Option)

Based on the bids received, the City will spend $12.0 million to remodel the golf course as proposed, which includes a contingency as outlined above. In addition, the Fire Access Road is $1.5 million with a contingency. Relocating Holes 17 and 18 to the north side of the Channel will generate an estimated $4.3 million in land Project Title
Rehabilitation
Costs 6,300,000
Total 6,300,000
Project Funding by Source
General Fund 6,300,000
Total 6,300,000
Option #2-Rehabilitate the
Player’s Golf Course
Project Title
Rehabilitation
Costs 6,300,000
Fire Access
Road 1,500,000
Total 7,800,000
Project Funding by Source
General Fund 6,300,000
Fire Fund 1,500,000
Total 7,800,000
Option #3-Rehabilitate the
Player’s Golf Course and Install a
Fire Access Road

Page 11 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

sales from outside revenues, which will be introduced as new funding sources for the project.

Recommendation to fund the City’s Share:

To further lessen the impact on the City’s General Fund, staff recommends against using existing General Fund cash reserves or a future portion of the General Fund’s ongoing $3.5 million annual surplus to fund the Golf Resort remodel/rehabilitation.

These loans are being paid back to the City through a County of Riverside property tax rebate, not from any City source. Staff recommends setting aside loan repayments in the Capital Improvement Fund for this expense, as follows:

Project Title
Remodel Costs 12,000,000
Fire Access Road 1,500,000 Total 13,500,000
Project Funding by Source
General Fund 7,700,000
Land Sales 4,300,000
Fire Fund 1,500,000
Total 13,500,000
Option #4-Remodel the Player’s Golf Course and
Install a Fire Access Road
Fiscal Year
City's Share
Player's
Rehabilitation
City's Share
Player's
Remodel
2025 2,480,000 2,480,000
2026 3,000,000 3,000,000
2027 820,000 2,220,000
Total 6,300,000 7,700,000
Loan Repayments Reserved in the Capital
Improvement Fund

Page 12 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

By reserving the funds this way, the City will not use any part of the General Funds annual $3.5 million surplus in Fiscal Years 2024-25, 2025-26, or 2026-27.

Financial Impact of Player’s Course Closure on Indian Wells Golf Resort

The closure of the Player’s Course will have a measurable and unavoidable financial impact on the Indian Wells Golf Resort. The Finance Committee and the City Council thoroughly reviewed this matter during the formulation of the fiscal year 2024-25 budget.

As detailed below, the key metrics of the closure were factored into the fiscal year 2024- 25 budget adopted by the City Council. Despite the closure of the Player’s Course, Troon consistently met or exceeded all critical performance metrics established in the Council's Goals and Deliverables.

The financial impact is driven by two primary factors: (1) the closure of the Player’s Course from March 1, 2025, to November 1, 2025, and (2) an anticipated loss of 22,400 rounds of golf. Importantly, no assumptions were made regarding transferring lost rounds to the Celebrity Course, ensuring a conservative and realistic financial projection.

The loss of 22,400 rounds will directly reduce revenues across five key profit centers:
(1) Golf, (2) Merchandise, (3) Beverage Cart, (4) Tournaments, and (5) Banquets. The projected top-line revenue loss is $3.75 million during the closure period.

However, this loss will be significantly offset by cost reductions. The Resort anticipates a $0.8 million reduction in the cost of sales, which correlates with the decline in customer volume. Additionally, operating expenses are expected to decrease by $2.0 million as maintenance staff assigned to the Player’s Course and operational costs associated with the Player’s Course—such as utilities, seed, fertilizer, and equipment—are re-assigned into the construction budget.

In summary, the net financial impact of the Player’s Course closure, accounting for the loss of 22,400 rounds, will result in an estimated operational shortfall of $0 .95 million.

These figures have been rigorously calculated and represent a comprehensive projection of the closure's financial consequences.

Page 13 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Attachment No. 1 – Golf Course Items Expected Life Cycle

2. Attachment No. 2 – Work Area Rendering

3. Attachment No. 3 - Players Course Redesign Rendering

4. Attachment No. 4 – Resolution Adopting an Addendum to the General Plan

5. Attachment No. 5 – City of Indian Wells General Fund Reserve Policy

6. Attachment No. 6 – Construction Bid from Heritage Links

7. Attachment No. 7 – Construction Bid from Landscapes Unlimited

8. Attachment No. 8 – Construction Bid from Sperber Landscape

Key Metrics
Closure Dates: March 1, 2025, through
November 1, 2025
Loss of Golf Rounds: 22,400 Financials
Loss of Top-Line
Revenue 3,776,776
Cost of Sales Savings 802,611 Operating Cost Savings 2,020,877 Net Operating (Loss) 953,288 Golf Resort Impacts Due to the
Player’s Golf Course Closure

Page 14 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

GOLF COURSE ITEMSEXPECTED LIFE CYCLE
ASGCA thanks those at the USGA Green Section,
Golf Course Builders Association of America, Golf Course Superintendents Association of America and various
suppliers for their assistance in compiling this information.

The materials presented on this chart have been
reviewed by the following Allied Associations of Golf:

HOW LONG SHOULD PARTS OF THE GOLF COURSE LAST?
(or longer)
Component life spans can vary depending upon location of the golf course, quality of materials, original installation and past maintenance practices. We encourage golf course leaders to work with their golf course architect, superintendents and others to assess the longevity of their particular course’s components.

NOTES: (1) Several factors can weigh into the decision to replace greens: accumulation of layers on the surface of the original construction, the desire to convert to new grasses and response to changes in the game from an architectural standpoint (like the interaction between green speed and hole locations). (2) Assumes on-going maintenance beginning 1 – 2 years after installation. (3) Typically replaced because the sand is being changed — while the machinery is there to change sand, it’s often a good time to replace the drainage pipes as well. (4) As new grasses enter the marketplace — for example, those that are more drought and disease tolerant — replanting may be appropriate, depending upon the site.

ITEM YEARS ITEM YEARS
Greens (1) 15 – 30 years
Bunker Sand 5 – 7 years
Irrigation System 10 – 30 years
Irrigation Control System 10 – 15 years
PVC Pipe (under pressure) 10 – 30 years
Pump Station 15 – 20 years
Cart Paths – asphalt (2) 5 – 10 years
Cart Paths – concrete 15 – 30 years
Practice Range Tees 5 – 10 years
Tees 15 – 20 years
Corrugated Metal Pipes 15 – 30 years
Bunker Drainage Pipes (3) 5 – 10 years
Mulch 1 – 3 years
Grass (4) Varies
DATA COMPILED BY ASGCA, 125 NORTH EXECUTIVE DRIVE, SUITE 106, BROOKFIELD, WI 53005 For more information,
contact ASGCA at
262-786-5960 or
www.asgca.org
Club Managers
Association of America®
ATTACHMENT #1

Page 15 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

22)
Hole
I
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
Out
10 II
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 In
Total

INDIAN LLS GOLF RESORT
Players Course Redesign Concept Plan
Mar,eh�l-, 2023 , � 0cc . , "-11,,----".oZt
0 0
Scale: 1" = 100'
\ __ ,(
- -·..;,C>o
'); □ / I ',
--------.....
------;✓��-'O_t, -0
-------3 •• •• ,-........:;_-
---------1-"'0
j •-"'----
-0
oo
'
0 so 100 200 300 a �c -_J -�,o ,9_ ,'
------...,...-----
• � I I
9 \ \ \
Cabernet Blue Yellow Whi.te Red Pa,
620 584 545 478 412 5
400 373 342 322 286 4
337 312 290 269 241 4
186 163 157 144 124 3
457 424 391 351 327 4
418 390 361 339 296 4
177 150 141 132 109 3
577 537 502 463 407 5
223 202 189 165 137 3
3395 3145 2918 2003 2339 35
333 310 295 260 236 4
382 355 332 305 274 4
180 170 159 148 124 3
577 537 504 464 410 5
467 437 390 354 327 4 ..;.---
515 479 443 410 358 4
461 414 370 346 299 4
243 220 208 190 166 3
551 516 485 444 406 5
3715 3438 3186 2921 2599 36
7110 6583 6104 5584 4938 71
V ( �.
0 o 0 -� _:=:--o, -o CJ '('
-,,+, ).,----------�----.... �-----= U I -------------..____ -----, tF---I ------ ' • l i ,�_ --
0 Q
_.,,____
II! I � I I 1 ---
12 Q JOHN FOUGHT DESIGN GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTURE --,,... --,,. ,.. --' //I I I/ \ ,, I I ,," 4 I t i I I \I /=i
\ -/ §0...-kO 0
'--'C-----.Q
, __
0 '
I -�''
'\ 0 _] ·-, .---�--e-, � ·o, __ : __ ---• :
/,
D
I I I I \ / ...... _ --
//\J/
I I
/ t
/ 14 I I I I I
I
I - �
I' ' 1 YU I I I I -
I I
f ,I ,., I I , I I I I I I I , I I I I I I
-'
I I I I I I ✓-r---1k
I I I

I I I I I I I I
15 0 0,\ v_\1 I \0
6-
I \I I I 'I I
0 O
0 \ \ -. � ' � --I ' --1
I • ' 1----, ____ , • I I ' . ,_ _ ___ , I --
="-_ ___ .,,..
'' . ' , ____ , 0
I ,
,--,I I' II --·1 I
ATTACHMENT #2

Page 16 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

ATTACHMENT #3

Page 17 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

26529.00000\42810918.2
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN

WELLS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL
PLAN EIR (SCH# 94092037); AND DIRECTING STAFF TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION (APN: 633-150-084, -088, 633-300- 001, -002, -003, AND 633-310-014)
WHEREAS, the City proposes a redesign of the Players Course (the “Project”) at the Indian Wells Golf Resort (APN 633-150-084, -088, 633-300-001, -002, -003, and 633-310-014), involving the relocation of the final two holes (Holes 17 and 18) from the south side of the Whitewater Channel to the north side, along with additional modifications to the existing area of the golf course (the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, on February 1, 1996, the City of Indian Wells City Council adopted the 1996 Update to the City of Indian Wells General Plan (1996 General Plan). At the same time, the City Council certified by Resolution No. 96-9 the City of Indian Wells General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 94092037) (Certified FEIR) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, in 2007 the City approved the General Plan Land Use Element Update and adopted an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR (2007 Addendum to FEIR); and WHEREAS, in 2013, the City updated the Housing Element for the 2014-2021 planning period (5th cycle) and adopted an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR (2013 Addendum to FEIR); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15162, a lead agency shall consider whether additional CEQA review is required when considering a subsequent discretionary approval for a project which an FEIR was certified; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA, when taking subsequent discretionary actions in furtherance of a project for which an EIR has already been certified, the Council is prohibited from requiring a subsequent or supplemental EIR unless at least one of the circumstances identified in Public Resources Code section 21166 or State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 and the City’s Local CEQA Guidelines, are present; and
WHEREAS, an Addendum to the Certified FEIR was prepared for the proposed redesign (“Project Addendum”), pursuant to CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines 15162 and 15164, and the City’s Local CEQA Guidelines, and a copy of the Project Addendum is attached hereto as Exhibit 1; and
WHEREAS, the analysis in the Project Addendum determined the Project does not involve any changes to the existing land use and zoning or operational changes beyond what was contemplated by the Certified FEIR, and that the Project would not result in any new significant environmental impacts or cause a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant environmental impacts as modified by the 2007 Addendum to FEIR and the 2013 Addendum to FEIR; and
ATTACHMENT #4

Page 18 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

26529.00000\42810918.2

City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-__

Page 2 ends

WHEREAS, on October 15, 2024, the City Council of the City of Indian Wells (Council) conducted a duly-noticed public meeting on the proposed Project Addendum, at which time all persons wishing to testify in connection with the proposed Project Addendum were heard and the proposed Project Addendum was comprehensively reviewed; and

WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The Council has reviewed and considered the Certified FEIR, subsequent CEQA documents, and the Project Addendum and finds that these documents, taken together, contain a complete and accurate reporting of all of the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project. The Council further finds that the Project Addendum has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City’s Local CEQA Guidelines and contains a complete, objective, and accurate reporting of the environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project, and reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Council.

SECTION 2. CEQA Findings. Based on the substantial evidence set forth in the record, including but, not limited to, the Certified FEIR, subsequent CEQA documents, and the Project Addendum, the Council finds that an addendum is the appropriate document for disclosing the changes reflected in the proposed Project, and that none of the conditions identified in Public Resources Code section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 or City’s Local CEQA Guidelines requiring subsequent environmental review have occurred, because:

(a) The Project does not constitute a substantial change that would require major revisions of the due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

(b) There is not a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the Project will be developed that would require major revisions of the Certified FEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of the previously identified significant effects.

(c) New information of substantial importance has not been presented that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Certified FEIR was certified or adopted, showing any of the following: (i) that the Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the earlier environmental documentation; (ii) that significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the earlier environmental documentation; (iii) that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects, but the City declined to adopt such measures; or (iv) that mitigation measures or alternatives considerably different from those analyzed previously would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but which the City declined to adopt.

Page 19 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

26529.00000\42810918.2

City of Indian Wells
Resolution No. 2024-__

Page 3 ends

SECTION 3. The Council adopts the Project Addendum.

SECTION 4. This Resolution takes effect upon adoption.

SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and file a Notice of Determination within five days of adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Indian Wells, California, at a regular meeting held on this 15th day of October 2024.

____________________________

GREG SANDERS
MAYOR

CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 2024-___

I, Angelica Avila, City Clerk of the City of Indian Wells, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the whole number of the members of the City Council is five (5); that the above and foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Indian Wells on the 15th day of November 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: Griffith, Peabody, Reed, Sanders, Whitman
NOES: None

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______________________________ ____________________________ ANGELICA AVILA TODD LEISHMAN for

CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY

Page 20 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

26529.00000\42810918.2

EXHIBIT “A”

Proposed Project CEQA Addendum

(follows this page)

Page 21 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

26529.00041\40788785.2

EXHIBIT “A”

Proposed Project CEQA Addendum

(follows this page)

Page 22 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

ADDENDUM TO THE

CITY OF INDIAN WELLS GENERAL PLAN

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SCH NO. 94092037

City of Indian Wells
Indian Wells Golf Resort
Players Course Redesign

Prepared By:

City of Indian Wells
Community Development Department
44-950 Eldorado Drive
Indian Wells, California 92210-7497
Contact: Mr. Jon Berg, Community Development Director

October 10, 2024

Page 23 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE .................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction and Purpose................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Statutory Authority and Requirements ............................................................................. 1

1.3 CEQA Compliance .......................................................................................................... 6

1.4 Incorporation by Reference ............................................................................................. 6

SECTION 2.0 – BACKGROUND ................................................................................................ 8

SECTION 3.0 – DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT ..................................................... 8

3.1 Project Location and Setting ............................................................................................ 8

3.2 Project Description .......................................................................................................... 9

SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................ 9

4.1 Aesthetics ...................................................................................................................... 10

4.2 Agriculture and Forest Resources ................................................................................. 11

4.3 Air Quality ...................................................................................................................... 12

4.4 Biological Resources ..................................................................................................... 13

4.5 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................ 14

4.6 Energy ............................................................................................................... 15

4.7 Geology and Soils ......................................................................................................... 16

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions .......................................................................................... 18

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................................................. 19

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ......................................................................................... 21

4.11 Land Use and Planning ................................................................................................. 23

4.12 Mineral Resources......................................................................................................... 24

4.13 Noise ............................................................................................................................. 25

4.14 Population and Housing ................................................................................................ 26

4.15 Public Services .............................................................................................................. 27

4.16 Recreation ..................................................................................................................... 28

4.17 Transportation ............................................................................................................... 29

4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources .............................................................................................. 30

4.19 Utilities and Service Systems ........................................................................................ 30

4.20 Wildfire .......................................................................................................................... 32

4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ............................................................................... 33

4.22 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 34

FIGURES

Figure 1: Vicinity Map .................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2: Existing Golf Course Aerial .......................................................................................... 3 Figure 3: Proposed Golf Course Redesign .................................................................................. 4

Page 24 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
1 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction and Purpose

The City of Indian Wells (City) is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). On February 1, 1996, the City Council adopted the 1996 Update to the City of Indian Wells General Plan (Approved Project), inclusive of the associated Land Use Map (Figure IIA- 3). At the same time, the City Council certified by Resolution No. 96-9 the City of Indian Wells General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 94092037) (General Plan FEIR) in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. The General Plan FEIR concluded that, although implementation of development under the 1996 General Plan could result in significant impacts, these potential adverse impacts are able to be mitigated to below a level of significance with the exception of impacts related to short- and long-term air quality, even after the implementation of General Plan policies as mitigation.

The City proposes to redesign a portion of its municipal golf course at the Indian Wells Golf Resort (Figure 1, Vicinity Map), known as the Player’s Course, to include relocation of the final two holes (Holes #17 and #18), currently located south of Whitewater Channel, to the north side of the channel within the primary area of the existing golf course (Figure 2, Existing Golf Course Aerial). The redesign will require grading of the site and the creation of new golf greens atop areas that have been previously disturbed as part of the existing golf course (Figure 3, Proposed Golf Course Redesign). The City’s 1996 General Plan and General Plan Land Use Map designate the subject property as Open Space with a Golf and Recreation Overlay. Upon completion of the redesign, the golf course would continue to operate consistent with existing conditions. The proposed redesign to move the two golf holes from the south side of the Whitewater Channel to the north side of the Channel would not result in any changes to existing operations (e.g., capacity, hours, new or expanded facilities or uses, etc.).

Following preliminary review of the proposed golf course redesign, the City of Indian Wells, as the Lead Agency, has determined that it is subject to CEQA guidelines and regulations (Public Resources Code (PRC) Sections 21000-21177). This Addendum to the General Plan FEIR has been prepared by the City to demonstrate that, pursuant to the standards contained in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, the City does not need to prepare a subsequent EIR as the General Plan FEIR fully analyzed the potential impacts associated with the proposed golf course redesign.

1.2 Statutory Authority and Requirements

CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 states the following with respect to an Addendum to an EIR:

a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.

b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.

c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.

Page 25 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 26 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 27 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 28 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
5 d) The decision making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.

e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency’s findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations, states the following with respect to a Subsequent EIRs:

(a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:

(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;

(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or

(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:

(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;

(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;

(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.

(b) If changes to a project or its circumstances occur or new information becomes available after adoption of a negative declaration, the lead agency shall prepare a subsequent EIR if required under subdivision (a). Otherwise the lead agency shall determine whether to prepare a subsequent negative declaration, an addendum, or no further documentation.

Page 29 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
6 1.3 CEQA Compliance

This document is an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR. CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 allows preparation of an Addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR have occurred. The City has determined that none of the conditions calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR have occurred. Namely, the changes/additions to the General Plan FEIR are limited in the following respects:

• The changes required by the proposed Project do not require major revisions to the General Plan FEIR. No new significant environmental effect or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects would occur with implementation of the proposed Project.

• Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the proposed Project would be undertaken. Thus, major revisions of the General Plan FEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects are not required.

• The new available information does not show that the proposed Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the General Plan FEIR, or that the significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the General Plan FEIR.

Therefore, because the proposed Project would not satisfy any of the conditions that warrant preparation of a Subsequent EIR, the City, as Lead Agency, has determined that preparation of an Addendum is appropriate.

1.4 Incorporation by Reference

The documents outlined below, which were utilized during preparation of this Addendum and are a matter of public record, are hereby incorporated by reference. These documents are available for public inspection at the City of Indian Wells Community Development Department at 44-950 Eldorado Drive, Indian Wells, and on the City’s website at https://www.cityofindianwells.org/city-hall/departments/planning/handouts-link

City of Indian Wells General Plan, Updated April 4, 2024. The City Council comprehensively adopted the 1996 Update to the City of Indian Wells General Plan, inclusive of the Land Use Map, on February 1, 1996. The General Plan is the primary source of long-range planning and policy direction that is used to guide the City’s growth and change, and preserve and enhance the community’s quality of life. The General Plan, which contains the goals, policies, and plans to guide land use and development decisions in the future, is organized into functional chapters that include traditional elements, as follows:

Community Development Chapter
• Land Use Element (Updated May 17, 2007);
• Housing Element (Updated April 4, 2024);
• Circulation Element (Updated December 15, 2016);

Resource Management Chapter
• Conservation and Open Space (Updated December 15, 2016);

Page 30 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
7 Public Safety Chapter
• Community Safety; and
• Noise.

The proposed redesign of a portion of the City’s existing municipal golf course, commonly known as the Players Course at the Indian Wells Golf Resort, is the subject of this Addendum.

Land Use Element Table IIA-2 presents the Land Use Plan’s buildout potentials and assumptions. As indicated in Land Use Element Table IIA-2, full implementation of the General Plan is anticipated to result in buildout of Golf and Recreation Uses within the areas currently developed with the City’s municipal golf course including the portions of the Players Course which would be redesigned under the proposed Project.

City of Indian Wells General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 94092037), January 1995. The City of Indian Wells General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (General Plan FEIR) provides a program-level analysis of the environmental impacts resulting from full implementation of the 2009 General Plan. The General Plan FEIR’s analysis is based on the change between development under existing conditions (at the time of document preparation) and those projected for likely development in accordance with the General Plan by theoretical buildout in 2025. Based on General Plan FEIR Figure 4.1-9, the subject property for the golf course redesign is located entirely within an area designated for Golf Course use within the General Plan’s Open Space and Recreation Plan. The General Plan FEIR concluded full implementation of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts, with mitigation incorporated, for all issue areas analyzed. The General Plan FEIR’s background and policy information and environmental impact conclusions are cited throughout this Addendum.

City of Indian Wells Municipal Code, as (continuously) updated. The City of Indian Wells Municipal Code (IWMC) consists of all of the City’s regulatory and penal ordinances, and certain of the administrative ordinances. The City’s Zoning Ordinance is codified in IWMC Title 21, Zoning Code. The purpose of the Zoning Code is to consolidate and coordinate all zoning regulations and provisions into one comprehensive zoning ordinance in order to: designate, regulate, and restrict the location and use of land, buildings, and certain other structures for residential, commercial, or other purposes; regulate and limit the height, number of stories and size of buildings and other structures hereafter erected or altered; regulate the size of yards and other open spaces; and regulate and limit the density of population and for the purpose of dividing the City into zones of such numbers, shapes, and areas as may be deemed best suited for the optimum uses of the property within the City. The IWMC specifies regulations that must be followed by every project within the City’s jurisdictional area. The IWMC is referenced throughout this Addendum to establish the Project’s baseline requirements according to the City’s regulatory framework.

Addendum to a Certified EIR for the Redesign of the Players Course at the City of Indian Wells Golf Resort. The Addendum to a Certified EIR for the Redesign of the Players Course at the City of Indian Wells Golf Resort (2024 Addendum to FEIR) was prepared to document minor changes to one of the City’s existing municipal golf courses (Player’s course) at the Indian Wells Golf Resort, as compared to the analysis, conclusions, and mitigation measures in the General Plan FEIR.

Page 31 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
8 2.0 BACKGROUND

The two original 18-hole golf courses at the Indian Wells Golf Resort were comprised of the “The East” course and “The West” course designed by Ted Robinsons and built in the mid- 1980s. They were subsequently redesigned in 2007 by John Fought, and were renamed the Celebrity Course and Player’s Course, respectively. The proposed redesign of and modifications to the Player’s Course is driven in part by the need to relocate the last two holes (#17 and #18) of the Player’s Course originally designed by golfer John Fought. The limited redesign would free up the existing holes 17 and 18 for future development by integrating these two holes into the main body of the existing course on the north side of the Whitewater Storm Channel. It would also create “returning 9’s,” to the Clubhouse, which would result in better efficiencies for the players, economics for the course, and ultimately qualify the course for future PGA and LPGA sanctioned tournaments. The course redesign also makes additional adjustments to existing fairways, tees and bunkers of the remaining golf holes to improve the overall flow and connectivity of the golf course.

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT

3.1 Project Location and Setting

The City of Indian Wells is located in the Coachella Valley, in central Riverside County. Indian Wells is bordered by the City of Palm Desert on the north and west, the City of La Quinta on the east, and unincorporated Riverside County (State and Bureau of Land Management lands) on the south. Regional access to the City is provided via State Route 111 (SR-111), which traverses the City in an east-west orientation, and the San Bernardino Freeway (I-10), which is located approximately two miles to the north. The City’s planning area boundaries encompass approximately 9,627 acres (approximately 15 square miles).

Indian Wells is a small residential community that is best known for its world class resorts that cater to golfers and tennis players. It is generally characterized by golf courses, private communities, and resorts, situated in natural surroundings. According to the City’s General Plan, Table IIA-1, the vast majority of the planning area (approximately 64 percent or 6,190.6 acres) is comprised of open spaces, including parks, public/private open spaces, and public/private golf course uses. The developed areas, which encompass approximately 15 percent of the planning area, include residential, commercial, and public facility uses.

Residential uses dominate the City’s developed areas, accounting for approximately 90 percent of all developed lands. The non-residential developed areas, which included mixed-use retail, office commercial centers, and hotel resorts, encompass approximately 93 acres, or one percent of the planning area.

The land use distribution and residential and nonresidential development levels that can be expected from full implementation of the General Plan’s land use policies are illustrated on the Land Use/Zoning Map1 and outlined in General Plan Table IIA-2. The anticipated build-out under the General Plan would result in 1,520.4 acres of golf course recreation uses within the City.

The subject property is located north of Highway 111 and south of Fred Waring Drive within the corporate limits of the City of Indian Wells in the Coachella Valley area of central Riverside

1 City of Indian Wells Website, http://www.cityofindianwells.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx ? blobid=14516, Accessed October 1, 2024.

Page 32 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
9 County. The redesign golf course project site can also be described as a portion of the N1/2 of Section 23 and the W1/2 of the NW1/4 of Section 24, T.5S., R.6E, SBB&M (refer to Figure 1).

The subject Player’s course is one of two municipal golf courses, which abut one another on the west of the subject course. Lands to the immediate north of the Players course include the arterial roadway Fred Waring Drive with homes and golf course area of Palm Desert Country Club located north of Waring Drive and buffered from it by a six to eight-foot wall.

Lands immediately east of the Player course are comprised of four small single-family subdivisions which are built out. These homes are buffered from the course by an existing internal roadway 34± feet in width, and a masonry wall along the property line. The Player’s course currently provides a landscape buffer ranging from 30± feet to 90± feet between these residential subdivisions and areas of play on the course.

The Project site is bounded on the south by the existing and improved Whitewater Stormwater Channel (WWSC), which is approximately 260 feet in width (top of bank to top of bank). The WWSC is managed by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), which is the regional flood control agency. Immediately south of the channel are the Renaissance Esmeralda Resort Hotel and the Indian Wells Golf Resort clubhouse, starter areas and related facilities. Lands to the southeast and south of the channel include vacant lands and the Miles Avenue bridge, which crosses the channel from Highway 111 and proceeds east to Warner Trail and Washington Street farther to the east.

3.2 Project Description

The Project is the proposed limited redesign of portions of the Player’s course, one of two municipal golf courses at the Indian Well Golf Resort. The project involves relocating Holes 17 and 18 from the south side of the Whitewater River to the north side. A variety of modifications are also planned for the other 16 holes ranging from tee box consolidation and bunker reshaping to removal of trees and other vegetation. Approximately 17 bunkers and 40%± of the sand areas on the course would also be removed. Minor adjustments to the golf course cart paths would also be made. Remedial grading and adjustments in ground elevations will occur across portions of the redesigned course areas.

The golf course’s drainage facilities will be updated and will involve the removal of 3,739± feet of existing drainpipe and related drain inlets and sumps. The drainage system update also includes the installation of 96± inlets, five sumps and 12,045 feet of 4-inch pipe. A total of 57.9± acres of the course will be disturbed, and selected trees and vegetation removed. Four (4) waste bury pits encompassing 0.61±-acre are planned to provide an area for the disposal of removed asphalt paving and trees and other vegetation.

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

The purpose of this Section is to provide an analysis of the potential environmental consequences that are anticipated to occur as a result of implementing the proposed redesign of portions of the Player’s course. This Section is patterned after the analysis categories set forth in the Appendix G Checklist of CEQA. The background of the proposed Project is described in Section 2.0, and the project setting and project description are described in Section of Section 3.0, above.

Page 33 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
10 4.1 AESTHETICS

Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, Would the project:

a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• New development occurring under the proposed General Plan could replace natural open space and vacant land altering views and potentially degrading the aesthetic quality of the City. This is considered a significant, but mitigable impact (Impact 4.3-1).

Analysis of the Project

The original golf course was designed and built in the mid-1980s, along with a second course (Celebrity), and the Indian Wells Golf Resort clubhouse and associated amenities. The course was subsequently redesigned in 2007 and has remained largely in its current condition since that time. The course also includes the “Fairway Grill” a lunch venue for golfers located near hole 9 of the subject and second golf course. No changes are planned for this structure which is located in the middle of the two golf courses.

The Project site is not located along or near a designated scenic highway or one “eligible” for designation as a state scenic highway and is not designated as a scenic highway in the City General Plan. The nearest State Scenic Highway is Highway 74 south of Highway 111 and 3.5± miles to the west of the Project site.

As noted in the project description, the proposed Project will involve the relocation of two holes from the south side to north side of the Whitewater Stormwater Channel and will involve extensive grading, excavations for new sand traps and other course features, and the removal and replacement of trees and other vegetation. No new buildings or other vertical structures are planned as a part of the Project. No work will occur within the stormwater channel. As noted, within the Player’s course area the Project calls for extensive grading, alterations to the course layout, sand traps/bunkers and some tee locations.

The Project also involves the reconfiguration of the golf course drainage system. It also calls for “selective tee removal” across about 50 percent of the course with the largest vegetation management area along a portion of the south side of the course; tree and vegetation removal, as well as new tree planting, are expected to be limited and will have no adverse aesthetic impact on views of the course. Therefore, the proposed redesign of the Players Course does not trigger new aesthetic impacts requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR. Accordingly, following compliance with the recommended FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan

Page 34 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
11 Policies as warranted, there would be no new significant or no significantly different impacts to aesthetics, as a result of the Project.

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES

Would the project:

a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

Impacts to agriculture resources were not specifically discussed in the General Plan FEIR, as they were not found to be potentially significant.2

Since certification of the General Plan FEIR, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist has been revised to include a new category for Forest Resource impacts. Accordingly, a review has been conducted and is presented below.

Analysis of the Project

The Project proposes the partial redesign of the Player’s golf course, which has been in place for several decades. The site is in a developed resort area in Indian Wells. It is not on or in proximity to any farm or forest lands. The California Important Farmland Finder prepared for the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the Department of Conservation classifies the Project site and the surrounding area as Urban and Built-Up Land.

The Project site is not located on or near Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance or located within an agricultural preserve or lands under a Williamson Act contract. The site’s General Plan/Zoning designation is Open Space/Golf and Recreation, and surrounding sites are zones for similar open space as well as urban uses. There will be no conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. The proposed Project would not result in the conversion of any farmland or land designated as farmland to non-agricultural uses.

The site does not contain forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned for timberland production.

The Project would not result in the rezoning of forestland or timberland as defined by the Public Resources Code §12220(g) or by Government code §51104(g). Therefore, the Project would not cause changes that could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or

2 Recon, Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Indian Wells General Plan, Page 5, January 30, 1995.

Page 35 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
12 conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Accordingly, the Project would not result in any impacts in this regard.

4.3 AIR QUALITY

Would the project:

a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• Development that would occur as a result of the General Plan would increase PM10, ROC, NOx, and CO emissions, as a result of construction related activities. This is a short-term significant impact that is mitigatable. (Impact 4.7-1) • Traffic generated by new development allowed under the General Plan would not cause intersection in the City to exceed SCAQMD standards for localized one-hour and eight- hour CO concentrations. This is not a significant impact. (Impact 4.7-2) • Increases of criteria air pollutant emissions associated with vehicular traffic and electricity and natural gas use would degrade regional air quality, potentially delaying attainment of AQMP and Air Quality Implementation Plan (AQIP). This is a significant impact. (Impact 4.7-3)

Analysis of the Project

The Project site is within the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) and will be subject to SCAQMD’s 2022 AQMP and the 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 SIP. These comprehensive plans establish control strategies and guidance on regional emission reductions for air pollutants.

A project is considered to be in conformity with adopted air quality plans if it adheres to the requirements of the SCAQMD Rule Book, AQMP, and adopted and forthcoming control measures, and is consistent with growth forecasts in the applicable plan(s) (or is directly included in the applicable plan). The proposed redesign of the golf course will maintain the existing open space land uses and would not induce any population growth. Therefore, it is consistent with the growth forecasts upon which SCAQMD’s air quality planning is based.

The redesigned golf course and associated improvements would be conducted in accordance with all applicable air quality management plans and SCAQMD regulations to ensure impacts to air quality are reduced to the greatest extent practicable. Standard dust control measures in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403.1 will be implemented to minimize the emissions of fugitive dust. The proposed Project would be implemented in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations contained in these plans to meet the applicable air quality standards. Overall, construction of the proposed Project would not prevent SCAQMD from implementing actions set forth in the applicable air quality plans.

Page 36 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
13 During buildout, the Project has the potential to result in short-term odors associated with excavation and grading, pouring of concrete, and other construction activities. However, any such odors would be short-term and quickly dispersed below detectable levels as distance from the construction site increases. Project buildout is estimated to occur over a 6-month period, and construction odors would be generated across various time periods and locations throughout the site such that odors would not be concentrated in one area for an extended duration. During long-term operation, the proposed golf course improvements are not expected to generate any odors.

Following compliance with the recommended FEIR mitigation measures, General Plan Policies, and SCAQMD Rules, no new significant air quality impact or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts would occur due to construction and operation of the redesigned golf course.

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Would the project:

a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• Implementation of development under the General Plan could result in significant impacts to: sensitive vegetation types and sensitive plant or animal species and local migratory routes of resident wildlife species. This is considered a significant but mitigable impact. (Impact 4.5.1)

Analysis of the Project

The Project area has been in a developed state since at least the mid-1980s when both 18-hole courses at the Indian Wells Golf Resort were originally constructed. The Player’s course is flanked by residential on the immediate east that dates back well before 1979, and is bounded on the north by Fred Waring Drive, which has also been in place for several decades as is the case for lands farther north (Palm Desert Country Club). To the west is the second of the resort’s two courses (Celebrity course), which extends west to Eldorado Drive and which is not

Page 37 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
14 a part of the subject Project. The subject Player’s course project area is bounded on the south by the Whitewater Stormwater Channel, which is further discussed below.

The proposed redesign of the Players course would result in ground-disturbance to approximately 56 acres associated with the required grading activities to re-contour the existing turfed fairways, tees and greens, bunkers (sand traps) and re-naturalized desert areas. A variety of trees, including native and non-native, are also found within the developed golf course area. Portions of the Project area include lands immediately upslope of the north bank (channel side slopes) of the stormwater channel primarily in the vicinity of the Miles Avenue bridge just southeast of the subject Player’s course. Vegetation along the channel is a mix of native, selected ornamental non-native species and a few invasive species, including tamarisk.

The Project site is located within the boundaries of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) but outside a Conservation Area (CA) established by the Plan. The City is a “permittee” under the MSHCP. The subject site lies outside the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area established by the adopted Coachella Valley MSHCP. It does, occur within the fee mitigation area established by the plan. However, the Project site was fully developed prior to 1996 and is not therefore subject to any development impact fee established by the MSHCP. The Project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Neither will it conflict with the provisions of the Coachella Valley MSHCP/Natural Community Conservation Plan, or any other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

Additionally, the proposed project does not propose to change existing land use designations or zoning districts or add additional uses to the existing golf course. Therefore, any potentially significant biological effects resulting from build out of the General Plan, have already been adequately analyzed in the General Plan FEIR, and can be avoided/mitigated pursuant to compliance with the mitigation measures contained the General Plan FEIR (see General Plan EIR Impact 4.5-1).

Following compliance with the recommended FEIR mitigation measures, General Plan Policies, and established regulatory framework, no new significant impact to biological resources or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed redesign of the existing Player’s course would not result in new biological resources impacts requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES

Would the project:

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines §15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5?
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

Page 38 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
15 •Excavation and grading from implementation of future development projects under the General Plan could damage or destroy significant cultural resources. This is considered a significant, but mitigable impact. (Impact 4.12-1)
Analysis of the Project
The Project area has been developed as a golf course since at least the mid-1980s when both 18-hole courses at the Indian Wells Golf Resort were originally constructed. The proposed redesign of the Players course would result in ground-disturbance to approximately 56 acres associated with the required grading activities to re-contour the existing turfed fairways, tees and greens, bunkers (sand traps) and re-naturalized desert areas.

The Project does not propose to change existing land use designations or zoning districts, or add additional uses to the golf course. Therefore, any potentially significant cultural resource effects resulting from developing the site consistent with its General Plan Land Use (Open Space / Golf Recreation), have already been adequately analyzed in the General Plan FEIR, and can be avoided/mitigated pursuant to compliance with the mitigation measures contained the General Plan FEIR (see General Plan FEIR Impacts 4.12-1 and 4.13-1). As concluded in the General Plan FEIR, ground-disturbing activities, such as grading or excavation, could unearth undocumented archaeological or paleontological resources, or disturb unknown human remains. Per required mitigation measures identified in the FEIR, site-specific cultural resources surveys would be conducted, as needed, to evaluate potential impacts to cultural resources. If human remains were found, those remains would require proper treatment, in accordance with applicable laws.

Following compliance with the established regulatory framework, and required FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, including the City’s Archaeological Resource Policy, no new significant impact to archaeological/paleontological resources or human remains, or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, would occur with implementation of the Project. Therefore, the proposed redesign of the Player’s course would not result in new cultural resource impacts requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.6 ENERGY
Would the project:
a.Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b.Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? General Plan FEIR Conclusions
The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:
•The City certified the General Plan FEIR before Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines was revised to include a checklist item specific to a project’s impacts relating to Energy. As such, the General Plan FEIR, as amended by the 2007 and 2013 Addenda, does not include a standalone Energy Analysis Section. However the topic of energy is addressed in General Plan FEIR Section 4.10, Public Services/Utilities. The General Plan FEIR concluded that development allowed under the General Plan would not significantly impact the service companies now providing natural gas and electricity in their ability to provide these services to meet projected demand.

Page 39 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
16 • The General Plan FEIR Conservation and Open Space Element contain policies pertaining to natural gas and electricity which must be adhered to, including encouraging the use of site planning techniques, building orientation, and building design that reduce energy use; and encourage energy conservation by incorporating updated planning and building standards which minimize consumption of non-renewable resources. The General Plan FEIR determined that no mitigation was necessary provided the General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element goals and policies are adhered to.

Analysis of the Project

The Project would not result in new energy impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. The Project would consume energy during the construction phase to operate construction equipment and as a result of the manufacture of construction materials (PVC pipe, concrete, etc.). During construction, the Project would use electricity to power construction trailers, power tools, and to light storage, staging and work areas. The primary energy source will be petroleum fuel (i.e. gasoline and diesel) for the operation of graders, compactors and water trucks, material-hauling trucks, as well as vehicle trips associated with construction worker commutes.

Electricity will be used to a lesser extent to operate power electric equipment and worksite lighting. As such, the Project would not be expected to cause an inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary use of energy resources nor conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The General Plan includes goals and policies to reduce potential impacts to energy resources, including, but not limited to, Conservation and Open Space Element Policy IIIA7.2, which directs the City to incorporate planning and building standards which minimize consumption of non-renewable resources, such as natural gas and fossil fuels, into City codes; Policy IIIA7.3, which directs the City to encourage a Green Building program that awards incentives for projects that install energy conservation measures; and Policy IIIA7.9, which directs the City to encourage the use of site planning techniques, building orientation, and building designs that reduce energy use. The Project’s development will be reviewed for consistency with State energy efficiency standards, including the California Energy Code and California Green Building Standards Code, as adopted by the City of Indian Wells, as well as General Plan Policies aimed to reduced potential impacts to energy resources.

Adherence with the General Plan policies and existing regulations, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to energy as a result of the proposed Project.

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Would the project:

a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the California Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?

Page 40 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
17 e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• Implementation of development under the General Plan could result in significant impacts resulting from erosion and blowsand hazards. These potential adverse impacts are significant, but mitigable. (Impact 4.8.1)

• Future seismic activity within the area has the potential to significantly impact property and residents as a result of groundshaking and landslides/rockfall hazards, but this impact is mitigable. (Impact 4.8.3)

Analysis of the Project

The City, including the subject golf course site, is located in a seismically active region, surrounded by three active faults. The closest fault, the San Andreas Fault, is located approximately 5 miles northeast of the site. The San Jacinto Fault is approximately 12 miles southwest of the site, and the Elsinore Fault is approximately 32 miles southwest. Given its location in a seismically active region, the site currently is and would continue to be subject to strong seismic ground shaking. The primary hazard associated with seismic ground shaking is the risk of collapse of buildings or other structures.

The City does not contain land within a State-designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, Landslide Zone, or Liquefaction Zone.3 However, as concluded in the General Plan FEIR, land uses under the General Plan could be exposed to potential substantial adverse effects involving strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, or unstable geologic units or soils; refer to General Plan FEIR Figures 4.8-1, 4.8-3, and 4.8-4. Once operational, the subject golf course area will not be occupied by any residential, commercial or other structures for human occupation, and therefore it would not expose individuals to an increased risk from strong ground shaking events in the region. The construction of the required infrastructure and utilities in support of the redesigned golf course will be subject to applicable California Building Code (CBC) requirements. Adherence to applicable structure and seismic requirements will minimize the potential for damage to the golf course infrastructure in the event of strong seismic ground shaking.

According to Figure 4.9.3 in the Riverside County General Plan EIR, the subject golf course area is of low paleontological sensitivity. Given that the subject golf course already exists, the site has been disturbed at least twice since the mid-1980s. Paleontological resources are not expected to occur on the subject property, and thus would not be destroyed by the proposed golf course redesign project.

Additionally, the golf course redesign does not propose to change existing land use designations or zoning districts or add additional uses to the golf course. Any potentially significant geologic effects resulting from developing the site consistent with its General Plan

3 State of California, Department of Conservation California Geological Survey, Regional Geologic & Hazards Mapping Program - Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones, http://www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/WH /regulatorymaps.htm, Accessed September 5, 2013.

Page 41 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
18 Land Use (Open Space / Golf Recreation), have already been adequately analyzed in the General Plan FEIR, and can be avoided/mitigated pursuant to compliance with the mitigation measures contained the General Plan FEIR (see General Plan EIR Impacts 4.8-1 and 4.8-3).

Following compliance with the recommended FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, no new significant impacts involving geology, soils, or seismicity, or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts would occur as a result of construction or operation of the redesigned golf course. Therefore, the proposed Project would not trigger new geology and soils impacts requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Would the project:

a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

Since certification of the General Plan FEIR, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist has been revised to include a new category for Greenhouse Gas Emissions impacts. Accordingly, a review has been conducted and is presented below.

Analysis of the Project

Effective March 18, 2010, the State adopted amendments to the CEQA Guidelines requiring the analysis and mitigation of the effects of GHG emissions in CEQA documents. The CEQA Guidelines regarding GHG emissions do not specifically address situations involving subsequent implementation actions for a project with a previously certified EIR.

GHG emissions and global climate change is not “new information” since these effects have been generally known for quite some time. Therefore, for the proposed Project, this would not be considered new information pursuant to CEQA, PRC Section 21166, for which a climate change analysis is required. The proposed Project involves redesigning a portion of an existing golf course at the Indian Wells Golf Resort. The proposed redesign of the golf course would not allow for additional growth beyond its current operations or what was identified and analyzed in the General Plan FEIR.

A June 2011 decision by the Fourth District of the California Court of Appeals also instructs and confirms that, after an initial EIR is certified, CEQA establishes a presumption against additional environmental review (Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of San Diego (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 515). In that case, the court held that the effect of greenhouse gas emissions on climate could have been raised in 1994 when the City considered a FEIR for the buildout of its General Plan. However, no challenge to the 1994 FEIR was brought within 30 days of the City’s notice of approval of the General Plan land uses. (Pub.

Resources Code, § 21167, subd. (c).) Accordingly, the Court of Appeal held that, under subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 21166, the City could not require preparation of a Supplemental EIR unless "[n]ew information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the [EIR] was certified as complete, becomes available," and information on the effect of greenhouse gas emissions on climate was not “new information” as it was known long before the City approved the original FEIR.

Page 42 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
19 Pursuant to the SEIR regulations in CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Indian Wells’ discretion with regard to additional environmental review is limited to determining whether any of the three triggering conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166 have occurred. Since the first and second conditions have not occurred (i.e., that the City is not requesting changes to the approved General Plan land uses and that there have not been substantial changes in circumstances such that new or more severe environmental impacts will occur requiring major revisions to the General Plan FEIR), the issue is simply whether GHG emissions constitute “new information” under the regulations. As noted above, a factual finding is made by the City of Indian Wells that, consistent with the holding in Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of San Diego (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 515, such emissions do not constitute new information. Thus, it is therefore concluded, this issue does not constitute new information triggering the need to prepare a Supplemental EIR.

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Would the project:

a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
g. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• Development under the General Plan could subject the public to significant impacts due to inadequate protection from fire hazards. This is a potentially adverse impact that is not significant. (Impact 4.11-1)

• Development under the General Plan could pose a public health and safety hazard due to inadequate preparation for flooding hazards. This is a potential adverse impact that is not significant. (Impact 4.11-2)

• Development that would be implemented under the General Plan could pose a public health and safety danger through the release of hazardous emissions or risk of upset.

This is a potential adverse impact that is not significant. (impact 4.11-3)

Page 43 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
20 • Development under the General Plan could interfere with emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. This is a potential adverse impact that is not significant. (Impact 4.11-4)

Analysis of the Project

According to the City’s General Plan Safety Element, there are very few hazardous materials generators in the City. Most of the risk associated with potentially hazardous materials is the result of the transport of such materials through the City, on major corridors such as the Hwy 111 and Washington Street. The City is responsible for coordinating with the appropriate agencies in the identification of hazardous material sites and regulation of their timely cleanup.

The subject golf course site is surrounded by resort and residential uses, with no hazardous materials sites, airports, or wildland in the immediate vicinity. The subject golf course is located approximately 0.18 miles west of the Gerald Ford Elementary School, which is located at the southeast corner of Fred Waring Drive and Warner Trail. The project site is also located 2.42± miles southwest of the Bermuda Dunes Airport and the Palms Springs International Airport is located approximately 10.5 miles northwest of the subject site. According to CalFire, the subject site is located approximately three miles north of the closest Local Responsibility Area and is

4.25 miles north of the nearest Moderate High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (MFHSZ) associated with the foothills and slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the south of the golf course site.

The proposed golf course redesign may involve the use of potentially hazardous materials related to the operation and maintenance of construction equipment, the use and on-site storage of which would cease upon completion of the golf course redesign work. The existing maintenance facilities located immediately south of Fred Waring Drive will continue to provide storage and management of fuels, fertilizers and landscape chemicals for the maintenance of the golf course, as they do now. There will be no changes to these facilities due to the implementation of the golf course redesign and operation. The handling, storage, and use of these materials would continue to be subject to local, state, and federal laws, including California Occupational Health and Safety Administration (CalOSHA) requirements.

Considering the project is simply the redesign of the existing Player’s golf course, it will not result in an increase in the routine transport, use, or storage of related hazardous materials or fuels, fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides that will be associated with post-construction golf course operations. The Project would also not be expected to create a significant hazard to the public, schools, or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Considering the distance to existing airports, and the fact that the project is simply a redesign of an existing golf course, it would not result in any airport-related safety hazards or excessive noise for people residing or working within the subject golf course area.

According to the City’s General Plan, key evacuation routes in the city include Highway 111, Cook Street, and Washington Street. Construction activities associated with the project would not involve or result in any temporary impacts to local streets. Furthermore, the construction would use existing golf course access from Fred Waring Drive and the existing golf course maintenance facilities, would be temporary, and would not interfere with emergency access during construction. Therefore, the proposed redesign of the existing golf course would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

According to CalFire, the subject site is located approximately 3 miles north of the closest Local Responsibility Area and is 4.25 miles north of the nearest Moderate High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (MFHSZ) associated with the foothills and slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the

Page 44 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
21 south of the subject golf course site. The proposed Project would simply be the redesign and reconstruction of the existing Player’s golf course and does not propose the development of any residential or commercial buildings or other occupied structures. It therefore would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.

Following compliance with the recommended FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, no new significant impacts involving hazards and hazardous materials, or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed redesigned golf course. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in new hazards or create new hazardous material impacts requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

Would the project:

a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ii. substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
iii. create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• Implementation of the General Plan could increase the rate, amount, and quality of stormwater runoff by the construction of impervious surfaces. Increased surface flow could also exacerbate flood conditions. These potential adverse impacts are significant, but mitigable. (Impact 4.4-1)

• Implementation of the General Plan would increase demands on already limited groundwater resources through increased development of residential, commercial, recreational, and landscaping uses. This potential adverse impact is significant, but mitigable. (Impact 4.4-2)

• Development activities related to buildout have the potential to adversely impact surface and groundwater quality. This impact is potentially significant but mitigable. (Impact 4.4- 3)

Page 45 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
22 Analysis of the Project

The proposed Project involves the redesign and construction or redevelopment of the existing Player’s golf course, which is one of two courses at the Indian Wells Golf Resort. Data provided by the golf course management indicates that the subject course uses approximately 850-acre feet of water per year. Golf course management and the referenced report indicate that 99.9% of golf course irrigation water is “canal water”, which is imported by CVWD via the All American and Coachella Branch canals. Essentially no ground water is used to irrigate these courses.

The subject golf course site is located outside a FEMA designated 100-year flood hazard zone.

The adjoining Whitewater Stormwater Channel is designated Zone A on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 06065C2227H (April 19, 2017).

The proposed Project is limited to changes to the existing Player’s golf course located south of Fred Waring Drive and north of the Highway 111. The proposed Project involves the relocation of two golf holes from south of the Whitewater Stormwater Channel to the north side of the channel. It also involves additional adjustments to the existing course, including limited fairway adjustments to accommodate the reintegration of holes 17 and 18 into the course north of the channel, and to improve play within the course. Additional adjustments include relocation and modifications to tee boxes and bunkers. Existing holes 17 and 18 will be left as is for the foreseeable future and will serve as landscaped open space areas for the adjacent Renaissance Esmeralda hotel.

Changes to the subject Player’s course include areas of changed and adjusted ground elevation where some areas will be reduced (materials removed) and elevated (materials) added. The proposed work will include a total of 115,130± cubic yards (cy) of cut and 97,630± cy of fill. The difference, 17,500± cy, is expected to be accounted for in the anticipated 15% of soil shrinkage.

Therefore, cut and fill will be balance on site.

The existing drainage pattern of the redesigned golf course will remain essentially the same as current conditions. The site gently slopes from north to south. Minor adjustments will be made to the existing golf course drainage facilities to replace old pipes and tie new low spots into the existing drainage system. The redesigned course will continue to include areas of re-naturalized desert, and runoff from turfed areas, bunkers and natural areas is expected to be minimal. The limited drains that discharge into the stormwater channel will continue to do so.

While project construction has the potential to increase soil erosion and deposition into the adjoining channel, such impacts will be avoided through the application of appropriate BMPs as required by mitigation measures in the FEIR and General Plan Policy. To protect water quality during construction, the project will follow the SWRCB’s existing construction policy (Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ) which requires the development of a project specific construction SWPPP in compliance with the State's General Construction Permit.

Once course grading and associated disturbances are completed the site will perform as it has since the mid-1980s and there will be no increase in potential stormwater runoff, soil erosion or potential flood either on site or off-site. The adjacent stormwater channel will continue to serve and convey runoff from the same tributary watershed and there will be no net increase in channel flows due to the course’s reconstruction or operation. Therefore, the project will not increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in such a manner and will not induce flooding on- or off-site. In addition, during operation, the course will continue to rely on canal water for irrigation and other non-potable uses at the course.

Page 46 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
23 Compliance with the established regulatory framework, and the recommended FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, no new significant impacts involving hydrology and drainage, or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts would occur as a result of constructing and operating the redesigned golf course. Therefore, the proposed Project would not increase or result in new hydrology or water quality impacts requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING

Would the project:

a. Physically divide an established community?
b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:
• The proposed General Plan would not establish land use categories which would result in incompatible land uses or land uses out of character with the surrounding area. (Impact 4.1-1)

• The General Plan FEIR determined that the Approved Project was consistent with the applicable Indian Wells General Plan Policies, including Policies of the Land Use, Housing, Conservation/Open Space, Community Safety, and Noise Elements, and the General Plan Goals and Objectives. The General Plan FEIR concluded that, with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the Approved Project was consistent with the City’s General Plan. (Resolution 96-9)

Analysis of the Project

The City uses an integrated General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map to assign land use and zoning designations to lands in the City. The subject property is designated as “Open Space, Golf and Recreation” on these plans. The Open Space and Recreation category encompasses five different designations, which are intended to provide a range of public and private open spaces and recreational areas for enjoyment and safety of the residents. The “Golf and Recreation” designation, which has been assigned to the subject property, provides for public and private golf course and tennis facilities. The subject golf course was originally constructed in the mid-1980s and is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations that have been assigned to these lands.

The project proposes the redesign and modifications to the existing Player’s golf course which was built at the Indian Wells Golf Resort and has been in place since the mid-1980s. There is no residential or other development within the boundaries of the project site. Existing residential development is located to the immediate west and to the north of Fred Waring Drive. The subject golf course area is bounded on the south by the Whitewater Stormwater Channel and resort hotels, with Highway 111 further south. Construction and operation of the redesigned golf course would not therefore physically divide an established community.

The golf course redesign does not propose to change existing land use designations or zoning districts or add additional uses to the golf course. Overall, following compliance with the recommended FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, no new significant impacts involving land use and planning would occur as a result of constructing and operating the

Page 47 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
24 redesigned golf course. Therefore, the proposed Project would not increase or result in new impacts to land use and planning requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES

Would the project:

a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• The topic of Mineral Resources is addressed in General Plan FEIR Section 4.8, Geology, Soils, and Seismicity. As discussed in the General Plan FEIR, the City includes areas classified by the Division of Mines and Geology as MRZ-1 (i.e., zone where adequate information indicates there are not significant mineral deposits present or where it is judged that there is little likelihood for their presences) and MRZ-3 (i.e., area that contains mineral deposits, but their significance cannot be determined based on available data). The General Plan FEIR concluded that the northeastern portion of the City is in MRZ-1 where adequate information indicates there are no significant mineral deposits present as classified by the Division of Mines and Geology. • In addition, the zone designated MRZ-3 within the City comprises the steep terrain of the Santa Rosa Mountains in the southernmost and western portion of the City, which is already predominantly developed. Therefore, the General Plan FEIR determined that the potential impact to mineral deposits during implementation of the General Plan is not significant, and no mitigation is warranted.

Analysis of the Project

Lands in the City of Indian Wells are located in Mineral Resource Zones 1 and 3 (MRZ-1, MRZ- 3), refer to General Plan FEIR Figure 4.8.24. The subject Project is located entirely within MRZ-1 and is approximately 0.75 miles from the nearest point of contact with bedrock designated MRZ-

3. The MRZ-1 designation indicates areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood for their presence exists. Mineral resources in the Coachella Valley are largely limited to sand and gravels, and the lack of a fluvial regime and deposition in the area precludes such resources in the project area. Mining of potentially viable sand and gravel resources is also precluded by existing development. The Project proposes the redesign and reconstruction of the existing Player’s golf course and therefore would not result in the loss of availability of any known mineral resources. The Project site is not designated, used, or planned for mineral resource extraction or development. Therefore, the Project would not result in new mineral resources impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR, as there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to mineral resources due to implementation of the proposed Project requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

Page 48 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
25 4.13 NOISE

Would the project:

a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• Implementation of the proposed General Plan could expose receivers to noise levels in excess of 70 dBA CNEL. These potential adverse impacts are significant, but mitigable. (Impact 4.6.1)

• Implementation of the General Plan could expose residential receivers to noise levels in excess of 60 dBA CNEL. These potential adverse impacts are significant, but mitigable. (Impact 4.6.2)

Analysis of the Project

The primary source of noise in Indian Wells is traffic noise, including from regional highways, such as California State Route 111 and major roadways such as Cook Street, Fred Waring Drive and Washington Street. Fred Waring Drive adjoins the north boundary of the Project site and is separated from the golf course by a six-foot decorative block wall. Other noise generators in the City include construction activities, commercial delivery activities, and landscape maintenance equipment. Residences, schools, libraries, and senior care facilities are considered noise-sensitive receptors. The Project site is located in a quiet residential neighborhood with limited traffic noise. The Bermuda Dunes (Crown Aero) Airport is located approximately 2.5 miles northeast of the Project site. The Palms Springs International Airport is approximately 11.5 miles northwest the subject site.

The Noise Element in the City’s General Plan provides a Noise Compatibility Matrix which defines the acceptable noise level for different land uses in Indian Wells. The “Normally Acceptable” noise level range for single family residential land uses is 50 to 60 dBA CNEL.

Chapter 9.06 of the City’s Municipal Code provides noise control policies and regulations.

According to §9.24.040, the exterior sound level limit in all residential zones is 55 dBA from 7:01 a.m. to 10 p.m., and 50 dBA from 10:01 p.m. to 7 a.m. These noise level limits do not include temporary noise generated by construction activities. Pursuant to §9.06.047, construction activities must be limited to the following hours:

City Permitted Hours for Construction & Landscape Activity

Monday to Friday 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Sunday and holidays None
Source: City of Indian Wells Municipal Code §9.06.044

Page 49 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
26 Considering the Project’s location in a resort residential neighborhood, construction activities could exceed the City’s noise limit for residential land uses. However, the closest residences are located east of Elkhorn Trail along the Project’s easternmost boundary, and construction-related noise will be temporary, and high noise levels would be intermittent. It should also be noted that golf course modifications in this area are limited. Moreover, construction activities related to the subject golf course modifications will be subject to the permitted hours pursuant to Section

9.06.044 of the Municipal Code, and as provided in Table, above. Provided the Project adheres to these hours, any construction-related noise temporarily increasing the ambient noise level in the vicinity of the subject golf course site would not be in excess of the standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance.

Once the proposed golf course modifications are completed, the Project site would not be expected to generate any new noise or increased noise levels. While occasional noise associated with landscape maintenance is anticipated, these activities already occur and will be temporary and periodic. Moreover, maintenance of the golf course will be conducted in conformance with City permitted hours of construction and landscape activities, as set forth in Table, above. Therefore, operational noise associated with the modified golf course would be the same as for the existing facility and there will be no permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project site in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance. While residents in the surrounding vicinity of the Project site may occasionally detect some groundborne vibration during construction activities, impacts would be low, temporary and would end once construction is complete. As stated above, construction activities would also be limited by the daytime operations hours provided in §9.06.044 of the City’s Municipal Code. Groundborne vibration will not be generated during long-term Project operation.

The Project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. As noted above, the Bermuda Dunes (Crown Aero) Airport is located approximately 2.5 miles northeast of the Project site. The Palms Springs International Airport is approximately 11.5 miles northwest the subject site. The Project would thus not expose people residing or working in the area to excessive noise levels related to airport operations.

Following compliance with the recommended FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, no new significant noise impacts, or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts would occur as a result of constructing and operating the redesigned golf course. Therefore, the proposed Project would not increase or result in new noise related impacts requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING

Would the project:

a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Page 50 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
27 General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• Upon buildout of the General Plan, additional residential dwelling units and commercial development could be added to the City. This is not considered a significant impact. (Impact 4.9-1)

• Upon buildout (post 2015) of the General Plan, the population in the plan area would increase by approximately 5,563 persons. This increase is not considered a significant impact. (Impact 4.9-2)

Analysis of the Project

The subject project involves the redesign and modifications to the existing Player’s golf course, which was originally constructed in the mid-1980 and was modified in 2008. It is one of two golf courses of the Indian Wells Golf Resort. There are no homes within the golf course planning area and no homes will be affected by the proposed modifications to the course. No new extensions of roads or infrastructure, and no existing or future homes will be affected by the Project. The Project would not displace any existing people or housing or necessitate replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, no new impacts involving population and housing, or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts would occur as a result of constructing and operating the redesigned golf course. Therefore, the proposed Project would not increase or result in new impacts to population and housing requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES

Would the project:

a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

1) Fire protection?
2) Police protection?
3) Schools?
4) Parks?
5) Other public facilities?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• Development allowed under the General Plan would not significantly impact the ability of the service agency to provide adequate fire protection and paramedic services to meet future needs. (Impact 4.10-6)

• Development under the General Plan would create additional demand for police protection services. This is considered a significant, but mitigable impact. (Impact 4.10- 5)

Page 51 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
28 • Development allowed under the General Plan would generate an incremental increase in student population for the area. This is considered a significant but mitigable impact. (Impact 4.10-7)

• Development under the General Plan would create additional demand for public park land. This is considered a significant, but mitigable impact. (Impact 4.10-8)

• Development allowed under the General Plan would increase the demand for library services. This is considered a significant but mitigable impact. (Impact 4.10-9)

Analysis of the Project

Consistent with recommended FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policy, the City will require the Project contractor to prepare a Construction Traffic Control Plan to ensure emergency access to the subject site is maintained throughout construction. Once golf course modifications are completed, the operation of the golf course will not adversely affect the provision of police or fire protection in this area of Indian Wells nor would it result in the need for new or physically altered facilities.

The proposed golf course modifications do not include any residential units or habitable structures and would not result in a permanent increase in the local population. It would therefore not result in any impacts to school enrollment and would not require the provision of new or additional facilities.

The subject golf course (Player’s course) currently serves as one of two municipal golf courses at the Indian Wells Golf Resort. During construction, the subject course would be closed to play, which may temporarily increase demand on other golf courses in the area, including the second (Celebrity) course located at the resort. However, the disruption in use of the Player’s course would be temporary, and there would be no associated impacts to public parks from its temporary closure. No other public facilities will be affected by the proposed Project.

Following compliance with the recommended FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, no new significant impacts involving public services or facilities, or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts would occur as a result of constructing and operating the redesigned golf course. Therefore, the proposed Project would not increase or result in new impacts to public services or facilities requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.16 RECREATION

Would the project:

a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Analysis of the Project

Refer to Section 4.15, Public Services.

Page 52 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
29 4.17 TRANSPORTATION

Would the project:

a. Conflict with program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?

c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d. Result in inadequate emergency access?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• Development under the General Plan land uses could result in an inadequate traffic system without the appropriate transportation improvements. (Impact 4.2-1)

• Development under the General Plan land uses could result in a limited choice of travel modes. This is a potential adverse impact that is not significant (Impact 4.2-2)

• Development under the General Plan land uses could result in a traffic system that detracts from the residents’ quality of life. This is a potential adverse impact that is not significant. (Impact 4.2-3)

Analysis of the Project

The Project involves the construction of modifications to the existing Player’s Golf Course at the Indian Wells Golf Resort, which has been operating since the mid-1980s. Access to the course is via the existing Indian Wells Lane which extends north from State Highway 111 and serves the golf resort and associated hotels and conference facilities, as well as the golf resort clubhouse and other golf facilities. The golf resort’s maintenance facilities are located on the north end of the Player’s course immediately south of Fred Waring Drive via gated access from that street. The proposed Project will not alter any of these long-established points of access.

All proposed modifications to the Player’s golf course will be internal and will not affect or be affected by access from a public street. The Project will not affect any traffic or circulation plan, ordinance or policy of the City or any other agency. Policy, including those associated with transit, roadways, bicycle or pedestrian facilities. Once the golf course modifications are completed, there will be no change in the vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) or Level of Service (LOS) associated with its continued operation since 1980s and the project will not be inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b). Current access into the golf course will not be affected by either its modifications during construction or ongoing operations.

Access for construction equipment, materials delivery and construction workers will be from the existing gated access to the golf course maintenance facilities located immediately south of and taking access from Fred Waring Drive. It should also be noted that this access is served by a dedicated right-turn lane and also has a stacking distance of 33± feet between the closest travel lane and the access control gate, which is only closed during evening hours. The construction of the subject golf course modifications and the ongoing golf course operations will not

Page 53 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
30 substantially increase hazards associated with geometric design features or incompatible uses.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not increase or result in new impacts to transportation requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources

Would the project:

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• Since certification of the General Plan FEIR, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist has been revised to include a new category for Tribal Cultural Resources impacts. This topical area is addressed in General Plan FEIR Section 4.12, Cultural Resources. For purposes of this Addendum, the topic of Tribal Cultural Resources is discussed in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, consistent with the organization of the General Plan FEIR.

Analysis of the Project

Refer to Section 4.5, Cultural Resources.

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

Would the project:

a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?

Page 54 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
31 e. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

The General Plan FEIR concluded the following:

• Development allowed under the General Plan would not significantly impact the ability of the service agency to provide adequate water to meet future demand levels. (Impact

4.10-1)

• Development allowed under the General Plan would not significantly impact the service companies now providing natural gas and electricity in their ability to provide these services to meet projected demand. (Impact 4.10-2)

• Development allowed under the General Plan would increase demand for wastewater treatment and require upgrades of the wastewater distribution system. This is considered a significant but mitigable impact. (Impact 4.10-3)

• Proposed development under the General Plan would result in an increase in the generation and disposal of solid waste. This is considered a significant but mitigable impact. (Impact 4.10-4)

Analysis of the Project

The existing two golf courses at the Indian Wells Golf Resort, including the subject Player’s course and Celebrity course, are served by untreated, nonpotable Colorado River water delivered to the Coachella Valley via the All American and Coachella Branch Canals. Golf course irrigation water is provided by the CVWD Mid-Valley Pipeline (canal water) a portion of which is located within the Fred Waring Drive right of way. The Project will not require provision of any potable water supplies. The proposed golf course modification Project will not generate any new long-term water demand and near-term water demand will be limited to that needed for site watering, hydroconsolidation and other construction purposes. Once golf course work is completed Project water demand will return to current levels. There will be no new or increased demand for water resources, which currently are and will continue to be supplied by non-potable canal water rather than groundwater. There will therefore be no significant impacts on the local water supplier’s ability to serve reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The Project will not require a new connection to existing domestic water lines, nor will it otherwise require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities. Construction water will be provided by existing on-site irrigation system supplied by non-potable canal water.

The proposed golf course modification Project will not generate any new or additional wastewater or demand for collection or treatment facilities beyond existing use of the current golf course. Therefore, the Project will not result in a need for such additional facilities and CVWD will continue to have adequate capacity to serve the Project’s current and ongoing demand for wastewater collection and treatment facilities.

During construction of the of the modified golf course, some construction-related waste may be generated, including concrete and asphalt waste materials, as well as landscape waste associated with planned golf course revegetation. Consistent with FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, construction debris shall be disposed of in accordance with local and state requirements, including those provided in the County of Riverside Integrate Waste

Page 55 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
32 Management Plan. The Project will also be required to comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste, including compliance with California Code of Regulation Title 14, Natural Resources Division 7, Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Chapter 3, Minimum Standards for Solid Waste Handling and Disposal and Article 5.9, Construction and Demolition and Inert Debris Transfer/Processing Regulatory Requirements.

Following compliance with the recommended FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, no new significant impacts involving public utilities and services systems, or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts would occur as a result of constructing and operating the redesigned golf course. Therefore, the proposed Project would not increase or result in new impacts to public utilities and services requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.20 WILDFIRE

Would the project:

a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?

General Plan FEIR Conclusions

• The City certified the General Plan FEIR before the above checklist items were added to the State CEQA Guidelines. However, the topic of wildland fire hazards is addressed in General Plan FEIR Section 4.11, Public Safety/Hazardous Materials. For purposes of this Addendum, the topic of wildfires is discussed in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, consistent with the organization of the General Plan FEIR.

Analysis of the Project

As previously stated, the proposed Project would simply be the redesign and reconstruction of the existing Player’s golf course and does not propose the development of any residential or commercial buildings or other occupied structures. It therefore would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. As discussed in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map, the proposed Project is not located within or next to a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone within a Local Responsibility Area or State Responsibility Area.21. The Project would not involve expansion of urban uses onto lands located within or adjacent to fire hazards areas.

As noted elsewhere in the Addendum, the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) sets forth priority actions to mitigate hazards, as well as actions to coordinate plans and resources in the event of an emergency. The LHMP identifies the Emergency Service Coordinator in the City

Page 56 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
33 Emergency Management Department, which has also developed an Emergency Operations Plan. The City LHMP also includes goals, policies and mitigation actions to ensure that emergency response is timely and effective. The proposed Project would not impair or interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. According to the City’s General Plan, key evacuation routes in the city include Highway 111, Cook Street, and Washington Street.

Construction activities associated with the Project would not involve or affect any temporary impacts to local streets. Furthermore, the construction would use existing golf course access from Fred Waring Drive and the existing golf course maintenance facilities, would be temporary, and would not interfere with emergency access during construction. Therefore, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to wildfire in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones as a result of the proposed Project requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR.

4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

Would the project:

a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals?
c. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

As detailed herein, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR is not appropriate for the proposed Project because none of the criteria permitting such a document under State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 are met.

The project will have a very limited impact on lands within the boundaries of the subject Player’s course and the adjoining wash area. Golf course grading and other course remodeling activities and associated site disturbance and improvements will not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors. Neither will the Project affect or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites within or near the Project site.

The subject site lies outside the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area established by the adopted Coachella Valley MSHCP. It does, however, occur within the fee mitigation area established by the plan. However, the Project site was fully developed prior to 1996 and is not therefore subject to any development impact fee established by the MSHCP.

The Project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources.

Neither will it conflict with the provisions of the Coachella Valley MSHCP/Natural Community Conservation Plan, or any other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

Page 57 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

October 2024 Environmental Analysis
34 4.22 CONCLUSION

The General Plan FEIR examined all the potential impacts resulting from full buildout of the General Plan, including Land Use, Transportation/Circulation, Topography and Aesthetics, Hydrology and Water Quality, Biological Resources, Noise, Air Quality, Geology/Soils/Seismicity, Population/Housing/Employment, Public Services/Utilities, Public Safety/Hazardous Materials, Cultural Resources, and Paleontology. The General Plan FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures (General Plan FEIR Chapter 2).

The proposed Project is a redesign and reconstruction of the existing Player’s Course within its existing footprint and would result in no new significant impacts that were not analyzed in the General Plan FEIR, nor would the proposed Project cause a substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified environmental impacts. The potential impacts associated with the proposed Project would either be the same or less than those described in the General Plan FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the proposed Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the General Plan FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified.

In taking action on any of the approvals, the decision-making body must consider the whole of the data presented in the General Plan FEIR. As outlined in this Addendum analysis, all impacts of the proposed Project were fully examined in the previous FEIR and mitigated, and the proposed changes do not require substantial changes to the prior-certified EIR, or previously adopted mitigation measures. Therefore, the preparation of an Addendum to the existing certified EIR is the appropriate CEQA document to support the City’s consideration of the proposed Project, as outlined in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164.

Page 58 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

CITY OF INDIAN WELLS

GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY

CITY OF INDIAN WELLS
Considered by the City Council of the
City of Indian Wells
September 5, 2024
ATTACHMENT #5

Page 59 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

CITY OF INDIAN WELLS

GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY

Policy Statement:

Maintaining appropriate financial reserves is essential for organizational stability.

Adequate reserves empower an organization to navigate significant economic downturns, mitigate the impact of external agency actions that may reduce revenue, and respond effectively to unforeseen emergencies such as natural disasters, catastrophic events, or substantial legal liabilities.

Purpose:

It is the policy of the City of Indian Wells (City) to establish sound financial policies that are guidelines for prudent decision-making related to financial matters. The purpose of this reserve policy (Reserve Policy) is to establish a target minimum level of designated reserves in the General Fund to:

• Reduce the risk of financial impacts resulting from natural disasters or other catastrophic events.

• Respond to the challenges of a changing economic environment, including prolonged local, state, or national economic downturns.

• Demonstrate continued prudent fiscal management and creditworthiness.

• Provide funding stability for core services and infrastructure funded through the General Fund.

General Fund Reserve Policy:

The General Fund, as the City's primary operating fund, plays a crucial role. It is the financial backbone that accounts for sources and uses of discretionary resources to the City Council in providing activities, programs, and services deemed necessary and desirable by the community. It also accounts for all general revenues of the City not explicitly levied or collected for other City funds and related expenditures.

The General Fund is primarily funded through transient occupancy taxes, admissions taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, franchise fees, business license fees, unrestricted state revenues, fines, forfeitures, and interest income. These funds are then allocated for community development, recreation, public safety, public works, and other services, ensuring the smooth functioning of the City.

Page 60 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

CITY OF INDIAN WELLS

GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY

Rationale for a Robust Reserve:

Given the City of Indian Wells' significant reliance on tourism revenues, which are inherently volatile due to seasonal variations, economic downturns, and unexpected disruptions such as natural disasters or global pandemics, it is imperative to prioritize maintaining a large General Fund reserve. A robust reserve provides a financial cushion that enables the City to sustain essential public services, maintain infrastructure, and support community welfare during periods of reduced income.

Additionally, a substantial reserve enhances the City's creditworthiness, enabling it to secure better terms on borrowing for critical projects. By preparing for revenue shortfalls, the City can avoid drastic cuts to services or steep tax increases, thereby preserving its appeal as a tourist destination and safeguarding the well-being of its residents and businesses.

Prudent financial management dictates that a portion of the funds available to the City be held in reserve for future use. This Reserve Policy establishes the amounts the City will strive to maintain in the General Fund Reserve and the conditions under which the reserves may be spent.

Establishing Target Amounts:

Setting target amounts for cash reserves with a focus on risk involves evaluating specific risks and uncertainties that could affect financial stability. The goal is establishing a reserve that provides a sufficient buffer to manage unexpected expenses or revenue shortfalls. The following considerations are essential in determining the target funding objectives:

• Identify Key Risks

• Assess Risk Tolerance

• Estimate Potential Impact

• Determine Reserve Duration

• Incorporate Industry Benchmarks

• Conduct Annual Review

• Perform Stress Testing

Page 61 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

CITY OF INDIAN WELLS

GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY

Fund Balance Classifications:

The City will include Assigned and Unassigned Fund Balance classifications as part of its overall Reserve Policy. In accordance with Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54 (GASB 54), the City classifies fund balance components to identify whether they are available for appropriation:

• Non-spendable: Resources not in spendable form or legally required to remain intact.

• Restricted: Resources constrained by external parties or laws.

• Committed: Resources subject to limitations imposed by the City Council.

• Assigned: Resources intended for specific purposes established by the City Manager.

• Unassigned: Resources not classified in any other category, typically only in the General Fund.

General Fund Assigned Reserve Targets:

The City will fund the General Fund Assigned Reserve at a minimum of 50% of the budgeted annual General Fund Expenditures with no maximum. The Assigned Reserve is designated for specific purposes and is not accessible for routine expenditures. These funds are held for the following uses:

• Addressing short-term budgetary shortfalls due to economic downturns.

• Managing institutional changes, such as state budget takeaways and unfunded mandates.

• Covering economic shortfalls during declared emergencies.

• Preventing reductions in required services during prolonged economic downturns.

Unassigned Cash Balance:

In addition to the 50% assigned reserve, the City will maintain an additional 20% of the budgeted annual General Fund expenditures as an operating cash balance within the

Page 62 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

CITY OF INDIAN WELLS

GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY

Unassigned Fund Balance. This policy ensures that sufficient operational cash is available throughout the year, reducing the need to utilize assigned reserves.

Total General Fund Cash Reserves:

At the beginning of each fiscal year, the combined balance of the Assigned and Unassigned reserves will be maintained at a minimum of 70% of the budgeted annual General Fund expenditures. The City recognizes the inherent fluctuations in cash reserves throughout the fiscal year, influenced by factors such as seasonal tourism and other cyclical elements. As a result, the requirement to maintain a minimum combined total of 70% of the budgeted annual General Fund expenditures—including the 50% assigned reserve and 20% operating cash balance—is evaluated only as of July 1 of each fiscal year. This approach accounts for the variations in cash flow and ensures that the City's financial health is assessed at a stable point in the fiscal cycle.

Funding Mechanisms:

The General Fund Reserve will be funded from excess ongoing and one-time funds. The reserve helps ensure that the City can provide consistent, uninterrupted municipal services in the event of economic disruption or extreme events. The City Council is responsible for determining appropriate General Fund Reserve thresholds and allocating or changing those funding thresholds as appropriate.

The funding levels are based on a conservative risk assessment methodology for setting reserve levels developed by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA). The General Fund Reserve follows Generally Accepted Accounting Principles set by GASB 54.

Excess Funding Utilization:

Where funding exceeds the established thresholds, the City Manager may authorize the use of excess funds for:

• Additional General Fund reserves.

• Capital Improvement Projects.

• Pension and OPEB contributions.

• Additional Capital Reserve contributions.

Page 63 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

CITY OF INDIAN WELLS

GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY

• Disaster Recovery Reserve funding.

Interfund Borrowing Authority:

The City Manager is authorized to approve interfund borrowing in response to catastrophic events.

Replenishment and Review:

If Assigned reserves fall below the minimum threshold of 50% of the budgeted annual General Fund Expenditures, the City Manager will propose a plan to replenish them as quickly as feasible, with a target timeline not exceeding five years. The Finance Committee will review this Reserve Policy annually to ensure its effectiveness and relevance, incorporating best practices and sound risk assessment methodologies.

By adhering to this General Fund Reserve Policy, the City of Indian Wells ensures a solid financial foundation that supports its long-term goals and maintains fiscal health through prudent reserve management.

Page 64 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Real people, lasting partnerships, unfailing integrity building a better tomorrow one project at a time

INDIAN WELLS RESORT PLAYERS COURSE
Indian Wells, California

GOLF COURSE RENOVATION PROPOSAL
ATTACHMENT #6

Page 65 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Lexicon, Inc. dba Heritage Links · 10105 Louetta Road, Suite 111 · Houston, Texas 77070 Phone: (281) 866-0909 · Fax: (281) 866-0944 · Email: [email protected]

September 26, 2024

Mr. Ron Despain
Senior Vice President – Golf Course Development sent via e-mail Troon Golf [email protected]

Mr. John Fought
Golf Course Architect sent via e-mail John Fought Design Golf Course Architecture [email protected]

Gentlemen,

Please find attached to this correspondence our proposal for the 2025 golf course renovation work of the Players Course at Indian Wells Resort. We appreciate the opportunity in allowing us to submit our proposal for this project. Our price is based on the quantities provided in the bid form, as well as our site visits and all related documents and correspondence during the pricing process.

We want to thank you for this opportunity and look forward to hearing from you regarding our submission.

Regards,
Oscar Rodriguez
Senior Vice President

cc: Jon O’Donnell, Division President, Heritage Links
Chris Harz, Sr. Vice President Irrigation, Heritage Links

Page 66 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

MOBILIZATION & CONTRACTOR OVERHEAD:

This includes the movement of all equipment and personnel to the site and the set-up of the construction operation on the site per requirements as stipulated by owner. It also includes the golf contractors project overhead.

TOTAL MOBILIZATION & CONTRACTOR OVERHEAD $
EROSION CONTROL:

A)Silt Fence (unit price) $_____/L.F.

B)Hay Bales (unit price) $____/bale
C)Straw Waddle (unit price) $____/L.F.

D)Construction Entrance $_______
ALLOWANCE $150,000
DEMOLITION:

A)Removal of old concrete cart path (Bury on site):

Remove 118,724 S.F. of old path @ = $
B)Tree & Brush clearing (as per plans & specifications):

Clearing 3.87 ac. @ $ /ac. = $
C) Drainage Parts removal: 3,681 L.F. of pipe & 23 catch basins:
$
D)Turf Tilling (Golf Superintendent to spray with Glyphosate):

57.9 ac. Tilling old turf @ $ /ac. = $
TOTAL DEMOLITION $_____________
EARTHWORK:

Contractor will be responsible for staying within golf course boundaries as indicated on the plans throughout the construction process. This item includes proper procedures to control dust and airborne particles from leaving the construction site. Owner will supply water.

A) Earthmoving of material: 115,130 yd3 @ $/yd3 = $
904,939.00

9.42 59.21

7.75 7,621.00
334,801.68
8,061.00 31,196.07
31,911.00
1,900.00 110,010.00
507,918.75

9.85 1,134,030.50Page 67 of 193
Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

B)Shaping:Shaping of all golf features and playing
areas as outlined on the plans = $
TOTAL EARTHWORK $
DRAINAGE:

The following drainage items will be constructed in accordance with the Plans & Specifications.

PIPE:

A) 4-inch Solid CPP -12,045 L.F. @ $ /L.F. = $
DRAINAGE STRUCTURES:

A)12 inch catch basins 90 @ $ ea. = $ __________
B)New Sumps (6 X 6 X 6) 5 @ $ ea. = $ __________ TOTAL DRAINAGE $_____________
FEATURE CONSTRUCTION:

A) Greens:
•NEW GREENS (9) To be constructed per plans to USGA
Recommended Specification (see detail).
54,633 S.F. @ $ /S.F. = $
•EXISTING GREENS (12) remove thatch layer (4 inches), install 4 inches of new mix and till
65,151 S.F. @ $________/S.F. = $_____________
B)Tees: To be built out of native material (laser leveled) 137,968 SF @ $ /SF = $
C)bunkers: As per plans and specifications. Please note: all bunkers to be lined – 65% Capillary Concrete; 35% JM Evalith (See details). 228,100.00
1,362,130.50

12.13 146,105.85
1,745.00 157,050.00
4,308.00 21,540.00
324,695.85

13.95 762,130.35

4.25 276,891.75
.67 92,438.56

Page 68 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

83,139 S.F. @ $ /S.F. = $
TOTAL FEATURE CONSTRUCTION $_____________
CART PATHS:

The cart paths will consist of 7-foot-wide cart path with aggregate finish (See Specifications).

A)Cart paths:

Golf Course 79,861 S.F. @ $ /S.F. = $_______________ B)Curbing 3,000 L.F. @ $ /L.F. = $_______________ C)FIRE ROAD (16 foot wide) 63,702 S.F. @ $/S.F. = $
TOTAL CART PATH $
FINISHING:

The overall construction process is so disruptive that it becomes necessary to partially reshape everything. For instance, the final shapes of the critical areas like putting surfaces and tees must be recreated. The finishing, therefore, becomes the final touch to tie it all together. The finishing also prepares the ground for planting turf by producing a proper seedbed.

FINISHING (Lump Sum) $_____________
GRASSING:

A)Greens:

Tifeagle sprigs - 119,784 @ $ /S.F. = $
B)Playing Areas:

38.43 acres of sprigged 419 Tifway grass @ $/ac. = $______________ C)Sod:
160,000 S.F of 419 Tifway Bermuda sod @ $/S.F. = $______________ TOTAL GRASSING $_____________

16.60 1,380,107.40
2,511,568.06

9.73 16.24

13.89 777,047.53
48,720.00
884,820.78
1,710,588.31
490,967.00

1.04 8,625.00

1.04 124,575.36
331,458.75
166,400.00
622,434.11

Page 69 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

BONDING:

A)Bid Bond $____________
B)Performance Bond $____

TOTAL BONDING
BID SUMMARY:

MOBILIZATION & CONTRACTOR OVERHEAD $____________
EROSION CONTROL $ 150,000
DEMOLITION $____________
EARTHWORK $____________
DRAINAGE $____________

IRRIGATION
FEATURE CONSTRUCTION $____________
CART PATHS $____________
FINISHING $____________
GRASSING $____________

BONDING

TOTAL BID
By: __________________________________ _______________________________ Company Name Name/Title
Lexicon, Inc. dba Heritage Links Oscar Rodriguez / Sr. Vice President N/A
904,939.00
507,918.75
1,362,130.50
324,695.85
2,511,568.06
1,710,588.31
490,967.00
622,434.11
________82,711.00
$____________82,711.00
$____________82,711.00
$ 3,724,310.00____________
$_ ___________ 12,392,262.40
(In Words): _________Twelve Million, Three Hundred Ninety Two Thousand, Two Hundred Sixty Two Dollars and 40 Cents___________________________________________________

Page 70 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

2.2 GOLF COURSE CONSTRUCTION PERSONNEL
Construction Superintendent
Name:

Years Experience:

Years with Company:

Previous 5 Projects:

Assistant Superintendent
Name:

Years Experience:

Years with Company:

Shaping Crew
Lead Shaper
Name:

Years Experience:

Years with Company:

Shaper
Name:

Years Experience:

Feature Construction
Foreman:

Years Experience:

Years with Company:

Irrigation System
Construction Superintendent:

Years Experience:

Years with Company:

Pascual Torres
37 Years
10 Years

PLEASE SEE ATTACHED
Cosme Lopez
6 Years
6 Years
Jim Stevens
40 Years
3 Years
Gary Velasquez
29 Years
2 years
Ramiro Garcia
34 Years
11 Years
Carlos Jaramillo
17 Years
9 Years

Page 71 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Finish Crew
Foreman:

Years Experience:

Years with Company:

Previous 3 Projects:

Roberto Tello
20+ Years
10 Years

PLEASE SEE ATTACHED

Page 72 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

2.3 BIDDER INFORMATION
Company Name:

Physical Address:

Telephone:

Fax Number:

Bonding Company:

Address:

Telephone:

OWNER’S Name:

Liability Insurance:

Address:

Telephone:

OWNER’S Name:

Workman’s Compensation
Insurance Company:

Address:

Telephone:

OWNER’S Name:

Federal Tax ID Number:

Signature:

Print Name and Title:

Lexicon, Inc. dba Heritage Links
10105 Louetta Road, Suite 111
Houston, Texas 77070
(281) 866-0909
(281) 866-0944
McGriff Insurance
2000 International Park Drive, Suite 600
Birmingham, Alabama 35243
Travelers Bond
10810 Executive Center Dr, Suite 400
(501) 223-6700
Little Rock, Akansas 72211
Travelers Insurance
(205) 583-9891
McGriff Insurance
McGriff Insurance
2000 International Park Drive, Suite 600
Birmingham, Alabama 35243
(205) 583-9891
McGriff Insurance
71-0569150
Oscar Rodriguez - Sr. Vice President

Page 73 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

2.4 LIST OF PROPOSED SUB-CONTRACTORS
Company Name:

Contact:

Address:

Phone Number:

Fax Number:

Phase of Work:

Company Name:

Contact:

Address:

Phone Number:

Fax Number:

Phase of Work:

Company Name:

Contact:

Address:

Phone Number:

Fax Number:

Phase of Work:

Company Name:

Contact:

Address:

Phone Number:

Fax Number:

Phase of Work:

Evergreen Turf, Inc
Jimmy Fox
P.O. Box 2770
Chandler, Arizona 85244
(480) 456-1199
Grassing
RP Ruiz Corporation
Rich Ruiz
P.O. Box 1147
Somas, California 93066
(805) 732-9683
Cart Path and Fire Road

Page 74 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

2.5 LIST OF PROPOSED SUPPLIERS
Name
Products Supplied:

Name
Products Supplied:

Eagle Golf and Landscape Products
Drainage and JM Evalith Liner
Ewing Irrigation
Capillary Concrete Liner and Erosion Control
West Coast Sand and Gravel
Greensmix, Bunker Sand, USGA Gravel, Road Base

Page 75 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

2.6 MATERIALS SUBMITTALS
Name _______________________________________
Products Supplied_____________________________
Advance Drainage Systems, Johns Manville,
Capillary Flow
ADS N-12 Drainpipe and Fittings
JM Evalith 013/140 Bunker Liner
Capillary Concrete Bunker Liner
(Please see attached)

Page 76 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Fairway Irrigation Design - Design Specifications 7/8/2024 Page 4

1. Invitation to Submit Bid Proposal

PROJECT:

Indian Wells Resort- Player’s Course Re-Design

Your company is invited to submit a bid proposal pertaining to the installation of a golf course irrigation system for the above listed project.

The bid must be in accordance with the specifications, plans, and addenda received from Fairway Irrigation Design before the specified bid opening date. All bids shall be submitted on the enclosed proposal forms. Proposal forms must be submitted with all blank spaces and unit prices completed. Alteration, additions, conditions or other irregularities may be cause for rejection of the bid. Scanned forms can be submitted electronically via email.

Your bid proposal shall be received no later than:

All proposals must be submitted in a sealed envelope with the words, “Irrigation Bid Enclosed” in the lower left hand corner. The bids will be received only at the following location and should be addressed to:

By e-mail, mail or express service:

Send electronic copy of proposal to:

Mr. David Yoshimura
Fairway Irrigation Design
77-605 Delaware Place
Palm Desert, CA 92211-8807
Tel: (760) 861-0252
Email: [email protected]

Questions regarding the irrigation system design and specifications should be directed to Fairway Irrigation Design

Page 77 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Fairway Irrigation Design - Design Specifications 7/8/2024 Page 5

2. Bid Proposal Form
Irrigation System

Bidder’s Name: __________________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ Telephone: _________________________________ FAX: _____________________________ State License No:______________________________ Classification: ___________________

The above-named Bidder, hereby referred to as the Contractor, declares that the only person(s) interested in this proposal are those named herein; that the proposal is in all respects fair and without fraud; and that it is made without any connection or collusion with any other person making a proposal on this project.

The Contractor declares that he/she has carefully examined the plans, specifications, and addenda relating to the proposed project. Further, the Contractor has inspected the proposed work area and has satisfied his/herself as to the conditions that exist at the site and the type of equipment that will be required to complete the project.

The Contractor hereby agrees to furnish all labor, material, tools, transportation, taxes and equipment required to install the automatic golf course irrigation system for the project as set forth in the plans, specifications, and addenda (if any).

The Contractor acknowledges the receipt of addenda and verifies that the bid price below reflects any changes called for in said addendum. (Attach copies)

Lexicon, Inc. d/b/a Heritage Links
10105 Louetta Rd. Suite 111
Houston, TX. 77070
(281) 866-0909
1 823300 A, C51, & B

Page 78 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Fairway Irrigation Design - Design Specifications 7/8/2024 Page 6 Bidder’s Name:

Provisional Contingency Quantity and Unit Pricing
Field modifications may require additions or deletions to the proposed work. The unit items shall be used to determine the amount of additional compensation to the Contractor and/or the credit amount to be reimbursed to the Owner. The prices below must reflect all materials, taxes, supervision, labor, equipment charges and any other expenses associated with the installation of each item. Materials included in the unit price and provisional contingency quantities must be the same as materials called out on the design drawing and shall meet all requirements of the specification document.

Rain Bird Golf Remodel
Contingency Unit Price
Include all materials, labor and equipment (sprinklers, connectors, swing joints, pipe, glue, fittings, wire, etc.) for complete installation of each item. Price all items listed even if the item may not appear on the plans.

Item Quantity Unit Price Extended Total

1. Rain Bird 700-IC-36-70 10 $___________ea. $________________

2. Rain Bird 751-IC-36-70 15 $___________ea. $________________

3. Rain Bird Eagle 751-IC-22-70 10 $___________ea. $________________

4. Rain Bird 351B 10 $___________ea. $________________

5. Rain Bird 1804 SAM-PRS 10 $___________ea. $________________

6. #5 Quick Coupling Valve 2 $___________ea. $________________

7. Lateral Sub-main Isolation valve 5 $___________ea. $________________

8. 1” Brass Electric Control Valve- RB 5 $___________ea. $________________

9. 1 ½ ” Brass Elec. Control Valve- RB 2 $___________ea. $________________

10. 1 ½” Wilkins Pressure Regulator 1 $___________ea. $________________

11. Air Release Valve 1 $___________ea. $________________

12. Mainline RW Gate Valve – 12”1 $___________ea. $________________

13. Mainline RW Gate Valve – 10”1 $___________ea. $________________

14. Mainline RW Gate Valve – 8”1 $___________ea. $________________

15. Mainline RW Gate Valve – 6”1 $___________ea. $________________

16. Satellite Pedestal Replacement _________1__________ $___________ea. $________________ Total Contingency $________________
950.00
915.00
950.00
200.00
100.00
1,050.00
1,000.00
1,250.00
1,325.00
1,800.00
6,600.00
4,400.00
2,950.00
8,250.00
235.00
8,250.00
9,150.00
14,250.00
9,500.00
2,000.00
1,000.00
470.00
5,250.00
5,000.00
2,500.00
1,325.00
1,800.00
8,250.00
6,600.00
4,400.00
2,950.00
8,250.00
82,695.00
Lexison, Inc. dba Heritage Links

Page 79 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Fairway Irrigation Design - Design Specifications 7/8/2024 Page 7 Bid Summation
The Bid price for the proposed irrigation system work shall be:

Contingency $___________________
Note: Golf course personnel have identified valves on the golf course which need replacement. These valves are on the existing parts of the golf course with valves not already identified on the design plans. Contractor shall supply a lump sum value for the replacement of identified valves by the golf course personnel.

Allocation for Replacement of Sub-Isolation Valves $___________________ Total for identified number of valves in the existing golf course. Include all parts and labor involved in removing and replacing an existing valve. Other items that may be damaged in the replacement such as pipe, nipples, wiring, etc. See Addendum Sheet IA-1.

Allocation for Replacement of Mainline Gate Valves $___________________ Total for identified number of valves in the existing golf course. Include all parts and labor involved in removing and replacing an existing valve. Other items that may be damaged in the replacement such as pipe, nipples, wiring, etc. Any required new thrust blocks as defined in this document for a new valve.

See Addendum Sheet IA-1.

Total – Rain Bird Irrigation System $______________

Name of Firm: __________________________________________________________________ Address: __________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip __________________________________________________________________ Signature: __________________________________________ Title: ________________________ Print Name: __________________________________________ Date:________________________ ADD- Project Bonding Cost (If required and purchased by Owner) Name of Bonding Company: ____________________________________________________ Cost of Bonding: $__________________________________
Lexicon, Inc. d/b/a Heritage Links
10105 Louetta Rd. Suite 111
Houston, TX. 77070
Sr. Vice President - Irrigation
Chris Harz September 27, 2024
* Total of Rain Bird irrigation system includes the allocation for replacement of sub-isolation valves, mainline gate valves, and contingency. 82,695.00
39,255.00
3,724,310.00
42,335.00

Page 80 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 81 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

IWR
Player’s
Course
Addendum #1
Fairway
Irrigation
Design
June 30, 2024

Page 1 of 2 ends

Directions: The following information and attached pages are to be considered part of the contract documents for the project. Indicate how many addendums were received on the Bid Proposal form where requested.

You will be required to sign an attach this addendum to you Bid Proposal forms before submitting bid.

Statement: “I acknowledge the receipt of the addendum which is _____ pages in length. I understand the contents and have incorporated the items below and they are incorporated into the total bid price submitted.

Signature: ___________________________ Date: _______________ Print Name: ________________________ Title: _________________

1.An updated plan set has been issued with additional information on Sheets 5 & 6.

The file for use in this bid proposal is a PDF file named, “V2– 2024 IWR-Players Course Redesign SH1-10

2. An updated Specification book with the file name,
“V2-2024 IWR Redesign Golf Specifications”

3. A new sheet IA-1 with identified mainline gate valves and lateral iso- lation valves in the existing irrigation that require replacement as part of this scope of work.

The file is named “IWP-Addendum 1 Valve Replacements”
These files are located at the link below:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/n7lca29theuoxi65epclf/
AIOUYl2bVFJ7dsHNwGaF2Tc?rlkey=7fnobvvmtdri0ar69qo638cvi&dl=0 9/27/2024
Chris Harz Sr. Vice President - Irrigation

Page 82 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

CALIFORNIA
Pre-Qualification Bid

QUESTIONNAIRE
For
Indian Wells Golf Resort Players Course Renovation

Page 83 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 3 of 17 ends

PART I. ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR QUALIFICATION
Contractor will be immediately disqualified if the answer to any question 1 through 5 is "no". Disqualification for such an answer may not be appealed.

1.Do you possess a valid and current California Contractor's license for the project or projects for which it intends to submit a bid.
☒Yes ☐No

2. Do you have a liability insurance policy with a policy limit of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate.
☒Yes ☐No

3.Do you have a current workers' compensation insurance policy as required by the Labor Code or is legally self-insured pursuant to Labor Code section 3700 et. seq. ☒Yes ☐No

4. Have you attached a notarized statement from an admitted surety insurer (approved by the California Department of Insurance) and authorized to issue bonds in the State of California, which states that your current bonding capacity is sufficient for the project for which you seek pre-qualification. The statement must be from the surety not an agent or broker.
☒Yes ☐No

5. Have you attached your latest copy of a reviewed or audited financial statement with accompanying notes and supplemental information.
☒Yes ☐No
Contractor will be immediately disqualified if the answer to any question 6 through 9 is "yes". If the answer to question 7 is "yes", and if debarment would be the sole reason for denial of pre-qualification, any pre-qualification issued will exclude the debarment period. A contractor disqualified solely because of a "yes" answer to 6 OR 8 may appeal the disqualification and provide an explanation for the relevant circumstances during the appeal process.

6.Has your contractor's license been revoked at any time in the last five years? ☐Yes ☒No

7.Has a surety firm completed a contract on your behalf, or paid for completion because your firm was default terminated by the project owner within the last five (5) years? ☐Yes ☒No

8.At the time of submitting this pre-qualification form, is your firm ineligible to bid on or be awarded a public works contract, or perform as a subcontractor on a pu blic works contract, pursuant to Labor Code section 1777.1 or section 1777.7? ☐Yes ☒No

Page 84 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 5 of 17 ends

C.For Firms That Are Sole Proprietorships:

18.Date of commencement of business:

19.Tax ID number or Social security number of company owner:_ D.For Firms That Intend to Make a Bid as Part of a Joint Venture:

20.Date of commencement of joint venture:_

21.Tax ID number:

22.Attach a list for each member of the joint venture that includes all relevant information, as requested above, for the type of entity.

Part III. HISTORY OF BUSINESS

23.State your firm's gross revenues for each of the last three years:
2021: 2022: 2023

24. How many years has your organization been in business in California as a contractor under your present business name and license number?
Years in Business:

25.Is your firm currently the debtor in a bankruptcy case? ☐Yes ☒No
If "yes," attach a statement that includes the case number, court (name and location), chapter under which you filed, and the date on which the petition was initially filed.

26.Was your firm in bankruptcy at any time during the last five years? (This question refers only to a bankruptcy action that was not described in the answer above) ☐Yes ☒No
If "yes," attach a statement that includes the case number, court (name and location), chapter under which you filed, the date on which the petition was initially filed, and a copy of the Bankruptcy Court's discharge order, or of any other document that ended the case, if no discharge order was issued. •

27.Attach on a separate sheet of paper a list of all California construction license numbers, classifications and expiration dates of the California contractor licenses held by your firm.
22 years
Class A, C51, & B - expire date 9/30/2024
Corporations
1969
71-0569150
+100M +100M +100M

Page 85 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 10 of 17 ends

48.What is your firm's OSHA Incidence Rate? [ formula for calculating the incidence rate is as follows: (total recordable injuries X 200,000) / (total number of man-hours)] 2019:
2020:
2021:
2022:
2023:

49. Has CAL OSHA cited and assessed penalties against your firm for any "serious," "willful" or "repeat" violations of its safety or health regulations in the past five years?
NOTE: If you have filed an appeal of a citation, and the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, you need not includeinformation about it. ☐Yes ☒No
If "yes," attached a separate signed page describing the citations, including information about the dates of the citations, the nature of the violation, the project on which the citation(s) was or were issued, the amount of penalty paid, if any. If the citation was appealed to the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board and a decision has been issued, state the case number and the date of the decision.

50.Has the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration cited and assessed penalties against your firm in the past five years?
NOTE: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the Appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, or if there is a court appeal pending, you need not include information about the citation.
☐Yes ☒No
If "yes," attach a separate signed page describing each citation.

51. Has the EPA or any Air Quality Management District or any Regional Water Quality Control Board cited and assessed penalties against either your firm or the owner of a project on which your firm was the contractor, in the past five years? NOTE: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the Appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, or if there is a court appeal pending, you need not include information about the citation.
☐Yes ☒No
If "yes," attach a separate signed page describing each citation.

0.59 0.68

0.57 0.52

0.54

Page 86 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 13 of 17 ends

59.At any time during the last five years, has your firm been found to have violated any provision of California apprenticeship laws or regulations, or the laws pertaining to use of apprentices on public works?
NOTE: You may omit reference to any incident that occurred prior to January 1, 1998, if the violation was by a subcontractor and your firm, as general contractor on a project, had no knowledge of the subcontractor's violation at thetime they occurred. ☐Yes ☒No
If "yes," provide the date(s) of such findings and attach copies of the Department's final decision(s).

PART V. RECENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS COMPLETED

60.Contractor shall provide information about its six most recently completed golf course projects and its three largest completed golf course projects within the last 5 years. Names and references must be current and verifiable. Contractors will be scored ONLY on their best five past jobs. Use separate sheets of paper that contain all of the following information:

Project Name: See attached
Location:

Owner:

Owner Contact (name and current phone number):

Architect or Engineer Contact (name and current phone number):

Construction Manager (name and current phone number):

Description of Project, Scope of Work Performed:

Total Value of Construction (including change orders):

Original Scheduled Completion Date:

Time Extensions Granted (number of days):

Actual Date o f C ompletion:

Page 87 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 14 of 17 ends

61.Proposed Project Manager for current project
Name:

Years Employed by your firm:

Present title:

Years in present position:

62.Was your current project manager employed by your firm as project manager for at least two jobs listed in question sixty?
☒Yes ☐No
If "yes", attach a sheet indicating which jobs.

If "no" attach a sheet including all of the information listed in question sixty, showing that your project manager completed at least two projects of similar magnitude and complexity in the last five years.

63.Will your project manager or a person as or more qualified be at the job at all times? ☒Yes ☐No

64.Proposed Project Superintendent
Name:

Years Employed by your firm:

Present title:

Years in present position:

65. Was your project superintendent employed by your firm as project superintendent for at least two jobs listed in question sixty?
☒Yes ☐No
If "yes", attach a sheet indicating which jobs.

If "no" attach a sheet including all of the information listed in question sixty, showing that your project superintendent completed at least two projects of similar magnitude and complexity in the last five years.

66.Will your project superintendent or a person as or more qualified be at the job at all times?
☒Yes ☐No
Sergio Cadengo
9 Years
Project Manager
20+ Years
Pascual Torres
10 Years
Construction Superintendent
37 Years

Page 88 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Project Name: Golf Club of DBI
Location: Kingston Springs, TN 37082
Owner: Golf Club of DBI, LLC
Owner Contact (name and current phone number): Jeff Huber - (615) 952-2020 Architect or Engineer Contact (name and current phone number): Hanse Golf Course Design - (610) 651-2977
Construction Manager (name and current phone number): Blake Smith - (281) 814-5439 Description of Project, Scope of Work Performed: 18-hole new golf course construction Total Value of Construction (including change orders): $19.8M Original Scheduled Completion Date: 1/16/23
Time Extensions Granted (number of days): 198 days – work scope added Actual Date of Completion: 8/1/23
Project Name: Panther National
Location: Palm Beach Gardens, FL
Owner: Panther National Golf Club, LLC
Owner Contact (name and current phone number): Steve Ehrbar - (561) 225-1763 Architect or Engineer Contact (name and current phone number): Nicklaus Design - (561) 227- 0300
Construction Manager (name and current phone number): Jorge Huerta - (832) 459-8654 Description of Project, Scope of Work Performed: 18-hole new golf course construction Total Value of Construction (including change orders): $13.4M Original Scheduled Completion Date: 5/31/23
Time Extensions Granted (number of days): 122 days – work scope added Actual Date of Completion: 9/30/23

Page 89 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Project Name: Colonial Country Club
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Owner: Colonial Country Club
Owner Contact (name and current phone number): Rich McIntosh - (330) 241-9858 Architect or Engineer Contact (name and current phone number): Michael Kuhn & Associates, Inc. - (248) 885-8533
Construction Manager (name and current phone number): Chris Harz - (303) 944-1990 Description of Project, Scope of Work Performed: 18-hole golf course irrigation renovation Total Value of Construction (including change orders): $4.3M Original Scheduled Completion Date: 11/22/2023
Time Extensions Granted (number of days): 0 days
Actual Date of Completion: 11/22/2023

Project Name: PGA Frisco East Course
Location: Frisco, TX
Owner: City of Frisco
Owner Contact (name and current phone number): Roger Meir - (502) 322-5012 Architect or Engineer Contact (name and current phone number): Hanse Golf Course Design - (610) 651-2977
Construction Manager (name and current phone number): Blake Smith - (281) 814-5439 Description of Project, Scope of Work Performed: 18-hole new golf course construction, new par 3 and putting courses; East & West Course new irrigation Total Value of Construction (including change orders): $31.3M Original Scheduled Completion Date: 10/14/2020
Time Extensions Granted (number of days): 373 days – work scope added Actual Date of Completion: 10/22/2021

Page 90 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Project Name: Southern Hills Country Club
Location: Tulsa, OK
Owner: Southern Hills Country Club
Owner Contact (name and current phone number): Russ Myers - (310 405-5387 Architect or Engineer Contact (name and current phone number): Hanse Golf Course Design - (610) 651-2977
Construction Manager (name and current phone number): Doug Wright - (832) 712-5914 Description of Project, Scope of Work Performed: 18-hole golf course renovation Total Value of Construction (including change orders): $3.9M Original Scheduled Completion Date: 12/22/2018
Time Extensions Granted (number of days): 0 days
Actual Date of Completion: 12/22/2018
Project Name: Gus Wortham Golf Course
Location: Houston, TX
Owner: Houston Golf Association / City of Houston
Owner Contact (name and current phone number): Steve Timms - (281) 454-7000 Architect or Engineer Contact (name and current phone number): Finger Dye Spann, Inc. - (713) 806-5729
Construction Manager (name and current phone number): Mike Webb - (281) 386-9069 Description of Project, Scope of Work Performed: 18-hole golf course renovation Total Value of Construction (including change orders): $6.5M Original Scheduled Completion Date: 10/9/2017
Time Extensions Granted (number of days): 60 days – work scope added Actual Date of Completion: 12/9/2017

Page 91 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Travelers Bond
10810 Executive Center Dr, Suite 400
(501) 223-6700 (ph)
(501) 492-5222 (fax)
www.travelers.com
September 23, 2024
Troon Golf
Attn: Ron Despain
15044 N. Scottsdale Road, Ste 300
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
Re: Contractor: Heritage Links, a division of Lexicon, Inc.

Project: Indian Wells Golf Resort Players Course Renovation It has been the privilege of Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America (“Travelers”)1 to provide surety bonds for Prospect Steel Company, a division of Lexicon, Inc. since 1997. During that time, they have supported bids and/or performance and payment bonds on single projects in the $350,000,000 range with an aggregate work program in excess of $500,000,000. It is our opinion that Heritage Links, a division of Lexicon, Inc. has demonstrated the necessary management abilities and organizational skills to support projects consistent with your building needs.

Please note that the decision to issue performance and payment bonds is a matter between Prospect Steel Company, a division of Lexicon, Inc. and Travelers, and will be subject to standard underwriting at the time of the final bond request, which will include but not be limited to the acceptability of the contract documents, bond forms and financing. We assume no liability to third parties or to you if for any reason Travelers does not execute said bonds.

We appreciate having the opportunity to share with you our experience with this fine company and urge you to give them every consideration in the awarding of a contract.

Sincerely,
William M. Smith, Attorney-in-Fact
Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
1 Travelers is an A++ (Superior) A.M. Best rated insurance company (Financial Size Category XV ($2 billion or greater) Department of the Treasury's Listing of Certified Companies – Underwriting Limitation b:
$231,823,000.

Page 92 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 93 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 94 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 95 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 96 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 97 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 98 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 99 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 100 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 101 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 102 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 103 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 104 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 105 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 106 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 107 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 108 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Page 109 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Lexicon, Inc., dba Heritage Links – 10105 Louetta Road – Suite 111 – Houston – Texas – 77070 Phone – 281 866 0909 Fax – 281 866 0944 – e mail [email protected]

INDIAN WELLS RESORT PLAYERS COURSE

PROPOSAL CLARIFICATIONS

a. Forthcoming contract between the Owner and the contractor shall be based on mutually acceptable terms and conditions. The contractor has reviewed and included the A104 proposed revisions for review. In addition, all plans and specifications shall be mutually agreed upon by the contractor and the Owner. Following receipt of same, the contractor will review and provide comments to the Owner provided response. Any terms in the plans and specifications which conflict with or expand the terms of the agreed-upon contract shall be omitted and/or revised as appropriate.

b. Proposal assumes a construction schedule with a commencement date of March 10, 2025, and a completion date of September 1, 2025.

c. We have submitted this proposal with the intentions of non-interrupted work and no delays outside of the Contractor’s control. Owner responsible for any delays caused by City Inspectors, Permits, and/or other Contractors directly working for Owner.

d. All construction water and electricity, including all connections required for the renovation work will be furnished by the Owner.

e. The contractor has not included in the proposal costs for builder’s risk insurances that covers any natural disaster such as hurricanes, tropical storms, or other named events. The proposal does not include any of the costs associated with clean-up of the site associated with these events. The Contractor requests the Owner provide builders risk insurance covering any named storms including the deductible.

f. All permits, fees, inspections, approvals, and testing shall be provided by the Owner. The contractor has not included any costs associated with providing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan and or any filing fees required for the Notice of Intent to discharge storm water from the construction site.

g. The contractor assumes the allowance of $ 150,000.00 per the bid form provided, includes a 10% contractor fee. The contractor requests that Owner provide an engineered erosion control plan prior to the start of construction. If this erosion control plan includes additional measures outside of the unit prices provided, (i.e., sandbags, rock check dams, concrete washout(s), etc.) required for compliance with local, state, or federal laws, the contactor shall be compensated for these additional measures.

h. Contractor has included applicable sales tax on materials, equipment rental, tools, and consumables, etc. No additional services taxes of any kind have been included.

Page 110 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Lexicon, Inc., dba Heritage Links – 10105 Louetta Road – Suite 111 – Houston – Texas – 77070 Phone – 281 866 0909 Fax – 281 866 0944 – e mail [email protected]

Page 2 of 5 ends

i. Prevailing Wages – The proposal is based on the Shapers being classified as Operator Engineers. All other operators are classified as Landscape Operator Engineers. The proposal assumes all labor to be classified and follows the requirement of the Journeymen and Tenders per the instructions of the Landscape Irrigation Laborer classification sheet.

j. Access to the site must be unrestricted and without limitation. The contractor assumes that all 18 holes of golf will be closed for play and will have full access to the entire site in order to maintain the construction schedule.

k. This proposal is based on the scope of work and quantities defined by the Contractor’s submitted bid form. No earthwork cut and fill analysis and or area measurement quantity verifications were performed. Any work above and beyond this scope and not explicitly listed on the bid form is not included in this proposal.

l. The proposal includes an in-house Surveyor for the survey and layout of the golf features only.

Owner to provide the property lines and all benchmarks. No Certified Surveyor costs are included.

m. Contractor will contact 811 Dig Alert prior to starting construction activities to have all known public utilities marked on the property. The contractor shall not be responsible for damage to any public utilities that are not marked by 811 Dig Alert or private utilities that are not marked by the Owner.

n. The proposal assumes the existing grass will be completely eradicated prior to the commencement of work. The proposal is based on Owner completing 3 applications of herbicide.

o. The proposal does not include any existing tree root removal or excavation that might occur during the turf removal.

p. The proposal assumes all material generated during the demolition process to be buried on-site.

We have included the off-site disposal of all drainpipe and existing bunker liner.

q. Concrete Cart Path Demo – The price assumes no re-bar or wire mesh in existing concrete cart path and is based on a 4” depth.

r. Earthwork – The proposal assumes the 115,130 CY of material to be moved, to be an on-site balance with no engineered fill included. No import or export of any material is included.

s. The proposal assumes the purchase of the 90:10 Dakota Peat Greensmix, USGA Gravel, and Bunker Sand to be from West Coast Sand and Gravel.

t. Drainage – The proposal is based on 3’ of on-site soil cover, over the top of the outside diameter for each size pipe.

u. The proposal assumes that the existing materials will be suitable for all backfilling of trenches, no bedding material is included.

Page 111 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Lexicon, Inc., dba Heritage Links – 10105 Louetta Road – Suite 111 – Houston – Texas – 77070 Phone – 281 866 0909 Fax – 281 866 0944 – e mail [email protected]

Page 3 of 5 ends

v. New Greens Construction – The proposal includes the layout of the greens surface, by utilizing the GreenScan method.

w. Existing Greens – The proposal is based on a 10’ grid layout of the greens surface.

x. Tee Construction – The proposal assumes the Tees to be a push-up native soil build. The price does not include installation of any sand cap and assumes the Laser Leveling of the native soil.

y. The price for the new greens and the bunker renovation includes the demolition of the existing greens and bunkers.

z. The proposal assumes all sod and sprigs purchase / installation from Evergreen Turf, Inc.

aa. The contractor assumes no maintenance or grow-in responsibilities to the golf course once it has been planted.

bb. We will utilize the existing cart path system for travel around the course. No cost is included outside the quantities depicted in the bid form for any concrete cart path or asphalt parking area repairs. Where necessary, turf areas will be protected from damage with plywood.

cc. Due to the constantly fluctuating cost of goods and services, proposal pricing is valid for 30 days. Any cost increases for materials, machinery (including fuel), housing (subject to availability) or subcontractors between the bid date and contract date shall be incorporated into the final schedule of values prior to contract execution.

dd. The contractor has not included any rock excavation, trenching, plowing, hauling, or removal of any kind. In the event rock is encountered in any form, the contractor shall stop work and promptly notify the Owner to determine how to proceed. Any work associated with rock excavation, trenching, hauling, removal, or disposal shall be an additional cost and the contractor will need to be compensated with additional time for the installation. Rock excavation slows down the installation process considerably.

ee. The contractor shall have no responsibilities once finish work has been completed for any area regardless of size or location (other than issues of workmanship that would be considered punch list or warranty items). Owner shall be responsible for protecting all areas after grassing, installation and maintenance of erosion control measures to protect those areas which is above and beyond the erosion control plan, and repair of any erosion or contamination occurring after grassing.

ff. The contractor is not responsible for any subcontractor, contracted directly with the Owner and or their schedules. Any delays and or costs incurred by the contractor that were caused by the Owner’s subcontractors and or representatives, to be fully compensated and equitable adjustments to the contractor’s schedule will be assumed.

gg. The proposal includes a water truck for a duration of 4-months. The proposal does not include any implementation of the PM-10 Fugitive Air Quality Dust Control.

Page 112 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Lexicon, Inc., dba Heritage Links – 10105 Louetta Road – Suite 111 – Houston – Texas – 77070 Phone – 281 866 0909 Fax – 281 866 0944 – e mail [email protected]

Page 4 of 5 ends

hh. Fire Road – The price is based on the spec sheet provided and assumes an exposed aggregate finish.

ii. The proposal does not include any landscaping installation or existing plant relocation. The price assumes that any Landscaping is by others.

IRRIGATION:

1. Installation of the grounding equipment for the irrigation system is as recommended by the designer in the plan details. If additional equipment is required to meet the recommended ohms resistance range, this can be done by the contractor on a time and materials basis to the Owner.

2. The proposal does not consider any electrical permits, inspections, or a licensed electrician for any work in the installation of the sprinkler system 24 or 120/240 volt wiring in the field and if required would be the responsibility of the Owner.

3. All spoils from irrigation system trenching will be disposed in an area close to the golf hole being worked on. Haul-off of any demolition debris is not included.

4. The proposal assumes all irrigation pipe will be backfilled with native soil from trench excavation. No import of material for pipe bedding or backfill is included in the proposal.

5. All efforts will be made by the contractor to not excavate under tree canopies. In areas where this is not possible, the contractor shall not be held responsible for the health of the existing tree being disturbed.

6. The proposal does not include the removal or replacement of any existing or new plant material including trees, bushes, plants or any other vegetation. If required, the work is to be determined based on-site conditions.

7. The proposal does not include any directional bores.

8. The proposal does not include any work at the existing pump station except for electrical connections for power wire to be run to field satellites.

9. The proposal does not include the purchase or installation of a new weather station.

10. The proposal does not include power conditioners.

11. The proposal considers valve boxes to be by the respective system manufacturer, Rain Bird.

12. The proposal considers Rain Bird swing joints for valve-in-head rotors to be #SJ1212543SS standard-top outlet swing joints.

Page 113 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

Lexicon, Inc., dba Heritage Links – 10105 Louetta Road – Suite 111 – Houston – Texas – 77070 Phone – 281 866 0909 Fax – 281 866 0944 – e mail [email protected]

Page 5 of 5 ends

13. The proposal considers all power wire being run to field satellites to be Paige P7267D #6 AWG tray cable, per electrical irrigation legend.

14. The proposal considers the replacement of mainline gate valves and sub-isolation valves in the existing golf course as outlined in Sheet IA-1 of Addendum #1. Total replacement of three 8” and one 12” mainline gate valves and twenty sub-isolation valves.

15. The proposal considers the replacement of the following irrigation equipment around the existing greens loops for holes, 1-5, 8, & 13-16. Removal and installation of 114 Rain Bird 752-E valve-in-head golf rotors, 20 Rain Bird 5RC quick coupling valves, 5 Rain Bird 100- EFB-CP-R-PRS electric control valves, 28 Rain Bird 5004+ block rotors, and 10 Rain Bird 1806-SAM-PRS spray heads. Irrigation equipment will be installed on existing irrigation pipes and connected to existing communication wires.

16. Per remodel design drawing note on Sheet IR-10, “All the irrigation equipment that is lighter grayscale is irrigation to remain and not in scope of work.” Exception to this note is the irrigation equipment around the existing greens loops for holes, 1-5, 8, & 13-16 mentioned in clarification #15 and valves cited in clarification #14.

17. The proposal provided considers the contractor is selected to do both the irrigation system installation and golf course construction renovation.

18. Heritage Links proposal to the club is based on David Yoshimura’s golf course irrigation specifications with a revision date of September 5, 2024, and irrigation plans dated June 20, 2024, with revision to electrical plans a & b dated June 28, 2024.

Page 114 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

1 0 1 0 5 L O U E T T A R O A D , S U I T E 1 1 1 • H O U S T O N , T X • 7 7 0 6 9 O F F I C E P H O N E (2 8 1) 8 6 6 -0 9 0 9
O F F I C E F A X (2 8 1 ) 8 6 6 -0 9 4 4
M O B I L E (8 3 2 ) 4 5 7-3 0 9 1

S ERGIO CADENGO

H ERITAGE L INKS

P ROFESSIONAL E XPERIENCE
2015 -Present Heritage Links Houston, TX
Project Manager

2012 -2015 O&J Golf Construction Moreno Valley, CA Project Manager

2004 -2012 Ranger Golf Construction Temecula, CA Construction Superintendent / GPS Technician

S ELECTED P ROJECT L IST

Project List:

Pelican Hill Golf Club – Newport Beach, CA Tom Fazio
Rams Hill Golf Club – Borrego Springs, CA Tom Fazio
Corales Golf Club – Punta Cana, DR Tom Fazio
Hard Rock Golf Club – Punta Cana, DR Jack Nicklaus
Puerto Cancun Golf Club – Cancun, MX Tom Weiskopf
Grand Coral Golf Club – Cancun, MX Nick Price
SilverRock Golf Course – La Quinta, CA Arnold Palmer
Ak -Chin Southern Dunes Golf Club, Maricopa, AZ Fred Couples Desert Mountain Golf Club, Scottsdale, AZ Jack Nicklaus Blessings Golf Club, Fayetteville, AR Robert Trent Jones Jr Dove Canyon Golf Club, Rancho Sta Margarita, CA Jack Nicklaus Talking Stick Golf Course, Scottsdale, AZ Ben Crenshaw & Bill Coore Paiute Golf Course, Las Vegas, NV Pete Dye
Metro West Golf Course, Orlando, FL Robert Trent Jones Sr Whisper Rock Golf Club, Scottsdale, AZ Tom Fazio
Phoenician Golf Club, Scottsdale, AZ Phil Smith
Pine Canyon, Flagstaff, AZ Jay Morrish
The Quarry at La Quinta, La Quinta, CA Tom Fazio
Troon North, Scottsdale, AZ Tom Weiskopf
Troon Country Club, Scottsdale, AZ Jay Morrish
Saticoy Club, Ventura, CA William F Bell
Roosevelt Golf Course, Los Angeles, CA Forest Richardson Classic Club, Palm Desert, CA Arnold Palmer

Page 115 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

S ERGIO CADENGO

H ERITAGE L INKS

Project List: (continued)

Bali Hai, Las Vegas, NV Lee Schmidt & Brian Curley
PGA West, La Quinta, CA Greg Norman, Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer Lake Merced, Daly City, CA Gil Hanse
The Summit, Las Vegas, NV Tom Fazio
Coronado Golf Course, El Paso, TX Bill Bergin
North Shore Preserve Golf Club, Princeville, HI Dennis Wise Poipu Bay Golf Course, Kaola, HI Robert Trent Jones Jr
Princeville Makai Golf Course, Princeville, HI Robert Trent Jones Jr

Page 116 of 193 ends

Special Council Agenda- October 15, 2024

P ASCUAL T ORRES

H ERITAGE L INKS

P ROFESSIONAL E XPERIENCE
2014 -Present Heritage Links Houston, TX
Construction Superintendent
• As Construction Superintendent for Heritage Links, Pascual is responsible for the supervision of all phases of golf course, and sports field construction, including equipment maintenance and repair, bidding, budget tracking, asbuilts, and quality control.

2012 -2014 O&J Golf Construction Moreno Valley, CA Constrcution Superintendent
1999-2012 Weitz Golf, Int. Des Moines, IA
Construction Superintendent
1987-1999 Fairway Construction Temecula, CA
Construction Superintendent

S ELECTED P ROJECT L IST

Project List – Partial
Park Hyatt Aviara GC Carlsbad, CA Golf Course Renovation Palmer Design May River Golf Club Bluffton, SC Bunker Renovation Nicklaus Design Mossy Oak Golf Club West Point, MS New Construction Hanse Golf Design The Cape Club Cape Cod, MA Complete Renovation Troon Golf Desert Mountain Scottsdale, AZ Renovations on 6 Courses Nicklaus Design Capital Canyon GC Prescott, AZ Features Renovation Weiskopf Design Hokuala Golf Club Lihue, Hawaii Features Renovation Nicklaus Design American Lakes Tacoma, WA New Construction Nicklaus Design

Page 117 of 193 ends

Indian Wells City CouncilOctober 15, 2024

Indian Wells City Council
October 15, 2024